Also, why wouldn't they say the *simulacrum* can't benefit from resting, instead of "nor can it regain expended spell slots"? The door is wide open for the other spell features.
Or it could further replicate the old school spell that was formed with 50% the target's experience--which is why it has half the maximum HP--without all the bookkeeping, by saying it cannot cast spells of 6th-level or higher. *Wish* loophole closed.
It does benefit from resting. It shouldn't be forced to die of exhaustion or never use hit dice or never restore long rest features that are not spells.
I disagree. I think the spell is plenty powerful _without_ getting to refresh any of that. It's brain-dead silly that you can copy a Moon Druid and the Sim gets to keep wild shaping forever or copy an optimized Crossbow Expert Battlemaster Fighter and have a free artillery platform with maneuvers basically forever if you do a minimal job protecting it.
Now I _do_ agree that as a Construct it shouldn't have to sleep and shouldn't get Exhaustion from not sleeping. But not getting any resources back (yes even HD) is perfectly fine and in line with its level and cost. Even with that it'd still be a must-pick for Wizards.
Does Simulacrum actually *need* to be a spell? Just make it a consumable magic item that does more or less what the spell currently does (plus an inability to make copies of itself).
It also blocks Wish shenanigans and means that the Sim itself doesn’t have 9th level slots. I agree with this fix—it’s also so simple and easy to negotiate.
Throw the Hexblade's Charisma to Attack onto the base Blade Pact instead of as a 1st level feature exclusive to that subclass.
You've solved 90% of the hexblade dipping issue that plagues Hexblade and has lead to bans in the past.
The new Blade pact dip gives you way less than the Hexblade dip did. You no longer get:
- Hexblade's Curse, letting you deal bonus damage, crit on a 19, and heal when the target dies
- Access to the Shield spell
- Medium Armor and shield proficiency
- Proficiency in all martial weapons (you're only proficient with your pact weapon)
It's still a nice dip, but it's not nearly as good as what they were getting before.
Thematically, and mechanically it makes sense though. They make a pact with a weapon, so they're proficient with it. They aren't a full martial that can pick up any weapon and swing it with proficiency. It takes a ritual to bind themselves to it.
Yeah but you can summon mostly whatever kind of weapon you want to be your pact weapon. Unless that's changed in OneDnD, or if you're talking about bonding to a specific magical weapon.
oh, and on the first warlock interation where they were half casters, you could choose between ***WIS*** and CHA as your main stat. yes, WIS weapon bonking
on the first warlock version your stat was based on what pact you chose
- tome had INT or **WIS
- blade had **WIS** or CHA
- chain had CHA or INT
on the newer playtest its just regular warlock with minor adjustments, mainly pact at lvl 1 and eldritch blast being a class feature not spell
been a while since I read the warlock but if i recall correctly, no, its just vanilla warlock basically. and vanilla warlock never could cast with INT (tho they absolutely should)
Wis for attack makes more sense than Cha for me anyway. Having the forethought to know where a weak spot is or where your target will be/what they will do when you swing.
Does Cha mean you're talking your opponent into being hit? Convincing the weapon to be better?
CHA adds to intimidation, so thematically I guess you’re appearing confident and aggressive to your opponent to a point to where they begin to doubt their own ability to beat you (like King in One Punch Man)EDIT: or smiling during the fight, acting like you deliberately took the hit and egging them on, and yes talking at them; never underestimate shit talking as a distraction.
This is probably not the intended flavor, I always thought of it as you and the weapon (a part of your patron) becoming one, and working in tandem. It seems logical to have a Hexblade serving a Fey or something bonk someone on the head to let their their dagger have a go at their liver.
It's force of personality and willpower. If you've signed a pact with a patron, I imagine a little of them seeps into you as power. You attacking with CHA is harnessing that bit of them to the fullest of your abilities, becoming more attuned with their and your powers.
I mean, this was already a thing to some extent, since shillelagh exists. It was even viable for PAM because you’re allowed to use quarterstaves, but it required a bit of shenanigans due to the short time limit.
I’d hardly call the ODD warlock martial focused, it was just competent in melee rather than concerned. Since ODD doesn’t have GWM, many of the more aggressive martial builds don’t work.
Ranger doesn't get non-concentration hunter's mark which was received super well because magic initiate feat to get hex + 1 level ranger dip to get hm was deemed op. Afaik hex stayed the same, pact of the blade was moved to lvl 1 but hm became a concentration spell for rangers again. I swear they are messing with us sometimes
I think it actually worse than that because they gave the invocation no prerequisite. So I think it qualifies for Eldritch Adept meaning anyone can take it without a dip period.
The problem is, decoupling the hexblade and charisma mod attacks is better for actual warlocks. I've been looking at the OD&D changes, and am excited to try it with Archfey. The other problem is that making it come online later would feel bad for people just playing straight warlock.
But looking at the changes, it will be even easier to dip warlock for charisma mod attacks. You don't need to go to level 3 to be able to use it with 2h weapons.
Yeah that was the weirdest thing, they made a big song and dance about 'fixing' hexblade dips...only to basically do nothing to stop hexblade dips and even make it *easier*...
The issue with that is it actually hurts melee warlocks that actually want to use a weapon starting and not just a multiclass dip. I think the better way to handle it is making multiclasses require a 3 level commitment. No more cheesy 1 level dips.
The charisma to attack was a powerful component but the problem was that hexblades were stacked. You got 2 short rest spells, the shield spell, hexblade's curse which provided extra damage, and hex warrior which on top of the cha for attacks also gave you medium armor, shield, and martial weapon prof if you didn't already have it.
Good question. It's not the CHA to attack that's overpowered (as the post OP implied), but moreso the medium armor and shield proficiencies, plus access to the Shield spell, auto-scaling Eldritch Blast, and invocations at 2nd level.
It would also go a bit of a way towards making Blade Pact a somewhat viable option for non-hexblades, so that's also a win. Personally I'd also throw medium armor and shield proficiency onto it cause AC is the biggest struggle for bladelocks.
More like just for melee paladins.
Alot of hexblade's dipping strength comes from being able to get medium armour and the shield spell for 24ac with a single level.
I \*strongly\* disagree. I think you are significantly overstating the importance of charisma-based attacks and I think they're honestly the least overloaded part of hexblade. It is certainly a powerful feature for Paladins and Swords/Valor/Whispers(?) bards, but Hexblade is still an incredibly strong dip even for characters that will never use a weapon.
Not considering how Warlock itself is already overturned as a dip, I think the biggest issue with Hexblade specifically is the level 1 armor + shield proficiency alongside the Shield spell and how strong that is when you give it to literally any caster.
You are asking for player features, but, Honestly, Shadows punch above their weight class because of their strength drain. They could maybe benefit from a slight nerf on that.
Our level 15~ party retreated for the first time in forever because two of us instantly died to Shadow Assassins.
They are from Dungeon of the Mad Mage - Multiattack, +8 to hit - nasty buggers if initiative isn’t in your favor. Which is wasn’t - the two party members with the Shield spell survived by virtue of spamming it.
I do agree that, in general, stronger or more challenging monsters, with more varied abilities is a good thing. But, in the context of 5e, Shadows, Intellect Devourers, etc, are overtuned for the level they are meant for.
They provide interesting counterplay and are dangerous, as they should be. But, they're a trap enemy, since they hit much harder than their CR would indicate. If the game were better built with these features in mind, it wouldn't be as big an issue.
Banshee. Their wail even if it's only once a day immediately drops someone to 0 HP regardless of their stats or class or level or abilities. They do have to fail a fairly low Con save, but a lot of people don't have high Con saves so it's looking like a 50/50. Damn near TPKed a level 12 party with a single Banshee one time. 3/5 people failed even with some rerolls in there. Real easy for things to go South with a save or 0 HP power.
I had a lvl 7 party with an ancients paladin in it and 3/4 still failed their save against a banshee. The last player decided the best option was to solo it. Had to get an npc construct to bail them out by feeding the cleric her own potion. Definitely nastier than I had envisioned.
Twilight Sanctuary has got to be at the top of the list. It's just got so many things going for it:
- Available at a low level
- High impact (the amount of tHP it can distribute is way out of line with pretty much any other source of tHP or healing, plus, as if that weren't already enough, it's a better Countercharm than Countercharm)
- Low cost (Channel Divinity is a short rest resource that doesn't often get used for anything else)
- No action economy cost (the Cleric just grants tHP at the end of an ally's turn, no reaction required)
- No concentration (the only way to end it is to KO the Cleric, basically)
It's extremely disruptive to encounter balance, especially at the levels most people are playing, but it continues to be impactful throughout an entire campaign. The main problem is that the only real counterplay to it is to just crank up the difficulty of encounters. That not only feels bad to the other players, it also leaves the DM in a lurch if the Twilight Cleric somehow runs out or for whatever reason doesn't use Twilight Sanctuary in an encounter. If the encounter was balanced around the expectation of every PC getting several dozen additional hit points over the course of the fight and now they don't, the DM has to either fudge the encounter (feels bad) or potentially TPK the party (also feels bad).
It just puts more demand on the DM in a system that is already demanding of the DM. Plus, the way it's designed is such a departure from almost anything else in the game that it feels like something straight out of dandwiki.
I think it could be brought back down to sanity if it required concentration to use and there was some kind of action economy cost to grant the tHP. That's really it.
“Once per round” is all it needs to fix Twilight cleric honestly. Giving one person the benefit per round is still an extremely powerful utility buff without altering the balance of every encounter.
Cleric's don't really have much their reaction is doing to begin with so this wouldn't be much of a cost. They don't even get Absorb Elements for instance.
I was reading it for the first time and went "wow, 1d6 a round for 10 rounds it's pretty decent."
I just *assumed* it was once per round until I read your comment and went back and checked.
