D&D 5E (2024) How 2024 design interacts with class features and resources (poorly)

[Zardnaar]

2024 Shield Master doesn't use your bonus action (one change from 2014)

Derp I blame ze French.

 

[rabirin]

I'm sorry, but this complaint is just silly. The fact that you get diminishing returns for completely spamming Bardic Inspiration and only really want to dump your lowest level slots but can use higher is not a problem.

Sure, it's silly to say that maybe if a 1st-level slot converts into one Bardic Inspiration use, maybe a 9th-level spell slot should convert into more than one as well. (And as noted, the Artificer doesn't have this issue.)

Again this is silly. Knowledge clerics know a lot and are gifted knowledge by the gods. And the size of your spell list gives diminishing returns. Someone should know the most spells.

Every Cleric gets gifted spell lists by their domain, that's the entire point of the spell list. Knowledge Clerics arbitrarily get more than everyone else, with no sacrifice in other areas, and the designers explicitly stated in the UA for the subclass that the added spells and other changes to the subclass were about giving it more combat utility.

So your problem here is that (a) a small nerf went alongside the buffs and (b) you get diminishing returns on spamming wild shape?

One class getting a significant reduction to its class resource—one that's shared between base class features and also required for their subclass features—when almost every other class gets much more uses of their class features is nonsensical.

You just seem to dislike choices here. In general this is sub par and intended to be but sometimes you want that emergency heal.

Bad choices suck. At level 10 a Cleric can, once a day, cast any spell of 5th-level or lower from their spell list without having it prepared and without any components or spell slot. There's no cost beyond the one use per day. A Druid at that same level has to burn a use of a reduced class resource to get one 1st-level spell slot that still abides by prepared spells, components, etc.

Oh noes! You use your action to attack when in combat! Except the 2024 monk may take the dodge action and still attack. And you don't just spam Stunning Strike until out of Ki.

So ... Cloak of Shadows is for when the ninja monk is preparing an ambush rather than spamming. The shadow monk doesn't cheat round the action economy much. I don't get the complaint?

The Monk weapon mastery was an increased damage die which is a legit buff. Open hand technique is a decent add on

People who play Monks by throwing Stunning Strike out on every attack and then complain when they run out of ki shouldn't be playing Monks, that much is obvious to everyone.

Also, Cloak of Shadows has combat utility so a Monk would want to dedicate a turn to using it. (Or not, because almost every high-level enemy will ignore it and their other subclass features due to the prevalence of blindsight/truesight.)

Lastly, the Monk getting a slight increase on its damage die doesn't come close to comparing to the additional damage output granted by Cleave or Nick or the benefits and options of other masteries.

As long as they use abilities. On the other hand someone has to be last and the 2024 rogue is it - but is way better than the 2014 monk or even the 2014 rogue while the ceiling hasn't moved much except for lawnmowers.

Vex is not "very little of a bump". For that matter Nick is surprisingly substantial for melee rogues.

1d6 at a time

Yeah, knowing to not poison the undead is useful

And take enemies out for an entire round as you do. This is a silly complaint.

It hardly helps when you acknowledge that 2024 Rogues are in a terrible place, but a big part of that is due to 2024 not really thinking through how its design choices affect other areas of the game. Rogues rely more on their once-a-turn Sneak Attack, so being able to make more attacks doesn't benefit them as much as other classes. Rogues used to be top-tier skill-wise, but Fighters and Barbarians' new features blow past them especially at low levels. Rogues could already give themselves easy advantage without Vex, so that isn't a huge boon for them. The end result is that other classes have gotten much stronger at skill utility, while the Rogue doesn't get as much of a combat boost as those classes have gotten, making their place in the game much weaker because their deficiencies are more pronounced and their niche is eroded.

Vex and Nick are good on Rogues, but as stated they don't represent as much of a benefit to Rogues as other attackers get.

"1d6 at a time" is only if you use one of the base options, once per Sneak Attack. You get the ability to use two per Sneak Attack, then you get options that consume more and more of your Sneak Attack dice. Using Daze twice or Knock Out eats up 6d6 of your Sneak Attack dice, out of a possible 10d6 starting at 19th level. With Poison being irrelevant against many high-level foes, you're going to need those higher-cost options to be impactful.

And of course worth noting that a.) it's possible to spend Sneak Attack dice on a Cunning Strike option and then have the target pass the save, and b.) any condition you inflict with Cunning Strikes isn't as strong as making the target dead.

