Hmm.. a Ghostwise Halfling, mayhaps. They are known for mounted combat. Granted, they ride giant owls for quick, silent kills...but that's a feature, not an issue.
I'm very happy to hear about the changes they made to the Cavalier, I liked the aesthetic of a Cavalier, but didn't like that they were tied to Superiority Dice. However, I would like to see the Superiority Dice feature propagated, just to other classes, not other fighter subclasses. The Rogue would probably make a good candidate for it, something of a combat focused "Duelist"
I really disagree about the superiority dice. First, there's already a feat that gives you access to some Battlemaster maneuvers. Second, the rogue already has the swashbuckler subclass, which is an excellent duelist. I'm playing one right now in Tales from the Yawning Portal.
Yes there is a feat that gives you that, but it's far more useful to a subclass (Battlemaster) that already has Superiority Dice, because they add it to their existing dice pool. The Swashbuckler can definitely be re-flavored as a Duelist and will work fine for that, however a "Duelist" could be more of a 3 Musketeer style, rapier wielder that uses superior techniques rather than hit and run tactics. Regardless, a Duelist was just a suggested archetype. I just think a rogue and maybe a ranger or monk subclass could benefit from the maneuver package.
Really? In the games I DM, I've taken to just making Battle Master as a subclass unavailable and instead making all Fighters gain all the abilities of the Battle Master because it solves the problem that most Fighter often experience, that of the fact that they'll find that they have very few options compared to a spellcasting class. I also feel it gives the Fighter a stronger identity as a sort of veteran warrior and handing over the role of the meatshield slugfest over to the Barbarian, where it should be.
I really like the idea of other archetypes that use the superiority dice mechanic as it can really be interesting to give them Martial Adept for access to other maneuvers they don't already have.
Eric was my favourite character in the Cartoon. He wasn't meant to be likeable, but he had more character in his writing and voice acting than the others.
It’s a shame that superiority dice propagation was argued against, because that would synergise well with Martial Adept and Superior Technique to have a non Battle Master way to get that stuff.
I very much enjoy the fact that the cavalier martial archetype is included in 'Xanathar's Guide to Everything' and Jeremy Crawford's point regarding 'Dungeons & Dragons' as high fantasy.
The one thing I've really wanted to know is why the Xanathar book added the Cavalier, but didn't really expand much on the info provided for mounted combat.. I have a Cavalier I've been working on... but most mount animals seem really squishy and make me wonder just how to make them be viable as to not die in the first round of combat to a huge AOE burst against like a dragon or something.
the feat mounted combatant gives you the possibility that if your mount get hit you can choose the attack to hit you instead, also if your mount succeed on Dex saving throw to dodge a spell it takes no damage at all.
I'd love to see a wizard subclass in one of these videos sometime soon! Also loving these, super excited to get my hands on the book so I can play some of these awesome subclasses
Czech translations of videos about Xanathar's content are available here: www.d20.cz/clanky/produkty/xanatharuv-pruvodce-vsim-videa.html (videos which are not yet translated will be translated soon...)
I thought Eric was everybody's favorite character in that show. Everybody was pretty rude to him, but he still was the one always saving and protecting the group.
I can see why they tried to give superiority dice to the Cavalier. Fighters desperately need a resource in their kit, which is why battlemaster and Eldritch knight get so far, even arcane archer to some degree although less so since their resource is a static 2 all the way to level twenty (a huge mistake in my opinion). The cavalier’s resource seems to be her reactions each round, which isn’t a bad idea, though it is a little dependent on actually getting to react to something.
Very happy to see during a flip through video that the Cavalier has taken in many if the Knights elements. With a better Sentinel at 10 level and a reaction every turn at 18th, this is truly the ultimate tank.
As I study this class, it feels like a super sticky tank. Mix in a little drunken master in here, I think you have a DMs worst nightmare, right there with the cleric. That or hoard breaker ranger.hmmm....
Pretty sure your lord would given you cheaper access to horses. The first one could be free (you maybe raised it, or your family is the lord's horse breeders) and then if it dies it incrementally increases in price after each death. Also Knight/Noble background gives you a squire, he/she could look after your horse while you delve into Dungeons.
When I heard the name I was hoping it was closer to the Pathfinder's take on the class. Sadly it wasn't, but I guess they can't copy that since it's from a different company.
