Go back Falko's Vault of Wonders before it's too late! www.kickstarter.com/projects/dungeondecks/falkos-vault-of-wonders-5e?ref=8jgvl9 - Watch the other part of this chat on Chris's Channel here: ruclips.net/video/L6eyavEknek/видео.html
I might ask on you channel too but concerning the rogues : they did get a lot of combat features, but don't you think that the skill system might be the reason for them being so weak ? Since skills are a major source of the rogue's power, when skills can't do powerful stuff, being powerful at them just leaves you kinda meh.
I think the new damage baseline for martials should be a subclassless rogue using steady aim and a hand crossbow. If they are truly the weakest class, then this represents a reasonable floor for sustained and resourceless damage that uses no feats and after the first turn almost always has their bonus action available.
My prediction: the TreantMonkinator and the thumbnail is gonna be a cheap photoshop of Colby with glowing red eyes and flexing his biceps but instead of biceps it's gonna be Chris's face.
I would personally B-line to Monk 10 where they get their flurry of blows upgrade that makes it do 3 attacks instead of 2, giving them 5 attacks a round, then do 2 levels of fighter for action surge, then maybe go the rest in cleric for spells/utility, since the ability points match up and you won't be MAD.
On the martial caster divide question I’m not sure a fantasy setting with powerful magic can or should eliminate a gap between those who can use magic and those who cannot. Otherwise magic would not be magic.
@@davidgreenwood7797 The problem is that it's A: bad for the game mechanically because imbalance between party members is never fun and B: Doesn't make any sense in the context of the world, because then why would you ever hire a fighter or a barbarian to do a job when you know a wizard is so much more capable?
@Woeboez Price as already mentioned. Availability (magic users are usually rather rare. The higher the level the more so. Hell according to Ebberon, which has more casters than your average setting, 5th level is pretty much the cut-off point with anything above that being the stuff of legends and fairy tales) Or just the fact that, y'know, casters still have weaknesses that martials cover. Ever tried to play without martials? Some encounters will suck without one or two to take the heat.
Love these collaborations with Chris. You two are so damn different as people and players, but it sure is wholesome to see you together ❤️ (Chris being the very rational/analytical/cold person, and you with your warm compassionate approach)
Would be cool to get a "weaponmaster" monk that would obviously also get masteries. Maybe thats just an updated kensei that gets weapon masteries for their chosen weapons.
I'm still really sad about the divine smite nerf. It's such a big blow to what you can do with a paladin. The best thing about divine smite was that it meant paladins didn't feel like half-fighter, half-cleric. They had their own unique way to shine (other than passively buffing saving throws), by doing some epic burst damage to single targets. The designers say they want to give players more options about how to play their classes, and I think they did a good job in other cases, but for the Paladin, it seems like they are pushing you more into spellcasting by making smiting much less attractive. I would have preferred that they make casting *more attractive* (e.g. with great spells like spirit guardians) or by giving them a feature along the lines of combining shield of faith and spiritual weapon like the War Cleric. (Also, making divine sense a channel divinity? Wholly unnecessary even with its improvements, and it cuts into the marginally increased number of channels you get.)
As a brand new player just starting to learn D&D right now (the transition between 2 rule books) it would be nice so I know what advice to discard from 5e, and which ideas are still effective
Still F's in the chat for Ranger, but I'm otherwise excited for the updated 5e classes and rules! This channel and Treantmonk's are my favorite for rule mechanics and discussion, love it when you guys cross-over
I don't think so, Chris has mentioned that Rangers aren't as bad as they look and someone asked if he would go over how much Concentration conflict there will be, from Chris's reaction to Rangers I suspect it won't be as bad as we imagine, so the hunters mark changes are going to be all up sides compared to 2014 Ranger. Yes, they could have done a better job, and I think it was a bad design decision in general to spend 4 features on Hunters mark, but feeling bad isn't the same as numerically bad, and if it was numerically bad Chris would have mentioned that.
I mean, overall the features that HM gets aren't game-changing, so it's not like you're straight up gimping your Ranger if you don't cast HM. Plus, with free castings, you can have it up, drop it if you need to concentrate on something else, and cast HM again if you decide that it would be more beneficial. As a long time wizard player, I can say that having to make a judgment on what deserves your concentration is just a part of the game.
@@chiepah2 I don’t think it’s power people are mad about is what treantmonk says about “feel bad features”. I don’t want to play a high level ranger because I am not going to use the 4 of the 10 high level features so why am I even playing this character to higher level instead of multiclassing out. It’s the same problem they had before a strong class with features that feel bad.
Yeah Chris said ranger is still a very effective class. A high level ranger can use their spells and concentration on something like summon beast and along with their attacks they will be doing plenty of damage. It’s just annoying to get all those boosts to a spell you no longer use.
@@andrewmcmillan229 You will probably have combats where summon beast is overkill but a base hunters mark is too weak, the boosted free hunters mark might just hit a niche that just wouldn't be covered otherwise. It just feels really bad to lose 4 features to use summon beasts, even if it is mathematically superior.
Hey Colby, check out Duluth, BWCA, & around the Great Lakes/upper peninsula of MI if you want a cooler getaway in the summer! Otherwise come during the MN Get Together/State Fair if you want to see the cities, eat well, & potentially catch a game @ Target Field. Mall of America is a giant mall/rainy day back-up plan. Bonus: we have a top-rated airport just south of the Twin Cities to fly into! Also Fahrenheit > Celsius; more numbers so more accurate!
Oh boy oh boy, Im really thrilled with this, two of my most favourites DnDtubers talking about a topic I really love (well I preffer 5.5 than 5.24 but anyway)😂
loved all of your discussions together about the future of the 2024. its good to hear more thoughtful opinions then the internets thoughts. using it alot to guide my decisions about if we will switch to the new ruleset.
Same reason I came here. Initially I had no interest in the 2024 ruleset in my games, but my main groups 4 year campaign is wrapping up around the time all of this drops and we've discussed making the switch, so I'll have to assimilate regardless. It makes more sense for me to approach it in a positive light rather than a "woe is me" mindset.
I feel like the way to "fix" smite in the way they seem to be trying to do is to remove it from being a spell. Just give it a certain number of uses per day, increase the damage it deals with paladin level. Would make it so the best smiters would be paladins and multiclassing wouldnt need to be as much of a consideration to its power.
thank you for keeping the negative rhetoric to the minimum. I appreciate it guys. Even with the issues you may have over the changes, this was still a super positive conversation. So thank you.