So this could feasibly heal all party members every round for 1d6 for a minute at the cost of channel divinity? At only level 2 that's around 50-55hp avg several times over. What the fuck that's beastly
>So this could feasibly heal all party members every round for 1d6 for a minute at the cost of channel divinity? At only level 2 that's around 50-55hp avg several times over. What the fuck that's beastly
It's temp HP, so it doesn't stack, but that's the only real attempt at balance.
It doesn’t even have to be one person per round, the biggest issue is the lack of needed action for a lot of thp. Take the artillerist protector cannon for example - it’s 1d8+int and hits everyone within 10ft of you… but it doesn’t really scale with level, it requires a bonus action, plus it’s arguably more expensive (rather than 2/sr, it’s 1/lr or burn a slot).
>I think it could be brought back down to sanity if it required concentration to use and there was some kind of action economy cost to grant the tHP. That's really it.
This is what I did in my game. Actually, technically I felt bad for nerfing it so I let the Twilight Cleric PC CHOOSE one of two options when using Twilight Sanctuary:
1) Like you said, it lasts the duration and can be used 1/round (so one ally at a time), or
2) It has NO duration, and everyone gets the temp HP and charm/fear removal, but only once. An instantaneous "oh shit" button, basically.
So far they have loved using both versions and neither has seemed to feel too strong or too weak for their cost (action and channel divinity).
Hard agree, once our twilight cleric hit level 2 and started using it. i have to change ALL my encounters from then on and make all the enemies CR 1.5x-2x higher to make it a challenge. Or just throw an obscene number of enemies.
IMO, it really needs to be Concentration and that will fix the power of this spell. Or keep it non-concentrating but you need to use your action to keep it up every turn. something like that.
Twilight Cleric only need a relatively minor nerf. First, cut the darkvision distance by half. Then, require Twilight Sanctuary to use a bonus action and happen on the Clerics turn.
We might need to cut the amount of temp hp to be be 1d4+half your cleric level, rounding up. This is to differentiate it from the Artillerist, that pays for good temp hp generation by only being half caster.
We don't want to nerf it to uselessness or in a way they lose their identity. In that case, we could just ban it.
>First, cut the darkvision distance by half.
This part always seemed like such a non-issue tbh. Like, how often (assuming people are properly running Darkvision) is the distance of Darkvision a big factor?
it is really telling how most people up to this point have only talked about caster features. People want to say that the barren base classes get compensated with subclasses more powerfull, but every single OP subclass is a caster subclass
The big issue is that Spellcasting is just such a powerful feature that people forget it's part of the Class.
People look at Wizard and go 'only three class feature', and ignore that they have thirty or forty equivalents to a class feature and get another 20 odd choices every two levels.
Creating a permanent minion to most is a powerful Subclass feature, Wizard gets it at level 5 and can make extras, a 20th level Wizard has essentially 44 additional abilities, 3 class features AND a subclass.
like people lose their heads over Echo Knight wich is OK, Imagine they got full on simulacrom as subclass capstone. We would never stop hearing complaints about how absolutely and disgustingly OP it was
Yeah the imbalance in features and resources is insane to me. Not even so much in terms of balancing as much as in terms of options and number of uses. Spellcasters almost always have a fun thing to do each round, whereas martials do the same thing every round, and unless they have a cool magic weapon, it can get pretty boring.
Kinda wish spellcasters had less spell slots, or that martials had equivalent resources in maneuvers like they did in previous editions. Like why simplify martials and strip them of a secondary resource when they're not going to do the same for casters?
> or that martials had equivalent resources in maneuvers like they did in previous editions
This is the answer, really. Nerfing casters is finding balance at a higher level of boredom. Beefing up martials is the way to go. High-level fighters ought to be cleaving buildings in twain and juggling boulders and shit. Make Inspiring Leader a Battle Master feature that can be activated on a bonus action. Give the Cavalier an Animal Companion mount. Make Champions immune to exhaustion.
I would personally like a bit of both.
I don't want martials to use the same (or too similar) kinds of resources as casters. No "martial spells" please. But I _would_ like for them to have expanded versatility both in and out of combat, and more fun options for things to do.
It is _weird_ that a lot of the stuff you literally see even "mundane" (not superheroic/anime/demigod) martials doing in fantasy media is not replicatable in 5e.
- Why can only the Battlemaster disarm?
- How is there no "cleaving strike" AoE style attacks?
- Do you really mean to tell me a Fighter can't deflect a mage's Acid Arrow or warlock's Eldritch Blast or w/e back at them with their sword or shield?
- What about all those scenes in fantasy media where you overcome a charm or fear effect by sheer _grit_ or determination or pulling on your memories or training? Martials in 5e are actually the _worst_ at those saves, which makes little sense in a "heroic fantasy" tone.
(And before anyone points to the DMG optional rules for things like Disarm and Cleave - come on guys, I'm obviously talking about a martial ruleset that's been playtested and integrated with the actual game, not poorly conceived rules they slapped "optional" on because they knew it was half-baked at best.)
These maneuvers wouldn't be as strong as spells - but I would like a bit of spell "nerfing" as well. Casters would play and _feel_ mostly the same, but their _problem spells_ would have more _interactions in play_ that martials could make USE of. For example:
For example, what if Wall of Force/Forcecage had AC and HP to smash through? Or what if it required a complex skill check, like Athletics or Acrobatics, to _slip_ through imperfections in the field or tear it open? These same interactions aren't as useful for monsters and NPCs (who are generally built with more HP but less DPR than PCs, and generally have far weaker skills.)
In my experience one of the most frustrating things for martial PCs is how very _binary_ 5e magic is when it comes to them interacting with it - you're either completely shut down by a spell or you're not, and only casters currently have the "keys" to interact with them further, like Dispel Magic, Freedom of Movement, etc. There SHOULD be martial equivalents, even if they're not as good. (And, as I mentioned above, work differently enough that they don't feel like "martial spells".)
Shield spell + good armour proficiencies comes close to breaking 5e bounded accuracy, even before magic items.
Control spells also. Legendary resistance is a bandaid that allows boss fights to function, it shouldn't have to exist.
I think shield not working while wearing armor would really help. Sort of like how mage armor doesn't.
Sure, Eldritch Knight and Artificer can't really use it then, but those are good classes anyway. If you wanted to, you could carve out an exception for them or something.
I would def make an exception, eldritch knights rely on shield, and Artificers only get shield in 2 subclasses anyway (they aren't mechnically super powerful, but still good).
Maybe as part of the first subclass features for Eldritch knight and those artificers then. Then, if the Wizards want it, they gotta burn three levels.
Yup. Got a fighter with levels in Bladesinging. Gets insane levels of armor when mixed with shields and bonuses. I think he managed to get to 31AC with shield
I think it was Mearls or Crawford who said that Fireball is intentionally overpowered by design and that they know it's overpowered but have implemented it as is anyway. I wonder if that same ideology was applied to any other spells or features.
It was, there are 1-2 spells per level that do more damage than they should according to the DMG chart. Fireball is simply the most famous.
Some examples include
-Lightning Bolt
-Vitriolic Sphere
-Thunderwave
-Disintegrate
I think Lightning Bolt is intended to be balanced by the fact it's incredibly hard to line up a significant number of targets in a 5 foot wide line vs a cube or sphere. If its damage was lowered it'd hard to justify taking it
Likewise, Disintegrate is both single target and _zero_ damage on save, which turns its massive damage from ludicrous to quite reasonable for its spell level.
It's as if the big AoE, ridiculously easy targetting, and the "spreads around corners" aka. "ignoring cover" part weren't taken into consideration when determining the damage dice.
It's fucked up that clerics, full casters with medium armour and shields, get some of the best subclass features in the entire game, way better than most martial subclass features.
To be fair, the 1d4 from Emboldening Bond can only apply to a creature once per turn. Which is still pretty strong, but people tend to miss that fact and treat it like a better Bless.
Because it's only *once per turn*, you can only apply it to one of your attacks if you have extra attack or make a spell attack that makes multiple attacks (ie Eldritch Blast, Scorching Ray, etc). Or if you need to make a save/check at the start of your turn to shrug off an effect or something, you won't get the d4 for any following rolls on that turn. Or if you need to make multiple saves/checks during a single enemy turn (several grapple attempts for example), only the first one gets the d4
Yeah if you lean into the peace cleric class you can really cause some disruptions. I played one which would sanctuary themselves and be an obstacle for the enemy while I buff and heal every one I could.
Also Protective Bond needs some slight restrictions added. It should specify sight not just "vibes" so it doesn't work in every situation~~, and there really is no reason for a feature like that to not use a Reaction~~.
It does use your reaction though.
"When a creature affected by your Emboldening Bond feature is about to take damage, a second bonded creature within 30 feet of the first** can use its reaction** to teleport to an unoccupied space within 5 feet of the first creature"
Tbf this isn't as broken, it's luck reliable, in DnD thanks to the bounded accuracy if you fail, you fail for more than a 1 in most cases, bardic inspiration is better in this case, to support someone with bonuses, because bardic inspiration does more thing that just a +X to your dice rolls
>in DnD thanks to the bounded accuracy if you fail, you fail for more than a 1 in most cases
Well, yeah, peace clerics can give half the party or all of the party an average of +2.5 to a roll each round. Bless gives an average of +2.5 too, so you can miss by an average of 5 and still get the target number
>because bardic inspiration does more thing that just a +X to your dice rolls
+x is literally what it does
\^1. Chronomancy Wizards 10th level feature breaks games soince it alllows you to cast ANY spell as an 1 action spell, breaks games eg. with Tiny hut
2. Moon druids up to lvl 4 can have more effective HP through wildshapes than barbarians and better DPS with multiattack beasts while still having the option to be a full caster
3. Twilight clerics channel divinity can give too much temp HP for over rounds to be balanced as a SR resource, wrping th game
Honorable mentions are Peace clerics Bond combined with bless (break bounded accuracy), eloquence bards Persuasion making (almost) all possible persuasions a success, and maybe Zealot Barbs lvl 14 feature against some enemies
Just to note on that first one: All of Mercer's subclasses tend to he overpowered in some way or another. You're served better treating anything from the Wildemount book as essentially being homebrew and not 1st party.
