View Full Version : Tasha Preview, Wild Magic Barbarian and Genie Warlock
micahaphone
2020-09-15, 03:37 PM
https://dndcelebration2020.com/#/previews
Barb is looking great, glad they got rid of limited the "spell slot battery" thing
In general I love that you can use some of the wild magic roll multiple times per rage, sort of a "let's embrace the weird" energy.
And you have a chance of becoming the best throwing weapon character without needing dual wielder feat
I don't see anything explicitly different about the genie warlock, but I might be missing some small changes
edit: the Marid expanded spell list contains "control warmer" can't wait for that
GorogIrongut
2020-09-15, 05:09 PM
Gotta say, I'm glad the Genielock came through unscathed. And the Barbarian looks to be quite playable. I'd play either of them quite happily. Heck, I might even do a M/C between the two of them for the fun of it.
diplomancer
2020-09-15, 05:16 PM
Is this the first comeback of the mythical d3 in 5e?
>one of the available foci is a ring
>elementals
I am...getting a Captain Planet vibe from this pact, so far...also LOL control warmer.
Mr Adventurer
2020-09-15, 05:55 PM
https://dndcelebration2020.com/#/previews
Barb is looking great, glad they got rid of limited the "spell slot battery" thing
In general I love that you can use some of the wild magic roll multiple times per rage, sort of a "let's embrace the weird" energy.
And you have a chance of becoming the best throwing weapon character without needing dual wielder feat
I don't see anything explicitly different about the genie warlock, but I might be missing some small changes
edit: the Marid expanded spell list contains "control warmer" can't wait for that
What is this website?
micahaphone
2020-09-15, 06:00 PM
What is this website?
Next dnd conference, all virtual. Play some online AL or watch panels
https://dnd.wizards.com/dndcelebration
jas61292
2020-09-15, 06:21 PM
Really don't like that they are doubling down on using proficiency bonus as a form of scaling. Really buffs multiclassing. Just glad that, between these two, the its nothing too good at low level. But still...
Spiritchaser
2020-09-15, 07:33 PM
They kept wish on the list...
I’ll likely never play or DM at those levels, but... I have to think that’s open up a whole lot of options...
They kept wish on the list...
I’ll likely never play or DM at those levels, but... I have to think that’s open up a whole lot of options...
Eh, it uses an Arcanum, not a Pact Magic slot, so its a 6/half-dozen scenario, really. "Well, bards, sorcerers and wizards can do this already, might as well add warlocks to that list."
In fact, it might help ever-so-slightly with actually getting people to stay in warlock, rather than multi-out the instant they get invocations and the 2nd Pact Magic slot.
Hooray for Genie Warlock! I want to play one so bad.
MrStabby
2020-09-15, 08:07 PM
I thought the barbarian looked a bit rubbish until I realised it didn't use the Sorcerer wild magic table but had its own, better table.
Not likely to play either of these, but I can see the way these classes are going and it looks promising.
BerzerkerUnit
2020-09-15, 08:09 PM
They kept wish on the list...
I’ll likely never play or DM at those levels, but... I have to think that’s open up a whole lot of options...
Focus firing your Eldritch blasts with your Wished Simulacrum. A Warlock that can prep Clones for the whole party...
In conjunction with Limited Wish it makes a Warlock more or less a suitable alternative to a wizard.
I love it.
Over the next 4 seasons of AL, I will likely play 4 different Genielocks for a full set.
The barbarian is very meh. It’s ok in tier1/2 but falls off insanely hard. This was already a problem for the class, but here it’s strictly weaker than the other subclasses bc of the bad scaling in that wild table.
The strongest feature is the spell slot battery, which is ok support, but still doesn’t overcome the overall weakness.
Genie is unchanged and fantastic.
Luccan
2020-09-15, 08:51 PM
I thought the barbarian looked a bit rubbish until I realised it didn't use the Sorcerer wild magic table but had its own, better table.
Not likely to play either of these, but I can see the way these classes are going and it looks promising.
Wow. WotC really hates Sorcerers*. That "wild" magic table is just good across the board. I don't even think it's that appealing a subclass, the table is just so much nicer to the PC than the WM Sorc.
*I'm aware most people despise Wild Magic Sorcerer due to the negative effects on it's list, so it makes sense to change the mechanic, but it still really sucks to see its schtick co-opted by another class and remove the entire downside. Everything Sorcerers get WotC wants to give to someone else. But better.
zinycor
2020-09-15, 08:55 PM
Really glad the genie warlock is largely unchanged
Lyracian
2020-09-16, 03:02 AM
Hooray for Genie Warlock! I want to play one so bad.
It seems nice; I might finally play a warlock.
Mr Adventurer
2020-09-16, 03:06 AM
Next dnd conference, all virtual. Play some online AL or watch panels
https://dnd.wizards.com/dndcelebration
Cool, thanks
Kane0
2020-09-16, 03:54 AM
Wasnt the genie lock really heavy on the prof bonus progression and gave a random damage bonus that it didnt really need?
Eldan
2020-09-16, 04:12 AM
>one of the available foci is a ring
>elementals
I am...getting a Captain Planet vibe from this pact, so far...also LOL control warmer.
