Tashas is out on DndBeyond

[CMCC]

I just bought it. Woohoo.

[Rfkannen]

Awesome stuff! My favorite things in the book are deffinitly the magical enviroments and hazard, my players are deffinitly going to run into a couple of those!

First impressions on class stuff:


love all the variant features
BOTH the barbarian subclasses make me need to play a barbarian for the first time. I especially like the beast one. Lets you play a werewolf, I approve.
I really want to like the bard of creation, but I just don't get it's main ability, which is to summon musical notes that do stuff. I just find that weird
I REALLY need to play an order cleric some day, have wanted to do it for a while, would require the right setting.
druids get revivey now, that's nice.
all the new battlemaster options are SUPER COOL, they don't focus on damage as much as OUT OF COMBAT STUFF and in combat utility, very cool!
I could see both the psycic fighter and the rune knight being a tone of fun as alternatives to the eldritch knight. If I was to play another fighter I would probably go psi.
I HAD NOT LOOKED AT THE MONK WAY OF THE ASTRAL SELF AND IT IS SO COOL I NEED TO PLAY ONE IMEDIATLY, NOT EVEN TALKING MECHANICS, IT IS JUST SO ANIME AND I LOVE IT
I adore the art for the oath of glory paladin, not normally how I picture paladins and I dig it.
I wanted to like the talisman pact boon, but I just don't feel it, looks alright but not my thing. On the other hand the pact of the chain got a new super cool looking invocation!
I simply do not understand the order of the scribes wizard.
I ADORE all the new feats.



good stuff!

[Dankus Memakus]

When the leaks were out on reddit I saw ALOT of criticism. Now that I've read most of it I think I thoroughly disagree. I'm pretty hyped about the subclasses they mostly seem pretty solid nothing struck me as broken (yet) I agree above that the astral self was really cool. It's not really my favorite concept but when I read through it I could sense the screams of joy from my players. I thoroughly enjoy twilight cleric and the druid options as well. I know there is anger over the loss of fireball for the wildfire druid but I think it's still neat.

As an aside. The order of scribes is 100% power creep. I won't ever play any other subclass of wizard. I feel guilty when I say I love it.

Edit: forgot to mention the new fighting styles really help fill alot of archetypes

[Nidgit]

I don't know how to feel about the Astral Self Monk. On one hand, Ki costs are basically halved from the UA and that's great. But on the other hand, no punch rush! What's the point of summoning a Stand if I get exactly one extra attack all the way at Level 17?

Don't get me wrong, a lot of the other changes to the subclass are good. The Astral Self Monk can use its abilities much more frequently and limited telepathy is accessible at an earlier level. But I've kind of lost my desire to play it because what should be the signature ability has been nerfed so hard.

[Hytheter]

I don't know how to feel about the Astral Self Monk. On one hand, Ki costs are basically halved from the UA and that's great. But on the other hand, no punch rush! What's the point of summoning a Stand if I get exactly one extra attack all the way at Level 17?.

The original version didn't really get any additional attacks vs regular monk until level 17 anyway.

[Dankus Memakus]

I don't know how to feel about the Astral Self Monk. On one hand, Ki costs are basically halved from the UA and that's great. But on the other hand, no punch rush! What's the point of summoning a Stand if I get exactly one extra attack all the way at Level 17?

Don't get me wrong, a lot of the other changes to the subclass are good. The Astral Self Monk can use its abilities much more frequently and limited telepathy is accessible at an earlier level. But I've kind of lost my desire to play it because what should be the signature ability has been nerfed so hard.

I still feel like the monk is pretty strong still though. I mean nothing crazy but force punches extra reach and other goodies are nothing to sneeze at right?

[Unoriginal]

I still feel like the monk is pretty strong still though. I mean nothing crazy but force punches extra reach and other goodies are nothing to sneeze at right?

It's probably the best subclass for a WIS-first Monk, so on top of it's own power we're talking about very high DC for Stunning Strike without diminishing the to-hit chances.

It's damn awesome.

