Unearthed Arcana 11/4

[Kane0]

We're also missing a reach weapon style if we're looking at thrown, unarmed and versatile options. I'd give it providing difficult terrain within your reach.

[HappyDaze]

I'm not thrilled with most of this. I don't mind replacement abilities, but I do not like the idea of heaping a bunch of enhancement abilities on everyone. All together, this looks like a prototype 5.5e in the making.

[Skylivedk]

I think Thrown Weapon fighting is a great start for people wanting to go with that theme and not get punished for it. What problems do you think are left? It solves the mechanical issue of drawing weapons and provides a damage buff, combined with Snipe it looks like it makes a throwing character not only viable but somewhat competitive.

Not really. It's still far behind any of the good builds as a main avenue. Combined with grappling and it might do something... But +1 DMG is pitiful. It's worse than dueling and archery and with no feat support.

On the topic of Spirit Guardians: I don't see how people can't see that it is a strong buff to an already strong class. Remember it's on top of what they already get. The reason why Crown wasn't seem as strong? Because SG was one of its stronger features. The other features were not as as good as other oaths.

New favoured enemy definitely out to scale by ranger level. Druid shouldn't get cone of cold not thunderstep or revivify imo. Fighter still needs to unlock better manoeuvers later. I like the Sorcerer bugs, but would still let them start with one more meta magic or have them gain more faster.

Also, I hope that for 5.5 that they have skill/utility feats separate from stats and again separate from combat feats (like pf2). I know it's more features. I don't care :) don't mind the power creep either. I would also prefer for all monsters to have a couple of more abilities.

[diplomancer]

Not really. It's still far behind any of the good builds as a main avenue. Combined with grappling and it might do something... But +1 DMG is pitiful. It's worse than dueling and archery and with no feat support.

On the topic of Spirit Guardians: I don't see how people can't see that it is a strong buff to an already strong class. Remember it's on top of what they already get. The reason why Crown wasn't seem as strong? Because SG was one of its stronger features. The other features were not as as good as other oaths.

Paladin 6/FS Sorcerer X got it already, two levels later than the new Paladin, but with scaling capability and casting it as a bonus action. It really does not break anything and is thematic.

I would just like to say how happy I am with the Bard expanded list. A lot of the spells on it I would be using a magical secret for them. It's interesting that they kept counterspell still locked in as a magical secret.

[Dork_Forge]

Not really. It's still far behind any of the good builds as a main avenue. Combined with grappling and it might do something... But +1 DMG is pitiful. It's worse than dueling and archery and with no feat support.

Both Dueling and Archery provide a single benefit, Throw weapon provides two. It wouldn't make balance sense for it to give the same damage as Dueling etc. +1 isn't bad when the main point of the style is to make thrown weapon fighting mechanically viable.

Is there any specific feats for it? No, it came out in a UA a couple days ago, of course there isn't. It certainly interacts with existing feats to some extent though: Spears interact with PAM, daggers interact with Defensive duelist and the entire concept works as two weapon fighting which means you can get a free BA every turn just by holding two weapons.Want to achieve the same thing at range more conventionally? You'll need to use a hand crossbow and pay the feat tax. Want to spend one of your Fighter ASIs on it anyway? Grab Duel Wielder, now you have +1AC and can throw around a bunch of spears for a d6.

It's not the most optimum style of play, but it is certainly a type of character out there and one that people would find fun to play. Those people that play it for fun won't be falling behind damage in comparison to most people, as most people don't play feat heavy optimised builds.

Edit: Dueling also works with thrown weapons, which means you could stack them for +3 damage.

[GorogIrongut]

But you aren't likely to even get an entire minute out of SG under normal circumstances, and it's not just because concentration can be smacked out of you.

Your average fight just doesn't take that long. Meanwhile, searching a room does. Checking for traps does. Lockpicking the door to the next group of monsters to thwack does. You're looking at two fights on average under normal circumstances, and neither is likely to last longer than 3 rounds. The few that do are usually going to be packing a wallop (things like dragon fights), and that means you're at a greater risk of losing concentration and thus SG anyway. Having it precast means enemies can see it coming and avoid it however they can, too (15 feet is a big aura, but it's rarely the whole room). While a Dexadin might, RAW, be able to sneak with that thing going off, your average DM will protest at enemies not seeing all those ghosts flitting around. And considering the paladin gets this at 9th level, 3d8 a round just isn't very impressive for damage purposes.

The damage quotes from it are way too white room for my tastes. You only get to see those big numbers after enough enemies stand around for a ludicrous amount of time in your aura and fail every single save, still alive and actively trying to kill you in the mean time. It's not horrible, but calling this broken, especially on a paladin, is failing to recognize the serious gaps in using this offensively.

