OneDnD So, has anyone actually PLAYED the Expert classes?

Things have changed a bit - the Bard spell list is blander and Song of Rest has been replaced by more generic casting so all bards are now healers.
I'm aware of the changes. None of that adds up to "repetitive play" though, does it? If we assume the player is talking relatively to a previous 5E Bard anyway.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
That makes sense for Ranger (which does literally become more repetitive), but seems weird for Bard. I don't see any way or even argument in which an L3 1D&D Bard is "more repetitive" than an L3 5E Bard. In fact, I can only see arguments to the contrary. Likewise flavour. I could see the argument at higher levels, but L3? Nah.

Sounds kind of like the Ranger player had intelligent critiques and the Bard player just said "Yeah what he said!".
It's more that they played with me before.

The Ranger player was the bard player in a previous campaign that had a healer. So he was a backup healer and mostly through Song of Rest.

So the bard player was comparing his PC to the old bard and felt his was being forced into the role of a classic healer. And he didn't realize Shatter was moved to Transmutation until the one shot was over. Which sparked this quote:

"Creating energy is Evocation. Summoning energy from somewhere else is Conjuration. How the #$%& is Sonic blasts Transmutation. The Elric brother's can't clap their hands and shoot sonic blasts. Just give them Evocation. Or let them choose between Songs of Restoration or Songs of Destruction. My bard plays Metal and doesn't play Pop like Mal's pretty boy himbo."

So that's going in my survey.

Basically he felt the power increase ue to swapping spells but felt forcedto be a healer and buffer due to Songs of Restoration and fewer Inspirations.
 

It's more that they played with me before.

The Ranger player was the bard player in a previous campaign that had a healer. So he was a backup healer and mostly through Song of Rest.

So the bard player was comparing his PC to the old bard and felt his was being forced into the role of a classic healer. And he didn't realize Shatter was moved to Transmutation until the one shot was over. Which sparked this quote:

"Creating energy is Evocation. Summoning energy from somewhere else is Conjuration. How the #$%& is Sonic blasts Transmutation. The Elric brother's can't clap their hands and shoot sonic blasts. Just give them Evocation. Or let them choose between Songs of Restoration or Songs of Destruction. My bard plays Metal and doesn't play Pop like Mal's pretty boy himbo."

So that's going in my survey.

Basically he felt the power increase ue to swapping spells but felt forcedto be a healer and buffer due to Songs of Restoration and fewer Inspirations.
I mean, he sounds like kind of an edgelord, gotta say buddy. Like quite a lot of an edgelord. This is an adult, right? Does he listen to a lot of KISS or something?

I think we can all agree that spell schools are pretty stupid though. What buffs did he use, out of interest?
 

Lidgar

Legend
Regarding the class balance, the Bard is notably underpowered compared to the Ranger and Rogue. The Ranger is hugely frontedloaded with many features to get the class up and running. The Rogue is simpler but Sneak Attack by itself is a massive upgrade in power. By contrast, the Bard lacks comparable design space. I am playing the playtest Bard and it feels a bit lacking.

I am less a fan of the way the playtest defines each Arcane, Divine, and Primal "spell list".

It is better to update the Spell Schools to organize the magic spell themes more clearly. Then choose the Spell Schools to build each class concept. For example, the Bard and the Druid have much in common, including Divination and nature-magic Transmutation with Healing. But they differ because the Bard has Enchantment and Illusion unlike the Druid, and the Druid has elemental-magic Evocation unlike the Bard.

Having the Schools organize the magical themes discretely, makes it easy to distinguish and construct each class concept.
Either that, or just keep the spell lists by class. I'm still puzzled why they thought going to generic lists by power source was even necessary. Part of the flavor of spellcasters is the unique spells they have access to.

Sorry for the slight derail...have not had a chance to play one of the new expert classes IRL yet.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
Either that, or just keep the spell lists by class. I'm still puzzled why they thought going to generic lists by power source was even necessary. Part of the flavor of spellcasters is the unique spells they have access to.
The one possibility I can imagine is if they eventually decide to make the Psionic source. By doing power groups they'll be able to at some point (like if/when they do Dark Sun and decide at that point to introduce the Psion) demarcate all the spells that are considered "psionic"... because these will be both spells that are currently in the game, plus probably new spells they would create for the source. By putting something like Telekinesis into the Psionic power source (in addition to it already being in Arcane)... it perhaps helps make it feel to some people like it is its own Psionic power, rather than just a spell "borrowed" from Wizards.

