Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Spores, Brutes, and Inventors: Unearthed Arcana Brings You Three New Subclasses
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 7732021" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>On a second reading, these subclasses are even worse than I thought. They are simply taking the whole edition in the <strong>wrong direction</strong>.</p><p></p><p>Some of these seem to be an attempt at "fixing" something that isn't broken, in the worst case just slightly below par. But by fixing it with a boost, it just becomes power creep, because then you'll have the other options become below par.</p><p></p><p>The Inventor subclass partly takes the Wizard towards the chaos mage, stealing a bit from the the Sorcerer subclass. And then it makes it even more versatile than the Wizard already is, putting the final nail in the coffin of the Sorcerer, which is overall the least developed class. If they didn't intend to support the Sorcerer, why did they even put it into the PHB? We've heard a lot of cr4p from WotC about how it was wrong to make Sorcerer subclasses grant bonus known spells because they would remove the main limitation of the Sorcerer and then make it too good, yeah right... so by the same logic the Inventor which removes the main limitation of the Wizard (sticking to prepared spells) is just as wrong. If you make the Sorcerer know a few more spells it's wrong because it steps on the Wizard's, but if you make the Wizard cast more flexibly (and that includes also the ability to change spells details such as damage type) it steps on the Sorcerer's, so how is that not just as wrong?</p><p></p><p>Then we have total disassociation of mechanics from narrative. The Inventor's Armor is presented with a special name to make it sounds like it's the core idea of the subclass. But besides the resistance to force damage, it's worse than Mage Armor, and it grants... metamagic? :/ Had they called it any other object, it would have made no difference.</p><p></p><p>Last but not least, these subclasses have nearly nothing else than combat boosts (mostly just damage, really), and half of these mechanics are overly complex. As if we didn't already have plenty of damage boosts everywhere. This means that if you play these subclasses you're just doing the same thing as usual, just with more complicated rules.</p><p></p><p>Honestly this article just tells me that now that we got a lot of subclasses in XGE, it's time for WotC to focus on something else than subclasses for a while! They are out of ideas, both narratively and mechanical. I know that there is still room for more subclasses, by apparently they are out of inspiration at the moment, why not just shelf them for now, and work on truly NEW additions such as (1) psionics, (2) mass combat rules, (3) alternative class features mechanics?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 7732021, member: 1465"] On a second reading, these subclasses are even worse than I thought. They are simply taking the whole edition in the [B]wrong direction[/B]. Some of these seem to be an attempt at "fixing" something that isn't broken, in the worst case just slightly below par. But by fixing it with a boost, it just becomes power creep, because then you'll have the other options become below par. The Inventor subclass partly takes the Wizard towards the chaos mage, stealing a bit from the the Sorcerer subclass. And then it makes it even more versatile than the Wizard already is, putting the final nail in the coffin of the Sorcerer, which is overall the least developed class. If they didn't intend to support the Sorcerer, why did they even put it into the PHB? We've heard a lot of cr4p from WotC about how it was wrong to make Sorcerer subclasses grant bonus known spells because they would remove the main limitation of the Sorcerer and then make it too good, yeah right... so by the same logic the Inventor which removes the main limitation of the Wizard (sticking to prepared spells) is just as wrong. If you make the Sorcerer know a few more spells it's wrong because it steps on the Wizard's, but if you make the Wizard cast more flexibly (and that includes also the ability to change spells details such as damage type) it steps on the Sorcerer's, so how is that not just as wrong? Then we have total disassociation of mechanics from narrative. The Inventor's Armor is presented with a special name to make it sounds like it's the core idea of the subclass. But besides the resistance to force damage, it's worse than Mage Armor, and it grants... metamagic? :/ Had they called it any other object, it would have made no difference. Last but not least, these subclasses have nearly nothing else than combat boosts (mostly just damage, really), and half of these mechanics are overly complex. As if we didn't already have plenty of damage boosts everywhere. This means that if you play these subclasses you're just doing the same thing as usual, just with more complicated rules. Honestly this article just tells me that now that we got a lot of subclasses in XGE, it's time for WotC to focus on something else than subclasses for a while! They are out of ideas, both narratively and mechanical. I know that there is still room for more subclasses, by apparently they are out of inspiration at the moment, why not just shelf them for now, and work on truly NEW additions such as (1) psionics, (2) mass combat rules, (3) alternative class features mechanics? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Spores, Brutes, and Inventors: Unearthed Arcana Brings You Three New Subclasses
Top