Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pukunui" data-source="post: 7277539" data-attributes="member: 54629">My opinion of the war wizard is that it should have been left on the cutting room floor. It seems like a waste of space to me. I would much rather have seen them revise the lore wizard or the theurge.You didn't ask for my opinion of any of the other new subclasses, but I'm going to share my thoughts on them anyway:Barbarian<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Ancestral Guardian: Meh. I can see how some people might like this, but it just doesn't appeal to me.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Storm Herald: Cool idea, but I would've liked to have seen more options. Why just desert, sea, and tundra?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Zealot: This one is cool. If I ever get around to playing a barbarian again, this will probably be the subclass I go with.</li> </ul>Bard<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Glamour: I like the concept but I feel like most of its abilities are too wordy. The wordiness puts me off wanting to play this subclass.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Swords: The blade bard was my favorite kit from the 2e days, and I really liked the initial take from the "Kits of Old" UA. I think this version is overall an improvement, but I'm still disappointed to see that they stuck with the weirdly worded Mobile Flourish and refused to bring back the much more awesome Trick Shot flourish for knife throwers.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Whisper: Again, too wordy. And possibly too mean.</li> </ul>Cleric<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Forge: Really cool. I'm a little disappointed they dropped shield from the bonus spells, but I like everything else about this class. I don't even mind that they can have a +1 magic weapon (or suit of armor) right from 1st level. (Normally I would.)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Grave: I have mixed feelings about this one. On its own, I like it (although I feel the picture accompanying it in the book is off-puttingly strange), but as a DM, I wonder if some of its features will make it too hard for PCs to die. (Being able to cast spare the dying at range as a bonus action, for instance.)</li> </ul>Druid<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Circle of Dreams: Conceptually quite cool. Not sure I'd want to play one, though.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Circle of the Shepherd: Not a big fan of pets, mainly just because I find having all those extra critters on the board slows the game down during combat. Could be a great class for solo play or if you've only got two or three players and need to fill the party out more. But when you've got four or five players already, I'd be inclined to ask the player to pick something else.</li> </ul>Fighter<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Arcane Archer: I *really* wanted to like this class. It's a rad concept. But I just feel like they have not been able to get it right. The arbitrary 2/rest limit on the magic arrow options is weird, and while I advocated that they remove the +1 bonus on the magic arrows, I don't know why they did that *and* moved that feature to 7th level.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Cavalier: Meh. I'm glad that it's not such a one-trick pony now (if you'll excuse the pun) but it's still not my cup of tea. And I'm not a fan of the marking mechanic, either.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Samurai: Meh. Seems OK, and I'm sure the folks who love medieval Japan will eat this up, but it's also not my cup of tea.</li> </ul>Monk<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Way of the Drunken Master: This one looks like it could be fun. If I ever play a monk again, I might take this subclass for a spin.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Way of the Kensei: It's about on par with the samurai for me. I have little interest in the whole Oriental Adventures thing, so meh.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Way of the Sun Soul: I actually played a sun soul/light cleric in Curse of Strahd. It was fun. I like this class. I note that some of its abilities have been slightly reworded for clarity.</li> </ul>Paladin<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Oath of Conquest: No.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Oath of Redemption: No.</li> </ul>Ranger<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Gloom Stalker: Cool, I guess.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Horizon Walker: Ditto.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Monster Slayer: Meh. I don't really like that they can magically identify all of a creature's resistances, immunities, and vulnerabilities, but whatevs.</li> </ul>Rogue<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mastermind: I think this one has a lot of potential. I briefly had one in one of my games but the character died before we really got to see how this subclass worked.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Inquisitive: Meh. I find the name off-putting first of all. The rest of it is just uninteresting.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Scout: Looks all right.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Swashbuckler: Arguably one of the best subclasses in the game. I'm currently playing a hexblade/swashbuckler. It's fun.</li> </ul>Sorcerer<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Divine Soul: They did a good job on this one, and I'm glad they changed the name from "Favored Soul". Now it's its own thing, and it does what it sets out to do well. I would definitely play one of these.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Storm Sorcery: I've seen one of these in play. It's OK. I think they should've kept the bonus spells it got in the UA version.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Shadow Magic: Looks cool. Wouldn't mind giving it a try. Not a fan of the hound, though.</li> </ul>Warlock<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The Celestial: Love it. They need to provide some celestial-themed options for familiars, though. A lantern archon would be sweet, for instance.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The Hexblade: Love it too.</li> </ul>Wizard<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">War Mage: See above.</li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification