log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Tasha's Upgrades to Everything

Azzy

KMF DM
Within Tasha's Guide to Everything is a lot of interesting stuff, like racial and class options, subclasses, feats, and spells. But this thread isn't about that. Instead, it's about the new paradigms for some of those features that have sneaked in upon us. One of the more obvious examples is sorcerer and ranger subclasses getting bonus spells know. However, there's more than that and I want to make a list of those changes and try to retrofit them to previous materials.

Changes
  • Ranger sublasses get bonus spells. @Zerdal tackled this in a thread that they created.
  • Sorcerer sublasses get bonus spells. Zerdal also tackled this in the same thread.
  • Feats that grant spells per long rest can be cast using spell slots. The only previous feat that I can really think of is Magic Initiate (not sure is it should be applicable to racial feats or features), which you can just add "You can also cast the spell using any spell slots you have.” to the end of the second paragraph.
  • Martial Adept feat (PHB), add "Whenever you reach a level that grants the Ability Score Improvement feature, you can replace one manuever you know with a different maneuver."this feat’s fighting style with another one from the fighter class that you don’t have." to the end of the first bullet point.

I know there's more, but I can't think of it off the top of my head. So, I'm asking all of you to please help me compile all of it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Feats that grant spells per long rest can be cast using spell slots. The only previous feat that I can really think of is Magic Initiate (not sure is it should be applicable to racial feats or features), which you can just add "You can also cast the spell using any spell slots you have.” to the end of the second paragraph.
I'm guessing today they would probably rewrite the racial feats that give spells to allow casting them with normal spell slots as well, as not allowing it both makes them weak feats and tends to cause confusion. But maybe not.

Certainly I'd like a rewrite of Magic Initiate to fit the new paradigm, as the current version is not only unduly weak by comparison, but way too complicated, having been officially ruled to allow casting the spells with slots if and only if you take it in your own class as a spellcaster whose known spells are automatically prepared.

The Aberrant Dragonmark feat from Eberron also adds a Sorcerer spell (that you then cast with Constitution) in a comparable way.
 

I'm guessing today they would probably rewrite the racial feats that give spells to allow casting them with normal spell slots as well, as not allowing it both makes them weak feats and tends to cause confusion. But maybe not.

Certainly I'd like a rewrite of Magic Initiate to fit the new paradigm, as the current version is not only unduly weak by comparison, but way too complicated, having been officially ruled to allow casting the spells with slots if and only if you take it in your own class as a spellcaster whose known spells are automatically prepared.

The Aberrant Dragonmark feat from Eberron also adds a Sorcerer spell (that you then cast with Constitution) in a comparable way.
I say that's easy enough to house rule in.
 

I say that's easy enough to house rule in.
Right, and I'll houserule it for my own table if someone takes one of those feats. But I care about the RAW for character options because:

1. I don't like having to have a vast array of house rules for lots of character options that may or may not come up. I'd prefer players be able to just look at character options and get what they see rather than have to have my own extensive addendum to it.

2. When I then go to a different group as a player they will generally be the baseline there. I don't want to have to pester the DM about character build questions unless the DM is themself opening that can of worms by setting out to houserule a lot of specific character options.

3. Also as a player, I am often more rules knowledgeable than other people at tables I play at, and so am often the one (hopefully gently) reminding people what the rules are. I also usually have a fairly optimized character. Asking for special rules dispensations for my own character, in that context, is going to make me look like both the worst caricature of a powergaming rules lawyer, and heck, maybe it will be an accurate appearance.
 

Azzy

KMF DM
I'm guessing today they would probably rewrite the racial feats that give spells to allow casting them with normal spell slots as well, as not allowing it both makes them weak feats and tends to cause confusion. But maybe not.
Looking at the latest UA, I'm inclined to say that you are absolutely correct. In the new races/lineages they preview, their spells from their race/lineage can also be cast using any spell slots that they have. So between that and normal feats that grant spells being able to be cast this way, I'm convinced that the racial feats that grant spells should as well. Good call.
 




Another change is class features being used "Ability Score Modifer times per long (usually) rest” to “Proficiency Bonus times per rest”.

Yeah that is really nice and that sort of thing really kind of makes me want a D&D 5.5E, I know most of you guys hate the idea, but I think there's a ton of stuff that could be cleaned up and improved without invalidating older adventures, monster-books and so on.
 

G

Guest 6801328

Guest
Right, and I'll houserule it for my own table if someone takes one of those feats. But I care about the RAW for character options because:

1. I don't like having to have a vast array of house rules for lots of character options that may or may not come up. I'd prefer players be able to just look at character options and get what they see rather than have to have my own extensive addendum to it.

2. When I then go to a different group as a player they will generally be the baseline there. I don't want to have to pester the DM about character build questions unless the DM is themself opening that can of worms by setting out to houserule a lot of specific character options.

3. Also as a player, I am often more rules knowledgeable than other people at tables I play at, and so am often the one (hopefully gently) reminding people what the rules are. I also usually have a fairly optimized character. Asking for special rules dispensations for my own character, in that context, is going to make me look like both the worst caricature of a powergaming rules lawyer, and heck, maybe it will be an accurate appearance.

Also, if the ability to houserule something meant it wasn't interesting to discuss online, Enworld would be /crickets.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top