I disagree about the ranger and exploration. You can get druid spells, expertise in stealth and survival right from first level. You get roving (+10 speed), a climb speed and swim speed at 7th. I would prefer the move some of that down a few levels. Still it's not a bad package for exploring.
Agreed. Rangers now get to fill their thematic side by improved skills and spellcasting instead of wasting class powers on flavor fluff. Sadly the Hunter subclass is littered with fluff features or weak always prepared spells that add very little - compared to the features they replaced.
To be fair, while bardic Inspiration uses are reduced, the feature itself is MUCH more potent. It is less likely to be wasted since you only use it after you KNOW the test has failed (so you can't waste it on a test that would have succeeded anyway), you can use it when needed on the character that needs it rather than having to preemptively guess which character might require assistance and it doesn't take a BA in combat to reapply to a given character. For the ranger, it's fine that the hunter is... boring. Not every subclass needs to be super complicated, psi-knife rogue levels of tracking; sometimes, simple is good. In fact, every class should have a simple option. So long as they're not the only one, ofc.
I have such mixed feelings about this playtest. But overall I think it's hard to playtest these things without the full context of changes to certain spells and changes to other classes. - The Innkeeper
It's not an invisibility spell it has specific wording so it won't go awY when you attack. Rangers effectively get improved invisibility for 2 turns. Nice not excessive but in the right situation that can create a memorable moment.
I like the bard as a spellcaster. I think if there was a more inspiring non-spellcaster to play people would ask less for the bard to be a half caster at most. Regarding this barr, I like many things and hate certain things, but what I hate most is the removal of additional magical secrets from the lore bard
That said, magical secrets gets a major buff here (since bards have prepared spells, they have ALL of one school of magic to choose from after a long rest) If the lore bard got additional magical secrets, they’d have access to every spell in the game. I’d like to see them get like… additional prepared spells from magical secrets…
I've literally never heard anyone say that they liked song of restoration or countercharm. They both were nearly useless, flavorless and not fun abilities.
Thank you, I thought the new bard sucked too. I’m not sure if WotC is just trying to make the PCs to not be too OP? But I think it’s too late for that most of the new players like to play OP characters. I still need to read through all this and see what else is good or bad. I definitely think it’s going to be a new edition and it’s 5.5 or whatever. It seems this is more about making more books hence more money for WotC
Im a bit new to dnd, is this some sort of an update, changes of rules and stuff of 5e? Or is it what they are planning with One Dnd that will be released in 2024?
@@Piotr_Tokarz These are essentially sneak peeks into the next edition of DnD coming in 2024. We will have a new Players Handbook, Dungeon Masters Guide, and Monster Manual. Think of it as a sequel to a video game. The new edition will be backwards compatible with content with the current edition we are playing now (5th Edition). WotC is asking us to give feedback and try out these changes ourselves so that we can give input to the new rules.
So...what is my motivation to get this besides it being new? As a player, it seems like I'm getting nerfed and my favorite toys are being put on a shelf I'll never reach.
The only time I had people go from 1 to 20 was the two waterdeep books. But at the local game store if we announce a tier 4 adventure we will have a full table.
It seems like the goal with these class reworks is toget rid of campaign and dm dependent abilities as a whole. There's pros and cons to that for sure. It seems like they wanted the bard to be cemented in the jack if all trades character, and then added in more support. Not all of my bards want to heal people, but I won't say no to free spells. Base ranger is overall better for combat, and they removed exploration aspect, mostly because it was useless unless the dm actively tries to make it a thing. Hunter Ranger was actually a straight nerf from 5e. I actually loved the modular class feature of the 5e hunter, and will likely not play this new one. They nerfed thr best feats and buffed the useless ones, no comment until I get to play with them. The epic boons are very lackluster. If I somehow make it to 20th lvl, I would want my final gifts to be the strongest I've even had. Gimme some demigod shit. What if the transportation boon just gave you misty step at will. What if the fortitude feat made it so you ignore the first instance of damage you take each turn. Notice I said each turn, not your turn. Monks are definitely eating in this economy, but I wonder what they will do with other martials.
Love the new exhaustion rules but need to only go up to 6. And monsters should give exhaustion. Hunter’s lore is a null to me. Most people know the monster manual. All the rework classes seem not to have a dead level. Feats. Most of the feats are just rewording to make it fit into the feat verbiage. Love the guidance change. I haven’t really look at the classes in depth yet.