And then by creating the giant pool of what are considered psionic spells... they could also start divvying them up amongst the Psions's subclasses (if they so choose) based upon their schools. So the Telepathy subclass would get Divination psionic spells plus maybe a couple other school options... the Psychometabolism subclass could get Transmutation psionic spells and maybe a couple other schools... and so forth.

Granted, I'm just spitballing here... but by creating power sources for spells you gain a bit of stylistic identification. These are Arcane spells... these are Divine prayers... these are Primal evocation... and these are Psionic Powers. Yes, there will be some overlap with some being in more than one group... but for the most part they might help solidify spell identity.
 

DnD Warlord

Adventurer
I've seen a lot of white-room analysis of the three expert classes and the supplemental feats, but I'm wondering if anyone actually statted up a ranger, rogue, or bard and run them through an adventure? Does the changes to Sneak Attack really make them weak? Is the bard playable as both a caster and a healer? Is the ranger actually good at anything? Does the changes to feats work?

I'm curious at this point if anyone has given the classes a go and what was the experience.
i just signed back in after like a year away... I didn't even know there was a new edition coming until this morning when one of my players asked if we could use the inspiration rules from the playtest.
 

Clint_L

Hero
Just bard so far. The player didn't find that it played a lot differently, but they loved the new ability to use bardic inspiration as a reaction and successfully prevented several characters being knocked unconscious. As DM, I didn't like that they were able to so easily prevent several players being knocked unconscious and felt that it made a somewhat tough encounter feel much easier than anticipated. So I guess it's a matter of perspective. The campaign isn't high enough level yet for the greater access to magic to have been much of a factor yet, but I imagine the player will really like that, as well
 

I've seen a lot of white-room analysis of the three expert classes and the supplemental feats, but I'm wondering if anyone actually statted up a ranger, rogue, or bard and run them through an adventure? Does the changes to Sneak Attack really make them weak? Is the bard playable as both a caster and a healer? Is the ranger actually good at anything? Does the changes to feats work?

I'm curious at this point if anyone has given the classes a go and what was the experience.
I have not played a class myself, but in a game I am playing a warlock and we have a ranger from the playtest and some of the basic rules of the playtest (inspiration, exhaustion, ect) and we are all having fun with the new feats
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
I mean, he sounds like kind of an edgelord, gotta say buddy. Like quite a lot of an edgelord. This is an adult, right? Does he listen to a lot of KISS or something?

I think we can all agree that spell schools are pretty stupid though. What buffs did he use, out of interest?
He can't name a single KISS song.

He didn't have buff spells. Just the 2 inspiration (which he hated). He thought that the changes forced him to play a certain way.
 


tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Ran Grasp of the emerald claw & voyage of the golden dragon with 2 rangers 1 bard 1 rogue levels 6 & 7.

From a GM standpoint the new prep style was a lot of fun & players were more likely to have interesting spells prepped when their niche came up than just relying on brute force & the best spells. The rangers & bard had a lot of fun with dual wielding & mark/hex. The spell lists being more restrictive for hybrid casters (ranger/bard) rather than including any spell that might possibly have some overlap in the venn diagram made choices players made to pickup new options really shine without stomping on the toes of full casters. Practically every skill check seemed like someone had expertise & it was a bit overkill. The new barkskin was a big hit & the casters were all looking forward to the eventual spell revision . Supreme sneak was basically autostealth but the new "ending the condition" stuff in the hidden condition mechanics avoided turning it into either scry & fry or fail by fiat. I particularly liked how racially linked spells made casters feel distinct beyond one extra cast of a spell & could see mage classes doing similar with the ardlings.


One of the rangers was an infernal tiefling that made good use of being able to add the necromancy hellish rebuke along with the new PAM on marked targets whenever the chance came up for him. The other ranger was a more traditional twf build who packed quite the punch thanks to the twf rules & mark changes. Tireless being 1d8 thp/long rest felt pointless, it should probably be a spend 1-10 minutes to just do it after the 1 free use.


