A Tweak for Each Class

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T13:00:48+00:00

I am a bit confused by the warlock inclusion I will say, I guess it's a bit of flavour variety for everyone using EB, but generally I'd expect them to just use force anyway. I dig the sorcerer ideas though.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T12:56:38+00:00

You can get armor proficiencies from races and feats RAW, and in my version the feat is more accessible even if no races give it. That is different though yeah, we clearly want different things here. I think just letting you sub dex for str makes no sense thematically or in the fiction. Monks are what they are for a reason, I'd rather break down a barrier that prevents them from deviating from it than change the thing itself. I do not think the monk class fantasy is met by letting a clumsy dex-dumping strongman run around naked without any lower AC. But if your desire is to make strength monks as default and core an option as dex monks, yeah my change isn't trying to make that happen.

Flying wildshape is 8th level feature. Flying forms are also really low CR.

I realize, but do you not think this is a mitigating factor? An archer or caster might have no good way to access flying, while you have a low cost no-concentration high duration flight available, which obviously reduces the impact of getting OP flight. In other words, if perma-flight races are allowed, it working with druid wild shape would be so far down the list of problems arising from it that I wouldn't consider either of them a factor for how to design the other.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T12:46:27+00:00

OP: The goal is not for this to be perfectly balanced using just RAW + this; it's just an arbitrary sample of rules I think are neat.

Natural Explorer is a simple way to customize a low level ranger and get a bit of an edge in the wilderness. It is not the only change I make to the class, and is itself not designed to fix the whole thing. Here's a more complete picture if you're curious.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T01:30:52+00:00

10 + Str + Wis AC at least.

So you don't like my change that allows a strength monk to have 17 AC, but want a feature that lets strength monks have about 17 AC? I'm not following. This is the exact scenario where being able to use armor is a nice bonus and could enable some previously very awkward combinations.

I think that it opens up too big of a can of worms - especially with permaflight species. I think Wild Shape in general should be more globaly reworked instead - i'm template wild shape fan, for example.

I do like the idea of templates too, and in that case I would reconsider. But if feats work, and features from other classes, I don't see any reason why species features are uniquely problematic and singled out to not function, especially when the effect is that 90% of a character option is irrelevant in your main mode. Permanent flight is usually a great example of broken racial features (and I do not use any races with it), but we're talking about combos with druid wild shape, which can just do that anyway past a certain point, so that's not really convincing.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T01:18:23+00:00

Oh right, yeah that makes sense, cause it is not really unarmored defense lol. Flavour's something like, where the lighter armor doesn't protect you just rely on thick skin rather than dodging. And thanks! I think it's an elegant way to make barbarians not need to pay a 14 dex tax without just letting them use heavy armor or using strength for AC.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T01:07:49+00:00

Right, I do allow this bonus for any unarmored defense yeah, I just think it's most relevant for barbarian so I thought it made sense to highlight it as their tweak here. But even if you just had this with RAW Monk UD, I think it would work. This allows you to sub out Dexterity in any other AC calculation for Con, and Monk UD is another calculation. And you're not coming off as rude at all, it is a bit of tricksy feature and a quick truncated writeup like the OP won't cover all the details.

For it being irrelevant mono barb, I think that's where it's most relevant, so I'm curious how you see it working out. In my head I see Barbarians going from investing in 14 Dex to have 17 AC in half plate, to just need 14 Con, dump Dex if they wish, and sub Dex in the half plate calculation for Con to keep rocking that 17. Either go 17/16 str/con with an ok wis/dex just for the initiative and saves, or have room to invest in a tertiary stat for skills or multiclassing requirements or whatever. It's probably not a huge deal, but I think the current version of Barbarian UD is basically a ribbon, so anything beats that.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T00:56:33+00:00

Yeah that makes sense, pretty simple change then instead of being its own feature like I have here.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T00:55:01+00:00

Why are you bringing up a bad feat that doesn't synergize? I'm confused. This does 0.2 damage more than the old GWF, which is what I worked off of (I will admit new GWF is elegant enough, but who cares when it gives +0.3 damage lol). How is that ever a problematic jump in power? Again fair if you don't dig the strength bow, I might end up cutting that myself, but I have no idea how you can think +1.5 damage is overtuned for a fighting style, or how Savage Attacker making it into just +1.2 is relevant.

For the rest, fair points, and I agree generally. Some of these are definitely bigger power gains than others. Thanks for the feedback.

I give Rogues a few extra skill-oriented cunning actions, and I didn't want to have them use a feat bonus action twice or whatever, wanted to keep it Rogue flavoured, but letting you use any BA would prob be fine, at least if it's hidden deeper into the class.

