1
Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: [D&D 5E] Shaman (Class)
« on: June 19, 2015, 01:07:54 PM »
Huh. I had actually come to the conclusion that Awakened Ally was the only one of the class features on this draft that I actually wanted to keep.
Blessings of Beasts: Well, guidance isn't happening because there's no compelling reason to take it off of the actual class list. Nothing about it seems particularly bestial to me, as opposed to generally shamanic.
Thornwhip ties in somewhat to the "Hunt" obeisance, allowing you to snag your prey and drag them back. Besides, a lot of callings have two damaging cantrips, and poison resistance and immunity are common enough that you'll want a second.
Animal Handling seems about as relevant as proficiency with artisan's tools, so nothing wrong there.
Primal Hunter: The problem that I have with this feature was really hard for me to identify, but someone else was able to put it into words for me: there's nothing about this that implies a spiritual involvement. This is the sort of thing you'd just pick up living in the wilds. Compare to the other 1st-level abilities, all which involve interacting with the subject of your calling in a magical way.
I also hadn't realized how favorably this compared to Oath of Vengeance--I had just been trying to tweak Hunter's Mark to replace the extra damage with something else. This, as it stands, is simply too good in comparison to the Vow of Enmity--and you get it two levels earlier.
If this feature stays, the prey declaration will have to be nerfed. I'd rather replace the whole thing entirely, though.
Land's Stride: A singularly unimpressive feature when compared to the other 6th-level features, and one that has nothing to do with beasts at all. I pulled it from ranger and druid to get at their shared space, but that portion of their shared space has nothing to do with beasts.
The problem that I'm realizing here is that "not!ranger" and "not!druid" aren't actually where this subclass wants to go. The shaman as a whole is already invested in protecting and preserving aspects of the natural world--doubling down on that just muddles the messaging. The subclass needs to be all beasts, all the time, and these two features are failing at that.
Child of the Wilds: This has more or less the same problem--it provides immunity to disease and poison without really trying that to beasts in any way. I feel like this subclass might actually want to be the one to break the "resistance/immunity at 10th level" trend, so this may well get the axe.
Awakened Ally: Again, this feels like the strongest part of this draft--not in terms of power, but in terms of theme and messaging. It does some good work that separates it from the actual awaken spell, including the telepathic communication and sense-sharing, as well as the fact that you can keep the beast charmed as long as you want. Significantly, it also restricts you to one charmed beast--and only works on beasts, instead of also hitting plants.
There are a number of reasons that I don't want to give out awaken as a spell on their list. First, on an aesthetic level, it just feels wrong to have a spell that takes longer to cast than it takes you to recover spells. I also like the devotion to a single beast--you don't mess with the natural order willy-nilly.
It's hardly the only 14th level ability that draws on a modified spell--see Flames of Creation or Move Across the Waters--and the differences it creates are exactly what I want from it. The diamond in this painfully rough draft.
Speak with Animals: Will remain an invocation. As you pointed out, this subclass isn't going for communing with individual beasts, but the spirits that watch over them. It would confuse the messaging a little, especially since I'm planning for the beast spirits to care more about the species than the individual--a deer spirit, for instance, might be concerned about a magical disease ravaging the wolves of the area, even though the deer are prospering, because of how the loss of a predator would adversely affect the deer.
Animal spirits should be strange and beyond animals, in the same way that dream spirits are strange and beyond humans.
Besides, speak with dead is also an invocation, for much the same reason--an individual corpse doesn't necessarily have anything to do with ancestral spirits. The shaman, regardless of calling, is a speaker.
Spell List: I've actually had some people say that they found the list disappointing--especially at first level. Beast bond was singled out as a pretty weak bonus. I'll look into reevaluating and replacing some of the spells.
Invocations: A conjure animals is planned--it was actually in an earlier draft of the general shaman--but awaken is not, for the reasons mentioned above.
Spirit Beast: Well, as said, Awakened Ally is being kept, and the subclass doesn't need to be a minionmancer. I do plan to get more of the "something larger than yourself" vibe when replacing the other three class features, but I also want to make sure I don't lean on the concept of having a spirit animal--that would drag me back to the same issues that prevented me from completing the original version of this calling. The usage of animal imagery is one of the common themes that's shared by multiple shamanic belief structures, and is something that shouldn't be tied to a single calling.
I'm honestly still conflicted on this one--a fire spirit shouldn't just be a column of fire, but, if it appears as a fox, how does that interact with the existence of beast spirits associated with foxes? An air spirit might take the form of an eagle, so what's an eagle spirit doing with itself? And it's not like these forms are static--a fire spirit might also look like a deer or a fiery bird. An earth spirit might be a mole, but it also might be a buffalo, a bear, or a sheep. Not all water spirits will be fish--some might take the form of otters, crocodiles, or frogs. And so on.
One of your points in pitching the subclass was that the speaker of beasts should care more about the bigger picture than the other callings, but I still disagree with that--all shamans should be concerned with the bigger picture to the same extent. Of course, there are no global spirits--a bear spirit is only going to be responsible for the bears within one forest, or maybe even something smaller--but all shamans will be operating on roughly the same scale. As in the Campbell quote earlier, the shaman is much more individualistic than, say, a priest, so it makes sense for her to interact with individual spirits, rather than gods by a different name.
For the time being, I'm going to put some of the Speaker of Beast spells back on the class list and give Animal Handling back to the skill list. This is a puzzle that's going to take a while to sort out, both in terms of flavor and mechanics, and I'd rather have to patch it in later than have to patch out the space made for it if I end up coming down on the side of it not fitting.
