Why do people hate Tasha’s?

[Hawk7915]

Basically, it's divisive because A. Power creep is real, and a couple classes got creeped that really didn't need it, B. Lineages were fixing a problem that never really existed in a way people don't like, C. It broke SCAG cantrips, and D. People don't like some of the stuff in it.

Most of this comes down to DM's not knowing how to say no or not wanting to say no. Some of it is honestly just poor design; Peace domain clerics are shockingly strong, twilight clerics are exceptionally good. Some of it is design that clashes with certain world-views; some people dislike artificers, and to be fair they do make a lot more sense in certain campaign settings than others.

Personally, it holds a certain space in my heart for including more battlemaster maneuvers and fighting styles. I also really like the new druids. For that reason, I'd never ban the entire book.

That powercreep is for sure real. I like Tasha's just fine, personally, and allow almost all of it at my table, but it is striking how whack some of the balance is.

- Clockwork and Aberrant Sorcerer are an order of magnitude better than every other Sorcerer subclass. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth of folks who really like Dragon/Storm/Wild/Celestial/Shadow sorcerer. Thing is, I think Sorcerers needed some help to not be "Wizard but worse" in a world of non-Vancian casting, but they really ought to have gone back and helped out the others especially the core ones.

- The issue is similar although less pronounced for Monk and Ranger subclasses in the book (and the fix to Beastmaster Ranger makes it all the more frustrating to not see a similar patch to the Wild and Dragon Sorcerer).

- We also have Cleric and Druid (arguably two of the best classes already anyways) getting some incredible subclasses (or outright broken ones, in the case of Cleric). No one has asked me about Peace or Twilight Domain Cleric yet in my playgroup, but I would have to think long and hard about approving it.

- Feats too are pretty wild. As far as half-feats go, Fey-touched, Skill Expert, Telekinetic, Telepathic, Slasher, Crusher, and (to a lesser extent) Piercer and Shadow-Touched are so much stronger than any of the core player's handbook half-feats. This is less power-creepy (since ultimately GWM, PAM, and Sharpshooter are still the best feats in the game) but it was notable. In particular, I'd likely strongly consider Fey-touched and Shadow-touched and Telepathic without the stat boost since they're near-strictly better than Magic Initiate. Again, one could argue that feats could have used some oomph to be better than an ASI more often, but if that's the case it would have been nice to see a pass made at feats like Grappler, Charger, and Dungeon Delver to make them less trash.

[Anymage]

I'm surprised that I don't hear anybody else talking about the caster spell focuses. Partially because scaling bonuses to spell save DCs implies a corresponding scaling bonus to saving throws while 5e very much tried to avoid going down that road. Partially because while it made sense on the rod of the pact keeper (locks had very spells per encounter and then needed a magic weapon for their EBs), other casters already have much more ability to disable on a save and don't need to be even harder to resist.

[Merudo]

I’m not very close to D&D these days. It’s probably been a couple of years since I regularly read these forums. I was browsing through yesterday and there seems to be a widely accepted view that Tasha’s is awful.

It’s casually referred to as ‘Trashas’ and I’ve seen ‘Tasha’s Cauldron of Excrement’. I have the book. I’ve not read it in any depth. What’s the reason for the hate? Is it just a bad book, or does it upset the game balance in some way? I seem to remember the reception being quite positive when it came out.

People are mad because it changes the player races a fair bit. Change can be scary.

IMO the only real garbage that came out is the Twilight Cleric, which is ridiculously OP.

[brainface]

I like Tasha's. \o/

I bought it for artificer rules--I'm kind of worried about their balance at lower levels but it seems to even out a lot by mid levels. I love the ancestry changes, as it allows me to pick a race based more on theme than on "has +1 or +2 to class ability score." I'd be worried more about twilight cleric if I ever wanted to play one or was dming for someone playing one I guess. Overall I thought it was a fun book.

[dafrca]

I do not love nor hate the book. I found it was no different than any other optional mish mash of various rules smashed into a book and sold to me. There are parts I liked, parts I didn't, parts I have to think on before adding into my game. But in the end it is all just more for me to pick from if I want to add to my game.

[Cheesegear]

I bought it for artificer rules--I'm kind of worried about their balance at lower levels but it seems to even out a lot by mid levels.

Artificer does break Tier 1. Can confirm.

I love the ancestry changes, as it allows me to pick a race based more on theme than on "has +1 or +2 to class ability score."

