Hey guys, what subclasses do you want in that new UA book.The book will be called Tasha's Cauldron of Everything, as in Tasha's hideous laughter. The book contains a whole host of subclasses, including the armourer, and a whole print of the artificer inside! It also has the class feature variants and some new feats,some group patrons as well! The spells and tattoos will be in, as well as some artefacts and loads of puzzles. This is such an amazing looking book, and hope you do as well!
Its coming out in November, and looks amazing. The cover looks amazing, and the book is in the same stream as Xanathars. What do you think?
I hope there's a balanced mystic, so we can *struggle* AAH ITS THE INTERNET ASSASSINS *struggle*
I understand that there is a lot of negative feelings about how the mystic was way too OP, and WotC likely won't ever think about it ever again, but honestly a homebrew psion class is something I would try. Just saying.
No Mystic, there's no possible way any new base class design wouldn't have gotten multiple rounds of UA playtesting and feedback. Also no way they're not announcing a new class well ahead of time to generate maximum possible hype, like they did for the artificer.
They announced 22 new subclasses in the book, and discounting the Undead warlock and Spirits bard that were released maybe thirteen minutes before Tasha's Allspice Soup Pot was announced, there's currently 22 active UA subclasses. So either they're surprising us with things they didn't bother playtesting, or actually factually every current subclass is in.
Scribes wizards? In
Rune Knight fighters? In.
Twilight clerics? In.
"Unity" clerics? Sadly, also in.
Lurker warlocks? To my everlasting regret, in.
Watcher paladins? In, so that counterspelling Smitemonster paladins will forever haunt DM's nightmares.
Everything but Undead warlock and Spirits bard is likely to be in, though many of them may see modification. Especially the older UA that's had plenty of time to percolate and take survey advice from newer documents with more unusual features. So brace your butts and say good-bye to everything in Xanathar's Rummage Sale, because your players'll never wanna run any of it again. Hueh.
I'm still annoyed about the whole psi stuff. I too would like a while new psi mechanic, but I don't want to voice my opinion because although I can stay calm, arguments with me NEVER end. Either way, I'm excited for it, and can't wait. Any of the subclasses that need fixing to you? I've got my own ideas of course...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
There's a few stinker subclasses in the current UA lot. The one that's most egregious to me is the Lurker warlock; it's an unpleasant one-schtick pony whose schtick doesn't even make any sense beyond the most superficial ****** reject plotz. If the 'Lurker' in question could shove tentacles through the void into the world whenever a warlock politely asks it to, why does it need 'Agents' in the first place? Clearly it can act on its own just fine. That entire subclass just makes my eyes roll so hard they start doing burnouts in their sockets. others are no doubt just as weird, but warlocks are one of my top three favorite classes so I tend to pay especial attention to their stuff.
Offhand? Unity was a mistake and ideally should just be replaced entirely. Swarmkeeper rangers were heckin' weird, not sure where that idea came from, but 'weird' isn't enough cause for eviction, I suppose. Beast barbarian definitely needs a cleanup pass, but it's also enduringly popular so ehhh. And of course I'm praying Wizards doesn't just shatter the Genie warlock I'm in the process of playing beyond recovery, like they're doubtlessly going to do to the Armorer artificer.
It's worth remembering that any subclasses that are released as Unearthed Arcana, result in feedback for Wizards of the Coast and historically, when they have then chosen to release these subclasses in an official publication, it is with changes that are based on the feedback received.
I believe it's pretty rare for a UA subclass to then go on to being published, without receiving changes to improve/balance it.
Heh, oh believe me Stormknight, I am super aware of that tendency. I'm honestly mildly terrified for my poor Genie warlock; she just got her artwork done and now she prolly only has three months to live T_T
There's a few stinker subclasses in the current UA lot. The one that's most egregious to me is the Lurker warlock; it's an unpleasant one-schtick pony whose schtick doesn't even make any sense beyond the most superficial ****** reject plotz. If the 'Lurker' in question could shove tentacles through the void into the world whenever a warlock politely asks it to, why does it need 'Agents' in the first place? Clearly it can act on its own just fine. That entire subclass just makes my eyes roll so hard they start doing burnouts in their sockets. others are no doubt just as weird, but warlocks are one of my top three favorite classes so I tend to pay especial attention to their stuff.