I haven't seen anyone call the Crown Oath busted, after all.

As a spell goes, we're arguing a 3d8 radiant damage against any and all creatures you choose in a 15' radius over a potential 10 minute period of time
vs
4d8 radiant damage against a single target, once.

If you can't see how much of a power boost that is in a character class that is already considered top tier (especially with a bit of multi classing), then I'm not sure we'll agree on much. There's a reason why, if you head over to Yorrin's How To Thread on Clerics, you'll see that SG is universally considered their best spell (Bless tries to fight but loses, hard).

Even if the spell lasts one round and there is only one target and it only does 1d8 damage less than the smite, you've still got all of the control features of the spell that remain highly desirable and make it the far superior choice over smiting (remembering that the movement halving happens to affected creatures regardless of their passing their save).

[Skylivedk]

Paladin 6/FS Sorcerer X got it already, two levels later than the new Paladin, but with scaling capability and casting it as a bonus action. It really does not break anything and is thematic.

I don't understand your argument. The multiclass you mention also get counterspell, fireball, haste, slow, Hypnotic Pattern, etc etc. and besides that it's considered amongst the most powerful builds available - and even it gets the spell later. What is your point? It's an immensely powerful ability to give an already top tier class. I don't get why the need is there; it was already an option for a cost (either multiclass or subclass). Making it free makes no sense IMO and steals an iconic cleric spell.

Both Dueling and Archery provide a single benefit, Throw weapon provides two. It wouldn't make balance sense for it to give the same damage as Dueling etc. +1 isn't bad when the main point of the style is to make thrown weapon fighting mechanically viable.

Is there any specific feats for it? No, it came out in a UA a couple days ago, of course there isn't. It certainly interacts with existing feats to some extent though: Spears interact with PAM, daggers interact with Defensive duelist and the entire concept works as two weapon fighting which means you can get a free BA every turn just by holding two weapons.Want to achieve the same thing at range more conventionally? You'll need to use a hand crossbow and pay the feat tax. Want to spend one of your Fighter ASIs on it anyway? Grab Duel Wielder, now you have +1AC and can throw around a bunch of spears for a d6.

It's not the most optimum style of play, but it is certainly a type of character out there and one that people would find fun to play. Those people that play it for fun won't be falling behind damage in comparison to most people, as most people don't play feat heavy optimised builds.

Edit: Dueling also works with thrown weapons, which means you could stack them for +3 damage.

My point is that the first benefit, throwing twice, essentially isn't a benefit. It's just overcoming an unnecessary nerf. The second part is hence the only remaining add-on and it's just not super strong with that in mind. Of course you can play this, you can play most things in 5e. It's still not a good build IMO compared to most other choices

[Theodoxus]

If you're going to play a SG build, you're gonna go Cleric and get it at 5th, not Paladin at 9th. Is it strong at 9th? I guess... kinda. A cleric could boost it to 5d8, and could literally take the Dodge action while BAing with their Spiritual Weapon (now with an extra d8 radiant for free!) and be FAR more effective than that Paladin who has better things to be doing.

Just because the spell is strong, doesn't mean it's optimal in every build. Yes, some Paladins will like the BFC SG offers; but it's not really for the damage, not at 9th level.

Regarding Favored Foe, presumably the HM is equal to a 1st level casting, though that's not really spell out. As a free HM, I think it'd be better to not be movable. You cast it on your foe, and it goes away when they're killed, or an hour expires, whichever happens first. You'd have a couple per day most likely. That's a decent boost to power. You get the spell for free at 2nd, if you want it to last longer, cast it when you get it.

Ki Powered strikes makes the baby berzerker cry. Yet another bonus action attack that can be used even if you don't make an attack... for the low low cost of spending 1 ki point on anything... from Patient Defense to Step of the Wind to apparently healing yourself now... and the 'zerker still gets exhaustion that cures on a long rest - and the monk gets its Ki back on a short... thanks WotC.

AoV on the base cleric just wiped out all the Life Cleric 1/Lore Bard X builds. Which I guess is nice...

I was excited when I saw the Wild Companion, thinking they'd branch out from the Wildfire druid... but no... instead of becoming the scouting animal, you get to summon one? If I really wanted that, I'd take magic initiate and grab FF, thanks.

I 2nd (3rd, 99th - whatever) the other folks bashing on the battlemaster love. It wasn't done the way most of us want, and other fighter archetypes needed far more love. In my circle of gamers, BM tends to be the top pick for fighters.

