Speculation UA Speculation [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Spectre9000

2017-01-23, 04:38 PM

I'm not really hopeful for anything. What I want more than anything oh my god is Mystic. But, we'll probably get Sorcerer, and they do need it. I envision an arcane sorcerer, some demonic sorcerers (although this is treading on the Tiefling theme a bit), a genie sorcerer, maybe?

I second Mystic UA as what I most desperately want. They've state they have the mystic class basically done, so I don't know why they haven't released it (God I'm hoping they're putting it into a book so it can be a real class).

I want a better melee spell-caster. The Eldritch Knight, Bladesinger, Valor Bard, Pact of the Blade, all seem incredibly weak and done in half-measures out of an intrinsic fear they may actually ever be good. Note, that people wouldn't multi-class so much, if the classes actually did what they wanted them to do to start with instead of these half-baked archetypes... To do a good Bladelock, you need Fighter MC, which could really be said of any melee caster build. Thematically, people want to play these types of characters, so WoTC makes them weaker so people will actually play the more boring mundane classes (read Fighter). If Eldritch Knight was a half-progression archetype, then it'd be decent. As it is, it's just meh, as are its archetype features. Does the job, but does so boringly.

Mikey P

2017-01-23, 04:43 PM

I expect them to rehash what they have already done with the Shadow Sorcerer and Favored Soul (pulling all the lovely bonus spells out of the latter in all probability.)

So far we have Draconic, Wild, Shadow, Favored soul, Storm...

There might be too much overlap, but the sorcerous origins and Warlock pacts seem pretty interchangeable... there is certainly room for Fiendish or fey blooded versions.

rooneg

2017-01-23, 04:55 PM

Honestly, what I want most is for them to retroactively give the existing Sorcerer archetypes a list of cleric domain style bonus spells, so the new ones have a chance at being awesome. As it is, the one example that made it into an actual published book tells me that none of the other UA sorcerer types are getting anywhere near print without severe nerfing.

toapat

2017-01-23, 04:57 PM

What hopes do people have for next Monday?

Planeshift: kaladesh is likely next, which would explain why Artificer came out this month

Ugganaut

2017-01-23, 06:07 PM

I second Mystic UA as what I most desperately want. They've state they have the mystic class basically done, so I don't know why they haven't released it (God I'm hoping they're putting it into a book so it can be a real class).

I'll third that. I'd love to see them make changes, engage the community until they get it right(which shouldn't take as long as it does), and then officially release it so we can play it.

I'd love to see them change their naming convention too on future material. Its my pet hate.
Mystic? It sounds like a tribal seer, which is certainly a TYPE of Psionist, but now my Psionist sounds a bit "voodoo".
Artificer Gunsmith - I've never played a medieval fantasy game with guns personally, now it feels locked out to me. "Gunsmith" should be in the class description as possibly types imo. I really liked that UA, first time I've taken a serious liking to Artificer, but if they had of made the subtype "Implement or Ammunition weapon" and built it accordingly, it would have fit so many more campaigns/settings. The description should have the "skins", and the subclasses the mechanics. Just my personal opinion. Again I loved the Artificer, except for the Wondrous Dogslop and the lazy Mechanical Servant.

And I'd like to see them read the community suggestions and actually take them on board more. I've seen so many awesome homebrews and fixes to UA material, and it gets ignored. So many talented people on the forums, basically working for free on content they are passionate about, you'd figure they'd make the most of it. Nope. Now I feel like I'm just ranting....I'll stop now. My answer was Mystic :)

Malaketh

2017-01-23, 06:09 PM

Planeshift: kaladesh is likely next, which would explain why Artificer came out this month

I hope they finish up the base classes before anything. Only 3 classes left and they doubled up the ranger/rogue. My guess? They took the extra week to toss the 3 spellcasters left together.

jaappleton

2017-01-23, 06:25 PM

I started with 4E, it's the only edition I've played prior to 5th.

But one of my favorite Paragon Paths for the Sorcerer was the Demonskin Adept. I'd love a version of that.

They introduced Demon Summoning spells with That Old Black Magic UA article awhile back, I'd love an archetype that really played into that theme.

toapat

2017-01-23, 06:28 PM

I hope they finish up the base classes before anything. Only 3 classes left and they doubled up the ranger/rogue. My guess? They took the extra week to toss the 3 spellcasters left together.

both Planeshift Zendikar and Planeshift Innistrad have been very bare bones relative material, Aether Revolt just came out last week, and like Eberron you cant really goto Kaladesh without the artificer class. i would expect Vedalken racial template, Aetherborn race (a race that has between 4 weeks and 4 years to live and is essentially waste material from fuel processing), Gremlin Monsterblocks (Rust Monsters for Wizards), and basics for vehicle combat which will let them slowly work to Spelljammer once Eberron is ready which it will be soon.

Potato_Priest

2017-01-23, 07:55 PM

No UA this week. What hopes do people have for next Monday? I'm hoping for an infernal/demonic sorcerer bloodline.

How do you know there isn't going to be any this monday?

Seriously, those guys at UA need to publish their schedule outside of social media. I've been tabbing over and refreshing for the last half hour, and now it looks like they aren't even going to put something out. :smallmad:

jaappleton

2017-01-23, 08:15 PM

How do you know there isn't going to be any this monday?

Seriously, those guys at UA need to publish their schedule outside of social media. I've been tabbing over and refreshing for the last half hour, and now it looks like they aren't even going to put something out. :smallmad:

I posted a reminder about no UA article this week at around 9am EST on this forum...

JumboWheat01

2017-01-23, 08:24 PM

If it's Sorcerer up next, I wouldn't mind seeing something like a Fey ancestry, a more dedicated controller and supporter over the general striker we've come to most equate sorcerers with. Or maybe translate the Spirit Shaman to them, since they already did the same with Favored Soul.

If it's Mystics or other Psions up next, I don't really know what to go for, as I've never played a game with Psions. I know nothing about non-4e Psions.

Potato_Priest

2017-01-23, 08:29 PM

I posted a reminder about no UA article this week at around 9am EST on this forum...

Where did you find out?

jaappleton

2017-01-23, 08:39 PM

Where did you find out?

Twitter. I found out last week.

StorytellerHero

2017-01-23, 08:48 PM

I believe that there's a chance of the next UA being related to Eberron.

With Ravenloft more or less out of the way, and feelers out on the Artificer, the timing might be right to prime the audience for an upcoming Eberron book.

Eberron would also be a logical property to add next for design permissions on the Dungeon Masters Guild.

jaappleton

2017-01-23, 09:00 PM

JackOfAllBuilds

2017-01-23, 09:34 PM

I want a full Mystic, including multiclass rules.
And instead of continuing with a 3rd system of Psi Points, they should use Ki Points.

There really is no reason to add a new game mechanic and complicating things. Mystics and Monks even have similar feel and theme with their training, meditation, and mental focus. In 4e Monks were a psionic class, and 3.5 had a psionic monk prestige, so there's plenty of history to build on.

And for those who mention that monk is short rest refresh, so is a warlock. And the two mystic builds are like the lore vs valor bard. So daily & short rest refreshes do work alongside each other.

Finback

2017-01-23, 09:54 PM

Aetherborn race (a race that has between 4 weeks and 4 years to live and is essentially waste material from fuel processing)

I feel like they would be a new type for the Genasi, overall - just a ticking clock version.

Gremlin Monsterblocks (Rust Monsters for Wizards)

Aw, but then what will the Disenchanter do? It's hard for a mutant Macrauchenia to find work in this age!

toapat

2017-01-23, 10:36 PM

I feel like they would be a new type for the Genasi, overall - just a ticking clock version.

while there is plenty of lore overlap in terms of the convergence of the Elemental planes forming the fabric of the Non-Far Realms Material and Celestial planes with the Multiverse and the internal cosmic flows of mana, Aether in MTG terms is tied to the force of magic (its literally blended mana, harvested from the pulsing heart of the world), which is rarely, if ever, explored in the grand cosmology of DnD (and im pretty sure isnt involved in 5th ed), Aetherborn are not related to Genasi. In fact they should absolutely have to suffer having the outsider's penalty where they cannot be resurrected. They also need a vampire subrace where they can kill a target and gain X years of lifespan as X (8 hour increments) of life extension.

From a purely Technical standpoint, Aetherborn are probably the second most important race that will be implemented in DnD, behind only Warforged. Aetherborn live fast and die young, why do you live?

Oh, and their most important characters are basically Lex Luthor and Vampire Batman

Malifice

2017-01-23, 11:00 PM

No UA this week. What hopes do people have for next Monday? I'm hoping for an infernal/demonic sorcerer bloodline.

Refluffed dragon does this just fine.

Arkhios

2017-01-24, 12:22 AM

"Basically done Mystic" doesn't mean it's ready for being published. They might be polishing out their various sub-classes until they feel just right. Homebrewing is exactly just like that: re-draft after re-draft after re-draft. I'd say that the "official" design process is not so different from that. Designers by labor are as much designers as those who do it for fun and for no personal gain; they are also human, making flawed designs, and fixing those flaws can take time.

I honestly believe (and hope) that they'll take the delay as a chance to make it certain there are as little flaws as is humanely possible.

Zalabim

2017-01-24, 04:19 AM

I'd like to see a teamwork-using rogue archetype. Mastermind veered way off into master of disguise for some reason.

I'd like to see a ranged sorcerer type that makes sense to be ranged, unlike dragons. I'd like to see an actual melee-type sorcerer to round out the just really close range types. I'd like to see an enchanting-type sorcerer to emphasize that aspect of their spell list.

Dimers

2017-01-24, 05:12 AM

I'm frankly surprised there haven't been more wizard additions so far. Between theurge, techno, bladesinger and Eberron artificer, the volume is about the same as any other class, sure. But 'modern' is completely unsupported in setting and equipment, artificer doesn't alter the base class much until 14th level, bladesinger is restricted to elves by default ... only the theurge is as functional as I'd expect. More importantly, 3.X and 4e have left me with the impression that Wizards of the Coast will highlight and improve the wizard class shamelessly.