My issue is that mounted combat is very hit and miss. Horses die very easily. The strongest Cavalry class is the Revised Ranger, with Paladin mixed in.
Rather liked the revised unearthed arcana version. Just needed to make a small enough character to take advantage of the mount skills in dungeons. My kobold riding a dragonborn he is dedicated to protecting (as a dragon shield is charged to do by his superior dragon) is just too much fun.
What they did with the Cavalier and the Knight they should also do with the Artificer class and the Artificer Wizard subclass and turn the Mechanical Servant into a subclass for the (resulting) Artificer.
I would like to build a Cavalier where the PC is an awakened animal who is actually the mount, and the rider is treated like the "mount" mechanically some how.
Goblin Cavalier with some Ranger for a Wolf companion animal. There, I'm now a Cavalier Goblin on the back of a Wolf. Wolf is medium size and so I can take it inside with me for the mount bonuses LOL As long as the tavern owner doesn't throw a fit about my little snuggles. Disregarding the fact that little snuggles is bigger than me.
So I have the book nowadays, and if I'm honest I'd take the level 3rd ability and the 15th level and scrap the rest. The cavalier as a tank is the opposite of what I want. I want to be the storming hussar who just charges into the enemy lines crushing them underfoot then sets back and charges again. I'd have made them have a way to get in and out of combat not tanking.
Haven't looked at the class but man does it make me feel uneasy when he describes that they don't need the mount but it's just a bit of extra. I feel like as a player that could very easily go from feeling like I am playing my class wrong by not having that extra. I also doubt they would overtune something to add extra.
It's a tough thing because in one sense having a class that's REALLY good at the thing they're good at and mediocre everywhere else is theoretically fine but most people expect their class to be useful everywhere these days.
Honestly you don't need the mount at all... You only get one feat with the mount which makes it a bit easier on you for checks when you fall off. That's it! To be honest I'm kinda bummed out, at least give us another mount feat or something :/
Zaxomio cavalier is way more focused as a defender, punishing enemies for attacking your teammates, and doesn't need the mount at all, if you want, get a mount.
I for one am disappointed at the removal of the Superiority Dice. I just feel that the baseline Fighter should have kept the Martial Damage Dice from D&DNext.
fucking crawford. the mount should be the main thing. will he be better at fighting mounted enemies than others? will he be able of getting his mount to attack, if say... he's riding a dragon? they just made the fucking knight and his 4e shit...
they fucked the cavalier fans... i wanted the 'kits of old'-style mobile hitter, with a lot of features intended to horse back, oly withou the battlemaster-style die. disappointing... seems im the only one tho. i just feel cheated: the cavalier UA won over the knight's UA, but they still released the knight anyway and just gave it the cavalier's name. and i know for sure they will never release a horse-back warrior, lance-wielding, shining-armored, wandering-knight-flavor-fitting subclass for fighter. maybe, just maybe something for the paladin, but and let's be real, they wont! AND i really wanted one for the fighter... xanathar's one doesn't get anything appliable to the horse until level 15(okay, the 7th level feat can be used to save the horse's ass), if it didn't get the "born to the saddle" they could have named it anything else and people would think "woah, they should have named it 'the cavalier' or 'the knight', man, just makes so much more sense then (insert any other subclass name here)". i would take al least two feats to make mounting with it worth, mounted combatant and charger, for sure... i curse jeremy crawford for the reminder of 5e's days...
Ok so let me get this straight: a Cavalier can ride....ANYTHING with four legs or more as a mount? Am I the only one who sees how over powered this is? Then again verity is the spice of life.... I'm going to have to think on this.
Okay it's actually so lame... Honestly you only have 1 class feature that involves a mount with the Cavalier but it's not even that big of a feature! It just help you get on your mount and helps if you fall off!! I was really hoping for at least some techniques that you could use with your mount...
Игры
I think that Halfling or Gnome Cavaliers would be best - because their mounts can be medium creatures and therefore fit in dungeons.
On top of that, revised Ranger makes the best mounted combatant.
Or just use really big dungeons. Underdark maybe.
Hmm.. a Ghostwise Halfling, mayhaps. They are known for mounted combat.
Granted, they ride giant owls for quick, silent kills...but that's a feature, not an issue.
Im playing a halfling cavalier who rides a caucasian shepherd
I'm trying to figure out what my Dwarf Cavalier should ride.