Man, your game view points is basically a 180 degree from mine. First, you want "flavor" over actual usefulness. And then you want to gate out options. I mean pick a lane....lol. Personally, I don't like nerfs, and I don't think that its terrible to allow powerful combinations. I want to see them go back to 3.5 in that Feats every 3 character levels, and AIS every 4 character levels. NOT Class levels. No need to punish multiclassing.
@@NoFunAllowed They might not. But its the houserule I use for my games. I like feats. I want people to take em. And I don't see why people cant get both. I am not afraid of powerful characters because it just allows me a larger canvus....
Hey man what happened, you used to tell me not to be so negative, now you're the salty one. It's a playtest it probably does need tuning. But the flexibility of preparing different spells every day and ritual casting is not nothing. Personally I think the main class is OK the lore subclass losing 6th level magical secrets feels sad. It was the main reason to play a lore bard.
haha im mostly salty that the bard is just a spellcaster now, instead of being its own thing. ultimately, the difference between the playtest material and the actual product have very few changes, so I dont see them going back to making the bard a unique buff/debudd class, just a class with spells
Sorry but I’d consider this a bad opinion. However, that’s fine because you can just submit your opinion to the survey. If enough people agree with you they’ll change it
@@NoFunAllowed Let’s stick with the Bard for my reasons. This is already going to be long for a comment. Their new bardic inspiration is strictly better. It does everything the old one did plus it heals a little. The old version often didn’t get used, or it was given to someone who didn’t use/need it. At low levels the fact it heals at reaction speed makes up for its smaller number of uses. By level 5 you’ll at most want 4ish uses of it per day (especially since it can keep a party member from making death saves) that fact that you have to use your ability carefully until you start getting “powerful” makes the recovery ability more impactful. I almost never used the damn ability. Changing it from 5 to 7 is barely an inconvenience now that my inspiration is better. Counter-charm was a useless ability and people overwhelmingly wanted it changed or gone. This high level hate/dislike is completely irrelevant. The only reason most people don’t play high level games isn’t because no one gets that high, it’s because WotC didn’t release any high level adventure modules. No one knows how to run them. You contradict yourself by saying capstone abilities are useless because no one plays that high, and then get mad they dropped the level requirement for the capstone abilities. Do you want more people to get to those abilities or not? The lack of people who play at high level has to do with how long the games are and the lack of resources for new DMs for running high level games. If they change that then this entire point of yours is dust in the wind. Being mad about Bards being full casters… I got nothing for this. I don’t understand that opinion at all. It sounds like you just want a social rogue. Most people like bards being full casters, so much so that I’ve never even encountered this opinion till your video. When I saw the “Bards Suck” I thought I was going to hear about the spell school restrictions or reduced weapon proficiencies. I wasn’t expecting this. This was waaaay out into left field. It sounds more like you don’t like 5e. If so (and even if not) that’s fine. Opinions are subjective and you should never feel bad for having opinions about a game. However, you posted your opinions on a public forum, and just like you I have opinions. I think it’s great that you’re out here making videos and giving your feedback, but I don’t believe I’m your target audience lol.
I disagree about the ranger and exploration. You can get druid spells, expertise in stealth and survival right from first level. You get roving (+10 speed), a climb speed and swim speed at 7th. I would prefer the move some of that down a few levels. Still it's not a bad package for exploring.
I was more looking at exanding the rules of exploration, which are next to non existant in 5e haha!
@@NoFunAllowed Fair enough, but that's not what this release is about. There's still the whole DMG and PHB to cover in the future.
Agreed. Rangers now get to fill their thematic side by improved skills and spellcasting instead of wasting class powers on flavor fluff. Sadly the Hunter subclass is littered with fluff features or weak always prepared spells that add very little - compared to the features they replaced.
Honestly, moving anything above lvl 16 is almost the same as taking it away and WOTC needs to accept that reality
May as well just remove 16-20 entirely haha right?
oh ya
To be fair, while bardic Inspiration uses are reduced, the feature itself is MUCH more potent. It is less likely to be wasted since you only use it after you KNOW the test has failed (so you can't waste it on a test that would have succeeded anyway), you can use it when needed on the character that needs it rather than having to preemptively guess which character might require assistance and it doesn't take a BA in combat to reapply to a given character.
