Say your campaign goes to level 18 and you're about to hit level 16. Assuming you've maxed your main stats, an ASI +2 in something else is still a good option. But if you already have even numbers in all your ability scores (or all the scores you care about) then the +1 from a General Feat will do very little for you. That puts the Origin Feats on a more even footing. Depending on your build, taking Magic Initiate over Fey Touched, or Skilled over Skill Expert, might be more powerful choices with no real downsides.

Just thought I'd share in case I'm not alone in overlooking this.

A Quick Tier List:

• They got it right: Scion of the Three
• Good, but could be better: Oath of the Noble Genies, College of the Moon
• Works, but needs buffs: Spellfire Sorcery, Bladesinger
• Mechanically flawed: Purple Dragon Knight, Knowledge Domain, Winter Walker

Reasons for each classification:

Scion of the Three:

• Bloodthirst: Simply phenomenal. It provides extra damage, something the rogue desperately needs. In D&D 2024, rogue isn't a top-tier DPS; every role it can fill is done better by another class, and its key features rely on skills where it isn't naturally strong. This feature not only boosts its turn-based damage but also gives it a reliable way to trigger Sneak Attack on other turns, significantly improving its damage output.
• Dread Allegiance: Each damage type has its use. Poison and necrotic are common, but you can adapt—fighting undead? Pick necrotic. Facing assassins? Poison. As for the cantrips, Blade Ward is by far the best, greatly increasing survivability in combat. The other options are mostly for RP or wizards, but why would you give up Sneak Attack just to deal minimal damage with a cantrip?
• Strike of Fear: Generic frightened effect.
• Aura of Malevolence: Not a major damage source, but still nice to have an AoE chip effect. Every bit of damage gets the enemy closer to Bloodied.
• Dread Incarnate: Battle Tyrant makes Strike of Fear much stronger, and you don’t even need to be the source of fear—if a wizard casts Fear, it still works. Murderous Intent is simply absurd, increasing Sneak Attack average damage from 31.5 to 36.

Conclusion: A solid subclass. It leans more into melee than most rogue subclasses, but it has enough defensive tools to make it viable.

Oath of the Noble Genies

• Elemental Smite: Dao’s Crush is great because Restrained is a strong condition, and it doesn’t require a save—perfect for bosses. Djinni’s Escape is weak; spending Channel Divinity on a teleport isn't worth it when better options exist. Efreeti’s Fury is underwhelming—just 2d4 fire damage? Not worth a Channel Divinity. Marid’s Surge is useful but situational. The main strength here is versatility, not raw power.
• Genie Spells: A mix of good and bad spells, but the bad ones outweigh the good. This was their chance to bring back Absorb Elements to fix that.
• Genie’s Splendor: Without magic armor, DEX paladins were already stronger than STR paladins. This subclass leans into that even more, reaching 17–18 AC at level 3 and likely 22 AC without a shield later on.
• Aura of Elemental Shielding: Resistance in an aura is already strong, but choosing the element at the start of your turn? Incredibly powerful. “Oh, a fire elemental/devil? I have high DEX and maybe Alert—I’ll just pick fire resistance for my whole team.”
• Elemental Rebuke: Might seem redundant with Defensive Duelist, but it’s not. It reduces incoming damage while dealing an estimated 25 damage back. Properly used, it’s strong—especially if triggered just before your turn.
• Noble Scion: Finally, a Bonus Action capstone (as they all should be). Flight is always useful. Minor Wish is disappointing—your reaction will likely be overloaded already, and having the ultimate feature of a paladin be “save one saving throw” feels underwhelming.

Conclusion: A cool DEX-focused subclass, but it suffers from small design issues.

College of the Moon

• Moonshae Folktales: Tale of Life gives a small healing buff. Tale of Gloam can save you from danger while buffing allies. Tale of Mirth is the highlight—you’ll probably keep it active all the time. Who wouldn’t want to force a boss to fail a monk’s Stunning Strike or your own Hold Person?
• Primal Lorist: Nice for RP, every subclass should have at least one RP feature.
• Blessing of the Moonwells: Moonbeam isn’t strong, but getting it as a Bonus Action without spending a spell slot, while healing allies when enemies fail their saves, is very strong.
• Bolstered Folktales: General buff to Moonshae Folktales, but again, you’ll mostly stick to Tale of Mirth since it’s far superior—especially now with unlimited uses.

Conclusion: A thematically cool subclass, but I’d consider letting players swap Moonshae Folktales at the start of their turn.

Spellfire Sorcery

• Spellfire Burst: Bolstering Flames provides nice temp HP for frontline allies. Radiant Fire is a light burn—at best, it counters Regeneration.
• Spellfire Spells: Many strong spells.
• Absorb Spells: Very cool, but situational.
• Honed Spellfire: Solid general buff to Spellfire Burst.
• Crown of Spellfire: Burning Life Force is nice, but you’ll have to request two long rests from your party. Flight is always useful. Spell Avoidance (Evasion) is decent, but as a backline caster, it’s not as impactful.

Conclusion: A subclass heavily focused on support—it could be a little stronger.

Bladesinger

• Bladesong: More early uses due to INT scaling, fewer late-game uses. Agility is very strong—Mage Armor gives 18–19 AC at level 3, scaling to 23 AC late game. Bladework makes melee viable; below level 5, you’ll deal more damage attacking than using cantrips. Focus is nice for concentration.
• Training in War and Song: Proficiencies and RP.
• Extra Attack: Always strong.
• Song of Defense: Doesn’t overlap with Defensive Duelist or Shield since it’s mainly for saves.
• Song of Victory: Decent, but I expected more from a capstone.

Conclusion: A fun and unique subclass, but it still suffers from 5e’s main problem—it needs three high stats (INT, DEX, CON). It also lacks melee spells like an improved True Strike for Bladesingers.

