Finally Doing My Shadowlands Raid Roundup

 BFA and Shadowlands were both periods in WoW where I was just not doing much in the way of raiding, even on LFR. The tuning of LFR's difficulty has always been a kind of question: how much to they actually want players to struggle, and how much of it should be essentially the "normal dungeon" level, where the most basic kind of competence is all that is required to succeed?

Personally, I think LFR in particular should be smooth and easy. And I think they kind of nailed the right difficulty in Aberrus and Amirdrassil - it wasn't that you'd never wipe, but it was only if your raid truly ignored the mechanics of a fight.

Anyway, I think that it was just a tad more difficult in BFA, and on top of that I was getting pretty burnt out, hating Azerite Armor, etc.

I wound up only doing enough of the Battle of Dazar'alor to finish the Horde side of the story campaign (which meant basically just running the final wing on my Shaman) and then didn't even set foot in the Eternal Palace. I did come back for Ny'alotha, but for whatever reason never got around to the final wing.

(I'll note that I haven't been doing Nerub'ar Palace as much on LFR, though in this case it's largely because I, frankly, outgear it thanks to Delves.)

Anyway, Shadowlands was an expansion I was more into than BFA, and I did all of Castle Nathria on a couple characters. But it was shortly into Sanctum of Domination that the whole scandal at Blizzard broke, and I found myself less motivated to play while I reckoned with that. So I wound up only doing the first wing of Sanctum and then, like the Eternal Palace, didn't set foot in Zereth Mortis - though this latter was odd, as I did come back for that patch. I think I just felt anxious about stepping into LFR.

The general rule is that you can pretty easily solo raids that are two expansions ago. In the end-of-expansion doldrums of Dragonflight, I finally went back and got through the BFA raids I'd missed (I still think the first part of Ny'alotha really nails the "cyclopean architecture" of cosmic horror). But just today, I finally did what I could of the Shadowlands raids.

There are a couple hiccups in Sanctum of Domination. First, there's a pull before the Eye of the Jailer fight where you need to draw some guys from the opposite side of a big spell effect that knocks you back. Earlier, when I tried to solo either Heroic or Normal on my DK, I was able to use his Venthyr Door of Shadows to cross the gap, but my paladin main had no way to do so.

Luckily, though, I had already done that wing when it was current, and I was doing it all on LFR (which is also convenient for giving you places to pause) so I just skipped ahead. Unfortunately, I then had an issue on Kel'thuzad, who requires you to go into his phylactery to defeat him, but if the main room is empty he despawns. So, I just had to leave him undefeated.

I know this is like three or four years out of date, but boy the Sylvanas fight is bonkers.

Sepulcher of the First Ones I really feel a lot of regret about not doing when it was current. The aesthetic of Zereth Mortis is genuinely unlike anything I've ever seen in WoW. I don't know what it is about it, but I feel like there's a kind of slick, 1960's vibe to it, whether it's the colors or the simple geometry.

Lorewise, of course, the "First Ones" really complicates and convolutes what we know before (muddying the waters by giving us even more ancient and powerful beings than the Titans who also have an oddly technological expression).

I'm really curious to see if and how they'll manage to sort out the cosmic stuff - personally, I love fantasy that gets weird and otherworldly, but I suspect they're going to get more mileage out of the nuances and complications of "hey, you know how earlier the Light and the Titans were generally seen as the ultimate forces of good? The truth might be more complicated" than this whole idea of... kind of meta-Titans.

For instance, it feels like Dragonflight and War Within are both really emphasizing a reckoning with whether the Titans were really all that benevolent in what they did to Azeroth - the Dragons coming to realize that their roles were kind of forced upon them, and the Earthen beginning to realize that the rigidity of their Titan edicts is just not suited to the dynamics of the world they live in.

Mechanically, of course, I can only kind of guess at how these fights would work - I liked the Fate-Scribe one in Sanctum where you had to align a bunch of code wheels. And I had heard about the one in Sepulcher that you have to chase across a huge map, which I somehow expected to be faster movement and a lot of starting and stopping, rather than the continual thing it was (also, I got it down about halfway down its path - on a tank spec).