The rogue was a dwarf who made good use of stealth+stone cunning, I ultimately decided to let him bypass the 1/long rest with a 10 minute to activate version & it felt less unnatural. Supreme sneak was basically autostealth but the new hidden mechanics headed off trouble that 5e's prior "but I rolled a 37 stealth!" often created & the player said he had a better feel for when he was pushing out on a limb but still didn't worry about pushing his luck thanks to death saves

The bard was a drow elf who made great use of faerie fire. Reaction heals keeping people from suffering a death save from bardic inspiration felt like it trivialized already minimal risk using the old 5e death save & yoyohealing mechanics. Like the rangers with mark he tore it up with hex & twf
 
Last edited:

Yaarel

Mind Mage
The one possibility I can imagine is if they eventually decide to make the Psionic source. By doing power groups they'll be able to at some point (like if/when they do Dark Sun and decide at that point to introduce the Psion) demarcate all the spells that are considered "psionic"... because these will be both spells that are currently in the game, plus probably new spells they would create for the source. By putting something like Telekinesis into the Psionic power source (in addition to it already being in Arcane)... it perhaps helps make it feel to some people like it is its own Psionic power, rather than just a spell "borrowed" from Wizards.

And then by creating the giant pool of what are considered psionic spells... they could also start divvying them up amongst the Psions's subclasses (if they so choose) based upon their schools. So the Telepathy subclass would get Divination psionic spells plus maybe a couple other school options... the Psychometabolism subclass could get Transmutation psionic spells and maybe a couple other schools... and so forth.

Granted, I'm just spitballing here... but by creating power sources for spells you gain a bit of stylistic identification. These are Arcane spells... these are Divine prayers... these are Primal evocation... and these are Psionic Powers. Yes, there will be some overlap with some being in more than one group... but for the most part they might help solidify spell identity.
When updating the Spell Schools to tag spells more thematically, it is easier to distinguish between:

Conjuration: telekinesis, force constructs, magical energy
Divination: scrying, fate, teleportation, planar effects
Evocation: elemental effects, earth, water, air, and fire
Enchantment: mind effects
Illusion: reality alteration
Necromancy: planar darkside, Undead, Fiend, Aberration
Transmutation: life, lifeform, body, shapeshifting, healing, plant and animal

While subclasses might do differently, the base class generally feels like:
Wizard = Conjuration, Evocation, Illusion
Psion = Conjuration, Divination, Enchantment, Transmutation
Bard = Divination, Enchantment, Illusion, Transmutation
Druid = Divination, Evocation, Transmutation
Cleric = Divination, Necromancy, Transmutation
Warlock = Conjuration, Divination, Illusion, Necromancy
Sorcerer = Evocation, Necromancy, Transmutation

Instead of the amalgamated UA lists of Arcane, Divine, and Primal, the class can refer to the schools. Then designers can modify each school when adding new features that several classes can share.
 

He can't name a single KISS song.

He didn't have buff spells. Just the 2 inspiration (which he hated). He thought that the changes forced him to play a certain way.
To be fair re: KISS until like a year ago neither could I until I found out "I was made for loving you" was by them. That came as a shock.

Agree: re: 2 Inspiration being dumb and will note so in feedback in a couple of days. They need to make so it's always (from L1) per Short Rest if they're going to make the number so low.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
Instead of the amalgamated UA lists of Arcane, Divine, and Primal, the class can refer to the schools. Then designers can modify each school when adding new features that several classes can share.
That's fine... except WotC isn't going to re-org their spells in the schools you proposed (including the removal of Abjuration). If they were going to... then sure your suggestion would be potentially viable.

My note just pre-supposes they keep their three power sources, and therefore enables a fourth to be added later if they so choose (not that there's any suggestion they actually intend to.)
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
That's fine... except WotC isn't going to re-org their spells in the schools you proposed (including the removal of Abjuration). If they were going to... then sure your suggestion would be potentially viable.

My note just pre-supposes they keep their three power sources, and therefore enables a fourth to be added later if they so choose (not that there's any suggestion they actually intend to.)
To update the school is just swapping a single word. Simple.

Many spells need far more revision than this!
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
To update the school is just swapping a single word. Simple.

Many spells need far more revision than this!
Yeah, but they aren't going to do it, including the removal of Abjuration. Your post just moved too many spells around. They aren't revamping stuff nearly that much.
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
Yeah, but they aren't going to do it, including the removal of Abjuration.
They can list Abjuration as a tag.

CURE WOUNDS
1st-Slot Transmutation (Healing, Abjuration)

ALARM
1st-Slot Divination (Scry, Abjuration)

ANTIMAGIC FIELD
8th-Slot Conjuration (Dweomer, Abjuration)

And so on.
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
If the traditional Schools remain an inconsistent and useless mess, then the game does better to delete them for the sake of simplification.

Otherwise, to keep the tradition, the Schools are in need of serious designer attention and updating to make them useful.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top