File: 1719426379507251.png (1.77 MB, 828x1242)

1.77 MB PNG

>1 hp

>>93194395
*cast true polymorph on you and turns you into a pixie slave forever*
Tee hee

File: StarterSet_Characters.pdf (569 KB, PDF)

569 KB PDF

Is the STR Fighter the worst character out of these? Anything it can do, other characters can do better. There is no single thing that the STR Fighter does best.

File: 1533374028769.png (171 KB, 374x373)

171 KB PNG

I don't get how any of you fags can enjoy playing casters after the concentration rule got introduced, let alone pretend that they're any good.

>>93194381
>TQ: Are druids good now?
They were already one of the top 5 classes in the game. What more do you want?

>>93194467
>pretend
Delusional

File: 1719508987860297m.jpg (144 KB, 1024x585)

144 KB JPG

You are level 5 and can use unearthed arcana, but no flying/yuan-ti races. What do you build to hit as hard as possible AT WILL while still being tanky/elusive?
Hard mode: No CBE, GWM nor PAM.

File: 1690142621887201.png (857 KB, 640x808)

857 KB PNG

>>93194467
>let alone pretend that they're any good.
even in 3.5 when you could stack many spells at once a lot easier, the meta for dungeon crawling was still to stack as many initiative bonuses as possible (improved initiative for +4, a familiar with +4 initiative, magic items and other features boosting it), go first and act while all the enemies are flat-footed, and open up with a single high-impact buff/debuff/battlefield control spell.
From that point on the fight is "over" even if it goes on for a few more rounds of the party martials and animal companions finishing off enemies who are no longer a threat.
5e has not significantly changed how you play a full caster in a dungeon crawl. You still want to go first and set the tone of the entire encounter with a big battlefield control spell and then are mostly fine with flinging cantrips or magic missile or occasional AoE to clean up.

The biggest change from 3.X is that Haste got fucking dumpstered, so you can't just open a fight by hasting the party druid and his pet tiger and your pouncebeast barbarian and then go take a smoke break while they kill everything on the charge.

>>93194467
You must be trolling.
Have you tried reading spells?
It only sucks for like 3 levels and most people skip the first 3 levels anyway.
Hell, it does not even suck for druids and clerics (and maybe some sorcerers and wizards).

>>93194470
He's not asking if they're good mechanically, he's asking if they're good morally.

>>93194467
>I don't get how any of you fags can enjoy playing casters after the concentration rule got introduced, let alone pretend that they're any good.
It turns out that warping reality in a single way at a time is still better than not being able to do it at all.

>>93194583
>5e has not significantly changed how you play a full caster in a dungeon crawl.
The retardation on display here is truly incredible.

>>93194558
At will meaning expending no resources?

>>93194558
Gloomstalker Ranger with Sharpshooter.

>>93194558
>>93194583
These two posts show the main issue: action economy, particularly around number of attacks, is too fragile.
How do we fix that?
Also
>no PAM/GWM/CBE
You missed SS bro.
Also, kind of a dick move to ban those feats AT LEVEL 5.

>>93194661
>SS
Shit, you are right.
Also, not a dick move. Only at rather low levels is the trade-off meaningful.
>>93194660
FUCK!
>>93194641
Yes, but given I banned GWM, PAM, CBE and now SS, I would consider almost at will good enough too. Almost at will is defined as, beyond using a no/free/bonus/standard action, it can be used often enough that you could use it every other round of combat during an average day (1-2 short rests, 2-3 medium/hard encounters between short rests).

File: 1692173025141228.png (768 KB, 1535x640)

768 KB PNG

>>93194625
I already explained why. There's not as much pre-buffing, but that's ALSO because effectively every single spellcaster in 5e is already pre-buffed at character creation with dozens of things you would need to invest spells or feats in to get in 3.X, rusty shanktown has never been easier as a wizard and you're still godlike in tier 4 and XP costs were removed so many high level spells are even more busted since their sole limiting factor was removed.
Every single character in 5e gets free Weapon Finesse and free DEX to damage. Every single 5e character is full-BAB since proficiency is universal, an elf wizard gets the same proficiency bonus to stab or shoot things that a rogue or fighter does.
Every single character in 5e gets free Spring Attack and can use their spellcasting ability to make melee and ranged spell attacks, and automatically casts every single spell defensively so casting in melee doesn't provoke.
Nor does moving around an enemy as much as you want without leaving their reach, nor does standing up provoke.
Arcane Spell Failure was totally removed and you don't need to succeed at a check to cast while grabbed, so you don't need constant Freedom of Movement. Every single character gets unlimited at-will cantrips so you don't need reserve feats or a crossbow of shame.
The game now has bounded accuracy so you don't need to layer defensive spells with an armor/enhancement/shield/sacred bonus to AC to avoid enemies hitting you, in fact simply using scalemail and a shield gives you almost the same AC as an adult red dragon right at level 1.

I've been in an ongoing 3.X game for the last several years, a full caster starting a fight with a big AoE spell or Haste and then saving their resources for the next battle is how you play a caster in both 5e and 3.X for the most part. If anything I'm constantly remanded of how fucking babymode-easy playing a caster is whenever I come back to 5e and remember literally nothing provokes and movement is free

>>93194711
Even without SS I'd say it's hard to beat Gloomstalker if you're looking for a low resource cost damage dealer with good defenses.
In fact you can swap the VHuman for an Elf (any kind) and get Elven Accuracy instead, which shouldn't be below SS if you can count on fighting in darkness at least some of the time.

>>93194718
So? Your spells suck and you can only use one.

File: 1716155632375075.png (525 KB, 875x475)

525 KB PNG

>>93194751
>So? Your spells suck
a lot are straight up better than they were in 3.X, like Shield (which was a Shield Bonus and didn't stack with actual shields in 3.X, but DOES stack with actual shields in 5e), Fireball (which does 33% more damage at the caster level you first get it in 5e vs 3.X), Sleep (which now works on hit points rather than Hit Dice, so you can use it even against higher level enemies once you get them to like half health, whereas before it'd be outright immuned, and it still deals with multiple weak enemies instantly), Forcecage (which is just as much of a cockblock but now doesn't consume its expensive component), and most Mind-Affecting spells since half the bestairy doesn't have blanket immunity from creature subtype anymore.
>and you can only use one.
so use something WITHOUT concentration. the mechanic still existed even in 3.X, it just wasn't as common.

this is seriously sounding like a skill issue, you can still fucking start a fight with Black Tentacles and then just blast everyone while your party wails on them like in 3.5.

>>93194802
>Most spells are worse
>But some spells are slightly better!
>But you can only use one of them
Wow!

File: 0086.jpg (506 KB, 2475x3263)

506 KB JPG

What if, think about it, pic related was the entirety of the spell list?

>>93194558
First draft 5.5e UA ranger: thri-kreen gloomstalker
>nick weapon mastery was built into light weapon master
>hunter's mark was without concentration
Cast hunter's mark, make 3 2d6+3 stabs at the enemy and an additonal 2d6+1d8+3 stab

>>93194733
Agree, it is a good choice.
I wish more feats were locked behind racial requirements to create an additional layer to fine tune balance

>>93194819
Some subclasses probably get screwed over, but it's probably an improvement overall.

>>93194819
Did you mean of the cleric spell list? or of the whole of magic spells?

>>93194711
Alternative option: Conquest (any will do but I like Conquest the best and you get to share Armor of Agathys with your steed) Paladin with Mounted Combatant for advantage on most of your Lance attacks. Only weakness is flying enemies.

What starting feat do I get on my Sorlock (eventually, just paladin now)?

>>93194864

inspiring leader

>>93194844
>>93194848
Only Clerics and Wizards get to cast spells.

So, any obvious winners (besides Wizards) and losers (besides Rogues and Rangers) for 5.5

>>93194879
yeah, paladins (losers)

>>93194879
At least rogues got new toys

Ranger's are based entirely on a shitty first level spell

>>93194864
PAM

>>93194879
Hard to guess without seeing all the features, but Warlock was very strong in the UA and I wonder if they toned down some of the Invocations.
Sorcerer was also insane.

>>93194879
Barbarians are improved, but it's still Barbarians we're talking about.

>>93194888
Assuming you have a DM with brain who house rules DS into a sensible feature (aka the old one except with once per turn limit rather than bonus action spell), Paladin doesn't lose anything.

>>93194879
>So, any obvious winners (besides Wizards) and losers (besides Rogues and Rangers) for 5.5
single-classed warlock is actually worth playing now since you have actual reasons to keep leveling in the class. now that you can eventually get all 3 pact boons on a single character your last couple invocations aren't "ehhh, I guess.", Magical Cunning rounding up means when you have 3 slots it gets you back 2 which is nice, the subclass spells are automatically prepared at all times instead of costing spells known.

New ranger is the biggest loser after Rogue. They got fucking NOTHING besides Weapon Masteries which half the classes in the fucking game get, in many ways their new features are actually weaker than the Tasha's replacements. They suck ass and are not worth playing, and fucking Gloomstalker got nerfed to boot.

>>93194906
I don't know, teleporting stuff around as a Barbarian isn't exactly on the weak side of things.

>>93194903
I hope they keep the WL invocations as they are. The blade invocations honestly looked real nice coupled with the ability to choose a proper patron.

>>93194888
Aside from less burst (the HORROR!) from Smite the Paladin has received nothing but boosts and it was already great before.
You're insane.

>>93194917
>and fucking Gloomstalker got nerfed to boot.
This is what bothered me the most. Aside from the joke capstone.
Why not buff the other subclass options so that they're on the same level as the only good one?

