Video preview of 2024 PHB [Archive] (2024)

Giant in the Playground Forums > Gaming > Roleplaying Games > > Video preview of 2024 PHB

PDA

View Full Version : Video preview of 2024 PHB

Merlecory

2024-06-14, 11:51 AM

I haven't seen it posted here yet, so heres a link to the YouTube preview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bKijDwNDyU

https://x.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1801329950005342336/photo/1

The first stream is set for the 18th. Hopefully that image loads in. Otherwise, the 18th covers the fighter, 19th the paladin, and 20th the barbarian.

EDIT
Let's see if I do it right this time, here will be the schedule for the week of 2024/06/21
https://i.imgur.com/stpQg7j.png

Millstone85

2024-06-14, 02:47 PM

Since your image didn't load in:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GP-cCufWQAAO9z0?format=jpg&name=small

Psyren

2024-06-14, 02:56 PM

Whelp, I'm getting no work done this week!

I'll do my usual transcript thing (for those who are curious but hate the video reveals) unless someone else beats me to it.

T.G. Oskar

2024-06-14, 03:15 PM

My interest is obviously on the Paladin. I'm definitely disappointed that they're pushing Oath of Glory so much, and I feel they're effectively going to cement it, but I'm still interested in what they're keeping from the playtest and what they're taking back. I presume that they'll standardize Channel Divinity to become prof bonus/LR (like the Cleric) and probably forbid them from touching Spirit Guardians; I'd be surprised if at the end they get SG since that'd be a HUGE boost for them, but I'm not confident that'll happen.

I presume the format will be a glance of the skills that have changed and the ones that remain as-is, then a bigger dive into the subclasses and their changes. Will see if that's the case with Barbarian, but in the case of Paladin, they'll focus on the Ancients and Vengeance.

Anyone wonders if some of the BGIII changes will apply to the new system? Most people that have played the game find them positive, but it's wise to assume that they fit the video game best and that they might not fit the tabletop.

Merlecory

2024-06-14, 03:16 PM

Since your image didn't load in

Not sure why my image didn't load in. Maybe the link to Twitter was the issue?

Does this mean that they'll do an over view of each class? If like to know how the bard ended up, especially dance bard.

Millstone85

2024-06-14, 03:39 PM

Not sure why my image didn't load in. Maybe the link to Twitter was the issue?We both used Twitter, actually.

"https://x.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1801329950005342336/photo/1" is what you get when you right-click on the picture in the tweet and copy the link. Despite saying photo, it actually brings you to the tweet itself.

"https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GP-cCufWQAAO9z0?format=jpg&name=medium" is what you get when you right-click on the picture in the tweet and copy the picture's address. I changed the size from medium to small.

Does this mean that they'll do an over view of each class? If like to know how the bard ended up, especially dance bard.No clue but hopefully. Also, I wonder if character origins cover species and/or backgrounds.

Oramac

2024-06-14, 04:37 PM

EDIT: double post.

Oramac

2024-06-14, 04:38 PM

I'll be very interested to see the Paladin video, and their treatment of "evil" paladin burst damage.

Psyren

2024-06-14, 05:34 PM

May I ask what you don't like about Glory? Honest question - I love having more unarmed combatant/grappler/wrestler options, and Glory fits the bill for that quite well I thought.

Whenever I think of Glory Paladins I think of this guy and get super excited to play one:

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/vsbattles/images/5/5d/Armstrongy.png/revision/latest?cb=20220120103935

I presume that they'll standardize Channel Divinity to become prof bonus/LR (like the Cleric) and probably forbid them from touching Spirit Guardians; I'd be surprised if at the end they get SG since that'd be a HUGE boost for them, but I'm not confident that'll happen.

The paradigm they seem to be going for with class resources appears to be "get back 1/SR, and all/LR." Paladin/Cleric Channel Divinity, Barbarian Rage, Fighter Second Wind (which also powers Tactical Mind/Shift) etc all work this way.

There are already a few (e.g. Pact of the Blade giving us Hexblade goodies baked in came from BG3.) I expect we'll see more.

I'll be very interested to see the Paladin video, and their treatment of "evil" paladin burst damage.

Their approach at least in the playtest was to restrict us to 1/round smite but buff all the smite spells. Personally I'm okay with that, with the caveat that I just want us to be able to Reaction Smite too.

Psyren

2024-06-14, 10:01 PM

I haven't seen it posted here yet, so heres a link to the YouTube preview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bKijDwNDyU

https://x.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1801329950005342336/photo/1

The first stream is set for the 18th. Hopefully that image loads in. Otherwise, the 18th covers the fighter, 19th the paladin, and 20th the barbarian.

Sorry to double post but FYI, above is no longer the correct link - we heard from a WotC employee with the corrected one over on the DDB forums: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPBnLlqV0Z0. They had to reupload due to an issue on YouTube's end.

paladinn

2024-06-14, 11:03 PM

I need to spend more time in the video. But I'm just getting a serious "standardization" vibe about this. Maybe not like 4e, but definitely more "structured" than what we're used to.

Psyren

2024-06-14, 11:41 PM

I need to spend more time in the video. But I'm just getting a serious "standardization" vibe about this. Maybe not like 4e, but definitely more "structured" than what we're used to.

The video hasn't actually released yet, the link is just a placeholder. It will debut on Tuesday 6/18 at 7am PDT/10am EDT.

paladinn

2024-06-15, 09:24 AM

The video hasn't actually released yet, the link is just a placeholder. It will debut on Tuesday 6/18 at 7am PDT/10am EDT.

I mean, so much of what I'm hearing (and reading the playtest docs) about D&D2024 seems to be about better-fitting everything into a grid. Maybe not to the extent of 4e, but more than 5e and Way more than 3e. Some people may like that; not sure I do.

Arkhios

2024-06-15, 10:08 AM

Whelp, I'm getting no work done this week!

I'll do my usual transcript thing (for those who are curious but hate the video reveals) unless someone else beats me to it.

This forum really needs a like button. Thumbs up for this one anyway!

==b

Psyren

2024-06-15, 11:50 AM

This forum really needs a like button. Thumbs up for this one anyway!

==b

Thank you! I honestly enjoy doing it :smallsmile: The peeks behind the curtain to the design process are my favorite part of the metagame, and writing out summaries etc helps me keep track too. "Wait, what video did they say that in again?" "Where was that statistic on rogue subclass favorability?"

Not totally sure what you mean by "into a grid" but my take is that one of their main goals is to normalize the power levels within classes and power bands to a degree. If they had, say, taken the existing sorcerer and reprinted the existing Draconic, Wild, Clockwork and Aberrant Mind, then not only would you have two subclasses that are wildly out of step with the other two, you'd also have them all residing within the (still) worst full caster in the game by a country mile. All of the updates they're making seem to be to get away from that.

T.G. Oskar

2024-06-16, 02:15 AM

May I ask what you don't like about Glory? Honest question - I love having more unarmed combatant/grappler/wrestler options, and Glory fits the bill for that quite well I thought.

Whenever I think of Glory Paladins I think of this guy and get super excited to play one:

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/vsbattles/images/5/5d/Armstrongy.png/revision/latest?cb=20220120103935

It just doesn't feel like a Paladin to me. Perhaps it's because all I can associate it with is Greek demigod heroes. All I know is that I don't like them either mechanically or thematically, even though I understand why it's a creative take on it. I just feel that the same could be accomplished with a Fighter or Barbarian.

Mechanically, I find it boring. Sure, you get really good in Athletics (and therefore in Grapple), but Grappling will change already, and there's nothing that suggests me from playing as a "wrestler" otherwise. Not even a luchador IMO.

Perhaps it's also because I feel Crown Paladin desperately needs a revision that it'll never get because people already decried it as the worst Paladin subclass ever, whereas Glory is relatively new and reclaimed from a MtG-related sourcebook.

I presume it's both - a subclass that didn't need either the revision OR the upgrade getting it while the subclass that needs it doesn't and will most likely never get it.

There are already a few (e.g. Pact of the Blade giving us Hexblade goodies baked in came from BG3.) I expect we'll see more.

That's mostly because subclasses have been standardized to 3rd level and because it only makes sense that Pact of the Blade was the way to create warrior-like Warlocks. Compare to, say, the minor powers all Paladins get when choosing their Oath at 1st level rather than third, or the "potions are used as a bonus action now" rule change.

If it requires a bonus action, most likely not. (And I surely hope not, since you already get limitations on how many you can use.)

That said, I feel like Smites could be powered by Channel Divinity now that there's the "use/LR = PB, recover 1 at SR". Sure, it limits the amount of Smites you can do by a LOT, but it makes spells actually usable for most people. Of course, that'd imply that Smites auto-scale in exchange, so that you always get max damage when used, rather than deciding whether you want to save some slots for a needed spell instead of going nova with smites. (And maybe, if reliant on CD uses, their effects could be concentration-free to make them more powerful.)

Zevox

2024-06-16, 04:04 PM

It just doesn't feel like a Paladin to me.
Hear hear. I feel the same; it seems to me to miss the point of the Paladin class entirely. Its oath is all about itself: being strong, be courageous, be disciplined, etc, but it has nothing to say about what it should do with those qualities. Other Paladin oaths devote themselves to a cause of some sort, while the oath of Glory doesn't. It's not a holy(/unholy) crusader with a cause, it's just a Fighter with an inflated sense of it's own importance.

KorvinStarmast

2024-06-16, 05:19 PM

Hear hear. I feel the same; it seems to me to miss the point of the Paladin class entirely. Its oath is all about itself: being strong, be courageous, be disciplined, etc, but it has nothing to say about what it should do with those qualities. Other Paladin oaths devote themselves to a cause of some sort, while the oath of Glory doesn't. It's not a holy(/unholy) crusader with a cause, it's just a Fighter with an inflated sense of it's own importance. Yep. I find Watchers to be a better package, conceptually. For the 'loner' Vengeance is a very good approach, minus the Tasha's bloat.

and their treatment of "evil" paladin burst damage. The "evil" paladin IMO does not belong in the PHB. That they put Oathbreaker in the DMG as an option for a fallen paladin was IMO a very good idea.

Never cared for the Conquest paladin either.

Some of these paladins go so far as to consort with the powers of the Nine Hells, valuing the rule of law over the balm of mercy. The archdevil Bel, warlord of Avernus, counts many of these paladins called hell knights as his most ardent supporters. Hell knights cover their armor with trophies taken from fallen enemies, a grim warning to any who dare oppose them and the decrees of their lords. These knights are often most fiercely resisted by other paladins of this oath, who believe that the hell knights have wandered too far into darkness.
Rather misses the point of Paladin.

But I guess certain of the community wanted the Death Knight style of PC available.

Zevox

2024-06-16, 05:44 PM

The "evil" paladin IMO does not belong in the PHB. That they put Oathbreaker in the DMG as an option for a fallen paladin was IMO a very good idea.

Never cared for the Conquest paladin either.
Rather misses the point of Paladin.

But I guess certain of the community wanted the Death Knight style of PC available.
On that I disagree, evil variants of the Paladin belong, and Conquest is an excellent example. They're still crusaders for a cause, just a dark and terrible one (or highly questionable one, for those can pull of a LN Conquest Paladin). It's honestly what I'd prefer to have been the fourth, specifically to have an evil variant in the PHB.

Luccan

2024-06-16, 06:15 PM

On that I disagree, evil variants of the Paladin belong, and Conquest is an excellent example. They're still crusaders for a cause, just a dark and terrible one (or highly questionable one, for those can pull of a LN Conquest Paladin). It's honestly what I'd prefer to have been the fourth, specifically to have an evil variant in the PHB.

Yeah, Evil Paladin has been in the game conceptually almost as long as Paladin has. It wasn't really called a Paladin, but we're working in a game that does subclasses so it doesn't really make sense to make an entirely different base class to represent Anti-Paladins/Blackguards just so they don't share a name.

Will also echo that Glory is a weird idea for a Paladin oath. An oath that you can't break so long as you act like a typical D&D warrior character isn't really influencing your Paladin's decision making.

Psyren

2024-06-17, 12:05 AM

I view that as the whole point of Glory myself - it's a means without an end. "Deeds over words", "Hone the body" and "Overcome failings in yourself and your allies" can be tied literally any alignment or objective. I think that's great, because you can have Glory Paladins that are champions of the downtrodden, vile oppressive bullies, and anything in between. Just like you can have Vengeance Paladins who are tireless seekers of justice, harsh vindicators who repay every slight tenfold, or anything in between.

While it's true that Peerless Athlete won't be quite as applicable to 2024 grappling as it was in 2014 5e, the movement increases it gets from that, Aura of Alacrity, and Haste are still valuable for a grappling character because grappling slows you down so much.

The main benefit it will get to being an unarmed character comes from the base Paladin, which will be able to Smite with its punches and pick up Unarmed with its Fighting Style and/or Tavern Brawler with its starting feat.

Zevox

2024-06-17, 12:58 AM

I view that as the whole point of Glory myself - it's a means without an end.
And I think that completely misses the point of the class. Without an end to strive towards, the Paladin's oath means nothing, has no purpose. If your strength is just a means to any end you choose, you're a Fighter (or Barbarian, etc), not a Paladin.

Oramac

2024-06-17, 08:24 AM

I can handle 1/round smite, so long as it works on reactions too. My biggest gripe was them trying to turn the baseline Smite into an actual spell. That pissed me off to no end.

The "evil" paladin IMO does not belong in the PHB. snip

My quoted "evil" was actually in reference to the apparent hate from WOTC about paladin burst damage, not about an actually evil paladin.

That said, I do like Conquest and would love to see it in the PHB, though I can totally understand why they wouldn't do that either.

Witty Username

2024-06-17, 08:39 AM

The "evil" paladin IMO does not belong in the PHB. That they put Oathbreaker in the DMG as an option for a fallen paladin was IMO a very good idea.

Eh, I think that ship sailed with removing alignment restrictions and vengeance paladin.

I am probably the wrong person to ask on conquest, I think its fine, but it is pretty compatible with a good alignment. It is about bringing and maintaining order and deterring evil and chaos with force.

It's not friendly, but it's a paladin. The smites were never decorative.
--
I think I just don't grok the glory argument, it's about embracing heroism and encouraging others to do the same. That doesn't feel far off devotion to me.

I never liked crown, but I also thought the book it was in was generally bad.

Blatant Beast

2024-06-17, 09:55 AM

While I like the notion of the Oath of Glory, (being able to represent Hercules or Sir Francis Drake as a Paladin, is cool), the subclass needs some tweaks, in terms of power level, especially in area of the subclass' Channel Divinity powers.

Inspiring Smite strikes me as being a tad under-tunned.

The Oath Spells for the Oath of Glory, are okay. The Oath spell list is not great, but serviceable.
Hopefully, the developers will increase the subclasses power level just a smidge.

Theodoxus

2024-06-17, 11:33 AM

It just doesn't feel like a Paladin to me.

Sounds like the Diablo 4 community crying for a Paladin so they can have a sword/board character that's not a Necromancer. [I think Blizzard missed an opportunity in making Barbarian the all around melee guy and should swap out the 2-handed slashing for shield, and make the 2-handed smashing just a universal 2-handed slot. Change a couple skills to utilize S/B effectively and boom, done. No need for a Paladin (just for the S/B decriers). A D2 style Paladin with auras would be appreciated by me, however.]

That aside, while I personally agree with you that Glory is a weird niche (and IMO is not close to Devotion) of anti-purpose that seems like it would be hard to forge convictions around. I'm not here to disparage those who can wrap their head around how it works. Certainly not the first or last time I'm unable to grok cognitive dissonance like that.

I can handle 1/round smite, so long as it works on reactions too. By definition, 1/round doesn't include reactions. You'd want 1/turn. Where you can do it once on your turn, and once again on someone else's turn, in the same round.

I get the idea behind limiting nova-smiting... but really, if your DM is running 5min days, you're only getting hurt by not allowing it - if you're running 15 hour days, you're hurting yourself by doing it... seems it should then be up to the player... enforced rules on how to play, to minimize trap decisions never works as intended.

Psyren

2024-06-17, 11:54 AM

And I think that completely misses the point of the class. Without an end to strive towards, the Paladin's oath means nothing, has no purpose. If your strength is just a means to any end you choose, you're a Fighter (or Barbarian, etc), not a Paladin.

I think an open-ended Oath can be just as meaningful as one with a clearly defined endpoint. In fact, it might be even moreso - I've always found it a bit silly that for example a Vengeance Paladin who fulfills their Oath should logically throw their entire subclass (if not class) in the bin and start being something completely different, getting a swathe of new powers out of nowhere - or worse, becoming a Fighter.

I can handle 1/round smite, so long as it works on reactions too. My biggest gripe was them trying to turn the baseline Smite into an actual spell. That pissed me off to no end.

Well... I'm not sure "trying" is the right word, they seem to have gone ahead and done that. But we won't know the final state for sure until Thursday.

My quoted "evil" was actually in reference to the apparent hate from WOTC about paladin burst damage, not about an actually evil paladin.

To be fair, the hate is from the players/DMs too. They surveyed every class in the PHB to learn the pain points before the playtest began, and that's where their feedback during the videos came from. And one of the key bits they shared was Nova Smites stealing the spotlight at a large number of tables. It's not something they pulled out of thin air.

That said, I do like Conquest and would love to see it in the PHB, though I can totally understand why they wouldn't do that either.

I'm curious about how they plan to handle updating the Oathbreaker. A cycle of "evil subclasses" in the DMG makes the most sense to me.

Evaar

2024-06-17, 12:39 PM

The purpose of Glory is personal perfection. You have a duty to be the greatest version of yourself. That's, like, a real thing that real people believe. I don't see why it needs to be more than that.

Just like lying and cheating would be anathema to a Devotion Paladin, laziness and cowardice would be anathema to a Glory Paladin.

Zevox

2024-06-17, 12:57 PM

I don't see Glory as being all that more undefined than, say, Devotion - they want to make the world a better place, but there's no real endpoint to that either. Your Oath could entail helping a thousand old people cross the street or launching an assault on Asmodeus himself, it's up to you to really define what that means for you.
A Vengeance Paladin who "fulfills their oath" must have had a very specific sworn enemy indeed, to be small enough in number to have achieved total, permanent victory over. Even in that event I would expect such a person to simply retire - they've done what they set out to do, time to settle down and live out the more peaceful life they've earned.

But I think you misunderstand. I'm not saying the oath needs a specific, achievable, concrete objective, like "kill a Pit Fiend" or somesuch. But it is supposed to be the Paladin swearing themselves to some higher cause, to an ideal or creed that's bigger than any one person. You can see that in each of the other Oaths, but not in the Oath of Glory, whose tenets are basically "stay in shape and be ready to fight a lot" in so many words.

A Paladin of Devotion, the Ancients, Vengeance, the Watchers, Redemption, Conquest, and the Crown all have reasons built into their oaths for why they do what they do. Their oaths have a clear higher purpose. How an individual interprets that purpose and pursues it may vary, but the purpose itself is inherent in the oath. The Oath of Glory has nothing of the sort. Many typical Fighters likely live by the tenents of the Oath of Glory without even consciously meaning to. That's a pretty clear sign that it doesn't belong.

