Thank you for giving me an idea for a character: the dragon-chicken riding kobold ranger! But with sincerity, without reflavoring, the Drake is supposed to look like the drakes from Hoard of the Dragon Queen/Volo's, because of Forgotten Realms lore. If they weren't, then they would name the subclass differently. I'm all for reflavoring, but the default flavor is pretty evident.
Unless there's a curve-ball and the subclass is being published in an unexpected Tarkir setting book for MtG.
Do you know when the new subclasses will be integrated into the D&D Beyond app?
UA typically takes a few weeks to hit D&D Beyond, and with all the effort being thrown at Tashas? I don't see this happening before Nov 17 but I would love to be wrong.
Thank you for giving me an idea for a character: the dragon-chicken riding kobold ranger! But with sincerity, without reflavoring, the Drake is supposed to look like the drakes from Hoard of the Dragon Queen/Volo's, because of Forgotten Realms lore. If they weren't, then they would name the subclass differently. I'm all for reflavoring, but the default flavor is pretty evident.
Unless there's a curve-ball and the subclass is being published in an unexpected Tarkir setting book for MtG.
Again, because of the M:tG Lore, the subclass doesn't make much sense. Drakes in Magic resemble small Wyverns. Nearly all Dragons in Magic can fly, which is a late-game ability for Drakewardens. They could be used FOR Tarkir, but they're probably not MADE for Tarkir.
Okay, I have finally had a chance to really look at this thing and here are my thoughts:
Way of the Ascendant Dragon
The name is a bit pretentious, but if they didn’t throw “ascendant” in there it would offend the Bruce Lee fans.
Draconic Disciple. That first burley point should be 1ce/turn or should require a Ki cost.
Breath of the Dragon. I really do not like Class features that key off of Proficiency bonus like that. I wish Racial features did, but I prefer class features to either be class level dependent or require investment in an Ability Score. And doesn’t this just kinda drop a coil on Dragonborn? I mean, this special dragon energy they learn to channel is supposed to be superior to a creature actually born with a breath weapon?!? 🤨
Wings Unfurled. Exactly how long is that vanishing supposed to last and what exactly do they mean by "vanish” anyway?!? Is it an invisibility thing? Is a teleports thing? Is it just a bit of flavor text? This is very poorly worded.
Aspect of the Wyrm. I expect this to get toned down by final printing. I mean, c’mon. There are Paladin Oaths with auras that aren’t this good.
Ascendant Aspect. If this makes it to final printing without a hard nerf I will be absolutely gobsmacked. Is broke.
Drakewarden
Man, they are really starting to run out of good names, aren’t they? And that Origin table. “You study a dragon’s scale and form a bond.” Really?!? 🙄 How many dragon scales have your PCs handled over the decades. This is just a weaksauce line here. Not critical all, but c’mon.
Draconic Gift. Okay
I’ma stop right here. The rest of this is basically just a mishmash of OP and bad writing that I don’t even want to reread again to give a real review.
Draconic Gift. not much here. language and useless-except-for pro spell
Drake Companion. too small duration per day. this and draconic gift is kinda weak because of the duration and it's statblock isn't that good either
Bond of Fang and Scale. much better, but still affected by the short duration
Drake’s Breath. seriously? isn't this Drakewarden? not becoming a dragon yourself?
Perfected Bond. not bad. you could say drake's breath and this balances out the other features
overall, they should focus more on the drakewarden lore. make the duration longer and nerf the other features. come up with a drake-exclusive feature replacing drake's breath
Yeah, this UA is one of the more badly written and designed ones I've seen in awhile. I (and quite a lot of DMs) could have easily done a better job on this that WotC did.
I'm fine with the monk subclass getting a breath weapon. I'm fine with them getting the weird switching out damage thing that mostly becomes useless beyond 5th level. I'm fine with them temporarily growing wings, lighting people on fire, and all that jazz. I'm not fine with all of the unneeded "prof. bonus per long rest, use ki to use more" features.
I am also fine with the ranger getting a more specific and intelligent animal companion than the Beast Master, and am absolutely fine with it working a bit better than the Steel Defender. I am not fine with their lazy "explanation" of what a drake is, how you freaking got it, why the heck it starts out as an oversized cat and suddenly is double your size at 15th level, it having most of its ability scores be useless for its own freaking features, and what the hell this ranger is supposed to be doing except for awaiting that level where they finally get a dragon to ride.
