Dnd Celebration has given us a preview of the official Drake Warden, to be released in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons in October.
What do we think about this version of the subclass? How does it compare to the UA version? How does it compare to its closest analogue, the Beast Master? Either the PHB version or Tasha's.
There's a definite improvement from the UA version, particularly at 7th level. It flat out allows you to use the drake as a mount then instead of at 15th level, albeit with a fair trade off. Amusingly, the inability to use the drake as a flying mount doesn't also forbid you to ride it as a canoe or small boat. So you still have a lot of terrain you can effectively circumvent.
I’m not familiar with the UA, but one thing I don’t like is you have to give up your bonus action AND and it only acts after you. Seems like if you have to give up your BA you should be allowed to better coordinate with it and have it attack first if you want.
I can’t be the only one thinking of dusting off the old Mounted Combat feat at 8th level, right? Granted, the advantage on melee attacks wouldn’t reliably kick in until 15th level, but redirecting attacks from the drake to you and giving the drake Evasion while you’re riding it would certainly help with survivability.
The new summon rules are huge IMO. Before it only lasted a couple hours, which made it feel a lot more like a spell than a companion. Now it sticks around until it dies, at which point you can spend a spell slot to "revive" it, or you can do so at any time to change its element.
Also probably an oversight, but if you have a small ally in the party they can totally use the dragon as a flying mount at 7 even if you can't.
The new summon rules are huge IMO. Before it only lasted a couple hours, which made it feel a lot more like a spell than a companion. Now it sticks around until it dies, at which point you can spend a spell slot to "revive" it, or you can do so at any time to change its element.
Also probably an oversight, but if you have a small ally in the party they can totally use the dragon as a flying mount at 7 even if you can't.
Yeah, manually banning a Small Drakewarden from riding their drake into the sky while allowing all other Small creatures to do so is incredibly poor rules-writing. I suspect they only playtested this with Medium Rangers, if at all.
There are other critical flaws as well, like the lack of access to magical damage at 7th level, and ignoring the Ranger's Wisdom for melee accuracy despite using the Ranger's Wisdom for the save DC on its breath. Also not a fan of Infused Strikes only working on weapon attacks - Rangers are half casters, and their best subclasses acknowledge that fact. Speaking of which, why doesn't the Drakewarden get any additional spells known? I thought we were past this.
Dynamic damage immunity for the Drake and Resistance for the Ranger is excellent, though, and potentially a fair trade for how incredibly bad at Stealth the drake is.
We'll see how this shakes out, but I expect this subclass to directly compete with the Tasha's Beast Master, and which one "wins" will depend on specific build choices, but for most builds I would pick the Beast Master.
The new summon rules are huge IMO. Before it only lasted a couple hours, which made it feel a lot more like a spell than a companion. Now it sticks around until it dies, at which point you can spend a spell slot to "revive" it, or you can do so at any time to change its element.
Also probably an oversight, but if you have a small ally in the party they can totally use the dragon as a flying mount at 7 even if you can't.
Yeah, manually banning a Small Drakewarden from riding their drake into the sky while allowing all other Small creatures to do so is incredibly poor rules-writing. I suspect they only playtested this with Medium Rangers, if at all.
There are other critical flaws as well, like the lack of access to magical damage at 7th level, and ignoring the Ranger's Wisdom for melee accuracy despite using the Ranger's Wisdom for the save DC on its breath. Also not a fan of Infused Strikes only working on weapon attacks - Rangers are half casters, and their best subclasses acknowledge that fact. Speaking of which, why doesn't the Drakewarden get any additional spells known? I thought we were past this.
Dynamic damage immunity for the Drake and Resistance for the Ranger is excellent, though, and potentially a fair trade for how incredibly bad at Stealth the drake is.
We'll see how this shakes out, but I expect this subclass to directly compete with the Tasha's Beast Master, and which one "wins" will depend on specific build choices, but for most builds I would pick the Beast Master.
When at least half of their damage is elemental that limits the issue of needing Magical Damage to begin with. Also Not using the Ranger's Spell Casting Modifier for their attack roll is actually a benefit over something like the Primal Beasts at lower level unless your going for more of a Wis Primary build, which is not the common way of doing them.