Purple Dragon Knight

• Knightly Envoy: RP.
• Purple Dragon Companion: A fighter minion subclass sounds cool, but the dragon lacks HP and AC, and its melee attack is weak. It’s more of a decoration.
• Dragon Rider: Without Mounted Combatant, your mount dies quickly. Even with it, the dragon moves as fast as you do. The breath weapon is weak, and Shared Second Wind is unreliable.
• Rallying Surge: Same problem as the 2014 Banneret—only one Action Surge (used for attacks) and it costs allies their reaction. Either it should trigger differently, or the attack shouldn’t cost a reaction.
• Enduring Commander: Late-game force resistance is nice.

Conclusion: Completely outclassed by Battlemaster, which deals absurd damage while controlling the battlefield with high AC. This subclass makes even Champion look good.

Knowledge Domain

• Blessings of Knowledge: RP.
• Knowledge Domain Spells: Mostly RP spells. Not great for combat, with a few exceptions.
• Mind Magic: Cool, but other clerics do it better.
• Unfettered Mind: Telepathy is always nice for RP.
• Divine Foreknowledge: Your capstone is also mostly RP. Sure, it buffs your saves and attacks, but most of your spells and cantrips rely on enemy saves, and you’ll likely be in the backline.

Conclusion: Subclasses should be balanced—not killing machines, but also not dead weight in combat. This one desperately needs combat utility.

Winter Walker

• Frigid Explorer: Frost Resistance – resistance is always good. Polar Strikes – too little damage. Low-level, I get it, but at higher levels, it’s still just 1d6. I imagine Baphomet feeling a slight tickle.
• Hunter’s Rime: Alright, temp HP on the class’s main feature and escape prevention. But again, it doesn’t scale.
• Winter Walker Spells: Rangers don’t have high WIS to make their save-based spells hit consistently. Some good spells, some bad ones—the bad ones win.
• Fortifying Soul: SONG OF REST ON A RANGER???? And advantage against Frightened for an hour? Hope you have precognition to know when to use it.
• Chilling Retribution: You give up your reaction to attempt to Frighten a creature with your WIS save. Why? Your WIS will be low, or else you’re not dealing damage.
• Frozen Haunt: Frozen Soul – immunity and AoE damage, cool, even if the damage is weak. Partially Incorporeal – nice for repositioning.

Conclusion: Ranger already struggles with late game—it needs three stats, but only gets four ASIs, so it can’t be good at all of them. This subclass follows the same pattern: damage falls off hard in the late game.

General Conclusion

This is just my opinion, but I’m posting it because I’d love to hear agreements and disagreements. I still have hope that these classes will be fixed before release. Thanks to everyone who read this far—I’d love to hear your thoughts too!

Edit1: Fixed formatting.

I'm finally getting a chance to play with the new 2024 rules, and in looking at my potential progression for the fighter I'm playing, it feels a bit silly to have so many weapon masteries.

Having a few makes sense. That'll get you a melee weapon, a ranged weapon, and some other weapon with the utility or mastery property you desire. But the fighter tops off at six masteries.

The idea of juggling weapons in combat is silly. Swapping between 3 or 4 weapons doesn't seem that ridiculous, but swapping between 5 or 6 does. Plus you're eventually going to be limited to one or two weapons anyway depending on what magic weapon or weapons you get your hands on.

If the Weapon Master and Fighting Style feats are presumed to be balanced, one could argue that one weapon mastery is the equivalent of one fighting style. Note that I said one could argue, not that it's a good argument, and that's why I'm starting the discussion.

Would you let a martial swap out one or more weapons masteries to get an additional fighting style? Is that unbalanced or overpowered?

Bonus question: would it be OP, and would you allow it, if instead of getting additional weapon masteries, a martial could instead opt for an additional mastery property on their mastered weapons. I.e., a ranger could take weapon mastery longbow, then use his second mastery to give the longbow vex instead of taking a martial weapon as his second mastery. I think I'd maybe limit each weapon to having a total of 2 or 3 mastery properties so that a fighter wouldn't have one weapon with 6 properties, but they could have 2 or 3 with a couple.

Let's discuss. I.e., help me have a compelling argument to bring up with my DM. 😂

So I was browsing the sub when I saw someone say that the UA Ranger's and Rogue's emanations might signal that WotC is rethinking their implementation of emanations in the PHB. Whether or not that's true, it got me thinking about Conjure Woodland Beings shenanigans and whether there was a good way make emanations flexible without either allowing crazy movement shenanigans or having tons of rules text. Here's what I came up with:

When a creature occupies a space covered by the emanation, you may [effect here]. Once a creature is subjected to this effect, it cannot be subjected to it again until the start of your next turn. Once you make this choice for a creature, you cannot make it again for that creature until the start of your next turn.

I think it works pretty well, but I wanted to run it past the sub in case I missed something. Potential issues that I see so far:

• Forced movement into an emanation right before your turn could cause the emanation to go off twice in a row. It would require specific timing, and would probably need to be done by an ally. As such, I don't mind this as much because of the teamwork aspect. Also, it would require that you've not damaged that enemy with the emanation earlier in the round, so it's not really a damage increase, just placing the two instances really close together.
• You could Ready a move action for right before your turn to move onto an enemy and activate the emanation twice in a row. I don't like this one as much. It feels closer to the super gamey stuff we already see with CWB. That said, it's somewhat dependent on whether the DM will allow meta triggers like that, and it still would restrict the damage to once per round on average(see my last point above). I may not like it, but I don't think it's a big deal.

ETA: Forgot to say that this would be primarily for damage effects. You could still have more passive effects on the emanations that don't need this like Spirit Guardians'

Any other creature's Speed is halved in the Emanation

Edit 2: Shortly after I posted this, I thought of another potential problem:

• You could theoretically hold off on triggering the emanation when a creature first enters it to then activate it while the creature is still inside. I'm not sure if there's anything particularly nonsensical that you could do with this, but it feels narratively weird and possibly abusable so I altered my rule to try and nip it in the bud.

