Results 1 to 30 of 91
Thread: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
-
2017-11-23, 07:23 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Brazil
Design "errors" in Xanathar's
DISCLAIMER: Errors are in quotes because these probably aren't errors, but a matter of intent. So, try not to comment 'they're not errors!'.
Inspecting the new subclasses in XgtE, I couldn't help but notice that some subclasses features seem to go against the original subclasses' intents, namely Fighter and Ranger.
Let's start with Fighters. Fighters at level 7th used to get an ability that made them good outside of combat. The only exception is Eldritch Knight, which gets War Magic, but I believe that was done just to have them use magic more often in the battlefield. Even Wizards confirms these arguments on the UA about modifying classes:
"Note that the 7th-level features for the Champion and the Battle Master lean heavily on the exploration and interaction pillars of the game; the Eldritch Knight gains spells, which contribute to the fighter’s competence in the exploration and interaction pillars, and so its 7th-level feature is geared to blending spells and attacks."
Arcane Archers get Magic Arrow AND Curving Shot at 7th level. Cavaliers get Warding Maneuver, and Samurais get Elegant Courtier. Elegant Courtier is a fine example because Purple Dragon Knights get a similar bonus to Persuasion except without a bonus save. Power creep much?
And then Rangers. All of the new subclasses get bonus spells, which are a much welcome addition to the 11-spell-learning Ranger. Those spells are also not from the class, which means a definitive boost for some (like Horizon Walker's Haste). These would be fair if these classes were below Hunters and Beastmasters in their abilities, but they're at least on par with Hunter and certainly outpacing the original Beastmaster.
So what happened? Why is WotC proposing these changes? Are they clearly interested in power creeping to sell more books, or is something else going on?
-
2017-11-23, 07:36 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2012
-
2017-11-23, 07:42 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2016
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
As far as ranger goes it seems like the bonus spells was something they realized they should have had from the start but Judy didn't want to introduce changes into existing archetypes
-
2017-11-23, 07:48 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2012
-
2017-11-23, 08:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
- Location
- United States
- Gender
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
Biggest error, it's a DC 20 check for someone with carpenter's tool proficiency to pry apart a door, but only a DC 15 to design a complex structure. I can pry open a door with a hatchet and a chisel, and I'm a gods-forsaken Creative Writing graduate!
5e Bard's Guide
5e Fighter's Guide
5e Paladin's Guide
5e Ranger's Guide
5e Sorcerer's Guide
5e Warlock's Guide
Magic Items
Avatar by Honest Tiefling
-
2017-11-23, 08:06 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2015
- Location
- Karthun
- Gender
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
Last edited by Moredhel24; 2017-11-23 at 08:07 PM.
-
2017-11-23, 08:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Location
- The Great White North
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
Our wonderful Specter actually had the brilliant idea to concoct bonus spell lists for the two PHB Rangers.
Originally Posted by Specter
-
2017-11-23, 08:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2017
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
They didn't do "power creep to sell more", they just listened to the community's feedback after the UA.
-
2017-11-23, 08:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2012
-
2017-11-23, 09:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2016
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
It's funny because I found the Fighter options the most underwhelming of all. I would rather have a battlemaster or an eldritch knight over an arcane archer any time. The limit of two arrows and underwhelming nature of the abilities is unacceptable. In amongst the abilities were maybe 2 or 3 that I would consider taking.
The Samurai is very underwhelming. The temp HP is so tragically insignificant in tier 2 and 3 I can hardly believe the designers play tested it and thought "yeah this is good"
The Cavalier is cool but all of its features simply amount to: Get the sentinel feat. The fact that the free attacks cost bonus actions and are limited to strength modifier # of times just has me irked.
Gloom Stalker having a way to get improved invisibility at level 3 is insanely overpowered.
Hexblade is so bloated with features the favoritism exhibited for the subclass is obvious. It makes an amazing multi-class dip for anyone who wants armor and doesn't already have it.
I also see very little reason to ever take Path of the Storm BarbarianLast edited by TheUser; 2017-11-23 at 09:35 PM.
-
2017-11-23, 10:09 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2017
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
Hexblade warlocks get two really good combat abilities at level one, while Old One warlocks get a ribbon. That has to be an error, right?
-
2017-11-23, 10:12 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Location
- The Great White North
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
-
2017-11-23, 10:36 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Location
- Earth
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
Summon minor demon clearly states that the DM picks the summons while Summon Greater Demon clearly states the player picks.
Surely this most be an error and they aren't standing by the awful Sage Advice they did for summoning spells.
-
2017-11-23, 10:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
Last edited by Snowbluff; 2017-11-23 at 11:00 PM.