It's also not true that the best subclasses acknowledge the half-caster status. Gloom Stalker for example is almost entirely based around weapon attacks with it's abilities and most of it's extra spell list amounts to "well most of these spells are pointless unless i make effort to make them work. but I suppose they are better than nothing for somebody." And it's often regarded as one of, if not the best subclass that rangers have. Though Personally. I consider the spell list as might as well not Exist except for Greater Invisibility Spell.
But I'd argue your getting potentially more that is basically constantly usable rather than potentially situational, or only niche usable like some of the subclass spell lists. With the fact that you get resistance, the ability to add elemental damage not just to yours but also allies attacks basically endlessly for just the cost of the drakes reaction, A fairly solid breath weapon attack at level 11, and eventually even a on call resistance to any one attack potentially every round for your only the cost of your own reaction. Some of these abilities are as strong as or arguably somewhat better than the spells you would get, on top of having a pet to fight with you.
It all adds up, specially when combined with certain feats like Mounted Combatant that something like a beast master has a harder time using, to something that is really strong without being completely over shadowing as a pet subclass.
If this is the form that it is going to be officially published in. It's got some interesting give and take compared to the Beast Master I'd really have to consider hard any time I wanted to play a pet based ranger.
If this is the form that it is going to be officially published in. It's got some interesting give and take compared to the Beast Master I'd really have to consider hard any time I wanted to play a pet based ranger.
There are some builds where it could be interesting, but I suspect for most of them Beast Master is going to be radically better. The best way I can think of to use the Drake is to have the party's Kobold Rogue ride it into battle, which is admittedly a good way to get your little buddy up into the air.
Personally, I feel the Drake Warden works just fine mechanically. But man it needs some streamlining. Like, it's cool that most of its damage is elemental, but the fact that its base isn't means you're going to be doing a lot of unnecessary math as you go up in levels and start facing monsters with resistances to nonmagical attacks. Every time you hit you'll have to calculate the base damage and the elemental damage separately, then cut the base damage in half and add it to the total of the elemental damage. It feels unnecessary. And, honestly, like an oversight. If they don't catch this and fix it before the official release, I fully expect it to be included in an errata.
Speaking of oversights, I'm 99% sure it's an oversight that you can't fly on the drake at level 7 but your goblin/gnome/halfling buddy can. I expect that to also get errata'd at some point.
Not using your Spell Attack Modifier is fine. It kinda bothers my OCD that it's the only pet since Tasha's not to, but it's...fine on its own. But the scaling does have a lower cap than your spell attack modifier, that's for sure. You cap at +9 vs the T-Beast Master, who caps at +11. If, however, you're neglecting your Wisdom as a Ranger (which I don't recommend. You want Wisdom for Perception, Survival, and Deft Explorer: Tireless,) then a fixed +9 will be better than the T-Beast Master. But it's still nothing to write home about on its own.
And on a personal note, I, too, wanted an expanded spell list.
Overall, I think the Drake Warden works. And it works really well. But there are parts of it that are clunky af and need another pass.
If this is the form that it is going to be officially published in. It's got some interesting give and take compared to the Beast Master I'd really have to consider hard any time I wanted to play a pet based ranger.
There are some builds where it could be interesting, but I suspect for most of them Beast Master is going to be radically better. The best way I can think of to use the Drake is to have the party's Kobold Rogue ride it into battle, which is admittedly a good way to get your little buddy up into the air.
Beast master isn't radically better from looking at it. I'd have to look at the Specifics But early on the Drake is going to hit slightly better on average though the Primal Beasts cap out slightly higher but this isn't going to usually be noticeable until high level.
The Drake has the advantage defensively, With at least 1 better AC than the primal beasts as well as a better hit dice, and it has the damage immunity. not to mention that it has proficiency in two good Attributes in having Dex and Wis save proficiency. But the Primal Beasts and some PHB beasts have potentially faster primary movement, several of which aren't ground based, and possibly effects other than damage on their attacks which can be useful in a variety of ways.