You mean you haven't been picking your species this entire time based on theme? Did you mean to say that?

I'd be worried more about twilight cleric if I ever wanted to play one or was dming for someone playing one I guess.

Artificer - the entire class - has balance problems. Especially in Tier 1. But we just covered this.

Bards; Both Subclasses can cause problems if they aren't checked at the door.

Cleric:
- Peace Domain is bonkers, with a bonkers combat-heal and none of the abilites of the Subclass have anything to do with peace.
- Twilight Domain has been done to death.

Rogue:
- Phantom is really, really strong.
- Soulknife is very silly. '...leaves no mark on its target...' Has amazing potential for disruption in any populated area. Whatever adventure you had planned, the Rogue can now go on a murder spree and be near-impossible to catch. I know this because I DM'd it.

Sorcerer; Both Subclasses are crazy good.

So I have mechanical problems with 8 Subclasses, and the entire Artificer class.

The Subclasses I think are 'just stupid' from a theme standpoint is too subjective so I wont bother...Unless we want to derail the thread at some point and start talking about subjective themes that are going to vary and differ at every single table, and even between players at the same table.

[Ogre Mage]

I like the book and have played a few of the subclasses in it. We allow all of the subclasses. I have played a twilight cleric and enjoyed it. She did not break the campaign. We are not using the change to racial ASIs.

[brainface]

You mean you haven't been picking your species this entire time based on theme? Did you mean to say that?

Yes, actually, I did mean to say what I said. Thank you for your concern, it is appreciated!

More seriously: yes I pick the species my character plays based on theme, but previously if I wanted to play, say, a half-orc wizard, well... that's probably not an idea that gets out of the gates, because I don't need my characters to be overpowered but I do want them to be competent, and for a lot of characters having the ability to at least put a +1 in your class's key stat guarantees they can perform at a reasonable level without having to do odd trickery to make it work.

[MrCharlie]

Artificer does break Tier 1. Can confirm.

Artificer - the entire class - has balance problems. Especially in Tier 1. But we just covered this.

Bards; Both Subclasses can cause problems if they aren't checked at the door.

Cleric:
- Peace Domain is bonkers, with a bonkers combat-heal and none of the abilites of the Subclass have anything to do with peace.
- Twilight Domain has been done to death.

Rogue:
- Phantom is really, really strong.
- Soulknife is very silly. '...leaves no mark on its target...' Has amazing potential for disruption in any populated area. Whatever adventure you had planned, the Rogue can now go on a murder spree and be near-impossible to catch. I know this because I DM'd it.

Sorcerer; Both Subclasses are crazy good.

So I have mechanical problems with 8 Subclasses, and the entire Artificer class.

The Subclasses I think are 'just stupid' from a theme standpoint is too subjective so I wont bother...Unless we want to derail the thread at some point and start talking about subjective themes that are going to vary and differ at every single table, and even between players at the same table.

In order; Artificer is great in tier 1 if built as a tank, good in tier 2, and on-par in tiers 3 and 4. Balance wise it does not break tier 1, tier 1 has always been broken in favor of what artificer does best. If you have an AC of 20 then nothing can hit you, but that's true of all classes.

Otherwise, artificer's only balance exploit are A. DM's that don't follow crafting rules and whose homebrew system can be exploited if its cheaper and faster, B. Spell storing item and summons passing it for free to rail-gun things to death.

Otherwise they are just a great tank and support character-they do something well, and it's useful, but not broken.

I've DMed for multiple artificers, played besides them, and played them, for some evidence of my credentials.

Creation is good at something; that's not problems, that's being a DnD character. What it's good at is just different and unique, and synergistic with the bard as a whole. It does not deserve to be mentioned in the same zip code as broken Bard archetypes.

Eloquence is the best archetype at base bard things, which given that bard things include "Winning", is a problem. Eloquence is probably the strongest thing in the game right now, twilight and peace included, because of how good de-buffing enemy saves is, and how good buffing ally saves is. I've never seen a party TPK from attacks-it's always a bad save that triggers a death cascade. Likewise, disabling spells rapidly turn DOA scenarios into cake walks when the friendly party uses them. Eloquence is notably the only Bard that competes with Lore Bard, and Lore Bard has been the strongest thing in the game since release.

Everything you said about cleric is accurate.