Avatar of Rudisplork Avatar of PC-dom and Slayer of the Internet. Extended sig
GitP Regulars as: Vestiges Spells Weapons Races Deities Feats Soulmelds/Veils
-
2017-11-23, 11:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2016
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
-
2017-11-23, 11:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2015
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
Redemption Paladin went from one of my favorite paladin subclasses to my least favorite in the official version. The UA version was incredibly mad and needed some tuning, as well as people complained that the AC = 16 + Dex, was stronger than plate + shield, which is understandable. They could of toned it back a bit.
But I honestly believe they should have kept the unarmored feature, and then made the other feature a channel divinity. I feel like the subclass lost a lot of its theme taking out those two abilities. It's incredibly boring now.
-
2017-11-24, 12:02 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
- Gender
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
For the most part this thread could be called "PHB errors [attempted to be] fixed by Xanathar's"
PHB ranger is widely considered weak, with the few spells known contributing to that. So they buff the new ranger subclasses and also tack on free spells as a screwed up way to patch the ranger.
Fighter 6 is a common break point in multiclassing because of the overly weak features that most fighters get at level 7. By adding effective combat abilities to level 7, that encourages players to make meaningful decisions, instead of "level 7 is crap so I'm going into x class." I wouldn't MC out of samurai at level 6. Level 7 is a free feat!
I will agree that Hexblade is overpowered. I think the blade locks needed something to make them better. They went too far with hexblade, and it's a bit too strong, especially as a dip.
Overall, as an avid multiclasser, I find hard break points in certain classes to be a design flaw that should be patched in any way possible. If everyone is leaving ranger at 5, ranger 6 is probably in need of a buff. Unfortunately, since they refuse to change existing content all they can do is create new subclasses that try and balance these out. So fighter 7 gets a buff, but is samurai better than battle master? Not hardly. And since ranger 6 isn't a subclass level it continues to be crap, but ranger 7 abilities are pretty decent and they dangle fruit in front of the ranger, like Haste in 3 more levels.
Don't get me wrong, like I'm just some fanboy of Xanathar's. I just thinking measuring subclasses against phb subclasses, especially at key levels, is a poor metric. Many things will come out to be overpowered in the micro level, such as the level 7 samurai, but not necessarily overpowered in the whole. What Xanathar's is to me is mostly an attempt to fix the gaps in power level--or perceived power level--of existing classes.
To sum up: Swords Bard is the Valor Bard we needed. Nevermind that it totally makes valor bard a trap option...Want to Multiclass? I wrote the book on it:http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...classing-Guide
Expect advice on the optimization rules you are breaking: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...r-Optimization
I am an avid optimizer and love to give fire to the people... So long as they are restrained first so they have disadvantage on their dex saves.
Feel free to PM me for one on one build advice.
-
2017-11-24, 01:08 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Cincinnati OH
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
I would disagree a bit on the sword bard making valor a trap. Valor and lore are support oriented in nature (as is much of the bard chassis) while that works for some players, other would like more of their classes features to be about their character and so the College of Sword fills that spot in my opinion.
Though I notice there is still a lot of lacking in the support of a melee focused ranger as more in combat use spells generally favor ranged.
-
2017-11-24, 01:29 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
- Gender
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
The problem with the valor bard is adding the inspiration die to damage is basically just worse than adding that to the attack of a near miss. Would you rather add 4.5 to damage or let the fighter turn a GWM miss into a hit for about 20 damage?
Adding it to AC is pretty much worse than Cutting Words, as you have to have already inspired them on your turn instead of doing it as a reaction. In some edge cases, that's better (since your bard can still have a reaction), but it's not often you know when an enemy is going to come close enough to hitting which ally a turn before.
I think a big problem with melee rangers is MADness and action economy. TWF is hard to manage with hunter's mark and even worse with the two new subclasses--so much bonus action competition. If you want to use a 2-hander, strength builds are MAD, needing a decent dex, con, and wisdom. I really wish there were more incentive for rangers to melee, but I can't think of anything that would really support it without being outright exclusive to melee. Maybe that's what we need, a melee ranger subclass. Then there is still the problem that so many ranger spells are tied to ranged attacks.
I've always been a bit annoyed that 5e has been so tied to the "ranger as archer," when the class is based on a guy who was very much a melee combatant, whom occasionally used a bow.Last edited by PeteNutButter; 2017-11-24 at 01:30 AM.
Want to Multiclass? I wrote the book on it:http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...classing-Guide
Expect advice on the optimization rules you are breaking: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...r-Optimization
I am an avid optimizer and love to give fire to the people... So long as they are restrained first so they have disadvantage on their dex saves.
Feel free to PM me for one on one build advice.
-
2017-11-24, 01:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
not really. You've adequately summed up why their 3rd level inspiration option is bad, and I've never considered it good, but valor bards still have a few things that blade doesn't:
1) shields
2) ranged weapons
3) and most of all, battle magic.