Also kinda love the megaphone effect.

[AttilatheYeon]

I'm excited for Aberrant Mind Sorc. The possibilities of mind sliver combined with quickened dissonant whisper or holdperson.

[bendking]

My first impressions on the sub-classes (I care about):

Barbarian:
- Path of the Beast is bad because it encourages you to not attack with GWM+PAM and thus lose out on a whopping ~20 DPR at level 11. It's legitimately a trap option.
- Wild Magic Barbarian looks like fun and is actually viable. Probably not as good as Zealot, but competes with Totem, and is probably the most fun of them all.

Cleric:
- Order is top tier, but we already knew that.
- Peace seems... OK. Probably the weakest of the bunch, though I might be missing something. The Channel Divinity is pretty bad, especially compared to Life Cleric's. However, it's a really potent 1-level dip.
- Twilight is really good, though he shines brightest (pun intended) in a group of PCs without Darkvision. The Channel Divinity is really strong, and works in tandem with the 6th level feature, allowing you to fly around the battlefield.

Fighter:
- Psi Warrior is a lot better than it's Rogue counterpart. I like how flexible it is. It's probably not top-tier Fighter, but it's definitely decent.
- Rune Knight is really good, honestly. Another very viable Fighter.

Monk:
- Way of Mercy is super cool. The flavor is great and this sub-class is just really well designed. Great job here. Top tier Monk.
- Way of the Astral Self is also super cool, though a little less interesting mechanically. A SAD Monk is a happy monk. Also, high DCs. Another top-tier Monk.
- We finally have options as good as (if not better than) the Open-Hand monk.

Paladin:
- Oath of Glory is a bit of a dud. The Channel Divinity heal is quite strong, but the aura is extremely underwhelming.
- Oath of the Watchers is a lot better. Watcher's Will is amazing, and the aura is quite tasty.

Rogue:
- Phantom Rogue is pretty cool. Looks like great potential DPR. Arcane Trickster is probably still better, though.
- Soulknife is hot garbage. It's as close as you can get to a "nothing" sub-class. I would never pick this sub-class. Ever.

Sorcerer:
- As expected, the new sub-classes are immensely more powerful than previous sub-classes.
- Metamagic Adept is the new go-to V.Human feat for Sorcerers.


High points:
- Most of the sub-classes here are additions to the current top-tier of sub-classes in their class. As a mechanics-oriented player, I am really pleased that we didn't get a bunch of dud sub-classes.

Low points:
- New Sorcerer sub-classes far outclass the old ones.
- Path of the Beast Barbarian is literally a trap.
- Soulknife is trash.

EDIT:
On second glance I might have been a bit too harsh on Soulknife, but I still think it's pretty bad.
I mean, his Psychic Blades literally do less damage than a normal dual-wielding Rogue would. What the $#%*?

[Unoriginal]

- Path of the Beast is bad because it encourages you to not attack with GWM+PAM

That's good.

[bendking]

That's good.
It's also highly sub-optimal. You literally lose out on 20 DPR (35 vs 55) at level 11 even if you go for the highest DPR option, which is the Claws.

[Dork_Forge]

My first impressions on the sub-classes (I care about):

Barbarian:
- Path of the Beast is bad because it encourages you to not attack with GWM+PAM and thus lose out on a whopping ~20 DPR at level 11. It's legitimately a trap option.

I don't understand this at all, even if you want to keep doing the GWM+PAM thing you can still use the tail as a lesser though at-will Shield, that's pretty darn good. The Bite let's you regen health to keep you up, if you're primarily taking BPS damage that's going to be a great life extender and an okay top off even if you aren't. The claws offer up a pretty good damage option whilst still (as far as I can see) being compatable with wearing a shield.

I'm curious how you came about the Beast being 20DPR behind at level 11, would you mind sharing your maths on that one?



Rogue:
- Soulknife is hot garbage. It's as close as you can get to a "nothing" sub-class. I would never pick this sub-class. Ever.