Hey there!

Treantmonk (somewhat recently) released a video comparing 3 paladin builds (great weapon master, dual wielder and longsword and shield). After watching it, i was super hyped to play, and playing a dual wielder dexadin was an old dream of mine, so i joined a campaign with some friends.

The video said that dual wielding was the most damaging style in tier one, and i gotta say, he was absolutely right.

I started in level 3. Basic strategy was to divine favor when i used vow of enmity, which happened in most combats. My damage was very good, roling the dice twice and still having a bonus action available was fun for a while. But level 4 was when the magic happened.

Dual wielder was super game changing. My DM likes to run combats that are long and brutal, frequently going for 7+ rounds, so divine favor and 3 attacks really paid off.

Plus, if i was low on life, i could just fall back to my plan of throwing daggers, and i could throw 3 daggers per turn (i had mastery in scimitar and daggers, for nick). I discovered that dual wielders are also amazing weapon throwers, problably the best.

In one occasion, we ended up in a combat we should'nt have, so the enemy hit hard and had a medium AC. Even so, the advantage from Vow of enmity and divine favor meant i was frequently dealing 30 damage per round on level 4(!!), i only missed 2 attacks in this long combat. Plus, since i wasn't smiting very much, i could use the spare slots in the shield spell, acquired through magic initiate wizard.

We just got to level 5, where great weapon master should shine a little more than dual wielder. However, my DM makes magic items pretty accessible, so i believe that i will eventually access some vicious weapons, and that would be something that benefits the "more attacks" build. The long combats also benefits the dual wielder sutained damage, so i think i'll be fine.

TLDR: I could'nt be more happy with my vengeance dual wielder, and i really recomend the build in tier 1. I'll make another post when i'm done with tier 2.

Hi friends, i’m currently playing a bladesinger wizard in a 2024 campaing, since every other class is up to date and me and my DM liked the new bladesinger we updated my character to the new version. I’m wondering what i should get in level 12 and what magic itens im looking for. I’m level 10 now with 8/16/19/20/10/8. My campaign is something like 60% combat, 40% role play and i like to play kinda off a damage dealer / controller. I was going to get a dex ASI when i get level 12 but i don’t see the need in this new version of bladesinger. My feats are alert and warcaster and the magic itens i’m using at the moment are amulet of health (i really like to keep this one), ring of protection (good but im looking for something better) and a flame tongue (i like it and i end up using it but im not really sure about it). For feats i have some ideas: First i can get res CON to have a really good concentration save but maybe is a bit overkill with my advantage and +5 from bladesong. The +1 con would be wasted since i don’t think i will stop using amulet of health but it is what it is. Second idea is to get Mage slayer (+1 dex). Guarded mind looks great and stoping other concentration is always good, the odd Dex is strange and i think i would need to find another dex feat to get at level 16. Third idea is to get Gunner feat. Im really looking for a ranged weapon that i can use with True Strike, i think it would be much better with the 14 feature and i could keep a distance and play better at range. For itens i really don’t know but some are looking interesting. Bracers of defense for the insane AC (mage armor + dex + int + 2 + shield) Arcane grimoire +1/+2 i think is a need. I’m kinda of new to wizard so maybe i missed something, what feat do you guys think is better and did i missed anything? And for itens, what i should be looking as a wizard?

I’ve loved arcane casters, especially sorcerers and wizards, and over the 10 years I’ve been playing 5e, I’ve switched between the two. I thought the tradeoff between the classes was good: fewer spells known for metamagic, better saves and stats, and more versatility in spell recovery versus more spells known but worse saves and stats and less versatility with your recovery feature.

At least, whenever I played sorcerer in 2014, I always out-damaged or out-controlled our wizard player, but when I played wizard, I had a lot more versatility in my choices.

Having played both classes in 2024, my suggestion now is to save yourself the trouble and just play sorcerer.

As a sorcerer, you get:

• Better stats: Charisma > Intelligence, both for skills and saves. This really needs to be stated. Charisma, in terms of multiclassing and utility during a game, is so much better.
• Better saves: Constitution proficiency is basically a free feat.
• More spells prepared: A ton more—like 25 at level 10 compared to a wizard’s 15. And seriously, read those lists, they are so versatile that they cover every role: damage, debuffing, summoning, buffing, across all subclasses that have expanded lists.
• Better spell save DC: Basically another free feat. Increasing your save DC is a priority for any caster. Besides, Innate Sorcery also turns you into a monster with Chromatic Orb, especially as your level increases.
• Better spell recovery: This is absurd to me, especially because sorcerers already had a better spell recovery in 2014. With sorcery points, you could always recover more spells than a wizard if you use your points for that, with the option to use them for metamagic instead. Now, a 6th-level wizard can recover a single 3rd-level spell after a short rest. A 6th-level sorcerer can recover a 3rd-level and a 2nd-level spell. Some people will argue, “Ah, but you can’t use metamagic to recover that much.” Well, yeah. That was the tradeoff since 2014. You have a class that can make 3 attacks, and a class that can make 3 attacks or replace one attack with a special move. And people complain that the class that can do more is worse because, if they use their special move, they can’t make the 3rd attack like the other class.
• Metamagic: Simply a game-changer, and how much better these features have become. Your choice when playing a sorcerer is simple. Do you want to recover more spells than your wizard friend and cast more (because you can—you can recover more spells than them and you have more spells prepared anyway), or do you want to spend 1 point to cast a spell at a higher level?
• Better subclasses: Do you know what wizard subclasses do? They allow you to do what a base sorcerer with metamagic can do before they get their subclasses. Oh, you’re a Diviner Wizard and you rolled a good number on your portent? Maybe one of them, maybe two. That’s great. Heightened spells give disadvantage on saves for EVERY save of a spell, not just the first. Oh, you’re an Evoker and you can sculpt your evocation spells? Careful Spell can do the same for every spell you have.

