D&D 5E Is Tasha's Broken?

[Oofta]

i mean that killed 4e, and people who like 5e are VERY proud of that...so

People not buying books is what killed 4E. Just like previous editions.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Come Tasha's, we have magic items for all full casters that increase spell save DCs to various degrees (from only a +1 bonus on uncommon, which is easy to craft if your game uses crafting rules, to a major +3 bonus which can be game-breaking under 5e's bounded accuracy)

What possible definition of “game breaking” can you be using, here?

. I can't help but think that these spells were the result of a slew of new designers looking at what magic items they could put in the book and going "Huh, it looks like the old guard made items that increase a Warlock's spell save DC but none for other casters. That's odd, let's just add those!" without thinking why that option was not made available in the first place.

Or the designers, lead by the same guy that wrote the PHB, have realized that letting casters raise thier DC won’t break the game.

Generally, assuming abject idiocy from professionals based solely on them doing a thing you wouldn’t have done doesn’t lead you to accurate conclusions.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I just can't get behind this. Especially with the huge emphasis on bounded accuracy, that extra +2 is really not necessary. The whole argument for floating ASIs boils down to optimization, and I am just not sympathetic to arguments based on optimization. It would be different if having a slightly lower score had a huge impact, but it just doesn't.

It doesn’t have a huge impact, but the arguments in favor of it are just about optimization? Make that make sense.

More importantly, why are you assuming bad faith on the part of all the people telling you, in many different threads, that it’s not about optimization?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't have a significant problem with anything in Tasha's. Things like twilight cleric being "broken" just aren't that big of a deal to me, it's not that significant of a bump and most classes get a few options we didn't have before. Not particularly fond of the "put points anywhere" because I think it just leans into making all races more generic but then again had no problem playing dwarven wizards or half-orc clerics before the change.

Things change. There's minor power creep, but it's nothing like what we've seen in previous editions. As a DM I'm always going to have to adjust encounters and challenges based on what the players bring to the table, this is no different.

I’d go so far as to say that there is no power creep.

How can there be power creep if nothing that’s new is more powerful than anything you can make in the PHB? The power floor was raised a bit, but the ceiling remains the same.

 

[Bill Zebub]

You're entitled to your opinion, as am I.

All I mean is that people who don't want change are going to resist, which means those who want change are going to have be noisy about it, and the first group will always accuse them of being squeaky wheel rabble rousing malcontents. Regardless of which side (if either) speaks for the majority, or has the moral high ground.

Now that Tasha's is a fait accompli, and those in favor of floating ASIs are defending the status quo, one could just as easily say that all the people griping about Tasha's are the squeaky wheels. Denigrating labels like that therefore serve no purpose other than to identify which side of the debate one speaks from.



One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, right?

 

[Minigiant]

I understand that you feel what you feel, but there's a sort of mind-reading going on - you are looking at the end product, and using it to ascribe negative personal characteristics to the authors themselves. That is unkind, and poorly founded.

If someone were to take your stated dislike for the product, and use that as a basis for an assessment that you are, personally, a real schnook of a player or GM, you'd probably take exception to that, no? And rightfully so!

But then the Golden Rule kicks in - don't do to them what you wouldn't want done to you.

I'm not placing blame on the authors. My entire point is that the authors were backed into a corner in many directions when it came to Tasha's. Their schedule, 5e's design goals, and fan desires forced certain aspects to be in TCOE. TCOE I'd still an A+ book. I love my copy and don't regret it one bit. However if doesn't seem like a direct sequel of Xanatars.

To me, it feels like there is a missing second options book between those two.

 

[Horwath]

I’d go so far as to say that there is no power creep.

How can there be power creep if nothing that’s new is more powerful than anything you can make in the PHB? The power floor was raised a bit, but the ceiling remains the same.

this would be correct.

most Tasha's feats are in line with Lucky, GWM, SS, CE, PAM, Alert.
I would say that they might not be just up with them, but very close.
they just didn't write horrible feats like many in PHB. Ok, Chef feat is poor mans inspiring leader.
And I'm sure that all full feats from tasha's can be toned down just a little to be considered a half feat.

 

[Horwath]

I'm not placing blame on the authors. My entire point is that the authors were backed into a corner in many directions when it came to Tasha's. Their schedule, 5e's design goals, and fan desires forced certain aspects to be in TCOE. TCOE I'd still an A+ book. I love my copy and don't regret it one bit. However if doesn't seem like a direct sequel of Xanatars.

To me, it feels like there is a missing second options book between those two.

wait until 2024

 

[Oofta]

All I mean is that people who don't want change are going to resist, which means those who want change are going to have be noisy about it, and the first group will always accuse them of being squeaky wheel rabble rousing malcontents. Regardless of which side (if either) speaks for the majority, or has the moral high ground.

Now that Tasha's is a fait accompli, and those in favor of floating ASIs are defending the status quo, one could just as easily say that all the people griping about Tasha's are the squeaky wheels. Denigrating labels like that therefore serve no purpose other than to identify which side of the debate one speaks from.



One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, right?

I don't think it's a bad thing to not like aspects of the game. I think at times some people complain about things that are easily fixed, but that's a different issue. I disagree with phrases like "we won" because that makes it sound like a contest. There has to be compromises of course and there are aspect of the game that I like and others that I don't particularly care for. I just don't think it's helpful to assign "winners and losers" to preferences.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I don't think it's a bad thing to not like aspects of the game. I think at times some people complain about things that are easily fixed, but that's a different issue. I disagree with phrases like "we won" because that makes it sound like a contest. There has to be compromises of course and there are aspect of the game that I like and others that I don't particularly care for. I just don't think it's helpful to assign "winners and losers" to preferences.

Yeah I was being too snarky with that. Not that two wrongs make a right* but your snarky response was perhaps justified.

*however, three lefts do