Offhand? Unity was a mistake and ideally should just be replaced entirely. Swarmkeeper rangers were heckin' weird, not sure where that idea came from, but 'weird' isn't enough cause for eviction, I suppose. Beast barbarian definitely needs a cleanup pass, but it's also enduringly popular so ehhh. And of course I'm praying Wizards doesn't just shatter the Genie warlock I'm in the process of playing beyond recovery, like they're doubtlessly going to do to the Armorer artificer.
Oath of Redemption also kinda forbids the paladin from fighting, if the paladin is at all playing that Oath properly. And a paladin that does not properly play their Oath is a paladin that should be running into trouble. Redemption is only allowed to use force against creatures of fundamental evil, e.g. devils or demons, and even then the Oath demands that the paladin seek other means of settling conflicts first.
Oath of Redemption is a very bizarre subclass for D&D, given that the average D&D character tends to have a body count of at least fifty critters per PC level and nowhere else in the entire game is this considered anything but a day's job well done. It gets Counterspell, but the huge thematic clash with...basically any other PC in the game and the Oath's restrictions against the use of force make it a very different kind of DM headache.
Oath of Redemption also kinda forbids the paladin from fighting, if the paladin is at all playing that Oath properly. And a paladin that does not properly play their Oath is a paladin that should be running into trouble. Redemption is only allowed to use force against creatures of fundamental evil, e.g. devils or demons, and even then the Oath demands that the paladin seek other means of settling conflicts first.
Oath of Redemption is a very bizarre subclass for D&D, given that the average D&D character tends to have a body count of at least fifty critters per PC level and nowhere else in the entire game is this considered anything but a day's job well done. It gets Counterspell, but the huge thematic clash with...basically any other PC in the game and the Oath's restrictions against the use of force make it a very different kind of DM headache.
Correct me if I'm wrong. My impression with Redemption Paladin is you're suppose to use Insight and Persuasion (maybe Intimidation) checks before leaving the Paladin with no choice but to fight. This is on account with the Wisdom tenet, yes?
Oath of Redemption also kinda forbids the paladin from fighting, if the paladin is at all playing that Oath properly. And a paladin that does not properly play their Oath is a paladin that should be running into trouble. Redemption is only allowed to use force against creatures of fundamental evil, e.g. devils or demons, and even then the Oath demands that the paladin seek other means of settling conflicts first.
Oath of Redemption is a very bizarre subclass for D&D, given that the average D&D character tends to have a body count of at least fifty critters per PC level and nowhere else in the entire game is this considered anything but a day's job well done. It gets Counterspell, but the huge thematic clash with...basically any other PC in the game and the Oath's restrictions against the use of force make it a very different kind of DM headache.
Correct me if I'm wrong. My impression with Redemption Paladin is you're suppose to use Insight and Persuasion (maybe Intimidation) checks before leaving the Paladin with no choice but to fight. This is on account with the Wisdom tenet, yes?
Also you can just reflavor oaths as you see fit. Redemption doesn't have to be an issue if you just like the mechanics of it.
I feel the same way about Conquest too....if you play that as its written it's almost impossible to not be Lawful Evil or at best Lawful Neutral. But if you reflavor it becomes a bit more workable.
I hope there's a balanced mystic, so we can *struggle* AAH ITS THE INTERNET ASSASSINS *struggle*
I understand that there is a lot of negative feelings about how the mystic was way too OP, and WotC likely won't ever think about it ever again, but honestly a homebrew psion class is something I would try. Just saying.
in this new book or just in general? becuase in general yeah i hope they revisit the class, have you choose your subclass at 3rd level instead of 1st, strength of mind and mystical recovery removed, and psi focus changed to be switched every short rest and unlocked at 2nd level, but no way in hell will they just release it in this next book without first announcing it, playtesting it and everything, too many unknowns, and like Yurei said they would defenetly want to hype up the inclusion of this brand new class, an all brand new addition brining the number of classes up to 14. Also they explicitly said they abandoned all plans to ever revisit the mystic or to ever have psionics be represented by an full on class. I think it is a shame they never
Oath of Redemption also kinda forbids the paladin from fighting, if the paladin is at all playing that Oath properly. And a paladin that does not properly play their Oath is a paladin that should be running into trouble. Redemption is only allowed to use force against creatures of fundamental evil, e.g. devils or demons, and even then the Oath demands that the paladin seek other means of settling conflicts first.