33:31 No. The gap isn't more narrow. It's worse. The martial floor was raised but the power ceiling got lowered. Casters got boosted almost across the board.
@@mr.fufucudlypoops8207 Basic resources. Like you can see it at level 3. A warlock has short rest spammable shatter and EB+AB+RB just memes on all the martials right out of the gates just like the old version. The obvious Cleric at level 5 is still a way front liner than any martial in the game and I dare say they got better. At lvl 10 you basically get a nuke. Wizard is still a god and now have a spell interaction that changes optimization dramatically, they're also better at making scrolls so that means even more resources for them on average. They just have more resources and power behind it than everyone else in the game. It's noticeable at level 3. Druid got nerfed A LOT but still has insane options. Later on they get a good single target damage option that rivals martials. Bard. Massive boost. Better monk too. Sorc. Boosted. I've looked at them the least but I think you get the jist of everything else. It is a wild claim to say the gap is smaller.
So basically, for most tables, it’ll be more balanced. But at optimized tables, it’ll be worse. Ceilings getting lower generally only effect tables that min-max or hyper optimize. I would argue to say that this type of table is the minority. Most tables are choosing things that are thematic and fun rather than straight mechanical power. So, with the floor getting raised, those casual tables will feel boosted, without noticing a difference. My 2 cents. Additionally, not many clerics are gonna know the best DI options like Hallow or Prayer of Healing. But I feel you. It will affect you directly because the table you play at and with IS and optimized table, which is not the target audience of the direction of the game.
So glad Melee weapon damage is king! When Ranged damage has always had a better time reaching enemies and keeping the ranged character safe, I’m glad things got rebalanced.
@@HeirophantCarneus I doubt it's Forcecage because Colby said it's something they will want to include in every build. I doubt it's a super high level spell like that. Plus, Colby's builds are less control oriented most of the time. Edit: I do think that Forcecage is one of the spells Wizards didn't rebalance though.
For the question of what the "weakest class is", for out of combat that might surprisingly be the Monk, and Fighter. Since the Monk is now the only class to not get access to either a Skill boosting feature, or utility magic spells, they will be relying on their basic Skill Proficiencies, and having high Wisdom, and Dexterity, which kind of caps what they can do. While Tactical Mind lets Fighters give themselves a bonus, that should help them in most situations where they need a boost, but only being able to successfully do that for 1, or 2 checks per Short Rest, could be very limiting. For the weakest class in combat for the Martials, based on what I have heard, and seen in the UA's it seems like what Magic Items are available in the 2024 rules could have a big impact on whether Rogues will be the weakest martial class, or not. Like for level 5 characters, a Rogue with a 1d4 weapon should be dealing 17 average damage, and with a 1d8 weapon they would be dealing 19 damage, while a level 5 Fighter who hits with both attacks would be dealing 17 average damage with a 1d8 weapon, and 22 average damage with a 2d6 weapon, and this interclass balance between Rogues, and Fighters seems to hold true even at higher levels, with Rogues being on par, or better than a 1d8 Fighter who hits with all attacks, but less than what a 2d6 Fighter who hits with all of their attacks would deal. However, if you give the PCs an extra "2d6 fire damage per hit" via something like the 2014 Flame Tongue magic weapon option, the damage output of Fighters would increase to 31 average damage with a 1d8+2d6 magic weapon, and 36 average damage with a 2d6+2d6 magic weapon, while a Rogue would only increase their damage output to 24 average damage with a 1d4+2d6 magic weapon, and 26 average damage with a 1d8+2d6 magic weapon. It kind of feels like in order for Rogues to keep up with Fighters there will need to be magic weapons that deal something closer to "3d6 extra damage once per turn" in tier 1, or something like "7d6 extra damage once per turn", or more at higher levels.
Out of combat, I think Monks are ahead of Fighters. Number go up is nice and all, but making Fighters better at skill checks was a bandaid fix WotC applied at the last minute because of people complaining about Fighters not having meaningful things to do out of combat, and now... they can't do anything new, they can just do some of those things everyone could before a little better. By comparison, even the 2014 Monk had a few things that no skill check can achieve, such as running on walls/water, slow fall, jumping impossibly far, and curing charm/fear effects. In combat, it looks like Rogues are suffering, with the exception of Thief depending on the magic item. This is a niche example, but Bracer of Flying Daggers looks absolutely disgusting on them in the best way, and I suspect WotC has at least considered putting it in the core books due to it filling the popular fantasy of "dagger dagger dagger."
Colby You mentioned several times about being beholden to the spreadsheet. I'd really like to see more builds that are more well rounded characters that don't sacrifice everything at the alter of dpr. Damage is easy, being effective is hard.
The whole skill monkey = rogue =why they suck at damage, has gone out the window now. Everyone else encroaching on the rogues niche making that arguement useless.
Everyone having a bonus action might speed things up when players aren’t staring at their sheet wondering if they have a bonus action and trying to decide if their turn is over or not.
I have been thinking about ways to homebrew rules around ranged attacks and prone foes and have come up with the following: As a ranged attacker you can make a Volley Attack, firing an arced shot instead of direct fire. By doing this you don't get disadvantage on the attack against a prone foe but the foe gets 3/4 cover (-5 to hit). Also a ranged attacker does not suffer disadvantage due to a foe being within 5 feet if that foe is prone. If a ranged attacker is in an elevated position firing at a prone foe, if they are elevated vertically at least half the distance that they are away from their target horizontally, they suffer no penalty. If they are elevated vertically 1/3rd the horizontal distance, the prone target has half cover (-2 to hit). If the ranged attacker is elevated 1/4th horizontal distance to the target, then the target has 3/4 cover (-5 to hit). Finally, if a ranged shooter is prone and using a crossbow (or a firearm, if you are using the rules for them), they do not suffer disadvantage to their attacks due to being prone.
Well, i think combat will be faster now from levels 4 onward, the ability to use oportunity attacks on allies allow spellcasters with war caster feat to trigger buffs and healing spells as a reaction, so a wizard can oportunity attack the fighter to cast enlarge/reduce and then on the wizard's turn he can cast fireball, this will help a lot with action economy and allow some pretty funny combos that will make combat more team-based and smoother.
I kind of like the idea of you two and maybe a few others dividing and conquering at first doing reviews and builds to start with, so we get more info out, then circle back for your take on what was covered by others!
I have a question I'd love to hear you two talk about. Do you feel more creative with the 2024 phb over the 2014? More inspired? Do you see builds that will be more creative and fun to play?