This is sheer arrant nonsense. The problem was that the 2014 Bladelock was so terrible it needed an entire subclass (Hexblade) to make it playable. The Tome and the Chain were both very playable under 2014 rules and therefore only got minor buffs (and a lot of pure chaff was removed,).

This is a pure White Room analysis. The basic fact is that outside tier 1 the warlock is probably the squishiest class in the game. No Mage Armour, medium armour, or shields. No Shield (or Absorb Elements). No self heals on their spell list. The only exceptions are caused by the subclass and the False Life at will invocation which doesn't scale.

This is part of the reason the Pact of the Blade was so bad - and even with the upgraded Pact of the Blade you need another reason to want to be close to enemies because it gets suicidal otherwise. The Archfey gets a melee boost because without it it just wants to hang back and spam Eldritch Blast for safety's sake. The buff is to make the play style work at all.

Bladelock was never terrible, it was just that a certain subset of players believed that Bladelocks (and exclusively Bladelocks) needed to be just as strong as martials with weapon attacks on top of their full casting. The idea that they need to be able to attack with Charisma is something that never was a problem for Paladins or Rangers, and the popularity of this isn't about Bladelocks specifically but about multiclass builds that abuse the ability to use one ability score for weapon attacks and magic.

Also, it isn't "White Room analysis" to say that a subclass with a feature that only functions when you activate it when you're within 5 feet of a creature or which discourages the target from attacking anyone but you is clearly meant for a melee combatant rather than a typical squishy Warlock. Yes, Warlocks don't have good defensive features—but as mentioned, Bladelocks were often played as multiclass builds, and taking/starting with a single level in Fighter or Paladin eliminates every weakness of the 2024 Bladelock.

Pact of the Blade was always viable in 2014. You can easily pick up Moderately Armored for durability, and Pact of the Blade always had an invocation that alleviates a lower investment in Strength/Dexterity. Just because the designers of 2024 expected everyone playing Bladelocks to also have a level elsewhere doesn't change that it's clearly their focus, and not just based on subclass design as listed. Chainlocks get very little that doesn't help their familiars stay relevant at higher levels, and Tomelocks are significantly nerfed with the loss of Book of Ancient Secrets. Only Bladelocks get new invocations at higher levels, and Bladelocks retain the one facet that made the one-level Warlock dips popular.

You don't care about "the majority of weapons". You only care about one. If you're a Paladin who finds a Holy Avenger longsword (or just a flametongue longsword) you will be wielding a Sap weapon regardless of whether you care about style or effectiveness. Saying Topple > Sap may be true - but Topple > Sap therefore you will be automatically wielding a Topple weapon is pure White Room theory crafting.

Except for the mechanics in 2024 that let a player obtain exactly the magic weapon they want.

There's also the matter that Defensive Duelist eats your reactions to work. Which means

• If you're mezzed your AC collapses
• You can't use the Sentinel feat or the Polearm Master's interrupt attack
• You're shut out of a number of good class and subclass features

Basically Defensive Duelist is for dueling and tanks your ability to tank.

Oh geez, thanks for pointing out that you can't use Polearm Master's reaction attack if you're using a weapon that supports Defensive Duelist. Or that a feat that gives you a substantial increase to your AC makes you bad at tanking. This is all very logical.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Sure, it's silly to say that maybe if a 1st-level slot converts into one Bardic Inspiration use, maybe a 9th-level spell slot should convert into more than one as well.

Or maybe there's no reason to make just spamming one ability look like a good idea.

Every Cleric gets gifted spell lists by their domain, that's the entire point of the spell list. Knowledge Clerics arbitrarily get more than everyone else,

Knowledge clerics know more than other clerics. W00t

One class getting a significant reduction to its class resource—one that's shared between base class features and also required for their subclass features—when almost every other class gets much more uses of their class features is nonsensical.

No it isn't. You just don't like it.

Also, Cloak of Shadows has combat utility so a Monk would want to dedicate a turn to using it.

The ninja does that before combat

Lastly, the Monk getting a slight increase on its damage die doesn't come close to comparing to the additional damage output granted by Cleave or Nick or the benefits and options of other masteries.

