I like the smaller versions for the reasons that others have state. This also allows me to jump to key areas I have questions on. I can have this in the background and get to what I need without having to scan. I also think it might be beneficial to you as a CC, giving more feedback and a larger video pool, with videos that have a more complete watch time. Basically "Hey this guy put out 4 videos that had a 90-100% watch time" vs "This guy put out one long video that only gets 5-10% watch time" because the audience skipped to what they were interested in and then peeled off.
As a fighter main, I am excited for all the awful shenanigans my bag of weapons now brings. I already had battlemaster so this is just adding more gravy to the mashed potatoes.
I started a new campaign this week. My new fighter is digging the mastery rules even at level 1. Though it probably didn't hurt that he rolled like five crits. -The warlock should probably have a pact of the blade invocation that could give it mastery with their pact weapon. -The lack of a shield bash mastery feels like a missed opportunity. Further it might be interesting how they might expand these rules to different armor types, as long as it's not a boring "+1 ac" mastery.
By giving battlemaster manuveurs to all martials you give meaningful options for martials, you bridge gap between martials and casters by creating symmetry between martials and casters! Casters get cantrips at will and resources to spend by casting spells; Martials on the other hand get weapon masteries at will and resources (superiority dices) to spend by using battlemaster maneuvers On top of weapon masteries, give all martials battlemaster maneuvers!!! You can design martials with a possibility to choose or not to access battlemaster maneuvers, very much like the new holy order feat for clerics for whoch you choose heavy armor or thaumaturgy… meaning that you can still design martials which are easy to play and if players want other types of martials which can opt to have more tactical options
I think the Light property should say "If wielding two weapons when making the attack action and one of them has the light property, you may make ONE additional Attack with the Light weapon as part of that action, but do not add your damage modifier to the result". This should change only for the Kensei Monk, Assassin or Swashbuckler rogue, and the Battlemaster Fighter?
I think having multiple TL;DR's makes sense for the length of the live stream and content of the play test packet. I'd like to see the battle master stick around and make some changes to how it interacts with the weapon mastery. Like you could have an improved graze where instead of your modifier you add your score. Just because ≤5 damage at higher levels isn't really anything.
The Battle Master subclass might have more maneuvers like "Bait and Switch," Evasive Footwork" and "Maneuvering Attack." and other maneuvers that help control the battlefield, or other things that are not necessarily connected to a specific kind of weapon.
I like that they added the musket and pistol to the player's handbook. It makes running a pirate campaign a lot more straightforward. I also hope they start broadening their settings away from The Sword Coast. I'd love a Maztica source book that pays homage to the great pre-columbian civilizations.
Commenting for the algorithm and to make a correction. You described cleave backwards. You only get the weapon damage, no ability damage on the second creature.
Also, if Tasha’s feats don’t change and go with a lot of this stuff; a Fighter with Crusher, Charger(UA Experts) and the Push Property onto a bludgeoning weapon(like a warhammer, so you need new fighter 7), but you could push someone back 25ft no save. Which I think is pretty cool.
Hej guys, here is a copy/paste of my survey comments to WoTC, what do you think? Hej guys, First of all, I would like to thank you for making an attempt to provide more tactical options to fighters and barbarians and to try to add specific effects to each single weapon. These are definitely 2 steps in the right direction but it feels that we are still far away from providing martial classes a real set of tactical tools on the battlefield. I love D&D martial classes and I would like you to consider the following feedback: 1) WEAPON MASTERIES: Add weapon masteries to shields - make the choice of specific type of shield something significant 2) WEAPON MASTERIES: Add armor masteries to make the choice more impactful 3) WEAPON MASTERIES: Design another weapon mastery for Versatile weapon, the current design is underpowered and tactically uninteresting 4) WEAPON MASTERIES: Nerf the VEX weapon mastery, this is too strong compared to the other weapon masteries 5) BATTLEMASTER MANEUVERS FOR ALL MARTIAL CLASSES - ABOVE ALL, PLEASE: - Give battlemaster maneuvers to all martial (Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, Ranger, Rogue & Paladin) classes. There are so many great examples of 5e compatible books (ex: www.levelup5e.com/) or homebrew (www.gmbinder.com/profile/laserllama). "Power balance-wise" compared to casters, this should be ok given the nerfs of the Great Weapon Master & Sharpshooter feats. This would drastically increase