log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E New class options in Tasha

Corrosive

Adventurer

So looks like this UNEARTHED ARCANA from November has been integrated into Tasha's, from what was said on the livestreams this weekend.


4 new fighting styles (blindfighting, thrown weapon, unarmed, interception).

Barbarian gets danger sense and survival instincts, plus fast movement and instiinctive pounce.

You can now learn a new spell in place of another of the same level whenever you finish a long rest.

Any time you get an ASI you can also change a skill proficiency.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

dnd4vr

The Smurfiest Wizard Ever!
I really didn't care for most of this in the UA, so I doubt we'll add much of it at our table.

Spell Versatility is definitely out. Having Learned Spells instead of Prepared Spells is supposed to be one of the defining features of those classes IMO.

Some of the Ranger, Rogue, and Sorcerer options might be adopted depending on how they look if we get the book.
 

I think those options might be nice but not appropriate for all campaigns. I still think some options could instead be another downtime option: retraining. I think I'd rather have it seperate from leveling up, which might happen every day or every year of play.
So swapping a skill makes more sense taking a certain about of time, which is what downtime is all about.
With such easy retraining rules, the ranger's natural explorer and favored enemies can be easily rehabilitated. Abandon your forest and live on the coast for 10 years. Swap forest favoured terrain for arctic. Maybe the switch back only takes a few days when you remember how it was back then.
 

Istbor

Dances with Gnolls
Cool. Some of the features might be pretty useful given certain campaigns, and I definitely love most of the fighting styles. Unarmed, Thrown weapon, blessed warrior, are my top favs.
 


Good thing I saved the Class Variant Features UA so any nerfs to that can be undone when I use em. That way when I check Tasha's out, I can see what got nerfed and toss the nerfs out if need be.
 

Loved all of it.

Stealth buff to Monks and Rangers were excellent. Ditto caster druids (Moon druids get all the love at present).

Allowing swapping of skills, spells and manoeuvres is great (speeds up the decision making process in advancing a level, and removes buyers remorse).

The fighting style that adds manouvers was dope. Coupled with Martial adept (grants 2 dice in my games) means more manouvers for everyone (and I loved ToB personally).
 

I think that the spell versatility and martial versatility are just awkward patches for making the feature choices too limiting to begin with. Like perhaps certain caster classes should simply have more spells knows, and perhaps it is not actually a good idea to force fighting classes to commit to one weapon type at the first level? (Like aren't feats supposed to be for that sort of specialisation?)
 

I think that the spell versatility and martial versatility are just awkward patches for making the feature choices too limiting to begin with. Like perhaps certain caster classes should simply have more spells knows, and perhaps it is not actually a good idea to force fighting classes to commit to one weapon type at the first level? (Like aren't feats supposed to be for that sort of specialisation?)

I've always been a fan of rebuilding and retraining rules generally.

Buyers remorse is not fun. The game loses nothing by allowing such swaps later on (as long as there is a slight opportunity cost or time limit to be served to so switch).
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter

Spell Versatility. Available to Socerers, Warlocks, Rangers, and Bards, this feature allows them to replace a spell known from their list with another spell of the same level from the same list whenever you finish a Long Rest. You can effectively change out one spell per day, so if you spend a while resting in town or not fighting, you could have a whole new spell list.


Big if true for Sorcerers and Rangers

Warlocks already have the one spell they need.

Bards more OP.
 

I've always been a fan of rebuilding and retraining rules generally.

Buyers remorse is not fun. The game loses nothing by allowing such swaps later on (as long as there is a slight opportunity cost or time limit to be served to so switch).
Well, the spell versatility goes far beyond that, it allows swapping spells on every long rest.

And whilst it makes sense to allow some amount of rebuilding, I think that just shouldn't be the default approach and should be agreed with the GM on case by case basis. It is just weird for characters to forget abilities they used to have and it can also encourage bizarre min-maxing (this feature is good at these levels, but then I get that feat on the higher level I swap it to this other one.) Perhaps some people don't mind that, but It kinda rubs me the wrong way.
 

Well, the spell versatility goes far beyond that, it allows swapping spells on every long rest.

And whilst it makes sense to allow some amount of rebuilding, I think that just shouldn't be the default approach and should be agreed with the GM on case by case basis. It is just weird for characters to forget abilities they used to have and it can also encourage bizarre min-maxing (this feature is good at these levels, but then I get that feat on the higher level I swap it to this other one.) Perhaps some people don't mind that, but It kinda rubs me the wrong way.

Its one spell per Long rest. Its no big deal seeing as Clerics, Paladins and Wizards can swap them out at will already and it really only benefits Rangers and Sorcerers and they can use the help.

Pretty easily fluffed also. I mean they can all already do it on level up anyway.

I dont see it as benefiting meta gaming. I see it more as helping people avoid buyers remorse and being a little more forgiving on players with less system mastery from decision paralysis on leveling up, both of which are good things that outweigh the bad.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
I think that the spell versatility and martial versatility are just awkward patches for making the feature choices too limiting to begin with. Like perhaps certain caster classes should simply have more spells knows, and perhaps it is not actually a good idea to force fighting classes to commit to one weapon type at the first level? (Like aren't feats supposed to be for that sort of specialisation?)

Well warriors in D&D are generalists by default. They end up specializing do to their ability scores nudging them in a direction or the cost for specialization being cheap.

The versatility options do feel like patches for the narrow-minded design of the team. However in universe the patches make sense as people do let skills dull while honing knew ones.

Just the relative ease of training by these rules oozes of "we don't want to errata the PHB so we are letting you swap things easy".

Hopefully in 5.5e or 6e this isn't needed or made into a racial attribute instead.
 






i_dont_meta

Explorer
To each their own, but from what I understand the Class Feature UA was one of the highest overall rated UA's to date, hence Crawford stating that most of what we saw was making it to publication. We must just have a really concentrated pool of oppositionists here. My group is anticipating this book, collectively, more than any other release to date.
 

Players: Sorcerers are garbage because they know fewer spells than a Wizard can prepare. Give Sorcerers more versatility
WotC: OK, check out this UA
Players: Ugh what is this spell versatility garbage, Sorcerers are supposed to be extremely limited, what is wrong with you
Just give them more spells known. Sorcerers are already devoid of clear mechanical identity so giving them a mechanic that makes them more like wizards just heightens that problem.
 

Halloween Horror For 5E

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top