>>93194934
>Aside from less burst (the HORROR!) from Smite the Paladin has received nothing but boosts
well that's simply untrue. less burst (one smite per turn) AND more action taxes (smite is now a bonus action every time you use it), AND no more curing disease with LoH, AND Aura of Warding no longer works on all spells, AND divine sense now costs your Channel Divinity to use.

The only way Paladin makes out better is if you go DEX TWF, since now they have access to all fighting styles (you couldn't TWF in 2014 paladin) and making the offhand attack part of the attack action with Nick can soften the blow of Smite costing a bonus action. Otherwise they're significantly weaker, especially at levels 1-4 where they literally get 50% less attacks now than 2014, Polearm Master is gonna go from the most common paladin feat to literally useless and never taken

File: 1700852013907995.png (20 KB, 564x99)

20 KB PNG

>>93194955
Crawford hates rangers

but its not looking good

>>93194955
Because Jeremy Crawford took personal offense to seeing fighters go fighter 5/ranger 3, how dare ranger offer something attractive (oh, but sorclock and sorcadin are """"iconic"""" and totally fine multiclasses according to him)
I wish I was joking

>>93194918
True. If nothing else, I might steal it for 5e games, but so far I'm really not enthused about most of the changes to other classes.

>>93194968
>AND no more curing disease with LoH
A bit disingenuous to count this considering the rule changes around diseases.
>AND Aura of Warding no longer works on all spells
It works against ALL the damage of the types listed instead, not just if it's a Spell. Monster design has changed and there are less spells used by monsters. It's a sidegrade.
>divine sense now costs your Channel Divinity to use
While making it more powerful and giving you multiple Channel Divinity per rest.

You're just playing the victim, as a paladin fag.

>>93194970
>but its not looking good
Doesn't matter, the book is already printed. Good choice to make changes after the playtest is over btw. Really shows how much they actually care about feedback.

>>93195005
>It works against ALL the damage of the types listed instead
resistance to all spell damage is way better than resistant to radiant, necrotic, and psychic. the only one worth a remote damn is necrotic and even then it's lame as fuck, resistance to radiant and psychic is so useless it's a ribbon on several races. I'll take half damage from Acererak's Chain Lightning and Disintegrate and Strahd's Fireballs and Animate Object, thanks.
>WELL, IF YOU DON'T USE SPELLS IT'S NOT AS GOOD
cool fag, now open up any actual published adventure and you'll see way more enemies with spells or traps that set off spells than mind flayers using psychic blasts or enemy celestials

>>93194467
Don't know about full casters but my Divine Soul Sorcerer/Oath of Vengeance Paladin is kicking a lot of ass by just casting Shadow Blade every encounter and swinging and he is COMPLETELY reliant on concentration so far but it's yet to become an issue.

>>93194819
>>93194844
>>93194848
>>93194875
Bards get access to both spell lists though.

>>93195057
How about the buffed channel divinity for Ancients? Doesn't that count as a buff?
What about the other Oaths? Or do you simply care about one features of one oath?

>>93195075
>moving the goalposts
thank you for admitting I'm right. your original post was
>>93194934
>Aside from less burst (the HORROR!) from Smite the Paladin has received nothing but boosts and it was already great before.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOTHING BUT BOOSTS
and it's simply inaccurate to say they got nothing but boosts, because that's untrue. There's completely valid reasons someone would prefer the original incarnation of paladin over the newer one.

>>93195089
I believe that the change to the OoA aura is a sidegrade at worst, but will be on average a minor boost.
You're just a shitposter arguing in bad faith.

>>93195121
>You're just a shitposter arguing in bad faith.
smite going from a free action to a bonus action is a dogshit retarded change, IDGAF about it being limited to once-per-turn or counting as a spell since that's largely incidental, but the absolute last thing this game needs is more idiotic bonus action bloat, especially when it's implemented in the clunkiest way imaginable where you make an attack and then spend a bonus action-mid attack to trigger the smite which nothing else in the entire game works like

>>93195141
I agree with that.
Now hop on your free find steed cast and gallop away.

>>93194381
>TQ: Are druids good now?
At what point were they bad in this edition?
>>93194467
Concentration has never been that much of problem in my experience, it helps keep things smoother.

>>93195170
>Concentration has never been that much of problem in my experience, it helps keep things smoother.
ironically the people who get most fucked by concentration aren't even full casters, it's the half-caster Ranger. tiny amount of spells known, limited spell list, and like 60% of all their spells require it, including one they get class features built around. Druid is also concentration heavy but they can choose from their entire list every day and can still use stuff like Plant Growth and a bunch of AoE damage spells without concentration on top of subclass abilities.

>>93195201
>can still use stuff like Plant Growth and a bunch of AoE damage spells without concentration on top of subclass abilities
To be fair, this part is also true for Rangers.

File: 1694841483134599.png (87 KB, 797x662)

87 KB PNG

>>93195217
>To be fair, this part is also true for Rangers.
a ranger can't even cast plant growth until 9th level and they don't get access to most druid AoEs, so no, not really.
There's only 32 ranger spells in the entire game without Concentration, here's the list.
For comparison Druids get 85.

>>93195201
>ironically the people who get most fucked by concentration aren't even full casters
Yes because if you are concentrating on something it is a shit idea to go to the front lines.

>>93195266
take resilient:con and hump your paladin's back and it's fine.

>>93194879
Warlock and druid are obvious winners.
Paladin and Fighter are great.
Rogue and Ranger suck.
Haven't even read Barbarian.

>>93195289
>Haven't even read Barbarian.
new berserker barbarian fucks and is literally better at being a skill monkey than new rogue, Brutal Strikes is more damage and more useful utility than Cunning Strikes and also doesn't allow a save, and they're even better at adding a bunch of dice to their attacks and get a Reaction attack every single turn against anyone who damaged them (not just attacked, any damage at all, so you can stand in the fire for bonus attacks like a true caveman)

File: 1698848074469911.png (1 MB, 651x955)

1 MB PNG

>yfw the smite bonus action nerf was a multiclass nerf.

>>93195325
pretty sure it's just crawford scraping D&DBeyond character data, seeing how popular PAM was on Paladins, and being a reactionary faggot about it. now dexadin is just gonna be the default instead.

>>93195366
sounds based

>power stancing paladins

>>93195366
>seeing how popular PAM was on Paladins
PAM was popular on every single melee character.

>>93195379
>PAM was popular on every single melee character.
Yes, but it was ESPECIALLY popular on Paladins, who otherwise had limited ways to access a bonus action attack, and who aren't even given the option to take Two-Weapon-Fighting without multiclassing in 2014. GWM+PAM and CBE+SS were the most common feat pairs in the game, but even non-GWM paladins would still grab PAM as soon as possible, since what the fuck else are you gonna use your bonus action for? Shield Master? Not after Crawford fucking tweeted an errata nerfing it.....

>>93195389
>since what the fuck else are you gonna use your bonus action for?
Wrathful Smite
But yes, hopefully now there will be more choices than just PAM/GWM or CBE/SS on every single martial character.
Hopefully the new Mage Slayer will be just as cool as it was in the UA.

>>93195389
>who aren't even given the option to take Two-Weapon-Fighting without multiclassing in 2014.

You mean two weapon fighting style? Because they could always do twf.

>>93195405
retard

File: 1713646196528726.png (102 KB, 1036x670)

102 KB PNG

>>93195405

File: Old Druid.png (1.02 MB, 720x697)

1.02 MB PNG

>>93194381
>TQ
Good as compared to what, other spellcasters? What level of optimization are we speaking of?
Their spell list is pretty competitive at low to mid levels, and becomes eclipsed by the other full casters except Warlock and non-Arcana Cleric (about 6th level spells onward, once shit like Contingency kicks in), and Druid magic items aren't very impressive compared to their competition.
At higher levels only Circle of the Moon and Shepherd are truly exceptional in 5e, and you can make an argument for Spores captsone being pretty handy defensively. In the new D&D edition Moon Druid got nerfed and unlimited Wildshape isn't a thing anymore, Shepherd is incompatible with the revised spells and Spores isn't special now that Druids can wear adamantine/mizzium.
Stars Druid start out strong (compared to other casters) but not quite as Moon Druid, then they shit the bed at mid levels because their subclass features don't scale properly except Dragon Constellation; Cosmic Omen is a shittier version of cutting words/bardic inspiration because you must use it before the roll is made (more often than not it was going to fail/succeed anyway and you wasted your reaction for nothing), Full of Stars is a meme because modern monster design is moving away from BPS damage, so you either dip 2 levels into it or wait for Shapechange for your subclass to do anything.
Now they're in the PHB and according to JC they are mostly the same as TCE, so most likely no subclass spells, making them the only druid subclass without them, other than guidance and guiding bolt.
The new Archdruid feature is a downgrade from base 5e because no more infinite wildshapes nor immunity to being counterspelled (BIG nerf), so I don't see what JC means by the base class being stronger.
Unless their spell list gets considerably better somehow, Druids are just low to middle of the pack compared to other spellcasters.

>>93194558
I would go artificer (battlesmith) 3/wizard (war magic) 2, but that falls a bit more on the defensive side of things.

File: 1707671862724.jpg (310 KB, 1024x871)

310 KB JPG

>>93194381
What's the general consensus over this JJK homebrew that essentially does away with 5E's classes and magic system in order to execute the way Curse Techniques work in the show?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sd-ouEwTkDVCrRHkVpcCuv0EduIn1o68dEFvD8Unz3I
My friends have been bugging me to do this as a oneshot but i really don't like 5E but i do like how it got rid of my major peeves (spell system and class inequality) so i am more open as to actually run it.