Oath of Redemption is a very bizarre subclass for D&D, given that the average D&D character tends to have a body count of at least fifty critters per PC level and nowhere else in the entire game is this considered anything but a day's job well done. It gets Counterspell, but the huge thematic clash with...basically any other PC in the game and the Oath's restrictions against the use of force make it a very different kind of DM headache.
not really? i mean making sure you attack does not actually kill somebody is as simple as declaring the attack to be nonlethal after you have already reduced them to 0 hit points with an melee attack, and the oath still allows you to fight in self-defense and to protect others. The subclass just means that your goal long-term is to rehabilitate criminals and evildoers, rather than killing them or sending them to overcrowded prisons run by profit-seeking mind flayers. The oath then works best if you have an evil PC in the party who only works with the party due to circumstance, for them to slowly and surely via RP opportunities win them over to the side of good, acting both as an character on your own and as an agent of character development for your fellow players, the paladin should not be forcing everyone to comply with his oath, but should defenetly encourage his allies to not jump to violence as soon as an situation presents itself. And the subclass does indeed state that on the rare occasion where an redemption paladin finds an creature who is too truly evil and wicked to ever redeem, they should, once they have made that decision and contemplated if it is true not even hesitate to kill that *****, simply put its not the oath of nonviolence, it is the oath of redemption, they do not seek to momentarily stop bloodshed, they seek to better the behavior of others in the future
Swarmkeeper rangers were heckin' weird, not sure where that idea came from, but 'weird' isn't enough cause for eviction, I suppose.
well ether it started as just an fae version of the ranger before they started taking it in a more specific, flavourful direction, or it is just another revamp of the beastmaster, this time with swarms but then they removed the swarm as an creature/ unit on the battlefield and focused purely on the kinds of actions an ranger would like to perform with their swarm and especially on how that could expand the ranger's surprisingly lacking capabilities in the exploration/ interaction sector, such as being lifted by a swarm of ravens in order to hover, covering your sword in bees to deal more damage and push your opponent, eventually becoming one with the swarm
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Descriptive DM killshots aside, dropping something to 0 hit points does not have to mean outright killing them. It happens to PCs all the time and they bounce right back.
If your enemy doesn't respond to diplomacy, beat the crap out of them, stabilize them, bind them, wake them up, and try diplomacy again. Or take them somewhere they can be "rehabilitated." If we're being nitpicky about playing to class concept, pretty much all Lawful paladins should be doing this unless they've explicitly been given the authority to execute criminals.
Is it odd that DnD Beyond hasn't put out a preorder for it yet? Me thinks they might not have it available for some time after launch due to issues with CFV being a thing....
DDB has run out of time for dragging their feet on CFVs. They could afford to ignore it and do their background codework to try and get ready for it when it was UA. They could afford to do other stuff to get other features online, such as Spells of the Mark, because CFVs were just UA and as much as people craved them, nobody had bought them.
The service is reliant on people buying stuff. Each book one buys has a Core Thing most people are buying that book for; DDB can afford to lag on side stuff from those books to an extent, but they can never really afford not to offer the Core Thing from the book. Eberron: Rising from the Last War's Core Thing was the setting of Eberron itself, the information in the book to run a game in Eberron, as well as the new artificer class. They slid on Spells of the Mark for close to a year solely and only because Spells of the Mark were a small piece of side content in the Eberron book, and even then they took a hit from the userbase on it for not allowing people to use content they'd bought and paid for without jank-ass homebrew weirdness.
Class Feature Variants are a Core Thing in Tasha's Cauldron. They are not a side feature, they are not a small piece of a book people are buying for other reasons. Subclasses and CFVs are the reason people are buying Tasha's Cauldron. If those two things are not usable in DDB the moment the book drops, people will flipp schitts. People will say - rightly - that they were charged money for a product that was, for the most part, not delivered. The backlash will be ferocious, especially since people have been simultaneously begging and demanding that DDB implement CFVs since they dropped. By the time TCoE drops, It will have been a full year since the CFV UA document was released.
D&D Beyond has 'bout two and a half months left to get their shit together and prepare for Class Feature Variants. They no longer have the luxury of putting it off. Whether they do it 'the right way' or not, they need to do it. That may well involve slap-patching CFVs in 'the wrong way' at first and repairing the code later, which is a lot more work than doing it right the first time. Unfortunately for them, their allotted time for doing it The Right Way is just about expended, and they know it.
So no. Unless they want to lose an enormous amount of business to their competitors, badly tarnish the reputation of their platform, and likely breach their contract and license agreements with Wizards, they will not delay Tasha's Cauldron. And because they cannot delay the book, they have to figure out how to make all of its core features work before it releases.
DDB has run out of time for dragging their feet on CFVs. They could afford to ignore it and do their background codework to try and get ready for it when it was UA. They could afford to do other stuff to get other features online, such as Spells of the Mark, because CFVs were just UA and as much as people craved them, nobody had bought them.
