# New SCAG Info: Someone Got The Book



## Morrus (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm really sorry, guys.  I promoted this to news status, but somehow managed to lose all the comments in the process.  There were about 35 comments at the time.  My apologies if yours was one of them!


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 22, 2015)

Boo, hiss, and so forth.  

Besides, there was a distinct lack of hard info on specific new options.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

*Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide*

NOT first (this time). 

It is out in multiple stores (not Chapters this time) in the area.

View attachment 71316


----------



## Pauper (Oct 22, 2015)

The info may benefit us, but if WotC finds out about the stores that sold early, it certainly won't benefit them.

--
Pauper


----------



## raphaelus (Oct 22, 2015)

Ah, my guess for the cleric was an Arcane domain tied to Mystara. 

Everything seems to be as hinted. Only surprises to me are 2 monk paths and the class entries focused instead on lore which is.. mkay i guess. I like how the options sound, now I just need the pretty pictures.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 22, 2015)

Pauper said:


> The info may benefit us, but if WotC finds out about the stores that sold early, it certainly won't benefit them.
> 
> --
> Pauper



And?


----------



## Li Shenron (Oct 22, 2015)

Ok, so it's a _diet_ setting book... For me 5e it's still in its infancy, I wouldn't mind it to be a bit more chubby.


----------



## Dragonhelm (Oct 22, 2015)

Some things I would like to know about, if the info becomes available:

1. What are the half-elf and tiefling variants?
2. What are the barbarian's new totem spirits?
3. What new bardic colleges are there?
4. Purple Dragon Knight - Only fighters can become Purple Dragon Knights? Or can you be a paladin and join, but not get the benefits? 
5. Paladin's Oath of the Crown - Is that gaining powers from your faith in a king or queen?
6. More info on The Undying, please!
7. Knight of the Order background - What does that represent? 
8. Conversions to other worlds - Thought there was something on that. Any details? I'm specifically interested in Dragonlance (i.e. does PDK = Knights of Solamnia?)

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Bladesinging for wizards is pretty cool, something I would want to try immediately. Also, a lot of expansion for the tiefling, four new racial trait variants (one replaces ability score modifiers, the other three can replace Infernal Legacy).


----------



## Pauper (Oct 22, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> And?




I should think it would be obvious -- those stores will lose their Premier status, hurting the gamers who patronize those stores, including people who would have preferred the store keep to the regular schedule.

This sort of 'benefit' is not without cost, is what I'm saying.

Let's be honest -- waiting until tomorrow for more information is not that great a burden.

--
Pauper


----------



## ehren37 (Oct 22, 2015)

Purple Dragon Knight is a fighter subclass, so guessing the CLASS isn't open to paladins without multiclassing. You could have a Paladin (or cleric, or whatever) in the Purple Dragon organization. Paladins get the oath of the crown, which I would bet could be easily repurposed to represent their loyalty to Cormyr.


----------



## Imaro (Oct 22, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Bladesinging for wizards is pretty cool, something I would want to try immediately. Also, a lot of expansion for the tiefling, four new racial trait variants (one replaces ability score modifiers, the other three can replace Infernal Legacy).




What are the major differences between a Bladesinger vs. an Eldritch Knight?


----------



## Irennan (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm going to ask just 1 question, lore-related, if you're willing to share.

Since Jeremy Crawford has already confirmed that the gods Eilistraee and Vhaeraun are in the book, what updates does it have on them? Does it speak about their status post-Sundering (i.e. that they're alive and what their ''power''/home plane/portfolio/relationships are)? Is there anything new on Eilistraee's transformed followers (maybe in one of the elven subraces entries)? Anything concerning the lore about them becoming archfey at some point?

I'm not asking to see the content of the book, just if the info that I've listed are included or not, and if what Ed Greenwood has said about Eilistraee's&Vhaeraun's return has been further confirmed or overwritten by WotC.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 22, 2015)

Are the other Tiefling variants based on Demons and Yugoloths?


----------



## Edwin Suijkerbuijk (Oct 22, 2015)

I wonder how the Purple Dragon Knight healing works and of it will apeal to warlord fans.


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 22, 2015)

Purple Dragon Knight. Warlord?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Imaro said:


> What are the major differences between a Bladesinger vs. an Eldritch Knight?




Bladesinger is a wizard arcane tradition. Main power is Bladesong, gives bonus to AC, speed, concentration saving throws, and Acrobatics checks. You get Extra Attack later on as well.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Irennan said:


> I'm going to ask just 1 question, lore-related, if you're willing to share.
> 
> Since Jeremy Crawford has already confirmed that the gods Eilistraee and Vhaeraun are in the book, what updates does it have on them? Does it speak about their status post-Sundering (i.e. that they're alive and what their ''power''/home plane/portfolio/relationships are)? Is there anything new on Eilistraee's transformed followers (maybe in one of the elven subraces entries)? Anything concerning the lore about them becoming archfey at some point?
> 
> I'm not asking to see the content of the book, just if the info that I've listed are included or not, and if what Ed Greenwood has said about Eilistraee's&Vhaeraun's return has been further confirmed or overwritten by WotC.




Sorry. There is no specific area for Eilistraee or Vhaeraun other than them appear on the Drow Pantheon chart. I have not read too much in depth yet though, so... maybe...?

Eilistraee has Light and Nature domains, Vhaeraun has Trickery. Hope that helps...


----------



## Irennan (Oct 22, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Sorry. There is no specific area for Eilistraee or Vhaeraun other than them appear on the Drow Pantheon chart. I have not read too much in depth yet though, so... maybe...?




Oh, thank you. Does it say anything on their state (i.e ''lesser power, demipower etc...''), and does the drow pantheon include other deities beside them and Lolth? Could it be possible to know how the gods section is structured?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Kobold Avenger said:


> Are the other Tiefling variants based on Demons and Yugoloths?




Tieflings are generally descended from Asmodeus (and have the regular traits), but those not might exhibit different qualities ("Tiefling Variants" sidebar).

Tiefling Variants:
Appearance
Feral (different ability scores)
Devil's Tongue
Hellfire
Winged


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> Purple Dragon Knight. Warlord?




Rallying Cry. When you use Second Wind, three creatures within 60 feet regains some hit points based on fighter level.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 22, 2015)

Not looking for really specific info, but what is the geographical extent of what is covered in the fluff section?  Just the coastal area, or does the interior Heartlands get described?


----------



## garydee (Oct 22, 2015)

Did moon elves get their own traits in this book or are they still considered high elves?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Oh, thank you. Does it say anything on their state (i.e ''lesser power, demipower etc...''), and does the drow pantheon include other deities beside them and Lolth? Could it be possible to know how the gods section is structured?




Faerunian Pantheon (more extensive than the one in PHB), Dwarven, Elven, Drow, Halfling, Gnomish, Orc.

Eilistraee, goddess of song and moonlight. Vhaeraun, god of thieves. Drow Pantheon also includes Kiaransalee, Lolth, and Selvetarm.

(P.S. I hate spelling out these names, heh.)


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

garydee said:


> Did moon elves get their own traits in this book or are they still considered high elves?




They do not get any mechanical changes, but have a small section devoted towards them for fluff.

There is a "Rare Elf Subraces" sidebar. No mechanical information, just some fluff.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 22, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Faerunian Pantheon (more extensive than the one in PHB), Dwarven, Elven, Drow, Halfling, Gnomish, Orc.
> 
> Eilistraee, goddess of song and moonlight. Vhaeraun, god of thieves. Drow Pantheon also includes Kiaransalee, Lolth, and Selvetarm.
> 
> (P.S. I hate spelling out these names, heh.)




Thanks again. But does the section include some writeups, or is it just a PHB-style list?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

I have a copy.

Ask away! Please one question per post or I will get lost trying to answer things.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Not looking for really specific info, but what is the geographical extent of what is covered in the fluff section?  Just the coastal area, or does the interior Heartlands get described?




The book has some generalities for the Realms overall, but focuses on Sword Coast and the North regions. Nothing from the interior from what I scanned quickly.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Thanks again. But does the section include some writeups, or is it just a PHB-style list?




Faerunian Pantheon dieties all get a small write up, along with some preface about Religion in the Realms.


----------



## gamefreak180 (Oct 22, 2015)

could we have more info on the blade singer especially since the new cantrips were swordmage powers from 4th ed be interesting to see how frontline the wizard can become.


technically a 2nd question but how did you get it since release is nov 3rd really need this for my game.


----------



## LapBandit (Oct 22, 2015)

Can you detail the mechanics of the Purple Dragon Knight?


----------



## Atlatl Jones (Oct 22, 2015)

What are the variant Tiefling and Half-Elf races, and what are they like mechanically?


----------



## Irennan (Oct 22, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Faerunian Pantheon dieties all get a small write up, along with some preface about Religion in the Realms.




One last thing. Does it speak about what the Sundering did regarding the gods, about them returning? Thanks for your patience, and sorry if I'm bugging you so much.


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 22, 2015)

Edwin Suijkerbuijk said:


> I wonder how the Purple Dragon Knight healing works and of it will apeal to warlord fans.




Probably not enough to dissuade the drumbeat for a full class with cleric-equivalent healing, but to me it opened the gate for such a thing to exist...


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 22, 2015)

gamefreak180 said:


> technically a 2nd question but how did you get it since release is nov 3rd really need this for my game.




Wizard Premiere stores get it two-weeks early, and some stories put it out even earlier (by a day or so).


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Irennan said:


> One last thing. Does it speak about what the Sundering did regarding the gods, about them returning? Thanks for your patience, and sorry if I'm bugging you so much.




Yes, it speaks specifically about the Sundering and returning of "dead" gods. I skimmed over the section header earlier. The timeline gets advanced to present day.


----------



## Dionysos (Oct 22, 2015)

I'd love to know everything about the cleric Arcana domain. Failing that, I'd love to know anything you would care to share about it.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 22, 2015)

What do the new Monk subclasses have?


----------



## Kramodlog (Oct 22, 2015)

Any info on the Sundering and the setting in general?


----------



## Irennan (Oct 22, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Yes, it speaks specifically about the Sundering and returning of "dead" gods. I skimmed over the section header earlier. The timeline gets advanced to present day.




Anything specific, or just a general ''they're all back''?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

gamefreak180 said:


> could we have more info on the blade singer especially since the new cantrips were swordmage powers from 4th ed be interesting to see how frontline the wizard can become.
> 
> 
> technically a 2nd question but how did you get it since release is nov 3rd really need this for my game.




It is released early in select stores.

Bladesinger

- Elves only
-Light armour, 1 one-handed weapon, performance
-Bladesong is similar to rage must have 1 hand free and has various benefits
-extra attack at 6 like valour bard
-reaction to spend spell to defend (10th)
-int to damage (14th)


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Us said:


> Can you detail the mechanics of the Purple Dragon Knight?




Main feature - 2nd wind also heals 3 allies fighter level each
- pesuasion expertise
- action surge also gives additional attack to ally
- indomitable for allies


----------



## TerraDave (Oct 22, 2015)

Yes, its a not so stealth warlord. I am sure the threads on it will start popping up. 

And half-elf options, because that class has not gotten enough love. 

Curious to see more on the setting part. And the gods. What is in that long section?


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 22, 2015)

What's with Bard Colleges/Druid Circles?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Atlatl Jones said:


> What are the variant Tiefling and Half-Elf races, and what are they like mechanically?




Tiefling - int and dex - 3 options to replace infernal legacy - charm spells/fire spells/wings

Half-Elf - instead of 2 bonus skills choose a bonus that a subrace gets or 30ft swim speed. Drow's magic is included in list of choices. Keen Senses is also a choice which makes no sense.


----------



## Dragonhelm (Oct 22, 2015)

What info on adapting materials to other settings, in particular Dragonlance?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Dionysos said:


> I'd love to know everything about the cleric Arcana domain. Failing that, I'd love to know anything you would care to share about it.




- arcana proficiency - 2 cantrips
- new domain list you can guess what it is like
- turn fiend, celestial, elemental, fey
- when heal ally can also dispel spells on them
- wisdom to cantrip damage
- add high level wizard spells to spell list



Also bonus info on the Ranger section - Rangers get a picture of Drizzt


----------



## spectacle (Oct 22, 2015)

Anything in the book about the dragonborn race in the post sundering realms?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Kobold Avenger said:


> What do the new Monk subclasses have?




- ranged radiant damage as monk attacks incl. flurry
- 2ki bonus action burning hands
- radiant damage fireball
- deal radiant damage to enemies when they hit you


- temp hp on creature death
- cause fear
- when at 0 hp be at 1 hp instead
- touch causes necrotic damage


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

spectacle said:


> Anything in the book about the dragonborn race in the post sundering realms?




Each race gets a write up about how it fits in the Realms. The dragonborn section talks about Tymanther, then having it disappear when Unther returned after the Sundering. It is not extensive, but I have not read a lot of the book yet (except to answer specific questions).


----------



## Raunalyn (Oct 22, 2015)

What's the difference between Path of the Battlerager and Path of the Berserker?


----------



## CrusaderX (Oct 22, 2015)

Can you tell if the Swashbuckler and/or the Storm Sorcerer are exactly as they appeared in their original Unearthed Arcana entries?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

CrusaderX said:


> Can you tell if the Swashbuckler and/or the Storm Sorcerer are exactly as they appeared in their original Unearthed Arcana entries?




Ooo... that is a hard one, I do not remember the Unearthed Arcana versions very well.

Swashbuckler:
Fancy Footwork (target of your melee attacks cannot make opportunity attacks against you)
Rakish Audacity (Charisma bonus to initiative, do not need advantage for Sneak Attack)
Panache (use Persuasion to give opponent on attack rolls against you)
Elegant Maneuver (bonus action to gain advantage on Acrobatics or Athletics)
Master Duelist (reroll a missed attack with advantage)

Storm Sorcery:
Wind Speaker
Tempestuous Magic (10 feet of flight after casting)
Heart of the Storm (damage resistance, eruption around you after casting)
Storm Guide (control weather)
Storm's Fury (reaction to deal lightning damage to an attacker)
Wind Soul (immunity, magical flight, grant others flight temporarily)


----------



## CrusaderX (Oct 22, 2015)

Thanks so much!  Last question from me for now:

Are there any good-aligned gods with the Tempest Domain?  Valkur, maybe?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

TerraDave said:


> Yes, its a not so stealth warlord. I am sure the threads on it will start popping up.
> 
> And half-elf options, because that class has not gotten enough love.
> 
> Curious to see more on the setting part. And the gods. What is in that long section?




It's long and I just got the book so haven't read it. It does have a list of gods with their domains and then each god has a write up. There are a lot of gods listed.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> What's with Bard Colleges/Druid Circles?




Nothing mechanical as far as I can see.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

CrusaderX said:


> Thanks so much!  Last question from me for now:
> 
> Are there any good-aligned gods with the Tempest Domain?  Valkur, maybe?




Istishia, god of water is neutral. Valkur is chaotic good. Aerdrie Faenya (elven pantheon) is chaotic good. Sheela Peryroyl (halfling) is neutral.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Dragonhelm said:


> What info on adapting materials to other settings, in particular Dragonlance?




3/4 page on suggestions for barbarians, clerics, fighters, monks, paladins, rogues, warlocks, and wizards.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Raunalyn said:


> What's the difference between Path of the Battlerager and Path of the Berserker?




- dwarves only
- spiked armour
- bonus action attack with spiked armour - bonus damage when grappling
- gain temp hp when reckless attacking
- dash as bonus action
- deal damage when hit with melee attacks


----------



## doctheweasel (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> It is released early in select stores.
> 
> Bladesinger
> 
> -Bladesong is similar to rage must have 1 hand free and has various benefits




The text says it ends if you use "two hands to make an attack with a weapon". 

I read that as attacking with a two-weapon, or the two-handed option for a versatile weapon. At the very least you could hold a weapon in your off hand and not use it.


----------



## Ryuutakeshi (Oct 22, 2015)

So, might I ask what the feature is for the Mercenary Veteran background?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Ryuutakeshi said:


> So, might I ask what the feature is for the Mercenary Veteran background?




Mercenary Life - Can identify mercenaries and know where they abide. Can maintain comfortable lifestyle in downtime
Skills - athletics, persuasion


----------



## Dragonhelm (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> 3/4 page on suggestions for barbarians, clerics, fighters, monks, paladins, rogues, warlocks, and wizards.




Follow up: Anything in there about adapting Purple Dragon Knights to be Knights of Solamnia in the adaptation section?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Dragonhelm said:


> Follow up: Anything in there about adapting Purple Dragon Knights to be Knights of Solamnia in the adaptation section?




That is exactly what the blurb on fighters talks about. They recommend being a Knight of the Rose to represent Purple Dragon Knights.


----------



## Greybird (Oct 22, 2015)

Are there any changes to the swashbuckler from the UA version?


----------



## Atlatl Jones (Oct 22, 2015)

Greybird said:


> Are there any changes to the swashbuckler from the UA version?



On a similar note, are there any changes to the Storm Sorcerer from the UA version?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Greybird said:


> Are there any changes to the swashbuckler from the UA version?




Panache against hostile targets now gives them disadvantage against targets other than you and they cannot use opportunity attacks against targets other than you. It also ends if you are more than 60ft away from the target or an ally attacks or casts a spell at the target.


----------



## Greybird (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Panache against hostile targets now gives them disadvantage against targets other than you and they cannot use opportunity attacks against targets other than you. It also ends if you are more than 60ft away from the target or an ally attacks or casts a spell at the target.




Instead of the backstab, or in addition to?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Greybird said:


> Instead of the backstab, or in addition to?




Not sure what it has to do with backstab. Can you explain?


----------



## Greybird (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Not sure what it has to do with backstab. Can you explain?




Sorry, I was getting it crossed with toujours l'audace.  Pesky French.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 22, 2015)

What's an Undying Patron?


----------



## Osgood (Oct 22, 2015)

Most of the major questions have been hit... what can you tell us about ghostwise halflings or the Oath of the Crown paladin?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Atlatl Jones said:


> On a similar note, are there any changes to the Storm Sorcerer from the UA version?




No bonus spells


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Kobold Avenger said:


> What's an Undying Patron?




Undead patron.

- spare the dying cantrip
- undead must make will save or be unable to attack you
- regain hp on successful death saving throw or spare the dying
- no air, food, water, sleep required, slower aging
- bonus action heal also reattach body parts


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Osgood said:


> Most of the major questions have been hit... what can you tell us about ghostwise halflings or the Oath of the Crown paladin?




Ghostwise - +1 wisdom, telepathy

Oath - law is paramount, word is bond, must be couragous, must be responsible for duties and obligations

- challenge - wisdom save or creatures can't move away
- bonus action mass heal for those with less than half hp
- reaction to take damage instead of other creature
- adv vs paralyzed, stunned
- capstone is a bunch of stuff


----------



## Mistwell (Oct 22, 2015)

What can you tell us about Ghostwise Halflings?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Mistwell said:


> What can you tell us about Ghostwise Halflings?




Ability Score Increase (1 to Wisdom)
Silent Speech (telepathy 30 feet).


----------



## Ryuutakeshi (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Undead patron.
> 
> - spare the dying cantrip
> - undead must make will save or be unable to attack you
> ...




So, my patron would be Christopher Lee then. I am okay with this. Sounds like an awesome pact.


----------



## Z. H. Darkstar (Oct 22, 2015)

So what power level does your scouter read for the Sun Soul Monk?


----------



## Lanliss (Oct 22, 2015)

Z. H. Darkstar said:


> So what power level does your scouter read for the Sun Soul Monk?




I think you know exactly what level.


----------



## TerraDave (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> - dwarves only
> - spiked armour
> - bonus action attack with spiked armour - bonus damage when grappling
> - gain temp hp when reckless attacking
> ...




Its a nod to the old (not FR specific) kit, to go with the elven bladesingers.


----------



## Z. H. Darkstar (Oct 22, 2015)

Three questions about the same subject. Does the Sun Soul Monk's ranged attack use Dex/Wis for attack/damage? Does it cost ki? Does it use the Martial Arts die for damage?


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> It is released early in select stores.
> 
> Bladesinger
> 
> - Elves only



Wow, that sucks. We got rid of LG-only human-only paladins and now this crap 

Eidt: Half-elves also forbidden?


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

My questions:

- Does the section on Baldur's Gate make any mention of the outcome of the events in the Murder in Baldur's Gate adventure? (eg. According to the Sundering FB app, Duke Silvershield blowing up parliament and becoming the Chosen of Bhaal was the most common reported result.)

- Does the entry on Lathander make any mention of his relationship to Amaunator? Similarly, does Talos' entry say anything about how, in 4e, he was revealed to be just an aspect of Gruumsh? Has he gone back to being a separate god again?


----------



## Devilbass (Oct 22, 2015)

Half elves are also allowed, and suggests that the DM remove the restrictions if so desired.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

pukunui said:


> - Does the entry on Lathander make any mention of his relationship to Amaunator?



One of the Sundering novels is heavy on info about that. Basically Amaunator is a role that Lathander adopts when he thinks the world needs stability the most and he takes on the role of Lathander when he thinks renewal is needed most.

The novel is "The Reaver" and a chosen of Lathander is one of the main protagonists


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 22, 2015)

What are the half-elf variants?


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

[MENTION=40810]Mirtek[/MENTION]: OK. I'm still curious to know if that is mentioned in his SCAG entry or not.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Z. H. Darkstar said:


> Three questions about the same subject. Does the Sun Soul Monk's ranged attack use Dex/Wis for attack/damage? Does it cost ki? Does it use the Martial Arts die for damage?




You get everything in regular martial arts except a regular bonus action attack.


----------



## Greybird (Oct 22, 2015)

Thanks for answering all of these questions, by the way.

Any meaningful bits on what has been going on with Dragonborn since their homeland went *poof*?


----------



## TheThirdFlash (Oct 22, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Bladesinger is a wizard arcane tradition. Main power is Bladesong, gives bonus to AC, speed, concentration saving throws, and Acrobatics checks. You get Extra Attack later on as well.




I'd be curious to know how this works mechanically. Also, I've seen the posting of the 10th and 14th level abilities and I'm a little stumped. The 10th level ability seems to indicate you can burn a spell to defend yourself in some way? And the 14th adds your Intelligence bonus to your damage? Weapons or spells? Both?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

pukunui said:


> My questions:
> 
> - Does the section on Baldur's Gate make any mention of the outcome of the events in the Murder in Baldur's Gate adventure? (eg. According to the Sundering FB app, Duke Silvershield blowing up parliament and becoming the Chosen of Bhaal was the most common reported result.)
> 
> - Does the entry on Lathander make any mention of his relationship to Amaunator? Similarly, does Talos' entry say anything about how, in 4e, he was revealed to be just an aspect of Gruumsh? Has he gone back to being a separate god again?




Baldur's Gate - don't think so but I only skimmed it.

Lathander - no but it may elsewhere

Talos - No, described as a man. Yes.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Baldur's Gate - don't think so but I only skimmed it.
> 
> Lathander - no but it may elsewhere
> 
> Talos - No, described as a man. Yes.



That's disappointing. I was hoping this book would actually address the changes made during the Sundering. Ah well. Thanks anyway.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Greybird said:


> Thanks for answering all of these questions, by the way.
> 
> Any meaningful bits on what has been going on with Dragonborn since their homeland went *poof*?




No problem, I'd be curious if I didn't have the book.

I don't know any history or lore about Dragonborn (they were big in 4e?) so I don't know what constitutes a meaningful bit.


----------



## JValeur (Oct 22, 2015)

What spell lists are the Greenflame Blade cantrip available on. Wizards only?


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> I don't know any history or lore about Dragonborn (they were big in 4e?) so I don't know what constitutes a meaningful bit.



They were introduced to the Realms during 4e, when parts of Abeir swapped places with Toril. They had two realms on the Inner Sea - Akanûl and Tymanther - both of which returned to Abeir during the Sundering. My guess is that the dragonborn are now scattered across Faerûn with no home to call their own. Is that about the gist of it?


----------



## TheThirdFlash (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Wow, that sucks. We got rid of LG-only human-only paladins and now this crap
> 
> Eidt: Half-elves also forbidden?




In a nod to the original 2nd edition flavor text for the bladesinger, it should be "elf only". Much in the same way that the battlerager should be "dwarf only". In the original fluff for the bladesinger, it was described as a highly protected secret amongst the elves. They would not teach it without a firm commitment to defend the elven way of life and they never taught it to non-elves, including half-elves and drow. Drow were said to have their own traditions. 

I hope the text allows half-elves as an option, but beyond that, as a DM, I wouldn't make any changes unless I was including it in another setting and had a reason to make the change there. Even after reading Richard Baker's Swordmage (Blades of the Moonsea trilogy), I'd still avoid allowing other races to train as bladesingers. To me, it's flavor. (EDIT: I see the Swordmage main character as an Eldritch Knight, more than a true bladesinger. Which is how I'd approach the issue in a game. Elves will teach you how to be an eldritch knight, but not a bladesinger.)

As always, it's your game. Change it how you see fit.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> What are the half-elf variants?




Instead of Skill Versatility, a half-elf can take a racial trait from the elf parent. Half-wood elf can take Weapon Training, speed increase, or Mark of the Wild. Half-moon/sun elf can take Cantrip. Half-drop can take Drow Magic. Half-aquatic elf can get a swim speed.


----------



## koga305 (Oct 22, 2015)

What do _booming blade_, _lightning lure_, and _sword burst_ do?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

TheThirdFlash said:


> I'd be curious to know how this works mechanically. Also, I've seen the posting of the 10th and 14th level abilities and I'm a little stumped. The 10th level ability seems to indicate you can burn a spell to defend yourself in some way? And the 14th adds your Intelligence bonus to your damage? Weapons or spells? Both?




(Just getting groceries, so this is from memory...)

10th: reaction to expend spell slot, absorb spell slot times 5 damage from the triggering attack. 
14th: Int mod damage with melee weapons while Bladesong.


----------



## TheThirdFlash (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> It is released early in select stores.
> 
> Bladesinger
> 
> ...




I'm very interested in this particular class option. Can you elaborate a bit on the 10th and 14th level abilities? Is the reaction to cast a defensive spell, or expend a spell slot to gain a defensive bonus? And is the INT to damage on weapons, spells, or both?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

pukunui said:


> They were introduced to the Realms during 4e, when parts of Abeir swapped places with Toril. They had two realms on the Inner Sea - Akanûl and Tymanther - both of which returned to Abeir during the Sundering. My guess is that the dragonborn are now scattered across Faerûn with no home to call their own. Is that about the gist of it?




Described as rare, free people, looking for place and purpose in their new world


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

TheThirdFlash said:


> In a nod to the original 2nd edition flavor text for the bladesinger, it should be "elf only". Much in the same way that the battlerager should be "dwarf only".



 If we're going there, then paladins should be human only.


TheThirdFlash said:


> In the original fluff for the bladesinger, it was described as a highly protected secret amongst the elves. They would not teach it without a firm commitment to defend the elven way of life and they never taught it to non-elves, including half-elves and drow.



 And paladins are shinning examples of goodness and would never never ever turn evil and become blackguards


TheThirdFlash said:


> Even after reading Richard Baker's Swordmage (Blades of the Moonsea trilogy), I'd still avoid allowing other races to train as bladesingers. To me, it's flavor. (EDIT: I see the Swordmage main character as an Eldritch Knight, more than a true bladesinger. Which is how I'd approach the issue in a game. Elves will teach you how to be an eldritch knight, but not a bladesinger.)



Like the tile suggest the main character was a swordmage, which was different from a bladesinger even in 4e


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

JValeur said:


> What spell lists are the Greenflame Blade cantrip available on. Wizards only?




All cantrips are sorcerer, wizard, and warlock


----------



## Valus (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Wow, that sucks. We got rid of LG-only human-only paladins and now this crap
> 
> Eidt: Half-elves also forbidden?




Based on some replies on reddit, I think half-elves are allowed by default.  DM approval for other races.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Described as rare, free people, looking for place and purpose in their new world



OK, so they've basically just reverted the FR dragonborn to the default 4e dragonborn fluff then - in the Nerath pseudo-setting, they were homeless wanderers looking for "place and purpose" after the fall of their great empire Arkhosia.



ad_hoc said:


> All cantrips are sorcerer, wizard, and warlock



That's gonna make my wife happy. She's playing a dwarf wizard with a penchant for wading into melee. She's managed to get him a breastplate and a shield (plus the War Caster feat). Some melee-oriented cantrips will be right up her alley.

One question: We saw a preview for _greenflame blade_, which made it clear that the attack doesn't actually need to be made with a sword. Any melee weapon will do. Is that the same with the other three cantrips?


----------



## I'm A Banana (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Wow, that sucks. We got rid of LG-only human-only paladins and now this crap




I wouldn't be too worried - you might not be able to play a human bladesinger in AL, but at individual tables, nobody gives much of a frig, and the restriction retains the story-first elements of 5e D&D - bladesingers have basically been elven in the narrative; paladins have not always been narratively human (it's not like they were added in the Complete Human's Handbook or are denoted as especially emblematic of human culture or anything).


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

koga305 said:


> What do _booming blade_, _lightning lure_, and _sword burst_ do?




BB - melee attack, if target moves before your next turn take d8 damage (dmg increases by d8+d8 on move dmg each increment)
LL - 15ft str save or pulled 10ft take d8 dmg if end up 5ft from you
SB - dex save or d6 force dmg all within 5ft


----------



## CrusaderX (Oct 22, 2015)

Are there any illustrations in the Gods section?  Do we get images of holy symbols for all gods? Do we get any artwork featuring the actual gods themselves?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

pukunui said:


> OK, so they've basically just reverted the FR dragonborn to the default 4e dragonborn fluff then - in the Nerath pseudo-setting, they were homeless wanderers looking for "place and purpose" after the fall of their great empire Arkhosia.
> 
> That's gonna make my wife happy. She's playing a dwarf wizard with a penchant for wading into melee. She's managed to get him a breastplate and a shield (plus the War Caster feat). Some melee-oriented cantrips will be right up her alley.
> 
> One question: We saw a preview for _greenflame blade_, which made it clear that the attack doesn't actually need to be made with a sword. Any melee weapon will do. Is that the same with the other three cantrips?




only booming blade and green-flame blade are attacks with weapons. Any melee attack with a weapon will trigger it. You can use a chair if you want or a hobbit or whatever.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

Cool. Thanks. 

Is there any fluff attached to the new cantrips? They look like they're all pretty much exactly the same as the 4e swordmage's at will powers from the _Forgotten Realms Player's Guide_. While they're available to sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards, is there any mention of them being primarily aimed at eldritch knights and/or bladesingers? I suppose blade pact warlocks might like them too.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Cool. Thanks.
> 
> Is there any fluff attached to the new cantrips? They look like they're all pretty much exactly the same as the 4e swordmage's at will powers from the _Forgotten Realms Player's Guide_. While they're available to sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards, is there any mention of them being primarily aimed at eldritch knights and/or bladesingers? I suppose blade pact warlocks might like them too.




"War Wizards of Cormyr, bladesingers, warlocks of the Pact of the Blade"


----------



## TheThirdFlash (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> If we're going there, then paladins should be human only.
> And paladins are shinning examples of goodness and would never never ever turn evil and become blackguards
> Like the tile suggest the main character was a swordmage, which was different from a bladesinger even in 4e




There's no racial justification for making paladins a "human only" class though. Yes, it was human only until 3e, but largely, that was a design decision, which is why it was done away with. 

As far as shining examples of goodness, I don't know how much fiction you've read for the FR, but most elves, especially gold elves, are haughty pricks. And very xenophobic. Not exactly my idea of a shining example of goodness. There is evidence in the fiction that the gold elves that interbred with demons to become the fey'ri continued to teach the bladesong to their own people. But that's an exception in fiction that has a reason, not a reason to break the game rules as written. 

While you are correct, I didn't play 4e. I only read some of the material regarding the swordmage and bladesinger classes. And that's perfectly legitimate statement. However, having read the Swordmage book, I get the strong impression that he learned this art from the elves in Cormanthyr. It felt like he, as a human, was taught some rudimentary bladesinger techniques, but it never felt like he was a true master of it. So in that, you are correct. He was a 4e Swordmage, not a 4e Bladesinger.

There weren't many other game examples of a fighter/mage class other than the bladesinger in prior editions. It wasn't until Pathfinder introduced the Magus and 4e gave you the variety of classes, that we had more to work with for games.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm A Banana said:


> I wouldn't be too worried - you might not be able to play a human bladesinger in AL, but at individual tables, nobody gives much of a frig



 Since I only play AL that's not going to help me.


I'm A Banana said:


> and the restriction retains the story-first elements of 5e D&D



 Which is exactly the opposite of what 5e was doing to date. If they had continued their previous style the fluff had said that they're almost exclusively elven and non-elven bladesingers are basically unheard of and left it at that


I'm A Banana said:


> bladesingers have basically been elven in the narrative; paladins have not always been narratively human



 They have until 3e


TheThirdFlash said:


> There's no racial justification for making  paladins a "human only" class though. Yes, it was human only until 3e,  but largely, that was a design decision, which is why it was done away  with.



 Same with bladesingers, there's no racial justification beyond "elves are pricks and managed to keep it secret" which is completely believable that in 20,000 years of bladesinging no rogue bladesinger ever violated his oath to not teach non-elves and no non-elve ever managed to just steal the technique


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Valus said:


> Based on some replies on reddit, I think half-elves are allowed by default.  DM approval for other races.




Yes, and it states that it isn't a big deal to allow it to any race as it is a fluff only consideration.


----------



## TheThirdFlash (Oct 22, 2015)

Palladion said:


> (Just getting groceries, so this is from memory...)
> 
> 10th: reaction to expend spell slot, absorb spell slot times 5 damage from the triggering attack.
> 14th: Int mod damage with melee weapons while Bladesong.




Wow. I'm falling in love with this class more and more. I've never liked the partial spell progression gish classes from 3e and 4e. I'm giddy to play this in the homebrew game I'm currently in.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Since I only play AL that's not going to help me.




If you only play AL, then that's your DM - take up the limitation with them, maybe they'll waive it! 



> Which is exactly the opposite of what 5e was doing to date




Not really - 5e describes the thing first, then models it with mechanics. The bladesinger is apparently first something that elves have. 



> They have until 3e




Nope. For one, Earth Genasi.


----------



## Baumi (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm surprised that the Storm Sorcerer don't get additional Spells. What does he get instead?


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Ghostwise - +1 wisdom, telepathy



Nice. My version had Charisma boosted but was otherwise the same. Easily fixed.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm A Banana said:


> If you only play AL, then that's your DM - take up the limitation with them, maybe they'll waive it!



 AL doesn't change the rules. Any player wanting to be a bladesinger in Encounters or Expeditions will have to be an elf or half-elf


I'm A Banana said:


> Not really - 5e describes the thing first, then models it with mechanics. The bladesinger is apparently first something that elves have.



 5e was supposed to be about options and rulings not rules, but now they again entered the path of just making rules that forbid things. If they did this from the begining we'd be back at LG only paladins and many other restrictive holy cows of old that 5e ackknowledges in description but retrains from hardcoding into rules thereafter


I'm A Banana said:


> Nope. For one, Earth Genasi.