This is really exciting. I've wanted this class for so long.
I'm very happy to hear about the changes they made to the Cavalier, I liked the aesthetic of a Cavalier, but didn't like that they were tied to Superiority Dice.
However, I would like to see the Superiority Dice feature propagated, just to other classes, not other fighter subclasses.
The Rogue would probably make a good candidate for it, something of a combat focused "Duelist"
I really disagree about the superiority dice. First, there's already a feat that gives you access to some Battlemaster maneuvers. Second, the rogue already has the swashbuckler subclass, which is an excellent duelist. I'm playing one right now in Tales from the Yawning Portal.
Yes there is a feat that gives you that, but it's far more useful to a subclass (Battlemaster) that already has Superiority Dice, because they add it to their existing dice pool.
The Swashbuckler can definitely be re-flavored as a Duelist and will work fine for that, however a "Duelist" could be more of a 3 Musketeer style, rapier wielder that uses superior techniques rather than hit and run tactics.
Regardless, a Duelist was just a suggested archetype. I just think a rogue and maybe a ranger or monk subclass could benefit from the maneuver package.
+Cayotick I think the Bard's College of Swords feels like a muskeeter. It have something similar to maneuvers.
Really? In the games I DM, I've taken to just making Battle Master as a subclass unavailable and instead making all Fighters gain all the abilities of the Battle Master because it solves the problem that most Fighter often experience, that of the fact that they'll find that they have very few options compared to a spellcasting class. I also feel it gives the Fighter a stronger identity as a sort of veteran warrior and handing over the role of the meatshield slugfest over to the Barbarian, where it should be.
I really like the idea of other archetypes that use the superiority dice mechanic as it can really be interesting to give them Martial Adept for access to other maneuvers they don't already have.
i want to play a high charisma/strength cavalier with really low intelligence and make them like prince charming in shrek 2 :D
Zurt might as well go paladin but whatever
You do you
@@elgatochurro not really since prince charming could not cast spells
@@aaronmorrison8050 then just play fighter?
@@elgatochurro that's what they are doing by playing a cavelier
@@aaronmorrison8050 a fighter subclass? Thanks for agreeing with me
Eric was my favorite character in the d&d cartoon he was flawed but you realized deep down he really cared
Eric was my favourite character in the Cartoon. He wasn't meant to be likeable, but he had more character in his writing and voice acting than the others.
Finally, I can re-create Part 7 of Jojo as a paralized Jockey that shoot finger nails at my enemy to kill them.
This sounds like its a show thats up my alley
It’s a shame that superiority dice propagation was argued against, because that would synergise well with Martial Adept and Superior Technique to have a non Battle Master way to get that stuff.
I look forward to building my Mongolian horde character
It's a shame the Cavalier is melee-based. I feel like they missed the mark by omitting any bonus to mounted archers or javelineers.
I wish to aide my khan in conquering everything under the great blue sky
Eric had character development so I actually remembered him fondly.
He reminded me of my players in the games I ran in high school.
I very much enjoy the fact that the cavalier martial archetype is included in 'Xanathar's Guide to Everything' and Jeremy Crawford's point regarding 'Dungeons & Dragons' as high fantasy.
?
The one thing I've really wanted to know is why the Xanathar book added the Cavalier, but didn't really expand much on the info provided for mounted combat.. I have a Cavalier I've been working on... but most mount animals seem really squishy and make me wonder just how to make them be viable as to not die in the first round of combat to a huge AOE burst against like a dragon or something.
the feat mounted combatant gives you the possibility that if your mount get hit you can choose the attack to hit you instead, also if your mount succeed on Dex saving throw to dodge a spell it takes no damage at all.
Sasqmo buy expensive armor for your mount then, it'll be 4x the cost of the normal armor. Just like druids can do for their forms
I still love the acrobat... Dunno why that's not a subclass for rogue.
I'd love to see something capitalizing on flying combat ^^ might even try to do some myself
If my dm wills it I will play a mounted goblin on a wolf and basically play sir didymus from labyrinth
Yes!
I'd love to see a wizard subclass in one of these videos sometime soon! Also loving these, super excited to get my hands on the book so I can play some of these awesome subclasses
Austin Borst they'll be covering all of the subclasses in the book. Everyday. So yeah, wizard subclasses will be there.