Fir the warlock baseline, I think it's time to have two separate damage measures, one for ranged damage and one for melee damage. Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast + Hex didn't improve, but ranged damage didn't get nearly the same improvements as melee damage and in many cases has gotten weaker, so the baseline remains relevant for them. You'd need a new melee baseline, though. Bladelock?
Future me coming back to 19:44 and laughing at Chris being sneaking. "I've never looked at G" meaning the Grappler feat and "putting it with F" meaning Four Elements
Im excited to see how the new books affects future builds. Ive been trying to build some given the linited info we have now, so eagerly waiting for full release.
For both @DnDDeepDive and @TreantmonksTemple I hope that both of you post a video describing how you are going to create a baseline and introduce the way that you will rank your builds moving forward.
My issue with rogues isn’t the damage, but the infringement on their skill monkey/specialist role. It is the reason I think Soul Knife was the best subclass. I’ll take the smaller damage ceiling if I can be the one who can out-skill check everyone else, which rogues can still do, but that gap is closing.
Love the Videos Colby but I was thinking about how to score how consistent your builds are in outputting damage while in the shower and thought you could make a scoring system with points. This is what I came up with for that One turn set up +2 Two turn set up +4 Three turn set up + 8 Four turn set up +16 Needs concentration +2 Melee attack +1 Familiar is helping +1 Lose enemy positioning +1 Precise enemy positioning+3 Party member matter +2* Needs long buffs +1** Other +X * (Can hurt allies or needs them to help for example for sneek attack or warlock darkness spell) ** (Like mage armour that last a full day) So a melee build that needs one round of set up gets a consistency score of 3 and if you were getting advantage with a familiar it would be a consistency score of 4 How do you all like this idea I would love to hear what you think
So is this like golf where lower scores are better? It might be more obvious to viewers/readers if you did it the other way around i see where youre going with it
@@Tausami yes the lower the score the better so a 0 is the best. I think that is a flaw with this method but if we started with 10 as the best and reduced the number with decreasing consistency we could get to 0 or some minus numbers and that could be even more confusing for everyone
There are no known plans for publishing 2024 rules in my region. There will be no localised version and English books have to be imported. The chance we will play with them is close to none.
@@the_algorithm :D Before that, I have many other games to play. I never really needed D&D to survive ;), so if WotC doesn't want my money it is fine by me.
I wish they'd kept the flex weapon mastery. Sure it was weak but it was also simple. An easy option for new players and the little damage boost to sword and board was nice
The capstone feats seem much better than in the past, do you two see less need to create multiclass builds or will multiclassing make even better characters?
My biggest question is it even worth multi classing now if your gonna lose out on end game feats like the lvl 19 boon for characters is that lost if you multi class?
I love Colbys argument for the old Smite. It's very flexible, which made it great. Nerfing it because of reddit spreadsheet warriors trying to squeeze out every inch of power from the feature do not reflect most tables I play in. I do think Divine smite should be once a turn, but I disagree with bonus action cost and spell instead of feature, because personally, burning all my actions and resources on one spell is never fun.
The change in the melee/ranged damage divide is great because the benefit of being ranged should be the fact that it is at range. There is the survivability advantage, you don’t have to spend movement to get close to an enemy, allowing you to position more easily, you can hit targets that are flying, etc
Geez... this video made me feel even worse about the divine smite change to bonus action if its that important now... the worst part is they recognized the importance through the change to lay on hands and they still did that to smite... heck they even had a once per turn smite on warlock that they could have used instead
They've nerfed martial's nova damage, but for casters a spell slot is just as nova as before. Fireball hitting a group of 10 gnolls is still going to do 200ish points of damage. So much for fixing the martial/caster divide.
When I first learned D&D I was so disappointed with TWF. In video games I always played a dual wield rogue. I can't WAIT to finally have TWF feel GOOD even if I have to multiclass my rogue again.
I 100% had the same experience as Colby. I watched the Barbarian on the WOTC channel, and then I watched Chris'. I waited for Chris to release his video for the rest.
Colby you got tons of content. You can probably get 4-5 videos out of going over old builds and seeing if they still work or totally broken, and maybe how new features enhance them!
I think they key to Rogue potentially being the weakest class is that Rogue has always been one of the most fun classes, regardless of how strong it was. This feels fine, it will still be just as fun as ever, and I think when you're having fun you don't notice feeling weak as much - at least unless it's REALLY weak.
Bugbear fighter/rogue is going to be nice. 2d6 on each attack on the first round (I'm thinking soul knife start with a normal dagger for nick, so on 11 fighter we can have 4 thrown blade attacks and than comes our bonus action blade from soul knife and we haven't even used action surge, but I'm wondering which fighter would be best) greatly making up for any of the special options we might be wanting to use. I don't hate the idea of 11 fighter/rogue, 7 fighter (if you like the feature)/13 rogue, 6 fighter/14 rogue or 5 fighter/15 rogue. There's gonna be so much we can do/combine. 😁😁😁🤣😆
Maybe bards, at least the subclasess with "weaponized inspiration" can burn spell slots for (several rounds) of burst damage, specially if the can use CHA for attack and damage, and even more if they gain second attack, and even more if hasted...Maybe with a little paladin dip for smite and fighter for surge
I need to know if my sorlock's Eldritch Blast build is going to work like it used to. I've seen a playtest where the Eldritch blast only scales based on Warlock level and not character level, which would completely break my Eldritch blast power.
As someone who playtested the new ranger, I can say that all the people crapping on it definitely haven't playtested it. Is it the best in the game? No, but it's not far and away the worst like people are making it out to be.
Rogue/Swashbuckler it gets you Sneak Attack every turn, regardless of where you are in relation to your allies; wield a rapier and you get Vex for Advantage on your next attack. Take a single Wizard or Sorcerer dip for Booming Blade and stab w/Booming Blade and then move away to make your foe stand still or take damage to move towards you.
Any chance of either of you proposing updates to the Artificer class (and its subclasses) to go along with all the other classes that have been polished by the new book? Some of us are in campaigns that don't have material that's been covered by the new book, but are planning on bringing in new material where applicable.
I would probably agree that the number of rounds of combat will be noticeably reduced thanks to certain actions becoming bonus actions, certain bonus actions being created that are effective to use, and many healing options getting boosted. PCs (especially weapon users) will spend fewer actions on not attacking, more PCs will be able to contribute something useful with their bonus actions, and PCs will spend less combat time being downed (and thus miss fewer turns). As was said, though, this might not reduce total combat time, but even that determination might be table-dependent.