 What's with earth genasi? Favored class fighter in FRCS


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> 5e was supposed to be about options and rulings not rules, but now they again entered the path of just making rules that forbid things. If they did this from the begining we'd be back at LG only paladins and many other restrictive holy cows of old that 5e ackknowledges in description but retrains from hardcoding into rules thereafter




Personally I make a distinction between core books and setting books.

I think it is the job of setting books to be restrictive in the interest of the fluff. Without the fluff it's not a setting book.

I could see the argument if it was called PHB2 instead of Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide. I think it is as advertised.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Personally I make a distinction between core books and setting books.
> 
> I think it is the job of setting books to be restrictive in the interest of the fluff. Without the fluff it's not a setting book.
> 
> I could see the argument if it was called PHB2 instead of Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide. I think it is as advertised.




This.

"Bladesingers have to be elves" isn't a D&D 5E game rule. It's a Forgotten Realms setting rule. There's a fundamental difference.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 22, 2015)

CrusaderX said:


> Are there any illustrations in the Gods section?  Do we get images of holy symbols for all gods? Do we get any artwork featuring the actual gods themselves?




Holy symbols of the main deities are depicted, no art for the deities themselves.


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

I don't like how AL and its goofy origin story works anyways, if you want to be say a Genasi or Goliath Paladin of the Crown or Purple Dragon Night, you won't be able to because they had that goofy origins thing, and that's just a start why I don't like how AL works compared to 4e living forgotten realms. 

 What's worse is if you want to worship a God that's not in the PHB, but is in the SCAG, that means you can't play Genasi, which means you can't have a water genasi worshiping the Elemental God of Water for example.

 And this will only get worse, its a silly role and makes AL not worth playing in.


----------



## Ainulindalion (Oct 22, 2015)

Could we get a brief overview of the dwarf pantheon as listed?


----------



## Staffan (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> What's with earth genasi? Favored class fighter in FRCS



2e earth genasi were allowed in rare cases to be paladins. Aasimar and bariaur could become paladins as well. So that's at least three races other than humans with the potential to become paladins in 2e.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 22, 2015)

Ainulindalion said:


> Could we get a brief overview of the dwarf pantheon as listed?




Abbathor, Berronar Truesilver, Clangeddin Silverbeard, Deep Duerra, Dugmaren Brightmantle, Dumathoin, Gorm Gulthyn, Haela Brightaxe, Laduguer, Marthammor Duin, Moradin, Sharindlar, Vergadain


----------



## CrusaderX (Oct 22, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Holy symbols of the main deities are depicted, no art for the deities themselves.




No Sune centerfold?  Drat.

Thanks for the answers!


----------



## Ainulindalion (Oct 22, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Abbathor, Berronar Truesilver, Clangeddin Silverbeard, Deep Duerra, Dugmaren Brightmantle, Dumathoin, Gorm Gulthyn, Haela Brightaxe, Laduguer, Marthammor Duin, Moradin, Sharindlar, Vergadain




Well, that should allow me a proper dwarf war cleric, then, finally.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

Staffan said:


> 2e earth genasi were allowed in rare cases to be paladins. Aasimar and bariaur could become paladins as well. So that's at least three races other than humans with the potential to become paladins in 2e.



But in the planewalker handbook they were also exclusively half-human


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Oct 22, 2015)

If it's not to much trouble, could you provide a brief rundown on the using this book in Eberron section?


----------



## TheThirdFlash (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Same with bladesingers, there's no racial justification beyond "elves are pricks and managed to keep it secret" which is completely believable that in 20,000 years of bladesinging no rogue bladesinger ever violated his oath to not teach non-elves and no non-elve ever managed to just steal the technique




What you are describing here would be a very, very rare situation. If I remember correctly, the fluff from the Complete Book of Elves in 2e essentially said that if any elf "went rogue", they'd be hunted down and stopped to protect their secrets. And I gave the odd examples of how the bladesong may be taught to others, but again, they are exceptions to the rules. 

Now, the 2e handbook was absolutely an all settings book, yet bladesingers never showed up in other fiction than Forgotten Realms. So it's become an FR only concept.


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

pukunui said:


> They were introduced to the Realms during 4e, when parts of Abeir swapped places with Toril. They had two realms on the Inner Sea - Akanûl and Tymanther - both of which returned to Abeir during the Sundering. My guess is that the dragonborn are now scattered across Faerûn with no home to call their own. Is that about the gist of it?




 Actually Akanul was a Genasi Realm, not Dragonborn, Dragonborn had Tymanther and Returned Abier continent. Well Akanul may have had some Dragonborn, but it was a Genasi City/Nation.

 Anyway saw a pic including Booming Blade, wow, Half-Moon/Sun Elven Paladins are going to want that spell. Deals weapon + Thunder damage and if you move it deals more thunder damage.

 And it targets a single being so it can be twinned spelled by Sorcerors, add on Warcaster and you can hit an enemy with a twinned Booming Blade as a reaction, if the target keeps moving ouch.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

gyor said:


> Actually Akanul was a Genasi Realm, not Dragonborn, Dragonborn had Tymanther and Returned Abier continent. Well Akanul may have had some Dragonborn, but it was a Genasi City/Nation.



Meh. Close enough. 



> Anyway saw a pic including Booming Blade



Where did you see this pic?


----------



## Staffan (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> But in the planewalker handbook they were also exclusively half-human



Bariaur are half-human?


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

Staffan said:


> Bariaur are half-human?



Genasi. Bariaur are celestials native to the upper planes


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

Btw this what twinned Booming Weapon looks like roughly  at level 18.

 normal weapon attack (W + Dex or Strength Mod) + (3D8 thunder damage + 4D8 thunder damage if the target moves) x 2. With Warcaster feat you can do that as a reaction. If your sorceror has an physical attack stat mod of 4 and a d12 weapon,  and the target moves that's 2d12 + 8 + 7d8 damage with Warcaster that's done as a reaction for the cost of your reaction and 1 sorceror point.


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

I saw the booming blade pic in the reddit.


----------



## Greybird (Oct 22, 2015)

At the time that Paladins were human only, the entire system had a convoluted mess of racial class restrictions and maximum level limitations.  Human only paladins were part of that, and they got rid of the whole shebang at once, as there was no lore/logical reason that other races couldn't be warriors serving the gods.

That aside, I don't mind single race only classes with a cultural and historical basis.  Races having their closely guarded military/magical secrets is a fundamental trope of much fantasy.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

gyor said:


> I saw the booming blade pic in the reddit.



Huh. I didn't see any pics when I looked a few minutes ago. Will have to look again.


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

JValeur said:


> What spell lists are the Greenflame Blade cantrip available on. Wizards only?




 Its on the Wizards, Warlocks, and Sorcerors spell lists.

 Which means that Wizards, Warlocks, Sorcerors, Eldrich Knights, Arcane Tricksters, High Elves, and Half-High Elves (new half elf variant), can use that and the other cantrips.


----------



## Ainulindalion (Oct 22, 2015)

CrusaderX said:


> No Sune centerfold?  Drat.




Given the changing face of gaming, they'd need to include a Tempus (?) centerfold as well.  Two centerfolds probably exceeded the art budget.


----------



## Mithreinmaethor (Oct 22, 2015)

gyor said:


> I don't like how AL and its goofy origin story works anyways, if you want to be say a Genasi or Goliath Paladin of the Crown or Purple Dragon Night, you won't be able to because they had that goofy origins thing, and that's just a start why I don't like how AL works compared to 4e living forgotten realms.
> 
> What's worse is if you want to worship a God that's not in the PHB, but is in the SCAG, that means you can't play Genasi, which means you can't have a water genasi worshiping the Elemental God of Water for example.
> 
> And this will only get worse, its a silly role and makes AL not worth playing in.




You are assuming that SCAG is not going to be considered a CORE Players resource in AL.


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

Is Sharess in it? If so what domains does she get?


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

Ainulindalion said:


> Given the changing face of gaming, they'd need to include a Tempus (?) centerfold as well.  Two centerfolds probably exceeded the art budget.




 Actually the way its going you'd need to put Sune in plate armour that would leave her looking like Tempus and then add 200 pounds to her, and then have a fully nude centerfold of Lanthander to please the feminists.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

Some pics from the reddit thread:

The Undying:






Half-Elf Variants:




(Trading Skill Versatility for Keen Senses is a pretty bum deal, eh?)

Tiefling Variants:





Map:


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

Mithreinmaethor said:


> You are assuming that SCAG is not going to be considered a CORE Players resource in AL.



I'd expect it to be repeatedly allowed from season 4 onward, but the admins have been pretty clear that rules for past season are not expected to change unless WotC really surprises them


Greybird said:


> Races having their closely guarded  military/magical secrets is a fundamental trope of much fantasy.



 As is the foreigner sneaking in (or even being accepted in) to learn such crafts

Really, just stating that non-pure-blooded elf bladesingers are of utmost rarity and treated with hostility and scorn by elves would have done it's service to tradition and still kept the open spirit of 4e


----------



## Azzy (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> If we're going there, then paladins should be human only.
> And paladins are shinning examples of goodness and would never never ever turn evil and become blackguards
> Like the tile suggest the main character was a swordmage, which was different from a bladesinger even in 4e




View attachment 71324

Just saying.


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Same with bladesingers, there's no racial justification beyond "elves are pricks and managed to keep it secret" which is completely believable that in 20,000 years of bladesinging no rogue bladesinger ever violated his oath to not teach non-elves and no non-elve ever managed to just steal the technique




There might have been one or two; that's up to the DM (as in: if they want to allow it, they will). 

Also, I'd like to see you argue the Battlerager shouldn't be dwarf only as well.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

Azzy said:


> Just saying.



 You're probably right, but at the moment the disappointment runs to deep. That was the one class I was really looking forward to.


Remathilis said:


> Also, I'd like to see you argue the Battlerager shouldn't be dwarf only as well.



 Oh,  that's easy. They're not even deeply rooted in dwarven culture. They're a recent development not even 200 years old and only two dwarven citadells have them. Bruenor had two adopted human children, if Wulfgar had ever expressed interested in the battlerager fighting style, you'd bet he would have been accepted into the gutbuster brigade


----------



## Mithreinmaethor (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> I'd expect it to be repeatedly allowed from season 4 onward, but the admins have been pretty clear that rules for past season are not expected to change unless WotC really surprises them




That tone changed slightly when an admin, an RC I believe it was, leaked that Chris Tulach had stated that SCAG would be usable upon release. Since that point they standard talking point is that "guidance on this will be coming soon." So I think they already know but likely have a time frame to submit their concerns/exclusions to Chris to pass up the line to get approval/disapproval for before they post anything official.

I am willing to bet though that it will be a Players resource just like the PHB is with restrictions on the use of some of the optional/variant rules. Meaning it will be a resource for character creation of all seasons.

So we shall see.


----------



## Greybird (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> As is the foreigner sneaking in (or even being accepted in) to learn such crafts





Absolutely, which would be covered under DM fiat.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 22, 2015)

Greybird said:


> Absolutely, which would be covered under DM fiat.



Which does do diddly for anyone participating in WotC's organized play


----------



## epithet (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> You're probably right, but at the moment the disappointment runs to deep. That was the one class I was really looking forward to.
> ...




I know almost nothing about this adventurer's league thing, but if the text says the racial restriction is up to the DM, doesn't that really just mean that you need to come up with a little background narrative for the character to justify the exception? What DM is gonna tell you "no" on that?


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

Wow the Undying is any mortal who has immortality of sorts. That would include Liches, Vampires, Gods who used to be mortal like Velshroon and Torm, Mulhorandi and Unther Deity Incarnations (one of which is mentioned Gilgeam God-King of Unther), Divine Minions of (a template added to mortal creatures that makes them immortal servants of the Mulhorandi Gods, beings absorbed by the weave, certain archwizards and chosen.

 Anyone who has cheated Mortality, winning Immortality.

 It would also include Elminister, although I doubt Elminster would offer such a pact.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 22, 2015)

Pauper said:


> I should think it would be obvious -- those stores will lose their Premier status, hurting the gamers who patronize those stores, including people who would have preferred the store keep to the regular schedule.
> 
> This sort of 'benefit' is not without cost, is what I'm saying.
> 
> ...



There is no consequence to you and me, and it is not your job to worry about somebody else's risk vs reward management. 

So please stop distributing your FUD and let the Internet do what it does best.

Thank you.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 22, 2015)

gyor said:


> It would also include Elminister, although I doubt Elminster would offer such a pact.




hey that would almost make elminister a useable NPC... almost


----------



## Azzy (Oct 22, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> You're probably right, but at the moment the disappointment runs to deep. That was the one class I was really looking forward to.




If it's any consolation, I hope you find a DM that'll let you play one.


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

Other possible Undying patrons Szass Tam Zulkir of Thay, Any Dracolich, Chosen, Ghosts, Sharess, Isis, Orisis, Horus-Ra, Sebek, Thoth, Valkur, actually ever Gods has had mortal form at one point or another in FR so ANY GODS IN FR, not in Ebberron (although those undying beings, I think they even called that, worshipped in Ebberon would qualify), fiends who remember they're mortal lives (the ones that had mortal lives), spiritual masters who have escaped mortality.

 Weirder is a high level Oath of the Ancients Paladin, they have a feature called Undying I think, they stop aging and can recover from a mortal wound.


----------



## Azzy (Oct 22, 2015)

Any information on Duergar as a PC race?


----------



## gyor (Oct 22, 2015)

Mithreinmaethor said:


> That tone changed slightly when an admin, an RC I believe it was, leaked that Chris Tulach had stated that SCAG would be usable upon release. Since that point they standard talking point is that "guidance on this will be coming soon." So I think they already know but likely have a time frame to submit their concerns/exclusions to Chris to pass up the line to get approval/disapproval for before they post anything official.
> 
> I am willing to bet though that it will be a Players resource just like the PHB is with restrictions on the use of some of the optional/variant rules. Meaning it will be a resource for character creation of all seasons.
> 
> So we shall see.




 I hope your right. I am betting at the very least the the Wing Variant of the Tiefling goes the way of Aacrokkaa (disallowed). The others are likely to be fine.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 22, 2015)

Do the non-human deities get some small writeup?


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 22, 2015)

gyor said:


> Weirder is a high level Oath of the Ancients Paladin, they have a feature called Undying I think, they stop aging and can recover from a mortal wound.




that makes me want to play a game where I get that ability they recruit my own cult...um I mean holy army


----------



## FormerlyHemlock (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Storm Sorcery:
> Wind Speaker
> Tempestuous Magic (10 feet of flight after casting)
> Heart of the Storm (damage resistance, eruption around you after casting)
> ...




The Unearthed Arcana Storm Sorcerer had a bunch of bonus spells, kind of like a cleric domain. From your list here it looks like that was cut. Can you confirm?

-Max


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

Hemlock said:


> The Unearthed Arcana Storm Sorcerer had a bunch of bonus spells, kind of like a cleric domain. From your list here it looks like that was cut. Can you confirm?



Yes, it's been stated elsewhere that the storm sorcerer no longer gets bonus spells. I guess WotC decided not to go that route after all.


----------



## Voort (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> ... Ebberron (although those undying beings, I think they even called that, worshipped in Ebberon would qualify)




The Undying Court of Aerenal. They are already listed in the patron list from the pictures.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 23, 2015)

I really like the idea of the bladesinger, but I admit I'm fuzzy on how well they're going to function. A front-liner with wizard's hit points and no heavy armor capability strikes me as a fairly tempting and squishy target.

Guess we'll see, though.


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 23, 2015)

Mouseferatu said:


> I really like the idea of the bladesinger, but I admit I'm fuzzy on how well they're going to function. A front-liner with wizard's hit points and no heavy armor capability strikes me as a fairly tempting and squishy target.
> 
> Guess we'll see, though.



I think he'll be more like a ranger or rogue; mobile and heavy hitting rather than a tank


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 23, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> I think he'll be more like a ranger or rogue; mobile and heavy hitting rather than a tank




Oh, absolutely. But even rangers and rogues have better HP and (in general) AC, and don't have to expend limited resources to _be_ "mobile strikers."

Again, though, I'm not dismissing it. Just curious to see how it plays out, or if it's fully effective.


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Yes, it's been stated elsewhere that the storm sorcerer no longer gets bonus spells. I guess WotC decided not to go that route after all.



Good: it doesn't make the draconic/wild sorcerer obsolete, and it keeps the favored soul unique.


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

Its such a wierd diverse list of beings that can act as Patrons just looking at those listed Certain Gods, Undead, Whatever the Undying Aeranal are, Very Poweful archwizards, Divine Incarnations and if you look at the prerequists for being a Patron previously a previous mortal who has achieved immortality, it can get stranger, like the Unbodied, Athlas Sorceror Kings (this is clearly the update to the Sorceror King pact from 4e expanded greatly), a Shade, someone whose soul gets trapped in a magic weapon (cool idea of an Undying Bladelock, my blade IS my Patron), Oath of the Ancients Paladin, some other weird stuff, so much weird stuff.

 I bet you guys/girls can think of other possible patrons and types of patrons.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 23, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> Good: it doesn't make the draconic/wild sorcerer obsolete, and it keeps the favored soul unique.




Assuming, of course, the FS still gets bonus spells if/when it appears in its final, published form.


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 23, 2015)

Mouseferatu said:


> Assuming, of course, the FS still gets bonus spells if/when it appears in its final, published form.



Considering that really the big element of the fs IS the domain spells, I wager it will.


----------



## Valador (Oct 23, 2015)

Any insight on the new paladin oath?  please and thank you!


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 23, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> Considering that really the big element of the fs IS the domain spells, I wager it will.




Oh, you're probably right. I was just surprised when the storm sorcerer didn't keep 'em, so...


----------



## Nullen Voido (Oct 23, 2015)

TheThirdFlash said:


> There weren't many other game examples of a fighter/mage class other than the bladesinger in prior editions. It wasn't until Pathfinder introduced the Magus and 4e gave you the variety of classes, that we had more to work with for games.




For what its worth, Pathfinder's Magus is a direct rip-off of the 3.5 PHB2's Duskblade class. The Magus has much better flavor, but D&D did do it first.

Also, duskblades are totally "desceneded from eleven traditions" flavored.


----------



## shadowmane (Oct 23, 2015)

I got to watch over my DM's shoulders as he flipped through the book after our session tonight.  The store won't put the books out until tomorrow, but allowed us to flip through it before we left tonight.  Tons of stuff there on history and background.  Expansion of several classes, and more spells.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> Is Sharess in it? If so what domains does she get?




No Sharess on the chart.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

Azzy said:


> Any information on Duergar as a PC race?




+1 Str
superior darkvision
sunlight sensitivity
undercommon
adv vs illusions, charms, paralysis
3rd: enlarge/reduce - self only
5th: invisibility - self only


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

Hemlock said:


> The Unearthed Arcana Storm Sorcerer had a bunch of bonus spells, kind of like a cleric domain. From your list here it looks like that was cut. Can you confirm?
> 
> -Max




Storm Sorcery does not get any additional spells.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

Mouseferatu said:


> Oh, absolutely. But even rangers and rogues have better HP and (in general) AC, and don't have to expend limited resources to _be_ "mobile strikers."
> 
> Again, though, I'm not dismissing it. Just curious to see how it plays out, or if it's fully effective.




They gain a lot for a Wizard subclass. I think this is their balancing factor. Light Armour + Dex + Int is strong too. I am thinking Shield will be pretty important to keep them alive when they need it.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

Valador said:


> Any insight on the new paladin oath?  please and thank you!




Oath Spells
Channel Divinity: Champion Challenge (creatures cannot move more than 30 feet from you), Turn the Tide (temporary hit points within 30 feet)
Divine Allegiance (reaction to take damage for someone within 5 feet)
Unyielding Spirit (advantage against paralyzed and stunned)
Exalted Champion (resistance to weapons, advantage on death saves for allies, advantage on Wisdom saves, 1 hour)


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 23, 2015)

How about a run-down of the background traits?  Some of them based on their names barely sound any different from the PHB backgrounds.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> Its such a wierd diverse list of beings that can act as Patrons just looking at those listed Certain Gods, Undead, Whatever the Undying Aeranal are, Very Poweful archwizards, Divine Incarnations and if you look at the prerequists for being a Patron previously a previous mortal who has achieved immortality, it can get stranger, like the Unbodied, Athlas Sorceror Kings (this is clearly the update to the Sorceror King pact from 4e expanded greatly), a Shade, someone whose soul gets trapped in a magic weapon (cool idea of an Undying Bladelock, my blade IS my Patron), Oath of the Ancients Paladin, some other weird stuff, so much weird stuff.
> 
> I bet you guys/girls can think of other possible patrons and types of patrons.




Somehow all the jokes said about Keith Richards comes to mind, with him being still alive living past his expiry date preserved by all the drugs and alcohol.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 23, 2015)

What cities/nations get significant detail in the initial chapter?


----------



## Tia Nadiezja (Oct 23, 2015)

TheThirdFlash said:


> What you are describing here would be a very, very rare situation. If I remember correctly, the fluff from the Complete Book of Elves in 2e essentially said that if any elf "went rogue", they'd be hunted down and stopped to protect their secrets. And I gave the odd examples of how the bladesong may be taught to others, but again, they are exceptions to the rules.
> 
> Now, the 2e handbook was absolutely an all settings book, yet bladesingers never showed up in other fiction than Forgotten Realms. So it's become an FR only concept.



Player characters are definitionally "very rare situations," and I would much prefer to have them recommend that virtually all NPC bladesingers be elfs.

Putting "Elf only" in the actual crunch of the class is an invitation for both Adventurer's League and individual GMs to stick needless restrictions on players. While my attitude on individual GMs is basically, "Your table, do what you want, take my opinion as suggestions only," AL has a terrible habit of being overly restrictive and does not need encouragement to be moreso.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> What cities/nations get significant detail in the initial chapter?




The Realms overview has a paragraph or two each for the current state of all the major cities/kingdoms of Faerun. The second chapter has a breakdown of the Sword Coast and the North, each city/kingdom has a page or more.


----------



## zicar (Oct 23, 2015)

What does the arcana domain get?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

zicar said:


> What does the arcana domain get?




I thought I answered this?


----------



## nicolas.carrillos (Oct 23, 2015)

Twiggly the Gnome said:


> If it's not to much trouble, could you provide a brief rundown on the using this book in Eberron section?



I second this! Please, oh please, do say (briefly, at least) what the book says on using it in the Eberron setting (the best one, in my humble opinion).


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

Sharess is not in it? Or perhaps she's under Bastet, her original name, actually that makes sense I guess.


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> No Sharess on the chart.




 Thanks for looking.


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 23, 2015)

I agree with a lot of people here regarding Bladesingers. I'm someone who actually likes the idea of human-only Paladins, but even I came around to the 5th edition style of thinking and came up with a narrative to explain why other races were being allowed to be Paladins in my homebrew world. Bladesingers are a definite anachronism among the 5th edition design philosophies.

That said, I really like the idea of setting books being open to flavour-specific mechanical choices. I wasn't a fan of 4th edition's philosophy of "any PC can have any dragonmark". I did like the 3.5e restrictions in that regard. Templars in Dark Sun should only be humans (IMO). Restricting bladesingers to elves and battleragers to dwarves does enhance the flavour on what would ultimately be fairly flavourless class choices.

So I'm torn on the issue. Ultimately though, I would have gone with flavour text restrictions but no actual mechanical restriction.


----------



## Hathorym (Oct 23, 2015)

Thank you very much for all of the information you have provided thus far. Were there any new spells other then the cantrips, like possibly _glitterdust_?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

nicolas.carrillos said:


> I second this! Please, oh please, do say (briefly, at least) what the book says on using it in the Eberron setting (the best one, in my humble opinion).




This is one I think I missed, apologies.

Class List: Barbarian, Cleric, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard.

Do you have any questions in particular about any of them? It's all advice on how to use the class material in the setting. Even though the Battlerager is Dwarf only in FR, in Eberron they recommend it for Warforged for instance.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> The Realms overview has a paragraph or two each for the current state of all the major cities/kingdoms of Faerun. The second chapter has a breakdown of the Sword Coast and the North, each city/kingdom has a page or more.





Wow, that's actually pretty extensive; thanks!

Is Coromyr just in the paragraph summary, or is it in chapter two?  Purple Dragon Knights seem a little odd if Coromyr is off the map.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 23, 2015)

Anything on Cormanthyr/Myth Drannor, or Rhymanthiin in the introductive section?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> Sharess is not in it? Or perhaps she's under Bastet, her original name, actually that makes sense I guess.




Sorry, no Bastet either.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

Hathorym said:


> Thank you very much for all of the information you have provided thus far. Were there any new spells other then the cantrips, like possibly _glitterdust_?




You're welcome. And no, not that I have seen unless it is in a sidebar somewhere that I haven't noticed.


----------



## nicolas.carrillos (Oct 23, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> This is one I think I missed, apologies.
> 
> Class List: Barbarian, Cleric, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard.
> 
> Do you have any questions in particular about any of them? It's all advice on how to use the class material in the setting. Even though the Battlerager is Dwarf only in FR, in Eberron they recommend it for Warforged for instance.




Thanks! I'm specifically interested in Paladins and Wizards (I guess they mention the Silver Flame for the former). Does the book mention artificers? Thanks again.


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> I hope your right. I am betting at the very least the the Wing Variant of the Tiefling goes the way of Aacrokkaa (disallowed). The others are likely to be fine.






Tia Nadiezja said:


> Player characters are definitionally "very rare situations," and I would much prefer to have them recommend that virtually all NPC bladesingers be elfs.
> 
> Putting "Elf only" in the actual crunch of the class is an invitation for both Adventurer's League and individual GMs to stick needless restrictions on players. While my attitude on individual GMs is basically, "Your table, do what you want, take my opinion as suggestions only," AL has a terrible habit of being overly restrictive and does not need encouragement to be moreso.




 Goofily restrictive, which is one reason why I don't play in it. Look at the way they handled the Acolyte Background, which is useless if you don't pick the right God, or the horrible idea of story origins.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Wow, that's actually pretty extensive; thanks!
> 
> Is Coromyr just in the paragraph summary, or is it in chapter two?  Purple Dragon Knights seem a little odd if Coromyr is off the map.




Cormyr is included in the "Lands to the East" section of the Realms overview. Two paragraphs, but a very good summary.


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

So they put in a very limited amount of subclasses two of which are restricted by race. Goofy.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Anything on Cormanthyr/Myth Drannor, or Rhymanthiin in the introductive section?




Cormanthor and Myth Drannor are mentioned a couple times, but not in their own heading, once in the timeline. The Knights of Myth Drannor are mentioned in the Knight of the Order background sidebar.


----------



## Macca86 (Oct 23, 2015)

I understand you said there'e very little offered up for Rangers, but i was hoping you could share what there was.
Cheers!


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

Not even in the Mulhorand sidebar? I can't believe Sharess got cut with no explaination.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 23, 2015)

Would it be possible to elaborate on the backgrounds a bit?  What makes a Waterdeep Noble different from a standard Novle, for instance.


----------



## nicolas.carrillos (Oct 23, 2015)

Another question! Is Maztica mentioned in the book by any chance? Thanks!


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 23, 2015)

raphaelus said:


> Ah, my guess for the cleric was an Arcane domain tied to Mystara.
> 
> Everything seems to be as hinted. Only surprises to me are 2 monk paths and the class entries focused instead on lore which is.. mkay i guess. I like how the options sound, now I just need the pretty pictures.




Not just Mystra. Azuth is another beneficary here.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

nicolas.carrillos said:


> Thanks! I'm specifically interested in Paladins and Wizards (I guess they mention the Silver Flame for the former). Does the book mention artificers? Thanks again.




It's more about how to use what is in this book in that setting rather than how to play that setting.

Paladins - Oath of the Crown matches to Karrnath and the Order of the Emerald Claw. No mention of Silver Flame
Wizards - Bladesingers in Aundair as agents of Arcane Congress. No mention of Artificiers that I can see.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> Not even in the Mulhorand sidebar? I can't believe Sharess got cut with no explaination.




Sorry, I have not seen the named mentioned anywhere yet while reading. Mulhorand sidebar does not mention the name.


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 23, 2015)

My Question: 

Are there any additional Gods listed for Worship/ by domain in the book? Thee demihuman pantheons were fairly small in the PHB, and there are some faerunian gods who also were missing from the table.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Cormanthor and Myth Drannor are mentioned a couple times, but not in their own heading, once in the timeline. The Knights of Myth Drannor are mentioned in the Knight of the Order background sidebar.




Thanks.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Would it be possible to elaborate on the backgrounds a bit?  What makes a Waterdeep Noble different from a standard Novle, for instance.




Waterdhavian Noble feature: Kept in Style (automatic comfortable lifestyle without paying for it or discount on higher lifestyle)


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

Macca86 said:


> I understand you said there'e very little offered up for Rangers, but i was hoping you could share what there was.
> Cheers!




You would have to ask a specific question. There is a sub section for each of Human, Elf, Halfling, and Dwarf rangers if that helps.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

nicolas.carrillos said:


> Another question! Is Maztica mentioned in the book by any chance? Thanks!




It isn't in the index.


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 23, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> You would have to ask a specific question. There is a sub section for each of Human, Elf, Halfling, and Dwarf rangers if that helps.



Are there any mechanics whatsoever? My impression from previous replies is no, but I'm thinking there is some wiggle room in the phrase "offered very little"


----------



## Macca86 (Oct 23, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> You would have to ask a specific question. There is a sub section for each of Human, Elf, Halfling, and Dwarf rangers if that helps.




Oh, I'd love to hear what it says about dwarf and halfling rangers. Is there any change in mechanics or abilities for them. There seems to be some great additions for the other classes so I'm interested whats been added in.

Cheers


----------



## nicolas.carrillos (Oct 23, 2015)

Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer our questions. You are very kind.


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Sorry, I have not seen the named mentioned anywhere yet while reading. Mulhorand sidebar does not mention the name.




 Thank you. That's the final straw I think I'm going to pass on the book because that. You saved me some money.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

Tyranthraxus said:


> My Question:
> 
> Are there any additional Gods listed for Worship/ by domain in the book? Thee demihuman pantheons were fairly small in the PHB, and there are some faerunian gods who also were missing from the table.




There are a ton.


----------



## nicolas.carrillos (Oct 23, 2015)

Thanks for taking the time for answering our questions. You are very kind.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 23, 2015)

Tyranthraxus said:


> My Question:
> 
> Are there any additional Gods listed for Worship/ by domain in the book? Thee demihuman pantheons were fairly small in the PHB, and there are some faerunian gods who also were missing from the table.




From what I've gathered in the other thread, the Seldarine is full once again, so is the Dark Seldarine. The previously gone dwarven and duergar deities are back. The halfling, gnomish and orcish pantheons are also included.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

Macca86 said:


> Oh, I'd love to hear what it says about dwarf and halfling rangers. Is there any change in mechanics or abilities for them. There seems to be some great additions for the other classes so I'm interested whats been added in.
> 
> Cheers




dwarf - shield dwarves who were cast out, clanless dwarves, or prospectors are most likely. Deities: Marthammor Duin and Dumathoin
halfling - natural fit for lightfoot - Deity Brandobari, Sheela Peryroyl, Arvorveen

No mechanics


----------



## Macca86 (Oct 23, 2015)

Thanks for taking the time to reply, great content for RP but its disappointing about the mechanics .

Thanks


----------



## Irennan (Oct 23, 2015)

That's really disappointing. Why would they specifically cut a deity out, when it seems that basically all of them are back/included...


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

How about the Faction Agent background? What's that all about? Is it tied into the Harpers, Zhents, et al, or is it more general than that?


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Oct 23, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Paladins - Oath of the Crown matches to Karrnath and the Order of the Emerald Claw.
> Wizards - Bladesingers in Aundair as agents of Arcane Congress.




Bladesingers as agents of the Arcane Congress is good. Oath of the Crown as Order of the Emerald Claw...


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> How about the Faction Agent background? What's that all about? Is it tied into the Harpers, Zhents, et al, or is it more general than that?




Faction Agent does have some information specifically pertaining to the five factions and what they are, but it is not specific to any faction. Feature is Safe Haven. They receive Insight and one skill from Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma based.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

Irennan said:


> That's really disappointing. Why would they specifically cut a deity out, when it seems that basically all of them are back/included...




Mulhorand gods are demigods or Chosen and are mentioned in passing (and perhaps not all listed) in the sidebar. There is no chart for them.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Faction Agent does have some information specifically pertaining to the five factions and what they are, but it is not specific to any faction. Feature is Safe Haven.



Interesting. Thanks.

Do any of the backgrounds come with their own lists of traits/ideals/flaws/bonds? Or are they all variations of the backgrounds in the PHB?

Also, does the Waterdhavian Noble say anything about adapting it for other cities, such as Baldur's Gate?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Interesting. Thanks.
> 
> Do any of the backgrounds come with their own lists of traits/ideals/flaws/bonds? Or are they all variations of the backgrounds in the PHB?
> 
> Also, does the Waterdhavian Noble say anything about adapting it for other cities, such as Baldur's Gate?




Far Traveler has its own characteristics tables. 

Waterdhavian Noble looks like it is designed and written specifically for Waterdeep. Courtier background mentions Baldru's Gate in the description.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Far Traveler has its own characteristics tables.



Ha. Well, at least there's one!



> Courtier background mentions Baldru's Gate in the description.



OK. Could you give me some more details on the courtier please? I ask because one of the PCs in my Tyranny of Dragons campaign is a patriar from Baldur's Gate. Her background is currently noble, but I'm curious to see if her player would like courtier better since it has ties to her hometown.


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Sorry, I have not seen the named mentioned anywhere yet while reading. Mulhorand sidebar does not mention the name.




 Does the side bar refer you to the PHB Egyptian Gods (Bast is there, but dispite the Mulhorand Pantheon being the same, except it also has Anhur, so they may have done that). 

 Sorry for being a pain.


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 23, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> dwarf - shield dwarves who were cast out, clanless dwarves, or prospectors are most likely. Deities: Marthammor Duin and Dumathoin
> halfling - natural fit for lightfoot - Deity Brandobari, Sheela Peryroyl, Arvorveen
> 
> No mechanics



Thanks for that.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Ha. Well, at least there's one!
> 
> OK. Could you give me some more details on the courtier please? I ask because one of the PCs in my Tyranny of Dragons campaign is a patriar from Baldur's Gate. Her background is currently noble, but I'm curious to see if her player would like courtier better since it has ties to her hometown.




"In your earlier days, you were a personage of some significance in a noble court or a bureaucratic organization..."

Feature: Court Functionary. Knowledge of how bureaucracies function, access people, records, inner workings, etc.


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 23, 2015)

What is the current year of the Forgotten Realms?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> Does the side bar refer you to the PHB Egyptian Gods (Bast is there, but dispite the Mulhorand Pantheon being the same, except it also has Anhur, so they may have done that).
> 
> Sorry for being a pain.




"Today Mulhorand is ruled by demigods that call themselves by such names as Re, Anhur, Horus, Isis, Nephthys, Set, and Thoth..."


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> "In your earlier days, you were a personage of some significance in a noble court or a bureaucratic organization..."
> 
> Feature: Court Functionary. Knowledge of how bureaucracies function, access people, records, inner workings, etc.



That sounds fairly useful.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

JohnLynch said:


> What is the current year of the Forgotten Realms?