My main reason to be here is to ask if there's any homebrew or conversion of 5E that fixes some of the problems that it has on the mechanical level (actions, advantages, etc) or any essential houserules so as to make it a better experience for DM and player alike

>>93195797
>What's the general consensus over this JJK homebrew that essentially does away with 5E's classes and magic system in order to execute the way Curse Techniques work in the show?
Why the fuck would you use D&D 5e for a JJK game?

>>93195436
>>93195428
You could still do it to fish for crits to smite, you just couldn't add your modifier to the attack

>>93195797
I would use spheres of might/power before I used whatever this abomination is

>>93195806
That's the same question i make to myself everytime they ask me to do it.
I honestly think i will just gut this thing for templates as to how make the CTs and shit to add into Savage Worlds, i'll probably be more fun.

>>93195797
if you want better rules for this type of game, you are better off digging through OSR bullshit, Pathfinder 2e, D&D4e and 5e Clones.
Tells us what the actual problem you have with the game and maybe I can help you narrow it down.

>>93195861
I guess your players are to retarded or lazy to learn another system because of how much of a pain in the ass it is to learn 5e for a newcomer.
Odds are you could walk them through the character creation or something like that but I don't know your context.

>dm says i cant play an aarakocra because its homebrew
>doesnt listen to me when i say its official
>refuses to even check online to see if its true

>>93195877
>better rules for this type of game
YES
I just don't know of many games besides stuff like Savage Worlds or sup systems that allow for abilities with such specific conditions
What i like of this document is that it tries to adapt the flavor of the setting as actual mechanics rather than doing faux adaptations of a character through a really specific build on the system (see at the character building of anime characters for 5e or other systems) instead it gives the players what they want, to use the cool ability of the character they watched and for the disonance between system and actual play to not be that big.
>>93195885
>learn another system because
They've never played a ttrpg or did so years ago (5E), i just want for them to be able to play without much hassle and i want to see if i can retro fit this butchery of 5E into a more bearable system, i have no specific problem with 5e rather that i believe it's clunky and with many nonsensical errata.

I know a superhero type game would be better but i also don't want for build complexity to be that high since this would be their first non 5e game and don't expect them to make a full on GURPS build that recreates a character, just give them the curse technique and how jujutsu sorcery works in-setting, am i too lost?

>>93195935
>I know a superhero type game would be better but i also don't want for build complexity to be that high since this would be their first non 5e game and don't expect them to make a full on GURPS build that recreates a character, just give them the curse technique and how jujutsu sorcery works in-setting, am i too lost?
The closest thing I know to a JJK RPG is Deviant the Renegade or Mage the Ascension. Both of them could work but odds are you are better off trying to use a super hero system with pre generated characters or run something closer to what D&D is built for.

>>93195909
Based DM.

>>93195935
>>93195985

just use Base 5e and drown them in magic items that mimic what jjk does.

>>93195995
It would be incredibly jank but if they refuse to play anything else, that sounds like a half playable option.

>>93194443
Just play homebrew, do Laserllama Alternate Fighter and pick champion or Master at Arms. Otherwise, be prepared to have a dull game experience unless your Dungeon Master can put in the effort to have you engage with combat and use optional rules like disarming and marking or whatever

>>93195909
kek get fukt

>>93194381
they were good. now they're less good since four of their strongest spells were nerfed. That said, they're still full casters, so they're miles better than your stupid fucking barbarogues

>>93196026
>It would be incredibly jank
So is striping 5e of its classes and magic system, I'd wager.

but yea, I don't know anything about jjk but just ban full casters to put everyone on an even playing field, and then throw magic items at them

>>93194381
>Cute nerdy girl I know is DMING two campaigns and several one-shots over the summer
>Wanna try some new character concepts, sign up for all the one-shots and was going to join one of the campaigns
>DM has a family emergency and puts everything on hold before the first one-shot can begin.
>Hasn't been online for almost a week, no indication of the campaigns or one-shots starting up again.
Pray for me /tg/bros

>>93194467
Cry harder

>Divine Smite lost all it's cool jank by actually being a spell now
Damn.
Atleast Fighter is really cool now.

File: d2a263ffbb1dff1325e51ed34(...).jpg (95 KB, 736x1067)

95 KB JPG

>>93194381
What's a good alternative to "with great power comes great responsibility"?

I wanted an Uncle Ben like NPC to say it but I didn't want to quote to be so blatantly lifted

>>93195990
Based? More like retarded. If you want to fucking disallow races based on personal preference, but to FUCKING INSIST that any race in supplementaries is FUCKING HOMEBREW, then no, you don't deserve to DM. Get your shit together. What, do Goliaths not exist? Genasi? Way of the Kensei for Monk? Soulknife rogue?

>>93194443
The first one? He's a totally fine leader/face/big guy type character. With his greataxe he has the highest damage potential without spending a resource, and if he switches to a one-hander and grabs a shield he has the highest AC of the party. He has the best Persuasion, so he and the Rogue can trade off being the talker depending on whether they're trying to be diplomatic or deceitful. Dumping Dex is a little rough for Initiative and Dex save purposes, but in return he doesn't have any mental saves that he's particularly weak at. I'd certainly play him any day over the Greatsword/Longbow fighter or the +0 Perception Rogue.

>>93195909
it doesn't matter if it's homebrew or official
dm decides what's in the game
>b-but it's official
dont care
>hey he cant play that, it's homebrew!
yes he can, it fits my game

>>93196191
Maybe you should just take the hint.

Did any of the old spell smites change?
Is Searing Smite finally usable?

>>93196181
The price of greatness is duty to protect the weak.

>>93196181
"Power is worthless if you have nothing to protect with it."

>>93195909
time to buy mordenkainen's so you can prove him wrong and he can ban anyway for being AL-illegal or something

>>93196181
Power is equal parts privilege and duty. The more you can do, the more you must.

>>93196181
>A great position entails great responsibility
>Never Mind Happiness; Do Your Duty
>The Price of Greatness is Responsibility

>>93196248
Ay, fuck the one I posted, this is good.

>>93196181
Noblesse oblige

File: Lulu.png (1.37 MB, 1078x1270)

1.37 MB PNG

>>93194381
Have you thanked the party caster yet, /5eg/?

File: 1691146950455234.png (502 KB, 640x960)

502 KB PNG

What do you think?

pros
-allows the party to hide in plain sight
-defensive tool against enemy marksman
-can't be blown away

>cons
-a 30ft hemisphere of mist is kind of conspicuous
-you can't just sit in it and take pot shots
-if you dismiss it, it's gone until you, you take a short rest


I wanted it to be a melee tool, like a predator coming up to assassinate their prey. I should mention, that this is a ranger "invocation" I started writing up earlier today

File: Anon's Bullshit Summary.jpg (1.97 MB, 2550x3300)

1.97 MB JPG

The absolute travesty of WotC's ranger "update" was enough to make me spend my entire Friday night on updating my own bullshit repository.

https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/E3GrBudyS1k5

The biggest change from last time has been the overhaul to feats, which have multiplied substantially in number. Some of them are probably ill-thought-out because I'm just one guy. I did give ranger another pass today for some reason, tightening up a few features and rewriting the capstone.

As always, feel free to call me a faggot, steal my ideas and publish them elsewhere as your own, neither, or both. If you do find something glaringly retarded, I would appreciate being told so that I can make it less so.

>>93194381
>elf
why do modern elves feel so boring

>>93196827
the issue is too many people just make their elves humans with pointy ears instead of exploring the things that make them different.

Freiren and Dungeon Meshi explore it a little, but I'm not sure I can think of an example of anything that makes them sufficiently inhuman

if your party would take one of the cultists that attacked your party (because they were where the cultists wanted to steal something) would the cultist try to convince the party that the cultists motifs are correct and the party is unknowingly getting in the way of a just cause or would they stay silent or extremely hostile, basically guaranteeing their death, should it come to .. "enhanced interrogation techniques"

>>93196998
jesus christ, I got lost in that sentence.
*if your party would take one of the cultists hostage

>>93196666
>-allows the party to hide in plain sight
you addressed it already but yeah: "what's with that concentrated cloud of mist? that wasn't here a minute ago." I feel like it'd mostly end up being a battlefield tool against power ranged enemies/ mook hordes/ spellcasters

>>93196827
the more isolated, alien, and/ or freakshit you can make elves - while still making them formidable enough to be reckoned with and civil enough to cooperate or integrate with the party - the better.

>>93196998
>>93197008
It's clear enough anon. For your question, only do the former if you can actually think of a way to make it make sense. That said, if your party takes a hostage you should probably give them the tools to move the plot along unless a single person talking would unravel the entire adventure

File: 1690945872453473.png (2.1 MB, 1000x750)

2.1 MB PNG

>>93196914
>Freiren and Dungeon Meshi explore it a little, but I'm not sure I can think of an example of anything that makes them sufficiently inhuman
outright Fey are the new Elves, now when people want to do actually interesting and alien but still "humanoid" looking characters they don't bother with elves or drow, they go right to the source and include Fair Folk. It's kind of funny that even the theater kid crowd have ironically ended up going full RETVRN TO TRVDITION in this regard, drawing on actual myth and legend instead of cribbing from tolkien with "elves are human++" for the thousandth time.

elves have no purpose in modern fantasy outside of objects of desire, it's easier to write in a hot elf waifu for your human fighter than justifying why he's banging an archfey, which even Tolkien was guilty of by literally self-inserting as Beren and writing in how his wife was the hottest and most beautiful elf to ever live to the point they LARPed as them in the bedroom and he put the fucking OC donut steel names on their goddamn TOMBSTONES, he was not exactly subtle about gooning to elf tits and fantasizing about breeding half-elf kids with his wife who he was madly in love with. If Tolkien was born a few decades later he and his wife would have been having cosplay sex.

