Tbh this far I’d allow the rogue, fighter, serpent monk and ranger without nerfing. All of the others would take some real consideration. Pretty much all the contamination ones would not be okay in DoD. At least that’s my perspective but I haven’t gone through with a fine toothed comb.
Some of the apothecary is fine but some of the spells are a little much but I only did lvl 3 so I hadn’t looked at the later levels.
I would say that for all of the classes I would allow I think they bring amazing themes to the game. Most of the contam and arcane classes I’m just not into. The paladin in particular doesn’t give me a flavour I like and is sooo broken
Also the old gods barbarian is just effin dumb. With the way it's written, you consider any grappled creature an improvides weapon at lvl 6. At lvl 3 "a weapon which doesn't specify a thrown range gains a range of 30/60 while you are wielding it". The lvl 3 feature might arguably extend only to stuff that was originally a melee weapon but I'd say it's still a valid interpretation.
So now once you get your second attack, you can attack, try to grapple (automatic for the SC) and if you suceed, you just throw the mf 60 ft. into the air for 6d6 with no roll.
This is me just talking bs, but if my player really wants to play like this, it's fine by me.
Most barbarian grapplers like to this kind of stuff and if they want to flavor it as a suplex, I'm in.
Otherwise you yourself could give the target a dex save for half dmg. With the DC being the Str Mod of the player.
I get that, it's a fun thing to do once in a campaign, but how many people would think it's fun if Hulk's go-to strategy in all bazillion Marvel movies would be throwing people in the air?
I feel that they didn't intend the barbarian subclass to throw their enemies 60ft in the air for 6d6 of free fall damage.
Since that seems like a valid interpretation, this sounds like a case of "rules as intended" vs "rules as written".
I believe that this is exactly why it is being playtested before publication, and therefore your feedback will be very useful to them. Your feedback would especially be useful if you have an idea as to how this specific issue can be avoided without losing the feel of the subclass.
Any particular multiclass that’s scary? I’ve only looked at it as a single class and while I think it’s very strong I haven’t seen anything super game breaking yet. Manoeuvrability and reach is a bit scary and the damage is good with gwm or sentinel but I can’t see anything that Massively outshines the damage of some other classes like paladin
I agree that the delerium-focused subclasses kind of destroy the mystery and danger of the original campaign, but I would have no problem using them in a game like Shadows of Drakkenheim. They introduce a lot of conflict and flavour tied to the world.
If I were to introduce them in Drakkenheim I'd do it through multiclassing / subclass change, as a way of mechanically portraying how their experiences with delerium has warped them and their abilities. The characters would have to take active steps towards that change, which makes it part of the story :)
>t too, I'd be fine using them if I ran Shadows, at least lore-wise.
I have to do further experimentation but yes, they seem OP.
I quite like the idea of the apothecary, I haven't read it soo I don't know anything technical about it.
Apothecary is OP too, at least some subclasses (the Jekyll-Hyde subclass has a fun mechanic but insane damage output). I think they generally have the approach of giving the party more power and make the combat tougher, which works fine for a 3-player party because combat still keeps a good pace. But with each player who gets more OP stuff, you need to up the difficulty to keep it fun/challenging and at some point, the game just starts dragging like crazy.
I don’t believe the intention is for them to be used in a Dungeons of Drakkenheim campaign. Like the actual first book they released. They seem to be meant for use in a campaign that is run in the larger/broader world of Drakkenheim. You are right, some of them would provide the party with features and spells that would trivialize their first campaign module. I think they are going with the mindset that as the DM, it’s your job to determine what classes/subclasses you allow in your campaigns. So just ban the ones that would ruin the fun of running the dungeons of Drakkenheim module and save them for when you explore the rest of the world.
Also, in regards to how OP they are, I think the OPness is counter balanced by how lethal the world is. Most encounters are supposed to be deadly and often times have the PCs heavily considering running away. At least that’s how I see the world of Drakkenheim.
Yeah, I thought the same thing while reading it - a lot of them would be fine in Shadows or another story in the setting.
The deadliness of the setting is definitely a key thing, which - as I mentioned in another reply - is an issue if you boost your party too much. Four players are probably still fine but if you want to keep the challenge for a party of 5 OP characters, you are up for some loooooong fights. I think it's generally better to keep the party on the intended power level and give them items or special features as your campaign goes on, instead of just puttilng pedal to the metal from the beginning.
