New Book on Amazon (TCoE)

[Amnestic]

Well my beef with PDK is that some poor new fighter may accidentally pick it.

And it’s existence means we’re less likely to ever get a good warlord class or subclass.

While it could be better, I don't think it's exactly broken-bad. A bit of crossover with Samurai in the "Face-Fighter" theme but it's okay.

I don't think PDK is stopping a warlord class from coming out, and given that we saw Undead/Undying warlock it might not even stop it as a subclass these days.

[Waazraath]

While it could be better, I don't think it's exactly broken-bad. A bit of crossover with Samurai in the "Face-Fighter" theme but it's okay.

I don't think PDK is stopping a warlord class from coming out, and given that we saw Undead/Undying warlock it might not even stop it as a subclass these days.

Agree. And while at some of its levels it obviously gets the short stick, an extra skill and expertise in persuasion (at a level where some other subclasses often only get a ribbon) is quite neat in the social pillar, and you have the ASI's to shine as well. Fighter is good enough in what it does (fighint) disregarding subclasses, and this one gives you something to do in the social pillar as well. Versatility instead of higher numbers.

[cutlery]

If so, they are slow to catch up with me. I've long thrown everything in SCAG out of my games. I see it as a worthless PoS--especially the busted cantrips and racial options.

Nothing about the SCaG cantrips is as bad as smite, and for paladins with extra attack they give up an attack (that could be a smite) to roll the dice on one attack that will do comparable damage if they choose to use one of the SCaG cantrips. A pal/sor can quicken one or twin one on two targets, but the SCaG cantrips aren't the problem with a pal/sor multiclass.

There are a number of classes with pretty abysmal at-will damage, and the SCaG cantrips give them a so-so melee option, as well as being thematic musts for Eldritch Knights.

[Millstone85]

So, another thread made me realize...

When we say that the artificer class is being reprinted, what are the odds of that including the alchemist, artillerist and battle smith subclasses?

[Dienekes]

While it could be better, I don't think it's exactly broken-bad. A bit of crossover with Samurai in the "Face-Fighter" theme but it's okay.

I must disagree there, since I believe it is frankly terribly designed. Many abilities have problems using them effectively. The most obvious is Bulwark of course, that only works if you and an ally both fail the same save. So if one ally fails and you want to help, you can’t. If you fail but no one else does if you use your Indomitable you’re not getting anything out of your level 15 ability. Same goes for almost all of them. The one real exception is Inspiring Surge. I’ll agree when you want to Nova most allies will also want to Nova. But it’s still your level 10 feature is a 1/ short rest one ally makes one attack instead of what they were going to do as their reaction.

I don't think PDK is stopping a warlord class from coming out, and given that we saw Undead/Undying warlock it might not even stop it as a subclass these days.

This I’ll grant you.

Agree. And while at some of its levels it obviously gets the short stick, an extra skill and expertise in persuasion (at a level where some other subclasses often only get a ribbon) is quite neat in the social pillar, and you have the ASI's to shine as well. Fighter is good enough in what it does (fighint) disregarding subclasses, and this one gives you something to do in the social pillar as well. Versatility instead of higher numbers.

That’s a 1 level dip in Rogue. Worse technically. I’ll admit it’s better than some other fighter subclasses get at that level. Still worse than Samurai, since they also get a saving throw in the mix. But I think that says more about what the Champion and Battlemaster got saddled with at 7th level.

[Unoriginal]

So, another thread made me realize...

When we say that the artificer class is being reprinted, what are the odds of that including the alchemist, artillerist and battle smith subclasses?

We know the Artillerist is in, at least.

[Yakmala]

I have mixed feelings on the SCAG sub-classes.

I really like Swashbuckler, Arcana Cleric and Way of the Long Death Monk. They are among my favorite sub-classes and I've enjoyed playing them. Swashbuckler, obviously, is a fan favorite that already made its way into XGtE. I hope both Arcana Cleric and Long Death Monk make the cut into TCoE.