Counterpoint

There are some good things about wizards:

• Exclusive spells: They have some excellent spells, which a sorcerer can grab with the right subclass. Most of those excellent spells are Tier 3 and 4, though. You will not be playing in Tier 3 and 4. If you’re playing in Tier 3 and 4, that will be the end of your campaign. Build your characters assuming that most action happens at Tier 1 and 2.
• Spell Swapping. It is great. But you don’t have your whole spell list like a cleric and a druid. Situations where you need 8 hours (or even 1 hour) to swap your spells can often be solved in different manners. Having more spells prepared is more useful than having more spells that you can prepare. You could increase your utility by coping more spells into your spellbook. But that costs money. Why waste money doing that, when you can play a sorcerer, have more spells prepared, and use the same money to craft magic items instead?
• Besides, if you’re playing in Tier 3 and 4, do you know what’s even better than a wizard? A bard. You get all their exclusive spells, plus Druid and Cleric ones, plus the full bard package and subclasses.
• Ritual Adept: Which is great. But remember, Tiny Hut is cool, but most rituals are Illusory Script, Gentle Repose, and stuff like that. You know what’s better than that? Having more actual spells prepared. Having Calm Emotions prepared (especially if you also have Subtle Spell) will be much more impactful in-game than having Detect Magic (and Detect Magic is one of the top-tier rituals). Besides, you have more spells prepared than a wizard anyway as a sorcerer, so if you want, you can grab some rituals and even Magic Initiate if you want.

If I’m playing at a very high tier, I might play a wizard… but honestly, a bard seems like such a better wizard at that tier. Truth be told, if I’m itching to play a wizard in the future, I’ll probably ask a GM to let me play a sorcerer using Intelligence instead of Charisma. That’s a nerf to the sorcerer, by the way, but it still seems like a better option.

I'm playing a class from a third party file. Main stat is wisdom and we started Recently at level 7.

Upon starting the campaign, our DM boosted our stats according to his gut feeling so he raised all main stats of the group to 20.

This poses me the question on what feat to get next if an Origin Feat or a General Feat.

Ok to give you more context, my character specifically is a Shaman from the Champions of Azeoth file.

My gut feeling is telling me to go either Tough or Lucky or Defensive Duelist to use with a dagger.

However I ask nonetheless to get better insight from you guys.

My origin feat is healer

The new Noble Genie subclass has four different options for the Elemental Smite feature:

• Dao's Crush. Grapples and restrains the target with no save. That's incredibly powerful, it would usually require someone two attacks and two failed saves to grapple a target and shove them prone, and restrained is generally an even more powerful condition than prone.
• Djinni's Escape. Teleport up to 30 feet way and have brief immunity to Grappled/Prone/Restrained. Essentially Misty Step but better. Very useful, especially against a grappling enemy, as you can escape the current grapple and become immune to the next one.
• Marid's Surge. On a failed Str save, knock all enemies within 10 feet 15 feet away and knock them prone. Useful to clear out a crowd and set up melee allies with advantage, especially grappling allies. If there's not a crowd and the push isn't needed, strongly favor Dao's Crush.
• Efreeti's Fury. Deal 2d4 fire damage. Average of 5. What?

We know that the designers have some model of how much they value different conditions relative to damage, but this just doesn't add up at all, Efreeti's Fury is so far below the curve here. Djinni's Escape is a 2nd-level Bonus Action spell, but better, and I'd put the other two abilities at that level or more powerful, Dao's Crush in particular could even be valuable as a 3rd-level or 4th-level action spell, maybe even 5th-level, especially with the lack of saving throw or Concentration that comparable spells would have, it almost certainly needs a save like Marid's Surge to be balanced. Meanwhile, 5 damage is roughly half the value of the 1st-level Divine Smite. I just can't imagine ever using it unless I know the enemy has so little HP remaining that 2d4 might kill it.

It may be like the playtest Flex Mastery, where the designers described it as mathematically strong even though it was also incredibly underwhelming compared to other Masteries. I think the designers just severely overestimate the value of damage or underestimate the value of these other effects. (I'd expect Dao's Crush, granting advantage to all attacks for self and allies until the target escapes, ends up indirectly contributing vastly more than 2d4 damage when used, not even accounting for the enemy either also having disadvantage on their attacks or using one or more turns to escape.)

With the Trend In Monster CON Saves Lowering, Counterspell Was Actually Buffed.

Contrary to the naysaying when the PHB released on Counterspell, it looks like it was a hefty buff now with added context. There's two factors at play here.

1. CON Proficiency seems to have been removed from Dragons and some of the other spellcasters previewed so far.

2. Counterspell does not have a clause about the spell level it is used against anymore. This means your 3rd level slot is just as likely to counter a 9th level spell as it is a 1st, based purely on the CON save of the triggering creature, as well as eating up "1 per day" castings without giving the spell slot back, since monsters don't use them.

Can he cast spells from an enspelled item as a bonus action? And if the spell inside the enspelled item in not an action cast spell?

The old PHB used to explicitly state not to add your Dex penalty to heavy armors:

"Heavy armor doesn’t let you add your Dexterity modifier to your Armor Class, but it also doesn’t penalize you if your Dexterity modifier is negative."

The 2024 PHB doesn't seem to have that same clause written anywhere.

Does the lack of that clause mean that we are supposed to be adding that penalty now, or is the fact that the table doesn't say "+ Dex modifier (max 2)" next to their AC values enough to cover it, even though it seemingly wasn't enough to cover it in 2024.