>>93197133
Dude, are you ok?

Do you think this is short, coherent and flexible enough for a backstory (it is for a one shot)?

"For years beyond count, I executed these duties with precision and unwavering loyalty, each battle a testament to my creators' intent. I was a machine of war, a construct devoid of doubt, my purpose clear and unchallenged. Yet, as the clamor of conflict faded and the need for my presence on the battlefield waned, a new directive emerged within me—one not inscribed by any master but born from the spark of sentience that flickered and grew in the recesses of my consciousness.

In this newfound era of peace, I have embarked on a journey not dictated by orders but by an intrinsic desire to understand the essence of my being. My creators endowed me with the ability to reason, to think, and it is this very capability that now drives me to explore the world beyond the constraints of my original design. As I traverse the diverse landscapes and encounter myriad civilizations, I am struck by the fleeting nature of organic life, so fragile and ephemeral compared to my own constructed form. This paradox of my immortality and their mortality gnaws at my understanding, compelling me to witness, to learn, and perhaps, to comprehend the true meaning of existence.

Honesty, a virtue encoded in my core, guides my interactions, often to the discomfort of those I meet. Yet, it is through this unwavering truthfulness that I seek to bridge the gap between my mechanical nature and the organic beings I encounter. The disconnect between my purpose as a creation of war and my quest for self-discovery is a chasm I strive to bridge. Each step I take, every experience I embrace, brings me closer to reconciling these two facets of my existence. I am Kern, no longer just a weapon, but a seeker of truths, a wanderer in a world vast and wondrous, determined to find my place within it."

You know what 5e really needs? A Mexican guy. And an Asian guy. And a bunch of AI-generated "art" assets by the Mexican and Asian student interns doing "machine learning" internships for WOTC.

cancer aislop edition but /tg/ somehow still didn't learn the lesson that 4e really wasn't so bad

>>93194443
Knowing these characters are made for Lost Mine of Phandelver, the STR Fighter is the one who can actually use the magic weapons found there effectively.

>>93194381
>Currently playing an LE
Should I go for redemption or embrace being a bastard?

File: DX_Xanathar_ProductShotv2.png (146 KB, 300x300)

146 KB PNG

Bros, is this worth picking up?

>>93197503
Maybe if you can get it for real cheap and you really want to have a physical copy.
Personally I wouldn't give WotC/Hasbro a dime.

>>93197503
New books are coming out in September.

>>93197394
Mexicans and Asians aren't diverse enough. Why complain about them? They don't get pushed the same way because they're not as high on the leftist oppression ladder.

>>93197522
>>93197580
I have Tashas book and I heard that this complimented it. It's pretty much impossible to get this book on here in Bongland without paying over the price for it though.

>>93197608
If your group is still going to use the old rule then it does have some good stuff in it. But if you all intend to switch when the new half edition comes out later it's not worth it. Wait a couple months.

Where do you want to go?
We’ll take you to the dream.
Welcome to fyelly tale.
Please show us you are best smile.

File: IMG_1559.png (28 KB, 373x326)

28 KB PNG

I noticed that 5etools has a ton of Good-aligned monsters but rarely do you ever see them in action.
What are some good excuses to force good monsters against a good party?

>>93198061
Have your party try to do something actually good, like bringing down the Wall of the Faithless. Watch all the "good" aligned deities come out the woodwork to try and murder you.

>>93198061
>intelligent monsters
The BBEG fed some false information to the Good monster(s) creating the illusion that the party is up to no good (probably not wrong either).
>dumb yet good monster
Just a normal case of retardation, no need to explain.

>>93194381
ONLY FAGS GO SHIRTLESS OR COLLECT SHIRTLESS FAG PICS.

>>93198101
Takes one to know one.

>>93196765
>562 pages
Anon what the fuck. I skimmed some and it looked pretty good, but you’re a fucking lunatic.

File: difference-between-cleric(...).jpg (92 KB, 1068x682)

92 KB JPG

>>93195289
>>93194917
>warlock
Absolute brainlet takes over here. If you're white-room theory crafting and only thinking about a class as a vehicle for yourself in combat, then maybe. But thematically Warlocks have been fucked.

>entire class about making a deal with an otherworldly creature
>don't choose a patron until level 3
And why?
>At level 3, your 2024 Warlock gains their subclass. While Warlocks used to get their subclass at level 1, this brings the Warlock in line with the other class options in the 2024 Player’s Handbook, which will make it easier for a party of players to manage their levels and for a DM to keep track of player advancement.
Oh because WotC decided no one gets their subclass until 3 because some play groups have literal shit for brains

>b-but 1 & 2 are just the tutorial levels now!!! Most campaigns should start at 3!!!
Everyone has already been running their games like that for years. About half my games have involved new players or moderately experienced players playing something different- starting at 1.
How is it simpler for a new player that their entire class is about making a deal with a patron, but somehow they have warlock abilities for 2 levels before they have a patron?

Its retarded.

>>93198172
>But thematically Warlocks have been fucked.
>>don't choose a patron until level 3
That's on you, you can choose your patron at level 1. You simply don't gain the Subclass™ feature.
You're not complaining about fluff but crunch.

>>93194467
I summon a million skeletons

>>93198191
>I'm gonna be a Fey Patron Warlock! :)
>2 levels in
>actually Fiend sounds better
>this is fine
Inb4 "I let my players just change class if they're not having fun :)"
Not without rolling a new character

>>93198228
Why are you complaining about scenarios that exist exclusively in your head?

>>93198228
Do you come up with imaginary events to get mad at on your own or do you have an AI write them down for you?

>>93198246
>>93198248
As opposed to what? Tell me. Tell me how I am supposed to talk about scenarios for rules that have not yet been published.

>>93198172
Don't forget the fact that Contact Patron is now a class feature at level 11, meaning that DMs who previously let you communicate with your patron earlier than that will now look at the rules and say you aren't high enough level to talk to your own boss.

>>93198260
You could start by not making shit up.

>>93198260
Anon, we had classes with subclass selection at 2nd and 3rd level for a decade now.
1st level selection has been in the minority of cases all this time. If you had actual examples you would've put them forward instead of sperging out against your own imagination.

>>93198283
>decide to standardize the level at which classes choose their subclasses
>have the option to move them all to level 1
>for some godforsaken reason, choose instead to move them all to level 3
WotC was presented with two options and flung themselves into the more retarded one.

>>93198280
Excellent point. Also the way I've always seen Warlocks run, I can't think of a single fucking patron that would tolerate being called up by their Warlock every single day like the feature allows. Also removed all risk from doing so, automatically succeeding the save.
>>93198282
Great, so we'll all sit here discussing new rules without trying to foresee situations those rules might result in. Got it.
>>93198283
>Anon, we had classes with subclass selection at 2nd and 3rd level for a decade now.
>1st level selection has been in the minority of cases all this time
Not for Warlocks.
>If you had actual examples you would've put them forward
Do you know why I don't have actual examples? Because Warlocks got their fucking patron at level 1.

>>93198332
>Also removed all risk from doing so, automatically succeeding the save.
Okay, now I know you're just baiting.

>>93198280
>Contact Patron is now a class feature at level 11
9th, and it gives you a 5th level spell. Which is gained at 9th level.
>meaning that DMs who previously let you communicate with your patron earlier than that will now look at the rules and say you aren't high enough level to talk to your own boss
Sounds like a (You) problem.

>>93198322
>make dipping even stronger than it already is
As bad as WotC is at game design, you are worse.

File: 4retards.png (82 KB, 1152x305)

82 KB PNG

>>93198339
Are you one of those shit-for-brains players the whole class system had to be reworked for?
Learn to read.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1756-2024-warlock-vs-2014-warlock-whats-new

>>93198352
Swing and a miss pal. You are baiting because you are pretending to be mad about a Warlock not going insane because he asked his patron a question. Way to show your room temperature IQ.

>>93198322
>for some godforsaken reason
The reasoning is quite solid, imo, although I would prefer 1st level subclasses myself.
If you have the subclass at 1st level it's hard to have some identifiable class feature at 1st level too, as it would end up making massively frontloaded classes. So you end up choosing the subclass feature, not the class feature, which is backwards.

>>93198332
>Not for Warlocks.
But yes for paladins. They have had their Oath, which supposedly gives them powers, at 3rd level.
And yet they manage to magically heal and smite people before that.

>>93198357
>throw your mind across the planes
>patron picks up
>"moshi moshi? patron desu"
>do this literally every fucking day

Yeah nah. There are risks to this magic. It's why it's in the fucking spell. The only time it should be risk-free is when the patron wants to contact the warlock. That is the power dynamic at play.

If you want to call Mephistopheles every night before bedtime to gossip about cute boys, do your thing but don't replace better 9th level abilities with it.

>>93198375
>why is taking an oath different to receiving magic powers from a specific being?
Gee I don't know.
Maybe it's the fact that 5e paladins don't receive powers from other entities? Maybe they explicitly develop magic from the faith of their convictions. They're not combat clerics anymore, Grog.

>93198380
>There are risks to this magic. It's why it's in the fucking spell.
You're the expert at making deals with extraplanar entities. People who get their mind mushed are the failures who don't make it.
>don't replace better 9th level abilities with it
Yeah, no (You) because this is clearly bait at this point. There is no 9th level ability being replaced. The 9th level ability was (and still is) getting 5th level pact slots.

>>93198375
>When you reach 3rd level, you swear the oath that binds you as a paladin forever. Up to this time you have been in a preparatory stage, committed to the path but not yet sworn to it. Now you choose from the list of available oaths.

>>93198395
>You're the expert at making deals with extraplanar entities.
Says fucking who? How many patrons does a warlock have? How experienced are they at making deals with extraplanar entities? Where is any of the shit you are pulling?

