Are there any Tasha's options you would not allow?

[TheUser]

Tasha's comes with a disclaimer that everything presented therein is optional and to be discussed with the group + DM. Which after seeing some of the new subclasses and features seems perfectly reasonable but with that in mind is there anything you would adamantly refuse to see at your table?


I think the college of eloquence is remarkably strong but because it is such an enabler for others as well as potent support caster I am unsure whether I would allow them at my table or just let that particular Bard dominate enemy saves left and right.

I am also a bit apprehensive about the Aberrant Mind Sorcerer as they not only get free subtle spell for enchantments but can also pair those spells with other metamagics and have an expanded spell list that includes modify memory and geas....real super villain fuel since they can also straight slot conversion those same spells from sorcery points (instead of paying the slot synthesis tax) .... That's 9 casts of level 5 enchantment spells in a day at level 9! Be it Geas, Modify Memory or 7 careful spell synaptic statics!

Anyway, I'm sure there's even more absolutely bonkers stuff that is in this book but I was wondering if the community here would flat out refuse any specific subclass or features in their current form and if they would either tweak or deny it completely.

[stoutstien]

Won't personally worry about anything until some actually table time. A single session of actual play is worth exponentially more than all the white room theorem.

[JNAProductions]

Once I own the book, I'll decide.

But probably not gonna restrict anything-I'm okay with players kicking butt.

[Xervous]

Were I to end up GMing 5e, possibly the DC boosting items for being obvious dull BIG NUMBERS things that would hedge out potentially interesting magic items. Or maybe not, would need to run the math on it.

Racial tweaks out the window. There was clearly no balance thought put into that.

[Bobthewizard]

I think the sorcerer subclasses are bonkers. The extra 2 spells known every two levels is so good. It's better than any other sorcerer subclass and might make them more versatile than wizards. Having said that, I'd still allow them. Shadow, draconic, and divine soul sorcerers would still be fun to play.

The +1-3 DC bonus items are crazy too since they aren't limited to spells of that class, so you can stack them. I probably wouldn't put those in my games and I don't usually allow players to buy magic items.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Were I to end up GMing 5e, possibly the DC boosting items for being obvious dull BIG NUMBERS things that would hedge out potentially interesting magic items. Or maybe not, would need to run the math on it.

Racial tweaks out the window. There was clearly no balance thought put into that.

I'm pretty much on this page. I don't have it yet, so I'll decide then.

[ZRN]

I am also a bit apprehensive about the Aberrant Mind Sorcerer as they not only get free subtle spell for enchantments but can also pair those spells with other metamagics and have an expanded spell list that includes modify memory and geas....real super villain fuel since they can also straight slot conversion those same spells from sorcery points (instead of paying the slot synthesis tax) .... That's 9 casts of level 5 enchantment spells in a day at level 9! Be it Geas, Modify Memory or 7 careful spell synaptic statics!


One nice counterbalance to this is how very creepy the subclass is... if a PC starts getting out of hand, it's not too hard for the DM to whip up a crowd with torches and pitchforks to take down the tentacle guy.

[Xervous]

I'm pretty much on this page. I don't have it yet, so I'll decide then.

It was one of my first 3.5e house rules. One of the things 5e generally got right, and a big concern in the system collab I’m in the middle of. Idle numbers from equipment is tedium. At least something like Shadowrun has a compelling implementation that works to play up the setting’s themes. +X D&D stuff is ultimately forgettable and just adds work.

[Warder]

All the custom racial options and the removal of racial requirements from feats for starters, those go right out the window. The psionic subclasses probably go as well in favor of something better & homebrewed, probably a Mystic variant. Those are the things my group agree with.

Then I have a personal pet peeve regarding the unarmed fighting style option, so if I have my way that goes away too, but I could be flexible on that. :P

Edit: Is Spell Versatility in Tasha's? If so, that goes away too!

[Telwar]

Were I to end up GMing 5e, possibly the DC boosting items for being obvious dull BIG NUMBERS things that would hedge out potentially interesting magic items. Or maybe not, would need to run the math on it.

Racial tweaks out the window. There was clearly no balance thought put into that.

I think we're not bothering much with the racial tweaks. Maybe allowing a floating second stat and the proficiency swaps, but not the "lol any stats anywhere lol". While surprisingly decent for the half hour it took them to think of it (I'm pretty sure 20 minutes of that was doing the table), there's so much existing balancing between stat bonuses and traits that an actual good solution would require, like, work, and stuff.

[PhoenixPhyre]

It was one of my first 3.5e house rules. One of the things 5e generally got right, and a big concern in the system collab I’m in the middle of. Idle numbers from equipment is tedium. At least something like Shadowrun has a compelling implementation that works to play up the setting’s themes. +X D&D stuff is ultimately forgettable and just adds work.

Yeah. And especially +save DC items. Those are nasty when the monsters can't make their saves even on a 1. Had that happen already with a warlock when I was too generous with a stat-boosting book.

My current game is not going to get any "bare" +X items. If a more flavorful item gives a +X, whatever.

[KorvinStarmast]

Tasha's comes with a disclaimer that everything presented therein is optional and to be discussed with the group + DM. Which after seeing some of the new subclasses and features seems perfectly reasonable but with that in mind is there anything you would adamantly refuse to see at your table? Don't have it yet, my pre order message is "delayed" (darnit! I wanted to read through it during the road trip for Thanksgiving this year ... :smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious: ) so I'll hold on any comment until I see it in my hot little hands. I'll check Roll20 tonight and see if my pre order there has activated.
I'm pretty much on this page. I don't have it yet, so I'll decide then. Case by case is usually a good call: we did that with SCAG when it first came out.

[gameogre]

The Book is filled with options I will not use. That's ok its a book of options your not meant to just use it all.

I like the new Race option that makes all races different but equal.

Some of the class features options would help out low powered class's So I prob would be willing to just add them to those class's. The High powered class's don't need it and it would in fact unbalance it even more between class's.

A LOT of the rest of this book will just not be used. Like Group Patrons.....i mean its not that the idea is bad....its just something I have already been doing for a long time and they didn't bring anything new to the table and what they did bring is more complicated than it needed to be.

Yeah feats are...meh

I will use like 20% of this stuff.

The only thing im really upset over is Ranger. I guess we have to wait for 6E to get a viable ranger out of WOTC.

[ironkid]

Freely distributing your racial bonuses is right out. Trading your free weapon/armor is reasonable if you have an appropiate background (elf raised by dwarves is more likely to pick up an axe), or if said proficiencies are redundant (elf/mountain dwarf/hobgoblin fighters might want to trade their redundant armor/weapon proficiencies for tools)

[ZRN]

there's so much existing balancing between stat bonuses and traits that an actual good solution would require, like, work, and stuff.

I mean, is there REALLY, though?

I mean, mountain dwarves are weird, but overall, the system is designed to accommodate a broad enough range of ability scores that moving a +2 around isn't going to break anything.

That's my response to the people complaining about gnome barbarians and the like: you could ALREADY play as a gnome barbarian, just with like 16 strength instead of 18. If you want to discourage people from playing particular character types, just tell them they can't do that; don't let them do that but then make it kinda suck a little bit for them by giving them slightly worse stats as some kind of punishment.

[Lord Vukodlak]

I saw someone else present a better option for stat bonuses then Tasha’s.
You got a +2 bonus from your class and a +1 bonus from your background.

Mountain Dwarves, got some kinda minor melee bonus for losing the plus two strength. I forget what.

Half-Elves would lose the plus two charisma and pick something off the half-elf versatility list.

[Willie the Duck]

Oh good, we get to have this debate again. :smallyuk:


Options I won't allow: nothing yet. I might stick with the UA Fae Wanderer simply because they nerfed it for no clear reason. I don't think I will be populating my world with a bunch of the spellcaster DC/magic attack boosters. All racial customization will be DM-approval (yes, obviously yuan ti, mountain dwarf, and maybe half elf being the eyebrow-raisers), but otherwise no clear restrictions .

[Warder]

I mean, is there REALLY, though?

I mean, mountain dwarves are weird, but overall, the system is designed to accommodate a broad enough range of ability scores that moving a +2 around isn't going to break anything.

That's my response to the people complaining about gnome barbarians and the like: you could ALREADY play as a gnome barbarian, just with like 16 strength instead of 18. If you want to discourage people from playing particular character types, just tell them they can't do that; don't let them do that but then make it kinda suck a little bit for them by giving them slightly worse stats as some kind of punishment.

Well, to be fair, you're saying that it's not a big deal while simultaneously saying that having worse stats is a punishment. I think you can't have it both ways, you know?

Me, I don't think +/-2 stats are a big deal at all. We've stopped playing optimized at our table and we're probably having more fun now as a result. We still won't use Tasha's racial options since we prefer more distinct differences between races anyway, to the point that we've been looking into adding more negative stat modifiers to some of the standard races, though that has more to do with thematics than any sort of mechanical balancing act.

[MaxWilson]

Tasha's comes with a disclaimer that everything presented therein is optional and to be discussed with the group + DM. Which after seeing some of the new subclasses and features seems perfectly reasonable but with that in mind is there anything you would adamantly refuse to see at your table?

I don't have it yet but from what I've seen it's mostly bloat, e.g. subclasses that have no reason to exist. My default position is "nothing in Tasha's should be assumed except ki-infused strike (3rd level monk feature). If you want something, come talk to me about an exception." In other words, it is more optional than the 3rd party spell adaptations in the Book of Lost Spells, which players can at least ATTEMPT to research completely in character with no need per se for a metagame conversation with the DM, just an action declaration. But you can't just make a Scribe wizard without talking to me, that's not legal, nor a custom lineage.

Is there any class or subclass in there I would adamantly refuse even if players desperately wanted it? Probably not. I doubt there's anything in there more broken per se than Shepherd Druid. But bloat is a problem of its own, and even though I might agree to Clockwork Soul for a specific PC if a player desperately wanted it, I'd probably also want to make it clear that this Clockwork Soul is unique and there aren't any other Clockwork Souls in the game setting. My objection is in large part to the complexity cost of bloat, although the game balance implications are also partially mitigated by making it unique. (E.g. the answer to "Why should I play a Storm Sorcerer? Why do Storm Sorcerers even EXIST if Clockwork Soul is just better?" is "That guy's a weirdo, don't assume he's the norm.")