The ring may just be a reference to Aladdin, who had a magic ring with a genie bound to it.
Mr Adventurer
2020-09-16, 05:11 AM
One of the legendary magic items that is available in the DMG is a Ring of Genie Summoning, in fact.
EggKookoo
2020-09-16, 05:18 AM
Ok but what's with this d3 thing?
Ok but what's with this d3 thing?
I assume its "wild magic is wierd, so lets use a largely non-existant dice type", since I can't imagine a d4 would have unbalanced anything. Either that or they're paranoid of lol random archetypes being the best and potentially dominating play so they making extra sure they're below average.
Waazraath
2020-09-16, 07:21 AM
Genie Warlock seems both very powerful and fun. Maybe a bit too powerful? Was the case with the hexblade of course, but in general, I think the post-phb subclasses of the warlock are quite a bit stronger than the phb ones (ignoring SCAG here though - so mabye more accurate to say that the later warlock subclasses are better than the earlier). This is imo more the case for Warlock than for other classes (with the possible exception of Ranger, whose Xanathar subclasses were also a bit stronger than the phb ones).
First reaction is “Wow, a barbarian that spends its days learning weapons and using its physical strength but happens to be infused with ‘Wild Magic’ has waaaaayyyy more control over it than a Sorcerer who spends their entire life trying to control such magic.”
I mean, I guess it’s an acknowledgement from WotC that they shouldn’t have made a subclass whose effectiveness is completely up to the DM (WM Sorc in case that’s not obvious) in the first place, but this just really says “Barbs are better at controlling Wild Magic than Sorcerers.” Particularly since nothing bad or even ineffective can come from the Barb’s surges like it can with a Sorc.
Oh well, not like there was too much reason to play a Sorc over a Wizard if you cared about effectiveness anyway.
Willie the Duck
2020-09-16, 08:13 AM
First reaction is “Wow, a barbarian that spends its days learning weapons and using its physical strength but happens to be infused with ‘Wild Magic’ has waaaaayyyy more control over it than a Sorcerer who spends their entire life trying to control such magic.”
I mean, I guess it’s an acknowledgement from WotC that they shouldn’t have made a subclass whose effectiveness is completely up to the DM (WM Sorc in case that’s not obvious) in the first place, but this just really says “Barbs are better at controlling Wild Magic than Sorcerers.” Particularly since nothing bad or even ineffective can come from the Barb’s surges like it can with a Sorc.
Oh well, not like there was too much reason to play a Sorc over a Wizard if you cared about effectiveness anyway.
Wow. WotC really hates Sorcerers*. That "wild" magic table is just good across the board. I don't even think it's that appealing a subclass, the table is just so much nicer to the PC than the WM Sorc.
*I'm aware most people despise Wild Magic Sorcerer due to the negative effects on it's list, so it makes sense to change the mechanic, but it still really sucks to see its schtick co-opted by another class and remove the entire downside. Everything Sorcerers get WotC wants to give to someone else. But better.
On the other hand, should WotC really never improve on something everyone has pretty much acknowledged is garbage?
On the other hand, should WotC really never improve on something everyone has pretty much acknowledged is garbage?
Yes, but they haven't improved the wildmagic sorceror. Unless this barbarian archetype is partially a test and they will later release a new version of it like they did with the ranger.
nickl_2000
2020-09-16, 08:40 AM
The Genie Warlock with a build in Spike Growth and pushing and pulling with Eldritch Blast seems like it would be absolutely amazing on combat on it's own.
KorvinStarmast
2020-09-16, 08:50 AM
Gotta say, I'm glad the Genielock came through unscathed. Looking forward to it.
Really don't like that they are doubling down on using proficiency bonus as a form of scaling. I like this. Tastes differ.
They kept wish on the list. We all have a wish list.
:smallbiggrin:
"Well, bards, sorcerers and wizards can do this already, might as well add warlocks to that list."
Yep. Agree on it helping to keep Warlocks in Warlock.
Focus firing your Eldritch blasts with your Wished Simulacrum. What's not to love?
BoxANT
2020-09-16, 09:26 AM
i ordered a big tasty bowl of genie dip and wotc delivered
hard to beat for scaling damage and a nifty ring
It feels bad to see sorcerer get crapped all over...again...
What is it with WotC and the sorcerer class? Skippy's not there anymore, this should've stopped happening...
Hope this Aberrant Mind/Psionic Soul/whatever's good...
Segev
2020-09-16, 11:28 AM
On the up side, one of the easiest optional rules in the world to write for WotC would be an alternate wild magic chart for sorcerers.
Also, is anything stopping a group from using the Wild Barbarian's chart for the Wild Magic Sorcerer?
On the up side, one of the easiest optional rules in the world to write for WotC would be an alternate wild magic chart for sorcerers.
Also, is anything stopping a group from using the Wild Barbarian's chart for the Wild Magic Sorcerer?
With only 8 options its kinda boring. I wouldn't be too happy with that if I were playing one. At the very least make iot a d12, but preferably d20.
Also, is anything stopping a group from using the Wild Barbarian's chart for the Wild Magic Sorcerer?