As a warlock, you have 1 patron, and unless you're multiclassing into it at like level 11, you were probably a fucking 1d4 hp nobody before your deal.
You didn't have the magic to be summoning entities or contacting other planes. You're not a fucking expert at it.

>>93198404
Substitute Oath with Pact and Paladin with Warlock. You're welcome.

>>93198418
>Says fucking who?
Pages 105-106 of the PHB

>>93198429
>train for years to become holy warrior, learning skills and magic along the way
>only take your oath when you are truly ready to devote your entire life to this cause, choosing which way you will best uphold justice and law
vs
>make deal with other worldly patron
>except actually you don't, they were just handing out freebies and you get to change your mind about who to sell your soul to once you've had a test-drive

>>93198443
>Sometimes a traveler in the wilds comes to a strangely beautiful tower, meets its fey lord or lady, and stumbles into a pact without being fully aware of it. And sometimes, while poring over tomes of forbidden lore, a brilliant but crazed student's mind is opened to realities beyond the material world and to the alien beings that dwell in the outer void.
Yeah this just screams "expert in contacting planar entities" to me.
Not being aware that you made a pact, or getting Rick Rolled by an old book.

You never had to sell your soul. You never had to sell your body. You never had to do basically anything except make a deal, the specifics of which are not made to be anything negative actually. You can also just fluff warlock in a way in which a pact is just an agreement of mutual benefit or something you inherently have due to researching certain things like with the GOO

>The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it

Your patron can straight up not know you exist or not even care you exist, there's no hard ruling law of you're a warlock so you're getting pegged every day especially since you absolutely don't have the power to try and enforce that roleplay at all like Paladin pretends to have

>>93198509
>You never had to sell your soul. You never had to sell your body. You never had to do basically anything except make a deal,
Yeah yeah, calm down sperg. "Selling your soul" is just shorthand. You could "sell your soul" to a corporation irl, it's just a fucking figure of speech.

File: 1434955204567.png (175 KB, 500x330)

175 KB PNG

Any way to make Eldirtch Knight good?

>>93198526
Wait for 5.2024e

>>93198517
In the games I run, I've actually gone with the common narrative of "selling your soul" being a misunderstanding of the literal process. Warlocks logically aren't just learning magic conventionally, since that would just make them wizards with weird tutors. Instead, I have the patron alter the warlock's soul so they can draw directly on its magical power. Basically installing a spigot. People know it messes with your soul, but don't understand that this doesn't inherently give the patron ownership, and so a misunderstanding was born.

>>93198474
>Through occult ceremony, you have formed a pact with a mysterious entity to gain magical powers. The entity is a voice in the shadows—its identity unclear—but its boon to you is concrete: the ability to cast spells.

>>93198554
Are you so retarded that you can't see the line you just posted says "pact first, magic after"?

>>93198573
That has been my argument, yes.
Just because you don't gain the subclass feature until 3rd level, it doesn't mean that you haven't made a pact already.
You made a pact with your patron of choice and got magic.
What was your problem, again? Ah yes, the imaginary case where an imaginary player isn't sure about what patron to choose.

>still not a peep about monk
Monkbros why is it always like this

>>93198597
>monk
Who?
Anyway, stay tuned for Spell reveals!
t. WIZARDS of the Coast

>>93198597
Crawford hates Monk because he thinks it's orientalist. Not sure why he hates Ranger, though.

>>93198588
Okay, your brain is entirely liquid so let me break this down for you.

>warlocks make pacts for magic
>to make a pact you have to have a patron
>for levels 1 and 2 you have absolutely no powers unique to your chosen patron
>a player could spend 2 levels saying they're a Fey warlock, only to change their mind once they hit level 3
>mechanically this is the same as not forming a pact at all until level 3
I need you to really put those braincells to work anon. Even if the PHB SAYS you have chosen your patron at level 1, if you don't actually get anything unique to your patron until level 3, you don't have a fucking patron at levels 1 and 2

>>93198609
>Crawford hates Monk because he thinks it's orientalist
wtf, I love crawford (no homo) now!

>>93198597
Good, that fag might break something
T. Shadow Gunk

>>93198623
>Even if the PHB SAYS you have chosen your patron at level 1
That's the old PHB, and the Pact Magic fluff text I posted was from the UA.
But again, nothing prevents you from choosing your patron at level 1.
>if you don't actually get anything unique to your patron until level 3, you don't have a fucking patron at levels 1 and 2
Why?

>>93197158
idk if he's ok but he's absolutely right, especially about Tolkien

>>93198648
Fuck you're dumb. Let's try another class.

>be level 1 fighter
>"I'm an eldritch knight!"
>have none of the abilities of the eldritch knight
>3rd level
>pick Battle Master instead
Were you ever an eldritch knight? No, you fucking weren't.
Same with warlocks. If you don't actually pick a patron until 3, you don't have a fucking patron.

>>93198674
>>"I'm an eldritch knight!"
>>pick Battle Master instead
Seems like a (You) problem. Maybe you should try to stay consistent, I don't know why your DM just allows you to flip-flop like that but you must be annoying to play with.

>>93198687
>I don't know why your DM just allows you to flip-flop like that but you must be annoying to play with.
NOTHING MECHANICALLY PREVENTS THIS
THAT IS THE ENTIRE POINT

YOU DO NOT RECEIVE PATRON FEATURES UNTIL LEVEL 3
SO WHATEVER YOU SAY YOUR PATRON IS AT LEVELS 1 AND 2 IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT
EFFECTIVELY YOU HAVE NO PATRON FOR THOSE LEVELS

THANK YOU FOR FINALLY GETTING IT

>>93198526
Can't help you with crunch, but I really enjoyed the fluff of an Eldritch Knight I played before - a variant human who hides his magic powers, while taking every feat in Martial Adept to pretend to be a Battle Master Fighter.

He hid his powers until the party finally met their match, and he Counterspelled a Disintegration spell.

With Mirror Image (Illusion school, replaced the 3rd level spell learned), Blur (Illusion school, learned at 8th), and judicious use of Absorb Elements and his Battlemaster dice, they eventually won, and it lead to a really fun roleplaying moment at the end.

Was he gimped compared to more optimised characters? Absolutely, but damn, I enjoyed the concept.

>>93198701
>NOTHING MECHANICALLY PREVENTS THIS
... And?
Are you complaining that you're not mechanically restrained enough? Seems a rather weird thing to sperg out about.

>>93198701
If someone's being a nigger and telling me they're a fey warlock then at level 3 they say it's actually a goo warlock they're simply not doing that
Rules like that are great because they filter subhumans out

>>93198712
Holy fuck.
Move patron selection back to level 1. It makes no sense to choose a patron at 3. You can say your patron is whoever the fuck you want at level 1 and 2, if you don't get the patron features until 3 it just isn't fucking true.

You were so close to having a coherent thought, but you chose to smother it in the crib.

>>93198554
Gotta say, though, this feels like the warlock pact involves what amounts basically to gacha for a patron, since the patron can be revealed to be the one you wanted or a different one.

It could make for some fun stories, I think - the "disgruntled Cthulhu cultist who wanted to contact a Great Old One but instead is stuck with a Celestial who keeps trying to make him change his ways", or the "straight-laced person who wanted to serve a higher being, but got hit with a Djinn or Archfey who keeps trolling him"

>>93198740
Doesn't it essentially eliminate a devil offering their services or typical warlock backstories. Not knowing who the patron is is completely insane lore to write.

>>93198740
In the UA Eldritch Invocations are listed before Pact Magic, and they aren't linked with the Patron or Pacts of any sort. They're just described as occult knowledge.
It does create a feeling that you're slowly learning more about those entities and how to deal with them.

>>93198739
>Move patron selection back to level 1.
It's up to you. I know that for you it requires effort to stay consistent between what you say and what you do but it's actually possible.

All subclasses should be chosen at level 1

>>93198811
I can promise you that level 1 and 2 players aren't going to have decided on their subclass before they get to it, especially if they're new. That's the whole fucking point of having tutorial levels, for players to get a feel for the class before choosing which aspect of it they want more of
Ignore the fucking game design if you want, but you're in a world of your own

>>93198766
Mechanically, that's fair, but given fluff is fluff is fluff, there's no reason why it wouldn't work. Even if your patron is "a voice in the shadows", I assume poring through occult tomes for the ritual to make a deal with the devil would provide the implication that the voice is said devil. Fluff-wise, it'll be up to the player to stick to the person they chose at that point, and if they don't, it could also be a fun story that can be fleshed out. In the end, it all boils down to trust, after all.

oh shit, can you imagine a devil who's annoyed at some fey's trickery or something, and gets the idea to, after some magical shenaniganry, basically offers deals that he reroutes to said fey? Or they make occult tomes that are the equivalent of the "'call this number for some fun! [insert the number of someone you hate]' on bathroom stalls" situation, and they hide them around the place

>>93198826
It's literally that simple. Scrap tutorial levels, the game isn't that fucking complicated. I wouldn't even say players have much to think about until 5th

>>93198766
It just seems like they're as picky with their patron as the typical level 1 adventuring party. Who hasn't taken a job from a hooded figure in the dark corner of a tavern?

I don't think devils make it a Standard Operating Procedure to say they're devils.

>Before I make this pact, are you a devil?
>You're alignmentally required to tell me if you are.

So maybe you know what you're contacting because you've done that kind of research, but it's just fine to not.