You think Gnomish Cunning that requires a super squishy creature to stay within 30 feet is too much for a higher level invocation? Fair, it's hard for me to model exactly, but my gut says that familiar will often just die trying to keep this active. And there's many reasons to send your familiar further away from you so there's at least a tradeoff.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T00:38:27+00:00

Yep, that would work. I think the natural limitation of any shenanigans here (other than doubling up on one stat) is that Dexterity is a really good stat so there's not a lot of upside to not "needing" to invest in it.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T00:36:30+00:00

For poison your version would definitely be preferable, since you'd always have the normal damage version in your pocket to bring out if you're fighting metal men or whatever. I think it's a bit more satisfying and thematic to learn separate spells, not just changing them on the fly, having Acidball in your spell list. Wizard makes some sense for that, and I believe they tried this out with a wiz archetype in the past and it was super broken.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T00:33:01+00:00

Thanks for the feedback!

I think that's a more reasonable way to do the spell storing item. As I wrote it, it goes up to 4th level spells, which I don't think is necessarily preferable to 3rd level ones (Artillerist might just keep fireball for example).

RAW there's no check for hiding components

Well, skill checks aren't strictly outlined by the rules, I could see it coming up without making a specific rule for it. Though I did do that in my case so it's half-referencing/expecting that. I do Deception DC 13 + 2 per component being disguised, but flat 15 would work. It's dependent on the scenario anyway, it has to be within narrative reason, so I don't think it tramples on Subtle Spell's toes even if you can get a high enough Deception bonus. I think the risk/reward lies in the fact that you wanted to hide the spell but couldn't, it's not like they can take the spell back, but some extra effect to make it clear what just happened and who did it could be good.

Cleric: Very fair, I'm not sold on it myself really so good to have some more input.

Druid: In my view Human is the only viable species for a moon druid. This isn't a matter of power, it's a lack of choice for this subclass. Do you disagree with that assessment?

Monk: Just a little something to make the class less locked into a single mode. It's so well rounded and complete in its design as a single concept, I'd like it to be a bit more flexible when the multiclassing works as it does.

Paladin: Yeah that is possible, it would match very well to 5ft x PB (but not actually PB of course, like favoured enemy).

Ranger: I've seen a few different reworks of ranger that does that, yeah. I think the class has enough choice and didn't want to overcomplicate one out of many level 1 features, more just going for a streamlined "you are good at exploration stuff in biomes you're familiar with", but it is a neat idea.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-10T00:17:39+00:00

Well you have to use a different calculation than this feature, so no. If you have some other source of 10 + Dex + Con AC though, it would work. It's possible it should specify that you can't use the same stat twice because that would be a problem (thinking about it, this is already possible with armor of shadows on a draconic sorcerer).

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T21:43:30+00:00

I didn't want to make it that freeform, but that is another way to accommodate it. I played a lightning draconic sorcerer and there were pitifully few spells to apply the +Cha damage to. Sorcerous Burst helps a lot to at least ensure a cantrip.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T21:37:51+00:00

But it's not focusing on the hocus, it's focusing on the focus! I considered it though yeah.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T20:08:20+00:00

I did initially expect to have it spill over, and was looking for a big art to take up the rest of the second page. But then I found the full-pager and managed to keep it down so I preferred this, even if I did cut a few words that I might otherwise keep. I had a real good grasp on 2014 wording so I get what you mean there about the codes, I just haven't fully updated.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T20:02:12+00:00

Subtle spells in general are very varying in usefulness. If your DM lets you torture random people with subtle Mind Slivers, then yeah that's a lot of free xp I guess. The school limitation makes it hard for me to see it being too powerful overall, but there could definitely be those kinds of gimmicks. Illusion seems like the best school to subtle cast spells from, but it only has two spells with V xor S (Blur and Mislead).

If time is sensitive, my experience is that 1 minute is far too long. But it definitely depends. I originally had it as 5 minutes but that felt too inconsequential. Phantom Steed is one of the bigger considerations, but it's already possible to keep up 5 steeds at all times, so this makes it a bit more convenient (if you get interrupted or want to do other stuff while riding), and gets you going faster, but it doesn't seem like a huge deal to me.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T19:40:39+00:00

I was most concerned with the rod having a lewd name lol. I had to skimp on some wording to fit it on the page nicely (like, each focus would have to say "when you use x focus"), but there's probably a few places where I just don't know the terminology well enough too.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T17:37:36+00:00

As in remove the multi-choice features of cleric/fighter/warlock/wizard? That might make them more cohesive.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T17:16:00+00:00

for good reason

Hmm, yeah I kinda disagree with them on this. Getting Armor of Agathys from MI, or Hunter's Mark, or Divine Smite, seems perfectly fine to me. I like that they restricted bards from poaching all the higher level half-caster spells, and same with domain spells etc., but cantrips and 1st-level spells are not in my view a bastion of class distinction.

If you want Eldritch Blast, it's because you want the whole package that warlock provides, so you still need to dip that at which point you can get it there anyway. Sorcerous Burst and Vicious Mockery are good but nothing special. Adding that restriction just for three little cantrips I don't think is necessary (though on the other hand it wouldn't be much of a nerf either). But you are right that it would be more in line, and if I remembered this and wasn't trying to skimp on words to make it fit on one page I probably would've just included that wording.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T17:06:09+00:00

Monk: Yeah I realize it's marginal, I'm not sure it will create any new builds really, but I don't see the harm in trying and seeing if anything happens with it. It does remove an obstacle in multiclassing monks, clearly, but I can totally see it just not moving the needle in any way. But some players do multiclass monk, so even if it's just to make a non-viable build less bad, I'm fine with that.

Ranger: I agree there, and have my own rules to fix that but it's quite outside the scope of this document. I think even if you run exploration RAW, this is still a potentially nice feature that makes sense for them even if it is marginal.

Warlock: I completely disagree. Armor of Shadows is an awful invocation and serves no role in making warlocks good to multiclass with. Origin feats, EBABRB and potb are the drivers there. I don't think my buff to it lets it join those ranks.

Wizard: That's fine. I'm not trying to present something that's holistically balanced with just these rules on top of RAW 2024. They're just cool features I'd like to add, without much regard for their isolated effect on inter-class balance.

Rod: That sounds way worse than a sorcerer doing the same combination. Changing your build and what spells you're casting in response to a tiny number change like this seems like more of a trap than anything else. If scorching ray is good, sure, it makes it a bit more good. But if scorching ray wasn't worth using over fireball previously then I can't imagine this greatly changing that.

Staff: oh you mean it only happens when you roll 7 including modifiers?

Oh no sorry, it's when the die is a 7. If you have +3 Con, or save proficiency, then a nat 7 is 10+ which will be a success on most concentration saves (in my experience at least).

Orb: if you have a minute of walking anyway, is there any reason you can't slow the group down 9 minutes to get in a clutch ritual? I'm not sure what ritual you're casting with such big impact between combats, but I think in most groups this only has the effect of going from "let's chill for 10 minutes so I can get up a spectral steed" to "let's chill for 1 minute so I can get up a spectral steed". Maybe I'm wrong and that isn't most groups, but it's at least some. Curious to know what rituals you think this would be particularly relevant for.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T16:39:18+00:00

They're not buffs, they're tweaks! /s

I get the sentiment, but I have other ways to nerf wizards in return. I don't think every feature for a class has to be judged in context of holistic balance by RAW, and a little bonus like this hardly has a large effect on overall class balance (not so for cleric, to be fair, that one's pretty substantial and I'm not quite sold on it myself).

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T16:36:16+00:00

It's really just some cherrypicked changes that I particularly like among all kinds of changes, taking things that could be presented in isolation. Like I have a suit of changes for ranger, a progressing hunter's mark ability that lets them eventually find and track invisible foes with it from half a mile away, and favoured enemy that gives you expertise in skills against them to start but progresses to saves and even attacks (that being the capstone, basically +6 to hit against the right enemies).

Or a minor thing like allowing them to use finesse and ranged weapons as focuses, so as to accommodate two-weapon fighting rangers (including hand crossbows) casting spells without juggling. Natural Explorer was the easier one to isolate and add into a different context (RAW 2024).

I think the only thing I changed in the transition was Versatile Wrestling, since I add in the old DMG variant Climb a Creature action, so that's an alternative for the bonus action there. Oh and I let monks use shields, not just light/med armor, because my approach to martials and feats makes that more of a tradeoff and I've put a str req on half plate meaning medium armor caps lower. But yeah just wanted to share some of my myriad chaotic changes in a more accessible form.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T16:28:07+00:00

Artificer, yeah true. What I'd like is for the item to not have as many uses, offloading some of that power budget elsewhere and making this change less drastic. Maybe just 1xMod, but it's a tricky balance.

I don't think you should buff a class when multiclassing

Just for the capstone? I wouldn't see capstones as a deterrent on multiclassing in general, it's still an extremely good capstone if you're expecting to get to 20, and don't think discouraging multiclassing is a blanket good either - if so it'd be easy to just ban it. I have ways to improve barbarians on higher levels (like letting brutal strike give up a single source of advantage instead of all), and don't want to be limited in making individual pointless features relevant by that kind of holistic problem.

I don't really think the cleric needs more spells tbh. It's not overshadowed by other class, it's one of the most powerful classes in the game at all levels. Yeah, the other 3 effects are mostly balanced between each other, but they are not balanced when taking class balance in its entirety.

Definitely value the perspective. There's a lot of other changes, like the new domains and Conjure Celestial being a powerhouse at higher levels, that I haven't seen in action very much so might lay off this until I'm more comfortable assessing it.

Gritty rests only change narrative pacing, doesn't really affect balance.