-Telepathy
-A fantastic skill monkey ability
-TWF that not only doesn't tie up your hands but also automatically adds your mod to the bonus attack. The thrown version is also just better than hucking a dagger, making the thrown Rogue a thing with integrated support.

That's all just at level 3, it just gets better from there:

-9th: basically the Precision maneuver but you only burn the die if you hit and and a bonus action teleport ability

-13th: You get a better version of the invisibility spell, because it isn't a spell

-17th: You can stun a creature for up to a minute, with no action economy cost on top of your attack, with a DC based on Dex and the first use of this is free per day

How on Earth is this a nothing subclass? The TWF built in actually makes it a better DPR than the AT until they get Shadow Blade at 7th level.

[Unoriginal]

It's also highly sub-optimal. You literally lose out on 20 DPR (35 vs 55) at level 11 even if you go for the highest DPR option, which is the Claws.

Is your position that the *only* worthwhile Barbarian is a GWM+PAM Barbarian and that all the others are trap options because they're not the highest DPR optimizable, then I don't know what to tell you except that I disagree.

[MoiMagnus]

Barbarian:
- Path of the Beast is bad because it encourages you to not attack with GWM+PAM and thus lose out on a whopping ~20 DPR at level 11. It's legitimately a trap option.

I mean, some tables play without feats, and even on tables that play with feats but the players take no combat-related feats at all, preferring to increase their out-of-combat usefulness even if that mean falling being in DPR.
[And I'm not even talking about DMs that ban or heavily nerf one of both of those feats, as they consider that the powerlevel with feats should not be significantly different from the powerlevel without feats]

I don't actually have Tasha, so I can't say that this subclass is good: it might still be bad by itself in a no-feat game, in which case I would fully agree that it is a trap option.

[trctelles]

I'm just not sure how Favored Foe from ranger works... Says that you mark the target as your favored enemy for 1 minute or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell). To me, RAW, it doesn't count as Concentration per se, right? So I CAN concentrate on spell, while using Favored Foe, right?

[bendking]

I don't understand this at all, even if you want to keep doing the GWM+PAM thing you can still use the tail as a lesser though at-will Shield, that's pretty darn good. The Bite let's you regen health to keep you up, if you're primarily taking BPS damage that's going to be a great life extender and an okay top off even if you aren't. The claws offer up a pretty good damage option whilst still (as far as I can see) being compatable with wearing a shield.

I'm curious how you came about the Beast being 20DPR behind at level 11, would you mind sharing your maths on that one?
I used LudicSavant's DPR Calculator (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14WlZE_UKwn3Vhv4i8ewVOc-f2-A7tMW_VRum_p3YNHQ/edit?usp=sharing), I compared a +4 STR Claws only Beast Barbarian to a V.Human Zealot Barbarian with PAM, GWM, and +2 STR.



-Telepathy
-A fantastic skill monkey ability
-TWF that not only doesn't tie up your hands but also automatically adds your mod to the bonus attack. The thrown version is also just better than hucking a dagger, making the thrown Rogue a thing with integrated support.

That's all just at level 3, it just gets better from there:

-9th: basically the Precision maneuver but you only burn the die if you hit and and a bonus action teleport ability

-13th: You get a better version of the invisibility spell, because it isn't a spell

-17th: You can stun a creature for up to a minute, with no action economy cost on top of your attack, with a DC based on Dex and the first use of this is free per day

How on Earth is this a nothing subclass? The TWF built in actually makes it a better DPR than the AT until they get Shadow Blade at 7th level.
1. I admit that I missed the bonus attack adding the Dexterity modifier, that makes it quite a bit better.
2. I don't value the skill-monkey ability that highly because I don't value skills that highly.
3. The telepathy is nice, sure, but it's pretty situational.

Even with all you wrote I still don't see how this archetype compares with Arcane Trickster's flexibility and damage output.
However, we can agree to disagree.