>>93198853
Right but there's plenty of warlock backstories- and real life stories- where the person absolutely knows that they're making a deal with a devil. It's kind of the crux of it, knowing this is the wrong thing to do but being so tempted by what the offer.
I mean fuck, that's literally the story of the warlock in Baldur's Gate 3 and they even have a fucking devil who reveals what he is and still tries to tempt you

>>93198826
People are going to whine and moan that you’re just buffing multiclass dips, while simultaneously ignoring the possibility of multiclass rules having requirements for you to maintain a certain number of levels in each class.

>>93198891
Multi-class is a variant rule. Just distinguish between generic rules and subclass rules at level 1 and say multiclass doesn't get subclass abilities until they dip 2 or 3

>Poo poo pee the book says my character can have big number

203pbp
/thread

>>93198880
>Right but there's plenty of warlock backstories- and real life stories- where the person absolutely knows that they're making a deal with a devil.
If that's the way you want to RP it there's nothing to stop you.
Hell, one of the examples in the PHB is that you don't know who the Patron is and may even be unaware that you entered into a pact, and yet you as the player get to make that choice and benefit from the features granted by said decision.

>>93198853
The classic story of Faust doesn’t have Mephistopheles pretending to be Metatron. And more recent variants on the theme typically have the prospective warlock actively seeking to conjure and negotiate with a specific type of entity. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a version of the bargain for power that involves the would-be patron trying to lure prospective warlocks into a van with promises of candy.

>>93198554
I'm cool with whatever desu but for you to have enough knowledge to make the ritual and enough conviction to go through with it and for the entity to want something from you but at the same time you not knowing what the entity is feels very much a weird take, if the right backstory sure, like a lineage thing and less you searching for it and more the entity searching for you, but you having all this knowledge feels like you should at least know what kinda of creature you are in contact with

>>93195389
Shield Master is tight. Forced movement/prone options can be huge depending on team comp.

>>93198928
The player and the character are two different things, its ok for the player to have knowledge the character doesn't

File: 1565818636447.jpg (925 KB, 1440x1428)

925 KB JPG

>No Dragon Warlock subclass

At least Moon Druid got a cool buff that it didn't really need

>>93198964
I agree, that's why the subclass at level 3 doesn't bother me.

>ermm I can't be held accountable for my character I'll just do whatever I want the rulebook says I can so I'll do it

File: hpav6pmtso091.jpg (350 KB, 600x779)

350 KB JPG

>>93198967
If you want to be subservient to a dragon, anon, just play a kobold.

>>93198953
It depends on how they decide to write the fluff.
Hopefully someone will leak the pdf and we will get to see the actual text on the book.

>>93198989
It doesn't bother me because I take it as mechanical choice, it's not like the character is actually changing it's patron or only choosing it now, it's just a game thing and if you wanna RP only at 3rd lvl the full power of the patron becomes apparent.

I actually see no difference between a warlock and like a eldritch knight, it's just a game choice that if you care about RP it would be woven into your character story

File: 1635888611469.png (556 KB, 780x1080)

556 KB PNG

Halfling CBE+SS Battle Master

File: IMG_4612.jpg (445 KB, 1054x1600)

445 KB JPG

>>93198609
>orientalist
Still makes me kek. God forbid we have cool kickass asians in our game, better draw three more black female knights as mea culpa

>>93199057
>Totem?!? Ew, what's that, Redskin bullshit? Remove that immediately!
>Aaaaah, yes, the Yggdrasil! Now that's a proper Barbarian subclass. Put it in print, but don't forget to get more blacks in the art while you're at it.

>>93199110
The thing is, I would kind of get it if there were indigenous groups that had actually raised any kind of objection to the use of a term they use to describe their religious practices…but most of them are too busy being annoyed that people are describing their religious practices using the term “totems” at all. It’s specific to one Algonquian group. Your average redskin is going to be far more annoyed by the notion that he practices totemism than the idea that a fantasy character does.

>>93198996
Have you never played D&D before?

>>93198967
Draconic sorcerer's flavor already gives the chance of being a warlock to a dragon, being a descendant of a dragon is only one of the options.

>Your innate magic comes from draconic magic that was mingled with your blood or that of your ancestors. Most often, sorcerers with this origin trace their descent back to a mighty sorcerer of ancient times who made a bargain with a dragon or who might even have claimed a dragon parent. Some of these bloodlines are well established in the world, but most are obscure. Any given sorcerer could be the first of a new bloodline, as a result of a pact or some other exceptional circumstance.

File: Heroes of the Dragon.png (120 KB, 1188x728)

120 KB PNG

>>93198967
>>No Dragon Warlock subclass
Because they want you to reflavor existing Warlock subclasses with a Dragon of appropriate type or power set.
Want a Red Dragon Patron for your Warlock? Reflavor a Fiend or Fire Genie as a Dragon one.
Want a Gem Dragon? Reflavored Great Old One.
Looking to play into a Metallic Dragon's healing prowess? Celestial Warlock reflavored as a Metallic Dragon.

>>93196765
This is an honestly impressive amount of work and an inspiring monument to your autism, but the scope of the changes you’ve made means it’s also going to be useless for a lot of players because they can’t bring it to the table unless the DM implements most or all of the whole package. Between the changes to backgrounds, feats, hit points, and maneuvers, this changes the game enough that there isn’t clean cross-compatibility with 5e. Unfortunately, it also isn’t really different enough to stand as its own system, so you’re stuck in a weird halfway place.

>>93199396
They did remove the pact phrase here, but you are still correct in that you could say your Sorcerous powers came from a pact with another creature. The difference here I suppose is the "Pact" itself isn't progressively giving you power nor is the Dragon itself, you just made a deal/pact, got superpowers that had permanently augmented your blood & soul, and that's about it.
>Your innate magic comes from the gift of a dragon. Perhaps an ancient dragon facing death bequeathed some of its magical power to you or your ancestor. You might have absorbed magic from a site infused with dragons’ power, perhaps the location where a great dragon was slain. Or perhaps you handled a treasure taken from a dragon’s hoard, some precious item that was infused with draconic power. Or you might claim a dragon for an ancestor or wield draconic magic by virtue of your Dragonborn heritage.

>>93199160
What, you think the "I'm offended on your behalf" crowd actually knows anything about the people they profess to speak for, let alone distinguishes between different cultures or ethnicities beyond the vaguest of spectrums?

>>93194381
ONLY FAGS GO SHIRTLESS OR COLLECT SHIRTLESS FAG PICS.

>Draconic Sorcerer
>Fiend Warlock
>Evocation Wizard

Which one of these is the best blaster caster?

>>93199505
Evocation Wizard. Getting to cheat saves for free is too good to pass up.

>>93197503
5e tools

>>93199505
wizard has the best spell list, the evoker subclass does more to improve damage than the other two

>>93199604
>wizard has the best spell list
Largely inconsequential for blasting alone.
>the evoker subclass does more to improve damage than the other two
What about metamagic?

>>93199623
you cant cast two blaster spells in one turn anyway
you can make allies save against fireball but they still take damage compared to sculpt spells

>>93199496
>fat

>>93199623
>Largely inconsequential for blasting alone.
Can't blast without blast spells. Warlock doesn't have a good list for that purpose.

>>93198172
>>93198228

>be warlock
>study fey magic and lore
>through diligent study or luck you manage to find a patron or they manage to find you and they share their secrets with you.

That's how mafia works

Is the hexblade confirmed already? i think melee warlock is going to be pretty good:
booming blade+agonizing and repelling blast with war caster as opportunity attacks, 3 attacks at lv11, some extra damage like improved divine smite from somewhere right? iam not sure, and then eldritch smites

>>93199753
>hexblade
They fixed Pact of the Blade instead, like they should've done in the first place.

>>93192486
>>93192494

thanks guys, the Archetype has been ported and I had fun using HTML again

>>93199753
If by “confirmed”, you mean “confirmed not in the book”, then yes.

File: subclasses.jpg (366 KB, 1529x1018)

366 KB JPG

>>93199753
Currently the only Warlock subclasses in the 2024 PHB are in pic rel. However that should still be possible depending on how they worked off Pact of The Blade. The real question I wanna know: Did they [Rightfully] nerf the origin feat Lightly Armored or not? That feat in the first playtest was crazy strong.

>>93199778
This is ass.

>>93199778
>Did they [Rightfully] nerf the origin feat Lightly Armored or not? That feat in the first playtest was crazy strong.
I fully expect extreme retardation, like having it part of the Soldier background so it doesn't do shit for martial classes while being basically mandatory for Wizards.

>>93199811
I think the biggest fuckup of tying origin feats to backgrounds is only having one per background. Instead, each background should have two options: one that benefits the obvious choices—such as a fighter being a soldier not needing certain feats because a fighter already gains those benefits—and one that benefits less common combinations—such as, in your example, a wizard who used to be a soldier having more proficiency with arms and armor than more bookish conjurors.

>>93199835
There is also custom backgrounds anon.

>>93199867
A mistake that I can fix myself is still a mistake in need of fixing.

>>93199835
how do origin feats work in onednd? seeing your post, i immediately started thinking about entertainer, and gladiator could get martial adept: quick toss to use a net as a bonus action once per short rest which would be cool and flavorful

>>93199881
Your background isn't set in stone. You can be a fighter with the scholarly background and also have been a soldier.

For me, the backgrounds listed are just examples.

>>93194381
ONLY FAGS GO SHIRTLESS OR COLLECT SHIRTLESS FAG PICS.

>>93199672
>screeches the fat, ugly hambeast as she projects and copes

>>93199898
Sure, but they aren’t presented that way this time around. Instead of explicitly being suggestions, as they were in the 2014 PHB, they’re presented as your set of options. Mention of custom backgrounds is restricted to the DMG.
Easily fixable, yes. But still a blunder.

File: background.jpg (48 KB, 337x456)

48 KB JPG

>>93199891
>how do origin feats work in onednd?
If by onednd you mean the UA playtest, it's pic related.