This UA is good in theme, but as disappointing as the new Ranger's Favored Foe feature.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Even when they finally get to ride the damned thing it takes it’s turn after yours so it’s the worst Mount ever. WTF?!? Okay, they don’t want it on the same initiative count as you for some lame reasons I can vaguely understand. But If it was even the initiative before yours it would be at least useful.
I agree. I'll have to remember that for my Dragon Rider homebrew so it doesn't have the same problem in the next version, but its a bigger issue with this UA's dragon mount due to them being very slow in comparison.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Agreeing that the Drakewarden while promising is sloppily written. There isn't a lot of context or explanation as to what the Drake actually is ("Dragon energy"? An actual drake with metamorphic properties?) to a degree deficient in comparison to past UA offerings (thinking of Phantom specifically who had "weird" powers). Maybe it's some secret in joke to keep the Ranger the most underdeveloped class in 5e consistent.
I'll be happy to provide constructive feedback when the surveys come out. However, they better have their act together when they release the Dragon Rager Barbarian or DRAGONRAGE activated! I also want to dip two UA to make a DragonragerRanger. It's main class feature is table flipping for effect.
(disclaimer: The Dragon Rage Barbarian is not necessarily a subclass being developed by WotC. Midnightplat is simply trying to push the rule of cool into the will of cool and make it happen via online forum advocacy. Plus, Dragonrage!).
Sooo when can we expect this to be added? Just curious because I'd love to get my hands on these two subclasses.
As has been stated multiple times before in this thread and others, it will likely come out by Monday next week. If it doesn't get put on this site by then, it's because the staff of this site are very busy with other issues (TCoE, mostly), so it may take a bit more patience.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Thank you for giving me an idea for a character: the dragon-chicken riding kobold ranger! But with sincerity, without reflavoring, the Drake is supposed to look like the drakes from Hoard of the Dragon Queen/Volo's, because of Forgotten Realms lore. If they weren't, then they would name the subclass differently. I'm all for reflavoring, but the default flavor is pretty evident.
Unless there's a curve-ball and the subclass is being published in an unexpected Tarkir setting book for MtG.
Again, because of the M:tG Lore, the subclass doesn't make much sense. Drakes in Magic resemble small Wyverns. Nearly all Dragons in Magic can fly, which is a late-game ability for Drakewardens. They could be used FOR Tarkir, but they're probably not MADE for Tarkir.
Having looked into it a bit more, I think Paspcorn's right in that the Drakewarden's Drake is likely derived from the ambush and guard drakes in Dragon Queen, reprinted in Volo's. And given that, the subclass becomes further problematic with its vague guidance on what a drake actually is. Drake's in prior publication are sort of draconic "constructs" of magic derived from scales and a magic ritual rather than biologically reproduced. It's interesting, but in current game lore, is a practice married to the Cult of Tiamat (which I'm sure has evil rangers in its ranks, but I think most players going this route aren't thinking dragon cultist in their character concept). I'm sure the Court of Bahamut could deliver a similar favor to its followers, but yeah it takes some digging to figure out where the subclasses writers and coming from and getting all this, and even after that digging, the ramifications are as much muddied as they are clear. I can appreciate the idea behind the effort, and I actually like the inspiration if it's truly coming from prior Drake precedent, but the execution is "ugh" and it also forces me to wonder whether the in game precedent is being honored or just broken off and run with (which is something that can be done, but there's an art to it to do it right, this feels like cruder kit bashing).
The table giving the Drakewarden to "unlock" the drake summoning seems ritualistically flavored from Dragon Queen (the egg binding, the contemplation of scales, all those seem more derivative of the "gruesome" ritual described for ambush and guard drakes, and the simpleton thing is certainly in line with the more construct than creature flavor I'm getting as it sets into my thinking.
Thank you for giving me an idea for a character: the dragon-chicken riding kobold ranger! But with sincerity, without reflavoring, the Drake is supposed to look like the drakes from Hoard of the Dragon Queen/Volo's, because of Forgotten Realms lore. If they weren't, then they would name the subclass differently. I'm all for reflavoring, but the default flavor is pretty evident.
Unless there's a curve-ball and the subclass is being published in an unexpected Tarkir setting book for MtG.
