Fizban's first impressions

[jas61292]

As far as "why aren't you summoning that exact thing?" You're not summoning a beast at all. You're summoning a spirit, that takes a shape similar to that creature, modified by your own imagination.

Spoiler: For those who have played FFXIV through at least 5.0

Show

It's like the difference between fighting Titan back at lower levels and fighting Titan during the Eden series of raids. The one summoned by the kobolds as their god and the one summoned from the WoL's memory via Eden's power are similar, but decidedly different. The old-school one didn't have wheels, after all.

I actually really like this comparison. It can simultaneously help explain away the fact that they are not the same as whatever base creature they supposedly are like, while also allowing the summoner to add a bit of personal flair and customization. I know some people prefer the idea of literally summoning actual creatures rather than a spirit, but I think having it be a spirit is not only better for balance, but also tends to feel more natural, especially for the lower level spells. More sensible at low level, to shape a spirit that could already just be around into whatever you want, rather than somehow port in creatures that may or may not make sense for the area.

Spoiler:

Show

And if one of my players wanted to add wheels to a creature, for flavor, I'd be all for it

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Darksun lore they definitely broke the whole planet. More than once actually. Mostly by screwing with their own sun, and poorly thought out bioengineering. The damage caused by defiling was just the icing on the apocalypse cake. Heck, the main setting was among the more *habitable* remaining regions by most accounts

Eberron could have parallel events, of course, because 'everything in DnD is in Eberron'

Prefacing with a "I'm fully aware there's no canon here, it's just a fun what if."

I'd point out that that understanding is subjective statements from creatures on the world that are constantly pulled into question. The people who watched the cataclysm watched the bio-engineers shoot a beam at the sun that changed it from blue to yellow and then yellow to red, but I don't recall if those memories are supposed to come from experts or just people there. And what looks like a beam that alters an entire star could also be some sort of field generator that affects the light coming to an area. Would explain how we tip a star from white/blue to yellow to red without any size difference.

We also only have assessment from those in the Tyr region that it's everywhere. But head west and you hit rainforests. Head north and you hit the last sea. It's pretty clear that there's no guarantee that it's all desolate everywhere, just in the local known area. :)

My issue with Summon Draconic Spirit is the same as with Tasha's summon spells - they don't summon a creature but rather something that looks like a certain creature and pretends to be that creature. And it doesn't feel as satisfying as using a monster stat block. I undestand that it's difficult to balance summoning spells against the ever-growing list of monsters but I would rather they limited summonable creatures to a specific list (as in some 3.5/pathfinder spells) than made all summons samey. And somehow a creature with 5d10 hit dice and a +3 Con modifier has an average hit points of 50.

It's all flavor. You get a stat block that is X, change it up. Like Monks wielding Nunchucks (Clubs) Your dragon is a real dragon that comes to assist you. It's all imagination and description unless you're specifically discussing a mechanical boon you want.

As an aside, the HP do average at 50. 5d10+(3*5)=5d10+15=10+(4*6)+15=10+24+15=49. So technically being a bit nicer.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I actually really like this comparison. It can simultaneously help explain away the fact that they are not the same as whatever base creature they supposedly are like, while also allowing the summoner to add a bit of personal flair and customization. I know some people prefer the idea of literally summoning actual creatures rather than a spirit, but I think having it be a spirit is not only better for balance, but also tends to feel more natural, especially for the lower level spells. More sensible at low level, to shape a spirit that could already just be around into whatever you want, rather than somehow port in creatures that may or may not make sense for the area.

Spoiler:

Show

And if one of my players wanted to add wheels to a creature, for flavor, I'd be all for it

The game I'm just starting has a bark-skin soul-forged moon druid. Soul-forged are my answer to warforged, living constructs awoken by forces unknown to souls and life. And the bark-skin were carved and constructed as sacred guardians of shrines, out of wood and stone.

So when he transforms into a bear, he can absolutely have "hair" that, on close examination, is just carved wood. Because wild-shape, for me, is calling on a spirit representing a beast and shaping a body out of the aether and stuff of their own body. The spirit is the one directly in control (which is why you don't have to spend weeks getting used to having four legs) and provides the basic shape and physical memory, but the druid is "riding" it, telling the spirit how to act. So the shape you take isn't some specific animal, it's your idea of the animal. If it's too far from the norm, the spirit will reject it (so you have to know what the beast is and how it functions), but things like a bright blue stripe or other cosmetic changes? That's fine.