If you mean by the new rules, it's unclear if there is custom backgrounds.
Quoting the dndbeyond article for what else is known
>Ability score adjustments are now tied to the background you select, rather than the species you choose.
>Each background comes with an Origin Feat. This is a new type of feat that is typically only provided at character creation.
So it looks like they fixed them.

File: Lightly Armored Playtest.jpg (40 KB, 655x301)

40 KB JPG

>>93199811
I HIGHLY doubt this will stay this way, but if it does...yeah this is messed up. Its basically the best 1st level background feat for all Warlocks, Sorcerers, Wizards, and most Bards. You'd be getting the equivalent of what was a 1st level dip into something at the start. Your competition is Tough or Alert or Lucky which mind you none of these are bad but its tough to fight a feat that just says "Your AC is 19 now".

>>93199971
I'm honestly not against the way they did it in the playtest, I'm just hoping they keep the Custom Background option as it does feel a little lame to say stuff like
>"Yeah, my Wizard joined the military to assist my homeland. There were many wizards there and we all worked together to hone our craft so I'll take a +2 to my In-... Oh? I can't do that..."
That's a little odd to me. Why not have a smart Soldier or Pirate or Folk Hero?

>>93200048
>I'm honestly not against the way they did it in the playtest
Same. And I can't remember now if they had said anything about the feedback but I assume that most people were fine with it.
That's why I don't get the changes. What's the point of the playtest if they were going to do something else anyway?

>>93200075
Marketing.

>>93200090
Yeah, no other logical explanation.

are there any leaks on what the hunter's mark spell actually ended up looking like in the 2024 book?

is it still once per turn? is the only upcast benefit still the duration? is there any chance that both rogue and fighter aren't better ranged damage dealers than ranger?

>>93197608
>I heard that this complimented it
That's true. Xanathar's has very nice things to say about Tasha's.

File: 1717506721588904.png (35 KB, 696x226)

35 KB PNG

>>93200018
>. Its basically the best 1st level background feat for all Warlocks, Sorcerers, Wizards, and most Bards.
as opposed to 2014 where Moderately Armored was the unconditional best feat for Warlock and Bard? Stop pretending this is anything new. The current "Lightly Armored" feat is worthless, since it only grants proficiency with Light Armor, which only 3 classes in the entire game don't have: Monk, Wizard, and Sorcerer. It's obviously useless foor Monk, and Spending an entire feat to wear Studded Leather is obviously retarded, especially when Mage Armor or Draconic scales exist.
Personally, I think they should make Shield proficiency universal and then simply limit stuff you don't want people using a shield for by the actual ability like with Martial Arts, but every single adventurer knowing to put the big piece of wood between you and the bad guys isn't a bad thing, especially since "shields" in 5e cover everything from bucklers and armguards to full-on tower shields, they've been totally abstracted.

Ideally they would fix how boring and lazy armor design is in 5e so choosing what kind of armor you wanted was something you'd actually think about like it was in AD&D and 3.5. Right now 99% of characters can just throw on scalemail and a shield and turn their brain off

what's the logic behind not including bladesinger in the subclass options?

it and the diviner are the most unique subclasses for wizards.

and why is wizard still the only intelligence main class. why not include artificer or change warlock to int based like it should be

>>93200310
>as opposed to 2014 where Moderately Armored was the unconditional best feat for Warlock and Bard?
Where it costed a feat and at best you were getting it instead of racial features as a V.Human, and at worst you had to pick it with one of your ASI delaying other feats and/or increasing your casting attribute.
Now you can get it with the background, severely worsening the problem.

>>93200310
>as opposed to 2014 where Moderately Armored was the unconditional best feat for Warlock and Bard? Stop pretending this is anything new.
I think the difference here is Moderately Armored is not something you could get at 1st level without being a specific species (V.Human/Custom Lineage). So for people not playing one of those options couldn't get it until level 4 and its at the cost of not upping your ASI or getting something like Warcaster.
I don't disagree that 2014 Lightly Armored is TRRASH, its terrible, but I think with the way they've changed in in 2024 Playtest ALONGSIDE it being a thing that anyone at 1st level can get before factoring in species is a bit too good.

>>93200348
>Where it costed a feat
the new one costs a feat too lol. what you're actually complaining about is that feats are more accessible and everybody gets a free one at level 1

>>93200347
Because Bladesinger isn’t a school of magic, shit-for-brains.

>>93200347
>and why is wizard still the only intelligence main class
Wizards (of the Coast) are the only smart class.
>why not include artificer
Something something artificer class fantasy doesn't fit with mexican orcs.
>or change warlock to int based like it should be
They "tried", made a complete mess that nobody liked because it was stupid, and abandoned the idea of trying in a competent way.

>>93200347
>change warlock to int based like it should be
>the class defined by making a stupid choice should be based on intelligence

>>93200357
>the new one costs a feat too lol
It doesn't compete with caster feats nor ASI.
If Warcaster and Resilient were other background feats you would have a point, but that's not the case.

>>93200368
>class about arcane and occult research
>charismatic
Yeah, I'm sure.

>>93200368
>>the class defined by making a stupid choice should be based on intelligence
being a Celestial Warlock and guaranteeing your divine sugar mommy gives you headpats and cuddles on Mount Celestia when you die is the smartest decision a man can make. Nobody said you couldn't sell your soul to the good guys, that's also what irl Catholics believe baptism and confirmation does too lmao.
>>93200377
>It doesn't compete with caster feats nor ASI.
And a martial character taking Magic Initiate or Lucky now doesn't compete with martial feats or ASI. Welcome to 2024. What you're actually whining about isn't the feat itself, it's that everyone gets a feat at 1, which is a power boost across the board and is fully intended since needing to sacrifice interesting character choices for stat boosts and only getting maybe one or two feats in an entire 15 level campaign was boring as hell

>>93199929
die mad about it, incel

>>93200368
Have you fucking seen half the shit made by goddamn Wizards, yeah Int works because Wizards ain't got no fucking wisdom. Any smart boys go Celestial anyways, even if the subclass sucks fucking ass.

>>93200405
>Magic Initiate or Lucky
Nowhere near the power level of Medium Armor + Shield for a Wizard or Sorcerer.

File: 1695080068286191.png (493 KB, 1178x413)

493 KB PNG

>>93200410
new archfey is pretty good and you can larp as Beren. if your DM tells you to stop inserting your fetishes into the game simply slam down a copy of the Silmarillion on the table and shout "IT'S WHAT TOLKIEN WOULD HAVE WANTED!"

>>93200449
I thought Tolkien wanted us to fuck hot goth girls who were actually giant spiders?

>>93200449
>pic
Maybe the satanic panic wasn't entirely out of place

>>93200368
Yeah. You're thinking of wisdom.

>>93200360
it is a subclass though

>>93200368
intelligence is not wisdom you mong

File: 1711905738423641.png (70 KB, 434x520)

70 KB PNG

>>93200428
>Nowhere near the power level of Medium Armor + Shield for a Wizard or Sorcerer.
new magic initiate gets you new true strike, which is definitely worth a feat for any MAD class since it's basically Shillelagh+Booming Blade combined that works at melee and range and changes your damage type to the best one in the game that only like 3 angels resist or are immune to.

Especially now that you can pick your casting score when taking magic initiate regardless of the class you steal from, meaning any 1/3 caster and 1/2 caster can also poach Shield (which you can now also use with your own spell slots, too) and True Strike, it's absolutely of comparable power and in actual gameplay I 1000% expect to see Magic Initiate be taken much more often than Lightly Armored, which only really appeals to sorcerer, wizard, some warlocks, and some bards.

>>93198101
t. fatty homo in the closet

>>93200472
if parents in the 80s thought their kids were talking about how much they wanted to marry and have kids with hot elven women and raise families with them in D&D they would have bought their kids full box sets.

>>93200449
My last DM inserted greek mythology , faeries and nymphs in the game that would meke a succubus feel like discount hoes.

>>93199636
nta, but isn't fire resistance pretty common?
at least in the last game I played we were surprised whenever the enemies were NOT resistant to fire lol

>>93200483
It’s a subclass introduced by a group of third-party consultants and reprinted solely to pad out the pages. Frankly, classes don’t need more than eight subclasses each, and wizard’s are spoken for. Even if you don’t agree with that low of a cap, school specialization is iconic, traditional, and the ideal subclass concept for the archetypal generic magic-user. Whether or not you think additional subclasses should be added later on down the line, they certainly shouldn’t come at the expense of the schools.

>>93200568
>. Frankly, classes don’t need more than eight subclasses each
hmmm
no.

File: IMG_2451.jpg (688 KB, 1738x2048)

688 KB JPG

Casters are getting uppity again

>>93200272
let's hope (unlikely) they show it on monday in the spells video.

latest UA was something like:
Level 1 Divination (Ranger)
Casting Time: Bonus Action
Range: 90 feet
Components: V
Duration: Concentration, up to 1 hour
You choose one creature you can see within range and magically mark it as your quarry. Until the spell ends, you deal an extra 1d6 Force damage to the target the first time you hit it with an attack roll on any turn. You also have Advantage on any Wisdom (Perception or Survival) check you make to find it. If the target drops to 0 Hit Points before this spell ends, you can use a Bonus Action to mark a new creature.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of level 3 or 4, you can maintain your concentration on the spell for up to 8 hours, and he extra damage increases to 2d6. When you use a spell slot of level 5 or higher, you can maintain your concentration on the spell for up to 24 hours, and the extra damage increases to 3d6.

>>93200580
Wizard can have more than eight subclasses when artificer has more than four.