[Damon_Tor]

I'm looking a the new Monk weapon rules and I'm not clear on if, or when, the Monk gets to choose new weapons. I assume he is supposed to be able to do so simply because his number of weapons is based on his Wisdom modifier, which will increase over time. But there's no clear mechanism in place for him to choose new weapons when his wisdom increases. Are his weapons supposed to stay locked in at level 1? Does a race without +1 wis really have to suffer a reduced weapon selection relative to other races for the entirely of their career? Do we really want a situation where monks feel "forced" to dip fighter for weapon proficiencies at level 1 to EVER see the weapons they want?

If monks can change their weapon selections upon leveling up, that changes things. Suddenly the Weapon Master feat becomes relevant for someone. And yeah, they could still dip fighter for those weapons, but at least they aren't required to go fighter first to do so.

As it stands, VHuman becomes a great monk race because of Weapon Master. It makes them a +2 Dex, +1 Wis race with 4 weapon proficiencies of their choice. Pick up broadsword for right now, whip for later, handcrossbow for your gunfu shenanigans and... and uh... I'm sure there's a fourth you would want. Blowgun? I'm going to go with blowgun. Nobody sees a blowgun coming.

[Daphne]

I 2nd (3rd, 99th - whatever) the other folks bashing on the battlemaster love. It wasn't done the way most of us want, and other fighter archetypes needed far more love. In my circle of gamers, BM tends to be the top pick for fighters.

Hopefully, we will get more subclass variants in a next UA.

[jaappleton]

I was reading the breakdown on this UA over at Tribality. Check it out if you haven’t, they do a solid job of working through every UA (and lots of other stuff).

And the author brought something up that I hadn’t considered before reading it.

A key aspect of this entire UA is flexibility. Swap out spells known, take a different fighting style, alter your character.

And Tribality brought up the aspect I hadn’t realized:

Buyers Remorse.

WOTC doesn’t want buyers remorse. Damn, my Sorcerer took the wrong spell... Gotta wait a whole level before I can do anything about it. Geez, my Fire Sorcerer is going to do NOTHING against this Pit Fiend because of its fire immunity. We found that +2 Greatsword but I have Dueling Style, that’s pretty much a waste...

Wait, I can swap out my spell during a long rest? I can alter Fireball to be Acidball? I can swap out Dueling Style?

It’s about quality of life changes to the game. For the most part, that’s precisely what this UA is. It’s quality of life changes, and fixes to oversights.

Oversights being, “Ok wait, WHY didn’t Druids have Revivify...? It makes sense for them to have it. Let’s fix that.”

Buyers Remorse, and Quality of Life.

The only additional change I wouldn’t mind seeing to Sorcs is the ability to swap out Metamagics at each level up.

[Theodoxus]

I'm looking a the new Monk weapon rules and I'm not clear on if, or when, the Monk gets to choose new weapons. I assume he is supposed to be able to do so simply because his number of weapons is based on his Wisdom modifier, which will increase over time. But there's no clear mechanism in place for him to choose new weapons when his wisdom increases. Are his weapons supposed to stay locked in at level 1? Does a race without +1 wis really have to suffer a reduced weapon selection relative to other races for the entirely of their career? Do we really want a situation where monks feel "forced" to dip fighter for weapon proficiencies at level 1 to EVER see the weapons they want?

It's just my opinion, but I think it's locked at 1st level. But 5+Wis mod would probably be 8 in most cases.

If monks can change their weapon selections upon leveling up, that changes things. Suddenly the Weapon Master feat becomes relevant for someone. And yeah, they could still dip fighter for those weapons, but at least they aren't required to go fighter first to do so.

MC with fighter at any time gives you prof in all weapons, same with barbarian, cleric (tempest and war domains), paladin or ranger. Doesn't have to be 1st level (though really none of those would be optimal).

As it stands, VHuman becomes a great monk race because of Weapon Master. It makes them a +2 Dex, +1 Wis race with 4 weapon proficiencies of their choice. Pick up broadsword for right now, whip for later, handcrossbow for your gunfu shenanigans and... and uh... I'm sure there's a fourth you would want. Blowgun? I'm going to go with blowgun. Nobody sees a blowgun coming.

So, monks are already proficient with all simple weapons and short swords. If we go with +2 Wis as the minimum a serious monk player would take, that's 7 extra martial weapons that fit the criteria: There are 9 martial melee weapons; pick 2 you don't like... and all of blowgun (ick) and hand crossbow (you have prof with short bows, so meh). Even if you gain a new weapon prof every time your Wis mod increases, you've completely maxed out your weapon choices by 20 Wis... Weapon Master is pointless...