I think it's a shame that Shadowlands really suffered from a combination of Covid, Blizzard's big scandal, and perhaps a bit of convolution to its story (which might have been the fault of one of the prominent people at Blizzard whose actions were among the most atrocious).

I sure hope that the people working at that company are doing better now - the scandal has kind of receded into the background, especially given the success (at least as I perceive it) of Dragonflight and what looks like it will be a well-received follow-up (have we ever had two expansions people almost universally liked in a row? Maybe Burning Crusade and Wrath? Though I don't know if BC has aged as well in peoples' minds - of course, it's early to judge War Within, but it's definitely got a strong first patch).

Basically, the concept of Shadowlands - a peek into another realm of existence, and giving the forces of death equal footing with other cosmic forces like the Void and the Fel - was something I was very into, and there's a ton of stuff to really recommend that expansion, but I don't think anyone could argue it wasn't flawed in many ways.

But it's cool to go back and visit, and to see things I missed back then.

Shillelagh vs True Strike

 Eventually, I'm going to get used to the fact that the "current rules" of D&D are those found in the 2024 PHB, and thus we can actually talk about True Strike as a good and even potentially really good spell, rather than the utter garbage it was in 2014 (and, notably, it was an entirely different design that served a different purpose).

Shillelagh was always a cool spell for Druids primarily, which admittedly didn't scale terribly well.

But both of these spells have changed somewhat, and also, it's a lot easier to come by either of them thanks to Magic Initiate being an Origin Feat.

I wanted to compare the two and talk about which kinds of builds would want to use them.

Let's just define our terms here:

True Strike is a cantrip available to Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizards. As an action, you make an attack with a weapon used in the casting (the spell, similar to Booming Blade and its ilk, has a material component of a weapon that is worth 1 copper or more so that you don't encounter issues with what the damage die for an amulet should be - though this does break the ability to use it with Shadow Blade), and you use your spellcasting ability rather than Strength or Dexterity for the attack and damage rolls. The weapon can deal either its normal damage or radiant damage, your choice. At levels 5, 11, and 17, you add a d6 of radiant damage when you hit with this.

Shillelagh is a cantrip available to Druids (though Rangers can get it if they take Druidic Warrior rather than a Fighting Style feat). As a bonus action, you take a Club or Quarterstaff and imbue it with natural magic. The weapon's damage die becomes a d8, and you can (note, can) use your spellcasting ability instead of Strength for attack and damage rolls with it. It can also deal force damage or the weapon's normal damage when it hits. At level 5, the damage die for the enhanced weapon becomes a d10, and then at level 11 it becomes a d12, and at level 17 it becomes 2d6.

    So, let's boil down the nuances here:

Notably, True Strike does not allow you to use Strength or Dexterity for the weapon's attack and damage rolls. It requires you to use your spellcasting ability. Shillelagh lets you use both.

Shillelagh's damage does technically scale up, but not nearly to the degree that other cantrips typically do. You will be adding your (likely growing) spellcasting modifier, but ultimately, a d8 has an average of 4.5 damage, while 2d6 has an average of 7 - a pretty tiny increase compared with, say, Ray of Frost, which goes from an average of 4.5 to 18.

True Strike scales in a lot of ways in the conventional way, adding a die at each tier of play. However, it also gives you your modifier.

    Now, let's think about who these are for.

Obviously, the classes these are available to are the easiest answer to this question, but as we mentioned before, it's not terribly difficult to get either of these. (Indeed, I think you could make a solid argument for taking both, even if there's a bit of redundancy in their overlap.)

As we said before, Shillelagh's damage scaling is pitiful compared with other cantrips. However, Shillelagh, the spell, is not actually the attack itself. And here, we can start to see how character with extra attack might find it more useful.

While its most obvious feature is the "use a spellcasting ability for attacks," I actually think where it might become most useful is in its weapon scaling.