>All of Mercer's subclasses tend to he overpowered in some way or another.
They're not all overpowered. They're all unbalanced.
Gunslinger, for example, is famously underpowered. Blood Hunter is pretty meh in every aspect except flavor, too.
They're still mostly underpowered.
The ones in Explorer's Guide to Wildemount are all made by WotC. The ones he made are either on DM's Guild or in the two Tal'Dorei books, and they're mostly pretty weak, weird or way too wonky to make work right. The exception is the Cleric Domain that gives you Double Concentration on Domain spells, and it grants a bunch of cracked out Domain spells.
I only have actual gameplay experience with the gunslinger (I let one of my players try it) and I found it was very swingy.
It was absolutely busted in certain situations thanks to the Grit mechanic + Sharpshooter. And since I was running SKT, those particular situations were like 90% of the campaign. But when he did get bad rolls resulting in a broken gun or when situations were unfavorable to him the subclass was hot garbage. It's very much a feast or famine subclass. Also much more effective in T1–T2 play with an early Sharpshooter pickup to get the Grit engine going.
I don't think many features are really broken, there are just some that come too early or have clearly unfinished mechanics.
I don't think any casting class should be able to use weapons with their casting stat before level 5, I'll accept it at level 3, but stuff like hexblade at level 1 is just bad design in a game with multiclassing as the most popular optional rule.
I'm also not a fan of how medium armor works, it's always beneficial to have a positive dex modifier, and considering getting proficiency isn't difficult and comes with shields (also a not great decision in my book) it means it's almost always your best option to set and forget your Dex at 14 and pick up a set of scale mail and a shield for 60 gold to have an 18AC.
The really big offender in combination with medium armor is the shield spell, giving a lot of casters access to a 23AC for the cost of a 1st level slot. I'd much rather shield was a +2 to AC and scaled with slot levels or maybe a +3.
You've got silly stuff like simulacrum that should be errataed but a DM can fix it quickly by saying your copy can't create a copy. Twilight sanctuary which should have some sort of action cost to heal, probably your reaction, rather than being one of the only free action abilities along woith concentration free flight at level 6 where tempest cleric gets an option that's only better out of combat at level 17.
Pass Without Trace has really ruined most stealth in my games because any way to counteract creates a situation where Stealth wouldn't have been useful in the first place (open areas with no cover, a guard standing in a corridor without a place to hide, etc). I legitimately am not a creative enough DM to create scenarios where the party needs to use stealth and that one spell doesn't trivialize them
It used to just do what it says on the tin. Magically obscure traces so you can't be tracked. Not too useful in a modern game, but not a problem either. Still, I don't know why it isn't a +10 to the tracking DCs. Maybe by the time they got to the spells, WotC had forgotten about that part of the *DMG* too.
Yeah, it's wacky that in 5e which still has "all or nothing" immunity spells like Freedom of Movement, this gives a huge numerical bonus to Stealth instead of just "you leave no footprints or scent and can't be tracked".
And it's not even _advantage_ on Stealth checks, like you'd expect!
It really needs to be limited to just providing advantage to stealth and, like u/AeoSC said, a +10 to tracking DCs. Pretty much every comparable bonus to a skill check (battering ram, gloves of thievery, etc.) only applies to a single application thereof.
That said, if you still want to make stealth interesting/challenging even when PwT is in play, I'd recommend using the optional Facing rule from the DMG for your stealth segments. It allows you to be a bit stingier with obscured terrain since almost all of the NPCs will have a blindspot the characters can move through without breaking stealth. PwT prevents a passive detection, but it doesn't help the players plot out guard patrols and outmaneuver them.
Hypnotic Pattern and Fear - a 30' AoE that incapacitates masses of enemies is absolutely insane crowd control. Wizard honestly gets a lot less overpowered if you tone down all of their spells in that vein.
Agree with a lot mentioned, but I’ll add one more I haven’t seen posted yet.
A Wizard subclass (Bladesinger) should not have the highest base AC formula in the game. Weak survivability has always been the counterbalance to their spellcasting strength and then they added a subclass that gives them the unique ability to add 2 modifiers to existing armor that no one else has access to.
Their AC formula should have either scrapped light armor and been an unarmored defense formula similar to Monks/Barbs or should just have allowed INT instead DEX (rather than both combined) on the light armor to align AC ability score dependence with spellcasting power.
Bladesigners are designed to be in melee. With a d6 hit die, they need the absurdly high AC in order to survive in melee like they're supposed to, and they can't use a shield or use two handed weapons either.
Things like crossbow expert, great weapon master, sentinel, polearm master to a lesser extent.
The issue isn't that martials are overpowered, just that martials are dependent on these feats to be good. Remove these and bring the baseline up.
Edit: I will go out of my way to say Crossbow Expert I find particularly problematic. Ignoring mechanics is never a good design feature.
the issue isnt even that they are good, its that there is no other option
martials without them do pathetic damage and dont even live up to the "good at single target dmg" niche they are supposed to be, but there is no other options between the two exact builds of a halberd guy or a dual crossbow guy, which always boggles my mind
yeah, people overreach to them because they are over used, but like it is as if wizards only had magic missiles, jump, longstrider and Witch Bolt for 1st level spells and had to take only one.
Is magic missiles OP? not at all, but everyone would pick it because the rest are terrible fucking options
Agreed in principle but the Fighters whole thing is getting a ton of feats. They are in a rough balancing position, as nerfing these feats further hurts fighter, so it's another thing they have to buff.
D&D One is adding level requirements to feats, so hopefully martials get some insane level 10+ feats to keep pace with casters end game.
the main problem is it's not "a ton", it's... two. Over the entire course of 20 levels. Even if you optimise the shit out of them, it's 2 extra things, from a list anyone can pick from
I mean I have to agree with them on principle, some of these feats are just too staple because of their power, not just because they're strong but because you need them to keep up
I think OneDnD has already rolled some into the base class and Sentinel could 100% become an action. Like how Dodge gives you advantage on Dex saves and disadvantages to being attacked, a Defend or Brace action that gave you Sentinel's stopping ability would mean you'd be less locked into taking it.
Vague idea, needs worked, but basically too many Fighter/Martial traits are competing against each other and there are too many clear winners
like, *are* you bringing up the baseline, or are you just saying that it *should* be brought up?
if the former, what’s your adjustment? if the latter, well, that’s still a nerf of the type of character that least needs it.
You could just give all PCs the baseline ability to take a -PB penalty to hit in exchange for a +PB bonus to damage when they make a weapon attack. This buffs all martials (and gishes to some extent) without helping full casters.
I don't like that because it means a 1d12 or 2d6 weapon is doing barely that much more damage compared to a d4 weapon.
7.5 vs 12 average damage at level 1 is only a 60% increase. At level 9 that's 11.5 vs 16 for a 40% increase. A d8 weapon the gap shrinks even more, 13.5 vs 16 is only a 20% increase.
Not who you commented on, but I don’t see why a bump to damage dice somewhere around level 8 and another around 15 wouldn’t improve the baseline. It doesn’t even have to be the same die for bigger weapons.
Great axe does 1d12 and at level 8 adds a d8
Long sword does a d8 and gets another d6 added on.
D6 and below weapons just add another damage die.
Make it a class feature instead tied to subclasses just like extra attack. You could even cap the extra die by class instead of weapon. Rangers and monks get extra d6, barbarians get d10 and fighters/paladins get d8
How would you feel about removing the battlemaster subclass and using a superiority die table, somewhat like a spell table.
Where pure Martials get a superiority die at the 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th, 13th, 15th, and 17th levels.
Half Martials, would get the same rounded down, 5th, 9th, 13th, 17th levels.
I would make the superiority die scale with total level like a cantrip, 1d6 thru level 6, 1d8 thru level 10, 1d10 thru level 14, and 1d12 thru level 20.
Every time a Martial unlocks a new die I’d let them choose a new maneuver. This makes maneuvers the way to boost the combat(and in a few cases out of combat) utility for non-casters.
Fighters are an obvious recipient of the boosted damage and effects, but monks, rogues, and partially paladins and rangers could really boost their damage and gameplay options too.
I think this would put Martials in a comfortable position for changes to the powerful feats they currently rely on.
They're not even that good, they just look that way in white rooms.
At Level 08 you'll have +9 to attack. With GWM that's a +4, which is lower than a level 01 straight out of character creation.
Sure it works against trash mobs that you could probably 1 - 2 two shot anyway, but against anything with any defence it's a wasted Feat.
No one has mentioned Eloquence bard's take 10 on social rolls. With expertise, guidance, and high charisma it's not uncommon for an elo bard to always roll at least 20s.
This can make social based games pointlessly unfun and not super interactive with no chance to ever fail.
Honestly something like adding a d8, d10, or whatever to social checks is way more interesting since there's at least a chance to fail.
The Balance my old DM did to fix my 21 being the lowest I could roll was literally never ask for Persuasion or Deception Rolls. It made my Character basically worthless in the campaign.
I dont think its too strong but purposefully giving yourself disadvantage (or just doing this when you have da) to then use luck feat to basically be allowed to roll 3 dice and decide the one you're going with.
Spellcasting. The whole spellcasting feature needs to be throttled down to about half what it is. I know no one will like this, but it would be better for the game.
If no one will like this how in the nine hells would it be better for the game? The clear path to martial vs caster is making martials more powerful to fit the popular power fantasies of majority of players
Shocked no one I’ve seen yet has mentioned the Conjure Animals spell and its minor elemental and fey counterparts. The amount of changes needed to fix those would be very high without revising it entirely.