The service is reliant on people buying stuff. Each book one buys has a Core Thing most people are buying that book for; DDB can afford to lag on side stuff from those books to an extent, but they can never really afford not to offer the Core Thing from the book. Eberron: Rising from the Last War's Core Thing was the setting of Eberron itself, the information in the book to run a game in Eberron, as well as the new artificer class. They slid on Spells of the Mark for close to a year solely and only because Spells of the Mark were a small piece of side content in the Eberron book, and even then they took a hit from the userbase on it for not allowing people to use content they'd bought and paid for without jank-ass homebrew weirdness.
Class Feature Variants are a Core Thing in Tasha's Cauldron. They are not a side feature, they are not a small piece of a book people are buying for other reasons. Subclasses and CFVs are the reason people are buying Tasha's Cauldron. If those two things are not usable in DDB the moment the book drops, people will flipp schitts. People will say - rightly - that they were charged money for a product that was, for the most part, not delivered. The backlash will be ferocious, especially since people have been simultaneously begging and demanding that DDB implement CFVs since they dropped. By the time TCoE drops, It will have been a full year since the CFV UA document was released.
D&D Beyond has 'bout two and a half months left to get their shit together and prepare for Class Feature Variants. They no longer have the luxury of putting it off. Whether they do it 'the right way' or not, they need to do it. That may well involve slap-patching CFVs in 'the wrong way' at first and repairing the code later, which is a lot more work than doing it right the first time. Unfortunately for them, their allotted time for doing it The Right Way is just about expended, and they know it.
So no. Unless they want to lose an enormous amount of business to their competitors, badly tarnish the reputation of their platform, and likely breach their contract and license agreements with Wizards, they will not delay Tasha's Cauldron. And because they cannot delay the book, they have to figure out how to make all of its core features work before it releases.
One way or another.
I mean they could just release without the content... But as you said it would be huge backlash. I could see them doing though...I would only be upset if they pull an Eberron and not let you know stuff wasn't integrated until after it dropped. They should have said in the preorder that the Spells of the Mark couldn't be integrated but they were tricksy hobbiteses about it...
What yurei also says, something which I know too, is that wizards gives permission to use this stuff, as long as it's done properly. So no cfvs, no happy customers and no happy wizards (you have been wished out if existence).
Edit: that last bit was a pun. Y'know: wizards and the wish spell? Never mind...
Hey guys, what subclasses do you want in that new UA book.The book will be called Tasha's Cauldron of Everything, as in Tasha's hideous laughter. The book contains a whole host of subclasses, including the armourer, and a whole print of the artificer inside! It also has the class feature variants and some new feats,some group patrons as well! The spells and tattoos will be in, as well as some artefacts and loads of puzzles. This is such an amazing looking book, and hope you do as well!
Its coming out in November, and looks amazing. The cover looks amazing, and the book is in the same stream as Xanathars. What do you think?
Link: https://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop-games/rpg-products/tashas-cauldron-everything
Enjoy!
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!
I hope there's a balanced mystic, so we can *struggle* AAH ITS THE INTERNET ASSASSINS *struggle*
I understand that there is a lot of negative feelings about how the mystic was way too OP, and WotC likely won't ever think about it ever again, but honestly a homebrew psion class is something I would try. Just saying.
Proud poster on the Create a World thread
No Mystic, there's no possible way any new base class design wouldn't have gotten multiple rounds of UA playtesting and feedback. Also no way they're not announcing a new class well ahead of time to generate maximum possible hype, like they did for the artificer.
They announced 22 new subclasses in the book, and discounting the Undead warlock and Spirits bard that were released maybe thirteen minutes before Tasha's Allspice Soup Pot was announced, there's currently 22 active UA subclasses. So either they're surprising us with things they didn't bother playtesting, or actually factually every current subclass is in.
Scribes wizards? In
Rune Knight fighters? In.
Twilight clerics? In.
"Unity" clerics? Sadly, also in.
Lurker warlocks? To my everlasting regret, in.
Watcher paladins? In, so that counterspelling Smitemonster paladins will forever haunt DM's nightmares.
Everything but Undead warlock and Spirits bard is likely to be in, though many of them may see modification. Especially the older UA that's had plenty of time to percolate and take survey advice from newer documents with more unusual features. So brace your butts and say good-bye to everything in Xanathar's Rummage Sale, because your players'll never wanna run any of it again. Hueh.
