D&D (2024) Why no new packs since late September?

[Minigiant]

I don't think they're finding out that it's not as good as it looked. More likely they are finding out that simple expertise by itself is kind of bland and doesn't really have a ranger feel to it, especially if every expert class has it.

That's what I meant.

Not that it's bad. But that in actual play it doesn't actually do anywhere as much as the hype. So you are left with just blandness.

Much how Hunter's Mark without concentration sounds good. But the ranger class isn't built to really utilize nonconcentration buff because they lack both the spell slots and spells (in the PHB). So you quickly drop down to something bland.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I mean like the whole community.

The designers never really expected people to play races whose ASI don't match their Class primary.

Yes, they very clearly did. That is part of why they opened up the ASI, though the biggest factor was inclusivity, not a mechanical issue.

The Tasha's ASI variants was due to people playing dwarf wizards and tiefling rogues often, something they didn't comprehend in house.

this is the absolute opposite of the case.

The Tasha's cultural variants were due to people not running every race with the standard FR stereotype for them.

No. It was due to complaints relating to inclusivity.

Or subclasses that have different levels...

I agree it's not too hard to house rule it together. But that falls short of what I would consider "compatible".

While the rule offered in the UA (just gain subclass features at the level the subclass says, even if it’s totally different) is terrible, as long as they include an actual rational rule*, there won’t be a compatibility issue.

*You gain subclass feature levels when your class tells you that you do, if that is different from when your subclass lists those feature levels. If your class lists a subclass feature on the table for the level you have just gained, and your subclass has already given all of its features, you gain a bonus feat appropriate to your level, instead.”

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Much how Hunter's Mark without concentration sounds good. But the ranger class isn't built to really utilize nonconcentration buff because they lack both the spell slots and spells (in the PHB). So you quickly drop down to something bland.

The ranger has a ton of concentration spells. Hunters mark without concentration is a massive QoL improvement.

 

[Minigiant]

Yes, they very clearly did. That is part of why they opened up the ASI, though the biggest factor was inclusivity, not a mechanical issue.

Actually, no.
In it was just inclusivity, they would have just removed the -2s like they were already doing.

They added floating +2/+1 to allow for goblin paladins. The change was to allow DMs and Players to create the race/class/culture combos they wants without feeling like the combos were weak or underpowered.

The ranger has a ton of concentration spells. Hunters mark without concentration is a massive QoL improvement.

It isn't that massive.

Like I said, rangers do not have the spell slots to put up 2 spells often in a 6-8 encounter day until hid-high levels. They'll burn though all their spells fast. And the primal spell list doesn't have that many spells you would stack within the short time. So it really doesn't do anything until level 9 when you get 3rd level spell slots and at that point most campaigns are over.

ALL concentrationless HM does is keep rangers from making checks to lose concentration on HM. Decent buff for melee rangers. Almost ignorable to ranged rangers.

So like what I said to Maxperson, It's looks cool on paper. Until actual play then its a big fat meh.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So like what I said to Maxperson, It's looks cool on paper. Until actual play then its a big fat meh.

Maybe prof bonus free uses or just 1 free use per day goes a long way.
Maybe add: against your favourite enemy it does not cost a spell slot.

Maybe changing hunter's mark to increase the number of targets, not duration when using a higher level slot.

There are quite some Ideas to make it work and a bit more interesting.

Right now I prefer the tasha ranger, just forgoing hunter's mark and use more interesting spells.

 

[Clint_L]

It's a quality of life improvement - it's not like it was billed as revolutionary or anything. That's mostly what OneD&D is going to be, tweaks and QoL improvements.

 

[Minigiant]

It's a quality of life improvement - it's not like it was billed as revolutionary or anything. That's mostly what OneD&D is going to be, tweaks and QoL improvements.

My point is it is either a bad and useless QOLI.

If you can swap spells every day, it doesn't matter if you learn for free.
It still uses your slots.
If you are a half caster, you barely have the slots to run HM and some other spell.

Playtest FE looks cool but plays meh. Same with Expertise as you can swap skill-skipping spells like Goodberry or Speak with Animal in any day. And these are not the only things from my own home playtest that was like that. I filled out my survey late. I'm sue anyone who actually playtested the rules didn't fill out their surveys early either. Especially since the time was extended.

So there is a good chance the early surveys look very different from the later ones.

 

[mellored]

Not that it's bad. But that in actual play it doesn't actually do anywhere as much as the hype. So you are left with just blandness.

I kind of agree.

What they really should do (IMO) is still have the flavor, but make the power level small. Then you can have the bland power be bigger.

I.e.
favorite terrain: add 1d4 to checks on your favorite terrain. If you spend a month of downtime in an area, you can add it to your favorite terrain.
Expertise in 1 skill.

Now the ranger still has a swing in power based on terrain, but it's not drastic that everyone dips ranger to get desert in a darksun campaign.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

My claim is that +6(Favored Terrain) < +20(expertise in Nature skill).

As I remember, your claim was that if you can use a 5e with a onednd character, so you can use a 3.5 character. So that they work on a totally different scale (BAB) seems to be negligible...

 

[tetrasodium]

My point is it is either a bad and useless QOLI.

If you can swap spells every day, it doesn't matter if you learn for free.
It still uses your slots.
If you are a half caster, you barely have the slots to run HM and some other spell.

Playtest FE looks cool but plays meh. Same with Expertise as you can swap skill-skipping spells like Goodberry or Speak with Animal in any day. And these are not the only things from my own home playtest that was like that. I filled out my survey late. I'm sue anyone who actually playtested the rules didn't fill out their surveys early either. Especially since the time was extended.

So there is a good chance the early surveys look very different from the later ones.

I found that mark was very effective in our test at level 6-7 for two very important reasons. The first is that it's easier to get more attacks now with the light weapon property or PAM making that extra d6 add up. HM lasts 1 hour & a level 6/7 ranger has 4 level 1 slots 2 level 2 slots/4 level1 3 level 2 slots respectively. That's up to 6 hours & you start hitting forced march after 8 hours... Step up the pace a bit & let those marks spread across multiple combats if you want to cast spells on top of them by saying things like "no bob I have mark running, maybe instead of pushing for us to take a short rest every fight or so you should start learning to psace yourself better & dialing back on the warlock nova/monk stunning strike/etc".