However, I'd RATHER fix the underlying issues than patch an issue through class bloat. If all you want is more spells, I'd rather let you play a Wild Sorc with a domain spell list and a house rule that sorcs can choose their spells from the wizard list than a Clockwork Soul.

[Warder]

My default position is "nothing in Tasha's should be assumed except ki-infused strike (3rd level monk feature). If you want something, come talk to me about an exception."

I like that. One thing that bothers me with 5e is that there's a general community expectation of being allowed to play anything you want and if the DM tries to restrict that, that's in poor taste. I greatly prefer a tighter set of core (sub)classes and races and if you want to color outside the lines, working together with the DM to make it happen is how to go about it. At least if you have a regular group, I don't have any experience with AL or West Marches.

[ZRN]

Well, to be fair, you're saying that it's not a big deal while simultaneously saying that having worse stats is a punishment. I think you can't have it both ways, you know?


My problem isn't that bad stats are a punishment - it's that they're a CRAPPY punishment. Like, drow daylight sensitivity - that's a fun punishment that actually potentially impacts the way you approach the game. Kenku not being able to speak - that's a really tough and interesting RP challenge! Gnomes not being able to use heavy weapons - even that at least forces you to adapt different tactics for some classes.

Having a 16 instead of an 18 in your primary stat won't make you do anything at all differently. It won't make you think creatively or adapt new tactics - it'll just mean that an extra 5% of the time you fail instead of succeeding. That just feels petty.

[MaxWilson]

I like that. One thing that bothers me with 5e is that there's a general community expectation of being allowed to play anything you want and if the DM tries to restrict that, that's in poor taste. I greatly prefer a tighter set of core (sub)classes and races and if you want to color outside the lines, working together with the DM to make it happen is how to go about it. At least if you have a regular group, I don't have any experience with AL or West Marches.

If I were setting up a West Marches community I'd probably restrict it to non-Tasha's with exceptions to be approved only by majority vote of the whole community.

[Warder]

My problem isn't that bad stats are a punishment - it's that they're a CRAPPY punishment. Like, drow daylight sensitivity - that's a fun punishment that actually potentially impacts the way you approach the game. Kenku not being able to speak - that's a really tough and interesting RP challenge! Gnomes not being able to use heavy weapons - even that at least forces you to adapt different tactics for some classes.

Having a 16 instead of an 18 in your primary stat won't make you do anything at all differently. It won't make you think creatively or adapt new tactics - it'll just mean that an extra 5% of the time you fail instead of succeeding. That just feels petty.

Oh, thank you for clarifying, that makes more sense to me. Honestly I think a lot of this goes far deeper into the core of 5e, like how classes are geared towards just one primary stat. If barbarians or fighters had more use for INT, gnome warriors that relied on wits rather than brute strength would be far more interesting to play, etc. 5e's simplicity has a lot of benefits, but it's certainly come with some severe sacrifices too, imho.

[JackPhoenix]

Don't have the book and won't have it for a while... it came up a month late to have the excuse of buying it for my birthday, and a month too early to buy it as christmas gift, so I don't know all that's in there.

But definitely the racial stuff, that one I've seen before and disagree with.

[king_steve]

For the games I DM, nothing seems out of the question for me. The items are very specific so who knows if they'll show up or not, it might make sense to have some items (e.g. the spell shards) show up in certain types of environments, but that will depend on the players going to an area to find them. I already allowed Artificers in a Waterdeep Dragon Heist campaign, so having them be a bit more 'generic' in an official non-Eberron book seems good to me.

I'm pretty excited to try out the Group Patron and the puzzles for my games.

[Telwar]

My problem isn't that bad stats are a punishment - it's that they're a CRAPPY punishment. Like, drow daylight sensitivity - that's a fun punishment that actually potentially impacts the way you approach the game. Kenku not being able to speak - that's a really tough and interesting RP challenge! Gnomes not being able to use heavy weapons - even that at least forces you to adapt different tactics for some classes.

Having a 16 instead of an 18 in your primary stat won't make you do anything at all differently. It won't make you think creatively or adapt new tactics - it'll just mean that an extra 5% of the time you fail instead of succeeding. That just feels petty.

To be fair, I never said it was "good" balancing. Petty does seem like a good descriptor.

[Tanarii]

All of it.

When (if at this rate) I spin up my campaign again, tasha's content will not be allowed.

[x3n0n]

All of it.

When (if at this rate) I spin up my campaign again, tasha's content will not be allowed.

Just curious: is the answer different for Xanathar or SCAG?
If so, why not allow the TCoE subclasses and/or spells? Those seem relatively innocuous, vs the optional rules and perhaps the feats.

[sithlordnergal]

I haven't gotten my hands on Tasha's yet, but I get the feeling I'll allow it all. I haven't banned anything but UA yet, and I can't see myself banning anything now. I'm not exactly concerned about the items or classes, its not like they'll be game breaking or anything like that. I've yet to find a subclass that meets my definition of "OP" to the point where it needs a nerf, same with magical items and feats. And I already implement the racial ability score variant rules, so not a big deal there either.

Then again, my personal thoughts whenever I see "X is OP and should be banned/nerfed" is always "Get better at DMing and creating encounters". I've yet to find any class, any build, any combo of things that cannot be challenged/overcome without some creative use of encounter design.

[Dankus Memakus]

I haven't gotten my hands on Tasha's yet, but I get the feeling I'll allow it all. I haven't banned anything but UA yet, and I can't see myself banning anything now. I'm not exactly concerned about the items or classes, its not like they'll be game breaking or anything like that. I've yet to find a subclass that meets my definition of "OP" to the point where it needs a nerf, same with magical items and feats. And I already implement the racial ability score variant rules, so not a big deal there either.

Then again, my personal thoughts whenever I see "X is OP and should be banned/nerfed" is always "Get better at DMing and creating encounters". I've yet to find any class, any build, any combo of things that cannot be challenged/overcome without some creative use of encounter design.

I feel similarly although I do have the book. As I've gone on I have found that the less you limit the better. Although if you have your niche you have to create that's cool I fully understand. I like the crazy fantasy acid trip that is all of d&d thrown together but I recognize others do not

[HappyDaze]

Just curious: is the answer different for Xanathar or SCAG?
If so, why not allow the TCoE subclasses and/or spells? Those seem relatively innocuous, vs the optional rules and perhaps the feats.

I have allowed most of Xan's, minus the Hexblade. I outright ban SCAG (the book and anything in it) at my table. Tasha's will start off with everything banned and it will be more a question of what I'll then allow in after review (i.e., the default rests at NO).

[Warder]

I outright ban SCAG (the book and anything in it) at my table.

I have to ask, are you saying you ban the contents of the book and actual physical copies of it at your table, or what do you mean? :smallamused:

[PhoenixPhyre]

One note: I don't ban. I selectively allow. DEFAULT DENY, then grant specific access. And that goes for core books as well (mainly for races, I'm much more allowing of classes). This is entirely for setting-reasons, not power reasons. The majority of the races are somewhere in the setting, but they haven't been discovered and brought into the set of playable races yet by anyone. When that changes, so will the restrictions.

One other thing I realized that certainly won't be allowed is the spell dream of the blue veil. Because it makes no sense in my particular setting, which is only marginally part of the same multiverse and is explicitly and intentionally cut off from any other setting. Even the planar structure is different and enclosed.

One thing from other published material that will be a hard no is anything that revolves around gunpowder or direct equivalents. It's not part of my setting for aesthetic reasons. So no gunslingers. I'll need to read the new version of the artificer to see what would require modifications for that reason. I'm ok with guns powered by personal magic (basically a wand-in-gun-form, firing firebolts), but the setting will never have an era of shot. Not because there's anything wrong with it per se, it just doesn't fit the aesthetic I'm going for.

[KorvinStarmast]

I have allowed most of Xan's, minus the Hexblade. I outright ban SCAG (the book and anything in it) at my table. Tasha's will start off with everything banned and it will be more a question of what I'll then allow in after review (i.e., the default rests at NO). No love for the Arcana Cleric? (I am glad sun soul monk ported into XGTE).

[GooeyChewie]

I'll adjudicate Custom Lineage on a case-by-case basis. In the debates regarding the Ability Score Increase portion of Customizing Your Origin, I've seen many players stress the importance of maximizing a character's primary ability score. I've seen plenty of arguments that starting with a +2 means the race/class combo is unplayable, or at least severely handicapped. Now with Custom Lineage and a well-chosen "half" feat, a character can start with a +4 ability score modifier. All those arguments about how +3 is so much better than +2 also seem to apply when comparing +4 to +3, at least for any SAD build. If a player presents me with an interesting race concept and a balanced ability score/feat choice, I'll accept it; if they want to play pseudo-human-with-an-18, no go.

I have my doubts about allowing free-floating stats in the first place, for similar reasons. It seems to me Half-Elves become the default race, with excellent racial abilities and the top-notch ability score improvements. Fortunately I think most of the players in my group will continue to focus on making characters they like, rather than for pure mechanical superiority.

Other than those, I have not delved deeply enough to find anything truly objectionable for a generic adventure or campaign.

[sithlordnergal]

I have my doubts about allowing free-floating stats in the first place, for similar reasons. It seems to me Half-Elves become the default race, with excellent racial abilities and the top-notch ability score improvements. Fortunately I think most of the players in my group will continue to focus on making characters they like, rather than for pure mechanical superiority.


I mean, given how strong Charisma is, and how powerful Half-Elves are, weren't they kind of the default anyway? Even when using a class that didn't use Charisma you had a pair of floating +1 stats, immunity to magical sleep, resistance to Charm, two floating Skill proficiencies, Darkvision, and three languages, one of your choice. The rule changes haven't really changed anything for Half-Elves because they were already the "Go-To" race for most builds. This is a minimal boost to Half-Elves while giving a huge boost to races that need it.

[Mikal]

The stat customization. Sorry but that won’t ever be a thing at my table

[GooeyChewie]

I mean, given how strong Charisma is, and how powerful Half-Elves are, weren't they kind of the default anyway? Even when using a class that didn't use Charisma you had a pair of floating +1 stats, immunity to magical sleep, resistance to Charm, two floating Skill proficiencies, Darkvision, and three languages, one of your choice. The rule changes haven't really changed anything for Half-Elves because they were already the "Go-To" race for most builds. This is a minimal boost to Half-Elves while giving a huge boost to races that need it.