the tactical options given to martial classes. The weapon masteries can be kept (see below point 6) but alone they do not add a massive amount of tactical options, unless your character carries a massive bag of different weapons, which at least for me does not sound thematically appealing as I love the idea of a character growing in power with a specific weapon. In the event, my character would only have 1 melee weapon, the tactical choices offered by 1 melee weapon are very limited and extremely repetitive. - There are several ways to make this introduction, ex: a) different set of maneuvers per martial class b) different number of superiority dice per martial class c) different types of superiority dice per martial class d) introduce maneuver increasing in power when a martial reaches a certain level etc... 6) WEAPON MASTERIES & BATTLEMASTER MANEUVERS: In the event all martial classes would get battlemaster maneuvers It does not mean weapon masteries should be removed, I believe this is something interesting when making an impactful choice between weapons and potentially for shields and armors - weapon masteries could potentially synergize with new battlemaster maneuvers 7) NEW COMBAT ACTIONS: ex: -5 to attack roll could be introduced as a standard combat action, I love the idea of having to think twice before trying to make a powerful melee move. I am not sure where should the extra damage should lie for a standard combat action, maybe +1d8? or maybe it could potentially scale with the proficiency bonus? Keep up the good work and have fun designing the best possible martial classes for the world's most famous TTRPG!
IMO, this is a good direction but needs a little more clarity on some of them. This makes me want to look through The Book of Nine Swords book for 3.5.
If they deprecate the battlemaster, the best class of 5e, well, they are completely crazy. They should revamp and expand the maneuver and make the BM more like the 4e Warlord (the best class of the 4e).
Yea, graze literally explains that you can't raise the damage save ability modifier change, that literally negates the rage bonus and it's a miss so not able to pump extra stuff with it. It literally says exactly what they mean. The fact you can't figure out such basic language scares me.
Would love to see them keep battle master and just turn up weapon masteries to 11. Be able to add an extra from early on, be able to apply superiority die any time you use one, etc. If i had my choice seeing Rune Knight and Echo Knight added to the PHB would be ideal, but maybe that is asking too much.
They just need to strengthen the battlemaster. If everyone can do it, but they only get the benefit of doing it where as the battlemaster does it better than everyone else and with more expertise, then that subclass still has a place.
Battlemaster is already the strongest fighter subclass, and I don’t really think this changes things. Mastery helps other fighter to have at least some utility, but Battlemasters have way more, and bonus damage, and don’t rely on specific weapons.
If you watch Treantmonk's video you will find that because of the change to light weapon property, 2-weapon fighting becomes even worse than it was under 2014.
Ive been having a BLAST with the masteries! My fighter is loving Graze so much, no turn feels wasted, and cleave is giving my barbarian so much more power, its a 10 extra damage every turn until there is only one enemy left. I want to make a dual wield vex fighter soon
Here's a helpful post that is here despite me not having anything useful or helpful to add but just wanting to convince youtube that I am engaged and active on your channel. Nothing else to add.
I've noticed that the Javelin is the only weapon that can't change its Mastery Property, as it doesn't qualify for any other than Slow, which it has by default. Should their be a Mastery Property for Thrown Weapons, or is the fact that the Javelin has a superior throwing distance than other thrown weapons enough?
frankly, these weapon masteries feel like something that anyone should be able to do .... and don't feel particularly powerful in comparison to the way that the Mage classification gets free spells up to like 5th level spells. warlock feels a little lackluster for which spells it gets when wizards can create new spells that don't care about concentration checks from damage, or counterspells with no components
Concentration part is overpowered, but otherwise the wizard can do some fun tweeks for an enormous amount of gold. While the wizard makes their spell longer, youre buying your flametongue greatsword with the same money. Again, other than concentration, people are not really looking at the cost appropietly. If the party gives all their gold on the wizard, then thats good for them. But you can use your gold to buy magic items instead.
@@Anegor entirely dependent on the game you are in, not all GMs have a magic item shop, and personally i think the magic items from the DMG aren't enough to outweigh what the wizard gets to do with just class features. in comparison to a fighter who just gets to cleave with an axe, but can't add their ability mod to damage even ... that would be ..... god think how broken that might be.