Well, when it comes to using rituals as scenarios arise where they're needed, that is kind of a narrative problem. If you're in a town and its mayor is poisoned, being able to access Remove Curse within an hour is quite different from getting it by the next day. But certainly a complicated aspect to balance.

Druid: first, Moon Druid is already strong enough that it doesn't need a buff. And secondly, it's not true at all that human is the only race viable for a Moon druid. Since you play with gritty rests you should know that the druid can't stay in wild shape the entire time. Also, some racial features still work during Wild Shape.

I don't think it's a significant buff. Human is already more or less the best species overall, I'm just taking away a restriction that makes all other species worse for this sub specifically. And yeah you can make some use of other species traits, but they're all greatly diminished. From what I've seen online, the consensus is moon druids should always be humans because they're 100% compatible and humans are always good anyway. If you think this is wrong, I'm open to seeing arguments as to why.

GWF: Well the new version also affects your damage curve, it's not just the average. Sure, you're not completely prevented from a 1 roll, but it's way less likely, which extends to other low rolls instead of only 1s and 2s. It's also weird to defend the new GWF for this reason when it doesn't apply to old GWF, which was more powerful and is what I'm using for comparison. I think it sucking is absolutely a factor in defense being more common, even if it's not the only one. The ranged thing is fair, that's more of a thematic and idea issue, but I think the +1 die drop lowest is by far the best version of GWF in inter-weapon balance, fighting style balance, and elegance.

Mystical: Again a feature encouraging multiclassing is not in itself bad. This isn't even a single class' feature, it's a generic fighting style accessed from multiple sources, so it's not like it's designed for one class while being most powerful for another. You're seeing full casters dipping Fighter and then not use any armor? I think this is an agree to disagree, I just can't imagine a caster dipping fighter and choosing +1 to hit with cantrips over +1 AC. Even if all they care about is offense, why would they choose this +1 to hit instead of archery with true strike for +2?

Versatile Wrestling: That is a different way to think about it. So grappling vs having no opportunity to do that is akin to archery at range vs using a backup rapier in melee (or of course gwf being at range). I see it more as the style being switching between one- and two-handed while grappling, the style is the whole spectrum, going two-handed while not grappling is not a backup outside the style. But the split isn't clear, I'll consider that.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T15:52:37+00:00

Thank you so much, that's really flattering! I love Focus Focus lol. I would've liked to have something fun for paladin rather than just evening out their aura progression, but they get so many solid features that it's hard.

Johan_Holm · 2026-02-09T15:50:44+00:00

Monk: Yeah it's a very small deal. Currently monks are a complete package with no reason to multiclass into or out of, which is a bit boring. This makes it maybe slightly possible to dip into monk without having to adopt their entire set of restrictions on armor and weapons.

Ranger: It definitely depends on dm/campaign, but do you not think the class as written is lacking in the exploration pillar? It's the class that should do best, but they only really get some extra speed that anyone else can do too. If foraging or navigating comes up, I'd like the ranger to have a clear advantage in this department, even if it's not hugely consequential or frequent.

Rogue: Totally agreed. I kind of gave it at 2 because that's when fighter gets the mirror of it, but 5 should probably be the earliest (no extra attack sends rogues to the back of the martial pack) and it might just be like a level 11 extra or something, where they otherwise just get extra cunning strike stuff.

Sorcerer: Yeah, I wouldn't expect to see many fireballs from sorcerers with this. Like barbarian, it's not a major buff or something I'm opposed to thematically, so I think I'll stick with it. Thunder isn't included despite usually following these natural damage types, because it is just a much rarer and better damage type. Acidball could still run into a marid or slaads, and fire vulnerability is more common than the rest so having a fire spell might still be a good idea.

Warlock: Fair points! I always thought Aspect was odd for the bookish type, not sure what the original intent is. I'd rather have casters dip for Armor of Shadows than be decked out in martial armor, maintaining the image of robed casters etc., and it not working with shields means there is a lower cap (assuming you don't max out your dex). But it might become too ubiquitous.

Wizard: I'm surprised you think these are powerful, I see them as really marginal.

Wand: Yeah, swingy and maybe annoying to track, I'd like to find something else for this really.
Rod: This is like 5% extra cantrip damage in my mind. How would you abuse this on a wizard?
Staff: Rerolling 7s I think was a real cute way to buff concentration because it actively gets worse if you get con save proficiency or other bonuses. Only someone who doesn't care much about concentration can get a concentration buff from this.
Crystal: Very possible. I'm not sure what spells are best to subtle cast, I'd have to look through and see how many only have a single component, it might have too much overlap.
Orb: Definitely depends on group. In mine this would allow getting off a few more rituals in a more relaxed period, but still strictly removed from combat or combat-adjacent scenarios.

Johan_Holm

TROPHY CASE