Arkhios

2017-01-24, 05:38 AM

I'm frankly surprised there haven't been more wizard additions so far.

If you haven't noticed, the sub-class options for the PHB classes have been presented in alphabetical order (artificer was a surprising exception in the middle of it - but it isn't from PHB so it doesn't count). Wizard will get its share eventually. Unfortunately, Wizard is the last one in that order, but eventually they'll get there.

On the other hand, D&D franchise has been around before Wizards of the Coast came to own the publication rights; it's not their original invention and thus shouldn't have any sway to its design. Sure, they own it now, but that doesn't matter. The game is about more than just wizards in dungeons, hunting dragons.

As for my hopes for upcoming UA: Revised Favored Soul would be nice, as it had a few problems which made it almost mandatory choice over any other sorcerous origin. Other than that I'm out of ideas for a sorcerer at the moment.

For wizard, I'd definitely like to see an universalist introduced, just because they should exist in my opinion.

MrStabby

2017-01-24, 07:17 AM

Sorcerers are cool and I look forward to seeing what they bring. Unfortunately they are like rogues and most of the power is in the main class not the archetype so there is less space for something awesome.

Kobard

2017-01-24, 07:24 AM

Regitnui

2017-01-24, 07:47 AM

I'm not really hopeful for anything. What I want more than anything oh my god is Mystic. But, we'll probably get Sorcerer, and they do need it. I envision an arcane sorcerer, some demonic sorcerers (although this is treading on the Tiefling theme a bit), a genie sorcerer, maybe?

I'd love to see a bumper UA with mystic class alongside sorcerer "wilder", fighter "Soulknife/psychic warrior" (name and signature ability from former, structure and 'spells' from latter), and a rogue "lurk".

Planeshift: kaladesh is likely next, which would explain why Artificer came out this month

both Planeshift Zendikar and Planeshift Innistrad have been very bare bones relative material, Aether Revolt just came out last week, and like Eberron you cant really goto Kaladesh without the artificer class. i would expect Vedalken racial template, Aetherborn race (a race that has between 4 weeks and 4 years to live and is essentially waste material from fuel processing), Gremlin Monsterblocks (Rust Monsters for Wizards), and basics for vehicle combat which will let them slowly work to Spelljammer once Eberron is ready which it will be soon.

I am wanting this so much. I haven't been able to play MtG recently, so getting a Planeshift for Kaladesh would be great, and scratch that Eberron itch I've had.

Draco4472

2017-01-24, 08:03 AM

Refluffed dragon does this just fine.

Yeah, but it deserves an archetype all of its own in my opinion. Other then something akin to that, I'm thinking something along fey or celestial lines to cover the major bloodlines, as we have draconic and storm mentions elemental heritage in its description. A sorcerer with more melee options like Favored Soul would also be great.

Aett_Thorn

2017-01-24, 10:08 AM

A fey-based Sorc subclass would make me very happy. Something that helps them take advantage of any enchantment and illusions spells they use, versus just straight up damage.

Malaketh

2017-01-24, 10:22 AM

A fey-based Sorc subclass would make me very happy. Something that helps them take advantage of any enchantment and illusions spells they use, versus just straight up damage.

I 2nd this (or at this point I think it's 4th or 5th this) Perhaps an old "beguiler" type class? And if there will be a lot of charm immune you can be a chump and dip warlock and pew pew them but use your awesome mind mucking powers for everything else.

jaappleton

2017-01-24, 10:31 AM

A Fey Sorcerer would be pretty good. Though an Eladrin Archfey Warlock / Fey Bloodline Sorc would be "I'M THE ELFIEST ELF THAT'S EVER ELFED!" and I want to make it now.

And be a Dwarf. :smallbiggrin:

toapat

2017-01-24, 10:32 AM

I am wanting this so much. I haven't been able to play MtG recently, so getting a Planeshift for Kaladesh would be great, and scratch that Eberron itch I've had.

like, skipping a week for UA when they have material lined up, the Art of Kaladesh Book coming out early compared to Art of Zen/Art of Innistrad, and Set #2 with the 2-set-block paradigm having come out, it seems appropriate for them to delay UA for the MTG version.

jaappleton

2017-01-24, 10:39 AM

like, skipping a week for UA when they have material lined up, the Art of Kaladesh Book coming out early compared to Art of Zen/Art of Innistrad, and Set #2 with the 2-set-block paradigm having come out, it seems appropriate for them to delay UA for the MTG version.

They've stated they have UA articles for each class, and some other things they've been working on.

See: Artificer, Mystic

Though I have thought for awhile the entire thing was leading to Eberron. I still do.

But another Plane Shift is something I hadn't considered at all. Interesting.

Arkhios

2017-01-24, 10:52 AM

Elemental Bloodline sorcerer could be fun indeed. While in general I agree that the Draconic Bloodline reflavored would work for the most part, I find that the synergy ends with elemental affinity.

IIRC, they experimented with element-substitution in D&D Next playtest, but when they came up only with the Elemental Adept feat I was quite disappointed with it.

I would think that an elementalist sorcerer could perhaps substitute their origin's element for damaging spells that share one of the possible elements. If not for free, then maybe getting an unique metamagic that would let them do that with a reasonable sorcery point cost. (I know that the Pathinder's Elemental Bloodline Sorcerer does this, but they do it for free rather than a cost, so it's different in a way.)

Maybe an Earth Elemental Sorcerer could have Acid affinity, and he could spend X Sorcery Points to cast Burning Hands that would deal acid damage instead.
Likewise a Water Elemental Sorcerer could have Cold affinity, and she could spend X Sorcery Points to cast Fireball that would deal cold damage instead.
An Air Elemental Sorcerer would have Lightning affinity, and he could spend X Sorcery Points to cast Cone of Cold that would deal Lightning damage instead (and exclaim: "UNLIMITED POWER!" while doing so)
Or a Fire Elemental Sorcerer would obviously have Fire affinity, and could spend X Sorcery Points to cast Shocking Grasp and deal Fire damage with it instead.

Maybe they could have draconic bloodline's elemental affinity feature to add their charisma on spells that deal the damage of their origin's type. (Either including the above substituted spells or not)

jaappleton

2017-01-24, 11:00 AM

Joe the Rat

2017-01-24, 11:23 AM

Elemental Bloodline sorcerer could be fun indeed. While in general I agree that the Draconic Bloodline reflavored would work for the most part, I find that the synergy ends with elemental affinity.

IIRC, they experimented with element-substitution in D&D Next playtest, but when they came up only with the Elemental Adept feat I was quite disappointed with it.

I would think that an elementalist sorcerer could perhaps substitute their origin's element for damaging spells that share one of the possible elements. If not for free, then maybe getting an unique metamagic that would let them do that with a reasonable sorcery point cost. (I know that the Pathinder's Elemental Bloodline Sorcerer does this, but they do it for free rather than a cost, so it's different in a way.)

Maybe an Earth Elemental Sorcerer could have Acid affinity, and he could spend X Sorcery Points to cast Burning Hands that would deal acid damage instead.
Likewise a Water Elemental Sorcerer could have Cold affinity, and she could spend X Sorcery Points to cast Fireball that would deal cold damage instead.

Maybe they could have draconic bloodline's elemental affinity feature to add their charisma on spells that deal the damage of their origin's type. (Either including the above substituted spells or not)You don't even have to make it a metamagic. Spend sorcery points, change damage type... leaving the door open to then apply metamagic.
Or you do, but as a origin feature, rather than taking up a metamagic selection.

The other thing we might see is three more flavors of element-ish sorcery, using Stormborn to fill the "Air" niche.
Oooo... Stormborn as Air+Water, then three more border mixes (Air+Fire, Fire+Earth, Earth+Water). That could get interesting.

Past Sorcerer, I would really like to see any of the Full Arcane to have an elementalist frame. Sorcerers are a natural fit, but I could see Wizard getting in on this (generic elementalist as a evocation/conjuration/transmutation hybrid, or elemental specialist). The Warlock version does it least well (or takes the most finagling to get it to work), but a Genie Pact is conceptually workable.

My outside the box sorcerer idea: Arcane Fist. Taking that inborn magic and turning it into a fighting style.

Arkhios

2017-01-24, 11:27 AM

You don't even have to make it a metamagic. Spend sorcery points, change damage type... leaving the door open to then apply metamagic.
Or you do, but as a origin feature, rather than taking up a metamagic selection.
Well, true. I just used metamagic as a point of reference really.

My outside the box idea: Arcane Fist. Taking that inborn magic and turning it into a fighting style.

That actually reminds me of the Enlightened Fist prestige class from 3.5 (from Complete Arcana IIRC)

Edit: Yep, Enlightened Fist (http://alcyius.com/dndtools/classes/enlightened-fist/index.html) was in Complete Arcana, and while it might make more sense as a monastic Tradition, it kinda does feel it could also work as a sorcerer sub-class as well.

Joe the Rat

2017-01-24, 11:44 AM

That actually reminds me of the Enlightened Fist prestige class from 3.5 (from Complete Arcana IIRC)

Edit: Yep, Enlightened Fist (http://alcyius.com/dndtools/classes/enlightened-fist/index.html) was in Complete Arcana, and while it might make more sense as a monastic Tradition, it kinda does feel it could also work as a sorcerer sub-class as well. That's what I was thinking of (I think there was also a monk-sorcerer multiclass feat that shifted all your Wisdom monk stuff to Charisma). Now we'd just have to see which they're more gun-shy about: Another 4E-style a la carte monk caster, or a non-monk with decent unarmed fighting.

Ooooo... Pact of the Fist! ...yeah, that's just silly.

CursedRhubarb

2017-01-24, 11:53 AM

Some Blood Magic for the Sorcerer could be fun. Let them expand their spell list with some curse and debuff type spells, maybe Inflict Wounds since it would be thematic, and letting them spend Hit Die to power up their spells or to cast rituals without needing components by sacrificing health and Hit Die with Hit Die spent this way refreshing after a long rest.