Please do not contact or message me.
I'm still annoyed about the whole psi stuff. I too would like a while new psi mechanic, but I don't want to voice my opinion because although I can stay calm, arguments with me NEVER end. Either way, I'm excited for it, and can't wait. Any of the subclasses that need fixing to you? I've got my own ideas of course...
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!
There's a few stinker subclasses in the current UA lot. The one that's most egregious to me is the Lurker warlock; it's an unpleasant one-schtick pony whose schtick doesn't even make any sense beyond the most superficial ****** reject plotz. If the 'Lurker' in question could shove tentacles through the void into the world whenever a warlock politely asks it to, why does it need 'Agents' in the first place? Clearly it can act on its own just fine. That entire subclass just makes my eyes roll so hard they start doing burnouts in their sockets. others are no doubt just as weird, but warlocks are one of my top three favorite classes so I tend to pay especial attention to their stuff.
Offhand? Unity was a mistake and ideally should just be replaced entirely. Swarmkeeper rangers were heckin' weird, not sure where that idea came from, but 'weird' isn't enough cause for eviction, I suppose. Beast barbarian definitely needs a cleanup pass, but it's also enduringly popular so ehhh. And of course I'm praying Wizards doesn't just shatter the Genie warlock I'm in the process of playing beyond recovery, like they're doubtlessly going to do to the Armorer artificer.
Blegh.
Please do not contact or message me.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersIt's worth remembering that any subclasses that are released as Unearthed Arcana, result in feedback for Wizards of the Coast and historically, when they have then chosen to release these subclasses in an official publication, it is with changes that are based on the feedback received.
I believe it's pretty rare for a UA subclass to then go on to being published, without receiving changes to improve/balance it.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Heh, oh believe me Stormknight, I am super aware of that tendency. I'm honestly mildly terrified for my poor Genie warlock; she just got her artwork done and now she prolly only has three months to live T_T
Please do not contact or message me.
Huh seems you hate about all of them lol
Most looking forward to see the official versions of Aberrant Mind Sorcerer, Way of Astral Self Monk, and Soulknife Rogue.
Interested to see how the psi mechanic turns out.
(RIP Psionics Tradition Wizard; we barely knew yee)
They said they dropped the psi die. So I'm assuming it's more in line with what we have.
Oath of Redemption also has counterspell, so I'm not sure what your point is?
Oath of Redemption also kinda forbids the paladin from fighting, if the paladin is at all playing that Oath properly. And a paladin that does not properly play their Oath is a paladin that should be running into trouble. Redemption is only allowed to use force against creatures of fundamental evil, e.g. devils or demons, and even then the Oath demands that the paladin seek other means of settling conflicts first.
Oath of Redemption is a very bizarre subclass for D&D, given that the average D&D character tends to have a body count of at least fifty critters per PC level and nowhere else in the entire game is this considered anything but a day's job well done. It gets Counterspell, but the huge thematic clash with...basically any other PC in the game and the Oath's restrictions against the use of force make it a very different kind of DM headache.
Please do not contact or message me.
Correct me if I'm wrong. My impression with Redemption Paladin is you're suppose to use Insight and Persuasion (maybe Intimidation) checks before leaving the Paladin with no choice but to fight. This is on account with the Wisdom tenet, yes?
Also you can just reflavor oaths as you see fit. Redemption doesn't have to be an issue if you just like the mechanics of it.
I feel the same way about Conquest too....if you play that as its written it's almost impossible to not be Lawful Evil or at best Lawful Neutral. But if you reflavor it becomes a bit more workable.