Some point after 1489 if that helps.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

JohnLynch said:


> What is the current year of the Forgotten Realms?



The Tyranny of Dragons storyline was set in 1489 DR, while the Elemental Evil storyline was set in 1491 DR. The Rage of Demons storyline doesn't appear to have a set date, though. My guess is that the SCAG presents a snapshot of the Realms mid-1490s.


----------



## Valus (Oct 23, 2015)

1605 DR.  Surprise!

(Joking.)


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 23, 2015)

Are there stats for aquatic elves, or just aquatic half-elves?


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> Are there stats for aquatic elves, or just aquatic half-elves?



I believe there's a "Rare Elf Subraces" sidebar. It might have stats for full aquatic elves. (Although it might just say something like, "Wild elves use the wood elf traits, while star elves use the high elf traits".)


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

I asked Chris Perkins on Twitter about _Out of the Abyss_. He said: "No, but if the novel ARCHMAGE is canonical in your campaign, the adventure would take place in 1485 DR or later."

Which would put it during the Sundering. And would mean that it's not necessarily meant to take place *after* the Tyranny of Dragons and Elemental Evil storylines. Which is interesting.

But I still reckon SCAG will be "set" around 1495 DR or so.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Yes, it's been stated elsewhere that the storm sorcerer no longer gets bonus spells. I guess WotC decided not to go that route after all.



But does the Storm Sorcerer get any powerup however tiny to compensate the loss of bonus spells?

Or is it exactly like the playtest but minus its bonus spells?


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

I can't answer that, as I haven't got the book myself yet. I think someone posted the details of what the storm sorcerer does get, but I can't remember where. There are, unfortunately, two different threads on the book here at EN World, plus the reddit thread, which makes it hard to remember who said what where.


----------



## MYV (Oct 23, 2015)

Can someone who has the book, please explain the spiked armor entry? i'm very curious

Thanks in advance


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 23, 2015)

Thanks everyone. Annoying that we have a campaign book with a timeline in it up to the present day but no actual indication as to what the present day year actually is (assuming people haven't just missed it which is completely possible). Last year adventurers league present year was 1489, so that jives with 1491 being when Elemental Evil "occurs". 1495 is another reasonable estimate to the current year, although it seems the devs just don't know (or just don't care) what the year is.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> I asked Chris Perkins on Twitter about _Out of the Abyss_. He said: "No, but if the novel ARCHMAGE is canonical in your campaign, the adventure would take place in 1485 DR or later."
> 
> Which would put it during the Sundering. And would mean that it's not necessarily meant to take place *after* the Tyranny of Dragons and Elemental Evil storylines. Which is interesting.
> 
> But I still reckon SCAG will be "set" around 1495 DR or so.




By the Novels it takes place after Tyranny of Dragons. Reading the books it's probably around 1488 or 9


----------



## Macca86 (Oct 23, 2015)

Thanks for all the info so far.
One if the guys I play with has a wood elf barbarian and he was wondering what the perks are for the tiger and elk totem, he has made more of a stalker hit em hard Barb and he reckons these could fit really well.
Cheers!


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> By the Novels it takes place after Tyranny of Dragons. Reading the books it's probably around 1488 or 9



"It" being _Out of the Abyss_?

As I mentioned above, Chris says _Archmage_ takes place in 1485 DR, which is the same year as the _Legacy of the Crystal Shard_ adventure and the _Vengeance of the Iron Dwarf_ novel, both of which were part of the Sundering storyline. The Sundering went from like 1483 to 1487 or something like that.

Tyranny of Dragons takes place in 1489 DR, while _Princes of the Apocalypse_ is in 1491 DR.

I wonder if maybe _Archmage_ is meant to be set in 14*9*5 DR?


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 23, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> By the Novels it takes place after Tyranny of Dragons. Reading the books it's probably around 1488 or 9




Well, their new years resolution didn't hold long before they messed up the timeline. In Archmage the ToD is over, the drow are discussing Tiamt's failure and how the early driw retreat nicht strain the relationship betwenn Lolth and Tiamat.

Guess they didn't manage to hire their realms traffic cop in time


----------



## Bardbarian (Oct 23, 2015)

Are there any new fighting style options for fighter or paladin? I remember them adding some stuff for maritime adventures, some of which looks like it made it into this book.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 23, 2015)

I hope someone tells me that panache was changed... the playtest one was a mess...


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Well, their new years resolution didn't hold long before they messed up the timeline. In Archmage the ToD is over, the drow are discussing Tiamt's failure and how the early driw retreat nicht strain the relationship betwenn Lolth and Tiamat.



Yeah, that's really got me thinking that the date mentioned in _Archmage_ is a typo and should really be 1495.



UngeheuerLich said:


> I hope someone tells me that panache was changed... the playtest one was a mess...



I believe it has. The details were mentioned in the reddit thread. Lemme just look 'em up for you.

EDIT: Nope, it's in the other SCAG thread.  [MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION]: Can you *please* combine the two threads so we don't have to keep looking in two places for all the SCAG details?



Palladion said:


> Swashbuckler:
> Fancy Footwork (target of your melee attacks cannot make opportunity attacks against you)
> Rakish Audacity (Charisma bonus to initiative, do not need advantage for Sneak Attack)
> Panache (use Persuasion to give opponent on attack rolls against you)
> ...




EDIT: Presumably that should read "use Persuasion to give opponent *disadvantage* on attack rolls against you. Am I right, [MENTION=12373]Palladion[/MENTION]?


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> I hope your right. I am betting at the very least the the Wing Variant of the Tiefling goes the way of Aacrokkaa (disallowed). The others are likely to be fine.






Palladion said:


> "Today Mulhorand is ruled by demigods that call themselves by such names as Re, Anhur, Horus, Isis, Nephthys, Set, and Thoth..."




 Thanks


----------



## Li Shenron (Oct 23, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> 5e was supposed to be about options and rulings not rules




The *system* is, but the *campaign settings* are not. Otherwise all campaign settings would be the same.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Yeah, that's really got me thinking that the date mentioned in _Archmage_ is a typo and should really be 1495.
> 
> I believe it has. The details were mentioned in the reddit thread. Lemme just look 'em up for you.
> 
> ...




I am pretty sure I answered this one along with some other questions that just came up.

Panache gives disadvantage if the opponent attacks people other than you and it ends now if you move more than 60ft away OR an ally targets them with something.

Don't think there are new fighting styles.

Spiked armour is AC 14 max +2 AC disadvantage to stealth.

1489 is mentioned in past tense but I don't see a mention of current year. I haven't read the whole thing though.

Storm Sorcerers as far as I can tell are the same but lose the bonus spells (as answered earlier)

Sea Elves fluff is mentioned but no crunch. Shouldn't be hard to just give them a swim speed though.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 23, 2015)

Didn't aquatic half-elfs get a swim speed?

Thus: you might not be able to play a canon sea elf, but you can play a character with elven blood and a swim speed


----------



## Irennan (Oct 23, 2015)

Do all racial deities get a small writeup/description, if only in the section regarding their race? Are deities like Velsharoon and Savras included?


----------



## zicar (Oct 23, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> I thought I answered this?




My bad, I seemed to have skipped it.


----------



## Zaran (Oct 23, 2015)

Are there water-soul halflings?


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Do all racial deities get a small writeup/description, if only in the section regarding their race? Are deities like Velsharoon and Savras included?




Each race section has a small blurb about the racial deities, no more than a paragraph each. It only remarks on who they are and what they stand for.

I have not seen the two deities you mentioned anywhere.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

Zaran said:


> Are there water-soul halflings?




Only the three types listed, sorry.


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> EDIT: Presumably that should read "use Persuasion to give opponent *disadvantage* on attack rolls against you. Am I right, [MENTION=12373]Palladion[/MENTION]?




Apologies, this was a typo.

Panache. Persuasion opposed by Insight. If succeeds, opponent has disadvantage on attacks vs. targets other than you and cannot make opportunity attacks against anyone but you. Basically protects your allies. If used on not hostile, target is charmed.


----------



## Pauper (Oct 23, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> There is no consequence to you and me, and it is not your job to worry about somebody else's risk vs reward management.




"No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; 
It tolls for thee."

"No Man Is an Island", John Donne

--
Pauper


----------



## Irennan (Oct 23, 2015)

Is Vhaeraun still CE, or has he been changed to CN like Mask?


----------



## Chimpy (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> Thank you. That's the final straw I think I'm going to pass on the book because that. You saved me some money.



So you left a review here for a book you haven't looked at?


----------



## Zaran (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Only the three types listed, sorry.




I guess Regis just has a high constitution.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 23, 2015)

Zaran said:


> I guess Regis just has a high constitution.



he likely is a quarter elemental aka has a genasi in bis family tree, but he's not a new subrace oft halflings (unless you count him AS a subrace of only one individual)


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Oct 23, 2015)

Zaran said:


> I guess Regis just has a high constitution.



I thought the premise was that he was like 1/16 Water Soul Genasi and had inherited just the ability to hold his breath for a long time because of it.  That's what I thought the novel said.


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> I hope your right. I am betting at the very least the the Wing Variant of the Tiefling goes the way of Aacrokkaa (disallowed). The others are likely to be fine.






Chimpy said:


> So you left a review here for a book you haven't looked at?




 I will remove it if I feel I was wrong after personally seeing it, but I've seen enough spoilers of its contents to form an opinion.


----------



## Noctem (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> I will remove it if I feel I was wrong after personally seeing it, but I've seen enough spoilers of its contents to form an opinion.




not to mention that everyone is entitled to having an opinion and everyone else can go suck on an egg if they don't like yours   I've pre purchased the book myself but I have to admit that based on the spoilers shown thus far I'm a tad disappointed.  Considering the subject matter the book feels small.


----------



## TheThirdFlash (Oct 23, 2015)

Majoru Oakheart said:


> I thought the premise was that he was like 1/16 Water Soul Genasi and had inherited just the ability to hold his breath for a long time because of it.  That's what I thought the novel said.




The reborn Regis doesn't work mechanically in the game because all genasi are humans mixed with elemental blood. I like the idea that this isn't restricted to just humans though. And it makes some sense. For instance, azers are essentially dwarves that come form the Plane of Fire in my mind. So why not have other PC races that come from elemental planes and have various traits. I think it would be interesting to see an option to swap out certain racial abilities for the "elemental soul" for all races rather than have a race like the genasi that is effectively a human variant. 

But to answer your question, the novel discusses his heritage or inherited ability from his mother, but that's really it. They don't talk about it beyond the fact that he has some genasi blood in him.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 23, 2015)

Fwiw I quite like the book. It is exactly what I expected it to be.

Would it be better if it was longer? Probably. I know how long it is though and the content is good.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Oct 23, 2015)

TheThirdFlash said:


> The reborn Regis doesn't work mechanically in the game because all genasi are humans mixed with elemental blood. I like the idea that this isn't restricted to just humans though. And it makes some sense. For instance, azers are essentially dwarves that come form the Plane of Fire in my mind. So why not have other PC races that come from elemental planes and have various traits. I think it would be interesting to see an option to swap out certain racial abilities for the "elemental soul" for all races rather than have a race like the genasi that is effectively a human variant.



Genasi aren't really any different than Tieflings.  They are both races that likely were planetouched at some time in the past.  Either due to interbreeding or magic rites.  However, the conceit in D&D has pretty much been that humans are the most adaptable race.  They easy bond with magic and change.  Both but of those races are very much races on their own no longer related to humans.  It doesn't make much sense to have the ability to add elemental soul to other races than it does to add dwarven resilience as an option to add to every other race.



TheThirdFlash said:


> But to answer your question, the novel discusses his heritage or inherited ability from his mother, but that's really it. They don't talk about it beyond the fact that he has some genasi blood in him.



From my memory, I know they don't saw it precisely but I thought there was a sentence to the effect of "There are some races who have been touched by the planes like the Genasi who were attuned to certain elements and his mother due to a trick of her birth seemed to have some semblance of this ability."

I don't remember the exact wording by I remember interpreting it to mean that she wasn't a member of a special race, that she was likely a very small percent either Genasi or Water Elemental.  But since the entire thing was coming from "young Regis" who was having difficulty understanding the world around him that he didn't really understand it himself.

Either way, it was fairly clear that he was meant to have a special ability not written in the rules that was unique only to him.


----------



## Shemeska (Oct 23, 2015)

More options for tieflings beyond the exclusively devil-blooded description of the PHB race and finally an acknowledgement that yeah, they aren't all linked to Asmodeus. Then they go ahead and link two of the options thematically to devils anyway...


----------



## Palladion (Oct 23, 2015)

TheThirdFlash said:


> The reborn Regis doesn't work mechanically in the game because all genasi are humans mixed with elemental blood. I like the idea that this isn't restricted to just humans though. And it makes some sense. For instance, azers are essentially dwarves that come form the Plane of Fire in my mind. So why not have other PC races that come from elemental planes and have various traits. I think it would be interesting to see an option to swap out certain racial abilities for the "elemental soul" for all races rather than have a race like the genasi that is effectively a human variant.
> 
> But to answer your question, the novel discusses his heritage or inherited ability from his mother, but that's really it. They don't talk about it beyond the fact that he has some genasi blood in him.




http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/EE_PlayersCompanion.pdf
Elemental Evil Player's Companion
Page 7, Heirs to Elemental Power
"They resemble humans but have unusual skin color (red, green, blue, or gray), and there is something odd about them..." and "A given genasi might have some features reminiscent of the mortal parent (pointed ears from an elf, a stockier frame and thick hair from a dwarf, small hands and feet from a halfling, exceedingly large eyes from a gnome, and so on)..."

All genasi look human-ish, but do not have to be from a human/genie pairing. Results in your own game may vary...


----------



## gyor (Oct 23, 2015)

Since 4e Asmodean Tieflings, the PHB Tieflings breed true almost no matter what the none Tiefling Race parent is.


----------



## Dragonhelm (Oct 23, 2015)

Majoru Oakheart said:


> From my memory, I know they don't saw it precisely but I thought there was a sentence to the effect of "There are some races who have been touched by the planes like the Genasi who were attuned to certain elements and his mother due to a trick of her birth seemed to have some semblance of this ability."
> 
> I don't remember the exact wording by I remember interpreting it to mean that she wasn't a member of a special race, that she was likely a very small percent either Genasi or Water Elemental.  But since the entire thing was coming from "young Regis" who was having difficulty understanding the world around him that he didn't really understand it himself.
> 
> Either way, it was fairly clear that he was meant to have a special ability not written in the rules that was unique only to him.




Honestly, I would treat it as a feat. Genasi Heritage, or some such. That would allow any race to take on a trait or two from the Genasi (or whatever race you want).


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 23, 2015)

Dragonhelm said:


> Honestly, I would treat it as a feat. Genasi Heritage, or some such. That would allow any race to take on a trait or two from the Genasi (or whatever race you want).



Except most races don't get a feat at first level, meaning they would be level 4± to "discover their heritage"


----------



## Dragonhelm (Oct 23, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> Except most races don't get a feat at first level, meaning they would be level 4± to "discover their heritage"




True, forgot about that.

Hrm...


----------



## Mistwell (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> I will remove it if I feel I was wrong after personally seeing it, but I've seen enough spoilers of its contents to form an opinion.




Commenting on it before you read it? Totally get that.  Posting a review of a book you've never seen? Messed up.


----------



## Prism (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> "It" being _Out of the Abyss_?
> 
> As I mentioned above, Chris says _Archmage_ takes place in 1485 DR, which is the same year as the _Legacy of the Crystal Shard_ adventure and the _Vengeance of the Iron Dwarf_ novel, both of which were part of the Sundering storyline. The Sundering went from like 1483 to 1487 or something like that.
> 
> ...




Archmage definitely takes place at the end of 1486 and is a direct continuation of Vengeance of the Iron Dwarf which is set during the Rise of Tiamat story line. I guess that means that Rage of Demons takes place sometime during 1487

Oddly Princes of the Apocalypse is said to take place during 1491 (I'd probably ignore that bit)

I would say that the main reason that these are all set so early is that the authors don't want to build time jumps into their stories (again). I'd just run them in whichever year you like. That's probably why there is no set current year as far as I can see


----------



## Azzy (Oct 23, 2015)

Yep, I can't wait until the 3rd.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

Palladion said:


> Panache. Persuasion opposed by Insight. If succeeds, opponent has disadvantage on attacks vs. targets other than you and cannot make opportunity attacks against anyone but you. Basically protects your allies. If used on not hostile, target is charmed.



Hmm. They fixed the combat usage - previously it made it so the target couldn't attack anyone other than you. I'm still unsure about the non-magical charm effect, though. But then charm isn't really mind control in this edition anyway. Yes, you're forcing the person to like you, but that doesn't mean they have to do what you say. I don't suppose they've added a clause indicating that the charm effect ends if you or an ally harms the target?



Prism said:


> Archmage definitely takes place at the end of 1486 and is a direct continuation of Vengeance of the Iron Dwarf which is set during the Rise of Tiamat story line. I guess that means that Rage of Demons takes place sometime during 1487



Wait. The Iron Dwarf book mentions the Tyranny of Dragons storyline? If so, that makes no sense. ToD takes place in 1489. And 1485 is, as I mentioned above, in the middle of the Sundering.

It seems like somewhere along the line, WotC has got their dates all messed up. 

Does the SCAG include a timeline of any kind?


----------



## Valus (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Wait. The Iron Dwarf book mentions the Tyranny of Dragons storyline?




Archmage mentions the Tyranny of Dragons storyline and the fact that Tiamat failed.  I don't recall any mention of it in Vengeance of the Iron Dwarf.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

[MENTION=6777490]Valus[/MENTION]: OK, which says to me that Archmage has to take place after 1489. Otherwise it makes no sense.


----------



## steeldragons (Oct 23, 2015)

AAAAAAGGGGHHHH!!!! 

-rest of originally typed post deleted-


----------



## Valus (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> @_*Valus*_: OK, which says to me that Archmage has to take place after 1489. Otherwise it makes no sense.




I can't say for sure - I have never kept perfect track of the years in realms, but I think there is some inconsistency.  This page lists Archmage as occurring from 1485-86: 

http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Archmage_(novel)#cite_ref-Archmage-p57_0-0 

While I know a wiki like that is hardly reliable, it does cite specific pages in the novel (which I can't confirm as I don't have my copy with me.)


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

Oh, I believe you. I just think the date mentioned in _Archmage_ has to be a typo. As I mentioned, 1485 is in the middle of the Sundering. _Legacy of the Crystal Shard_, the only Sundering adventure to give a hard date, is also set in 1485. We know from the AL season of Tyranny of Dragons that that storyline is set in 1489, and while neither hardback adventure gives a set date, _The Rise of Tiamat_ States that it is assumed to take place after the Sundering has finished.

Since _Princes of the Apocalypse_ is set in 1491, and Sword Coast Legends is supposedly set in 1494 or thereabouts, it seems to me like _Archmage_ (and the therefore _Out of the Abyss_) *should* be set in 1495-96.

EDIT: Furthermore, [MENTION=6748898]ad_hoc[/MENTION] mentioned that the SCAG refers to 1489 in the past tense. All this is why it would be nice to know if there's a timeline (roll of years?) of any kind in the book.


----------



## Valus (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Since _Princes of the Apocalypse_ is set in 1491, and Sword Coast Legends is supposedly set in 1494 or thereabouts, it seems to me like _Archmage_ (and the therefore _Out of the Abyss_) *should* be set in 1495-96.




I agree - as it stands, the numbers don't make sense, and it seems like Archmage should be happening at basically the same time as Sword Coast Legends.  If Archmage happens in the mid-1490's, though, Vengeance of the Iron Dwarf would need to, as well, since Archmage is pretty clear about that it fact that it's coming right after the events of Iron Dwarf, not years later.  Hopefully, it's safe to say that the whole Companions Codex series + Archmage can be safely moved to the 1490s without any conflicts in the text (I can't think of any, as long as it's taken in bulk.)


----------



## Prism (Oct 23, 2015)

Valus said:


> Archmage mentions the Tyranny of Dragons storyline and the fact that Tiamat failed.  I don't recall any mention of it in Vengeance of the Iron Dwarf.




The reason that the two Dragons are in the book is because of the Tiamat storyline. They are introduced in one of the two preceding books (I forget which) where the drow are offering them great wealth to add to the 'hoard'


----------



## Valus (Oct 23, 2015)

Prism said:


> The reason that the two Dragons are in the book is because of the Tiamat storyline. They are introduced in one of the two preceding books (I forget which) where the drow are offering them great wealth to add to the 'hoard'




Yup, I forgot about that.  That basically means the timeline is irreconcilable by a few years, without the aid of a high level chronomancer.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 23, 2015)

Valus said:


> Archmage mentions the Tyranny of Dragons storyline and the fact that Tiamat failed.  I don't recall any mention of it in Vengeance of the Iron Dwarf.



The dragons recruited by the drow are in it because they must collect a huge tribut to pay for Tiamat's summoning


----------



## Prism (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Oh, I believe you. I just think the date mentioned in _Archmage_ has to be a typo. As I mentioned, 1485 is in the middle of the Sundering. _Legacy of the Crystal Shard_, the only Sundering adventure to give a hard date, is also set in 1485. We know from the AL season of Tyranny of Dragons that that storyline is set in 1489, and while neither hardback adventure gives a set date, _The Rise of Tiamat_ States that it is assumed to take place after the Sundering has finished.
> 
> Since _Princes of the Apocalypse_ is set in 1491, and Sword Coast Legends is supposedly set in 1494 or thereabouts, it seems to me like _Archmage_ (and the therefore _Out of the Abyss_) *should* be set in 1495-96.
> 
> EDIT: Furthermore, [MENTION=6748898]ad_hoc[/MENTION] mentioned that the SCAG refers to 1489 in the past tense. All this is why it would be nice to know if there's a timeline (roll of years?) of any kind in the book.




Honestly its best to ignore either the novel timeline or the adventures league timeline...or both. Salvatore reintroduces the companions as the first book of the sundering and the next four book (including Archmage) run as a continuous story over the next two years or so. If I remember correctly the extended story starts in winter, there is a winter in the middle of Vengeance of the Iron Dwarf and then Archmage ends during the next winter. There is no typo - all this happens around 1485-1487 as far as Salvatore is concerned.

The novel writers typically don't want time jumps, so the rate of progress of the timeline in the Realms is typically very slow. It is also unusual for adventures to be released and to specific an exact year they are set in. Its usually left to the DM to set the year to whatever they want. Sometimes dates are assigned to adventure modules after the event. However in this case the AL dates conflict with the authors dates. You will need to choose which one to follow if you want one at all. I imagine the authors dates are considered more canon, especially when it comes to Archmage and the release of the demons, considering the tie in is so strong.


----------



## Pauper (Oct 23, 2015)

pukunui said:


> I don't suppose they've added a clause indicating that the charm effect ends if you or an ally harms the target?




They did, in fact, add such a clause.

Also, the 3rd level ability is now in English instead of French, and the relaxation of sneak attack occurs 'if no creature other than your target is within 5 feet of you' rather than 'target has none of your allies adjacent', and Elegant Maneuver is slighly re-worded to suggest that it can't be taken as a readied action.

Storm Sorcerer in SCAG, meanwhile, doesn't grant bonus spells as the UA one does (instead, you gain Primordial as a bonus language); Tempestuous Magic requires a bonus action to activate the ability to fly after you cast rather than allowing you to fly as a bonus action; Heart of the Storm now damages creatures when you 'start' casting a spell, so it works even if your spell is counterspelled; Storm's Fury is unchanged, except it specifically uses your 'sorcerer spell save DC' rather than calling out the components of that DC (so presumably if you have something that increases your spell save DC that isn't your proficiency bonus or Charisma bonus, it would apply to this save as well); Wind Soul gains a clause that, once you use it to reduce your fly speed, you can't do so again until you finish a short or long rest.

--
Pauper


----------



## Z. H. Darkstar (Oct 23, 2015)

I'm actually glad that there's no timeline in the book. This book needs to be as accessible to FR newbs as it is to the veterans. While it's perfectly fine to make allusions to the novels, the novels should not be needed to understand the content of this book.


----------



## Greg Benage (Oct 23, 2015)

Pauper said:


> Also, the 3rd level ability is now in English instead of French, and the relaxation of sneak attack occurs 'if no creature other than your target is within 5 feet of you' rather than 'target has none of your allies adjacent'




Oh my! So if you're solo in melee against 2+ opponents, no sneak attack for you. That's a fairly significant nerf.


----------



## Z. H. Darkstar (Oct 23, 2015)

Greg Benage said:


> Oh my! So if you're solo in melee against 2+ opponents, no sneak attack for you. That's a fairly significant nerf.



Correct, the Swashbuckler needs to stick to outside edge of melee to get the solo SA.


----------



## The Myopic Sniper (Oct 23, 2015)

I hope WOTC includes a full subclass in future Adventurer's Guides for each core class. There is always going to be a sense of disappointment among partisans of particular classes even if it is not a subclass that they would ever use if they don't get equal treatment with the other classes.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 23, 2015)

Prism said:


> Honestly its best to ignore either the novel timeline or the adventures league timeline...or both.



I don't read the novels, so yes, I think I'll just ignore them and go with the RPG product timeline.



Pauper said:


> They did, in fact, add such a clause.



Glad to hear it. That makes it much more palatable.


----------



## Macca86 (Oct 23, 2015)

Is there a charging bonus or anything for the Barbarian Elk totem?


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Oct 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> Thank you. That's the final straw I think I'm going to pass on the book because that. You saved me some money.



Get rid of your review. You have not looked at the book. Also seriously one minor god was not mentioned, why is that a deal breaker?


----------



## Arryn (Oct 23, 2015)

Sorry if this has been asked, but if the Tiefling opts for the Int/Dex bonus, do the innate spells from Infernal Legacy or other still key off of Cha?


----------



## fba827 (Oct 23, 2015)

I know I'm in the minority, but I'm actually GLAD they don't have a new subclass for each class.  It potentially shows that wotc isn't looking to force an idea for the sake of symmetry but rather stuck with what was flavorful and inspired for the concept of the book.

In my opinion , designing subclasses purely for the purpose of 'filling out symmetry of all classes getting included" is just begging for half assed things that aren't really inspired by concept but are shoe horned in. I mean one doesn't mean th other will happen but it's definitely knocking on the door in that direction if it did.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 23, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> Get rid of your review. You have not looked at the book. Also seriously one minor god was not mentioned, why is that a deal breaker?




This. Expressing an opinion is one thing, but writing an actual review for a book you haven't read? Dirty pool, and frankly disingenuous.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 23, 2015)

Yeah, dishonest "reviews" like that are why I don't pay any attention to that part of the site here.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 23, 2015)

Aquatic elves...maybe we'll see them soon in another product?

They will probably have amphibious and 30' swim speed as their subrace features. The problem is we have no idea what their +1 ability score is.


----------



## Remathilis (Oct 23, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> Aquatic elves...maybe we'll see them soon in another product?
> 
> They will probably have amphibious and 30' swim speed as their subrace features. The problem is we have no idea what their +1 ability score is.



My homebrew ones were +1 con


----------



## Silthen (Oct 23, 2015)

Can someone tell me what the scale is for the maps in the book? I hope I'm just missing it somewhere, but none of the maps have any kind of scale. Kind of hard to determine travel times without it.


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Arryn said:


> Sorry if this has been asked, but if the Tiefling opts for the Int/Dex bonus, do the innate spells from Infernal Legacy or other still key off of Cha?




Yes still based off CHA. Devils tongue is a replacement set of spells which use CHA. Hellfire can replace hellish rebuke but doesn't change the spell casting ability


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Macca86 said:


> Is there a charging bonus or anything for the Barbarian Elk totem?




You can move through an opponents space and knock them prone with a bonus attack. It also does some damage. Got to be 14th level though


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Silthen said:


> Can someone tell me what the scale is for the maps in the book? I hope I'm just missing it somewhere, but none of the maps have any kind of scale. Kind of hard to determine travel times without it.




No scale that I can see. The maps are lovely but too small to see properly. 

If only there was a high res image around somewhere...


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

[MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION] could you look up if Vhaeraun is CN or CE? Are he and Eilistraee allied?


----------



## pukunui (Oct 24, 2015)

Prism said:


> No scale that I can see. The maps are lovely but too small to see properly.
> 
> If only there was a high res image around somewhere...



Anyone got a spare $11,000?


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Irennan said:


> [MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION] could you look up if Vhaeraun is CN or CE? Are he and Eilistraee allied?




He is CE. It doesn't mention any alliances. Eilistraee gets a short paragraph and Vhaeraun a brief mention


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Prism said:


> He is CE. It doesn't mention any alliances. Eilistraee gets a short paragraph and Vhaeraun a brief mention




Thank you.


----------



## Tazykat (Oct 24, 2015)

SO Eilistraee is there?


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Tazykat said:


> SO Eilistraee is there?




Well, if she gets a paragraph, then yes. But her return is old news, Ed Greenwood had already explicitly confirmed it, and implied it in his latest novel.


----------



## Tazykat (Oct 24, 2015)

Thanks I saw that after I saw a mention of her and her brother.


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Tazykat said:


> SO Eilistraee is there?




Yup. Eilistraee, Kiaransalee, Lolth, Selvetarm and Vhaeraun. Ghaunadaur is not listed in the pantheon but as a possible warlock patron


----------



## Tazykat (Oct 24, 2015)

The Myopic Sniper said:


> I hope WOTC includes a full subclass in future Adventurer's Guides for each core class. There is always going to be a sense of disappointment among partisans of particular classes even if it is not a subclass that they would ever use if they don't get equal treatment with the other classes.




but then you could always convert the stuff you do have or make something up or use the DNG to help make something up


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Prism said:


> Yup. Eilistraee, Kiaransalee, Lolth, Selvetarm and Vhaeraun. Ghaunadaur is not listed in the pantheon but as a possible warlock patron




Do Selvetarm and Kiaransalee also get some lore, or just Lolth (well, so I guess), Eilistraee and Vhaeraun? Is the fact that they are mother and children mentioned?


----------



## pukunui (Oct 24, 2015)

[MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION]: Is there a timeline (or Roll of Years) of any kind in the book?


----------



## TheThirdFlash (Oct 24, 2015)

*Bladesinger*

Someone described it as being like rage. Can someone that has the book elaborate on the mechanic? Does it specify that you must be in light armor? I'm curious about multiclassing options.


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Do Selvetarm and Kiaransalee also get some lore, or just Lolth (well, so I guess), Eilistraee and Vhaeraun? Is the fact that they are mother and chilrend mentioned?




No very little lore - more a simple description of what each deity stands for and who might worship them. There is no mention of family ties or relationships with any of the gods that I can see.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Prism said:


> No very little lore - more a simple description of what each deity stands for and who might worship them. There is no mention of family ties or relationships with any of the gods that I can see.




Oh, I see. Thank you again.


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION]: Is there a timeline (or Roll of Years) of any kind in the book?




You get a reasonable amount of detail about the various ages such as The Crown Wars and Netheril. It then breaks down the period of the Sundering from 1482 (Murder in Balders Gate) through to 1489 when the Gods withdraw the power from most of their Chosen. This is the last date seemingly written in the past tense so it kind of suggests 1490+ as a place to start.

The source in this section relates to the Sundering novels and the playtest era adventures. No mention of any of the story lines since the 5e release, which brings us no closer to when these events supposedly happened.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Prism said:


> You get a reasonable amount of detail about the various ages such as The Crown Wars and Netheril. It then breaks down the period of the Sundering from 1482 (Murder in Balders Gate) through to 1489 when the Gods withdraw the power from most of their Chosen. This is the last date seemingly written in the past tense so it kind of suggests 1490+ as a place to start.




So all the various chosen have drastically been reduced in number. Does it give examples of any chosen who kept their power? Does it specifically talk about which gods are back, or is it a ''all the gods in the lists are back''?


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

TheThirdFlash said:


> Someone described it as being like rage. Can someone that has the book elaborate on the mechanic? Does it specify that you must be in light armor? I'm curious about multiclassing options.




I suppose its a bit like rage - maybe a stance would be a better word (although it doesn't call it that)

You can wear light armour but don't have to. No shields or using a weapon in two hands. The tradition does give you proficiency in light armour. It has limited uses per rest and basically improves your AC, speed, acrobatics and concentration rolls. Later on you can use your spell slots to absorb damage and you do more damage with your own weapon attacks.

It might multiclass quite well with eldritch knight - not sure yet - but you would lose a lot of nice high level spells


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Someone posted the Bladesinger on reddit http://imgur.com/4RGKhUM


----------



## Morrus (Oct 24, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Someone posted the Bladesinger on reddit http://imgur.com/4RGKhUM


----------



## gyor (Oct 24, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> Get rid of your review. You have not looked at the book. Also seriously one minor god was not mentioned, why is that a deal breaker?




 Do you think at this point that after all the spoilers and even pics from the reddit and forums that I have no idea of what's in it? There is no shocking revelation in the book that will radically change the things I don't like about it. 

 But I'm not unreasonable, I'll withdrew it, but when I see it and if I still don't like it, its going back up with greater details.

 Unless it miracliously rewrites itself and grows hundreds of pages, I remain doubtful of that.

 And Sharess has always been my favourite FR deity, I love her back story which is complex and rich, I love her fun, yet compassionate philosphy, I love cats they so cute and cuddly, even then they ambush your ankles in the middle of the night, I love all her aspects Sharess, Zandilar, Bast, Felidae, and her titles like Succubus of sensation, I love how she explored the dark side of herself and came back from that. I love that she had all these adventures in various forms over millenia.

 So yes, that alone is worth the lost of a single star, maybe two.


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Irennan said:


> So all the various chosen have drastically been reduced in number. Does it give examples of any chosen who kept their power? Does it specifically talk about which gods are back, or is it a ''all the gods in the lists are back''?




In the timeline section it just says the Gods stop interfering through their chosen. Its referring to the chosen that appeared during the Sundering. So far I haven't seen any mention of the original type of chosen such as Elminster is. There is a small section explaining that some gods withdraw, other die and others go dormant. Mortals don't know anything except their prayers go unanswered (and therefore I doubt we will find out). The individual god descriptions have no mention of coming back. For example if you read the section on Mystra you would not know she had been gone for nearly 100 years.

Its probably better that way as it reads much better for people new to the realms or those that don't care so much about the storylines. They want to know what does it mean for their character now, not what's been happening with their god recently


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Prism said:


> In the timeline section it just says the Gods stop interfering through their chosen. Its referring to the chosen that appeared during the Sundering. So far I haven't seen any mention of the original type of chosen such as Elminster is. There is a small section explaining that some gods withdraw, other die and others go dormant. Mortals don't know anything except their prayers go unanswered (and therefore I doubt we will find out). The individual god descriptions have no mention of coming back. For example if you read the section on Mystra you would not know she had been gone for nearly 100 years.
> 
> Its probably better that way as it reads much better for people new to the realms or those that don't care so much about the storylines. They want to know what does it mean for their character now, not what's been happening with their god recently




So, it says that all the listed gods are currently active/alive and that's it, I guess?