Probably just that it would make WM Sorc even worse. At least the current list has awesome possibilities like Conc-less Haste, recouping all spent Sorc points and regaining spell slots.
Granted bad things can happen, but I feel that’s a necessary part of playing a WM Sorc: you take the risk of the bad/ineffective for the chance at awesome.
I doubt anyone plays Sorc for the chance of a 1d6 Damage, BA, Ironman chest beam. Even more doubt for the ability to throw whatever is in your hand.
It’s okay as an “you’ll always get something extra when Raging” ability; but it’s horrible as your “the DM finally let you roll for a surge” Sorc ability.
Arkhios
2020-09-16, 02:31 PM
Oh lord, not this again... a d3....
Segev
2020-09-16, 02:34 PM
Oh lord, not this again... a d3....
There's something that unsettles me about the Genie Patron, I admit, but I also admit I can't put my finger on what that is.
But I am very, very confused why the notion of a d3 bothers so many people.
Use a d4 if you feel like it's that onerous; the boost in power isn't huge and will please your barbarian player.
EggKookoo
2020-09-16, 02:51 PM
But I am very, very confused why the notion of a d3 bothers so many people.
Hey now, you may not think adding a d3 mechanic is a big problem. And it may not be, in and of itself. But that's a slippery slope to d5, d7, and the dreaded dπ!
Segev
2020-09-16, 03:03 PM
Hey now, you may not think adding a d3 mechanic is a big problem. And it may not be, in and of itself. But that's a slippery slope to d5, d7, and the dreaded dπ!
I dunno, I don't see a problem with those. :smalltongue:
More seriously, the d5 is no worse than the d3. I've used d8s for d7s and d6s (the latter when I couldn't find a d6 fast enough), just re-rolling any illegal numbers.
And I actually liked the dψ.
Mr Adventurer
2020-09-16, 03:08 PM
Until I got to the second page, I was assuming that the Barbarian rolled on the Wild Surge table...
MaxWilson
2020-09-16, 03:17 PM
Until I got to the second page, I was assuming that the Barbarian rolled on the Wild Surge table...
WotC needs to hire a good editor.
Damon_Tor
2020-09-16, 03:17 PM
Kind of annoying the Barbarian is heavily incentivized to get far away from his team before he activates his rage. If you've got other party members on the frontlines, they're going to get annoyed when you necro-splode on them.
I'm interested in the new "Control Warmer" spell. I assume it works like Animate Objects, but is specific to blankets, mittens and jammies.
Asisreo1
2020-09-16, 03:23 PM
I dunno, I don't see a problem with those. :smalltongue:
More seriously, the d5 is no worse than the d3. I've used d8s for d7s and d6s (the latter when I couldn't find a d6 fast enough), just re-rolling any illegal numbers.
And I actually liked the dψ.
Everybody gangster until the DM makes you roll a dEuler's Constant.
Valmark
2020-09-16, 03:46 PM
Kind of annoying the Barbarian is heavily incentivized to get far away from his team before he activates his rage. If you've got other party members on the frontlines, they're going to get annoyed when you necro-splode on them.
Why's that? None of the effects on the table harm the party unless the barbarian wants to for whatever reason.
Connington
2020-09-16, 03:53 PM
Kind of annoying the Barbarian is heavily incentivized to get far away from his team before he activates his rage. If you've got other party members on the frontlines, they're going to get annoyed when you necro-splode on them.
Nope. "Each creature of your choice that you can see within 30 feet of you..."
Nothing on this wild magic table can accidentally cause a negative effect for your allies. There is an incentive to be within 30 feet of enemies when you start raging, but that shouldn't be a problem for barbarians.
micahaphone
2020-09-16, 04:00 PM
Personally I'm looking forward to a Dao warlock with repelling blast and grasp of hadar. At level 5 that's 2 pushes and 1 pull. With a spike growth, that's 2d10+6d4 damage, quite a pretty little combo. I'm still thinking on names, currently I have "the cheese grater"
Damon_Tor
2020-09-16, 04:33 PM
Why's that? None of the effects on the table harm the party unless the barbarian wants to for whatever reason.
Nope. "Each creature of your choice that you can see within 30 feet of you..."
Nothing on this wild magic table can accidentally cause a negative effect for your allies. There is an incentive to be within 30 feet of enemies when you start raging, but that shouldn't be a problem for barbarians.
Ah, you are both correct. Argument withdrawn.
MaxWilson
2020-09-16, 04:44 PM
Personally I'm looking forward to a Dao warlock with repelling blast and grasp of hadar. At level 5 that's 2 pushes and 1 pull. With a spike growth, that's 2d10+6d4 damage, quite a pretty little combo. I'm still thinking on names, currently I have "the cheese grater"
I'm not following your math. Each push/pull is 10', and it's 2d4 per 5', so shouldn't that be 2d10+12d4 (41)?
It comes online at level 3 too, at which point it is 1d10+8d4 (25.5). Not bad for a level 3 PC, although IMO it actually works better if you have someone else cast the Spike Growth so you can start grating on round 1.
micahaphone
2020-09-16, 05:50 PM
I misremembered how much the push/pull was, this is even better!
