Tasha's Cauldron of Everything is by far the most controversial book ever made in 5e. It changes core parts of the game, and adds a whole slew of new subclasses to the fray. I don't own the book, and want to know if you personally think the book was worth it. It so, what were the sections you liked the most? If not, what brought the book down for you. Thank you in advance for your responses.
First off the features that are avaliable for charecter customization are all stuff that could be implemented with homebrew options for you and your campaign anyway, I have played in several campaigns that had implemented the free stat increases over standard racial increases some people enjoy this flexibility others do not. Like most things in d&d this is down to preferences of players in each game.
That being said Tasha's extra feats and class options are the reason I personally purchased my copy on d&d beyond I enjoy making charecters and having all the options available to me is important for any games I run if players wish to use such things. I love some of the new subclasses and think the things like battle master builds are great for new players to work with to get something they want out of how they wish to play. I am always a sucker for new stuff in terms of feats, spells and items. There are some changes that people already dislike the main ones that springs to mind are the booming blade and green flame changes as it changes a few build ideas that utilise it.
Overall was it worth it for me, yes mostly for the players I dm to have access to the content and for me to just play in the charecter builder (seriously I have a problem at one point I had about 130 charecters)
Would it be worth it for you? Hard to say really as there will likely be things that you like and dislike in the book but again if there are any things in d&d your not really a fan of speak with your dm the heart and soul of the game is that the rules are just a guide if something out of the rules fits a session or a charecter concept and your dm is cool with it work with them to set a different rule for whatever it is.
My biggest criticism isn't the book itself, as I find it nice that the previously UA content has been released as official content, but D&D Beyond itself. I'm sure it'll be fixed soon, but the variant class features and alternate race ability scores aren't selectable in the character creator. I just feel like that is something that should have been prepared leading up to the actual release of the book.
Edit: This is coming from an emotional place and is unfair to the hard work the devs have been doing. I enjoy the book a lot. While the main criticism people throw is that a lot of the rules and stuff are easily homebrewed, I think it's nice to have it written down where new players or other players not overly active on forums or too keen on homebrew can find it.
o shid, thanks. I wasn't aware of that post. I'm happy about the book, of course, but I was a bit unhappy about the lack of character creator content and am a bit overly emotional, I'll admit.
My biggest criticism isn't the book itself, as I find it nice that the previously UA content has been released as official content, but D&D Beyond itself. I'm sure it'll be fixed soon, but the variant class features and alternate race ability scores aren't selectable in the character creator. I just feel like that is something that should have been prepared leading up to the actual release of the book.
If you've been following their Dev Updates, they've been working like crazy to get everything implemented, and only saw the final copy a few weeks ago(remember that D&D Beyond is a separate company from Wizards Of The Coast). Incorporating things like the alternate class features required a complete rewrite of their character builder(phases of which have been implemented over the past year). They said the character builder stuff for Tasha's would be available this morning. It isn't even 9am Eastern Time, and I'm pretty sure they're on the West Coast. Cut them a little slack.
its a book full of options. some people don't like some of the options so they don't like the book. Just remember, that optional means optional. You don't think something works in your campaign it is ok not to use it.
Yea, that's really all it boils down to in my opinion. Most people who hate the options will at least allow the classes, though, so that's nice.
Not going to lie though, if I ever get the chance to be a player again and the DM doesn't let me use the variant features for Ranger I just might not play. Ranger has been basically forced to lean on its subclass features since its inception, and now its finally getting the stuff it needs to be functional outside of a forest/cave/hillside, or relying on hating specific races and hoping your DM puts them in so you can use your feature. Druids don't get screwed for being far away from their preferred landscape, why does Ranger have to be?
its a book full of options. some people don't like some of the options so they don't like the book. Just remember, that optional means optional. You don't think something works in your campaign it is ok not to use it.
I'm kinda curious to see how this book will be handled when it comes to Adventurer's League. Does this mean someone wouldn't be allowed to play for example a Gloom Stalker Ranger and use the new Ranger class options from Tasha's, if it's still PHB+1?