Half-Elves were the default for Charisma-based classes. For other classes they were still good, but not necessarily the default. I fear the rules change takes of that "for Charisma-based classes" qualifier.

EDIT: I hope I'm wrong about that. I hope the customization does everything Wizards hopes it will do and that we're all better off for it.

[Segev]

My problem isn't that bad stats are a punishment - it's that they're a CRAPPY punishment. Like, drow daylight sensitivity - that's a fun punishment that actually potentially impacts the way you approach the game. Kenku not being able to speak - that's a really tough and interesting RP challenge! Gnomes not being able to use heavy weapons - even that at least forces you to adapt different tactics for some classes.

Having a 16 instead of an 18 in your primary stat won't make you do anything at all differently. It won't make you think creatively or adapt new tactics - it'll just mean that an extra 5% of the time you fail instead of succeeding. That just feels petty.

I agree: stat penalties have no place in 5e. But "not having a +2 in this specific stat" isn't a "penalty." It's a lack of a boost in one specific area.

The logic that says it's a penalty is logic that thinks that all stats are really 2 higher than they are paid for, and that 4 states get a -2 and 1 a -1. That's...just not accurate. :smallannoyed:

[ATHATH]

Half-Elves were the default for Charisma-based classes. For other classes they were still good, but not necessarily the default.
I thought the default (optimizer's) choice for most classes was variant human?

[HappyDaze]

I have to ask, are you saying you ban the contents of the book and actual physical copies of it at your table, or what do you mean? :smallamused:

Both are banned.

[MrCharlie]

I thought the default (optimizer's) choice for most classes was variant human?
It depends; some races give things you can't really duplicate with a feat, like githyanki giving medium armor and good one-handed and two-handed weapons. Sometimes you wanted to start with a 17 in both STR and CON so you can really power level those physical attributes and went mountain dwarf. Sometimes you cared about level to damage and busted out ye-olde Aasamir. If you were planning on playing to high levels and didn't have a bunch of feats lined up, sometimes min-maxing attributes mattered more, and you went for half-elf. And sometimes you rolled for stats and ended up with an array which human didn't really help.

(Even if you did want to min-max attributes though, resilient variant human is very hard to pass up).

Otherwise, variant human it was.

Also, optimization isn't always simple power gaming, sometimes you optimized a bad idea because you loved it. "Oh, you mean my Bugbear can hit people from 15 feet away with a pike? This is pretty objectively useless, but lets go on a journey here." If you were generically optimizing a class, yeah, variant human usually won that debate, with some exceptions where feats didn't help as much, or you wanted a +1 X feat to the main stat so you put a +2 in there at character creation.

To answer the original question-I'm liable to either require that everyone use the "Choose your own humanoid" option and/or variant human, or no one does. But I haven't thoroughly read through some of the feats and spells yet (or classes really), so I may find something else that shatters my perception of game balance yet.

[Dr. Cliché]

The race/stat customisation parts.

I'm willing to consider tweaking racial traits in line with backstories, but I absolutely will not have floating stats as the default state.

[ftafp]

While I don't DM, the only options I really think need to be banned are some of the available options for sidekick. Dolgrim for example get four arms and three attacks at level one, and everyone knows how bad pixies are. If you're using Big Rick Energy, the Meeseeks are even worse, as they physically can't take damage. Granted, according to the lore they do die the instant their goal is completed, but there are much harder goals out there than taking two strokes off Jerry's game

[Bilbron]

I haven't gotten my hands on Tasha's yet, but I get the feeling I'll allow it all. I haven't banned anything but UA yet, and I can't see myself banning anything now. I'm not exactly concerned about the items or classes, its not like they'll be game breaking or anything like that. I've yet to find a subclass that meets my definition of "OP" to the point where it needs a nerf, same with magical items and feats. And I already implement the racial ability score variant rules, so not a big deal there either.

Then again, my personal thoughts whenever I see "X is OP and should be banned/nerfed" is always "Get better at DMing and creating encounters". I've yet to find any class, any build, any combo of things that cannot be challenged/overcome without some creative use of encounter design.Well said! I agree entirely. Powerful characters just means powerful enemies and more epicness all around!

[IsaacsAlterEgo]

Nope, I allow all official content in my games.

I might however offer to modify some of the content a bit to revert some of the changes between UA and the final release, as the nerf hammer seemed to be particularly heavy handed this time around. Poor Wildfire druid, so close to fireball and yet so far.

[Dragonsonthemap]

Probably won't get much use out of the mimic colony, group patrons, or anything designed for characters above 11th level, but nothing it actually banned. Subclasses are fine enough to me, and all my playgroups have been more or less using the float ability increases and proficiency trading for years, now.

[Anymage]

Then again, my personal thoughts whenever I see "X is OP and should be banned/nerfed" is always "Get better at DMing and creating encounters". I've yet to find any class, any build, any combo of things that cannot be challenged/overcome without some creative use of encounter design.

It isn't just about designing encounters, although that can get tricky too. (The harder you make it to DM the fewer DMs you have to run groups and all.) The other major issue is the 3.5 tier issue. If one person played a wizard and another played the rogue, you'd be hard pressed to not have the former outshine the latter.

Power creep is also a thing, but with the TCoE subclasses in particular I'm getting a playtest vibe from them. Err on the side of too strong to see how well the ideas work, use the feedback for the eventual 5.5 or 6e. So less upset than I'd otherwise be, even if I do get a sense of a lot of rough edges from the book.


I agree: stat penalties have no place in 5e. But "not having a +2 in this specific stat" isn't a "penalty." It's a lack of a boost in one specific area.

The logic that says it's a penalty is logic that thinks that all stats are really 2 higher than they are paid for, and that 4 states get a -2 and 1 a -1. That's...just not accurate. :smallannoyed:

The big thing that bugs me about the TCoE rules, and full flex stats in general, is how everything has to line up perfectly. It isn't about just talking and trying to find common ground. Like I'd be more inclined to let your gnomebarian swap their subrace's +1 to a stat to Str if you really felt like a +2 mod didn't cut it, while still keeping the +2 Int.

But that's a debate that's been had repeatedly, and always seems to degenerate. So that's all I'll say on the topic.

[Kireban]

One nice counterbalance to this is how very creepy the subclass is... if a PC starts getting out of hand, it's not too hard for the DM to whip up a crowd with torches and pitchforks to take down the tentacle guy.

Sadly no one knows it is them since it is all subtle without even components :P

[PhoenixPhyre]

After a quick read through, here are my starting positions on Tasha's, by "chunk":

--Customizing your Origin: DISALLOW (use variant races/regional backgrounds instead)
--Artificer: ALLOW
--Barbarian: ALLOW
--Bard: ALLOW
--Cleric: ALLOW
--Druid: DISALLOW (Stars) ALLOW OTHER
--Fighter: ALLOW
--Monk: ALLOW
--Paladin: ALLOW
--Ranger: ALLOW
--Rogue: ALLOW
--Sorcerer: DISALLOW (subclasses) ALLOW (OCF)
--Warlock: ALLOW
--Wizard: DISALLOW (Scribe) ALLOW OTHER
--Feats: DISALLOW (Gunner)
--Group Patrons: Incorporate these into Adventuring Companies
--Spells: DISALLOW (Dream of the Blue Veil)
--Magic Items: DISALLOW (All-Purpose Tool, Amulet of the Devout, Arcane Grimoire, Bloodwell Vial, Far Realm Shard, Rhythm-Maker's Drum)
--Sidekicks: In play

The disallowed subclasses are based on aesthetics peculiar to the world, although I don't like the sorcerer ones for other reasons. Gunner is out because no firearms. Dream of the blue veil because contact with other settings is blocked by a setting feature. The implements because I don't like them. Far Realm Shard for setting reasons.

Chapter 1 is out completely, hard stop. I have a plethora of setting-specific variant races for use instead. Or you can use the printed ones (although I don't do the stat penalties). If you use one of my variants, you can take a regional background which gives a couple region-specific proficiencies. Usually a language and a weapon or tool.

[JackPhoenix]

While I don't DM, the only options I really think need to be banned are some of the available options for sidekick. Dolgrim for example get four arms and three attacks at level one, and everyone knows how bad pixies are. If you're using Big Rick Energy, the Meeseeks are even worse, as they physically can't take damage. Granted, according to the lore they do die the instant their goal is completed, but there are much harder goals out there than taking two strokes off Jerry's game

Given the PCs would have to befrienden one of them before they would be even considered for a sidekick, and thus completely in GM's jurisdiction anyway, I don't see either of those as a problem. I also haven't seen anything saying sidekicks are intended as PCs.

If the characters meet a pixie, stick around long enough to befriend it, and then convince it to follow them into situations where it faces deadly dangers regularly, they deserve it.

[Tanarii]

Just curious: is the answer different for Xanathar or SCAG?
If so, why not allow the TCoE subclasses and/or spells? Those seem relatively innocuous, vs the optional rules and perhaps the feats.
SCAG was not allowed.

Xanathars it took IIRC over a year of playesting in one shots before I allowed it. And then I excluded the Hexblade.

So I'll amend my answer: initially none. Its possible with extentive playtesting I may allow some new subclasses.

[Telwar]

Dream of the blue veil because contact with other settings is blocked by a setting feature.

To be fair, the components for that spell require DM Fiat anyway, between the "magic item from another world" or "person from another world who's already there." Some amusement could be derived from mentions of the spell, but probably not enough to really be worth doing.

[x3n0n]

So I'll amend my answer: initially none. Its possible with extentive playtesting I may allow some new subclasses.

I understand that stance. Thank you for explaining. :)

[MaxWilson]

To be fair, the components for that spell require DM Fiat anyway, between the "magic item from another world" or "person from another world who's already there." Some amusement could be derived from mentions of the spell, but probably not enough to really be worth doing.

Except... Wish doesn't require DM fiat for components.

[PhoenixPhyre]

To be fair, the components for that spell require DM Fiat anyway, between the "magic item from another world" or "person from another world who's already there." Some amusement could be derived from mentions of the spell, but probably not enough to really be worth doing.