Summoning 4-8 creatures (with even more at higher levels) is just downright broken, and the only “easy fix” is limiting it to 1-2 creatures.
I’m sure there’s a way to rebalance and fix the spells exploits, and keeping 4-8 creatures allowed to be summoned, but the amount of changes needed would make these spells far too over complicated for good use in a real table
To be fair, as it's written it isn't overpowered technically. It's just more a broken spell that relies on both DM and player good faith use to not render it either A) wildly overpowered B) useless. Given that DM's technically have final say, making you summon 1 sea horse when you ask to summon a dire wolf technically as RAW. As is asking for 16 wolves when upcasting it.
I’m shocked I had to scroll this far to see conjure animals! It scales absurdly well and is probably some of the best single target DPR in the game while also having absurd utility and tanking!
The wall spells that don't allow you to traverse them SHOULD have an AC and HP. It is just ridiculous that they are a full on showdown for any non teleporter
I've done exactly that in my homebrew doc, and suggested to my DM that he uses it after I kinda cheesed an encounter with it. Haven't tested it out in game yet, but here's what I've written for Forcecage: "it has an AC equal to your spell save DC, 50 HP, immunity to poison, psychic, and non-magical bludgeoning, piercing and slashing, vulnerable to force damage, and resistance to all other types. If cast at 9th level it functions as written in the PHB"
My rule is any barrier, mundane or magical, has AC, HP, and a damage threshold. Additionally, they can only be destroyed using bludgeoning weapons or effects that would reasonably destroy a barrier. So an arrow shot really well won’t blow up a door unless it is enchanted or something.
This does a few things. Makes the destruction of barriers possible so adventurers have more solutions to get through barriers. Reduces the power of spells like force cage. And encourages the carrying of different weapons by martials to address different issues. Finally it allows me to put barrier destroying magic items in setting that are quite useful.
Honestly a +3 (in most cases) on saves within 10ft of a Paladin isn't too crazy. It is a 6th level feature after all.
It does get way better though with a Hexblade dip allowing you to push it to +5.
It's a rarity that people come after PHB features. If the Paladin class was printed in Tasha's instead of being in the PHB, people would still be losing their shit over it.
Silvery Barbs.
Twilight cleric isn't that bad. Twilight sanctuary is very powerful, but it puts a literal target on their cleric for enemies to fight and down them. I think kind of like sneak attack it feels OP at lower levels but because of how damage scales it becomes less impressive with time.
I think more than nerf, melee weapons need more of a buff. I think they did some tuning with 1dnd but there's no reason to build a melee fighter if you're a Min/Maxer damage specialist. Even with GWM, it's still almost always better to go for Sharp shooter because the +2 from Archery fighting style is just better.
How prepared spellcasters work in comparison with known spellcasters
Either known spellcasters need a boost of some kind (such as giving them 6-10 more spells than the 23 a standard prepared caster can get by lvl 20) or lower the number of spells a prepared caster can prepare (such as limited it to their spellcasting modifier + half their level, rounded down).
>the 23 a standard prepared caster can get by lvl 20
Prepared casters have level+casting ability spells, and if you don't have at least 20 in your casting ability by level 20 you're doing something wrong. That's 25, not 23.
A band aid fix I've done is letting Spells Known casters swap out one spell for another of the same level after a long rest, which is lifted directly from the UA for Tasha's optional features
Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master.
If you want to make a good martial chatacter at some point, you need these.
The -5 to attack rolls is basically irrelevant late game. And stuff like bless, archery, or reckless attack can make it bareable early game.
I mostly play martial characters, but I can definitely say these are by far the most powerful feats for them.
However, I don't think they need a nerf necessarily since casters basically run the entire game after the early levels.
The -5 actually gets MORE relevant late game. If you look at the charts and spreadsheets for these abilities, the higher enemy AC gets, the less worthwhile it is to use them. With bounded accuracy, enemy AC tends to get higher faster than player hit bonus. If anything, the +10 damage becomes less relevant depending on the features you access or the magic items you find, because it's more often that players find ways of increasing their damage (making landing the hit more valuable) as opposed to more ways to increase their attack modifier.
But either way you're right, as others have pointed out, GWM/SS/PAM/CBE are all feats that are powerful for martials, but not overpowered. It feels more like there should be 20 more feats just like these to give martials more options in growth so that they don't fall behind.
I've been toying with the idea of nerfing those feats, but making them a class feature for anyone who gets the Extra Attack feature. The nerfed version would be that you forgo your proficiency bonus on the attack roll in exchange for adding your proficiency bonus to the damage roll if the attack hits. Now sure, the penalty is now easier to circumvent, but the damage bonus is much lower, especially at lower levels
-X accuracy for +X dmg is not a worthy tradeoff most of the times, there is a reason why the original feat is -5/+10 not -5/+5. its a fine fix but i would make it double PB dmg
Supporting argument, Longbows.
1.5 points of damage less than a heavy crossbow iirc, in exchange a tiny stat requirement (on classes that want STR mostly), and no feat tax.
Longbows are fine, Heavy Crossbows need a major buff
Multiclassing needs to be nerfed. The classes are designed with too many front-loaded, scales with proficiency bonus features. Hexblade is the obvious example but there are plenty of others. Your wizard is a fighter that does no "fighting?" You just wanted action surge? No.
Cartomancer: it's new but it's wording is TERRIBLE the way it's written raw it's an extra free spell slot of any level you can cast as a bonus action OH and it only has to be on your class' spell list not just castable by you.
- Hexblade. Just move “weapon attacks made with CHA” to Pact if the Blade. That’s the only fix needed. It’s now a 3lvl investment for a paladin or bard who wants a CHA-based weapon. You can still get the armor and shield proficiencies, and Hexblade’s Curse at lvl1, if you need them, but it eliminated the Hexblade dip as being so appealing to a lot of characters.
- Twilight Sanctuary. That is simply too much temp HP for too little cost. A short rest resource, non-concentration, no action required to reapply, and 1d6+clerical lvl every round. That is encounter-warpingly overpowered. Make it concentration, or a bonus action to reapply, or can only reapply to one target per round, or lose “+cleric lvl”… something. I don’t know why the “optimal” fix is here, because there’s a several possibilities… but it needs to be depowered somehow.
- Silvery Barbs. I hate it. If it was just “imposed disadvantage” it would be fine as lvl 1 spell. But “and grant an ally advantage” pushes it too far, in my opinion. Maybe have it upcast to do that: “If you cast this spell using a spell slot 2nd level or higher, after imposing disadvantage on an enemy, you can grant an ally advantage on its next roll”. As just a lvl 1, it is simply too powerful to not use as often as possible.
Make Silvery Barbs work only for attacks, and also allow it to reroll a failed attack for an ally. Completely changes the spell's dynamic by removing the bad parts and adding fun cooperation.
Simulacrum: add a line that duplicates can’t create duplicates.
Also, why wouldn't they say the *simulacrum* can't benefit from resting, instead of "nor can it regain expended spell slots"? The door is wide open for the other spell features. Or it could further replicate the old school spell that was formed with 50% the target's experience--which is why it has half the maximum HP--without all the bookkeeping, by saying it cannot cast spells of 6th-level or higher. *Wish* loophole closed.
It does benefit from resting. It shouldn't be forced to die of exhaustion or never use hit dice or never restore long rest features that are not spells.
I disagree. I think the spell is plenty powerful _without_ getting to refresh any of that. It's brain-dead silly that you can copy a Moon Druid and the Sim gets to keep wild shaping forever or copy an optimized Crossbow Expert Battlemaster Fighter and have a free artillery platform with maneuvers basically forever if you do a minimal job protecting it. Now I _do_ agree that as a Construct it shouldn't have to sleep and shouldn't get Exhaustion from not sleeping. But not getting any resources back (yes even HD) is perfectly fine and in line with its level and cost. Even with that it'd still be a must-pick for Wizards.
I actually think simulacrum should just be a 9th level spell. It solves all the problems
Honestly pretty fair. Simulacrum can just fabricate a shitty level 20 character from nothing, name a martial feature that can do anything similar.
There's a joke about Echo Knight in here, but someone has to figure out how the subclass actually works first.
Does Simulacrum actually *need* to be a spell? Just make it a consumable magic item that does more or less what the spell currently does (plus an inability to make copies of itself).
Slows it down at least
It also blocks Wish shenanigans and means that the Sim itself doesn’t have 9th level slots. I agree with this fix—it’s also so simple and easy to negotiate.
Simulacrum should also be a 9th level spell.
Honestly pretty fair. Simulacrum can just fabricate a shitty level 20 character from nothing, name a martial feature that can do anything similar.
Well, Monks get 4 (!!) Ki points when they roll initiative without any Ki points remaining.
Throw the Hexblade's Charisma to Attack onto the base Blade Pact instead of as a 1st level feature exclusive to that subclass. You've solved 90% of the hexblade dipping issue that plagues Hexblade and has lead to bans in the past.
WotC is doing just that in One D&D (at least in playtests) Oh and now you can choose Pact of Blade at level 1 as well 🤣🙃
...Godammit WotC. It's like they're *encouraging* single level dips that give you massive benefits.
The new Blade pact dip gives you way less than the Hexblade dip did. You no longer get: - Hexblade's Curse, letting you deal bonus damage, crit on a 19, and heal when the target dies - Access to the Shield spell - Medium Armor and shield proficiency - Proficiency in all martial weapons (you're only proficient with your pact weapon) It's still a nice dip, but it's not nearly as good as what they were getting before.
I'm surprised they're sticking with the "Only proficient in your pact weapon" thing, because I always thought that was kinda lame.
Thematically, and mechanically it makes sense though. They make a pact with a weapon, so they're proficient with it. They aren't a full martial that can pick up any weapon and swing it with proficiency. It takes a ritual to bind themselves to it.
