So...sword coast player options?

[Ralanr]

Has anyone given much thought to what might be there? I know we've got purple dragon knight (fighter or paladin), swashbuckler (probably rogue), and bladesinger (more more spell casting form of Eldrich knight I guess?), but has anyone speculated on what they might give other classes?

I'm guessing the storm sorcerer will make a finished presence, if for no other reason than "coast" in the title (stupid I know, but I like to guess and got nothing else that makes it more likely than favored soul).

Is it possible that not all classes will get a new subclass? And what of new sub races that are specific to the realms but not in the PHB (I don't read the novels).

Anyone else wondering? Everyone seems to be quiet on the matter.

[ScrivenerofDoom]

(snip) Everyone seems to be quiet on the matter.

Maybe because there are no hints from WotC as to what else might be there.

[Ralanr]

Maybe because there are no hints from WotC as to what else might be there.

Yeah...that's fair.

[MadGrady]

I don't really have speculations, but I do have hopes.

I hope for at least 1-2 additional official sorcerer bloodlines. That class desperately needed some additional options (imho). I really liked the Storm Sorcerer, and the Favored Soul was a solid option as well, so to see some official versions of these would be nice, but at this point I'm good with any additions to that class.

I hope to see some ranger adds to beef that class up a bit.

Some new fighter options would be great for some martial class love, especially some non-magical based sub-classes.

I would love to see a "good" aligned warlock patron, instead of the evil and neutral themed ones we already have.

I think they mentioned backgrounds, which is always nice to have official fluff for characters (though I know that this is an area where homebrew is perfectly fine and frequently done anyway).

If they include new spell-casting classes, probably not out of the realm of possibility to see new spells (we saw some with EE and we saw some play test ones with the Modern Combat Unearthed Arcana, so not too far out of left field to think they have some new spells coming out).

I'ld like to see some new gear options.

Yeah, I'm really curious to see what all they include.

[Princess]

Aside from making some of the Unearthed Arcana articles official, they will quite likely (to the point I'd bet on it) include regional backgrounds for a few of the sword coast city states and possibly neighboring nations, as regional background options were a big deal for FR in 3E (And FR material at least since 2e has always tried to present mechanical incentives for various ethnicities, subraces, and subclasses). I'll be highly surprised if it doesn't include everything you need to make an official Rogue from Waterdeep who gets the Swashbuckler archetype at level 3, who will be somehow different than the Swashbucklin' Rogue from Baldur's Gate he meets in his travels.

As for races and subraces, they might include something to mechanically distinguish Sun Elves from Moon Elves, like they did in previous editions, as while High Elf works perfectly fine for both of them, FR has a history of being super specific about Elves. Similarly, they might also introduce Wild Elves as opposed to Wood Elves, and possibly additional Dwarf, Halfling, et c. It's also possible they'll specifically include Half-Drow, but I don't know what value that would add, because Half Elves work perfectly fine for that as is. Somewhat likely, they may also include something to distinguish human ethnicities from each other aside from just names. I'm not sure whether they'd do these as backgrounds, variant human options, feats, et c., but something to distinguish Illuskans from Tethyrians seems like it might show up. How many people would care about that is another matter. I'd be far more interested in that sort of thing if it were done for all of FR than just the Sword Coast, but that also treads dangerous water in the "thinly veiled racism in fantasy" category.

As for things that would be most helpful mechanically to diversify characters that haven't shown up in UA yet, I think Rangers and Druids could each use a new archetype, but I'm not sure how that fits in with the Sword Coast theme. Possibly something to do with the Neverwinter Wood?

And I'd suspect Bladesinger to either offer another take on a Fightin' Bard, or a slightly more Bard-like take on Fighter or Rogue. Who knows, maybe they'll make them a whole new class that is to a bard what a Ranger is to a Druid.

[Shining Wrath]

I'd look to the first few surveys and UA articles to see what they thought was in need of work. So minotaurs, Storm Sorcerers and Favored Souls, genasi of various flavors, and so on. The Elemental Evil stuff might come in, too.

