First playtest thread! One D&D Character Origins.


log in or register to remove this ad

Kurotowa

Legend
Thinking of the future UAs, are there any big things that have been telegraphed about the classes? Or are all of those changes likely much smaller?
Nothing concrete. I'm predicting that martial classes will be getting "this is my special attack!" resources that are less random and explosive than the nerfed crits, but that's highly speculative. There's also the fact that Eldritch Blast isn't on the spell lists, which suggests they did the smart thing and folded it in as a proper Warlock class feature.

Beyond that is anybody's guess. Backwards compatibility says that classes will need to leave room for subclass features at the same level brackets as before, but most other things are up for grabs.
 


Cadence

Legend
Supporter
Cú Chulainn. Hercules. Sun Wukong.

I kind of liked the way Pathfinder 1e had the Mythic Adventures set of rules for those who wanted to play demi-gods. A blacksmith rising to the peak of human power seems like a very different story than a demi-god reaching towards full godhood, and it isn't clear to me that a single set of rules can do both well.
 

Al2O3

Explorer
Slowed Condition implies movement is tracked in individual feat, rather than 5ft increments, not sure why they would decide to do that.
I suggest you check the 2014 PHB, page 182.

From Difficult terrain: "You move at half speed in difficult terrain--moving 1 foot in difficult terrain costs 2 feet of speed"
From Climbing, swimming and crawling: "each foot of movement costs 1 extra foot (2 extra feet in difficult terrain".

Movement has been tracked in individual feet since 2014.

There is a variant rule in a sidebar on p 192 of the 2014 PHB. With those VARIANT rules, you do track speed in 5-foot segments. This is as standard as Variant Humans and equipment sizes.
 

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
Everyone else seems to talk up the "fun role-playing" aspect of floating ASIs and playing fast and loose with racial traits. I can't be the only one that sees the latest trend expand the opportunities for optimization. As an example, when Tasha's was released, I could make a dwarf wizard that has the highest starting Intelligence possible and comes with medium armor right out of the gate without having to sacrifice anything - something I could not do prior.
Yep. And that still doesn't make dwarf the best race for wizards. It just expands the list of races that are top-tier. It gives options.

I can't believe we're still arguing about removing ASIs after 2 years. It's kind of ridiculous at this point.
 

ehren37

Legend
Wizards break reality with magic.
They break it with spells. Monks show you can incorporate magic without spells. Gimme an armored mythic warrior from the book of 9 swords.

Fighters should be incorporating magic into their training and techniques. Chugging dragon blood, using elemental oils to strengthen their skin. Them not using any magic, which is the fundamental tech of D&D world, is like a modern soldier not using tech.

"But muh low magic". D&D is not low magic as written. Casters break the laws of reality more often than they poop.
 
Last edited:

dave2008

Legend
Again, thats what the attribute array is for.
This is essentially an extension of the attribute array. Which I am fine with. I mean not everyone uses the array and it is nice to a bit customizing on top of that. I would also be fine if stat bonus went away in character creation and it was part of the array (the old elite array) or roll. Same difference really. Except, buy linking it to a background you are creating a story for why your character is exception. Which can be a good thing for some more than others, but I don't think it hurts but a very few.
But even an exceptional elf is still an elf which comes with biological facts which includes trance, darkvision and better dexterity among other things.
Except that dexterity, if it is still a thing at all, is not expressed by attribute scores. I'm OK with that. Hopefully allows them to give races something more interesting than a stat bonus, which is kinda boring.
In the end it comes down to 2 things.
1. People somehow thinking that different fictional races being different is somehow racist (see @Faolyn's post). Which strangely only seems to be a problem in fantasy, not in scifi. I haven't heard any complains about Vulcans.
2. People refusing to play anything not minmaxed with an 18 in the primary attribute which imo is not something you should cater to. Thats not role playing. No one is preventing them from playing an elf barbarian or orc wizard except their inability to play something not minmaxed.
IMO, the issue is balance. WotC, and most players it seems, want races to be balanced mechanically. If you let go it that notion you have no issue with a minotaur with max Str 20 and halfling with a max strength of 16. It doesn't have to min./max. types, many players just don't want to feel they are being left behind.

