UngeheuerLich
Legend
Hm... Better than 27 bonus hp. So maybe it works well enough.Level 3 Life cleric gets 15 bonus healing per Channel Divinity.
So 15 THP with low AC seems right to me.
Hm... Better than 27 bonus hp. So maybe it works well enough.Level 3 Life cleric gets 15 bonus healing per Channel Divinity.
So 15 THP with low AC seems right to me.
More or less agreed.People don't play Moon Druid to do extra radiant damage. They play it to be beefy in combat. They wanna tank with their face. Tying the Big Beefy Beast Tank subclass to the Moon theme has been a problem since the beginning, as it muddles the theme and effectiveness. Shoehorning moon and radiance stuff really takes away from the physical effectiveness wildshape enthusiasts crave. There also aren't enough Beasts at the appropriate CRs to give decent options. They would have to add so many land, aquatic, and flying beast stat blocks that actually feel different, and somehow make them balanced as monsters and wildshape options, while making them different from each other? There is no real difference between a cave bear and a polar bear. They're both bears.
Could not disagree more, and this option got shouted down hard by players.Utilizing a template design that utilizes the Druid's own PB and other scaling effectiveness, and letting the druid choose bestial abilities that match a cosmetic choice is really the only way to go. They just need to give it bestial abilities to choose from.
If you are a 12th level Moon Druid and want to be effective in a fight at that level, you should still be able to be effective as a bear, wolf, panther, wolverine, hyena, elk, rhino, a hip-hop-oppotamus, owlbear, griffon, or a "dire" version of whatever beast theme works for your character. Only Template-based design lets you have it all. Stat block design is a non-starter because there just aren't enough decent stat blocks to pull it off at all the appropriate CRs.
And what matters is how they compare to each other in a variety of situations. Which includes different encounter and rest models. The moon druid breaks what the DMG says the default should be - and is certainly used.I ignore the "adventuring day" guideline as I think it's meaningless; there is absolutely no consistency in how games are actually played. What matters is how classes compare to each other.
It's more interesting in play than the 2014 Moon Druid and their ability to suffer zero long term consequences by taking all the damage on the overcoat of temp hp.And I strongly disagree that "overcoats of temp hit points" (which is an oversimplified way to describe wild shape) are an inherent problem. To the contrary, I think they offer a different approach to tanking that is tactically interesting. The current 2024 proposal basically just tries to turn the moon druid into a fighter by giving an actual temp HP adjustment and buff to AC. It's boring.
Nope. The 2014 moon druid does not soak damage. The barbarian soaks damage (I know you call that resistance). The moon druid would have to take damage to soak it. Instead it wanders around with a de-facto force-field no-selling damage. "Damage" on the animal form simply isn't damage at all because there are literally no consequences. And that is what needs to be changed.Soaking: using HP like a sponge. This is the current model for low level moon druids: low AC, high HP. Again, passive.
No. The main problem is how they make running the game with the recommended (or indeed any slow) pacing non-viable at the levels that are most likely to harm new DMs. This is why if we can't find an acceptable version they should be removed from the game entirely.I think we are paying too much attention to them being OP for a few low levels; that's not the main problem,
But you won't accept templates and the overcoat of temp hp is truly, gamebreakingly awful at the biggest weakness of 5e - new DMs trying to learn to DM and not getting their game and intended pacing destroyed.And I also don't like the current approach, which seems to be to use wild shape to turn them into kinda sorta fighters.
It's not about optimization. It's about enabling the class fantasy... which is playing the beast you want to play and not sucking because of it. The current design doesn't fulfill any of that. At all. A Moon Druid who prefers a wolf form cannot fight as a wolf at mid to high levels. The stat blocks to support that fantasy don't exist. The UA8 rules recognize that players shouldn't have access to the MM stat blocks (unless the DM wants that headache), by limiting the class to the stat blocks in an appendix. There isn't enough space in the PH to cover 20 levels of Moon Druid forms in an appendix. For it to work, the books would have to offer multiple stat blocks to cover CR 1-6 (20th Druid level divided by 3 is CR6) for every beast, that allow the Moon Druid to scale their basic effectiveness as they gain levels. There are too many beasts in our world, let alone a fantasy world, to have unique stat blocks for all of them. That is too much design space for 1 subclass.More or less agreed.
Could not disagree more, and this option got shouted down hard by players.
The template option doesn't feel right. I've seen this with Beastmaster Ranger - one of my players absolutely refused the new "beast of the whatever" option. When I asked why, given that it was way more optimal, she didn't care. She wanted the class fantasy of her character training an actual beast companion, not some magical spirit creature that could take various forms. She hated that. In effect, she wanted something like Trinket from Critical Role.
Our current moon druid player similarly hates the template idea. With a passion. For a substantial number of moon druids fans, it just isn't the class fantasy. The answer is to come up with beast forms that scale better, and include beast-like monstrosities, such as owlbears (or just call creatures like that "beasts" in the new MM, which is probably the most sensible option).
I think a lot of the arguments around templates are based on optimization, which is missing the point entirely. Class fantasy always comes first. Stat block design is happening (and has been used for 10 years), so it's obviously not a non-starter. Templates actually are a non-starter: they were unequivocally rejected. They ain't happening. It's not even worth arguing about, because it's going nowhere.
He mostly talks about the attack bonus. Which i agree could be an issue.
or, you scale the wolf's numbers based on Druid level.There isn't enough space in the PH to cover 20 levels of Moon Druid forms in an appendix. For it to work, the books would have to offer multiple stat blocks to cover CR 1-6 (20th Druid level divided by 3 is CR6) for every beast, that allow the Moon Druid to scale their basic effectiveness as they gain levels.
Want to wildshape into a panther or a wolf for a level 12 fight? You'll just suck to death.
That is a wolf template. A very narrow template.or, you scale the wolf's numbers based on Druid level.
Like their AC, THP, saving throws, bonus damage...
If they added in the to-hit and possibly their trip DC.
Almost like a template...