Is your position that the *only* worthwhile Barbarian is a GWM+PAM Barbarian and that all the others are trap options because they're not the highest DPR optimizable, then I don't know what to tell you except that I disagree.
I mean, yeah. It's a Barbarian. Its whole thing is combat. Obviously, I'm going to say that an option with 50% more DPR and minuscule opportunity cost (delaying +2 STR by one ASI) easily takes the cake.
What other metrics would you judge a Barbarian by if not its combat effectiveness?


I mean, some tables play without feats, and even on tables that play with feats but the players take no combat-related feats at all, preferring to increase their out-of-combat usefulness even if that mean falling being in DPR.
[And I'm not even talking about DMs that ban or heavily nerf one of both of those feats, as they consider that the powerlevel with feats should not be significantly different from the powerlevel without feats]

I don't actually have Tasha, so I can't say that this subclass is good: it might still be bad by itself in a no-feat game, in which case I would fully agree that it is a trap option.
Sure, it's definitely viable and even great in a no-feat game. However, in my experience most DMs allow feats.

[x3n0n]

Pre-release, folks said that there was a statement that got rid of racial prerequisites for feats. I don't see it in the feats section, nor in the "customizing your origin" section.

Did I miss it?

[Amnestic]

Even with all you wrote I still don't see how this archetype compares with Arcane Trickster's flexibility and damage output.


If it doesn't 'compare' with the arcane trickster's flexibility and damage output (questionable depending on what level you're playing at), it's 'hot garbage'?

[Azuresun]

When the leaks were out on reddit I saw ALOT of criticism. Now that I've read most of it I think I thoroughly disagree.

I think a lot of the wailing and gnashing of teeth came from "The final version isn't as powerful as the UA version, my build is RUINED FOREVER!".

If anything, I'd half-seriously say it makes a good case for not doing public UA's any more.

[Dork_Forge]

I used LudicSavant's DPR Calculator (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14WlZE_UKwn3Vhv4i8ewVOc-f2-A7tMW_VRum_p3YNHQ/edit?usp=sharing), I compared a +4 STR Claws only Beast Barbarian to a V.Human Zealot Barbarian with PAM, GWM, and +2 STR.

Against what AC? You're also holding it up against the Barbarian Path that is basically about damage and calling it a trap when it offers a mix of offense and survivability. Just a note though, nothing says that both of your normal attacks needs to be with a claw. You can take one swing with a great weapon for the die size or a polearm to trigger PAM giving you an at will 4 attacks a turn, each benefiting from mod and rage bonus.

Did you factor in the 2d12 smite option can proc prof mod times a day?

How does the DPR compensate for the first turn lacking a PAM attack whilst the Beast still retains the extra claw attack?


1. I admit that I missed the bonus attack adding the Dexterity modifier, that makes it quite a bit better.
2. I don't value the skill-monkey ability that highly because I don't value skills that highly.
3. The telepathy is nice, sure, but it's pretty situational.

1. It's easily one of the if not the best damage orientated Rogue for tier 1 and part of tier 2 and competitive thereafter
2. You can't trash a subclass for a skill based ability on a Rogue, a heavily skill based class, as a bad ability. You seem to only care about combat really, grapples are skill checks.
3. It's a ribbon ability on a psionic subclass, how much do you actually want out of it?


Even with all you wrote I still don't see how this archetype compares with Arcane Trickster's flexibility and damage output.
However, we can agree to disagree.

We certainly can, I'm very curious though what subclasses you actually consider good for the Rogue.


I mean, yeah. It's a Barbarian. Its whole thing is combat. Obviously, I'm going to say that an option with 50% more DPR and minuscule opportunity cost (delaying +2 STR by one ASI) easily takes the cake.
What other metrics would you judge a Barbarian by if not its combat effectiveness?

That's not a miniscule opportunity cost, you forwent a bigger stat bump and other racial abilities by being a Variant Human and will hit less often for the entire comparison.

The Barbarian as a class gets far more survivability than it does damage, judging a Barbarian solely by it's damage output is missing a lot of the point of playing the only d12 hit die class in the game that gets resistances.


Sure, it's definitely viable and even great in a no-feat game. However, in my experience most DMs allow feats.

