log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E My Quick and Dirty Tasha Read

You dont know that.

Maybe he always wanted to play a Dwarven Monk, but the poor fixed Stat mods to useless stats and useless Armor proficiencies kept him away from the concept.
My group select races because the want to play them. If the race has sub-optimal stats then they play a character with sub-optimal stats. We've had goliath rogues and gnome druids amongst other things.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Don't forget: if your mad about dwarven monks, it's possible to have Bird Monks with +2/+2 as well. And now dat Monk has flying AND Antimatter rifles as a Monk Weapon!
 
Last edited:

Haven't gotten that far into reading it (currently on Druids), but so far I dig the book. The Origins section, for being just two pages, will definitely be a real game-changer (and probably will create the most discussion online). I'm guessing origin is going to eventually replace the term race.

The way the origin customization is set out, I dig it. An elf will still feel like an elf, a dwarf a dwarf. If someone wants to swap their elven training with longswords for polearms, that's hardly a stretch for elfdom, and could be a great storytelling opportunity.

I find that some of the new class abilities are contingent on DM approval to be interesting. For most of them, I think I'll be requiring a swap of an existing and commensurate ability seems fair. But I also imagine that some DMs will be fine tossing it all in the mix and others none of it.

Also, I was a little iffy on the alt cover, but in person it looks gorgeous. The shimmer gives it a lovely ethereal look.
 

NaturalZero

Adventurer
The way the origin customization is set out, I dig it. An elf will still feel like an elf, a dwarf a dwarf. If someone wants to swap their elven training with longswords for polearms, that's hardly a stretch for elfdom, and could be a great storytelling opportunity.
This is why I don't understand some folks tearing out their hair over tweaking the race mechanics. An elf wizard and an elf fighter PC had a boatload of mechanical differences before, but there are people acting like an elf starting with Con 16 instead of Con 14 completely destroys some mythical concept of racial purity.
 

Part of me gets it - I've been playing since demihumans had Predator-style infravision. Old habits die hard for some; I'm certainly very much prone to nostalgia. And nostalgia has a lot to do with the complaints - when they're not attached to more odious retrograde views. People have been playing with sword and bow elves for ages. Nevermind that, oh, for example, one can rebut the whole "dwarves use only axes and hammers, all the time" with Thorin and Orcrist.

This is why I don't understand some folks tearing out their hair over tweaking the race mechanics. An elf wizard and an elf fighter PC had a boatload of mechanical differences before, but there are people acting like an elf starting with Con 16 instead of Con 14 completely destroys some mythical concept of racial purity.
 

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon
Hence why Tasha's is optional.
This is true, and well understood. But just because something is optional doesn't mean it cannot be critiqued, analyzed, disagreed with, loved, etc. Your respond is marginally more useful than if you had said "giraffes have long necks"

Besides, there is an expectation among a substantial number of players that the options should be available, and that only hard-ass GMs say no. So...
 


Hatmatter

Adventurer
Besides, there is an expectation among a substantial number of players that the options should be available, and that only hard-ass GMs say no. So...
Hmmm...not among my players...or those who congregate at the couple local hobby shops I frequent. It seems to be easily understood that as the creator or manager of the fantasy world, the DM gets to pick which races, subclasses, and so forth are permitted. The same for which optional rules in the DMG will be used. I have never seen any push back on that...of course, the DMs I observe often try to help a player fulfill a character concept that a player might have through alternate approaches or even making allowances. But I have never seen such an inflexible, negative attitude toward Game Masters.
 

I think the swaps are ok, unless as a dwarf fighter you swap all your proficiencies for tools, because the dwarf did not spent his time learning weapons and armor... Only when they suddenly trained to be a fighter... 1 or 2 proficiencies ok, but not all of them.
I think the costs of the trades should be somewhat meaingful.
 


Something that occurs to me is that I might allow the racial feature swaps that allow you to trade out redundant things that you are going to get from your class because that incentivizes you to take the classes you are supposed to be good at. Fighter is traditionally the most iconic class for a dwarf. So a mountain dwarf fighter can trade out their weapon and armor proficiencies and use them for some other dwarfy tool proficiencies (or whatever the allowed trades are—I wont have the book for months).

I would probably only allow trades that let you swap out non-redundant but relatively useless features—like say allowing a mountain dwarf wizard to give up his weapon proficiencies—on a limited case by case basis if it made really good sense for both the setting and the character.