@@Stormwovles i play this game ever since it came out, i almost never heard of a campaign where you couldn't buy useful items with money. If not magic items, then at least potions and other powerful consumables or hiring an enchanter. If the DM offers no use for the gold they give, that is on them. Also my cleave barbarian is having an absolute blast! It's around 10 extra damage nearly every round costlless! Very appreciated
Definitely prefer multiple shorter TL;DR videos but will take them in any format because the full videos aren't always realistic to watch, especially when they exceed two hours.
Graze is right out. Add more complexity for new people. You mean I hit on a miss? Does mean damage on a critical miss? No. Most of the others need to only activate with +/- one size. Slow should only be 5 feet.
I like all of these and I think the new Fighter and Barbarian look great with them in there, but I'm not a big fan of the golf bagging weapons thing; I think there is another way to do Mastery that isn't so clunky and awkward. I'm also surprised that the fighter didn't get maneuvers caked into the class itself, as I think maneuvers are one of the things that currently makes fighter the most interesting. I get it if they want to keep Champion simple yet good and keep battle master unique though.
There are so many subclasses that dont all fit maneuvers. Eldritch Knight and Rune Knight for example have completely different themes. Plus nothing stops anyone from taking feats or fighting styles to get maneuvers, right?
I don’t necessarily mind the golf bag if folks are only using one weapon a turn (mostly… caveats for TWF and Throw). Juggling types of weapons for Mastery switching within a turn is something I think shouldn’t happen.
Thank you for the shorter video. I do appreciate your knowledge in the love streams but I just can't do them live and the 1hr long vids don't appeal to me. I liked the traitionally older youtube 20min and under videos.
They didn't include the yklwa 🙁. I hope they do include it with Vex. Why don't some weapons get both pierce and slash? Instead of Battle master being a sub class. Every class has a little bit of Battle master in them? I would not mind seeing the Arcane Archer gone from the next PHB. I wouldn't mind a sorcerer based Eldritch Knight? I will be trying that idea in DL:SotDQ. I hope you do videos for every part mentioned in the Unearthed Arcane.
I'm not a fan of Vex as it is written right now. Essentially, this mastery is a source of infinite advantage against a single target, which in my opinion is not tactical at all. You don't have to make an strategy to get that advantage, you just have to keep hitting the same target over and over until you kill it so you can start with another one. I would prefer that this mastery is only applied if you hit a creature on your turn and you have advantage only until the end of that turn. That way, shortswords are also useful for two-weapon fighting despite not having the Nick mastery.
Im starting to realise that I think locking weapon masteries behind class features isnt needed. People are gonna want Paladins and rangers to get masteries anyway and at that point almost every class who wanna use weapons will get the feature.. So why not just make masteries freely available for everyone? That way you can add more abilities to martials.
I totally disagree. Mastery should mostly be a Warrior (and Rogue) thing. Paladins and Rangers have spells and smites and all sorts of other great things. I don’t mind them getting maybe one mastery, but they should be noticeably less effective, less flexible.
@@thebitterfig9903 I think you're missing the point I was making. I'm sayin that most classes whod want masteries are probably getting them, so why are we treating them like class features instead of actually giving something exciting and unique to each class. I think the fighters ability to combine masteries is decently interseting, but why are we pretending weapon mastery is a barbarian feature if we'll eventually end up in a situation where every martial will have it anyway. Id much rather give the masteries as an inherent ability on weapons and for example give the base fighter the maneuvers from the battlemaster subclass. Masteries are fine, but theres a long way to go for martials to be as cool as casters.
I think they'll be able to choose weapon mastery as a fighting style or something similar to that. Or they may just get it as part of the next round of revisions
I know I shouldn’t be surprised, but I actually am that folks are talking about how to increase Graze damage. It literally says that it cannot be increased in any way. But there are folks out there who “think” they’re following RAW when they come up with nonsensical justifications for why it should do more damage. There is no reasonable reading of the rules that increases damage. Period.
This will be D&D 5.5 or 6E despite whatever WotC says. As with Discon, it should be tossed in the garbage where it belongs. Only reason I watched this video is because you put it out Ted. :)
t.t/whatever will crash as is, but it does have some good ideas worth bringing in. for instance the sorcerer capstone, warlocks getting to pick spellcasting stat, and the weapon mastery.