Even in a feat allowed game you might want to not play a V.Human and might value the reliability of higher strength.

[Unoriginal]

Pre-release, folks said that there was a statement that got rid of racial prerequisites for feats. I don't see it in the feats section, nor in the "customizing your origin" section.

Did I miss it?

Don't have the book, but I've seen several people who have the book say it's not in the book.

[Dork_Forge]

Don't have the book, but I've seen several people who have the book say it's not in the book.

Can confirm, the feats section is just the new feats, the origin section doesn't indicate creating a custom origin (and say, saying you're an Elf) would allow you access to restricted feats.

[Unoriginal]

If anything, I'd half-seriously say it makes a good case for not doing public UA's any more.

The fact that they adjusted things from the UA thanks to the public feedback makes a good case for why they should keep doing public UAs.

[Sindal]

I'm just not sure how Favored Foe from ranger works... Says that you mark the target as your favored enemy for 1 minute or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell). To me, RAW, it doesn't count as Concentration per se, right? So I CAN concentrate on spell, while using Favored Foe, right?

Nah, it's the opposite.

Whenever you start concentrating on something, period, anything else that you would need to concentrate on to start doing will break concentration of the old ability. The fact that the ability text mentions concentration at all tells us that we need use the 'consentration' mechaics. Otherwise it would have just been 'this lasts for a minute'.
Items that require you concentrate have the same rules (if you cast a spell from an item that requires concentration, casting a different spell from your own spell list will break the first spell's concentration)

So you can't concentrate on Hunters Mark and use Favored Foe at the same time. The second you start the second instance, the first will fail.
Tis a shame, but it's likely to stop excessive lvl1 dips for a free non concentration extra damage ability.

It's worth noting, however, that you don't need to use any sort of action to trigger FF. You can just 'do' it whenever you hit someone.
This means that you could cast a concentration spell like hail of thorns or thunder arrow, attack someone, get the damage bonus from the spell, then mark the target with FF to receive it's extra damage (which is something that you can't do with something like hunter's mark).

It's also a resource that isn't your spell slots, so you can spend those on other things.

It's a poor man's hunter's mark, but a slightly more flexible version because of it.

[Dankus Memakus]

I think a lot of the wailing and gnashing of teeth came from "The final version isn't as powerful as the UA version, my build is RUINED FOREVER!".

If anything, I'd half-seriously say it makes a good case for not doing public UA's any more.

Yeah that's totally fair. I was also on reddit which I don't really think of as the peak of the 5e community.

In the end. I love UA a lot but sometimes I do see people screaming "let my class be able to do whatever I want!!" I'm hopeful since these subclasses did get some deserved nerfs WOTC is pretty apt at ignoring that opinion.

[Amechra]

Path of the Beast is bad because it encourages you to not attack with GWM+PAM and thus lose out on a whopping ~20 DPR at level 11. It's legitimately a trap option.

Slightly off-topic: This is one of the reasons that I think GWM+PAM (and, by extension, SS+CE) is a bad thing for the game. Any other at-will damage option that's balanced around someone making optimal use of those feats is really excessive if you're playing in a game without feats, which is the default.

There's also the fact that you spent two feats on one very narrow trick instead of something more generally useful (like a stat increase or a feat that expands your options).

[Deathtongue]

if you're playing in a game without feats, which is the default.I hear this argument a lot: feats are optional, multiclasses are optional, etc. 99% of the non-AL 5E games I've played or even seen advertised on Roll20 or Warhorn or Discord allow feats. About 9/10ths of games that get into T2 use magical items. Over 95% of them allow multiclassing.

At a certain point, we should just treat feats -- including GWM + SS -- as a default we have to live with, rather than just retreating behind RAW. Who cares what RAW says if they don't reflect how most people play the game?

[MaxWilson]

Slightly off-topic: This is one of the reasons that I think GWM+PAM (and, by extension, SS+CE) is a bad thing for the game. Any other at-will damage option that's balanced around someone making optimal use of those feats is really excessive if you're playing in a game without feats, which is the default.