For the ranger, it's fine that the hunter is... boring. Not every subclass needs to be super complicated, psi-knife rogue levels of tracking; sometimes, simple is good. In fact, every class should have a simple option. So long as they're not the only one, ofc.
im just upset that the bard is being moved to being "a wizard, but gets a reaction shield spell for others" haha
I have such mixed feelings about this playtest. But overall I think it's hard to playtest these things without the full context of changes to certain spells and changes to other classes.
- The Innkeeper
true true!
Guess we will have to wait till next year to know since they are releasing this thing so piece meal
It's not an invisibility spell it has specific wording so it won't go awY when you attack. Rangers effectively get improved invisibility for 2 turns. Nice not excessive but in the right situation that can create a memorable moment.
I like the bard as a spellcaster. I think if there was a more inspiring non-spellcaster to play people would ask less for the bard to be a half caster at most.
Regarding this barr, I like many things and hate certain things, but what I hate most is the removal of additional magical secrets from the lore bard
haha fair enough!
What they did to the Bard capstone feels like a blatant "haha eff u in particular"
haha yup
I think this actually has some decent buffs to Bard. I like it. The subclass needs to be fixed but I think it is pretty strong
fair enough!
@@NoFunAllowed Everyone is mad that Lore Bard doesn’t get magical secrets but we are also forgetting that Bard is getting an extra feature.
And I admit. I like the new bard except for moving around the Magical Secrets (Lore Bard WAS the bardiest bard)
fair enough!
That said, magical secrets gets a major buff here (since bards have prepared spells, they have ALL of one school of magic to choose from after a long rest)
If the lore bard got additional magical secrets, they’d have access to every spell in the game.
I’d like to see them get like… additional prepared spells from magical secrets…
I've literally never heard anyone say that they liked song of restoration or countercharm. They both were nearly useless, flavorless and not fun abilities.
haha you heard it here first then
Thank you, I thought the new bard sucked too.
I’m not sure if WotC is just trying to make the PCs to not be too OP? But I think it’s too late for that most of the new players like to play OP characters.
I still need to read through all this and see what else is good or bad.
I definitely think it’s going to be a new edition and it’s 5.5 or whatever.
It seems this is more about making more books hence more money for WotC
more money, more problems for us haha!
Im a bit new to dnd, is this some sort of an update, changes of rules and stuff of 5e? Or is it what they are planning with One Dnd that will be released in 2024?
yes, this is the new rules that they will be implementing in the future!
@@NoFunAllowedIn the future? So they arent implemented already? Or you mean that now DMs and players will take time to adjust to those rules?
@@Piotr_Tokarz These are essentially sneak peeks into the next edition of DnD coming in 2024. We will have a new Players Handbook, Dungeon Masters Guide, and Monster Manual. Think of it as a sequel to a video game. The new edition will be backwards compatible with content with the current edition we are playing now (5th Edition). WotC is asking us to give feedback and try out these changes ourselves so that we can give input to the new rules.
@@Kcg8rGaming Ohhh, thank you for explaining, now i understand
So...what is my motivation to get this besides it being new? As a player, it seems like I'm getting nerfed and my favorite toys are being put on a shelf I'll never reach.
because its shiny and because money haha
I was so confused on these feats. Are we REALLY going to be playing up to 20 now? I've been in for years and never made it past level 14.
Haha exactly. Going to make a video soon addressing the number of reasons why people don't play to level 20
The only time I had people go from 1 to 20 was the two waterdeep books. But at the local game store if we announce a tier 4 adventure we will have a full table.
@@RottenRogerDM See, Even though I've been playing a long time, I only feel qualified to DM for people from 12th level down.
And I imagine I can blame WotC for making all their adventures from 1-13th level.
It seems like the goal with these class reworks is toget rid of campaign and dm dependent abilities as a whole. There's pros and cons to that for sure.
It seems like they wanted the bard to be cemented in the jack if all trades character, and then added in more support. Not all of my bards want to heal people, but I won't say no to free spells.
Base ranger is overall better for combat, and they removed exploration aspect, mostly because it was useless unless the dm actively tries to make it a thing. Hunter Ranger was actually a straight nerf from 5e. I actually loved the modular class feature of the 5e hunter, and will likely not play this new one.