In AD&D, Cavalier was available to Warriors in general, including both Fighters and Paladins
Currently a cavalier, and UA centaur. So far so good
The class has been weighed. The class has been measured, but will not have us to be found wanting .?
If it does, I will fong Wizards of the Coast!
Sir, You have earned a like.
sikitywiked ???
Oh, so the Knight and Cavalier were not the same subclass in UA? It seems I may be happy with the combination then!
i want the acrobat class though... she was so great in the classic cartoon XD
I know they didn't want it dependant on a mount, but I felt it needed a little more with it to really feel like a mounted warrior
I agree. The mount is just an extra gimmick, but in terms of roleplaying, you can write the mount as an important companion for your character.
Ideal fine cavalier class, knights od excaliburs legends and history of crusade. but I think that they are high class agent.
Can't wait to make my human Cavalier LeBron James
what about Leroy Jakens
My thoughts exactly 😂
Love the cavalier, but was wondering where do they get their mount, and how does he keep track of it when he dungeon crawls?
Adam Demeter tie it up or something
Please do the protector paladin!
Czech translations of videos about Xanathar's content are available here: www.d20.cz/clanky/produkty/xanatharuv-pruvodce-vsim-videa.html (videos which are not yet translated will be translated soon...)
I really want to see this guy do an Agent Smith impression.
Why is the extra attack linked to Str? No love for Dex Cavaliers?
his shirt is an optical illusion
How
Those thoughts would have been nice for the Ranger Beastmaster, which is just nothing without his pet
I thought Eric was everybody's favorite character in that show. Everybody was pretty rude to him, but he still was the one always saving and protecting the group.
Mounts, Mounts, Mounts!
Would like to know how to get hired to develop content for d&d, Pathfinder, starfinder, etc.
Stegosaurus, here's come Grung
whatever, man! people love Eric!
So they won’t eat it from a longbow?
I can see why they tried to give superiority dice to the Cavalier. Fighters desperately need a resource in their kit, which is why battlemaster and Eldritch knight get so far, even arcane archer to some degree although less so since their resource is a static 2 all the way to level twenty (a huge mistake in my opinion). The cavalier’s resource seems to be her reactions each round, which isn’t a bad idea, though it is a little dependent on actually getting to react to something.
Perhaps a remake of the D&D cartoon this time with character development?
He said the Cavalier is a combo of the UA Cav and Knight. Am I crazy or is there not already a Knight subclass in the SCAG.
Will Mills that was the Purple Dragon Knight, or the Banneret. UA Knight had different mechanics
Very happy to see during a flip through video that the Cavalier has taken in many if the Knights elements.
With a better Sentinel at 10 level and a reaction every turn at 18th, this is truly the ultimate tank.
Arcane Archer
As I study this class, it feels like a super sticky tank. Mix in a little drunken master in here, I think you have a DMs worst nightmare, right there with the cleric. That or hoard breaker ranger.hmmm....
Isn't Oath of the Crown already a paladin oath?
Drow Cavalier with a Riding Lizard!!! Sign me up
Lizardfolk cavalier with a triceratops.
So good bye forever Knights?
Would like to see a remake of the Knight, maybe with another name for it history ):
goodbye cavalier! they just released the knight under the cavalier's name...
I mean knight and cavalier are basically interchangeable terms for a noble mounted warrior so you can play a knight.
Inquisitor Thomas not really tho. the cavalier actually had mount relatef features.
Moses Lord just play cavalier and call him a knight.
TheKlauspc the cavalier still has mount features
Still waiting on that thief acrobat....
Hope they get some way to magic their mount in otherwise it a waste of so much gold to keep buying war horses.
Pretty sure your lord would given you cheaper access to horses. The first one could be free (you maybe raised it, or your family is the lord's horse breeders) and then if it dies it incrementally increases in price after each death.
Also Knight/Noble background gives you a squire, he/she could look after your horse while you delve into Dungeons.
When I heard the name I was hoping it was closer to the Pathfinder's take on the class. Sadly it wasn't, but I guess they can't copy that since it's from a different company.
If this class doesn't get a mount as a class feature, it's still a broken class.
My issue is that mounted combat is very hit and miss. Horses die very easily. The strongest Cavalry class is the Revised Ranger, with Paladin mixed in.
Roll up a lizardfolk character with a triceratops as a mount, or just have a local blacksmith make armor for the animal.