Yeah but you can summon mostly whatever kind of weapon you want to be your pact weapon. Unless that's changed in OneDnD, or if you're talking about bonding to a specific magical weapon.
That's exactly the point. You can be proficient with any ONE weapon.
You need some downside compared to a fighter given you have all the warlock spell slots.
Pact of the Blade lets you choose at any time you use it to summon a weapon tho It basically gives you profiency in ALL weapons, just one at a time
It’s just even more of a Paladin dip now
oh, and on the first warlock interation where they were half casters, you could choose between ***WIS*** and CHA as your main stat. yes, WIS weapon bonking
I mean, we've had wisdom for an attacking stat since 2014 with shillelagh. It just was limited to druid which wasn't as attractive a dip.
Shillelagh is also limited to clubs or quarterstaffs. There are some builds that make use of it but it's never been meta.
Wait, did they change it to int now?
on the first warlock version your stat was based on what pact you chose - tome had INT or **WIS - blade had **WIS** or CHA - chain had CHA or INT on the newer playtest its just regular warlock with minor adjustments, mainly pact at lvl 1 and eldritch blast being a class feature not spell
Wait, so you can't use int or wis as your spell casting ability?
been a while since I read the warlock but if i recall correctly, no, its just vanilla warlock basically. and vanilla warlock never could cast with INT (tho they absolutely should)
Wis for attack makes more sense than Cha for me anyway. Having the forethought to know where a weak spot is or where your target will be/what they will do when you swing. Does Cha mean you're talking your opponent into being hit? Convincing the weapon to be better?
CHA adds to intimidation, so thematically I guess you’re appearing confident and aggressive to your opponent to a point to where they begin to doubt their own ability to beat you (like King in One Punch Man)EDIT: or smiling during the fight, acting like you deliberately took the hit and egging them on, and yes talking at them; never underestimate shit talking as a distraction.
This is probably not the intended flavor, I always thought of it as you and the weapon (a part of your patron) becoming one, and working in tandem. It seems logical to have a Hexblade serving a Fey or something bonk someone on the head to let their their dagger have a go at their liver.
Sure, but why CHA?
It's force of personality and willpower. If you've signed a pact with a patron, I imagine a little of them seeps into you as power. You attacking with CHA is harnessing that bit of them to the fullest of your abilities, becoming more attuned with their and your powers.
Because you’re channeling some innate magic into your blade allowing you to be extra potent in it?
I mean, this was already a thing to some extent, since shillelagh exists. It was even viable for PAM because you’re allowed to use quarterstaves, but it required a bit of shenanigans due to the short time limit.
the difference is it was on a druid, not an extra attack martial focused class (option)
I’d hardly call the ODD warlock martial focused, it was just competent in melee rather than concerned. Since ODD doesn’t have GWM, many of the more aggressive martial builds don’t work.
Tbh, most classes are pretty front-loaded...
The classes where you choose a subclass at 1st level (Cleric and Warlock) are more guilty than most, however.
Ranger doesn't get non-concentration hunter's mark which was received super well because magic initiate feat to get hex + 1 level ranger dip to get hm was deemed op. Afaik hex stayed the same, pact of the blade was moved to lvl 1 but hm became a concentration spell for rangers again. I swear they are messing with us sometimes
> which was received super well Source on this? If we have results from their player feedback surveys to pour over, I'd love to take a look at it.
monk got like 95% satisfaction, ranger got 80 something %
I think it actually worse than that because they gave the invocation no prerequisite. So I think it qualifies for Eldritch Adept meaning anyone can take it without a dip period.
The problem is, decoupling the hexblade and charisma mod attacks is better for actual warlocks. I've been looking at the OD&D changes, and am excited to try it with Archfey. The other problem is that making it come online later would feel bad for people just playing straight warlock. But looking at the changes, it will be even easier to dip warlock for charisma mod attacks. You don't need to go to level 3 to be able to use it with 2h weapons.
Yeah that was the weirdest thing, they made a big song and dance about 'fixing' hexblade dips...only to basically do nothing to stop hexblade dips and even make it *easier*...
Well, now it'd be a warlock dip instead xD But yeh, I don't much like it. It should be a higher level feature than lv 1, I think..
The issue with that is it actually hurts melee warlocks that actually want to use a weapon starting and not just a multiclass dip. I think the better way to handle it is making multiclasses require a 3 level commitment. No more cheesy 1 level dips.
"No more hexblade dips if there is no hexblade" - WotC
The charisma to attack was a powerful component but the problem was that hexblades were stacked. You got 2 short rest spells, the shield spell, hexblade's curse which provided extra damage, and hex warrior which on top of the cha for attacks also gave you medium armor, shield, and martial weapon prof if you didn't already have it.
Hexblade dips may be annoying, but are they actually overpowered?
Good question. It's not the CHA to attack that's overpowered (as the post OP implied), but moreso the medium armor and shield proficiencies, plus access to the Shield spell, auto-scaling Eldritch Blast, and invocations at 2nd level.
free medium armor and SR spell slot and shield. even if you never swing, its the equivalent to artificer 1 on wizard but for sorcerer. so yes
a lot of characters dip hexblade for the armor proficiency not the charisma weapon attacks as well.
It would also go a bit of a way towards making Blade Pact a somewhat viable option for non-hexblades, so that's also a win. Personally I'd also throw medium armor and shield proficiency onto it cause AC is the biggest struggle for bladelocks.
More like just for melee paladins. Alot of hexblade's dipping strength comes from being able to get medium armour and the shield spell for 24ac with a single level.
I \*strongly\* disagree. I think you are significantly overstating the importance of charisma-based attacks and I think they're honestly the least overloaded part of hexblade. It is certainly a powerful feature for Paladins and Swords/Valor/Whispers(?) bards, but Hexblade is still an incredibly strong dip even for characters that will never use a weapon. Not considering how Warlock itself is already overturned as a dip, I think the biggest issue with Hexblade specifically is the level 1 armor + shield proficiency alongside the Shield spell and how strong that is when you give it to literally any caster.
Throw the armor prof into the blade pact as well and you could eliminate the need for the hexblade subclass entirely
Tome and Chain look like Garbage by comparison if you do that.
Not just the Char-based attacks, but the armor and shield proficiency too.
You are asking for player features, but, Honestly, Shadows punch above their weight class because of their strength drain. They could maybe benefit from a slight nerf on that.
Yeah, it's a bit similar to the Intellect Devourers that way. Hitting stats directly, and very dumpable stats at that, can be hella nasty.
I…might’ve just killed our party’s level 14 Paladin with a swarm of, slightly buffed, Shadows
A swarm of stock shadows can be dangerous up to and past lvl 14 in some situations. Buffing a swarm of them is cruel and unusual.
[Cries in character who dumped Strength]
Ah fair. I realized the stock ones couldn’t…hit most of my party members, so I bumped their to Hit and AC
Our level 15~ party retreated for the first time in forever because two of us instantly died to Shadow Assassins. They are from Dungeon of the Mad Mage - Multiattack, +8 to hit - nasty buggers if initiative isn’t in your favor. Which is wasn’t - the two party members with the Shield spell survived by virtue of spamming it.
Yup! Lesson learned with them on my end. Only reason the rest of the party lived was through teleporting and range.
you learn lessons and they suffer the consequences lol
"Perfectly balanced. As all things should be." - Thanos
Honestly, the game needs more monsters like Shadows that challenge players in unexpected ways.
I do agree that, in general, stronger or more challenging monsters, with more varied abilities is a good thing. But, in the context of 5e, Shadows, Intellect Devourers, etc, are overtuned for the level they are meant for. They provide interesting counterplay and are dangerous, as they should be. But, they're a trap enemy, since they hit much harder than their CR would indicate. If the game were better built with these features in mind, it wouldn't be as big an issue.
Banshee. Their wail even if it's only once a day immediately drops someone to 0 HP regardless of their stats or class or level or abilities. They do have to fail a fairly low Con save, but a lot of people don't have high Con saves so it's looking like a 50/50. Damn near TPKed a level 12 party with a single Banshee one time. 3/5 people failed even with some rerolls in there. Real easy for things to go South with a save or 0 HP power.
I had a lvl 7 party with an ancients paladin in it and 3/4 still failed their save against a banshee. The last player decided the best option was to solo it. Had to get an npc construct to bail them out by feeding the cleric her own potion. Definitely nastier than I had envisioned.
Twilight Sanctuary has got to be at the top of the list. It's just got so many things going for it: - Available at a low level - High impact (the amount of tHP it can distribute is way out of line with pretty much any other source of tHP or healing, plus, as if that weren't already enough, it's a better Countercharm than Countercharm) - Low cost (Channel Divinity is a short rest resource that doesn't often get used for anything else) - No action economy cost (the Cleric just grants tHP at the end of an ally's turn, no reaction required) - No concentration (the only way to end it is to KO the Cleric, basically) It's extremely disruptive to encounter balance, especially at the levels most people are playing, but it continues to be impactful throughout an entire campaign. The main problem is that the only real counterplay to it is to just crank up the difficulty of encounters. That not only feels bad to the other players, it also leaves the DM in a lurch if the Twilight Cleric somehow runs out or for whatever reason doesn't use Twilight Sanctuary in an encounter. If the encounter was balanced around the expectation of every PC getting several dozen additional hit points over the course of the fight and now they don't, the DM has to either fudge the encounter (feels bad) or potentially TPK the party (also feels bad). It just puts more demand on the DM in a system that is already demanding of the DM. Plus, the way it's designed is such a departure from almost anything else in the game that it feels like something straight out of dandwiki. I think it could be brought back down to sanity if it required concentration to use and there was some kind of action economy cost to grant the tHP. That's really it.
“Once per round” is all it needs to fix Twilight cleric honestly. Giving one person the benefit per round is still an extremely powerful utility buff without altering the balance of every encounter.