Edit:

The purpose of Glory is personal perfection. You have a duty to be the greatest version of yourself.
That would be precisely my point: that's not a higher cause. It's just about the person themselves. It would work fine if this were a Fighter subclass, but it is wholly out of place on the Paladin.

Psyren

2024-06-17, 01:50 PM

A Vengeance Paladin who "fulfills their oath" must have had a very specific sworn enemy indeed, to be small enough in number to have achieved total, permanent victory over. Even in that event I would expect such a person to simply retire - they've done what they set out to do, time to settle down and live out the more peaceful life they've earned.

Here's the example given for a Paladin who takes up an Oath of Vengeance in Tasha's:

"An Oath of Devotion paladin failed to stop a demonic horde from ravaging her homeland. After spending a night in sorrowful prayer, she rises the next morning with the features of the Oath of Vengeance, ready to hunt down the horde."

I still don't see what's wrong with that. That's like, every monk ever, and they get magical power from it too. Classes are allowed to have thematic overlap like that, e.g. both Druids and Ancients Paladins can get power from devoting themselves to the cause of protecting nature, they just go about it in different ways.

Theodoxus

2024-06-17, 02:12 PM

It just points out the gamist ideas that some folks don't like. It's akin to why Fighters can't learn to sneak attack without taking Rogue levels. Seems pretty easy, a guy who typically doesn't fight big monsters for a living can do it, why can't I? asks the Fighter.

"Hi, I'm a Paladin of Glory. I work out, eat right, and because of that, I can cast spells and use that DIVINE POWA!!! to smite the ever living $#!^ out of things.!"
Fighter "..."
Paladin "What, friend?"
Fighter "I work out, eat right, and because of that, I can on occasion trip people or if I'm really lucky, turn someone else's miss against me into a retributive strike... I want to smite someone too!"
Paladin 'Boot to the head!'

Zevox

2024-06-17, 02:12 PM

Here's the example given for a Paladin who takes up an Oath of Vengeance in Tasha's:

The implication there is that once that specific horde is dealt with, vengeance achieved. Which is totally fine, but let's say the Devotion paladin's failure happened at level 3 and then they achieve their goal at level 18; if they go back to Devotion once the horde is defeated, now they have a bunch of brand new powers and spells they didn't learn over their career. It's just a bit odd.
That's an example for a Paladin who changes Oaths specifically, not merely for taking it up. And personally, my expectation would be that in the circ*mstance you describe, the Paladin would either continue as a Vengeance Paladin, just devoted to fighting demons more generally now that the specific hoard that set her on that path is defeated, or as I said before, retire. Perhaps rededicating herself to the Oath of Devotion could be an option depending on the person, but it seems the least likely to me.

And if she were to do that, I don't see how her suddenly having the Devotion class features afterward is any weirder than her suddenly having the Vengeance class features when she first switched Oaths in the first place. Any weirdness there comes from allowing a subclass swap in general.

I still don't see what's wrong with that. That's like, every monk ever, and they get magical power from it too.
Right, but you know what a Monk is not? A Paladin!

We simply seem to have incompatible views of what a Paladin is. From where I'm sitting, the class exists to be the (un)holy knight or crusader archetype. A champion devoted to a higher cause, to something that goes beyond just themselves. That's why the Oath of Glory seems utterly out of place to me, as it is nothing of the sort.

I don't think of Achilles, Hercules, etc and think the Paladin class fits them at all - Fighter would be my first pick easily, though I could also see Monk if you want to emphasize skill at unarmed combat. But I'd no more make such a character a Paladin than I would make them a Wizard (or Ranger, to go with a class that has just as much in common with them as the Paladin). It just doesn't fit from where I'm sitting.

Millstone85

2024-06-17, 02:18 PM

But it is supposed to be the Paladin swearing themselves to some higher cause, to an ideal or creed that's bigger than any one person. You can see that in each of the other Oaths, but not in the Oath of Glory, whose tenets are basically "stay in shape and be ready to fight a lot" in so many words.The tenets of the oath of glory are presented in the context of being ready for when destiny calls. In a pseudo ancient Greek setting, destiny is a force more important than the gods themselves. Theros in particular seems to equate destiny with the natural order, cosmic balance, fabric of reality, or what have you, that keeps the world going. So the oath of glory does care about a higher cause.

Moving the subclass to the PHB bears the risk of losing that context, however.

T.G. Oskar

2024-06-17, 02:45 PM

RE: Purpose of Oath of Glory

I disagree, and while it changes nothing about my dislike for the subclass, I feel it's fair to point out.

Oath of Glory has a meaning, but one wrapped in the trappings of its sourcebook. The Oath of Glory is meant to represent heroes like Hercules (or, if you wanna be pedant, Herakles), Jason, Perseus - even Leonidas. Effectively, Paladins of the Oath of Glory represent these heroes who cultivate their physical prowess to ultimately serve as an example of heroism itself - but with the caveat that they can also fall victim to their own vainglory. Thus, just as you have those I mentioned, you can also have Achilles or Hector. It's not "making the world a better place" any more than a Devotion Paladin or an Ancients Paladin or a Redemption Paladin want to make the world a better place - it's being the embodiment of heroism so that others feel inspired to follow the same path.

This bit sums it up best for me:

While I like the notion of the Oath of Glory, (being able to represent Hercules or Sir Francis Drake as a Paladin, is cool)[...]

That easily sums up the kind of hero the Oath of Glory's supposed to represent - the larger-than-life hero. Unfortunately, here's where my dislike slides in: it doesn't feel (like others have mentioned) as something unique to a Paladin. In fact, those heroes I mentioned would've originally counted as Fighters, for they were given as examples of Fighting Men, specifically of the Hero or Superhero level. (And personally, I feel Hercules is a Barbarian, as he was prone to fits of rage - it's the reason why he had to do the Twelve Labors in the first place, and that was because of Hera's jealousy - which means Zeus's plan to call him 'the glory of Hera' didn't exactly work...)

Mechanically and thematically I understand where it's coming from. Mechanically it's supposed to be a "Paladin/Barbarian" multiclass of sorts, ditching Rage for greater physical strength and agility. The spells, the CD, even its aura represent this enhanced athleticism*. And in that regard, it's creative. Thematically, it represents a divine champion - the likes of which would serve Kord or Dol Dorn, or even emulate Hercules once the latter becomes a deity. However, they don't need to be servants of a deity, inasmuch as a Crown Paladin can draw devotion from service to its country or a Conquest Paladin draws power from its subjugated subjects, projecting that power to maintain it. Paladins are no longer tied to service to divinity (that's exclusively a Cleric thing, and that's still debatable). And in that regard, a warrior who embodies the qualities of a paragon of heroism makes perfect sense.

Unfortunately, even stripping the shackles of alignment and divinity, the purpose it ultimately represents overlaps greatly with other classes to the extent that it becomes interchangeable with the class itself. It feels like trying to shoehorn mechanics to fit the bill, rather than let them flow naturally elsewhere - and this is where Theodoxus fits in**:

Sounds like the Diablo 4 community crying for a Paladin so they can have a sword/board character that's not a Necromancer.

It feels like it was built to answer the question, "how do I play Hercules/Perseus/Achilles as a Paladin?", when you could easily play it as a Fighter or Barbarian instead. (Specifically, the concept of Smites and using spells, even if they could be "explained", feel off to these kinds of heroes who mostly relied on their physical prowess and magic items.) Other subclasses make sense when you consider what they represent - Devotion Paladins are the traditional knights-errant in shining armor, and their smites and spells come from a source of devotion that could easily be explained as blessings manifesting from their faith; Ancients' Paladins are empowered by Nature in the same way Druids and Rangers do, while Vengeance Paladins are effectively Avengers who, while easily existing as assassins and "dark knights" in the same vein as Batman, are different because their beliefs become instruments to their vengeance. In this last regard, a Vengeance Paladin may be empowered by a god of vengeance (a specific elven god that hates the Drow with a passion comes to mind), a spirit of vengeance (Ghost Rider, anyone?) or even the inquisitorial arm of a church.

That's why I say Glory doesn't fit the Paladin - because the exemplars that I could envision as "Glory Paladins" are, IMO, legendary Fighters and Barbarians, and making them as such diminishes the worth of those classes overall (especially the Fighter, who has fought for so long to feel relevant and only recently has escaped its 'glorified wargame unit' status). That, and that they're getting a revision when they're ignoring a perfectly useful class that suffers in the late-game because of an attempt to make them more "mundane" and because they appeared too early in the game's life cycle.

Then the Glory Paladin isn't the "best" for Unarmed combatants, since technically every subclass can provide boons and the rest can be enhanced by feats. Peerless Athlete essentially makes Enhance Ability redundant, only useful as a backup if it runs out and you haven't taken your short rest given that it's far more useful in regards to old grappling than the spell. You might consider Haste, but if so, then the Vengeance Paladin is superior because Vow of Enmity means you'll get the same benefit against that enemy you really want taken down while keeping that same spell on the ready. And to be honest, the Aura of Alacrity is pathetic, even if its range expanded to that of traditional auras - you grant your allies a +5 to their speed as long as they're up to 30 feet away from you, which means that if they're too far, they're not really benefitting from it - effectively defeating the purpose of the aura overall.

Maybe it was good for old grappling rules, but nothing that'd make me see it as THE choice for Unarmed Paladins - at least, not in the same way that Dance Bards are now THE choice for Unarmed Bards because they directly enhance it. (Provided they don't change and/or disappear in the final print.)

GooeyChewie

2024-06-17, 02:46 PM

On the subject of Paladins as a whole, I dont put much faith in the names of the subclasses. Paladins supposedly get their divine magical powers from their oaths, but they have divine magical power before they choose an Oath subclass at level 2 (2014 rules) or 3 (2024 rules). So to me, the oath (or oaths) your Paladin takes upon their first level of Paladin - which are totally up to you the player - have more to do with your Paladins character than does the subclass Oath. For example, I dont consider all Vengeance Paladins to necessarily have to have a specific oath about vengeance, but rather their oaths give them powers that one might commonly use FOR vengeance.

I can handle 1/round smite, so long as it works on reactions too. My biggest gripe was them trying to turn the baseline Smite into an actual spell. That pissed me off to no end.

I still believe Smites would have been better as a central feature than as spells. That way different Paladin subclasses could have subclass-specific Smites to help set them apart. But I also believe all Fighters should have maneuvers, and that Rogues should get Cunning Strike before or alongside their subclass, for much the same reason. Clearly WotC isnt consulting me directly on these issue! (Not that Im anyone important such that they would.)

Atranen

2024-06-17, 03:40 PM

Psyren

2024-06-17, 04:00 PM

Right, but you know what a Monk is not? A Paladin!

And a Druid isn't an Ancients Paladin either, so what's the difference?

Oramac

2024-06-17, 04:23 PM

Yea, I meant 1/turn. My typo.

In any case, I agree. As I said in my feedback to WOTC: "When one endeavors to make a thing idiot-proof, one succeeds only in creating a better idiot".

Well... I'm not sure "trying" is the right word, they seem to have gone ahead and done that. But we won't know the final state for sure until Thursday.

Yea. That's primarily what I'm waiting to hear about in the Thursday video. And I know it was a big pain point in the surveys. They made that pretty clear. But as has been pointed out ad nauseum on this and other forums, there's a million ways to handle the issue that are better than making baseline smite a spell.

Such as...

I still believe Smites would have been better as a central feature than as spells. That way different Paladin subclasses could have subclass-specific Smites to help set them apart. snip

This. I agree with this completely.

Zevox

2024-06-17, 05:02 PM

The tenets of the oath of glory are presented in the context of being ready for when destiny calls. In a pseudo ancient Greek setting, destiny is a force more important than the gods themselves. Theros in particular seems to equate destiny with the natural order, cosmic balance, fabric of reality, or what have you, that keeps the world going. So the oath of glory does care about a higher cause.

Moving the subclass to the PHB bears the risk of losing that context, however.
If that's the idea, then mention of destiny should really have been included somewhere in the actual tenets of the oath. And yeah, even then it also only works at all in a setting where that's how destiny works, in which case including it in the PHB is still a poor idea.

I agree with this take on the Paladin--the Oath of Glory represents a different kind of Paladin. Perhaps the natural consequence of redefining what a Paladin is since 3.5, from a righteous champion to anyone who serves a cause? I favor Paladins who have oaths which are difficult to follow, or entail some sort of sacrifice, or at least, have literary precedents showing that. Are there many Greek heroes who gave up everything so they could hit the gym? Paladins should be getting power at a cost, not power as a nice bonus for being in shape.
I think it's also a matter of, simply put, the ancient Greek concept of what makes someone a hero being pretty out of step with the modern one, or the one upon which the Paladin class was based. Ancient Greek heroes are more about being really good at killing than anything else. Courage and skill at arms are valued, but there's no moral element to it, no concern for justifying their actions in pursuit of any goal, noble or otherwise. Achilles especially is the poster boy for this - his greatest enemy, Hector, comes across as a much better person to a modern reader of The Illiad than he does, yet Achilles is the "hero" of that story, not Hector.

By contrast, the Paladin class was inspired by things like the legends of King Arthur, or the knights and crusaders of the middle ages. Highly idealized versions of them mind you, but nonetheless those are the idea, and those are rooted in very different concepts of heroism that really don't mesh with the ancient Greek concept. Take away them fighting for some higher cause and those just cease to be, it's not longer the same thing at all. It's like if we had a class based on the ancient Greek idea of a hero and tried to put something like the Oath of Redemption in it; it would clash just as badly, because the idea of violence as a last resort just doesn't fit with that.

Millstone85

2024-06-17, 06:14 PM

If that's the idea, then mention of destiny should really have been included somewhere in the actual tenets of the oath.That feels a bit unfair. The closest the tenets of the ancients come to mentioning nature is with "Where life flourishes, stand against the forces that would render it barren". Otherwise, all references to druids, the fey and forest-themed adornments are in the introductory text for the oath. Yet that doesn't seem to spark much debate on the theme of the subclass.

And yeah, even then it also only works at all in a setting where that's how destiny works, in which case including it in the PHB is still a poor idea.I am starting to see it as an issue, yes. And like you, I would have preferred conquest as the fourth PHB oath.

Psyren

2024-06-17, 06:48 PM

No no no! Subclass-specific smites would be a horrible idea. Either they would end up worse than the base Paladin smites, making them a dead feature, or they would be better, and now you have the 2017 Gloomstalker problem where everyone was piling into that subclass because it blows away the others rather than because it fit their concept the best.

It's not "making the world a better place" any more than a Devotion Paladin or an Ancients Paladin or a Redemption Paladin want to make the world a better place - it's being the embodiment of heroism so that others feel inspired to follow the same path.

To clear up the confusion above, I was talking about Devotion with the bolded line, not Glory. In fact, I was pretty clear that Glory lends itself just as much to Evil and Neutral Paladins as it does Good ones, which I think is part of the beauty of the subclass. Gaston would be a great Glory Paladin, as would Theseus from Hades, and Captain Hammer from Dr. Horrible.

Zevox

2024-06-17, 07:00 PM

That feels a bit unfair. The closest the tenets of the ancients come to mentioning nature is with "Where life flourishes, stand against the forces that would render it barren". Otherwise, all references to druids, the fey and forest-themed adornments are in the introductory text for the oath. Yet that doesn't seem to spark much debate on the theme of the subclass.
I see that as a feature of that subclass - it's not pigeonholed into being just being the "nature Paladin" as a result. You can play it (and I have done so) with that as only a mild aspect of it, instead emphasizing its commitment to preserving and nurturing goodness and joy in the world, making it perfect for NG or CG Paladins that don't quite fit with the more lawful-heavy Oath of Devotion.

Gaston would be a great Glory Paladin, as would Achilles from Hades, and Captain Hammer from Dr. Horrible.
Yeah, I don't know that third one, but the other two feel quite in line with what I'm saying: I would never consider them as candidates for the Paladin class. Fighters, definitely, not Paladins.

Psyren

2024-06-17, 07:03 PM

Yeah, I don't know that third one, but the other two feel quite in line with what I'm saying: I would never consider them as candidates for the Paladin class. Fighters, definitely, not Paladins.

And that's totally fine - I'll enjoy my Gaston/Achilles paladin at my table/AL, you can ban it at yours, all is well.

Evaar

2024-06-17, 07:24 PM

That would be precisely my point: that's not a higher cause. It's just about the person themselves. It would work fine if this were a Fighter subclass, but it is wholly out of place on the Paladin.

Like, All-Might isn't a Fighter. You might argue he's a Devotion Paladin, but I don't really buy that. He's the symbol of peace - critically, the symbol. He has to endure and appear unstoppable because the world, and other heroes, look to his example. But behind the scenes he does lie, he hides his true identity and his failing health. That's a good-aligned Oath of Glory Paladin.

Millstone85

2024-06-17, 07:43 PM

I see that as a feature of that subclass - it's not pigeonholed into being just being the "nature Paladin" as a result. You can play it (and I have done so) with that as only a mild aspect of it, instead emphasizing its commitment to preserving and nurturing goodness and joy in the world, making it perfect for NG or CG Paladins that don't quite fit with the more lawful-heavy Oath of Devotion.Okay, that makes sense.

Yeah, I don't know that third one, but the other two feel quite in line with what I'm saying: I would never consider them as candidates for the Paladin class. Fighters, definitely, not Paladins.About the third one... Capt. Hammer and Dr. Horrible are basically a jock and a nerd who grew up to be a beloved super hero and a despised mad scientist. They are both terrible people in their own ways. In Hammer's case, he of course relishes in his fame without any humility. He also takes more satisfaction in the act of beating up Horrible, physically and emotionally, than in stopping other people from getting hurt. That includes dating a woman only because Horrible was interested in her, with the infamous line "These *shows his fists* are not the hammer. *leaves then comes back* The hammer is my ■■■■■."

Dr.Samurai

2024-06-17, 10:39 PM

Just like lying and cheating would be anathema to a Devotion Paladin, laziness and cowardice would be anathema to a Glory Paladin.
I agree with Evaar. Having a singular drive or ambition to achieve one's potential is a gift that rewards everyone; I think it's fine as an Oath. Someone mentioned Achillies but like... at the end of the day, Hector was cool and all, but if you're in a battle, you want to be the most competent and skilled warrior. If you're in an army, you want the most competent and skilled warrior on your side. These people make things happen. They are an inspiration to others, a force behind which to rally, etc etc.