[DivisibleByZero]

As for races and subraces, they might include something to mechanically distinguish Sun Elves from Moon Elves, like they did in previous editions, as while High Elf works perfectly fine for both of them, FR has a history of being super specific about Elves.

Sun Elves (and Qualinesti Elves from Dragonlance, and Gold Elves from Greyhawk) are High Elves.
Moon Elves (and Silvanesti Elves from DL, and Gray Elves from GH) are Eladrin (in the DMG).

[dropbear8mybaby]

I'm guessing the storm sorcerer will make a finished presence, if for no other reason than "coast" in the title (stupid I know, but I like to guess and got nothing else that makes it more likely than favored soul).

Given the Elemental Evil storyline, storm sorcerer might actually be a well-storied and legitimate option to present in the Sword Coast book.

[Dimolyth]

Honestly, I would rather seeing a feat for Bladesinger, rather than a subclass.
First, feats could have cultural/mechanical requirements (such as being member of certain race). Requirements for subclass... I just don`t like the idea.
Second, that would reflect a lot the niche for prestige classes from 3.X. While subclass is an archetype of class (casting fighter, mystical-bonded barbarian, rogue-killer), a feat could reflect possible training, which some classes would benefit a lot.
Given bladesinger, as a feat, could be taken by valor bard, abjurer wizard, eldritch knight (even dueling ranger or paladin) or any multiclass combination.
Bladesinger, as an archetype, would be bounded to bard, fighter or wizard, and possibly easy stacked with some existing feats at level 4.

Yes, I`m happy to have a new mechanics for beloved bladesinger. But I expected it in the way, other than: "hey, you would have another valor bard option, even more MAD as you ought to concider Intelligence now".

[coredump]

Mearls let drop that every class except 3 would have a 'new build' in SCAG. But not sure what that means....

[Ralanr]

Hope barbarians get a new subclass. I'm a little tired of just totem warrior and berserker.

[AbyssStalker]

I want to see another bard subclass, but not the bladesinger, something original. Like a bard who drives his enemies insane by singing eldritch hymns of horror and devastation.

[Orbis Orboros]

Mearls let drop that every class except 3 would have a 'new build' in SCAG. But not sure what that means....

Probably a lumping together of new subclasses and a rebuild of the Ranger.

Wizard and Cleric are two of them, I'd guess, given that they already have so many subclass options. Can't really decide on the third. Paladin, because they have 4 if you count Oathbreaker? Warlock, because they arguably have nine (all possible combinations of their two subclass selections, pact and patron)?

But then, there are some classes that I see it as difficult to properly add another subclass to. For instance: in my eyes, Land Druid only has a few "domains" and pseudo Arcane Recovery going for it. It's hard to not see that being outclassed by a third option (pun not intended).

[KorvinStarmast]

I want to see another bard subclass, but not the bladesinger, something original. Like a bard who drives his enemies insane by singing eldritch hymns of horror and devastation. Dissonant Whispers becomes Dissonant Chorus?

[Ralanr]

I want to see another bard subclass, but not the bladesinger, something original. Like a bard who drives his enemies insane by singing eldritch hymns of horror and devastation.

A bard built around humming?

[AbyssStalker]

Don't know, was just an example, perhaps bardic inspiration into psychic damage or status affects. Different stuff thematically appropriate for one who would spread the speech of an Old One, like your words imbuing extra damage to allied attacks or crippling debuffs on wounded or frightened enemies, maybe bardic inspiration invocations or something, I'm afraid i'm not very good at homebrewing due to relative inexperience but stuff like that is what I would like to see in a Choir of the Old Gods.

Or something entirely unrelated, I just want more good subclasses for bards, it feels like bards would be more varied than falling under 2 colleges (or 3), even though they (individually) can be dramatically different.

[Raxxius]

I want to see Bladesinger go back to the 2nd edition style of character.

I'd make it a wizard Archtype, Bladesong as a fighting style designed to support frontline casting and working with finessable weapons only, light to medium armour. Base it around a frontline spell/sword nova to contrast to the EK who would be more sturdy with better continuous damage.