Hey there, Josh and Marty here. We're two LA natives, and both of us just lost our childhood homes in the LA fires. We’re absolutely devastated by what’s happening to our city, and we wanted to do something to help. This year, we were preparing to launch a D&D map business, but then the wildfires broke out. As a result, we’ve decided to open our doors a little early and sell a map for charity. We have some island-shipwreck themed battlemaps for sale for $5 on our Etsy Page, and 100% of the proceeds will be split between the LAFD Foundation and the Anti Recidivism Coalition. Additionally, all Patreon subscription fees for the month of February will go to those charities as well. If you’d like to support, either through us or by donating to these charities directly, we would really appreciate it.

Much love,

Josh & Marty

tl;dr Buy a battlemap, help LA

Sphere of Annihilation got some changes in 2024, but it seems like the Talisman hasn't quite been updated in a way that makes sense with them; at least as far as I can understand it. In 2014, the Arcana check to gain control of a Sphere of Annihilation would give that character indefinite control of the sphere, until someone else succeeded on a check to usurp control of it. In 2024, that check gives the character control, quote, "until the start of your next turn". That's all well and good, but here is the text for the second feature of the Talisman of the Sphere:

In addition, when you start your turn in control of a Sphere of Annihilation, you can take a Magic action to move it 10 feet plus a number of additional feet equal to 10 times your Intelligence modifier.

RAW, there is literally no way to start your turn in control of a SoA, because the control ends at the start of your next turn.

What's the best fix here? Change control of a SoA to end at the end of your next turn? I'm running Tomb of Annihilation so this will (eventually) be very relevant.

Looks like an official preview with the new Wizkids model for the Black Dragon Corruptor.

I lack an Imugr type thing, so your timestamp is 2:29 for the statblock side-by-side with the 2014 version.

Link: https://youtu.be/SR_kgucwjSI?si=fblm9YTVbfDnfHs6&t=149

Thoughts:

• So this is where the Frightful Presence name ended up, given the design team said this was now changing per dragon to be something different. Downside is its counterable and easy to gain advantage/immunity on, but the upside is its repeatable on PCs who do not have either of those and can be cast via Legendary Action.
• After the Gold Dragon preview showing off upcast Guiding Bolt, I kinda assumed this would get Melf's Acid Arrow. Looks like Adults get 3rd level versions of their spell whilst Ancients get 4th level. I like this additional way to access ranged damage. Speaking of, Vitriolic Sphere is a nice way to mix up damage compared to the line-based breath weapon.
• Legendary Action Cloud of Insects on a single target, but doesn't appear to do anything on a success. Still beats Tail and Wing attack though.
• Same +2 to Charisma over the 2014 version, but also still loses its Constitution proficiency.

Playing a Genie bladelock in a level 20 campaign.

Thematically this is an amazing choice.

And mechanically it offers so much.

My main questions are on some key trade offs late game

Is 3 level (ac and smite bonus) of noble genie worth losing an epic boon? -ive never played with an epic boon

Is 6 levels ( aura of protection too) worth losing wish and epic boon and some mystic arcanum

• I know it's the best spell in the game but is this huge defensive capability worth it

-my party doesn't have a lot of spellcasting -would still have limited wish genie feature

Are these worth it? Where would you go and for what reasons?

Thanks for any input

I know this might sound like I'm just picky and unnecessarly angry, but I have to say, among all the old subclasses that needed a rework, the bladesinger was definitely NOT one of them.

For those of you who don't know, with the new UA regarding the Playtest of the Forgotten Realms subclasses, we now see they propose a revised Bladesinger too.

Here's the thing:

Having a subclass that makes the caster class with the highest potential in 5e become also a great frontliner was already a bit too much, and made the class arguably better than most other frontliners due to the existence of cantrips like greenflame blade, booming blade and spells like shadow blade etc...

Now this new bladesinger is also able to:

• Use Intelligence both for spellcasting and melee attacks (this was the only "weakness" it had in the old version, the fact it was a bit MAD but now, good god)
• Use melee weapon with which he has proficiency as a Spellcasting Focus for his Wizard spells
• The number of uses now scales with INT mod
• They now gain proficiency with all melee martial weapons that don't have the two-handed or heavy proprierty.
• The Performance skill proficiency got substituted with a list of skills you can pick, including Performance.

All of this right from level 3.

They are also able to, at level 14, attack as a bonus action when they cast a spell that has a casting time of an action ... but wait ...

So this means, that since they can still use a cantrip instead of one of their attacks when they get multiattack at level 6, they can use this with a cantrip too ... sooo they can for example "cantrip+attack+ ba attack"? right?
There is nothing impling it can't! A cantrip is still a spell

What did they lost? well, easy

• They no longer gain proficiency in light armor: this is the only significant change, since they will have to rely more on mage armor to obtain that absurd AC, but still, it is just a 1st level slot, at level 3 this is already not a big problem for a wizard
• They no longer have advantage on Acrobatics checks while the bladesong is active
• They no longer add the INT mod to melee weapon attack while the bladesong is active (this was substituted by letting you use int for attacks right from level 3, as we said)

Basically they gave a big set of buffs to this class right from the beginning, which seems to be a strange way they decided to follow with this new subclasses

And they didn't fix the most important things, like the fact that for a bladesinger it becomes effectively impossible to lose concentration at later levels if you just pick War Caster or Resilient (CON), and a bladesinger only needs one single spell to use to boost their attacks, which is shadow blade, and with impossible to break concentration, they can win a tough fight with just that spell and a bunch of 1st level slots for shield

As a DM that has a bladesinger among his party right now, I have to say that this would be a fricking nightmare. and you can say all the same things like "target him with Saving Throws and conditions and such" but the point is that a single subclass shouldn't be so strong that it forces the DM to redesign every combat around his presence.

So I ask, to all the D&D community of Reddit, please...