Phantom is about as strong as arcane trickster, and has similar abilities-some strong pseudo-spells and a sneak attack rider like SCAG cantrips. Arcane trickster is up there for rogue archetypes, but isn't problematic for game balance-Rogue as a whole is mediocre in 5e as a base class. In terms of multiclassing swashbuckler is still better because of consistency, although phantom has better ideal turns if you can get off-turn sneak attack without swash (despite wails being bound to your turn).

Soulknife is silly for other reasons, but not because soulknives work like they are suppose too. Yes, it can assassinate people with no trace. But so can a lot of magic. You just need to counter with magic-speak with dead "Who killed you", augury, divination, etc. can all identify the soulknife as the killer. If the soulknife manages to keep those from working or chooses targets whom won't be looked at like that, then good on them-that's what the soulknife does. In other words, what you're describing is one of the intended uses for soulknife.

The problems with soulknife are that the class is, in fact, weak in high magic combat heavy campaigns because their class has nothing that works with magic items and their inability to synergize with reaction attacks due to class design, and OP in intrigue heavy low magic campaigns because their soulknives are as good as weak magic items due to dice applying to hits, plus insanely good at skill checks. Basically , it's shockingly good compared to low power characters because of it's bonuses to getting its skill checks and attack rolls to succeed, and bad in high power parties because succeeding on skill checks or attack rolls to deal base sneak attack damage isn't enough in those situations.

Also, soulknife breaks accuracy because they roll their dice on a miss, and only expend if it works. They can always try to apply it with no penalty, and have enough dice that on average their number of misses that convert to hits in a day will be less than or just over their number of dice. How problematic that actually is depends on the party optimization.

[Yakmala]

I don't hate Tasha's in the slightest. In fact, I think it's an excellent addition to general 5e play.

I've had the opportunity to either try many of the new classes or play with others that have been using them over the last year, and my complaints are minor.

1: Twilight Cleric is, in fact, overpowered. I say this as someone that has been playing a Twilight Cleric weekly in a Rime of the Frostmaiden campaign for nearly a year now. I love what they can do, and I play them mostly as support, but within that role, they are a game-changer. Twilight Sanctuary is fantastic, and now that my cleric has gotten their hands on an Amulet of the Devout, it's even better.

2: I have never liked playing Sorcerers. They are my least played class. But I like the Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul Sorcerers. The problem here isn't that these two sub-classes are overpowered, it's that errata needs to be created to bring the other Sorcerer sub-classes up to par with their own slate of bonus spells.

3: Eloquence Bard getting the equivalent of Reliable Talent for Persuasion and Deception at Level 3 is insanely strong in RP situations. Unsettling Words + Instrument of the Bards makes control spells stick like glue.

A few sub-classes I didn't like at first, but then had the chance to play and they really changed my mind. In particular, the Soul Knife Rogue and the Oath of the Watchers Paladin. The Soul Knife is now a top 3 Rogue sub-class for me, and the Oath of the Watchers has risen to my #1 preferred Paladin sub-class.

[Toadkiller]

Pretty much if someone is raging about a D&D book it’s worth the time to see if the platform allows you to block them.

[werescythe]

I mean I wouldn't say I hate, but I would say that I feel that compared to XGtE, Tashas is a bit underwhelming. XGtE gave us (with the exception of Clerics and Wizards) 3 subclasses and a large number of spells, while TCtE for the most part only gives 2 subclasses (Artificer technically only had 1 new subclass) and a lower number of spells.

[KorvinStarmast]

Artificer does break Tier 1. Can confirm.

And Tier 2. DM experience at play in that comment.

Pretty much if someone is raging about a D&D book it’s worth the time to see if the platform allows you to block them.

On the other hand, an open mind is a wonderful thing.

[strangebloke]

Guidance and Bardic Inspiration have always stacked. This is not new. Why are you singling out the psionic dice as being bad?

By creating more things that stack, the peak value you can get to the check increases, as well as the easy of getting far higher than intended.

Currently by level 3 its pretty easy to have 3+4+1d6+1d4+1d6=+16.5 average modifier. That's absurd for level 3. With help you can pretty consistently get DC 30 checks. You might say that the BI and PD get expended, but they only get expended if the person rolling them expects that the bonus is needed.

PD also works on attack rolls BTW.

[Witty Username]

Whatever people say, Tasha's put entangle back on the Ranger list, and correcting that blasphemy is worth any complaints made about the book.