And I'm excited to have it he available on a single character, my friends aren't usually interested in the nature classes.
sambojin
2020-09-16, 07:35 PM
Well, yeah, this'll be out-of-context.
"Come on, touch the furry. Touch it! The moment your are level 6, you'll be touching some furries' moon. You know you'll like it.
What do you want. More constricts? More webbing? A bit of a pounce? I'll do that for you....
OMG. You're naughty and dark and magical. C'mon sugar, give me some magic. I'll let you have all my berries, just to yourself. Or maybe we just stealth right out of here? Or make you a big-bad-big boy! If you're good at this, I can call in some of my friends to help.... "
Wild Magic Barb + Moon Druid at lvl6 is hilarious :)
(in context: undispellable, non-concentration, not magical +d3's to restrain-on-hit is BS good for that little duo for the moon druid. For both of them, so the Barb can shine. Or druid spell slots for the Barb, for good berries, super-hide PwT, enhance ability for barb skill advantage, or a spare conjure animals to prone/ grapple/ restrain enemies for the Barb is amazing as well. But, I mean, role-playing it totally wrong is fun too)
loki_ragnarock
2020-09-16, 07:39 PM
More using proficiency for low level features, I see.
Whelp. Leaning into bad precedent is very on brand for 2020.
1 in 8 chance of giving a barbarian a ton of temp hp. No bueno. I have *opinions* about barbarians and temp hp.
I also amn't a big fan of extraneous dice rolling. Slows things down too much. I'm also not a fan of introducing a d3, in general, but I suppose barbarians are the only ones to use d12s... I wish they'd just leaned into d12s.
The barbarian is very not my cup of tea, from a design perspective, but I guess it takes all sorts. Though I will take this as permission to remove all the bad stuff from the wild sorcerer's table.
The 10th level feature of the genie warlock is... not going to play nice with variant rest mechanics, and for a class that's all about short rests is a surprisingly heavy ability. Nothing world shattering, I suppose, to have a shorter short rest once a day.
Limited Wish should be a Sorcerer only spell; seeing it on something other than sorcerer annoys me. So I'll take this as permission to add it to the Sorcerer's spell list as a 7th level spell.
Really not digging the proficiency for low level features as a consistent theme.
Segev
2020-09-16, 08:16 PM
I must be blind. What "proficiency for low-level features" are people talking about?
Seclora
2020-09-16, 08:20 PM
I'm still thinking on names, currently I have "the cheese grater"
How about Millstone? Since it requires a Dao patron and all.
I must be blind. What "proficiency for low-level features" are people talking about?
Duration for the genie-lock is 2 hours per proficiency bonus I believe.
ProsecutorGodot
2020-09-16, 08:43 PM
Wow. WotC really hates Sorcerers*. That "wild" magic table is just good across the board. I don't even think it's that appealing a subclass, the table is just so much nicer to the PC than the WM Sorc.
*I'm aware most people despise Wild Magic Sorcerer due to the negative effects on it's list, so it makes sense to change the mechanic, but it still really sucks to see its schtick co-opted by another class and remove the entire downside. Everything Sorcerers get WotC wants to give to someone else. But better.
I find myself repeating this often: I don't think the bad part of Wild Magic has anything to do with the contents of the table. A majority of the table is either neutral or beneficial effects, there are very few actively harmful effects and out of the ones that are only an even smaller handful of them are actually damaging. For reference, there's about 9 negative effects and only 2 of them actively damage you (or your allies) when they occur. For comparison, there are roughly 19 positive effects. The rest are superficial (leaning on positive) but serve the purpose of refreshing your Tides of Chaos.
However that's just the mechanical perspective. Nobody wants that surge that finally happens to immediately throw a dud or a fireball on you.
The worst part of Wild Magic Sorcerer (which is also removed for this Barbarian) is the DM controlled aspect. It makes more work for your DM, you'll probably have to pester your DM about Wild Magic Surges because you have literally no control over when you make one. Our Wild Magic Sorcerer is very lucky that our DM enjoys that kind of macro activity.
Luccan
2020-09-16, 08:50 PM
I find myself repeating this often: I don't think the bad part of Wild Magic has anything to do with the contents of the table. A majority of the table is either neutral or beneficial effects, there are very few actively harmful effects and out of the ones that are only an even smaller handful of them are actually damaging. For reference, there's about 9 negative effects and only 2 of them actively damage you (or your allies) when they occur. For comparison, there are roughly 19 positive effects. The rest are superficial (leaning on positive) but serve the purpose of refreshing your Tides of Chaos.
However that's just the mechanical perspective. Nobody wants that surge that finally happens to immediately throw a dud or a fireball on you.
The worst part of Wild Magic Sorcerer (which is also removed for this Barbarian) is the DM controlled aspect. It makes more work for your DM, you'll probably have to pester your DM about Wild Magic Surges because you have literally no control over when you make one. Our Wild Magic Sorcerer is very lucky that our DM enjoys that kind of macro activity.
Oh, I totally agree with you (it may in fact have been you I first saw point it out), but there's no denying that whatever the actual cause for dissatisfaction, the majority of people seem to blame the negative effects. It's certainly the most vocal group. And thus, it makes sense that WotC has made a wild magic table that's really more of random benefits table. And given no hint they plan to help WM Sorcs in any way.