----------



## The Myopic Sniper (Oct 24, 2015)

fba827 said:


> I know I'm in the minority, but I'm actually GLAD they don't have a new subclass for each class.  It potentially shows that wotc isn't looking to force an idea for the sake of symmetry but rather stuck with what was flavorful and inspired for the concept of the book.
> 
> In my opinion , designing subclasses purely for the purpose of 'filling out symmetry of all classes getting included" is just begging for half assed things that aren't really inspired by concept but are shoe horned in. I mean one doesn't mean th other will happen but it's definitely knocking on the door in that direction if it did.




I get that... in theory. This early in the edition though there are still a lot of concepts within the base classes that don't have full support. Obviously, you don't want to release anything "half assed," but I think partisans of the classes that are overlooked on each go around will feel that what they do get "three new musical instruments for your bard!" will feel that the space devoted to that is "half assed" because they don't have a crunchy subclass to go along with it.

As I said in the deleted thread, Bards in particular are hard to design for with only three subclass levels. And the Rangers may have not gotten anything because the class is being eyed for a redesign. I think that is all the better reason to throw more options out there as long as it doesn't result in power creep.

If a Ranger lover skips your book because you devote 3/4s of a page to "how to play this class" material and flavor options when the space could have been used for a simple but flavorful subclass, I think they probably should opt for a subclass that incorporates some of that flavor. If the game had 50 classes in the core, yeah, designing options for all of them wouldn't really be desirable, but 12 is a small enough number that I don't think that you are going to hit a lot of subclasses that are just subclasses for subclass sake, at least at this point. 

I did sigh a bit of relief to discover that the Purple Dragon Warrior (or whatever awkwardly Phallic name that they used) was a subclass and not a prestige class. That way lies madness.


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Irennan said:


> So, it says that all the listed gods are currently active/alive and that's it, I guess?




Sort of - it just says these are the gods. No mention of if they have ever been dead or not active. Several entries do mention the gods origin if important, so Cyric is listed as once being mortal.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Oct 24, 2015)

gyor said:


> Do you think at this point that after all the spoilers and even pics from the reddit and forums that I have no idea of what's in it? There is no shocking revelation in the book that will radically change the things I don't like about it.
> 
> But I'm not unreasonable, I'll withdrew it, but when I see it and if I still don't like it, its going back up with greater details.
> 
> ...




Next to no Demigods are featured in the book.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 24, 2015)

gyor said:


> Do you think at this point that after all the spoilers and even pics from the reddit and forums that I have no idea of what's in it? There is no shocking revelation in the book that will radically change the things I don't like about it.
> 
> But I'm not unreasonable, I'll withdrew it, but when I see it and if I still don't like it, its going back up with greater details.




I've deleted your review since, as you say, you have not seen the book. Unfortunately, this now messes up the ratings, as deleting a review is a major PITA in that system. It'll need to be fixed in the database manually.

Please do not review items you have not seen.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Prism said:


> Sort of - it just says these are the gods. No mention of if they have ever been dead or not active. Several entries do mention the gods origin if important, so Cyric is listed as once being mortal.




Hm, I see. But does the list refer to the current era/post-Sundering, or is it just up in the air? And thanks for answering my questions.


----------



## Sunseeker (Oct 24, 2015)

Picked up the book today, gotta say it feels a little light but there's a lot of good stuff in there.


----------



## gyor (Oct 24, 2015)

Morrus said:


> I've deleted your review since, as you say, you have not seen the book. Unfortunately, this now messes up the ratings, as deleting a review is a major PITA in that system. It'll need to be fixed in the database manually.
> 
> Please do not review items you have not seen.




 I apologize, it was an emotional reaction to disappointment, it will not happen again.


----------



## gyor (Oct 24, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> Next to no Demigods are featured in the book.




 Oh so its not just Sharess, I didn't realize its most of the demigods left out. That's disappointing. Even a chart with domains and portifio would at least make them playable for clerics. Its ironic because even 4e had the list of demigods in the Pantheon of the World Chart.

 This is an even bigger disappointment then I realized.


----------



## steeldragons (Oct 24, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Hm, I see. But does the list refer to the current era/post-Sundering, or is it just up in the air? And thanks for answering my questions.




I don't have a copy but from reading the thread...thanks to @_*Prism*_'s remarkable patience...I can confidently say the following with a fair degree of certitude of being correct: 

1. The gods' stuff is in the gods' section.
2. There is no "timeline" stuff in the gods' section [see below, responding to your own question].
3. There is very little to no lore for any deities except the ones in the human pantheon.
4. Non-human gods (yes, that includes the drow...they have been listed for us) get a) a list of the gods, b) what they are the gods of, c) limited lore for a major deity or two but most have none, and d) at least some kind of short general intro to the pantheon.

That's all. That's what's in the gods' stuff.

Furthermore, we know [have already been told] this:


Prism said:


> You get a reasonable amount of detail about the various ages such as The Crown Wars and Netheril. It then breaks down the period of the Sundering from 1482 (Murder in Balders Gate) through to 1489 when the Gods withdraw the power from most of their Chosen. This is the last date seemingly written in the past tense so it kind of suggests 1490+ as a place to start.
> 
> The source in this section relates to the Sundering novels and the playtest era adventures. No mention of any of the story lines since the 5e release, which brings us no closer to when these events supposedly happened.




AND, this... specifically in response to you...


Prism said:


> In the timeline section it just says the Gods stop interfering through their chosen. Its referring to the chosen that appeared during the Sundering. So far I haven't seen any mention of the original type of chosen such as Elminster is. There is a small section explaining that some gods withdraw, other die and others go dormant. Mortals don't know anything except their prayers go unanswered (and therefore I doubt we will find out). The individual god descriptions have no mention of coming back. For example if you read the section on Mystra you would not know she had been gone for nearly 100 years.
> 
> Its probably better that way as it reads much better for people new to the realms or those that don't care so much about the storylines. They want to know what does it mean for their character now, not what's been happening with their god recently




I will concur that, yes, it is better written that way.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Right, sorry for that irritating behaviour. I have an OCD, and sometimes it shows.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 24, 2015)

Yeah, seems pretty good this way; fairly little detail is needed for new players, mainly just the crunch and a couple key details.


----------



## FormerlyHemlock (Oct 24, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> Undead patron.
> 
> - spare the dying cantrip
> - undead must make will save or be unable to attack you
> ...




How does the "regain HP on death saving throw" compare to the Necromancer's Grim Harvest or the Fiendlock's Blessing of the Dark One? How much healing, and at what level does it come online?

Is there anything to stop you from casting Spare the Dying, then knifing the now-stabilized creature to start it bleeding again, and then casting Spare the Dying all over again?

Maybe it's just me, but no air/food/water/sleep sounds frankly awesome. What level is that at?


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Oct 24, 2015)

So, it's looking a lot like a "since our adventures take place in this region, here is the basic background for DMs and players to use" book. Which, while basic, is nice - there are a lot of options I've seen so far that I and my players may want to use. But I hold out hope that a full-fledged campaign setting book will still be in the works for those of us who would like to see the Realms fleshed out in fuller detail...


----------



## EroGaki (Oct 24, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Yes, it's been stated elsewhere that the storm sorcerer no longer gets bonus spells. I guess WotC decided not to go that route after all.




Well shoot. I guess I'll be retiring my storm sorcerer character once the book comes out. :/


----------



## Li Shenron (Oct 24, 2015)

fba827 said:


> I know I'm in the minority, but I'm actually GLAD they don't have a new subclass for each class.  It potentially shows that wotc isn't looking to force an idea for the sake of symmetry but rather stuck with what was flavorful and inspired for the concept of the book.
> 
> In my opinion , designing subclasses purely for the purpose of 'filling out symmetry of all classes getting included" is just begging for half assed things that aren't really inspired by concept but are shoe horned in. I mean one doesn't mean th other will happen but it's definitely knocking on the door in that direction if it did.




It's not a matter of symmetry at all in this case, it's a matter of range of options.

I have been advocating the need for at least 3 subclasses per class, and at the same time I've said I'd like at least a dozen clerical domains, and half a dozen rogue subclasses. IMHO there is a huge psychological difference between having 2 options and having 3. Two options feel a bit like a ultimatum: be this or be that  Three is a range. But beside these (probably unfounded) psychology remarks, Bards and Rangers could seriously benefit from more options, given the fact that they are the 2 classes most discussed about even their concept. At the same time, I don't think Druids need a third subclass because Druids of the Land actually have 8 sub-suboptions, and Barbarians could similarly just get a few more totem animals and they'd be fine.


----------



## Li Shenron (Oct 24, 2015)

The Myopic Sniper said:


> As I said in the deleted thread, Bards in particular are hard to design for with only three subclass levels.




Well... on one hand it might be hard to think of a Bard subclass concept with only 3 levels worth of features to represent it, but on the other hand it should obviously be easier to design and playtest 3 features rather than more


----------



## Ahrimon (Oct 24, 2015)

Have there been any screen shots or detailed information on the new warlock patron?  I have a one shot this weekend and it would be fun to do something new.


----------



## MindxKiller (Oct 24, 2015)

Li Shenron said:


> Barbarians could similarly just get a few more totem animals and they'd be fine.




 The issue with this is that not all barbarians want to be totem warriors because of the fluff surrounding spirit animals, and the berserker has such a huge penalty that it's weak unless you have very few combats per day. Barbarians definitely need more than just new totem spirits, and the new barbarian archetype is a step in the right direction as far as including more options (Haven't seen the actual numbers or anything so I cant comment on its effectiveness.) Though I'm an advocate for EVERY class receiving more options.


----------



## Serpine (Oct 24, 2015)

Li Shenron said:


> Well... on one hand it might be hard to think of a Bard subclass concept with only 3 levels worth of features to represent it, but on the other hand it should obviously be easier to design and playtest 3 features rather than more




A lot of the old Bard kits from the 2e Complete Handbook only had a very small list of signature abilities to work with. They could probably be used to inspire the progression of a host of bards. For instance:

* Gallant: 3rd {Lance, Medium Armor, Shield // Poetic Charm: Advantage to romantic Persuasion, Charm person Considered Non-Magical Ritual}, 6th {Heavy Armor // Essense of Purity: Reroll saves that would result in death 0 HP, Fight for d4 after reaching 0 HP}, 14th {Code of the Gallant: Bardic inspiration to boost own damage or AC}).

* Jester: 3rd {Jesting: Communicate with body language on performance check. Enemy within 30' must save or attempt to head for and throttle jester // Joking: Advantage checks to change moods.}, 6th {Fool's Luck: Bardic inspiration to boost own save, ability check, or AC // Joking allows those nearby another save vs fear condition}, 14th {Jester's Mind: Immune to insanity, Double save prof bonus vs enchantment / charm}


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

steeldragons said:


> I don't have a copy but from reading the thread...thanks to @_*Prism*_'s remarkable patience...I can confidently say the following with a fair degree of certitude of being correct:
> 
> 1. The gods' stuff is in the gods' section.
> 2. There is no "timeline" stuff in the gods' section [see below, responding to your own question].
> ...




I'll just add to that and say the main gods section is pretty good. You get about three gods per page and get all sorts of details about the deity, followers, ethos and legends. Really good stuff to help someone choose a god for their character. I'm not sure how much if anything is new beyond what was already printed in previous editions.


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Hemlock said:


> How does the "regain HP on death saving throw" compare to the Necromancer's Grim Harvest or the Fiendlock's Blessing of the Dark One? How much healing, and at what level does it come online?
> 
> Is there anything to stop you from casting Spare the Dying, then knifing the now-stabilized creature to start it bleeding again, and then casting Spare the Dying all over again?




its just once per long rest. Its 1d8+con



> Maybe it's just me, but no air/food/water/sleep sounds frankly awesome. What level is that at?




That's at 10th level


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 24, 2015)

Hemlock said:


> Is there anything to stop you from casting Spare the Dying, then knifing the now-stabilized creature to start it bleeding again, and then casting Spare the Dying all over again?



It's called DM


----------



## pukunui (Oct 24, 2015)

Ahrimon said:


> Have there been any screen shots or detailed information on the new warlock patron?  I have a one shot this weekend and it would be fun to do something new.



I posted a pic from the reddit thread a few pages ago. It was just the first part of the warlock patron text, though, not the whole thing.


----------



## Macca86 (Oct 24, 2015)

Thanks for all the continuous updates and answering all our questions.
what the run down of the city watch background if anyone has looked into it?


----------



## Mithreinmaethor (Oct 24, 2015)

OK Amaunator returned in 4th edition only to disappear and be replaced by Lathander again. Is anything said about this in the book?


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

Macca86 said:


> Thanks for all the continuous updates and answering all our questions.
> what the run down of the city watch background if anyone has looked into it?




You are basically ex police. You get athletics and insight, a couple of languages and a uniform and police gear . You get to notice police outposts and dens of criminal activities. An interesting variant is the 'detective' type which get investigation instead of athletics.

I love it!


----------



## Macca86 (Oct 24, 2015)

Awesome! Thanks for the reply


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 24, 2015)

Prism said:


> Yes still based off CHA. Devils tongue is a replacement set of spells which use CHA. Hellfire can replace hellish rebuke but doesn't change the spell casting ability



But the tiefling becomes a better wizard, got it.


----------



## Knight_Marshal (Oct 24, 2015)

It looks like WoTC screwed up and some of the premiere stores did not get their books including mine. It doesn't look like I am going to get my hands on it until the 3rd.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 24, 2015)

Regarding the map, Mike Schley tweeted:



> on Monday I'm releasing a huge digital version of the regional map from SCAG. Whole & tiled out on 32 full pages. Big!




https://twitter.com/schley/status/657709777536090112

 [MENTION=45267]Mithreinmaethor[/MENTION] it's explained in one of the Sundering novels. IIRC, Lathander and Amaunator are basically two faces of the same god, and one of them emerges accordingly to what ''the world needs'', or something along those lines.


----------



## CrusaderX (Oct 24, 2015)

Is the god Hoar in the book?  He would seem to be a great choice for an Oath of Vengeance Paladin.


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

CrusaderX said:


> Is the god Hoar in the book?  He would seem to be a great choice for an Oath of Vengeance Paladin.




Yeah, he gets a write-up in the Gods section


----------



## CrusaderX (Oct 24, 2015)

I haven't seen any mention of converting some of the rules to the Greyhawk setting.  I imagine alot of it can be used as is.  But what does a Purple Dragon Knight become in Greyhawk?


----------



## chibi graz'zt (Oct 24, 2015)

He becomes a Knight of Furry-Undies, lol 

Picked this up yesterday, wow, they really packed alot of info into this book, and it even covers cursorily Zakhara and Kara-Tur. Im excited to start perusing, the production values are stunning, I only wish that a pull out map could have been included, but then again, Im sure that these maps will be sold cheap through digital, (if not already).

The gods section is pretty impressive, I had no idea they would include non-human deities, and there are some deities that I had not even heard of, (Jergal, Hoar).  

Wizards really delivered me the FR book I needed for 5e. Hope we get to see more FR books, possibly one on Kara-Tur and Zhakara.


----------



## Li Shenron (Oct 24, 2015)

Good to hear that this book has good FR setting information that is usable beyond the Sword Coast itself.

Alas, I'm pretty sure I have enough 'fluff' from my 3e FR books already... The 3e FRCS was amazing, but I also loved Faiths & Pantheons, Magic of Faerun and Monsters of Faerun. Considering that I hated the spellplague rearrangements and the introduction of dragonborn, I had already decided that if I run a FR game again, I'd rather set it in the 3e era than in the 5e era anyway.

I've said already that I am disappointed by the low amount of 'crunch', although what I've heard about the subclasses sounds mostly quite good, I'm just sorry that it's not much. 

Overall it makes the book worth a lot less than its tag price for me personally. Still, it's practically one supplement per year we are getting (as I am not buying the adventures), so I might still get it. Maybe I'll just wait until it's discounted somewhere...


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 24, 2015)

Hows about inheritor or far traveller backgrounds?  Hows the Utgardt tribesmen different than the standard Outlander?


----------



## beemoney19 (Oct 24, 2015)

Did anyone else notice the overland map, the Coast Way northbound ends at Baldur's Gate, instead of meeting up with the Trade Way south of Dragonspear, and The Trade Way itself just sort of stops before the Boareskyr Bridge? Is this a printing error?


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

CrusaderX said:


> I haven't seen any mention of converting some of the rules to the Greyhawk setting.  I imagine alot of it can be used as is.  But what does a Purple Dragon Knight become in Greyhawk?




It recommends Knights of the Watch protecting against Baklunish incursions


----------



## Prism (Oct 24, 2015)

beemoney19 said:


> Did anyone else notice the overland map, the Coast Way northbound ends at Baldur's Gate, instead of meeting up with the Trade Way south of Dragonspear, and The Trade Way itself just sort of stops before the Boareskyr Bridge? Is this a printing error?




No its just old school.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120229031742/forgottenrealms/images/2/26/Faerun_1e.jpg

There are trails between but not used enough to be on the main map. A lot of goods between Balder's Gate and Waterdeep are moved by ship.


----------



## chibi graz'zt (Oct 24, 2015)

Correct; shipping is the prefered and safest method of trade between the major ports of the Sword Coast, overland caravan travel is fruaght with peril, thus the raison d'être of most adventuring companies.


----------



## chibi graz'zt (Oct 24, 2015)

Li Shenron said:


> Good to hear that this book has good FR setting information that is usable beyond the Sword Coast itself.
> 
> Alas, I'm pretty sure I have enough 'fluff' from my 3e FR books already... The 3e FRCS was amazing, but I also loved Faiths & Pantheons, Magic of Faerun and Monsters of Faerun. Considering that I hated the spellplague rearrangements and the introduction of dragonborn, I had already decided that if I run a FR game again, I'd rather set it in the 3e era than in the 5e era anyway.
> 
> ...




Agreed, the 3e FRCS still remains the best published resource out there, since I got back to D&D with 5e Ive been slowly collecting the series, Faiths & Pantheons is indispensable. Now with the SCAG I can reference the cleric domains.


----------



## SkidAce (Oct 24, 2015)

EroGaki said:


> Well shoot. I guess I'll be retiring my storm sorcerer character once the book comes out. :/




Why?  Honestly curious...


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 24, 2015)

SkidAce said:


> Why?  Honestly curious...



Because he chose to play a Sorceror specifically because there was a variant with bonus spells?

Because those bonus spells would be removed by his DM?

Because he would presumably get no compensation for this loss (at least, it's my impression SCAG does not replace the bonus spells with something nearly as useful, it just takes them away)?


----------



## SkidAce (Oct 24, 2015)

Thanks, still curious as to his reply.


----------



## MindxKiller (Oct 24, 2015)

It's almost as if putting out new sorcerer archetypes with bonus spells makes the core archetypes obsolete and they wanted to avoid power creep or something... No, that couldn't be it... Could it?


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 24, 2015)

They probably thought the expanded spell list was not a big deal, but playtesting showed differently.  This is why they do play teats and Unearted Arcana.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 24, 2015)

Storm sorcerer is still appealing without the extra spells. It just doesn't make draconic sorcerer look like a wimp now.


----------



## EroGaki (Oct 25, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> Because he chose to play a Sorceror specifically because there was a variant with bonus spells?
> 
> Because those bonus spells would be removed by his DM?
> 
> Because he would presumably get no compensation for this loss (at least, it's my impression SCAG does not replace the bonus spells with something nearly as useful, it just takes them away)?




Pretty much this. I had all of my spell choices carefully selected to play the character I desired to play. Now, with the removal of the bonus spells, I can't match the concept. If I can't actually use my magic to call up storms or lightning or conjure air elementals, then I see no point in pretending to be this awesome weather mage.

Especially since my character, who's 8th level now, has built tactics around those spells and used them effectively since level one. To turn around and see 8 of my spells vanish kills any fun I was having. I know most consider a paltry 9 spells at 8th level to be plenty, but it really isn't.


----------



## nightspaladin (Oct 25, 2015)

Can someone with the book post the names of the Purple Knight Abilites? i know the mechanics, just need the titles. Thanks


----------



## Prism (Oct 25, 2015)

nightspaladin said:


> Can someone with the book post the names of the Purple Knight Abilites? i know the mechanics, just need the titles. Thanks




Rallying Cry, Royal Envoy, Inspiring Surge, Bulwark


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 25, 2015)

EroGaki said:


> Pretty much this. I had all of my spell choices carefully selected to play the character I desired to play. Now, with the removal of the bonus spells, I can't match the concept. If I can't actually use my magic to call up storms or lightning or conjure air elementals, then I see no point in pretending to be this awesome weather mage.
> 
> Especially since my character, who's 8th level now, has built tactics around those spells and used them effectively since level one. To turn around and see 8 of my spells vanish kills any fun I was having. I know most consider a paltry 9 spells at 8th level to be plenty, but it really isn't.




I can see how that would suck. Mechanics getting in the way of character concept is always a pain. I think the change needed to be made for inter-sorcerer balance, but I wouldn't mind at all if they presented an optional rule somewhere giving *all* sorcerers bonus spells.


----------



## Prism (Oct 25, 2015)

EroGaki said:


> Pretty much this. I had all of my spell choices carefully selected to play the character I desired to play. Now, with the removal of the bonus spells, I can't match the concept. If I can't actually use my magic to call up storms or lightning or conjure air elementals, then I see no point in pretending to be this awesome weather mage.
> 
> Especially since my character, who's 8th level now, has built tactics around those spells and used them effectively since level one. To turn around and see 8 of my spells vanish kills any fun I was having. I know most consider a paltry 9 spells at 8th level to be plenty, but it really isn't.




You could still keep most of those spells (except for call lightning and conjure minor elementals), assuming you dropped your other spells instead. You could still keep your theme if you wanted. I understand you are disappointed with the loss of spells known but it was a bit unbalanced that storm sorcerers got almost double spells known over other sorcerers.


----------



## Serpine (Oct 25, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Hows the Utgardt tribesmen different than the standard Outlander?




Proficiency wise Uthgardt can have artisan tool instead of music. Feature wise they don't have the map memory (though they still have an idea of the are) and can only find double forage (rather then feed a whole party). However they get hospitality with their tribe, its allies, and nature oriented folk. 

So basically Uthgardt are "social" types better for working peaceful encounters with wilderness dwellers, where Outlanders are the rugged loners who guide you through the wilderness itself.


----------



## nightspaladin (Oct 25, 2015)

Prism said:


> Rallying Cry, Royal Envoy, Inspiring Surge, Bulwark




Thank you so much!


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 25, 2015)

EroGaki said:


> Pretty much this. I had all of my spell choices carefully selected to play the character I desired to play. Now, with the removal of the bonus spells, I can't match the concept. If I can't actually use my magic to call up storms or lightning or conjure air elementals, then I see no point in pretending to be this awesome weather mage.



Your DM clearly had no problem with you choosing this ability and presumably it hasn't caused problems during play. Have you considered asking him to let you keep your character as is?

for me the days of having to implement errata are gone. I'll look at it and then decide if it's fixing any problems for my table and disregard it if it isn't.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 25, 2015)

Serpine said:


> Proficiency wise Uthgardt can have artisan tool instead of music. Feature wise they don't have the map memory (though they still have an idea of the are) and can only find double forage (rather then feed a whole party). However they get hospitality with their tribe, its allies, and nature oriented folk.
> 
> 
> 
> So basically Uthgardt are "social" types better for working peaceful encounters with wilderness dwellers, where Outlanders are the rugged loners who guide you through the wilderness itself.





Nice.  How about the Far Teaveller, what's the deal there?


----------



## SkidAce (Oct 25, 2015)

EroGaki said:


> Pretty much this. I had all of my spell choices carefully selected to play the character I desired to play. Now, with the removal of the bonus spells, I can't match the concept. If I can't actually use my magic to call up storms or lightning or conjure air elementals, then I see no point in pretending to be this awesome weather mage.
> 
> Especially since my character, who's 8th level now, has built tactics around those spells and used them effectively since level one. To turn around and see 8 of my spells vanish kills any fun I was having. I know most consider a paltry 9 spells at 8th level to be plenty, but it really isn't.




I think I see your point.

I am assuming the DM won't grandfather your character in and just let you keep playing it as is?  Yeah, that's rough to lose a concept, I wouldn't like it either.


----------



## The Myopic Sniper (Oct 25, 2015)

It will be interesting to see how they handled Favoured Souls if they ever get around to them now that bonus spells for Sorcerers are off the table. I do agree that bonus spells made the PHB sorcerous origins unattractive in comparison since spells known was one of their big limiting factors. I still think that the Sorcerer is second behind the Ranger in terms of unrealized potential and bonus spells would be a good offset for that. I can understand why they didn't want to make the PHB versions obsolete one year out as well.


----------



## The Myopic Sniper (Oct 25, 2015)

Li Shenron said:


> Well... on one hand it might be hard to think of a Bard subclass concept with only 3 levels worth of features to represent it, but on the other hand it should obviously be easier to design and playtest 3 features rather than more




It is just a bit more limited than it might be because the features fall at 3, 6, and 14 rather than being spread out a bit more evenly. Subclass features at 10 and 18 would definitely allow a bit more flexibility in even dropping in a couple of "ribbon" type abilities. I realize that the Bard is pretty "busy" class in terms of design and mechanics anyway. I think throwing more of those abilities into subclasses might have helped in terms of subclass focus. This is no slight on the bard. It may have hit its design goals better than any other class in 5e and it works great as is. I just wish it was a bit sleeker and more customizable on the subclass  end.


----------



## nicolas.carrillos (Oct 25, 2015)

chibi graz'zt said:


> He becomes a Knight of Furry-Undies, lol
> 
> Picked this up yesterday, wow, they really packed alot of info into this book, and it even covers cursorily Zakhara and Kara-Tur. Im excited to start perusing, the production values are stunning, I only wish that a pull out map could have been included, but then again, Im sure that these maps will be sold cheap through digital, (if not already).
> 
> ...




What about Maztica? Is it mentioned as well?


----------



## EroGaki (Oct 25, 2015)

The Myopic Sniper said:


> It will be interesting to see how they handled Favoured Souls if they ever get around to them now that bonus spells for Sorcerers are off the table. I do agree that bonus spells made the PHB sorcerous origins unattractive in comparison since spells known was one of their big limiting factors. I still think that the Sorcerer is second behind the Ranger in terms of unrealized potential and bonus spells would be a good offset for that. I can understand why they didn't want to make the PHB versions obsolete one year out as well.




What irks me is that by taking away bonus spells, they've chosen to let the class stay underpowered, rather than doing anything to improve it. There was enough of an out cry that they presented to archtypes with bonus spells.

And now that it's all said and done, they just shrug and say, "too late now. Sorcerers shall just have to continue being lame."


----------



## Celtavian (Oct 25, 2015)

They removed bonus spells? I'm going to continue them as a house rule and write some bonus spells for the sorcerous origins in the PHB. 15 spells is too few, especially at high level.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 25, 2015)

EroGaki said:


> And now that it's all said and done, they just shrug and say, "too late now. Sorcerers shall just have to continue being lame."




I'm hopefully that Mike will float some sorcerer buffing playtest brainstorm past us in a year or so. I'll be glad to see it, but there are other things I want to see first.

Right now, its one of those situations where, if you take into account A, and you think about how B compares to C, and you kind of squint at it just right, you can how sorcerers are kinda sorta okay.

If they just all had about one bonus spell for each level from 1-5 I think that's be about the best way to balance them, personally.


----------



## Celtavian (Oct 25, 2015)

10 bonus spells seems about right to me. 

Clerics get to prepare up to 25 + 10 domain spells.
Bards get 22 (24 as lore bard) spells known with access to every list.
Druids get 25 (35 with domain)
Wizards get 25 prepared (+2 at 18th level usable at will and exchangeable). They have a possible 40 spell list to choose those 25 from.
Sorcerer gets 15. 

None of their archetype abilities for leveling makes them more powerful than the other classes. Their metamagic can be nice. The current best use for it making a sorlock and using points to double up on _eldritch blast_. I don't see how adding bonus spells 5th level or lower was a balance issue. 15 spells is far too few.


----------



## mellored (Oct 25, 2015)

Celtavian said:


> 10 bonus spells seems about right to me.
> 
> Clerics get to prepare up to 25 + 10 domain spells.
> Bards get 22 (24 as lore bard) spells known with access to every list.
> ...



Metamagic for heightened hold person, or twin haste, is very nice.
Empowered fireball isn't shabby either.
Subtle suggestion is also fun.

They aren't lacking.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Oct 25, 2015)

Speaking as the player of a sorcerer, I think they're fine. Narrow spell selection and metamagic are the bread n' butter.


----------



## EroGaki (Oct 25, 2015)

Moldy bread and rancid butter...


----------



## Celtavian (Oct 25, 2015)

mellored said:


> Metamagic for heightened hold person, or twin haste, is very nice.
> Empowered fireball isn't shabby either.
> Subtle suggestion is also fun.
> 
> They aren't lacking.




It is very nice. I don't think it is so nice as to be better than Arcane Recovery or Empowered Evocation or a Philosopher's Stone or the Diviner ability to alter rolls to guarantee a failure or success. Or a lot of the various cleric abilities. 

I can sort of understand concerns for players that don't play much past level 9 or 10. That's ten free spells for nothing for the sorcerer, which puts them past the wizard and close to even with the cleric or bard. For those of us that like to push past level 15, the bonus spells are inconsequential. That being said, I may extend the levels needed to obtain them to balance for the lower level abilities if I find a balance problem from giving the sorcerer bonus spells. To me this is the same as _Pathfinder_. WotC more concerned about balance at the levels most people play rather than balance across all levels. It makes sense business-wise, it kinds of screws those of us that want to play a higher level game where the bonus spells are anything but a balance a problem.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 25, 2015)

Mike Mearls has just posted a whole series of tweets about the storm sorcerer:

- "Quick note about the storm sorcerer in the Sword Coast Adventurers Guide - bonus spells were removed based on playtest feedback."

- "Which might sound weird, because people really liked that sorcerer and the bonus spells. However, implementing feedback is never that simple."

- "The original sorcerer is rated very well without bonus spells. Having sorcerous origins with them would make PHB ones look weaker."

- "The class didn't need the buff, and while people like the idea of the bonus spells, they don't fit with the game's overall structure."

- "You can expect that kind of revision as UA material enters the environment - we sometimes try stuff in UA to get a sense of future paths."


----------



## Celtavian (Oct 25, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Mike Mearls has just posted a whole series of tweets about the storm sorcerer:
> 
> - "Quick note about the storm sorcerer in the Sword Coast Adventurers Guide - bonus spells were removed based on playtest feedback."
> 
> ...




I don't buy the "don't fit with the games overall structure." I don't buy the feedback other than feedback saying, "It makes them more powerful than PHB origins." The only part that I buy is the makes the PHB sorcerous origins look weaker, which was likely in the feedback. Which could have been fixed by adding bonus spells to both the PHB origins.


----------



## Azzy (Oct 25, 2015)

Because, if what they say doesn't agree with your bias, they must be lying. Amiright?


----------



## pukunui (Oct 25, 2015)

Perhaps. But it seems like they want to avoid changing anything in the PHB unless absolutely necessary.


----------



## Li Shenron (Oct 25, 2015)

The Myopic Sniper said:


> It is just a bit more limited than it might be because the features fall at 3, 6, and 14 rather than being spread out a bit more evenly. Subclass features at 10 and 18 would definitely allow a bit more flexibility in even dropping in a couple of "ribbon" type abilities. I realize that the Bard is pretty "busy" class in terms of design and mechanics anyway. I think throwing more of those abilities into subclasses might have helped in terms of subclass focus. This is no slight on the bard. It may have hit its design goals better than any other class in 5e and it works great as is. I just wish it was a bit sleeker and more customizable on the subclass  end.




Yeah I felt the same when I first saw the Bard as being the only class with only 3 subclass features. It was probably already too "full" with class features to fit in a fourth subclass feature, but IMHO it would have been better as you say to avoid that huge 8 levels gap. They could have easily put a small subclass feature at level 11th for example.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 25, 2015)

I guess their magical secrets at level 10 are more or less their subclass feature by another name.
I would also have liked more features however.
There may be design space however to replace a feature with a subclass feature...


----------



## Edwin Suijkerbuijk (Oct 25, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> Storm sorcerer is still appealing without the extra spells. It just doesn't make draconic sorcerer look like a wimp now.




 [MENTION=32417]MikeM[/MENTION]earls Quick note about the storm sorcerer in the Sword Coast Adventurers Guide - bonus spells were removed based on playtest feedback.
 [MENTION=32417]MikeM[/MENTION]earls Which might sound weird, because people really liked that sorcerer and the bonus spells. However, implementing feedback is never that simple
 [MENTION=32417]MikeM[/MENTION]earls The original sorcerer is rated very well without bonus spells. Having sorcerous origins with them would make PHB ones look weaker.
 [MENTION=32417]MikeM[/MENTION]earls The class didn't need the buff, and while people like the idea of the bonus spells, they don't fit with the game's overall structure.
 [MENTION=32417]MikeM[/MENTION]earls You can expect that kind of revision as UA material enters the environment - we sometimes try stuff in UA to get a sense of future paths.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 25, 2015)

[MENTION=6801221]Edwin Suijkerbuijk[/MENTION]: Take a look at post #408.


----------



## the Jester (Oct 25, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> No bonus spells




Awesome.


----------



## Serpine (Oct 25, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Nice.  How about the Far Teaveller, what's the deal there?




Far Traveler is a totally different beast from the Outlander (and most other existing options) and is in fact the only background in SCAG different enough that it got new Trait/Ideal/Bond/Flaw tables rather then just a suggestion to look at existing ones. It is basically a tourist from a strange or distant civilization like Kara-Tur or Zakhara and their feature "All Eyes On You" amounts to everybody wanting to hang around the new kid with the cool accent.


----------



## Li Shenron (Oct 25, 2015)

UngeheuerLich said:


> I guess their magical secrets at level 10 are more or less their subclass feature by another name.
> I would also have liked more features however.
> There may be design space however to replace a feature with a subclass feature...




Absolutely. No reason why a subclass couldn't be designed with some substitution levels.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 25, 2015)

pukunui said:


> "The original sorcerer is rated very well without bonus spells."



I guess this is the crucial point. 

If y'all (this does not mean YOU, but the guy to your right  ) hadn't rated the class so high, perhaps they would have retrofitted bonus spells to the PHB sorqs instead...

Myself, I rate the sorcerer and ranger the lowest of the PHB classes.

A shame not more of you did the same... oh well.


----------



## Celtavian (Oct 25, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> I guess this is the crucial point.
> 
> If y'all (this does not mean YOU, but the guy to your right  ) hadn't rated the class so high, perhaps they would have retrofitted bonus spells to the PHB sorqs instead...
> 
> ...




You and I rate it one of the lowest. I'd like to see what Dave Dash thinks as well. And more of the DMs that have power gamer players.


----------



## Tia Nadiezja (Oct 25, 2015)

Celtavian said:


> You and I rate it one of the lowest. I'd like to see what Dave Dash thinks as well. And more of the DMs that have power gamer players.




I find it quite functional. If it's underpowered, it's underpowered within an acceptable range, unlike the Ranger which is pretty much awful.


----------



## Celtavian (Oct 25, 2015)

Tia Nadiezja said:


> I find it quite functional. If it's underpowered, it's underpowered within an acceptable range, unlike the Ranger which is pretty much awful.