I was reading the breakdown on this UA over at Tribality. Check it out if you haven’t, they do a solid job of working through every UA (and lots of other stuff).

And the author brought something up that I hadn’t considered before reading it.

A key aspect of this entire UA is flexibility. Swap out spells known, take a different fighting style, alter your character.

And Tribality brought up the aspect I hadn’t realized:

Buyers Remorse.

WOTC doesn’t want buyers remorse. Damn, my Sorcerer took the wrong spell... Gotta wait a whole level before I can do anything about it. Geez, my Fire Sorcerer is going to do NOTHING against this Pit Fiend because of its fire immunity. We found that +2 Greatsword but I have Dueling Style, that’s pretty much a waste...

Wait, I can swap out my spell during a long rest? I can alter Fireball to be Acidball? I can swap out Dueling Style?

It’s about quality of life changes to the game. For the most part, that’s precisely what this UA is. It’s quality of life changes, and fixes to oversights.

Oversights being, “Ok wait, WHY didn’t Druids have Revivify...? It makes sense for them to have it. Let’s fix that.”

Buyers Remorse, and Quality of Life.

The only additional change I wouldn’t mind seeing to Sorcs is the ability to swap out Metamagics at each level up.

If only there was some kind of official WotC approved retraining available somewhere in their documentation...

I tease. I get retraining is a bear at times, so being able to do it "on the fly" is a huge boon... and yes, it's definitely about buyer's remorse - I think this goes a little too far - choices should have consequences - "you really thought Witch Bolt would be great throughout your career? Bummer, but do I have a quest for you! Go kill the Blitherblather Beast on Bummerstan Hill and I can wipe all those painful memories away!" (Hint, retraining is way better, in game, than any of this.)

[Damon_Tor]

MC with fighter at any time gives you prof in all weapons, same with barbarian, cleric (tempest and war domains), paladin or ranger. Doesn't have to be 1st level (though really none of those would be optimal).

But monks can only make them monk weapons at monk level 1. So they would need to go fighter 1 (to gain proficiency) then monk 1 (to make it a monk weapon). If they go monk 1 then fighter 1, by the time they get proficiency with the weapons it's too late to make them monk weapons

So, monks are already proficient with all simple weapons and short swords. If we go with +2 Wis as the minimum a serious monk player would take, that's 7 extra martial weapons that fit the criteria: There are 9 martial melee weapons; pick 2 you don't like... and all of blowgun (ick) and hand crossbow (you have prof with short bows, so meh). Even if you gain a new weapon prof every time your Wis mod increases, you've completely maxed out your weapon choices by 20 Wis... Weapon Master is pointless...

I see your confusion now: the new monk feature only allows them to make monk weapons out of weapons with which they are already proficient. A level 1 monk cannot choose a longsword as a monk weapon unless they are somehow already proficient with that weapon, and that means either they have a racial weapon proficiency, a level in another class that gives them the desired proficiency, or they have the Weapon Master feat.

[Theodoxus]

But monks can only make them monk weapons at monk level 1. So they would need to go fighter 1 (to gain proficiency) then monk 1 (to make it a monk weapon). If they go monk 1 then fighter 1, by the time they get proficiency with the weapons it's too late to make them monk weapons



I see your confusion now: the new monk feature only allows them to make monk weapons out of weapons with which they are already proficient. A level 1 monk cannot choose a longsword as a monk weapon unless they are somehow already proficient with that weapon, and that means either they have a racial weapon proficiency, a level in another class that gives them the desired proficiency, or they have the Weapon Master feat.

I'm not really confused - I was actually trying (weakly, I admit) to show that Kensai is still a really strong archetype for Monk... Because exactly, your best bet would be drow, for rapier and hand crossbow proficiency, despite that drow make mediocre monks... Unless you want to use a warhammer. That whole 5+Wis mod is massively overblown for a non-mc monk.

[KorvinStarmast]

One of the absolute best things about this UA is the change to Fighting Style.

The fact that you can swap your fighting style when you level up is absolutely HUGE.

And IMO, for the Fighter, about darned time. They are supposed to be THE martial specialists.

That true, but on the other hand it's looking like a Celestial Tomelock can be a pretty seriously good support build.
Bonus action healing? Check.
The entire party gets a get out of death free card? Check.
Pass out THP every short rest? Check.
And you're still a normal Warlock.

I have a celestial coming on line next month, and she's pact of the Tome. So I am really happy about this; we'll see if my brother the DM agrees to use any of these.

...I know it was obvious from the beginning, but why the hate about Paladins getting Spirit Guardians?