[Cheesegear]

More seriously: yes I pick the species my character plays based on theme, but previously if I wanted to play, say, a half-orc wizard, well... that's probably not an idea that gets out of the gates, because I don't need my characters to be overpowered but I do want them to be competent...

I can't remember who said it (i.e; Mearls or Crawford), but a character is designed to be competent all the way up to Level 20, with only a 14 in their main stat, and 'enough' hit points.

Point Buy allows you to go to 15 by design.

If you are under the impression that you need a 16 in your class' main stat, at Level 1 - or at all - you are not correct.

Creation is good at something; that's not problems, that's being a DnD character.
[...] It does not deserve to be mentioned in the same zip code as broken Bard archetypes.

Creation excels in any situation where an item would be beneficial, if not the actual solution to the scenario. Creation Bards are really good at bribery, too. You can't Minor Illusion a coin into someone's hand. You can create a 100gp 'singing' gem that isn't real, give it to someone, and then have them do whatever you want, and then in an hour be long gone when the gem disappears.

This situation calls for a 10 ft. ladder. Done.
I've seen the King's crown...So I'll just make another one and pretend I have it.
I summon a lead box.
Only people who have an insiginia can enter...Oh here's one I pulled out of HammerSpace. Thanks for playing.

I've also DM'd a Creation Bard who would 'shape' the fight by putting a 10 ft. table in the middle of the room. Thankfully I haven't reached the stage where a 14th Level Bard is creating Huge items...Yet.

Creating something from nothing is a deity-level ability. If your players aren't treating it as such, they're doing it wrong. If the item lasted a minute, or a number of rounds equal to your level, etc. I wouldn't have a problem. But the item lasts for multiple hours, which is more than enough time to solve your way out of any scenario.

Phantom is about as strong as arcane trickster...

Short Rest to gain any Skill or Tool proficiency you want is incredibly strong. The ability is gained at Level 3 which leaves you plenty of time to multi-class out.

One thing Tasha's repeatedly does, is tell the player that their choices aren't permanent (i.e; That is, their choices don't matter). The Phantom is the ur-example of this. You can have anything you want. If you make a wrong choice, you merely have to Short Rest to fix it. If you have an hour's prep-time for the next scenario, and you know that scenario is (hence...Prep...), you can just choose to have the thing you think will be most beneficial. Just...Have the thing you want. No cost.

I could level this criticism at the Creation Bard, too. Not having resources makes people sad. Solution? Just give them resources.

Also, I have massive problems with Arcane Trickster. Invisible Mage Hand has the potential to cause even more problems than untraceable soul knives.

In other words, what you're describing is one of the intended uses for soulknife.

In that case, not only do I have a problem with the Soulknife's mechanics, I also have a problem with the theme.
I think it's an excellent NPC class (a guy in Rime of the Frostmaiden has similar abilities and is a great villain). But PCs shouldn't have it.

Pretty much if someone is raging about a D&D book itÂ’s worth the time to see if the platform allows you to block them.

Text does not indicate tone or body language. If you can tell if someone is 'raging' just by text, you're better than me.

[sithlordnergal]

I can't remember who said it (i.e; Mearls or Crawford), but a character is designed to be competent all the way up to Level 20, with only a 14 in their main stat, and 'enough' hit points.

Point Buy allows you to go to 15 by design.

If you are under the impression that you need a 16 in your class' main stat, at Level 1 - or at all - you are not correct.

Gonna have to respectfully disagree and say that whoever said that is 100% incorrect, depending on what you play. A 14 will work as your primary stat if, and ONLY if, you are a martial. I find a 16 can work until about level 16 for a martial class, but that's pushing it. But on a caster? I can say from experience that a 14 will get you no-where fast at level 1, and you need an 18 in your casting stat by level 5. Now, maybe it was the game we were playing, but I tried playing a Half-Orc Cleric in Out of the Abyss. I started with a 14 Wisdom, boosted it to 16 at level 5, and eventually dropped the character because he just couldn't do anything with his spells.

Whenever he cast a spell with a saving throw, my targets generally succeeded on their save, and they usually succeeded by 1. That +1 to spell DC makes a MASSIVE difference in how well your spells work. And I had even more confirmation when a player tried playing a Bard with only a 14 Charisma at level 1. Monsters usually succeeded on their saving throws, and it wasn't until the player got an 18 Charisma that he really started to see his spells succeed.

So yeah, when it comes to casters, you ALWAYS choose abilities over flavor. So when Tasha's changed that up, it meant you could finally do things like a Half-Orc wizard and not have to hope you found a Headband of Intelligence.