>>93200568
>Even if you don’t agree with that low of a cap, school specialization is iconic, traditional, and the ideal subclass concept for the archetypal generic magic-user.
nah, it's retarded as fuck when all wizards have the same spell list, since you'd expect the X expert to be able to cast the best X spells, so either you're locked into making wizards have all the best spells from every school, of you make the specialists look like tards by keeping some of those spells exclusive to other casters.

File: GRBogIFXoAA_H7c.jpg (304 KB, 1633x2042)

304 KB JPG

>>93200588
Paladins are casters too. In fact due to Divine Smite being a bonus action casting will be more common.

>>93200619
Yeah, the wizard schools ought to offer expanded spell lists, cannibalizing the base wizard spell list when needed. Which would also help balance in other areas by lowering other specialists’ access to the best spells of other schools.

>>93200635
>due to Divine Smite being a bonus action
And, most importantly, a spell instead of a class feature. Get fucking countered, faggot.

>>93200588
>>93200635
I love this guy’s OC but seeing him draw anime Palestinian children with evil realistic Biden lurking in the background is so fucking funny. Artists need a reality check

>>93200500
Nta but my god you are retard if you think true strike is even close to be as useful to fighter as light armored is to a wizard, just take the L

File: IMG_2664.jpg (669 KB, 1700x2048)

669 KB JPG

>>93200767
Artists gonna artist

>>93200769
I'm currently playing a druid, getting access to Shield and a way to shoot people with a wisdom longbow from 120 feet away when produce flame is only 30 feet, that also adds modifier to damage and scales up at 5, is looking very attractive. if you want medium armor as a wizard in 5e you can just be a bladesinger and take moderately armored with zero multiclassing required. or just play a fucking dwarf or gith. Or simply dip a level in Artificer which ALSO saves you a feat in Resilient:CON. and gives you two more cantrips (including Guidance), plus healing which Wizards have no access to.

Is using a feat to get armor proficiency on somebody with no armor proficiency pretty good? Yeah, that's kind of the fucking point you dumb sperg, otherwise why would you waste a feat on something that doesn't benefit you? Not being railroaded into valor bard or hexblade or bladesinger if you don't feel like multiclassing is a good thing, not a downside.

>>93198701
if you want to be mechanically restrained for no purpose other than to ease your mental problems, go to a dominatrix like a normal person

>>93200767
When considering artists and their foibles, it’s best to remember that you’re talking about people who have found it easier to become artists than to make a living in more conventional ways—and being an artist doesn’t pay terribly well, so that’s a meaningful threshold. Whether it’s because they struggle to come across as normal or because they simply chafe under the structures that everyone else submits to, something doesn’t quite line up for them.

>>93199505
with elemental adept, draconic sorc. without it, evocation wizard

>>93200767
>anime Palestinian children with evil realistic Biden lurking in the background
based artist

>>93200822
So you agree that it's not even close? Cool don't care about your bs fairly take what ifs

>>93200500
>giving up your attack action as a non-fullcaster
May as well say that you're retarded.

>>93200568
it's not 8 subclasses when the extent of the difference is: you have exactly the same bonus as the other 7 subclasses but for this 1/8 of the spells. it might as well be a single subclass with multiple choice for the school like hunter colossus/horde

>>93200590
so crap. a bonus of 6 damage on average per turn for a lvl 20 ranger.

they really really want to make the ranger a dip only class eh

>>93200996
The “same bonus” is literally only true of the bonus spells, not any of the actual features.

>>93201065
Aside from the complete meme of a capstone the rest of the features are good.
The Hunter's Mark (free cast) is there when you don't have anything better to do, all the rest of the time you've got decent spells (I assume they still have a decent spell list).
Ranger has never been shit. Just written like shit and full of borderline useless features only there to bloat the class description. At least most of the garbage is gone now.

>>93201117
>I assume they still have a decent spell list
More than half of which require concentration. Which, guess what, Hunter’s Mark is a concentration spell.

>>93200897
pretty good for a rogue though

>>93201129
Read again what I said.
It's badly designed but it's not shit.

>>93201117
it's not a free cast if you need to concentrate on it. and besides that you said they removed the bloat but at the same time that the hunter's mark is there if you have nothing better to do. so if they have anything better than a d6 to do then the whole class is bloat and expertise (which to be fair is very fitting)

File: vengeful-war-great-axe-of(...).png (39 KB, 512x256)

39 KB PNG

Gentleman, ignore the gay elf from OP pick for a minute and check out this axe.
It is a greataxe that holds the grudges of a fallen dwarven warrior.
>It gives +2 dmg on hits
>Allows to enter rage as a barbarian once per day, but you only get the +2 dmg.
>If you are a barbarian, it gives you an extra rage and gives +2 to your rage damage.

Let's pretend you are the DM and one player asks to the best blacksmith he knows (a master) to turn it into a one-handed axe.

IF YOU HAD TO make some changes to it's powers or properties to reflect these adjustments, how would you do it? what would you change? Would you even allow it?

I normally wouldn't allow it, but the player presented a pretty good reason using lore from the setting.

>>93201146
The only exception, and if you want to give up Nick. Could be a decent trade, maybe, starting at 11th level.

>>93201201
>its an axe
>hes a dwarf
>the grudges drarves require recompense
>their kin is willing to aid them

make it a battleaxe from a great axe. jobs done.

>>93201170
>it's not a free cast if you need to concentrate on it
You do it when there's nothing else to do. What other spells are you concentrating on all the time at tiers 1-2?
At higher levels there's no way you're going to bother, on that I agree. Even with the Advantage at 17th level I'm very dubious about wasting your concentration on it.
>so if they have anything better than a d6 to do then the whole class is bloat and expertise (which to be fair is very fitting)
Yeah. If it wasn't for the sacred cows Ranger could've been merged with the Rogue and maybe we would've had one decent class out of two mediocre ones.

>>93201201
Yeah, sure. No changes needed besides the base item differences.
Could even throw in a sidequest where they're asked to retrieve some special rocks for the blacksmith or something it they want this work done. Just so they don't ask to change every single magic weapon they get into something else.

People on twitter and reddit are telling me Ranger is good. What's your problem with it?

>>93201298
>D10 Hunter's Mark capstone

>>93201307
Capstones don't matter you never actually play the game at that level.

>>93201298
It's a good joke, I give them that.
Surely the real ranger doesn't have a focus on a 1st level damage spell appearing on multiple class and subclass features. Who in their right mind would make a class like that? Haha!

>>93201309
Then why make it shit? If capstones don't matter, make them amazingly powerful.

I really struggle to work out WotC. It's like they employ exactly 1 guy who hates his job to produce all the D&D content.

>>93201322
I don't know why it isn't a feature at this point. 1d6 damage to each weapon attack really isn't that big of a boost in damage for it to be this limited.

>>93201378
Because they can't be bothered to put in the effort to think up something to replace it.

>>93201298
It's very back loaded and their capstone is cheeks. Additionally, outside of weapon mastery and spellcasting being a level sooner, this is the same damn tasha ranger that has existed for 4 years. It's not new.

>enemy moves out of range
>require to recast hunter's mark on a new enemy or lose out on class features

>class features require concentration on a 1st level spell, so you can't use other great concentration spells

spike growth?
summon beast?
pass without trace?
healing spirit?
entangle?
Ensnaring strike?
hail of thorns?
zephyr strike?
silence?
lighting arrow?
summon fey?

hey, remember that unique ranger spell swift quiver? NOPE, can't use it or you give up class features because of fucking hunter's mark

>>93201378
>I don't know why it isn't a feature at this point.
I'm fairly sure they don't know either.
They could've easily made it scale and function similarly to the Druid's Wild Shape. Capstone included.
Obviously the Hunter's Mark spell would still be there because of their 'tism about not deleting any spell, but it would be functionally something completely new. Make it even more powerful at tracking and that's also done, a new utility spell for the Ranger.

>>93201382
Didn't they give Ranger the new Study action as a bonus action? Just make it so using that on an enemy gives +1d6 to damage rolls for one minute against enemies you study.
Then look at any subclass features that use a bonus action, and give this similar bonus for following through on them. Your Beastmaster beast attacks someone as a bonus action? That activates the buff.

No concentration, no limited uses, synergizes with subclasses rather than ruining your action economy.

>>93201399
>this is the same damn tasha ranger that has existed for 4 years
Hardly alone in that.

>>93201405
It's literally that they put the absolutely minimum of effort into this and couldn't be bothered to think up anything different, unlike anon in literal minutes: >>93201410

WotC suck. When it comes to writing content for their own system they're bad, unproductive, lazy, greedy and unimaginative.

>>93201432
I can't think of other classes that have received virtually nothing new, aside from weapon mastery (lol). Even Rogue got something new, it's not enough but it's something.

>>93201461
I guess ranger is the only one that got C&P from Tasha's with some bits clipped out, but most of the others at best got a little sticker put on them. This supposed unified edition is just a cash grab. They couldn't be fucked to put in any work at all.

Just tell me straight whether or not I should be happy about the warlock changes.

>>93201527
Ask again when the book is out.

>3rd level
hunter's make doesn't break concentration because of damage
>7th level
hunter's mark no longer requires concentration
>10th level
free casts of hunter's mark now recharge on a short rest
>13th level
when attacking a marked target, your weapon mastery is also treated as graze or topple instead of your regular mastery
>17th level
advantage in marked targets
>capstone: foe slayer from the fucking UA we had
You become an unparalleled hunter of your foes. When your attack roll misses the target of your Hunter’s Mark, you can add your Wisdom modifier to the attack roll, potentially turning it into a hit.
In addition, whenever you hit that target with an attack roll and deal damage to it, you can add your Wisdom modifier to the damage.