D&D 5E Is Xanathars The New UA? AKA A Munchkins Book

[SkidAce]

Pretty close to the opposite of UA, which was a quick, shoddily written unplaytested cash grab. XGtE was carefully thought out and play tested before release, with public input taken into account. Just because somebody can abuse a variant rule in a way that any DM wouldn't allow to work doesn't make it comparable to the hot mess of UA.

Q: How is UA a cash grab...its free?

 

[Parmandur]

Q: How is UA a cash grab...its free?

The 80's book referenced in the OP, not the current article series that harkens back to it

 

[SkidAce]

The 80's book referenced in the OP, not the current article series that harkens back to it

Thanks, missed that.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

The 80's book referenced in the OP, not the current article series that harkens back to it

There are actually multiple (both infamous) examples:

The one that started it all, including the Cavalier Paladin (which was particularly awful), the Barbarian (which destroyed the rest of the groups magic items - you know - great for fun gaming), and 9d6 ability score generation.

The 3.5 edition abomination. How about standard action summoning? Gestalt characters? Paragon Classes? Character Flaws (AKA free feats)?

It's been handled so much better in 5E with free UA material available online, and not published as to give the impression it's official in any way.

However, the recent handling of Eberron, which is playtest material, and available for purchase on D&D beyond (and there doesn't even seem to be a function to hide it), is a concerning switch in policy.

 

[Dausuul]

The coffee lock is RAW though and doesn't require any creative interpretations. Stupid yes but I thought it was funny people thought 5E would be any different to 3.5 in terms of abusive things you could do lol.

This is not an abusive thing you can do. It is an abusive thing you can try to do, and then your DM smacks you upside the head and tells you not to be an idiot.

Real balance issues are things like Sharpshooter/GWM, or the sorlock, or the simulacrum spell*--stuff where you could stumble into it without intending to exploit anything, and it's not obvious how broken it is until you sit down and work through the mechanics. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see addressed, though it will probably have to be done via house rules until the time comes for 6E.

The devs do not need to--and should not--waste their time policing the rules for coffeelock-style exploits.

[SIZE=-2]*I'm not talking about chain-casting simulacrum and wish, which falls into the same "silly exploit is silly" bucket as the coffeelock. No, I'm just talking about the bog-standard simulacrum spell, used strictly as intended. Why, yes, I would pay 1.5K gold for a mini-me that has all my spells minus one, another set of actions per round, and a second concentration slot, why do you ask?[/SIZE]

 

[Mistwell]

Healing Spirit, as written, is stupidly broken. Whoever allowed that one into print, deserves to be banned from the industry entirely. At the very least, they should pay back any salary they earned for the project. There is zero excuse for that degree of incompetence.

 

[guachi]

The only thing I insta-banned was Healing Spirit. Out of combat it's effectively 10d6 (35) HP of healing for each member of the party. Its power level is far beyond other healing spells of similar or higher level.

I changed it to 10d6 healing and the caster (if out of combat and there's no pressure) can divide up the d6s however he likes. It's still a really good spell.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Pity its not in the actual book,

Sigh.

"A short rest is a period of downtime, at least 1 hour long" PHB.

Jeremy Crawford wasn't making up new rules or rules interpretations, he was reminding us what was already in the PHB.

doesn't change RAW.

Wasn't trying to. Just pointing out that Coffee Lock doesn't work with RAW as is unless, as mentioned, there is a very liberal DM interpretation.

How many players do you think have all of Crawfords twitter suggestions conveniently available.

If someone makes a character that seems to make use of an infinite loop, I would hope a DM might check the PHB at least, and if they are unable to find anything, google it, because someone else has probably come across the same issue. Then they would find a Tweet from Jeremy Crawford reminding us that the PHB already provides a solution to the issue.

I'm not even sure if 5E has an errata sheet anywhere lol.

It does.

However, the PHB rules on Short Rests were always as Crawford reminds us.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

If you compare Healing Spirit to Prayer of Healing, of course it looks insane, only because Prayer of Healing isn't an effective out of combat healing spell. Try comparing it to Rope Trick instead (the previous best out of combat healing spell).

Rope Trick is not a healing spell. It's a utility spell, which makes it slightly easier to do something that you could already do anyway.

If short rests and Hit Dice are not a major factor in your resource management, then you have problems that are far beyond the scope of this thread.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

The only thing I insta-banned was Healing Spirit. Out of combat it's effectively 10d6 (35) HP of healing for each member of the party. Its power level is far beyond other healing spells of similar or higher level.

I changed it to 10d6 healing and the caster (if out of combat and there's no pressure) can divide up the d6s however he likes. It's still a really good spell.

Imagine a 5th level party.

That 5th level party has 4 members. A Wizard (con 14), a Fighter (con 14), a Bard (con 12) and a Druid (con 14).

Now, the party is in a tough fight. Lots of damage taken by PC's. Lots of resources used. PC's are in bad shape and need to recover before the next fight.

Druid player says, "I could cast healing spirit, everyone would recover approximately 35 hp, though I would lose one second level slot."

Wizard says, "I could cast rope trick, I would recover approximately 31 hp, the fighter 41 hp, the Bard 31hp and the Druid 36hp. Also, the fighter would recover Second Wind, Action Surge and their Combat Superiority Dice, the Bard gets back their Inspiration and the Druid recovers their wildshapes, though I would lose one second level slot, that I could recover immediately, along with another spell."

So the DM says, "OH MY GOD! That first spell sounds like it will break my game! I have to houserule it."

I still don't get it, and nobody has been able to explain to me why one of the above spells I describe is absolutely fine, and the other breaks the game.

I suspect it's because most players don't think of wizard spells as healing spells, so don't really consider it when evaluating healing spirit...