Senses wise it oddly loses out slightly because it only has darkvision 40' despite the fact that the default is usually 60'. It's a weird little thing that makes me wonder if it's a typo but it exists. and it doesn't seem to have any proficiency in skills though unfortunately. But at the same time. The couple of skills you'd have them do they either have at least a little attribute bonus in them or the Ranger can help things out with things like Pass Without Trace that they commonly cast on the party anyway.
The Damage for both of them is also fairly similar despite being structured differently. Though the Drake never gets what is effectively a form of multi-attack. It does get things like the breath attack and even an extra die on it's basic attack and the Drake has the advantage of a once a turn damage ability that is practically infinitely usable. So even if it doesn't show up in the drake's own damage roll. It is still increase damage per round that could only happen by the drake.
Personally, I feel the Drake Warden works just fine mechanically. But man it needs some streamlining. Like, it's cool that most of its damage is elemental, but the fact that its base isn't means you're going to be doing a lot of unnecessary math as you go up in levels and start facing monsters with resistances to nonmagical attacks. Every time you hit you'll have to calculate the base damage and the elemental damage separately, then cut the base damage in half and add it to the total of the elemental damage. It feels unnecessary. And, honestly, like an oversight. If they don't catch this and fix it before the official release, I fully expect it to be included in an errata.
This is actually something that happens with spells and stuff anyway. There's always a chance that anything with two types of damage is going to have resistance or immunity to one of those types. The Reality is that resistance to non-magical physical damage isn't all that common. So your not going to be doing math like that all that often. Your more often going to run into resistances of the Elemental Damage than you are the physical damage. But it's just in general a good idea to be mindful of how much of what kind of damage your doing just as a matter of course so that it's just rote habit and easy to deal with the few times it does come up. Because your not going to necessarily immediately know when they are at a glance.
Personally, I feel the Drake Warden works just fine mechanically. But man it needs some streamlining. Like, it's cool that most of its damage is elemental, but the fact that its base isn't means you're going to be doing a lot of unnecessary math as you go up in levels and start facing monsters with resistances to nonmagical attacks. Every time you hit you'll have to calculate the base damage and the elemental damage separately, then cut the base damage in half and add it to the total of the elemental damage. It feels unnecessary. And, honestly, like an oversight. If they don't catch this and fix it before the official release, I fully expect it to be included in an errata.
This is actually something that happens with spells and stuff anyway. There's always a chance that anything with two types of damage is going to have resistance or immunity to one of those types. The Reality is that resistance to non-magical physical damage isn't all that common. So your not going to be doing math like that all that often. Your more often going to run into resistances of the Elemental Damage than you are the physical damage. But it's just in general a good idea to be mindful of how much of what kind of damage your doing just as a matter of course so that it's just rote habit and easy to deal with the few times it does come up. Because your not going to necessarily immediately know when they are at a glance.
~23% of creatures have resistance or immunity to non-magical B/P/S.
I do not know if I would say almost 1 out of every 4 creatures is not a lot.
There are a lot in the first two tiers surprisingly as well which 90% of games play/end in.
Personally, I feel the Drake Warden works just fine mechanically. But man it needs some streamlining. Like, it's cool that most of its damage is elemental, but the fact that its base isn't means you're going to be doing a lot of unnecessary math as you go up in levels and start facing monsters with resistances to nonmagical attacks. Every time you hit you'll have to calculate the base damage and the elemental damage separately, then cut the base damage in half and add it to the total of the elemental damage. It feels unnecessary. And, honestly, like an oversight. If they don't catch this and fix it before the official release, I fully expect it to be included in an errata.
This is actually something that happens with spells and stuff anyway. There's always a chance that anything with two types of damage is going to have resistance or immunity to one of those types. The Reality is that resistance to non-magical physical damage isn't all that common. So your not going to be doing math like that all that often. Your more often going to run into resistances of the Elemental Damage than you are the physical damage. But it's just in general a good idea to be mindful of how much of what kind of damage your doing just as a matter of course so that it's just rote habit and easy to deal with the few times it does come up. Because your not going to necessarily immediately know when they are at a glance.
~23% of creatures have resistance or immunity to non-magical B/P/S.
I do not know if I would say almost 1 out of every 4 creatures is not a lot.
There are a lot in the first two tiers surprisingly as well which 90% of games play/end in.