EDIT: Which thinking about it, that makes sense. At level 5 you start facing things that usually have a +3 or higher to their saves. The average dice roll of a d20 is about 11, meaning the average saving throw of a creature is going to be 14. At level 5, a PC with a 16 in their casting stat will have a Spell Save DC of 14. Which means NPCs will, on average, succeed on their saving throw. The player is then stuck with a 14 spell save DC until level 8, during which time the NPCs usually get stronger. Willing to bet most CR 7-8 creatures have at least one +4 to their saves.

[Cheesegear]

Gonna have to respectfully disagree and say that whoever said that is 100% incorrect, depending on what you play. A 14 will work as your primary stat if, and ONLY if, you are a martial. I find a 16 can work until about level 16 for a martial class, but that's pushing it. But on a caster? I can say from experience that a 14 will get you no-where fast at level 1

Bounded Accuracy is baked into the game. Whatever the martial is using as their attack stat will be the same as yours as a caster.

Whenever he cast a spell with a saving throw...

Saving Throws aren't...Bounded. Have you tried playing a Blaster Caster?

[Pex]

I mean, even as a buffer I find my cleric really only has three spells to add: Aid, Bless, and Death Ward. Outside of that, I've yet to find any spells that impress me as buffs for the party, debuffs for the enemy, or battlefield control. Most of their higher level spells seem to have a heavy focus on Divination...but I've never found a use for Divination spells. I find Druids are far better at things like Battlefield control, transportation, ect.

Edit: Now, once I reach level 17 I suspect I'll have more fun...but that's only going to be because of Wish. I'm an Arcana cleric, and using Wish to instantly make a Simulacrum, then wait a day to cast it again for an instant, free Planar Binding is gonna be great. But I could do the same thing as a Wizard...

Bane has wrecked many a DM's plans. I used it on a hydra once. Spirit Guardians wants a word with you. Healing Word and Cure Wounds spells have been literal life savers, even in combat. Guidance, Guiding Bolt, Shield of Faith, Banishment, Freedom of Movement, Lesser and Greater Restoration, Dispel Evil & Good, Blade Barrier, Word of Recall, Heroes' Feast, Divine Word, Antimagic Field, Holy Aura, Mass Heal. All are worthy buff, debuff, or battlefield control. What you probably see is they're not as flashy as other class spells and fewer number of spells per level available. They nevertheless get the job done.

At low level, it can also be fun doing Spiritual Weapon and Cantrip or Weapon attacks all combat long, getting "extra attack" two levels before the warrior classes. Sometimes that good enough even for mid level combats when you want to conserve spell slots and don't need to use your big guns, but the occasional Guiding Bolt and then attack with advantage with your already cast Spiritual Weapon is nice too.

[PhoenixPhyre]

EDIT: Which thinking about it, that makes sense. At level 5 you start facing things that usually have a +3 or higher to their saves. The average dice roll of a d20 is about 11, meaning the average saving throw of a creature is going to be 14. At level 5, a PC with a 16 in their casting stat will have a Spell Save DC of 14. Which means NPCs will, on average, succeed on their saving throw. The player is then stuck with a 14 spell save DC until level 8, during which time the NPCs usually get stronger. Willing to bet most CR 7-8 creatures have at least one +4 to their saves.

That depends on how your DM designs encounters. Here are the average saving throw modifiers for the "big three" saves for monsters in the main monster books:

CR	DEX	CON	WIS
1	2	1	0
5	2	4	1
9	2	5	3
13	3	7	5
18	5	8	6

So unless you're only targeting CON, save bonuses don't go up much, and stay low for quite a while.

If you're only facing one big solo per day, sure. You need a high primary stat. But that's already a pathological case for many other reasons. Solution--don't do that.

That said, I wouldn't say you're fine with a 14 main stat until level 20. My analysis suggests that the breakpoints are something like:
Level 1-8: 14 is "normal"
Level 9-14-ish: 16 is "normal"
Level 15+: 18 is "normal"

You never need 20. And you especially don't need 18+ at level 1. One of my parties got really really lucky with their rolls[1] and ended up with something like 17, 15, 15, 14, 13, 12. Yeah. They're an outlier. Game still works. Just as it does for people who start out with the standard array and non-synergistic races.

[1] I did "we each roll 4d6k3 until we have 6 numbers, that's the array for everyone".