I just don't like the subclass features lol. They are underwhelming. Which I suppose is an irony of some sort... :smalltongue:

Zevox

2024-06-17, 11:44 PM

Who says that's not a higher cause? You aren't asking WHY a Paladin of Glory feels they have a duty to be the best version of themselves. That's up to the player, of course, but you might have a Paladin of Glory who's devoted to Kord or Tempus or Dol Dorn or any other god of ass-kicking.
The only one of your examples that I'm familiar enough with to express an opinion on is Tempus - and I think he's simply a deity who wouldn't have Paladins among his faithful, for much the reasons I've been giving for feeling the Oath of Glory doesn't fit the class. He's a god who doesn't care why you fight, only that you do - one who views warfare as a natural part of the world to be embraced in itself. He and his church don't take sides or dictate a cause his adherents should take up, they're just expected to fight whatever wars come. They have a certain warrior's code of honor about things like not causing battles to drag out senselessly nor engaging in uncontrolled bloodshed, but that's as far as their sense of moral or ethical beliefs go. A deity like him, I'd argue, would neither attract Paladins as worshippers (at least not ones who would consider him their patron; obviously plenty would offer him prayers more casually), nor would his church have any cause to establish its own order of Paladins.

I'll at least agree with you that his outlook is pretty fitting with the ancient Greek view of heroism that the Oath of Glory is inspired by; in that sense, it's a well-chosen example. But I don't agree that he, or others like him, make the Oath of Glory make any more sense as a Paladin's oath.

About the third one... Capt. Hammer and Dr. Horrible are basically a jock and a nerd who grew up to be a beloved super hero and a despised mad scientist. They are both terrible people in their own ways. In Hammer's case, he of course relishes in his fame without any humility. He also takes more satisfaction in the act of beating up Horrible, physically and emotionally, than in stopping other people from getting hurt. That includes dating a woman only because Horrible was interested in her, with the infamous line "These *shows his fists* are not the hammer. *leaves then comes back* The hammer is my ■■■■■."
So, he's just a horrible jacka** who relishes tormenting one specific person and getting glorified for it? Yeah, also not seeing how that's a Paladin of any sort.

That would also apply to a deeply but positively written Superman, who All Might is a great anime homage to.
Superman I would definitely peg as a textbook Devotion Paladin, were you to translate his sort of character into D&D. Truth and Justice, the Big Blue Boyscout and all that. The tenents of that oath are him to a T.

Blatant Beast

2024-06-18, 01:03 AM

The only one of your examples that I'm familiar enough with to express an opinion on is Tempus - and I think he's simply a deity who wouldn't have Paladins among his faithful, for much the reasons I've been giving for feeling the Oath of Glory doesn't fit the class. He's a god who doesn't care why you fight, only that you do - one who views warfare as a natural part of the world to be embraced in itself. He and his church don't take sides or dictate a cause his adherents should take up, they're just expected to fight whatever wars come.

One of the 2e Specialty Priest classes for Tempus was called Gloryblood. https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Gloryblood

In the social world of Chimpanzees, the most badass chimp with the most followers, leads the group, and has access to the most desirable breeding partners. Can't get more part of the natural world than that.

If Hip Hop and Rock 'n Roll has taught us anything, it is that Glory can get you laid.:smallwink:
It is a simple motivation, but a powerful one.

Amechra

2024-06-18, 02:33 AM

I mean, I think the reason that Oath of Glory feels weird is that it's really... frictionless? Part of the Paladin class fantasy is that your Oath will get you in trouble every so often, so having an Oath where the Tenets boil down to "do cool stuff", "don't chicken out of encounters", "raise your Strength score", and "overcome your weaknesses" is a bit of a nothingburger.

Like, there are totally ways that you can make an Oath of Glory work Tenets-wise, it's just that the person who wrote the subclass didn't really bother.

RedMage125

2024-06-18, 02:45 AM

Whelp, I'm getting no work done this week!

I'll do my usual transcript thing (for those who are curious but hate the video reveals) unless someone else beats me to it.

Please be sure to post the link here when you do. I am one of those who would rather read than watch a video.

Psyren

2024-06-18, 03:03 AM

So, he's just a horrible jacka** who relishes tormenting one specific person and getting glorified for it? Yeah, also not seeing how that's a Paladin of any sort.

I agree with Evaar. Having a singular drive or ambition to achieve one's potential is a gift that rewards everyone; I think it's fine as an Oath. Someone mentioned Achillies but like... at the end of the day, Hector was cool and all, but if you're in a battle, you want to be the most competent and skilled warrior. If you're in an army, you want the most competent and skilled warrior on your side. These people make things happen. They are an inspiration to others, a force behind which to rally, etc etc.

....I just realized reading this that I royally screwed up earlier; the Hades character I meant to reference as being as an example of an Evil Glory Paladin was Theseus, not Achilles :smallredface:

I just don't like the subclass features lol. They are underwhelming. Which I suppose is an irony of some sort... :smalltongue:

On the one hand, sure, speed boosts and temp HP aren't all that exciting. But I think it's kind of slept on honestly. It's the only other Paladin to get Haste, you get a deceptively large amount of Temp HP from Inspiring Smite if you focus it all on one target (which would typically be but doesn't have to be yourself), and Peerless Athlete means you can put Enhance Ability on someone else in the party for the exploration scenes, or even slap it on your Wisdom score while it handles your physical scores to make you a halfway decent scout. Not to mention, PA is getting buffed to an hour in 2024.

But above all, at the end of the day - even a quote-unquote "bad paladin" is one of the best classes in the game, and likely to be one of the best in their party.

I'd say "don't chicken out of encounters" can cause quite a bit of friction (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0467.html) depending on your party (and the encounter), honestly.

Theodoxus

2024-06-18, 08:26 AM

....I just realized reading this that I royally screwed up earlier; the Hades character I meant to reference as being as an example of an Evil Glory Paladin was Theseus, not Achilles :smallredface:

LOL - I'm sure it wasn't purposeful, but this made me chuckle.

I'd say "don't chicken out of encounters" can cause quite a bit of friction (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0467.html) depending on your party (and the encounter), honestly.

So, Glory can be the epitome of 'Lawful Stupid' more than Devotion? Interesting...

Millstone85

2024-06-18, 08:59 AM

The first stream is happening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPBnLlqV0Z0

Edit: I love this picture of the Outlands, except for how they mixed up the symbols of Arcadia and Celestia.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GQXPLDUWYAASuxf?format=png

Edit2: Uh, a background now lists three ability scores for you to either +1/+1/+1 or +2/+1. They are truly making it half of your "origin", the other being your species.

Blatant Beast

2024-06-18, 09:39 AM

It's the only other Paladin to get Haste,
The Oath of Vengeance and Oath of Glory have the exact same 9th level Oath Spells on their respective lists, if I remember correctly.

Psyren

2024-06-18, 09:56 AM

Preorders are open!

Edit2: Uh, a background now lists three ability scores for you to either +1/+1/+1 or +2/+1. They are truly making it half of your "origin", the other being your species.

Default is Custom so it doesn't really matter.

LOL - I'm sure it wasn't purposeful, but this made me chuckle.

I'll go ahead and claim it :smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:

So, Glory can be the epitome of 'Lawful Stupid' more than Devotion? Interesting...

Yes, exactly! Glory can make for a great himbo that gets in over their head too.

Zevox

2024-06-18, 10:04 AM

If you're against the very notion that evil paladins should exist, then fine, I can see why such a character being a paladin would be offputting... but that ship has (thankfully) kinda sailed in the printed game.
Oh, I'm absolutely not. I said I'd prefer the fourth subclass have been Conquest precisely to get an evil Paladin subclass in there, remember? But an evil Paladin still needs a reason to be a Paladin - a cause they are the champion of and are sworn to fight for. A character such as Millstone85 described there does not sound they have any such thing. Just being evil in itself doesn't make one a Paladin, any more than just being good does.

GooeyChewie

2024-06-18, 10:24 AM

The first stream is happening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPBnLlqV0Z0

This one felt like an overview, and if youve been paying attention to the UAs there wasnt much new revealed. I dont mean that as a criticism; I think thats exactly what they were going for in this stream and well get more details in the more focused ones later this week.

Psyren

2024-06-18, 10:41 AM

Oh, I'm absolutely not. I said I'd prefer the fourth subclass have been Conquest precisely to get an evil Paladin subclass in there, remember? But an evil Paladin still needs a reason to be a Paladin - a cause they are the champion of and are sworn to fight for. A character such as Millstone85 described there does not sound they have any such thing. Just being evil in itself doesn't make one a Paladin, any more than just being good does.

I totally agree that a Paladin should have a reason to be a Paladin. But the Oath itself does not have to be that reason - it can be a means to an end.

On-topic: Working on the transcript now! Most of the video is gushing about the new toys like weapon mastery and crafting but there are indeed some new tidbits of information we didn't have before.

Evaar

2024-06-18, 11:50 AM

Thank you for reminding me that Oath of Glory gets haste. My party has a Glory Paladin and no one else who is likely to cast Haste on me, and I'm going to be playing a Rogue. This will be very helpful.

Regarding the thread topic - on the Weapon Mastery video about 2 minutes in there's an interaction that I had to rewatch. Crawford is explaining the Nick property and says it means you don't have to use your bonus action to make the offhand attack with a Nick weapon, great, we know that. But then Kenrick says "But they COULD" and Crawford agrees that you can. Kenrick then says "So you can throw three daggers" and Crawford again agrees.

So... does that mean with the Nick property you're essentially getting two offhand attacks as long as you devote your bonus action to it? I don't know how else to read that interaction, but I thought the purpose of the property was to free up your bonus action for stuff other than attacking. Maybe that's my misunderstanding.

Silverblade1234

2024-06-18, 12:11 PM

Some other sponsored videos are coming out. I don't have the widest awareness of the D&D media world, so I'd appreciate others adding affiliate videos they see!

D4: The *NEW* Rogue Assassin Revealed! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN7Q1tthY5k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN7Q1tthY5k)

Theodoxus

2024-06-18, 01:10 PM

Sounds to me like Nick does exactly what you're expecting, allowing you to use your BA for anything else. With the added benefit of being able to also use the BA to attack! Best of both worlds. Now, if this was 2014, I'd be miffed if it didn't generate Exhaustion :smallwink:

Psyren

2024-06-18, 01:11 PM

Okay, here's the choice tidbits from the PHB part of the presentation. The DMG and MM are a lot smaller, I'll do them later if there's anything particularly noteworthy. Timestamps included so you can hear the exact verbiage on certain things firsthand.

3:53 There are things in the new PHB that didnt go through UA at all, like the crafting rules.

4:10 There will be revised knockout/subdual rules (Todds specific example was using sneak attack to knock out a target. Unsure if this means you still need to get them all the way to zero first, can it be done from range now etc.)

4:38 Chris commenting on the Rules Glossary as being a centralized location for tables to find things.

6:50 They have codified some very popular houserules into the core rules - example, drinking a potion is now officially a bonus action

14:02 Reiteration that Background + Species = who your character was prior to adventuring, including the feat, skills and ASIs. Each background now suggests three ability scores, and you can go +1/+1/+1 or pick two of the three and go +2/+1. (They didnt say anything about custom backgrounds so Im holding out for the Origins video on that.)

18:00 The new creature appendix in the PHB is bigger than the old one, so that they could be very intentional about which monsters get included in the PHB. This allows them for example to have statblocks for every mount in the Equipment chapter in the PHB, as opposed to the player needing to hop back and forth. This affects Moon Druids as well (see below)

18:30 Confirmation that Find Familiar and Chain Familiar will also go back to specific creature stats rather than the mutable spirits they showed in the UA.

18:42 Confirmation that Moon Druids will have far more options right in the PHB, but will still need to visit the Monster Manual when they get high enough level because they didnt have enough pages in the PHB. (Sigh. At least the forms known will keep them under control if thats still a thing.)

19:58 The Beastmaster Ranger companion statblocks have been redesigned even further beyond what we did in Tashas Cauldron of Everything. (Oooooh!)

20:18 All the summoning spells have been redesigned even beyond what they were in Tashas. The goal is for companions and summons to deliver the goods when it comes to their damage and resilience.

22:02 Theyve been wanting to bring psionics into the core game for 10 years ago and now they have the ability to do that via the Soulknife/Psi-Warrior/Aberrant Mind/GOOlock.

26:07 There are way more feats. This book has 75 feats in it. Confirmation that these include both the level 1 feats as well as the Epic Boon feats that we now get access to at level 19. (presumably, these can be taken instead of pumping our key ability to 22, allowing for considerably more choice in high-level games.)

26:55 Some feats were carved out of previous class features, e.g. Fighting Styles, and more options have been created than there were in 2014.

28:09 Even people who participated throughout the full UA process are going to be surprised by some of the changes and additions.

28:53 The final version of Inspiration in the PHB didnt appear in any of the UAs. It doesnt grant Advantage anymore, because Advantage is so easy to get in the rest of the game it didnt feel impactful enough. Now, its just a plan reroll that you can use on anything (whether you have advantage or not), and you can even use it on non-d20 rolls like healing, damage, or even those totally random DM rolls like when they ask you to roll a d100 while traveling. (Assuming Champion Fighter and Human are still tied to Inspiration, those options just got a lot better.)

33:13 If you activate the new PHB in your existing campaign it will replace the old one.

33:48 Reiterating that 2014 and 2024 characters can be played side by side, but they strongly recommend that you use the 2024 rules as the base.

35:43 There will be longer Examples of Play than theyve ever done in the 1st chapter of the PHB.

38:12 New guidance to help more experienced tables start at 3rd level who want to get right to picking their subclass - or even much later levels. (Im curious if the start at high levels guidelines include any magic item recommendations!)

39:25 Further race tweaks - Orcs Adrenaline Rush now recharges on a short rest. Aasimar are now able to choose their Celestial Revelation when they activate the ability as opposed to being locked in.

Psyren

2024-06-18, 01:31 PM

Yes, if you have another means to BA attack then Nick will stack with it. This is why Weapon Mastery on a Monk is so strong, you can dual-wield Scimitars to get three attacks with your Attack action and then flurry for 3 more kicks/headbutts, ending up with six attacks at level 11 (seven attacks if hasted, and eight if you throw in your reaction for OA or Deflect.)

KorvinStarmast

2024-06-18, 01:59 PM

Moving the subclass to the PHB bears the risk of losing that context, however. Like other Tasha's sloppiness, yes.

As I said in my feedback to WOTC: "When one endeavors to make a thing idiot-proof, one succeeds only in creating a better idiot". Indeed.
Also, smite wasn't broken. When you have six encounters in an adventure day, or four, it is easy to run out of smites before the day is over. Seen it happen time and again.

Like, there are totally ways that you can make an Oath of Glory work Tenets-wise, it's just that the person who wrote the subclass didn't really bother.
As with other Tasha's sloppiness.

Payren, my responses to your points will be in bold italics.

3:53 There are things in the new PHB that didnt go through UA at all, like the crafting rules.
Not happy that crafting is in the PHB.

6:50 drinking a potion is now officially a bonus action
OK, that's likeable.

18:30 Confirmation that Find Familiar and Chain Familiar will also go back to specific creature stats rather than the mutable spirits they showed in the UA.
Good! :smallsmile:

19:58 The Beastmaster Ranger companion statblocks have been redesigned even further beyond what we did in Tashas Cauldron of Everything. (Oooooh!)
OK. Only took them ten years.

20:18 All the summoning spells have been redesigned even beyond what they were in Tashas. The goal is for companions and summons to deliver the goods when it comes to their damage and resilience.
Details needed, the Tasha era and beyond's general sloppiness does not fill me with confidence.

22:02 Theyve been wanting to bring psionics into the core game for 10 years ago and now they have the ability to do that via the Soulknife/Psi-Warrior/Aberrant Mind/GOOlock.

As long as aberrant mind does not have bonus spells, or all sorcerers have bonus spells, this is fine.

28:09 Even people who participated throughout the full UA process are going to be surprised by some of the changes and additions.
Great. More opportunities to drop the ball.

28:53 The final version of Inspiration in the PHB didnt appear in any of the UAs. lot better.)
It's a re roll. Fine.

33:13 If you activate the new PHB in your existing campaign it will replace the old one.

Says who? You aren't the DM at our table, JC. :smallfurious:

Reiterating that 2014 and 2024 characters can be played side by side, but they strongly recommend that you use the 2024 rules as the base.
Because we need book sales. AI generated art is expensive. :smallyuk:

35:43 There will be longer Examples of Play than theyve ever done in the 1st chapter of the PHB.
Good.

Zevox

2024-06-18, 02:01 PM

I totally agree that a Paladin should have a reason to be a Paladin. But the Oath itself does not have to be that reason - it can be a means to an end.
I absolutely believe the Oath needs to include such a reason, and should never only be a means to any end the Paladin chooses. Otherwise it's not much of an oath, as it literally lacks any purpose, and at that point you've missed the point of the entire class.

KorvinStarmast

2024-06-18, 02:09 PM

I absolutely believe the Oath needs to include such a reason, and should never only be a means to any end the Paladin chooses. Otherwise it's not much of an oath, as it literally lacks any purpose, and at that point you've missed the point of the entire class.

Yes.

As to evil paladins: the anti paladin was not in the books till much later than the introduction of the class, but there was something like that in a Dragon Magazine back in 77 or 78. It was built as an NPC.

When the paladin became a subclass of Cavalier in the UA 1985 book, there "evil paladin" still wasn't core. Won't comment further on paladins, since the 'agree to disagree" path seems the best approach at this point.

Oramac

2024-06-18, 02:23 PM

Also, smite wasn't broken. When you have six encounters in an adventure day, or four, it is easy to run out of smites before the day is over. Seen it happen time and again.

I mentioned that in my feedback several times, as well. Sadly, my one small voice is largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Evaar

2024-06-18, 02:44 PM

To be clear, that's not what I was referencing. I would expect that a Monk with weapon mastery would still get to use their Martial Arts attack (or Flurry). What the interaction I referenced seems to describe is using the weapon's Light feature to make a bonus action attack, ON TOP of the attack that you get from Nick. No "other means" required.

Now maybe Kenrick misunderstands the rules (has certainly happened before) and Crawford spoke without clarity (has certainly happened before) but that's what it seemed like they were saying.

Psyren

2024-06-18, 02:52 PM

Won't comment further on paladins, since the 'agree to disagree" path seems the best approach at this point.

Against my better judgement...

So what's the goal of Devotion? "Make the world more gooder so we can all feel warm and fuzzy?" Where does that one end?

Now maybe Kenrick misunderstands the rules (has certainly happened before) and Crawford spoke without clarity (has certainly happened before) but that's what it seemed like they were saying.

Yeah, I don't see Nick straight up getting you an additional attack that you didn't already have. But we'll see.

Zevox

2024-06-18, 03:12 PM

So what's the goal of Devotion? "Make the world more gooder so we can all feel warm and fuzzy?" Where does that one end?
Again, I'm not referring to some defined end point, but to a higher purpose and cause bigger than the Paladin themselves. And I think we both know I needn't explain what that is for the Devotion Paladin to you, as it's the single most traditional, obvious one.

Atranen

2024-06-18, 03:13 PM

So what's the goal of Devotion? "Make the world more gooder so we can all feel warm and fuzzy?" Where does that one end?

"Goal" doesn't imply (or require) a set endpoint. The goal of a Devotion Paladin is to protect what is good and beautiful against the forces of evil and corruption, and to drive evil out of this world. Moreover, a Devotion Paladin must do so while rejecting any tempting "ends justify the means" ideology, and acting as a moral exemplar themself.