There is no hate on that, and it certainly is thematic, but my general point is that Paladins are already a very well packaged class for this edition. (And it coming on line at 9th level means a lot of people won't ever see it ...) [/QUOTE] Paladin's are not OP in a game where there are six encounters between long rests ...

The ability to do 3d8 radiant damage (and still does half on a save) in a fairly large AOE every round for up to 10 rounds while also slowing your enemies for the cost of only a level 3 spell slot is an incredibly powerful spell, balanced by the relatively low damage of other cleric spells. When you put a spell that powerful on a class like the Paladin who already has some of the best damage in the game and incredible utility, and by the way, superior concentration saves thanks to their aura, it's too much. I'd argue it's too much on the Oath of the Crown too.

It comes on line for Paladin at level 9. And how many battles last 10 rounds, no less 10 minutes?

As far as impact on the game.... Is this the biggest UA ever?

Hardly; revised ranger ended up being AL playable, and this pile of spaghetti noodles thrown against the wall needs to be trimmed a bit.

If you're going to play a SG build, you're gonna go Cleric and get it at 5th, not Paladin at 9th. Is it strong at 9th? I guess... kinda. A cleric could boost it to 5d8, and could literally take the Dodge action while BAing with their Spiritual Weapon (now with an extra d8 radiant for free!) and be FAR more effective than that Paladin who has better things to be doing.

Yep.

and the 'zerker still gets exhaustion that cures on a long rest

They need Lesser Restoration to cure one level of exhaustin, and a long rest to restore either all or three; the problem is in the exhaustion mechanic's implementation.

A key aspect of this entire UA is flexibility. Swap out spells known, take a different fighting style, alter your character.
Buyers Remorse.

I brought this up yesterday in my post in this thread, just didn't use that term. I made mention of how one gets out of a trap option ... now, do it on level up ... or swap a spell on a long rest ... the recent UA Artificer experimented with this ... if they get it everyone should get it ..

For the most part, that’s precisely what this UA is. It’s quality of life changes

It still doesn't fix a bunch of goofy things, and they need to do another take on the Beast Master.

I wouldn’t mind seeing to Sorcs is the ability to swap out Metamagics at each level up.

Agreed, though I think they need one more at 7th anyway.

[Damon_Tor]

I'm not really confused - I was actually trying (weakly, I admit) to show that Kensai is still a really strong archetype for Monk... Because exactly, your best bet would be drow, for rapier and hand crossbow proficiency, despite that drow make mediocre monks... Unless you want to use a warhammer. That whole 5+Wis mod is massively overblown for a non-mc monk.

I feel like Wood Elves are still the flagship monk race because longsword proficiency gives them a 1d10 damage option. Rapiers are no better than using a quarterstaff two-handed, and monks are unlikely to either dual-wield or use a shield. But Vhumans with Weapon Master match Wood Elves stat for stat as +2 Dex and +1 Wis and can boast 4 potentially useful weapon proficiencies. The blowgun and the handcrossbow are simply the only ranged martial weapons the monk is allowed to use as monk weapons (two-handed weapons are excluded), and their low damage becomes irrelevant quickly as the martial arts die grows.

[Theodoxus]

I mentioned drow since they get 2 usable profs, vice any other race's 1.

I'd hazard to say that actually warhammer would be the best non-standard monk weapon, as there are more things vulnerable to bludgeoning damage than slashing (longsword) or piercing (rapier).

Makes hill dwarves a pretty strong contender verses wood elf. At that point, the elf has a 10 foot speed advantage, and that's about it. The dwarf has more HP, a slightly better weapon option, and arguably stronger resistance to poison vice sleep.

[jaappleton]

I mentioned drow since they get 2 usable profs, vice any other race's 1.

I'd hazard to say that actually warhammer would be the best non-standard monk weapon, as there are more things vulnerable to bludgeoning damage than slashing (longsword) or piercing (rapier).

Makes hill dwarves a pretty strong contender verses wood elf. At that point, the elf has a 10 foot speed advantage, and that's about it. The dwarf has more HP, a slightly better weapon option, and arguably stronger resistance to poison vice sleep.

We're starting to veer off topic, but the Wood Elf offers Dex, their primary stat.... unless you're making an Astral Soul Monk, in which case Wisdom can be considered the higher priority, but then you don't really need weapons at that point, right?

[Zalabim]

As a spell goes, we're arguing a 3d8 radiant damage against any and all creatures you choose in a 15' radius over a potential 10 minute period of time
vs
4d8 radiant damage against a single target, once.

