D&D 5E New class options in Tasha

[Vael]

It's also amusing to me that those that are arguing that Sorcerers are too good now are busy over in the psionics thread arguing Sorcerers should not even exist. Message acknowledged.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It's also amusing to me that those that are arguing that Sorcerers are too good now are busy over in the psionics thread arguing Sorcerers should not even exist. Message acknowledged.

It's not about being too good, it is the classes having some coherent identity mechanically and thematically. This change makes sorcerers mechanically more similar to wizards, which makes them existing as as separate class even less justified. I actually like the themes of sorcerer, warlock mechanics just fit those themes better.

 

[Mistwell]

Well, no, it is absurd. It’s not hyperbole.

OK. I asked you nice.

 

[TwoSix]

the only hyperbole in this discussion is people claiming that wizards are losing something.

It's weird how much identity the various caster classes derive by being in competition with each other. Wizards have lost exactly nothing, but because there are some other related caster classes that are now stronger in comparison, they have somehow become less good?

There's a psychology lesson in there somewhere.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It's weird how much identity the various caster classes derive by being in competition with each other. Wizards have lost exactly nothing, but because there are some other related caster classes that are now stronger in comparison, they have somehow become less good?

There's a psychology lesson in there somewhere.

So how would you feel about giving fighters the sneak attack? Would you also think that it would be weird that if people though that it would make rogues feel less special and muddy the differentiation between these two classes? Because this is kinda like that.

 

[Todd Roybark]

The pressure is part of the game. For the sake of the gods I am sick and tired of WotC making a version of D&D that coddles to players. 5E is already a very easy game as designed. Oh, you picked a spell you thought was great and it turned out you were wrong??? The HORROR!!! Well, it is one spell, look through the list and when you level choose a better one... But you might be wrong again.

There is a lot of anger in that. More anger than RPG mechanics warrant.

I"m going to flip your statement:

I'm sick of people stuck in AD&D mode freaking out at versatility. Essentially you are saying that any character that can surprise you with a single spell a day, will throw off your DM-FU, leading to cats and dogs, living together ....total anarchy!

After all the time you have been DMing, a player surprising you with just one spell per Long Rest is going to wreck your DMing prowess?

In all sincerity, I think you are up to the challenge.

5e is a lethal edition.
In September alone I have seen the following:

-My then 6th level Fighter failed a DC 13 Con save and started dying. Twice.
The first time on round One.
It is an old school rolled stats and HP game, I have +6 to the Saving Throw and 82 HP.
All my HP, down to 0, because of one failed save against a Banshee's Wail. (Twice)
My Initiative was right after the Banshees.

-A 10th level Halfling Bard with a +4 and Advantage to a DC 12 Suggestion spell, rolled the number two twice, and failed. The Suggestion, essentially took her out for the day, due to the spell duration.
In the same session, the remaining three party members fight 4 trolls.

The monk is knocked unconscious by Troll 1 of 2 trolls surrounding her.
Troll 2 moves into feast. Each attack has Advantage, each hit is an Automatic critical hit, and more importantly, each hit counts as TWO Death Save Failures.
(Two hits and the character is Dead.)
I rolled two sets of the number 1, twice.

I had the troll pick her up and take her deeper into the caves, (with more trolls), with the party and other trolls chasing behind. We were playing on 9/11, and as a group we have been referring to it as the 9/11/2020 Miracle.

Lethality is about how you play it.
This campaign is an open roll, the dice are what they are game.
It feels like old school D&D to me.

 

[TwoSix]

So how would you feel about giving fighters the sneak attack? Would you also think that it would be weird that if people though that it would make rogues feel less special and muddy the differentiation between these two classes? Because this is kinda like that.

Personally, I would have preferred a scaling damage bonus over multiple attacks, so I'm down.

 

[Undrave]

It's weird how much identity the various caster classes derive by being in competition with each other. Wizards have lost exactly nothing, but because there are some other related caster classes that are now stronger in comparison, they have somehow become less good?

There's a psychology lesson in there somewhere.

Wizards player are just salty they're not as op as they used to be in older editions

So how would you feel about giving fighters the sneak attack? Would you also think that it would be weird that if people though that it would make rogues feel less special and muddy the differentiation between these two classes? Because this is kinda like that.

Whenever we're talking about new classes, everyone's always ragging on about 'the fiction'. 'Ooh the fiction needs to support it!' 'think of the fiction!'

Well, Spell Versatility isn't part of the fiction, it's pure mechanic. Are you telling me the Wizard has no identity beyond 'has a spell book', which is basically just a random prop to justify the bizarre mechanics of Vancian casting? Sometimes you gotta remember that D&D style spell casting is not universal in fiction...

So I guess the Wizard just doesn't have weak fiction attached to it?

If a fighter got a variation on Sneak Attack instead of Extra Attack? I wouldn't mind. They still have a solid kit (admittedly with weaknesses in Exploration and Social) and the Rogue even more so.

 

[Undrave]

Personally, I would have preferred a scaling damage bonus over multiple attacks, so I'm down.

Multiple Attacks feel so much like a 3.x thing... "Fighters in 3e got lots of feat and more attacks than anybody, let's just do that and not try to push the design in any exciting direction or the grognard will not buy into this new edition. Let's hide the Fighter's other class features in the Feat section.". But I'm kinda salty so who knows?

 

[TwoSix]

Multiple Attacks feel so much like a 3.x thing... "Fighters in 3e got lots of feat and more attacks than anybody, let's just do that and not try to push the design in any exciting direction or the grognard will not buy into this new edition. Let's hide the Fighter's other class features in the Feat section.". But I'm kinda salty so who knows?

I'll be Na, you be Cl, and we can be salty together.