Primeval Guardian please and thank you :)
Rather liked the revised unearthed arcana version. Just needed to make a small enough character to take advantage of the mount skills in dungeons. My kobold riding a dragonborn he is dedicated to protecting (as a dragon shield is charged to do by his superior dragon) is just too much fun.
I really hope the knights ability Hold the Line and his marking ability made it into the class
What they did with the Cavalier and the Knight they should also do with the Artificer class and the Artificer Wizard subclass and turn the Mechanical Servant into a subclass for the (resulting) Artificer.
I would like to build a Cavalier where the PC is an awakened animal who is actually the mount, and the rider is treated like the "mount" mechanically some how.
Goblin Cavalier with some Ranger for a Wolf companion animal. There, I'm now a Cavalier Goblin on the back of a Wolf. Wolf is medium size and so I can take it inside with me for the mount bonuses LOL As long as the tavern owner doesn't throw a fit about my little snuggles.
Disregarding the fact that little snuggles is bigger than me.
So I have the book nowadays, and if I'm honest I'd take the level 3rd ability and the 15th level and scrap the rest. The cavalier as a tank is the opposite of what I want. I want to be the storming hussar who just charges into the enemy lines crushing them underfoot then sets back and charges again. I'd have made them have a way to get in and out of combat not tanking.
Haven't looked at the class but man does it make me feel uneasy when he describes that they don't need the mount but it's just a bit of extra. I feel like as a player that could very easily go from feeling like I am playing my class wrong by not having that extra. I also doubt they would overtune something to add extra.
It's a tough thing because in one sense having a class that's REALLY good at the thing they're good at and mediocre everywhere else is theoretically fine but most people expect their class to be useful everywhere these days.
Honestly you don't need the mount at all... You only get one feat with the mount which makes it a bit easier on you for checks when you fall off. That's it! To be honest I'm kinda bummed out, at least give us another mount feat or something :/
Zaxomio cavalier is way more focused as a defender, punishing enemies for attacking your teammates, and doesn't need the mount at all, if you want, get a mount.
I for one am disappointed at the removal of the Superiority Dice. I just feel that the baseline Fighter should have kept the Martial Damage Dice from D&DNext.
I really hope. that Raven Queen would be in Xanatar, she had so great favor, but so....not interesting mechanics
WARNING: You can not buy the Item in the link provided. You can only pre-order it.
Even more important warning: the link provided is for the digital version of Xanathar's Guide to Everything and you will not receive a physical book.
Be a small size cavalier and let your mount be your party's barbarian problem solved.
Play any size character and let the druid be your mount.
fucking crawford. the mount should be the main thing. will he be better at fighting mounted enemies than others? will he be able of getting his mount to attack, if say... he's riding a dragon? they just made the fucking knight and his 4e shit...
they fucked the cavalier fans...
i wanted the 'kits of old'-style mobile hitter, with a lot of features intended to horse back, oly withou the battlemaster-style die. disappointing...
seems im the only one tho.
i just feel cheated: the cavalier UA won over the knight's UA, but they still released the knight anyway and just gave it the cavalier's name. and i know for sure they will never release a horse-back warrior, lance-wielding, shining-armored, wandering-knight-flavor-fitting subclass for fighter. maybe, just maybe something for the paladin, but and let's be real, they wont! AND i really wanted one for the fighter...
xanathar's one doesn't get anything appliable to the horse until level 15(okay, the 7th level feat can be used to save the horse's ass), if it didn't get the "born to the saddle" they could have named it anything else and people would think "woah, they should have named it 'the cavalier' or 'the knight', man, just makes so much more sense then (insert any other subclass name here)". i would take al least two feats to make mounting with it worth, mounted combatant and charger, for sure...
i curse jeremy crawford for the reminder of 5e's days...
Ok so let me get this straight: a Cavalier can ride....ANYTHING with four legs or more as a mount? Am I the only one who sees how over powered this is? Then again verity is the spice of life.... I'm going to have to think on this.
Saying they need to make the cavalier do things without his mount is like saying mages need to be able to cast spells in anti magic zones...
Okay it's actually so lame... Honestly you only have 1 class feature that involves a mount with the Cavalier but it's not even that big of a feature! It just help you get on your mount and helps if you fall off!! I was really hoping for at least some techniques that you could use with your mount...
How about an trampling enemies or horseback archery?
Too bad the class doesn't really perform well