The gap did not close between world changing spells and attacking martials. What changed was that martials gets more options in combat. Not just attack. A few more options. Push, knock down, aoe, more damage. More of that. Like ki points.
I'm excited for the new content and builds from both of you. I'm also keen on dndbeyond adding more 3rd party content to the site. Maybe it'll justify some more homebrew builds down the line?
i like the way that chris is approaching this at 19:00, so much of the sentiment that i've seen online is "they took "x" from us" or "why did they change "y"?" instead of looking for the new exciting combinations that might be available now
Hot take that everyone will likely hate, the rogues should be the weakest martial when it comes to straight up damage over the fight. Their burst is still impactful, are surprising hard to kill and they have the highest utility of any Martial class by a mile. I am not sure 2024 changes that at all.
@DnDDeepDive First of all, excitement. Second of all, did you see the snippets they have been releasing about the Stormlight Archive TTRPG? The kickstarter actually starts on August 6th. I'd love to know your opinions on it
@@DnDDeepDive I noticed those too, and just did a search on the comments for this. Let me tell you how happy i am to read this. love ur videos and love Stormlight
Interesting Question, Are all dragonborn gem ancestry from Fizbans but non-telepathic. Also, because the dragonborn was updated, are we not suppose to use the subraces (Subspecies?) anymore? I always likes that you course have different capabilities based on the type of dragon because it distinguished a silver dragonborn from a white dragonborn or a gold dragonborn and a red dragonborn. And all the options seemed real fitting. It would be a bummer if I couldn't canonically use these cool subraces.
I mean with the Nick property being unveiled as allowing you to make the offhand attack as part of your bonus action, and still use your bonus action for another offhand attack, two weapon fighting will straight up pass dueling. A Sap weapon like a short sword, and a Nick weapon like a scimetar in the off hand on a fighter allows for four attacks as opposed to two attacks that add a flat +2. And since the rework to fighting styles, two weapon fighting will be significantly more prevalent
You can't make two offhand attacks though. It's one or the other. It says you can make the offhand attack as part of the attack action instead of using the bonus action.
it's not an addition to the rule, it changes the rule. the offhand attack BECOMES part of the attack action, freeing your bonus action to do other things. however i imagine classes like monk that have bonus action unarmed strikes could theoretically take advantage of this, if i were DM i would allow a dual wielding monk that can do 3 main attacks (attack, extra attack, nick property offhand attack) and a bonus action kick, or 2-3 with flurry of blows. thats just badass.
@@fordsmolko872 We'll have to see the exact wording in the book itself but the playtest said that you can only use the nick property to make an offhand attack as part of the attack action once per turn. That should mean that Attack, nick attack, action surge, attack, bonus action attack is viable.
They said three or four times that Martials are just as good if not better for damage now. The martial/caster divide is slightly smaller due to a couple classes gaining utility options, and there is one spell that stands out for damage quite a bit, but the real problem with casters has nothing to do with damage and everything to do with utility. Spellcasters can do everything martials can do just as well or better, and martials can't do a lot of things the casters can.
"Does Smite really keep up with spellcasters? No!" Well we're about to find out if not having Smite keeps up with spellcasters, my bet would be even less so personally. That's why it should've been made better, but taken away. They didn't take away Rage or Sneak attack, I've only seen Ranger screwed over this hard...
A little while ago, Colby did a "baseline" build. I would love to see another take on that video fairly soon after the new PHB releases. Partially because I would be interested in seeing if that baseline changes a few years down the line.
Interesting question I’ve got: do you wish Ranger and Rogue got more out of short rests than they do with the 2024 rules? I know that’s one of my pain points from what I’ve seen from the new reveals/UA.
Go back Falko's Vault of Wonders before it's too late! www.kickstarter.com/projects/dungeondecks/falkos-vault-of-wonders-5e?ref=8jgvl9 - Watch the other part of this chat on Chris's Channel here: ruclips.net/video/L6eyavEknek/видео.html
Ooooh, love the CLIFFHANGER! Thanks so much for the conversation Colby, as always, I really enjoyed it.
I wanted to save the second video for tomorrow, but now I can't wait to continue watching. Can't wait for August 1st either!
I might ask on you channel too but concerning the rogues : they did get a lot of combat features, but don't you think that the skill system might be the reason for them being so weak ? Since skills are a major source of the rogue's power, when skills can't do powerful stuff, being powerful at them just leaves you kinda meh.
That was really smooth, love that you guys did that
That. Was. DEVIOUS.
I think the new damage baseline for martials should be a subclassless rogue using steady aim and a hand crossbow. If they are truly the weakest class, then this represents a reasonable floor for sustained and resourceless damage that uses no feats and after the first turn almost always has their bonus action available.
Shout out to Chris for distracting Colby from breaking his NDA multiple times. Thats a bro!
I can’t wait to see Colby’s first monk build with the new rules.
Same, but if it will be strength-based I may cry a little.
God I love Monk so I can’t wait either. It’s my main class and it pained me being so weak until now. Time to catch these hands.
My prediction: the TreantMonkinator and the thumbnail is gonna be a cheap photoshop of Colby with glowing red eyes and flexing his biceps but instead of biceps it's gonna be Chris's face.
@@mattyice165 I main Ranger but I’m glad your class got its buff. I will definitely be multiclassing.
I would personally B-line to Monk 10 where they get their flurry of blows upgrade that makes it do 3 attacks instead of 2, giving them 5 attacks a round, then do 2 levels of fighter for action surge, then maybe go the rest in cleric for spells/utility, since the ability points match up and you won't be MAD.
Did you, treatmonk, and the dungeon dudes do a one shot together with the 2024 rules? Might be a fun day 1 drop
No, but I love the idea :)
@@DnDDeepDive I would drop whatever I was doing to watch that the moment it came out
I second this!
I‘m in! :D
Yup, let's do it!
Great quote. "There's always going to be a class that's the weakest, but there's not always going to be a 2014 monk."
Maybe a 2020 artificer home alone with the spiders😢
On the martial caster divide question I’m not sure a fantasy setting with powerful magic can or should eliminate a gap between those who can use magic and those who cannot. Otherwise magic would not be magic.
@@davidgreenwood7797 The problem is that it's A: bad for the game mechanically because imbalance between party members is never fun and B: Doesn't make any sense in the context of the world, because then why would you ever hire a fighter or a barbarian to do a job when you know a wizard is so much more capable?
@@Woeboez Price. A warrior will be cheaper. It is the difference between skilled and unskilled labor really
@Woeboez
Price as already mentioned.