I wouldn't want another Cha based Gish, just for the sake of the half dozen cha based Gishes already in the ruleset. Int based only please.

[Ralanr]

Warlock, sorcerer, paladin, bard...we have enough charisma based classes thank you, no more please.

Wizards I understand you don't want charisma to be a dumpstat, but after awhile it gets a bit annoying when the incredibly charismatic guy (or girl) is able to cast powerful spells because of how charismatic they are.

[Spacehamster]

A crusader type divine fighter subclass would be fun. :)

[Orbis Orboros]

A crusader type divine fighter subclass would be fun. :)

Isn't that what a Paladin basically is?

[Ralanr]

Isn't that what a Paladin basically is?

No...a crusader attacks while a paladin defends.

Phone can't color text.

[Orbis Orboros]

No...a crusader attacks while a paladin defends.

Phone can't color text.

So more offensive abilities and fewer things like Lay on Hands and save bonuses? Still seems a little specific for the theme of 5e to me, but I understand better now.

---

I want to see a mounted class. Something themed around a mount that works from level one (or three at the latest) to level 20. The Paladin's Find Steed doesn't show up until level 5 and doesn't scale at all. Not to mention that's all they get relevant to the mount. And don't bring up the Beast Master. Just don't, okay?

[Ralanr]

So more offensive abilities and fewer things like Lay on Hands and save bonuses? Still seems a little specific for the theme of 5e to me, but I understand better now.

---

I want to see a mounted class. Something themed around a mount that works from level one (or three at the latest) to level 20. The Paladin's Find Steed doesn't show up until level 5 and doesn't scale at all. Not to mention that's all they get relevant to the mount. And don't bring up the Beast Master. Just don't, okay?

My only issue with mount based classes is how you justify bringing a horse into a dungeon.

[DivisibleByZero]

I want to see a mounted class. Something themed around a mount that works from level one (or three at the latest) to level 20. The Paladin's Find Steed doesn't show up until level 5 and doesn't scale at all. Not to mention that's all they get relevant to the mount. And don't bring up the Beast Master. Just don't, okay?

Don't drink the Kool-Aid, okay? Just don't. Beast Master is perfectly fine.

[Grimstaff]

As for races and subraces, they might include something to mechanically distinguish Sun Elves from Moon Elves, like they did in previous editions, as while High Elf works perfectly fine for both of them, FR has a history of being super specific about Elves.

And I'd suspect Bladesinger to either offer another take on a Fightin' Bard, or a slightly more Bard-like take on Fighter or Rogue. Who knows, maybe they'll make them a whole new class that is to a bard what a Ranger is to a Druid.

I'm hoping for some new Elvish diversity myself.

As for the Bladesinger, a Bard archtype seems the likely choice, but I'm personally hoping for a Wizard or Sorcerer archetype that adds a little fighting to the magic, the same way Eldritch Knight adds a little magic to the fighting.

[Grimstaff]

Mearls let drop that every class except 3 would have a 'new build' in SCAG. But not sure what that means....

If I had to pick the three least "Forgotten Realmsy" classes, they'd probably be Warlock, Monk, and Paladin (in that order).

[Grimstaff]

My only issue with mount based classes is how you justify bringing a horse into a dungeon.

Or a tavern. How are they ever going to meet a party to adventure with?

[Orbis Orboros]

Don't drink the Kool-Aid, okay? Just don't. Beast Master is perfectly fine.

Lol :smallbiggrin:

No seriously, it's a mess. Maybe, mathematically, its DPR holds up and it's balanced. Despite the devs admitting themselves that the Ranger has issues. Or the stupidity of your animal getting a power-up when you are separated or unconscious. Or that it is straight up better ,mechanically, if you're one of two races in the PHB so that you can mount it.

But all that has been discussed to hell, and none of that is relevant anyway. I'm talking about a mounted class. I shouldn't have to play a gnome or halfling to kinda sorta do that.

[Orbis Orboros]

Or a tavern. How are they ever going to meet a party to adventure with?

It's not like you have to ALWAYS be on horseback. Or whatever your mount is.