Valmark
2020-09-16, 09:03 PM
Limited Wish should be a Sorcerer only spell; seeing it on something other than sorcerer annoys me. So I'll take this as permission to add it to the Sorcerer's spell list as a 7th level spell.
Why should it be a Sorcerer only spell? Also note that a sorcerer will be getting much more mileage out of it, being able to cast it consistently every day (twice at 20th).
Plus making it a spell means opening it to Bards too (dunno if that's a concern).
I must be blind. What "proficiency for low-level features" are people talking about?
You can remain inside the
vessel up to a number of hours equal to twice your
proficiency bonus.
Once during each of your turns
when you hit with an attack roll, you can deal extra
damage to the target equal to your proficiency
bonus.
In addition, as a bonus action, you can give yourself
a flying speed of 30 feet that lasts for 10 minutes,
during which you can hover. You can use this bonus
action a number of times equal to your proficiency
bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you
finish a long rest.
Sanctuary Vessel runs off Bottled Respite, so technically that one, too.
sambojin
2020-09-16, 09:17 PM
Just theory-crafting a Firbolg Genie Warlock from Tasha's "Totally AL legit" choose-your-own-adventure stat rules. For lots of short-rest magic, fire-resistance at lvl6 (any other genie subclass is better for spells, but fire-resistance is pretty good, and Warlock has a heavily front loaded "pick this, it's good" amount of spell choices anyway), and patron/ invocation/ pact stuff from the Genie (Efreeti) Warlock lvls. +2 Cha, +1 Con stats, a bit of extra damage and disguise and invis and talky stuff. And free 3x10min non-magic flying per day as well (with 240lb dump-stat carry/ lift) at 6th, and you get more of it later too.
At 10th lvl, have a free-short-rest per day, to refresh all your warlock slots and firbolg short-rest spells. Because.
+1 lvl6 spell every d4 long rests at 14th. So, every couple of days. Except, it can be anything. As long as that spell only takes one action to cast. Doesn't say you can't ask your genie to up-cast something either. So, yeah, a limited wish spell. Seems kinda handy. One of the best lv14 features I've seen, for any class, ever (right up there with Illusionist). No components either, so if it's quick and expensive, you have a business regardless. Your genie will totally understand (and probably require some of the profits). But letting your patron make you an occasional demi-god is a pretty good class feature at 14th.
You probably won't feel like there's a lack of things to do, on any given rest. Even at lvls 1-6.
Tasha's Preview + Tasha AL Stat rules looks fun for heaps of builds. Free DLC!
Asisreo1
2020-09-16, 09:38 PM
The worst part of Wild Magic Sorcerer (which is also removed for this Barbarian) is the DM controlled aspect. It makes more work for your DM, you'll probably have to pester your DM about Wild Magic Surges because you have literally no control over when you make one. Our Wild Magic Sorcerer is very lucky that our DM enjoys that kind of macro activity.
The easiest thing a DM can do is give the power back to the player. That is, let the player decide when they want to use the Wild Magic table.
If the DM wants some form of control still, he can veto the Wild Magic so a sorcerer still can't quite predict it but the burden of it activating no longer falls onto the DM. It's something I've been tinkering with as a DM and it's been fun so far.
The easiest thing a DM can do is give the power back to the player. That is, let the player decide when they want to use the Wild Magic table.
If the DM wants some form of control still, he can veto the Wild Magic so a sorcerer still can't quite predict it but the burden of it activating no longer falls onto the DM. It's something I've been tinkering with as a DM and it's been fun so far.
I'd just say wildmagic always triggers. Its too unpredictably to be exploited IMO, and even the advantage from Tides of Choas isn't spammable enough to be too powerful.
In one setting I've considered having all sorcerors who didn't attend the nation magic academy to have wildmagic in addition to any other archetype they choose. Its only for one setting, not a universal houserule, but no it isn't optional.
Asisreo1
2020-09-16, 09:58 PM
I'd just say wildmagic always triggers. Its too unpredictably to be exploited IMO, and even the advantage from Tides of Choas isn't spammable enough to be too powerful.
In one setting I've considered having all sorcerors who didn't attend the nation magic academy to have wildmagic in addition to any other archetype they choose. Its only for one setting, not a universal houserule, but no it isn't optional.
I feel like the Wild Magic sorcerer is the greatest gotcha to houserulers in the PHB. I can't say what you and I do are houserules, because they technically aren't. We, as the DM in our games, are (preemptively) choosing when the Wild Magic Surge activates which means we're always following RAW unless we do something drastic.
Uh, that aside. I've also began considering having the activation of Wild Magic also deal with a dice roll that gets more unstable the more powerful the magic is. Perhaps something like having the Sorcerer activate Wild Magic on a roll of 10 or higher using 1d10+spell's level.
Luccan
2020-09-16, 09:58 PM
The easiest thing a DM can do is give the power back to the player. That is, let the player decide when they want to use the Wild Magic table.
If the DM wants some form of control still, he can veto the Wild Magic so a sorcerer still can't quite predict it but the burden of it activating no longer falls onto the DM. It's something I've been tinkering with as a DM and it's been fun so far.