Yes it does if you actually run the numbers and don't combo with additional damage features like Hunter's Mark or Divine Favour. To simplify we're going to assume all attacks have the same to hit chance

Boost to damage die at level 5: the monk gets 3-4 attacks per round so plus 3 or 4 (multiplied by the to hit percentage)

Nick: the biggest nick weapon does d6 damage - so comparable to the monk

Cleave: the biggest Cleave weapon does D12 damage. So 6.5 damage. But this is on a secondary target (which might not be there) so due to harming focus fire halve it. Also it needs a previous attack to land

There was a reason WotC offered the Flex mastery for versatile weapons. There was also a reason the community didn't feel it - but it wasn't the basic numbers before adding magic weapons and procs.

It hardly helps when you acknowledge that 2024 Rogues are in a terrible place,

Someone has to be last. And no Primal Rage (Stealth) doesn't step on their toes

Rogues rely more on their once-a-turn Sneak Attack, so being able to make more attacks doesn't benefit them as much as other classes.

This actually isn't so

• Off-turn attacks benefit them by landing the entire Sneak Attack
• Nick with its weedy damage that doesn't include your stat does benefit them massively. It's insurance for if their main attack missed; the Nick can land the entire Sneak Attack - and you can still Cunning Action

Now they'd gain less from more attacks - but the ability to make two attacks and Cunning Action is big.

Rogues used to be top-tier skill-wise, but Fighters and Barbarians' new features blow past them especially at low levels.

Fighters possibly at the cost of their self healing - but at the levels Guidance does as well. Barbarians no because they have to be raging.

Rogues could already give themselves easy advantage without Vex, so that isn't a huge boon for them.

Just a decent QoL feature.

The end result is that other classes have gotten much stronger at skill utility, while the Rogue doesn't get as much of a combat boost as those classes have gotten

Breaking this down by level:

Level 1: the effect of Vex (and Nick) is a huge buff to the rogue; they don't have an easy time getting Advantage without Cunning Action

Level 3-4: With a 2d6 Sneak Attack pre-Extra Attack the Rogue is doing fine

Level 7+: The rogue blows everyone else's skills out of the water.

Levels 2, 5, and 6 might have issues about relative power levels compared to 2014 but I don't think so.

"1d6 at a time" is only if you use one of the base options, once per Sneak Attack. You get the ability to use two per Sneak Attack, then you get options that consume more and more of your Sneak Attack dice. Using Daze twice or Knock Out eats up 6d6 of your Sneak Attack dice,

Because you are trying for a straight up save or lose. Those are really powerful effects.

And of course worth noting that a.) it's possible to spend Sneak Attack dice on a Cunning Strike option and then have the target pass the save,

Oh noes. I guess no one should ever cast spells that require saving throws and lose their entire action and the spell slot.

and b.) any condition you inflict with Cunning Strikes isn't as strong as making the target dead.

So no debuff spells ever - instead spam damage. Gotcha.

Bladelock was never terrible, it was just that a certain subset of players believed that Bladelocks (and exclusively Bladelocks) needed to be just as strong as martials with weapon attacks on top of their full casting.

This is arrant nonsense. The Bladelock was best played like the Bladesinger - you treat your blade as a ribbon, hang back, and throw spells.

Either that or you played with an exceptionally nice DM whose monsters didn't target you. Because you had the squishiest class in the game.

Also, it isn't "White Room analysis" to say that a subclass with a feature that only functions when you activate it when you're within 5 feet of a creature or which discourages the target from attacking anyone but you is clearly meant for a melee combatant rather than a typical squishy Warlock.

And you don't have to use it. Can you play a Feylock as a bladelock? Yes. But due to squishiness and high resource investment it would be objectively inferior to do this if there were no synergies with the subclass.

Yes, Warlocks don't have good defensive features—

So they should hang back and use distance as their main defence.

but as mentioned, Bladelocks were often played as multiclass builds

Because they were suicidal otherwise. If you have to multiclass to make it work it's because it's not working by itself.

, and taking/starting with a single level in Fighter or Paladin eliminates every weakness of the 2024 Bladelock.

Which doesn't fix the Bladelock, just patches it.

Pact of the Blade was always viable in 2014.

With low enough challenge so was the monk.

You can easily pick up Moderately Armored for durability, and Pact of the Blade always had an invocation that alleviates a lower investment in Strength/Dexterity.

What are you thinking of? Thirsting Blade? Eldritch Smite from Xanathar's? The Hexblade? Devil's Sight + Darkness for easy Advantage to help you hit? Or something homebrew?