By the numbers given on his page. it's only about 18% that have resistance and 4% that have immunity. Though a decent number are at a level Where it doesn't actually matter because the ability to hit like magical weapons or the likely-hood of having a magical weapon is low to non-existent (Primarily being in the first Tier of play).
So the actuality of them being actually a factor when it could be mitigated is more like 12%. And Closer to 3% immunity. And you'd also note that of those with immunity by and large they are mostly either found in Tier 1, or at the end of tier 4 (what some would call tier 5) because they are creatures with CR's above 20 and aren't exactly balanced anyway.
So it's not 1 in 4. It's more like 1 in 5 for all level groupings and it's more like 1 in 8 or lower in any level range where ways to overcome it could be considered accessable or even common. But then it's further complicated by the fact that typically your only likely to run into about 30% of the monsters of any given tier level on average.
Edit: i'll just tack on the fact that by his chart Of those Monsters that have resistances to nonmagical weapons. Your likely going to encounter 60% of them at level 10 or lower. So in the first 2 tiers of play. and you'll run into 38% of the ones with immunity. Another 38% of those with immunity are going to be encountered at Top Tier, Leaving just 9 monsters which represents the other 24% roughly of those that are immune to be encountered in CR's between 11 and 20.
Still not getting how thaumaturgy is part of this subclass. I've used it since it is there, but it feels out of place. Very much like that the Drake sticks around.
Personally, I feel the Drake Warden works just fine mechanically. But man it needs some streamlining. Like, it's cool that most of its damage is elemental, but the fact that its base isn't means you're going to be doing a lot of unnecessary math as you go up in levels and start facing monsters with resistances to nonmagical attacks. Every time you hit you'll have to calculate the base damage and the elemental damage separately, then cut the base damage in half and add it to the total of the elemental damage. It feels unnecessary. And, honestly, like an oversight. If they don't catch this and fix it before the official release, I fully expect it to be included in an errata.
This is actually something that happens with spells and stuff anyway. There's always a chance that anything with two types of damage is going to have resistance or immunity to one of those types. The Reality is that resistance to non-magical physical damage isn't all that common. So your not going to be doing math like that all that often. Your more often going to run into resistances of the Elemental Damage than you are the physical damage. But it's just in general a good idea to be mindful of how much of what kind of damage your doing just as a matter of course so that it's just rote habit and easy to deal with the few times it does come up. Because your not going to necessarily immediately know when they are at a glance.
~23% of creatures have resistance or immunity to non-magical B/P/S.
I do not know if I would say almost 1 out of every 4 creatures is not a lot.
There are a lot in the first two tiers surprisingly as well which 90% of games play/end in.
By the numbers given on his page. it's only about 18% that have resistance and 4% that have immunity. Though a decent number are at a level Where it doesn't actually matter because the ability to hit like magical weapons or the likely-hood of having a magical weapon is low to non-existent (Primarily being in the first Tier of play).
So the actuality of them being actually a factor when it could be mitigated is more like 12%. And Closer to 3% immunity. And you'd also note that of those with immunity by and large they are mostly either found in Tier 1, or at the end of tier 4 (what some would call tier 5) because they are creatures with CR's above 20 and aren't exactly balanced anyway.
So it's not 1 in 4. It's more like 1 in 5 for all level groupings and it's more like 1 in 8 or lower in any level range where ways to overcome it could be considered accessable or even common. But then it's further complicated by the fact that typically your only likely to run into about 30% of the monsters of any given tier level on average.
Edit: i'll just tack on the fact that by his chart Of those Monsters that have resistances to nonmagical weapons. Your likely going to encounter 60% of them at level 10 or lower. So in the first 2 tiers of play. and you'll run into 38% of the ones with immunity. Another 38% of those with immunity are going to be encountered at Top Tier, Leaving just 9 monsters which represents the other 24% roughly of those that are immune to be encountered in CR's between 11 and 20.
181/799 = 22.6%
so yes closer to 1/4th....not sure where you got your numbers
Resistance and Immunity are not the same thing for one thing. And your still not at 1 in 4 even with your math and shoving immunity in as well. Your actually making bigger adjustments through rounding than I actually am. But then you claim you don't understand how I got to my numbers despite the fact that they are staring you right in the face.