If “we could have homebrewed most of this” is an argument against buying this book, it’s an argument against buying pretty much anything ever again. There’s value in things being official - more portability, more clarity, fewer complaints or arguments. I have a bit of flow in groups I play with or DM for, particularly online. I’m not opposed to significant homebrew at each of those tables but, you can take my word for it, it gets exhausting to have to track what goes where at some point. And I’m pretty easygoing, arguments about one player getting this or that while others don’t get what they want or even have some options nerfed or taken away just slide off me like water on a duck and I rarely go for homebrew options as a player to begin with. Homebrew can be great, but homebrew can also be a hassle.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
its a book full of options. some people don't like some of the options so they don't like the book. Just remember, that optional means optional. You don't think something works in your campaign it is ok not to use it.
Yes that is true, but some of us, as DMs, have players who simply MUST have every possible option, and will be very unhappy if we say no to any of them. Which, for world reasons, I am going to HAVE to do. I sense many long discussions in my near future... especially when I disallow the Psionic-related feats like Telekinesis and Telepathy, because I have other plans for Psionics in my world and these do not fit those plans.
And before anyone says, "You're the DM -- it's your world and campaign." Yes... and no. It's OUR world, as a group at the table, and as a DM, I try and find as many ways as possible to say yes to my players. This means I'm probably going to allow more options than I normally would, because as a DM, I try to "take the hit" on being unhappy over making a player unhappy unless it's REALLY going to make me miserable.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Not going to lie though, if I ever get the chance to be a player again and the DM doesn't let me use the variant features for Ranger I just might not play. Ranger has been basically forced to lean on its subclass features since its inception, and now its finally getting the stuff it needs to be functional outside of a forest/cave/hillside, or relying on hating specific races and hoping your DM puts them in so you can use your feature. Druids don't get screwed for being far away from their preferred landscape, why does Ranger have to be?
This is another gift of the rather dubious (IMHO at least) 2e which thought it clever to change the AD&D bonus vs. giant class humanoids to something that you had to chose from. And ever since, this has been repeated through the editions because they thought that the favoured enemy (and after that, they added terrain) added flavour to the class. It's always a tough decision when designing a game do you cater to the icon of the class or do you break it. These, whatever you do, you will receive more hate than love anyway...
That is a fair point. I'm a fairly new player (Played a little pathfinder then got into 5e), so I was unaware of the history of the feature. That being said, I just feel like at a certain point, homage to the past just ruins the present. I've seen countless threads about why Ranger is terrible compared to other classes, and even though I will fully acknowledge that it is a competent class in combat and has the potential to be as lethal or more so than the other martial classes, It's just weird to me that class features didn't really do anything beyond high flavor and granting languages. I unno, I'm probably biased here, I've always thought of rangers as less "master of the wilderness and out and about" and more "mystical hunters/trackers in tune with nature", so the new stuff really spoke to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
Well I haven't read all of it yet but I do know several things that I hate with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns, and at least a couple of them one of my players already loves.... sigh.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
If not, what brought the book down for you. Thank you in advance for your responses.
Everything.
I found most of the subclasses uninteresting while they were in UA, and I still find them uninteresting now.
Of the subclasses I did find interesting, the ones I have checked have seen change at that I do not appreciate.
They have continued the trend of using Proficiency bonus as a thing for class features to key off of, and I think that’s horrible design. Class features should either key off of class level, or Ability score in which the player has to invest. This design will see ridiculous multiclass builds with 3 levels in everything to collect as many of these abilities as possible, and it’s horseshit.
The above is one of the reasons that Psionics has been murdered in 5e.
The CFVs have been nerfed to the point of WTF?!?
The Lineage system is one of the worst things to ever happen to D&D.
I think new content is received very differently due to a huge amount of it being available here as UA for months first.
If this was the first time we were seeing all these new subclasses and CFV, I think the community would be ecstatic right now. But we've not only seen a lot of the content, we've actually played with it, so it doesn't feel new. This is the good stuff that would normally be overshadowing the two main complaints of the book that I like to call Changing Racial Stats is The End of the World and Not My Psionics.
This is another gift of the rather dubious (IMHO at least) 2e which thought it clever to change the AD&D bonus vs. giant class humanoids to something that you had to chose from. And ever since, this has been repeated through the editions because they thought that the favoured enemy (and after that, they added terrain) added flavour to the class. It's always a tough decision when designing a game do you cater to the icon of the class or do you break it. These, whatever you do, you will receive more hate than love anyway...