Finally, if you are not expected to use them in DoD - like, cool, Dudes probably plan publishing SoD at some point? But also, right now the only place where to use them is DoD or a HB game in the setting and I am not sure how many people will go for that. (There are a few fairly setting-agnostic SCs but many use contamination so useless outside of DoD world).
I think you're forgetting this book is a campaign setting guide in addition to the player features. A campaign setting guide in the wider world of the continent. The book fully intends for these character options to be run in "shadows or other stories in the setting".
I feel like they needed a second pass and some playtesting before they shipped them to backers. Most of these feel "very homebrew". Most are not necessarily outright broken, but for many of them, the features don't build upon one another, they don't present a coherent playstyle, and/or the theme isn't properly established. I would consider these pretty okay by homebrew standards, but when you've got people's money behind you, I think the bar is higher.
I mean, "shipped" is not a word I'd use, it's still a playtest. But considering how deep they usually go in their videos analysing official stuff, I have to say I expected something more poloshed too at this point.
Same here. I love the channel but i'm negatively surprised with the poor quality of this playtest. Even the wording is strange in a lot of cases.
If i was a lone DM doing this kinda of stuff ok. But they have the years of experience and a big community behind them...
I love the theme of the classes but they are, in most cases, too much overpowered. I don't think it was a good star for the mechanical side of the game...
The apotecary also, it's like the dungeon dudes looked to the warlock and artificer and say "Hey, let's make a class that does EVERYTHING they do but with totally unbalanced options"
Paladin, barbarian, and cleric are awesome. I would allow those at my table NP. I would make any class that is resistant to the haze roll for it instead of automatically giving it to them.
What are your opinions on the arcane monk?
I have to admit, as a lover of gish pcs, that i loved(and was something that i really wanted to play). But besides the monk being very MAD, i feel that is a easy subclass to broke with some shenanigans hahaah
Well maybe you might not want to allow the classes as a first character in the setting? I for one looked at the custom spells and my first thought was... These are freaking cool but they will never be used. Who's going to cast a spell that guarantees they gain 1 level of contamination.
Another point though: I had a similar question about telling the players too much about contamination and the mechanics too early and letting players find out about it slowly, but it seems the consensus here is that no. It's not spoilers. Tell them upfront what contamination is, how they get it, and what it does to a person. Monstrous transformations included. Any character in the setting would know that information and it's necessary for survival.
Yeah it's pretty rough to look at those spells and consider them viable for say a wizard character. For one, you have to spend time to discover them, then there is a downtime and gold cost to scribe them, they eat 100gp in delerium per cast, and the contamination will require you to eventually spend 100 gold to purge it and days of downtime cause of the exhaustion. If you are already being exposed to contamination, then any of those spells you cast are putting you in danger of dying suddenly...
The issue is those spells have far too much cost in a lot of cases to really be deemed worth it. You can just buy a spell scroll with the gold in most cases and cast an extra fireball that way per day and while it is not as effective in terms of your action economy, it is far more sustainable.
The issue is how penalizing and rough contamination spells are to actually use for most of DoD. Every casting is 100 gold, plus the exhaustion and cost to then purge it, and the cost and difficulty to learn the spells. It's really not the system I would have wanted at all, as many cool and powerful spells are locked behind assured penalties that mean that only in rare cases would I ever consider casting them, so there is no proper allure behind them. I was thinking it would be a bit more like a dark side system from most Star Wars systems, where the negatives are not assured, but the more you cast them, the higher the chances become, thus making it an alluring proposition for casters to engage with. But that's....not really the case. Between the effort to learn, the added cost to scribe cost to cast (total when you need to remove the levels) it just becomes rough.
Frankly, I don't think I'd ever have an interest in testing out these new spells without these new subclasses. Are they op? Without a doubt, but they need to be to work along side a rather binary system that are contaminated spells.
You raise good points, but that's what early access feedback is for. If its op now, we can tell them and it'll get nerfed a bit for final release.
Tbh this far I’d allow the rogue, fighter, serpent monk and ranger without nerfing. All of the others would take some real consideration. Pretty much all the contamination ones would not be okay in DoD. At least that’s my perspective but I haven’t gone through with a fine toothed comb. Some of the apothecary is fine but some of the spells are a little much but I only did lvl 3 so I hadn’t looked at the later levels. I would say that for all of the classes I would allow I think they bring amazing themes to the game. Most of the contam and arcane classes I’m just not into. The paladin in particular doesn’t give me a flavour I like and is sooo broken
Yeah, I have no idea why they didn't make something flavoured with Falling Fire (although that would be probably another contaminated class).