[strangebloke]

I basically agree with this. If the game is going to be designed with combat as a major focus, and such combats are typically going to be skirmishes between small groups, you simply cannot have characters whose whole thing is controlling multiple creatures and expect it to be balanced. Action economy is too important to allow a character to just break it for free. We see that issue with every summon spell. No matter how weak, they are all among the most busted for their level. Heck, even having a single permanent companion is incredibly difficult to do. We've now had multiple takes on the concept across a few classes, and I'm not convinced any of them are truly balanced against their alternatives.

While I much prefer the newer summon spells to the conjure ones from the PHB, I'd really just prefer none of them exist in the first place. Players should play a single character. More than that just does not work well.

Summoning can be balanced but it does tend to break the game in one of a few ways

1. being better tanks and meatbags than the characters built for such a purpose because the summons are expendable and generally take up more space.
2. breaking the action economy (the help action is particularly relevant here, but reaction attacks as a means to control space are also relevant)
3. exploiting aura buffs that were balanced with the assumption of only targeting 3-5 characters
4. If you allow specific creatures, you'll always end up giving PCs access to abilities they definitely shouldn't have access to at a given level (conjure animals as a mass flying taxi service, pun-pun in 3.5, nonmagic bsp immunity, )

There's also a problem that mass summons in particular tend to be completely feast or famine. Either the enemy has no AOE and you run them over, or the dragon roasts all twenty of your zombies in the opening round at no extra cost.

Basically, its imo not worth the trouble. I know people like summons, but asking for more than the (very very strong) spells we have in Tasha's just feels whiny to me. But maybe I'm just a salty martial fanboy.

[Fynzmirs]

It's all flavor. You get a stat block that is X, change it up. Like Monks wielding Nunchucks (Clubs) Your dragon is a real dragon that comes to assist you. It's all imagination and description unless you're specifically discussing a mechanical boon you want.

As an aside, the HP do average at 50. 5d10+(3*5)=5d10+15=10+(4*6)+15=10+24+15=49. So technically being a bit nicer.

1. Yes, some people enjoy the mechanical side of things. It's dismissive to say "you can refluff it anyway"

2. It doesn't add up and you have shown that. Whether we count the first hit die as maximized (not sure if that's a rule only for players or if it also applies to monsters) it doesn't add up to 50. That's not "being nicer", that's wrong math. And I know it's pretty minor but it annoys me how close they were. It's like a rules lawyer's version of the uncanny valley, or the 89° angle.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

1. Yes, some people enjoy the mechanical side of things. It's dismissive to say "you can refluff it anyway"

2. It doesn't add up and you have shown that. Whether we count the first hit die as maximized (not sure if that's a rule only for players or if it also applies to monsters) it doesn't add up to 50. That's not "being nicer", that's wrong math. And I know it's pretty minor but it annoys me how close they were. It's like a rules lawyer's version of the uncanny valley, or the 89° angle.

1: You're combining two aspects of my point for some reason. I didn't dismiss people who enjoy the mechanical side. I said you can change the fluff at will, that's built into the PHB. Then I said the only thing that doesn't solve for is if you were after a specific mechanical trait. (IE a Dragon's Fear or a Wolf's Pack Tactics, etc). Fluff doesn't solve for that. But if you really want that mechanical benefit, talk to your DM, it's not exactly a wrong game design to not include that as a feature.

2: 1 HP off is not significant in this game. For that matter, an 89 degree angle is not significant unless we're talking architecture or structural soundness, then it can be a big issue. But we're talking a table top game that already plays light and soft with math.

Also, re-checked the actual spell, because I initially just went off the statement here of 5d10+Con*5 Which coincidentally is 49. But the spell entry in UA (Don't have Fizban's in front of me right this minute) just says 50+10/Spellslot above 5th. Looking at the spells in Tasha it's the same (Example 3rd level Summon Fey is 30+10/spellslot above 3rd).

The summoned creatures just have 10/Spell level. Their con modifier is just there for saving throws essentially.

Summoning can be balanced but it does tend to break the game in one of a few ways

1. being better tanks and meatbags than the characters built for such a purpose because the summons are expendable and generally take up more space.
2. breaking the action economy (the help action is particularly relevant here, but reaction attacks as a means to control space are also relevant)
3. exploiting aura buffs that were balanced with the assumption of only targeting 3-5 characters
4. If you allow specific creatures, you'll always end up giving PCs access to abilities they definitely shouldn't have access to at a given level (conjure animals as a mass flying taxi service, pun-pun in 3.5, nonmagic bsp immunity, )

I don't disagree on the other stuff, but wanted to touch on these because they seem more situational than direct concern.