Again, because of the M:tG Lore, the subclass doesn't make much sense. Drakes in Magic resemble small Wyverns. Nearly all Dragons in Magic can fly, which is a late-game ability for Drakewardens. They could be used FOR Tarkir, but they're probably not MADE for Tarkir.
Having looked into it a bit more, I think Paspcorn's right in that the Drakewarden's Drake is likely derived from the ambush and guard drakes in Dragon Queen, reprinted in Volo's. And given that, the subclass becomes further problematic with its vague guidance on what a drake actually is. Drake's in prior publication are sort of draconic "constructs" of magic derived from scales and a magic ritual rather than biologically reproduced. It's interesting, but in current game lore, is a practice married to the Cult of Tiamat. I'm sure the Court of Bahamut could deliver a similar favor to its followers, but yeah it takes some digging to figure out where the subclasses writers and coming from and getting all this, and even after that digging, the ramifications are as much muddied as they are clear. I can appreciate the idea behind the effort, and I actually like the inspiration if it's truly coming from prior Drake precedent, but the execution is "ugh" and it also forces me to wonder whether the in game precedent is being honored or just broken off and run with (which is something that can be done, but there's an art to it to do it right, this feels like cruder kit bashing).
Building off this, I have looked over M:TG lore, and, to my knowledge, there is nothing that correlates to the Drakewarden. Drakes in Magic are defined as 2 winged, 2 legged dragons that can fly. The Dragons that cannot fly can be listed on one hand, with all of them either being Asiatic style dragons, Robots, Shapeshifters, or this thing. After level 15, most Drakes or Dragons from Magic could be recreated with the Drakewarden's drake, however.
Thank you for giving me an idea for a character: the dragon-chicken riding kobold ranger! But with sincerity, without reflavoring, the Drake is supposed to look like the drakes from Hoard of the Dragon Queen/Volo's, because of Forgotten Realms lore. If they weren't, then they would name the subclass differently. I'm all for reflavoring, but the default flavor is pretty evident.
Unless there's a curve-ball and the subclass is being published in an unexpected Tarkir setting book for MtG.
Again, because of the M:tG Lore, the subclass doesn't make much sense. Drakes in Magic resemble small Wyverns. Nearly all Dragons in Magic can fly, which is a late-game ability for Drakewardens. They could be used FOR Tarkir, but they're probably not MADE for Tarkir.
Having looked into it a bit more, I think Paspcorn's right in that the Drakewarden's Drake is likely derived from the ambush and guard drakes in Dragon Queen, reprinted in Volo's. And given that, the subclass becomes further problematic with its vague guidance on what a drake actually is. Drake's in prior publication are sort of draconic "constructs" of magic derived from scales and a magic ritual rather than biologically reproduced. It's interesting, but in current game lore, is a practice married to the Cult of Tiamat (which I'm sure has evil rangers in its ranks, but I think most players going this route aren't thinking dragon cultist in their character concept). I'm sure the Court of Bahamut could deliver a similar favor to its followers, but yeah it takes some digging to figure out where the subclasses writers and coming from and getting all this, and even after that digging, the ramifications are as much muddied as they are clear. I can appreciate the idea behind the effort, and I actually like the inspiration if it's truly coming from prior Drake precedent, but the execution is "ugh" and it also forces me to wonder whether the in game precedent is being honored or just broken off and run with (which is something that can be done, but there's an art to it to do it right, this feels like cruder kit bashing).
The table giving the Drakewarden to "unlock" the drake summoning seems ritualistically flavored from Dragon Queen (the egg binding, the contemplation of scales, all those seem more derivative of the "gruesome" ritual described for ambush and guard drakes, and the simpleton thing is certainly in line with the more construct than creature flavor I'm getting as it sets into my thinking.
In 2nd Edition, Drakes were smaller, weaker, and less-intelligent cousins of true dragons that lacked most of their special abilities and were thus better suited for being tamed and used as mounts or war beasts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
In 2nd Edition, Drakes were smaller, weaker, and less-intelligent cousins of true dragons that lacked most of their special abilities and were thus better suited for being tamed and used as mounts or war beasts.
Yes, but in the current edition there's stat block precedent and the present edition lore describes those drake's creation ritual in a manner from which the drake warden's draconic gift table seems derivative. So rather than a call back to 2nd edition species, this "power" seems more in line with present edition usage of the word/idea drake, just more hazy and question begging than grounding in the write up. It needs work if I'm to untap the real ultimate power of a Drakewarden Dragonrager.