I like the way they’re going with this, tho some things needs to be clarified, and some options are way more powerful than others. For example, Topple; knocking a creature Prone and potentially giving your whole party advantage against it VS Flex; d10 instead of d8 with Versatile
flex applies on weapons that will also be used with a shield. Flex weapons with dueling have the same damage as 2-handed weapons. You need to weight having Topple vs having a Shield, thats more accurate
@@Anegor that true, tho players who use “sword and board” are more than often tanks and damage output tends to be a lower priority for them, so getting that 1-2 additional damage/hit still seems a bit lackluster to me. I’d prefer if they either went harder on the additional damage (perhaps rolling damage with advantage), or gave versatile weapons some more utility for sword-and-board type characters.
@@Anegor topple is on Trident and Battleaxe, so it can work with a Shield. Right now, I’d certainly use either a topple weapon or a Sap weapon (Flail and Morningstar) for a Dueling+Shield build, for the control aspects. Something like Flex ought to exist, but mathematically it’s mostly pretty bad. Flex is 1 damage per hit, so something like 0.6 damage per attack or so. Graze is 5 damage per miss, or about (1-0.6)*5 damage, so around 2 damage per attack. Using a 2h weapon should do more damage, but should they get more than three times more damage added by Mastery? Vex on a Rapier works fine on a Strength character, and will no doubt do much more damage than Flex. Flex just needs something of a bump, to add a bit more damage. Right now, it’s just kinda weak.
@@thebitterfig9903 oh, someone who makes proper arguments. That's nice, hi friend! Alright, so, i actually agree with you on most of your points! I actually particularly look forward to playing a heavy shield tank with Morningstar, maybe also with protection fighting style. And topple is certainly a very powerful option, but! Lets not forget its a constitution saving throw! And we all know how high of a constitution enemies tend to have! It is much more powerful than flex... When it works. But flex will always work. That said, Vex is tremendously powerful, and i think its that that needs a nerf. A Vex fighter is going to be a sight to behold, hits first attack, action surge... But even so, if you can reliably flank your opponents, vex becomes rather useless! While flex will always provide! Flex is absolutely a weaker option, but it is an option that will always apply no matter what!
@@TheLaensman i actually often play sword/shield off-tanks that try to balance damage and defense, so i find the damage increase quite nice! While some other options are attractive, the flex is very reliable. You can always seek utility through push or topple options, but flex is always gonna give you that extra damage, no matter what. Poeple also tend to underestimate the bigger damage die. It's more than just an average increase.
Ted, I like you, man, but you're WAY off base if you think they're going to get rid of by far the most popular fighter subclass just because the weapon masteries do a tiny fraction of what maneuvers were doing. The only way we're losing the Battle Master is if the feedback to this survey just overwhelmingly tells them to bake maneuvers into the base fighter or even all base martials, like I've been telling them to every survey the fighter comes up.
its good..but it's a bit clunky and weird, realistically your only going to use one weapon, maybe two for range, so why am I starting with 3, and why am I unlocking more?
I like the idea of the Weapon Mastery, however I hate the names of the traits, they are lame. I also feel like this still doesn't address the complaints of Martial classes, especially the Fighter. These all trigger simply from attacking with the weapon so it doesn't really add depth to combat and it doesn't address the complaints of Martial classes feeling weaker in social encounters.
I like having these bite sized videos on hand when I fill out the surveys Incase I miss something or forget where my own notes are
I like the smaller versions for the reasons that others have state.
This also allows me to jump to key areas I have questions on.
I can have this in the background and get to what I need without having to scan.
I also think it might be beneficial to you as a CC, giving more feedback and a larger video pool, with videos that have a more complete watch time. Basically "Hey this guy put out 4 videos that had a 90-100% watch time" vs "This guy put out one long video that only gets 5-10% watch time" because the audience skipped to what they were interested in and then peeled off.
As a fighter main, I am excited for all the awful shenanigans my bag of weapons now brings. I already had battlemaster so this is just adding more gravy to the mashed potatoes.
I started a new campaign this week. My new fighter is digging the mastery rules even at level 1. Though it probably didn't hurt that he rolled like five crits.
-The warlock should probably have a pact of the blade invocation that could give it mastery with their pact weapon.
-The lack of a shield bash mastery feels like a missed opportunity. Further it might be interesting how they might expand these rules to different armor types, as long as it's not a boring "+1 ac" mastery.
I think thematic invocations would work well, for all the subclasses.