1: Being a better tank is an issue if there's a tank and you're making the game not fun for that player. But what if the Caster is the tank and the summon is a deliberate choice for party balance?

2-3: This is all examples of the same issue, does additional bodies = too much power for the PC. I'd argue it's situational, not concrete. When you look at an encounter scaled for 4 people, 5+ tips the scales. But then, do you weaken it as a DM if there's only 3? What happens when you have more than 4 players? It seems less of a balance issue and more of a DM adjustment.

4: Define abilities players shouldn't have access to? Not really needing to because this becomes a wholely subjective discussion, but that again seems an issue of DM expectations set at the beginning. Some DMs won't allow Aarakokra because flight before level 5 or continuous flight in general is bad in their mind. Other DMs don't care at all.

[Amnestic]

The dragons should be d12, not d10.

7*5=35+15 from Con=50. This also matches for +10HP/spell level.

Not aware of any situations where it being listed as a d10 instead of a d12 would actually matter, mind you.

[JackPhoenix]

The dragons should be d12, not d10.

7*5=35+15 from Con=50. This also matches for +10HP/spell level.

Not aware of any situations where it being listed as a d10 instead of a d12 would actually matter, mind you.

It's large, so it's d10, not d12. And even if it was, I don't know where are you getting 7, average of 1d12 is 6.5, not 7, and D&D rounds down, not up. Though monster HP only round the final value, not individual dice.

[Dork_Forge]

It's large, so it's d10, not d12. And even if it was, I don't know where are you getting 7, average of 1d12 is 6.5, not 7, and D&D rounds down, not up. Though monster HP only round the final value, not individual dice.

D&D doesn't universally round down, PCs round up for average hp increases.

The spell level increase makes perfect sense as:

7(avg d12 rounded up) + Con (+3)

So this looks like it's probably either an error in the hit doe description, or they just threw out the guidelines and went with what seemed right or looks appropriate for the spell.

[PhantomSoul]

D&D doesn't universally round down, PCs round up for average hp increases.

The spell level increase makes perfect sense as:

7(avg d12 rounded up) + Con (+3)

So this looks like it's probably either an error in the hit doe description, or they just threw out the guidelines and went with what seemed right or looks appropriate for the spell.

And if it's +10 (I don't have the book to confirm), maybe also what's easy to calculate on the fly

[JackPhoenix]

D&D doesn't universally round down, PCs round up for average hp increases.

The spell level increase makes perfect sense as:

7(avg d12 rounded up) + Con (+3)

Again, that's not how monster HP work.

So this looks like it's probably either an error in the hit doe description, or they just threw out the guidelines and went with what seemed right or looks appropriate for the spell.

It's not an error. The spirit's HP is not based on its HD. Really, there's no reason for it to even have HD... other "X spirits" don't, because they aren't sticking around long enough for the HD to be relevant.

[Dork_Forge]

Again, that's not how monster HP work.

It's not 'a monster' though, it's a statblock for a summoning spell.

The blocks for companion creatures don't really act like monster blocks either, but they're not being presented as monsters to use as such, so it shouldn't be an issue.

It's not an error. The spirit's HP is not based on its HD. Really, there's no reason for it to even have HD... other "X spirits" don't, because they aren't sticking around long enough for the HD to be relevant.

It takes a Sorcerer 1 SP to make the spirit last 2 hours instead of one and Catnap exists, so whilst it commonly won't use HD, it most certainly can, but I suspect that everything is given HD to accommodate not only the rest rules but any future mechanics (or ones I can't think of) that revolve around that sort of thing.

No idea if it's correct, but off the top of my head I'd use number of HD as a substitute for level/CR when using something like Polymorph.

[PhoenixPhyre]

No idea if it's correct, but off the top of my head I'd use number of HD as a substitute for level/CR when using something like Polymorph.

That's a really inaccurate measure in this edition, and will tend to give answers that are way too high.

I'm looking at a CR 6 creature right now with 15 HD. Or a CR 3 with 8 HD. The CR 2 Will o wisp has 9(!) HD. The CR 3 Archer (humanoid NPC) has 10 HD. HD and CR are only very loosely coupled (higher HD means, for fixed size, higher HP, which influences CR). But two creatures of the same CR can have radically different HD and the same HP, just by having different sizes.

Only PCs have level == HD. Anything else is quite unrelated.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Either way, all of the newer Summon spells seem to be "Has 10 HP/Spell Slot level" The Con modifier if there is for Con saves and such, not to determine HP.