Just because the designers of 2024 expected everyone playing Bladelocks to also have a level elsewhere

[Citation needed]

doesn't change that it's clearly their focus,

It's their focus because they want it to actually work. You can practically vomit out a set of random abilities and they will work for Eldritch Blast spammers. But an Infernal Bladelock feels very different from a Fey Bladelock and it's a fun design challenge.

and not just based on subclass design as listed. Chainlocks get very little that doesn't help their familiars stay relevant at higher levels, and Tomelocks are significantly nerfed with the loss of Book of Ancient Secrets. Only Bladelocks get new invocations at higher levels, and Bladelocks retain the one facet that made the one-level Warlock dips popular.

To put things another way Tomelocks spend a single invocation, possibly two, on the Tome and one on Agonizing blast and they are good and can spend their other invocations on interesting things. Likewise Chainlocks. Bladelocks need to go almost all in because they are worse.

All warlocks get more invocations at higher levels. Only bladelocks need to clog up their invocations to stay relevant.

It Or that a feat that gives you a substantial increase to your AC makes you bad at tanking. This is all very logical.

Tell me you don't understand what tanking is without telling me you don't understand what tanking is.

Tanking isn't just staying alive. It's keeping the enemy eyes on you so they don't:t go past you and eat the squishier characters. You need to be sticky. Defensive duelist makes you hard to hit, encouraging the enemies to find easier prey - while taking away the resource you need (a reaction) to stop enemies simply brushing past you on the way to the wizard. Relying on defensive duelist makes you objectively a bad yank. even if it keeps you personally alive. Of course some DMs are nice and don't actually have smart foes or test the tanks.

 

[Steady Vane]

Warlock never struck me as particularly squishy, they have a solid selection of defensive spells they are supposed to cast on themselves before engaging in melee, and their class features are usually defensive in nature as well.

Squishiest was always the run-around classes like Rogue or Monk, who were designed that way so they did not just face-tank like the classes with d10 hit dice and armor can.

Squishy Warlock argument vs Armor of Agathys, Mirror Image, and Shadow of Moil.

 

[ECMO3]

This isn't the only time you've done this, where you misinterpret/misrepresent what you're responding to. No one said "absurd number of magic items", what was said was "absurd number of magic items that boost AC". You can't weigh mechanics on the basis that one character of yours has a total of +7 AC from all of their magic item bonuses—most PCs aren't going to have that specific setup at level 13.

No but I could have a similar boost with simple spells and feats. I am at 26AC with the defender doing defense and I am not wearing plate armor. Plate and Shield, Defensive Fighting Style and the Shield spell give you the same AC with no magic items at all.

This is the point, my PC is not full on AC. Her magic items are, but her build isn't and there is more AC to be had if you go looking for it.

(After all, you already mentioned you're using random treasure, which resulted in unoptimal weapons and at least one player disappointed that their character hadn't gotten anything good for them.)

"Unoptimum weapons" was a different campaign.

This campaign is actually not "random" treasure, because the DM is not placing it. It is what is published in the adventure. Go pulll the PDFs for the adventures I mentioned and you will everything I have on my character sheet.

And remember: at the same level, Defensive Duelist is an unlimited-use +5 AC that's completely independent of magic item drops, and everything but the shield is compatible with it (and before you say "not the longsword", Defenders can come in shortsword/scimitar).

Why do you keep saying the bolded and underlined when it isn't true? A SHIELD IS COMPATIBLE WITH DEFENSIVE DUELIST! They stack. There is no conflict between the two.

My current AC with a full on +3 Defender using the +3 on defense it is 26. If I had Defensive Duelist and a Defender Scimitar (and the shield, ring and armor I have) at level 13 it would be 31 when using a reaction.

Also having a defender sword at all, let alone a Scimitar, Short Sword or Rapier Defender is entirely dependent on magic item drops.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Warlock never struck me as particularly squishy, they have a solid selection of defensive spells they are supposed to cast on themselves before engaging in melee, and their class features are usually defensive in nature as well.

...

Squishy Warlock argument vs Armor of Agathys, Mirror Image, and Shadow of Moil.

And how exactly does the warlock have the spell slots to have all three of those up before level 11? You've also nothing left for more than an Eldritch Blast offensively

• Armour of Agathys lasts 1 hour - so no short rest with it.
• Mirror Image takes an action to cast and lasts a minute. Also takes a spell slot for a second level spell
• Shadow of Moil takes an action to cast with a concentration duration up to a minute. And is hard to use from ambush because it messes with the light

Armour of Agathys is a decent spell although it provides fewer temp hp than False Life never mind a healing spell - but the deterrent against melee helps.

