Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
October 29th Playtest Class Changes
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6038722" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>Mixed feelings...</p><p></p><p>First of all I am undecided about the general spellcasting changes... I thought that shrinking the number of slots per day was a horrible step towards the AEDU framework, but this comes together with also shrinking the number of at-will cantrips and limiting their choice. In a way, this change can have two benefits: reduces the "quadratic feel" of spellcasters, which also still depends on sheer spell power and amount of spells known, but at least is seriously limited if even at 10th level you have to be careful not to waste your slots because they won't last more than 2 encounters. BUT the flip of the coin is exactly that: ONE hard encounter and you've used up your highest-half of spellcasting ability. This could bring back the instinct of shortening adventuring days.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Cleric</strong>:</p><p></p><p>I am OK whether they want to base the class on domains or deities. What I seriously dislike is that MOST of the additional spells are already in the Cleric spell list. You get the benefit of having them prepared by default, but this means once again that clerics of all faiths are very similar to each other (Trickery being the only exception). Domains/Deities should rather give NEW known spells, otherwise unavailable to other clerics!</p><p></p><p>Very sad to see that domains don't affect armor proficiency anymore. But the "Disciple of..." domain powers are open to nice ideas.</p><p></p><p>I don't like "words of power", I like healing spells to require to touch the target, but this is a minor issue I can live with.</p><p></p><p>Turn Undead is an unsolvable problem: as a spell you get people complaining "I don't want to waste a precious slot to turn undead!", and as a non-spell you get people complaining "if I don't use it then I want it replaced with something else!". I strongly prefer it as a non-spell, but it really needs an alternative for those who don't want it.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Fighter</strong>:</p><p></p><p>The only two changes here are the extra attack (and I totally OK with it) and removing Parry from the automatically known maneuvers (on one hand it's worse for an already experienced player who now has 2 instead of 3 options for expertise, on the other hand it's better for a beginner who has an easier life).</p><p></p><p>Very good to clear it out that you can make your own style. By putting it this way, it's also easy for a DM to add some restrictions.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Rogue</strong>:</p><p></p><p>I knew that re-using expertise dice was a bad move... </p><p></p><p>Generally speaking, I want and expect the Fighter to be overall the best at fighting. I then expect the Rogue to be able to <em>occasionally </em>surpass the Fighter's damage output on an opportunistic and lucky blow. If it was up to me, I'd make Sneak Attack MORE powerful but RARE to pull it off. Now you can use it almost every round, but it is plain and simple a lesser version of Deadly Strike.</p><p></p><p>I understand that the purposes of making Sneak Attack optional is good, but it just doesn't fit together in the same mechanic as getting bonuses to skill checks and saving throws... because their numbers are not comparable. Maybe they could still use the mechanic, but then have options for only exploration-phase "maneuvers" (renamed, perhaps) and leave all the combat-related maneuvers exclusive to the Fighters, and then find another solution for Sneak Attack.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Wizard</strong>:</p><p></p><p>Once again I'm undecided about Traditions... the BEST about them is the unique benefits of each: Spell Mastery, Spell Tactician, Arcane Deception. THIS is the way to go IMHO, and would be even better if there were additional unique benefits at higher levels.</p><p></p><p>I am not a fan of this implementation of Signature Spells, but <strong>notice the following</strong>: a Wizard with Academic tradition is very similar to the previous version of the Wizard, with 3-4 cantrips at will. It might look like the fact that only those cantrips you <em>prepared </em> can be cast at will is a restriction; but compared to the previous version (which gave you 3 cantrips at will, period), this version means you're just the same (1 more actually) but you can swap them every day if you have more in your spellbook.</p><p></p><p>Thus Signature Spells are essentially in the game only if the DM allows Traditions other than Academic, and I am fine with this.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6038722, member: 1465"] Mixed feelings... First of all I am undecided about the general spellcasting changes... I thought that shrinking the number of slots per day was a horrible step towards the AEDU framework, but this comes together with also shrinking the number of at-will cantrips and limiting their choice. In a way, this change can have two benefits: reduces the "quadratic feel" of spellcasters, which also still depends on sheer spell power and amount of spells known, but at least is seriously limited if even at 10th level you have to be careful not to waste your slots because they won't last more than 2 encounters. BUT the flip of the coin is exactly that: ONE hard encounter and you've used up your highest-half of spellcasting ability. This could bring back the instinct of shortening adventuring days. [B]Cleric[/B]: I am OK whether they want to base the class on domains or deities. What I seriously dislike is that MOST of the additional spells are already in the Cleric spell list. You get the benefit of having them prepared by default, but this means once again that clerics of all faiths are very similar to each other (Trickery being the only exception). Domains/Deities should rather give NEW known spells, otherwise unavailable to other clerics! Very sad to see that domains don't affect armor proficiency anymore. But the "Disciple of..." domain powers are open to nice ideas. I don't like "words of power", I like healing spells to require to touch the target, but this is a minor issue I can live with. Turn Undead is an unsolvable problem: as a spell you get people complaining "I don't want to waste a precious slot to turn undead!", and as a non-spell you get people complaining "if I don't use it then I want it replaced with something else!". I strongly prefer it as a non-spell, but it really needs an alternative for those who don't want it. [B]Fighter[/B]: The only two changes here are the extra attack (and I totally OK with it) and removing Parry from the automatically known maneuvers (on one hand it's worse for an already experienced player who now has 2 instead of 3 options for expertise, on the other hand it's better for a beginner who has an easier life). Very good to clear it out that you can make your own style. By putting it this way, it's also easy for a DM to add some restrictions. [B]Rogue[/B]: I knew that re-using expertise dice was a bad move... Generally speaking, I want and expect the Fighter to be overall the best at fighting. I then expect the Rogue to be able to [I]occasionally [/I]surpass the Fighter's damage output on an opportunistic and lucky blow. If it was up to me, I'd make Sneak Attack MORE powerful but RARE to pull it off. Now you can use it almost every round, but it is plain and simple a lesser version of Deadly Strike. I understand that the purposes of making Sneak Attack optional is good, but it just doesn't fit together in the same mechanic as getting bonuses to skill checks and saving throws... because their numbers are not comparable. Maybe they could still use the mechanic, but then have options for only exploration-phase "maneuvers" (renamed, perhaps) and leave all the combat-related maneuvers exclusive to the Fighters, and then find another solution for Sneak Attack. [B]Wizard[/B]: Once again I'm undecided about Traditions... the BEST about them is the unique benefits of each: Spell Mastery, Spell Tactician, Arcane Deception. THIS is the way to go IMHO, and would be even better if there were additional unique benefits at higher levels. I am not a fan of this implementation of Signature Spells, but [B]notice the following[/B]: a Wizard with Academic tradition is very similar to the previous version of the Wizard, with 3-4 cantrips at will. It might look like the fact that only those cantrips you [I]prepared [/I] can be cast at will is a restriction; but compared to the previous version (which gave you 3 cantrips at will, period), this version means you're just the same (1 more actually) but you can swap them every day if you have more in your spellbook. Thus Signature Spells are essentially in the game only if the DM allows Traditions other than Academic, and I am fine with this. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
October 29th Playtest Class Changes
Top