I just checked all of the "Summon X" spells. They all run as a base of X0 with an additional modifier per spell slot. None are calculated as HD. Further they just flat adjust numbers for typing or weirdness. (IE Beasts only get +5/extra spell level, Constructs get +15/extra spell level, Fiends move from 40-60 depending on the type summoned).

So Summon Draconic Spirit isn't trying to calculate any HD with a 3 con to get the total, it's just in line with all the other spells.

[strangebloke]

I don't disagree on the other stuff, but wanted to touch on these because they seem more situational than direct concern.

1: Being a better tank is an issue if there's a tank and you're making the game not fun for that player. But what if the Caster is the tank and the summon is a deliberate choice for party balance?

2-3: This is all examples of the same issue, does additional bodies = too much power for the PC. I'd argue it's situational, not concrete. When you look at an encounter scaled for 4 people, 5+ tips the scales. But then, do you weaken it as a DM if there's only 3? What happens when you have more than 4 players? It seems less of a balance issue and more of a DM adjustment.

4: Define abilities players shouldn't have access to? Not really needing to because this becomes a wholely subjective discussion, but that again seems an issue of DM expectations set at the beginning. Some DMs won't allow Aarakokra because flight before level 5 or continuous flight in general is bad in their mind. Other DMs don't care at all.

1. The caster is already the caster. Picking a certain spell and using a single spell slot should not replicate the function of a character built around that concept, but it frequently does.

2-3. If the DM has to functionally treat a single character (and their pets) as 3 characters than you obviously, transparently have a balance problem and odds are the other characters are feeling relatively sidelined.

4. Let me put it this way. If a spell that's nominally for dealing damage and tanking is also granting you access to an ability that you couldn't otherwise have until high level, that's probably a hilariously overpowered spell.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

1. The caster is already the caster. Picking a certain spell and using a single spell slot should not replicate the function of a character built around that concept, but it frequently does.

2-3. If the DM has to functionally treat a single character (and their pets) as 3 characters than you obviously, transparently have a balance problem and odds are the other characters are feeling relatively sidelined.

4. Let me put it this way. If a spell that's nominally for dealing damage and tanking is also granting you access to an ability that you couldn't otherwise have until high level, that's probably a hilariously overpowered spell.

1:It's not replicating an entire build. It's serving the purpose of the Tank in combat. It does not have skill checks, heavy role playing or frequent appearance outside of time it is cast.

2-3: Why do we have a balance problem? If other players are feeling sidelined that's it's own issue (You making tank summons when there is a tank). But me having two characters on the battle field is not a balance issue in and of itself. The came is built around cooperative groups. Our goal is to overcome the bad guys, figure out the puzzles, etc, etc. Not make sure we're all at precise equal power.

Also, the original concern is that adding or subtracting from that sweet spot group number is a bad thing. Which is a different argument from is the summoner making the other players feel left out.

4: The spell is nominally for conjuring that creature which has those abilities and has a duration of an hour or so at the cost of my concentration (Fey Wanderer aside). All of its abilities are things the caster is meant to have. I'm not sure what ability you're feeling the party isn't supposed to have, hence my pointing out that's a subjective line from DM to DM not a hard and fast balance point.

[Dork_Forge]

That's a really inaccurate measure in this edition, and will tend to give answers that are way too high.

I'm looking at a CR 6 creature right now with 15 HD. Or a CR 3 with 8 HD. The CR 2 Will o wisp has 9(!) HD. The CR 3 Archer (humanoid NPC) has 10 HD. HD and CR are only very loosely coupled (higher HD means, for fixed size, higher HP, which influences CR). But two creatures of the same CR can have radically different HD and the same HP, just by having different sizes.

Only PCs have level == HD. Anything else is quite unrelated.

No, it would give results that would be lower, all of those things already have CR.

I'm talking about using the number of HD in place of CR where there isn't one, like on the Draconic Spirit, or any number of companion options. That means you'd be Polymorphing them in an equivalent fashion to a PC, not getting some wildly inflated metric.

[DigoDragon]

Kobolds didn't make the book.

Ah, so the idea of changing Kobolds was completely dumped from the UA (at least for this book; UA in https://media.wizards.com/2021/dnd/d...nicOptions.pdf)

Ah, so they get no mention in this book (Gene Wilder is yelling in my head now "good day, sir!"); yeah I think that UA was where I had heard of their rebuild rumor.

That is... kind of a shame that they didn't get anything nice out of this book. Ah well, thank you both for letting me know in any case. :3

[P. G. Macer]

Ah, so they get no mention in this book (Gene Wilder is yelling in my head now "good day, sir!"); yeah I think that UA was where I had heard of their rebuild rumor.