Mirror Image is a good spell ... for a wizard to cast from a second level slot when you have higher levels spell slots. It's the sort of spell that shows why wizards and bards are less squishy.

Shadow of Moil is vastly overrated. It's too short duration for a non immediate combat prebuff, too visually messy for an ambush prebuff, and in combat takes your entire action and half your pact magic to not progress taking the enemy down.

 

[ECMO3]

Lastly, the Monk getting a slight increase on its damage die doesn't come close to comparing to the additional damage output granted by Cleave or Nick or the benefits and options of other masteries.

The increase in Monk dice is way better than Cleave at pretty much all levels after 5. Cleave is not that good in play, at low level the damage is significant but your character is only getting 1 attack, which misses a lot and missing on that attack means you can't even try to Cleave. And then if you hit, there needs to be another enemy within reach to TRY to roll another attack.

I think I have played 3 PCs that started the game with a Greataxe and Cleave before switching to another combat style when we found magic weapons. The number of times I actually landed a Cleave with them is probably less than 10 total. You can land it better with a Halberd, but do less damage when you do.

At high levels the problem with Cleave is it is low damage because you are not adding strength.

Nick is better, but I would say the 1d8 is probably about equal to nick at level 5. At higher levels though the 1d10 and 1d12 martial arts die is better than nick. What really works well on a Monk is the Weapon Master feat (or a level of Ranger or Rogue) grab nick and either Vex or Slow and go in with a dagger and a hand axe or club.

Also, it isn't "White Room analysis" to say that a subclass with a feature that only functions when you activate it when you're within 5 feet of a creature or which discourages the target from attacking anyone but you is clearly meant for a melee combatant rather than a typical squishy Warlock. Yes, Warlocks don't have good defensive features—but as mentioned, Bladelocks were often played as multiclass builds, and taking/starting with a single level in Fighter or Paladin eliminates every weakness of the 2024 Bladelock.

You need to burn a crapton of Evocations to have a decent Pact of the Blade Warlock with only 1 level of Paladin or Fighter. In 2024 this works better with 5 levels of Paladin or 11 levels of Fighter. If you are only taking 1 level of Fighter/Paladin I think you are better off with Agonizing Truestrike than you are with Pact of Blade.

Or that a feat that gives you a substantial increase to your AC makes you bad at tanking.

I don't think the feat itself makes them bad at tanking, but going without a shield or Sap does compromise them somewhat compared to other options when it comes to tanking and means they won't be great at it.

TBH if you don't want to use spells or other magic options, the best white room tanking build is probably the Zhentarim Tactics+PAM with a spear and shield. Sap is not tied to the attack action, so it activates every time you hit, whether it is the attack action, your bonus action attack, or on the reaction when someone walks into your reach and when you make an AOO if they hit you.

 

[Horwath]

But how do you handle the once per turn restriction?

simple, it's once per turn.

if someone is a rogue/paladin, they can sneak attack and smite each once per turn.

Bonus action prevents stacking too many things.

usually not a problem.

if it's not spellcasting, it is not overpowered 99% of the time.

 

[Weiley31]

Whats wrong with a sword and board paladin?

From a number of posts I've seen from people before on this message board, anything that isn't "optimal" is therefore wrongbadfun or your playing the game wrong or using the wrong weapons for PCs.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

simple, it's once per turn.

Bonus actions are 1/turn in total.

if someone is a rogue/paladin, they can sneak attack and smite each once per turn.

Bad example. That is already possible.
Steady aim and smite?

usually not a problem.

Define problem? I think it is a problem when stacking 5 things on the same effect makes interactions very complex.

if it's not spellcasting, it is not overpowered 99% of the time.

Overpowered is not a measurement here. It is about reducing complexity.

In the beginning of DNDnext, war priests could just cast a spell and attack. Simple.

I think it is also simple to have a 1/turn smite. Or a 1/turn sneak attack.
You could define smite or sneak attack as their own actions. So you can't stack it.
I guess they did not keep this, because having every different attack as their own actions resembled 4e too much.

Still I think, that having all bonus actions folded into the normal action would be better.

So a rogue could get the ability to attack and move (disengage/dash/dodge). This would remove the "problem" of rogues being lightning fast when using dash twice per turn.

Could be called: mobile attack.