Mastermind and Sun Soul were both sub-classes I wanted to like, but they simply had too many flaws. If the Tandem Tactician feat makes the cut for TCoE, we can officially hold a wake for Mastermind.

Oath of the Crown seems fine, but honestly, I've never seen it played.

Storm Sorcery is cool. It's not the best Sorcerer sub-class, but it has enough bells and whistles to make it fun in the right campaign setting.

The Undying Warlock was so bad, they just re-made it as the Undead Warlock, though this might be too recent to make the cut for TCoE.

Battle Rager... I don't have enough experience to say. I'd play it before I played a Berserker, but only because I really hate the Berserker's exhaustion penalty. There's a chance this will no longer be restricted to Dwarves in TCoE.

Purple Dragon Knight. Never seen one played. Would only consider it as a lark for a one shot. If any SCAG sub-class needs a re-work, it's this one.

Blade Singer: Getting a re-work, though none of us knows what that might entail. Likely no longer restricted to elves, which, when combined with being able to shuffle around racial bonuses, could lead to an already effective sub-class becoming downright scary.

[Waazraath]

That’s a 1 level dip in Rogue. Worse technically. I’ll admit it’s better than some other fighter subclasses get at that level. Still worse than Samurai, since they also get a saving throw in the mix. But I think that says more about what the Champion and Battlemaster got saddled with at 7th level.

All true. It's not good. Can have its niche though, in a game without feats or multiclass, for a party lacking a 'face' (bbn/druid/wizard as other party members for example). I think I'll might play one one day, only with a race like changeling or something though.

[KorvinStarmast]

I do not see it among the artifacts, but it is at the beginning of chapter 3, page 70.

Original Babay Yaga's Hut was in Eldritch Wizardry, page 44, TSR, 1976, OD&D.
BABA YAGA'S HUT

Somewhere there reportedly exists this relic of the greatest wizardress of all time. Baba Yaga. Her hut is a smallish-appearing hovel, about 10'-15' in diameter, and it stands on but two strange stilts. The interior of this hut, however, is ten times the outer diameter, it is filled with rich furnishings and minor magical items, and its walls are equal to stone five feet thick. Furthermore, the stilts it stands upon are actually gigantic bird-like legs which can carry the hut over any sort of terrain — 36"/turn in wet places. 24"/turn on normal terrain. 12"/turn through forests, over rough and rocky ground or up or down mountainous land. The legs of the hut are able to deliver mighty blows to any intruder rash enough to come near without invitation. Each melee round the hut's legs are able to strike once, with a 30% hit probability, doing from 3-24 points of damage. The Hut also has one power from TABLE IV.

You rolled for powers randomly.

On page 156 of the AD&D 1e DMG, we find ...

Baba Yaga’s Hut: Ages ago the most powerful female mage ever known spent much of her power in the creation of a magical dwelling of superb character.

The power is similar but different.

I did like the D&DNext playtest where each Class got a boost to its primary ability score at Level 1, which didn't stack with a racial boost. That seemed anti-traditional, but in practice it made Race/Class combinations very flexible. I wouldn't mind something similar in Tasha's.

I like the idea, and I think 13th Age did something like that.

I liked the Brute, but apparently giving a Fighter bonus damage was too avant garde for most.

Yeah.

I've long thrown everything in SCAG out of my games. I see it as a worthless PoS--especially the busted cantrips and racial options.

I like the Arcana Cleric, find the Tiefling variants pointless, and find the half elve variants to have been badly scrubbed before publishing. The cantrips don't bother me.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I like the Arcana Cleric, find the Tiefling variants pointless, and find the half elve variants to have been badly scrubbed before publishing. The cantrips don't bother me.

They get a lot of flak (from my perspective) for being a very effective form of damage for Gish dips. Everything I'd researched when I started looking into how to play DND told me that Gish were popular and people wanted them in 5E but for some reason the cantrips being an effective ability to help enable them was a terrible thing.