True. But it's easier to say up front "don't take this spell, it will never work."

[IsaacsAlterEgo]

To be fair, the components for that spell require DM Fiat anyway, between the "magic item from another world" or "person from another world who's already there." Some amusement could be derived from mentions of the spell, but probably not enough to really be worth doing.

Can't you use a focus or component pouch for the components, since they don't have a value and aren't consumed on casting?

[Pex]

I think Scribe Wizards will cause problems for some DMs despite the nerf. Such wizards can still cast Forceful Hands, Psychic Ray, and Thunderball easily enough. Damage spells aren't everything, but they are significant.

I like Star Druid, but in my opinion it rivals Moon Druid in power. Stay out of melee and you're golden. Free castings of Guiding Bolt. Bonus action range attack. Its own version of Bardic Inspiration/Cutting Words. If there's a Concentration spell you really want to keep going you can "Take 10".

[MrCharlie]

Can't you use a focus or component pouch for the components, since they don't have a value and aren't consumed on casting?
Same question comes up with the component for summon greater demon, and the answer seems to be yeah, even if the component has a clearly implied rarity and associated cost, if it's not said then you can cast it with a focus. However the other ruling was that you can't get benefits connected to using the item-such as creating a circle of blood to protect from find greater demon.

So technically you could probably cast it given the rules, but the spell then can't resolve because you lack any way to teleport to a particular location. So...Nothing appears to happen, or you waste the slot. Maybe you just get to decide to wake up in a world of your choice, but that seems unlikely.

The other thing is that magic items universally have worth, it's just not clear what their worth is. So maybe it would work differently, and it fails outright.

Wish is more ambiguous, but in general my impression is that wish can force the spell to work however you intend it regardless of implications, due to how wish is worded-you don't technically cast it at all, you just will the effects of a successful cast into being.

[P. G. Macer]

(Dislclaimer: I do not have the book, and I likely won’t until mid or late December, so I’m going off secondhand information)

The general consensus elsewhere on the inerwebs is that the Twilight Cleric’s Channel Divinity is brokenly good, to the point (along with some other features) that the subclass might be the strongest Domain in 5e. A shame, really, I was looking forward to it.

On a related note, Peace Domain’s Level 1 ability is apparently multi class bait that makes the Hexblade blush, so at the very least I’m going to ban multi classing with the Peace Domain.

Like many of you, I will be banning the race-customization rules due to how poorly designed they are.

If what’s being said about the magic items is true, most of them are getting the ban hammer as well.

Order of Scribes still has the damage-swapping ability, so it’s a no-go, as there is at least one wizard spell for every spell level except 8th that deals bludgeoning damage, which by virtue of being a spell is magical.

[MrCharlie]

(Dislclaimer: I do not have the book, and I likely won’t until mid or late December, so I’m going off secondhand information)

The general consensus elsewhere on the inerwebs is that the Twilight Cleric’s Channel Divinity is brokenly good, to the point (along with some other features) that the subclass might be the strongest Domain in 5e. A shame, really, I was looking forward to it.

On a related note, Peace Domain’s Level 1 ability is apparently multi class bait that makes the Hexblade blush, so at the very least I’m going to ban multi classing with the Peace Domain.

Like many of you, I will be banning the race-customization rules due to how poorly designed they are.

If what’s being said about the magic items is true, most of them are getting the ban hammer as well.

Order of Scribes still has the damage-swapping ability, so it’s a no-go, as there is at least one wizard spell for every spell level except 8th that deals bludgeoning damage, which by virtue of being a spell is magical.
Twilight cleric also grants advantage on initiative to one party member at no cost and inexplictly gets the full cleric proficiencies, so it's now the bust multiclass if you want heavy armor for any reason as well. It also gets to solve darkvision problems with super darkvision, and can give it to other people.

(Why they choose to nerf ranger fixes but not twilight, which has been bonkers since printed, is beyond me).

The actual temp HP spam is merely good, and the charm/frighten remove is merely good, and together there are merely great. It doesen't scale, thank all that exists, and 1d6 don't do much to stop dragons. It's still nutso at early levels and the other features are both great at high levels and incredible at low levels, so yeah, it's certainly up there.

(Though as long as Arcana domain grants Wish and forge domains makes you immune to fire there will always be competition).

Peace isn't quite multiclass bait because there are no armor proficiencies and twilight now exists, but emboldening bond is like bless+guidance that stacks with bless+guidance, with the small problem of appearing to encourage AOE bait formations (in truth, the range is generous enough and you only need to from linked pairs, so it just encourages people not to run off like lunatics alone).

Why does scribes granting magical bludgeoning matter? Its probably not resisted by anything or something like that, but I don't see resistance come up often enough to be a huge deal anyway.

[Sception]

Nah, I allow all official content.

Even & especually the floating racial stats, I find they do more for encouraging thematic play than anything else. Finally you can have decent drow clerics, shadar-kai shadow sorcerers, dwarf paladins, & any number of other thematic options that were discouraged by poor stat fits before. I don't see any balance problem with it, it's clear that the dev's have been treating +2 to one stat as equivalent to +2 to any other from day one and mostly just lets players who get hung up on the numbers play whatever race/class combo they like without worrying about it. It brings the floor way, way up while barely moving the ceiling, which is exactly the sort of change I like to see.

Even gunner & blue dream, though neither does anything in most of my games as they mostly don't include firearms or people/items from other worlds. Even with wish to skip the spell component, blue dream won't do anything because the spell takes you ti the world of that component, if there isn't one it cant take you anywhere.

[MrCharlie]

Nah, I allow all official content.

Even & especually the floating racial stats, I find they do more for encouraging thematic play than anything else. Finally you can have decent drow clerics, shadar-kai shadow sorcerers, dwarf paladins, & any number of other thematic options that were discouraged by poor stat fits before. I don't see any balance problem with it, it's clear that the dev's have been treating +2 to one stat as equivalent to +2 to any other from day one and mostly just lets players who get hung up on the numbers play whatever race/class combo they like without worrying about it. It brings the floor way, way up while barely moving the ceiling, which is exactly the sort of change I like to see.

Even gunner & blue dream, though neither does anything in most of my games as they mostly don't include firearms or people/items from other worlds. Even with wish to skip the spell component, blue dream won't do anything because the spell takes you ti the world of that component, if there isn't one it cant take you anywhere.
To play devils advocate, Wish doesn't even cast the spell, it duplicates the effect of the spell directly. The effect is to take the creatures to a planet/makes you dream. So Wishing without having to provide the components or meet any requirements duplicates the effect of casting the spell with all the proper components-it takes you to a planet/makes you dream.

Given that wish can also just duplicate plane shift, I don't see why it would matter to do anything but narrow down your target reticle, but eh.

[Sception]

I like twilight and would def allow it, but am also confused that it's a weapons & heavy armor instead of cantrips & no heavy armor domain. Losing heavy armor wpuld help reduce the too-dippable issue, and from a purely thematic stand point, plate armor is about as far from 'evening wear' as you can get.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I'm kneejerking at Order of the Scribes, but I understand that I'm probably kneejerking at it. On paper it sure looks overpowered. But I really ought to give it some time, really think about it. This would be the first official option I've ever banned in 5e if I did.

[Luccan]

Maybe not ban anything in the book, but I might ban or at least limit multiclassing from now on. You have most of what you could want from a dip in the form of feats now and if you play with downtime things like proficiencies can always be picked up without investing an ASI.

[KyleG]

I dont like the stat shift to races feature but i have less issue with proficiency...these are learned things after all and that applies to skills, weapons etc.
On the other hand if in helping me flesh out my world you can convince me your version (stat shift) of a RACE and not just your PC is good then that might become the reflavour version of that race.

[Sception]

in defense of floating racial stat bonuses:
In terms of the stat shift, my own perspective comes from mostly playing paladins. Within that focus, the previous top tier paladin core 5e races were Vuman, Half Elf, Triton (esp in maritime games), Fallen Aasimar, Eladrin (for dexadins), and maybe Lightfoot Halfling (for 'small paladin on medium mount' builds).

With tasha stat swapping around, those are all still top tier choices. I wouldn't call anything outright better than those apart from ~maybe~ yuan-ti pureblood and winged variant tieflings, neither of which are allowed in most campaigns regardless, and gnomes over halflings within the narrow confines of the 'small paladin on medium mount' specialty, though even there halfling luck can't be easily dismissed and the ability to move through the spaces of medium enemies is a significant mobility buff to paladins when you can't be mounted.

A few extra options arguably join that list - mountain dwarves (maybe), hill dwarves, non-Fallen Aasimar certainly - but they don't stand out as in any way above what was already there.

The complete custom race doesn't even really compete with vumans due to the MADness inherent in paladins making two +1s better than one +2. But even outside of paladins and their dual-attack-stats, pretty much any class is going to want high scores in at least con and an AC stat in Str or Dex, and most want another attack/spellcasting stat on top of that, so I really don't see one +2 as significantly better than two +1s regardless, even with the ability to take a half feat to stack up to +3, not when settling for a half feat already takes most of the biggest benefit out of taking a starting feat race in the first place, ie starting with major build components like PAM, GWM, SS, or Sentinel in place.


The main effect of the making all stat bonuses floating is to raise the floor. It doesn't really raise the ceiling noticeably, at least not for paladins, but it would mean no more /bad/ paladin races. Anything would have at least the basic level of competence within the class that Dragonborn currently enjoy.

...

Speaking in terms of my subjective personal experience as a DM, when I face optimization problems regarding races & classes in my players, it's almost never in the form of a player scouring all books to find what they think is the singular most optimal racial option for their class. Far more often, it takes the form of a player who comes up with an initial idea for a character, but then is disappointed when they realize the stats don't particularly work out, so they 'settle' for something else with a better stat fit. Yeah, they could have played the combo they really wanted and made it work anyway, but for many players that just kind of feels bad and compromises their enjoyment no less than settling for another race altogether.

With tasha's floating stats in place, that doesn't have to happen any more. And is putting up with a mountain dwarf wizard from the one min max player who was going to mildly annoy you with their min-maxery regardless really that terrible of a price if it means all the players who wanted to try dwarven paladins or drow clerics or forest gnome druids or shadar-kai hexblades can do so without feeling like they're handicapping themselves - regardless of whether you think those feelings are justified or not?