"Default" is a social norm in a particular context, not a game rule. E.g. Druids aren't in the Basic Rules but playing a 5E game where Moon Druids aren't allowed will surprise people unless you say up front that it's Basic Rules only, because Basic is not the default assumption people make.

In any case, Path of the Beast is clearly NOT balanced around GWM/PAM or it wouldn't underperform. In fact it's primarily of interest to those who are primarily interested in something other than damage, e.g. it's not bad for a grapple barb (shield + grappling hand + bite or tail enemies to death). I can see it working out as a Barb X/Rogue 5 Tarzan archetype, if Tarzan were also a mutant. Rogues don't want to GWM anyway.


It's also highly sub-optimal. You literally lose out on 20 DPR (35 vs 55) at level 11 even if you go for the highest DPR option, which is the Claws.

That doesn't seem to be true once you factor in hit chances, even when Recklessly attacking. Let's compare a GWM greatsword attack (including crits) vs. two claw attacks:

One greatsword attack at +4 for 2d6+18 vs. AC 15: 12.85 DPR
Two claw attacks at +9 for d6+8 vs. AC 15: 17.60 DPR

One greatsword attack at +4 with advantage for 2d6+18 vs. AC 15: 19.43 DPR
Two claw attacks at +9 with advantage for d6+8 vs. AC 15: 22.25 DPR

If you mostly GWM/PAM but do claw attacks twice per turn your DPR will rise against AC 15, not fall. Against higher ACs, claws have a proportionately bigger advantage. Is 2-5 extra points of DPR a big deal? Not in my opinion, I'd rather have Ancestral Guardians or Bear Totem resistance, but it's definitely not a DPR decrease.

[Waazraath]

I hear this argument a lot: feats are optional, multiclasses are optional, etc. 99% of the non-AL 5E games I've played or even seen advertised on Roll20 or Warhorn or Discord allow feats. About 9/10ths of games that get into T2 use magical items. Over 95% of them allow multiclassing.

At a certain point, we should just treat feats -- including GWM + SS -- as a default we have to live with, rather than just retreating behind RAW. Who cares what RAW says if they don't reflect how most people play the game?

I'd like to see some data on this. Most of the games I played were either without multiclassing or without feats and multiclassing. Magic iems are common, but always been 100% been dealt with by the DM - not picking or buying them. I'm not representative, but before I'd accept an optional rule as a 'default' I'd like to have some reliable statistics.

[Hael]

I think the book is largely a missed opportunity.

The racial stuff is bad, and poorly thought out.

The rebalance, I mean class variants is godawful. Ok please explain, why Rangers, Barbarians, Monks, Rogues and Warlocks somehow come away less strong relatively speaking than the Druid and Wizard. The Druid in particular is now flat out OP. Hey, let’s give Shepherd druids Familiars, revivify, aura of vitality, unalterable by the DM summon spells and cone of cold.

We won’t even get into the item dc stuff which heavily favors casters over martials.

The subclasses are a mixed bag. Quite a few are mechanically subpar (see rogues, rangers, bards, barbarians and wizard). The astral monk is sorta the monk version of a gloom stalker (eg basically a class fix). I like the fighter and Druid subclasses (the star Druid is so strong). The sorcerer subclass stuff is a meta changer, and IMO bad design. Warlock and cleric subclasses are a mixed bag. The twilight and genie subclasses are nice, fathomless and peace not so much.

Again, I’m reminded how strange some of the design decisions are. In a world where summon woodland creatures or spirit shroud exist at lvl5, theyre still paranoid about the scaling of cleric attacks at lvl 17 (damage only on one attack per round).

[MaxWilson]

I'd like to see some data on this. Most of the games I played were either without multiclassing or without feats and multiclassing. Magic iems are common, but always been 100% been dealt with by the DM - not picking or buying them. I'm not representative, but before I'd accept an optional rule as a 'default' I'd like to have some reliable statistics.