Don't let this revisioned Bladesinger pass. We should ask for something more balanced

One example of how I would have changed the bladesinger is just one simple change

• Instead of adding INT to maintain Concentration while bladesinging, let them make INT saves for Concentration: this reduces the MADness and doesn't lead to ridiculous saves modifiers right from level 3, the modifiers still scale, but with less spikes, and reduces the need for feats that invest on it. Which you might say it's still a buff, but not that kind of buff that makes you too strong right from level 3.

^(But the truth is that I have a different opinion on this matter which is that Concentration is a mechanic that feels good on paper, but is bad in practice, so that is more a problem of how Concentration works rather than how you change thai feature, but that is another story)

I recently looked through older editions to see what lore Elves on Faerûn had, and I wanted to makes some notes about how that lore interacts with the recent UA Bladesinger.

• The restriction on two-handed attacks was originally in place because Bladesingers needed a free hand for spellcasting. Now that Bladesingers can use a weapon as a spellcasting focus, it seems unnecessary to keep this restriction. Though, Bladesingers in 4e's Neverwinter Campaign Setting pg. 70 could use their weapon as an implement, which is basically a focus. -The Complete Book of Elves pg. 88

• Weapon Mastery is missing despite Bladesingers being "masters of their weapons [having] spent their lives in the study of their chosen weapons." -The Complete Book of Elves pg. 88

• Bladesingers used to be able to wear Elven Chain specifically, but this is not present in the UA. This is especially notable, because Bladesingers specifically went out to find elven artifact. -The Complete Book of Elves pg. 90

• Bladesingers used to have something similar to the metamagic quicken spell, which they could use once per day. -Complete Warrior pg. 18

Suggestions

• Remove the restriction on two-handed weapons. Bladesingers will already be focusing on Intelligence, so they won't be able to get weapon feats that make two-handed weapons all that great. Additionally, it feels like a clunky thing that is included for legacy reasons.
• Bladesingers should get a single weapon expertise that they can swap out on a long rest. It does step on the toes of Martials, but I still think that Bladesingers should be able to demonstrate more than proficiency with their weapon.
• Let elves wear elven chain. It's either equal to or slightly better than mage armor with 16 DEX (and in the slightly better case, the elf needs 13 STR to not have a movement penalty).
• The fourteenth level ability should basically let the Bladesinger quicken a spell INT times/day after the Bladesinger takes the attack action in Bladesong. The end-result of this is that the wizard basically gets to cast an additional cantrip. I suggest this, because a weapon attack as a bonus action seems really insignificant at 14th level.

Bladesinger Styles

In 5e, Bladesingers had styles (Lion, Red Tiger, Leopard, Viper, etc...) that didn't contribute mechanically, and I would like to see that rectified. Maybe the Bladesinger could choose a style at the start of their bladesong (or only let the Bladesinger have one type, changeable on long rest like weapon mastery), and those styles could each let the Bladesinger do something with their bonus action. Here are some examples:

• The Leopard, based on stealth and illusion, could take the hide action as a bonus action after taking the attack action or casting an illusion spell with a casting time of one action.
• The Eagle, based on thrown weapons, could throw a weapon as a bonus action.
• Red Tiger, described as, "a whirling dance of defense," could use the dodge action as a bonus action after casting a spell with an attack roll or taking the attack action.

Final Thoughts

Rereading my post, all of these are buffs to a subclass of the most powerful class in the game. Though, I feel that most of these buffs are thematically relevant. Additionally, I think that these buffs mostly help the martial side of the Bladesinger; a common critique of the Bladesinger subclass was that the Bladesinger didn't have a good enough reason to enter melee, which could change.

Hey everyone!

I'm playing a Shadar Kai Bladesinger at level 6, and I need some advice on my next feat choice. Here’s where I’m at:

Character Details:

• Level: 6 (Bladesinger Wizard)
• Feats:
• Magic Initiate (Druid): Cure Wounds, Shape Water, Mold EarthWar Caster (+1 INT at level 4)
• Stats (rolled): 8 STR, 17 DEX, 14 CON, 20 INT, 13 WIS, 11 CHA
• Weapons: 2 +1 Shortswords (currently dual wielding)

Current Plan:

• Wizard 8: I’m considering taking the Dual Wielder feat for an extra weapon attack, bringing me up to 4 attacks per round (buffed by conjured elementals).
• Ranger 1 at level 9: I’m planning to dip Ranger 1 for Weapon Mastery, which gives me useful bonuses for dual-wielding without sacrificing full spellcasting progression (which I’d lose if I dip Fighter).

The Dilemma:

I’m trying to decide between two feats for maximizing my damage and effectiveness, especially considering Conjure Minor Elementals (which benefits from more attacks):

1. Dual Wielder feat: This would give me an extra weapon attack with a bonus action (for 4 attacks per round), but doesn’t add my Dex modifier to the damage of my off-hand weapon.
2. Two-Weapon Fighting Style feat: This would let me add my +4 Dex modifier to the damage of both my main and off-hand attacks (for 3 attacks per round), but no bonus action attack.

Since Conjure Minor Elementals boosts my attacks, I’m leaning toward making as many attacks as possible. However, the Two-Weapon Fighting Style would make each attack hit harder.

Which option would you recommend for maximizing damage output?

• Dual Wielder feat (4 attacks per round, no Dex mod to off-hand)?
• Two-Weapon Fighting Style feat (3 attacks per round, +4 Dex mod to all attacks)?
• Or should I switch to a one-handed rapier build for a completely different style?

Thanks in advance for any insights or advice!

With the recent Bladesinger UA and how Eldritch Knights and Valor Bards were changed in the 2024 PHB, it’s become increasingly clear Gish with the ability to use Cantrips as a part of their Extra Attack is now core design option for spellsword subclasses.

The changes to True Strike, which made it work similar to both the other preexisting “blade cantrips”, those being Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade, also seem to be purposefully designed to work in conjunction with the three aforementioned subclasses, and any future subclasses that may also gain their unique Extra Attack.