Arkhios

2017-01-24, 12:00 PM

That's what I was thinking of (I think there was also a monk-sorcerer multiclass feat that shifted all your Wisdom monk stuff to Charisma). Now we'd just have to see which they're more gun-shy about: Another 4E-style a la carte monk caster, or a non-monk with decent unarmed fighting.

Ooooo... Pact of the Fist! ...yeah, that's just silly.

There was at least the Ascetic Mage feat which gave your monk/sorcerer levels some feature synergy. It's been years since I dove into the deep sea of 3.5 feats, so I don't remember if there was a feat like the one you described. (there could be; in fact, it might have even been the Ascetic Mage)

X3r4ph

2017-01-24, 12:42 PM

I am hoping they will redo the Shadow Sorcerer. I am playing one, well, I was, I have now changed to a homebrew Shadow Adept from dndwiki. It has the right Shadow feel to it.

But yeah. Blood and Elemental makes sense. Warlocks have fey and demons covered.

Maybe Master of the Unseen Hand? Or is it finally time for the mighty Ooze Master to return?

eastmabl

2017-01-24, 01:07 PM

There was at least the Ascetic Mage feat which gave your monk/sorcerer levels some feature synergy. It's been years since I dove into the deep sea of 3.5 feats, so I don't remember if there was a feat like the one you described. (there could be; in fact, it might have even been the Ascetic Mage)

In 3.5, there were a series of feats that were geared around multiclassing.

You could pump your caster level by 4 for a spellcasting class, or you could sneak attack as though you had four more levels of rogue.

There were also feats that allowed you to multiclass in and out of classes like monk and paladin (which

5e game design has done away with a lot of this multiclassing feat tax.

Arkhios

2017-01-24, 02:00 PM

In 3.5, there were a series of feats that were geared around multiclassing.

You could pump your caster level by 4 for a spellcasting class, or you could sneak attack as though you had four more levels of rogue.

There were also feats that allowed you to multiclass in and out of classes like monk and paladin

Yeah, I know there were feat chains in 3.5 to accomplish a huge variety of things, I just can't possibly remember all of them (there were hundreds, if not thousands of feats).
Back in the day I used to be a huge fan of the ascetic feats. I even had a character that was based on unarmed sneak attack that could also hurt undead (ascetic rogue and, iirc, a feat or alternative sneak attack from Player's Handbook II).

As a trivia, the feat that would let you multiclass freely between monk and paladin was Ascetic Knight.

5e game design has done away with a lot of this multiclassing feat tax.

Which is one of many reasons why I prefer 5e to both 3.5 and Pathfinder.

Sception

2017-01-24, 02:58 PM

I'd love to see a vampyric or otherwise undead-themed bloodline with a mix of life-draining and undead creating/controlling abilities.

But an updated version of the shadow sorcerer would be cool, too.

Or maybe, instead of or in addition to entire bloodlines, some new sorcerer spells or metamagic options?

toapat

2017-01-24, 03:16 PM

Which is one of many reasons why I prefer 5e to both 3.5 and Pathfinder.

honestly, even though 3.5 and PF are more interesting to work on character concepts in, it really is just 5th Is actually trying to be a game.

Byke

2017-01-24, 03:26 PM

Any additional flavor of Sorcerer would be nice.

Domain spells for each flavor...this is absolutely needed, with some kind of retro updated for the existing sorcerers in the PHB and UA material currently available.

Expand metamagic options and even increase the number of meta magic available/known at lower levels....As Quicken and Twin are just to good to pass up. But there are times Subtle or Heightened or Extend or Distance would be nice to have at earlier levels.

One of my biggest pet peeves isn't the amount of spells known as a Sorcerer it's the restricted/limited spell list.

Sorcerers are already limited on spells known, why limit there options further? If this is going to continue then at least they could put in some Sorcerer only spells or just open up some options to the Wizard spell list. (don't get me started on absorb elements and find familiar)

rooneg

2017-01-24, 03:45 PM

(don't get me started on absorb elements and find familiar)

I have to admit that Absorb Elements seems weird to leave off of the Sorcerer list. The logic behind what makes it on and what gets reserved for Wizards only is utterly arbitrary as far as I can tell.

Arkhios

2017-01-24, 03:52 PM

I have to admit that Absorb Elements seems weird to leave off of the Sorcerer list. The logic behind what makes it on and what gets reserved for Wizards only is utterly arbitrary as far as I can tell.

I wouldn't say preventing action economy shenanigans are arbitrary. With the right Metamagic options you could accomplish something truly ridiculous with the spells (at least with Find Familiar, I haven't theorycrafted with Absorb Elements much (read: at all), so I can't tell).

Normally, you use your Action to cast a spell, and your familiar could use it's reaction to deliver the spell.

With Quicken Metamagic you can accomplish the same with just a Bonus Action on your turn, and use your Action to something else entirely. Multiclassing and/or Magic Initiate are reasonable taxes to accomplish this, in my honest opinion.

Byke

2017-01-24, 04:09 PM

With Quicken Metamagic you can accomplish the same with just a Bonus Action on your turn, and use your Action to something else entirely. Multiclassing and/or Magic Initiate are reasonable taxes to accomplish this, in my honest opinion.

Well something else I didn't expand on since I don't think they can address it in a UA article, but Sorcerers are just better with multi-classing. Whether it 2 levels of Pal or 2-3 levels of Warlock (Undying Light shenanigans) . It just make Sorcerers better overall. Whereas with a Wizard I seldom look at more than 1 level of fighter or cleric and that is just to abuse armor/cantrips. (Yes I agree delaying spell progression hurts, but the front loaded nature of Lock and Pally more than make up for it IMO)

rooneg

2017-01-24, 04:19 PM

I wouldn't say preventing action economy shenanigans are arbitrary. With the right Metamagic options you could accomplish something truly ridiculous with the spells (at least with Find Familiar, I haven't theorycrafted with Absorb Elements much (read: at all), so I can't tell).

Normally, you use your Action to cast a spell, and your familiar could use it's reaction to deliver the spell.

With Quicken Metamagic you can accomplish the same with just a Bonus Action on your turn, and use your Action to something else entirely. Multiclassing and/or Magic Initiate are reasonable taxes to accomplish this, in my honest opinion.

That's a fair argument for Find Familiar, my main objection was Absorb Elements though. I can't imagine a mechanical reason they'd be willing to give the Sorcerer access to Shield but not Absorb Elements. They fill almost precisely the same niche, and if anything Sorcerers are more elemental than Wizards tend to be.

Byke

2017-01-25, 09:23 AM

I wouldn't say preventing action economy shenanigans are arbitrary. With the right Metamagic options you could accomplish something truly ridiculous with the spells (at least with Find Familiar, I haven't theorycrafted with Absorb Elements much (read: at all), so I can't tell).

Normally, you use your Action to cast a spell, and your familiar could use it's reaction to deliver the spell.

With Quicken Metamagic you can accomplish the same with just a Bonus Action on your turn, and use your Action to something else entirely. Multiclassing and/or Magic Initiate are reasonable taxes to accomplish this, in my honest opinion.

Thinking about it further I don't see the pet delivering a quickened spell as it reaction, anymore more broken that a beast master pet using it's reaction to attack when a beast master attacks.

Quicken is made to break action economy, having your familiar deliver a touch spell, has the same impact as quickening a fireball and then a cantirp, also it opens it up to attacks.

If it was such a broken combination many min/max players would be using it also :)

DivisibleByZero

2017-01-25, 09:31 AM

If it was such a broken combination many min/max players would be using it also :)

They absolutely, most certainly, definitely would, except for the fact that it currently requires either a multiclass or a feat to pull off, and not everyone wants to do those (sometimes they aren't even available both being Optional Rules).

Joe the Rat

2017-01-25, 09:35 AM

I have to admit that Absorb Elements seems weird to leave off of the Sorcerer list. The logic behind what makes it on and what gets reserved for Wizards only is utterly arbitrary as far as I can tell.

(rechecks EEPG) ...damn that's arbitrary. I can't think of any metamagics that would impact this (except empowered being added to the rebuttal damage, or subtle, but that just makes you look badass). Switching to origin features... charisma to damage on the follow-up if it's the right element, flying 10 feet (if that doesn't use reaction), or potentially triggering a wild surge.

I'm adding it to the list for my home game.

Byke

2017-01-26, 01:53 PM

I'm adding it to the list for my home game.

Most usually do :) Let's hope some sanity is brought to the new UA or next product release that break the arbitrary spell trend.

I would love to have a Sorcerer that doesn't have to dip with future releases.

Kileonhardt

2017-01-26, 09:08 PM

More than anything, more than new classes or archetypes or a campaign setting book, I want new spells.

I truly do.

Elemental Evil expanded the list a little bit. But some of the spells are outright terrible. Snilloc's Snowball Storm? It's a garbage spell.

By gaining new spells, Dragonic Sorcerers go on to have viable archetypes besides Fire. There's no Lightning damage cantrip that is useful at range, for example (Lightning Lure? You want to pull enemies closer to your d6 HD self?).

I love Cold spells, personally, and have been seeking a viable build, there's basically just Ice Knife and then you wait until Cone of Cold. Where's their Fireball equivalent? Their version of Shatter?

Every time I go to make a sorcerer this is what slows me down or stops me. I would love a bunch of new cantrips and spells with higher damage type variance. Usually I make this slightly more bearable by asking my DM if Fire Bolt can instead be Chromatic Bolt. Makes no sense that an arcane user couldn't channel a different energy type into a bolt.

Some Blood Magic for the Sorcerer could be fun. Let them expand their spell list with some curse and debuff type spells, maybe Inflict Wounds since it would be thematic, and letting them spend Hit Die to power up their spells or to cast rituals without needing components by sacrificing health and Hit Die with Hit Die spent this way refreshing after a long rest.

I've actually got something along these lines written up but have yet to get around to creating the pdf to throw on dmsguild. Might get to that this weekend.