The Hunter Ranger seems to hammer for a lot of damage and seems very effective. I'm surprised you find it awful. I find it more boring and irritating than awful. Natural Explorer is annoying as a DM since it effectively eliminates difficult terrain for the group in certain common areas even in combat, even thought it seems meant for overland travel. Since it doesn't specify, difficult terrain is worthless against a group with a ranger in the right terrain. It doesn't have very interesting abilities as you level, effective and boring ranger abilities.


----------



## Tia Nadiezja (Oct 25, 2015)

Celtavian said:


> The Hunter Ranger seems to hammer for a lot of damage and seems very effective. I'm surprised you find it awful. I find it more boring and irritating than awful. Natural Explorer is annoying as a DM since it effectively eliminates difficult terrain for the group in certain common areas even in combat, even thought it seems meant for overland travel. Since it doesn't specify, difficult terrain is worthless against a group with a ranger in the right terrain. It doesn't have very interesting abilities as you level, effective and boring ranger abilities.




The Ranger I have the most experience with is the Beastmaster.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 25, 2015)

Apart from the Beastmaster (which is dead on arrival simply because having to give up your own action to let your pet play is the worst design decision of all in the entire PHB), the Ranger is more plagued by irritating and avoidable missteps than being outright weak.

Hunter's Mark interacts badly with two-weapon fighting. And Concentration interacts badly with a character that expects to take damage. Etc.

---

And this is where the Sorcerer is too. Getting 9th level spells means the class will never be considered bad, but the Draconic subclass is decidedly better than the woefully underdeveloped Wild Mage, and still I can't choose it when I can choose so much more fun arcane caster alternatives. 

As a sorcerer I will always feel constricted by the harsh limits, rather than feeling empowered to explore my strengths like how a Wizard feels. 

Getting metamagics is not a weak choice but a dry and colorless one. It is really a shame they could not find a stronger niche for the 5E sorcerer than "the one with metamagics", partly because that tells me nothing about my character, partly because metamagics feels "brainy" (and thus a better fit for psionics), and partly because now wizards can't have metamagics!


----------



## Tia Nadiezja (Oct 25, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> Apart from the Beastmaster (which is dead on arrival simply because having to give up your own action to let your pet play is the worst design decision of all in the entire PHB), the Ranger is more plagued by irritating and avoidable missteps than being outright weak.
> 
> Hunter's Mark interacts badly with two-weapon fighting. And Concentration interacts badly with a character that expects to take damage. Etc.
> 
> ...




Yeah. My biggest issue with the Sorc is that, in the PHB, it basically ended up with one usable subclass. The Wild Mage looks kind of fun to play, but reliability beats randomness basically every time in D&D - especially when "randomness" can easily mean "accidentally wiped the party in a single spell" when at low levels.


----------



## chibi graz'zt (Oct 25, 2015)

nicolas.carrillos said:


> What about Maztica? Is it mentioned as well?



 Oh thank the gods no.  IMO the whole maztica thing was a low period in FR history.


----------



## Mistwell (Oct 25, 2015)

Celtavian said:


> I don't buy the "don't fit with the games overall structure." I don't buy the feedback other than feedback saying, "It makes them more powerful than PHB origins." The only part that I buy is the makes the PHB sorcerous origins look weaker, which was likely in the feedback. Which could have been fixed by adding bonus spells to both the PHB origins.




Would you buy it if we threw in a second Shamwow! free of charge (just pay additional shipping and processing fee)?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 25, 2015)

Tia Nadiezja said:


> Yeah. My biggest issue with the Sorc is that, in the PHB, it basically ended up with one usable subclass. The Wild Mage looks kind of fun to play, but reliability beats randomness basically every time in D&D - especially when "randomness" can easily mean "accidentally wiped the party in a single spell" when at low levels.




The Wild Mage is one of my favourite subclasses. Tides of Chaos is quite good. So is Bend Luck.

The non-scaling 1 in 50 chance for a Fireball is a bit unfortunate. It would be nice to see it scale. It's not too hard to work around for the early levels which don't last very long. The main feature is the advantage that you get from Tides of Chaos. The Wild Magic surge creates interesting situations but it is not where the power of the subclass comes from. 

I am glad that we get a third option as I would never play a Draconic Sorcerer and neither would my players. I like the Wild Sorcerer but it is a commitment to add a bit of zanyness to the game.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 25, 2015)

chibi graz'zt said:


> Oh thank the gods no.  IMO the whole maztica thing was a low period in FR history.



it might not be mentioned in the SCAG but iirc it's confirmed to be back


----------



## Irennan (Oct 25, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> it might not be mentioned in the SCAG but iirc it's confirmed to be back




It's in the DMG, but IIRC it doesn't explicitly confirm its return.


----------



## Z. H. Darkstar (Oct 25, 2015)

Just got my copy last night. I've already noted a few builds that I need to watch out for as a DM: GFB/Boom Blade Swashbucklers, Arcana Domain gishes, and variant Tieflings/Half-elves.

As a player, I'm most looking forward to playing a Sun Soul Monk. Hadoukens and Kamehamehas are the order of the day. I'm also working on an Arcana Cleric as an homage to the Final Fantasy Red Mages. The thread for that build is in the CharOp forum.

Bladesingers look like they can fill the gish role, but I am concerned about their survivability with Wizard HD. One good whack, and pretty boy elf gish is dead. It might be worth taking two levels of Rogue to get Cunning Action, so you can use your bonus actions to dodge.

Battleragers are nice subclass that give dwarf Barbarians a useful bonus action with the spiked armor attack. The new totems aren't that good except for the 14th level ones.

Purple Dragon Knight is the Warlord reincarnated. Please remove the temp forum now.

Oath of the Crown makes for a decent battlefield controller and damage sponge. However, the tenets are very goody-two-shoes and not really compatible with any alignment other than LG.

Masterminds are dirty in pairs. However, there's little of use to the subclass beyond 3rd level, so its utility is more for being useful as a dip. 

Storm Sorcerer is okay, finally giving an option that will see play other than Draconic. While I cannot ban Dragonborn Draconic Sorcerers at my AL table, I can refuse to help create any more of them. I mourn the loss of bonus spells, but the subclass doesn't suffer too much for it. Fortunately, that means that Favored Soul might become its own class, instead of being the divine caster on an arcane class that the UA version was.

Undying Warlocks seem kind of weak. Nothing about it really screams "must play," even in a test setting. Might be useful in an undead-heavy campaign, but otherwise a bit of a situational subclass choice. I would rather have had a new pact choice and some new invocations, instead of a patron. Hopefully, the next release of new Warlock materials will include them.


----------



## chibi graz'zt (Oct 25, 2015)

Irennan said:


> It's in the DMG, but IIRC it doesn't explicitly confirm its return.




Then lets hope its forgotten, I grew a bit tired of the whole real Earth history/FR history analogues, (except for the Tuigan, I really like those horse barbarians, very much like the Dothraki).


----------



## Irennan (Oct 25, 2015)

chibi graz'zt said:


> Then lets hope its forgotten, I grew a bit tired of the whole real Earth history/FR history analogues, (except for the Tuigan, I really like those horse barbarians, very much like the Dothraki).




Why? I'm not really a fan of Maztica, but there are people who like it, and would be happy to see something about it, probably even a small update. It wouldn't be game-breaking, as people who don't like that land could easily ignore it in their campaign, while those who like it would know that one of their favourite parts of the FR hasn't been forgotten/thrown into the trash bin/destined to not see any support ever. Also, since every single swapped land is back (including those countries that some people like to call FR-Egypt), letting Maztica out seems rather pointless...


----------



## Prism (Oct 25, 2015)

It hints at Maztica existing or having once existed, but that's all. Specifically it says that over the seas to the west, in previous generations, explorers have encountered people wearing feathered clothes. But it also says land masses have appeared and disappeared.

They seem to be leaving it open ended to allow for groups to play whatever they want


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 25, 2015)

Mulhorand and Unther are back, so the return of Maztica should be the logical conclusion, as all Land exchanged with Aber is re-exchanged

Edit: looks linke its back
http://community.wizards.com/forum/forgotten-realms/threads/4163201


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 25, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> Apart from the Beastmaster (which is dead on arrival simply because having to give up your own action to let your pet play is the worst design decision of all in the entire PHB), the Ranger is more plagued by irritating and avoidable missteps than being outright weak.
> 
> Hunter's Mark interacts badly with two-weapon fighting. And Concentration interacts badly with a character that expects to take damage. Etc.
> 
> ...




In my opinion the ranger i easy to fix:

remove beastmaster.
Add ritual spells, maybe general or by favoured terrain.
Allow retraining/training of favoured enemy/terrain and improve level 20 feature
rewrite level 11 attack options of the hunter class to not badly work with two weapon fighting.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 25, 2015)

> Mulhorand and Unther are back, so the return of Maztica should be the logical conclusion, as all Land exchanged with Aber is re-exchanged
> 
> Edit: looks linke its back
> http://community.wizards.com/forum/f...hreads/4163201




Yes, that's the quote from the DMG that I was talking about.


----------



## Klaus (Oct 25, 2015)

CrusaderX said:


> I haven't seen any mention of converting some of the rules to the Greyhawk setting.  I imagine alot of it can be used as is.  But what does a Purple Dragon Knight become in Greyhawk?




There several knightly orders that fit the bill. You can use the Knights of the Watch, the Knights of the Dispatch, or any of the three branches of the Knights of the Hart.


----------



## Jiggawatts (Oct 25, 2015)

Another tidbit regarding the timeline discussion from earlier, when describing the Shieldmeet holiday the book says "The next Shieldmeet will be observed in 1492 DR". So we know for a fact the "official year" is somewhere between 1489 and 1492.

Someone asked about Amaunator earlier, he is in here, along with Lathander, they are separate deities. Amaunator is LN, Lathander is NG.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 25, 2015)

Jiggawatts said:


> Someone asked about Amaunator earlier, he is in here, along with Lathander, they are separate deities.




So, it lists Amaunator and Lathander, and it says nothing about the fact that they're two faces of the same god?


----------



## pukunui (Oct 25, 2015)

Jiggawatts said:


> Another tidbit regarding the timeline discussion from earlier, when describing the Shieldmeet holiday the book says "The next Shieldmeet will be observed in 1492 DR". So we know for a fact the "official year" is somewhere between 1489 and 1492.



Cool. I like how that makes the book neutral in terms of the storylines they've released so far. That is, it can be used with Tyranny of Dragons, Elemental Evil, and Rage of Demons (plus any future stories) without the DM needing to worry about plot spoilers and the like. I'll be happy to show this to my ToD players and let them have a read through it.



> Someone asked about Amaunator earlier, he is in here, along with Lathander, they are separate deities. Amaunator is LN, Lathander is NG.



Really? That's odd. They're supposed to be two faces of the same god.


----------



## Jiggawatts (Oct 25, 2015)

Irennan said:


> So, it lists Amaunator and Lathander, and it says nothing about the fact that they're two faces of the same god?



Each Faerunian deity has a 3-4 paragraph blurb describing them, they both have their own entry.

 Amaunators talks about how he is the god of law and the sun, that he is seen as a stern and unforgiving god, not unlike Silvanus, also talking how people will swear oaths, sign contracts, and declaring laws under the light of the sun in veneration to him. It does mention that he has died and been reborn time and again.

Lathander is described as the god of spring, youth, vitality, renewal, and it specifically mentions that he is not a god of the sun but of the dawn, which is the start of a new day filled with potential.


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Oct 25, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Really? That's odd. They're supposed to be two faces of the same god.




Didn't someone earlier in the discussion say that SCAG specifically says that they are the same? Looks like we're getting a some crossed wires here...

(Also, I'm a bit irritated that my local stores that had OotA early don't have SCAG early. I was really wanting to have it available for my game later today...)


----------



## Irennan (Oct 25, 2015)

Well, thanks for the info, but that's rather surprising. Sounds like a retcon of what was said in a novel published when? 2 years ago? Meh...


----------



## pukunui (Oct 25, 2015)

Demetrios1453 said:


> Didn't someone earlier in the discussion say that SCAG specifically says that they are the same? Looks like we're getting a some crossed wires here...



It says that in one of the Sundering novels. Not sure about SCAG.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 25, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Well, thanks for the info, but that's rather surprising. Sounds like a retcon of what was said in a novel published when? 2 years ago? Meh...



Well, not necessarily. If the post above it's all the SCAG says, it doesn't state anything about whether they are two distinct entities. In _The Reaver_ the church of Amaunator, at least some parts of it, were not happy with the idea of Lathander's return and tried to to convict the chosen of Lathander as a heretic (and no, the fact that he could show off legit powers from Lathander made them only more angry at him). The church of Aumanator didn't even disagree that Lathander transformed into their deity (the first sects preaching the upcomming change sprang up when Lathander was still fully himself yet), they just were angry about the claim that he was already changing back not even two centuries later.

So both faces could still be worshipped by different churches (and clerics preaching the truth might be hunted by both branches) until Lathander speaks a ultimate decree.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 25, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Well, not necessarily. If the post above it's all the SCAG says, it doesn't state anything about whether they are two distinct entities. In _The Reaver_ the church of Amaunator, at least some parts of it, were not happy with the idea of Lathander's return and tried to to convict the chosen of Lathander as a heretic (and no, the fact that he could show off legit powers from Lathander made them only more angry at him).
> 
> So both faces could still be worshipped by different churches (and clerics preaching the truth might be hunted by both branches) until Lathander speaks a ultimate decree.




Yes, I guess that it makes sense. He could be currently answering to prayers invoking both Lathander and Amaunator.


----------



## Jiggawatts (Oct 25, 2015)

Just wanted to also say, as someone who disliked the Spellplague and the 100 year time jump, I really like this book. It has a surprising amount of lore packed in given its page count. Only thing I'm really bummed about is no official return for Khelben and Halaster.

The new character options are all pretty nice, though I would have loved at least one new subclass for bards, druids, and rangers.  I'm personally looking forward to playing a Bladesinger after I finish my current rogue character. I'm gonna talk to my DM about letting Bladesinger training swap the versatile property for the finesse property on the longsword as I want to go full on classical style and without having to go rapier.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 25, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> The main feature is the advantage that you get from Tides of Chaos. The Wild Magic surge creates interesting situations but it is not where the power of the subclass comes from.



I completely agree.

But imagine my dismay when I realize the PHB offers two (2) non-cantrip spells that you can use that advantage on. And both are bottom-rung level (levels one and two). Add ranged attack level 3, 4 and 5 spells ASAP!

Just getting advantage on defense is not nearly enough for me.

Then I want spells that specifically plays off the wild mage schtick. Just like rangers or necromancers, I want spells with randomness built into the basic chassi, which I then can control better as a Wild Mage.

Undercooked, is my end analysis. 

To this you then add the issues with all Sorcerers. A painfully short list of spells means you're basically being forced into the Fireballer archetype. No other element is given enough support. And you don't want to be anything else because you can't really afford to be without the "best in class" spells: once you've done a decently optimized spell selection you pretty much don't have anything left for "signature" spells.

Add to this metamagics which is very dry. Not weak, but beige.

Take all of this together and each time I look at building an arcanist, I choose a Wizard or something. The Sorcerer doesn't get any truly standout powers justifying its limitations. That's the brutal truth: it ain't worth all the hassle.

The UA sorcerers would have gone a long way of ameliorating this. 

Screw "we can't overshadow the PHB" because the PHB Sorcerer (and Ranger) needs bein' overshadowed!


----------



## Serpine (Oct 25, 2015)

​


CapnZapp said:


> Add ranged attack level 3, 4 and 5 spells ASAP!




Definitely. The EEPC which should have been brimming with elemental blasts I think only added one in that range (Storm Sphere) and two in the weaker range (Ice Knife and the Magic Stone cantrip). This issue limits the options for the Spell Sniper feat's range bonus to.


----------



## EroGaki (Oct 25, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> I guess this is the crucial point.
> 
> If y'all (this does not mean YOU, but the guy to your right  ) hadn't rated the class so high, perhaps they would have retrofitted bonus spells to the PHB sorqs instead...
> 
> ...




Agreed. The only class lower than the sorcerer is the ranger.

Really, I wish more thought had been put into the sorcerer. It's just so strange to me that the so-called natural born magical genius is the worst full caster.


----------



## FormerlyHemlock (Oct 26, 2015)

Z. H. Darkstar said:


> Bladesingers look like they can fill the gish role, but I am concerned about their survivability with Wizard HD. One good whack, and pretty boy elf gish is dead. It might be worth taking two levels of Rogue to get Cunning Action, so you can use your bonus actions to dodge.




Do you mean Disengage? Cunning Action is not usable for Dodging.

Bladesingers have a lot of pressure on their ASIs already, but you might be able to squeeze in a Mobile feat. Failing that, the Bladesinger can just rely on Expeditious Retreat to enable bonus action Disengages, although that does eat your concentration.


----------



## Prism (Oct 26, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Yes, I guess that it makes sense. He could be currently answering to prayers invoking both Lathander and Amaunator.




Its also worth saying that the religion section is about the worship of the gods, not the actual gods themselves. There is nothing I can see in the descriptions that isn't something a mortal would know. So if indeed Lathander and Amauntor are the same that's fine, but it wouldn't be written as fact in this book as nobody (on faerun) actually knows if that's the case. In the novels where this was alluded to that was only the opinions of the individuals claiming that they were one and the same. Many other priests of the two gods disagree. Only the DM can decide really what the truth is. I doubt there will ever be an official answer unless a DM only book of facts comes out, or one of the authors writes a novel about the gods themselves, both of which I sincerely doubt will happen.

The whole book is written as much for players as for DMs - possibly more for players considering the crunch in there. This is good for DMs in one way as it doesn't give a single truth that you feel obligated to follow, especially is the players have read the book, considering its for them. On the other hand you are not given much in the way of secret or background knowledge as a DM. This is why the workings behind the scenes of the Sundering are not given, nor the relationships between the gods, nor the secrets of hidden organizations.


----------



## ssvegeta555 (Oct 26, 2015)

I was considering on canceling my pre-order to save some money, but I'm pleased to see what's being spoiled. I'm glad for threads like these. I like to know what I'm getting into, I don't like buying blind if I can help it. As someone who's buying this largely for the mechanics and considering it's a setting book, I'm not too surprised about the fluff vs crunch ratio. That's to be expected. I'm just glad to see some class options that aren't half-baked. I'm been so starved for mechanics. Now give me more WotC, nom nom nom!


----------



## Irennan (Oct 26, 2015)

Prism said:


> Its also worth saying that the religion section is about the worship of the gods, not the actual gods themselves. There is nothing I can see in the descriptions that isn't something a mortal would know. So if indeed Lathander and Amauntor are the same that's fine, but it wouldn't be written as fact in this book as nobody (on faerun) actually knows if that's the case. In the novels where this was alluded to that was only the opinions of the individuals claiming that they were one and the same. Many other priests of the two gods disagree. Only the DM can decide really what the truth is. I doubt there will ever be an official answer unless a DM only book of facts comes out, or one of the authors writes a novel about the gods themselves, both of which I sincerely doubt will happen.
> 
> The whole book is written as much for players as for DMs - possibly more for players considering the crunch in there. This is good for DMs in one way as it doesn't give a single truth that you feel obligated to follow, especially is the players have read the book, considering its for them. On the other hand you are not given much in the way of secret or background knowledge as a DM. This is why the workings behind the scenes of the Sundering are not given, nor the relationships between the gods, nor the secrets of hidden organizations.




Yes, I see. But the book does give some description of the gods themselves and what they do, so it is seems to be about both. In fact there's a religion section, plus a god section


----------



## Irennan (Oct 26, 2015)

Prism said:


> I doubt there will ever be an official answer unless a DM only book of facts comes out, or one of the authors writes a novel about the gods themselves, both of which I sincerely doubt will happen.




Authors have been featuring gods in their novels quite often as of recent, though. You get little updates, like Ed Greenwood does, or even full blown scenes directly involving gods (I'm told that RAS did it in his latest book).


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 26, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> I completely agree.
> 
> But imagine my dismay when I realize the PHB offers two (2) non-cantrip spells that you can use that advantage on. And both are bottom-rung level (levels one and two). Add ranged attack level 3, 4 and 5 spells ASAP!
> 
> Just getting advantage on defense is not nearly enough for me.




You can actually get advantage on anything you do, including skill use out of combat. Like, say, a persuasion check as you are likely the party face with your high charisma.

You just need to cast a 1st level or higher spell to recharge the ability. The ability itself can be applied to any roll you make. Heck, you can use it to gain advantage on Initiative checks too.


----------



## nicolas.carrillos (Oct 26, 2015)

I acknowledge that Maztica has always been controversial, and respect divergent opinions. However, I personally like its inclusion because: a) it gives more diversity to the Realms (the fact that I am Latin American helps); and b) it is a huge canvas that allows DM creation (the 3e FRCS says that much of Maztica is unknown). That is why I am glad that it seems that officially its return is hinted at.


----------



## mflayermonk (Oct 26, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Authors have been featuring gods in their novels quite often as of recent, though. You get little updates, like Ed Greenwood does, or even full blown scenes directly involving gods (I'm told that RAS did it in his latest book).




I've always felt the large amount of gods/clerics and their cosmology were one of the main arguments against the "Tolkien inspired D&D argument".


----------



## Irennan (Oct 26, 2015)

mflayermonk said:


> I've always felt the large amount of gods/clerics and their cosmology were one of the main arguments against the "Tolkien inspired D&D argument".




D&D draws upon Tolkien, but it also draws upon mythology and fantasy in general. Tolkien's influence is definitely there, as it is for a lot of modern fantasy.


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 26, 2015)

Jiggawatts said:


> Another tidbit regarding the timeline discussion from earlier, when describing the Shieldmeet holiday the book says "The next Shieldmeet will be observed in 1492 DR". So we know for a fact the "official year" is somewhere between 1489 and 1492.



Thanks for taking the time to notice that and then post it. This is exactly what I was hoping for.



nicolas.carrillos said:


> I acknowledge that Maztica has always been controversial, and respect divergent opinions.



If they ever do revisit Maztica (big if here. We don't even know if the rest of Faerun outside of the Sword Coast will be revisited)I hope they use its time in Abeir as an excuse to help undo some of the more distasteful portions of Maztica and allow it to flourish as a unique place and lives up to its huge potential.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Oct 26, 2015)

I like Maztica as a Mayincatec fantasy setting. I really like that vibe and I feel like it hasn't been explored a lot.

I'm not a fan of, basically, the expy conquistadors. 

Too close to real-world horrors for my make believe elf game.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 26, 2015)

I'm A Banana said:


> I like Maztica as a Mayincatec fantasy setting. I really like that vibe and I feel like it hasn't been explored a lot.
> 
> I'm not a fan of, basically, the expy conquistadors.
> 
> Too close to real-world horrors for my make believe elf game.




This is one reason--among many--that I really want to see Maztica, Al-Qadim*, and the other "non-Western" lands brought back and treated as totally separate from Forgotten Realms. Let them thrive, develop, and expand as their own thing, not as a subset or afterthought.

*(To this day one of my favorite D&D settings, and to those who argue it's harder to do in today's political climate--an argument I've heard put forth more than once--I would say that just makes it more important to do, and do well.)


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 26, 2015)

Celtavian said:


> I don't buy the "don't fit with the games overall structure." I don't buy the feedback other than feedback saying, "It makes them more powerful than PHB origins." The only part that I buy is the makes the PHB sorcerous origins look weaker, which was likely in the feedback. Which could have been fixed by adding bonus spells to both the PHB origins.




I buy it. I've never found any statements by the developers in the entire Next/5e run so far to be disingenuous. And it's not that I don't have a BS detector here, it's just that it isn't going off. Now, there definitely are _diplomatic_ statements made. Often times I think, "Just say X!", but I know that they won't (and I wouldn't either if I were on Hasbro's payroll), because it's just not advisable to tick off your customers to make a point, especially when your job might be on the line.

With that said, I actually find the part about not fitting with the overall structure to be interesting--because it hints at a structure that they have possibly already defined (probably after the UA articles, but possibly before and just testing for alternatives), but which I don't know. Is it an idea that bonus spells is meant to be a divine thing? Who knows, but there's something there to know.

I think the most encouraging thing I saw though is that he diplomatically hinted that, "people don't always want what they think they want." Which is 100% true, and I'm glad the D&D crew is aware of it and taking it into account.


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 26, 2015)

Mouseferatu said:


> This is one reason--among many--that I really want to see Maztica, Al-Qadim*, and the other "non-Western" lands brought back and treated as totally separate from Forgotten Realms. Let them thrive, develop, and expand as their own thing, not as a subset or afterthought.
> 
> *(To this day one of my favorite D&D settings, and to those who argue it's harder to do in today's political climate--an argument I've heard put forth more than once--I would say that just makes it more important to do, and do well.)




Im a big fan of Maztica and Al Qadim (probably the latter more) and am glad we are seeng elements of that in the SCAG. 

THe Invasion of Maztica was driven by Helm which I always found an interesting Deity choice for such a 'crusade'. It didnt exactly help the popularity of the God (not that Time of troubles helped much either).

I always thought a reverse style of invasion (ie a Group of Mazticans invading Faerun proper) would of been more awesome and original.


----------



## Zardnaar (Oct 26, 2015)

Tyranthraxus said:


> Im a big fan of Maztica and Al Qadim (probably the latter more) and am glad we are seeng elements of that in the SCAG.
> 
> THe Invasion of Maztica was driven by Helm which I always found an interesting Deity choice for such a 'crusade'. It didnt exactly help the popularity of the God (not that Time of troubles helped much either).
> 
> I always thought a reverse style of invasion (ie a Group of Mazticans invading Faerun proper) would of been more awesome and original.




 THe game Crusader Kings II has a DLC where the Aztecs invade Europe. They teched up via a shipwreck and invaded Europe.


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 26, 2015)

Nice.

I can understand why the designers felt invading Maztica was the right idea too. You can better detail a new setting location if you have your characters THERE and not characters FROM there.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Oct 26, 2015)

Celtavian said:


> I don't buy the "don't fit with the games overall structure." I don't buy the feedback other than feedback saying, "It makes them more powerful than PHB origins." The only part that I buy is the makes the PHB sorcerous origins look weaker, which was likely in the feedback. Which could have been fixed by adding bonus spells to both the PHB origins.




But if the PHB origins are "fine" as they are (which is what the feedback is showing them), adding bonus spells would've made 'em too potent. The only class with issues in the feedback is the Ranger. Sorcerer doesn't need a fix, judging by the feedback. 



Tia Nadiezja said:


> Yeah. My biggest issue with the Sorc is that, in the PHB, it basically ended up with one usable subclass. The Wild Mage looks kind of fun to play, but reliability beats randomness basically every time in D&D - especially when "randomness" can easily mean "accidentally wiped the party in a single spell" when at low levels.




Weirdly, my wild mage is _more reliable_, thanks to bending luck and the like. Wild surges are fluff, not power. The power comes from forcing something to have a -1d4 penalty on my heightened _Polymorph_. The chump. 

And yeah, as a player of a wild mage, I think the reputation they have for being weak largely disappears in practice. I would say they seem a bit more DM dependent than others thanks to a repeat class feature hinging on the surge, but that's not a weakness, it's just a thing you need to chat with a human being about before you go and assume it'll be fun for you.


----------



## Celtavian (Oct 26, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> I buy it. I've never found any statements by the developers in the entire Next/5e run so far to be disingenuous. And it's not that I don't have a BS detector here, it's just that it isn't going off. Now, there definitely are _diplomatic_ statements made. Often times I think, "Just say X!", but I know that they won't (and I wouldn't either if I were on Hasbro's payroll), because it's just not advisable to tick off your customers to make a point, especially when your job might be on the line.
> 
> With that said, I actually find the part about not fitting with the overall structure to be interesting--because it hints at a structure that they have possibly already defined (probably after the UA articles, but possibly before and just testing for alternatives), but which I don't know. Is it an idea that bonus spells is meant to be a divine thing? Who knows, but there's something there to know.
> 
> I think the most encouraging thing I saw though is that he diplomatically hinted that, "people don't always want what they think they want." Which is 100% true, and I'm glad the D&D crew is aware of it and taking it into account.




All the structure statement means is, "We already made sorcerers without bonus spells. We don't feel like adding them to PHB sorcerers this early, so we're taking away the bonus spells from the other sorcerers." I don't believe the feedback said sorcerers were fine without bonus spells. I think internally, regardless of feedback, they decided not to retrofit sorcerers with bonus spells. Not enough people play them or care what they have at the moment. Same reason we likely won't see a ranger change any time soon even with the talk of changing the class. They don't want to retrofit classes when the PHB hasn't been out for very long.


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 26, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> With that said, I actually find the part about not fitting with the overall structure to be interesting--because it hints at a structure that they have possibly already defined (probably after the UA articles, but possibly before and just testing for alternatives), but which I don't know. Is it an idea that bonus spells is meant to be a divine thing? Who knows, but there's something there to know.



My reading of it was everyone loved the extra spells, yet most agreed it was significantly better than the PHB subclasses. WotC looked over the power (rather than the enjoyability) and found that the PHB Sorcerer wasn't underpowered. So they decided not to devalue the existing subclasses. The option of issuing errata to improve the PHB subclasses is certainly there. But one WotC is avoiding like the plague. Given there is no mechanical problem they're not going to errata the sorcerer.




Tyranthraxus said:


> I always thought a reverse style of invasion (ie a Group of Mazticans invading Faerun proper) would of been more awesome and original.



I do like that idea. It would be the perfect way to reintroduce Maztica, yet keep the focus on the Sword Coast, and avoid rehashing the 2nd edition Maztica metaplot.




I'm A Banana said:


> But if the PHB origins are "fine" as they are (which is what the feedback is showing them), adding bonus spells would've made 'em too potent.



While versatility does result in increased power, is it 5-10 bonus spells really going to make it more powerful than say the Wizard (arguably one of the most versatile classes).


----------



## I'm A Banana (Oct 26, 2015)

JohnLynch said:


> While versatility does result in increased power, is it 5-10 bonus spells really going to make it more powerful than say the Wizard (arguably one of the most versatile classes).




....but if they don't need the power boost, there's no point in giving it to them. The people who like playing the class aren't really asking for it.


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Oct 26, 2015)

So, after a few days of frustration, I've finally snagged myself a copy of the book.  To answer a few things brought up in this thread (as well as other things):

The non-Sword Coast areas do get brief, but for their length, fairly detailed descriptions. I was honestly surprised in how much info was packed into just a few paragraphs for each entry.

1489 DR is heavily hinted, but not outright stated, to be the present year. One paragraph in the history section starts with "By 1489..." and the next begins with "The world today..." It's a bit murky with the tenses used in the paragraphs in question, but I'd say 1489 would be the most likely candidate, given that every year from 1482 through 1489 - excepting only 1483 - gets date-checked in the section. It would seem odd to go up to 1489 and stop there without it being the present year (and if, for some reason not, then 1490 is just about the only other viable candidate).

Amaunator and Lathander are distinct deities - both get in-depth descriptions, and both sections use the present tense, indicating that both are worshiped separately in the here and now.

The human deities all get fairly detailed descriptions - much more than expected given the length of the section in the pre-released table of contents. The only exception to this are the four elemental deities for some reason. Also, there are a few missing holy symbol illustrations at the bottom of the deity pages  - Gwaeron Windstrom and Melil are the two I noticed as missing. But beyond that the artwork for the symbols is top-notch. Only some of the demigods did make it into the book however; like other posters, I'm surprised by the exclusion of Sharess when Jergal somehow made the cut (surely the former has far more worshipers than the latter!)

The non-human deities are less covered. At first it seems that they only get tables for each pantheon, but later in the book, under each race, all of them do get at least some brief coverage. The poor dragonborn, however, have to make due with the info on Bahamut and Tiamat in the Player's Handbook; even though the deities are mentioned repeatedly in the dragonborn section, neither they, nor any of the other draconic deities, merits even a table in this book. Conversely, all of the deities for playable races appear to be fully listed (other than Ghaunadaur, who seems to have been, not unreasonably, recast as a Great Old One patron for warlocks).

The actual main geographical areas covered in the book are surprisingly detailed. The Island Kingdoms section especially stood out for me - given its length and various hints I suspected the Moonshaes might be covered, and indeed they are, quite fully, but I certainly wasn't expecting anything on Lantan or Nimbral! Granted, much of what is said for them (and for Evermeet as well) comes in the form of hearsay from the narrator of the section (a gnome sailor - all the geographic regions covered has their own specific narrator talking about the cities and regions), but even then just the half page or so on Lantan compares favorably to the entirity of the coverage we've had in all previous editions _combined_...

The races and classes section are chock-full of good stuff - too much to go into in detail, other than the fact that after I got the book today, I now have a variant tiefling, an arcana domain cleric (of Mystra), and a swashbuckler suddenly in my party...


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 26, 2015)

I'm A Banana said:


> ....but if they don't need the power boost, there's no point in giving it to them. The people who like playing the class aren't really asking for it.



No, the people who like playing the 5th edition version of the class aren't asking for it. That is not the same as saying people who like sorcerers aren't asking for it. That said I certainly understand and respect the decision. But that's not the same to say bonus spells would make sorcerers overpowered.




Demetrios1453 said:


> One paragraph in the history section starts with "By 1489..." and the next begins with "The world today..." It's a bit murky with the tenses used in the paragraphs in question, but I'd say 1489 would be the most likely candidate, given that every year from 1482 through 1489 - excepting only 1483 - gets date-checked in the section. It would seem odd to go up to 1489 and stop there without it being the present year (and if, for some reason not, then 1490 is just about the only other viable candidate).



Nice find. That jives with the Adventurers League date as well.




Demetrios1453 said:


> The poor dragonborn, however, have to make due with the info on Bahamut and Tiamat in the Player's Handbook; even though the deities are mentioned repeatedly in the dragonborn section, neither they, nor any of the other draconic deities, merits even a table in this book. Conversely, all of the deities for playable races appear to be fully listed (other than Ghaunadaur, who seems to have been, not unreasonably, recast as a Great Old One patron for warlocks).



It would be unfortunate if the Dragonborn are said to worship the Draconic deities. In the 4e FRCG they were opposed to the Draconic pantheon (due to their battles with dragons in Abeir). Still, they could have been forced to convert. I was hoping to explore Dragonborn philosophy and their relationship with gods though.


----------



## Serpine (Oct 26, 2015)

JohnLynch said:


> It would be unfortunate if the Dragonborn are said to worship the Draconic deities.



It devotes a paragraph describing how and why most of them are skeptical about religion in general and actual deities in particular, seeing the whole thing as slavery to potentially dead or uncaring powers. Then it has an equal amount of space indicating which gods get worshiped by those few that just feel a real need to have one (B&T are mentioned, as well as Torm, Tyr, Tempus, the Red Knight, and Kelemvor).


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 26, 2015)

Serpine said:


> It devotes a paragraph describing how and why most of them are skeptical about religion in general and actual deities in particular, seeing the whole thing as slavery to potentially dead or uncaring powers. Then it has an equal amount of space indicating which gods get worshiped by those few that just feel a real need to have one (B&T are mentioned, as well as Torm, Tyr, Tempus, the Red Knight, and Kelemvor).