in this new book or just in general? becuase in general yeah i hope they revisit the class, have you choose your subclass at 3rd level instead of 1st, strength of mind and mystical recovery removed, and psi focus changed to be switched every short rest and unlocked at 2nd level, but no way in hell will they just release it in this next book without first announcing it, playtesting it and everything, too many unknowns, and like Yurei said they would defenetly want to hype up the inclusion of this brand new class, an all brand new addition brining the number of classes up to 14. Also they explicitly said they abandoned all plans to ever revisit the mystic or to ever have psionics be represented by an full on class. I think it is a shame they never
not really? i mean making sure you attack does not actually kill somebody is as simple as declaring the attack to be nonlethal after you have already reduced them to 0 hit points with an melee attack, and the oath still allows you to fight in self-defense and to protect others. The subclass just means that your goal long-term is to rehabilitate criminals and evildoers, rather than killing them or sending them to overcrowded prisons run by profit-seeking mind flayers. The oath then works best if you have an evil PC in the party who only works with the party due to circumstance, for them to slowly and surely via RP opportunities win them over to the side of good, acting both as an character on your own and as an agent of character development for your fellow players, the paladin should not be forcing everyone to comply with his oath, but should defenetly encourage his allies to not jump to violence as soon as an situation presents itself. And the subclass does indeed state that on the rare occasion where an redemption paladin finds an creature who is too truly evil and wicked to ever redeem, they should, once they have made that decision and contemplated if it is true not even hesitate to kill that *****, simply put its not the oath of nonviolence, it is the oath of redemption, they do not seek to momentarily stop bloodshed, they seek to better the behavior of others in the future
well ether it started as just an fae version of the ranger before they started taking it in a more specific, flavourful direction, or it is just another revamp of the beastmaster, this time with swarms but then they removed the swarm as an creature/ unit on the battlefield and focused purely on the kinds of actions an ranger would like to perform with their swarm and especially on how that could expand the ranger's surprisingly lacking capabilities in the exploration/ interaction sector, such as being lifted by a swarm of ravens in order to hover, covering your sword in bees to deal more damage and push your opponent, eventually becoming one with the swarm
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
RE: Oath of Redemption
Descriptive DM killshots aside, dropping something to 0 hit points does not have to mean outright killing them. It happens to PCs all the time and they bounce right back.
If your enemy doesn't respond to diplomacy, beat the crap out of them, stabilize them, bind them, wake them up, and try diplomacy again. Or take them somewhere they can be "rehabilitated." If we're being nitpicky about playing to class concept, pretty much all Lawful paladins should be doing this unless they've explicitly been given the authority to execute criminals.
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
About this book too...
Is it odd that DnD Beyond hasn't put out a preorder for it yet? Me thinks they might not have it available for some time after launch due to issues with CFV being a thing....
I've said it before, I'll say it again.
DDB has run out of time for dragging their feet on CFVs. They could afford to ignore it and do their background codework to try and get ready for it when it was UA. They could afford to do other stuff to get other features online, such as Spells of the Mark, because CFVs were just UA and as much as people craved them, nobody had bought them.
The service is reliant on people buying stuff. Each book one buys has a Core Thing most people are buying that book for; DDB can afford to lag on side stuff from those books to an extent, but they can never really afford not to offer the Core Thing from the book. Eberron: Rising from the Last War's Core Thing was the setting of Eberron itself, the information in the book to run a game in Eberron, as well as the new artificer class. They slid on Spells of the Mark for close to a year solely and only because Spells of the Mark were a small piece of side content in the Eberron book, and even then they took a hit from the userbase on it for not allowing people to use content they'd bought and paid for without jank-ass homebrew weirdness.
Class Feature Variants are a Core Thing in Tasha's Cauldron. They are not a side feature, they are not a small piece of a book people are buying for other reasons. Subclasses and CFVs are the reason people are buying Tasha's Cauldron. If those two things are not usable in DDB the moment the book drops, people will flipp schitts. People will say - rightly - that they were charged money for a product that was, for the most part, not delivered. The backlash will be ferocious, especially since people have been simultaneously begging and demanding that DDB implement CFVs since they dropped. By the time TCoE drops, It will have been a full year since the CFV UA document was released.
D&D Beyond has 'bout two and a half months left to get their shit together and prepare for Class Feature Variants. They no longer have the luxury of putting it off. Whether they do it 'the right way' or not, they need to do it. That may well involve slap-patching CFVs in 'the wrong way' at first and repairing the code later, which is a lot more work than doing it right the first time. Unfortunately for them, their allotted time for doing it The Right Way is just about expended, and they know it.
So no. Unless they want to lose an enormous amount of business to their competitors, badly tarnish the reputation of their platform, and likely breach their contract and license agreements with Wizards, they will not delay Tasha's Cauldron. And because they cannot delay the book, they have to figure out how to make all of its core features work before it releases.
One way or another.
Please do not contact or message me.
I mean they could just release without the content... But as you said it would be huge backlash. I could see them doing though...I would only be upset if they pull an Eberron and not let you know stuff wasn't integrated until after it dropped. They should have said in the preorder that the Spells of the Mark couldn't be integrated but they were tricksy hobbiteses about it...
What yurei also says, something which I know too, is that wizards gives permission to use this stuff, as long as it's done properly. So no cfvs, no happy customers and no happy wizards (you have been wished out if existence).
Edit: that last bit was a pun. Y'know: wizards and the wish spell? Never mind...
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!