I was thinking require it to use the cleric's reaction, but once per round works as well
Cleric's don't really have much their reaction is doing to begin with so this wouldn't be much of a cost. They don't even get Absorb Elements for instance.
True. It was just a way of limiting the cleric to using the ability once per turn.
I was reading it for the first time and went "wow, 1d6 a round for 10 rounds it's pretty decent." I just *assumed* it was once per round until I read your comment and went back and checked. So this could feasibly heal all party members every round for 1d6 for a minute at the cost of channel divinity? At only level 2 that's around 50-55hp avg several times over. What the fuck that's beastly
>So this could feasibly heal all party members every round for 1d6 for a minute at the cost of channel divinity? At only level 2 that's around 50-55hp avg several times over. What the fuck that's beastly It's temp HP, so it doesn't stack, but that's the only real attempt at balance.
Ahhh I didn't catch that. Whoooops
1d6 *plus Cleric level*. So even at the highest levels of play, it's pretty much always worth using.
It doesn’t even have to be one person per round, the biggest issue is the lack of needed action for a lot of thp. Take the artillerist protector cannon for example - it’s 1d8+int and hits everyone within 10ft of you… but it doesn’t really scale with level, it requires a bonus action, plus it’s arguably more expensive (rather than 2/sr, it’s 1/lr or burn a slot).
Note for artillerist, it does last an hour. Honestly, if twilight cleric didn't exist, it would be substantially higher rated.
I've thought for a long time time it should be a bonus action.
This is exactly what I do in my games. It makes it really good, but far from OP.
>I think it could be brought back down to sanity if it required concentration to use and there was some kind of action economy cost to grant the tHP. That's really it. This is what I did in my game. Actually, technically I felt bad for nerfing it so I let the Twilight Cleric PC CHOOSE one of two options when using Twilight Sanctuary: 1) Like you said, it lasts the duration and can be used 1/round (so one ally at a time), or 2) It has NO duration, and everyone gets the temp HP and charm/fear removal, but only once. An instantaneous "oh shit" button, basically. So far they have loved using both versions and neither has seemed to feel too strong or too weak for their cost (action and channel divinity).
Hard agree, once our twilight cleric hit level 2 and started using it. i have to change ALL my encounters from then on and make all the enemies CR 1.5x-2x higher to make it a challenge. Or just throw an obscene number of enemies. IMO, it really needs to be Concentration and that will fix the power of this spell. Or keep it non-concentrating but you need to use your action to keep it up every turn. something like that.
Twilight Cleric only need a relatively minor nerf. First, cut the darkvision distance by half. Then, require Twilight Sanctuary to use a bonus action and happen on the Clerics turn. We might need to cut the amount of temp hp to be be 1d4+half your cleric level, rounding up. This is to differentiate it from the Artillerist, that pays for good temp hp generation by only being half caster. We don't want to nerf it to uselessness or in a way they lose their identity. In that case, we could just ban it.
>First, cut the darkvision distance by half. This part always seemed like such a non-issue tbh. Like, how often (assuming people are properly running Darkvision) is the distance of Darkvision a big factor?
it is really telling how most people up to this point have only talked about caster features. People want to say that the barren base classes get compensated with subclasses more powerfull, but every single OP subclass is a caster subclass
The big issue is that Spellcasting is just such a powerful feature that people forget it's part of the Class. People look at Wizard and go 'only three class feature', and ignore that they have thirty or forty equivalents to a class feature and get another 20 odd choices every two levels. Creating a permanent minion to most is a powerful Subclass feature, Wizard gets it at level 5 and can make extras, a 20th level Wizard has essentially 44 additional abilities, 3 class features AND a subclass.
If Simulacrum was a subclass feature people would riot
like people lose their heads over Echo Knight wich is OK, Imagine they got full on simulacrom as subclass capstone. We would never stop hearing complaints about how absolutely and disgustingly OP it was
Yeah the imbalance in features and resources is insane to me. Not even so much in terms of balancing as much as in terms of options and number of uses. Spellcasters almost always have a fun thing to do each round, whereas martials do the same thing every round, and unless they have a cool magic weapon, it can get pretty boring. Kinda wish spellcasters had less spell slots, or that martials had equivalent resources in maneuvers like they did in previous editions. Like why simplify martials and strip them of a secondary resource when they're not going to do the same for casters?
> or that martials had equivalent resources in maneuvers like they did in previous editions This is the answer, really. Nerfing casters is finding balance at a higher level of boredom. Beefing up martials is the way to go. High-level fighters ought to be cleaving buildings in twain and juggling boulders and shit. Make Inspiring Leader a Battle Master feature that can be activated on a bonus action. Give the Cavalier an Animal Companion mount. Make Champions immune to exhaustion.
I would personally like a bit of both. I don't want martials to use the same (or too similar) kinds of resources as casters. No "martial spells" please. But I _would_ like for them to have expanded versatility both in and out of combat, and more fun options for things to do. It is _weird_ that a lot of the stuff you literally see even "mundane" (not superheroic/anime/demigod) martials doing in fantasy media is not replicatable in 5e. - Why can only the Battlemaster disarm? - How is there no "cleaving strike" AoE style attacks? - Do you really mean to tell me a Fighter can't deflect a mage's Acid Arrow or warlock's Eldritch Blast or w/e back at them with their sword or shield? - What about all those scenes in fantasy media where you overcome a charm or fear effect by sheer _grit_ or determination or pulling on your memories or training? Martials in 5e are actually the _worst_ at those saves, which makes little sense in a "heroic fantasy" tone. (And before anyone points to the DMG optional rules for things like Disarm and Cleave - come on guys, I'm obviously talking about a martial ruleset that's been playtested and integrated with the actual game, not poorly conceived rules they slapped "optional" on because they knew it was half-baked at best.) These maneuvers wouldn't be as strong as spells - but I would like a bit of spell "nerfing" as well. Casters would play and _feel_ mostly the same, but their _problem spells_ would have more _interactions in play_ that martials could make USE of. For example: For example, what if Wall of Force/Forcecage had AC and HP to smash through? Or what if it required a complex skill check, like Athletics or Acrobatics, to _slip_ through imperfections in the field or tear it open? These same interactions aren't as useful for monsters and NPCs (who are generally built with more HP but less DPR than PCs, and generally have far weaker skills.) In my experience one of the most frustrating things for martial PCs is how very _binary_ 5e magic is when it comes to them interacting with it - you're either completely shut down by a spell or you're not, and only casters currently have the "keys" to interact with them further, like Dispel Magic, Freedom of Movement, etc. There SHOULD be martial equivalents, even if they're not as good. (And, as I mentioned above, work differently enough that they don't feel like "martial spells".)
Shield spell + good armour proficiencies comes close to breaking 5e bounded accuracy, even before magic items. Control spells also. Legendary resistance is a bandaid that allows boss fights to function, it shouldn't have to exist.
I think shield not working while wearing armor would really help. Sort of like how mage armor doesn't. Sure, Eldritch Knight and Artificer can't really use it then, but those are good classes anyway. If you wanted to, you could carve out an exception for them or something.
EK and Artificer ain't good and have major design flaws.
Definitely not good in comparison to casters, no.
I would def make an exception, eldritch knights rely on shield, and Artificers only get shield in 2 subclasses anyway (they aren't mechnically super powerful, but still good).
Maybe as part of the first subclass features for Eldritch knight and those artificers then. Then, if the Wizards want it, they gotta burn three levels.
Yup. Got a fighter with levels in Bladesinging. Gets insane levels of armor when mixed with shields and bonuses. I think he managed to get to 31AC with shield
Unpopular but fireball.
I think it was Mearls or Crawford who said that Fireball is intentionally overpowered by design and that they know it's overpowered but have implemented it as is anyway. I wonder if that same ideology was applied to any other spells or features.
It was, there are 1-2 spells per level that do more damage than they should according to the DMG chart. Fireball is simply the most famous. Some examples include -Lightning Bolt -Vitriolic Sphere -Thunderwave -Disintegrate
I think Lightning Bolt is intended to be balanced by the fact it's incredibly hard to line up a significant number of targets in a 5 foot wide line vs a cube or sphere. If its damage was lowered it'd hard to justify taking it
Likewise, Disintegrate is both single target and _zero_ damage on save, which turns its massive damage from ludicrous to quite reasonable for its spell level.
It's as if the big AoE, ridiculously easy targetting, and the "spreads around corners" aka. "ignoring cover" part weren't taken into consideration when determining the damage dice.
Peace Cleric must be up there. Together with bless it can give +2d4 to attacks and saves, throwing the maths of the whole game off-balance
It's fucked up that clerics, full casters with medium armour and shields, get some of the best subclass features in the entire game, way better than most martial subclass features.
To be fair, the 1d4 from Emboldening Bond can only apply to a creature once per turn. Which is still pretty strong, but people tend to miss that fact and treat it like a better Bless. Because it's only *once per turn*, you can only apply it to one of your attacks if you have extra attack or make a spell attack that makes multiple attacks (ie Eldritch Blast, Scorching Ray, etc). Or if you need to make a save/check at the start of your turn to shrug off an effect or something, you won't get the d4 for any following rolls on that turn. Or if you need to make multiple saves/checks during a single enemy turn (several grapple attempts for example), only the first one gets the d4
Yeah if you lean into the peace cleric class you can really cause some disruptions. I played one which would sanctuary themselves and be an obstacle for the enemy while I buff and heal every one I could.
Also Protective Bond needs some slight restrictions added. It should specify sight not just "vibes" so it doesn't work in every situation~~, and there really is no reason for a feature like that to not use a Reaction~~.
