I mean I love Led Zeppelin and KISS. (granted I prefer the early KISS, Gold Gin, 100,000 years, Black Diamon, etc)
OneDnD So, has anyone actually PLAYED the Expert classes?
- Thread starter Remathilis
- Start date
Willie the Duck
Hero
We are playtesting a group with one of each, plus a battlemaster and evoker using the UA background rules. Semi-gritty recharge rules (situationally rest-constrained to try to accomplish ~ the 6-8 or equivalent). We've gone L1-6.
Everyone seems to like the 'free' L1 feat, with lots of people taking human to get an extra (Skilled and Toughness see a lot more love than before, and I can tell if Lightly Armored sticks as light, medium, and shields, it will be on a lot of wizard and lore bard first pick lists).
Ranger is definitely more straightforward -- two weapon fighting and hunter's mark is definitely enjoyed (although part of that may just be finally getting a chance rather than what they'd always do if it became the norm). I have to say, I disagree that it has made everything more same-y for the ranger. The changes to 2wf, hunter's mark, and spell selection allow for the ranger to cast (and swap out) spells to much greater effect, making them feel much more like a half-caster with multiple spell options, especially in combat.
Lore bard is interesting. In general we've liked it. The limit on the L3 skills to be the knowledges moves it from the 'generic not-eventually-get-multiattack' bard variant to more of a 'hey, we really meant it with the 'lore' bit' style. That's... I mean it's reinforcing the theme, which is fine, but then there isn't really a 'generic bard' archetype. So we have mixed feelings. Spell list we don't see why this is better than a class-specific list, but the actual spells are fine. Not getting the two 3rd level spells from other classes so early, along with fewer inspiration are clear power-downgrades, which is fine so long as the other casters get similar cuts.
Rogue... what to say? 2wf as a not-bonus-action (and SA on attack actions, so no SCAGtrips) definitely makes swashbuckler and Arcane Trickster less go-to options for melee rogues. We all noticed that the 'rules exploits' had been addressed. I think people recognized that reaction-action SAs, SCAGtrip SAs, and thief-rogue bonus action using great items were perhaps not the best way to boost rogues (since your average grade school or beer&pretzel players might not have picked up on them), but at the same time I think people were looking for more things to boost the rogue as compensation. We are thinking about jumping to level 10-12 to see how it plays there, and I think the guy playing the rogue is expecting to feel overshadowed. That, however, has not been playtested.
Everyone seems to like the 'free' L1 feat, with lots of people taking human to get an extra (Skilled and Toughness see a lot more love than before, and I can tell if Lightly Armored sticks as light, medium, and shields, it will be on a lot of wizard and lore bard first pick lists).
Ranger is definitely more straightforward -- two weapon fighting and hunter's mark is definitely enjoyed (although part of that may just be finally getting a chance rather than what they'd always do if it became the norm). I have to say, I disagree that it has made everything more same-y for the ranger. The changes to 2wf, hunter's mark, and spell selection allow for the ranger to cast (and swap out) spells to much greater effect, making them feel much more like a half-caster with multiple spell options, especially in combat.
Lore bard is interesting. In general we've liked it. The limit on the L3 skills to be the knowledges moves it from the 'generic not-eventually-get-multiattack' bard variant to more of a 'hey, we really meant it with the 'lore' bit' style. That's... I mean it's reinforcing the theme, which is fine, but then there isn't really a 'generic bard' archetype. So we have mixed feelings. Spell list we don't see why this is better than a class-specific list, but the actual spells are fine. Not getting the two 3rd level spells from other classes so early, along with fewer inspiration are clear power-downgrades, which is fine so long as the other casters get similar cuts.
Rogue... what to say? 2wf as a not-bonus-action (and SA on attack actions, so no SCAGtrips) definitely makes swashbuckler and Arcane Trickster less go-to options for melee rogues. We all noticed that the 'rules exploits' had been addressed. I think people recognized that reaction-action SAs, SCAGtrip SAs, and thief-rogue bonus action using great items were perhaps not the best way to boost rogues (since your average grade school or beer&pretzel players might not have picked up on them), but at the same time I think people were looking for more things to boost the rogue as compensation. We are thinking about jumping to level 10-12 to see how it plays there, and I think the guy playing the rogue is expecting to feel overshadowed. That, however, has not been playtested.
I suspect few people have such an issue with the spell schools as you do. Or at the very least that WotC has not seen or heard the same amount of issues from enough people to feel the need to reorganize them all.
But who knows? Maybe they will. We will just have to wait and see.