I would love to see Armor Mastery and see some more options for the shields and shield/armor related skills
By giving battlemaster manuveurs to all martials you give meaningful options for martials, you bridge gap between martials and casters by creating symmetry between martials and casters! Casters get cantrips at will and resources to spend by casting spells; Martials on the other hand get weapon masteries at will and resources (superiority dices) to spend by using battlemaster maneuvers
On top of weapon masteries, give all martials battlemaster maneuvers!!! You can design martials with a possibility to choose or not to access battlemaster maneuvers, very much like the new holy order feat for clerics for whoch you choose heavy armor or thaumaturgy… meaning that you can still design martials which are easy to play and if players want other types of martials which can opt to have more tactical options
I appreciate both forms of videos, both the short and long, but i appreciate not having to timestamp the long video lol
Commenting for the algorithm
Replying for the algorithm
@@outofideas42Re - Replying for the algorithm
And my axe.
Flowers for algernon
I’m doing my part!
I think the Light property should say "If wielding two weapons when making the attack action and one of them has the light property, you may make ONE additional Attack with the Light weapon as part of that action, but do not add your damage modifier to the result". This should change only for the Kensei Monk, Assassin or Swashbuckler rogue, and the Battlemaster Fighter?
Solid video, I like the idea of small tldr videos for this massive UA
I think having multiple TL;DR's makes sense for the length of the live stream and content of the play test packet.
I'd like to see the battle master stick around and make some changes to how it interacts with the weapon mastery. Like you could have an improved graze where instead of your modifier you add your score. Just because ≤5 damage at higher levels isn't really anything.
I prefer the shorter videos. Thanks for all you do.
The Battle Master subclass might have more maneuvers like "Bait and Switch," Evasive Footwork" and "Maneuvering Attack." and other maneuvers that help control the battlefield, or other things that are not necessarily connected to a specific kind of weapon.
I like that they added the musket and pistol to the player's handbook. It makes running a pirate campaign a lot more straightforward. I also hope they start broadening their settings away from The Sword Coast. I'd love a Maztica source book that pays homage to the great pre-columbian civilizations.
I like how this sounds, it's always kind of felt like Battlemaster should be the baseline fighter class purely from a funness point
Commenting for the algorithm and to make a correction. You described cleave backwards. You only get the weapon damage, no ability damage on the second creature.
Also, if Tasha’s feats don’t change and go with a lot of this stuff; a Fighter with Crusher, Charger(UA Experts) and the Push Property onto a bludgeoning weapon(like a warhammer, so you need new fighter 7), but you could push someone back 25ft no save. Which I think is pretty cool.
I'm okay with doing small TLDRs of the different sections of the playtest :)
Hej guys, here is a copy/paste of my survey comments to WoTC, what do you think?
Hej guys,
First of all, I would like to thank you for making an attempt to provide more tactical options to fighters and barbarians and to try to add specific effects to each single weapon. These are definitely 2 steps in the right direction but it feels that we are still far away from providing martial classes a real set of tactical tools on the battlefield. I love D&D martial classes and I would like you to consider the following feedback:
1) WEAPON MASTERIES: Add weapon masteries to shields - make the choice of specific type of shield something significant
2) WEAPON MASTERIES: Add armor masteries to make the choice more impactful
3) WEAPON MASTERIES: Design another weapon mastery for Versatile weapon, the current design is underpowered and tactically uninteresting
4) WEAPON MASTERIES: Nerf the VEX weapon mastery, this is too strong compared to the other weapon masteries
5) BATTLEMASTER MANEUVERS FOR ALL MARTIAL CLASSES - ABOVE ALL, PLEASE:
- Give battlemaster maneuvers to all martial (Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, Ranger, Rogue & Paladin) classes. There are so many great examples of 5e compatible books (ex: www.levelup5e.com/) or homebrew (www.gmbinder.com/profile/laserllama). "Power balance-wise" compared to casters, this should be ok given the nerfs of the Great Weapon Master & Sharpshooter feats. This would drastically increase the tactical options given to martial classes. The weapon masteries can be kept (see below point 6) but alone they do not add a massive amount of tactical options, unless your character carries a massive bag of different weapons, which at least for me does not sound thematically appealing as I love the idea of a character growing in power with a specific weapon. In the event, my character would only have 1 melee weapon, the tactical choices offered by 1 melee weapon are very limited and extremely repetitive.