I can only assume it's because for most Gish you're making an active decision to be worse if you don't use them, but I prefer to view it from the "it enabled so many things" than "It's so good that I feel like I must use it" perspective, although both are probably valid.

An example, older posts I looked at regarded EK as a fairly weak Fighter subclass (this may or may not have been true, but it was noticeable more frequent then) which changed substantially because of these cantrips.

[KorvinStarmast]

An example, older posts I looked at regarded EK as a fairly weak Fighter subclass (this may or may not have been true, but it was noticeable more frequent then) which changed substantially because of these cantrips.

Friend of mine played a non SCAG EK, he didn't miss them.

[nickl_2000]

Friend of mine played a non SCAG EK, he didn't miss them.

SCAG certainly does make the Cantrip + bonus action attack from a situation ability to one that you could be using frequently.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Friend of mine played a non SCAG EK, he didn't miss them.

I'm sure they were fine before, it's not like SCAG did anything to improve their already immense durability, but even a perceived increase in effectiveness can skew public opinion.

[Dienekes]

They get a lot of flak (from my perspective) for being a very effective form of damage for Gish dips. Everything I'd researched when I started looking into how to play DND told me that Gish were popular and people wanted them in 5E but for some reason the cantrips being an effective ability to help enable them was a terrible thing.

I can only assume it's because for most Gish you're making an active decision to be worse if you don't use them, but I prefer to view it from the "it enabled so many things" than "It's so good that I feel like I must use it" perspective, although both are probably valid.

An example, older posts I looked at regarded EK as a fairly weak Fighter subclass (this may or may not have been true, but it was noticeable more frequent then) which changed substantially because of these cantrips.

I think it is partially a problem with perceived balance. I don't think anyone (or at least not most people) want Gishes to be bad. But everyone always assumed it'd be a trade-off. Sure, the EK gets all these awesome spells that make it the best Fighter tank and also the most versatile of the currently available Fighter subclasses. But because of that they don't get any bonuses to damage like the Battlemaster gets through their Maneuvers and the Champion gets through their improved crit (which early 5e players I think dramatically overvalued).

Then came the cantrips and suddenly not only was EK the best defensive fighter, and the most versatile fighter, but then it was also the most damaging until level 11. And I think a lot of people thought that was kind of ridiculous.

[Amnestic]

They get a lot of flak (from my perspective) for being a very effective form of damage for Gish dips. Everything I'd researched when I started looking into how to play DND told me that Gish were popular and people wanted them in 5E but for some reason the cantrips being an effective ability to help enable them was a terrible thing.

I can only assume it's because for most Gish you're making an active decision to be worse if you don't use them, but I prefer to view it from the "it enabled so many things" than "It's so good that I feel like I must use it" perspective, although both are probably valid.

An example, older posts I looked at regarded EK as a fairly weak Fighter subclass (this may or may not have been true, but it was noticeable more frequent then) which changed substantially because of these cantrips.

It may also be that BB and GFB are the only two 'gish' cantrips, meaning they show up in *so many builds* and people get sick of them. If there were a few others (I've been tossing about Eldritch Claws as a 1d12 melee version of Eldritch Blast in my head but not really gone any further than that) then may not be such a big deal.

[clash]

They get a lot of flak (from my perspective) for being a very effective form of damage for Gish dips. Everything I'd researched when I started looking into how to play DND told me that Gish were popular and people wanted them in 5E but for some reason the cantrips being an effective ability to help enable them was a terrible thing.

I can only assume it's because for most Gish you're making an active decision to be worse if you don't use them, but I prefer to view it from the "it enabled so many things" than "It's so good that I feel like I must use it" perspective, although both are probably valid.

An example, older posts I looked at regarded EK as a fairly weak Fighter subclass (this may or may not have been true, but it was noticeable more frequent then) which changed substantially because of these cantrips.