[Amnestic]

I've yet to see anything I'd outright ban but I've not got the full picture yet.

[KorvinStarmast]

I like twilight and would def allow it, but am also confused that it's a weapons & heavy armor instead of cantrips & no heavy armor domain. Losing heavy armor wpuld help reduce the too-dippable issue, and from a purely thematic stand point, plate armor is about as far from 'evening wear' as you can get. If I allow Twilight domain, the armor remains at medium, but for martial weapons: sure, wear that rapier to the formal dinner. :smallcool:

300' is so far beyond anything else that it's bizarre; however, that still leaves targets in dim light so 'disadvantage to attack at range unless one has dark vision' is technically still on the table ... and things can try to hide in dim light ...

I am still puzzling over the creation bard. The 14th level skill suggests to me some exploits can be had: you need that 5,000 GP ruby for that fancy spell? I'll be right with you ...

[stoutstien]

If I allow Twilight domain, the armor remains at medium, but for martial weapons: sure, wear that rapier to the formal dinner. :smallcool:

300' is so far beyond anything else that it's bizarre; however, that still leaves targets in dim light so 'disadvantage to attack at range unless one has dark vision' is technically still on the table ... and things can try to hide in dim light ...

I am still puzzling over the creation bard. The 14th level skill suggests to me some exploits can be had: you need that 5,000 GP ruby for that fancy spell? I'll be right with you ...

Dim light doesn't affect attack rolls only certain ability checks. Not a big deal either way. Having long distance surprise strikes isn't something that is new. This is just a new way of pulling it off rather than a completely new angle.

As far as martial weapons/ H armor neither bother me. Both are only a smidge stronger than simple/ medium with step ASI spending and/or feat support. I don't understand why twilight has them but I also don't understand why nature has H armor and forge didn't get martial weapons. Just a few more oddities.

[Sception]

To play devils advocate, Wish doesn't even cast the spell, it duplicates the effect of the spell directly. The effect is to take the creatures to a planet/makes you dream. So Wishing without having to provide the components or meet any requirements duplicates the effect of casting the spell with all the proper components-it takes you to a planet/makes you dream.

Given that wish can also just duplicate plane shift, I don't see why it would matter to do anything but narrow down your target reticle, but eh.

The spell also requires the caster to 'be aware of the world's existance', a requirement that wish doesn't otherwise bypass. You cant wish to go to a place if you aren't even aware of the place's existence to wish to go there in the first place, and you can't be aware of the existence of another world if that world doesn't exist in your game.

This is a spell that only does anything at all in campaigns where DMs want world travel to be a thing. Though, admittedly, in such a campaign it might make world travel a bit too easy, eg by skipping the actual spell jamming part of spell jammer.

[Xervous]

300’ is probably just a typo of the standard 30’. There’s no precedent for such large darkvision and there is a precedent for editing issues.

[x3n0n]

300’ is probably just a typo of the standard 30’. There’s no precedent for such large darkvision and there is a precedent for editing issues.

Not so sure. The UA says "you have darkvision with no maximum range".

[Trustypeaches]

I might have players use the UA version of the Twilight Cleric's Channel Divinity, which I think is extremely overpowered in it's published iteration.

When it was 1d8 each round (in UA), I thought it was a powerful channel divinity option for mitigating damage during an encounter. But now that it provides temp hp equal to 1d6+Cleric Level, it's the strongest form of group temp hp generation available in the game now, even outside of combat. It's stronger than Circle of the Shepherd's Bear Totem, Inspiring Leader, College of Glamour's Mantle of Inspiration. And it refreshes each round on top of that.

I get that they wanted to make it scale better into higher tiers of play but I think there were better ways of doing that, like increasing the size of the temp hp die or the number of die rolled (2d6 at 11, 3d6 at 17 or something). As it stands, the amount of damage mitigation their CD provides is encounter warping.

[HappyDaze]

I might have players use the UA version of the Twilight Cleric's Channel Divinity, which I think is extremely overpowered in it's published iteration.

When it was 1d8 each round (in UA), I thought it was a powerful channel divinity option for mitigating damage during an encounter. But now that it provides temp hp equal to 1d6+Cleric Level, it's the strongest form of group temp hp generation available in the game now, even outside of combat. It's stronger than Circle of the Shepherd's Bear Totem, Inspiring Leader, College of Glamour's Mantle of Inspiration. And it refreshes each round on top of that.

I get that they wanted to make it scale better into higher tiers of play but I think there were better ways of doing that, like increasing the size of the temp hp die or the number of die rolled (2d6 at 11, 3d6 at 17 or something). As it stands, the amount of damage mitigation their CD provides is encounter warping.

It's especially powerful if the group has a supply of minions (hirelings, summoned creatures, etc.) as it can easily double (or more) their effective hit points, especially if also fighting against things that don't do massive damage in a single hit.

[tsuyoshikentsu]

The racial variants are the morally correct way to portray race in the game. I may, in fact, simply only allow custom lineages moving forward.

Past that, I do not see myself using the puzzle or group patron rules. If a group asked to use the patron rules I would certainly allow it, but I would not write them into a game by myself.

[togapika]

This is a spell that only does anything at all in campaigns where DMs want world travel to be a thing. Though, admittedly, in such a campaign it might make world travel a bit too easy, eg by skipping the actual spell jamming part of spell jammer.

I just wanna be able to play as a Giff...

[MaxWilson]

The racial variants are the morally correct way to portray race in the game. I may, in fact, simply only allow custom lineages moving forward.

I guess that means Aarakocra can't fly any more and sea elves can't breathe underwater. As you say, any other playstyle would be immoral.


I might have players use the UA version of the Twilight Cleric's Channel Divinity, which I think is extremely overpowered in it's published iteration.

When it was 1d8 each round (in UA), I thought it was a powerful channel divinity option for mitigating damage during an encounter. But now that it provides temp hp equal to 1d6+Cleric Level, it's the strongest form of group temp hp generation available in the game now, even outside of combat. It's stronger than Circle of the Shepherd's Bear Totem, Inspiring Leader, College of Glamour's Mantle of Inspiration. And it refreshes each round on top of that.

I get that they wanted to make it scale better into higher tiers of play but I think there were better ways of doing that, like increasing the size of the temp hp die or the number of die rolled (2d6 at 11, 3d6 at 17 or something). As it stands, the amount of damage mitigation their CD provides is encounter warping.

And it doesn't even take concentration, so the party is nigh-unkillable in combat, and AFTER combat the Twilight Cleric can patch everybody up with either Aura of Vitality (from their domain spell list, if one PC got focused) or Prayer of Healing (if a bunch of people took small amounts of damage, not normally likely but much more likely when everybody is getting tons of temp HP every round).

The Twilight and Peace domains are just nuts, crazy strong, as strong as Shepherd Druids.

[micahaphone]

Well said, Max. I'm reminded of one game a few years ago where a powerful spellcaster upcasted Heroism onto most of our party. Having 5 temp hp (refreshing every turn) was amazing and made the fight feel like a cakewalk. Twilight does that but better.

I feel weird in that I don't think I'd ever play a twilight or peace cleric or shepard druid, their rp flavor does not entice me at all. I'd only ever play them if my best friend did some sort of megadungeon no-rp game. I know they're the best mechanically, but I'm never going to play a character that I don't find interesting.

[Hael]

There are potentially 5 subclasses that might be problematic. The two new sorcerer subclasses (in particular the aberrant mind). The Peace/Twilight cleric (watch for dips). The circle of the stars druid (which is on par with Moon druids and approaching Shepard druid power) which is also super strong.

All the other classes are relatively average to below average.. There's nothing that jumps out to me as being broken. The Astral monk will be the best in slot monk, but I don't think there's anything objectionable there (I played the UA version, and despite what people said wasn't OP in the slightest, and this is a nerfed version).

The Sidekicks might be problematic.. Watch out for item dc stacking issues.. Spirit Shroud might start breaking games in tier 3/4 but for the most part is fine...

The custom lineage is fine.. But the racial swapping is not. It's not ok having mountain dwarf wizards in armor.

I'd also be a little careful with the bladesinger, and possibly the druid class as a whole (the spell list they got + the familiar really took away most weaknesses they had).

[HappyDaze]

The custom lineage is fine.. But the racial swapping is not. It's not ok having mountain dwarf wizards in armor.


We could already have Mountain Dwarf Wizards in armor long before Tasha's.

[jas61292]

Personally, I would not allow any of the racial stuff by default. If a player wants to do something, we can talk, but the rules clearly have no thought put into them, so I'm not going to allow them. I'd rather just customize stuff myself.

Beyond that, the only thing that I would strictly say no to is the Aberrant Mind sorcerer. Granting that many bonus spells is such a blatant and obvious violation of game balance, and the fact that they are not even set, and worse, not even limited to Sorcerer spells just makes everything worse. Clockwork Soul also has these issues, but I can easily fix that one by saying that you simply do not get the bonus spells feature, or maybe just change it to be like warlock where it simply adds those spells to your list without making you automatically know them.

Aberrant Mind, on the other hand, actually has another feature that works of the bonus spell feature, and that means taking them away basically breaks the class. I might see what I can to to adjust the class to make it work, but until I do that, its simply not allowed.

Oh, and well... I'm not so sure about a lot of the Optional Class features stuff. I love alternate class features that give you options. I'm not a big fan of optional features that are just a free buff. I'd probably not allow them carte blanche, but I don't think there are any I would outright ban. It would be a case by case thing where I might allow one to a character, but not simply give them every power boost for free.

[MaxWilson]

Oh, and well... I'm not so sure about a lot of the Optional Class features stuff. I love alternate class features that give you options. I'm not a big fan of optional features that are just a free buff. I'd probably not allow them carte blanche, but I don't think there are any I would outright ban. It would be a case by case thing where I might allow one to a character, but not simply give them every power boost for free.

To be fair, this is also what Tasha's tells the players: it's not automatic, it's just something your DM could choose to give you at some point after you reach the appropriate level. It reminds me of the DMG rules (in Chapter 7: Treasure) on acquiring magical charms/blessings and acquiring bonus skills/feats through training, as an alternate form of reward. Maybe you could even make it a player choice after a big adventure: either get a free ASI, or get one of the Tasha's class bonuses that you qualify for.