The spell is still good, but it has the same issue as bless for the paladin. Because paladins have better offensive actions than clerics to begin with, an offensive spell isn't as beneficial to cast. The spells are usually pushed for their other benefits: bless's saving throws and spirit guardians's speed reduction.

[Waterdeep Merch]

As a spell goes, we're arguing a 3d8 radiant damage against any and all creatures you choose in a 15' radius over a potential 10 minute period of time
vs
4d8 radiant damage against a single target, once.

No, we're not. We're arguing about 3d8 (and possibly half that) over time versus a full turn of attacking with an extra 4d8 on the same round you'd cast it. And I've already pointed out there's times for the former, but it's rarely going to be for damage. Not on a mid level paladin. You could kill most monsters in the time it would take a vanilla level 3 SG against CR 9+ encounters to do the same, and dead is the single best condition a paladin can inflict.

With some obvious exceptions, like when the challenge comes in tons of low health minions that really will die in 1-2 hits like that. SG mulches then.

So did fireball four levels ago when the wizard got it.

If you can't see how much of a power boost that is in a character class that is already considered top tier (especially with a bit of multi classing), then I'm not sure we'll agree on much. There's a reason why, if you head over to Yorrin's How To Thread on Clerics, you'll see that SG is universally considered their best spell (Bless tries to fight but loses, hard).

It's amazing when a cleric gets it at level 5, and it upcasts well. More importantly, clerics don't get that many useful concentration combat spells to begin with, and most deal crummy damage. High magic damage is more of an arcane thing. This just allows heavy armor clerics that prefer attacking to supporting some way to work at all during tier 2.

Point- I don't see it used much until later on because the clerics I've seen and played myself have more critical uses of 3+ spell slots. Revivify, firstly. Dispel Magic, Clairvoyance, Mass Healing Word, Protection from Energy, and these are just the level 3's- most people play clerics for their support and utility. Even those that want to be pure battle clerics save slots for this stuff, it's super important.

I mean, a cleric that doesn't bother with support or utility as much and loves bashing heads is basically the definition of a paladin. It makes a lot more sense on them.

Even if the spell lasts one round and there is only one target and it only does 1d8 damage less than the smite, you've still got all of the control features of the spell that remain highly desirable and make it the far superior choice over smiting (remembering that the movement halving happens to affected creatures regardless of their passing their save).

This was my exact argument earlier- you don't cast it for the damage, you cast it for the battlefield control. And it's good here, absolutely.

And if it's stronger on the paladin, it's only because of d10 hit dice and that you can't be smacked out of your own Aura of Protection, not because the spell's gotten any better this much later into the game.

[Grey Watcher]

I was reading the breakdown on this UA over at Tribality. Check it out if you haven’t, they do a solid job of working through every UA (and lots of other stuff).

And the author brought something up that I hadn’t considered before reading it.

A key aspect of this entire UA is flexibility. Swap out spells known, take a different fighting style, alter your character.

And Tribality brought up the aspect I hadn’t realized:

Buyers Remorse.

WOTC doesn’t want buyers remorse. Damn, my Sorcerer took the wrong spell... Gotta wait a whole level before I can do anything about it. Geez, my Fire Sorcerer is going to do NOTHING against this Pit Fiend because of its fire immunity. We found that +2 Greatsword but I have Dueling Style, that’s pretty much a waste...

Wait, I can swap out my spell during a long rest? I can alter Fireball to be Acidball? I can swap out Dueling Style?

It’s about quality of life changes to the game. For the most part, that’s precisely what this UA is. It’s quality of life changes, and fixes to oversights.

Oversights being, “Ok wait, WHY didn’t Druids have Revivify...? It makes sense for them to have it. Let’s fix that.”

Buyers Remorse, and Quality of Life.

The only additional change I wouldn’t mind seeing to Sorcs is the ability to swap out Metamagics at each level up.

Relatedly, I sort of feel like a lot of the "change this choice at level up" additions were essentially giving a quasi-official seal of approval to things that were already being houseruled in a lot of the time anyway.

Swapping out even one spell on a long rest still feels off to me for a Sorcerer, but I get why they have it. That said, I'd almost rather see Elemental Spell as a Class Feature rather than a Metamagic option instead, since it pretty directly addresses a sizeable chunk of the "crud, I chose the wrong spell" issue. (My impression is that "I chose a condition-causing spell and everything's immune to that condition" is much rarer, but I could be wrong.)

Of course that would be useless if you're building a specific-element-themed character: if you sat down and said "I wanna play Elsa from Frozen!" you're never going to use Elemental Spell because "my magic only does cold damage" is a core part of the character concept; it doesn't make sense to suddenly say "Oh, but ACID FOR NO RAISIN!"

