Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
One D&D Playtest Expert Classes survey is up! Update! Now due Nov 23rd.
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="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8805471" data-attributes="member: 6704184"><p>In aggregate, they'll get plenty of information. the most important thing is how these options feel, frankly. They are entirely capable of balancing the mechanics in house, but sometimes the community falsely decides something is broken with such a resounding consensus that they end up changing it in spite of it being completely fine by the numbers. </p><p></p><p>The Four Elements Monk is a great example. They overvalued ki points in relation to spell slots, valued getting to choose from a list rather than getting set spells highly enough to cost shadow spells and 4elements spells differently, and while all of that made perfect sense on paper, the 4elements just sucks to play for a large swath of players, so it will almost certainly get some sort of change. </p><p></p><p>I'm hoping they recycle the wu jen psionic disciplines from the mystic for the four elements monk, tbh. Steal it's name, too, and make the lore around the class less orientalist, while we're at it. </p><p></p><p>/tangent</p><p></p><p>As for the survey, I was mildly surprised at how negative my detailed feedback was. </p><p></p><p>I had a box for written feedback for the rogue, so it's only some respondents experiencing that issue. </p><p></p><p>I gave almost entirely negative feedback on the Bard. Leaning more heavily into spellcasting rather than bardic inspiration, reducing choices, "normalizing" everything in general, all leading to a Bard that just might as well be a variant Rogue at this point. And I say that as someone who vehemently opposing consolidating the classes. This is a bad version of the Bard. The Lore College is even worse than the base class. After level 3, it has nothing that relates remotely to knowledge. Swap the extra skills for a choice of social skills, and rename it something related to being the guy satirizing the king, or dressing down the villain until he relents, etc, with flavor pulled from Irish and Scandinavian bardic archetypes, and give it a ribbon "you can gain entrance to courts and noble households in exchange for performance and bringing news from the road, and the common folk are usually eager to share gossip with you and listen to your stories and hear new songs." I'd love it, then. </p><p></p><p>As it is, it's eating a very good Bardic archetype while doing nothing to actually fulfill that archetype.</p><p></p><p>The Ranger was mostly positive, with only a couple sore spots. Nature's Veil would be good if it didn't cost a spell slot, but is absolutely a waste of said slot as is. Either buff the effect, preferably by letting the ranger share the effect with at least one ally, or drop the spell slot cost. Foe Slayer is still terrible at that level. No one is excited to get that at level 18. I'd barely be excited about it at level 11. </p><p></p><p>Hunter is just...boring. This impulse designers have to listen to optimizer and rework the game to drop the options the optimizers ignore is bad for games. I told them it reads like they spend too much time listening to people who yell online. </p><p></p><p>Rogue is fine, though I challenged the change to Sneak Attack. if the point is to limit the rogue to 1 use per round, just <em>do that</em>. Directly. let the rogue who misses on their turn use SA if they get a reaction attack. </p><p></p><p>The Thief is excellent. I want to play a Thief with the Athlete feat and maybe Charger immediately. Charger makes a great <em>Fleche </em>fencer, and with the rest of the build makes such a fast and aggressive swashbuckling rogue that I don't know if I even need the Swashbuckler anymore. </p><p></p><p>I took a break to write this post, and I'm going to move on to feats. There are just so damn many.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8805471, member: 6704184"] In aggregate, they'll get plenty of information. the most important thing is how these options feel, frankly. They are entirely capable of balancing the mechanics in house, but sometimes the community falsely decides something is broken with such a resounding consensus that they end up changing it in spite of it being completely fine by the numbers. The Four Elements Monk is a great example. They overvalued ki points in relation to spell slots, valued getting to choose from a list rather than getting set spells highly enough to cost shadow spells and 4elements spells differently, and while all of that made perfect sense on paper, the 4elements just sucks to play for a large swath of players, so it will almost certainly get some sort of change. I'm hoping they recycle the wu jen psionic disciplines from the mystic for the four elements monk, tbh. Steal it's name, too, and make the lore around the class less orientalist, while we're at it. /tangent As for the survey, I was mildly surprised at how negative my detailed feedback was. I had a box for written feedback for the rogue, so it's only some respondents experiencing that issue. I gave almost entirely negative feedback on the Bard. Leaning more heavily into spellcasting rather than bardic inspiration, reducing choices, "normalizing" everything in general, all leading to a Bard that just might as well be a variant Rogue at this point. And I say that as someone who vehemently opposing consolidating the classes. This is a bad version of the Bard. The Lore College is even worse than the base class. After level 3, it has nothing that relates remotely to knowledge. Swap the extra skills for a choice of social skills, and rename it something related to being the guy satirizing the king, or dressing down the villain until he relents, etc, with flavor pulled from Irish and Scandinavian bardic archetypes, and give it a ribbon "you can gain entrance to courts and noble households in exchange for performance and bringing news from the road, and the common folk are usually eager to share gossip with you and listen to your stories and hear new songs." I'd love it, then. As it is, it's eating a very good Bardic archetype while doing nothing to actually fulfill that archetype. The Ranger was mostly positive, with only a couple sore spots. Nature's Veil would be good if it didn't cost a spell slot, but is absolutely a waste of said slot as is. Either buff the effect, preferably by letting the ranger share the effect with at least one ally, or drop the spell slot cost. Foe Slayer is still terrible at that level. No one is excited to get that at level 18. I'd barely be excited about it at level 11. Hunter is just...boring. This impulse designers have to listen to optimizer and rework the game to drop the options the optimizers ignore is bad for games. I told them it reads like they spend too much time listening to people who yell online. Rogue is fine, though I challenged the change to Sneak Attack. if the point is to limit the rogue to 1 use per round, just [I]do that[/I]. Directly. let the rogue who misses on their turn use SA if they get a reaction attack. The Thief is excellent. I want to play a Thief with the Athlete feat and maybe Charger immediately. Charger makes a great [I]Fleche [/I]fencer, and with the rest of the build makes such a fast and aggressive swashbuckling rogue that I don't know if I even need the Swashbuckler anymore. I took a break to write this post, and I'm going to move on to feats. There are just so damn many. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
One D&D Playtest Expert Classes survey is up! Update! Now due Nov 23rd.
Top