Great stuff. That is exactly the state I hoped Dragonborn would be in. Good to hear they're respecting 4th edition lore where appropriate


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Oct 26, 2015)

JohnLynch said:


> It would be unfortunate if the Dragonborn are said to worship the Draconic deities. In the 4e FRCG they were opposed to the Draconic pantheon (due to their battles with dragons in Abeir). Still, they could have been forced to convert. I was hoping to explore Dragonborn philosophy and their relationship with gods though.




It actually does say that most don't worship deities for that exact reason. They do go into the dragonborn philosophy of honor and loyalty, and that most dragonborn believe that is all the religion they need. But for those few that do follow the path of worshiping deities, it does mention that they tend towards Bahamut and Tiamat, as well as human deities that dovetail with the dragonborn philosophy (such as Tyr and Torm, among others)


----------



## Celtavian (Oct 26, 2015)

I'm A Banana said:


> But if the PHB origins are "fine" as they are (which is what the feedback is showing them), adding bonus spells would've made 'em too potent. The only class with issues in the feedback is the Ranger. Sorcerer doesn't need a fix, judging by the feedback.




I'd like to see the feedback myself. I think people wanted bonus spells, not for power reasons, but to make them more interesting. They decided it wasn't enough of a problem to make modifications internally because the feedback wasn't negative enough to warrant it. That does not mean the sorcerer is a very attractive or often played class. I believe bonus spells would have made it a much more attractive class to play. Right now the wizard is the king of the arcane classes as far as what it brings to the table. 

Even the warlock is a very strange class that is too easy to defeat and turn into a useless _eldritch blasting_ one trick pony. An opposing caster can eliminate all of the warlock's spell slots with a minor expenditure of his own. 

The sorcerer at higher lacks spell versatility. I imagine this won't get noticed until far more people reach the higher levels, meaning it may never be noticed. Which is unfortunate given bonus spells would have made them more attractive at higher level because they don't have to use their precious 15 slots on lower level spells and pick some higher level versatility.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 26, 2015)

Demetrios1453 said:


> ... but even then just the half page or so on Lantan compares favorably to the entirity of the coverage we've had in all previous editions _combined_...



That's cool. Does it say anything about Lantan's return from beneath the waves?


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Oct 26, 2015)

pukunui said:


> That's cool. Does it say anything about Lantan's return from beneath the waves?




The section on Lantan mainly describes (from the narrator's point of view) of what that island was generally like before it disappeared (i.e smokepowder and inventions), what happened when it disappeared (everything blew up and waves crashed over it), speculation on what it was like during its "exile" on Abeir (comparing mainly to Halruaa, where, due to divination magic, the populace had preparation, which wasn't the case in Lantan), and, now that it's back, how tight-lipped traders from Lantan are buying up huge amounts of raw materials such as wood and metals, and are selling such things as shield guardians by the bucketful.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 26, 2015)

Interesting. Thanks!


----------



## Prism (Oct 26, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Yes, I see. But the book does give some description of the gods themselves and what they do, so it is seems to be about both. In fact there's a religion section, plus a god section




The religion section is generic. It covers things like forms of worship, prayers, how devotees sometimes worship new gods and forget old ones, the afterlife.... that kind of stuff

The gods section itself covers the details or worship for specific gods. So for example if we take Lathander, we are told that he is the god of the dawn, that people often pray to him before embarking on a new endeavor, his colours are rose, gold and violet and that his followers despise undead. No mention of the god himself - no description, thoughts or background. No mention of Amaunator in his section. No allies nor enemies. In fact the only thing we know about the god himself is his alignment NG.

Wizards did say that they were going to make the gods more distant from now on and I see this as a good example of that. I'm not sure we will ever know what really happened during the Sundering (which is great since our group already made our own lore up) and if we will ever learn the same amount of detail about the gods that we did during the Time of Troubles. So are Lathander and Amaunator the same god? I'm not sure we will ever find out and I'm happy about that because a church with schisms, claims of heresy and disagreements is far more interesting. If the DM ever chooses to reveal to their group the truth behind such an issue then they can do so without worry about going against canon.



> Authors have been featuring gods in their novels quite often as of recent, though. You get little updates, like Ed Greenwood does, or even full blown scenes directly involving gods (I'm told that RAS did it in his latest book).




Ed Greenwood pretty much always writes from the perspective of Elminster, who himself is an unreliable source. Elminster himself sometimes wonders if Mystra uses him to feed the information she wants him to know. Mortals (and us) know almost nothing about Mystra but rather we know what Elminster knows, which in turn is what Mystra wants him to know.

RAS did include a cut scene about Lloth in the latest book. It seemed to be there to give us some background about the reason behind the Rage of Demons storyline. In this case we are getting to learn something that no mortals would ever know (actually one might do) but I believe information like this will be pretty rare. There is certainly nothing like it, that I have seen, in SCAG.

I have to say that I really like the way that SCAG is done. Its a bit like an old Volo's Guide but from an unnamed persons perspective. Lots of open ended descriptions leaving plenty for the DM to fill in.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 26, 2015)

Prism said:


> I have to say that I really like the way that SCAG is done. Its a bit like an old Volo's Guide but from an unnamed persons perspective. Lots of open ended descriptions leaving plenty for the DM to fill in.



Awesome!


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 26, 2015)

Prism said:


> . So are Lathander and Amaunator the same god? I'm not sure we will ever find out



 well novels are still canon, so we already found out even while the SCAG doesn't say one thing or another

For many it's not a bug but a feature that the FR have an ever flowing canon metaplot through the novels

I would never read an eberron novels since beging non canon they're just glorified fanfiction to me. I personally suspect that's a big part of the reason why the eberron novels line failed and was ended while FR novels march on


----------



## Prism (Oct 26, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> well novels are still canon, so we already found out even while the SCAG doesn't say one thing or another
> 
> For many it's not a bug but a feature that the FR have an ever flowing canon metaplot through the novels
> 
> I would never read an eberron novels since beging non canon they're just glorified fanfiction to me. I personally suspect that's a big part of the reason why the eberron novels line failed and was ended while FR novels march on




We didn't find out at all. A character in one of the novels believed this to be the case. I have read the Sundering novels where this was spoken about and its simply given as a characters opinion. The various authors have stated a number of times that what their characters say in novels is not necessarily true and just opinion. If they describe an event as happening from a non character perspective, like the volcano eruption at Neverwinter or the fall of the Netheril cities then you can take that as canon.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 26, 2015)

ad_hoc said:


> You can actually get advantage on anything you do, including skill use out of combat. Like, say, a persuasion check as you are likely the party face with your high charisma.
> 
> You just need to cast a 1st level or higher spell to recharge the ability. The ability itself can be applied to any roll you make. Heck, you can use it to gain advantage on Initiative checks too.



I know this.

What I sign up for is in-combat advantage on attacks. Since you can't transform your advantage into giving enemies disadvantage when they save against your spells, you're left with ranged spell attacks.

And there's not enough of them to base a strategy on.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 26, 2015)

Prism said:


> We didn't find out at all. A character in one of the novels believed this to be the case. I have read the Sundering novels where this was spoken about and its simply given as a characters opinion. The various authors have stated a number of times that what their characters say in novels is not necessarily true and just opinion. If they describe an event as happening from a non character perspective, like the volcano eruption at Neverwinter or the fall of the Netheril cities then you can take that as canon.



actually the Charakter was a chosen of lathander and actually did speak with lathander himself at the end of the novel.

For all the promise oft dialing back in the deities, starting with the sundering novels wie have more deities appearing in novels than before

Shar, Mystra, Cyric, Lolth, Azuth, Asmodeus, Nobanion, Helm, Lathander, it might be easier to count the recent novels without a deity appearing


----------



## pagnabros (Oct 26, 2015)

Can you please elaborate more about the adaptation section in the last part of the book for other settings? (like Dragonlance, Eberron, Ravenloft etc.)


----------



## Irennan (Oct 26, 2015)

Prism said:


> The religion section is generic. It covers things like forms of worship, prayers, how devotees sometimes worship new gods and forget old ones, the afterlife.... that kind of stuff
> 
> The gods section itself covers the details or worship for specific gods. So for example if we take Lathander, we are told that he is the god of the dawn, that people often pray to him before embarking on a new endeavor, his colours are rose, gold and violet and that his followers despise undead. No mention of the god himself - no description, thoughts or background. No mention of Amaunator in his section. No allies nor enemies. In fact the only thing we know about the god himself is his alignment NG.
> 
> Wizards did say that they were going to make the gods more distant from now on and I see this as a good example of that. I'm not sure we will ever know what really happened during the Sundering (which is great since our group already made our own lore up) and if we will ever learn the same amount of detail about the gods that we did during the Time of Troubles. So are Lathander and Amaunator the same god? I'm not sure we will ever find out and I'm happy about that because a church with schisms, claims of heresy and disagreements is far more interesting. If the DM ever chooses to reveal to their group the truth behind such an issue then they can do so without worry about going against canon.




Yes, I see what you mean. I don't really that kind of approach, because if I want to change something, I have no problem doing so, but I still want to know what things are like in the Realms. However, it works for many, so...



> Ed Greenwood pretty much always writes from the perspective of Elminster, who himself is an unreliable source. Elminster himself sometimes wonders if Mystra uses him to feed the information she wants him to know. Mortals (and us) know almost nothing about Mystra but rather we know what Elminster knows, which in turn is what Mystra wants him to know.
> 
> RAS did include a cut scene about Lloth in the latest book. It seemed to be there to give us some background about the reason behind the Rage of Demons storyline. In this case we are getting to learn something that no mortals would ever know (actually one might do) but I believe information like this will be pretty rare. There is certainly nothing like it, that I have seen, in SCAG.




With their storylines, WotC has been using ''uber'' beings, even gods (like Tiamat), in very blunt, not subtle ways. Info about gods (whether they come from Elminster, of Farideh, or whoever) are getting included in various novels. Yes, they are from a character's perspective, and they have a varying degree of accuracy, but if you look at it from our perspective, they're obviously there to inform us about what's happening/what has happened with the gods (or because they are key to the story), so they can be considered true. They're fully optional to use (everything is), but they're still info about the gods or other ''above mortals'' stuff in the current time.

Ed Greenwood has also given answers about various matters, including deities, in his ''Questions for'' thread over Candlekeep, and that is considered official unless WotC decides to overwrite it (which, given their approach of letting details out, seems very unlikely). Granted, they have mostly been ''yes, X is back'', but he also given insight on stuff that mortals would have no way to know (the matter with Tiamat, Bane, and Asmodeus for example, or that Eilistraee and Vhaeraun are separate again).


----------



## Prism (Oct 26, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Yes, I see what you mean. I don't really that kind of approach, because if I want to change something, I have no problem doing so, but I still want to know what things are like in the Realms. However, it works for many, so...




I would quite like a small background piece, maybe a dragon article at some point, to explain 'what really happened'. I don't hold out much hope.

I am just about ok with demon lords and princes of elemental evil making an appearance but it is getting a bit too much. Lets hope for a more down to earth story next time. 

Those authors and their love of godly intervention though! Its getting a bit stale


----------



## Irennan (Oct 26, 2015)

Prism said:


> I would quite like a small background piece, maybe a dragon article at some point, to explain 'what really happened'. I don't hold out much hope.




Neither do I. Probably the only insight we're going to get will be nuggets hidden in the novels, or --if you're lucky enough to not run into a NDA-- by asking Ed Greenwood.



> I am just about ok with demon lords and princes of elemental evil making an appearance but it is getting a bit too much. Lets hope for a more down to earth story next time.
> 
> Those authors and their love of godly intervention though! Its getting a bit stale




I like having info and updates about them being given through stories, even small appearances, *but* yeah, we've got to the point where people (probably even in-universe) are taking bets on what uber being will try to lay waste on the Sword Coast the next year, and selling apocalypse survival kits around...


----------



## gyor (Oct 26, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> well novels are still canon, so we already found out even while the SCAG doesn't say one thing or another
> 
> For many it's not a bug but a feature that the FR have an ever flowing canon metaplot through the novels
> 
> I would never read an eberron novels since beging non canon they're just glorified fanfiction to me. I personally suspect that's a big part of the reason why the eberron novels line failed and was ended while FR novels march on




 Bingo.


----------



## gyor (Oct 26, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> actually the Charakter was a chosen of lathander and actually did speak with lathander himself at the end of the novel.
> 
> For all the promise oft dialing back in the deities, starting with the sundering novels wie have more deities appearing in novels than before
> 
> Shar, Mystra, Cyric, Lolth, Azuth, Asmodeus, Nobanion, Helm, Lathander, it might be easier to count the recent novels without a deity appearing




 You forgot Umberlee.


----------



## gyor (Oct 26, 2015)

Btw is Nobanion listed in the SCAG?


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 26, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> I know this.
> 
> What I sign up for is in-combat advantage on attacks. Since you can't transform your advantage into giving enemies disadvantage when they save against your spells, you're left with ranged spell attacks.
> 
> And there's not enough of them to base a strategy on.




Play a Barbarian?

There are lots of classes to choose from.

Sorcerer is just fine for those of us who appreciate benefits other than advantage on attacks.


----------



## gyor (Oct 26, 2015)

Demetrios1453 said:


> So, after a few days of frustration, I've finally snagged myself a copy of the book.  To answer a few things brought up in this thread (as well as other things):
> 
> The non-Sword Coast areas do get brief, but for their length, fairly detailed descriptions. I was honestly surprised in how much info was packed into just a few paragraphs for each entry.
> 
> ...




 The most ironic thing is that in past editions its actually apart of the lore that she's most popular ON THE SWORD COAST, I kid you not. Yes her roots are in Mulhorand and the Yuirwood and her biggest Temple is in Calimport and she helped found Nathlan, city of cats with Nobanion before it got taken over by the Shue refugees, but it always made it clear that the place she was primarily worshipped in was the Sword Coast, so its just goofy she's not in the book.

 I can only assume she in Mulhorand hooking up with Anhur again.


----------



## Z. H. Darkstar (Oct 26, 2015)

CapnZapp said:


> I know this.
> 
> What I sign up for is in-combat advantage on attacks. Since you can't transform your advantage into giving enemies disadvantage when they save against your spells, you're left with ranged spell attacks.
> 
> And there's not enough of them to base a strategy on.



You can give yourself advantage on saving throws, including death saves.


----------



## gyor (Oct 26, 2015)

JohnLynch said:


> Thanks for taking the time to notice that and then post it. This is exactly what I was hoping for.
> 
> If they ever do revisit Maztica (big if here. We don't even know if the rest of Faerun outside of the Sword Coast will be revisited)I hope they use its time in Abeir as an excuse to help undo some of the more distasteful portions of Maztica and allow it to flourish as a unique place and lives up to its huge potential.




 Maztica is mentioned in the PHB briefly I believe so that basically confirms its back.


----------



## ZethTheRed (Oct 26, 2015)

Anyone have any information they would like to share concerning the Arcana Cleric and Dwarven Battlerager?  Really interested in hearing more about them!


----------



## the Jester (Oct 26, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> Considering that really the big element of the fs IS the domain spells, I wager it will.




I really hope not. There are better, more elegant ways of making the FS more clericy without making the other sorcerer subclasses essentially obsolete.


----------



## the Jester (Oct 26, 2015)

EDIT: Never mind, I'm like 20 pages behind in this thread.


----------



## Serpine (Oct 26, 2015)

the Jester said:


> I really hope not. There are better, more elegant ways of making the FS more clericy without making the other sorcerer subclasses essentially obsolete.



Would it make more sense (for comparative power) to replace the Chosen of the Gods / Bonus Proficiencies features of the FS so they just let them *choose* from that domain list rather then automatically have them known, and grant them the 1st level benefits from the domain?


----------



## the Jester (Oct 26, 2015)

Serpine said:


> Would it make more sense (for comparative power) to replace the Chosen of the Gods / Bonus Proficiencies features of the FS so they just let them *choose* from that domain list rather then automatically have them known, and grant them the 1st level benefits from the domain?




That would be a significant improvement, in my book. 

I had actually written up a sorcerer favored soul subclass after the PH came out and before the first 5e game I ran. One of my players is using it. Here's my version:



			
				My Notes said:
			
		

> *ANGELIC RESISTANCE*
> Starting at 1st level, you gain resistance to radiant damage.
> 
> *CELESTIAL SENSES*
> ...




The pc in question is currently a paladin 2/favored soul 4. She's not as effective at range or in melee as she would be if she'd stayed single classed, but she's fairly effective either way. She plans to stay sorcerer the rest of the way up so that she can get those wings. My version might be slightly underpowered, but I don't think it's too bad, and she really enjoys it. It also feels right to me, in terms of how much it feels like a divine champion. 

Full disclosure: I hated the 3e favored soul in execution but liked the basic concept.


----------



## Z. H. Darkstar (Oct 26, 2015)

I think I know of an easier way of making the UA Favored Soul balanced against how Storm Sorcerer changed from UA to SCAG. This is in lieu of the bonus spells and the 18th level ability.

1. Have cantrips known come from either Sorcerer or Cleric lists. (Maintain base level blasting potential)
2. Spells known of 1st level and higher come only from Cleric list.
3. Use holy symbol instead of arcane focus.
4. Change 18th level ability to self-heal when casting non-cantrips on allies. (Reward support castings)

Everything else about the UA Favored Soul looks balanced enough, if they are intent on making it a Sorcerer subclass. Personally, I'd rather see it become its own class with three subclasses to specialize in martial prowess, magical blasting, and battlefield support. Attempting to graft a divine caster onto an arcane class just doesn't make sense.


----------



## gyor (Oct 26, 2015)

The thing that was cool about the favoured soul and domains, is it was away to create diversity for sorcerors with a single subclass, so that should stay in part.

 So instead of getting the spell lists they get a channel divinity power like a cleric, they get one use per short rest, but can spend sorcery points to use it more often.

 They also gain access to a special favoured soul channel divinity called Chosen of the Gods instead of turn dead. Have it be a healing ability, they also get they're deities domain channel divinity. This fits the fluff better anyways,channel divinity is supposed to be the raw essence of a God, as opposed to divine spells which is basically a deity granting a spell caster access to divine spells.

 Also maybe the Favour Soul's special channel divinity gets more powerful if you channel power points into it.

 To help make up for the loss of the spells, martial weapon prof and holy symbol prof.

 Get rid of extra attack, Greenfire Blade or Booming Sword will usual be the better choice anyway. Your choice of energy resistance and another use of Channel Divinity.

 The wings can stay, they're iconic for the class.

 Change the 18th to healing yourself when ever you use your channel divinity, but for more hps then the current verison.


----------



## Macca86 (Oct 26, 2015)

Apart from the benefits for being a battlerager, does anyone have the run down of the spiked armour?
Is there a good advantage for having it over other armour?


----------



## gyor (Oct 26, 2015)

I read somewhere it doesn't have an advantage for none battleragers. In fact its more expensive to buy.


----------



## Li Shenron (Oct 26, 2015)

Hidden in order not to derail the thread:

[sblock]







Z. H. Darkstar said:


> I think I know of an easier way of making the UA Favored Soul balanced against how Storm Sorcerer changed from UA to SCAG. This is in lieu of the bonus spells and the 18th level ability.
> 
> 1. Have cantrips known come from either Sorcerer or Cleric lists. (Maintain base level blasting potential)
> 2. Spells known of 1st level and higher come only from Cleric list.
> 3. Use holy symbol instead of arcane focus.




I agree with you that the UA Favored Soul cannot keep the bonus known spells, if the Storm Sorcerer had them stripped away. The reason was even spelled out in the UA Favored Soul itself! "Any time we expand the known spells of the sorcerer, we run the risk of overshadowing the other sorcerous origins, since the limitation on the number of spells the sorcerer knows has a big impact on how the class plays." 

I don't think cantrips make much difference, but OTOH I think that completely swapping the Sorcerer spell list with the Cleric spell list (if I understand your suggestion) is too much. The resulting character will be too similar to a Cleric IMHO.

Instead, I think a better solution would be to still let the Favored Soul choose a _domain_. But instead of adding those spells to the _known spells_, they would just be added to the _sorcerer spells list_. In other words, no more spells known than all other sorcerers subclasses, but a wider selection possible.



gyor said:


> The thing that was cool about the favoured soul and domains, is it was away to create diversity for sorcerors with a single subclass, so that should stay in part.
> 
> So instead of getting the spell lists they get a channel divinity power like a cleric, they get one use per short rest, but can spend sorcery points to use it more often.




Yes, the domains idea was very nice. It immediately creates a 'multiple' subclass. I am not sure we need an additional mechanic (channel divinity), but as an alternative to my previous suggestion, domain spells could be still added to the _known spells_, but be castable only using spell points (i.e. slots created by spell points) but not using regular slots.

I am not a huge fan of the idea of Favored Souls having a martial bent, so I wouldn't mind if they removed Extra Attack and maybe even the extra proficiencies.
[/sblock]


----------



## Prism (Oct 26, 2015)

Macca86 said:


> Apart from the benefits for being a battlerager, does anyone have the run down of the spiked armour?
> Is there a good advantage for having it over other armour?




Its medium armour pretty much identical to scale mail. Only battleragers can use the spikes, although i'd probably allow it to be used as a normal melee weapon if someone wanted to. Only does 1d4 damage though


----------



## Macca86 (Oct 26, 2015)

Ahh, thanks for the info.
I'm starting up a DnD game with some mates soon and itll be interesting to see if anyone picks a battlerager.
Cheers


----------



## Tia Nadiezja (Oct 26, 2015)

Li Shenron said:


> Hidden in order not to derail the thread:
> 
> [sblock]
> 
> ...



The thing is, the Storm Sorc's subclass features are awesome. The Favored Soul's, by and large, aren't. Apart from bonus spells, the only really good subclass feature comes in during the Paragon tier.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 26, 2015)

Celtavian said:


> All the structure statement means is, "We already made sorcerers without bonus spells. We don't feel like adding them to PHB sorcerers this early, so we're taking away the bonus spells from the other sorcerers." I don't believe the feedback said sorcerers were fine without bonus spells. I think internally, regardless of feedback, they decided not to retrofit sorcerers with bonus spells. Not enough people play them or care what they have at the moment. Same reason we likely won't see a ranger change any time soon even with the talk of changing the class. They don't want to retrofit classes when the PHB hasn't been out for very long.




That could be right. They most definitely are _not_ going to revise anything in the PHB. That is pretty much set in stone. Unless people start protesting outside of the WotC offices, it's never going to happen. (Which is probably a good call on their part.)

With the ranger (the least liked class), Mike has said that they are going to keep running variant options past people, and if they find one that people really, really like, eventually it will come out in some other book, and it might eventually be made AL legal--but the PHB version will _never_ be replaced or changed.



Demetrios1453 said:


> The actual main geographical areas covered in the book are surprisingly detailed. The Island Kingdoms section especially stood out for me - given its length and various hints I suspected the Moonshaes might be covered, and indeed they are, quite fully, but I certainly wasn't expecting anything on Lantan or Nimbral! Granted, much of what is said for them (and for Evermeet as well) comes in the form of hearsay from the narrator of the section (a gnome sailor - all the geographic regions covered has their own specific narrator talking about the cities and regions), but even then just the half page or so on Lantan compares favorably to the entirity of the coverage we've had in all previous editions _combined_...




How useful is the setting information for playing FR in a prior time period? For instance, I set my FR in about 1370 DR, right before 3e, much less 4e. How useful is the setting info for me, and how much effort do I have to put into analyzing it to _make_ it useful for me.

I'm planning to get the book anyway for some of the other material, but it would be great if I could actually make use of the setting material as a supplement to some of the 2e and 3e material I have.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 26, 2015)

Demetrios1453 said:


> The actual main geographical areas covered in the book are surprisingly detailed. The Island Kingdoms section especially stood out for me - given its length and various hints I suspected the Moonshaes might be covered, and indeed they are, quite fully, but I certainly wasn't expecting anything on Lantan or Nimbral! Granted, much of what is said for them (and for Evermeet as well) comes in the form of hearsay from the narrator of the section (a gnome sailor - all the geographic regions covered has their own specific narrator talking about the cities and regions), but even then just the half page or so on Lantan compares favorably to the entirity of the coverage we've had in all previous editions _combined_...




Do Skullport/the Promenade get any coverage?


----------



## gyor (Oct 27, 2015)

Tia Nadiezja said:


> The thing is, the Storm Sorc's subclass features are awesome. The Favored Soul's, by and large, aren't. Apart from bonus spells, the only really good subclass feature comes in during the Paragon tier.




 Agreed, if you take away the spells, wings are all the Favoured Soul has that's worth anything, (extra attack is of no benifit) and the Dragon Sorceror has that too and even the Storm Sorceror gets some flying, so you have to radically redesign the Favoured Soul.

 You could grant the Favoured Soul resistance, but the Dragon Sorceror already gets that as well.

 So that's why I thought a mechanic based around mixing channel divinity with sorceror points, allowing domain channel divinity choices for diversity of choice, would help make for a sorceror who feels unique. Plus holy symbols of course.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 27, 2015)

[MENTION=6801060]Demetrios1453[/MENTION],  [MENTION=6748898]ad_hoc[/MENTION] or  [MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION]: What does the book say about Elturgard?

I ask because the 4e LFR adventures had the Companion exploding and the nation failing, but the nation still exists and the second sun still hovers over Elturel in _Hoard of the Dragon Queen_, so it would seem that the LFR storyline was non-canonical.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Oct 27, 2015)

Is anything mentioned about Many Arrows.


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Oct 27, 2015)

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=6801060]Demetrios1453[/MENTION],  [MENTION=6748898]ad_hoc[/MENTION] or  [MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION]: What does the book say about Elturgard?
> 
> I ask because the 4e LFR adventures had the Companion exploding and the nation failing, but the nation still exists and the second sun still hovers over Elturel in _Hoard of the Dragon Queen_, so it would seem that the LFR storyline was non-canonical.




Elturgard and the Companion are still there. Elturgard is covered fairly extensively on pages 79 - 82.


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Oct 27, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> Is anything mentioned about Many Arrows.




Only a few things here and there, and in passing.

What caught my eye in that region though is that there is over a page on Hartsvale, which has barely been revisited since Troy Denning's Twilight Giant novels and the 2e _Giantcraft_, way back in the day. I think it got a passing mention in 3e's _Silver Marches_, but that's about it. I'm wondering if it getting so well described is setting us up for the rumored _Against the Giants_-type adventure set in the area - it's the perfect spot in the Realms for it.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 27, 2015)

Demetrios1453 said:


> Elturgard and the Companion are still there. Elturgard is covered fairly extensively on pages 79 - 82.



OK. Is it basically just a rehash of what was in the 4e FRCG? Is it still something of a police state with laws against profanity and the like? Or have they relaxed a bit in the past decade or so?


----------



## Duan'duliir (Oct 27, 2015)

What feature does the Mercenary Veteran have? A player of mine is looking at it with interest.


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Oct 27, 2015)

pukunui said:


> OK. Is it basically just a rehash of what was in the 4e FRCG? Is it still something of a police state with laws against profanity and the like? Or have they relaxed a bit in the past decade or so?




It really doesn't go into too much detail of the laws and such, other than they can sometimes seem a bit stern. The narrator of the chapter (an elf ranger from Evereska) seems pretty approving of the nation from her tone, so it wouldn't seem to be all that bad.


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 27, 2015)

pukunui said:


> @_*Demetrios1453*_,  @_*ad_hoc*_ or  @_*Prism*_: What does the book say about Elturgard?
> 
> I ask because the 4e LFR adventures had the Companion exploding and the nation failing, but the nation still exists and the second sun still hovers over Elturel in _Hoard of the Dragon Queen_, so it would seem that the LFR storyline was non-canonical.



LFR became non-canonical early in it's run. Was a win-win with WotC no longer having to police each module and LFR being allowed to tell grander stories

Altering the companion or the whole epic level storyline would not have been possible if LFR were still canon


----------



## pukunui (Oct 27, 2015)

Demetrios1453 said:


> It really doesn't go into too much detail of the laws and such, other than they can sometimes seem a bit stern. The narrator of the chapter (an elf ranger from Evereska) seems pretty approving of the nation from her tone, so it wouldn't seem to be all that bad.



Yeah, if an elf ranger approves of the place, it must be a decent place.

What, if anything, does it say about the Kingdom of Many Arrows?



Mirtek said:


> LFR became non-canonical early in it's run. Was a win-win with WotC no longer having to police each module and LFR being allowed to tell grander stories
> 
> Altering the companion or the whole epic level storyline would not have been possible if LFR were still canon



Ah OK. I wasn't aware of that. Thanks.


----------



## Serpine (Oct 27, 2015)

userZynx_name said:


> What feature does the Mercenary Veteran have?



Basically you can identify mercenary companies, know mercenary hangouts, and can work as a mercenary during downtime.


----------



## Duan'duliir (Oct 27, 2015)

Serpine said:


> Basically you can identify mercenary companies, know mercenary hangouts, and can work as a mercenary during downtime.



Thanks. That player will probably stick to the PHB for her background, but I think that it suits another player's concept quite well.


----------



## gyor (Oct 28, 2015)

I believe I owe an apology to both the community here and to the writers of the SCAG for that rude unread review I wrote based on bits and pieces of things I read on the internet.

 I was going through some personally issues at the time, I had my father going on a 3 day drug binge during my birthday, the Canadian political party I support took a huge lose after coming so close to winning for the first time, plus other deep personal issues and when I saw certain things weren't in it, things I had been looking forward to thinking they'd be in it, I over reacted and flipped out.

 Normally I am an emotional controlled person, I'm deeply ashamed of making such as a scene, and I'm no saint,  but I know I'm a better person then that and so again I apologize for my behavior and unfortunate consquences.


----------



## MoonSong (Oct 28, 2015)

I'm A Banana said:


> ....but if they don't need the power boost, there's no point in giving it to them. The people who like playing the class aren't really asking for it.




I love the class, I could even be the N1 fan of the class in the whole omniverse, and I think the class really needed it. Was the Favored souls simple PR? I don't know I'm starting to seriously reconsider giving up on 5e at all, not buying a ny single book and focus my energy into something else. 



the Jester said:


> I really hope not. There are better, more elegant ways of making the FS more clericy without making the other sorcerer subclasses essentially obsolete.




But the other subclasses  were born obsolete! Unflattering flavor, ultra focus on blasting. ugh.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 28, 2015)

[MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION] et al: Does the SCAG mention the city of Elversult at all? I mentioned that it was misspelled on the map, but Chris Perkins claims "Eversult" is the correct spelling (despite it being spelled "Elversult" in all my 2e, 3e, and 4e content). I'm just curious to see how it is spelled in the book, if it appears at all. It's possible WotC decided it needed a spelling change. (It happens sometimes.)


----------



## Prism (Oct 28, 2015)

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION] et al: Does the SCAG mention the city of Elversult at all? I mentioned that it was misspelled on the map, but Chris Perkins claims "Eversult" is the correct spelling (despite it being spelled "Elversult" in all my 2e, 3e, and 4e content). I'm just curious to see how it is spelled in the book, if it appears at all. It's possible WotC decided it needed a spelling change. (It happens sometimes.)




I can't see it mentioned. It falls outside of the detailed areas of the Sword Coast. I quick FR wiki search shows the different spelling appears earlier too, in a novel at least


----------



## pukunui (Oct 28, 2015)

Ah well. Maybe both are right then.


----------



## Charles Rampant (Oct 28, 2015)

As a question to those with the book: 

How useful will this be to someone running Princes of the Apocalypse? My players don't appear hugely interested with straying outside of the map boundaries, except perhaps to find something to spend money on, so I don't /need/ the wider world information at the moment, beyond my hazy memories of the 3e book. I'm just debating whether to buy this (for background stuffs for my PotA game) or Out of the Abyss (for underdark chat for my homebrew game). Thanks!


----------



## Irennan (Oct 28, 2015)

[MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION] May I know if Moander appears in the book?


----------



## Prism (Oct 28, 2015)

Irennan said:


> [MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION] May I know if Moander appears in the book?




As a great old one warlock patron. Gets a short paragraph but that's all.


----------



## Prism (Oct 28, 2015)

Entsuropi said:


> As a question to those with the book:
> 
> How useful will this be to someone running Princes of the Apocalypse? My players don't appear hugely interested with straying outside of the map boundaries, except perhaps to find something to spend money on, so I don't /need/ the wider world information at the moment, beyond my hazy memories of the 3e book. I'm just debating whether to buy this (for background stuffs for my PotA game) or Out of the Abyss (for underdark chat for my homebrew game). Thanks!




Well you get quite a bit of detail on Longsaddle, Yartar and Waterdeep which are near (but not that near). It best use is probably during character creation as the players can get a good amount of information on possible homelands which tie nicely into the localised backgrounds. Then of course you have the alternate character builds. Not sure you will get much from it during play of one of the adventure modules unless the party heads off course.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 28, 2015)

Prism said:


> As a great old one warlock patron. Gets a short paragraph but that's all.




Thanks. So I take that entities like Ghaunadaur and Moander, going by the book, may no longer grant divine spells, but have cults, warlock ''agents'' and so on?


----------



## Prism (Oct 28, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Thanks. So I take that entities like Ghaunadaur and Moander, going by the book, may no longer grant divine spells, but have cults, warlock ''agents'' and so on?




It doesn't say so up to the DM. The list of gods is not complete, for example Tiamat is missing as are all of the Mulhorand dieties (they are referred to as demigods). Moander is a dead god though so its up to you to decide if priests can still get divine magic from him. Did he grant spells in earlier editions? I thought he was killed off in 1e


----------



## Irennan (Oct 28, 2015)

Prism said:


> It doesn't say so up to the DM. The list of gods is not complete, for example Tiamat is missing as are all of the Mulhorand dieties (they are referred to as demigods). Moander is a dead god though so its up to you to decide if priests can still get divine magic from him. Did he grant spells in earlier editions? I thought he was killed off in 1e




He could have returned with the Sundering. He lost his divinity, but he has one avatar, out there. However, since he is included, but not even mentioned as a god, I assume that ''by default'' he doesn't have divinity.

 Since, according to what I've gathered, the section presents a general picture of who is currently worshipped/active (I know that it's up to DMs, it always is, but I mean as ''default/canon/official''), the fact that Ghaunadaur is included, but only as a Great Old One (repeating the PHB), without even hinting him as a possible deity, is what made me wonder if he lost his divine status during the Sundering (so, priests no longer receving spells, as default). There's also the fact that a few months ago, Ed Greenwood said in his thread over Candlekeep that the gamble for power that all deities took with the chosen ended badly or even for basically everyone, save for those gods who managed to re-emerge and be worshipped again. So this could point towards Ghaunadaur being one of those deities who lost something in the process.


----------



## FormerlyHemlock (Oct 28, 2015)

MoonSong(Kaiilurker) said:


> I love the class, I could even be the N1 fan of the class in the whole omniverse, and I think the class really needed it. Was the Favored souls simple PR? I don't know I'm starting to seriously reconsider giving up on 5e at all, not buying a ny single book and focus my energy into something else.
> 
> But the other subclasses  were born obsolete! Unflattering flavor, ultra focus on blasting. ugh.




There's no reason you can't houserule the Storm Sorcerer's spells back into effect. I've been using a houserule wherein all sorcerers get bonus spells just like a Favored Soul/Storm Sorcerer (Dragon Sorcerers get spells related to communication and fear, for empire-building like a dragon; Wild Sorcerers roll their bonus spells completely randomly leading to odd-but-surprisingly-non-useless picks like Jump). Now that the final version of Storm Sorcerer nixes those spells, I need to decide whether to nix my houserule as well or to houserule the Storm Sorcerer's bonus spells back in. I haven't decided which I'll do but it could go either way.