My problem with them is they are a straight up damage improvement in a lot of cases.

Whats always straight up better than a melee attack from a rogue? Booming blade or Green flame blade from rogue. It does scaling cantrip damage plus weapon damage. So for anyone that actually has the stats to use a weapon it is better then either an attack or a cantrip and it offers control as well.

At level 5 it is competitive with extra attack with any kind of finesse weapon (1d8 + 5)*2 ~ 19, (2d8 + 1d8 + 5) ~ 18.5. This is a level earlier than the bladesinger gets extra attack, pretty much invalidating that subclass feature. This is the same level warlock can get extra attack, mostly invalidating blade pact if you ask me.

The only class that really needed it to be a gish was sorcerer and in that case I would have much preferred a sorcerer subclass with extra attack.

I dont really understand what they were thinking when they decided that in this one case it was fine to add cantrip damage to weapon attack damage. I dont allow it at my table because it is simply not balanced with any of the preexisting content.

[king_steve]

My problem with them is they are a straight up damage improvement in a lot of cases.

Whats always straight up better than a melee attack from a rogue? Booming blade or Green flame blade from rogue. It does scaling cantrip damage plus weapon damage. So for anyone that actually has the stats to use a weapon it is better then either an attack or a cantrip and it offers control as well.

At level 5 it is competitive with extra attack with any kind of finesse weapon (1d8 + 5)*2 ~ 19, (2d8 + 1d8 + 5) ~ 18.5. This is a level earlier than the bladesinger gets extra attack, pretty much invalidating that subclass feature. This is the same level warlock can get extra attack, mostly invalidating blade pact if you ask me.

The only class that really needed it to be a gish was sorcerer and in that case I would have much preferred a sorcerer subclass with extra attack.

I dont really understand what they were thinking when they decided that in this one case it was fine to add cantrip damage to weapon attack damage. I dont allow it at my table because it is simply not balanced with any of the preexisting content.

What do you think would be a better design? Maybe if they a cantrip version of some of the smite spells? E.g. Bonus action cast concentration spell and you can add 1d8 (thunder or fire) to one attack? I'm not sure if it would scale like other cantrips. But would something like that be more reasonable?

[Dienekes]

What do you think would be a better design? Maybe if they a cantrip version of some of the smite spells? E.g. Bonus action cast concentration spell and you can add 1d8 (thunder or fire) to one attack? I'm not sure if it would scale like other cantrips. But would something like that be more reasonable?

A group of non-damaging control focused cantrips that cost a Bonus Action to cast and can only be used after hitting an opponent with an attack.

Just spitballing, admittedly.

[clash]

What do you think would be a better design? Maybe if they a cantrip version of some of the smite spells? E.g. Bonus action cast concentration spell and you can add 1d8 (thunder or fire) to one attack? I'm not sure if it would scale like other cantrips. But would something like that be more reasonable?

See I would be totally down for something like this. I would say you could even remove concentration and just have bonus action to add 1d6 dmg, and maybe a rider to your next attack. This way it is balanced by using you bonus action which in theory could be used for twf if nothing else and doesnt add cantrip scaling and stacks with gish features like extra attack rather than competing for them.

[Amechra]

It would actually be kinda interesting to convert the Smite spells into cantrips. If you wanted to get exotic, you could have the smites unlock new abilities as you level up.

For example, Blinding Smite would deal Xd8 Radiant damage, with the save vs. blind rider coming online at 11th level. Having an at-will ability that lets you blind people feels strong, but it does require Concentration plus an attack roll plus a failed save, so...

[jaappleton]

It would actually be kinda interesting to convert the Smite spells into cantrips. If you wanted to get exotic, you could have the smites unlock new abilities as you level up.

For example, Blinding Smite would deal Xd8 Radiant damage, with the save vs. blind rider coming online at 11th level. Having an at-will ability that lets you blind people feels strong, but it does require Concentration plus an attack roll plus a failed save, so...