I dunno, the Sorcerer Spell Swap is probably fine, it just rubs me the wrong way. I'm tempted to put a Sorcery Point tax on it to mollify my inner grognard, but that really does seem like just punishing a player for trying to be useful.

[GorogIrongut]

No, we're not. We're arguing about 3d8 (and possibly half that) over time versus a full turn of attacking with an extra 4d8 on the same round you'd cast it. And I've already pointed out there's times for the former, but it's rarely going to be for damage. Not on a mid level paladin. You could kill most monsters in the time it would take a vanilla level 3 SG against CR 9+ encounters to do the same, and dead is the single best condition a paladin can inflict.

With some obvious exceptions, like when the challenge comes in tons of low health minions that really will die in 1-2 hits like that. SG mulches then.

So did fireball four levels ago when the wizard got it.


It's amazing when a cleric gets it at level 5, and it upcasts well. More importantly, clerics don't get that many useful concentration combat spells to begin with, and most deal crummy damage. High magic damage is more of an arcane thing. This just allows heavy armor clerics that prefer attacking to supporting some way to work at all during tier 2.

Point- I don't see it used much until later on because the clerics I've seen and played myself have more critical uses of 3+ spell slots. Revivify, firstly. Dispel Magic, Clairvoyance, Mass Healing Word, Protection from Energy, and these are just the level 3's- most people play clerics for their support and utility. Even those that want to be pure battle clerics save slots for this stuff, it's super important.

I mean, a cleric that doesn't bother with support or utility as much and loves bashing heads is basically the definition of a paladin. It makes a lot more sense on them.


This was my exact argument earlier- you don't cast it for the damage, you cast it for the battlefield control. And it's good here, absolutely.

And if it's stronger on the paladin, it's only because of d10 hit dice and that you can't be smacked out of your own Aura of Protection, not because the spell's gotten any better this much later into the game.

1. You are correct that there is a chance for half damage when the save is made while smiting is auto. You wait and choose after you've made a successful attack. So you get it. But it still requires you to hit. Even with the best of modifiers and advantage, this happens far more than we would like. SG always gets that half to full damage and halving of movement. I personally considered them to be roughly the same. Which is why I opted not to mention them.

2. I'm seeing a bit of contradiction here. First you say that SG is fantastic at level 5 when the cleric gets it. Then you say that you rarely see it played anyways until much higher levels because of a focus on spells that are utilitarian... but not comparable. Clairvoyance? PfE? Obviously MHW and revivify are staples and should be prepared, but they are defensive spells. As has been argued up until this point, offensive action negates the need for defensive action. Neither of these should preempt the use of SG unless you're playing back in the Stone Ages where clerics are nothing but heal batteries. The fact that you relegate a combat oriented cleric to the definition of a paladin seems to reinforce this point. 5e has gone past that.

If you want your healing go to almost any casting class, up to and including Paladin...

3. Paladins are combat oriented casters who can nova. They benefit from fantastic aura's. They tank. They have limited casting which tends to support what they do. They heal. What don't they do besides arcane casting and be a skill monkey scout? This is why they are considered a top tier character class. The addition of an iconic spell like SG to them is a push too far. It does almost as much damage as a smite at it's weakest and at it's strongest, it completely obliterates what smite can do. Combine that with the field control aspects of the spell, and you literally turn the paladin into the king of field control.

It's too much. And I know you think it works well with the paladin. Because it would. But that doesn't negate that it's too much. The paladin would sit in the middle of combat with his own little bubble. Protecting his teammates with his aura's. With SG. And blasting anything that makes it past that bubble. It would feel fantastic. But it's still too much.

Now. I'm personally done trying to discuss this. You obviously have your own opinions and you're welcome to them.

[Sparhafoc]

Most of my (lvl 3) party seem excited by these changes except for the Revived Rogue.

Initially, he seemed to think it was overpowered for the rogue, but then changed his opinion based on the bolts of the dead and losing movement.

He's mostly been using bows so far, but I think he's got an eye to melee as well.

Is he right that this is not really a boost for him?

[Theodoxus]

Of course that would be useless if you're building a specific-element-themed character: if you sat down and said "I wanna play Elsa from Frozen!" you're never going to use Elemental Spell because "my magic only does cold damage" is a core part of the character concept; it doesn't make sense to suddenly say "Oh, but ACID FOR NO RAISIN!"

I don't know, I think Elsa would love to have a Frostball, or Melf's Frozen Arrows... I mean, yeah, there are a lot of cold based spells native, but swapping elements from one to another would totes be her thing.