If you like the bonus spells, what harm does it do to keep the domain spells in your game? WotC won't object.


----------



## Duan'duliir (Oct 28, 2015)

Hemlock said:


> There's no reason you can't houserule the Storm Sorcerer's spells back into effect. I've been using a houserule wherein all sorcerers get bonus spells just like a Favored Soul/Storm Sorcerer (Dragon Sorcerers get spells related to communication and fear, for empire-building like a dragon; Wild Sorcerers roll their bonus spells completely randomly leading to odd-but-surprisingly-non-useless picks like Jump). Now that the final version of Storm Sorcerer nixes those spells, I need to decide whether to nix my houserule as well or to houserule the Storm Sorcerer's bonus spells back in. I haven't decided which I'll do but it could go either way.
> 
> If you like the bonus spells, what harm does it do to keep the domain spells in your game? WotC won't object.



Out of interest, could you post the bonus spells you used for Dragon Sorcerers and and Wild Sorcerers (or in the case of the Wild, how they roll their bonus spells)? A player of mine is probably going to play a sorcerer soon, and he might like some extra spells.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 28, 2015)

userZynx_name said:


> Out of interest, could you post the bonus spells you used for Dragon Sorcerers and and Wild Sorcerers (or in the case of the Wild, how they roll their bonus spells)? A player of mine is probably going to play a sorcerer soon, and he might like some extra spells.



I'd be interested in seeing that too. Even if you just PM us rather than post it here for all to see.


----------



## MoonSong (Oct 28, 2015)

Hemlock said:


> There's no reason you can't houserule the Storm Sorcerer's spells back into effect. I've been using a houserule wherein all sorcerers get bonus spells just like a Favored Soul/Storm Sorcerer (Dragon Sorcerers get spells related to communication and fear, for empire-building like a dragon; Wild Sorcerers roll their bonus spells completely randomly leading to odd-but-surprisingly-non-useless picks like Jump). Now that the final version of Storm Sorcerer nixes those spells, I need to decide whether to nix my houserule as well or to houserule the Storm Sorcerer's bonus spells back in. I haven't decided which I'll do but it could go either way.
> 
> If you like the bonus spells, what harm does it do to keep the domain spells in your game? WotC won't object.




The bonus spells were an improvised solution to begin with. They don't really solve the underlying problems. And again I don't know anybody who can be the DM and the player at the same time. When I DM I accept lots of stuff, and like to say yes. The problem is when I want to play. Unless I could somehow clone myself to play and DM at the same time, "Houserule it" is no solution.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 29, 2015)

MoonSong(Kaiilurker) said:


> The bonus spells were an improvised solution to begin with. They don't really solve the underlying problems. And again I don't know anybody who can be the DM and the player at the same time. When I DM I accept lots of stuff, and like to say yes. The problem is when I want to play. Unless I could somehow clone myself to play and DM at the same time, "Houserule it" is no solution.




I'm really flexible as a player. I'll play just about anything, and I'll abide by whatever parameters the GM sets. But sometimes, you just want to play something specific, in a certain context, and you know the only way you would ever be able to do it is if you were the DM.

Here's a possibility (and it's one that I'm going to be doing.) Start up a sandboxy campaign. Set it up with house rules and everything, making as close to possible the environment in which you want to play your character. Create your PC too. Then, invite any of your players who are interested to be guest DMs (even those who haven't DMed before). With a sandbox setup, you can provide basic guidelines about the parameters, and let them create whatever adventures they want to run within those parameters, without you knowing exactly what they will be. When you are DMing, you can either have your PC be absent, or put them on more passive mode. When others are DMing, you can enjoy the parameters you want as a player.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 29, 2015)

My main beef is how broken Bladesingers are. Holy frijole! Trances back after a short rest! AC higher than the Palladin (before adding +5 sporadically with Shield spell for complete ridiculousness)! Bonuses to concentrate checks! Extra movement! Extra attack like a fighter! 

WotC went full-retard on this one, boys...


----------



## MoonSong (Oct 29, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> My main beef is how broken Bladesingers are. Holy frijole! Trances back after a short rest! AC higher than the Palladin (before adding +5 sporadically with Shield spell for complete ridiculousness)! Bonuses to concentrate checks! Extra movement! Extra attack like a fighter!
> 
> WotC went full-retard on this one, boys...




SO you say they made an overpowered wizard subclass -which had an overwhelming approval- and refused to let a sorcerer one be on equal terms with other casters? there is no justice.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 29, 2015)

MoonSong(Kaiilurker) said:


> SO you say they made an overpowered wizard subclass -which had an overwhelming approval- and refused to let a sorcerer one be on equal terms with other casters? there is no justice.




Pretty much the gist of it...


----------



## carlbobo (Oct 29, 2015)

*Horrible layout of the map*

They need to release a free version of the map of the Sword Coast since the one in the book is screwed up.


----------



## Zaran (Oct 29, 2015)

carlbobo said:


> They need to release a free version of the map of the Sword Coast since the one in the book is screwed up.




Yeah, you can't even see many of the cities on the actual Coast.


----------



## Prism (Oct 29, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> My main beef is how broken Bladesingers are. Holy frijole! Trances back after a short rest! AC higher than the Palladin (before adding +5 sporadically with Shield spell for complete ridiculousness)! Bonuses to concentrate checks! Extra movement! Extra attack like a fighter!
> 
> WotC went full-retard on this one, boys...




I think you are over-reacting a bit. AC is likely to be lower than a fighter or paladin who typically have in the region of AC18 to 21 over the first 10 levels. If we assume that the blade singer casts mage armour and starts with a good INT and DEX (16 in each) then they might have AC19 to 21 for two encounters and then AC 16 for any others before they rest. However at the same time their hit points are bad as they would have a average CON (maybe 13) and 1d6 hit dice compared to a fighter or paladin with a decent CON and 1d10 hit dice.

Also while the bladesinger is playing around in combat they aren't casting spells which is an opportunity cost. Its often better and safer to cast a wizard cantrip than go into melee. The cantrip would likely hit more often and do as much damage. Its a lot better to cast a full spell.

And the main thing is you miss out on all the other cool wizard school features that you could of otherwise take.

Bladesinger is an interesting option, possibly a bit weak, but I still like it


----------



## pukunui (Oct 29, 2015)

carlbobo said:


> They need to release a free version of the map of the Sword Coast since the one in the book is screwed up.



What's wrong with the one in the book?


----------



## Eric V (Oct 29, 2015)

Prism said:


> Also while the bladesinger is *playing around in combat* they aren't casting spells which is an opportunity cost. Its often better and safer to cast a wizard cantrip than go into melee. The cantrip would likely hit more often and do as much damage. Its a lot better to cast a full spell.
> 
> And the main thing is you miss out on all the other cool wizard school features that you could of otherwise take.
> 
> Bladesinger is an interesting option, possibly a bit weak, but I still like it




Re: the bolded part above.

Why would a bladesinger have to play around in combat?  Doesn't bladesong still give the same bonuses if I hang back and cast spells like a standard wizard?


----------



## SkidAce (Oct 29, 2015)

Eric V said:


> Re: the bolded part above.
> 
> Why would a bladesinger have to play around in combat?  Doesn't bladesong still give the same bonuses if I hang back and cast spells like a standard wizard?




/head explodes


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

Prism said:


> I think you are over-reacting a bit. AC is likely to be lower than a fighter or paladin who typically have in the region of AC18 to 21 over the first 10 levels. If we assume that the blade singer casts mage armour and starts with a good INT and DEX (16 in each) then they might have AC19 to 21 for two encounters and then AC 16 for any others before they rest. However at the same time their hit points are bad as they would have a average CON (maybe 13) and 1d6 hit dice compared to a fighter or paladin with a decent CON and 1d10 hit dice.
> 
> Also while the bladesinger is playing around in combat they aren't casting spells which is an opportunity cost. Its often better and safer to cast a wizard cantrip than go into melee. The cantrip would likely hit more often and do as much damage. Its a lot better to cast a full spell.
> 
> ...




One aspect to keep in mind is that one of the greatest dangers for a wizard is for the front line to collapse, forcing the Mage (Wizards and Sorcerers both suffer here) into melee combat. Low AC, low hit points, and opportunity attacks while casting don't exactly do you any favors in this regard. 

With the above in mind, pretty much any player with even a smidgen of tactical acumen will realize that with a Bladesinger you hang back and cast just like a regular Mage. If things go south you then crank up the Trance and go to work with Improved Movement to disengage, double attack and ridiculous AC when you get stuck brawling, _and_ improved Concentration saves if you need to risk casting in direct melee combat to support a teammate or get a particularly stubborn foe off of you.

Not a whole lot of direct negatives and whole lot of "It's like a Wizard, but without the negative parts!", IMO.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

Now, now Eric V...you aren't supposed to counter a "Meh! I think it's actually kinda weak..." response about a broken new character option with logic. It's against the rules of internet decorum and stuff.


----------



## Tia Nadiezja (Oct 30, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> One aspect to keep in mind is that one of the greatest dangers for a wizard is for the front line to collapse, forcing the Mage (Wizards and Sorcerers both suffer here) into melee combat. Low AC, low hit points, and opportunity attacks while casting don't exactly do you any favors in this regard.
> 
> With the above in mind, pretty much any player with even a smidgen of tactical acumen will realize that with a Bladesinger you hang back and cast just like a regular Mage. If things go south you then crank up the Trance and go to work with Improved Movement to disengage, double attack and ridiculous AC when you get stuck brawling, _and_ improved Concentration saves if you need to risk casting in direct melee combat to support a teammate or get a particularly stubborn foe off of you.
> 
> Not a whole lot of direct negatives and whole lot of "It's like a Wizard, but without the negative parts!", IMO.




An evoker can cast the game's best damaging spells and deal extra damage without fear of harming allies.
An abjurer can basically shut enemy spellcasters down completely with _Counterspell_ - their bonus to their check will just overwhelm their enemy's.
A conjurer can keep their summoned creatures in play whenever they aren't at 0 HP.
A diviner can force failed or successful saves on targets, and can regenerate slots by casting spells.
An enchanter can double the effectiveness of some of the best removal and control spells in the game - taking out two enemies with one instance of concentration.
An illusionist can keep a single slot going on an illusion while creating a variety of effects.
A necromancer can keep low-tier skeletons and zombies useful into the high levels.
A transmuter can gain a list of extra effects, and bypass exploration encounters without using a spell slot on Polymorph.

What you're missing here is that opportunity costs are a thing. Yes, the bladesinger is able to stand up in a melee - and, in fact, to shine there given the right choice of spells - but they're distinctly inferior at _wizarding_ to the other wizard subclasses.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

Tia Nadiezja said:


> An evoker can cast the game's best damaging spells and deal extra damage without fear of harming allies.
> An abjurer can basically shut enemy spellcasters down completely with _Counterspell_ - their bonus to their check will just overwhelm their enemy's.
> A conjurer can keep their summoned creatures in play whenever they aren't at 0 HP.
> A diviner can force failed or successful saves on targets, and can regenerate slots by casting spells.
> ...




Good point. 

But you know, with the removal of basically every strong negative to being a Wizard (and every Wizard you mentioned above suffers as I discussed above), the Bladesinger really shines. You see, I'm an Old Skool D&D player and I honestly had no clue that half the stuff you mentioned above even existed. And when I'm looking at three Multi-Attack, Pack Tactics baddies at bad breath range (which happened _a lot_ in the Tiamat campaign) I probably won't give a dang. But I _certainly will_ care that my AC is 19+, that I can move +10ft to get away if I have to use my action to Dash to make room or simply scream and run, I can attack twice later if necessary, and that my Concentration checks are done at a probable minimum of +3 if I _really_ have to cast something at point-blank range.

I, for one, would _gladly_ trade each thing you mentioned above for the stuff I just mentioned for both character survivablity and general Death Machine (tm) utility for most parties.


----------



## Tia Nadiezja (Oct 30, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> Good point.
> 
> But you know, with the removal of basically every strong negative to being a Wizard (and every Wizard you mentioned above suffers as I discussed above), the Bladesinger really shines. You see, I'm an Old Skool D&D player and I honestly had no clue that half the stuff you mentioned above even existed. And when I'm looking at three Multi-Attack, Pack Tactics baddies at bad breath range (which happened _a lot_ in the Tiamat campaign) I probably won't give a dang. But I _certainly will_ care that my AC is 19+, that I can move +10ft to get away if I have to use my action to Dash to make room or simply scream and run, I can attack twice later if necessary, and that my Concentration checks are done at a probable minimum of +3 if I _really_ have to cast something at point-blank range.
> 
> I, for one, would _gladly_ trade each thing you mentioned above for the stuff I just mentioned for both character survivablity and general Death Machine (tm) utility for most parties.




I'm currently planning a Bladesinger, and currently playing an Abjurer.

I fully expect my Abjurer will turn out to have been by far the more powerful of the two. Improved Abjuration and the abjurer's Ward ability are incredible features, which I expect to completely outshine my new Bladesinger's abilities. I'm building a Bladesinger because I love them and have since the days of 2e.

Oh, and if you need to get away from the baddies? Misty Step is a level 2 spell that casts as a bonus action and teleports you 20 feet, leaving you free to both move and cast a cantrip. Shield is +5 AC as a reaction for the rest of the round, boosting your momentary AC for that round from 16-ish (+2 Dex - Dex is pretty much always the second-best ability score for wizards) to 21-ish and, if you're an Abjurer, restoring your ward.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

Tia Nadiezja said:


> I'm currently planning a Bladesinger, and currently playing an Abjurer.
> 
> I fully expect my Abjurer will turn out to have been by far the more powerful of the two. Improved Abjuration and the abjurer's Ward ability are incredible features, which I expect to completely outshine my new Bladesinger's abilities. I'm building a Bladesinger because I love them and have since the days of 2e.
> 
> Oh, and if you need to get away from the baddies? Misty Step is a level 2 spell that casts as a bonus action and teleports you 20 feet, leaving you free to both move and cast a cantrip. Shield is +5 AC as a reaction for the rest of the round, boosting your momentary AC for that round from 16-ish (+2 Dex - Dex is pretty much always the second-best ability score for wizards) to 21-ish and, if you're an Abjurer, restoring your ward.




All of which a Bladesinger will likely also have. 

I'm currently looking at a character in my group with a Trance AC of 21 (26 with Shield...higher than Tiamat!) and everything you just mentioned above...at 3rd level and zero magic items.

My Tiamat campaign paladin had a 26 AC with Dwarven Plate +2, and Shield of Spell Deflection (or whatever it's called) +1, Haste, and Shield of Faith.

Level 3 Wizard...Level 17 Paladin with epic-level magic items... *tetters outstretched hands and tilts towards the Wizard*


----------



## Devilbass (Oct 30, 2015)

All wizards can cast at point blank range without fear of opportunity attacks. All casters for that matter. In 5e the only thing that triggers an OA is leaving an enemy's reach (at least by default).  The bladesinger's bonus to concentration checks is helpful for all wizards, but especially helpful for those who are melee-focused.  Also, of wizard subclasses, bladesingers do not have a monopoly on such a benefit; transmuters can gain proficiency in CON saves with their philosopher's stone.

Also, the bonus to AC is being over-valued, as it is not always on, and is more than necessary to supplement a wizard's piddly HP.  And factoring the Shield spell is mostly inconsequential, as it is available to all wizards - the only relevant factors are light armor proficiency and Int bonus.  And really, the armor proficiency effectly only saves a single level 1 spell slot, rather than increasing AC (unless you gain access to magic armor in which case it does both).  The saving of this spell slot is probably the only way that shield is relevant to the discussion because it means that bladesingers could get one more use of it compared to a wizard who is mage armoured.

Bonus speed (10 ft) is nice, but not significant enough to cause any kind of imbalance, plenty of monsters have higher speeds, ranged weapons, proning attacks, and grapples; if enemies are determined to limit your mobility, or put the hurt on you, 10 ft of extra movement may not save you.

It looks to me like the bladesinger is designed to be a melee wizard, especially with the new cantrips.  Now, you're right that the subclass somewhat undoes a number of the wizard's classic weaknesses, but in order for it to be a melee wizard, it has to.  And maybe the idea of paying a bladesinger who doesn't do melee is appealing to you, but then you're playing a wizard who isn't as good at magic. The subclass features of the other subclasses are potent and probably worth more to the typical wizard than a higher armor class. I mean, if defence is a big concern, the abjure had that covered nicely - better than the bladesinger even, as it's defensive capabilities are tailored to cope with physical and magical assault. Having superior counter spell and dispel magic capabilities is a powerful advantage as is spell resistance.  I don't think the bladesinger measures up to this.

That's not even to mention the potent abilities of other subclasses.  I think if you look closely at all the wizard subclasses, you'll find that the bladesinger only really tops then as a melee wizard, and not as a wizard in general.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 30, 2015)

I think it's strong, but not quite overpowered.

As far as Extra Attack, that is great. But unless you have a good magic weapon, you won't be using it much. You'll be using _greenflame blade_ (or _booming blade_) because it's better most of the time. And it's even better for you than for most, because at high enough level you add your Int to weapon damage. Now, _by that time_ you might have a nice magic item and be using Extra Attack for single target attacks and getting your Int bonus on both attacks. The only ones who can get more out of the weapon enhancing cantrips are the valor bard and eldritch knight, who can make two attacks and still use it.

Basically, you are on the high end of the "not designed to excel with weapons" damage tier. You're doing better than an evoker with _firebolt_, but you aren't competing with anyone packing a d10 HD.

The two weaknesses that I can see are hit points and opportunity cost. Now, as far as hit points go, there is a simple solution: Tough. *BAM!* Fighter equivalent hit points with a single feat. Now you can tank if you want. Of course, anyone can take Tough, so that's not a balance issue. It's just how you would turn into a tank if you wanted to.

Opportunity cost is simple. While you are doing a great job outclassing the people who aren't supposed to be swinging weapons around anyway by providing modest melee support to the real tanks, you aren't supporting the party by casting spells.

What might be a good way to deal with it would be to _not_ focus on combat spells. Just fight in combat, and use your spells for everything that isn't combat. That's a perfectly viable way to do it. You might end up making the worst combat contribution in the whole party if you do that though.

I'm sure there are ways to increase your melee potential significantly, and make your character a welcome presence on the front lines. Wizards don't have a lot of "I do more damage with my weapon attacks" spells, but _haste_ comes to mind. You can pair that with Tough and go frontline it with the others, as long as you have the spell slots, and then be the out of combat utility guy with the rest of them.

I think bladesinger is a really fun concept and a great contribution to the game, but I can't quite do what I want to do with my fighter/mage with it. If it were overpowered I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have any problem making it do what I want it to (which isn't actually overpowered, just difficult to squeeze out of the rules).


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 30, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> All of which a Bladesinger will likely also have.



 But he won"t have any powerful wizard Tricks, only the standard wizard tricks.

He trades being good in his main job for being good in an emergency happening once in a while


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 30, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> But he won"t have any powerful wizard Tricks, only the standard wizard tricks.
> 
> He trades being good in his main job for being good in an emergency happening once in a while




disclaimer: I don't have the book yet

I thought that someone said blaidsingers add extra attack ontop of spells... once you have 4th or 5th level spells those class features are no where near as good... and to be honest 1 6th level spell per day IS the powerful wizard trick in my book


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 30, 2015)

AC is not as important as HP, and a High Elf using the standard array will be lacking there.


----------



## Prism (Oct 30, 2015)

GMforPowergamers said:


> disclaimer: I don't have the book yet
> 
> I thought that someone said blaidsingers add extra attack ontop of spells... once you have 4th or 5th level spells those class features are no where near as good... and to be honest 1 6th level spell per day IS the powerful wizard trick in my book




No, you only get to use your two melee attacks like any other character when you take the attack action. So its an alternative to casting a spell or cantrip in any given round. A nice alternative, but as you level up less and less useful. There is a small damage bump at higher levels to each of those two attacks but only enough to keep it in line with a cantrip really. The class basically lets you mix it up in combat when you don't want to cast a spell that round. It gives you a high enough AC that will allow you to survive a while in melee. However it doesn't make you any better as a spellcaster at all, whereas the other schools all do.


----------



## JohnLynch (Oct 30, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> AC is not as important as HP, and a High Elf using the standard array will be lacking there.



DEX 14, CON 14, INT 16. How could that be better?


----------



## Prism (Oct 30, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> All of which a Bladesinger will likely also have.
> 
> I'm currently looking at a character in my group with a Trance AC of 21 (26 with Shield...higher than Tiamat!) and everything you just mentioned above...at 3rd level and zero magic items.




So this 3rd level character has a Dex of 18 and Int of 18 (or maybe Dex 16 and Int 20)? And they cast mage armour when needed too which might be 1-2 slots per day. Good stat rolling does make for a powerful character I agree. A typical bladesinger at 3rd level is far more likely to be AC 19 though - still nice to have.



> My Tiamat campaign paladin had a 26 AC with Dwarven Plate +2, and Shield of Spell Deflection (or whatever it's called) +1, Haste, and Shield of Faith.
> 
> Level 3 Wizard...Level 17 Paladin with epic-level magic items... *tetters outstretched hands and tilts towards the Wizard*




The paladin is in a much better place when it comes to AC. How many times a day does the bladesinger really want to cast shield. Nice as a get out of jail but hardly reliable.

Anyway the point is that Bladesingers do get a nice AC which helps out in a limited amount of combat. They are also able to use shield pretty well since they are likely to get attacked more than other wizards. However non of that actually helps them offensively. Bladesinger is a defensive focused option so if that's what you want it looks fun. I would disagree that going defensive as a wizard is the best way to go all the time. I like the other schools better in general though I wouldn't be against trying a bladesinger too.

Btw this discussions comes from you claiming that bladesinger is broken. If you think a decent AC (to a class that rarely needs it), a slightly better movement and concentration checks, and an extra melee attack breaks a wizard then I disagree. These are all instead of the standard wizard school abilities which are also pretty cool.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> AC is not as important as HP, and a High Elf using the standard array will be lacking there.




I would rather not be hit at all than be able to take a hit. Just sayin'...


----------



## Prism (Oct 30, 2015)

JohnLynch said:


> DEX 14, CON 14, INT 16. How could that be better?




The point is that having a decent AC in combat isn't that important if your hit points are poor. You need both. And with that array the bladesingers AC will be 18 at best and the hit points will be average to low for a melee character. Enough for a melee support character which is how we should be looking at this school.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

GMforPowergamers said:


> disclaimer: I don't have the book yet
> 
> I thought that someone said blaidsingers add extra attack ontop of spells... once you have 4th or 5th level spells those class features are no where near as good... and to be honest 1 6th level spell per day IS the powerful wizard trick in my book




I agree completely.

Some (many of you, in this case) players will focus in the "neat tricks" of certain Wizard styles but when it comes to raw survivability and utility, the Bladesinger goes way too far. At least the other <other stuff>/wizard classes have limitations on them like limited spell schools. Bladesinger is basically a Wizard without the bad stuff (poor in melee, not as fast as other classes outside of dumping spell slots/feats) that attacks like a brawling class.

A few potential fixes I have thought about are:

1. Making the extra attack a bonus action. 

2. Removing the +10ft of movement

3. Removing the bonus to Concentration checks

or making it so the class gets a single feature of Trance at certain levels until the Bladesinger gets them all by level 16-17 but certainly not giving them all of them at 3rd level.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

Prism said:


> The point is that having a decent AC in combat isn't that important if your hit points are poor. You need both. And with that array the bladesingers AC will be 18 at best and the hit points will be average to low for a melee character. Enough for a melee support character which is how we should be looking at this school.




And I disagree completely. Once I hit a natural AC 20 and then started stacking defensive spells from there I could basically wade into dang near anything. Most "Big and Bad" enemies cap out at +10 to hit or so and you won't be running into those for a while outside of fighting the critter on the book cover. 

You can't build the encounters around the one guy that can basically move anywhere on board with an AC of 20+ when everyone else galumphs around at AC 17 and 30ft of movement.


----------



## MYV (Oct 30, 2015)

the bladesinger is for wizards simply what the EK is for fighters...
the EK is a fighter with crappy wizard options and a bladesinger is a wizard with crappy fighter options.

If you wanna play a wizard as a caster, the bladesinger sucks.
If you wanna play a GISH with mainly a spell caster focus you are better multiclassing but the bladesinger can be an option.

If you wanna go all the way with bladesinger wizard you'll realize you are just a wizard with mostly useless features out of the bladesinger. At high levels you are not gonna be competitive with frontline fighters and you are never gonna go melee when you have access to high lvl spells.


----------



## Salamandyr (Oct 30, 2015)

Talking about bladesingers, has anyone looked at how it stacks multiclassed with Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster?


----------



## MYV (Oct 30, 2015)

Salamandyr said:


> Talking about bladesingers, has anyone looked at how it stacks multiclassed with Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster?




I would guess it goes well with AT but not so well with EK
The EK is a bit redundant, and losing the shield and heavy armor is not worth it IMO, the EK is better off with an Abjurer

most likely a BS is probably better off multiclassing with a straight rogue or straight fighter (battlemaster?) for some more GISH styled character


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 30, 2015)

JohnLynch said:


> DEX 14, CON 14, INT 16. How could that be better?





By being a Hill Dwarf Fighter, similar AC but pulling waaaaaay more HP per level: that array gives an average of ~7 per level, which is not much.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 30, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> I would rather not be hit at all than be able to take a hit. Just sayin'...





Assuming maxed out Dex and Int while wearing +3 studded leather armor, that's AC of 25: harder to hit, but the PC will be hit, and given the d6 hit die hit HARD.  Frankly, no offense meant, bit if you think AC is the key in 5E you need to rum the math again...


----------



## SkidAce (Oct 30, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Frankly, no offense meant, bit if you think AC is the key in 5E you need to rum the math again...




I rum my math all the time, its what messes me up!


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Assuming maxed out Dex and Int while wearing +3 studded leather armor, that's AC of 25: harder to hit, but the PC will be hit, and given the d6 hit die hit HARD.  Frankly, no offense meant, bit if you think AC is the key in 5E you need to rum the math again...




So when I was fighting Tiamat at Level 13 and barely keeping the to-hit better than 50/50 in my favor...you're saying that simply not being hit _wasn't_ a huge part of my personal success in that battle...when Tiamat easily averages 40+ points of damage per attack...

Umm...interesting viewpoint, sir!


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 30, 2015)

Salamandyr said:


> Talking about bladesingers, has anyone looked at how it stacks multiclassed with Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster?




again don't have the book yet, but

that is my main reason to follow this. I think mixing Bladesinger X with Eldritch KNight Y is going to be the way to go...


----------



## Salamandyr (Oct 30, 2015)

Just theorycrafting, but I think MYV is right, the bladesinger is going to turn the Arcane Trickster into a bear.  Multiple attacks, Expertise, Cunning action, High Level spellcasting, and all the little bonus things I can't think of right now because I don't have the books in front of me?  Synergistic alignment of all major stats?

Finally, the Fighter/Magic-User/Thief is reborn!

Low hit points, but those guys were always glass tigers anyway.


----------



## ZickZak (Oct 30, 2015)

*Mod edit: *link to copyright infringing images removed.  Sorry.  ~Umbran

Somewhere at the end is the Bladesinger, if you havent seen it.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 30, 2015)

SkidAce said:


> I rum my math all the time, its what messes me up!





Ha, given how small my phone is, and hoe large my thumbs are, it's a marvel of engineering that my spelling is as well-captured as it is! :-o

That said, D&D math is better with rum.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 30, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> So when I was fighting Tiamat at Level 13 and barely keeping the to-hit better than 50/50 in my favor...you're saying that simply not being hit _wasn't_ a huge part of my personal success in that battle...when Tiamat easily averages 40+ points of damage per attack...
> 
> 
> 
> Umm...interesting viewpoint, sir!





Sure, the AC helps, but the d6 High Elf with a similar AC to the Half-Orc Barbarian will take fewer hits before going down.

And yeah, while this one cool subclass, the other Wizard Traditions have plenty going for them.  The Bladesinger is better in melee conditions than a Diviner, but the Diviner wants to avoid melee conditions.


----------



## Celtavian (Oct 30, 2015)

The way the game is set up, I can't see that Bladesinger getting much play save as a style-choice. When the Bladesinger first appeared, it was a very cool archetype/kit. Now it's just an inferior archetype very few will ever play.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 30, 2015)

Salamandyr said:


> Just theorycrafting, but I think MYV is right, the bladesinger is going to turn the Arcane Trickster into a bear.  Multiple attacks, Expertise, Cunning action, High Level spellcasting, and all the little bonus things I can't think of right now because I don't have the books in front of me?  Synergistic alignment of all major stats?
> 
> Finally, the Fighter/Magic-User/Thief is reborn!
> 
> Low hit points, but those guys were always glass tigers anyway.




if nothing else, this makes it rock... 2e fighter/mage/thief for the win...

now we need a fighter/cleric/mage build...


----------



## Salamandyr (Oct 30, 2015)

Celtavian said:


> The way the game is set up, I can't see that Bladesinger getting much play save as a style-choice. When the Bladesinger first appeared, it was a very cool archetype/kit. Now it's just an inferior archetype very few will ever play.




It's a wizard with a sword.  It will get played.


----------



## gyor (Oct 30, 2015)

You don't need to be a bladesinger to play a wizard with a sword, you just need to play an Elf, certain half elf variants, or take the right feat, or multiclass.

 I say that not as a complaint against bladesinger, it sounds like an interesting subclass, but as mere observation.


----------



## gyor (Oct 30, 2015)

GMforPowergamers said:


> if nothing else, this makes it rock... 2e fighter/mage/thief for the win...
> 
> now we need a fighter/cleric/mage build...




 Fighter/Cleric/Mage equals Favoured Soul Sorceror with life domain from UA, access to sorceror spells/metamagic, cleric buff and healing spells from the life domain (many of which are enhancable with metamagic), and two attacks, extra weapon and armour prof, and now access to Greenflame Blade and Booming Blade (this assumes favoured soul is not nerfed by removing domain spells).

 Alternately play a Valour Bard, take a mix of wizard and cleric spells, plus you get an extra attack, and armour weapon prof.

 Really out there verison Tomelock, which gives you access to other classes rituals and cantrips including the clerics and wizard, with Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade cantrips.


----------



## Z. H. Darkstar (Oct 30, 2015)

GMforPowergamers said:


> if nothing else, this makes it rock... 2e fighter/mage/thief for the win...
> 
> now we need a fighter/cleric/mage build...



Arcane Domain Cleric with a Fighter dip gives you that same feel. You get 10 generic Wizard spells, 4 high level Wizard spells of your choice, 2 Wizard cantrips of your choice, and +Wis to cantrip damage. Playing as variant human opens the door to grabbing a feat at 1st level for more build specialization. I have a thread about a similar build in the CharOp forum.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 30, 2015)

Z. H. Darkstar said:


> Arcane Domain Cleric with a Fighter dip gives you that same feel. You get 10 generic Wizard spells, 4 high level Wizard spells of your choice, 2 Wizard cantrips of your choice, and +Wis to cantrip damage. Playing as variant human opens the door to grabbing a feat at 1st level for more build specialization. I have a thread about a similar build in the CharOp forum.




sounds good to me...


----------



## Salamandyr (Oct 30, 2015)

Z. H. Darkstar said:


> Arcane Domain Cleric with a Fighter dip gives you that same feel. You get 10 generic Wizard spells, 4 high level Wizard spells of your choice, 2 Wizard cantrips of your choice, and +Wis to cantrip damage. Playing as variant human opens the door to grabbing a feat at 1st level for more build specialization. I have a thread about a similar build in the CharOp forum.




Ah, yeah.  that's the stuff.  Thanks, I will check that thread out.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 30, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> At least the other <other stuff>/wizard classes have limitations on them like limited spell schools.




Not in 5e. No wizard subclass limits spell access or anything else. Subclass features are purely additive across the board in 5e.

Please don't take this in the wrong way, but I'd encourage you to read or re-read the wizard entry in the PHB. It sounds like you may be going on some outdated premises. I apologize if I'm misunderstanding your argument.


----------



## ZickZak (Oct 30, 2015)

Bladesinger is an Archetype of a Wizard who really doesnt lose that much. It is still a Wizard who can go melee twice a short rest. The only thing I dont like is that it cannot have 2hander. Easy to HB as long as one isnt trying to break it.
MCing Wizard and Warlock I would have went Blade pact and Bladesinger, would "look" cool.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Oct 30, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> Not in 5e. No wizard subclass limits spell access or anything else. Subclass features are purely additive across the board in 5e.
> 
> Please don't take this in the wrong way, but I'd encourage you to read or re-read the wizard entry in the PHB. It sounds like you may be going on some outdated premises. I apologize if I'm misunderstanding your argument.




I was about to post something like this. It _really_ sounds like the bladesinger is being compared to older-edition wizards.

Read the wizard entry. Completely. Without assumptions. You'll find a lot of prior-edition knowledge simply isn't accurate here.


----------



## Degwerks (Oct 30, 2015)

I was really hung up on the Bladesinger not getting the EK's War Magic ability, also I wanted my bladelock to get War Magic as well. Grabbing 7 lvls in EK is not a great idea for either class. However today I've rediscovered the 5e version of the Scimitar of Speed, this little guy kinda solves my envy of the EK's 7th level ability. Does less damage than a rapier but I can still finesse it.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> Not in 5e. No wizard subclass limits spell access or anything else. Subclass features are purely additive across the board in 5e.
> 
> Please don't take this in the wrong way, but I'd encourage you to read or re-read the wizard entry in the PHB. It sounds like you may be going on some outdated premises. I apologize if I'm misunderstanding your argument.




I was talking about Arcane Trickster and the Eldrich Knight variants, actually.


----------



## psychophipps (Oct 30, 2015)

Mouseferatu said:


> I was about to post something like this. It _really_ sounds like the bladesinger is being compared to older-edition wizards.
> 
> Read the wizard entry. Completely. Without assumptions. You'll find a lot of prior-edition knowledge simply isn't accurate here.




No, I understand it just fine. I'm simply pointing out that the stuff you lose for going with Bladesinger vs. another Wizard type isn't what I consider a big hit in most circumstances. With the right character concept, I would even go so far as to say that the stuff that you guys are clinging so tightly to is far inferior in many respects to what you would gain with Bladesinging, especially since my earlier comments were lacking the knowledge that starting at level 10 the Bladesinger can dump spell slots for damage mitigation (Seriously ?!?).

Trying hard to figure out the best way to handle this as Shield is also a Reaction. Do you hide the to-hit total from the player hoping to draw a spell slot with Shield use or do you announce all of your to-hit totals and give them a leg up on picking the perfect method to deal with each attack as it comes in?

How y'all aren't seeing what I see is pretty confusing to me, but we obviously have completely different priorities in terms of game balance.


----------



## Prism (Oct 30, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> Trying hard to figure out the best way to handle this as Shield is also a Reaction. Do you hide the to-hit total from the player hoping to draw a spell slot with Shield use or do you announce all of your to-hit totals and give them a leg up on picking the perfect method to deal with each attack as it comes in?