- There are several ways to make this introduction, ex: a) different set of maneuvers per martial class b) different number of superiority dice per martial class c) different types of superiority dice per martial class d) introduce maneuver increasing in power when a martial reaches a certain level etc...
6) WEAPON MASTERIES & BATTLEMASTER MANEUVERS: In the event all martial classes would get battlemaster maneuvers It does not mean weapon masteries should be removed, I believe this is something interesting when making an impactful choice between weapons and potentially for shields and armors - weapon masteries could potentially synergize with new battlemaster maneuvers
7) NEW COMBAT ACTIONS: ex: -5 to attack roll could be introduced as a standard combat action, I love the idea of having to think twice before trying to make a powerful melee move. I am not sure where should the extra damage should lie for a standard combat action, maybe +1d8? or maybe it could potentially scale with the proficiency bonus?
Keep up the good work and have fun designing the best possible martial classes for the world's most famous TTRPG!
IMO, this is a good direction but needs a little more clarity on some of them. This makes me want to look through The Book of Nine Swords book for 3.5.
Please make more of these short videos. They’re easier to digest, like eating a meal in bites instead of swallowing whole.
If they deprecate the battlemaster, the best class of 5e, well, they are completely crazy. They should revamp and expand the maneuver and make the BM more like the 4e Warlord (the best class of the 4e).
Watched the longer version , dig the new weapon mastery system
If these shorter TLDR videos are easier for you to produce and put out with your schedule then I support you doing it
Hey Ted. Thanks for the vid. I watched the live stream video - long version but I also appreciate these smaller hits.
Yea, graze literally explains that you can't raise the damage save ability modifier change, that literally negates the rage bonus and it's a miss so not able to pump extra stuff with it.
It literally says exactly what they mean.
The fact you can't figure out such basic language scares me.
Would love to see them keep battle master and just turn up weapon masteries to 11. Be able to add an extra from early on, be able to apply superiority die any time you use one, etc.
If i had my choice seeing Rune Knight and Echo Knight added to the PHB would be ideal, but maybe that is asking too much.
They just need to strengthen the battlemaster. If everyone can do it, but they only get the benefit of doing it where as the battlemaster does it better than everyone else and with more expertise, then that subclass still has a place.
Battlemaster is already the strongest fighter subclass, and I don’t really think this changes things. Mastery helps other fighter to have at least some utility, but Battlemasters have way more, and bonus damage, and don’t rely on specific weapons.
If you watch Treantmonk's video you will find that because of the change to light weapon property, 2-weapon fighting becomes even worse than it was under 2014.
The short videos are much better, please continue.
A TL;DR of a TL;DR. Woah.
TL:DRception
Ive been having a BLAST with the masteries! My fighter is loving Graze so much, no turn feels wasted, and cleave is giving my barbarian so much more power, its a 10 extra damage every turn until there is only one enemy left.
I want to make a dual wield vex fighter soon
definitely prefert to watch multiple short videos over one long video
Here's a helpful post that is here despite me not having anything useful or helpful to add but just wanting to convince youtube that I am engaged and active on your channel. Nothing else to add.
Appreciate the short format tldrs
I've noticed that the Javelin is the only weapon that can't change its Mastery Property, as it doesn't qualify for any other than Slow, which it has by default. Should their be a Mastery Property for Thrown Weapons, or is the fact that the Javelin has a superior throwing distance than other thrown weapons enough?
Like the shorter breakdowns.
frankly, these weapon masteries feel like something that anyone should be able to do .... and don't feel particularly powerful in comparison to the way that the Mage classification gets free spells up to like 5th level spells. warlock feels a little lackluster for which spells it gets when wizards can create new spells that don't care about concentration checks from damage, or counterspells with no components
Concentration part is overpowered, but otherwise the wizard can do some fun tweeks for an enormous amount of gold.
While the wizard makes their spell longer, youre buying your flametongue greatsword with the same money.
Again, other than concentration, people are not really looking at the cost appropietly. If the party gives all their gold on the wizard, then thats good for them.
But you can use your gold to buy magic items instead.
@@Anegor entirely dependent on the game you are in, not all GMs have a magic item shop, and personally i think the magic items from the DMG aren't enough to outweigh what the wizard gets to do with just class features. in comparison to a fighter who just gets to cleave with an axe, but can't add their ability mod to damage even ... that would be ..... god think how broken that might be.