[sithlordnergal]

Bounded Accuracy is baked into the game. Whatever the martial is using as their attack stat will be the same as yours as a caster.

Saving Throws aren't...Bounded. Have you tried playing a Blaster Caster?

Oh yeah, I could hit things just fine with attack rolls. But I was trying to play more of a debuffer at the time and found that most of my debuff spells just didn't work because the creatures succeeded on their saving throws. But yeah, you can really tell that saves are not done well with bounded accuracy.

[Eldariel]

In order; Artificer is great in tier 1 if built as a tank, good in tier 2, and on-par in tiers 3 and 4. Balance wise it does not break tier 1, tier 1 has always been broken in favor of what artificer does best. If you have an AC of 20 then nothing can hit you, but that's true of all classes.

Well, you won't have that quite at level 1. And even then, I've seen a 20 AC character go down to simple Goblins (and even one with Heavy Armor Master get trashed by bandits and one Chosen of Levistus); the rumours of their unhittability are greatly exaggerated. You're close to unhittable vs. Tier 1 enemies when you get AC 24 so they're rolling for 20s, not when you get to 1/4 hit chance (or about 50% with advantage, which many like Wolves, Kobolds, Goblins, etc. have easy means of generating). For Tier 1, what you really want is enough HP to not go down to a lucky streak from enemies; to that end, something like Moon Druid is pretty much the only safe option (though any Druid is pretty good; even normal Druid Wildshape is plenty combat worthy on Tier 1 packing masses of extra HP).

Eloquence is the best archetype at base bard things, which given that bard things include "Winning", is a problem. Eloquence is probably the strongest thing in the game right now, twilight and peace included, because of how good de-buffing enemy saves is, and how good buffing ally saves is. I've never seen a party TPK from attacks-it's always a bad save that triggers a death cascade. Likewise, disabling spells rapidly turn DOA scenarios into cake walks when the friendly party uses them. Eloquence is notably the only Bard that competes with Lore Bard, and Lore Bard has been the strongest thing in the game since release.

Well, rather Lore Bard is the only Bard competitive with other full casters and Eloquence adds another Bard that can be valuable in a party with Wizards and Druids and Clerics. Of course, that's not a low standard considering how many classes the set leaves in dust anyways but the balance point does fall within the existing balance scale of the game. I don't think it's that bad because Bard is quite a bit weaker than the preparing full casters on the baseline (among others they miss out on the superminionmancy on Tier 2 in Conjure Animals or Animate Dead) and they lack the key rituals. But yeah, Lore and Eloquence do make the Bard quite worthwhile to have around.

[sithlordnergal]

Bane has wrecked many a DM's plans. I used it on a hydra once. Spirit Guardians wants a word with you. Healing Word and Cure Wounds spells have been literal life savers, even in combat. Guidance, Guiding Bolt, Shield of Faith, Banishment, Freedom of Movement, Lesser and Greater Restoration, Dispel Evil & Good, Blade Barrier, Word of Recall, Heroes' Feast, Divine Word, Antimagic Field, Holy Aura, Mass Heal. All are worthy buff, debuff, or battlefield control. What you probably see is they're not as flashy as other class spells and fewer number of spells per level available. They nevertheless get the job done.

At low level, it can also be fun doing Spiritual Weapon and Cantrip or Weapon attacks all combat long, getting "extra attack" two levels before the warrior classes. Sometimes that good enough even for mid level combats when you want to conserve spell slots and don't need to use your big guns, but the occasional Guiding Bolt and then attack with advantage with your already cast Spiritual Weapon is nice too.

1st through 2nd level Cleric spells are absolutely amazing, I won't deny that. Guiding Bolt, Bane, Healing Word, Bless, Silence, they're all excellent spells. Spirit Guardians is meh in my eyes, if only because of its limited range. Its good for tanky clerics that have Heavy Armor, but its bad on caster Clerics that only get medium armor, especially at high levels. Outside of that though, you really don't get that many good spells. While I fully agree that Freedom of Movement, Banishment, and Holy Aura are good, the rest in your list aren't:

Dispel Evil & Good: Extremely limited use. You cause celestials, elementals, fey, fiends, and undead to have disadvantage to hit you, an effect copied straight from the 1st level spell Protection from Evil and Good, you can end a Charmed, Frightened, or Possession effect caused by one of those creatures, and you can try to Banish said creature. Note that the Banishment can only occur if they are not on their Home Plane. That works fine with Elementals, Fiends, Fey, and Celestials, but you'll rarely run into an Undead that isn't from the Material World. Its too limiting to be that usable, and Protection Against Good and Evil provide similar buffs, is a Touch spell, and is level 1.