It's worth noting that Tasha's paton rules also encourage handing out magical charms/blessings at certain levels. I bet a bunch of DMs who never even know those rules existed before are going to start hearing from their players...

[jas61292]

To be fair, this is also what Tasha's tells the players: it's not automatic, it's just something your DM could choose to give you at some point after you reach the appropriate level.

Oh totally. I get that, and I love that they are spelling that out at the beginning of each classes section. I just know that in a lot of internet discussions people tend to assume "everything allowed (and if optional, assumed to be used) unless otherwise specified," and so I just was mentioning that those will very much not be assumed, even if they are allowed.

Like, personally, I like some of them a lot, but I'm not necessarily a big fan of the ones that just make spellcasters lists bigger. None of them really need it, and if a player really needed a particular spell for a concept, I was already often willing to allow it. But as always, it will be a case by case thing.

[Hael]

We could already have Mountain Dwarf Wizards in armor long before Tasha's.

Obviously not the same thing when you have 2 +2s that you can use to pump up dex and int. Its not until tier 3 that a pre Tasha dwarf would start catching up..

[HappyDaze]

Obviously not the same thing when you have 2 +2s that you can use to pump up dex and int. Its not until tier 3 that a pre Tasha dwarf would start catching up..

Perhaps not, but hobgoblin wizards are pretty impressive, especially if you have an odd Dex (like a 13) and take Moderately Armored.

[McSkrag]

Overall, I think all the new content and options will make the game more fun for myself and my players. Which is really the whole point.

For me, the one thing I will be strict on is switching subclasses for experienced players. For new players it's a fine way to make sure they have a character they enjoy playing. For my experienced players they should know by now and be able to commit to a build.

[tsuyoshikentsu]

I guess that means Aarakocra can't fly any more and sea elves can't breathe underwater. As you say, any other playstyle would be immoral.

I was including the racial customization options (moving ability bonuses, e.g.) in "the racial variants are the only morally correct" etc. Though as regards custom lineages, it would not be the first time races with alternative movement options end up disallowed.

With that said, however, I generally run homebrew settings; restricting creation to custom lineage only means that I simultaneously do not have to justify every possible race in order to allow flexibility while also allowing players to collaborate with me on a truly unique race to add to the setting, should they so wish.

[bendking]

I feel like most of the new subclasses are additions to the previous top tier, almost none of them are better than what was previously the best, so I would allow all of them.
The exception being the new Sorcerer origins which are straight up more powerful than the old ones, and my fix to that is adding origins spells to the other origins to balance things out.

[Kireban]

Personally, I would not allow any of the racial stuff by default. If a player wants to do something, we can talk, but the rules clearly have no thought put into them, so I'm not going to allow them. I'd rather just customize stuff myself.

Beyond that, the only thing that I would strictly say no to is the Aberrant Mind sorcerer. Granting that many bonus spells is such a blatant and obvious violation of game balance, and the fact that they are not even set, and worse, not even limited to Sorcerer spells just makes everything worse. Clockwork Soul also has these issues, but I can easily fix that one by saying that you simply do not get the bonus spells feature, or maybe just change it to be like warlock where it simply adds those spells to your list without making you automatically know them.

Aberrant Mind, on the other hand, actually has another feature that works of the bonus spell feature, and that means taking them away basically breaks the class. I might see what I can to to adjust the class to make it work, but until I do that, its simply not allowed.

Oh, and well... I'm not so sure about a lot of the Optional Class features stuff. I love alternate class features that give you options. I'm not a big fan of optional features that are just a free buff. I'd probably not allow them carte blanche, but I don't think there are any I would outright ban. It would be a case by case thing where I might allow one to a character, but not simply give them every power boost for free.

If you just take the bonus spells from the clockwork then you can let players play the aberrant mind without bonus spells too.

[Pex]

I was including the racial customization options (moving ability bonuses, e.g.) in "the racial variants are the only morally correct" etc. Though as regards custom lineages, it would not be the first time races with alternative movement options end up disallowed.

With that said, however, I generally run homebrew settings; restricting creation to custom lineage only means that I simultaneously do not have to justify every possible race in order to allow flexibility while also allowing players to collaborate with me on a truly unique race to add to the setting, should they so wish.

People in this thread have decided they won't use the new rules. Are they immoral?

[P. G. Macer]

If you just take the bonus spells from the clockwork then you can let players play the aberrant mind without bonus spells too.

I think what jas61292 is saying is that the Aberrant Mind’s Level 6 feature directly interacts with its bonus spells, so if you take the spells away, you leave 6th level without a subclass feature.

[Kireban]

I think what jas61292 is saying is that the Aberrant Mind’s Level 6 feature directly interacts with its bonus spells, so if you take the spells away, you leave 6th level without a subclass feature.

The clockwork's 6th level feat is not that good so there shouldn't be too much difference.
What I want to say is, the main strength of the clockwork is his bonus spells list. take it from him and you have a new weakest sorcerer subclass. Aberrant is strong (and he pays with 2 class features for that), but I don't see people ban the evocation wizard for being able to ignore friendly fire. If the aberrant mind was a wizard subclass people wouldn't have any problem with him, and since the base wizard class is better than the base sorcerer class it comes from idea that sorcerers shouldn't be strong.

*and the bonus spell list itself is a subclass feature. The main level 1 subclass feature. Since he got no problem with removing one feature he shouldn't have a problem with removing two.

[Sception]

I thought the main strength of the clockwork sorcerer ignoring spell resistance proficiency mod times per day. That's certainly the feature that has me considering multiclassing into it as opposed to other sorcerers with future Conquest Sorcadin builds. As someone who recently played through DtA, spell resistance is a pain in the butt.

[gameogre]

I love the new Custom Lineage option for Race. I'm tired of 5E's unbalanced races and pc's wanting to play Bazaar problematic races for specials and bonus's exactly like they play a human. This now removes that for me.

Now anyone wanting to play a special problematic race in my games does so because of the role playing, and that's fine.

Does it make the racial choice rather bland now? Yeah, a little in a pure mechanical way.. Small price to pay in my book.

[Sception]

I love the new Custom Lineage option for Race. I'm tired of 5E's unbalanced races and pc's wanting to play Bazaar problematic races for specials and bonus's exactly like they play a human. This now removes that for me.

Now anyone wanting to play a special problematic race in my games does so because of the role playing, and that's fine.

Does it make the racial choice rather bland now? Yeah, a little in a pure mechanical way.. Small price to pay in my book.

If you're using custom lineage as a replacement for /all/ races, then I would also recommend letting players have a choice of either +2 to one stat or +1 to two stats.

[Kireban]

I thought the main strength of the clockwork sorcerer ignoring spell resistance proficiency mod times per day. That's certainly the feature that has me considering multiclassing into it as opposed to other sorcerers with future Conquest Sorcadin builds. As someone who recently played through DtA, spell resistance is a pain in the butt.

Removing adv/dis is not strong enough to be considered a main feature. It will never be as strong as inflicting adv/dis, and you are not building a character around the ability to negate a rare spell resistance proficiancy times per day.
It is a nice "O no you don't!" ability. Nothing more.

[Sception]

Subjective experience I suppose, but I don't find spell resistance to be at all rare in games I've played.

[Tanarii]

People in this thread have decided they won't use the new rules. Are they immoral?
I know I am. But not because of that. :smallamused:

[Xervous]

I know I am. But not because of that. :smallamused:

Hmm, it’s on the tip of my tongue. Why don’t I know anything about you? You must have a really high CR.

[Segev]

I know I am. But not because of that. :smallamused:

It's because you're a CE fiend, isn't it, Tanarii. :smalltongue:

[Chaosmancer]

All the custom racial options and the removal of racial requirements from feats for starters, those go right out the window.

*Snippity*


There are no removed racial requirements from Feats. That was an internet rumor, it is not in the book.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



in defense of floating racial stat bonuses:
In terms of the stat shift, my own perspective comes from mostly playing paladins. Within that focus, the previous top tier paladin core 5e races were Vuman, Half Elf, Triton (esp in maritime games), Fallen Aasimar, Eladrin (for dexadins), and maybe Lightfoot Halfling (for 'small paladin on medium mount' builds).

With tasha stat swapping around, those are all still top tier choices. I wouldn't call anything outright better than those apart from ~maybe~ yuan-ti pureblood and winged variant tieflings, neither of which are allowed in most campaigns regardless, and gnomes over halflings within the narrow confines of the 'small paladin on medium mount' specialty, though even there halfling luck can't be easily dismissed and the ability to move through the spaces of medium enemies is a significant mobility buff to paladins when you can't be mounted.

A few extra options arguably join that list - mountain dwarves (maybe), hill dwarves, non-Fallen Aasimar certainly - but they don't stand out as in any way above what was already there.

The complete custom race doesn't even really compete with vumans due to the MADness inherent in paladins making two +1s better than one +2. But even outside of paladins and their dual-attack-stats, pretty much any class is going to want high scores in at least con and an AC stat in Str or Dex, and most want another attack/spellcasting stat on top of that, so I really don't see one +2 as significantly better than two +1s regardless, even with the ability to take a half feat to stack up to +3, not when settling for a half feat already takes most of the biggest benefit out of taking a starting feat race in the first place, ie starting with major build components like PAM, GWM, SS, or Sentinel in place.


The main effect of the making all stat bonuses floating is to raise the floor. It doesn't really raise the ceiling noticeably, at least not for paladins, but it would mean no more /bad/ paladin races. Anything would have at least the basic level of competence within the class that Dragonborn currently enjoy.

...

Speaking in terms of my subjective personal experience as a DM, when I face optimization problems regarding races & classes in my players, it's almost never in the form of a player scouring all books to find what they think is the singular most optimal racial option for their class. Far more often, it takes the form of a player who comes up with an initial idea for a character, but then is disappointed when they realize the stats don't particularly work out, so they 'settle' for something else with a better stat fit. Yeah, they could have played the combo they really wanted and made it work anyway, but for many players that just kind of feels bad and compromises their enjoyment no less than settling for another race altogether.