So what if a blade bard can get a free 1-6 on AC every turn at 14th level? if he's doing that, he's not casting a big spell, while a valor bard can cast a big spell and then shoot you.Spoiler: bad tactics
I look at the lich and smirk a bit, as I bring myself back to my feet
"What are you smiling about?" it says
"hehe, it looks like you've made... a grave mistake :D"
the bard, actively bleeding out on the ground *ba-dum-tss*
"Ha! Nice try. Telling a bad joke to try to make your opponent drop their guard. Oldest trick in the book. Trust me, I was there."
*barbarian falling, sword in hands, from the top of the castle wall directly above the lich*
-
2017-11-24, 02:28 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2017
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
-
2017-11-24, 06:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
-
2017-11-24, 06:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2013
- Gender
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
I will agree that Hexblade is overpowered. I think the blade locks needed something to make them better. They went too far with hexblade, and it's a bit too strong, especially as a dip.
Comparing Hexblade 20 to any other Warlock pact (besides old god, which is the worst) doesn't feel overpowered to me. It simply has the tools needed to possibly make a melee warlock playable.Last edited by Solusek; 2017-11-24 at 06:42 AM.
-
2017-11-24, 07:14 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Brazil
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
I'm still thinking this is it.
Yeah, probably, but the sad part is feeling that the PHB options can become obsolete.
They're very good in tiers 1 and 2, and tend to fall behind after level 11.
Totally missed that, where is it?
I'm blushing.
I'm pretty sure that if the community wanted anything, it was a general way of fixing issues, not just sweeping the old failures under the rug and come up with newish solutions.
I don't think they're overpowered either, but I do wonder why they couldn't just give them a flavor 7th-level feature and increase the potency of their core features (Samurai's temp hp is indeed sad).
I'd play a Storm Barbarian, if only for field shenanigans.
"Screwep up way" is what sums this up. They couldn't just say 'hey guys, we made a mistake, add this to your classes from now on'. Instead, they went 'well, let's just think about the future'. Ditto for multiclassing points and dead levels (not that I care too much about those, some levels should be bad if what's coming ahead is very good).
All of this. Also, whenever you're using your flourishes, you're spending Bardic Inspiration, which your friends will miss. So it's not like Swords gets a new resource like a Battlemaster, but instead it has to manage their already limited BI in attacks.
-
2017-11-24, 07:20 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2016
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
I think its weird that the Monster slayer archetype is completely tuned to killing casters. Should be called the mage slayer but that flavor kind of sucks.
-
2017-11-24, 07:29 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
I'm a little disappointed that their anti-teleport feature doesn't come online until level 11, when casters have had Misty Step, Dimension Door, etc... for 7 levels already. I guess it's great at high level, but the majority of games I play never reach that level and short of a blind counter spell, this seems to be the only way to stop a teleport in the entire game.
Side note: why does "Mage Slayer" not have a teleport interrupt? Without it, that feat is more like "Mage Irritator"Hello, I'm Finlam: content creator for D&D5e and writer.
Playable Slimes for D&D5e
>>>So You Want To Be A Slime?<<<
5eHeroic - Make high level D&D feel heroic and fun again.
-Game Content-
Roleplay Warm-up - Exercises to get into Character
3 Traps to Get Your Players Excited
GM's Easy Creation Kit (G.E.C.K.)
-Character Builds-
Building a Super SAD Tank - Using a Paladin/Hexblade to build an unstoppable tank.
Let's chat sometime.
-
2017-11-24, 08:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2017
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
Probably because the rational is that it is meant to be a feat to place casters in a tough spot, not to crush them completely. A caster in the presence of a "Mage Slayer" is limited to spend a slot on a teleport (which means at most a cantrip as another in round spell), suck an AoO or deal with the "next to me" threat in a way that prevents an attack from happening.
It makes a bad position worse, just not worse enough for some.
-
2017-11-24, 09:08 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2016
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
The frustrating thingn for me is that there are far less direct ways that a subclass can become powerful than straight up dpr, yet still contribute to it, while being useful out of combat too (Fast hands and portent come to mind).
-
2017-11-24, 09:18 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
- Location
- United States
- Gender
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
5e Bard's Guide
5e Fighter's Guide
5e Paladin's Guide
5e Ranger's Guide
5e Sorcerer's Guide
5e Warlock's Guide
Magic Items
Avatar by Honest Tiefling
-
2017-11-24, 09:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Location
- Earth
Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's
You must have missed that they said back then that player picks for greater summons. They only said DM picks for lesser summons.
I understand this is confusing because both kinds of spells have the same wording in the PH. For this book they decided to double down on their clarification.
Which makes me very glad I looked at a friend's book and haven't spent a single dime on this game since the PH, DMG, and MM. I do not feel that 5e has been managed well and that the game is worse now than when it was released.