That is... kind of a shame that they didn't get anything nice out of this book. Ah well, thank you both for letting me know in any case. :3

I’m still holding out hope that the revised kobold will appear in Monsters of the Multiverse this January, since there’s going to be revised content from Volo’s in there. I’m not holding my breath either, though.

[Segev]

Ah, so they get no mention in this book (Gene Wilder is yelling in my head now "good day, sir!"); yeah I think that UA was where I had heard of their rebuild rumor.

That is... kind of a shame that they didn't get anything nice out of this book. Ah well, thank you both for letting me know in any case. :3

This book is definitely focused on what it says on the cover: dragons. I also think it more a DM's resource than a players'; it has player-focused stuff, but very little of it, with no more than 2-3 pages devoted to any one category of things. I think the new dragonborn get the most pagecount. Draconic gifts are a neat idea for a new category of boon to serve as a reward, but there aren't many of them listed (unless you count the sidebar's individual "you could also grant these feats" as "more things," and that takes less than a quarter of a page).

The bulk of the book is on dragon personalities for designing individual NPCs, dragon lairs and customizing them for various kinds of dragons, and then a bestiary with a lot of dragons and some dragon-associated critters. Far higher dragon-to-not-quite-dragon ratio in this one's bestiary, it feels like to me, than in 3.5's Draconomicon, too.

[DigoDragon]

I’m still holding out hope that the revised kobold will appear in Monsters of the Multiverse this January, since there’s going to be revised content from Volo’s in there. I’m not holding my breath either, though.

Dang, is everyone doing a multiverse thing? XD

What I'd like to see in a new kobold revision are abilities that allow them to make little one shot traps. Like how the tinker gnomes can make little clockwork devices, I think a PC kobold who could set up a quick trap that could hinder or injure someone would be a useful and flavorful ability.

This book is definitely focused on what it says on the cover: dragons. I also think it more a DM's resource than a players'

That sounds it from this thread! I still plan on getting the book. My old 3.5 Draconomicon got a lot of use back in the day, and I do love making a dragon BBEG in my campaigns.

[Garfunion]

Are there any changes/additions to the sorcerer draconic bloodline?

[Segev]

Are there any changes/additions to the sorcerer draconic bloodline?

Nope.

Some new spells, but that's not bloodline-specific.

[JackPhoenix]

Are there any changes/additions to the sorcerer draconic bloodline?

In one word, no. In at least ten words requied to reply, also no.

[Garfunion]

Nope.

Some new spells, but that's not bloodline-specific.

In one word, no. In at least ten words requied to reply, also no.

So no force dragon bloodline😢

[Xervous]

So no force dragon bloodline😢

Is that horny bard meets ghostbusters?

[Garfunion]

Is that horny bard meets ghostbusters?

When it comes to Bards…

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-eDzxEr_gjp...k-Bard-Axe.jpg

[quindraco]

So no force dragon bloodline😢

Since the Draconic Bloodline doesn't get any bonus spells to worry about, if your DM wants Gem Bloodlines to exist, the homebrew is absolutely trivial - Fizban's does provide a mapping from Gem to Damage Type. Easiest way to view the mapping is in the Gem Dragonborn section, imho, but here you go:

Amethyst Force
Crystal Radiant
Emerald Psychic
Sapphire Thunder
Topaz Necrotic

Although, very few sorcerer spells will work with Elemental Affinity and this list. Thunder might be the lowest-hanging fruit here, just due to Booming Blade.

[Naanomi]

Amethyst Force

I played a 'magic missile' mage in 3.5e, if available, this would be a decent option for that yeah?

[Foolwise]

Since the Draconic Bloodline doesn't get any bonus spells to worry about, if your DM wants Gem Bloodlines to exist, the homebrew is absolutely trivial - Fizban's does provide a mapping from Gem to Damage Type. Easiest way to view the mapping is in the Gem Dragonborn section, imho, but here you go:

Amethyst Force
Crystal Radiant
Emerald Psychic
Sapphire Thunder
Topaz Necrotic

Although, very few sorcerer spells will work with Elemental Affinity and this list. Thunder might be the lowest-hanging fruit here, just due to Booming Blade.

Booming Blade/Thunderclap - Thunder
Sword Burst - Force
Mind Sliver - Psychic
Chill Touch - Necrotic

Cantrips alone, only radiant is not found on the Sorcerer list. But your point does stand, a gem draconic sorcerer would need an expanded spell list tailored to their chosen type. In that case, thunder's low hanging fruit becomes a liability as they would have the most sorcerer available spells on their list.