I was considering a variation of this, where the DM can instead still decide to call for a wild magic roll even if the player doesn't.
Segev
2020-09-17, 12:04 AM
The easiest thing a DM can do is give the power back to the player. That is, let the player decide when they want to use the Wild Magic table.
If the DM wants some form of control still, he can veto the Wild Magic so a sorcerer still can't quite predict it but the burden of it activating no longer falls onto the DM. It's something I've been tinkering with as a DM and it's been fun so far.
If I had a player using it, I'd tell them to roll the d20 every time they cast a spell unless I specifically said otherwise, rather than it being only when I wanted them to. A 1/20 chance every time they cast a spell is fine.
When they use the power that makes it more likely, I'd say it works the next time they cast a leveled spell unless I specifically choose otherwise.
My "unless I choose otherwise" is mainly to prevent it from disrupting a scene or being otherwise unfun when it happens.
I was considering a variation of this, where the DM can instead still decide to call for a wild magic roll even if the player doesn't.
I think we're on the same page, here, if not exactly at the same paragraph.
Arkhios
2020-09-17, 12:45 AM
But I am very, very confused why the notion of a d3 bothers so many people.
Because it's a non-standard die.
Not everyone takes the extra effort to purchase an (both figuratively and physically) oddly shaped "die" to be able to roll exactly d3, and the d6 method is awkward at best. It's not hard, it's just annoying.
Besides, if the system comes with a set of dice: 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 1d20 and d%, then WHY do we need an abstract die to be rolled with some other die or dice? (granted, d% is close to being the same, but at least they made the effort to include a special die in the standard dice set just for that. d3 didn't get any of that courtesy).
Plus, it's still argued over and over again after 40 years whether you should use a) 1,2 (1); 3,4(2); 5,6(3) OR b) 1,2,3 (1,2,3) and 4,5,6 (1,2,3).
TL;DR: d3 is STUPID.
Azuresun
2020-09-17, 04:21 AM
Because it's a non-standard die.
Not everyone takes the extra effort to purchase an (both figuratively and physically) oddly shaped "die" to be able to roll exactly d3, and the d6 method is awkward at best. It's not hard, it's just annoying.
There are d6's that have 1-3 twice. Otherwise, use a d4 and reroll 4's, or just, you know, talk to your group about which method you're using and use a d6.
Arkhios
2020-09-17, 04:29 AM
There are d6's that have 1-3 twice. Otherwise, use a d4 and reroll 4's, or just, you know, talk to your group about which method you're using and use a d6.
There are also those weird "dice" with odd number of sides, such as 3, 5, 7 etc., but those are exactly what I meant with taking extra effort to get one.
Mind you, I gave my opinion. No amount of "reasoning" of how you can get around it will change my mind.
diplomancer
2020-09-17, 05:10 AM
Because it's a non-standard die.
Not everyone takes the extra effort to purchase an (both figuratively and physically) oddly shaped "die" to be able to roll exactly d3, and the d6 method is awkward at best. It's not hard, it's just annoying.
Besides, if the system comes with a set of dice: 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 1d20 and d%, then WHY do we need an abstract die to be rolled with some other die or dice? (granted, d% is close to being the same, but at least they made the effort to include a special die in the standard dice set just for that. d3 didn't get any of that courtesy).
Plus, it's still argued over and over again after 40 years whether you should use a) 1,2 (1); 3,4(2); 5,6(3) OR b) 1,2,3 (1,2,3) and 4,5,6 (1,2,3).
TL;DR: d3 is STUPID.
What kind of lunatic would use that bolded method? I don't know about you, but I know I don't want to play in those sorts of tables :smallcool:
TigerT20
2020-09-17, 10:51 AM
What kind of lunatic would use that bolded method? I don't know about you, but I know I don't want to play in those sorts of tables :smallcool:
Yeah, I'm sticking with 1 (3) 2 (1) 3 (3) 4 (2) 5 (1) 6 (2)
Segev
2020-09-17, 10:57 AM
Because it's a non-standard die.
Not everyone takes the extra effort to purchase an (both figuratively and physically) oddly shaped "die" to be able to roll exactly d3, and the d6 method is awkward at best. It's not hard, it's just annoying.
Besides, if the system comes with a set of dice: 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 1d20 and d%, then WHY do we need an abstract die to be rolled with some other die or dice? (granted, d% is close to being the same, but at least they made the effort to include a special die in the standard dice set just for that. d3 didn't get any of that courtesy).
Plus, it's still argued over and over again after 40 years whether you should use a) 1,2 (1); 3,4(2); 5,6(3) OR b) 1,2,3 (1,2,3) and 4,5,6 (1,2,3).
TL;DR: d3 is STUPID.Not sure why there's argument over that. I have used both. I just make it clear before I roll which I'm using.
There are d6's that have 1-3 twice. Otherwise, use a d4 and reroll 4's, or just, you know, talk to your group about which method you're using and use a d6.
I have also used the d4, reroll 4s method.
I just don't see what's so difficult about a d3.