We tend to announce the AC that the monster hits so as a player you know if using shield will work or not. We also often play using fantasy grounds and that automatically tells you the AC that the monster hits.



> How y'all aren't seeing what I see is pretty confusing to me, but we obviously have completely different priorities in terms of game balance.




We may well have different priorities of what we want in a character option but I wouldn't say terms of balance. I am quite happy that the bladesinger is well balanced. Where we differ I think is how much we rate AC on a wizard. I know its a high AC - equal to a plate mail wearing fighter. I just don't see this remotely as an issue. I have several characters with AC 20 to 22 and they get hit often enough. At the same time the bladesinger has a fairly low damage output with weapons.

I much prefer the more offensive and out of combat options that the other wizard schools get. Much more than having a better defense.


----------



## Tia Nadiezja (Oct 30, 2015)

I tend to announce the AC the monster hits too. It feels more right to me... the character is a trained adventurer; they would generally know if their spell would be able to deflect the blow or not.

Then again, for that very reason, I tend to err in the direction of giving too much information (particularly mechanics information) to the players over too little. The mechanics are how the players interact with a world that their characters will, by necessity, know more about than I can convey descriptively. The mechanics are the visible laws of physics for the game world; the characters have an instinctive understanding of them.


----------



## Charles Rampant (Oct 31, 2015)

When rolling to hit versus players with access to Shield, I roll and announce each attack's total. That means that the player has to decide, when hit by the first attack of three in a multiattack, whether they need to blow the shield spell or not. It adds a bit more tension to that decision, which I like.


----------



## gyor (Oct 31, 2015)

I finally got a look at the SCAG, and here is what I noticed.

 First since I've seen people ask about the Barbarian's Tiger spirit, its gives a jumping bonus while raging, two bonus skills out of a selection of four (I only remember Athletics and Acobatics), and the big daddy, if you move in a straight line over 20 feet and attack, you can make a bonus attack as a bonus action, basically a humaniod verison of pounce. I really like it. I didn't have time to catch Elk.

 I focused more on the fluff.

 Mulhorand is not back from Abier, more like back to the future (or past). The Mulhorandi lead a second revolt against the High Imaskari, drove them into the purple desert and to safehavens in other planes (Shadowfell and Feywild? Ethereal plane? Elemental? Outer? Astral? it doesn't say which planes).

 The Mulhorand Divine Incarnations sound like Chosen whose power is to be possessed by the full might of they're Gods (same with Gilgeam in Unther), they're host "Chosen" is are either Human, Aasimar, or Tiefling (which likely makes these the most powerful and respected Tieflings in the realms). 

 The Mulhorand section reads like its writtem by someone who works for the propoganda branch of the Mulhorand Government. The Mulhorand gods reincarnated into the Mulhorandi population, beat the stuffing out of the Imaskri like they did thousands of years previously, but this time they eliminated slavery (of course the High Imaskari already did this, but apparently they're rule was somehow like slavery, aside from some religious freedom suppression I guess, and they had to deal with the High Imaskari secret police so I sort of see it, or at least I can see how the Mulhorandi buy into it).

 The Tiefling section has abit more like how Mulhorand Tiefling last name, like all desendants of the gods, have Sia or Zai added to the thier Ancestor God's name, examples given are Sia'sobek and Zai'Anhur (Anhur was Chaotic Good, why does he have Aasimar desendants? It actually makes sense in a minute).

 The Mulhorand Gods are one big happy family, well not so happy, but they're united in ruling Mulhorand as Pharos, so Set is back in as a member of the ruling family, no longer an outsider within the Pantheon. They all rule it together (I sure Sharess, aka Bast, aka the Foe of Set is thrilled they one big happy family again).

 Mulhorand is focused on protecting they're returned turf. 

 Unther is back and its pissed off, it was subjagated by other beings, until Gilgeam reborn lead a revolt in Abier to free his people, and on the cusp of William Wallace's, er I mean Gilgeam's last battle for FREEEEEEDOM, Unther was teleported back to Faerun where, wait for it...Tymanther IS STILL THERE, that's right, Tymanther did not go back to Abier.

 So the Unther Tymanther war happened, the Dragonborn it appears where one of the beings were dominated the the Untherites, and Tymanther shrunk to a much smaller, place on the coasts. Its fortified its position so it isn't going anywhere, and the Untherite Navy is kept at bay by a strange beast in Tymanther's waters. 

 Tymanther isn't the only 4e survivor, Najara, Elf Harrows, Air Spur (what's left of the Akanul Genasi Empire, its now just one of many Chessenta City States, and but it still floats unlike other motes), Eltgurd, possibly a few I'm not thinking of.

 Evermeet is cooler then ever, if abit confusing by what it means by existing in three planes, it almost sounds like its comingled with the Feywild and Avandor Eberron style.

 Alot of peoples that returned from Abier seemdd scarred by thier time in Abier, possible exception Halruu which did it on purpose, displacing part of Abier to the Shadow Plane (I assume the Shadow Planes inhabitants, were returned to Abier, no doubt becoming creeper for the experience like the Shades).


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 31, 2015)

I mean, the Bladesinger is cool; but it doesn't replace the Fighter, nor negate the coolness of the base classes.

One of the beauty of 5E design is that they do not need to make anything worrying about multi passing "balance" as the optional rule is called out as unbalanced: play at your own risk!


----------



## gyor (Oct 31, 2015)

One interesting thing is how they dealt with the Gods they did write ups for, many of the evil Gods have a less evil spin among regular folks, with Asmodeaus beings the most jaw dropping as the God of Indulgence, like folks will pray to him for forgiveness for thier sins, wish fulfilment, to hide stuff from other gods, ect...and not just in exchange for ones soul either, I guess since he benifits from worship as well as Souls, lesser gifts don't cost your soul anymore, just some praying, or at leasts that's what it sounds like.

 Serious he sounds like a cross between Jesus, Pan, and a Genie who has a side job as the devil he doesn't like to talk about.

 I could totally see a Good Priest of Asmodeaus as weird as that sounds, Bane too, especially in Eltgurd oddly.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 31, 2015)

Well, Lawful Neutral possibly.  Sounds more like real religion, or even more like Greenwoods' concepts.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Oct 31, 2015)

Indulgence and Sin is a very wide category. So I see asking for reprieve for them to the God of them making sense.


----------



## gyor (Oct 31, 2015)

Oh the Mulhorand Archwizard Nezram the World Walker, who was old before the spellplague, and who blamed High Imaskar unfairly for Mulhorand's fall, helped the Mulhorand Gods over throw the Imaskari.

 I think Nezram is one of the coolest Archmages in the realms, and not really Mortal anymore.

 Tcarzzar the Undying's latest incarnation (he's become like the Mulhorand Gods and Gilgeam it seems), rules in Erosobe in Chessenta. Another Chessenta city, Lutheq or something like that is ruled by a strange deity called Entropy.

 So the Gods are not silent anymore, but they're quiet instead, dumping most of thier Chosen in exchange for more sublte signs of thier wishes mostly. The exception appears to be the Old Empires (Mulhorand, Unther, Chessenta) , where the Gods don't do Sutble, they are loudly in charge of much of it directly via possessed Chosen rulers. This most really change the vibe of religion in that region.

 Oh and Vaasa is still ruled by Warlock Knights from 4e.

 Ra and Horus are seperate beings, the Mulhorand Gods side bar doesn't mention all the Gods of Mulhorand, such as Sobek, but he's mentioned in the Tiefling section, so its likely thier all back. 

 Some deities are left out, but it does mention in addition to the Faerun Pantheon they're is racial pantheons, and local powers and divinities as well as forgiegn Gods worshipped (like Zakhara Gods and Kara-Tur both of which have thier own Gods). Monster Pantheons are listed, only player race Pantheons listed (Drow, Elf, Dwarf, Gnome, Halfling, Orc). Dragonborn never really followed the Dragon Pantheon, because they have a bad history with Dragons, so its no surprise that the Dragon Pantheon isn't listed. Tieflings outside Mulhorand worship a mix of more forgiving Tiefling friendly Gods, Gods that share common Tiefling Interests including Gods of War, and of course Asmodeaus, demons, and devils.

 The really cool part (and why Tiefling religion is my favourite racial religion part), is that Tieflings have been recieving visions of Tieflingfied Gods, like a Tiefling Tymora and Selune for example with special mames for them. 

 It makes wonder if Evil Aasimar get visions of Aasimar looking Evil Gods like Bane, Lovitar, Malar, Besheba and Talona for example. Actually I could really see Asmodeaus doing that, appearing as an Angel of Light to an Aasimar worshipper hehehe.


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Oct 31, 2015)

gyor said:


> I finally got a look at the SCAG, and here is what I noticed.
> 
> First since I've seen people ask about the Barbarian's Tiger spirit, its gives a jumping bonus while raging, two bonus skills out of a selection of four (I only remember Athletics and Acobatics), and the big daddy, if you move in a straight line over 20 feet and attack, you can make a bonus attack as a bonus action, basically a humaniod verison of pounce. I really like it. I didn't have time to catch Elk.
> 
> ...





A lot of the fluff parts of the book need to be taken with a grain of salt, as there are a lot of unreliable, (slightly) misinformed, and (somewhat) biased narrators. Since Mulhorand is so far from the Sword Coast, what reports or information that trickles west may be quite different than what it's _really_ like there. Or, then again, maybe that _is_ what it's really like there - it's not uncommon for even enemies to get along in the first flush of victory, only to see the quarrels and backstabbing start soon after (no doubt Set will instigate something sooner rather than later...)

Najara is actually of 3e vintage, having premiered in 2004's _Serpent Kingdoms_.

Oh, in regards to your other post, Luthcheq has worshiped Entropy all the way from 2e times - it's a _very_ weird and creepy city.


----------



## ad_hoc (Oct 31, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> No, I understand it just fine. I'm simply pointing out that the stuff you lose for going with Bladesinger vs. another Wizard type isn't what I consider a big hit in most circumstances. With the right character concept, I would even go so far as to say that the stuff that you guys are clinging so tightly to is far inferior in many respects to what you would gain with Bladesinging, especially since my earlier comments were lacking the knowledge that starting at level 10 the Bladesinger can dump spell slots for damage mitigation (Seriously ?!?).
> 
> Trying hard to figure out the best way to handle this as Shield is also a Reaction. Do you hide the to-hit total from the player hoping to draw a spell slot with Shield use or do you announce all of your to-hit totals and give them a leg up on picking the perfect method to deal with each attack as it comes in?
> 
> How y'all aren't seeing what I see is pretty confusing to me, but we obviously have completely different priorities in terms of game balance.




It sounds to me like you have high stats in your games.

My idea of balance is the standard array or standard point buy.

A Bladesinger with ridiculous stats will be very good. Otherwise they are a standard MAD class that must sacrifice in other areas to slowly invest in those stats.


----------



## Irennan (Oct 31, 2015)

gyor said:


> One interesting thing is how they dealt with the Gods they did write ups for, many of the evil Gods have a less evil spin among regular folks, with Asmodeaus beings the most jaw dropping as the God of Indulgence, like folks will pray to him for forgiveness for thier sins, wish fulfilment, to hide stuff from other gods, ect...and not just in exchange for ones soul either, I guess since he benifits from worship as well as Souls, lesser gifts don't cost your soul anymore, just some praying, or at leasts that's what it sounds like.
> 
> Serious he sounds like a cross between Jesus, Pan, and a Genie who has a side job as the devil he doesn't like to talk about.
> 
> I could totally see a Good Priest of Asmodeaus as weird as that sounds, Bane too, especially in Eltgurd oddly.




I like this kind of take, and --if you read Elminster's FR-- it's what Ed envisioned too. Evil gods and their followers (well, most of them. Then you have deities like Lolth...) *don't* go ''evulz is kewl, I kick puppies for the lulz'', because no one with half a brain, save for people with severe problems, would dedicate themselves to such a religion. Their followers base would be narrowed by such a behaviour, they would get swiftly crushed or driven away from any civilized society, because they would be nothing but a harmful annoyance that needs to be eradicated. They have to show that they can offer something (and no, ''powahhh'' won't do, because most people don't have the tools to use such magic, wouldn't probably even think of it, and those who do can choose deities that don't have a nonsensical dogma), that they have a place in a functioning society, in order to survive.


----------



## carlbobo (Oct 31, 2015)

They screwed up the layout. Neverwinter and some of the Sword Coast cities are in the crease of the book. Shoddy work.


----------



## gyor (Oct 31, 2015)

The mainstream (not evil cult) interuptation of Cyric is interesting too, basically he's the God of Libertarianism, especially in Amn. All individualism, capitalism, self suficieny, ambition.


----------



## gyor (Oct 31, 2015)

I remember in the priests series a Priestess of Lovatar fought an Entropy.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 31, 2015)

Man, from the sound of it, I want the Sea of Fallen Stars Adventurers guide, that's. Where the action is!


----------



## Mirtek (Oct 31, 2015)

psychophipps said:


> No, I understand it just fine. I'm simply pointing out that the stuff you lose for going with Bladesinger vs. another Wizard type isn't what I consider a big hit in most circumstances. With the right character concept, I would even go so far as to say that the stuff that you guys are clinging so tightly to is far inferior in many respects to what you would gain with Bladesinging, especially since my earlier comments were lacking the knowledge that starting at level 10 the Bladesinger can dump spell slots for damage mitigation (Seriously ?!?).



 What is it you see the bladesinger getting? I honestly fail to see anything beyond being hit less and taking less damage. So you trade being a better wizard all the time for taking less damage once in a while.


psychophipps said:


> How y'all aren't seeing what I see is pretty confusing to me, but we obviously have completely different priorities in terms of game balance.



 Indeed. I'd have the evoker who can throw fireballs at the fronline completely un-scathing his allies but temprarily drops to 0 for a round or two in the third fight when his allies could not hold the frontline over the bladesinger who was scorching his allies all three battles even if he was missed / migated all damage to himself the two rounds he was forced into melee the third battle.

Honestly after finally seeing the bladesinger in full, I am completly over my disappointment of it being elf-only since the class as a whole is a disappointment to me and I am no longer interested in playing it even if AL would allow human bladesingers.


----------



## gyor (Nov 1, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Man, from the sound of it, I want the Sea of Fallen Stars Adventurers guide, that's. Where the action is!




 Yeah I know, around the Sea of Fallen Stars is where all the best action and all the interesting stuff is going on and where alot of the coolest most interesting places in the realms are, all interacting by this In land Sea. The Sword Coast is the single most over rated and boring part of the realms and yet that's where most of the video games and all the 5e Modules take place.

 Yet around the Sea of Fallen Stars is Cormyr, Sembia, Mulhorand, Unther, Tymanther, Chessanta (including what's left of Akanul), Turmish, Algorond, Thay, Westgate, Nathlan, and inside of it is Myth Nantar I believe, a Sea Elven City where the Mythal lets air breathing species breath water.


----------



## pukunui (Nov 1, 2015)

[MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION] or anyone else with the book: Does the Daggerford entry name the current duke? Is it still Maldwyn? I ask because the Sundering adventure _Scourge of the Sword Coast_ could quite easily result in Maldwyn getting killed while possessed by a demon, and I'm not sure what the most-reported result was. I'm curious to know if he officially survived or if he's been replaced by his sister or someone else.


----------



## Parmandur (Nov 1, 2015)

gyor said:


> Yeah I know, around the Sea of Fallen Stars is where all the best action and all the interesting stuff is going on and where alot of the coolest most interesting places in the realms are, all interacting by this In land Sea. The Sword Coast is the single most over rated and boring part of the realms and yet that's where most of the video games and all the 5e Modules take place.
> 
> 
> 
> Yet around the Sea of Fallen Stars is Cormyr, Sembia, Mulhorand, Unther, Tymanther, Chessanta (including what's left of Akanul), Turmish, Algorond, Thay, Westgate, Nathlan, and inside of it is Myth Nantar I believe, a Sea Elven City where the Mythal lets air breathing species breath water.





Generic works for basic licensing stuff, and Greenwood really detailed Waterdeep effectively.

Now that you have the book, what do you think of it?


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Nov 1, 2015)

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION] or anyone else with the book: Does the Daggerford entry name the current duke? Is it still Maldwyn? I ask because the Sundering adventure _Scourge of the Sword Coast_ could quite easily result in Maldwyn getting killed while possessed by a demon, and I'm not sure what the most-reported result was. I'm curious to know if he officially survived or if he's been replaced by his sister or someone else.




He's been succeeded by his sister Morwen.


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Nov 1, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Man, from the sound of it, I want the Sea of Fallen Stars Adventurers guide, that's. Where the action is!




I have a feeling, if they continue with further Adventurers Guides, that we would see two more for Faerun, using the division of the areas outside the Sword Coast in Chapter 1 - the Lands to the South and the Lands to the East. A Sea of Fallen Stars Adventurers Guide would pretty much be the same as "The Lands to the East" - even Turmish and the Old Empires are considered east and not south.

But as Pukunui mentioned in the map thread, and it's something I've been considering myself, such Adventurers Guides may end up being more or less Player's Guides, so we may also get an outright DM-centric "Campaign Setting" as well...


----------



## pukunui (Nov 1, 2015)

Demetrios1453 said:


> He's been succeeded by his sister Morwen.



Aha! I suspected as much. I guess that means the majority of the reported _Scourge of Sword Coast_ playthroughs ended with Maldwyn dead.

Thank you!


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Nov 1, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Aha! I suspected as much. I guess that means the majority of the reported _Scourge of Sword Coast_ playthroughs ended with Maldwyn dead.
> 
> Thank you!




Actually he is implied to still be alive. His sister has just taken the position from him.


----------



## pukunui (Nov 1, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> Actually he is implied to still be alive. His sister has just taken the position from him.



Really? That's interesting. _Scourge of the Sword Coast_ indicates that if Maldwyn survives his possession by Baazka, he humbles himself before Isteval and promises to become a less pompous, more pious leader. That being said, the adventure also makes it quite clear that many residents of Daggerford think Morwen would make for a much better leader (with primogeniture being the only thing stopping her). I guess maybe Maldwyn stepped down so his sister could rule instead.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Nov 1, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Really? That's interesting. _Scourge of the Sword Coast_ indicates that if Maldwyn survives his possession by Baazka, he humbles himself before Isteval and promises to become a less pompous, more pious leader. That being said, the adventure also makes it quite clear that many residents of Daggerford think Morwen would make for a much better leader (with primogeniture being the only thing stopping her). I guess maybe Maldwyn stepped down so his sister could rule instead.




If he did die their is the possibility he could have gotten Raised. 

I know in Cormyr if a Noble gets Raised they go all the way back to the end of line of succession for the Crown. (If a King is raised then they are castrated and exiled from the Kingdom and the person who raised them is executed.)


----------



## pukunui (Nov 1, 2015)

Wow. I didn't know that.

EDIT: New Question: Does the book make any mention of spellfire?


----------



## gyor (Nov 1, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Generic works for basic licensing stuff, and Greenwood really detailed Waterdeep effectively.
> 
> Now that you have the book, what do you think of it?




 Writing is great, but the way things are organized like the pantheon, is messed up.

 Like the Goddess Lurue is mentioned several times in the book, such as the in the knight order sidebar, but SHE'S NOT IN THE PANTHEON SECTION, wtf. Ghuandar is mentioned as being apart of the Drow Pantheon in the Elf race section, but in table on the Drow Pantheon in the Gods section he's absent.


----------



## Marandahir (Nov 1, 2015)

No mention of spellfire to my knowledge. At least, it's not in the index, and I didn't see it during my read-through.


----------



## Irennan (Nov 1, 2015)

gyor said:


> Writing is great, but the way things are organized like the pantheon, is messed up.
> 
> Like the Goddess Lurue is mentioned several times in the book, such as the in the knight order sidebar, but SHE'S NOT IN THE PANTHEON SECTION, wtf. Ghuandar is mentioned as being apart of the Drow Pantheon in the Elf race section, but in table on the Drow Pantheon in the Gods section he's absent.




Oh, so Ghaunadaur *is* still a god. About the other gods, well, we don't have ''stats'' for them, but at least they're confirmed as active/still active Post-Sundering. Either way, assigning domains to them is rather easy. For example, Lurue would probably have Nature, and perhaps Aracana, if you wanted to keep her role as one of the goddesses of magic in Ed's original FR. For Sharess, you could look at Liira for comparison, and she would probably get Life as well. Perhaps Nature too, if you wanted to somewhat highlight her connection to felines.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Nov 1, 2015)

gyor said:


> Writing is great, but the way things are organized like the pantheon, is messed up.
> 
> Like the Goddess Lurue is mentioned several times in the book, such as the in the knight order sidebar, but SHE'S NOT IN THE PANTHEON SECTION, wtf. Ghuandar is mentioned as being apart of the Drow Pantheon in the Elf race section, but in table on the Drow Pantheon in the Gods section he's absent.




Ghaunadaur is mentioned as Warlock Patron of the Great Old One style.


----------



## jwade1980 (Nov 2, 2015)

Could someone with the book provide a bit of details surrounding any new tidbits about the bard? Any new colleges? etc?


----------



## Demetrios1453 (Nov 2, 2015)

jwade1980 said:


> Could someone with the book provide a bit of details surrounding any new tidbits about the bard? Any new colleges? etc?




There's really not much new game-wise on bards. The section talks about Bardic Colleges, but in the sense of places bards go to learn their craft, and not the PHB class feature Bardic College sense (so you get sentences like "Most bards of New Olamn belong to the College of Lore.")

Beyond that, there is a wide selection of musical instruments listed and described...


----------



## gyor (Nov 2, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Oh, so Ghaunadaur *is* still a god. About the other gods, well, we don't have ''stats'' for them, but at least they're confirmed as active/still active Post-Sundering. Either way, assigning domains to them is rather easy. For example, Lurue would probably have Nature, and perhaps Aracana, if you wanted to keep her role as one of the goddesses of magic in Ed's original FR. For Sharess, you could look at Liira for comparison, and she would probably get Life as well. Perhaps Nature too, if you wanted to somewhat highlight her connection to felines.




 Actually Sharess in her incarnation as Bast is in the Player's Guide, but for some reason the Egyptian Gods are back in FR, but you can't use them in AL, another goofy rule brought to you by AL. Bast/Sharess domain is War, despite being the Goddess of Cats, Lust, and Brothels, Sharess was a semi retired War God.

 When she first came to Faerun in the form of Bast she was a war god and Anhur's Lieutenant in the first war against the Imaskar. It was only later when she first absorbed Falidae (basically a primal spirit or demigod worshipped briefly by beast cults in lands near Mulhorand), and became more about pleasure and travel that she began drifting away from War. Then she absorbed the Yuirwood Goddess Zandilar, a member of the Yuirwood Pantheon which got absorbed into the Seldarine (Elven Pantheon). Absorbing Zandilar who was an Elvish Goddess of Lust who prefered to seducing her enemies to warfare, completed the transformation into Sharess sex Goddess, who was still worshipped by the Mulhorandi as a War Goddess and as the Foe of Set, abit with a more sexual twist.

 Given the second war with the Imaskari and the "liberation" of Mulhorand from the High Imaskar, it likely she was invovled in the war.

 The only Mulhorand God not listed in the Eygptian Panthion table is Anhur, but I'd just use that stats for Herculu in the PHB, the stats are CG God with the War and Tempest domains, and a Lion head holy symbol.

 As for the life domain, the clerics of all gods can chose the life domain no matter if its in thier gods domains or not.

 Anyways my problem is that while written is good, and it gives you alot to be excited about, if it had better editing, layout, and 200 more pages, it could have been outstanding. This should have been a proper FRCG and FRPG, and the great writing and interesting unexpected twists tease at what this book should have been. 

 So its both impressive and frustrating.

 As far most interesting locations I'd say around the Sea of Fallen Stars, the lands of Intrigue, the Island Kingdoms (Evermeet, Lantan, Nimbral, Moonshaes), Vaasa with its Warlock Knights, And Eltgurd/Najara war are the most interesting to me.

 I will say that the 5e realms are an interesting mix of 1e/2e and 4e. The old races say that its alot like before the spellplague, and on the surface, it is, alot of 3e and even more 4e stuff had been reversed by the Sundering and other events, but when you closely examine the events and locations, you start to see that the connection to 1e/2e realms is an inch deep and a mile wide.


----------



## gyor (Nov 2, 2015)

Take Alagorond for example, on the surface it seems the same as it was, but examine closely and you see that its gained a large tiefling minority thanks to Thay, its relations with Thay have relaxed compared to the past, the Chosen of Mystra no longer rules, it governed by a council.

 Mulhorand seems like its back to being directly by incarnation of its Gods,and it is, but this time slavery has been abolished, Horus-Ra is two seperate Gods now, and its far less culturally insolated then it was back in 1e/2e, which makes sense because much of its population grew up in other cultures as minorities. Think of the creation of modern day Isreal and international influence the Jewish dispora has had on it.

 Then you have 4e survivor states, and a few 4e verisions of previous states like Dambrath (which was a half-drow civilization before 4e, but became a wereanimal, shifter, human civilization in 4e and 5e) dimished, but still around.

 You have the effect of having at-will magic, new forms of magic of all sorts, new races that didn't exist or were thought extinct, or were unknown.

 Lots of interesting stories to be told.

 But we still need a SCAG.


----------



## gyor (Nov 2, 2015)

I like the Yarting, Faerun Guitar, personally for bards, Pan Pipes, and Hand Drums.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Nov 2, 2015)

gyor said:


> I will say that the 5e realms are an interesting mix of 1e/2e and 4e. The old races say that its alot like before the spellplague, and on the surface, it is, alot of 3e and even more 4e stuff had been reversed by the Sundering and other events, but when you closely examine the events and locations, you start to see that the connection to 1e/2e realms is an inch deep and a mile wide.




My Forgotten Realms is set at the tale end of 2e (1370 DR). How much fluff in SCAG will be of use to me?


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Nov 2, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> My Forgotten Realms is set at the tale end of 2e (1370 DR). How much fluff in SCAG will be of use to me?




All of it pretty much.


----------



## Irennan (Nov 2, 2015)

gyor said:


> Actually Sharess in her incarnation as Bast is in the Player's Guide, but for some reason the Egyptian Gods are back in FR, but you can't use them in AL, another goofy rule brought to you by AL. Bast/Sharess domain is War, despite being the Goddess of Cats, Lust, and Brothels, Sharess was a semi retired War God.
> 
> When she first came to Faerun in the form of Bast she was a war god and Anhur's Lieutenant in the first war against the Imaskar. It was only later when she first absorbed Falidae (basically a primal spirit or demigod worshipped briefly by beast cults in lands near Mulhorand), and became more about pleasure and travel that she began drifting away from War. Then she absorbed the Yuirwood Goddess Zandilar, a member of the Yuirwood Pantheon which got absorbed into the Seldarine (Elven Pantheon). Absorbing Zandilar who was an Elvish Goddess of Lust who prefered to seducing her enemies to warfare, completed the transformation into Sharess sex Goddess, who was still worshipped by the Mulhorandi as a War Goddess and as the Foe of Set, abit with a more sexual twist.
> 
> Given the second war with the Imaskari and the "liberation" of Mulhorand from the High Imaskar, it likely she was invovled in the war.




Wasn't aware of Sharess being related to war, albeit distantly in the present time. Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## hejtmane (Nov 2, 2015)

I will have my book tomorrow yay


----------



## Irennan (Nov 2, 2015)

hejtmane said:


> I will have my book tomorrow yay




I'll have to wait till late November :/


----------



## hejtmane (Nov 2, 2015)

Irennan said:


> I'll have to wait till late November :/




I pre-order Amazon Prime so it shipped already


----------



## Mirtek (Nov 2, 2015)

hejtmane said:


> I pre-order Amazon Prime so it shipped already




Well, obviously the european market has proved to be inconsequential for WotC, so neither the premium stores nor Amazon receive the books early enough to take advantage of the pre-sale or at least to deliver them on normal release.

They at least tried with the PHB release, I remember having to convince the clerk at my FLGS that no it's not a misstake that they got it so early and yes he is allowed to sell it to me without getting into trouble with WotC for breaking a street date. Thanfully google finally convinced him that I did not make up the whole early access for premier stores 

However that was the last time I was able to get a 5e book during the early access period or even on standard street day at either the FLGS or Amazon (expected delivery of the SCAG is 13th of November, they must just starting to ship it from the US tomorrow), guess they didn't sell enough copies on this side of the pond the be keen on providing the future books early enough.

At least the 10 days of amazon give my FLGS another chance to sell it to me, if I can pick it up there next saturday I'll cancel Amazon


----------



## pukunui (Nov 2, 2015)

You guys should try the Book Depository. So far, they've had ever 5e release up for sale early so they can ship on the general release day. Their prices are a wee bit higher than Amazon's, but the shipping is free, so that tends to make up for it.


----------



## Corpsetaker (Nov 2, 2015)

Question with regards to the pantheons.

Are they still doing the whole aspect thing? For example, in 4th edition they said Talos was actually an aspect of Gruumsh which I think is beyond lame. Please tell me they didn't continue with this rubbish.


----------



## pukunui (Nov 2, 2015)

Corpsetaker said:


> Question with regards to the pantheons.
> 
> Are they still doing the whole aspect thing? For example, in 4th edition they said Talos was actually an aspect of Gruumsh which I think is beyond lame. Please tell me they didn't continue with this rubbish.



I asked about that earlier in the thread. They are not still doing that. Even Amaunator and Lathander are being treated as two separate gods.


----------



## Corpsetaker (Nov 2, 2015)

pukunui said:


> I asked about that earlier in the thread. They are not still doing that. Even Amaunator and Lathander are being treated as two separate gods.




Oh thank god!


----------



## gyor (Nov 3, 2015)

Irennan said:


> Wasn't aware of Sharess being related to war, albeit distantly in the present time. Thanks for clarifying.




 Yeah that's why Sharess is so interesting, she's got one of the coolest stories. She starts out having to sacrifice some of her divinity, along with the other Mulan Gods, in order to get past the Imaskar magic and liberate her people from Slavery.

 Then the Orcgate wars come along, she fights the orc gods and Set kills her father (Ra is Bast's father, and possibly mother as well as suprising as that sounds, in Egyptian Mythology), so she becomes the Foe of Set.

 Not long after the Cult of Felidae arises in Mulhorand thanks to a rise in beast cult popularity in Mulhorand (temperarily). Felidae has her origins in nearby Barbarian tribes. She a Goddess or Cat Spirit of Pleasure, Travel, Cats, and Nomads.

 So Bast absorbs her and she begins to lose interest in war to some degree, she still supports the fight against Set, but she develops a wonderlust to explore Faerun.

 A deal is struck with Mask, Bast, now Sharess is allowed to join the Faerun Pantheon, and Mask is allowed to become the God of thieves in Mulhorand (no other Mulhorand God has an interest in the role of God of Thieves not even Set or Sobek).

 Sharess has all sorts of Adventures, but ends up in the Yuirwood, where another Goddess of Pleasure, more focused on lust, and trading on that for the Good of her people is in a pickle.

 See Zandilar made a deal with a drow God to gain intel and help fighting a drow invasion of the Yuirwood. This backfired on Zandilar, because the dude is a jerk and after sleeping with her, he tries to kill her.

 So Bast finds this out and rescues Zandilar, who is too injured to stay alive on her own and so Bast and Zandilar merge (I'll leave how two Goddess of Pleasure merge to your imagination).

 Bast War God of Cats has now been transformed into Sharess, former war god, former nomad god of travel, into party girl Goddess of Cats, Brothels, and Lust.

 Which leads Sharess to wonder the realms getting into all kinds of mischief, forming cults and then leaving like the cat verison of the Littlest Hobo, till she mets and hooks up with Shar, Goddess of Night, Forgetfulness, and Loss, who leads her to darker pleasures (this is Sharess' likely source for her title Succubus of Sensation, just my opinion).

 Eventual Sharess is caught up in the Time of Troubles, and she ends up in the body of the Caliphs favourite Concubines body. Sharess then parties it up in what is likely Faerun's largest Harem. 

 Shar comes along after having murdered the God of Caves, and then tries to do the same to Sharess, everyone wants eat Sharess' divinity it seems. Sune, Goddess of Love and Gingers, comes along and acts as Sharess' knight in well no armour and purifies Sharess with magic holy water, saving her from Shar.

 So after the time of troubles Sharess leaves Faerun to hang with Sune in Brightwater, the Planar Party City. 

 Then the Spellplague happens and she gets demoted to exarch like all the demigods.

 Then the Sundering happens, but she's not mentioned, so we have to infere what happened to her based on current events, like the second Mulhorand-Imaskar war and the return of the Mulhorand Gods.

 And that's the tip of the iceberg. 

 Sharess was interested in Tieflings and Alu-Fiends before it was cool, Succubi of Sensation remember. 

 She along with Nobanion founded Nathlan city of cats.

 She created the first werecats.

 She the only deity in FR whose sees Ilmater's deformed and hideous broken formand things, he's hot I want to hit that.

 She's in off again, on again relationship with Anhur, God of War and later Storms in Mulhorand.

 She's in a war with Lovitar over sensation and who gets to be Goddess of S&M.

 She's in more Pantheons them most Gods.

 Her son Selvtarm has his own interesting, and far sadder story.

 She has so many sides to her story, she's not just a Goddess, she's an adventurer, and the closest thing the realms has to a rockstar.

 She grants wishes from her kisses, kind of fall apart the next day.

 How could they leave her out of SCAG?


----------



## Irennan (Nov 3, 2015)

gyor said:


> Yeah that's why Sharess is so interesting, she's got one of the coolest stories. She starts out having to sacrifice some of her divinity, along with the other Mulan Gods, in order to get past the Imaskar magic and liberate her people from Slavery.
> 
> Then the Orcgate wars come along, she fights the orc gods and Set kills her father (Ra is Bast's father, and possibly mother as well as suprising as that sounds, in Egyptian Mythology), so she becomes the Foe of Set.
> 
> ...




It actually was Zandilar who tried to seduce Vhaeraun, IIRC, and he tried to get back at her by assorbing her divinity afterwards. Either way, I see what you mean, and while Sharess isn't the only FR deity to have a colorful/vivid story, her worship is definitely widespread and influent among people, so I disagree with the decision of leaving her out (especially over other demipowers who surely are more ''niche'' in terms of worshippers, like Jergal).


----------



## CapnZapp (Nov 3, 2015)

Corpsetaker said:


> pukunui said:
> 
> 
> > I asked about that earlier in the thread. They are not still doing that. Even Amaunator and Lathander are being treated as two separate gods.
> ...



Which one?


----------



## Mithreinmaethor (Nov 3, 2015)

Corpsetaker said:


> Oh thank god!




My Cleric and the rest of the Brotherhood of the Glorious Sun would like to have a word with you.


----------



## GobiWon (Nov 9, 2015)

MindxKiller said:


> It's almost as if putting out new sorcerer archetypes with bonus spells makes the core archetypes obsolete and they wanted to avoid power creep or something... No, that couldn't be it... Could it?




The voice of reason. I'd give experience if I had any to give.


----------



## Corpsetaker (Nov 9, 2015)

GobiWon said:


> The voice of reason. I'd give experience if I had any to give.




So would you say they backed themselves into a corner with the Sorcerer?


----------