Well, for what it's worth and on the theory that limited and undoubtedly biased data is still more than zero data, on the first page of giantitp's Recruitment forum, I counted six 5E games recruiting:

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?622169-5e-DM-FOUND-Looking-for-a-DM-with-a-game-they-WANT-to-run (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?622135-Winter-Is-Coming-5E-One-Off-Boss-Fight (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621890-A-Concerto-Of-Death-5E-One-Off-Boss-Fight (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621734-Competitive-5E-Anarchy-In-The-Magnificent-Mansion (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621034-DND-5E-Guilty-until-proven-Innocent (feats not specified but from reading the discussion seems to be okay; multiclassing restricted to two classes max)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621751-5e-West-Marches-PG-13-Roll20-Bright-Dawn-Recruitment (not specified)

The first four links are all from the same DM.

From this I conclude... limited data isn't much better than no data, but implicit defaults are clearly important because people aren't feeling the need to explicitly communicate their choices up front. Thread #5 took a while to discuss feats and multiclassing but both turned out to be allowed, so there doesn't seem to be an implicit default AGAINST them, at least from that DM's perspective. Further research is needed.

[Deathtongue]

Well, for what it's worth and on the theory that limited and undoubtedly biased data is still more than zero data, on the first page of giantitp's Recruitment forum, I counted six 5E games recruiting:

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?622169-5e-DM-FOUND-Looking-for-a-DM-with-a-game-they-WANT-to-run (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?622135-Winter-Is-Coming-5E-One-Off-Boss-Fight (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621890-A-Concerto-Of-Death-5E-One-Off-Boss-Fight (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621734-Competitive-5E-Anarchy-In-The-Magnificent-Mansion (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621034-DND-5E-Guilty-until-proven-Innocent (feats not specified but from reading the discussion seems to be okay; multiclassing restricted to two classes max)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621751-5e-West-Marches-PG-13-Roll20-Bright-Dawn-Recruitment (not specified)

The first four links are all from the same DM.

From this I conclude... limited data isn't much better than no data, but implicit defaults are clearly important because people aren't feeling the need to explicitly communicate their choices up front. Thread #5 took a while to discuss feats and multiclassing but both turned out to be allowed, so there doesn't seem to be an implicit default AGAINST them, at least from that DM's perspective. Further research is needed.

You might be better off with Roll20 or Discord. Or if you have the patience for it, Warhorn.

[Waazraath]

Well, for what it's worth and on the theory that limited and undoubtedly biased data is still more than zero data, on the first page of giantitp's Recruitment forum, I counted six 5E games recruiting:

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?622169-5e-DM-FOUND-Looking-for-a-DM-with-a-game-they-WANT-to-run (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?622135-Winter-Is-Coming-5E-One-Off-Boss-Fight (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621890-A-Concerto-Of-Death-5E-One-Off-Boss-Fight (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621734-Competitive-5E-Anarchy-In-The-Magnificent-Mansion (feats/multiclassing not specified but seems permissive, even Ravnica is allowed)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621034-DND-5E-Guilty-until-proven-Innocent (feats not specified but from reading the discussion seems to be okay; multiclassing restricted to two classes max)
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621751-5e-West-Marches-PG-13-Roll20-Bright-Dawn-Recruitment (not specified)

The first four links are all from the same DM.

From this I conclude... limited data isn't much better than no data, but implicit defaults are clearly important because people aren't feeling the need to explicitly communicate their choices up front. Thread #5 took a while to discuss feats and multiclassing but both turned out to be allowed, so there doesn't seem to be an implicit default AGAINST them, at least from that DM's perspective. Further research is needed.