144 of 799 is 18.02% if I remember my math right while lacking quite a bit of sleep.
And the Immunity is 4.6%. (37 of 799)
But then your also still ignoring the fact that A good chunk of those cannot be mitigated through magical weapons or abilities that make attacks function as magic weapons. Most of which are at level 6 to 7.
This means that 48 resistance enemies and 13 immune enemies are unlikely to be met while you actually have those abilities. Which is 6% and 1.6% of the total respectively. Which reduces the numbers to 12% and 3% for a total of 15%
12.5% is roughly 1 in 8. 20% is roughly 1 in 5. And 15% is actually 1 in 6.6 just for completeness.
Honestly I'm just homebrewing the magical damage thing. I'm all for making monster traits count and all that, but the time it takes to deal with separating out 1d6+PB damage from the total and then halving it and then recalculating the total is not worth the ~3 damage difference outcome and totally against the streamlined 5e design tenets. Most PC features treat nonmagical damage as something you grow out of by level 6 or 7 and there's little reason for this to be any different.
I can go either way with basing the attacks off WIS. It seemed like a neat idea in Tasha's, but the outcome encourages every Ranger with a companion to go full WIS with Shillelagh and that ends up feeling very samey. And no one wants to be wielding a dumb stick when they're riding on a frickin dragon.
I feel like, if they are going to move away from the Spell Attack Modifier calculation of companions, they should at least do a bit more to make them equivalent. Perhaps a 5+PB instead of 3+PB (caps off at +11, just like the T-BM) or something along those lines.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Dnd Celebration has given us a preview of the official Drake Warden, to be released in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons in October.
What do we think about this version of the subclass? How does it compare to the UA version? How does it compare to its closest analogue, the Beast Master? Either the PHB version or Tasha's.
There's a definite improvement from the UA version, particularly at 7th level. It flat out allows you to use the drake as a mount then instead of at 15th level, albeit with a fair trade off. Amusingly, the inability to use the drake as a flying mount doesn't also forbid you to ride it as a canoe or small boat. So you still have a lot of terrain you can effectively circumvent.
I’m not familiar with the UA, but one thing I don’t like is you have to give up your bonus action AND and it only acts after you. Seems like if you have to give up your BA you should be allowed to better coordinate with it and have it attack first if you want.
This is how all "pet" classes in 5th edition work, with the exception of the Beast Master.
Understood. Doesn’t mean I have to like it.
I can’t be the only one thinking of dusting off the old Mounted Combat feat at 8th level, right? Granted, the advantage on melee attacks wouldn’t reliably kick in until 15th level, but redirecting attacks from the drake to you and giving the drake Evasion while you’re riding it would certainly help with survivability.
The new summon rules are huge IMO. Before it only lasted a couple hours, which made it feel a lot more like a spell than a companion. Now it sticks around until it dies, at which point you can spend a spell slot to "revive" it, or you can do so at any time to change its element.
Also probably an oversight, but if you have a small ally in the party they can totally use the dragon as a flying mount at 7 even if you can't.
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
Yeah, manually banning a Small Drakewarden from riding their drake into the sky while allowing all other Small creatures to do so is incredibly poor rules-writing. I suspect they only playtested this with Medium Rangers, if at all.
There are other critical flaws as well, like the lack of access to magical damage at 7th level, and ignoring the Ranger's Wisdom for melee accuracy despite using the Ranger's Wisdom for the save DC on its breath. Also not a fan of Infused Strikes only working on weapon attacks - Rangers are half casters, and their best subclasses acknowledge that fact. Speaking of which, why doesn't the Drakewarden get any additional spells known? I thought we were past this.
Dynamic damage immunity for the Drake and Resistance for the Ranger is excellent, though, and potentially a fair trade for how incredibly bad at Stealth the drake is.
We'll see how this shakes out, but I expect this subclass to directly compete with the Tasha's Beast Master, and which one "wins" will depend on specific build choices, but for most builds I would pick the Beast Master.
When at least half of their damage is elemental that limits the issue of needing Magical Damage to begin with. Also Not using the Ranger's Spell Casting Modifier for their attack roll is actually a benefit over something like the Primal Beasts at lower level unless your going for more of a Wis Primary build, which is not the common way of doing them.