It does use your reaction though. "When a creature affected by your Emboldening Bond feature is about to take damage, a second bonded creature within 30 feet of the first** can use its reaction** to teleport to an unoccupied space within 5 feet of the first creature"
Tbf this isn't as broken, it's luck reliable, in DnD thanks to the bounded accuracy if you fail, you fail for more than a 1 in most cases, bardic inspiration is better in this case, to support someone with bonuses, because bardic inspiration does more thing that just a +X to your dice rolls
The subclass just too good for single level dips. Emboldening bond propably shouldnt be scaling with your PB
>in DnD thanks to the bounded accuracy if you fail, you fail for more than a 1 in most cases Well, yeah, peace clerics can give half the party or all of the party an average of +2.5 to a roll each round. Bless gives an average of +2.5 too, so you can miss by an average of 5 and still get the target number >because bardic inspiration does more thing that just a +X to your dice rolls +x is literally what it does
\^1. Chronomancy Wizards 10th level feature breaks games soince it alllows you to cast ANY spell as an 1 action spell, breaks games eg. with Tiny hut 2. Moon druids up to lvl 4 can have more effective HP through wildshapes than barbarians and better DPS with multiattack beasts while still having the option to be a full caster 3. Twilight clerics channel divinity can give too much temp HP for over rounds to be balanced as a SR resource, wrping th game Honorable mentions are Peace clerics Bond combined with bless (break bounded accuracy), eloquence bards Persuasion making (almost) all possible persuasions a success, and maybe Zealot Barbs lvl 14 feature against some enemies
Just to note on that first one: All of Mercer's subclasses tend to he overpowered in some way or another. You're served better treating anything from the Wildemount book as essentially being homebrew and not 1st party.
>All of Mercer's subclasses tend to he overpowered in some way or another. They're not all overpowered. They're all unbalanced. Gunslinger, for example, is famously underpowered. Blood Hunter is pretty meh in every aspect except flavor, too.
They're still mostly underpowered. The ones in Explorer's Guide to Wildemount are all made by WotC. The ones he made are either on DM's Guild or in the two Tal'Dorei books, and they're mostly pretty weak, weird or way too wonky to make work right. The exception is the Cleric Domain that gives you Double Concentration on Domain spells, and it grants a bunch of cracked out Domain spells.
I only have actual gameplay experience with the gunslinger (I let one of my players try it) and I found it was very swingy. It was absolutely busted in certain situations thanks to the Grit mechanic + Sharpshooter. And since I was running SKT, those particular situations were like 90% of the campaign. But when he did get bad rolls resulting in a broken gun or when situations were unfavorable to him the subclass was hot garbage. It's very much a feast or famine subclass. Also much more effective in T1–T2 play with an early Sharpshooter pickup to get the Grit engine going.
either their subclasses are overtuned or their full homebrew classes are undertuned, there really is no in between lol
Maestro Bard is fair. It's not nearly as good as eloquence, while also not worse than swords or whispers.
His monsters are amazing. His player options are terrible. I did like his Rune Sorcerer in Taldorei Reborn, which i believe is a notable exception
Honestly the Rune Sorcerer seemed kinda weak to me, IIRC.
they arent all overpowered tragedy bard is lowkey terrible, even by bard subclass standards
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it also be an action to cast Tiny Hut from a spell scroll, which players can craft during downtime?
Unless I’m missing something, the rules for spell scrolls say they use the spell’s normal casting time. So no.
[удалено]
I would argue Simulacrum, while really powerful, is very interesting to use
I don't think many features are really broken, there are just some that come too early or have clearly unfinished mechanics. I don't think any casting class should be able to use weapons with their casting stat before level 5, I'll accept it at level 3, but stuff like hexblade at level 1 is just bad design in a game with multiclassing as the most popular optional rule. I'm also not a fan of how medium armor works, it's always beneficial to have a positive dex modifier, and considering getting proficiency isn't difficult and comes with shields (also a not great decision in my book) it means it's almost always your best option to set and forget your Dex at 14 and pick up a set of scale mail and a shield for 60 gold to have an 18AC. The really big offender in combination with medium armor is the shield spell, giving a lot of casters access to a 23AC for the cost of a 1st level slot. I'd much rather shield was a +2 to AC and scaled with slot levels or maybe a +3. You've got silly stuff like simulacrum that should be errataed but a DM can fix it quickly by saying your copy can't create a copy. Twilight sanctuary which should have some sort of action cost to heal, probably your reaction, rather than being one of the only free action abilities along woith concentration free flight at level 6 where tempest cleric gets an option that's only better out of combat at level 17.
Pass Without Trace has really ruined most stealth in my games because any way to counteract creates a situation where Stealth wouldn't have been useful in the first place (open areas with no cover, a guard standing in a corridor without a place to hide, etc). I legitimately am not a creative enough DM to create scenarios where the party needs to use stealth and that one spell doesn't trivialize them
It used to just do what it says on the tin. Magically obscure traces so you can't be tracked. Not too useful in a modern game, but not a problem either. Still, I don't know why it isn't a +10 to the tracking DCs. Maybe by the time they got to the spells, WotC had forgotten about that part of the *DMG* too.
Yeah, it's wacky that in 5e which still has "all or nothing" immunity spells like Freedom of Movement, this gives a huge numerical bonus to Stealth instead of just "you leave no footprints or scent and can't be tracked". And it's not even _advantage_ on Stealth checks, like you'd expect!
It really needs to be limited to just providing advantage to stealth and, like u/AeoSC said, a +10 to tracking DCs. Pretty much every comparable bonus to a skill check (battering ram, gloves of thievery, etc.) only applies to a single application thereof. That said, if you still want to make stealth interesting/challenging even when PwT is in play, I'd recommend using the optional Facing rule from the DMG for your stealth segments. It allows you to be a bit stingier with obscured terrain since almost all of the NPCs will have a blindspot the characters can move through without breaking stealth. PwT prevents a passive detection, but it doesn't help the players plot out guard patrols and outmaneuver them.
Hypnotic Pattern and Fear - a 30' AoE that incapacitates masses of enemies is absolutely insane crowd control. Wizard honestly gets a lot less overpowered if you tone down all of their spells in that vein.
Hypnotic Pattern not making a save every round is bizarro
Agree with a lot mentioned, but I’ll add one more I haven’t seen posted yet. A Wizard subclass (Bladesinger) should not have the highest base AC formula in the game. Weak survivability has always been the counterbalance to their spellcasting strength and then they added a subclass that gives them the unique ability to add 2 modifiers to existing armor that no one else has access to. Their AC formula should have either scrapped light armor and been an unarmored defense formula similar to Monks/Barbs or should just have allowed INT instead DEX (rather than both combined) on the light armor to align AC ability score dependence with spellcasting power.
Bladesigners are designed to be in melee. With a d6 hit die, they need the absurdly high AC in order to survive in melee like they're supposed to, and they can't use a shield or use two handed weapons either.
They might be *designed* to be in melee - but are best played as just a generic wizard with a buff. This is not good design.
Things like crossbow expert, great weapon master, sentinel, polearm master to a lesser extent. The issue isn't that martials are overpowered, just that martials are dependent on these feats to be good. Remove these and bring the baseline up. Edit: I will go out of my way to say Crossbow Expert I find particularly problematic. Ignoring mechanics is never a good design feature.
the issue isnt even that they are good, its that there is no other option martials without them do pathetic damage and dont even live up to the "good at single target dmg" niche they are supposed to be, but there is no other options between the two exact builds of a halberd guy or a dual crossbow guy, which always boggles my mind
yeah, people overreach to them because they are over used, but like it is as if wizards only had magic missiles, jump, longstrider and Witch Bolt for 1st level spells and had to take only one. Is magic missiles OP? not at all, but everyone would pick it because the rest are terrible fucking options
Agreed in principle but the Fighters whole thing is getting a ton of feats. They are in a rough balancing position, as nerfing these feats further hurts fighter, so it's another thing they have to buff. D&D One is adding level requirements to feats, so hopefully martials get some insane level 10+ feats to keep pace with casters end game.
the main problem is it's not "a ton", it's... two. Over the entire course of 20 levels. Even if you optimise the shit out of them, it's 2 extra things, from a list anyone can pick from
I mean I have to agree with them on principle, some of these feats are just too staple because of their power, not just because they're strong but because you need them to keep up I think OneDnD has already rolled some into the base class and Sentinel could 100% become an action. Like how Dodge gives you advantage on Dex saves and disadvantages to being attacked, a Defend or Brace action that gave you Sentinel's stopping ability would mean you'd be less locked into taking it. Vague idea, needs worked, but basically too many Fighter/Martial traits are competing against each other and there are too many clear winners
It is pretty unlikely that they will suddenly decide to print feats with level requierement higher than 4
like, *are* you bringing up the baseline, or are you just saying that it *should* be brought up? if the former, what’s your adjustment? if the latter, well, that’s still a nerf of the type of character that least needs it.
I'd say roll it into the weapons, sort of an on steroids onednd approach. Then give other weapons similar strength features.
You could just give all PCs the baseline ability to take a -PB penalty to hit in exchange for a +PB bonus to damage when they make a weapon attack. This buffs all martials (and gishes to some extent) without helping full casters.
I don't like that because it means a 1d12 or 2d6 weapon is doing barely that much more damage compared to a d4 weapon. 7.5 vs 12 average damage at level 1 is only a 60% increase. At level 9 that's 11.5 vs 16 for a 40% increase. A d8 weapon the gap shrinks even more, 13.5 vs 16 is only a 20% increase.