I think I'd compromise somewhere in the middle. Instead of using Sorcery Points, or just letting them do it on the fly - I'd have them pick the element the spell would do when they learn it. You can swap elements on a long rest, for one spell (essentially picking a "new" spell).

But if you want a Fireball, an Acidball, a Frostball, a Thunderball? that's gonna cost ya...

[Waterdeep Merch]

That's fine, I'll address general points-

Spirit Guardians is a great spell, but it's not always your best option. There are a lot of good spells you could cast in their place, many of which can mean the difference between life and death for the party, or do things that few to no other members of the party can. This is why I generally don't see clerics use it when it's first available- and this happens to includes the only Crown paladin I've ever seen played, who got the dreaded over-the-top all powerful Spirit Guardians at 9. He didn't outshine anyone.

It has a great and common use, but this isn't always the best spell to cast. The damage isn't enough and doesn't reach far enough to be useful as anything but a (admittedly very nice) rider, and the principle effect isn't always going to be the most helpful thing you could be doing. It's going to depend on the circumstance, as is true for everything. That goes especially for someone with extremely limited slots to do it in the first place, which includes not only paladins but even lower level clerics. Even lower level clerics who specialize in front line damage dealing, because even they need their own defensive and utility buffs from time to time, or are worried enough about the barbarian that they keep a revivify on hand just in case.

The opportunity cost for a paladin to even use Spirit Guardians is a lot higher than people are pretending it is. Just go ask the Crown Oath players.

[Lyracian]

He's mostly been using bows so far, but I think he's got an eye to melee as well.
Is he right that this is not really a boost for him?

That depends if you allow Bonus Hide followed by a pop-up-and-shoot in the same turn? Static aim means you do not need cover to do this.

As written you can use Aim on a melee attack. Providing you started the turn in combat you can stab them with advantage and not move. It could promote Sentinel builds?

[Dork_Forge]

Most of my (lvl 3) party seem excited by these changes except for the Revived Rogue.

Initially, he seemed to think it was overpowered for the rogue, but then changed his opinion based on the bolts of the dead and losing movement.

He's mostly been using bows so far, but I think he's got an eye to melee as well.

Is he right that this is not really a boost for him?

Whilst using a bow, as long as he is at a suitable distance it's certainly a buff. Advantage on his main attack AND the bolts ability is a lot to get on a turn, every turn, for free. If he finds himself in situations where enemies are closing in, or he's a Halfing etc. with reduced movement and wants the option to close into melee then it's not as good. But then again he doesn't HAVE to use it, it's just yet another thing his Cunning Action is capable of.

[Sparhafoc]

Whilst using a bow, as long as he is at a suitable distance it's certainly a buff. Advantage on his main attack AND the bolts ability is a lot to get on a turn, every turn, for free. If he finds himself in situations where enemies are closing in, or he's a Halfing etc. with reduced movement and wants the option to close into melee then it's not as good. But then again he doesn't HAVE to use it, it's just yet another thing his Cunning Action is capable of.

That's exactly how I was reading it. Essentially, he loses nothing at all. He can choose to use this ability and pay a cost of losing his movement - so it's a tactical choice which should equate to sustained higher damage. But he seems to think it negates the bolts of the grave and I can't grasp his reasoning for that, but as I don't play rogue I thought I might be missing something here. Basically, this all just amounts to adding a tactical option that wasn't there before. I understand him being a bit disappointed though as it doesn't seem as big and flashy as many of the other classes, but I would have thought a rogue would be wholly on board with getting free advantage nearly all the time.

[Dork_Forge]

That's exactly how I was reading it. Essentially, he loses nothing at all. He can choose to use this ability and pay a cost of losing his movement - so it's a tactical choice which should equate to sustained higher damage. But he seems to think it negates the bolts of the grave and I can't grasp his reasoning for that, but as I don't play rogue I thought I might be missing something here. Basically, this all just amounts to adding a tactical option that wasn't there before. I understand him being a bit disappointed though as it doesn't seem as big and flashy as many of the other classes, but I would have thought a rogue would be wholly on board with getting free advantage nearly all the time.

If anyhting it just gives him even more to trigger Bolts From the Grave with, he might be disappointed that the Rogue only got one ability? Though Rogues as a base class didn't really need a buff to begin with.

[FilthyLucre]

Hopefully, we will get more subclass variants in a next UA.

Battle Master, for me, almost completely fixed my problem with the 3.x Fighter - the Move + Attack or Full Attack tedium. To be frank, battle master should be the base fighter class, not a subclass.