So with that established, what different kinds of “blade cantrips” would you like to see in the future?

Perhaps an ice themed one that slows a target, or wind themed one that pushes, or maybe one that works similar to shocking grasp and prevents opportunity attacks? The options are nearly endless.

some of this was taken from a larger post i made that was removed from r/dndmemes. none of this is intended to target or belittle anyone in particular, and maaybe it's out of the scope for what we want to discuss on a subreddit that's mostly just theorycrafting new rules, but if anyone has noticed the same trends i have across several D&D-adjacent communities, here's a place to post your own two cents.

misinformation in D&D subreddits is hardly a new. but in the past few months, there were a smattering of posts surrounding content from the 2024 Core Rulebooks that really had me scratching my head as to whether the people with apparent access to a Reddit comment section also have access to a search engine. i'm gonna be addressing two such posts, both of which have long cooled down to a point where i hope no one is going to seek them out for inflammatory purposes.

AI art

the first flood that really caught my attention was ~3 months ago, on a post regarding a new piece of artwork for the 2024 DMG. dozens of comments called the hard work of Chris Seaman into question, claiming the acrylic painting was AI-generated artwork. my pain point is that nobody who accused it of being lazy AI-generated artwork even considered asking for a source on the artist who created it. which, if anyone had asked, would've been easily provided, because Chris Seaman is a fantasy art rockstar who's been doing work for WOTC for two decades.

in case it wasn't obvious, WOTC is not sitting someone down in an office and forcing them to use ChatGPT while stroking a white cat from a swivel chair. they commission well-renowned artists from all over the world. sometimes, those artists have used generative AI in their creative process. this is bad, and you can argue that the D&D team should've caught the instances where it slipped through, such as in the infamous case where an artist named Ilya Shkipin used generative AI in his pieces for Bigby's Glory of the Giants. it was so egregious that it earned the following statement from the D&D team:

Shkipin’s art has been in almost 10 years of Dungeons & Dragons books, going back to the fifth edition’s debut in 2014. Wizards in Saturday’s statement said it is “revising our process and updating our artist guidelines to make clear that artists must refrain from using AI art generation as part of their art creation process for developing D&D art.”

and they did. they even have an FAQ on generative AI art where they state the following:

The core of our policy is this: Magic and D&D have been built on the innovation, ingenuity, and hard work of talented people who sculpt these beautiful, creative games. As such, we require artists, writers, and creatives contributing to the Magic TCG and the D&D TTRPG to refrain from using AI generative tools to create final Magic or D&D products.

as a side note, i think it's incredibly rich that people criticized WOTC at the time for not being able to recognize "obvious" AI art, only to fast-forward to today where many of their detractors can't even identify a physical painting.

half-species

here's a trickier one. this post received (at time of writing) about 2.7k upvotes.

on the off chance it gets removed/edited, here's the original comment in full:

Half races no longer occur. Because being half something is racist.

I wish I was kidding that was legit their wording. Guess my existence is racist as a person of mixed descent and don't deserve to be represented with Half-Elves like I've been doing since I was kid starting off with 3e.

this, to me, is a bad faith argument—it paints an incredibly unfair and unappealing image of the designers' intentions. there's a lot of nuance here RE: discussing mixed ancestries.

here's the actual statement from Jeremy Crawford:

“Frankly, we are not comfortable, and haven’t been for years with any of the options that start with ‘half’…The half construction is inherently racist so we simply aren’t going to include it in the new Player’s Handbook. If someone wants to play those character options, they’ll still be in D&D Beyond. They’ll still be in the 2014 Player’s Handbook”

this is from Daniel Kwan's blog post on the D&D Creator Summit.

if this statement reads to you, "Jeremy Crawford thinks mixed people's existence is racist and doesn't deserve to be represented", i don't think you're approaching this subject from a place of good faith.

true, the books don't account for half-species like the 2014 books did. but the reason is not because the D&D designs secretly hate mixed people. it's the "half- construction". this is anecdotal, but i remember a lot of adults in my life using the word 'half-caste' to refer to mixed people in my school or community. it wasn't until i was older (and we studied John Agard's famous poem on the subject) that i realized this term had become derogatory. so i can then understand from what precedent the D&D team are approaching the issue from. does that mean the concept of mixed species (which was actually extant in the 2024 books' playtests) should've been 'removed' outright? no. but the motivation is not, and was never intended to be, the erasure of mixed people.

species in the 2024 rules is an abstraction of reality. you can be an elven-looking human. you can be an orc with features reminiscent of a dragonborn. the only thing defined by your choice is the literal mechanics on your sheet, granted by a unique physiology or magical influence. everything else is up to you. some people prefer these kinds of systems in their TTRPGs. some people don't. the point isn't whose opinion is correct, the point is that we're all approaching the subject with good faith, basing our arguments only on what can be respectfully inferred from the actual statements the team has made.

also, as an aside, the post from which that comment originated is in itself pure ragebait. the orc on the left is the orc art from the 2014 Monster Manual, and has never been used to depict an orc PC anywhere outside of D&D Beyond's 2014 orc species page. the orc on the right is cherry-picked from dozens of examples of 2024 orcs, all of which feature a variety of builds and skin tones. and you can say it's just a meme and you can say it isn't to be taken seriously ... and then you go to the comments and see people accusing the D&D team of invalidating the existence of mixed race people, and you have to wonder how much of it is warping people's perceptions of the real people in the D&D team.

so what ?

again, i don't mean to be opening old wounds here. i originally intended to make a post like this around the time those other posts dropped, but i found myself being unnecessarily vitriolic to the people involved. misinformation and disinformation are swords that cut both ways. i think that's shown here.

look, there will always be people who hate WOTC. or the D&D team. regardless of what they do or say. i'm not trying to convince those people. but there are other people i've spoken to and gotten to come around on certain issues, just by presenting them with the actual facts and statements. it's worth saying that there are things happening on a corporate level at WOTC and Hasbro that i don't intend on justifying or defending, and that i think anyone is well within their right to disregard the company for. i don't really care what opinion someone ends up forming, provided it's not done on the basis of lies, speculation, and ragebait. i think that's sort of my objective by even throwing my hat in the ring. i think i'd enjoy a bit of sanity and sensibility as reprieve from the constant flood of atrocious hot takes and unfounded myths about why the 2024 rules made X decision. if you have any other examples of blatant mis/disinformation that's been circling the community, i'd like to see it straightened out.