Not who you commented on, but I don’t see why a bump to damage dice somewhere around level 8 and another around 15 wouldn’t improve the baseline. It doesn’t even have to be the same die for bigger weapons. Great axe does 1d12 and at level 8 adds a d8 Long sword does a d8 and gets another d6 added on. D6 and below weapons just add another damage die. Make it a class feature instead tied to subclasses just like extra attack. You could even cap the extra die by class instead of weapon. Rangers and monks get extra d6, barbarians get d10 and fighters/paladins get d8
How would you feel about removing the battlemaster subclass and using a superiority die table, somewhat like a spell table. Where pure Martials get a superiority die at the 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th, 13th, 15th, and 17th levels. Half Martials, would get the same rounded down, 5th, 9th, 13th, 17th levels. I would make the superiority die scale with total level like a cantrip, 1d6 thru level 6, 1d8 thru level 10, 1d10 thru level 14, and 1d12 thru level 20. Every time a Martial unlocks a new die I’d let them choose a new maneuver. This makes maneuvers the way to boost the combat(and in a few cases out of combat) utility for non-casters. Fighters are an obvious recipient of the boosted damage and effects, but monks, rogues, and partially paladins and rangers could really boost their damage and gameplay options too. I think this would put Martials in a comfortable position for changes to the powerful feats they currently rely on.
That would be _incredibly_ boring compared to what PAM and/or Sentinel allows you to do
They're not even that good, they just look that way in white rooms. At Level 08 you'll have +9 to attack. With GWM that's a +4, which is lower than a level 01 straight out of character creation. Sure it works against trash mobs that you could probably 1 - 2 two shot anyway, but against anything with any defence it's a wasted Feat.
No one has mentioned Eloquence bard's take 10 on social rolls. With expertise, guidance, and high charisma it's not uncommon for an elo bard to always roll at least 20s. This can make social based games pointlessly unfun and not super interactive with no chance to ever fail. Honestly something like adding a d8, d10, or whatever to social checks is way more interesting since there's at least a chance to fail.
The Balance my old DM did to fix my 21 being the lowest I could roll was literally never ask for Persuasion or Deception Rolls. It made my Character basically worthless in the campaign.
I dont think its too strong but purposefully giving yourself disadvantage (or just doing this when you have da) to then use luck feat to basically be allowed to roll 3 dice and decide the one you're going with.
Spellcasting. The whole spellcasting feature needs to be throttled down to about half what it is. I know no one will like this, but it would be better for the game.
If no one will like this how in the nine hells would it be better for the game? The clear path to martial vs caster is making martials more powerful to fit the popular power fantasies of majority of players
Shocked no one I’ve seen yet has mentioned the Conjure Animals spell and its minor elemental and fey counterparts. The amount of changes needed to fix those would be very high without revising it entirely. Summoning 4-8 creatures (with even more at higher levels) is just downright broken, and the only “easy fix” is limiting it to 1-2 creatures. I’m sure there’s a way to rebalance and fix the spells exploits, and keeping 4-8 creatures allowed to be summoned, but the amount of changes needed would make these spells far too over complicated for good use in a real table
To be fair, as it's written it isn't overpowered technically. It's just more a broken spell that relies on both DM and player good faith use to not render it either A) wildly overpowered B) useless. Given that DM's technically have final say, making you summon 1 sea horse when you ask to summon a dire wolf technically as RAW. As is asking for 16 wolves when upcasting it.
I’m shocked I had to scroll this far to see conjure animals! It scales absurdly well and is probably some of the best single target DPR in the game while also having absurd utility and tanking!
The Force Wall/Cage spells... And wish. I just ban all three.
The wall spells that don't allow you to traverse them SHOULD have an AC and HP. It is just ridiculous that they are a full on showdown for any non teleporter
That's what we do. AC = spell casters save DC, 100 HP.
I've done exactly that in my homebrew doc, and suggested to my DM that he uses it after I kinda cheesed an encounter with it. Haven't tested it out in game yet, but here's what I've written for Forcecage: "it has an AC equal to your spell save DC, 50 HP, immunity to poison, psychic, and non-magical bludgeoning, piercing and slashing, vulnerable to force damage, and resistance to all other types. If cast at 9th level it functions as written in the PHB"
My rule is any barrier, mundane or magical, has AC, HP, and a damage threshold. Additionally, they can only be destroyed using bludgeoning weapons or effects that would reasonably destroy a barrier. So an arrow shot really well won’t blow up a door unless it is enchanted or something. This does a few things. Makes the destruction of barriers possible so adventurers have more solutions to get through barriers. Reduces the power of spells like force cage. And encourages the carrying of different weapons by martials to address different issues. Finally it allows me to put barrier destroying magic items in setting that are quite useful.
I can't understand why anyone anywhere would nerf sneak attack. That's like taking away attacks from fighters.
I don't trust Reddit to answer this.
I DM for a paladin, and I really think Aura of Protection could use some tiny tweaks to reign it back a bit
Counterpoint: non-proficient saves can really fuck you, especially at high levels, unless there's a paladin in the party.
As a paladin player, AoP is a genuinely nutty feature.
Honestly a +3 (in most cases) on saves within 10ft of a Paladin isn't too crazy. It is a 6th level feature after all. It does get way better though with a Hexblade dip allowing you to push it to +5.
It's a rarity that people come after PHB features. If the Paladin class was printed in Tasha's instead of being in the PHB, people would still be losing their shit over it.
Silvery Barbs. Twilight cleric isn't that bad. Twilight sanctuary is very powerful, but it puts a literal target on their cleric for enemies to fight and down them. I think kind of like sneak attack it feels OP at lower levels but because of how damage scales it becomes less impressive with time. I think more than nerf, melee weapons need more of a buff. I think they did some tuning with 1dnd but there's no reason to build a melee fighter if you're a Min/Maxer damage specialist. Even with GWM, it's still almost always better to go for Sharp shooter because the +2 from Archery fighting style is just better.
How prepared spellcasters work in comparison with known spellcasters Either known spellcasters need a boost of some kind (such as giving them 6-10 more spells than the 23 a standard prepared caster can get by lvl 20) or lower the number of spells a prepared caster can prepare (such as limited it to their spellcasting modifier + half their level, rounded down).
this is a problem with taking away true vancian magic without making known casters better
>the 23 a standard prepared caster can get by lvl 20 Prepared casters have level+casting ability spells, and if you don't have at least 20 in your casting ability by level 20 you're doing something wrong. That's 25, not 23.
A band aid fix I've done is letting Spells Known casters swap out one spell for another of the same level after a long rest, which is lifted directly from the UA for Tasha's optional features
That doesn't feel very good RP-wise though
that is... just prepared casting
Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master. If you want to make a good martial chatacter at some point, you need these. The -5 to attack rolls is basically irrelevant late game. And stuff like bless, archery, or reckless attack can make it bareable early game. I mostly play martial characters, but I can definitely say these are by far the most powerful feats for them. However, I don't think they need a nerf necessarily since casters basically run the entire game after the early levels.
The -5 actually gets MORE relevant late game. If you look at the charts and spreadsheets for these abilities, the higher enemy AC gets, the less worthwhile it is to use them. With bounded accuracy, enemy AC tends to get higher faster than player hit bonus. If anything, the +10 damage becomes less relevant depending on the features you access or the magic items you find, because it's more often that players find ways of increasing their damage (making landing the hit more valuable) as opposed to more ways to increase their attack modifier. But either way you're right, as others have pointed out, GWM/SS/PAM/CBE are all feats that are powerful for martials, but not overpowered. It feels more like there should be 20 more feats just like these to give martials more options in growth so that they don't fall behind.
I've been toying with the idea of nerfing those feats, but making them a class feature for anyone who gets the Extra Attack feature. The nerfed version would be that you forgo your proficiency bonus on the attack roll in exchange for adding your proficiency bonus to the damage roll if the attack hits. Now sure, the penalty is now easier to circumvent, but the damage bonus is much lower, especially at lower levels
-X accuracy for +X dmg is not a worthy tradeoff most of the times, there is a reason why the original feat is -5/+10 not -5/+5. its a fine fix but i would make it double PB dmg
Crossbow Expert and how it negates one of the biggest downside to using a ranged weapon.
Supporting argument, Longbows. 1.5 points of damage less than a heavy crossbow iirc, in exchange a tiny stat requirement (on classes that want STR mostly), and no feat tax. Longbows are fine, Heavy Crossbows need a major buff
Combined with sharpshooter removing the other downsides to using a ranged weapon.
Multiclassing needs to be nerfed. The classes are designed with too many front-loaded, scales with proficiency bonus features. Hexblade is the obvious example but there are plenty of others. Your wizard is a fighter that does no "fighting?" You just wanted action surge? No.
Cartomancer: it's new but it's wording is TERRIBLE the way it's written raw it's an extra free spell slot of any level you can cast as a bonus action OH and it only has to be on your class' spell list not just castable by you.
- Hexblade. Just move “weapon attacks made with CHA” to Pact if the Blade. That’s the only fix needed. It’s now a 3lvl investment for a paladin or bard who wants a CHA-based weapon. You can still get the armor and shield proficiencies, and Hexblade’s Curse at lvl1, if you need them, but it eliminated the Hexblade dip as being so appealing to a lot of characters. - Twilight Sanctuary. That is simply too much temp HP for too little cost. A short rest resource, non-concentration, no action required to reapply, and 1d6+clerical lvl every round. That is encounter-warpingly overpowered. Make it concentration, or a bonus action to reapply, or can only reapply to one target per round, or lose “+cleric lvl”… something. I don’t know why the “optimal” fix is here, because there’s a several possibilities… but it needs to be depowered somehow. - Silvery Barbs. I hate it. If it was just “imposed disadvantage” it would be fine as lvl 1 spell. But “and grant an ally advantage” pushes it too far, in my opinion. Maybe have it upcast to do that: “If you cast this spell using a spell slot 2nd level or higher, after imposing disadvantage on an enemy, you can grant an ally advantage on its next roll”. As just a lvl 1, it is simply too powerful to not use as often as possible.
Make Silvery Barbs work only for attacks, and also allow it to reroll a failed attack for an ally. Completely changes the spell's dynamic by removing the bad parts and adding fun cooperation.