D&D 5E Was the Rune Knight (in Tasha's) "over-nerfed"?

[Ancalagon]

Hello

So it is quite common for Unearthed Arcana sub-classes to be a bit too good, and nerfed a bit when published in an "official" book. And the Rune Knight was too good - the combo of the hill giant rune giving your damage resistance, and the +1d6 dmg to all attacks was just... a little bit much. So a nerf was clearly necessary.

I did like the mechanics and the "flavor" of the subclass a lot. So I hoped it would be published officially. I wondered how it would be nerfed however. Would it be OP (probably not), just right or over-nerfed?

Now that I see the official version I'm a bit... torn. Level-gating the hill giant rune makes sense, but it's a long weight for that subclass feature to kick in. And limiting the extra damage of giant's might to 1d6 per turn, with a slow increase to 1d8 and then 1d10.... it's a bit harsh.

It's clearly still a playable subclass! But... did they go too far?

EDIT: After running a few sessions as a DM with a player who had a level 6 RK - no they did not go too far, the subclass is super good.

edit part deux: I ran a RK in part of SKT (level 7-10) and again, definitely did not overnerf.

 

[Mistwell]

I never read the original and my immediate impression of this version is it's pretty powerful. It competes well to be the most powerful subclass of fighter.

 

[Ancalagon]

I never read the original and my immediate impression of this version is it's pretty powerful. It competes well to be the most powerful subclass of fighter.

Don't forget to consider the bonus-action costs - you need a bonus action to activate the hill giant rune, another for the giant form... it's a bit slow to get going.

One thing I love is that it allows you to make a "magical" fighter without the "formality" of magical education the EK has.

 

[Charlaquin]

Seems fair to me. It’s a very powerful subclass, even after the changes.

 

[Stalker0]

When I first read through tashas, this subclass immediately caught my eye. It seems very powerful, and steals a little thunder from the barbarian.

 

[Don Durito]

Don't forget to consider the bonus-action costs - you need a bonus action to activate the hill giant rune, another for the giant form... it's a bit slow to get going.

One thing I love is that it allows you to make a "magical" fighter without the "formality" of magical education the EK has.

This is the big issue. (Bonus actions remain one the worst design elements of the game.) When I found the UA version I found this aspect of it very awkward in play. It's really unsatisying to be trying to use them both. Especially as there's a good chance you have some kind of feat that wants to use your bonus action. It's actually somewhat annoying that Giant's Might is a central feature rather than a rune as it means should you want the resistance you end up with two different features you effectively need to choose between. But that's the nature of subclasses - they tend to bake in features whether you want them or not, instead of giving you a range of choices. This one is better than most in that it least it gives you a choice of runes.

To me the biggest bonus about this class is that it gives you ways to be genuinely effective in the social sphere.

 

[Charlaquin]

When I first read through tashas, this subclass immediately caught my eye. It seems very powerful, and steals a little thunder from the barbarian.

I still wish it had been a barbarian subclass.

 

[Don Durito]

I just noticed that they changed the saving throw calculation from Int to Con, but they didn't bother to change the advantage on Arcana checks that the Storm rune grants to something that's would actually be useful for the class.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I just noticed that they changed the saving throw calculation from Int to Con, but they didn't bother to change the advantage on Arcana checks that the Storm rune grants to something that's would actually be useful for the class.

Most of the skill affecting runes fall into the category of "not necessarily very useful". You can get boosts to charisma skills, wisdom skills, tools...

What's useful and to what degree is very much dependant on what tertiary attribute you pick.

 

[Sacrosanct]

It's a lot like the changes to booming blade. When they give you a huge 7 course meal (when everyone else is still getting 3 course), and then take part of it away to bring it down to 3 course, it feels like they are making it bad. It's not bad. It's just not as awesome as it was. And if you never got the 7 course meal in the first place but always got the 3 course, then you'd think it's good and not think you got cheated in any way because you never experienced just how too good it was. People are weird like that.

 

[Weiley31]

I mean you can always stick to the UA version, change the INT to CON, remove the level rune gate locks, and then just apply any other buff from Tasha's to the UA version.

Rune Knight though, is probably one of my top three fave Fighter Subclasses.(Rune Knight, Echo Knight, and Battle Master.)

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

My problem with the archetype is two issues:
First, with only 6 runes to pick from, I cannot help but think that levelgating two of them is a bad idea without adding more rune options. Having played the UA version for quite a bit now, I can definitely agree that while it is powerful, that "slow to turn on" thing of the bonus actions is a bigger balancing factor than people realize. I also find it very odd that the Hill Giant rune is one of the strongest when they are by FAR the weakest and dumbest of the giants by a wide margin. I would have much rather they nerfed storm giant rune and possibly even the hill giant than make them level gated.