All in all it is not a lot to get upset about IMO and it makes sense for a big-tent game like D&D to cater to the broadest group of people. If you want racial bonuses, penalties, or limits then houserule them into your game. If your group balks at it, then maybe you shouldn't have them in the first place. FYI, my group accepts racial limits - it can work.
 

I kind of liked the way Pathfinder 1e had the Mythic Adventures set of rules for those who wanted to play demi-gods. A blacksmith rising to the peak of human power seems like a very different story than a demi-god reaching towards full godhood, and it isn't clear to me that a single set of rules can do both well.
The kinds of stories D&D emulates are more "blacksmith finds out he's a demigod" or "orphan boy pulls out the Sword in the Stone" than either of those.
 

dave2008

Legend
They break it with spells. Monks show you can incorporate magic without spells. Why are fighters so lame as to not incorporate the basic tool of their society into their training regimens? It would be like a modern soldier not using technology because they aren't an engineer.
I am not really familiar with the class, but isn't that the eldritch knight subclass?
 

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
Which is completely and utterly pointless.

People complain about ASIs in races, so they make them "floating". Now, they move them to backgrounds, which by default are completely customizable anyway so the ASI are, in fact, still floating; making the "change" utterly pointless.

It's like, when with the devs finally get it. Just make ASI part of generating ability scores or bake them into the numbers by default...

Anyway, bowing out.
I do agree that "moving" them to backgrounds is fundamentally a nothingburger compared to the Tasha's rules. If the ASIs are floating, that means they aren't connected to any mechanical entity. That's kind of the point of "floating", you justify them with whatever narrative you see fit.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
They break it with spells. Monks show you can incorporate magic without spells. Why are fighters so lame as to not incorporate the basic tool of their society into their training regimens? It would be like a modern soldier not using technology because they aren't an engineer.

Like magic swords, and magic armor, and ... ?
 

RoughCoronet0

Dragon Lover
So I'm looking over the UA and collecting my first impressions and opinions. I'll start with the races (which I'm sort of surprised they are still going with race as the term to use but I was never bothered one way or the other about what to call them. Race, ancestries, origins, lineages, species, all work for me.

Races
  • Humans - I cant help but feel they need just a little something more. I know they get a free feat and inspiration every long rest. It might be just because I'm not fully wrapping my head around the current strength of this race, I don't know. I just feel like maybe even just one extra language known or a free tool proficiency would round it out in my eyes. It weird right?

  • Ardlings - I'm going to say it, I love the idea of this race. Aasimar are the angel touched race, but never felt like it covered the wide array of celestial creatures that could be pulled from as an ancestry. Not to mention that they are basically just celestial humans most of the time. The Ardlings encourage having ancestries from celestials like the more animal like Archons, the Guardinals, the Animal Lords of the Beastlands, and the various other animal like celestials that exist in the Upper Planes. I do wonder if it would be possible to give a few more options to choose from the match a wider range of animal types, but otherwise I love this so much!

  • Dragonborn - I don't actually mind the idea of there being a more standard version of the race and having the Fizban Dragonborns being ones that have a closer tie to a particular draconic ancestor then normal Dragonborn. However, as it stands this iteration isn't doing it for me. First I think the breath weapon should be reverted back to the version used in Fizban, and this Dragonborn needs some other stand out feature to really distinguish it from the others. Otherwise, reprinting the Fizban Dragonborns would be the way to go I feel.

  • Dwarf - While I am a bit sad to see Hill and Mountain Dwarves combined into one (mostly because I wanted to see how they could more clearly distinguish them from each other), I like the changes to the race over all. No real complaints here.