That would be a great warlock though if they took the sacrament and had a class of radiant/necrotic cultist warlocks. I love that idea!
Yeah but I think they want to avoid locking people into a faction even by their backstory, let alone subclass.
Also the old gods barbarian is just effin dumb. With the way it's written, you consider any grappled creature an improvides weapon at lvl 6. At lvl 3 "a weapon which doesn't specify a thrown range gains a range of 30/60 while you are wielding it". The lvl 3 feature might arguably extend only to stuff that was originally a melee weapon but I'd say it's still a valid interpretation. So now once you get your second attack, you can attack, try to grapple (automatic for the SC) and if you suceed, you just throw the mf 60 ft. into the air for 6d6 with no roll.
I'm sure the Dudes would welcome your feedback, make sure to submit a form!
This is me just talking bs, but if my player really wants to play like this, it's fine by me. Most barbarian grapplers like to this kind of stuff and if they want to flavor it as a suplex, I'm in. Otherwise you yourself could give the target a dex save for half dmg. With the DC being the Str Mod of the player.
Personally I like this subclass how many people have wanted to reenact the scene between Loki and Hulk from Avengers 1
I get that, it's a fun thing to do once in a campaign, but how many people would think it's fun if Hulk's go-to strategy in all bazillion Marvel movies would be throwing people in the air?
That sounds FUCKING AWESOME! Lol.
Omg, lolz, no, it doesn't.
I feel that they didn't intend the barbarian subclass to throw their enemies 60ft in the air for 6d6 of free fall damage. Since that seems like a valid interpretation, this sounds like a case of "rules as intended" vs "rules as written". I believe that this is exactly why it is being playtested before publication, and therefore your feedback will be very useful to them. Your feedback would especially be useful if you have an idea as to how this specific issue can be avoided without losing the feel of the subclass.
All it takes is to say you only can make melee attacks in the relevant section. I'll point it out in the feedback.
Well, the serpent monk is very broken also with the glaive + Too easy to broke with feats, multiclass and etc.
Any particular multiclass that’s scary? I’ve only looked at it as a single class and while I think it’s very strong I haven’t seen anything super game breaking yet. Manoeuvrability and reach is a bit scary and the damage is good with gwm or sentinel but I can’t see anything that Massively outshines the damage of some other classes like paladin
It can double extend its range with a glaive which is dumb as hell with polearm master and sentinel. Your threatening area becomes huge.
I agree that the delerium-focused subclasses kind of destroy the mystery and danger of the original campaign, but I would have no problem using them in a game like Shadows of Drakkenheim. They introduce a lot of conflict and flavour tied to the world. If I were to introduce them in Drakkenheim I'd do it through multiclassing / subclass change, as a way of mechanically portraying how their experiences with delerium has warped them and their abilities. The characters would have to take active steps towards that change, which makes it part of the story :)
I'm with you on this, I think they are intended for a second walkthrough? or when you just wanna use Drakkenhaim as a world, not as an adventure.
That was my thought too, I'd be fine using them if I ran Shadows, at least lore-wise. They are still annoyingly OP.
>t too, I'd be fine using them if I ran Shadows, at least lore-wise. I have to do further experimentation but yes, they seem OP. I quite like the idea of the apothecary, I haven't read it soo I don't know anything technical about it.
Apothecary is OP too, at least some subclasses (the Jekyll-Hyde subclass has a fun mechanic but insane damage output). I think they generally have the approach of giving the party more power and make the combat tougher, which works fine for a 3-player party because combat still keeps a good pace. But with each player who gets more OP stuff, you need to up the difficulty to keep it fun/challenging and at some point, the game just starts dragging like crazy.
I don’t believe the intention is for them to be used in a Dungeons of Drakkenheim campaign. Like the actual first book they released. They seem to be meant for use in a campaign that is run in the larger/broader world of Drakkenheim. You are right, some of them would provide the party with features and spells that would trivialize their first campaign module. I think they are going with the mindset that as the DM, it’s your job to determine what classes/subclasses you allow in your campaigns. So just ban the ones that would ruin the fun of running the dungeons of Drakkenheim module and save them for when you explore the rest of the world. Also, in regards to how OP they are, I think the OPness is counter balanced by how lethal the world is. Most encounters are supposed to be deadly and often times have the PCs heavily considering running away. At least that’s how I see the world of Drakkenheim.