Availability (magic users are usually rather rare. The higher the level the more so. Hell according to Ebberon, which has more casters than your average setting, 5th level is pretty much the cut-off point with anything above that being the stuff of legends and fairy tales)
Or just the fact that, y'know, casters still have weaknesses that martials cover. Ever tried to play without martials? Some encounters will suck without one or two to take the heat.
“That’s a question from my patron so I might be jumping the gun here”
Wait…. Patron? Is……is Colby a WARLOCK!?!???
Yes, yes he is…
Clearly his patron is the spreadsheet
@@GameMastersAcademy. it goes by the name Ex-ell
@DownUnderDM lol yes!!
Haven't you seen the amount of HexBlade dips Coby uses on builds? Of course he's a walock...always has been. xD
Love these collaborations with Chris. You two are so damn different as people and players, but it sure is wholesome to see you together ❤️ (Chris being the very rational/analytical/cold person, and you with your warm compassionate approach)
Agree. Love it when they are both on together. They work well together.
I love the deep respect and friendly banter
I like the idea of a weapon master esque character who really leans into the weapon perks like topple or nick
"There's multiple ways to get bonus action attacks at melee and at range every round, no resource"
All I needed to hear! Thanks TM!
Lol Treant, the Mr. Actually of DND, gotta love him. Thanks for the collab you two!
Would be cool to get a "weaponmaster" monk that would obviously also get masteries. Maybe thats just an updated kensei that gets weapon masteries for their chosen weapons.
I'm still really sad about the divine smite nerf. It's such a big blow to what you can do with a paladin. The best thing about divine smite was that it meant paladins didn't feel like half-fighter, half-cleric. They had their own unique way to shine (other than passively buffing saving throws), by doing some epic burst damage to single targets.
The designers say they want to give players more options about how to play their classes, and I think they did a good job in other cases, but for the Paladin, it seems like they are pushing you more into spellcasting by making smiting much less attractive.
I would have preferred that they make casting *more attractive* (e.g. with great spells like spirit guardians) or by giving them a feature along the lines of combining shield of faith and spiritual weapon like the War Cleric.
(Also, making divine sense a channel divinity? Wholly unnecessary even with its improvements, and it cuts into the marginally increased number of channels you get.)
Completely agree with you.
D4, may I suggest a list video specifically of things that NO LONGER WORK that were commonly used from the normal 5e books.
As a brand new player just starting to learn D&D right now (the transition between 2 rule books) it would be nice so I know what advice to discard from 5e, and which ideas are still effective
I'm so glad you two got together. You guys are by far my most favorite dnd creators.
Still F's in the chat for Ranger, but I'm otherwise excited for the updated 5e classes and rules!
This channel and Treantmonk's are my favorite for rule mechanics and discussion, love it when you guys cross-over
I don't think so, Chris has mentioned that Rangers aren't as bad as they look and someone asked if he would go over how much Concentration conflict there will be, from Chris's reaction to Rangers I suspect it won't be as bad as we imagine, so the hunters mark changes are going to be all up sides compared to 2014 Ranger. Yes, they could have done a better job, and I think it was a bad design decision in general to spend 4 features on Hunters mark, but feeling bad isn't the same as numerically bad, and if it was numerically bad Chris would have mentioned that.
I mean, overall the features that HM gets aren't game-changing, so it's not like you're straight up gimping your Ranger if you don't cast HM. Plus, with free castings, you can have it up, drop it if you need to concentrate on something else, and cast HM again if you decide that it would be more beneficial. As a long time wizard player, I can say that having to make a judgment on what deserves your concentration is just a part of the game.
@@chiepah2 I don’t think it’s power people are mad about is what treantmonk says about “feel bad features”. I don’t want to play a high level ranger because I am not going to use the 4 of the 10 high level features so why am I even playing this character to higher level instead of multiclassing out. It’s the same problem they had before a strong class with features that feel bad.
Yeah Chris said ranger is still a very effective class. A high level ranger can use their spells and concentration on something like summon beast and along with their attacks they will be doing plenty of damage. It’s just annoying to get all those boosts to a spell you no longer use.
@@andrewmcmillan229 You will probably have combats where summon beast is overkill but a base hunters mark is too weak, the boosted free hunters mark might just hit a niche that just wouldn't be covered otherwise. It just feels really bad to lose 4 features to use summon beasts, even if it is mathematically superior.
Hey Colby, check out Duluth, BWCA, & around the Great Lakes/upper peninsula of MI if you want a cooler getaway in the summer!
Otherwise come during the MN Get Together/State Fair if you want to see the cities, eat well, & potentially catch a game @ Target Field. Mall of America is a giant mall/rainy day back-up plan.
Bonus: we have a top-rated airport just south of the Twin Cities to fly into!
Also Fahrenheit > Celsius; more numbers so more accurate!
Ranger in Peace
I have so enjoyed watching Chris's reaction videos. I'm glad the pair of you collaborate as much as you do!
Oh boy oh boy, Im really thrilled with this, two of my most favourites DnDtubers talking about a topic I really love (well I preffer 5.5 than 5.24 but anyway)😂
Honestly, I'm just glad someone is picking a name and sticking to it
😂
5.24 captures that these changes are not much bigger than those in XGE and TCE that also changed the meta significantly.
loved all of your discussions together about the future of the 2024. its good to hear more thoughtful opinions then the internets thoughts. using it alot to guide my decisions about if we will switch to the new ruleset.
Same reason I came here. Initially I had no interest in the 2024 ruleset in my games, but my main groups 4 year campaign is wrapping up around the time all of this drops and we've discussed making the switch, so I'll have to assimilate regardless. It makes more sense for me to approach it in a positive light rather than a "woe is me" mindset.
I feel like the way to "fix" smite in the way they seem to be trying to do is to remove it from being a spell. Just give it a certain number of uses per day, increase the damage it deals with paladin level. Would make it so the best smiters would be paladins and multiclassing wouldnt need to be as much of a consideration to its power.
thank you for keeping the negative rhetoric to the minimum. I appreciate it guys. Even with the issues you may have over the changes, this was still a super positive conversation. So thank you.
I did in fact start waiting for Chris's react videos after the first couple. I also shared Chris's version on my platforms to my friends.
33:31 No. The gap isn't more narrow. It's worse. The martial floor was raised but the power ceiling got lowered. Casters got boosted almost across the board.
Would love to see your reasoning why when the embargo is lifted.
Likely he is referring to sharpshooter and gwm loosing their -5 to hit +10 to damage. Though, those were never going to go through anyway.
