D&D 5E 02/08/13 New playtest packet to released today. [Udate: PACKAGE OUT!][

[Li Shenron]

Instead of getting +1 to every score, Humans would get an Ability Score Increase at 1st level (+2 to a single score or +1 to two scores), with the option of trading it for a Feat.

Better...

Personally I would rather have something like ~5 to choose from bonus proficiencies or Lore or Languages.

We already have such generous ability scores generation and increases every few levels, that we could just completely remove ability bonuses from races (like they have removed from classes).

 

[gyor]

A Paladin with the Archery Mastery and Arcane Archer feats is surprisingly good. As I read it once you get Two Attacks and Divine Strike you should be able to make two attacks with full attack and two with -5, each doing 1d8 radiant or necro damage and the first of those arrows could have a spell like Flame Strike on it as well. And that's before one includes any buffing spells. Heck you can even holy smite with one of the attacks.

Most Paladin's will likely go with Weapon Mastery and Mounted Combat instead or for a greater focus on divine magic with divine iniate.

I also like that Lay on Hands and Cleansing body are seperate from channel divinity and that cd is now basically an encounter power.

A level 20 Paladin will be hard to put down.

I don't agree that half the Paladin's stuff has been ripped out. I will say the Paladin's oath matters more now then it did before.

While the Paladin may do slightly less damage then before, depending on his choice of feats, I feel the Paladin is more powerful over all. I'd rename Aura of Protection divine grace.

The Monk is simply awesome. So is divine intervention on the cleric, not super powerful but flavourful. I believe divine intervention was an optional rule from a previous edition.

As for Knights I get how they work. If an enemy straight up attacks you they get disadventage. If they attack someone else they get disadvantage, unless they change the target to you.

The main purpose of this is to discourage an enemy from attacking an ally. The reason that you can also grant disadvantage if someone targets you first is when you have no allies near you the feature won't be useless.

So far this is my favourite playtest so far with only a few complaint like I want to see more subclasses.

Its easy to see how they will build the blackguard now and I can even see an easy way to build an Avenger with this new verison of Paladin. Mounts are not required with every oath now.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I've mention an alternative take on Humans to Mearls, and he said it was floated about the office the other day. What do you guys think?

Instead of getting +1 to every score, Humans would get an Ability Score Increase at 1st level (+2 to a single score or +1 to two scores), with the option of trading it for a Feat.

Much, much better than just a +1 across the board.

I particularly like it because not only does it make choosing a Human to be a meaningful, balanced choice compared to another race, it also means one Human character can be quite different from another Human character.

 

[Kinak]

I particularly like it because not only does it make choosing a Human to be a meaningful, balanced choice compared to another race, it also means one Human character can be quite different from another Human character.

That's quite true. It makes it a lot easier to play the average non-D&D fantasy setting where almost everyone is human.

It also means, if you were feeling ambitious, you could suggest "average" bonuses for different areas. Which is kind of neat. The giant magical empire could have most of its citizens with cantrips, while the barbaric north could have Strength and Con. Adds a nice bit of texture without a lot of complexity.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Kobold Avenger]

One of the good things about moving Divine Smite to a Channel Divinity option of the Oath of Devotion, is that could lead to future Oaths/Subclasses like the Avenger (likely) or even Hexblade (if it becomes a subclass of Paladin) having different things like Divine Emnity or Hexes in place of Divine Smite.

For humans the having a +2, or 2 +1's or a feat would be perfect compared to all +1's. Though I think they'd also need a bonus lore or skill as well.

 

[A'koss]

For humans the having a +2, or 2 +1's or a feat would be perfect compared to all +1's. Though I think they'd also need a bonus lore or skill as well.

+1 to every ability score... doesn't really bother me. A bit bland, but 'eh... The other races tend to have a good array of perks. Not completely balanced mind you, but I think we'll get there.
The +1 to 2 or +2 to 1 or a feat idea? I agree they'd need something else. I'd argue you could almost give them +1 to 2 or +2 to 1 and a feat and they'd still be okay balance-wise.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

The +1 to 2 or +2 to 1 or a feat idea? I agree they'd need something else. I'd argue you could almost give them +1 to 2 or +2 to 1 and a feat and they'd still be okay balance-wise.

The new feats are pretty darn powerful; I'm not sure it would be fair to do both.

 

[A'koss]

The new feats are pretty darn powerful; I'm not sure it would be fair to do both.

It's not far off though. If a feat is worth 2 ability points and the human is now giving up 4 for it at 1st level, it's probably a reasonable trade.
But I agree some of them are... pretty good - I would be fine if they were restricted to non-combat feat choices like Alert, Healer, Loremaster, Lucky, Mobile, Stealthy or Tough.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

The new feats are pretty darn powerful; I'm not sure it would be fair to do both.

Well, technically, the human is getting +1 to six, which is worth three feats.

But I'd be okay with the suggested idea. At least by presenting it as a choice, it's clearly not a genetic advantage.

 

[Warbringer]

The benefits of the other races on top of their +2 to abilities (in general), suggest +1 to two abilities (they may be the same ability) plus feat is appropriate.... Otherwise, too weak...