Like I said, this was just my first impression upon reading the new document. I'm sure if I sat with it for a little while and did a detailed reading, tested things out, etc., I would have different opinions. But right off the cuff, these were my observations.
What about that line hits you the wrong way so to speak? Just curious? So many mobility options have that as part of their standard boilerplate in 5e that I never thought to question its inclusion here.
I feel that "double your Proficiency bonus" messes too much with bounded accuracy, especially in the later stages of character development. I'm sure it's fine mathematically; it's a matter of personal preference.
Blessed Strikes is just (basically, I know it's slightly different) a combination of the two different 8th level ability that all domains have. 7/12 domains already add 1d8 of some damage type at 8th level to their melee attacks and the other 5/12 add their Wis modifier to cantrips. This gives the flexibility as an example to play a more martial focused Trickery Cleric or a more caster focused War Cleric
Yeah, I know. And to be honest, most of the changes that are presented here for the cleric I am on board with; this one was the only one that stuck in my craw. Maybe not every cleric needs to be "more martial focused", ya know?
Ki features are always/free you get all these things, so she wouldn't have to pick them. Just like all monks get Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, & Step of the Wind at 2nd level. These would just be MORE things they get at 2nd level to go with the core 3.
Ah. Well in that case, it's probably fine. I doubt they would get much use at any rate.
I get what you're saying about some of the other features, it definitely brings a lot of that feel/concept in, but I think there's space for both Rangers as more Druidic just as Moon Druids step on Rangers toes in a lot of ways related to combat. It's the nature version of Fighter (Eldritch Knight) and Wizard (Bladesinger) to a degree.
Plus I really like what they've done with the Beast Master companion options.
WotC has been trying for years to build a better ranger. This one is getting closer, but it's still got a ways to go. I would prefer they make the Ranger into a subclass of Druid or Fighter instead of trying to stitch the two together...but I understand why that won't ever happen. Alas, a moogle can dream.
Re: spell Versatility - Welcome to the club, prepare to be pelted. So you're ok with it on Bards/Warlocks, but not Sorcerer?
Only for flavor reasons. A sorcerer's magical ability comes from their bloodline, not from the whims of a divine or extraplanar entity. So do they change their blood while they sleep? As far as the rules are concerned I think it's fine; I just don't understand why
every class has to have the same abilities as every other class. Come on, Wizards.
Talisman seems very... underwhelming to me as a PC option, though I could see it as a Mentor/NPC choice kind of thing.
I really like the flavor more than anything else. The specific features could use a little more polish, sure, but I think it's pretty evocative. And I agree--in its current rendition, it will work great for NPCs.
I could see "enhancing" or "replacing" a Cleric of the War domain's 8th level Domain Ability to either add or be Extra Attack. At 8th level, it's certainly not breaking the game, and it's not going to be a "dip"
True, that wouldn't be bad. Another option would be to give War Clerics the same d10 hit die of other martial classes.
dnd.wizards.com