Let's fight!
@@mr.fufucudlypoops8207 Basic resources. Like you can see it at level 3.
A warlock has short rest spammable shatter and EB+AB+RB just memes on all the martials right out of the gates just like the old version.
The obvious Cleric at level 5 is still a way front liner than any martial in the game and I dare say they got better. At lvl 10 you basically get a nuke.
Wizard is still a god and now have a spell interaction that changes optimization dramatically, they're also better at making scrolls so that means even more resources for them on average. They just have more resources and power behind it than everyone else in the game. It's noticeable at level 3.
Druid got nerfed A LOT but still has insane options. Later on they get a good single target damage option that rivals martials.
Bard. Massive boost. Better monk too.
Sorc. Boosted. I've looked at them the least but I think you get the jist of everything else. It is a wild claim to say the gap is smaller.
So basically, for most tables, it’ll be more balanced. But at optimized tables, it’ll be worse.
Ceilings getting lower generally only effect tables that min-max or hyper optimize. I would argue to say that this type of table is the minority. Most tables are choosing things that are thematic and fun rather than straight mechanical power.
So, with the floor getting raised, those casual tables will feel boosted, without noticing a difference. My 2 cents.
Additionally, not many clerics are gonna know the best DI options like Hallow or Prayer of Healing. But I feel you. It will affect you directly because the table you play at and with IS and optimized table, which is not the target audience of the direction of the game.
So glad Melee weapon damage is king! When Ranged damage has always had a better time reaching enemies and keeping the ranged character safe, I’m glad things got rebalanced.
Good to see my two favorite dnd content creators together again!
Theories for what the spell they talked about around 32:00 is?
I too would like some insights onto what spells they were talking about 😅
My guess it’s the new Summon Elementals?
Conjure minor elementals
It's Forcecage lads
@@HeirophantCarneus I doubt it's Forcecage because Colby said it's something they will want to include in every build. I doubt it's a super high level spell like that.
Plus, Colby's builds are less control oriented most of the time.
Edit: I do think that Forcecage is one of the spells Wizards didn't rebalance though.
For the question of what the "weakest class is", for out of combat that might surprisingly be the Monk, and Fighter. Since the Monk is now the only class to not get access to either a Skill boosting feature, or utility magic spells, they will be relying on their basic Skill Proficiencies, and having high Wisdom, and Dexterity, which kind of caps what they can do. While Tactical Mind lets Fighters give themselves a bonus, that should help them in most situations where they need a boost, but only being able to successfully do that for 1, or 2 checks per Short Rest, could be very limiting.
For the weakest class in combat for the Martials, based on what I have heard, and seen in the UA's it seems like what Magic Items are available in the 2024 rules could have a big impact on whether Rogues will be the weakest martial class, or not. Like for level 5 characters, a Rogue with a 1d4 weapon should be dealing 17 average damage, and with a 1d8 weapon they would be dealing 19 damage, while a level 5 Fighter who hits with both attacks would be dealing 17 average damage with a 1d8 weapon, and 22 average damage with a 2d6 weapon, and this interclass balance between Rogues, and Fighters seems to hold true even at higher levels, with Rogues being on par, or better than a 1d8 Fighter who hits with all attacks, but less than what a 2d6 Fighter who hits with all of their attacks would deal. However, if you give the PCs an extra "2d6 fire damage per hit" via something like the 2014 Flame Tongue magic weapon option, the damage output of Fighters would increase to 31 average damage with a 1d8+2d6 magic weapon, and 36 average damage with a 2d6+2d6 magic weapon, while a Rogue would only increase their damage output to 24 average damage with a 1d4+2d6 magic weapon, and 26 average damage with a 1d8+2d6 magic weapon. It kind of feels like in order for Rogues to keep up with Fighters there will need to be magic weapons that deal something closer to "3d6 extra damage once per turn" in tier 1, or something like "7d6 extra damage once per turn", or more at higher levels.
Out of combat, I think Monks are ahead of Fighters. Number go up is nice and all, but making Fighters better at skill checks was a bandaid fix WotC applied at the last minute because of people complaining about Fighters not having meaningful things to do out of combat, and now... they can't do anything new, they can just do some of those things everyone could before a little better. By comparison, even the 2014 Monk had a few things that no skill check can achieve, such as running on walls/water, slow fall, jumping impossibly far, and curing charm/fear effects.
In combat, it looks like Rogues are suffering, with the exception of Thief depending on the magic item. This is a niche example, but Bracer of Flying Daggers looks absolutely disgusting on them in the best way, and I suspect WotC has at least considered putting it in the core books due to it filling the popular fantasy of "dagger dagger dagger."
Colby
You mentioned several times about being beholden to the spreadsheet. I'd really like to see more builds that are more well rounded characters that don't sacrifice everything at the alter of dpr.
Damage is easy, being effective is hard.
The whole skill monkey = rogue =why they suck at damage, has gone out the window now. Everyone else encroaching on the rogues niche making that arguement useless.
Everyone having a bonus action might speed things up when players aren’t staring at their sheet wondering if they have a bonus action and trying to decide if their turn is over or not.
I have been thinking about ways to homebrew rules around ranged attacks and prone foes and have come up with the following:
As a ranged attacker you can make a Volley Attack, firing an arced shot instead of direct fire. By doing this you don't get disadvantage on the attack against a prone foe but the foe gets 3/4 cover (-5 to hit).
Also a ranged attacker does not suffer disadvantage due to a foe being within 5 feet if that foe is prone.
If a ranged attacker is in an elevated position firing at a prone foe, if they are elevated vertically at least half the distance that they are away from their target horizontally, they suffer no penalty. If they are elevated vertically 1/3rd the horizontal distance, the prone target has half cover (-2 to hit). If the ranged attacker is elevated 1/4th horizontal distance to the target, then the target has 3/4 cover (-5 to hit).
Finally, if a ranged shooter is prone and using a crossbow (or a firearm, if you are using the rules for them), they do not suffer disadvantage to their attacks due to being prone.
Well, i think combat will be faster now from levels 4 onward, the ability to use oportunity attacks on allies allow spellcasters with war caster feat to trigger buffs and healing spells as a reaction, so a wizard can oportunity attack the fighter to cast enlarge/reduce and then on the wizard's turn he can cast fireball, this will help a lot with action economy and allow some pretty funny combos that will make combat more team-based and smoother.
Burst damage builds, that relied on multiple attacks per turn, were the most fun for me. Now that is completely destroyed.
Not necessarily. They both just released a couple of builds over the last week, check into those.