Oh I think D&D spells in general are a complete and utter mess, not just the schools. Although the schools are, more specifically, inconsistent and useless too. But I don't complain about it in public, normally. And technically I'm not complaining now, I'm just stating an opinion.
It's all ultimately Jack Vance's fault anyhow, how dare he write entertaining fiction about societies with silly unworkable customs that contain...silly, and...unworkable...magic....
I mean he felt it was forcing him to play a certain type of bard. He and the Ranger player felt that US was dumbing down the classes and removing options for complete newbies and hiding it behind pure power.
Or in the RangerUA/Bard5e players words. "It's so powerful you'll forget it's boring and repetitive".
Which the BardUA/Artificer5e say "Like the fighters. We all fighters now baby."
Yaarel
Mind Mage
Most spells already have the correct school.
The main updates are moving a few earth spells (rock, crystal, metal) spells to elemental Evocation, then Transmutation remains plants and animals. Divination handles remote-presence magic like teleportation. Conjuration refers to force and magical energy.
Even with these small tweaks, the Schools suddenly become clear and useful.
This is what happens when you design a game to appeal to everyone.
Part of the problem is the setting I run has Bard who's spell lists are themes around real life artists and bands.
They rolled bad twice, failed a quest, and The "Slayer" got resurrected. Was a tough fight by the time I got to Seasons in the Abyss but their luck came back big time.
They nova some bards when they want me to turn off their music or think I will fudge to hear more music.
kapars
Explorer
My 1d&d playtest group is still going. The only player affected by the recent packet was the Rogue but they are still level one and the only effect is they got an extra language. They have taken up the light weapon rules changes and enjoyed them. The Order Cleric cannot make the Rogue sneak attack but that’s not really been an issue.
Aside: I’m running Dragons of Stormwreck Isle and I’ve never seen as many Nature and Religion checks. I don’t know if it is the nature of the campaign or the players but it has been a lot of fun.
Aside: I’m running Dragons of Stormwreck Isle and I’ve never seen as many Nature and Religion checks. I don’t know if it is the nature of the campaign or the players but it has been a lot of fun.
Willie the Duck
Hero
If you ever wanted to make a separate thread on the subject, I would be a reader.Oh I think D&D spells in general are a complete and utter mess, not just the schools. Although the schools are, more specifically, inconsistent and useless too. But I don't complain about it in public, normally. And technically I'm not complaining now, I'm just stating an opinion.
Well I wasn't sure I was qualified to get into too much detail, but since you asked, I did start a thread for discussion! Enjoy.
MoonSong
Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
Because only wizards have had to care until now? Now that they are going to be everywhere everybody is going to have an opinion.
Neonchameleon
Legend
I'm very much in the camp that "spell schools make a lot of worldbuilding sense as a part of the way most wizards see the world - but they are a structure imposed by wizards to categorise reality not a part of actual reality. I don't want to have to worry about that nonsense as a general thing for most casting classes."
Uni-the-Unicorn!
Hero
Well you already missed the first survey then!
Only wizards have had to care until now. But now, bards, clerics, druids, sorcerers, warlocks, rangers, arcane fighters, arcane rogues, monks, artificers...pretty much everybody is going to have to deal with spell schools now.
Remathilis
Legend
Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knights had to care previously...
Eldritch Knight
Spells Known of 1st-Level and Higher. You know three 1st-level wizard spells of your choice, two of which you must choose from the abjuration and evocation spells on the wizard spell list.
Arcane Trickster
Spells Known of 1st-Level and Higher. You know three 1st-level wizard spells of your choice, two of which you must choose from the enchantment and illusion spells on the wizard spell list.
GMs needed to care for lots of reasons depending on the edition. A wall made with an illusion spell conjuration spell & evocation spell will all behave differently. conjuration spells tended to do less damage than evocation but bypasses SR or targeted an unusual save. EK was already noted. Also arcane trickster was limited to illusion & enchantment spells
What do the classes have to do with it though? It's the players who are the ones who might deal with spell schools, and my point to Yaarel was that few to no players have seemed to have issues with what spells went into which schools. So their point that the schools had to be "fixed" and made clearer seemed to me to be overstating things.
Could a school reorganization occur? Sure. But does it seem like it's near the top of the list of things WotC needs to get on for the new books? My feeling is no.
If D&D is going the school path it needs to start describing how schools are different.
Things created with evocation and abjuration are pure magic and are subject to anti-magic, spell resistance, dispels, and disjunctions.
Things created with conjuration are real, summoned from somewhere else, aand are subject to banishment and reality.
Things created with illusion are either nor real or made with shadow stuff and are subject to disbelief.
Things created with transmutation are transformations of real things and are subject to anti-magic, spell resistance, dispels, and disjunctions.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