I have not followed it too closely but by now I read several posts saying that some common creature that used to be humanoid is now something else (often followed by a dig at having to rename Hold Person into Hold No One)

So far I read that

• Goblins are fey
• Kobolds are dragons (but dragonborn are not?)
• Gith are abbarations

Is this correct and have there been any other changes? And is there any pattern on this and criteria for what us still humanoid?

First is:

"The Bladesong lasts for 1 minute and ends early if you have the Incapacitated condition, if you don armor or a Shield, or if you use two hands to make an attack with a weapon. You can dismiss the Bladesong at any time (no action required)."

Is this intended to still allow them to be using Two Weapon fighting, as they are using only one hand to make an attack with each weapon?

And then the combination of:

"You can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. Moreover, you can cast one of your Wizard cantrips that has a casting time of an action in place of one of those attacks."

And

"After you cast a spell that has a casting time of an action, you can make one attack with a weapon as a Bonus Action."

So you make an Attack action and cast a cantrip with the casting time of an Action, as a cantrip is a Spell; can you then make one bonus action attack?

How would you rule this?

https://imgur.com/a/YoVsj48

Fiends, finally!

Casting spells like Scrying and Legend Lore as an action to suddenly know things feels a LOT like passing a Shivers check. Knowledge is streaming into your head from somewhere else.

Making constant lore rolls without a chance of failing feels like all the high Encyclopedia runs where you just walk around remembering EVERYTHING even if it doesn't matter in the slightest.

Investigating with your wisdom instead of your Intelligence makes it feel like you rolled badly on History, but your gut won't let it rest. There's more to this, and your Psyche is pointing that out to you.

Not to mention that you can hear multiple voices in your head as a class feature, and like all D&D characters time suddenly slows down in combat.

Time to make a complete piece of crap PC. Mr Xanathar is helping me find my Crossbow.

I’m planning on playing a shadow monk and was wondering about the new darkness spell. I want to use a mask as the source of darkness but I’m confused if I can cast Darkness on the mask or not since it’s an object I am holding/carrying. Do I have put the mask down, cast darkness and then pick it up and put it on for it to work. This is all flavour since I can change the location of the emination at the start of each turn but I just thought it would be cool

Mounted Combat—Falling Off (Playing the Game, page 27): "If an effect is about to move your mount against its will while you're on it, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or fall off, landing with the Prone condition in an unoccupied space within 5 feet of the mount."

Mounts and Vehicles—Saddles (Equipment, page 229): "A Military Saddle gives Advantage on any ability check you make to remain mounted."

By the new rules, a military saddle would be of no benefit in the one instance in the rules that addresses being forcibly dismounted. The 2014 rules applied the advantage to "any check," which would probably equate to "any d20 Test" in the new lingo, so it's minor error and easily fixed, but probably worth correcting in a forthcoming errata .pdf and future printings.

I see the same kind of responses again and again when someone expresses how disappointingly dull the new elements monk is - usually along the lines of "but it's mechanically adequate now!".

The issue is it's not trying to be a four elements monk any more. The original four elements monk had a cool as hell concept, go be punchy Aang, which it completely failed to live up to mechanically. Great concept, awful execution.

The reason the 5.5 version is disappointing is that it solved the disparity between promise and outcome by entirely removing the promise, replacing it with a bunch of generic abilities that don't even try to do the Avatar monk thing.

And the reason that's a massive disappointment should be obvious - instead of putting in the effort to make a monk that can mechanically embody a frankly awesome playstyle, they took the lazy route and replaced it entirely so they didn't have to try. It's made worse by the fact that we know they know how to make a monk that nails the bender style, they did it last edition. They just chose not to because it was easier to replace it with something bland but adequate.

Which is a huge disappointment, both in and of itself and because it's a symptom of a larger problem, the fact that they've long since ceased trying to be creative in game design. They released less creative player content in the entire last decade than they did in any single year during the decade before that, and some of us were hoping 5.5 might change that - but it turns out even that lingering spark that gave us cool concepts like the four elements monk is gone now.

I have a player joining my party as a level 3 Chthonic Tiefling Thief Rogue, and she gets the chill touch cantrip, thaumaturgy cantrip and false life level 1 spell. How do I determine her spell slots for casting false life? Or is it a once per long rest situation?

I feel like we don't use skill checks enough even though its a relatively loose system. Which I am use to since I played other systems like fate.

Dm's I have been with don't seem to use them often. Search and study already have decent outlines on what it can do for a lot of skills. Influence as well. But I wanted to come up with uses for more underused skills and some that benefit martials as well as athletics and acrobatics.

Stuff like the old overrun rule I just made a skill check. The phb already suggest to roll athletics to jump further than normal and acrobatics flipping over enemies. Athletics to prevent your from falling off a ledge by catching yourself. Acrobatics to stop your self falling prone from a fall(you still take damage) I let the barbarian throw a ally as athletics check or break a pillar. Frighten a creature with intimidation as a action(you can apply conditions retroactively). I let players Improvising action very often.

I just need more ideas as to how to apply them in simple ways that feel flavorful. I genuinely want to find more ways to apply them. I am not necessarily looking for codified skill uses. Just general suggestions. Have fun!