Theodoxus

2024-06-18, 03:40 PM

Level of service and power received.

A Nature Cleric, an Ancients Paladin, a Fey Warlock - let's say for the sake of argument they're all pinging the same celestial being for power.

The Cleric is worshipping a Fey God of Nature, giving their entire devotion to the being and following its tenants to a T. In return, they're granted arguably the most power in return. Full spellcasting, heavy armor proficiency, some Druid magic not normally available to Clerics.

The Paladin has devoted their life to the ideals of Fey exuberance and being the life of the party. They aren't connected directly to the Divine like the Cleric, but because of their devotion receive some of the same power (spells) as the Cleric, albeit at a a lower power level (half caster).

The Warlock has entered a Pact with this Fey God of Nature (or more likely one of their more powerful servants). The Pact stipulates what each brings to the table; for the God, the Warlock becomes a living extension of their power, perhaps even a singular entity; not to proselytize but to do works of the god. for the Warlock, the God provides a means to an ends that allows near unbridled freedom without the encumbrance of a rigid religiosity that the Cleric must endure.

Each is a unique offering of power, for the recipient by the overbeing. Each has their place within the pantheon of mortals. The world would be less if any of them were combined, especially for the sake of 'well, they're kinda close to each other in worldview.'

Merlecory

2024-06-18, 03:49 PM

Doing this from a phone has never gone well before, but that won't stop me!

Here's a link to the dnd beyond page about weapon masteries: https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1742-your-guide-to-weapon-mastery-in-the-2024-players

I didn't see any mechanical changes from the UA, but they did add flavor text, and what if call suggestion/tutorial text. I can't say that I'm really a fan of WotC including things like "blaster caster". I thought one of the better parts of 5e was intentionally designing away from rolls and expected party comps. Language like this makes me feel like they lost sight of that.

Psyren

2024-06-18, 03:59 PM

Again, I'm not referring to some defined end point, but to a higher purpose and cause bigger than the Paladin themselves. And I think we both know I needn't explain what that is for the Devotion Paladin to you, as it's the single most traditional, obvious one.

The causes of Heroism and Discipline are also bigger than the paladin themselves in my view. It just so happens that honing their body (and encouraging their allies to do the same) is the most straightforward way to achieve that ideal.

Circling back to this post:

Now maybe Kenrick misunderstands the rules (has certainly happened before) and Crawford spoke without clarity (has certainly happened before) but that's what it seemed like they were saying.

We have confirmation from the DDB article Merlercory linked that you don't get a third attack from Nick:

"The Nick mastery property allows you to make the additional attack you receive from wielding two Light weapons as part of the initial attack action.

Keep in mind that this doesnt mean you can make a third attack as a Bonus Action, as the Light property specifies you only get one extra attack. But, while it may not pump your damage, this frees up your Bonus Action to use class/species abilities, such as the Rogues Cunning Action, while still getting an additional attack in."

paladinn

2024-06-18, 04:05 PM

Doing this from a phone has never gone well before, but that won't stop me!

Here's a link to the dnd beyond page about weapon masteries: https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1742-your-guide-to-weapon-mastery-in-the-2024-players

There are a number of facets to 2024 that seem like steps toward 4e-ising 5e.

Atranen

2024-06-18, 04:36 PM

Level of service and power received.

A Nature Cleric, an Ancients Paladin, a Fey Warlock - let's say for the sake of argument they're all pinging the same celestial being for power.

That's the idea, but then game balance comes into play, and this dictates that the "level of power" cannot be very different. Else a level 5 Cleric and a level 5 Paladin would differ substantially at the table.

You can say the Paladin receives less, but they also get access to auras, they can use spell slots for smites...and if we're considering things like "heavy armor proficiency" as part of the package, they end up very similar. Probably we shouldn't, in which case the Paladin remains a bit stronger after stripping all their divine powers.

We can also consider cases where they end up more similar. A warlock can have a pact that includes prosleytizing, for example, or includes following a more rigid set of rules. A Cleric can follow a chaotic being without such rigid requirements, where the deity does not demand so much. A Paladin can take an Oath to a being, pledging to serve it in xyz ways, and gain power from this oath. I think you can flavor any of them so they seem like the archetype of the other.

I'm opposed to this trend; I think it comes out of a general smearing of the uniqueness of each class, which the designers are doing to satisfy a wider array of player demands. For example, "I want to play Hercules as a Paladin". So I agree with your last statement--the world is less because they can be combined! And in my games, I'll police the flavor more closely. That means things like the Oath of Glory don't work well at my table.

Evaar

2024-06-18, 05:22 PM

Okay good. Wish I knew what the hell Kenrick and Crawford were talking about then.

Theodoxus

2024-06-18, 05:28 PM

I'll police the flavor more closely. That means things like the Oath of Glory don't work well at my table.

Totally. I toyed with allowing Ravnica into my homebrew - even had new guild names that matched my world places. And then I worked dragonmarks in too... and didn't like the feel of either; felt too bolted on. So, no Theros, no Eberron for me. But no shade to those who like that kind of thing... and apparently, a lot of people do, from the character builds floating around.

GeneralVryth

2024-06-18, 06:47 PM

Nothing really mind blowing. They are generally introducing good mechanics and improvements, I just wish in some cases they went farther (and I am assuming they won't much beyond what was in the UA).

One thing I do hope they do (and it's much more realistic to expect than a lot of things I would wish for), is building in an alternate bonus for a second instance of Extra Attack when multiclassing. I know it's been discussed to death in other threads, so no reason to do so here, just wish they do it.

Millstone85

2024-06-18, 06:54 PM

39:25 Further race tweaks - Orcs Adrenaline Rush now recharges on a short rest. Aasimar are now able to choose their Celestial Revelation when they activate the ability as opposed to being locked in.
OK, both seem to me to be useful improvements.Perhaps, yes, but I find it funny that the same aasimar companion who flew on luminous wings and bathed their weapons and spells in radiance would the next day go "Boo!" with pitch-black eyes and deal necrotic damage, then sleep on it and go back to the light as if nothing happened. Will aasimar soon become known as the yin-yang species?

GooeyChewie

2024-06-18, 08:06 PM

Okay good. Wish I knew what the hell Kenrick and Crawford were talking about then.

My guess is that at one point Nick did allow an additional attack, and then it proved too good so they changed it, and they were just thinking of the previous version.

Psyren

2024-06-18, 08:20 PM

Nothing really mind blowing. They are generally introducing good mechanics and improvements, I just wish in some cases they went farther (and I am assuming they won't much beyond what was in the UA).

We already saw one big change, what with Assassin having a completely new feature we never saw in the UA, and a big tease about the Beastmaster companions. So personally I'm excited that the UA isn't going to be the final version for a lot of these.

In addition, the rules changed out from under some of these classes too. The Inspiration rule is going to have a big impact on Champion for example.

Okay good. Wish I knew what the hell Kenrick and Crawford were talking about then.

If it's any consolation you're not the only one who interpreted them that way. I think that might have been why they spelled it out in the article.

Perhaps, yes, but I find it funny that the same aasimar companion who flew on luminous wings and bathed their weapons and spells in radiance would the next day go "Boo!" with pitch-black eyes and deal necrotic damage, then sleep on it and go back to the light as if nothing happened. Will aasimar soon become known as the yin-yang species?

I kinda view it like the Eladrin seasons thing where they can tap into lighter or darker emotions.

Witty Username

2024-06-18, 09:17 PM

Yeah, I like Ravnica, but the stuff doesn't really fit outside a Ravnica game.

Sans the spores druid, it hits Golgari well, but fungus and decay style for druid fits reasonably well in other places.

I think Glory paladin fits fine, for 5e anyway, I think oaths and themes just mean less than they used too for paladin. I tend to play it as oath of Heroism like it was described back in the UA.

Hurrashane

2024-06-18, 09:49 PM

I think it's neat. It can have as much thematic weight as you'd like it to. Like, the usually bright luminous wings Aasimar uses the darker transformation when angered or saddened, go all dark hado on people or other angry/evil/dark powerup of your choice. Or you have a Aasimar that usually uses the dark transformation because they're so edgy and troubled change to the more neutral and then the light as they become a happier person.

So yeah, I think it's neat that it's not an intrinsic unchanging part of their being. And it still could be if that's the way a table wants to play it.

Zevox

2024-06-18, 10:18 PM

Agreed. We're in danger of anything that makes "Paladin" distinct being subsumed by a general "they have to want something". I think there's a similar problem with Cleric and Warlock, which seem less and less distinct each time around. (Or Paladin and warlock for that matter. How is an "oath" to serve an otherworldly being in order to obtain some goal distinct from a "pact" with that being?)
I don't feel there's any issue there with the Cleric or Warlock there myself. Clerics are servants of a deity; Warlocks form a pact for power with some powerful supernatural entity that isn't a deity. Clerics usually follow a deity because their teachings resonate with them in some way and they wish to follow and/or spread those teachings, while Warlocks may have any number of kinds of relationships with their patrons, but it probably won't involve that sort of faith-based relationship. Fairly straightforward there to my mind.

Paladins also don't generally swear their oaths to serve any otherworldly beings. They may well follow a patron deity depending on the setting, such as in the Forgotten Realms (and I do prefer it that way myself), but none of the oaths' tenets so much as mention serving anyone, deity or otherwise. They're all about the cause the Paladin is to uphold and pursue. Even the Oath of the Crown's tenets are to uphold Law in general as the "mortar that holds civilization together," not a specific nation or ruler (even if in practice most such Paladins probably do serve a specific nation or ruler).

The causes of Heroism and Discipline are also bigger than the paladin themselves in my view.
Discipline I would disagree with you on - that is merely a tool or practice, not a cause. Like how courage, in and of itself, isn't a cause, but is a good thing to exercise in pursuit of an actual cause.

Heroism could be (albeit it would be the most generic possible cause lacking anything else to go with it), except for the fact that the tenets of the Oath of Glory neither mention nor even imply the word even once. And to top that off, as previously brought up, the definition of heroism for the types of "heroes" the Oath of Glory is based on is very different from the way we use the term today, and for that definition of it I would disagree that it's a cause bigger than the person themselves.

Psyren

2024-06-18, 10:27 PM

But the very first sentence of the subclass does?

"Paladins who take the Oath of Glory believe they and their companions are destined to achieve glory through deeds of heroism."

That line is also in the UA version.

Yeah, I like Ravnica, but the stuff doesn't really fit outside a Ravnica game.

Glory is from Theros I thought?

...

We got another WotC preview from the PHB courtesy of the Good Time Society channel, one of the brand new spells. Spoiling for anyone who would rather wait for the book for the text:

Tasha's Bubbling Cauldron
6th-level Conjuration (Warlock, Wizard)
Casting Time: 1 Action
Duration: 10 minutes
Range: 5ft
Components: V, S, M (a gilded ladle)

You conjure a claw-footed cauldron filled with bubbling liquid. The cauldron appears in an unoccupied space on the ground within 5 feet of you, and lasts for the duration. If no such space exists, the spell fails, but the spell slot isn't expended. The cauldron can't be moved, and disappears when the spell ends, along with the bubbling liquid inside of it.

The liquid in the cauldron duplicates the properties of a common or uncommon potion of your choice, such as Potion of Healing. As a bonus action, you or an ally can reach into the cauldron and withdraw one potion of that kind. The potion is contained in a vial that disappears when the potion is consumed. The cauldron can produce a number of these potions equal to your spellcasting ability modifier (minimum 1.) When the last of these potions is withdrawn from the cauldron, the cauldron disappears, and the spell ends. Potions withdrawn from the cauldron that aren't consumed disappear when you cast the spell again.

(Leave it to Tasha to have a World of Warcraft-style cauldron you can whip out for your group before a boss pull.)

At first glance I thought this was weak for a 6th-level spell., but it's growing on me a bit. While the cauldron itself only lasts 10 minutes, the 5 potions you and the party pull out of it actually last indefinitely until drunk or until you make a new cauldron, and their effects tend to last an hour without concentration, so if you have any downtime or any sufficiently-high slots left over at the end of a day, this could be a good use for them - having a bunch of extra potions handy before a boss. Sticking to core, the standout for me would be 5x Potion of Resistance for concentration-free resistance to an energy damage type of your choice* for the entire party for 1 hour. Other interesting choices could be Potions of Climbing for the next best thing to mass flight, Potions of Growth for your melee (concentration-free Enlarge for an hour), or of course Greater Healing potions so that your Wizard actually has a way to restore a bunch of HP to the group in a pinch (up to 20d4+20.)

Going outside of core, Potions of Psionic Fortitude could be good to hand out before a Mindflayer or Hag fight, Potions of Polychromy before a group stealth scene, or just plain Potions of Advantage for whatever.

*Unless the cauldron inherits the randomness aspect of the resistance potion, which makes this a lot less useful of course.

Zevox

2024-06-18, 11:30 PM

But the very first sentence of the subclass does?

"Paladins who take the Oath of Glory believe they and their companions are destined to achieve glory through deeds of heroism."

That line is also in the UA version.
Doesn't matter. The tenets are the description we're given of the actual oath itself, not the preceding flavor text about the Paladins who follow it. This is also why I said that if "destiny" in the way Millstone85 brought it up earlier is supposed to be central to the oath, it needed to be mentioned in the tenets.

Plus, even if you won't agree with me on that, the second part of my remark on that subject remains every bit as important.

Arkhios

2024-06-18, 11:37 PM

Zevox

2024-06-18, 11:40 PM

A quick dip-in, before I need to start get ready for work: I wish they won't leave psionics at the four subclasses, going forward. I'm hoping that they'll tackle full-fledged psionic classes in a near-future book of their own. I don't know if there have been talk about such a book, yet, but I really do hope so.
Considering they consider the Aberrant Mind Sorcerer and Great Old One Warlock "psionic" and dumped their one attempt at a true psionic class completely years ago, I'm not holding my breath on that. The last Mystic UA is probably the closest we'll ever get to that.

Psyren

2024-06-18, 11:45 PM

I think the opening sentence of a subclass does matter, so we'll have to agree to disagree. Glory is here to stay.

I'd be okay with that as long as they still use the spellcasting system to cast, much like Paizo's Psychic Magic did. IMO, it's literally the only way to guarantee psionic/psychic classes get ongoing support and/or stay balanced with the rest of the system.

Speaking of Great Old One, that was our second subclass preview today (after the Assassin, whose changes I went over in the Rogue thread.) It ended up identical to the UA except that it lost Black Tentacles as a subclass preparation in exchange for Summon Aberration. (I'm still iffy on how well those summons will work with Pact Slots, but I guess we'll find out when we see how they modified their statblocks.)

Arkhios

2024-06-19, 12:01 AM

I think the opening sentence of a subclass does matter, so we'll have to agree to disagree. Glory is here to stay.

Yeah, I don't have any qualms about psionics being a new form of spellcasting source, I just feel that the subclass approach is bit of a "plaster" over a way bigger wound. Besides, we still don't have an intelligence focused psionics user (whether it's spellcasting, pact magic, or neither). Psi Knight and Soulknife don't count; they are still primarily fighters or rogues, and therefore their primary focus still lies in either strength or dexterity, with the intelligence admittedly close behind. But behind.

I don't expect them to cover psionic classes in as large scale as mystic UA, but I do hope that they have at least one unique psionic (spellcaster) class coming at some point, one that'd use intelligence as their primary ability. If only they'd introduce Psion, I'd be happy. In a way similar to how they introduced Artificer as a lone class, as part of a setting book. I know for a fact, that there are other settings that utilize psionics than the painfully obvious Dark Sun (I understand that it's the insensitive topics hard-boiled into the setting lore that is largely preventing them to use Dark Sun again, as is, without a huge overhaul of the lore). Why not rekindle Mystara instead? IIRC, the whole setting is built upon magic users vs psionics user rivalries.

animewatcha

2024-06-19, 01:47 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nUsURlGMyA

anyone with a bit of creativity will be able to link any attribute increase to any background. Meaning that restricting the ASI increase via backgrounds is awfully not being very inclusive.

Theodoxus

2024-06-19, 08:55 AM

Since I'm converting Sorcery into psionics for my games, it's a pretty simple solution to split the class into two aspects.

Since I don't know (I've not been keeping too keen a look at the new hotness) if the 4 sorcerer subclasses are getting a list of spells known like Aberrant and Clockwork or not, my first blush for separating Sorcerer from Psionist would be the subclasses that don't get extra spells remain Sorcerers, using spell slots, Sorcery Points, and metamagic. Psions would be the subclasses that get extra spells. They would use spell points instead of slots, and not get metamagic (debatable if they'd then also not need sorcery points - though the extra pool of spell points would be nice). There might be some additional changes to the base Sorcerer class that would need to be done to make them sufficiently different from Psions (one reason I'm just porting the whole kit and caboodle instead of splitting it like this). But Sorcery has also felt more psionic in nature than 'magical', just due to the 'I will up magic to do my bidding' feel.

I still like giving psions Subtle Spell for free. Though maybe just for material components* and verbal or somatic (chosen at casting) - so psions are either pointing/waggling fingers, or mumbling their manifestations.
*Expensive/consumed material components would still be required.

Millstone85

2024-06-19, 09:26 AM

I liked the way 4e did psionics. In 5e terms, psionic classes got upcastable cantrips. That felt sufficiently unique and like you had these mental muscles that you could always use but sometimes put extra effort in.

I remember UA trying that in the form of packages where, for example, learning mage hand would also give you access to improved versions of mage hand and then to telekinesis. Neat, if only the presentation had been clearer.

But that ship has sailed. 5e psionics are just subclasses with a psychic theme. I am, at least, glad that it motivated them to rework the GOO patron.

Theodoxus

2024-06-19, 10:53 AM

In that case, might I suggest the Spheres of Power as a place to look for powers that grow as you level up? It would work great, if you're less worried about matching spells to spells and would be ok with a new casting system completely. I didn't utilize it because it's definitely a learning curve for folks who only know 5E spells - but it can definitely emulate a more psionic (or even Spellfire) vibe.

GooeyChewie

2024-06-19, 11:02 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nUsURlGMyA

anyone with a bit of creativity will be able to link any attribute increase to any background. Meaning that restricting the ASI increase via backgrounds is awfully not being very inclusive.

I missed this detail the first time around. The first UA had the background set up such that you made your own, with the pre-existing backgrounds merely being examples of how you could make a background. That method gave players the most flexibility possible. Now it appears background limit your ASIs to three of the six ability scores. At 4:10 they claim that the flexibility of the new backgrounds "goes beyond anything we previewed in Unearthed Arcana," but that's straight up not true. It does provide more flexibility than the 2014 species-based fixed-ASI rules did, but less flexibility than the UA.

The example provided is the Guide, which allows you to boost Dex, Con and/or Wisdom. That's good for Rogue, Monk, Ranger, Druid and Cleric. It can be good for a Dex-based Fighter, but not a Str-based Fighter. It's not particularly good for Barbarian (needs Str), Paladin (needs Str and/or Cha), Wizard (needs Int), Sorcerer (needs Cha), Warlock (needs Cha) or Bard (needs Cha). It works for maybe half the classes, depending on how you count Fighter.