In 5E, both 2014 and 2024 versions, the highest damage die you can get with a simple weapon is a d8, and the highest damage you can get with a light weapon (simple or martial) is a d6. Clubs do only a d4 of bludgeoning damage, but they have the Light property. Thus, casting Shillelagh on a Club actually boosts it by two damage on average immediately. By tier 4, your club is hitting as hard as a maul or greatsword, while still being a one-handed light weapon.

Thus, in this case, I imagine that martial classes would get the most out of this cantrip - for a single bonus action at the start of combat, each of your attacks is doing a lot more. A max level fighter with, say, 21 in Strength, could go from doing (1d4+5)x4, which comes to an average of 30, to (2d6+5)x4, or 48 - a jump of over 50%.

By contrast, True Strike takes up an entire action to use every time you make the attack. At least for most.

Eldritch Knights and Valor Bards have joined the Bladesinger Wizard in now being able to weave a cantrip into their extra attack feature.

The problem for them, of course, is that it will mean that different attacks use a different ability modifier.

Typically, an Eldritch Knight will focus on a physical ability over their spellcasting ability - I know on mine, I favored spells that didn't really care how high my Intelligence was, or were at least pretty effective regardless, like Booming Blade and Shield (Green-Flame Blade does benefit a little from good intelligence, but not by a ton).

I could see it working better for Valor Bards, who are more inclined to pump their Charisma. But they are still left in that awkward position, unless they're boosting both Charisma and... probably Dexterity perfectly evenly.

Thus, True Strike might actually be best in the hands of a focused spellcaster - without Extra Attack, you may as well pump all the potential damage into a single spell per turn.

Of course, it might be best to just get both.

Again, there's some awkward redundancy here, but what this will allow you to do is, if you get a Club or Quarterstaff. While Mastery will play a part for Eldritch Knights, the real question is whether you want to dual-wield or not.

The choice between these weapons is basically whether you want to dual-wield or not. For damage, dual-wielding is certainly a little more potent than using a Quarterstaff, but you might not be trying to maximize damage. For an EK in particular who wants to be very tanky with sword-and-board, the Quarterstaff has the advantage of also acting as a spell focus, meaning if your DM is persnickety about whether you can cast Shield or other spells with your weapon and shield out, you don't need to worry about it. I'd also argue that for a Fighter, the Club's Slow Mastery is a little redundant, as you'll eventually get a feature that lets you use that mastery with any weapon.

Dual-wielding is tricky here, and depends on a couple rules clarifications.

Essentially, what you want is a Shillelagh'd up Club and another light weapon - one with nick if you get weapon mastery. Let's say a Dagger is your other weapon:

The first attack you make is with your Shillelagh Club. Now, as part of your attack action, using your Extra Attack feature, you cast True Strike with the Dagger.

Because you've hit with a light weapon, you can make your extra light-weapon-attack with the other. And because you've used both weapons with your regular attacks, you can make your light-weapon-attack with either of them. And, of course, we're going to do so with our Shillelagh Club, meaning that all three attacks are using our spellcasting ability, and two of them are hitting with higher dice thanks to Shillelagh.

The only question here is whether, if you do get access to weapon mastery, the off-hand (or really the light-weapon-attack, which I'll abbreviate to LWA) has to be made with the Nick weapon. If that's the case, we're kind of SOL for trying to save our bonus action, as neither of the potential targets for Shillelagh have Nick. But still, we can make all those attacks with our spellcasting ability.

Eldritch Knights can go for this as well, if you want to heavily invest in Intelligence rather than Strength. I'd probably want to get at least 15 to wear plate armor (and bump that to 16 with something like the Dual Wielder feat). But I think Valor Bards, who can afford to just bump Dex to 14 and have their best armor class, probably make the most sense for something like this - especially because they have plenty of ways to get all the spells needed once they unlock Magical Secrets.