I kind of like the idea of you two and maybe a few others dividing and conquering at first doing reviews and builds to start with, so we get more info out, then circle back for your take on what was covered by others!
I have a question I'd love to hear you two talk about. Do you feel more creative with the 2024 phb over the 2014? More inspired? Do you see builds that will be more creative and fun to play?
Fir the warlock baseline, I think it's time to have two separate damage measures, one for ranged damage and one for melee damage. Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast + Hex didn't improve, but ranged damage didn't get nearly the same improvements as melee damage and in many cases has gotten weaker, so the baseline remains relevant for them. You'd need a new melee baseline, though. Bladelock?
Future me coming back to 19:44 and laughing at Chris being sneaking. "I've never looked at G" meaning the Grappler feat and "putting it with F" meaning Four Elements
Im excited to see how the new books affects future builds. Ive been trying to build some given the linited info we have now, so eagerly waiting for full release.
For both @DnDDeepDive and @TreantmonksTemple I hope that both of you post a video describing how you are going to create a baseline and introduce the way that you will rank your builds moving forward.
My issue with rogues isn’t the damage, but the infringement on their skill monkey/specialist role. It is the reason I think Soul Knife was the best subclass. I’ll take the smaller damage ceiling if I can be the one who can out-skill check everyone else, which rogues can still do, but that gap is closing.
Love the Videos Colby but I was thinking about how to score how consistent your builds are in outputting damage while in the shower and thought you could make a scoring system with points. This is what I came up with for that
One turn set up +2
Two turn set up +4
Three turn set up + 8
Four turn set up +16
Needs concentration +2
Melee attack +1
Familiar is helping +1
Lose enemy positioning +1
Precise enemy positioning+3
Party member matter +2*
Needs long buffs +1**
Other +X
* (Can hurt allies or needs them to help for example for sneek attack or warlock darkness spell)
** (Like mage armour that last a full day)
So a melee build that needs one round of set up gets a consistency score of 3 and if you were getting advantage with a familiar it would be a consistency score of 4
How do you all like this idea I would love to hear what you think
So is this like golf where lower scores are better? It might be more obvious to viewers/readers if you did it the other way around i see where youre going with it
@@Tausami yes the lower the score the better so a 0 is the best. I think that is a flaw with this method but if we started with 10 as the best and reduced the number with decreasing consistency we could get to 0 or some minus numbers and that could be even more confusing for everyone
always nice to see a collab with you and chris
I’m curious as to how y’all would improve hunter’s mark to make it feel better as a feature without completely changing the Ranger altogether
There are no known plans for publishing 2024 rules in my region. There will be no localised version and English books have to be imported. The chance we will play with them is close to none.
Arrrgh thar matey!
@@the_algorithm :D Before that, I have many other games to play. I never really needed D&D to survive ;), so if WotC doesn't want my money it is fine by me.
When I play there is rarelly more than 1 to 3 combats per long rest. And 3 per long rest is rare. We usually let players get some sleep in between.
Great channel...proud supporter
Thanks for sharing your thoughts
I wish they'd kept the flex weapon mastery. Sure it was weak but it was also simple. An easy option for new players and the little damage boost to sword and board was nice
My two favorite RUclipsrs! Thank you for this fun collaboration. Excellent as always.
The capstone feats seem much better than in the past, do you two see less need to create multiclass builds or will multiclassing make even better characters?
Colby, have you started your new spreadsheet for 2024 PHB baselines? Keep being awesome
So far there's only one build but yep!
absolutely jarring cliffhanger, gonna go watch his video now.
My biggest question is it even worth multi classing now if your gonna lose out on end game feats like the lvl 19 boon for characters is that lost if you multi class?
43:40 What? The Rogue is the weakest? Not the Ranger? What are we missing?
Great video guys and love the shirt Colby! 🍁🍁
I love Colbys argument for the old Smite. It's very flexible, which made it great. Nerfing it because of reddit spreadsheet warriors trying to squeeze out every inch of power from the feature do not reflect most tables I play in.
I do think Divine smite should be once a turn, but I disagree with bonus action cost and spell instead of feature, because personally, burning all my actions and resources on one spell is never fun.
The change in the melee/ranged damage divide is great because the benefit of being ranged should be the fact that it is at range. There is the survivability advantage, you don’t have to spend movement to get close to an enemy, allowing you to position more easily, you can hit targets that are flying, etc
I think it'd be really interesting to see y'all have another conversation after all the dust settles from the new addition
Geez... this video made me feel even worse about the divine smite change to bonus action if its that important now... the worst part is they recognized the importance through the change to lay on hands and they still did that to smite... heck they even had a once per turn smite on warlock that they could have used instead
They've nerfed martial's nova damage, but for casters a spell slot is just as nova as before. Fireball hitting a group of 10 gnolls is still going to do 200ish points of damage. So much for fixing the martial/caster divide.
When I first learned D&D I was so disappointed with TWF. In video games I always played a dual wield rogue. I can't WAIT to finally have TWF feel GOOD even if I have to multiclass my rogue again.
I 100% had the same experience as Colby. I watched the Barbarian on the WOTC channel, and then I watched Chris'. I waited for Chris to release his video for the rest.
Colby you got tons of content. You can probably get 4-5 videos out of going over old builds and seeing if they still work or totally broken, and maybe how new features enhance them!
I am glad ranged damage got worse. It shouldn't be bad, don't get me wrong, but it should be worse because it is easier to do.
Because your character is useless and can't use one ?
That deck thing for magic items is an old idea from Earthdawn
I think they key to Rogue potentially being the weakest class is that Rogue has always been one of the most fun classes, regardless of how strong it was. This feels fine, it will still be just as fun as ever, and I think when you're having fun you don't notice feeling weak as much - at least unless it's REALLY weak.
Bugbear fighter/rogue is going to be nice. 2d6 on each attack on the first round (I'm thinking soul knife start with a normal dagger for nick, so on 11 fighter we can have 4 thrown blade attacks and than comes our bonus action blade from soul knife and we haven't even used action surge, but I'm wondering which fighter would be best) greatly making up for any of the special options we might be wanting to use. I don't hate the idea of 11 fighter/rogue, 7 fighter (if you like the feature)/13 rogue, 6 fighter/14 rogue or 5 fighter/15 rogue. There's gonna be so much we can do/combine. 😁😁😁🤣😆
Maybe bards, at least the subclasess with "weaponized inspiration" can burn spell slots for (several rounds) of burst damage, specially if the can use CHA for attack and damage, and even more if they gain second attack, and even more if hasted...Maybe with a little paladin dip for smite and fighter for surge
I need to know if my sorlock's Eldritch Blast build is going to work like it used to.