I see a lot of comments on the video that their tables are most likely going to immediately move to allowing free-floating ASIs regardless of stated background, and I suspect most tables (including mine) will do the same. It's easy to work around, and it sounds like the DMG will even tell you how to work around it, but it's still... disappointing.

Psyren

2024-06-19, 12:01 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nUsURlGMyA

anyone with a bit of creativity will be able to link any attribute increase to any background. Meaning that restricting the ASI increase via backgrounds is awfully not being very inclusive.

IIRC the make-your-own-background rule is still there, it's just in the DMG now.

The Fighter video just dropped and it includes some juicy tidbits, like how for a while there they were considering Battlemaster Maneuvers as baseline for the whole class.

animewatcha

2024-06-19, 12:40 PM

Psyren

2024-06-19, 12:53 PM

I wouldn't call Tactical Master a nerf at all. Basically, they can choose on the fly (i.e. every time they hit) to apply Sap/Slow/Push instead of whatever property is on the weapon they're using. Basically it means they have those three always prepared, and they can use a weapon with one of the others like a Topple or Vex weapon instead and never be without those first three.

Master of Armaments meanwhile only let you swap on a Long Rest, and you were locked into whatever change you made for that whole day. I'd much rather have TM.

Millstone85

2024-06-19, 01:05 PM

Slowly going through fighter video now and apparently level 9 fighter feature that apparently allowed for 'any weapon mastery replacement' for current weapon got nerfed into 3 of the more basic ones. Nerfing fighter and nerfing weapon choice. Their thought process was in regards to battlemaster. However, not every fighter is gonna be battlemaster...which should be in the base fighter anyway.At 15:35 (https://youtu.be/ZLq837P_o94?t=935), Crawford goes on a tangent about moving maneuvers to the base class and why they ultimately didn't do it. As before, it is because they believe a large number of players want the option of making a very simple character. :smallsigh:

animewatcha

2024-06-19, 01:22 PM

Master of Armaments meanwhile only let you swap on a Long Rest, and you were locked into whatever change you made for that whole day. I'd much rather have TM.

Half o proficiency bonus rounded down of maneuvers you know appliable instead of just those three. Change-able each short / long rest. There we go.

While tactical mind is somewhat better than master of armaments 'overall', it can reduce desire to use a weapon that 'already' has one of those weapon masteries.

Psyren

2024-06-19, 01:46 PM

At 15:35 (https://youtu.be/ZLq837P_o94?t=935), Crawford goes on a tangent about moving maneuvers to the base class and why they ultimately didn't do it. As before, it is because they believe a large number of players want the option of making a very simple character. :smallsigh:

"They believe" implies they don't have data saying this is exactly the case :smalltongue:

Half o proficiency bonus rounded down of maneuvers you know appliable instead of just those three. Change-able each short / long rest. There we go.

I'll still take at-will/on-hit swapping over anything rest-based.

While tactical mind is somewhat better than master of armaments 'overall', it can reduce desire to use a weapon that 'already' has one of those weapon masteries.

While I agree the optimal approach would be to use one completely outside of those three, you can still benefit even picking one of those three, because it gives you access to the other two on the fly. But I would personally aim for Topple, Graze or Vex.

GooeyChewie

2024-06-19, 01:54 PM

IIRC the make-your-own-background rule is still there, it's just in the DMG now.
That's what it sounds like, yes. Putting it in the DMG feels like an extra step and I'm not sure there's any real benefit to it. I suppose it makes it easier for the DM to soft-ban certain ASI/origin feat combos?

I do understand that argument. I don't particularly agree with it, for reasons that would take too long to explain presently, but I at least understand it.

The argument I don't understand is that giving base class Fighter access to Maneuvers would kill Battlemaster as a subclass. They absolutely could have given base Fighter a simplified version of the Maneuver system, with Battlemaster additions to that system to make them more complex and robust than a standard Fighter.

Psyren

2024-06-19, 02:02 PM

I do understand that argument. I don't particularly agree with it, for reasons that would take too long to explain presently, but I at least understand it.

They did do that, it's called Martial Adept (and the base Fighter getting bonus feats to pick it up with.)

I'm hoping MA gets a buff, but that's how you get limited maneuvers onto Champion etc. And technically, Superior Technique is still around too if you want more.

KorvinStarmast

2024-06-19, 02:59 PM

I kinda view it like the Eladrin seasons thing where they can tap into lighter or darker emotions. Yep.

"They believe" implies they don't have data saying this is exactly the case :smalltongue: Quite a few of the people I play with prefer precisely that.

Theodoxus

2024-06-19, 03:01 PM

Speaking of Martial Adept, I hope one of new feats is something like 'Sneaky Adept' that grants a couple of SA dice, with a stipulation something along the lines of 'You can't use more dice with Sneak Attack than half your level, rounded up.' This would do a few things: allow non-Rogues the ability to deal 2d6 more damage once per round. Allow Rogues to get a couple more dice for things like Cunning Strike so they can do more control without losing as much damage. And allow Rogues to MC three or four levels without sacrificing sneak attack progression; allowing for more builds to be viable where they previously weren't. Being a feat, there's an opportunity cost, so it works all around.

GooeyChewie

2024-06-19, 03:10 PM

They did do that, it's called Martial Adept (and the base Fighter getting bonus feats to pick it up with.)

I'm hoping MA gets a buff, but that's how you get limited maneuvers onto Champion etc. And technically, Superior Technique is still around too if you want more.

The existence of Martial Adept does not mean that WotC gave Maneuvers to base Fighter, any more so than the existence of Magic Initiate means WotC gave spellcasting to base Fighter. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad there is a way to get Maneuvers on Fighters who are not Battlemasters, but it absolutely is not the same thing as making Maneuvers part of the base class.

Hurrashane

2024-06-19, 03:13 PM

They did do that, it's called Martial Adept (and the base Fighter getting bonus feats to pick it up with.)

I'm hoping MA gets a buff, but that's how you get limited maneuvers onto Champion etc. And technically, Superior Technique is still around too if you want more.

I hope they change the martial adept feat to let it be taken multiple times. That way you could get a more sizable chunk of maneuvers and dice on a champion or just get a mountain of them on the battle master.

Or possibly a higher level version of it that enhances the base feat.

Psyren

2024-06-19, 04:20 PM

I could see room for 5e to get its own version of PF's Accomplished Sneak Attacker or similar, sure.

It's as close as we're going to get, or should get. I'd certainly be in favor of buffing them, but the current MA+ST gets you 3 maneuvers and 2 superiority dice to fuel them with. I don't think a universal version of the system that any Fighter subclass (or any other martial for that matter) could take would go much beyond that.

Pex

2024-06-19, 04:50 PM

I presume it's both - a subclass that didn't need either the revision OR the upgrade getting it while the subclass that needs it doesn't and will most likely never get it.

I'm currently playing a Paladin (Glory)/Bard (Glamour). He's a himbo. I don't play him as a grappler. He's a typical weapon and shield paladin. In combat I use the channel for the occasional shove but mostly to avoid being grappled. Out of combat I use it as a ribbon to wrestle NPCs and show off. He sings, he dances, he flexes.

I play it as his role is to inspire others to greatness. I have Inspiring Leader accordingly, and Bard facilitates the part. He's the Alpha Jock good at what he does and encourages others to follow his example. He's fine with hero worship to give joy to others. John Cena in his prime.

Theodoxus

2024-06-19, 05:16 PM

Going back to recharging dice, I think that would be fantastic for both Superior and Psionic dice. Could even do it so you're getting better chances on the recharge as you're leveling up. (AFB, so just examples - extrapolate as necessary)

So, you start with 1 d6, recharges on a 5-6, at the end of your turn you roll. A 33% chance means you're using a manuever once every 3 rounds on average. At the next boost (6?) you get 1 d8, recharges on a 5-8. 50/50 now. Next boost at 13? you get 1 d10, recharges on a 4-10. A 60% recharge rate. Finally, at 17th? level, you get a d12, recharge on a 4-12 doubling your original chances to 66%. And then, regardless, you always have the die when you roll initiative.

I think it ends up being a slight boon for SD and a smidge of a nerf to PD, but I might be wrong.

Millstone85

2024-06-19, 05:36 PM

Some interesting pictures floating around on the net:

Page 49 of the new PHB, listing all classes and subclasses. (https://duet-cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/0x0:1535x1023/2400x1599/filters:focal(768x512:769x513):format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25496028/CHARACTER_CLASSES.png)

Page 1 of the new character sheet. (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GQd95pUW8AAAIN9?format=jpg&name=large)

An incomplete view of the sheet's next page. (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GQcV_lLXAAAkO58?format=jpg&name=large)

Merlecory

2024-06-19, 05:42 PM

Here is some new info about bards, and Dance bard specifically. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky7Af1aU5Z0)

No real talk about the bse class mechanics (what is spell casting going to look like?). I assume WotC want that for themselves.

Dance bard discusions starts at about the 8 minute mark.

3rd lvel still gets unarmourd defence and psuedo-martial arts (better than barbarian unarmored defence)

6th level has a reaction movement ability and a way to boost initiatives via spending inspiration

14th level now has super evaion (You and an ally within 5ft get evasion)

I had forgotten how large the gap between bard sublcass features were. Yet another victim of non-standardized subclass levels...

schm0

2024-06-19, 05:45 PM

Regarding the quote from Crawford re: design choices for the fighter and why they didn't put manuevers on the class:

"There was actually an early version of the revised fighter where we (and I know actually there are many 5e fans who expected us to do this, right?) considered taking the Battlemaster and turning its maneuver system into the Baseline for the whole class. And we actually spent quite a bit of time several of several years ago assuming that was the direction we were going in with the fighter. We, as you can see, backed away from that and the main reason we did so is we realized that would undermine our goal of providing different levels of complexity for people and different play Styles within the fighter. Because even though there are a segment of fans, you included, who love the Battle Master, there also many fighter players who have no interest in playing the battle master or having this whole array of Maneuvers to manage. In many ways, I'm glad for the battle Master's sake that we did not absorb it into the base class, because it allowed us to protect the Battle Master as the Battle Master."

So it's not about numbers, it was a specific design goal.

Millstone85

2024-06-19, 06:05 PM

"They believe" implies they don't have data saying this is exactly the case :smalltongue:

Regarding the quote from Crawford re: design choices for the fighter and why they didn't put manuevers on the class:

Psyren

2024-06-19, 06:13 PM

Regarding the quote from Crawford re: design choices for the fighter and why they didn't put manuevers on the class:

So it's not about numbers, it was a specific design goal.

They're acting on the feedback of the "people" that he's referring to in your bolded sentence, and the "many fighter players" in the sentence immediately after it. We have the popularity numbers for both the existing and playtest Champions.

I think it ends up being a slight boon for SD and a smidge of a nerf to PD, but I might be wrong.

I'm not sure how all that's better than simply getting them back on a short rest.

Here is some new info about bards, and Dance bard specifically. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky7Af1aU5Z0)

No real talk about the bse class mechanics (what is spell casting going to look like?). I assume WotC want that for themselves.

Dance bard discusions starts at about the 8 minute mark.

3rd lvel still gets unarmourd defence and psuedo-martial arts (better than barbarian unarmored defence)

6th level has a reaction movement ability and a way to boost initiatives via spending inspiration

14th level now has super evaion (You and an ally within 5ft get evasion)

I had forgotten how large the gap between bard sublcass features were. Yet another victim of non-standardized subclass levels...

Dance Bard is a huge disappointment to me.

The evasion thing is a massive nerf relative to the playtest - in the UA, Dance Bard got that same feature at 6th level rather than 14th. And in its place, the 14th level subcapstone feature was to always have Irresistible Dance prepared, as well as the ability to cast it without slots, which was much more powerful.

On top of that nerf, it still doesn't have Extra Attack. Sure, you can attack as part of the same bonus action you use to inspire, but inspiring on every turn is a fast way to run out of your uses. Keep in mind you're starting most fights down a die for the initiative boost too.

You did miss one buff at 3rd level - they get advantage on any Performance checks that involve dancing. (Meh.)

Psyren

2024-06-19, 06:34 PM

Oh right, something I forgot to reply to earlier:

Not happy that crafting is in the PHB.

They've stressed that the main crafting rules are in the DMG, the PHB crafting is just getting a selection of low-rarity potions and scrolls.

Merlecory

2024-06-19, 06:36 PM

Dance Bard is a huge disappointment to me.

You did miss one buff at 3rd level - they get advantage on any Performance checks that involve dancing. (Meh.)
I didn't miss the performace buff, I just didn't care:smallbiggrin:

I am aware of the big nerf, though it was feedbcak I gave. A fullcaster subclass gettign evasion before Monks and Rogues felt very wrong te me. As a 10th level feature, maybe I could see that working?

At 4:30 ish in the fighter video, the talk about the new Tacticale Master feature, and say that the UA version of the ability was creatign "a number of headaches for the system down the line". Anyone care to speculate with me on that? Were they trying to find some way to group weapons that let people have a nice collection to chose from? I wish that they had spent more time htere, but alas.

Psyren

2024-06-19, 08:09 PM

I didn't miss the performace buff, I just didn't care:smallbiggrin:

Yeah I don't mind them getting Evasion later than Monks do, but as the subclass capstone? It just feels lackluster when the top ability of a subclass should feel a lot more dramatic. I agree that 10th level would have been an okay sweet spot.

I'm always down to speculate. My off-the-cuff guesses:

1) It's more of a tracking burden than they planned for, especially for their "simple fighter." It's okay if you're swapping the properties of 1-2 weapons, but the more you have the more there are to remember.

2) It incentivizes weird "golf bag" behavior. Say I'm a Crusher pop-up-and-fall build - here's my regular Topple Maul for most fights, but for high AC enemies I'll bring the Graze Maul so I can do my build's pop-up thing more easily to them, and when I'm facing a bunch of weak minions I'll get out the Cleave Maul...

3) They could be planning additional masteries at some point down the line (much like how they created additional fighting styles and BM maneuvers) and that would have increased the tracking/complexity burden even more.

Silverblade1234

2024-06-19, 08:21 PM

I'm now hoping that bards get extra attack by default. That would help the dance bard a lot, free up space in the valor bard for something actually cool, and play into the class' history and identity as a versatile hero. I'm not necessarily optimistic, though.

Psyren

2024-06-19, 10:38 PM

I think the only way they could justify Bards getting EA baseline, as opposed to needing the substantial budget of a subclass feature for it, would be for them to become half-casters, or at the very least pact casters similar to Warlocks. Staying as fullcasters baseline while getting EA also baseline would put them too far out of step with the current class design paradigm.

Arkhios

2024-06-20, 09:31 AM

Just checked out the reveal on Fighter, and I must say: Oh, wow! I wasn't expecting to be this excited about the class. Fighter has been a little bit on the boring side for me for the last decade, and I've kept it on the back burner because of it. Still, I've played a few, but I never got that same excited feeling that I had when playing the Paladin I made as my first - and still the favorite - 5e character. I might have to seriously reconsider that soon, but let's see how the Paladin turns out in an hour and a half.

Psyren

2024-06-20, 10:16 AM

Even the new Champion has me excited; I'm already picturing a Human Champion as some kind of Inspiration Battery build for the party, assuming they kept that second part of the rule.

Oramac

2024-06-20, 10:59 AM

Even the new Champion has me excited; I'm already picturing a Human Champion as some kind of Inspiration Battery build for the party, assuming they kept that second part of the rule.

Agreed. The new Heroic Inspiration mechanic seems like it'll be a lot of fun, and potentially abusable.

Also, the paladin video is going live in mere moments:

https://youtu.be/uLn6dC7XkKc?si=Yp1G9xzlEggxq-k7

P. G. Macer

2024-06-20, 11:32 AM

Just finished the paladin video live; Im still very bitter about the divine smite nerf, especially as I was a judicious smiter and didnt abuse it with 5-minute workdays. Im also honestly more than a little miffed that Crawford is refusing to acknowledge turning it to a spell is a nerf. I dont give much of a darn about the QoL improvements because paladin in 2014 was IMO so close to the ideal in terms of balance in terms of drawbacks and advantages that this one looks like a mess in comparison. The solution wasnt to drag the paladin down to the other martials level, but should have been to bring fighter, barbarian, et al. up to paladin level of strength.

Psyren

2024-06-20, 11:49 AM

Paladin stuff!

Base Paladin

Paladin casting obtained at 1st level
More spell slots from multiclass for both Paladin and Ranger (presumably due to rounding up?)
Can learn ALL Fighting Styles, OR can learn Cleric cantrips instead
Smite is a spell (always prepared) and they get 1/day free smite. No word on if the free one scales
2x Channel Divinity, regain 1 per SR + all per LR. 2x becomes 3x at 11th
Divine Sense uses CD and lasts 10 minutes instead of 1 round
Find Steed always prepared, 1x free casting per day
New Ability, Abjure Foes uses CD. No word on if its different than the playtest.
All Paladin Auras combined. Subclass auras now just add abilities to the base aura.
Auras use the "new" Area of Effect - Emanation

Devotion

Sacred Weapon is now part of attack action, i.e. no action cost to activate
New feature, Smite of Protection (replaces Purity of Spirit) - When you smite, your aura grants half cover to you and allies
Holy Nimbus is a bonus action now

Glory

Peerless Athlete lasts an hour now (same as UA)
Aura of Alacrity - benefits allies who enter the aura get the speed boost, rewards positioning.
New Oath spell for Glory, Yolandes Regal Presence (5th) - Overawe enemies to make them fall on their knees and take psychic damage

Ancients

Aura of Warding now gives resistance to Necrotic/Psychic/Radiant
Increased range of Natures Wrath
Undying Sentinel you come back with a bunch of HP instead of 1

Vengeance

Vow of Enmity no longer an action, is activated as part of attacking
If Enmity target dies, you can transfer it to a new target
Avenging Angel is now a BA to activate and lasts for an entire Hour, still includes flight

sithlordnergal

2024-06-20, 11:53 AM

Oh, I hate the change to Divine Smite. They nerfed it into the ground so hard. You can no longer use Divine Smite with Smite spells, it can be Counterspelled, its stopped by Silence due to it being Verbal, and its your Bonus Action.

But Paladin got nerfed more than that. Lay on Hands no longer cures Disease, it just heals or removes the effects of Poison.

They are sort of a mix between a Prepared Caster and Spells Known. They know a specific number of spells based on their level, but they can change one spell after a long rest.

Find Steed was made into an even more niche spell. Paladins always have it prepared, and can cast it for free once per day, but they can only summon a Large Mount. You wanna know why I hardly ever used Find Steed in any edition? Its because most places you adventure don't really have the room to fit a Large Steed. My Paladin that used Find Steed the most was a Goblin, because I could summon a Medium Steed.

Psyren

2024-06-20, 11:58 AM

FYI, they didn't actually confirm anything about the components it uses. Be careful about relying too much on the playtest.

But Paladin got nerfed more than that. Lay on Hands no longer cures Disease, it just heals or removes the effects of Poison.