Why not both? I certainly agree it adds flavor to the class. The problem is that those flavor features were given the same weight as real mechanical features that other classes were getting at the same levels. I would be fine with keeping both Enemy and Terrain in the class, just throw them in at level 1 or something for what they really are - little flavor ribbons with no large effect on the game unless the DM specifically builds for it.
That is a fair point. I'm a fairly new player (Played a little pathfinder then got into 5e), so I was unaware of the history of the feature. That being said, I just feel like at a certain point, homage to the past just ruins the present. I've seen countless threads about why Ranger is terrible compared to other classes...
The problem with this is that it is almost always in appearance about "I can't play the ranger that I would like to play..." but when you dig it's almost always "...alright it's there, but the real problem is that it is technically underpowered and you won't ever see me playing on because it sucks..."
There are tons of versions, and I agree that they suffer from the choice of enemies and environment, but actually, this could be fun to roleplay by saying things like "I'm more used to swamps than forest, but I can try, etc." Playing the game does not always mean succeeding and in any case, when going up in level, you get a better chance to understand where the campaign is going to go and who the enemies are going to be. Moreover, they made it from the start that this has little combat importance, it's mostly about non-combat stuff anyway, so minmaxers should not be too frustrated.
Now, with TCoE, you have things which have a mechanical effect in combat, and still minmaxers complain about them. Conclusion, some people will never be satisfied until they get something really OP...
True. I quite like the alternate choices, I don't necessarily want some fighter with druid spells, just something to play into the tracker aesthetic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
Tasha's Cauldron of Everything is by far the most controversial book ever made in 5e. It changes core parts of the game, and adds a whole slew of new subclasses to the fray. I don't own the book, and want to know if you personally think the book was worth it. It so, what were the sections you liked the most? If not, what brought the book down for you. Thank you in advance for your responses.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Someone else made a thread about how they think it is a bit meh
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/88169-tashas-is-a-bit-meh
and this about chapter 4
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/88182-tashas-love-chapter-4
When players get creative.
First off the features that are avaliable for charecter customization are all stuff that could be implemented with homebrew options for you and your campaign anyway, I have played in several campaigns that had implemented the free stat increases over standard racial increases some people enjoy this flexibility others do not. Like most things in d&d this is down to preferences of players in each game.
That being said Tasha's extra feats and class options are the reason I personally purchased my copy on d&d beyond I enjoy making charecters and having all the options available to me is important for any games I run if players wish to use such things. I love some of the new subclasses and think the things like battle master builds are great for new players to work with to get something they want out of how they wish to play. I am always a sucker for new stuff in terms of feats, spells and items. There are some changes that people already dislike the main ones that springs to mind are the booming blade and green flame changes as it changes a few build ideas that utilise it.
Overall was it worth it for me, yes mostly for the players I dm to have access to the content and for me to just play in the charecter builder (seriously I have a problem at one point I had about 130 charecters)
Would it be worth it for you? Hard to say really as there will likely be things that you like and dislike in the book but again if there are any things in d&d your not really a fan of speak with your dm the heart and soul of the game is that the rules are just a guide if something out of the rules fits a session or a charecter concept and your dm is cool with it work with them to set a different rule for whatever it is.
Role often and roll high my friend!
My biggest criticism isn't the book itself, as I find it nice that the previously UA content has been released as official content, but D&D Beyond itself. I'm sure it'll be fixed soon, but the variant class features and alternate race ability scores aren't selectable in the character creator. I just feel like that is something that should have been prepared leading up to the actual release of the book.
Edit: This is coming from an emotional place and is unfair to the hard work the devs have been doing. I enjoy the book a lot. While the main criticism people throw is that a lot of the rules and stuff are easily homebrewed, I think it's nice to have it written down where new players or other players not overly active on forums or too keen on homebrew can find it.
o shid, thanks. I wasn't aware of that post. I'm happy about the book, of course, but I was a bit unhappy about the lack of character creator content and am a bit overly emotional, I'll admit.