I agree. I think this drakewarden needs a lot of work before they publish it in whatever it is intended for. I could fix the Ascendant Dragon Monk easily, but the Drakewarden Ranger is much more difficult to fix, due to the fact that they seem to have no idea what they want this subclass to be, other than "dragon/drake, better Beast Master Ranger."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Unless there's a curve-ball and the subclass is being published in an unexpected Tarkir setting book for MtG.
UA typically takes a few weeks to hit D&D Beyond, and with all the effort being thrown at Tashas? I don't see this happening before Nov 17 but I would love to be wrong.
Again, because of the M:tG Lore, the subclass doesn't make much sense. Drakes in Magic resemble small Wyverns. Nearly all Dragons in Magic can fly, which is a late-game ability for Drakewardens. They could be used FOR Tarkir, but they're probably not MADE for Tarkir.
Okay, I have finally had a chance to really look at this thing and here are my thoughts:
Way of the Ascendant Dragon
The name is a bit pretentious, but if they didn’t throw “ascendant” in there it would offend the Bruce Lee fans.
Draconic Disciple. That first burley point should be 1ce/turn or should require a Ki cost.
Breath of the Dragon. I really do not like Class features that key off of Proficiency bonus like that. I wish Racial features did, but I prefer class features to either be class level dependent or require investment in an Ability Score. And doesn’t this just kinda drop a coil on Dragonborn? I mean, this special dragon energy they learn to channel is supposed to be superior to a creature actually born with a breath weapon?!? 🤨
Wings Unfurled. Exactly how long is that vanishing supposed to last and what exactly do they mean by "vanish” anyway?!? Is it an invisibility thing? Is a teleports thing? Is it just a bit of flavor text? This is very poorly worded.
Aspect of the Wyrm. I expect this to get toned down by final printing. I mean, c’mon. There are Paladin Oaths with auras that aren’t this good.
Ascendant Aspect. If this makes it to final printing without a hard nerf I will be absolutely gobsmacked. Is broke.
Drakewarden
Man, they are really starting to run out of good names, aren’t they? And that Origin table. “You study a dragon’s scale and form a bond.” Really?!? 🙄 How many dragon scales have your PCs handled over the decades. This is just a weaksauce line here. Not critical all, but c’mon.
Draconic Gift. Okay
I’ma stop right here. The rest of this is basically just a mishmash of OP and bad writing that I don’t even want to reread again to give a real review.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'll finish the Drakewarden
Draconic Gift. not much here. language and useless-except-for pro spell
Drake Companion. too small duration per day. this and draconic gift is kinda weak because of the duration and it's statblock isn't that good either
Bond of Fang and Scale. much better, but still affected by the short duration
Drake’s Breath. seriously? isn't this Drakewarden? not becoming a dragon yourself?
Perfected Bond. not bad. you could say drake's breath and this balances out the other features
overall, they should focus more on the drakewarden lore. make the duration longer and nerf the other features. come up with a drake-exclusive feature replacing drake's breath
Yeah, this UA is one of the more badly written and designed ones I've seen in awhile. I (and quite a lot of DMs) could have easily done a better job on this that WotC did.
I'm fine with the monk subclass getting a breath weapon. I'm fine with them getting the weird switching out damage thing that mostly becomes useless beyond 5th level. I'm fine with them temporarily growing wings, lighting people on fire, and all that jazz. I'm not fine with all of the unneeded "prof. bonus per long rest, use ki to use more" features.
I am also fine with the ranger getting a more specific and intelligent animal companion than the Beast Master, and am absolutely fine with it working a bit better than the Steel Defender. I am not fine with their lazy "explanation" of what a drake is, how you freaking got it, why the heck it starts out as an oversized cat and suddenly is double your size at 15th level, it having most of its ability scores be useless for its own freaking features, and what the hell this ranger is supposed to be doing except for awaiting that level where they finally get a dragon to ride.