But, if it's really that big of a deal, buff the Barbarian a little bit by giving him a d4, instead.
nickl_2000
2020-09-17, 11:01 AM
What kind of lunatic would use that bolded method? I don't know about you, but I know I don't want to play in those sorts of tables :smallcool:
Yeah, I'm sticking with 1 (3) 2 (1) 3 (3) 4 (2) 5 (1) 6 (2)
You don't just have one of these sitting around?
https://images2.sw-cdn.net/product/picture/625x465_7175886_2867087_1459322131.jpg
Evaar
2020-09-17, 04:23 PM
I can't recall if this was discussed already. Can Limited Wish be used to generate 5,050 gold for the warlock every 1d4 days via uses of Leomund's Secret Chest?
In order for the spell to function, you need a 5,000g chest and a 50g replica. The duration of the spell is instantaneous. The ongoing use of the spell requires that you be able to touch the replica and store things inside the full sized chest.
So does it just... make those items for you? So you can then turn around and sell them for a tidy income during your downtime?
Dark.Revenant
2020-09-17, 04:39 PM
I can't recall if this was discussed already. Can Limited Wish be used to generate 5,050 gold for the warlock every 1d4 days via uses of Leomund's Secret Chest?
In order for the spell to function, you need a 5,000g chest and a 50g replica. The duration of the spell is instantaneous. The ongoing use of the spell requires that you be able to touch the replica and store things inside the full sized chest.
So does it just... make those items for you? So you can then turn around and sell them for a tidy income during your downtime?
I imagine the intent is that it creates a chest and replica, but they have no value. Alternatively it would just work with *any* chest/replica of any value.
EggKookoo
2020-09-17, 04:52 PM
I have also used the d4, reroll 4s method.
I just don't see what's so difficult about a d3.
But, if it's really that big of a deal, buff the Barbarian a little bit by giving him a d4, instead.
I'm not sure you'll get far asking for objective justification for something that's really just a matter of personal taste. There's a myriad of reasons why someone would object to a d3. One might just be simple aesthetics. An odd-numbered die feels weird amongst a set of evens. Most dice are Platonic solids, and back in the day there were people who objected to the d10 because it wasn't. Perhaps the mechanic behind the d3 isn't interesting enough to warrant the inclusion of its own special die, and would fit into the game better as a d4. By the same token, a number of existing mechanics might benefit from a d3 but the game has a certain structure to compensate for its nonexistence -- until now. We've been doing d6, halved (or whatever) for decades. Why is that no longer acceptable?
All of these are valid opinions (note I'm not saying I subscribe to all of them, just describing...).
heavyfuel
2020-09-17, 05:51 PM
Wow. WotC really hates Sorcerers. That "wild" magic table is just good across the board. I don't even think it's that appealing a subclass, the table is just so much nicer to the PC than the WM Sorc.
You never saw the WotC memo for creating 5e classes?
I think it went:
1 - Martials must suck (unless they're a Paladin);
2 - Sorcerers should be inferior to Wizards
Thankfully whoever was responsible for the Battlemaster and the Echo Knight also missed it.
Luccan
2020-09-17, 09:02 PM
You never saw the WotC memo for creating 5e classes?
I think it went:
1 - Martials must suck (unless they're a Paladin);
2 - Sorcerers should be inferior to Wizards
Thankfully whoever was responsible for the Battlemaster and the Echo Knight also missed it.
Well, the second one was created by someone outside the WotC design team...
And come to think of it, the first one uses the mechanic all martials were planned to have at some point to make them better.
Mr Adventurer
2020-09-18, 02:55 AM
I wonder if it would still work well if you DID use the Wild Surge table instead...
ProsecutorGodot
2020-09-18, 08:08 AM
I wonder if it would still work well if you DID use the Wild Surge table instead...
If you mean the Barbarian uses the Sorcerer table, not very well considering many of the options involve casting spells and restoring resources only Sorcerer's have.
Mr Adventurer
2020-09-18, 09:08 AM
If you mean the Barbarian uses the Sorcerer table, not very well considering many of the options involve casting spells and restoring resources only Sorcerer's have.
To be clear, "many" here means five results on a table of 50, so one in ten.
ProsecutorGodot
2020-09-18, 09:42 AM
To be clear, "many" here means five results on a table of 50, so one in ten.
There are actually 14 results that do nothing for the Barbarian, as they cannot cast any of the spells while raging (the reason why their other 3rd level feature is no longer "cast detect magic" by the way) cannot recover sorcery points, and by proxy have no spell slots or spells to cast as a bonus action instead of an action.
Coincidentally, this makes it more likely that the Barbarian will have a bad result than if then Sorcerer rolled on the table, as almost all of these results were a neutral or positive effect for the Sorcerer.
Segev
2020-09-18, 09:45 AM
There are actually 14 results that do nothing for the Barbarian, as they cannot cast any of the spells while raging (the reason why their 3rd level feature is no longer "cast detect magic" by the way) cannot recover spell points, and by proxy have no spell slots or spells to cast as a bonus action instead of an action.
Coincidentally, this makes it more likely that the Barbarian will have a bad result than if then Sorcerer rolled on the table, as almost all of these results were a neutral or positive effect for the Sorcerer.