VoxRationis

2017-01-26, 10:26 PM

I envision an arcane sorcerer, some demonic sorcerers (although this is treading on the Tiefling theme a bit), a genie sorcerer, maybe?

We desperately need a fiendish sorcerer ancestry. Tieflings going for fiend warlock all the time makes no sense to me. Any real scion of an infernal legacy should have demonic power without having to beg for it.

Kileonhardt

2017-01-28, 11:31 PM

MrStabby

2017-01-29, 12:00 PM

Now that I think about it I'm hoping that Sorcerer is getting the Ranger treatment and getting a complete overhaul. Now I don't mind Sorcerer as it is currently, but the idea of Wild Magic getting re-tooled (even though it's honestly my favorite one because I love randomness), more meta magic options, an old UA archetype with slight tweaking (Favored Soul or Shadow?), and maybe one brand new archetype would interest me more than Sorcerer's just getting a few new archetypes.

I could go with this.

Metamagic is too powerful, as a result it means that the archetypes cant contain much mechanical power so can't really distinguish the class. Weakening metamagic and beefing up some aspects of the archetypes would be great - if they did this then they could even add some archetype specific spells as well without breaking anything.

Millstone85

2017-01-29, 12:44 PM

We desperately need a fiendish sorcerer ancestry. Tieflings going for fiend warlock all the time makes no sense to me. Any real scion of an infernal legacy should have demonic power without having to beg for it.I would get to this from "Sorcerous Origin: Ancestral Pact". You are descended from a warlock, who may even have slept with their patron, and you are manifesting otherworldly powers. As with Favored Soul, this would actually be several possible subclasses. Tieflings would commonly manisfest powers from the Fiend, and elves manifest powers from the Archfey. If they ever add an elemental patron, the genasi would join the club. If they ever make the daelkyr half-bloods playable again, so would they.

Potato_Priest

2017-01-29, 03:20 PM

Most usually do :) Let's hope some sanity is brought to the new UA or next product release that break the arbitrary spell trend.

I would love to have a Sorcerer that doesn't have to dip with future releases.

They didn't patch up the arbitrary exemptions of the bard spell list, so I wouldn't be too hopeful.

My main complaint on bards is that they don't get Alter Self. Any caster with Disguise self and Polymorph on their spell list ought to get the spell that combines the two.

SharkForce

2017-01-29, 03:48 PM

I could go with this.

Metamagic is too powerful, as a result it means that the archetypes cant contain much mechanical power so can't really distinguish the class. Weakening metamagic and beefing up some aspects of the archetypes would be great - if they did this then they could even add some archetype specific spells as well without breaking anything.
lately I've been thinking something rather different for sorcerers...

I'd get rid of metamagic entirely, put it into a prestige class (because seriously, why the hell does a druid, cleric, wizard, bard, warlock etc need to be a sorcerer to have metamagic? why couldn't they just need a prestige class that studies metamagic?) and then start over on the sorcerer class from scratch and try to make it more interesting now that it doesn't have metamagic taking over the entire class and leaving very little distinctness for the various sorcerer types.

Sception

2017-01-29, 05:31 PM

SharkForce

2017-01-29, 05:46 PM

re: why not metamagic for other classes, I'd imagine mostly because it's the specific mechanic used to convey the sorcer's instinctive manipulation of magic, that they can alter or change its form on the fly, that their spells aren't so rigidly specific in their effects as those of other caster classes. Without metamagic as a sorcerer-specific gimmick, the class as a whole loses its distinguishing feel.

Toning it down to beef up subclasses, perhaps even making some subclass-specific metamagic abilities, that I could get behind. But pulling metamagic out, or making it available to non-sorcerers... at that point you might as well just make the entire class a wizard variant instead.

the problem right now is that metamagic takes over the entire class. if you keep metamagic as a sorcerer thing, then first off you can't give it to anyone else or sorcerers really become obsolete, and secondly you wind up with sorcerers that have really awful spells known and almost nothing in the way of distinguishing class features (unless those class features are half drawback). the "draconic" sorcerer doesn't feel like a dragon. the wild sorcerer has only one ability that makes it feel particularly wild (and the other features are only really wild sorcerer features because they interact with that one feature). the storm sorcerer has almost nothing in the way of actual weather control, and doesn't feel storm-themed particularly. i mean, does a 10 foot reposition make you think of storms?

if you put metamagic into something that exists purely for people to get metamagic, you separate that theme out from any one class and now sorcerers can get something else distinct that *won't* take over the entire class's power budget so the main class can actually have more than one feature and the subclasses can really feel as distinct as they should, while also making it so that nobody else *needs* to be a sorcerer in addition to being another primary spellcaster just so they can have metamagic.

metamagic is a great thing. but it's taken over sorcerer way too much. it needs to go, not because sorcerers shouldn't be able to access metamagic (they should access it just as easily as anyone else), but because as long as sorcerers have metamagic they cannot have anything else. so long as metamagic is a sorcerer ability, sorcerers will never be able to be much different than they are now.

Kileonhardt

2017-01-29, 05:47 PM

Toning it down to beef up subclasses, perhaps even making some subclass-specific metamagic abilities, that I could get behind. But pulling metamagic out, or making it available to non-sorcerers... at that point you might as well just make the entire class a wizard variant instead.

Yeah metamagic definitely needs changes because of Quickened and Twinned. I'd say something along the lines of Warlock invocations would have been perfect for metamagic rather than 2 (Quickened and Twinned nearly all the time) at level 3 and then another at 10 and a fourth you'll likely never get. More varied options with tweaked point costs and some level requirements for picking them up would be great.

Regitnui

2017-01-30, 12:07 AM

Yeah metamagic definitely needs changes because of Quickened and Twinned. I'd say something along the lines of Warlock invocations would have been perfect for metamagic rather than 2 (Quickened and Twinned nearly all the time) at level 3 and then another at 10 and a fourth you'll likely never get. More varied options with tweaked point costs and some level requirements for picking them up would be great.

So tie metamagic into the Sorcery Points feature? 2 points for Energy Substitution and 4 for Subtle or Maximised Spell, as an example. Make them things you can do rather than things you can choose.

Kileonhardt

2017-01-30, 12:30 AM

So tie metamagic into the Sorcery Points feature? 2 points for Energy Substitution and 4 for Subtle or Maximised Spell, as an example. Make them things you can do rather than things you can choose.

This is one of the good examples to how they could fix metamagic. Of course sorcery point pools would need to be adjusted as well but that's also fine.

There's quite a lot they could do to sorcerer to give it more identity by changing metamagic, but more than likely it's a dream that will never come to pass.

Byke

2017-01-31, 11:18 AM

So tie metamagic into the Sorcery Points feature? 2 points for Energy Substitution and 4 for Subtle or Maximised Spell, as an example. Make them things you can do rather than things you can choose.

This would be the best options, open up all of the metamagics, but restrict them via SP costs/spell level.

As for energy substitution is should be a base class feature of sorcerer.

Byke

2017-01-31, 11:21 AM

They didn't patch up the arbitrary exemptions of the bard spell list, so I wouldn't be too hopeful.

My main complaint on bards is that they don't get Alter Self. Any caster with Disguise self and Polymorph on their spell list ought to get the spell that combines the two.

Some really simply fixes:

Make Firebolt act EXACTLY like Eldritch blast....2 bolts@5th, 3 bolts@11th ect..
Energy Substitution as a free metamagic for Sorcerer base
Reverse JC asinine ruling on Scorching Ray

TentacleSurpris

2017-01-31, 11:57 AM

Calling it now:

bacon cheddar cheese-head class in UA next week.

JumboWheat01

2017-01-31, 11:59 AM

Calling it now:

bacon cheddar cheese-head class in UA next week.

Sound's like a dragon's favorite class.

jaappleton

2017-01-31, 12:01 PM

Calling it now:

bacon cheddar cheese-head class in UA next week.

Mearls has done UA based on whatever he's doing at the moment.

He was really big into Destiny when he made the Light, Dark, Underdark! UA Article. Compare Sunsinger Warlocks in Destiny to the Undying Light Warlock.

EDIT: So, I mean... If he's really into McDonald's right now, expect a Mac Sauce related Sorcerous Origin. Oozemaster for 5e confirmed! :smallbiggrin:

MrStabby

2017-01-31, 01:54 PM

Mearls has done UA based on whatever he's doing at the moment.

Well I hope he wiped after he finished off the Artificer UA.

jaappleton

2017-01-31, 02:06 PM

Well I hope he wiped after he finished off the Artificer UA.

Whoa. Ouch!

Out of curiosity, what didn't you like? I thought it was pretty good.

DivisibleByZero

2017-01-31, 02:14 PM

Whoa. Ouch!

Out of curiosity, what didn't you like? I thought it was pretty good.

Yeah. I have a couple of problems with it, but all in all I thought it was pretty good.
Like, I thought it should have UMD a'la Thief ingrained. I thought that the Mechanical Servant should scale at least a little. I thought it either needs (a) to be at least an half caster, or (b) it should have both Alchemist and Gunsmith abilities, because without one of those two (a or b) it falls behind other classes.

toapat

2017-01-31, 02:37 PM

Yeah. I have a couple of problems with it, but all in all I thought it was pretty good.
Like, I thought it should have UMD a'la Thief ingrained. I thought that the Mechanical Servant should scale at least a little. I thought it either needs (a) to be at least an half caster, or (b) it should have both Alchemist and Gunsmith abilities, because without one of those two (a or b) it falls behind other classes.

as far as casting, the Artificer is balanced against the Martial classes, not the fullcasters, which is why their subclasses both get Sneak-attack equivalents.

im not a great fan of the way they continue to balance gish classes, but thats because they could do much better by rebalancing it to where each class's abilities and spellcasting matter independantly.

not having UMD does seem fairly odd, as well as not having a more robust creation system. And the balance of the created items doesnt exist at all, with Broom of Flight coming before the wings

DivisibleByZero

2017-01-31, 02:50 PM

as far as casting, the Artificer is balanced against the Martial classes, not the fullcasters, which is why their subclasses both get Sneak-attack equivalents.

But Alchemy is not a sneak attack equivalent. It equates to sneak attack without any weapon, which is approximately 2d6 or 3d6, or even possibly 4d6 lost, depending on level and weapon.
Gunsmith is similar, yes. But Rogue has a ton of class and subclass features which make it more of a martial. Gunsmith has none of that. Instead he has casting. And he casts just like an Arcane Trickster does. But that AT has the Rogue chassis to build on. Artys' chassis is bare bones in comparison.
And Paladins & Rangers are Martials, but they're half casters. When casting is built into the class, half casting should be minimum.
Artificers' casting is lacking, and should be an half caster, not a third. It's a design flaw. It makes Artys fall behind everyone else.
That's not something I say lightly. Anyone who knows me knows that I err on the side of caution when it comes to balance. But Artificer, while good in a general sense, falls behind the curve.

Kileonhardt

2017-01-31, 03:36 PM

Some really simply fixes:

Make Firebolt act EXACTLY like Eldritch blast....2 bolts@5th, 3 bolts@11th ect..
Energy Substitution as a free metamagic for Sorcerer base
Reverse JC asinine ruling on Scorching Ray

Making Fire Bolt exactly like Eldritch Blast would take away from Eldritch Blast being what it is. As for the Scorching Ray ruling, it is in no way asinine. Compared to Agonizing Blast reading as extra damage on Eldritch Blast hit everything else reads as extra damage on spell cast, so it makes sense to only add to one of the hits.

Byke

2017-01-31, 03:44 PM

Making Fire Bolt exactly like Eldritch Blast would take away from Eldritch Blast being what it is. As for the Scorching Ray ruling, it is in no way asinine. Compared to Agonizing Blast reading as extra damage on Eldritch Blast hit everything else reads as extra damage on spell cast, so it makes sense to only add to one of the hits.

Opinions will differ....the context of the text was to stop Sorc from, multi-classing into Lock...

Adjust Firebolt would be the simplest way and takes nothing away from Warlock. It like saying that Barbarian, lock or Paladin getting a second attack takes away from fighter.

Scorching Ruling is dumb/arbitrary/ridiculous use whatever descriptor you want, if an Evoker can apply int to MM and a Lcok can apply Char to EB....then the ruling on SR is STUPID. SR acts EXACTLY like EB, if you are going to use RAW then Fire damage should be added to each bolt. JC is wrong on this one...That is my opinion, we will agree to disagree.

Kileonhardt

2017-01-31, 06:18 PM

Adjust Firebolt would be the simplest way and takes nothing away from Warlock. It like saying that Barbarian, lock or Paladin getting a second attack takes away from fighter.

It detracts from the one thing Warlocks have that separates their cantrips from other casters.

Scorching Ruling is dumb/arbitrary/ridiculous use whatever descriptor you want, if an Evoker can apply int to MM and a Lcok can apply Char to EB....then the ruling on SR is STUPID. SR acts EXACTLY like EB, if you are going to use RAW then Fire damage should be added to each bolt. JC is wrong on this one...That is my opinion, we will agree to disagree.

I understand where you're coming from on this, but agonizing blast says to add the damage to every hit, elemental affinity adds damage to the spell when cast rather than to damage rolls, and empowered evocation specifically reads to damage rolls.

He's not wrong on his ruling because they each have very specific wording in how they work. Do I happen to agree with elemental affinity working the way it does? No, but that's literally how it's supposed to work so saying that he's the one that's wrong is what is ridiculous.

Zalabim

2017-02-01, 03:24 AM

Byke

2017-02-01, 02:38 PM

It detracts from the one thing Warlocks have that separates their cantrips from other casters.

I understand where you're coming from on this, but agonizing blast says to add the damage to every hit, elemental affinity adds damage to the spell when cast rather than to damage rolls, and empowered evocation specifically reads to damage rolls.

He's not wrong on his ruling because they each have very specific wording in how they work. Do I happen to agree with elemental affinity working the way it does? No, but that's literally how it's supposed to work so saying that he's the one that's wrong is what is ridiculous.

PHB
EMPOWERED EVOCATION
Beginning at 10th level, you can add your Intelligence
modifier to the damage roll of any wizard evocation
spell you cast.

Do dam apply int...MM + int to each missile

PHB
ELEMENTAL AFFINITY
Starting at 6th level, when you cast a spell that deals
damage of the type associated with your draconic
ancestry, add your Charisma modifier to that damage.
At the same time, you can spend 1 sorcery point to gain
resistance to that damage type for 1 hour.

pretty clear every time you do dam "type" you add char.

Errata

Elemental Affinity
Starting at 6th level, when you Cast a Spell that deals damage of the type associated with your draconic ancestry, you can add your Charisma modifier to one damage roll of that spell. At the same time, you can spend 1 sorcery point to gain Resistance to that damage type for 1 hour.

apply dam only once...

so yes ridiculous...but once again we will agree to disagree.

At the end of the day Wizards has been clear D&D is about the unscripted narrative and not the rules per say. People will have different way of interpreting the rules.

Byke

2017-02-01, 02:45 PM

That's all pointless bitching anyway because sorcerer does not mean "pyromancer." It doesn't even mean "elementalist." You can't fix sorcerers by giving one type of one subclass of sorcerer a single high-damage single target spell. Especially not a fire damage spell. At least you can use magic missile on an iconic red dragon.

What you call bitching I call discussion.

Actually Dragon Sorcerers are "elementalist." Elemental Affinity make that abundantly clear.

They just implemented it poorly (not enough spells to support the various elements). Giving Sorcerer Elemental Substitution (base), would go along way to fix this.

As for firebolt acting like EB...please fell free to make a better suggestion instead of sarcastic MM comments.

Deleted

2017-02-01, 02:52 PM

Well I hope he wiped after he finished off the Artificer UA.

They need new blood into D&D, I wouldn't be sad to see Mearles and JC go.

SharkForce

2017-02-01, 04:03 PM

They need new blood into D&D, I wouldn't be sad to see Mearles and JC go.

mostly the problem isn't that mearles and crawford are horrible. it's that they're the only people on the team any more. the core books were written by a much larger team that included mearles and crawford as the people making decisions, and they came out pretty well i think. then WotC let go of most of the design team. i don't think the problem is that mearles and crawford are still employed by WotC, i think the problem is that the rest of their team is gone.

Deleted

2017-02-01, 06:16 PM

mostly the problem isn't that mearles and crawford are horrible. it's that they're the only people on the team any more. the core books were written by a much larger team that included mearles and crawford as the people making decisions, and they came out pretty well i think. then WotC let go of most of the design team. i don't think the problem is that mearles and crawford are still employed by WotC, i think the problem is that the rest of their team is gone.

I'm not saying they can't do decent work, but they haven't done anything stellar and this is isn't their first rodeo. As much as I love 4e and 5e D&D... I expected a bit more complete system. A lot of 5e seems halfway completed.

My biggest gripe comes from the fact they took what people hated about essentials and 4e (beastmaster ranger had the same "robot pet" problem and I'm still not sure if anyone ever liked the essentials fighter over the 4e fighter but I may be wrong on that last part) instead of what people loved (martials that grow).

I would like to see what others can do with the system. This doesn't come from a personal hate of them or anything, I don't know them, but I'm not going to spend anymore money on the stuff these guys create because since the PHB, I haven't seen anything worth buying. I still regret buying the DMG and monster manual, but I just had to order the set...

jaappleton

2017-02-02, 10:31 AM

I highly doubt there's going to be a total class rework of the Sorcerer as there was for the Ranger.

Mikey P

2017-02-02, 02:56 PM

I hope there is something new and fun for the Sorcerer.

I'm just afraid we're going to just get "Nerf: Favored Soul and Shadow Sorcerer"

I can see the bonus spells being over the top, but something fresh to go with the damage control would be nice.

Deleted

2017-02-02, 03:02 PM

I highly doubt there's going to be a total class rework of the Sorcerer as there was for the Ranger.

I can guarantee that at somepoint in 5e's life there will be.

It may be called something else, but it will essentially be a revised Sorcerer base class.

That's the WotC's business model, and it makes money.

At some point we will get essentially a 5.5, we are actually due to for one next year I think. Though with their new business branding the PHB 2 will probably be this "half edition".

jaappleton

2017-02-02, 03:19 PM

I can guarantee that at somepoint in 5e's life there will be.

It may be called something else, but it will essentially be a revised Sorcerer base class.

That's the WotC's business model, and it makes money.

At some point we will get essentially a 5.5, we are actually due to for one next year I think. Though with their new business branding the PHB 2 will probably be this "half edition".

Deleted,

Reading your posts in this topic, you seem... I want to make sure I phrase this correctly. I don't mean for this to come off as any sort of an attack, but I can't help but make the observation.

It seems like you feel slighted over something WOTC has done. Whether it's a "I've been down this road before" mentality, or you didn't like the direction something went in, I don't know. Maybe it's that you're a bit more jaded than myself, I've only been into the hobby for a few years, I know lots of people have been into it for decades.

But there seems to be this bias. And it may be completely justified. If it is the "I've been down this road before" thing, I've only heard people gloss over the 3.0 to 3.5 thing before (If that's it), and I'd like to know more.

Would you be kind enough to clarify for me?

Deleted

2017-02-02, 03:25 PM

Deleted,

Reading your posts in this topic, you seem... I want to make sure I phrase this correctly. I don't mean for this to come off as any sort of an attack, but I can't help but make the observation.

It seems like you feel slighted over something WOTC has done. Whether it's a "I've been down this road before" mentality, or you didn't like the direction something went in, I don't know. Maybe it's that you're a bit more jaded than myself, I've only been into the hobby for a few years, I know lots of people have been into it for decades.

But there seems to be this bias. And it may be completely justified. If it is the "I've been down this road before" thing, I've only heard people gloss over the 3.0 to 3.5 thing before (If that's it), and I'd like to know more.

Would you be kind enough to clarify for me?

What? No, I love this model. This means we get more classes.

But it is a fact that WotC has done this (twice with 3e, but that was because 4e was coming along, and once with 4e).

This isn't a negative thing in the slightest. This is great news as we will be getting a better (hopefully) sorcerer.

I do feel slighted out of the money I spent on the Monster Manual and DMG, those are absolutely worthless, but getting a PHB 2 would be fantastic as they can fix the many issues that appear in the PHB (rules clarifications, class issues, etc...).

I mean, they won't fix everything, but they can't screw up any worse than Essentials screwed up certain classes (I think).

SharkForce

2017-02-02, 03:26 PM

jaappleton

2017-02-02, 03:30 PM

Gotcha. Sorry for misinterpreting!

I do agree that 4E's design, especially with Essentials, became... Well, sloppy is a good word. I came into the hobby about 2 years prior to any NEXT playtest material, so it was close to the end of 4E's life cycle when I started. And it was... It took me awhile to make sense of things. How X interacted with Y and why some things were strictly superiors to others. I had to read up on the history of 4E to figure things out a bit. Changes from lead designers, etc.

That's why I'm actually pretty against Mearls and Crawford being moved away from 5E; I think people should be brought in alongside them. When Mearls designed Essentials, it got very messy, in my opinion. He came in with a very different mindset than what the original intent was. Get Chris Sims back, bring back Greg Bilsand, etc. Sometimes less is more, sometimes more is, in fact, better.

jaappleton

2017-02-02, 03:31 PM

Deleted

2017-02-02, 03:38 PM

with the much slower production schedule, i wouldn't expect them to start on 5.5th edition yet. i mean, a new edition will certainly come at some point. it's pretty much inevitable. but they haven't remotely come close to milking this edition dry yet. the core books sell a lot more copies, yes, but they also take a lot more investment to produce. they're going to want to get value out of their investment before starting up a new edition i would think... if they were planning on a new edition this soon, they should have been publishing a lot more stuff in the current one.

5.5 wouldn't be a new edition.

I think they won't call it a 5.5 or Essentials or anything like that. They will call it "PHB 2" and go with it from there softly.

You will see the rules clarifications and fixes in it, much like how 3e => 3.5 changed some things (Lich Druids yay!).

But you will also see new classes that are upgrades in some way.

New classes would draw parallels to old ones. Having a Witch, Oracle, Gladiator, and Bandit in the party would be the core 4.

So they may not call it 5.5, but eventually it will happen. The core rules for 5e are quite good, they just kinda dropped the ball on some classes and made things very sparse.

Really, with the current ruleset they could put out a new "edition" of 5e every few years and have it fall under the D&D 5e: PHB 1, PHB 2, PHB 3, PHB 4... Each could focus on different things, still work with each other, and each sell rather well. They are pulling an Eric Cartman's Funland on us right now. They are saying "no, you can't have more official classes and options" so that we get to the point we will buy that next PHB if it comes out. In droves.

Eventually they would need to make a new edition of D&D but they can wear out their old model quite well within a single edition.

edit====

The sales for 5E are over and above anything 4E approached at its height.

Even taking the "Well 4E was nothing like any other edition" argument into account, the fact that its making them money hand over fist is proof they are in no rush to begin approaching 5.5 or 6E yet.

People say this and other things but I highly doubt it. 4e sold a lot, like it or not, it was beating Pathfinder like a rented mule until Essentials came out. There was also more to buy from 4e than there is from 5e...

What little information we have to go from, since WotC doesn't release such info (well Hasbro I guess), it seems very improbable that 5e has done that yet. Hell, 5e will do better than 4e just for the fact that WotC has a decent PR team (or had... did they get fired too?) with them.

MrStabby

2017-02-02, 03:38 PM

Deleted

2017-02-02, 03:44 PM

I think that the rogue, the monk and the sorcerer would benefit from a rework if there is a major re-release. Not that any of these classes are under or overpowered but they are a little restrictive.

In each case so much of the class' total power is in the base class and so little in the archetype that it becomes hard to differentiate between characters of different archetypes.

The Rogue only needs levels 12-20 fixed in order to be a perfectly designed class. Oh, and change expertise to advantage... But... Yeah...

The Monk only needs about the same levels fixed and a few tweaks (people have a ton of 4 Element monks that are a lot more fun to play than the PHB one).

Sorcerer... I have no clue why they can't do this right haha. I love me some sorcerer but so many small things just add up.

===

PHB 2 could be hybrid classes now that I think about it... A entire book dedicated to "Dual Class" characters would be awesome.

In 4e they didn't seem to have it all thought out at first cause it was hit or miss... But my god, a Sorcerer/Warlord hybrid (Red Mage) was fun!

Kileonhardt

2017-02-02, 05:42 PM

The Rogue only needs levels 12-20 fixed in order to be a perfectly designed class. Oh, and change expertise to advantage... But... Yeah...

The Monk only needs about the same levels fixed and a few tweaks (people have a ton of 4 Element monks that are a lot more fun to play than the PHB one).

Sorcerer... I have no clue why they can't do this right haha. I love me some sorcerer but so many small things just add up.

===

PHB 2 could be hybrid classes now that I think about it... A entire book dedicated to "Dual Class" characters would be awesome.

In 4e they didn't seem to have it all thought out at first cause it was hit or miss... But my god, a Sorcerer/Warlord hybrid (Red Mage) was fun!

I agree with Rogue and Monk statements. Everyone knows 4EM are a mess but that's one archetype that they will easily fix so yeah they're not in too bad a place.

If they don't rework Sorcerer like they did Ranger in UA in the upcoming weeks (honestly as much as I want it after bringing it up I really doubt they will), I'll probably spend my free time on a full class rework I'll throw on dmsguild for free. Meaning I'll be heading over to the homebrew forum to collaborate on mostly metamagic fixing suggestions soon :smalltongue:

Deleted

2017-02-02, 05:56 PM

I agree with Rogue and Monk statements. Everyone knows 4EM are a mess but that's one archetype that they will easily fix so yeah they're not in too bad a place.

If they don't rework Sorcerer like they did Ranger in UA in the upcoming weeks (honestly as much as I want it after bringing it up I really doubt they will), I'll probably spend my free time on a full class rework I'll throw on dmsguild for free. Meaning I'll be heading over to the homebrew forum to collaborate on mostly metamagic fixing suggestions soon :smalltongue:

I'm, eventually, going to make a Magic-User base class that lets you build your own magic user.

One thing I was thinking of is making Metamagic into spells like Smite Spells... Bonus action and they take effect the next time you cast a spell. Sorcerers wouldn't be metamagic specialist, they would get get their own specific features (blood sorcerers are totally getting that teleportation ability from 3e that lets you burst out of people's chests...).

I want Sorcerers to be fricken weird and have abilities that other Magic-Users can't even begin to replicate. These abilities should stay within the rules of the game BUT break the rules of magic to some degree. Like using teleportation to go into a creature. Or when a Sorcerer uses enchantments, fey don't have bonuses to resist and undead aren't automatically immune but perhaps Dragons are immune to their enchantments and Demons (but not devils) gain advantage on the saving throw.

Regitnui

2017-02-03, 02:12 AM

No offence intended to anyone, but a major rework of the entire rules system is a horrible idea. Elaboration under the quote:

with the much slower production schedule, i wouldn't expect them to start on 5.5th edition yet. i mean, a new edition will certainly come at some point. it's pretty much inevitable. but they haven't remotely come close to milking this edition dry yet. the core books sell a lot more copies, yes, but they also take a lot more investment to produce. they're going to want to get value out of their investment before starting up a new edition i would think... if they were planning on a new edition this soon, they should have been publishing a lot more stuff in the current one.

Right now, we've had precisely one setting. One. Forgotten Realms. There are fourteen others mentioned on D&D's TvTropes page (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/TabletopGame/DungeonsAndDragons). That doesn't include third party settings, but does include other parts of the Forgotten Realms' planet. Each of those unused settings is an absolute gold mine for new subclasses, races, and monsters. Even new mechanics, as the mystic brings psionics to the table and the artificer magic item crafting. Fifth edition hasn't even learned to walk yet by the standards of previous editions.

I have no doubt a new version of D&D will come. That'll likely be at least another decade from now, unless they decide to leave the vast majority of good, solid material from previous editions unadapted. Heck, they could even reboot a setting like Ghostwalk with an incarnum mechanic after the other big name settings are all out and extend another three years.

Deleted

2017-02-03, 06:55 PM

No offence intended to anyone, but a major rework of the entire rules system is a horrible idea. Elaboration under the quote:

Right now, we've had precisely one setting. One. Forgotten Realms. There are fourteen others mentioned on D&D's TvTropes page (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/TabletopGame/DungeonsAndDragons). That doesn't include third party settings, but does include other parts of the Forgotten Realms' planet. Each of those unused settings is an absolute gold mine for new subclasses, races, and monsters. Even new mechanics, as the mystic brings psionics to the table and the artificer magic item crafting. Fifth edition hasn't even learned to walk yet by the standards of previous editions.

I have no doubt a new version of D&D will come. That'll likely be at least another decade from now, unless they decide to leave the vast majority of good, solid material from previous editions unadapted. Heck, they could even reboot a setting like Ghostwalk with an incarnum mechanic after the other big name settings are all out and extend another three years.

It doesn't have to be an overhaul of the rules. It isn't All or nothing.

Consolidation and expansion of the rules and classes would be a soft "5.5" without needing to call it that.

PHB 2 will probably be their "5.5".

Outliar

2017-02-03, 10:27 PM

I want Sorcerers to be fricken weird and have abilities that other Magic-Users can't even begin to replicate. These abilities should stay within the rules of the game BUT break the rules of magic to some degree.

That is literally what metamagic is. I think what you want is some more metamagic options, maybe with prerequisites. Here's one I just made up now:

Bloodwalk (prerequisite: level 15 sorcerer or higher)
When you cast a spell that teleports you (such as dimension door or teleport) you may spend 5 sorcery points and choose to teleport into a creature that you can see within range. The creature makes a Constitution saving throw, taking 10d6 necrotic damage on a failed save or half as much on a successful one. If it is killed by this damage it explodes in a grisly shower of blood and gore and you appear in a space of your choice that it was occupying. If it survives the damage you die instantly and your body dissapears.

Foxhound438

2017-02-03, 10:53 PM

Meaning I'll be heading over to the homebrew forum to collaborate on mostly metamagic fixing suggestions soon :smalltongue:

let me give you a head start: more things to do. One thing I've considered is having the ability to move a spell with a set or repeating area effect, like wall of fire or daylight.

Kileonhardt

2017-02-03, 11:00 PM

let me give you a head start: more things to do. One thing I've considered is having the ability to move a spell with a set or repeating area effect, like wall of fire or daylight.

Yeah I'd already planned on a metamagic for 3 points allowing you to re-position one of your concentration based aoes as a bonus action.

Edit: On second thought after mentioning it the point cost definitely would need to be reworked. Probably more along the lines of Twinned going point cost = spell level. The second I posted it I went "You know what, I would really need to discourage dipping for movable Wall of Force."

MBControl

2017-02-04, 10:47 AM

jaappleton

2017-02-04, 11:01 AM

Does anybody think they might ever create a mod or supplement focused on high level play?

I know that it's "bad business" because it wouldn't sell to the new players, which limits it's market, but I think a lot of current players are hungry for more advanced monsters, class traits or prestige classes.

Thoughts?

I think it'll come eventually. A survey revealed that most campaigns end before level 13 or so. Considering that, I think the demand for it is relatively small. But the demand is there, and I think it'll only grow as time goes on.

So, eventually. But not for quite awhile.

Deleted

2017-02-04, 11:56 AM

That is literally what metamagic is. I think what you want is some more metamagic options, maybe with prerequisites. Here's one I just made up now:

Bloodwalk (prerequisite: level 15 sorcerer or higher)
When you cast a spell that teleports you (such as dimension door or teleport) you may spend 5 sorcery points and choose to teleport into a creature that you can see within range. The creature makes a Constitution saving throw, taking 10d6 necrotic damage on a failed save or half as much on a successful one. If it is killed by this damage it explodes in a grisly shower of blood and gore and you appear in a space of your choice that it was occupying. If it survives the damage you die instantly and your body dissapears.

Metamagics are very limited and you don't get enough of them.

What I mean is something like my simple chaos sorcerer

Sorcerous Origin: Chaos Magic

Level 1

Weird Chaos: Starting at first level your magic is chaotic and just plain weird. Whenever you cast a spell, including cantrip, that requires a saving throw, roll a d6 and consult the list below. The spell now requires a different save based on your roll.

1: Str
2: Dex
3: Con
4: Int
5: Wis
6: Cha

The player and DM are encouraged to fluff the spell in a different way based on the saving throw. If burning hands requires an Int save then perhaps it is an illusion spell. If burning hands is a Cha save, perhaps it is an enchantment spell where the sorcerer "burned" the target so bad with insults that the target really felt the flames.

Where the rules of magic are completely different. With metamagic, for the most part, you are still playing by the overarching rules of magic.

Subtle Spell gets the closest, but even that is somewhat bland.

Sorcerers need to be distinct to show that no spell is normal when cast through the sorcerer because they don't learn spells... They kinda just figure them out.

Regitnui

2017-02-04, 12:41 PM

So, deleted, you're advocating a completely different magic system for only sorcerers on the basis of a fluff issue?

Deleted

2017-02-04, 01:06 PM

So, deleted, you're advocating a completely different magic system for only sorcerers on the basis of a fluff issue?

Yes. 5e casters are very bland. I'm currently working on my Magic-User so here is some sneak peaks :P

But it's not just Sorcerers, I believe the same thing about Bard and Warlock too. I can understand all divine casters using the same system as Clerics, Druids, and Paladins do use the same system (more or less) to obtain and cast spells (paladins no longer need a deity so but replace deity with ideal). But arcane casters don't gain their spells the same way and so their spells should be quite different.

Bard should get songs to manipulate reality, depending on if the the bard sings or plays an instrument the song's effects changes.

Sorcerers are just weird. They don't make sense, how can someone who never trained , practiced, or sold their soul get the same powers as the ones that did? It's a lot more fun if they are weird.

Warlocks shouldn't even be a spell caster, they should have invocations that the more they give up, the more they gain from an invocation. Maybe an invocation gives me access to a spell, but spell casting shouldn't be guaranteed... Forcing all deals to end with spells makes all deals way too similar. Warlock with patron X and warlock with patron Y should be different. The idea that the Great Old One and the Infernal patron give the Warlock the same base spells (more so, that the Infernal patron gives access to Arms of Hadar as a spell...) is bad.

Reach of the Far Realm
You bargain with an Old One, an entity from the far realm. You will do the Old One's work on the material plane and in return the Old One gives you the power to cast the spell Command at-will. However if you are successful against a target, that target gains advantage on any saving throw against the Command spell until the end of your next short or long rest. From time to time the Old One will give instructions on how it would like events to play out.

Body: Starting at level X you may bargain for a bit more power, but you must give up your body to the Old One. Choose a hand, it and the arm attached has octopus suction cups on it.
Mind: Starting at level Y you may agree to more terms and conditions, however your mind is now permanently linked with the Great Old One.
Soul: Starting at level Z you may agree that when you die, your soul belongs to the Old One with which you made a pact with. Your power becomes its power and your existence is erased.

Have it where each patron has multiple Invocations that give different abilities. However you have to give up different things to gain said abilities beyond the initial invocation. You can't take another patron's invocations until you bargain for more power from your initial patron...

Sorcerers have always been Wizards little brother and it is still that way in 5e. Hell, the Evoker gains a better careful spell than the Sorcerer!

The Bard is essentially a Blade Tradition Wizard.

The Warlock is about selling your soul but the class doesn't really show it. Even through the fluff, you get some cool fluff at first and then the class becomes a bunch of bland.

===

Final Note: If you are going to have different fluff, you better have different and interesting mechanics for said fluff... Or else what's the point of having the fluff? The only class that really should be bland is the Wizard, as they are essentially a generic "build a magic user" type class.

Regitnui

2017-02-04, 01:55 PM

Yes. 5e casters are very bland. I'm currently working on my Magic-User so here is some sneak peeks :P

Here's the thing, though. Except for the cleric, druid, paladin and ranger, all of those classes tap into Arcane Magic. It's not like there's a "Wizard Magic" and a "Warlock Magic". Even fiends and aberrations themselves cast the same spells mortals do. Is it so farfetched that an archfiend, an ancient wyrm, and an archmage all cast spells that are similar enough in effect that the mechanics make no difference? If a creature from the Far Realm that is a thousand eyes embedded in bums set in a polyhedron can produce a wave of intense heat, why bend the rules backwards and forwards when the effect is identical to the burning hands spell the Eldritch Knight casts after eating too much curry the night before?

It makes perfect sense if you look at how arcane magic actually works; in the Forgotten Realms, magic is predicated on the Weave maintained by Mystara and her pet wizard Elminster. The Weave produces certain effects when manipulated in a certain way, mediated by Mystara. Eberron has Arcane Magic being the raw power of the Dragon Above.

Whatever the method of interaction, the effects are the same. If a sorcerer and a warlock both produce a fireball, what does it matter on the mechanical level that one did so by coughing up burning phglem and the other by tearing a piece of magic off an archfiend? 5e's stated design goal is simplicity. Yet whenever someone dislikes the mechanics of a (non-UA) class, why is their first thought is to add complexity?

Deleted, I like your passion and I can see where you're coming from. But you're missing the essential point that fluff is fluff. How do you want your sorcerer to produce a fireball? By waving their fingers covered in guano? By swallowing a jalapeño and mooning the target? By tapping their fingers against each other and spinning three times widdershins? Great, go ahead. The importance from the DM's perspective is that the result is a 20-foot-wide explosion that forces a Dexterity save and does 8d6 to unlucky foes.

There are systems that have the sort of spellcasting you're looking for. Importantly, I've never seen a system that dramatically changes its magic system between classes. It's way too much bookkeeping for me, as a DM, if my warlock, arcane trickster,.and eldritch knight use GURPS, 5e, and FATAL respectively to cast spells just to create identical mechanical effects.

I fear that you might be asking why the horse doesn't push the cart instead of pulling it. Then rebuilding the cart and wondering why the horse keeps crashing into your behind.

Deleted

2017-02-04, 02:02 PM

Here's the thing, though. *snip*

Here's the thing though.

They all have fluff that tries to make them different but by having them all tap into the same force in the exact same way... It makes them bland.

Which is exactly my point.

Having a sorcerer cast from the same list as the wizard (well, same but missing a few spells) doesn't do their fluff justice. Having Bards cast arcane magic the way wizards do, doesn't do their fluff justice.

We can sit here and look at two red apples and call one an orange and the other an apple... But if they taste the same, then they are both apples. There is no reason to fluff one as an orange.

If you give a class fluff, make mechanics to back up that fluff. So far a bard is just a wizard who has a side job as an entertainer.

Regitnui

2017-02-04, 02:10 PM

Here's the thing though.

They all have fluff that tries to make them different but by having them all tap into the same force in the exact same way... It makes them bland.

Which is exactly my point.

Having a sorcerer cast from the same list as the wizard (well, same but missing a few spells) doesn't do their fluff justice. Having Bards cast arcane magic the way wizards do, doesn't do their fluff justice.

We can sit here and look at two red apples and call one an orange and the other an apple... But if they taste the same, then they are both apples. There is no reason to fluff one as an orange.

If you give a class fluff, make mechanics to back up that fluff. So far a bard is just a wizard who has a side job as an entertainer.

What about the rest of the class features? The sorcerer is underserved in these, I'll freely admit, but spellcasting isn't the entirety of any of the classes. Don't look at the spellcasting being the same and claim the classes are identical because they all use the same system. Clerics and druids use the same system, yet you are fine with them.

Perhaps the solution, instead of gutting the magic system, is simply one that will solve naturally as the classes gain access to more spells and different lists. We are, remember, in the earliest days of 5e. Only one setting and less than ten spells out of core?

Potato_Priest

2017-02-04, 02:14 PM

Here's the thing though.
If you give a class fluff, make mechanics to back up that fluff. So far a bard is just a wizard who has a side job as an entertainer.

Admittedly, many bards play this way.

However, it is also possible to flavor the bard's spellcasting in a much more bardly way. It's the difference between the wizard bard saying
"I cast thunderwave at that guy"
and the bardly bard saying
"I point my Drum in the direction of the enemy, and beat it loudly, creating an explosion of noise. The enemies are engulfed in a thunderwave."

or, for a lore bard who picked up spirit guardians
"I play my fiddle, calling upon spirits of the dead to dance around me."

You don't need new mechanics to reflavor the bard, but the sorcerer does need more work.

RedMage125

2017-02-04, 02:15 PM

In 4e they didn't seem to have it all thought out at first cause it was hit or miss... But my god, a Sorcerer/Warlord hybrid (Red Mage) was fun!

I came up with that same build years ago! :smallbiggrin:

Dragonborn, Warlord|Sorcerer hybrid, Balance STR/CHA at 16 before stat boosts, take Hybrid Talent (Warlord Armor Proficiency), and at level 2 take Arcane Implement Proficiency (Heavy Blade), and BOOM, classic Final Fantasy Red Mage. All you have to do is re-flavor Inspiring Word as actual healing magic.

Regitnui

2017-02-04, 02:18 PM

Deleted

2017-02-04, 02:39 PM

Admittedly, many bards play this way.

However, it is also possible to flavor the bard's spellcasting in a much more bardly way. It's the difference between the wizard bard saying
"I cast thunderwave at that guy"
and the bardly bard saying
"I point my Drum in the direction of the enemy, and beat it loudly, creating an explosion of noise. The enemies are engulfed in a thunderwave."

or, for a lore bard who picked up spirit guardians
"I play my fiddle, calling upon spirits of the dead to dance around me."

You don't need new mechanics to reflavor the bard, but the sorcerer does need more work.

The bard is all about making magic out of music, as it is now they can't do that. That is fluff that brings players into the class but only to let them down when they figure out they are not different from a wizard.

I could fluff my wizard as a performer just as easy. The only time a character is any different from another is through mechanics... Hell, I could fluff the fighter (battle master) as a bard who plays the tamberine.

There is no point to fluff without mechanics to back it up. It's like getting a hallow kinder egg with no toy.

I came up with that same build years ago! :smallbiggrin:

Dragonborn, Warlord|Sorcerer hybrid, Balance STR/CHA at 16 before stat boosts, take Hybrid Talent (Warlord Armor Proficiency), and at level 2 take Arcane Implement Proficiency (Heavy Blade), and BOOM, classic Final Fantasy Red Mage. All you have to do is re-flavor Inspiring Word as actual healing magic.

Yup!

I always played mine as Red Mage from 8-Bit Theater... With a preference for Ice Magic and a Sword.

The healing word was fluffed to be Red Mage explaining to a character that they weren't really hurt and it was just numbers on a page!

Potato_Priest

2017-02-04, 09:28 PM

The bard is all about making magic out of music, as it is now they can't do that. That is fluff that brings players into the class but only to let them down when they figure out they are not different from a wizard.

They can create magic through music though. Just because creating magic through music isn't functionally different enough from creating magic by waving a stick around and saying silly words to warrant a separate mechanic doesn't mean that it's not a thing that you can do. A Longsword is not a Battleaxe, even though they are exactly the same mechanically.

Regitnui

2017-02-05, 02:06 AM

They can create magic through music though. Just because creating magic through music isn't functionally different enough from creating magic by waving a stick around and saying silly words to warrant a separate mechanic doesn't mean that it's not a thing that you can do. A Longsword is not a Battleaxe, even though they are exactly the same mechanically.

Mine point, though I'm more verbose about it.

Potato_Priest

2017-02-05, 02:17 AM

Mine point, though I'm more verbose about it.

Indeed. I found yourne points to be quite good on the whole. Helps that they're the same as mine. :smallsmile:

Edit: Your response to me changed my mind about the sorcerer thing. I was starting to be swayed, since It is much harder for me to imagine someone who is a sorcerer actually flavoring up their magic in a different way than the wizard , than it is for me to imagine a bard flavoring their music differently.

Zalabim

2017-02-05, 04:01 AM

So, deleted, you're advocating a completely different magic system for only sorcerers on the basis of a fluff issue?

It doesn't have to be a whole magic system, but it is imperative that different classes have different mechanics to differentiate and distinguish them. Sorcerers rate very poorly on that metric.

Deleted

2017-02-05, 01:57 PM

It doesn't have to be a whole magic system, but it is imperative that different classes have different mechanics to differentiate and distinguish them. Sorcerers rate very poorly on that metric.

My generic magic-user will do just this.

The Bard (Muscian) subclass will have more lenient concentration rules. As long as they perform each round (bonus action) their concentration won't be broken due to damage or whatever... Bards will continue to play their lute in hail, battle, or while they are being attacked by dragons

https://media.giphy.com/media/wobo1gQljPKlW/giphy.gif

If the Bard (Musician) is restrained and stopped from performing... The ongoing spell is broken.

The bard doesn't cast arcane spells, they play music that manipulates arcane energies. They didn't go to school and learn the logic of spell creation, they went to college to manipulate the emotion of arcane energies into doing something.

It's like Martials. They use the same overriding rules for martial combat BUT they get different rules to distinguish them (except the fighter because the fighter isn't special, they just get to use the rules more).

The difference between a barbarian and fighter is fluff and mechanics that directly change the rules to fit the fluff. What makes the barbarian who it is, is the mechanics of rage. You can change those mechanics in some way but as long as they are there... You have a reason to have the fluff.

JumboWheat01

2017-02-05, 03:00 PM

Where is that GIF from? I get the feeling I should watch that.

Kobard

2017-02-05, 03:09 PM

Where is that GIF from? I get the feeling I should watch that.El Dorado by Dreamworks.

DracoKnight

2017-02-05, 03:32 PM

El Dorado by Dreamworks.

Truly one of the most beautifully hilarious animated movies of all time :smallbiggrin:

Jarlhen

2017-02-05, 03:35 PM

I'm more excited for this than I am for Christmas.

DracoKnight

2017-02-05, 03:37 PM

I'm more excited for this than I am for Christmas.

Hahah! I hear you! I've been jonesing for a new article for 3 weeks now.

Deleted

2017-02-06, 02:33 AM

Truly one of the most beautifully hilarious animated movies of all time :smallbiggrin:

It is rather underrated by a mass majority of people.

It is essentially a D&D game where a Rogue and a spell-less Bard don't have their three other members so they bullcrap their way through this awesome adventure and The DM rolls with it because he set everything up for 4 or 5 players but only those two players could show up.

JumboWheat01

2017-02-06, 08:52 AM

Now I really need to watch this movie. Just write it down in my book for future looking on 9cartoon or something.

Aett_Thorn

2017-02-06, 09:17 AM

Now I really need to watch this movie. Just write it down in my book for future looking on 9cartoon or something.

Don't forget about the one player who really wanted to play as a horse. Because they're in the movie as well.

Kobard

2017-02-06, 09:51 AM

It is rather underrated by a mass majority of people.

It is essentially a D&D game where a Rogue and a spell-less Bard don't have their three other members so they bullcrap their way through this awesome adventure and The DM rolls with it because he set everything up for 4 or 5 players but only those two players could show up.Plus a new player character rogue they meet once they arrive. And through their actions in the adventure save the day from another adventuring party of murder hobos.

Joe the Rat

2017-02-06, 11:55 AM

Two rogues, one an entertainer, the other Bob Hope, team up with a female foil-and-maybe-but-not-love-interest, and after hijinks and a lack of fighting acumen, they end up with an amazing experience, none of which goes to raising Wisdom, and not much more than what they had at the beginning.

It's a classic Road movie.

Deleted

2017-02-06, 12:32 PM

Plus a new player character rogue they meet once they arrive. And through their actions in the adventure save the day from another adventuring party of murder hobos.

I always pictured those murder hobos to be the other memvers of the group!

Because the party got split and because timing issues they stayed split.

So the DM ran both games and yeah... Lol.

The Spell-less Bard, the Rogue, and the Rogue's GF (who wanted to know what D&D was and joined in as a Rogue) ended up defeating the band of murder hobos.

King539

2017-02-06, 12:35 PM

I always pictured those murder hobos to be the other memvers of the group!

Because the party got split and because timing issues they stayed split.

So the DM ran both games and yeah... Lol.

The Spell-less Bard, the Rogue, and the Rogue's GF (who wanted to know what D&D was and joined in as a Rogue) ended up defeating the band of murder hobos.

A bard and two rogues walk into a bar...

Christian

2017-02-06, 01:14 PM

Now I really need to watch this movie. Just write it down in my book for future looking on 9cartoon or something.

Not to pile on, but just to add some urgency, or to help anyone reading who is thinking, "Eh, maybe?" ... You may be interested to know that the two bumbling con-men protagonists are voiced by Kevin Kline (Otto ["Don't call me stupid!"] from A Fish Called Wanda and the Pirate King from The Pirates of Penzance) and Kenneth Branagh (Doctor Victor Frankenstein from Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and, of course, Professor Gilderoy Lockhart from Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets). And Rosie Perez voices the love interest, by the way ... If you ever wonder how a face-specialized rogue or bard gets away with some of their ridiculous bluffs--watch some total Charisma scores in the 60-ish range in action with one Deception check after another. Some of their victims keep rolling with it even after they start to realize it's all baloney ...