This UA is good in theme, but as disappointing as the new Ranger's Favored Foe feature.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Even when they finally get to ride the damned thing it takes it’s turn after yours so it’s the worst Mount ever. WTF?!? Okay, they don’t want it on the same initiative count as you for some lame reasons I can vaguely understand. But If it was even the initiative before yours it would be at least useful.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I agree. I'll have to remember that for my Dragon Rider homebrew so it doesn't have the same problem in the next version, but its a bigger issue with this UA's dragon mount due to them being very slow in comparison.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Agreeing that the Drakewarden while promising is sloppily written. There isn't a lot of context or explanation as to what the Drake actually is ("Dragon energy"? An actual drake with metamorphic properties?) to a degree deficient in comparison to past UA offerings (thinking of Phantom specifically who had "weird" powers). Maybe it's some secret in joke to keep the Ranger the most underdeveloped class in 5e consistent.
I'll be happy to provide constructive feedback when the surveys come out. However, they better have their act together when they release the Dragon Rager Barbarian or DRAGONRAGE activated! I also want to dip two UA to make a DragonragerRanger. It's main class feature is table flipping for effect.
(disclaimer: The Dragon Rage Barbarian is not necessarily a subclass being developed by WotC. Midnightplat is simply trying to push the rule of cool into the will of cool and make it happen via online forum advocacy. Plus, Dragonrage!).
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Sooo when can we expect this to be added? Just curious because I'd love to get my hands on these two subclasses.
As has been stated multiple times before in this thread and others, it will likely come out by Monday next week. If it doesn't get put on this site by then, it's because the staff of this site are very busy with other issues (TCoE, mostly), so it may take a bit more patience.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I didn't see it, I was merely asking out of curiosity.
No biggie. But a general rule of thumb is always “the following Monday.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah, no problem. I didn't mean to sound rude or annoyed, sorry if I came across that way. I would like for them to put it on the site soon, too.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
No worries, thank you though.
Having looked into it a bit more, I think Paspcorn's right in that the Drakewarden's Drake is likely derived from the ambush and guard drakes in Dragon Queen, reprinted in Volo's. And given that, the subclass becomes further problematic with its vague guidance on what a drake actually is. Drake's in prior publication are sort of draconic "constructs" of magic derived from scales and a magic ritual rather than biologically reproduced. It's interesting, but in current game lore, is a practice married to the Cult of Tiamat (which I'm sure has evil rangers in its ranks, but I think most players going this route aren't thinking dragon cultist in their character concept). I'm sure the Court of Bahamut could deliver a similar favor to its followers, but yeah it takes some digging to figure out where the subclasses writers and coming from and getting all this, and even after that digging, the ramifications are as much muddied as they are clear. I can appreciate the idea behind the effort, and I actually like the inspiration if it's truly coming from prior Drake precedent, but the execution is "ugh" and it also forces me to wonder whether the in game precedent is being honored or just broken off and run with (which is something that can be done, but there's an art to it to do it right, this feels like cruder kit bashing).
The table giving the Drakewarden to "unlock" the drake summoning seems ritualistically flavored from Dragon Queen (the egg binding, the contemplation of scales, all those seem more derivative of the "gruesome" ritual described for ambush and guard drakes, and the simpleton thing is certainly in line with the more construct than creature flavor I'm getting as it sets into my thinking.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Building off this, I have looked over M:TG lore, and, to my knowledge, there is nothing that correlates to the Drakewarden. Drakes in Magic are defined as 2 winged, 2 legged dragons that can fly. The Dragons that cannot fly can be listed on one hand, with all of them either being Asiatic style dragons, Robots, Shapeshifters, or this thing. After level 15, most Drakes or Dragons from Magic could be recreated with the Drakewarden's drake, however.
In 2nd Edition, Drakes were smaller, weaker, and less-intelligent cousins of true dragons that lacked most of their special abilities and were thus better suited for being tamed and used as mounts or war beasts.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yes, but in the current edition there's stat block precedent and the present edition lore describes those drake's creation ritual in a manner from which the drake warden's draconic gift table seems derivative. So rather than a call back to 2nd edition species, this "power" seems more in line with present edition usage of the word/idea drake, just more hazy and question begging than grounding in the write up. It needs work if I'm to untap the real ultimate power of a Drakewarden Dragonrager.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I agree. I think this drakewarden needs a lot of work before they publish it in whatever it is intended for. I could fix the Ascendant Dragon Monk easily, but the Drakewarden Ranger is much more difficult to fix, due to the fact that they seem to have no idea what they want this subclass to be, other than "dragon/drake, better Beast Master Ranger."
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms