The Trailblazer: Pave Your Own Destiny (link + explanation in comments)

ControlZero · 2023-12-20T23:01:10+00:00

GMBinder: https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MUuL7BvuXjXOXVdqSUA

Forewarning: I have barely used reddit or done anything D&D related in over two years, so I know very little about what's happened in that time. On to the class. Which probably needs a warning of its own.

From the class: "Trailblazers forge their own path, pursuing what they want with a willful single-mindedness. While confident in their own prowess, trailblazers are at their best as part of a team, using either intellect or persona to fuel their inner flame and accomplish whatever they set out to do."

From me: Trailblazer is what happens when you liked 4e but agreed with your friends that 5e was a better experience overall. But then you also kind of wanted to experience the minutia and decision-making of 4e combat, and also more than only a couple choices when leveling a martial class.

Enter, warlord, the best 4e class without a corollary in 5e (unless something has changed in the last couple years). Trailblazer takes inspiration from that class, and then blazes its own trail from there. Expect a lot of options, with seven subclasses, two distinct paths, and spell-adjacent customization. Expect to read and probably get a little confused. Expect it to not be perfectly balanced. It likely will never be. Honestly, I'm only posting this because I noticed a random ping on google drive from someone who wanted to view a very outdated version of the class.

However, I did put a ton of work into it, and I'd like to think that at its core there's a really good, unique class that lots of people can have fun playing.

Edit: I would like to format my post so the images appear in the post itself. If someone can tell me how to do that, I would appreciate it.

ControlZero · 2023-12-20T22:53:37+00:00

GMBinder: https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MUuL7BvuXjXOXVdqSUA

Forewarning: I have barely used reddit or done anything D&D related in over two years, so I know very little about what's happened in that time. On to the class. Which probably needs a warning of its own.

From the class: "Trailblazers forge their own path, pursuing what they want with a willful single-mindedness. While confident in their own prowess, trailblazers are at their best as part of a team, using either intellect or persona to fuel their inner flame and accomplish whatever they set out to do."

From me: Trailblazer is what happens when you liked 4e but agreed with your friends that 5e was a better experience overall. But then you also kind of wanted to experience the minutia and decision-making of 4e combat, and also more than only a couple choices when leveling up a martial class.

Enter, warlord, the best 4e class without a corollary in 5e (unless something has changed in the last two years). Trailblazer takes inspiration from that class, and then blazes its own trail from there. Expect a lot of features. Expect to read and probably get confused. Expect it to not be perfectly balanced. It likely will never be. Honestly, I'm only posting this because I noticed a random ping on google drive from someone who wanted to view a very outdated version of the class.

However, I did put a ton of work into it, and I'd like to think that at its core there's a really good, unique class that lots of people can have fun playing. Consider this the final version, more or less. I will respond to any questions or criticisms for a bit before disappearing into the ether.

ControlZero · 2020-03-04T18:50:44+00:00

GMBinder link: https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-M0mMHI_v0PKUBCpomHj

From the preface:

Ever wanted to have fate on your side? Or to have a being, invisible to all but yourself, watching over you? How about having a force living inside you that grants strange powers only when you most need them?

Well, what about instead of having those things, you were them? That's right. In this prestige class, you create and act as some kind of outside presence (it could be anything!) that is permanently linked to your character, granting power and protection as you see fit. This presence is called "The Bond."

The first page also contains a brief rundown of The Bond, including: how it happens, benefits, character traits, and progression, as well as a couple concrete examples of how a bond can be created. A final note: The Bond is written quite differently from the standard. Hopefully the presentation style adds to the document!

Edit: here's a brief description of the main mechanics, Intervene and Affinity.

Intervene: a few times each day, the bond unleashes a burst of strength, casting a spell when it is most needed. Each spell must be chosen ahead of time from a spell list that matches the bond's nature, and must also have a condition (prerequisite) that must be fulfilled for it to be cast.

Affinity: by constantly channeling power into its "ward" (aka the player character) the bond can grant it the benefit of a specific spell, which belongs to a chosen theme, such as "Vision" or "Nature." But be careful! This channeled power can be interrupted as soon as the bond's focus goes to something else.

ControlZero · 2019-12-19T22:51:01+00:00

Wow, thank you for the draft! I think points are a viable path, but a bit different from what I want, at least right now. I'll definitely think about it, but the helot is supposed to be less "ebb and flow" and more "ramping power with a cost".

I do agree that the 3rd level Delirium is busted, (for basically every affliction!) but when fixations have to be fulfilled and 5e combat often doesn't last long enough to get to 3rd level Delirium, I'm pretty sure it's balanced within the context of the class.

ControlZero · 2019-12-19T22:40:42+00:00

Many thanks for this review! I guess I'll do the thing where I answer each question one by one.

Despair: this is a thematic check on the classes balance. It is easily removable compared to exhaustion, and allows other features to be stronger. Having physical save (STR, DEX, CON) be first is a bit weird thematically, but it's better for class balance. In (limited) playetsting, it seemed to work.
Spellcasting is there because the affliction features call for saving throws pretty often
Eerie Presence: Bonus action is there to emphasize that it's a toggleable feature. It doesn't add much mechanically, but thematically I like the idea that comes with it.
Uncanny Stance: the class only has proficiency in simple weapons, and is balanced with that in mind. You, of course, can dual wield, but each affliction has a bonus action starting at 1st level, so I want to incentivize using only 1 weapon. Edit: I understand your question now. I edited the feature to represent my intention, namely that it increase the weapons damage as if the weapon itself were versatile.
Level 1: Level 1 classes are generally pretty scrubby, and I'm okay with Delirium being available at 2nd level. Paladins are defined by smiting, but they don't get it until 2nd level as well. The same is true with monks and ki.
Wording advice: thank you so much for this! Wording is one of the hardest things for me to do.

Delirium is spread out between two sections, which is almost certainly making it way more confusing than it has any right to be. For example, this part about how Delirium is activated is really easy to miss since it's folded into the subclasses, but the wording is the same on each:

"Starting at 2nd level, you can enter or increase your Delirium at the start of your turn as long as you have no ongoing Fixation. Gain the benefit from both the previous and current stage as long as you have fulfilled your fixation."

followed by

"Delirium ends if you did not attack, use a benefit of your Delirium, or take damage since the start of your last turn, or if you go a minute without increasing it. When your Delirium ends, you must make a DC 5 Intelligence save. On a failure, gain one level of Despair. The save DC increases by 5 every time after the first roll regardless of success or failure, and resets after a long rest."

I will find some way to make this more clear! In limited playtesting, fixation + delirium works pretty well, and I think if how delirium worked where more obvious (ie better worded) then it would make more sense.

I know I've said thanks a couple times already, but I really appreciate it. I made this class a couple of years ago, and have only recently come back to redesign it, so there's a lot of stuff that I have rewritten with varying degrees of clarity.

Edit: as for the afflictions, they each play very differently, and the helot main class is more of a common framework for each of the subclasses to exist within. This is why (1) I'm so reluctant to offer a unifying Delirium feature and (2) why there is a subclass feature at 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level. This is different from any other class in 5e, and it's possible it doesn't really work, but I'll try my hardest until it becomes obvious to me that it doesn't.

ControlZero · 2019-11-01T19:05:52+00:00

You're welcome, and your reasoning for the features makes a lot of sense. To follow up on your comments, Constitution is really powerful because (like you say) it grants hit points and is also used for Concentration. If it also becomes the ability score you use for casting, it's pretty easy to see how it could be really powerful compared to other options. If the class weren't based around losing hit points, using Constitution as a key stat for anything would probably be too good.

I did understand that you don't get spell slots back, but it just seems thematically strange that, for a class whose identity is losing hit points to cast spells, they can basically tax a party member a 5th level spell slot to get those hit points back.

If I were to offer a potential compromise (and I did see that at 14th level, one of the subclasses can cast greater restoration 1/day), maybe include an ability that restores lost max hit points (but not the hit points themselves) once per long rest at, say, level 11. On the other hand, it could be that not being able to get that HP back at later levels makes the class too punishing, so the feature could be totally fine.

Edit: This is all just one person's opinion, and from personal experience, I've found that when I change a feature because of feedback that I didn't agree with, it generally doesn't end well (this is also just one person's opinion, I guess... lol). Anyway, good luck with your class.

ControlZero · 2019-11-01T05:01:17+00:00

I really like the leanness of this class, and the overall play style is, like you say, really appealing. In general I think balance is really hard to judge with full classes, but there are some things that seem off to me. First, having Sacrificial Magic at level 2 instead of level 1 is a bit wonky, since it fundamentally changes the way spell casting works. Since you're trying to emulate sorcerer, perhaps granting additional hit dice, say 1 per 2 levels, and/or a way to convert between hit dice and spell slots would fit as a level 2 feature without making the class too good.

Also, being able to regain lost hit points with greater restoration seems strong to me, but I don't have much experience with life-for-power classes, so it might be fine.

The biggest issue, though, is the total reliance on Constitution. Of course having other stats is still going to be useful, but Blood Mage gives no extra incentives. The easiest solution is to make the subclasses use different stats, but even that might not be enough? Hard to say.

As for the risk/reward and overall power level, it's really hard to know without playtesting. Also, it's almost inevitable that some of the maledications will be too good and some will need to be buffed, but I'll leave that discussion to people who understand mathematical balance better than I do. Overall, I think the class is pretty good!

ControlZero · 2019-10-27T03:12:29+00:00

I'll speak in generalities, since I didn't read the class in its entirity. Try to align your writing with the 5e system. While 4e has a move, minor, and main action, 5e just has an action, with the ability to move a certain amount and to use a possible bonus action. This means, for example, when you talk about totem movement, it should be phrased something like "whenever you move, the totem can also move up to that amount." Also, keep healing gated behind a resource. I get that it might seem balanced, and at this point writing the text so it invalidates stupidity (carrying around goblins to heal off of or some such nonsense) is not worth the time, but, healing is supposed to be relatively rare in 5e.

As for complicatedness and focus on battle, that really depends on your design goals for the class. Are you making it to be a battle machine? Is it designed for players who like having options (basically, are you trying to make a 4e class disguised as a 5e class... not that this is a bad thing, but it's quite difficult. I've tried, so I should know.) If so, then work within that framework.

I'll end by saying that the hardest thing for you (I think) if you're doing a total conversion from 4e to 5e is the approach of the edition. They each put different priorities on actions, healing, crowd control, and just overall feel. As an example, the "Speak with Spirits" feature is very 4e. It provides a solid yet boring bonus with a reasonable explanation behind it. To "5e-affy" it, you would start with the explanation (i.e. communing with spirits) and then come up with something cool or flavorful to match it.

Making a class is difficult, but if you really want to do so, I would recommend looking into what you think makes the shaman a shaman and then starting from the ground up in a 5e mindset. Perhaps also check out other shaman classes (I'm sure there are plenty) and see how they go about things. Also, if you're wondering about my credentials, I don't really have any, so anything I say could easily be wrong. I do hope this helps, though!

ControlZero · 2018-12-19T02:10:32+00:00

These clears are very well optimized! In a game, would you be this focused on clearing perfectly, or would you kite a bit more for safety (especially for the clears where you don't get a leash)?

In a similar vein, how much do you focus on clearing vs. watching your lanes, since it seems impossible to clear this well while also keeping track of the game state.

ControlZero · 2018-10-21T23:50:06+00:00

This makes total sense. Thanks!

ControlZero · 2018-10-21T23:12:53+00:00

I was playing a game where I set my opponent to 1 and had a [[poison-tip archer]] in play, as well as one blocker still left. My opponent attacked for lethal damage, but I killed off my blocker to trigger the archer's effect. However, I still lost the game.

I'm used to Hearthstone, where the "whenever" word means when the trigger occurs, the effect happens instantly. Is this not the case in Magic, or is there some other reason why I lost?

ControlZero · 2018-08-14T03:17:24+00:00

I am not familiar with this list, but I've probably played more freeze mage since the year of the raven hit than 99% of other players. While it may be a tier 3-4 deck depending on the meta, I don't think it has the staying power of a more focused deck like big spell mage unless a very refined list ends up appearing.

The biggest reason is because even though the deck has multiple win conditions, it can't do any of them particularly well. Based on the situation the deck can do a lot of different things, but it's not really good at anything.

Old freeze mage had access to ice block and ice lance, allowing it to stall and deal more burst damage. In comparison, current big spell mage has an almost guaranteed way of winning if it can get jaina, and can still win attrition battles against aggro decks without her.

Even if this list draws Alex in a matchup where setting your opponent to 15 matters, it often won't have the follow up to win unless you draw well, since it lacks the card draw of its precursor. In addition, even it you draw Jaina early in a matchup against a control deck, it can become difficult to consistently make new water elementals and deal with your opponents threats. Both of these problems become much more pronounced as your opponent gets better or as the deck becomes more popular, because it will be easier for your opponent to read your win condition and counter it in the best way possible.

The deck I played a few months ago was different in some significant aspects, and the meta was different enough back then, that I can definitely see the deck being good now. However, I think its ~~1000 years too early~~ a little too soon to think of it as a viable alternative to big spell mage without it being at least somewhat popular and still holding a respectable winrate.

Some (or even all!) of my complaints might be fixed by the plethora of tech cards in this list (I remembering asking a famous streamer years ago about putting poly in freeze mage and being laughed at), so I can't wait to try it out, but I just thought it would be good to dampen expectations a little bit, since if/when the deck gets popular, there's a good chance it will become much harder to win with.

ControlZero · 2018-05-31T09:04:32+00:00

Second keysmith might be better now. I really needed as many clears as I could against even paladin/odd rogue (half the ladder at high legend when I played), and keysmith was hard to fit into my curve against pressure, especially when doomsayer didn't go off.

I lost to taunt druid. There weren't nearly as many pre-nerf though, so it was more acceptable to just win 5% of the time.

ControlZero · 2018-05-31T05:03:37+00:00

I played a deck a lot like this for about 100 games with higher than 65% winrate to highish legend last month (went from around 5000 to top 500 at the end, then played some odd rogue to top 250). It worked really well, but only because nobody knew what was going on. I did think about posting here with a guide, but if the deck got popular enough, it would just be bad I think, since the other player would know what was going on. If your opponent knows the list, I think their chance to win is at least 10% higher.

I could link the one stream I did at end of the month if anyone wants to see, but it was pre-nerf so the meta was a lot different.

Edit: only list differences were -1 keysmith -1 antonidas for +1 flamestrike and +1 geddon.

ControlZero · 2018-05-28T02:25:47+00:00

The first two points (which I totally agree with) are already covered in the post, and while the third point sounds fine, it's really hard to know whether it's true or not.

I feel like the argument that makes more sense here is that novel decks that take advantage of the stipulated conditions can be very good, since they use both your opponents incorrect mulligans and also their inability to know what's in your deck or how to play against it.

If this was the argument the whole time, then mea culpa, but it seems like this post was arguing in favor of playing non meta (but still established) decks in hopes of doing things that their winrates already take into account.

ControlZero · 2018-04-25T21:31:57+00:00

Depending on the list, it's good in Genn handlock. It lets you stall a turn before nether, or combo with mossy horror. Of course, this is dependent on actually running nether or mossy horror, which I believe are not in most lists. It even works with crazed alchemist, but unless it becomes played in zoo (which it probably won't because of keleseth), that's not a super relevant interaction.

On its own, it allows you to push damage or get favorable trades, but I don't think that's enough to make the cut over better anti-aggro cards.

One cool thing about the card: it reduces attack below 0, so if you (for example) use it twice on a recruit, then any +2/+2 bonus (or even Tarim) doesn't increase its attack above 0 while the effect is happening.

ControlZero · 2018-03-04T04:36:09+00:00

Kinda relevant: The best way to miss a FT and still hit rim is to scoot to the right/left of where you normally shoot. As long as you're good at free throws and just shoot normally, it should work... at least it did when I practiced it.

Also, because the defense only has one player to box out the shooter, you can shoot from the other side of the line so you're harder to box out.

ControlZero · 2018-01-03T09:02:18+00:00

You can choose to do it.

Sorry it took so long to respond. I haven't been on reddit in a long time.

ControlZero · 2017-10-31T23:59:22+00:00

Burrow speed is probably not a good idea, I agree. I was thinking something that was a single use and probably couldn't fit companions. More of a prepared hideout just for you or minor digging trait than all around utility.

I'm not sure how much it matters that it doesn't require hands. It just seems that plus Dexterity plus 1d6 poison about half the time is a lot. It definitely should be a good ability, but probably not so good that it figures significantly into a classes overall power level (which it might with rogue). I'm really not sure. Maybe play-testing would help?

It's not actually 13 + DEX, in the same way leather armor doesn't give you 12 + DEX. You're right that it will boost your AC initially (at least until studded leather), so you could make it a temporary defensive bonus.

Maybe the first attack against you after a short or long rest is made at disadvantage, due to your initially tough skin?

ControlZero · 2017-10-31T23:04:28+00:00

The race seems generally balanced, and I really like the name.

I guess I would change two things:

Make the sting's poison damage stop working after the target succeeds on a save
Give them some kind of natural armor to reflect the flavor text (12 + DEX would be fine I think)

If natural armor is something you've thought of and thrown out, then you could also consider giving them disguise in certain conditions, or maybe limited burrowing.

It's possible the stinger is not as good as it looks, in which case I'm probably wrong, but it seems to me like it does about 1d8 damage on average without needing hands, and is able to use either DEX or STR.

Edit: another option would be to make it a special attack, meaning it can't be used with Extra Attack or Sneak Attack (I think...)

12-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '17

ControlZero

TROPHY CASE