[Ralanr]

It's not like you have to ALWAYS be on horseback. Or whatever your mount is.

My image of a mount based class begs to differ.

[Shining Wrath]

Or a tavern. How are they ever going to meet a party to adventure with?

Or enact this scene?

https://youtu.be/O8cDfnQD0ws

[Orbis Orboros]

My image of a mount based class begs to differ.

Your image of a mounted class is a centaur race?

[Ralanr]

Your image of a mounted class is a centaur race?

Nope, just a guy who's ****ed when he's caught without his horse.

[Orbis Orboros]

Nope, just a guy who's ****ed when he's caught without his horse.

Ahh. Well, firstly, he COULD still go into the tavern. If he so chose.

Secondly, I'd think it would more equate to someone out of resources (no ki points, no high-level spells, etc) than just straight up ****ed. Or, for that matter, like a Beastmaster separated from his beast. He can still fight, he's just hindered.

And, of course, I'd expect some discretion. If you're always crawling through tiny holes in your campaign, then a mounted class wouldn't do much good. It would require some aforethought, like Aarakocra.

Still. There are times when the wizard doesn't have his spellbook, or the martials their weapons, and so on. I don't think it would be too big a deal.

But I suppose I could be wrong. I'm only in my second campaign ever, I'm not exactly an expert here.

[Gnomes2169]

My image of a mount based class begs to differ.

So you're going full-on Fire Emblem here? :smalltongue:

[AbyssStalker]

I wouldn't want another Cha based Gish, just for the sake of the half dozen cha based Gishes already in the ruleset. Int based only please.

This, although I do want more bard subclasses (just not Gishes), I think we could use another Druid, and another Monk wouldn't hurt

[eastmabl]

There's an interview with the lead designer of Sword Coast Player's Guide in the new "issue" of Dragon+. To summarize:

It looks like we have Uthgardt barbarians, bladesingers, Purple Knights, and "new totems, sub-classes, and a new warlock patron (the Undying)." There are half-elf and tiefling variants that are supposed to be Realms-oriented, and we are getting a new paladin oath (Oath of the Crown - allegiance to civilization).

[Flashy]

Still. There are times when the wizard doesn't have his spellbook, or the martials their weapons, and so on. I don't think it would be too big a deal.

But I suppose I could be wrong. I'm only in my second campaign ever, I'm not exactly an expert here.

The difference is that those are pretty niche circumstances. Places you don't have your weapons are a lot less common than places you aren't allowed to bring your horse. A rogue at the opera could still bring in a boot dagger. A mounted knight can't exactly smuggle his charger in under his trenchcoat.

[Ralanr]

There's an interview with the lead designer of Sword Coast Player's Guide in the new "issue" of Dragon+. To summarize:

It looks like we have Uthgardt barbarians, bladesingers, Purple Knights, and "new totems, sub-classes, and a new warlock patron (the Undying)." There are half-elf and tiefling variants that are supposed to be Realms-oriented, and we are getting a new paladin oath (Oath of the Crown - allegiance to civilization).

Source?


The difference is that those are pretty niche circumstances. Places you don't have your weapons are a lot less common than places you aren't allowed to bring your horse. A rogue at the opera could still bring in a boot dagger. A mounted knight can't exactly smuggle his charger in under his trenchcoat.

Basically what I meant.

[dropbear8mybaby]

Source?

Dragon+ is a crappy tablet/phone app that operates as the official Dragon "magazine" now.

[Ralanr]

Dragon+ is a crappy tablet/phone app that operates as the official Dragon "magazine" now.

I was hoping for an online article.

Damn tablets.

[Orbis Orboros]

The difference is that those are pretty niche circumstances. Places you don't have your weapons are a lot less common than places you aren't allowed to bring your horse. A rogue at the opera could still bring in a boot dagger. A mounted knight can't exactly smuggle his charger in under his trenchcoat.

I really feel like I'm arguing too hard here for something I just think would be cool, but eh. Got nothing better to do.

If the mount was via something like the Find spells (albeit with an instant cast time) then problem mostly solved. Sometimes you'll be in areas just too small, but it solves the doorway and "Hey, you can't bring that in here!" problems.