Diseases in general are getting removed except as like a plot thing (in which case they would have been unaffected by class stuff anyway.)

They didn't confirm anything about the statblock either; again, things change after the playtest.

GeneralVryth

2024-06-20, 12:00 PM

To add a contrasting view as someone who liked (and still does) the Paladin, I like the change to Divine Smite. I like increased consistency. The Paladin also looks to be getting a number of buffs (it was already strong) as well, so the Divine Smite nerf on net isn't much of one.

Oramac

2024-06-20, 12:08 PM

Agreed. My first houserule will be simply: baseline smite is not a spell.

Silverblade1234

2024-06-20, 12:12 PM

Incredibly disappointed with the divine smite change. I was totally fine with making it 1/turn to limit burst, but I hate that I now have to choose between divine smite and casting a spell to help my friends (shield of faith, healing word, etc.) or using another bonus action (polearm master attack, great weapon master attack, etc.). This is a pretty crippling blow to some traditional and common paladin builds and gameplay patterns, and I would argue a severe overcorrection.

Arkhios

2024-06-20, 01:11 PM

To be fair, I didn't catch Crawford saying anything about if Divine Smite is an Action, a Bonus Action, or no Action at all, even if it's a spell.

Given how it seems that "replacing an attack with X" where X is e.g. dragonborn's breath, cantrip or spell seems to be liberally thrown around, I wouldn't rule the same possibility out for divine smite, as well.

Again, don't take playtest wording for granted. Anything can change.

Hurrashane

2024-06-20, 01:55 PM

To be fair, I didn't catch Crawford saying anything about if Divine Smite is an Action, a Bonus Action, or no Action at all, even if it's a spell.

Again, don't take playtest wording for granted. Anything can change.

From the news on the paladin on D&D beyond:

"it now requires a Bonus Action to use, but that Bonus Action can be taken immediately after you hit a creature with an attack roll, bringing it mostly in line with the original Divine Smite's mechanics"

Oramac

2024-06-20, 02:00 PM

From the news on the paladin on D&D beyond:

Link (https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1749-2024-paladin-vs-2014-paladin-whats-new).

Ugh. **** WOTC. Everything else they've officially revealed so far I actually like, but this. Man. This is just stupid.

Psyren

2024-06-20, 02:06 PM

From the news on the paladin on D&D beyond:

Thanks for the heads up about the article going live!
Glad to see Lay on Hands being a bonus action stuck.

It looks like throwSmites didn't survive :smallfrown:

Link (https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1749-2024-paladin-vs-2014-paladin-whats-new).

Ugh. **** WOTC. Everything else they've officially revealed so far I actually like, but this. Man. This is just stupid.

Is it the 1/round Smite that you hate, or the lack of a reaction Smite? Or both?

Oramac

2024-06-20, 02:16 PM

Is it the 1/round Smite that you hate, or the lack of a reaction Smite? Or both?

All of the above, combined.

Any one of those things I'd have been totally fine with. I could even handle it being a spell, despite not liking that part. Being a spell and a BA means a few things that I think WOTC has overlooked, or certainly over/undervalued.

- If I smite, I can't use LOH (since it's now a BA as well). This is probably fine. Interesting choices and all that.
- Smite can be Counterspelled. We won't know the extent of this until we see the official wording of Counterspell, but regardless, it's a significant nerf.
- As a spell, one could argue that Smite can now be used with Metamagic options.
- Additionally, as a spell it will scale with spell level, meaning that a Sorcadin (or other multiclass) will be straight up better at smiting than anything else.
- The BA means it generally can't be used with other interesting multiclass options, like a Rogue/Paladin.

Even if I concede that 2014 Smite was overpowered (which I don't), the 2024 version is an overcorrection in every sense of the word.

EDIT: also what SilverBlade said below.

Silverblade1234

2024-06-20, 02:16 PM

Is it the 1/round Smite that you hate, or the lack of a reaction Smite? Or both?

For me it's mostly that it's a bonus action (preventing me from also using shield of faith, healing word, polearm master, shield master shove, etc. etc.), but I also don't love that it's a spell (and therefore doesn't work in an antimagic zone, against a globe of invulnerability, against a rakshasa, etc.). I genuinely don't care about a 1/turn restriction, but limiting my gameplay by making it take a BA hurts. And yes, choices are generally good, but to me this choice feels punitive rather than rewarding.

Edit: What Oramac said above!

Theodoxus

2024-06-20, 02:24 PM

It's gonna be 3.PF -> 5E all over again...

Paladin: "I attack the creature, does a 19 hit?"
DM: "Yup, roll damage."
Paladin: "I'm gonna smite it."
DM: "Groovy, roll more damage"
Paladin: "15 points, poop roll. I use Extra Attack and swing again."
DM: "Ok"
Paladin: "Ohh, nat 20, crit! I smite again!"
DM: "Oh, you can't, it's 1/round now."
Paladin: "But last week I could... stupid nerf."

Forget what you knew last week, it's a whole new game folks. Play the RAW not the RARemembered.

GooeyChewie

2024-06-20, 02:41 PM

I was going to do my own post about it, but then I realized I could just say

EDIT: also what SilverBlade said below.

Edit: What Oramac said above!

What both of them said!

Psyren

2024-06-20, 02:44 PM

Edit: What Oramac said!

Two things:

1) At least in the playtest, Shield Master isn't a Bonus Action anymore - it works kinda like Nick. Assuming that made it to print, Paladins should be able to sword-and-board to the fullest without competing with their Smite, which is exactly what I would want Paladins to be doing.

2) I actually kinda like that Smite conflicts with PAM - I'll explain why. With every other Str-based martial I feel that pressure to take PAM+GWM or else I'm being suboptimal, and thus all the sword-and-board builds, Greatswords/Greataxes, Mauls etc are left gathering dust because halberds and glaives and pikes (and lucerne hammers whenever we get those?) just feel strictly better. With the Paladin that's not the case - because PAM isn't as useful for them, now I have a Str-based class that actually wants to use those other weapons.

All of the above, combined.

I'm with you on the reaction bit but not the 1/round bit. Smite novas were a real problem, maybe not at your table but at enough for them to do something about the default rule.

- If I smite, I can't use LOH (since it's now a BA as well). This is probably fine. Interesting choices and all that.

I mean... you couldn't Smite + LoH before either though when LoH took up your action, barring OA stuff. I'd much rather have my action free on LoH turns - to attack normally, cast a spell, Disengage, Dodge etc. It makes moving around to use my LoH on an endangered ally much easier imo.

- Smite can be Counterspelled. We won't know the extent of this until we see the official wording of Counterspell, but regardless, it's a significant nerf.

We won't know that until we see the spell components - but even if it is counterable, honestly I would much rather the enemy burn a counterspell on my paladin than on an actual caster. Keep in mind too that counterspell was nerfed in the playtest.

- As a spell, one could argue that Smite can now be used with Metamagic options.

That sounds like a buff to me, both for Sorcadins and Metamagic Adept paladins.

- Additionally, as a spell it will scale with spell level, meaning that a Sorcadin (or other multiclass) will be straight up better at smiting than anything else.

Again though, that was already the case, since those multiclasses got more higher slots to use on it.

- The BA means it generally can't be used with other interesting multiclass options, like a Rogue/Paladin.

You have a strange definition of interesting :smallbiggrin:
But sure, I can see some disappointment wrt a Barbadin who won't be able to smite while raging anymore.

Waterdeep Merch

2024-06-20, 03:14 PM

The paladin smite nerf is going to be my first houserule against 5.5 here. Once per turn was one thing (I can see that one, that's fine), eating a BA is a step too far. They made it more fiddly and annoying to use, and I'm 100% against that. Who asked for this?

This clued me in on how to fix the other spell smites, too. They never should have taken a BA or concentration, and should have always simply been on-hit. If those are more or less the same (and since they degenerated regular smites to being like that, they probably are), I'm going to remove those requirements for my games.

Oramac

2024-06-20, 03:28 PM

I'm with you on the reaction bit but not the 1/round bit. Smite novas were a real problem, maybe not at your table but at enough for them to do something about the default rule.

Toning down smite nova would have been as easy as adding the "once per turn when you..." text into the baseline smite. I'd have been more than ok with that. In fact, that will likely become my house rule. Once per round is too extreme.

True. I only pointed it out since it does conflict now.

I said as much in my post. We need to see the final version of Counterspell to be sure.

That sounds like a buff to me, both for Sorcadins and Metamagic Adept paladins.

It is a buff for those people. And a massive nerf for anyone who doesn't want to multiclass and/or take that very specific feat.

Again though, that was already the case, since those multiclasses got more higher slots to use on it.

Yes and no. They did get more slots to use on smite, but smite was limited to 5d8, rendering anything past a 4th level slot useless. Assuming the UA6 text is accurate, there is no longer a cap on the damage. So a 9th level smite is not only possible, but kinda screws over the whole "reign in smite nova" goal.

You have a strange definition of interesting :smallbiggrin:

Interesting and optimal are not the same thing. :smallbiggrin:

Evaar

2024-06-20, 03:37 PM

If a player has built such that they have Divine Smite and a 9th level spell slot and they're using that slot to add 10d8 radiant damage or whatever to a single target, I am not concerned about the power that player is bringing to the table.

Psyren

2024-06-20, 04:16 PM

They indeed removed concentration from most of them. Shining and Banishing still have it, but those two are packaged with Faerie Fire and Banishment respectively, so.

Interesting and optimal are not the same thing. :smallbiggrin:

Touché :smalltongue:

To do that they would have had to make DS not be a spell, which I think is part of their goal. In 5e, everyone was spamming DS and ignoring the others, then complaining that all martials get to do in every fight is deal damage.

It is a buff for those people. And a massive nerf for anyone who doesn't want to multiclass and/or take that very specific feat.

Well, again, their goal seems to be to want you to use the non-vanilla smites, which could also be metamagicked before.

Ehh.... I wouldn't call burning a 9th-level slot on 9d8 single-target damage a "nova" at all. Even upcasting Scorching Ray would get you more damage than that, and that would be a pretty bad use of that slot most of the time.

Ninja'd by Evaar

GeneralVryth

2024-06-20, 04:29 PM

Then what are they? No-action spells? Reaction? No-longer spells, instead some nebulous on attack effect that consumes spell slots? Anyways the important thing was bringing the default smite in-line with the other smites. Before the abnormal smites took concentration, a bonus action, and did less damage per slot. Now the concentration requirement is mostly gone (except for 2 that they kind of make sense for), and they are all BA, so now it's just a question of damage versus bonus effect which is a lot more balanced.

Also, I think people are getting to wrapped up in the smite nerf and are missing the several buffs Paladins (which were already a good class) got. The smite nerf helps remove the nova aspect (which was polled as problematic) and helps justify some nice other nice improvements.

Finally, Smites being a bonus action spell is actually a nerf to the most common Paladin/Full Caster multi-class, Sorcadins. A Sorcadin can no longer quicken a spell and smite in the same turn. As for being able to smite with 6th+ slots, so what? All of those slots have better uses than smite. If they are being used for smite then the character is being player far from optimally.

sithlordnergal

2024-06-20, 04:40 PM

Well, again, their goal seems to be to want you to use the non-vanilla smites, which could also be metamagicked before.

I don't know if they'll be used all that much though. Since Divine Smite is now a Bonus Action to use, those Smite spells are competing for spell slots AND your Bonus Action. That's on top of competing with Lay on Hands. And unless the give the spells an overhaul before they release the PHB, the Smite spells are kind of a mixed bag. It seems like there are an equal number of good Smite Spells and bad ones.

For example, Blinding Smite deals 1d8 less damage than a Divine Smite of the same level, but Blinds the target on a hit with no initial save, lasts a minute without Concentration, and ends on a Wisdom save at the end of the target's turn. That's really good, I can get behind that. Same with Banishing Smite, it deals about the same average damage as a regular 5th level Divine Smite. Not a bad spell, even if it comes kind of late. I could see myself using those. And they're decently balanced around their secondary effects and the damage you lose out on.

But then you have ones like Searing Smite and Thunderous Smite. Both of those deal less damage than a regular Divine Smite, and their secondary effects aren't really that impressive. Searing Smite is probably the worst, since it deals 1d6 Fire at the start of each of the target's turns but ends on a Con save. Unless they seriously revamped the monsters, Con saves are extremely unreliable. Thunderous Smite is somewhat better, dealing 2d6 Thunder Damage, but it pushes the target back 10 feet and knocks them prone on a failed Strength Save. Not a bad effect, but is it good enough to compete with 2d8 to 3d8 Radiant damage? I dunno, personally with how I play I'd say no, its not.

The buffs the paladin got don't really make up for the nerfs they received. I know we're focusing on Divine Smite, but they received a fair number of nerfs.

- They're no longer a proper Prepared Spell Caster. They can prepare 2 to 15 spells, depending on their level, but can only change out one spell per day, that is undeniably a nerf.

- Your Aura of Protection ends if you're Incapacitated, which is a nerf compared to the previous version that ends when you're Unconcious. Unless they changed the Paralyzed, Stunned, and Petrified Conditions, those all cause you to be Incapacitated, so they all turn off Aura of Protection.

- Divine Sense is now tied to your Channel Divinity uses as compared to 1+Charisma Mod, so you have fewer uses of it and less incentive to use it because its competing with Channel Divinity.

- Cleansing Touch is now Restoring Touch, and instead of ending a spell effect it can only end the Blinded, Charmed, Dazed, Deafened, Frightened, Paralyzed, or Stunned Conditions, and takes 5 points of Lay on Hands to use instead of being able to use it a number of times equal to Charisma+1. So its competing with Lay on Hands resources and has a weaker effect since it can't end spell effects.

The Smite nerf is basically the cherry on top of the cake for the nerfs. And I don't feel that the buffs they received make up for these nerfs. They basically buffed Channel Divinity, gave us Weapon Mastery, made it so you can Smite with Unarmed Strikes, gave us a Turn Undead that works on all creatures, and gave us an easier to use Find Steed. I'd say the Paladin has a net negative on the buff/nerf scale.

EDIT: Oh, and unless they decide to change the Find Steed spell, its still not going to be used that often because its restricted to Large Mounts. Which historically don't do so well in Dungeons/Caves/Cities built for Medium Sized creatures. At least the old Find Steed allowed a Small Creature to summon a Medium Mount. A niche use to be sure, but still a use. The only times this will be used will be during travel, which is what it was commonly used for already, or for encounters/adventures in wide open spaces.

Psyren

2024-06-20, 05:21 PM

Assuming the target makes their save, 1st-level DS indeed does more damage than a 1st-level SS (2d8 vs 2d6) - but SS scales way better, because both the initial and ongoing damage go up with slot level. A 3rd-level DS (Paladin 9) does 4d8 total, while a 3rd-level SS does 6d6 minimum. A single failed save regardless of level puts SS even further ahead (9d6), with more doing more.

The only time you should use DS over SS past 1st-level is if the target is strong against fire, or is a fiend/undead - and even for the latter case, there's a point of scaling where the math once again swings in SS' favor. Sure, lots of enemies are strong against fire or are fiends/undead - but ultimately, fewer enemies are strong against fire than aren't.

As for Thunderous - it does less individual damage, but if your party is melee-heavy then knocking the enemy prone could be a bigger damage buff overall. A Strength save vs prone is more reliable than Topple's Con save, and you can actually apply both for multiple chances to knock the target prone. And if knocking them down isn't advantageous... just don't use it, it's a free preparation so it's not like you gave up anything to have it ready.

Waterdeep Merch

2024-06-20, 06:16 PM

It can be its own thing. That's what it currently is, and I've never known anyone to be confused by it. My issue is that paladins are half-casters, and their spell slots are very precious. Smiting isn't just one of the key things that separates them from being a fighter, it's one of the only things that makes them worthwhile in combat over just bringing a cleric (really, add their aura and I think that's it). The only ones going nova in debilitating ways that I've ever seen were all multiclass paladins, and there were several ways they could've prevented that without punishing pure paladins in the process. Single-use per turn was enough, even if I feel that's a restriction pure paladins probably shouldn't have.

If I were trying to fix that problem myself, I'd probably just tie smite damage caps to current paladin level. So if you're a level 5 Paladin/15 Sorcerer, you can't smite higher than a 2nd level spell slot. Basically the opposite of what they did.

GeneralVryth

2024-06-20, 07:04 PM

It wasn't its own thing before it was 2 things, which was part of the problem, especially as the 2 things were badly balanced between each other. The base divine smite effect completely overshadowed all the other smites. They needed to be standardized to be the same thing. Now as most were spells already, and some warrant concentration making the base effect a spell makes a lot of sense. Once it's a spell the question is what should the action be? Bonus and Reaction are the most sensible options if you only want to spend the slot on hits (unless you want to build some kind of refund mechanic, or some special action mechanic). Maybe it should be reaction instead of Bonus, I don't think that would be that unbalanced. But I don't think you can get out of them being spells.

As for the other nerfs I will go back and re-read them, but they sound worse on paper than I think they will be in play. As for the issues with a large steed, that also strikes me as overblown. It will be useful plenty unless all you are doing is adventuring in tight spaces (which has not been my experience).

Waterdeep Merch

2024-06-20, 07:14 PM

There's already a precedent for melee attack spells that don't eat your bonus action, though- Green-Flame Blade and Booming Blade. They simply work off your to-hit. The attack is the action necessary, it doesn't need to have some extra cost applied.

The new Eldritch Knight War Magic will let them exchange one attack with a cantrip. If GFB and BB are still in the game (I'd say it's likely, they printed them twice), EK's will be able to use them closer to how I'd like to see all smites work. They removed a lot of bonus actions from other classes, reasoning that it was too limiting and too finnicky. So why did they decide to go and make smite those things?

EDIT: Slight addendum, but if given the option between the 2014 and 2024 paladin, I think the 2014 paladin is going to be more fun entirely thanks to smites. It's the only class I've thought that about so far.

GeneralVryth

2024-06-20, 07:43 PM

The important thing is those are cantrips and they take your action to use. A smite structured that way would really suck if it missed. Compare the base smite to Chromatic Orb. Smite does 2d8 radiant and always hits (it won't get used on a miss). Chromatic Orb does 3d8 of an elemental damage type, but it requires an attack roll and you lose the slot if you miss.

I am sure anything that gets nerfed in the new edition is going to have people saying they prefer the 2014 version. The entire class over (you get one or the other), I don't know. My guess is it will be more split than most classes, but even in this thread you can find people for and against. Paladin is probably my go to martial/half-caster (Fighter Battlemaster being number 2). The things that were buffed are all more likely to help me in play, than the things that were nerfed will hinder me.

Psyren

2024-06-20, 08:05 PM

My issue is that paladins are half-casters, and their spell slots are very precious. Smiting isn't just one of the key things that separates them from being a fighter, it's one of the only things that makes them worthwhile in combat over just bringing a cleric (really, add their aura and I think that's it).

1) Their slots being precious is irrelevant, smite is fueled by slots no matter which version you're using. Moreover, the per-slot damage is the same, or actually increasing in the case of the smite spells since they're no longer competing with whatever you're concentrating on.