Divine Word: Another limited use spell. You either need to be facing a Celestial, elemental, fey, or fiend not on its home plane and have them fail a Charisma save, or you need to make sure your targets have less than 50 HP. I don't know about you, but most DMs don't tell you how much HP a creature has. And the effects aren't great either. 50 HP causes a creature to be Deafened, which doesn't actually have an effect outside of auto-failing sound based perception checks, 40 HP causes it to be Blinded and Deafened, 30 adds Stunned to the list, and 20 just kills it. Whatever creatures you're targeting with this spell can usually be killed via Fire Storm or some other AoE spell by the time you'd use this spell.

Blade Barrier: About as good as Thorn Wall. Its not a bad spell like the first two, but still, this isn't super impressive. Especially when you look at other spell lists.

Word of Recall: Only usable if you have some kind of base of operations. By the time you can use this, your base should either have a different, easier way back, or is probably traveling with you.

Heroes' Feast: Great spell, a shame it costs 1k GP to cast. It also only lasts for 24 hours, so when you cast it you need to be in a position where you have an hour to spend before you go into the fight with that 1k gp component in hand.

Antimagic Field: Yes, turning off the primary abilities of a full caster's class is a good idea. Channel Divinity is also a magical effect, so its turned off too. Now, it is good if you're a frontline Cleric with Divine Strike, but even then...ehhh? You're turning off all of your magic items, your spells, and your Channel Divinity, and by that level whatever you're facing can usually beat a Cleric with no magic in a fist fight. Even worse against bosses since they tend to be immune to non-magical weapon damage by that level, so even if you catch the BBEG in the antimagic field, chances are they are now immune to anything your allies can do.

Mass Heal: An underwhelming 9th level spell, not gonna lie. Its great at what it does, but at the same time is it really better than Wish, Foresight, or Shapechange?


Seriously, compare Divine Word against things like Forcecage, Simulacrum, and Crown of Stars on the Wizard, or Whirlwind, Reverse Gravity, or Draconic Transformation on the Druid. When you look at the Druid, Wizard, and Cleric spell lists, the Cleric spell list falls flat. It really does. And while I will agree that it is arguably better than the base Bard spell list, the fact that the Bard can take a 5th, 7th, and 9th level spell from any spell list they want kind of makes up for that.

[TyGuy]

I’m not very close to D&D these days. It’s probably been a couple of years since I regularly read these forums. I was browsing through yesterday and there seems to be a widely accepted view that Tasha’s is awful.

It’s casually referred to as ‘Trashas’ and I’ve seen ‘Tasha’s Cauldron of Excrement’. I have the book. I’ve not read it in any depth. What’s the reason for the hate? Is it just a bad book, or does it upset the game balance in some way? I seem to remember the reception being quite positive when it came out.

You know how one really bad flavor can ruin the rest of the meal? Or how we forgive the little stuff in a movie when the plot is great. But we stop suspending disbelief, and every negative detail piles on when the plot is bad.
Tasha's had a polarizing take openly driven by politics and that flavor was so foul to some people that they quickly ran out of forgiveness-stock to overlook the other issues. And some of those other issues weren't minor either. Making them that much harder to overlook.

But people that like WotC and their content will still like the book more than likely. If you look at Amazon reviews, all their books fall between 4.9 and 4.7 stars. Pretty tight margin between the greats and the duds. I personally take the decimal and look at it as an 'out of ten' score. Making XGtE & Volos 9/10 and TCoE 8/10.

I opted out of buying TCoE personally because even if I agreed with wizard's ideology I wouldn't want it messing with my escapism hobby. But from what I've seen, I'm glad I didn't get it. I find most the subclass themes are either uninteresting or incoherent (mechanics don't reinforce the theme). With a big serving of poorly play tested and balanced. The new spells and magic items were mostly appreciated but at 30 pages felt lacking.
And with only 4 chapters I guess that leaves group patrons and DM tools which were pretty meh.