It's also not true that the best subclasses acknowledge the half-caster status. Gloom Stalker for example is almost entirely based around weapon attacks with it's abilities and most of it's extra spell list amounts to "well most of these spells are pointless unless i make effort to make them work. but I suppose they are better than nothing for somebody." And it's often regarded as one of, if not the best subclass that rangers have. Though Personally. I consider the spell list as might as well not Exist except for Greater Invisibility Spell.
But I'd argue your getting potentially more that is basically constantly usable rather than potentially situational, or only niche usable like some of the subclass spell lists. With the fact that you get resistance, the ability to add elemental damage not just to yours but also allies attacks basically endlessly for just the cost of the drakes reaction, A fairly solid breath weapon attack at level 11, and eventually even a on call resistance to any one attack potentially every round for your only the cost of your own reaction. Some of these abilities are as strong as or arguably somewhat better than the spells you would get, on top of having a pet to fight with you.
It all adds up, specially when combined with certain feats like Mounted Combatant that something like a beast master has a harder time using, to something that is really strong without being completely over shadowing as a pet subclass.
If this is the form that it is going to be officially published in. It's got some interesting give and take compared to the Beast Master I'd really have to consider hard any time I wanted to play a pet based ranger.
There are some builds where it could be interesting, but I suspect for most of them Beast Master is going to be radically better. The best way I can think of to use the Drake is to have the party's Kobold Rogue ride it into battle, which is admittedly a good way to get your little buddy up into the air.
Personally, I feel the Drake Warden works just fine mechanically. But man it needs some streamlining. Like, it's cool that most of its damage is elemental, but the fact that its base isn't means you're going to be doing a lot of unnecessary math as you go up in levels and start facing monsters with resistances to nonmagical attacks. Every time you hit you'll have to calculate the base damage and the elemental damage separately, then cut the base damage in half and add it to the total of the elemental damage. It feels unnecessary. And, honestly, like an oversight. If they don't catch this and fix it before the official release, I fully expect it to be included in an errata.
Speaking of oversights, I'm 99% sure it's an oversight that you can't fly on the drake at level 7 but your goblin/gnome/halfling buddy can. I expect that to also get errata'd at some point.
Not using your Spell Attack Modifier is fine. It kinda bothers my OCD that it's the only pet since Tasha's not to, but it's...fine on its own. But the scaling does have a lower cap than your spell attack modifier, that's for sure. You cap at +9 vs the T-Beast Master, who caps at +11. If, however, you're neglecting your Wisdom as a Ranger (which I don't recommend. You want Wisdom for Perception, Survival, and Deft Explorer: Tireless,) then a fixed +9 will be better than the T-Beast Master. But it's still nothing to write home about on its own.
And on a personal note, I, too, wanted an expanded spell list.
Overall, I think the Drake Warden works. And it works really well. But there are parts of it that are clunky af and need another pass.
Beast master isn't radically better from looking at it. I'd have to look at the Specifics But early on the Drake is going to hit slightly better on average though the Primal Beasts cap out slightly higher but this isn't going to usually be noticeable until high level.
The Drake has the advantage defensively, With at least 1 better AC than the primal beasts as well as a better hit dice, and it has the damage immunity. not to mention that it has proficiency in two good Attributes in having Dex and Wis save proficiency. But the Primal Beasts and some PHB beasts have potentially faster primary movement, several of which aren't ground based, and possibly effects other than damage on their attacks which can be useful in a variety of ways.
Senses wise it oddly loses out slightly because it only has darkvision 40' despite the fact that the default is usually 60'. It's a weird little thing that makes me wonder if it's a typo but it exists. and it doesn't seem to have any proficiency in skills though unfortunately. But at the same time. The couple of skills you'd have them do they either have at least a little attribute bonus in them or the Ranger can help things out with things like Pass Without Trace that they commonly cast on the party anyway.
The Damage for both of them is also fairly similar despite being structured differently. Though the Drake never gets what is effectively a form of multi-attack. It does get things like the breath attack and even an extra die on it's basic attack and the Drake has the advantage of a once a turn damage ability that is practically infinitely usable. So even if it doesn't show up in the drake's own damage roll. It is still increase damage per round that could only happen by the drake.