  • Elves - While a bit clunky due to shoving three subraces into one race's feature listing, my only real critique is that they should update these elves with the same trance feature as the Shadar-kai, Eladrin, and Sea-Elves from MPMM. Then it would be just right in my eyes.

  • Gnomes - I feel like, just like with the Human and Dragonborn, the Gnomes just need a little extra something to round out their abilities. either something that is standard to all Gnomes, or something added on to the subrace. Maybe a Nature, Survival, or Animal Handling proficiency for the Forest Gnomes and a Tool Proficiency for the Rock Gnomes. I don't know, just something more I guess.

  • Halflings - If you can combine the three Elves and two Gnomes into one race to give customization, then I feel like you can do the same for the Halflings easily. Have the Lightfoot Halflings gain something like advantage on stealth a number of times equal prof bonus or a bonus action hide or something along those lines, give the Stout Halflings resistance to poison, and give the Ghostwise Halflings a 30 ft. range telepathy. Then it would be perfect for me.

  • Orcs - I think this race is solid. I could see it getting maybe something else, like a a revised version of the Savage Attacks feature from Half-Orcs as they seem to be going away, but I don't think they really need it even if I would like to see more. Maybe I just really like each race having at least 4 distinct features (not including Dark-vision that is). Overall, I'm fairly satisfied.

  • Tieflings - I'm overall happy with this race and it being expanded to encompass all the fiendish beings of the lower planes. I am curious if a flying variant will be added. I will always feel like another feature will add to this but once again I don't think this races really needs it, I'd just like to have another feature is all. Otherwise, good all around.
 
Last edited:

cbwjm

Legend
No, this is what happens. People who won't play anything without an 18 certainly won't pass up on this chance. But its hard to defend floating ASI with "I can optimize more". Only 1, maybe 2 posters in all the ASI discussions I have seen were honest enough and said they like floating ASI because they can optimize.
All others tried to argue that it "allows them to play different race/class combinations" which makes no sense as even with fixed ASI you can play all race/class combinations you want if you do without the 18.
Where did 18 come from? Most of the time I see people wanting to start with a 16, that +3 bonus is typically the highest you can start with unless you roll and get high enough to boost to an 18. Personally, I'm fine with starting with a +2, but a lot of people really do want to start with a +3.
 


Arilyn

Hero
Most of the changes seem pretty good. I like having background feats over the mechanically and narratively weak old background features. Inspiration is more solidly explained and implemented.

I don't like how mixed races are handled. Having all the mechanics from one and just cosmetic bits from the other is uninteresting.

And "One D&D?" I really dislike this name. I dislike it a lot!

Overall, I think it's heading in a good direction, but I feel that I'm going to continue prefer Level Up.
 

Ixal

Hero
Where did 18 come from? Most of the time I see people wanting to start with a 16, that +3 bonus is typically the highest you can start with unless you roll and get high enough to boost to an 18. Personally, I'm fine with starting with a +2, but a lot of people really do want to start with a +3.
Highest attribute from the standard array +2.
When you are satisfied with a 16 then there is no reason to have floating ASI as you can put the 16 anywhere you want and there are no penalties anymore.
In all ASI discussions the pro-floating people in the end always said that "they want to play a race/class combination" and not suck, and sucking for them was not having the 18 you can only get with the correct +2 ASI.
 


Cadence

Legend
Supporter
The kinds of stories D&D emulates are more "blacksmith finds out he's a demigod" or "orphan boy pulls out the Sword in the Stone" than either of those.

I'm not used to seeing D&D games that do either of those. It feels more like the blacksmith gradually advances from being a schlub to being really tough by going on lots of Adventures (like Conan?) with no revelation of divine parenthood. The orphan gradually advances from being a schlub to being really tough with a bunch of progressively better magic items along the way and no big moment of becoming a future king because of one.

(The sword in the stone didn't particularly do much for Arthur's fighting prowess, did it?)
 


An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top