Second they completely left my main complaint unaddressed with the archetype, that there are too many competing reaction abilities in one archetype, especially when they all effectively accomplish the same thing: granting disadvantage or causing an attack to miss. It's also particularly odd that they felt that the 7th level feature had to be nerfed from an infinitely useable ac bonus of proficiency to what they changed it to, when the storm rune is that AND MORE of a full minute every short rest. Like how the hell did that make it out of the design room?

If anything the storm rune and the 7th level shield ability should be switched, or make the stone rune the 7th level ability. Don't get me wrong, I am loving this archetype in play, but my DM and I took one look at the changes, both said "well that was stupid", and are now trying to figure how to fix it.

 

[Ancalagon]

My problem with the archetype is two issues:
Having played the UA version for quite a bit now, I can definitely agree that while it is powerful, that "slow to turn on" thing of the bonus actions is a bigger balancing factor than people realize. I also find it very odd that the Hill Giant rune is one of the strongest when they are by FAR the weakest and dumbest of the giants by a wide margin. I would have much rather they nerfed storm giant rune and possibly even the hill giant than make them level gated.

Second they completely left my main complaint unaddressed with the archetype, that there are too many competing reaction abilities in one archetype, especially when they all effectively accomplish the same thing: granting disadvantage or causing an attack to miss. It's also particularly odd that they felt that the 7th level feature had to be nerfed from an infinitely useable ac bonus of proficiency to what they changed it to, when the storm rune is that AND MORE of a full minute every short rest. Like how the hell did that make it out of the design room?

If anything the storm rune and the 7th level shield ability should be switched, or make the stone rune the 7th level ability. Don't get me wrong, I am loving this archetype in play, but my DM and I took one look at the changes, both said "well that was stupid", and are now trying to figure how to fix it.

1: Re slowness thank you!
2: Hill giant rune being so good: Yes! that bothered me too.
3: It definitely bothers me too that it feels... unpolished. It's almost like the mechanics reflect the fact that the giants don't work well together... which is kinda cool in a way, but not fun?

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

1: Re slowness thank you!
2: Hill giant rune being so good: Yes! that bothered me too.
3: It definitely bothers me too that it feels... unpolished. It's almost like the mechanics reflect the fact that the giants don't work well together... which is kinda cool in a way, but not fun?

If anything, the giants for feeling like they don't work together is just further issues on WotC's part, particularly when they have several written adventures prominently featuring Giants already in both this edition and previous ones.

I'm gonna brainstorm on it this weekend and see what we come up with, I might post it here for critique. The fact is I'm not convinced that the stone giant rune needs to be level gated or nerfed as it's not as terrifying in actual play as it seems, and giant's might, while gaining an extra use in the published one at low levels is getting limited in damage. Even if one does view it ass too strong for level 3, past level 5 the stone giants rune is 100% fine, but I think 7th level is a wee bit punishing. We'll see.

My main design goal is going to be figuring out how to keep two runes and the 7th level ability from all using reaction, and figuring out how to keep the storm rune from just being the 7th level ability or the cloud rune...but better. We shall see.

 

[Undrave]

Did they better explain wether you can put runes on somebody else's stuff? I feel like this was a thing that should have been made clearer. A lot of these passive bonuses would be appreciated by other party members.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Did they better explain wether you can put runes on somebody else's stuff? I feel like this was a thing that should have been made clearer. A lot of these passive bonuses would be appreciated by other party members.

The text is pretty clearly "no" on this.

 

[Undrave]

The text is pretty clearly "no" on this.

Sucks, but to be expected. The UA wasn't clear on that point so its at least nice that it gets specified here.

It also feels ike a missed opportunity. Feels like being able to engrave runes on your allies' gear would be a cool way to offer support, but that you would just be able to tap into them much better than them,ya know? Maybe that kind of thing would work for a Bard of Fashion or something? Give minor buffs through magical embroidery!

 

[BacchusNL]

I found it kinda weird, lore-wise, that they put Hill Giant next to Storm Giant as the 2nd tier of abilities. Cloud Giant would have made more sense, traditionaly speaking.

The Hill Giant rune effect (resistance to bludgeoning/ piercing and slashing damage for 1 minute) also seems a lot more like the kind of abilities you see at 3rd level compared to the Cloud Giants, in my opinion, more unique effect (misdirecting an enemy attack), so I'm not sure what the thought process was there.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Sucks, but to be expected. The UA wasn't clear on that point so its at least nice that it gets specified here.

I don't think the text is much changed - I don't think the UA was unclear.

It also feels ike a missed opportunity. Feels like being able to engrave runes on your allies' gear would be a cool way to offer support, but that you would just be able to tap into them much better than them ya know?

Improving other people's gear is covered by the Artificer, Forge cleric and talisman warlock. The idea is to let go of the "be the best or go home" mentality. The runes give the fighter a chance to be good, or at least competent, at some things fighters aren't usually known for.

 

[jayoungr]

I've got a player who's playing the original UA Rune Knight, and it's crazy powerful. I haven't seen the new version, but I'd say it needed a bit of nerfing.