I will note that pure spellcasters can also make decent use of True Strike. If we assume a +3 for their spellcasting ability modifier, a two-handed Quarterstaff will deal 1d8+3, compared to 1d10 for something like Firebolt, which is 7.5 versus 5.5. At 5th level, if we get a +4 to that stat, we're looking at 12 versus 11. By level 11, if we've maxed our our spellcasting stat, we're looking at 16.5 vs 16.5. It's really only when you hit level 17 that it falls off to 20 versus 22 - but note that if we have a +2 weapon, we're once again on-par.

Shillelagh, on the other hand, because of its extremely modest scaling, really needs extra attack to start feeling impactful

Duskmourn: House of Horrors First Impression

 This is my jam.

While I'm a real wimp when it comes to horror movies - and there were such scary horror movies in the 1980s (though I don't know how much my feelings toward that are because I was born in that decade and thus my first exposure to horror as a genre was largely what had come out then and in the early 90s) I've always been a big fan of the horror aesthetic - frankly, I blame Magic the Gathering for that, when I pulled a Royal Assassin in my very first mixed Revised Edition deck box and learned to love playing Black.

I am also, as shown many times on this blog, a big fan of genre-bending fantasy. I was thrilled when Kamigawa Neon Dynasty reimagined modern Kamigawa as a magitek-cyberpunk world, with real technology in concert with magic. Duskmourn embraces the idea of television screens and other modern tech, though filtered through a different world's alternate history.

But beyond that, this has some serious Stephen King vibes - a house taken over by a demonic presence that grew and grew until in consumed its entire world.

As is always the case with new sets, the meta-game takes a few weeks to shift, and I fear we won't be free of the plague of aggro decks until the Dominaria/Phyrexia year rotates out of Standard.

But the deck I've found myself enjoying the most is built around Rooms. (Found on MTGA Zone).

Rooms are a new enchantment type, and Room cards let you cast one side of it or the other, but once it's on the board, you can "unlock" the other side to get the effects of both. Many simply have an enter-the-battlefield (or I guess now just "enter") effect, but this deck is built around Central Elevator / Promising Stairs as a win condition (and in my experience, it's been the condition that usually wins the game for me).

Promising Stairs has you surveil 1 during your upkeep, and then if you have eight separate rooms unlocked (which could be just four room cards on your board if you unlock them all) you win the game. (I believe they have to be unique rooms - while you can double up on multiple copies of the same room, you'll need eight unique ones here).

The deck is primarily in Izzet colors, with a few white spells to help facilitate things and maintain board control. I honestly wonder if there's a more elegant and efficient true Izzet deck, given that all of our rooms are either red or blue (or red/blue) but we'd be giving up some important control elements, like Inuqisitive Glimmer (which reduces the cost of our Rooms, whether casting them or unlocking them) and Ghostly Dancers, which can help retrieve Rooms that have been lost to removal or, more likely, dumped in the graveyard on early turns via surveil to dig for spells we can actually afford. (The Dancers also give us an alternate win condition, quite efficiently producing 3/1 spirit tokens that can swing in or help with control by being scary blockers).

One of the important rooms in the deck is Smoky Lounge (which comes with Misty Salon,) which generates RR on our upkeep that can only be spent on casting or unlocking Rooms.

In a weird way, while this is sort of a control deck, it's also vaguely aggro in the sense that you have a lot of parts that ramp up to get as many rooms out there as you can as quick as you can. Because most decks don't have a ton of enchantment removal, you're kind of racing the clock to get eight rooms opened up.

Here's what I especially love about the deck: It has a real flavor to it.

Duskmourn is a setting where an entire plane has been swallowed up by a single mega-haunted house. And I imagine, in this planeswalker-duel of a game, that winning with this deck is accomplished by successfully trapping the opponent within the labyrinth of the house. We don't even kill them - we just swallow them up to the point where they can't escape.

There's certainly some removal, largely in the form of direct damage from our red cards, and a delaying tactic with Meat Locker, one of our blue rooms, which taps a creature and puts two stun counters on them. But for the most part, we're just trying to get our haunted house assembled before the opponent can take us down. And I think that's neat!