That would actually provide additional support for classic archetypes.

Swaps that are relatively mechanically neutral, such as a dwarf wizard from a culture that uses pole arms swapping his weapons for pole arms, would likely be allowed on a fairly permissive case by case basis.
 



I've liked most of the covers, alt and regular, save for the regular Theros and alt cover Mordenkainen's. For whatever reason, those left me cold.

This is the first book I got with the alt cover - all the others I thought were just ok. The Xanathar regular cover is one of my favorite ever.

Continuing reading through it. I quite like the Way of Mercy monk. And that they added a fighting style for fighters that is all about unarmed strikes and grapples is an interesting option for those that don't want to go monk. I dig the idea of a heavily armored fighter just opting to deck their foes.
 



Lord Twig

Explorer
My first impressions. Drow are gray and WotC doesn't like drawbacks on abilities, powers, or characters in general.

First, drow. Honestly I always thought the pitch black skinned drow were very difficult to picture, and extremely difficult to draw. If you look back at previous version of D&D the art for drow is all over the place as they use different colors to portray a race that would essentially just be a black splotch. Paizo went with purple drow (or lavender), which I kinda like more than the gray, but gray works too. I think over all it is a good aesthetic change.

No draw backs. Now I know people can disagree on this, and people like different things, but one of the things I liked about the Wild Magic Surge was that things could go horribly wrong. You can cast grease or fireball centered on yourself, you can turn into a potted plant, you can get older or younger, everybody within 30' could gain vulnerability to damage.

The Wild Magic barbarian has none of that. Everything is good, and not just good, but good for you and your friends. You can't control what magic will happen, but you can control who is effected by it. If it is protective lights, it protects you and your friends. If you grow a bunch of plants around you, they only hinder your enemies. I mean, sure, magic can do that kind of stuff, but if it is really random, why does it always recognize who is friendly and who isn't? Why doesn't it randomly effect everyone? Or randomly give the bad guys a bonus?

Now I understand this is supposed to be a benefit, so the majority should be beneficial, but you can throw a few curve balls in there to make things interesting. I mean, if you always won at gambling, it wouldn't be fun anymore. Sure you would still do it to make some money, but now it is just a chore.

To continue on the "no drawbacks" theme, Customizing your Origin. Overall I like the addition, I'm not saying that it is always good to have drawbacks, sometimes drawbacks are just not fun. So giving people the option to remove drawbacks from a race they would like to play is fine. That said, I think they are being a little dishonest here as to their reasoning. To quote:
"Whatever D&D race you choose for your character, you get a trait called Ability Score Increase. This increase reflects an archetypal bit of excellence in the adventurers of this kind in D&D's past. For example, if you're a dwarf, your Constitution increases by 2, because dwarf heroes in D&D are often exceptionally tough. This increase doesn't apply to every dwarf, just to dwarf adventurers, and it exists to reinforce an archetype."
This is not true. I can go back and look at previous editions of D&D, this is not why the dwarf Constitution increase exists. It exists because it represents how an alien race, the mythical dwarf, differs from humans, as a species. ALL dwarves get this bonus because dwarves are different from humans. Why couldn't they just be honest? I think it would be cooler to say that, yes, MOST dwarves are tougher, but you are the exception, you are special, you are different, you are an adventurer. But instead we now have to wonder. Are all of the mythical species in D&D exactly the same? Do they, on average, all have 10s across the board? Are elves not more dexterous? Are gnomes not more intelligent? Dwarves are not more hardy? What the heck!

AND I LIKE THE RULES! I'll be honest. I had some reservation at first, but I have since been convinced that adventurers, being exceptional, should be allowed to move their stat bonuses around. And they just destroyed that whole argument!

Oh well, just fluff I guess, which I can ignore, but it is dishonest fluff. Just... Why?

Finally. I know they want to remove limitations, but forget the dwarf monk. What about the mountain dwarf wizard bladesinger with +2 Int, +2 Dex, and wielding a morningstar? Who, of course, by doing so, is honoring the elven way? ;)

Once again, I would actually be fine with this combination, but it totally would NOT be elven bladesinging. I would flavor it as a uniquely dwarven magical martial technique that has the same game mechanics.
 

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon
The Twilight cleric is amazing. S+ tier. 1d6+level temp HP every round without concentration? To the entire party? That is so good.
 

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top