[Ralanr]

I really feel like I'm arguing too hard here for something I just think would be cool, but eh. Got nothing better to do.

If the mount was via something like the Find spells (albeit with an instant cast time) then problem mostly solved. Sometimes you'll be in areas just too small, but it solves the doorway and "Hey, you can't bring that in here!" problems.

You probably are and I don't see a reason why the class shouldn't exist in some way or form. Beyond my original issue I see no problem.

Also for barbarian: reading up on the sky pony people (cause I can't look up previous posts on the phone) I'm a little disheartened that it feels like more totem spirits only.

I mean more spirits are cool, but I was hoping a third subclass instead of an expansion of a previous one. But this is just speculation.

[Orbis Orboros]

You probably are and I don't see a reason why the class shouldn't exist in some way or form. Beyond my original issue I see no problem.

Also for barbarian: reading up on the sky pony people (cause I can't look up previous posts on the phone) I'm a little disheartened that it feels like more totem spirits only.

I mean more spirits are cool, but I was hoping a third subclass instead of an expansion of a previous one. But this is just speculation.

Eastmabl said "Uthgardt barbarians... and new totems" (emphasis mine).

Maybe I'm missing something, but that sounds like subclass and totems both to me.

[Ralanr]

Eastmabl said "Uthgardt barbarians... and new totems" (emphasis mine).

Maybe I'm missing something, but that sounds like subclass and totems both to me.

I read up on Urthgart, they seem to be spirit worshipping (like the Sky Pony) tribespeople.
I'm probably wrong though.

[INDYSTAR188]

I wanted to share this with you guys that don't have the application on your personal devices. From the Dragon+ article:

What challenges did you face in creating class-race-background options that are meant to be tied to the Realms?

"Primarily we had to balance rooting those options strongly in the Realms - and the Sword Coast in particular - while also making them as broadly useful to D&D players as possible. Too much one way and you lose the unique character and style of the Realms that make it such an appealing setting: too much the other and the Adventurer's Guide would only be useful to those looking to adventure in the Realms. I think we struck a good balance, such that you'll find many Realms-specific options, like the Uthgardt barbarians, elven bladesingers, Purple Dragon Knights, and the like, while also having options like new totems, sub-classes, and a new warlock patron (the Undying) you can use in any campaign."

Do you have a favorite background in the book?

"[There's one] that comes to with the character being the heir to something of value, and the accompanying table that provides inspiration as to what it might be. It's a classic fantasy background that suits the Realms well: a hero who has some mysterious item, document, bit of lore, or even a tattoo or unusual scar, which turns out to be the key to a greater story.

That said, all the backgrounds in the guide help to root new characters strongly in the Realms and the Sword Coast and offer plenty of interesting character hooks and new background features."

What are your favorite character options in the book?

"How to choose! I like the half-elf and tiefling variant options, which pack a lot into a small space in terms of customizing those races for the Realms to reflect their unique heritage. I'm a big fan of the Oath of the Crown option for paladins - owning allegiance to the ideals of civilization and service to a sovereign, nation, or deity of law and rulership, because it's perfect for chivalrous champions and battlefield leaders. The Undying warlock patron makes for some tough warlocks and also manages to slip in some fun multiversal references."

[Grimstaff]

There's an interview with the lead designer of Sword Coast Player's Guide in the new "issue" of Dragon+. To summarize:

It looks like we have Uthgardt barbarians, bladesingers, Purple Knights, and "new totems, sub-classes, and a new warlock patron (the Undying)." There are half-elf and tiefling variants that are supposed to be Realms-oriented, and we are getting a new paladin oath (Oath of the Crown - allegiance to civilization).

Half-elf variant?

Three-quarter-elf? One-fifth-elf? Half-elf-half-orc?

[Orbis Orboros]

Half-elf variant?

Three-quarter-elf? One-fifth-elf? Half-elf-half-orc?

No, it's called "Half-Human."