@@Stormwovles i play this game ever since it came out, i almost never heard of a campaign where you couldn't buy useful items with money. If not magic items, then at least potions and other powerful consumables or hiring an enchanter. If the DM offers no use for the gold they give, that is on them.
Also my cleave barbarian is having an absolute blast! It's around 10 extra damage nearly every round costlless! Very appreciated
Definitely prefer multiple shorter TL;DR videos but will take them in any format because the full videos aren't always realistic to watch, especially when they exceed two hours.
These changes are also in Baldur's Gate 3. I wonder if there's any connection. 🤔
So I guess I am the only one who noticed that the sling is bludgeon damage now Instead of piercing.
4:01
Incorrect. You have it backwards, Ted. You do the weapon damage with the second attack, without the ability modifier added in.
Graze is right out. Add more complexity for new people. You mean I hit on a miss? Does mean damage on a critical miss? No. Most of the others need to only activate with +/- one size. Slow should only be 5 feet.
I like all of these and I think the new Fighter and Barbarian look great with them in there, but I'm not a big fan of the golf bagging weapons thing; I think there is another way to do Mastery that isn't so clunky and awkward. I'm also surprised that the fighter didn't get maneuvers caked into the class itself, as I think maneuvers are one of the things that currently makes fighter the most interesting. I get it if they want to keep Champion simple yet good and keep battle master unique though.
There are so many subclasses that dont all fit maneuvers. Eldritch Knight and Rune Knight for example have completely different themes. Plus nothing stops anyone from taking feats or fighting styles to get maneuvers, right?
I don’t necessarily mind the golf bag if folks are only using one weapon a turn (mostly… caveats for TWF and Throw). Juggling types of weapons for Mastery switching within a turn is something I think shouldn’t happen.
I haven’t had the time to finish the long video. So a series of short videos would be nice. I just hope you have the time to get the videos done.
Thank you for the shorter video. I do appreciate your knowledge in the love streams but I just can't do them live and the 1hr long vids don't appeal to me. I liked the traitionally older youtube 20min and under videos.
They didn't include the yklwa 🙁. I hope they do include it with Vex. Why don't some weapons get both pierce and slash? Instead of Battle master being a sub class. Every class has a little bit of Battle master in them? I would not mind seeing the Arcane Archer gone from the next PHB. I wouldn't mind a sorcerer based Eldritch Knight? I will be trying that idea in DL:SotDQ. I hope you do videos for every part mentioned in the Unearthed Arcane.
I'm not a fan of Vex as it is written right now. Essentially, this mastery is a source of infinite advantage against a single target, which in my opinion is not tactical at all. You don't have to make an strategy to get that advantage, you just have to keep hitting the same target over and over until you kill it so you can start with another one.
I would prefer that this mastery is only applied if you hit a creature on your turn and you have advantage only until the end of that turn. That way, shortswords are also useful for two-weapon fighting despite not having the Nick mastery.
For the Algorithm and the Topple Property!!!
Im starting to realise that I think locking weapon masteries behind class features isnt needed. People are gonna want Paladins and rangers to get masteries anyway and at that point almost every class who wanna use weapons will get the feature.. So why not just make masteries freely available for everyone? That way you can add more abilities to martials.
I totally disagree. Mastery should mostly be a Warrior (and Rogue) thing. Paladins and Rangers have spells and smites and all sorts of other great things. I don’t mind them getting maybe one mastery, but they should be noticeably less effective, less flexible.
@@thebitterfig9903 I think you're missing the point I was making. I'm sayin that most classes whod want masteries are probably getting them, so why are we treating them like class features instead of actually giving something exciting and unique to each class.
I think the fighters ability to combine masteries is decently interseting, but why are we pretending weapon mastery is a barbarian feature if we'll eventually end up in a situation where every martial will have it anyway.
Id much rather give the masteries as an inherent ability on weapons and for example give the base fighter the maneuvers from the battlemaster subclass.
Masteries are fine, but theres a long way to go for martials to be as cool as casters.
Sad that Paladin got Cantrips instead of Weapon Mastery but makes Fighter Paladin a cool multi instead of making fighter a simple dip.