They nerfed thr best feats and buffed the useless ones, no comment until I get to play with them.
The epic boons are very lackluster. If I somehow make it to 20th lvl, I would want my final gifts to be the strongest I've even had. Gimme some demigod shit. What if the transportation boon just gave you misty step at will. What if the fortitude feat made it so you ignore the first instance of damage you take each turn. Notice I said each turn, not your turn.
Monks are definitely eating in this economy, but I wonder what they will do with other martials.
Love the new exhaustion rules but need to only go up to 6. And monsters should give exhaustion.
Hunter’s lore is a null to me. Most people know the monster manual. All the rework classes seem not to have a dead level.
Feats. Most of the feats are just rewording to make it fit into the feat verbiage.
Love the guidance change.
I haven’t really look at the classes in depth yet.
fair enough!
Wow poor bard got dookied on. They took everything that made bard fun and unique and just said “nah generic spell caster go”
Hah true
Man, your game view points is basically a 180 degree from mine. First, you want "flavor" over actual usefulness. And then you want to gate out options. I mean pick a lane....lol. Personally, I don't like nerfs, and I don't think that its terrible to allow powerful combinations. I want to see them go back to 3.5 in that Feats every 3 character levels, and AIS every 4 character levels. NOT Class levels. No need to punish multiclassing.
haha i doubt 5e will go down the path of feat frenzies!
@@NoFunAllowed They might not. But its the houserule I use for my games. I like feats. I want people to take em. And I don't see why people cant get both. I am not afraid of powerful characters because it just allows me a larger canvus....
Hey man what happened, you used to tell me not to be so negative, now you're the salty one. It's a playtest it probably does need tuning. But the flexibility of preparing different spells every day and ritual casting is not nothing. Personally I think the main class is OK the lore subclass losing 6th level magical secrets feels sad. It was the main reason to play a lore bard.
haha im mostly salty that the bard is just a spellcaster now, instead of being its own thing. ultimately, the difference between the playtest material and the actual product have very few changes, so I dont see them going back to making the bard a unique buff/debudd class, just a class with spells
Sorry but I’d consider this a bad opinion. However, that’s fine because you can just submit your opinion to the survey. If enough people agree with you they’ll change it
im curious as to why its a bad opinion haha!
@@NoFunAllowed Let’s stick with the Bard for my reasons. This is already going to be long for a comment.
Their new bardic inspiration is strictly better. It does everything the old one did plus it heals a little. The old version often didn’t get used, or it was given to someone who didn’t use/need it. At low levels the fact it heals at reaction speed makes up for its smaller number of uses. By level 5 you’ll at most want 4ish uses of it per day (especially since it can keep a party member from making death saves) that fact that you have to use your ability carefully until you start getting “powerful” makes the recovery ability more impactful. I almost never used the damn ability. Changing it from 5 to 7 is barely an inconvenience now that my inspiration is better.
Counter-charm was a useless ability and people overwhelmingly wanted it changed or gone.
This high level hate/dislike is completely irrelevant. The only reason most people don’t play high level games isn’t because no one gets that high, it’s because WotC didn’t release any high level adventure modules. No one knows how to run them. You contradict yourself by saying capstone abilities are useless because no one plays that high, and then get mad they dropped the level requirement for the capstone abilities. Do you want more people to get to those abilities or not? The lack of people who play at high level has to do with how long the games are and the lack of resources for new DMs for running high level games. If they change that then this entire point of yours is dust in the wind.
Being mad about Bards being full casters… I got nothing for this. I don’t understand that opinion at all. It sounds like you just want a social rogue. Most people like bards being full casters, so much so that I’ve never even encountered this opinion till your video.
When I saw the “Bards Suck” I thought I was going to hear about the spell school restrictions or reduced weapon proficiencies. I wasn’t expecting this. This was waaaay out into left field. It sounds more like you don’t like 5e. If so (and even if not) that’s fine. Opinions are subjective and you should never feel bad for having opinions about a game. However, you posted your opinions on a public forum, and just like you I have opinions.
I think it’s great that you’re out here making videos and giving your feedback, but I don’t believe I’m your target audience lol.
haha fair enough
Hi
hello!
The Bard always sucked
Haha some people regarded 5e bard as a better wizard