A Little Tweak to Artilerists I'd Like to See

 We didn't get a reprint of Artificers in the new Player's Handbook - which both makes sense but also make me sad.

But I had this notion:

True Strike has gone from being an utterly worthless spell to an, honestly, pretty solid choice for a primary damage cantrip. Admittedly, because it only scales up with d6s, it might eventually fall behind something like Fire Bolt (at level 17, we're looking at 4d10, or about 22, versus 3d6+the weapon's die+your spellcasting modifier. Let's say you are using a Light Crossbow, that's 3d6+1d8+let's say 5, or about 20 - so not that far behind) but it's going to be quite good, especially with magic weapons and anyone who gets to mix in cantrips with their extra attack feature (likely better for Valor Bards and Bladesingers than Eldritch Knights, the latter of whom might not have a terribly high Intelligence).

Now, this spell is not (as far as I can tell from D&D Beyond) on the Artificer class list, but it feels like it would be ideal for Artificers - particularly those who don't get Extra Attack (for Battle Smiths and Armorers, I'd probably stick with Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade).

Artificers have an optional rule of being proficient with firearms, something I think would just be a full-on rule now that Pistols and Muskets are part of the base game.

Now, the Artillerist subclass gets a feature at level 5 called Arcane Firearm - they can inscribe carved runes into a Staff or Rod (normally an arcane spell focus) that turns it into their Arcane Firearm, which now works as a spell focus for them, and when they use it, they can add 1d8 to the damage of any spell they cast through that focus (because I'm a kind DM, I let our Artillerist use their +2 All-Purpose Tool, generally configured as Glassblower's Tools, figuring that a blow-pipe is rod-like enough).

The weird thing is that this technically doesn't work on actual firearms.

I've also said before that I wish that Artillerists and Alchemists fought with weapons instead of relying on cantrips as their free attacks (though I like that Artificers get cantrips). And here, I think it all comes together:

First, give Artificers True Strike as a cantrip option.

Second, let Artillerists use a firearm (Pistols or Muskets, of course, but also modern and futuristic weapons if the DM has them in their game) for the Arcane Firearm.

And then, an Artillerist would very reasonably be using True Strike to, at level 10, for example, hit for 1d12+1d8+1d6+5 damage with their Musket - actually, probably something like +6 because they've got repeating shot, so we're looking at 20.5 damage.

Backgrounds are the Biggest Problem Area of D&D 2024

 While there might be an uproar here about Divine Smite or there about Wild Shape, in nearly every regard, I think that the 2024 revision to the Player's Handbook has been a successful one.

We've seen, overall, a better balance between the power of different classes and character builds, and a lot of fun new ideas added to the game.

But we need to talk about Backgrounds.

In 2014 D&D, a Background was about 90% an aesthetic choice. This is a Role-Playing game, though, and a character's backstory and vibe are, I think, important things to consider. The vibe of a Fighter could be very different if they're a Soldier or an Entertainer.

Of the three big choices you make when you create a character, Background in the 2014 rules fell far behind Class and Species (then called Race). This was particularly true before Tasha's Cauldron of Everything came out, when racial bonuses to ability scores would play a strong role in determining what class you might play as a given race (or vice versa). For example, a Dragonborn in 2014 got a +2 bonus to Strength and a +1 bonus to Charisma. These are excellent bonuses for a Paladin, but not so great for a Monk. Thus, you tended to see a lot of Dragonborn Paladins. Indeed, I, at least, often felt pushed to avoid building character concepts I liked because, for example, a Tiefling Cleric wasn't going to get any real benefit from their +2 to Charisma or +1 to Intelligence.

Thus, when Tasha's came out, it was a fantastic relief - suddenly, you could make exactly the character you wanted to. Sure, some species abilities were suited a bit more toward certain character concepts (species with natural weapons seemed really better for Strength-based characters) but it worked out overall pretty well.

A Dwarf Warlock, an Elf Barbarian, etc. - all of these were now perfectly reasonable.