2) I can never understand the whole "why would we bring X" argument. This game isn't an MMO where the other party members are standing around staring at LFG and rejecting applicants for their Mythic+ run. "Nah, locks got nerfed, don't take that guy." The reason you bring a paladin is because the person sitting across the table from you in real life wants to play a paladin.

3) If your paladin can't outdamage a cleric even after this change, especially single-target, they're really not trying hard enough. Conversely, if your cleric is devoting their build to doing the most damage, there are probably far, far better things they could be doing with their build instead.

Your assumption here is that the problem they're seeing with paladin burst/nova is limited to paladins that multiclass. We have absolutely no reason to believe that's the case. Every single time they've brought it up as an issue, they said Paladins were the problem, not multiclass Paladins.

Those are balanced around being single-attacks, and on classes with Extra Attack they actually suck unless you have a subclass like Bladesinger and EK that can combine them with that somehow. That's not a mechanic you can or should build a whole class around.

It's more fun for the paladin, certainly. Especially when they crit. Not so much for the rest of the party who get to be his backup dancers, or the DM whose boss encounter got deleted in 2 rounds.

Sirocco745

2024-06-20, 08:48 PM

I'm gonna make a list of the points for and against the DS changes made in this thread, just so we have a comprehensible bullet point selection of arguments.

AGAINST

It restricts DS too much due to not being able to cast another spell/smite again in that same round
I don't want to have to choose between DS and another bonus action
It would be better if it worked like BB or GFB
Counterspell exists
Multiclassers gain better smites than paladins
It changes meta/normal play up too much

NEUTRAL

You now have a proper reason to use the other smite spells
Paladins needed the nova nerf. Maybe not to the current extent, but they did
You can't build a class around a cantrip concept (not talking about spammers, talking about resource management and power and all that)
We don't know yet if you can Counterspell it
Multiclassers have always been able to do more smites than normal Paladins, but tbh you're better off using your higher level spell slots for something that isn't DS
(my own opinion) this is good! give the Paladin more wriggle room! make people uncomfortable with not knowing what's best anymore, it's now a legitimate decision you have to make in battle and when creating a character. Meta is boring, embrace change and adapt to it.

I feel like this sums up most of it.

Psyren

2024-06-20, 10:13 PM

I'm gonna make a list of the points for and against the DS changes made in this thread, just so we have a comprehensible bullet point selection of arguments.

AGAINST

NEUTRAL

I feel like this sums up most of it.

I'd put some of your NEUTRALS under FOR myself, and a couple of AGAINST in NEUTRAL :smalltongue:

I've been keeping track of all the content creators who've been given preview material of the new books; DnDBeyond published a list (https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1747-where-to-find-2024-players-handbook-previews) that I used as a starting point for visiting their channels.

Here are all the ones I've found so far:

Dungeon Dudes/Monty + Kelly - 6/18/24 Path of the World Tree Barbarian (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5R-PCMVAP0)
d4: D&D Deep Dive/Colby - 6/18/24 Assassin Rogue (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN7Q1tthY5)
PixelCircus - 6/18/24 Wayfarer and Guard Backgrounds (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Iyi7IrLRzw)
Ginny Di - 6/19/24 College of Dance Bard (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky7Af1aU5Z0)
Mark "Sherlock" Hulmes - 6/18/24 Great Old One Patron Warlock (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qElkBdNd0nI)
Dael Kingsmill/MonarchsFactory - 6/18/24 Greyhawk DMG Preview - Silver Dragon Inn (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUkaP_ySr7g)
Pointy Hat/Antonio Demico -
Dungeon Dad - 6/20.24 Sphinx of Wonder - CR1 Chain Familiar Preview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Z9d0O6R6Zo)
Jonathan Perez Galvan/LatinosAgainstSpooky**** - Epic Boon - Boon of the Night Spirit (https://www.dndbeyond.com/linkout?remoteUrl=https%253a%252f%252fwww.tiktok.c om%252f%2540latinosagainstspooky****%252fvideo%252 f7381860099624635690)
Pack Tactics - 6/18/24 Weapon Masteries (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjFQ69TBs8g)
Good Time Society - 6/18/24 Tasha's Bubbling Cauldron and Cure Wounds spells (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAPvD0njt2Y)

That Chain Familiar is absolutely wild, and I love that Sphinxes are apparently being changed from Monstrosities into Celestials. Apparently, powerful Sphinxes will be added to the list of potential Celestial Pact Warlock Patrons, which explains the little guy previewed above.

Sirocco745

2024-06-20, 10:21 PM

I'd put some of your NEUTRALS under FOR myself, and a couple of AGAINST in NEUTRAL :smalltongue:

It's not my list, just the list of what people have said here :P
Personally, I'm fine with the changes. Paladins now need to make options that aren't just "I add holiness to my sword," they now need to consider adding special holiness to it! As well as choosing whether to boost their melee damage, heal someone, cast a different spell, etc. Was it done the best way? Who knows. Could it have been done better? Everything can always be done better. I'm just interested to see how the whole thing plays out and what comes up next!

Psyren

2024-06-20, 10:31 PM

It's not my list, just the list of what people have said here :P

In that case - hi! I'm People :smalltongue: and I was For several things. So having no Fors, only Against and Neutral, still compelled me to speak up.

Personally, I'm fine with the changes. Paladins now need to make options that aren't just "I add holiness to my sword," they now need to consider adding special holiness to it! As well as choosing whether to boost their melee damage, heal someone, cast a different spell, etc. Was it done the best way? Who knows. Could it have been done better? Everything can always be done better. I'm just interested to see how the whole thing plays out and what comes up next!

Yeah - I think there's a lot more choice now, especially when it comes to which smite to use moment to moment, plus combining them with their Weapon Mastery and Fighting Style options. Paladin has a lot of moving parts now, instead of either spamming smite or choosing not to hit smite.

Silverblade1234

2024-06-20, 10:52 PM

Which is great, but did not require moving it to the bonus action. That just discourages a lot of concepts, builds, and gameplay that previously were viable and fun. In practice, I think you're going to see fewer such creative explorations and more samey gameplay. In the revised rules' overall pattern of freeing up actions so you can do more fun things and play more with the fun tricks you get from your class, species, feats, etc., moving a key class ability from free to a bonus action is literally going backwards. I cannot believe there wasn't a better way that didn't sacrifice creativity and flexibility.

Ah well: at least it's easy to houserule away, as a huge chunk of the online playerbase seem destined to now do, based on the comments and reactions I've seen.

GeneralVryth

2024-06-20, 11:01 PM

Ah well: at least it's easy to houserule away, as a huge chunk of the online playerbase seem destined to now do, based on the comments and reactions I've seen.

Only the base Divine Smite was ever "free". Most of the other smites no longer taking concentration is a nice bonus. And what are all of these builds and concepts you think are being shut down? Unless you expect to smite every round of combat, you are still going to have bonus actions to spare.

I would not take the comments in this thread or on this forum as any kind of representative sample. I would wager most tables that play 5.5e are going to be using Bonus Action smites.

One thing I am curious about is if the various Ranger strikes will work the same as the smites (no concentration required, castable on hit...).

Sirocco745

2024-06-20, 11:03 PM

In that case - hi! I'm People :smalltongue: and I was For several things. So having no Fors, only Against and Neutral, still compelled me to speak up.

My brain is not keeping up with stuff today, forgot to look at who replied XD
Sorry about that, my bad.

Indeed, it's going to be quite exciting when creating martial characters in general now. Also, I must now contribute to "Breaking the New Smite." If WoTC releases the final version of DS as a spell with a range of touch, then a 5 Paladin/2 Sorcerer would theoretically be able to DS twice in one turn, thanks to our old frenemy known as Twinned Spell:

When you cast a spell that targets only one creature and doesn't have a range of self, you can spend a number of sorcery points equal to the spell's level to target a second creature in range with the same spell (1 sorcery point if the spell is a cantrip).

What we have so far is "it now requires a Bonus Action to use, but that Bonus Action can be taken immediately after you hit a creature with an attack roll, bringing it mostly in line with the original Divine Smite's mechanics." Honestly, I'd allow this version of DS at my table. It requires the PC to take two levels in Sorcerer to get one semi-nova. Does it boost their casting capabilities? Yes, but they're sacrificing Paladin progression for a two level dip that lets them get 2 sorcery points. Of course, they could just take Metamagic Adept and do the same thing, but it's the same "balance." They miss out on an ASI or other feat if they want to semi-nova DS. And since it's limited by a resource that is advanced through another class or is a set number through the feat, I'd let it fly.

EDIT: This is an important addition to mention, but the number of sorcery points is the limiting factor here. If you do allow this at your table, I highly recommend making the following change to Twinned Spell:

When you cast a spell that targets only one creature and doesn't have a range of self, you can spend a number of sorcery points equal to the level of the spell slot used to target a second creature in range with the same spell (1 sorcery point if the spell is a cantrip).
This drastically reduces nova capabilities whilst not making it a pipe dream. You can choose to use a weaker double DS, or you can choose to take more levels or the feat AND more Sorcerer levels in order to raise their double DS capabilities, but they sacrifice Paladin progression even further for this.

Psyren

2024-06-20, 11:17 PM

I personally think it encourages concepts. We finally have a Str-based martial that won't go down the same tired PAM+GWM path all the rest do.

Hurrashane

2024-06-20, 11:18 PM

This drastically reduces nova capabilities whilst not making it a pipe dream. You can choose to use a weaker double DS, or you can choose to take more levels or the feat AND more Sorcerer levels in order to raise their double DS capabilities, but they sacrifice Paladin progression even further for this.

It depends on the version of twinned spell we get. The one from UA 7 was
"When you cast aspell, such as Charm Person or
Hold Person, thatcanbe cast with a higher-level spell slot to target an additional creature, you can spend 1 SorceryPoint to increase the spells effective level by 1."

So that definitely doesn't work with smite.

T.G. Oskar

2024-06-20, 11:19 PM

Paladin stuff!

Base Paladin

Paladin casting obtained at 1st level
More spell slots from multiclass for both Paladin and Ranger (presumably due to rounding up?)
Can learn ALL Fighting Styles, OR can learn Cleric cantrips instead

This feels more like QoL upgrades. Guidance is still *decent*, if not overwhelmingly good, and it gives them some ranged attacks, so getting Cleric cantrips is mostly a buff. Not just that, you also get stuff like Divine Favor at 1st level, which is pretty boss.

No mention about Spirit Guardians?

Smite is a spell (always prepared) and they get 1/day free smite. No word on if the free one scales

Ambivalent about this. On one hand, I understand the detractors in that they nerfed Smite WAY too hard, but I also understand the supporters in that Smite was just too good to do anything else. I mean, who used Aura of Vitality or Crusader's Mantle, or even Circle of Power (all of which are or were Paladin exclusive spells)?

Sadly, this kills Smites as reactions by every conceivable means, even if War Caster still exists. Multiclassing with Sorcerer or Warlock still lets them have Booming Blade/Greenflame Blade, which can be cast alongside Smites since they're cantrips.

2x Channel Divinity, regain 1 per SR + all per LR. 2x becomes 3x at 11th
Divine Sense uses CD and lasts 10 minutes instead of 1 round
New Ability, Abjure Foes uses CD. No word on if its different than the playtest.

Does this mean the Paladin gets less CD than Clerics? Because, IIRC, Clerics get their proficiency bonus worth of CD uses.

Ambivalent about Divine Sense since it could be useful but not always, and now that it conflicts with your other CD uses it means you'd be using it less. Abjure Foes makes sense for most subclasses since they had a form of "turn" unique to themselves (at least the ones in the PHB; you may argue for Conquest as it pseudo-abjures by causing Fear), but it effectively makes all subclasses have only one extra CD, which means either you need to kill one of the CD uses of the other subclasses or grandfather them, making those subclasses have even more uses.

Find Steed always prepared, 1x free casting per day

Also ambivalent. You basically get a free spell, a free use of that spell, so you don't have to worry about transportation ever again. Or, if you don't wanna use it, you... don't have to. It almost feels like a ribbon more than anything.

All Paladin Auras combined. Subclass auras now just add abilities to the base aura.
Auras use the "new" Area of Effect - Emanation

So, if I get this correctly, that means you get immunity to Fear and Cha bonus to all saves at the same level, which I assume will be 10 or something? *shrug*. This doesn't really say a lot - unless that means you get the 30-feet range early on, in which case it's a HUGE buff.

Also: are they reusing 3.x language? Emanation basically means that the effect centers on you and moves with you, so it's mostly QoL at best.

Devotion

Lots of buffs all around. Purity of Spirit will be missed, but the new effect is solid since it provides a very solid buff which triggers on your smite. Cool to see that Super Saiyan mode for Paladins (Super Paladin Mode?) is BA all over, since while it means it'll conflict with Smite on that first level, all you need is that first level to trigger it. But it's important to point out that Paladins have more access to bonus actions, which makes using Smite much more difficult.

Glory

Bleh. Glory won.

Peerless Athlete is the only thing mentioned, so that means Inspiring Smite got the axe. Any indication it became a spell or got repurposed as a class feature? (Don't remember if it was changed in the UA.)

With the aura buffs, Aura of Alacrity makes a little more sense now - except Peerless Athlete no longer applies to Grapple so it's more of a "you win some you lose some".

New Oath Spell: Prone + Psychic damage as a 5th level spell seems kinda weak. I recall they revived Daze from 3.x in this revision, and I feel it would've been perfect to add. Prone is still a super useful condition, but there are ways to achieve this very early, including a feat and a smite, at least to take the opponent you really want down. (Though I'm assuming that they must remain Prone for a specific duration and make it a Concentration spell to justify having it at such a high level.)

Ancients

Aura of Warding now gives resistance to Necrotic/Psychic/Radiant
Increased range of Natures Wrath
Undying Sentinel you come back with a bunch of HP instead of 1

Aura of Warding being nerfed to oblivion was a given. Does that mean Ancients will no longer be liked by people?

I always said Nature's Wrath is a worse version of Ensnaring Strike, only useful since the former doesn't require Concentration. The extra range *might* make it a bit more useful but you're still allowed a save at the end - and Ensnaring Strike triggers on a weapon attack, so that means it can trigger on a bow attack at more than the expected range of NW anyways. Doesn't surprise me.

Vengeance

Cool for VoE to trigger on attack. (Which means that, for those who oppose the Smite changes, there's precedence for a class feature to trigger on an attack.) I believe that, of all effects that make good use of more CD uses, Vow of Enmity takes the cake - and now that it can be transferred just like Hexblade's Curse, twice as better! Definitely a buff, especially since the other CD was folded into Abjure Enemy. Of all, it feels like Vengeance got a huge buff compared to the others.

Overall: basically they kept the stuff from the last UA. Vengeance got a massive boost, followed by Devotion. Still not impressed by Glory.

As for Smite, mechanically it makes sense. All other Smite spells are BA spells, so this is basically unifying the mechanic to avoid excessive nova and double-dipping (i.e., cast the Smite spell and then add DS to deal insane amounts of damage, especially on crits). Mechanically it's simpler and more efficient, but unfortunately it kills some of the unique stuff you could do with DS - specifically, triggering them on a reaction to make Paladins even more dangerous with their few chances to trigger Opportunity Attacks.

As a player, I definitely recognize turning DS into a spell like the others is a huge nerf. It was a clever way to use spell slots and it added to the power of the class to the point it became the top dog - with this, it's no longer as top, though still top enough. As a DM, I really didn't mind the extra damage being able to eviscerate my monsters since most of the time I customized my battles. But as a homebrewer with some knowledge of the system's mechanics, I feel this move makes for a much simpler, streamlined mechanic - either you turn all smites into BA spells or you rework the entire Smite mechanic to work like Cunning Strike, reducing some of the base Smite damage and/or requiring a higher spell level for a specific effect. And the latter is far more complicated than the former, keep in mind.

That said, I recall that Clerics also have access to a couple smites, which means that they're diluting the brand of the class to an extent. Clerics could get access to the BA Smite spells but not to the core effect of Divine Smite, meaning Paladins still had the upper hand. If Clerics still get access to Smite spells, I feel this just ends up harming the Paladin more than benefitting it - I assume they won't, but you'll never know. I feel DS should have a revision to make it BA OR Reaction to compensate for the change.

Silverblade1234

2024-06-20, 11:34 PM

I personally think it encourages concepts. We finally have a Str-based martial that won't go down the same tired PAM+GWM path all the rest do.

Only by discouraging anything using a BA. That encourages a single concept at the expense of a formerly huge variety--and only in a single class! By all means, make sword and board more viable for EVERYONE with better feat support, weapon mastery options, fighting styles, some kind of gameplay for shields, etc. And certainly, tone down GWM and PAM, or at least the combo. But this "solution" unique to paladin comes at far too high a cost to those who wanted variety inside the paladin class.

GeneralVryth

2024-06-20, 11:51 PM

I still have the question, are you smiting every turn? Is that the only thing you are using spell slots for? I would expect at least every other turn to have a bonus action available. Coming at it from the other direction, if you are using a bonus action heavy something else, maybe don't smite as often? Paladins have a fair number of spells. If nothing else that's a lot of slots that can go to the improved cure spells to keep your group in top shape outside of combat.

Psyren

2024-06-21, 12:59 AM

Only by discouraging anything using a BA.

Yeah, and with the other QOL changes like Sacred Weapon being actionless, I think it will keep up damage-wise, or at the very least not be far behind while adding a lot of defense and utility. That's a win in my book.

No mention about Spirit Guardians?

No mention, but I doubt they mess with that much given its popularity in BG3.

Does this mean the Paladin gets less CD than Clerics? Because, IIRC, Clerics get their proficiency bonus worth of CD uses.

They both get the same amount per the most recent playtest, and the progression lines up with what he revealed in the video.

Ambivalent about Divine Sense since it could be useful but not always, and now that it conflicts with your other CD uses it means you'd be using it less.

I never used it before, so I doubt I'll go less than zero :smalltongue:

So, if I get this correctly, that means you get immunity to Fear and Cha bonus to all saves at the same level, which I assume will be 10 or something?

No - you get one aura (+Cha to saves) at 6, then at 10 that same aura upgrades to grant fear immunity. Between those two, at 7, you also got {subclass upgrade} to the aura. It's all one aura that gets new stuff as you level in other words.

As far as the 30ft expansion, in the playtest that came online at 18th, just like it does in 5e.

To be clear, Crawford only mentioned the buffs and nerfs. Not mentioning Inspiring Smite doesn't mean it's gone, it means it works like it does in 5e.

New Oath Spell: Prone + Psychic damage as a 5th level spell seems kinda weak.

He didn't say "prone" actually - he said "fall to their knees in awe." That reads like Incapacitated to me.

That said, I recall that Clerics also have access to a couple smites, which means that they're diluting the brand of the class to an extent.

Not sure if this is still the case, in the UA6 video they specifically mentioned not wanting Clerics to smite.

Hurrashane

2024-06-21, 02:18 AM

I don't think I've ever seen Divine sense used ever. Granted with the group I currently play with Paladin isn't a very popular class but I don't think I've seen it used once in a game in the full ten years of 5e's life.