Blessings of Beasts: Well, guidance isn't happening because there's no compelling reason to take it off of the actual class list. Nothing about it seems particularly bestial to me, as opposed to generally shamanic.
Thornwhip ties in somewhat to the "Hunt" obeisance, allowing you to snag your prey and drag them back. Besides, a lot of callings have two damaging cantrips, and poison resistance and immunity are common enough that you'll want a second.
Animal Handling seems about as relevant as proficiency with artisan's tools, so nothing wrong there.
Primal Hunter: The problem that I have with this feature was really hard for me to identify, but someone else was able to put it into words for me: there's nothing about this that implies a spiritual involvement. This is the sort of thing you'd just pick up living in the wilds. Compare to the other 1st-level abilities, all which involve interacting with the subject of your calling in a magical way.
I also hadn't realized how favorably this compared to Oath of Vengeance--I had just been trying to tweak Hunter's Mark to replace the extra damage with something else. This, as it stands, is simply too good in comparison to the Vow of Enmity--and you get it two levels earlier.
If this feature stays, the prey declaration will have to be nerfed. I'd rather replace the whole thing entirely, though.
Land's Stride: A singularly unimpressive feature when compared to the other 6th-level features, and one that has nothing to do with beasts at all. I pulled it from ranger and druid to get at their shared space, but that portion of their shared space has nothing to do with beasts.
The problem that I'm realizing here is that "not!ranger" and "not!druid" aren't actually where this subclass wants to go. The shaman as a whole is already invested in protecting and preserving aspects of the natural world--doubling down on that just muddles the messaging. The subclass needs to be all beasts, all the time, and these two features are failing at that.
Child of the Wilds: This has more or less the same problem--it provides immunity to disease and poison without really trying that to beasts in any way. I feel like this subclass might actually want to be the one to break the "resistance/immunity at 10th level" trend, so this may well get the axe.
Awakened Ally: Again, this feels like the strongest part of this draft--not in terms of power, but in terms of theme and messaging. It does some good work that separates it from the actual awaken spell, including the telepathic communication and sense-sharing, as well as the fact that you can keep the beast charmed as long as you want. Significantly, it also restricts you to one charmed beast--and only works on beasts, instead of also hitting plants.
There are a number of reasons that I don't want to give out awaken as a spell on their list. First, on an aesthetic level, it just feels wrong to have a spell that takes longer to cast than it takes you to recover spells. I also like the devotion to a single beast--you don't mess with the natural order willy-nilly.
It's hardly the only 14th level ability that draws on a modified spell--see Flames of Creation or Move Across the Waters--and the differences it creates are exactly what I want from it. The diamond in this painfully rough draft.
Speak with Animals: Will remain an invocation. As you pointed out, this subclass isn't going for communing with individual beasts, but the spirits that watch over them. It would confuse the messaging a little, especially since I'm planning for the beast spirits to care more about the species than the individual--a deer spirit, for instance, might be concerned about a magical disease ravaging the wolves of the area, even though the deer are prospering, because of how the loss of a predator would adversely affect the deer.
Animal spirits should be strange and beyond animals, in the same way that dream spirits are strange and beyond humans.
Besides, speak with dead is also an invocation, for much the same reason--an individual corpse doesn't necessarily have anything to do with ancestral spirits. The shaman, regardless of calling, is a speaker.
Spell List: I've actually had some people say that they found the list disappointing--especially at first level. Beast bond was singled out as a pretty weak bonus. I'll look into reevaluating and replacing some of the spells.
Invocations: A conjure animals is planned--it was actually in an earlier draft of the general shaman--but awaken is not, for the reasons mentioned above.
Spirit Beast: Well, as said, Awakened Ally is being kept, and the subclass doesn't need to be a minionmancer. I do plan to get more of the "something larger than yourself" vibe when replacing the other three class features, but I also want to make sure I don't lean on the concept of having a spirit animal--that would drag me back to the same issues that prevented me from completing the original version of this calling. The usage of animal imagery is one of the common themes that's shared by multiple shamanic belief structures, and is something that shouldn't be tied to a single calling.
I'm honestly still conflicted on this one--a fire spirit shouldn't just be a column of fire, but, if it appears as a fox, how does that interact with the existence of beast spirits associated with foxes? An air spirit might take the form of an eagle, so what's an eagle spirit doing with itself? And it's not like these forms are static--a fire spirit might also look like a deer or a fiery bird. An earth spirit might be a mole, but it also might be a buffalo, a bear, or a sheep. Not all water spirits will be fish--some might take the form of otters, crocodiles, or frogs. And so on.
One of your points in pitching the subclass was that the speaker of beasts should care more about the bigger picture than the other callings, but I still disagree with that--all shamans should be concerned with the bigger picture to the same extent. Of course, there are no global spirits--a bear spirit is only going to be responsible for the bears within one forest, or maybe even something smaller--but all shamans will be operating on roughly the same scale. As in the Campbell quote earlier, the shaman is much more individualistic than, say, a priest, so it makes sense for her to interact with individual spirits, rather than gods by a different name.
For the time being, I'm going to put some of the Speaker of Beast spells back on the class list and give Animal Handling back to the skill list. This is a puzzle that's going to take a while to sort out, both in terms of flavor and mechanics, and I'd rather have to patch it in later than have to patch out the space made for it if I end up coming down on the side of it not fitting.