Personally, if the rules did say to use the Wild Sorcerer table, I'd interpret that as specific overriding general and the line about "casting" a spell being more "this spell is cast, in the passive voice" despite the way it's worded (which I assume is in part, at least, for brevity). I doubt a sorcerer is really stopping and going through the conscious act of casting a fireball centered on himself when he rolls that result on the table, and thus I would also rule that a Barbarian who somehow got that result from raging with wild magic would just have his rage explode into the fiery ball of anger around him. Maybe it could be counterspelled, but I wouldn't require the sorcerer or the barbarian to actually be able to take a casting action. (I mean, other than the fact that the sorcerer doesn't even get to roll on the table if he hasn't cast a spell in the normal way.)
ProsecutorGodot
2020-09-18, 09:54 AM
Personally, if the rules did say to use the Wild Sorcerer table, I'd interpret that as specific overriding general and the line about "casting" a spell being more "this spell is cast, in the passive voice" despite the way it's worded (which I assume is in part, at least, for brevity). I doubt a sorcerer is really stopping and going through the conscious act of casting a fireball centered on himself when he rolls that result on the table, and thus I would also rule that a Barbarian who somehow got that result from raging with wild magic would just have his rage explode into the fiery ball of anger around him. Maybe it could be counterspelled, but I wouldn't require the sorcerer or the barbarian to actually be able to take a casting action. (I mean, other than the fact that the sorcerer doesn't even get to roll on the table if he hasn't cast a spell in the normal way.)
I still think it's generally worse for the Barbarian even if you're only adding 5 results to the list of bad rolls. Remember that those 5 were also all "good" rolls for the Sorcerer, so the Barbarian's odds on the table are primarily bad/neutral while the Sorcerers are neutral/good.
Segev
2020-09-18, 10:00 AM
I still think it's generally worse for the Barbarian even if you're only adding 5 results to the list of bad rolls. Remember that those 5 were also all "good" rolls for the Sorcerer, so the Barbarian's odds on the table are primarily bad/neutral while the Sorcerers are neutral/good.
Not going to argue, there. Just was making a point about the reason I wouldn't specifically allow inability to cast to prevent a result on the table.
MaxWilson
2020-09-18, 10:05 AM
Personally, if the rules did say to use the Wild Sorcerer table, I'd interpret that as specific overriding general and the line about "casting" a spell being more "this spell is cast, in the passive voice" despite the way it's worded (which I assume is in part, at least, for brevity). I doubt a sorcerer is really stopping and going through the conscious act of casting a fireball centered on himself when he rolls that result on the table, and thus I would also rule that a Barbarian who somehow got that result from raging with wild magic would just have his rage explode into the fiery ball of anger around him. Maybe it could be counterspelled, but I wouldn't require the sorcerer or the barbarian to actually be able to take a casting action. (I mean, other than the fact that the sorcerer doesn't even get to roll on the table if he hasn't cast a spell in the normal way.)
Agreed. For example, even if the wild surge was triggered by a bonus action spell which makes it illegal to cast Fireball, the wild mage would cast Fireball on self anyway.
The main change the Barbarian needs is better editing: rename the 3rd level feature from "Wild Surge" to "Wild Magic" to avoid confusion, and add a note in the text about where to find the Wild Magic table, as in "roll on the Wild Magic table below to determine the magical effect produced." One extra word "below" to avoid a lot of potential confusion with the PHB wild surge table.
WotC needs to hire a good editor.
KorvinStarmast
2020-09-18, 08:55 PM
I'd just say wildmagic always triggers. I like "roll on the d20 whenever when a leveled spell slot is cast" But, you could go and roll that d20 also whenever a cantrip is cast, but it takes a special group of players to roll with that in their group.
WotC needs to hire a good editor. About six and a half years ago. :smallcool:
MaxWilson
2020-09-18, 09:09 PM
I like "roll on the d20 whenever when a leveled spell slot is cast" But, you could go and roll that d20 also whenever a cantrip is cast, but it takes a special group of players to roll with that in their group.
I like "don't bother rolling the d20, ever, but always trigger if Tides of Chaos recharge would apply." Seriously, there's no point in that d20 unless you attach more effects to it than RAW does.
As a rule variant to fix the boredom, it might be interesting to say "always roll the d20 and apply the original table from Tome of Magic to it" though. Instead of using a fixed value from the table to denote wild surges (e.g. at level 20, rolling a 9 always triggers a Wild Surge on the original table), just have the player call out a number before rolling. If the die roll matches, that's a surge, in addition to the level adjustment effect.
But rolling a d20 that does nothing 95% of the time per RAW is a waste of table time.
EggKookoo
2020-09-18, 09:12 PM
But rolling a d20 that does nothing 95% of the time per RAW is a waste of table time.
Has anyone experimented with increasing the target value by 1 for each spell level after the 1st? Cast at 9th level, surge on 1-9.
micahaphone
2020-09-19, 03:08 PM
Has anyone experimented with increasing the target value by 1 for each spell level after the 1st? Cast at 9th level, surge on 1-9.
That's good, I also like to have a build up of chaos inside the sorcerer. Like if you cast a spell (w/o tides of chaos proccing), roll and don't get a 1, the next time you roll it'll proc on a 1 or 2. Whenever it does cause a surge you reset to 1.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.