With tasha's floating stats in place, that doesn't have to happen any more. And is putting up with a mountain dwarf wizard from the one min max player who was going to mildly annoy you with their min-maxery regardless really that terrible of a price if it means all the players who wanted to try dwarven paladins or drow clerics or forest gnome druids or shadar-kai hexblades can do so without feeling like they're handicapping themselves - regardless of whether you think those feelings are justified or not?


Well Said

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I haven't seen anything I wouldn't allow yet, but I'm still slowly working my way through the DnD Beyond stuff. Frankly, most of the stuff I've seen is great and I can't wait for it to show up. Though there are also things that won't show up. "Dream of the Blue Veil" is a no go for my games, but that's to be expected. I didn't make an adventure on a different world, I made it on this world, so why would you want to go there? It is clearly meant to be a DM plot spell.

And... I'm kind of sad how many people are banning so much of the book. I get people are worried about balance, but the Way of Mercy Monk is just bad, not OP. Barbarian seems fine. The Warlock's seem fine (though as a warlock player I'm miffed about a lack of Optional Class Features, I feel left out :P )

Just feels strange to me how many people are taking the approach of not allowing this stuff.

[MrCharlie]

Removing adv/dis is not strong enough to be considered a main feature. It will never be as strong as inflicting adv/dis, and you are not building a character around the ability to negate a rare spell resistance proficiancy times per day.
It is a nice "O no you don't!" ability. Nothing more.
Spell resistance is more or less common depending on what you are fighting. In certain campaigns involving planar threats prepare to deal with it a ton.

That said, while it's obviously not as strong as granting it, negating advantage/disadvantage is still going to come up inevitably over the course of the day. It's not useless, and I would be surprised if you didn't exhaust your ability to use the ability.

Further, the text of the rules has surprising synergy with Rogues, letting them sneak attack in situations they normally couldn't.

Now this isn't saying that clockworks features are particularly good, nor that it could stand without having the bonus spells which is where this thread originated. I doubt either it or aberrant could compared with the good sorcerer subclasses if you gave them new spells, unless the spells they gained were hot garbage. I do think it could stand against draconic, storm, or wild though without the bonus spells though.

Of course, draconic, storm, and wild magic aren't very good subclasses, and sorcerers in general are pretty niche-the have like, five or six metamagicked spells which make them worthwhile given their lackluster base class, and even then only a couple of these spells are good enough to really compare to optimized casters of another class.

[Dragonsonthemap]

There are no removed racial requirements from Feats. That was an internet rumor, it is not in the book.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Well Said

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I haven't seen anything I wouldn't allow yet, but I'm still slowly working my way through the DnD Beyond stuff. Frankly, most of the stuff I've seen is great and I can't wait for it to show up. Though there are also things that won't show up. "Dream of the Blue Veil" is a no go for my games, but that's to be expected. I didn't make an adventure on a different world, I made it on this world, so why would you want to go there? It is clearly meant to be a DM plot spell.

And... I'm kind of sad how many people are banning so much of the book. I get people are worried about balance, but the Way of Mercy Monk is just bad, not OP. Barbarian seems fine. The Warlock's seem fine (though as a warlock player I'm miffed about a lack of Optional Class Features, I feel left out :P )

Just feels strange to me how many people are taking the approach of not allowing this stuff.

This basically sums up what my experience has been and what my feelings are. Disappointed they didn't remove racial requirements from the racial feats, though; my playgroup will probably just allow them anyway, since except for the couple that really do work off ancestry-specific powers their restriction was mostly just annoying.

[Warder]

There are no removed racial requirements from Feats. That was an internet rumor, it is not in the book.


Oh whew, glad to hear it!



And... I'm kind of sad how many people are banning so much of the book. I get people are worried about balance, but the Way of Mercy Monk is just bad, not OP. Barbarian seems fine. The Warlock's seem fine (though as a warlock player I'm miffed about a lack of Optional Class Features, I feel left out :P )

Just feels strange to me how many people are taking the approach of not allowing this stuff.

It's not a matter of balance for me, because balance is not something I look for when I make my games (and especially not when I'm a player). I could write pages about this, but to sum it up I think that trying to maintain anything more than a vague baseline of balance tends to take away more fun than it adds to any given game. For me, there are two reasons I don't want to include some things from Tasha in my game, and that's either that I don't find it thematically appropriate (as with the unarmed fighting style or Artificer) or I don't find it enjoyable (as with the racial customization). Mechanical balance very, very rarely comes into play.

[PhoenixPhyre]

It's not a matter of balance for me, because balance is not something I look for when I make my games (and especially not when I'm a player). I could write pages about this, but to sum it up I think that trying to maintain anything more than a vague baseline of balance tends to take away more fun than it adds to any given game. For me, there are two reasons I don't want to include some things from Tasha in my game, and that's either that I don't find it thematically appropriate (as with the unarmed fighting style or Artificer) or I don't find it enjoyable (as with the racial customization). Mechanical balance very, very rarely comes into play.

Basically this for me. The stuff I banned was due to aesthetic issues--it doesn't fit my setting. Or I don't like the core ideas mechanically. Not for balance reasons.

[jas61292]

I think what jas61292 is saying is that the Aberrant Mind’s Level 6 feature directly interacts with its bonus spells, so if you take the spells away, you leave 6th level without a subclass feature.

This is indeed what I meant. If someone did want to play the class without bonus spells and did not mind losing out on a level 6 feature as well, I guess I would let them, but I would generally just rather say that it is banned until I am able to come up with a replacement feature.

[Kireban]

Spell resistance is more or less common depending on what you are fighting. In certain campaigns involving planar threats prepare to deal with it a ton.

That said, while it's obviously not as strong as granting it, negating advantage/disadvantage is still going to come up inevitably over the course of the day. It's not useless, and I would be surprised if you didn't exhaust your ability to use the ability.

Further, the text of the rules has surprising synergy with Rogues, letting them sneak attack in situations they normally couldn't.

Now this isn't saying that clockworks features are particularly good, nor that it could stand without having the bonus spells which is where this thread originated. I doubt either it or aberrant could compared with the good sorcerer subclasses if you gave them new spells, unless the spells they gained were hot garbage. I do think it could stand against draconic, storm, or wild though without the bonus spells though.

Of course, draconic, storm, and wild magic aren't very good subclasses, and sorcerers in general are pretty niche-the have like, five or six metamagicked spells which make them worthwhile given their lackluster base class, and even then only a couple of these spells are good enough to really compare to optimized casters of another class.

If you give all the sorcerers bonus spells the same as the new subs you need to give the new subs a strong extra first level feature too

[ProsecutorGodot]

If you give all the sorcerers bonus spells the same as the new subs you need to give the new subs a strong extra first level feature too

Why? The new subclasses don't just have extra spells, they also have first level features.

[x3n0n]

It sounds like the consensus is that the new sorcerer options are too strong, particularly because they have 2 bonus spells each at class levels 1/3/5/7/9.
If that many additional spells is too many, is there any reason not to experiment with something like "you may choose one of these two spells as your bonus spell for this level", and then allow swapping each bonus spell according to the rules given in the subclass?

[Kireban]

Why? The new subclasses don't just have extra spells, they also have first level features.

As i said, the new subs got 1 level 1 fluff feature and the list. All the old subs got 2 level 1 features. If every old sub gets extra spells then the new subs needs to get an extra feature. A good one.

[MrCharlie]

It sounds like the consensus is that the new sorcerer options are too strong, particularly because they have 2 bonus spells each at class levels 1/3/5/7/9.
If that many additional spells is too many, is there any reason not to experiment with something like "you may choose one of these two spells as your bonus spell for this level", and then allow swapping each bonus spell according to the rules given in the subclass? I don't actually think that's actually the consensus.

I think the real consensus is that they are miles above previous sorcerers-maybe the divine soul can compare, some people still like shadow as a counterpoint-but that this is a good thing because sorcerers have such a severe lack of spells. As long as the spells gained as thematic, there is no reason to nerf them.

[Sception]

It sounds like the consensus is that the new sorcerer options are too strong, particularly because they have 2 bonus spells each at class levels 1/3/5/7/9.
If that many additional spells is too many, is there any reason not to experiment with something like "you may choose one of these two spells as your bonus spell for this level", and then allow swapping each bonus spell according to the rules given in the subclass?

Instead add bonus spells to existing sorcerer subclasses. If you feel the new sorc subclasses have unusually weak first level features intended to balance the dpells (i dont, but i won't argue), then give the old subclasses one extra spell per level.

Not enough spells known to support both necessary staples and thematic choices and not a broad enough spell list to even cover all the subclass themes have both been persistant complaints about the sorcerer class since 5e was released. Subclass bonus spells are *the* ideal fix for both problems. The answer here is absolutely to add subclass spell lists to existing subclasses. Honestly, it's kind of frustrating that they didn't do that already in the variant/additional sorcerer class feature section.

[MaxWilson]

I was including the racial customization options (moving ability bonuses, e.g.) in "the racial variants are the only morally correct" etc. Though as regards custom lineages, it would not be the first time races with alternative movement options end up disallowed.

With that said, however, I generally run homebrew settings; restricting creation to custom lineage only means that I simultaneously do not have to justify every possible race in order to allow flexibility while also allowing players to collaborate with me on a truly unique race to add to the setting, should they so wish.

Sounds kind of homogeneous to me, but then, I grew up on Dark Sun so to me most 5E races are already kind of homogeneous. Where's the never-sleeping four-armed thri-kreen? Where's the Str 24 half-giants with attachment issues? Where's the actually alien psychology? There are exceptions (I find warforged, goblins, and lizardfolk interesting--aarakocra don't interest me but Hadozee would) but most 5E races have no real reason to exist.

I would understand it if you said you wanted to eliminate elves/dwarves/etc. as redundant, but that you'd instead call it literally immoral NOT to eliminate some of the few distinguishing traits they do have is very interesting. It implies a kind of Star Trek universe where alien races are humans-with-funny-foreheads as deliberate analogies to specific sociological groups on planet Earth. I guess I like my fantasy more fantastic, more like the Star Wars aliens than Star Trek.

Enjoy your game.

[MrCharlie]

As i said, the new subs got 1 level 1 fluff feature and the list. All the old subs got 2 level 1 features. If every old sub gets extra spells then the new subs needs to get an extra feature. A good one.
Basically correct, but slightly more nuanced.

