Search results

I mean, if you look at the mechanical details Replicate Magic Item is 90% the same as Infusions. They changed the name to make it clearer what it does and made some tweaks around the edges. In substance it's still basically the same thing.

There's no change log for that because it was changed with the previous Artificer UA, back in mid-December. That and the many other changes were all detailed back then. This release only notes the differences since the last one.

That's an excellent point. Usually when this comes up, people focus on the overpowered spell combos it opens up. Very rarely do they talk about how playing around Concentration, both avoiding damage and investing in ways to make the save more reliably, is an important part of the caster...

Just to clarify, because it took me a couple of reads to get it right. The base Dragonmark feat's "Spells of the Mark" adds those spells to your class spell list if you have Spellcasting or Pact Magic. You still have to select them as Prepared Spells from your normal allotment to be able to cast...

The Cartographer confuses me. I'm not sure what it's supposed to do. It's got mobility, but no additional weapon skills to use with it. Only if it's supposed to be using cantrips, it's got no extra damage bumps like Alchemist and Artillerist. Instead it mostly seems to be about group buffs...

A few tweaks to the base class, to go with the new subclass. Wands and weapons made with Replicate Magic Item now work as a Spellcasting Focus, which partially fixes the issues with Battle Smith. Still doesn't help if you find a powerful magic weapon you want to use instead of your weak...

That's one meaning of "authority". Merriam-Webster lists four, two others of which fit here. You are not being particularly clever.

Invoking the name of a (mostly) beloved founder is an Appeal to Authority. Citing the legacy of the early days is an Appeal to Tradition. Both are well known logical fallacies. So yeah, using the name of Gygax as a weapon in a debate is not a cool move. No contest from me. It's the same as when...

Everything I know about Lorwyn-Shadowmoor I learned this week. But it does strike me that the dual aspected plane hits themes that D&D has already been exploring. Lorwyn is somewhat similar to Witchlight's fey whimsy, and Shadowmoor wouldn't be at all out of place in Ravenloft. If they're doing...

You joke, but that's a valid path. Just, you know, dress it up right. Hanging out at the local tavern waiting for someone to wander in looking for help? Only the really penny ante jobs show up there. For the big ticket ones, you gotta go through the middlemen. The ones who vet both the quest...

Pretty much. The one gameplay type that does suffer from this is "Murderhobos wandering the countryside performing home invasions", because it cuts away at the moral justification for blanket designating certain populations as acceptable targets. Which yes, okay, if that's really the core...

All it really leads to is a bit less Kill On Sight gameplay. At least, Kill On Sight based on creature type. If you're storming the Evil Darklord's Fortress of Evil, then anyone wearing the Darklord's colors is legitimately Kill On Sight. If you're raiding a bandit camp, anyone walking around...

Species alignment is dumb if they're actually a species. If they're a Celestial, or a Fiend, or a Fey manifestation of a particular emotion, an innate (but not absolute) alignment tendency is okay. Which is more or less the direction WotC is moving in, so I'm happy as a clam with these changes...

Indeed. But it's saying "This evil genie is evil because they personally are a jerk, not because Efreet or Dao are culturally evil". And I think that's an improvement. They're a lot more useful, this way. More genie bargains, more genies as patrons or suppliers, that sort of thing.

I like the new alignments. Goblins being chaos gremlins is more interesting, more in line with current popular culture depictions, and moving away from tropes with dark histories. While we're on the topic, I like that genies aren't polarized into good and evil variants anymore. In the new book...

This does, in fact, exist. The ever lovable Flumph is a Lawful Good Aberration in the Revised MM.

There's basically three options, as I see it, for determining that from the player side. Blind trial and error, picking up on context clues from the DM's narration, and the Study action. Trial and error is obvious, you do it and see if it works. Context clues are listening to how the DM...

Or, it turns out, very often entirely real and well known animals. Just with the descriptions filtered through an international game of Telephone in an era without photographs or detailed zoological understanding. The kirin was a giraffe. Unicorns were, duh, rhinoceroses. Behemoth was a...

Even odds that they don't force themselves to cover every class because it's a setting book and not a player options book, and that those four get covered in a second later UA because they need a little more time to cook before they ask for feedback.

On the one hand, fair point. On the other hand, I try not to do test builds with the assumption of any specific magic items if I can help it, and a Dex primary Scion Rogue with a Headband is just a bog standard Rogue. There's nothing new from the subclass besides some minor features and cool...