DeTess

2024-06-21, 02:31 AM

There's a paladin in my current game who uses it sporadically, and when I played a paladin I used it often enough that it got nicknamed the Paladin Ping.

It's mostly used when a situation gives us bad vibes to see if we can pinpoint a source for that.

sithlordnergal

2024-06-21, 02:57 AM

Ohh, I hadn't considered upcasting. I was using the spells at their base level against a Divine Smite of the same level. I might need to re-evaluate Searing Smite, because looking at it, the upcasting would deal more damage than any of the other options since the damage essentially hits twice at minimum. And it matches a 2nd level Smite too. It still sucks that its a Con Save, cause unless they changed how NPC Constitution works, most NPCs have a decent to high Con modifier.

Though I still don't think Thunderous is as good. Prone is nice for a melee-heavy party, but at the same time its really not much better than a regular Shove. Though its odd they changed Shove to a Dex/Strength Save over an ability check.

GeneralVryth

2024-06-21, 03:34 AM

For Thunderous, it's not just the prone condition. Knockback can also be powerful depending on terrain. Sure it's more situational than some of the others but there is value there, and you have it prepared for free, so it's existence isn't hurting anything.

sithlordnergal

2024-06-21, 08:25 AM

To be fair, when has Find Steed not been a ribbon feature? Don't get me wrong, its cool Paladins have an intelligent steed...but I don't remember them being that powerful in 3.5 or 5e. Size limitations mixed with HP ,made them kind of clunky to use. Not a lot of dungeons/caves/buildings are sized for a Large Horse after all. Usually only Small creatures made heavy used of 5e's Find Steed since it gave them a Medium Creature, and even then a Fireball usually made pretty short work of said steed.

Its less that its prepared for free, and more that its competing directly against Divine Smite since they both use your Bonus Action. I'm not sure how much use Thunderous Smite will see. That said, Searing Smite is a lot better then I first gave it credit, what with the upcasting potential, so I'm not longer super concerned about the Smite spells. The majority of them are strong enough to have a reason to use them over Divine Smite.

Blatant Beast

2024-06-21, 09:43 AM

Auras use the "new" Area of Effect - Emanation

Perhaps with this addition, we can finally have a definitive answer on whether a Spirit Guardian spell adheres to the caster, or is a free floating spell effect that just happens to follow the caster.

Pathfinder 2 added this 5 years ago....D&D is just old tech, trying to play catch up, at this point.

Psyren

2024-06-21, 11:01 AM

I agree that Thunderous is the worst one for sure.

Barbarian video starting shortly!

Theodoxus

2024-06-21, 11:14 AM

Pathfinder 2 added this 5 years ago....D&D is just old tech, trying to play catch up, at this point.

I'm sure there's some kind of NDA/non-compete clause, but man, WotC couldn't do worse than trying to woo back the Paizo creative team.

As for smites, other than the free one, is there really any reason they couldn't have just gotten rid of the generic divine smite, made each level have a couple of options that are always known/prepared, make the damage commerserate with the spell level as appropriate, made the damage Radiant, guaranteed, and whatever rider came along, save based and other energy flavored (as appropriate)?

If you're burning slots anyway, and they're all using a BA to attach, and that BA is triggered by a successful hit, what's the point of DS again? Tradition for the sake of tradition isn't cool.

If it's just for the sake of the 'free' DS, there are better ways to accomplish that.

Merlecory

2024-06-21, 11:44 AM

Skirted by exhaustion rules again here, I'm still hoping for the-1 rules.

Anyone see clarification on how brutal strikes and other sources of advantage work?

Psyren

2024-06-21, 12:10 PM

There were a number of changes to the subclasses since the UA, particularly Zealot. Now Zealot gets a pool of dice to heal itself, and later can save allies with its capstone ability (they kept the flight etc.)

Wildheart has new animal totems that weren't in the UA like Salmon and Panther.

If you're burning slots anyway, and they're all using a BA to attach, and that BA is triggered by a successful hit, what's the point of DS again?

Vanilla DS has the highest base damage and (at most tables) the most reliable damage type. The others either sacrifice damage but have CC effects, or higher damage potential but a less reliable type (Searing.)

Is there a difference here I'm not grasping?

Skirted by exhaustion rules again here, I'm still hoping for the-1 rules.

Anyone see clarification on how brutal strikes and other sources of advantage work?

They didn't clarify but the the article's wording (https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1750-2024-barbarian-vs-2014-barbarian-whats-new) suggests you give up all advantage, not just from Reckless. Sigh.

Silverblade1234

2024-06-21, 02:13 PM

No question, it's still a highly potent class, and many paladins won't notice the difference. But the well-supported concepts and gameplay options are narrower than they were before, purely for moving smite onto the bonus action. I know I've made paladins before that I wouldn't make these rules, purely based on fun and gameplay experience. I do not think it had to be this way, and I'm disappointed this is the way they go.

Moving on to barbarian...

There's no question that the new barbarian is a big improvement from the current one, and the additional utility and roleplay bonuses will be much appreciated. But is it enough? More and more, at least based on current information, I'm leaning towards no.

The 2014 barbarian suffered from being incredibly front-loaded, not scaling well, and not having particularly potent or appealing later-level features. Many (maybe most) discussions and guides around barbarians end up only dipping for rage and reckless attack, or at least multiclassing out after 5th or 6th level. With the highest impact features still happening early, with getting rages back on a short rest, with not getting powerful damage boosts in the class, I see very little to challenge that conventional wisdom. And depending on how great weapon master looks, their damage might be significantly lowered because of available feat support.

I'm hoping that the final forms of the subclasses might add some of that needed offensive oomph, or even a rage damage bonus that is more meaningful, but right now I'm unimpressed.

Arkhios

2024-06-21, 02:25 PM

I may be slightly biased, but after giving it some time to sink in, personally I don't think that smiting being dependant on BA is that much of an issue.

I've always preferred using Divine Favor instead as the more default "smite", and Divine Smite only when I land a critical hit. Essentially reaching same conclusion, albeit at my own free will.

Now, having said I'm biased, the paladin I played was a dual wielder, and Divine Favor was way more useful than burning all spell slots for overkill results.

Theodoxus

2024-06-21, 03:05 PM

Now if you're using Nick weapons, you won't be using your BA for an offhand attack, so that's nice too.

Silverblade1234

2024-06-21, 03:13 PM

Now if you're using Nick weapons, you won't be using your BA for an offhand attack, so that's nice too.

I'm hopeful (but not optimistic) that dual wielder feat will have been "enhanced" to also grant Nick to 1H weapons, or something similar. I love the idea of dual wielding larger weapons like longswords or battle axes, and would love to see that classic concept more effectively realized. But in a game that is still putting so much on the bonus action, it's not particularly viable, and it doesn't really look like that's changing.

Pex

2024-06-21, 03:27 PM

The frequency of use is directly proportional to how useful the information the DM will let you have and inversely proportional to how annoyed the DM is that you use it. Mathematical proof: Me playing a paladin with different DMs.

Psyren

2024-06-21, 04:10 PM

They didn't clarify but the the article's wording (https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1750-2024-barbarian-vs-2014-barbarian-whats-new) suggests you give up all advantage, not just from Reckless. Sigh.

Update on this - while he couldn't share specifics, Treantmonk was adamant that every question we had from the UA regarding Brutal Strike will be answered and that the text is a lot clearer than it was - what happens if you have advantage from another source, what happens if you have disadvantage and activate Reckless, which attack do you get to use it on etc. So I'm going to upgrade my outlook on this to cautiously optimistic.

Now if you're using Nick weapons, you won't be using your BA for an offhand attack, so that's nice too.

Shield Master doesn't use your BA anymore either, so sword-and-board Paladins can grab that and still go all-in on smiting.

I mean, even if you had the most helpful DM in the world the original ability was just awful. Not working through cover meant the creature needed to be in the same room with you, and only lasting a round meant you pretty much already had to know or suspect something was there. About the only consistently useful scenario is the one Kenreck mentioned, where you're at a high-society party or similar and the creature in question is disguised among the guests.

GeneralVryth

2024-06-21, 04:28 PM

Shield Master doesn't use your BA anymore either, so sword-and-board Paladins can grab that and still go all-in on smiting.

So thinking through is, not counting class features, are Polearm Master and Crossbow Expert (with dual hand crossbows), the only things that would have you use your bonus action every round for? Shield Master was adjusted, Nick covers a lot of Two-Weapon Fighting. Charger also no longer requires a bonus action, and I think everything else is intermittent.

Psyren

2024-06-21, 04:40 PM

As written, Dual Wielder (with non-Nick weapons) would also still use your BA every round. But yeah, of the feats we know, those about cover it.

(I mean, I guess there's also Keen Mind if you want to spam the Study BA for a bunch of weaknesses in the first few rounds but yeah.)

EDIT: We have next week's release schedule, could someone update the OP?

https://i.imgur.com/stpQg7j.png

Looks like we'll be waiting quite a while for the Bard...

Merlecory

2024-06-21, 06:21 PM

EDIT: We have next week's release schedule, could someone update the OP?

It is done

At least Ranger is coming up soon, that one had a rough UA process. Is the plan to still be Hunter's Mark: the class?

Also, what will wizard have going on? I remember only the "create" spell feature that I highly doubt will have made it through.

Silverblade1234

2024-06-21, 06:23 PM

In fairness, he just said that they'd be answered. On DnDBeyond, The Arcane Eye (another content creator who MAY have received an advanced copy) clarifies (https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1750-2024-barbarian-vs-2014-barbarian-whats-new#c25):

Brutal Strike requires you to forgo Advantage on your attack. Doesn't have to be from Reckless Attack (but that's a surefire way to enable it). Brutal Strike can only be used on one Strength-based attack roll on your turn and it can't have Disadvantage.

This could just be nonsense, but given (a) their credibility, (b) their confidence in their answer, and (c) that this is different than what we last saw in the UA, I'm inclined to believe it.

IF this is correct, it would at least address the core issue of "wasting" Reckless if you have advantage already. I don't think I find it very satisfying, but that's just my general feeling about the barbarian, improvements notwithstanding.

Psyren

2024-06-21, 07:01 PM

Also, what will wizard have going on? I remember only the "create" spell feature that I highly doubt will have made it through.

IIRC they axed that in favor of "we'll just give them the biggest spell list and call it a day."

This could just be nonsense, but given (a) their credibility, (b) their confidence in their answer, and (c) that this is different than what we last saw in the UA, I'm inclined to believe it.

Yeah I can see that not being able to "advantage-juggle" would be the easiest way to handle it. But still, disappointing.

Pex

2024-06-21, 09:31 PM

The key words are "useful information" and "annoyance". My DMs had run the gamut of numbers and direction of undead not in the room but there is a hallway and this thing over here is EVIL!!! to refusing to tell us which suspected item among three is the lich's phylactery so we can destroy it because he wanted the lich to come back and fight another combat. For the record I'm not blaming the ability nor 5E. This is all on the DM from generous to stingy.

Arkhios

2024-06-22, 12:44 AM

Edit: noticed something that did come up before in UA, but seems that it warrants repeating; it seems that Paladin's Smite as well as the Divine Smite no longer require a melee attack, specifically.

The bonus action to smite a foe can be taken "immediately after hitting a creature with an attack". Now, it "can be used with Unarmed Strikes" (as specifically mentioned), and, to my reading/understanding, it might also apply to, say, a cantrip spell attack hit, and of course a ranged weapon attack hit.

Now if you're using Nick weapons, you won't be using your BA for an offhand attack, so that's nice too.
Indeed.

As written, Dual Wielder (with non-Nick weapons) would also still use your BA every round. But yeah, of the feats we know, those about cover it.

(I mean, I guess there's also Keen Mind if you want to spam the Study BA for a bunch of weaknesses in the first few rounds but yeah.)

Where is it written? Based on which version?

Remember that they said there are alot of surprises even to those people who actively participated in the playtest UA process; Dual Wielder being enhanced even further is possible (I've been trying to search for 2024 reveals that would go into detail regarding the new - and old - feats, to no avail. If you know something, please share).

T.G. Oskar

2024-06-22, 01:23 AM

They both get the same amount per the most recent playtest, and the progression lines up with what he revealed in the video.

Then that feels more like a nerf to the Cleric, since the latter recovered all its uses on a short rest.

I never used it before, so I doubt I'll go less than zero :smalltongue:

Would it kill then to make it at-will? (Kinda like their own specialized cantrip?) Because, if a vocal group of the player population claims it has never used it before, folding it into CD uses makes it even less usable to those who actually use it, because it conflicts with the better choices you might get. Because, if the idea was to make it more attractive by extending its duration, they certainly didn't achieve their goal.

As far as the 30ft expansion, in the playtest that came online at 18th, just like it does in 5e.

Oh, so it is language clarification. You made it sound like it was a single feature upgraded only once, not the same feature spread exactly like it was before.

To be clear, Crawford only mentioned the buffs and nerfs. Not mentioning Inspiring Smite doesn't mean it's gone, it means it works like it does in 5e.

That's detrimental, since, based on the playtest and how they're revamping CD for Clerics and Paladins, it doesn't show whether the subclass keeps, loses or rearranges the feature, but compared to the others, it should either lose it or gain it at a different level - akin to Devotion Paladins getting Smite of Protection later on. Otherwise, the other subclasses got shafted from getting another CD.

He didn't say "prone" actually - he said "fall to their knees in awe." That reads like Incapacitated to me.

That's a very generous reading. "Fall to their knees" is one of the many ways to go Prone, and "awe" could also be interpreted as Charmed or Frightened. Someone in awe is still very capable of moving and defending itself - they're not so overawed that they are unable to even think or react. So let's say Prone, Charmed/Frightened and psychic damage, which is slightly better, but that's only evaluating this little point - for all I know, it could be the same as I said. (Or, the reading could go, "as long as they're Charmed, they are also Prone and cannot stand up".)

Teasing up without going too far just causes things like this - and I just don't have the confidence that they'll go that far to make a 5th-level spell exclusive to one subclass where they can do something that goes beyond what Hold Person/Monster or Flesh to Stone can.

It wasn't a ribbon feature because it wasn't a feature until the revision - it was a spell (and a ritual spell at that) which could be accessed by the Bard through Magical Secrets. But that's semantics. (Now, Chain Familiars are a feature, because of the unique familiars you had access to, but being able to get the vanilla familiars through a feat...)

In 3.5, they probably weren't as powerful as a Druid's animal companion (which was almost always a bear and why didn't you take a bear if you said "I didn't take a bear"?), but they were pretty meaty, what with Evasion and having the scores of either themselves or their master, whichever was higher, alongside a pretty hefty STR and DEX stat that was most likely higher than the Paladin's one.

As for size limitations, that depends on the table. They're certainly super-useful for the long open road, and while I can believe that buildings aren't usually built for Large creatures if in cities where Humanoids are the norm, I digress about dungeons and caves. Dwarf cave systems? Debatable. The Underdark has a lot of Large creatures, so you can expect only a couple corridors that are less than 10 ft. high, which would make life difficult for mounts but also for, say, Chuul or Driders or even Shadow Dragons. And the same goes for dungeons, especially if they're designed for Giants. I could probably give it to you on published modules, but the ones I've played have a good balance on open space combats and dungeons, so it's not like it's entirely detrimental.

I will give you that they're frailer than they used to be, but in exchange they can be literally resummoned by spending a spell slot. They're even more Pokémon-like than before, being able to send them into their celestial/fey/fiendish realm and calling them back again at full HP if slain.

Psyren

2024-06-22, 10:20 AM

Edit: noticed something that did come up before in UA, but seems that it warrants repeating; it seems that Paladin's Smite as well as the Divine Smite no longer require a melee attack, specifically.

The most recent Paladin UA we have states "when you hit with a melee weapon or unarmed strike." What's nice about that wording is several melee weapons are also thrown weapons, e.g. Javelins. But that wording would rule out cantrips and ranged weapons.

Where is it written? Based on which version?

I'm not saying Dual Wielder won't interact with/grant Nick to non-light weapons; it might. But I can only go off the language we have at the moment.

Then that feels more like a nerf to the Cleric, since the latter recovered all its uses on a short rest.

The 2014 Cleric maxed out at 3 though, and for the majority of their career in most campaigns were stuck with 2. The 2024 one eventually hits 4, even if they only recover 1 per SR, and they hit 3 much sooner.

The duration isn't the only buff it got; It works through cover now which makes it massively more practical.

Oh, so it is language clarification. You made it sound like it was a single feature upgraded only once, not the same feature spread exactly like it was before.

It's a single feature upgraded at least twice.

I genuinely have no idea what you're on about. Glory still has the temp HP smite.

That's a very generous reading.

There is no "reading" as neither of us have seen the text yet. So let's wait for that.

ZRN

2024-06-22, 10:37 AM

Update to your update: it looks like WOTC changed the D&D Beyond articl (https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1750-2024-barbarian-vs-2014-barbarian-whats-new)e with an actual explanation:

Using Brutal Strike, you can forgo Advantage on one of your Strength-based attacks in exchange for more damage and a selection of debuffs you can impose on your enemies. The Advanatage could be gained through Reckless Attack, or it could be enabled by attacking a Prone enemy. The only condition is that you can't have Disadvantage on the roll as well.

So no more weirdness about whether you can use it on the first hit, etc. (Although their wording here makes it sounds like you can use it multiple times a round, which would be a big change that I doubt they actually did without explicitly mentioning it SOMEwhere.)

Silverblade1234

2024-06-22, 12:03 PM

There's some reason to be hopeful: we only saw the Dual Wielder feat in UA2, which is when they were playing with two weapon fighting not requiring a bonus action (which was the correct approach, but I'll save that rant for another day). They immediately moved back to normal 2WF and Nick, but we never saw if Dual Wielder was adjusted accordingly. So it MIGHT happen. I'm skeptical given recent events, but I'd be delighted to be wrong.

I've been using this document for reference, which lists in a unified compilation all the most recent UA versions of everything: https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/comments/zb7cu1/one_dd_playtest_collation_v10/. This does NOT capture anything based on the new reveals from last week or going forward (I assume), so it's increasingly for archival and reference purposes.

Arkhios

2024-06-22, 12:25 PM

I'm actually more than hopeful, because the way how dual wielding has been treated since 2014 has been a hot potato ever since. People have time and again voiced their concerns for the fighting technique (notice that I didn't say 'style') having been "shafted" from the beginning. I'd be surprised if they didn't enhance the one feat that literally focuses in said technique any further than that.

They claim to have heard the concerns and feedback throughout the past decade, to have listened, and to have made changes accordingly. Here's to hope they didn't forget it after they "invented" the way to handle it without BA by introducing Nick weapons. Dual Wielder is a feat, for crying out loud. It deserves to make a character become literally better at dual wielding.

Personally, I don't think it's too far-fetched to expect the Dual Wielder (feat) work somewhere along the lines of letting all qualifying weapons gain, or benefit from, the Nick property when holding a different weapon in each hand, regardless of what other properties they might have, as one of the benefits of the feat.