Bring back the 4E Bladesinger cantrips.

At the time they were called "At-Will Powers", but they worked quite similarly to how 5E handles the smite spells.

You'd hit with an attack and then pick what Bladesinger Cantrip you wanted to add on as a rider. I think the Radiant one provided Advantage on the next attack (which at the time was a flat +2 to the next attack roll), the Cold one slowed, etc. And they all did a little extra damage.

[GlenSmash!]

The Brute Fighter: The only sub-class to make two weapon fighting + Dual Wielder worthwhile.

Does it make it worthwhile though? Brute force works just as well with PAM as it does with two weapon fighting. Better even with the reliable Reaction Attack. Heck it even works with Crossbow expert as well as it does with TWF.

Brute was hated for a number of reasons:

1. It occupied essentially the same design space as the Champion

2. Out-paced pretty much every other Fighter damage-wise

3. Bonus to saves, even Death saves? Straw that broke the camels back. Having that ability on top of Indomitable was a bit much.

My issue was with the fact that you could dump strength and be a dex based crossbow expert sharpshooter "Brute" shooting bolts that are somehow more brutish than regular bolts.

Still I think the concept could have been saved.

[Kane0]

My issue was with the fact that you could dump strength and be a dex based crossbow expert sharpshooter "Brute" shooting bolts that are somehow more brutish than regular bolts.

Still I think the concept could have been saved.

Nose art on the arrows/bolts?

[GlenSmash!]

Nose art on the arrows/bolts?

That... sounds pretty cool

[1811]

UA Sub-Classes and other features I'm most excited to (potentially) see in TCoE:

Sub-Classes:
Path of the Wild Soul Barbarian
College of Spirits Bard
Unity Domain Cleric
Circle of Stars Druid
Circle of Wildfire Druid
Oath of Treachery Paladin
Swarmkeeper Ranger
Genie Patron Warlock
Lurker in the Deep Patron Warlock

Other:
UA Class Options
New Feats, in particular, the ones that allow you to pick up a fighting style or invocation.

Won't make the cut but wish it would:
The Brute Fighter: The only sub-class to make two weapon fighting + Dual Wielder worthwhile.

So excited about the unity domain - playing the UA version at the moment. I wonder whether it will be changed much in the new book.

[Millstone85]

So excited about the unity domain - playing the UA version at the moment. I wonder whether it will be changed much in the new book.

I have a very small hope that the name will be changed back to the Love domain.

[micahaphone]

I have a very small hope that the name will be changed back to the Love domain.

sounds like someone's not super excited for the commie domain!

I do agree that Love makes a lot more sense for a divine domain

[Millstone85]

sounds like someone's not super excited for the commie domain!

I do agree that Love makes a lot more sense for a divine domain

To be clear, I am all for a Love domain that encompasses romance, friendship, family and charity, AKA "the four loves".

[Naanomi]

sounds like someone's not super excited for the commie domain!

I do agree that Love makes a lot more sense for a divine domain

Eh, from a world-building perspective I think Unity has more gas... it can be used for Community and City Gods (Yondalla is a Goddess of Unity, but not really of Love), Gods of Peace (like Eldath), as well as Love Gods/Goddesses in the more traditional sense

[micahaphone]

To be clear, I am all for a Love domain that encompasses romance, friendship, family and charity, AKA "the four loves".

I like that! More depth to it than just a Cupid style love bug.

Eh, from a world-building perspective I think Unity has more gas... it can be used for Community and City Gods (Yondalla is a Goddess of Unity, but not really of Love), Gods of Peace (like Eldath), as well as Love Gods/Goddesses in the more traditional sense

I hadn't thought of a civic god, that's a cool idea. I would've put them under Order but that's not always the same.


tbh I just like commie dwarves, a quirk of my worldbuilding.