D&D 5E Fantasy Grounds Previews of Tasha's Cauldron

Ahead of the November 17th release date, the product page for Tasha's Cauldron of Everything has several previews on the Fantasy Grounds website. The previews include the origins customization section, group patrons, sidekicks, and a look at the alternate class features for the ranger Beast Master.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Hell yeah, my Gnome Bladesinger projects an illusory field that only he sees (essentially an Augmented Reality Heads Up Display), mapping a ritual circle over the field of battle, with circles for each actor in the battle and vectors connecting circles. He sees a real time tactical map of his surroundings, which combined with protective glyphs and a very fast mind allow him to predict movement.

Was tired when I wrote this.

What he sees is like an "transmutation circle" from Fullmetal Alchemist, but constantly moving with the battlefield, and even showing him magic and such, which he uses to position himself advantageously. It also speeds up his mind and body, the mapping shows him vectors and such as he moves to help him in acrobatics, and helps him enhance his focus on his own spells.

 

[SkidAce]

Was tired when I wrote this.

What he sees is like an "transmutation circle" from Fullmetal Alchemist, but constantly moving with the battlefield, and even showing him magic and such, which he uses to position himself advantageously. It also speeds up his mind and body, the mapping shows him vectors and such as he moves to help him in acrobatics, and helps him enhance his focus on his own spells.

I liked the 1st description. 2nd is okay too.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I liked the 1st description. 2nd is okay too.

Thanks! It's a lot of fun to explore what his magic looks like and how it works.

I'm working hard right now on my own system's magic, to make it feel and work in way that is simple, but that encourages the player to think about the look and feel of their character's magic.

 

[cbwjm]

I'll still be restricting bladesinging to elves and half-elves in my games, I like keeping it a uniquely elven technique and I actually think we could do with more subclasses that are restricted to certain races. It's not like you can't release them to everyone as shown by many posters here, they even included a side bar which said to feel free to do so.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

I'll still be restricting bladesinging to elves and half-elves in my games, I like keeping it a uniquely elven technique and I actually think we could do with more subclasses that are restricted to certain races. It's not like you can't release them to everyone as shown by many posters here, they even included a side bar which said to feel free to do so.

So why not the other way around, put the restriction in the sidebar? "In [X setting], [Y subclass] is traditionally practiced by the [Z culture] of [AA race] and is a closely guarded secret, the existence of which is known to few outsiders and mastered by even fewer," something like that. Keep the subclass itself setting-neutral.

 

[Azzy]

So why not the other way around, put the restriction in the sidebar? "In [X setting], [Y subclass] is traditionally practiced by the [Z culture] of [AA race] and is a closely guarded secret, the existence of which is known to few outsiders and mastered by even fewer," something like that. Keep the subclass itself setting-neutral.

I'm fine with that, too. Either way that notes that it's traditionally restricted to elves (in the case of the bladesinger), but can be opened up to other races depending on setting, DM, or whatever is good with me. I like the traditional elves-only bit, but I certainly don't begrudge those that want to use the subclass without such a restriction.

 

[cbwjm]

So why not the other way around, put the restriction in the sidebar? "In [X setting], [Y subclass] is traditionally practiced by the [Z culture] of [AA race] and is a closely guarded secret, the existence of which is known to few outsiders and mastered by even fewer," something like that. Keep the subclass itself setting-neutral.

Why change something that didn't need to change? It was fine as it was, people could and did do what they want with it for their own campaigns. I'd prefer leaving lore in place with the current sidebar to remove restrictions if the DM wants to open it up to other races.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I'll still be restricting bladesinging to elves and half-elves in my games, I like keeping it a uniquely elven technique and I actually think we could do with more subclasses that are restricted to certain races. It's not like you can't release them to everyone as shown by many posters here, they even included a side bar which said to feel free to do so.

Like, say... Dwarven Defender?

 

[cbwjm]

Like, say... Dwarven Defender?

Yep. I also think some subclasses could be made that play up a races characteristics though these would be limited to race due more to other races not having the racial characteristics that the subclass is improving, like say a dragonborn barbarian subclass that improves their breath weapon and enhances their ties to their draconic nature.

 

[Blue]

Why change something that didn't need to change? It was fine as it was, people could and did do what they want with it for their own campaigns. I'd prefer leaving lore in place with the current sidebar to remove restrictions if the DM wants to open it up to other races.

Luckily, they didn't "change something that didn't need to change". With their current paradigm of not restricting by race, be it feats or subclasses, it did need to change.

Many games, be it ones like AL or at FLGS, will stay to the rules as written and do not have the option to "do what they want with it for their own campaigns". WotC wants these to be inclusive that any character can have access to the, so it isn't "fine as it was" since it would exclude those games. So they changed it. What you said is still as true as it was - those who can change their own campaigns can do what they want with it. Why was that acceptable to you one way but not the other?