I'd even say "limited data can be worse than no data", cause limited data can fuel ill-conceived decisions that never would have been taken with no data ("but hey we have something so we can act on it!"), but lets not get into that :)

If I do a quick google search, I find this thread from 2 years ago, haven't counted but I'd say its about 50/50 where feats and / or multiclass is allowed: https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/91hrzm/5e_no_multiclassing_or_feats/

Or this one: think more than half play with feats, but plenty don't: https://www.enworld.org/threads/no-feats-allowed.478346/page-2

And of course we had Crawford saying 2 years ago the majority of players don't use feats - which is different from the majority of games disallow feats, but there's that: https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/8166at/crawford_a_majority_of_dd_characters_dont_use/

[MaxWilson]

(A) I'd even say "limited data can be worse than no data", cause limited data can fuel ill-conceived decisions that never would have been taken with no data ("but hey we have something so we can act on it!"), but lets not get into that :)

(B) If I do a quick google search, I find this thread from 2 years ago, haven't counted but I'd say its about 50/50 where feats and / or multiclass is allowed: https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/91hrzm/5e_no_multiclassing_or_feats/

Or this one: think more than half play with feats, but plenty don't: https://www.enworld.org/threads/no-feats-allowed.478346/page-2

(C) And of course we had Crawford saying 2 years ago the majority of players don't use feats - which is different from the majority of games disallow feats, but there's that: https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/8166at/crawford_a_majority_of_dd_characters_dont_use/

(A) Definitely a fair criticism.

(B) Even ignoring selection bias, I honestly can't tell from the thread how frequent either is. My impression is that no multiclassing/no feats is a minority of the posts that actually give an opinion, but the vast majority don't even say, and it's not a poll. We can certainly tell from that thread that the percentage is non-zero.

(C) Yes, especially with the common misconception that you "have" to max your primary stat before taking any feats.


You might be better off with Roll20 or Discord. Or if you have the patience for it, Warhorn.

I agree that would be better, but since I don't use either of those, learning how to access them doesn't meet my cost/benefit bar for writing a forum post when I should be getting work done. :-P Speaking of which...

[Amechra]

OK, maybe going for "feats are optional" wasn't the best way to approach this. But even if feats are standard at a table, GWM+PAM isn't going to be unless your table optimizes, because it's a non-obvious strategy. You have to:

A) Notice that glaives work with both feats.
B) Notice that -5/+10 is always a good trade if you're making attacks with advantage.
C) Figure out a way to consistently get that advantage.
D) Figure out that using GWM with a glaive while also having PAM is strictly better than using it with a greataxe.

If you started balancing new build options to match that level of damage output as if it were the default expectation, you're basically demanding that anyone playing any other type of martial character has to learn how to optimize their damage output. That's an unnecessary barrier to entry, right there.

As it stands, the Path of the Beast's claws option looks like it gives you a damage output roughly on par with a Barbarian who uses GWM with a greataxe, which is an eminently reasonable point at which to balance around for a new kind of Barbarian.

(One houserule I'm thinking of trying out the next time I run a game is cutting out PAM and making it so reach weapons get the whole "you get an OA on people who enter your space" thing instead of extended reach.)

[Chaosmancer]

I hear this argument a lot: feats are optional, multiclasses are optional, etc. 99% of the non-AL 5E games I've played or even seen advertised on Roll20 or Warhorn or Discord allow feats. About 9/10ths of games that get into T2 use magical items. Over 95% of them allow multiclassing.

At a certain point, we should just treat feats -- including GWM + SS -- as a default we have to live with, rather than just retreating behind RAW. Who cares what RAW says if they don't reflect how most people play the game?


I disagree for a simple, practical reason.

The Designers will never design the game with that in mind. And, even if they did, not everyone will take the most optimal combat feats instead of other feats. So, they actually create more parity by designing assuming no feats, because then the Barbarian with Alert is at least nominally balanced against the one with PAM.

[CMCC]

So what the hell is actually available in character builder? I see the new classes, but no new class variants or lineage or ability switches etc.

[x3n0n]

So what the hell is actually available in character builder? I see the new classes, but no new class variants or lineage or ability switches etc.

On the "Home" tab for your character, there are two new switches you need to turn on. They have obvious names.

After you do that, the race and class tabs will have "sub-tabs" for optional features.

[CMCC]

On the "Home" tab for your character, there are two new switches you need to turn on. They have obvious names.

After you do that, the race and class tabs will have "sub-tabs" for optional features.

Wonderful. Thank you.