[INDYSTAR188]

I wanted to share this with you guys that don't have the application on your personal devices. From the Dragon+ article:

What challenges did you face in creating class-race-background options that are meant to be tied to the Realms?

"Primarily we had to balance rooting those options strongly in the Realms - and the Sword Coast in particular - while also making them as broadly useful to D&D players as possible. Too much one way and you lose the unique character and style of the Realms that make it such an appealing setting: too much the other and the Adventurer's Guide would only be useful to those looking to adventure in the Realms. I think we struck a good balance, such that you'll find many Realms-specific options, like the Uthgardt barbarians, elven bladesingers, Purple Dragon Knights, and the like, while also having options like new totems, sub-classes, and a new warlock patron (the Undying) you can use in any campaign."

Do you have a favorite background in the book?

"[There's one] that comes to with the character being the heir to something of value, and the accompanying table that provides inspiration as to what it might be. It's a classic fantasy background that suits the Realms well: a hero who has some mysterious item, document, bit of lore, or even a tattoo or unusual scar, which turns out to be the key to a greater story.

That said, all the backgrounds in the guide help to root new characters strongly in the Realms and the Sword Coast and offer plenty of interesting character hooks and new background features."

What are your favorite character options in the book?

"How to choose! I like the half-elf and tiefling variant options, which pack a lot into a small space in terms of customizing those races for the Realms to reflect their unique heritage. I'm a big fan of the Oath of the Crown option for paladins - owning allegiance to the ideals of civilization and service to a sovereign, nation, or deity of law and rulership, because it's perfect for chivalrous champions and battlefield leaders. The Undying warlock patron makes for some tough warlocks and also manages to slip in some fun multiversal references."

For my part I will be most excited to see the new race/background options and the Barbarian and Ranger subclasses. I'm not especially excited for expansions to the already powerful classes (paladin, wizard, bard) but I'm glad for the new options. Mostly though, I'm excited to get an official splatbook and new Realms fluff!

[Ralanr]

Undying warlock eh?

Sounds like an insanely awesome patron choice for half-Orc warlocks.

[INDYSTAR188]

Undying warlock eh?

Sounds like an insanely awesome patron choice for half-Orc warlocks.

Any idea what that might be from a Forgotten Realms perspective? I was hoping for a good-aligned warlock patron that's not fey exclusive.

[Ralanr]

Any idea what that might be from a Forgotten Realms perspective? I was hoping for a good-aligned warlock patron that's not fey exclusive.

Considering my lackluster knowledge of the realms; no, no I do not.

[AZGrowler]

I would love to see a "good" aligned warlock patron, instead of the evil and neutral themed ones we already have.

While it might not qualify as a patron, per se, spellfire was introduced in the 2E days, and it could be adapted to work with a warlock.

[Spectre9000]

I would love to see a "good" aligned warlock patron, instead of the evil and neutral themed ones we already have.


There are good Fey.

[Ralanr]

There are good Fey.

Even the not so good ones are probably less evil than fiends.

[Alikat]

A bard built around humming?

We had a hummingbard in our last campaign! Chaotic evil halfling, she also played the kazoo and liked to write words starting with the letter D on peoples corpses..

[INDYSTAR188]

Even the not so good ones are probably less evil than fiends.

While it's true I'd rather be indebted to a fomorian or hag than a fiend, I still wouldn't consider it a good situation!

[Ralanr]

While it's true I'd rather be indebted to a fomorian or hag than a fiend, I still wouldn't consider it a good situation!

You're an adventure. When is your situation ever a good?

[Socko525]

Anybody notice that the article says "elven bladesingers"? Do you think we'll see our first race specific archetype?

[Ralanr]

Anybody notice that the article says "elven bladesingers"? Do you think we'll see our first race specific archetype?

I kinda hope not. I'm not really a fan of race/class restrictions.

[Princess]

More likely, Bladesinger will just have flavor text explaining that elves invented the style. Duskblade was the same way in 3.5 - standard fluff says it was their idea, but anyone with the talent can potentially learn how.

No one wants to go back to the dark days of 2e's half-baked restrictions (except people who play Hackmaster).