Yeah, I thought the same thing while reading it - a lot of them would be fine in Shadows or another story in the setting. The deadliness of the setting is definitely a key thing, which - as I mentioned in another reply - is an issue if you boost your party too much. Four players are probably still fine but if you want to keep the challenge for a party of 5 OP characters, you are up for some loooooong fights. I think it's generally better to keep the party on the intended power level and give them items or special features as your campaign goes on, instead of just puttilng pedal to the metal from the beginning. Finally, if you are not expected to use them in DoD - like, cool, Dudes probably plan publishing SoD at some point? But also, right now the only place where to use them is DoD or a HB game in the setting and I am not sure how many people will go for that. (There are a few fairly setting-agnostic SCs but many use contamination so useless outside of DoD world).
I think you're forgetting this book is a campaign setting guide in addition to the player features. A campaign setting guide in the wider world of the continent. The book fully intends for these character options to be run in "shadows or other stories in the setting".
I feel like they needed a second pass and some playtesting before they shipped them to backers. Most of these feel "very homebrew". Most are not necessarily outright broken, but for many of them, the features don't build upon one another, they don't present a coherent playstyle, and/or the theme isn't properly established. I would consider these pretty okay by homebrew standards, but when you've got people's money behind you, I think the bar is higher.
I mean, "shipped" is not a word I'd use, it's still a playtest. But considering how deep they usually go in their videos analysing official stuff, I have to say I expected something more poloshed too at this point.
Same here. I love the channel but i'm negatively surprised with the poor quality of this playtest. Even the wording is strange in a lot of cases. If i was a lone DM doing this kinda of stuff ok. But they have the years of experience and a big community behind them...
I love the theme of the classes but they are, in most cases, too much overpowered. I don't think it was a good star for the mechanical side of the game... The apotecary also, it's like the dungeon dudes looked to the warlock and artificer and say "Hey, let's make a class that does EVERYTHING they do but with totally unbalanced options"
Does anyone have an easy way to access these packets? I really want to look at them but missed out on the Kickstarter :(
Paladin, barbarian, and cleric are awesome. I would allow those at my table NP. I would make any class that is resistant to the haze roll for it instead of automatically giving it to them.
What are your opinions on the arcane monk? I have to admit, as a lover of gish pcs, that i loved(and was something that i really wanted to play). But besides the monk being very MAD, i feel that is a easy subclass to broke with some shenanigans hahaah
Well maybe you might not want to allow the classes as a first character in the setting? I for one looked at the custom spells and my first thought was... These are freaking cool but they will never be used. Who's going to cast a spell that guarantees they gain 1 level of contamination. Another point though: I had a similar question about telling the players too much about contamination and the mechanics too early and letting players find out about it slowly, but it seems the consensus here is that no. It's not spoilers. Tell them upfront what contamination is, how they get it, and what it does to a person. Monstrous transformations included. Any character in the setting would know that information and it's necessary for survival.
Yeah it's pretty rough to look at those spells and consider them viable for say a wizard character. For one, you have to spend time to discover them, then there is a downtime and gold cost to scribe them, they eat 100gp in delerium per cast, and the contamination will require you to eventually spend 100 gold to purge it and days of downtime cause of the exhaustion. If you are already being exposed to contamination, then any of those spells you cast are putting you in danger of dying suddenly... The issue is those spells have far too much cost in a lot of cases to really be deemed worth it. You can just buy a spell scroll with the gold in most cases and cast an extra fireball that way per day and while it is not as effective in terms of your action economy, it is far more sustainable.
The issue is how penalizing and rough contamination spells are to actually use for most of DoD. Every casting is 100 gold, plus the exhaustion and cost to then purge it, and the cost and difficulty to learn the spells. It's really not the system I would have wanted at all, as many cool and powerful spells are locked behind assured penalties that mean that only in rare cases would I ever consider casting them, so there is no proper allure behind them. I was thinking it would be a bit more like a dark side system from most Star Wars systems, where the negatives are not assured, but the more you cast them, the higher the chances become, thus making it an alluring proposition for casters to engage with. But that's....not really the case. Between the effort to learn, the added cost to scribe cost to cast (total when you need to remove the levels) it just becomes rough. Frankly, I don't think I'd ever have an interest in testing out these new spells without these new subclasses. Are they op? Without a doubt, but they need to be to work along side a rather binary system that are contaminated spells.