In general, sorcerers tend to receive two level 1 features-one that does something generically good mechanically, and a second which changes the way their spellcasting works fundamentally and adds some minor utility. Dragon sorcerers got an ancestor which defines their element along with doubled proficiency on charisma with dragons and bonus hit points and free mage armor, wild magic sorcerers get the wild magic surge table and tides of chaos for advantage on demand, Divine souls got an expanded spell list+one more spell and a reaction to add 2d4 to some checks, shadow sorcerer learns the darkness spell and gets to see through darkness and gets death defiance. Storm sorcerers are an exception, or rather their 2nd level 1 feature sucks-they can read languages and also get to bonus action move after casting. They do get a bonus level 6 feature to control wind and rain though, so whatever.

If you took the expanded list, you should add in some feature that changes their spellcasting in a similar way. Further, their second features are generally less powerful-how much that matters is debatable, but its there.

[Kireban]

Instead add bonus spells to existing sorcerer subclasses. If you feel the new sorc subclasses have unusually weak first level features intended to balance the dpells (i dont, but i won't argue), then give the old subclasses one extra spell per level.

Not enough spells known to support both necessary staples and thematic choices and not a broad enough spell list to even cover all the subclass themes have both been persistant complaints about the sorcerer class since 5e was released. Subclass bonus spells are *the* ideal fix for both problems. The answer here is absolutely to add subclass spell lists to existing subclasses. Honestly, it's kind of frustrating that they didn't do that already in the variant/additional sorcerer class feature section.

Having too few spells is a problem that really should be solved by changing the main class. I don't think that it should be fixed with adding to each subclass. Something like knowing 4 spells at level 1 is a better fix in my opinion than adding bonus spell lists. This and the touched feats should let the class breath a little easier.

[MrCharlie]

Having too few spells is a problem that really should be solved by changing the main class. I don't think that it should be fixed with adding to each subclass. Something like knowing 4 spells at level 1 is a better fix in my opinion than adding bonus spell lists. This and the touched feats should let the class breath a little easier.
I mean, it's semantics. Clerics get a massive domain list that gives them more spells prepared, Bards get magical secrets, Land Druids get extra spells in exchange for not having nutso wild-shape uses, etc.

Many classes have assumed spells in their archetype, it just depends on how the class is built.

The benefit of adding a bloodline list is that these spells can be from out of the main sorcerer list, and expand the scope of the archetype as such. Given that not all domains are going to be purely powered by arcane sources, I favor this fix instead of simply adding new spells. I suppose you could just expand the sorcerer list as part of the 1st level features, but that assumes another list or combination of lists is perfect for that particular archetype.

[Quietus]

I will allow everything, with the standard agreement of "please don't break my game". If I have a PC show up with simulacrum nuclear wizards, I politely ask them to change characters. Same goes if they use something from this book to be super OP.

So long as the game is not being cracked entirely in half, there's nothing a PC can do that really scares me. There's some real dumb strong things in this book, sure. But if we have (for example) a Twilight cleric... then I bring monsters with bigger damage numbers. It takes some of the edge off of the swinginess of combat.

[ZZTRaider]

As i said, the new subs got 1 level 1 fluff feature and the list. All the old subs got 2 level 1 features. If every old sub gets extra spells then the new subs needs to get an extra feature. A good one.

I don't think I really agree with that.

Clockwork Soul's Restore Balance isn't terribly different from Wild Magic's Tides of Chaos. Restore Balance is more limited use than Tides of Chaos could be, but is not subject to the whims of the DM or your need or desire to cast leveled spells. I suppose Restore Balance is slightly weaker because it requires a reaction, but that's mostly equivalent to the effective "once per round" nature of Tides of Chaos because of how it recharges. Allowing it for no action could be pretty ridiculous.

Looking at the 1st level features for Draconic and Storm, neither of these seem overly strong for a 1st level power. Shadow is in a similar boat; the things it gains at 1st actually seem a bit on the weak side to me, but the 3rd level pickup is great and Sorcerers typically don't get a subclass feature at that level.

Divine Soul is a little more interesting, because its 1st level power includes a spell known. If you include that in a presumed expanded spells known list, you're mostly just left with access to the cleric list. Which is good, of course, but comes at high opportunity cost now, and would be diluted somewhat by any thematic expanded spells known list. Favored by the Gods is pretty limited at once per short rest, probably based on the idea that the bonus spell known is pretty good.

Aberrant Mind's Telepathic Speech is a bit weaker than the other options, but solidly okay, I think. Being able to talk to your companions without being overheard is great, even if you have to do it one at a time.
(I think there's room for a permissive DM to allow it to work as a way to use Suggestion and similar spells in situations where you otherwise could not be traditionally heard. Basically, does being "heard" mentally count, or do those spell restrict you to strictly verbal speech that can be heard?)
But I think the big thing here is that the 6th level abilities may well be some of the strongest available, so the weaker 1st level ability is perfectly fine. Getting effectively free subtle spell on even a subset of your spells known is fantastic, and the theming of the subclass means that you'll absolutely have spells that benefit from going unnoticed.

[Sception]

Having too few spells is a problem that really should be solved by changing the main class. I don't think that it should be fixed with adding to each subclass. Something like knowing 4 spells at level 1 is a better fix in my opinion than adding bonus spell lists. This and the touched feats should let the class breath a little easier.

Being firced to choose between the strongest spells of a level and weaker or more situational thematic spells is best solved by giving you thematic spells based on your subclass for free. The sorcerer spell list not having the right spells for a given subclass theme is best solved by giving you thematic spells - which don't have to be sorcerer spells - for free. And in the process of solving those two common vomplaints you have also largely solved the 'not enough spells known' problem anyway.

Subclasses are a part of the class, it is not inherently a bad thing for a class to have gaps that different subclasses can then fill in different ways, in this case with different spells.

[Kireban]

Being firced to choose between the strongest spells of a level and weaker or more situational thematic spells is best solved by giving you thematic spells based on your subclass for free. The sorcerer spell list not having the right spells for a given subclass theme is best solved by giving you thematic spells - which don't have to be sorcerer spells - for free. And in the process of solving those two common vomplaints you have also largely solved the 'not enough spells known' problem anyway.

Subclasses are a part of the class, it is not inherently a bad thing for a class to have gaps that different subclasses can then fill in different ways, in this case with different spells.

I don't think that giving each subclass a fixed bonus list can solve the sorcerer's problem. Knowing a low amount of spells means that every spell counts, and since i love playing Wild Magic, and I see the "thematic" spell lists people think of (which usually contains color spray. omg why?!), I don't think that fixed lists are going to contain enough useful options for each player playstyle. Things that work for clerics and druids are not meant to work for sorcerers.

[ZZTRaider]

Bloodline spell lists worked fantastic for sorcerers in Pathfinder, in my opinion. I see no reason the same can't be true here, as long as you pick the spell lists well.

[Kireban]

I don't think I really agree with that.

Clockwork Soul's Restore Balance isn't terribly different from Wild Magic's Tides of Chaos. Restore Balance is more limited use than Tides of Chaos could be, but is not subject to the whims of the DM or your need or desire to cast leveled spells. I suppose Restore Balance is slightly weaker because it requires a reaction, but that's mostly equivalent to the effective "once per round" nature of Tides of Chaos because of how it recharges. Allowing it for no action could be pretty ridiculous.

Looking at the 1st level features for Draconic and Storm, neither of these seem overly strong for a 1st level power. Shadow is in a similar boat; the things it gains at 1st actually seem a bit on the weak side to me, but the 3rd level pickup is great and Sorcerers typically don't get a subclass feature at that level.

Divine Soul is a little more interesting, because its 1st level power includes a spell known. If you include that in a presumed expanded spells known list, you're mostly just left with access to the cleric list. Which is good, of course, but comes at high opportunity cost now, and would be diluted somewhat by any thematic expanded spells known list. Favored by the Gods is pretty limited at once per short rest, probably based on the idea that the bonus spell known is pretty good.

Aberrant Mind's Telepathic Speech is a bit weaker than the other options, but solidly okay, I think. Being able to talk to your companions without being overheard is great, even if you have to do it one at a time.
(I think there's room for a permissive DM to allow it to work as a way to use Suggestion and similar spells in situations where you otherwise could not be traditionally heard. Basically, does being "heard" mentally count, or do those spell restrict you to strictly verbal speech that can be heard?)
But I think the big thing here is that the 6th level abilities may well be some of the strongest available, so the weaker 1st level ability is perfectly fine. Getting effectively free subtle spell on even a subset of your spells known is fantastic, and the theming of the subclass means that you'll absolutely have spells that benefit from going unnoticed.

Yes, the subclass features push you to play it in a certain way. I think that it's refreshing btw. This is the style that the wild magic should have had. Switch the level 14 feature with the level 6 and let him play without limitations from the DM.

[Dark.Revenant]

I feel as though if the older subclasses had 10 fixed spells OR 5 flex spells, it would bring them in-line with the new subclasses. For reference, the new subclasses have 10 flex spells, but have fewer features at 1st level. There's clearly a level of importance associated with the 10 flex spells, but I think a good part of that is the ability to swap them out (the 'flex' part).

[Chaosmancer]

It sounds like the consensus is that the new sorcerer options are too strong, particularly because they have 2 bonus spells each at class levels 1/3/5/7/9.
If that many additional spells is too many, is there any reason not to experiment with something like "you may choose one of these two spells as your bonus spell for this level", and then allow swapping each bonus spell according to the rules given in the subclass?

I don't agree with that, because I gave sorcerers bonus spell lists like this ages ago, and it barely moved the needle on the sorcerer.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------



Being firced to choose between the strongest spells of a level and weaker or more situational thematic spells is best solved by giving you thematic spells based on your subclass for free. The sorcerer spell list not having the right spells for a given subclass theme is best solved by giving you thematic spells - which don't have to be sorcerer spells - for free. And in the process of solving those two common vomplaints you have also largely solved the 'not enough spells known' problem anyway.

Subclasses are a part of the class, it is not inherently a bad thing for a class to have gaps that different subclasses can then fill in different ways, in this case with different spells.

Agreed.