I think they'll be able to choose weapon mastery as a fighting style or something similar to that. Or they may just get it as part of the next round of revisions
Short form vid is good
both are good
I know I shouldn’t be surprised, but I actually am that folks are talking about how to increase Graze damage. It literally says that it cannot be increased in any way. But there are folks out there who “think” they’re following RAW when they come up with nonsensical justifications for why it should do more damage. There is no reasonable reading of the rules that increases damage. Period.
👍🏻 Looks cool
This will be D&D 5.5 or 6E despite whatever WotC says. As with Discon, it should be tossed in the garbage where it belongs. Only reason I watched this video is because you put it out Ted. :)
t.t/whatever will crash as is, but it does have some good ideas worth bringing in. for instance the sorcerer capstone, warlocks getting to pick spellcasting stat, and the weapon mastery.
For the algorithm!
I like the way they’re going with this, tho some things needs to be clarified, and some options are way more powerful than others. For example, Topple; knocking a creature Prone and potentially giving your whole party advantage against it VS Flex; d10 instead of d8 with Versatile
flex applies on weapons that will also be used with a shield. Flex weapons with dueling have the same damage as 2-handed weapons. You need to weight having Topple vs having a Shield, thats more accurate
@@Anegor that true, tho players who use “sword and board” are more than often tanks and damage output tends to be a lower priority for them, so getting that 1-2 additional damage/hit still seems a bit lackluster to me.
I’d prefer if they either went harder on the additional damage (perhaps rolling damage with advantage), or gave versatile weapons some more utility for sword-and-board type characters.
@@Anegor topple is on Trident and Battleaxe, so it can work with a Shield. Right now, I’d certainly use either a topple weapon or a Sap weapon (Flail and Morningstar) for a Dueling+Shield build, for the control aspects.
Something like Flex ought to exist, but mathematically it’s mostly pretty bad. Flex is 1 damage per hit, so something like 0.6 damage per attack or so. Graze is 5 damage per miss, or about (1-0.6)*5 damage, so around 2 damage per attack. Using a 2h weapon should do more damage, but should they get more than three times more damage added by Mastery?
Vex on a Rapier works fine on a Strength character, and will no doubt do much more damage than Flex. Flex just needs something of a bump, to add a bit more damage. Right now, it’s just kinda weak.
@@thebitterfig9903 oh, someone who makes proper arguments. That's nice, hi friend! Alright, so, i actually agree with you on most of your points! I actually particularly look forward to playing a heavy shield tank with Morningstar, maybe also with protection fighting style.
And topple is certainly a very powerful option, but! Lets not forget its a constitution saving throw! And we all know how high of a constitution enemies tend to have!
It is much more powerful than flex... When it works. But flex will always work.
That said, Vex is tremendously powerful, and i think its that that needs a nerf. A Vex fighter is going to be a sight to behold, hits first attack, action surge...
But even so, if you can reliably flank your opponents, vex becomes rather useless!
While flex will always provide!
Flex is absolutely a weaker option, but it is an option that will always apply no matter what!
@@TheLaensman i actually often play sword/shield off-tanks that try to balance damage and defense, so i find the damage increase quite nice!
While some other options are attractive, the flex is very reliable.
You can always seek utility through push or topple options, but flex is always gonna give you that extra damage, no matter what. Poeple also tend to underestimate the bigger damage die. It's more than just an average increase.
Ted, I like you, man, but you're WAY off base if you think they're going to get rid of by far the most popular fighter subclass just because the weapon masteries do a tiny fraction of what maneuvers were doing.
The only way we're losing the Battle Master is if the feedback to this survey just overwhelmingly tells them to bake maneuvers into the base fighter or even all base martials, like I've been telling them to every survey the fighter comes up.
Go algorithm!
Am I the only one that thinks many of these effects are similar to 4e powers?
I like it
I prefer the shorter TL;DR videos.
I’m ok with the 10 minute or the 40 minute. Just don’t have the time for the 3 hour ones.
its good..but it's a bit clunky and weird, realistically your only going to use one weapon, maybe two for range, so why am I starting with 3, and why am I unlocking more?
I like the idea of the Weapon Mastery, however I hate the names of the traits, they are lame. I also feel like this still doesn't address the complaints of Martial classes, especially the Fighter. These all trigger simply from attacking with the weapon so it doesn't really add depth to combat and it doesn't address the complaints of Martial classes feeling weaker in social encounters.
They need to bring back critical ranges for weapons and add new weapons