[Ogre Mage]

Seriously, compare Divine Word against things like Forcecage, Simulacrum, and Crown of Stars on the Wizard, or Whirlwind, Reverse Gravity, or Draconic Transformation on the Druid. When you look at the Druid, Wizard, and Cleric spell lists, the Cleric spell list falls flat. It really does. And while I will agree that it is arguably better than the base Bard spell list, the fact that the Bard can take a 5th, 7th, and 9th level spell from any spell list they want kind of makes up for that.

All clerics gain access to 10 bonus spells due to their domain. And these spells are always prepared -- clerics can spontaneously use a spell slot and cast them. The land druid is not a fair comparison because that is only one druid subclass. The warlock is not a fair comparison because spells from their bonus list have to be prepared. ALL cleric subclasses gain 10 bonus spells which are always prepared. That is an important aspect of the cleric's spell versatility. And other classes do not (universally) have it.

Given that clerics as casters can compete with any class up till level 10. Once the game gets into Tier 3 then yes, one could argue some other spellcasting classes begin to outshine them. But it must be pointed out that the wizard is a relatively weak class in Tier 1, while the cleric is one of the better ones.

[Second Wind]

Tasha's lets unfavored races participate on an almost even playing field despite historically getting the short end of the stick. Then WotC had the gall to say "hey doesn't this remind you of something" and the knives came out.

[Zhorn]

Most of the book I've liked, but I don't care for the race/lineage nonsense, even more so with the politics being used to excuse the lazy homogenization between racial identities, and pretending that the desire for it is anything but powergaming rubbish.

But it allows more race/class combinations

They were always possible. Nothing was stopping any combination of class to race except players wanting to min/max.

Old rules meant race X could never be as good at class Y as race Z

There are enough levelling ASIs to max any stat you want, and lots of extra benefits in stat boosting items and boons from the DMG to fill in the rest if you wants to have both stats and feats.
Its all just wanting the most numerically powerful character as early as possible without having to work for it.

Players were punished for picking races with non-matching ASIs to their class

No, they were just buffed in other areas. Being less likely to fail a saving throw or skill check to aligned with something other than your attack stat is hardly a punishment. Again, it's just min/max'ing.

[J-H]

Oh yeah, I could hit things just fine with attack rolls. But I was trying to play more of a debuffer at the time and found that most of my debuff spells just didn't work because the creatures succeeded on their saving throws. But yeah, you can really tell that saves are not done well with bounded accuracy.

I'm not very familiar with Out of the Abyss, but doesn't it involve a lot of drow and devils that have Magic Resistance, giving them advantage on their saves?

[Bobthewizard]

I just want to say that I love Tasha's. I love giving players more options and more creative license. I don't play in games where everyone is power gaming. We try to make interesting, original characters, and if you can make that interesting character with a 16 in your starting stat instead of a 14 because the race and class don't match, that's great. Before Tasha's, most people limited their class/race combo to things that had a bonus to their primary stat. Now, a whole world of options has opened up. I haven't seen everyone in my games taking mountain dwarf, half-elf or custom lineage.

I love Aberrant mind and clockwork soul sorcerer because they showed that bonus spells for sorcerers are great but not broken. With my most frequent group, we've adopted a list of spells for the other sorcerer subclasses that we use in all of our games. I love that Tasha's gave us the framework to do that. Sorcerers still aren't wizards for utility, but now they can dabble in it and can take more defensive spells to go along with whatever theme they want.

The ranger beastmaster fix is amazing. I like the optional features for rangers and we just let rangers take both the php and the new Tasha's abilities and it's fine. I love having more battle master maneuvers. The cleric subclasses are fun, if admittedly overtuned.

The summon spells are much better balanced than the odd collection of summon, conjure spells we had before. Immediate casting, one hour, and free to control are perfect. Then limiting it to one keeps from breaking or slowing down the game.

The tattoos are fun and flavorful. All the +1 casting items are boring but fine.

[Bobthewizard]

This statement about not power gaming ...

... and this statement about how stats not lining up prevent people from picking a race ...
... directly contradict each other.

You've described that people you game with need the Lineage rules because they powergame, after saying you don't play in games where people power game.

I can see that. I think there is a difference between "I'd like to meet a certain floor of competence, and custom origins helps", and "I'll only play custom lineage with a half feat because it's the most optimal". I don't consider wanting a 16 in your primary to be power gaming, but I would consider giving up the rest of the races just to always play the most optimal one power gaming. Obviously there aren't set definitions, so one person's baseline competence is another's power gaming.

My point is that I've found that Tasha's seems to open up more options instead of limiting players to the new most optimal one.