If you've been following their Dev Updates, they've been working like crazy to get everything implemented, and only saw the final copy a few weeks ago(remember that D&D Beyond is a separate company from Wizards Of The Coast). Incorporating things like the alternate class features required a complete rewrite of their character builder(phases of which have been implemented over the past year). They said the character builder stuff for Tasha's would be available this morning. It isn't even 9am Eastern Time, and I'm pretty sure they're on the West Coast. Cut them a little slack.
its a book full of options. some people don't like some of the options so they don't like the book. Just remember, that optional means optional. You don't think something works in your campaign it is ok not to use it.
Yea, that's really all it boils down to in my opinion. Most people who hate the options will at least allow the classes, though, so that's nice.
Not going to lie though, if I ever get the chance to be a player again and the DM doesn't let me use the variant features for Ranger I just might not play. Ranger has been basically forced to lean on its subclass features since its inception, and now its finally getting the stuff it needs to be functional outside of a forest/cave/hillside, or relying on hating specific races and hoping your DM puts them in so you can use your feature. Druids don't get screwed for being far away from their preferred landscape, why does Ranger have to be?
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
I'm kinda curious to see how this book will be handled when it comes to Adventurer's League. Does this mean someone wouldn't be allowed to play for example a Gloom Stalker Ranger and use the new Ranger class options from Tasha's, if it's still PHB+1?
If “we could have homebrewed most of this” is an argument against buying this book, it’s an argument against buying pretty much anything ever again. There’s value in things being official - more portability, more clarity, fewer complaints or arguments. I have a bit of flow in groups I play with or DM for, particularly online. I’m not opposed to significant homebrew at each of those tables but, you can take my word for it, it gets exhausting to have to track what goes where at some point. And I’m pretty easygoing, arguments about one player getting this or that while others don’t get what they want or even have some options nerfed or taken away just slide off me like water on a duck and I rarely go for homebrew options as a player to begin with. Homebrew can be great, but homebrew can also be a hassle.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Yes that is true, but some of us, as DMs, have players who simply MUST have every possible option, and will be very unhappy if we say no to any of them. Which, for world reasons, I am going to HAVE to do. I sense many long discussions in my near future... especially when I disallow the Psionic-related feats like Telekinesis and Telepathy, because I have other plans for Psionics in my world and these do not fit those plans.
And before anyone says, "You're the DM -- it's your world and campaign." Yes... and no. It's OUR world, as a group at the table, and as a DM, I try and find as many ways as possible to say yes to my players. This means I'm probably going to allow more options than I normally would, because as a DM, I try to "take the hit" on being unhappy over making a player unhappy unless it's REALLY going to make me miserable.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
That is a fair point. I'm a fairly new player (Played a little pathfinder then got into 5e), so I was unaware of the history of the feature. That being said, I just feel like at a certain point, homage to the past just ruins the present. I've seen countless threads about why Ranger is terrible compared to other classes, and even though I will fully acknowledge that it is a competent class in combat and has the potential to be as lethal or more so than the other martial classes, It's just weird to me that class features didn't really do anything beyond high flavor and granting languages.
I unno, I'm probably biased here, I've always thought of rangers as less "master of the wilderness and out and about" and more "mystical hunters/trackers in tune with nature", so the new stuff really spoke to me.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
I thoroughly enjoy the book and it’s contents
The vast majority of this travesty falls under this category for me.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Well I haven't read all of it yet but I do know several things that I hate with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns, and at least a couple of them one of my players already loves.... sigh.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Everything.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think new content is received very differently due to a huge amount of it being available here as UA for months first.
If this was the first time we were seeing all these new subclasses and CFV, I think the community would be ecstatic right now. But we've not only seen a lot of the content, we've actually played with it, so it doesn't feel new. This is the good stuff that would normally be overshadowing the two main complaints of the book that I like to call Changing Racial Stats is The End of the World and Not My Psionics.
Why not both? I certainly agree it adds flavor to the class. The problem is that those flavor features were given the same weight as real mechanical features that other classes were getting at the same levels. I would be fine with keeping both Enemy and Terrain in the class, just throw them in at level 1 or something for what they really are - little flavor ribbons with no large effect on the game unless the DM specifically builds for it.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
True. I quite like the alternate choices, I don't necessarily want some fighter with druid spells, just something to play into the tracker aesthetic.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
Did the other feats survive intact?
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
What other feats?