This is actually something that happens with spells and stuff anyway. There's always a chance that anything with two types of damage is going to have resistance or immunity to one of those types. The Reality is that resistance to non-magical physical damage isn't all that common. So your not going to be doing math like that all that often. Your more often going to run into resistances of the Elemental Damage than you are the physical damage. But it's just in general a good idea to be mindful of how much of what kind of damage your doing just as a matter of course so that it's just rote habit and easy to deal with the few times it does come up. Because your not going to necessarily immediately know when they are at a glance.
~23% of creatures have resistance or immunity to non-magical B/P/S.
I do not know if I would say almost 1 out of every 4 creatures is not a lot.
There are a lot in the first two tiers surprisingly as well which 90% of games play/end in.
Source: Monster Resistance Totals in 5e (optionalrule.com)
By the numbers given on his page. it's only about 18% that have resistance and 4% that have immunity. Though a decent number are at a level Where it doesn't actually matter because the ability to hit like magical weapons or the likely-hood of having a magical weapon is low to non-existent (Primarily being in the first Tier of play).
So the actuality of them being actually a factor when it could be mitigated is more like 12%. And Closer to 3% immunity. And you'd also note that of those with immunity by and large they are mostly either found in Tier 1, or at the end of tier 4 (what some would call tier 5) because they are creatures with CR's above 20 and aren't exactly balanced anyway.
So it's not 1 in 4. It's more like 1 in 5 for all level groupings and it's more like 1 in 8 or lower in any level range where ways to overcome it could be considered accessable or even common. But then it's further complicated by the fact that typically your only likely to run into about 30% of the monsters of any given tier level on average.
Edit: i'll just tack on the fact that by his chart Of those Monsters that have resistances to nonmagical weapons. Your likely going to encounter 60% of them at level 10 or lower. So in the first 2 tiers of play. and you'll run into 38% of the ones with immunity. Another 38% of those with immunity are going to be encountered at Top Tier, Leaving just 9 monsters which represents the other 24% roughly of those that are immune to be encountered in CR's between 11 and 20.
Still not getting how thaumaturgy is part of this subclass. I've used it since it is there, but it feels out of place. Very much like that the Drake sticks around.
181/799 = 22.6%
so yes closer to 1/4th....not sure where you got your numbers
Resistance and Immunity are not the same thing for one thing. And your still not at 1 in 4 even with your math and shoving immunity in as well. Your actually making bigger adjustments through rounding than I actually am. But then you claim you don't understand how I got to my numbers despite the fact that they are staring you right in the face.
144 of 799 is 18.02% if I remember my math right while lacking quite a bit of sleep.
And the Immunity is 4.6%. (37 of 799)
But then your also still ignoring the fact that A good chunk of those cannot be mitigated through magical weapons or abilities that make attacks function as magic weapons. Most of which are at level 6 to 7.
This means that 48 resistance enemies and 13 immune enemies are unlikely to be met while you actually have those abilities. Which is 6% and 1.6% of the total respectively. Which reduces the numbers to 12% and 3% for a total of 15%
12.5% is roughly 1 in 8. 20% is roughly 1 in 5. And 15% is actually 1 in 6.6 just for completeness.
Honestly I'm just homebrewing the magical damage thing. I'm all for making monster traits count and all that, but the time it takes to deal with separating out 1d6+PB damage from the total and then halving it and then recalculating the total is not worth the ~3 damage difference outcome and totally against the streamlined 5e design tenets. Most PC features treat nonmagical damage as something you grow out of by level 6 or 7 and there's little reason for this to be any different.
I can go either way with basing the attacks off WIS. It seemed like a neat idea in Tasha's, but the outcome encourages every Ranger with a companion to go full WIS with Shillelagh and that ends up feeling very samey. And no one wants to be wielding a dumb stick when they're riding on a frickin dragon.
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
I feel like, if they are going to move away from the Spell Attack Modifier calculation of companions, they should at least do a bit more to make them equivalent. Perhaps a 5+PB instead of 3+PB (caps off at +11, just like the T-BM) or something along those lines.