D&D 5E Monster Slayers from Xanathar's Guide

[Dungeonosophy]

Besides the usual 5e trade dress, WotC ought to print a special edition of this book, printed with the trade dress of 1e Unearthed Arcana: orange spine, 1e font, black-and-white line-drawings and all.

 

[lostsanityreturned]

When Clerics were first created, they had two things going for them:

One, they healed people, which patched up the downtime problems that the game had. Something that also makes them the defacto "Doctors" of the D&D world.
And Two, they were the anti-vampire character. Which also granted them abilities that were useful against other monsters and spellcasters.

So naturally, the good doctor was presented as a Cleric, because that was as cool as a Cleric was ever going to be.

But fear not! It seems that XGtE is doing it's damnedest to outmode the Cleric. Between the existing alternatives, this subclass, and all the other divine flavored subclasses that are looming, there will be nary a reason to ever roll up a Cleric again. Which is fair, considering that Clerics are just a hodgepodge of tentatively related ideas that somehow jelled despite of the mess.



The Witcher would get along swimmingly with Elminster.

In what world are Clerics short changed in 5e? They get so very much in 5e and are a top tier class in every sense.

 

[Yaarel]

Makes sense to me.

I always thought of Buffy the Vampire Slayer as a kind of Ranger with a favored enemy.

 

[Azzy]

Besides the usual 5e trade dress, WotC ought to print a special edition of this book, printed with the trade dress of 1e Unearthed Arcana: orange spine, 1e font, black-and-white line-drawings and all.

And pages that fall out in clumps.

 

[Xeviat]

I don’t want Monster Slayer to be a Ranger. The ranger has nature themes and Druidic magic that doesn’t necessarily fit with all monster slayers. Fighter would have been a better place for it, and would have allowed for a nonmagical ranger-type character.

How does the Monster Slayer differentiate itself from the Hunter Ranger?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gyor]

I was hoping for a new subclass video today, but instead we got interviews with critical roll guys. Not a good trade off honestly.

 

[Shroomy]

I was hoping for a new subclass video today, but instead we got interviews with critical roll guys. Not a good trade off honestly.

Based on a recent tweet, I think a new Bard video is coming out soon.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I don’t want Monster Slayer to be a Ranger. The ranger has nature themes and Druidic magic that doesn’t necessarily fit with all monster slayers. Fighter would have been a better place for it, and would have allowed for a nonmagical ranger-type character.

How does the Monster Slayer differentiate itself from the Hunter Ranger?

Less "One with Nature", and more "Destroy the unnatural" I would guess.

Note that the UA Fighter version of the Monster Slayer was not nonmagical: they got a couple of spells.

 

[MonkeyWrench]

It's less about the specific mechanics and how close they track to what Geralt can do than it is the feel of the subclass.

The Geralt in the video games (I've never read the original Polish novels or their translations) has access to Burning Hands, Thunderwave, Shield, Charm Person and whatever spell Yrrden might be equivalent to. Though houserule wise you'd just swap some spells from the Ranger list out for those ones.