I've seen a playtest where the Eldritch blast only scales based on Warlock level and not character level, which would completely break my Eldritch blast power.
Love you guys! ❤
As someone who playtested the new ranger, I can say that all the people crapping on it definitely haven't playtested it. Is it the best in the game? No, but it's not far and away the worst like people are making it out to be.
Rogue/Swashbuckler it gets you Sneak Attack every turn, regardless of where you are in relation to your allies; wield a rapier and you get Vex for Advantage on your next attack. Take a single Wizard or Sorcerer dip for Booming Blade and stab w/Booming Blade and then move away to make your foe stand still or take damage to move towards you.
Can't wait to hear about the Wild Magic Changes. Thematically it's one of my favorite subclasses, but it's always been mechanically lacking.
Any chance of either of you proposing updates to the Artificer class (and its subclasses) to go along with all the other classes that have been polished by the new book? Some of us are in campaigns that don't have material that's been covered by the new book, but are planning on bringing in new material where applicable.
Can't wait for the embargo to drop! 😄 And to get my hands on the new phb!
I would probably agree that the number of rounds of combat will be noticeably reduced thanks to certain actions becoming bonus actions, certain bonus actions being created that are effective to use, and many healing options getting boosted. PCs (especially weapon users) will spend fewer actions on not attacking, more PCs will be able to contribute something useful with their bonus actions, and PCs will spend less combat time being downed (and thus miss fewer turns). As was said, though, this might not reduce total combat time, but even that determination might be table-dependent.
The gap did not close between world changing spells and attacking martials. What changed was that martials gets more options in combat. Not just attack. A few more options. Push, knock down, aoe, more damage. More of that. Like ki points.
I can't be sure but most of these changes sound good for balance between PC's.
I hope you two do a 2024 monk video!
I'm excited for the new content and builds from both of you. I'm also keen on dndbeyond adding more 3rd party content to the site. Maybe it'll justify some more homebrew builds down the line?
Subbed for the mega vid on classes. Great conversation
i like the way that chris is approaching this at 19:00, so much of the sentiment that i've seen online is "they took "x" from us" or "why did they change "y"?" instead of looking for the new exciting combinations that might be available now
Hot take that everyone will likely hate, the rogues should be the weakest martial when it comes to straight up damage over the fight. Their burst is still impactful, are surprising hard to kill and they have the highest utility of any Martial class by a mile. I am not sure 2024 changes that at all.
Yooo Colby, I knew you liked Stormlight, but I see that Way of Kings Leatherbound in the background what a brother!
Oh just wait until the video on August 6th... ;)
@DnDDeepDive First of all, excitement. Second of all, did you see the snippets they have been releasing about the Stormlight Archive TTRPG? The kickstarter actually starts on August 6th. I'd love to know your opinions on it
@@ShadeGuitarist1 you’re Reeeeally gone like the video on August 6th! 😅
@@DnDDeepDive I noticed those too, and just did a search on the comments for this. Let me tell you how happy i am to read this. love ur videos and love Stormlight
Is longbow a viable option without sharpshooter? I'm worried about the classic archer Ranger build.
I miss the Swashbuckler Rogue.
You can still play it...
Interesting Question, Are all dragonborn gem ancestry from Fizbans but non-telepathic. Also, because the dragonborn was updated, are we not suppose to use the subraces (Subspecies?) anymore? I always likes that you course have different capabilities based on the type of dragon because it distinguished a silver dragonborn from a white dragonborn or a gold dragonborn and a red dragonborn. And all the options seemed real fitting. It would be a bummer if I couldn't canonically use these cool subraces.
I mean with the Nick property being unveiled as allowing you to make the offhand attack as part of your bonus action, and still use your bonus action for another offhand attack, two weapon fighting will straight up pass dueling. A Sap weapon like a short sword, and a Nick weapon like a scimetar in the off hand on a fighter allows for four attacks as opposed to two attacks that add a flat +2. And since the rework to fighting styles, two weapon fighting will be significantly more prevalent
You can't make two offhand attacks though. It's one or the other. It says you can make the offhand attack as part of the attack action instead of using the bonus action.
Yeah, that is a misread.
it's not an addition to the rule, it changes the rule. the offhand attack BECOMES part of the attack action, freeing your bonus action to do other things. however i imagine classes like monk that have bonus action unarmed strikes could theoretically take advantage of this, if i were DM i would allow a dual wielding monk that can do 3 main attacks (attack, extra attack, nick property offhand attack) and a bonus action kick, or 2-3 with flurry of blows. thats just badass.
@@fordsmolko872 We'll have to see the exact wording in the book itself but the playtest said that you can only use the nick property to make an offhand attack as part of the attack action once per turn. That should mean that Attack, nick attack, action surge, attack, bonus action attack is viable.
@@XanderHarris1023 I don't agree that it is. Unless it's the situation that mac just describes
Awesome discussion:D
Martials lost a lot of damage. Spells were already more potent and this skewed further towards leaning towards magic users.
They said three or four times that Martials are just as good if not better for damage now. The martial/caster divide is slightly smaller due to a couple classes gaining utility options, and there is one spell that stands out for damage quite a bit, but the real problem with casters has nothing to do with damage and everything to do with utility. Spellcasters can do everything martials can do just as well or better, and martials can't do a lot of things the casters can.
Is that The Way of Kings leatherbound on Colby's shelf? Exquisite taste!
"Does Smite really keep up with spellcasters? No!"
Well we're about to find out if not having Smite keeps up with spellcasters, my bet would be even less so personally. That's why it should've been made better, but taken away. They didn't take away Rage or Sneak attack, I've only seen Ranger screwed over this hard...
A little while ago, Colby did a "baseline" build. I would love to see another take on that video fairly soon after the new PHB releases. Partially because I would be interested in seeing if that baseline changes a few years down the line.
I was really hoping for videos like these thank you guys so much!!!
Interesting question I’ve got: do you wish Ranger and Rogue got more out of short rests than they do with the 2024 rules?
I know that’s one of my pain points from what I’ve seen from the new reveals/UA.
Howdy from the Pacific northwest. Cda was 103 last Sunday too but the lake is nice.
overall, the one-level dip options could be even more powerful now, such as one level in Paladin for any spellcaster or partial caster
Chris with his Make A Wish shirt looks like he was granted a video with his favorite RUclipsr! Speaking of, both of you are mine!