Backgrounds, of course, in the 2014 version of the game, were one of the three "big choices" you made upon character creation, but in practice, Backgrounds were sort of just a flavor choice - they had skills attached to them, as well as some starting equipment and money, and then a feature that I think about 5% of any tables ever actually used - like the Acolyte's ability to find lodging with members of their church.

In 2024, Backgrounds have been seriously pushed forward as an important character choice. They're still not going to be nearly as impactful as your class, but it's arguable that they're at least close to the importance of your species.

And honestly, I applaud this.

Backgrounds, as before, give you two skill proficiencies and some starting gear (most of which is more flavorful than functional) but there were two giant additions to them:

The first is just a pure boon (or almost is) - in place of those oft-ignored Background features from 2014, you now get an Origin Feat from them. That's huge, and I'd argue fun. There's a bit of an asterisk here, as some origin feats are a lot more powerful than others (I think on most characters I'd be happier to get Tough than Crafter) but honestly, I think if this were it, I'd be pretty satisfied with the system.

The second thing, though, is that you now get your ability score bonuses that used to come from your species via your background - the old classic +2/+1 or +1/+1/+1. But the background determines which three ability scores you can choose from for these bonuses.

And that re-creates the old problem.

Back in 2014, if you wanted to play a Tiefling Cleric, for example, and you were using Point Buy or the Standard Array, or just didn't roll any particularly high ability scores, there was no way for you to start with a +3 to Wisdom. Generally, I try to give any brand-new character a +3 to their most important stat. Maybe that's not strictly necessary (and in a world of new general feats, I'm no longer going to assume every character is hitting 20 in their main stat at level 8) but it didn't feel great that a Hill Dwarf or Wood Elf Cleric had a leg up.

As an example of how this would disadvantage me, my... either longest or second-longest-running character (I have been playing my Wizard for a good while now, though probably fewer sessions, as we have had to cancel a lot), my Eldritch Knight Fighter, had the Sage background, because after he was trained as a guard (and thus a Fighter) he was taken in by a powerful archmage as a protege and taught the basics of arcane magic. But, built using the 2024 rules, his Sage background would only allow him to boost his Constitution, Intelligence and WIsdom. Naturally, Con and Int would be good for him, but it would mean that with the 14 or whatever I rolled in Strength, I'd be a bit behind on getting that maxed out, compared with taking something like a Soldier, Guard, or Farmer.

The thing is, being a Sage was pretty central to his character - he had a bit of a chip on his shoulder about not being a full Wizard, but overall that academic environment was pretty key to his identity, in a way that wouldn't really be covered by the "Guard" background for his short stint in that line of work. Really, primarily, the nature of his training as a fighter was very academic and kind of scientific in nature, studying historical forms and working with other Eldritch Knights and masters-of-arms to refine his technique and discipline.

Now, sure, I could take the feat. Indeed, it would even let him be a little more Eldritch-Knight-y at levels 1 and 2 (though we started at level 3 in that campaign) and thus have the core basics - Green-Flame Blade, Booming Blade, and the Shield spell - to start.

But the way these backgrounds work, they kind of funnel people into particular classes, or rather, you're going to feel pushed to pick up certain backgrounds based on which class you're playing. As I've written before, we're going to see an absolute influx of Sailor Monks. Meanwhile, though, my speculative Circle of the Sea Druid is going to be sitting on a somewhat useless Tavern Brawler feat for a character who would primarily focus on spellcasting.

So, what's the solution?

The first possibility could be revealed to us as early as November. The Dungeon Master's Guide will be coming out then, and within it, I've seen rumors (somewhere, I can't recall) that there will be rules for customizing backgrounds, which could be as open and free as just "pick you ability bonuses, your origin feat, and your skill proficiencies," which would basically put this whole issue to bed.

And while I think this is probably the right solution, there is a little part of me that likes the notion that a background should carry some more mechanical heft to it while still wanting to allow people freedom to pick the background that fits their character concept without hamstringing themselves.

The possible solution in that scenario?

Well, basically, more backgrounds.

Over the course of 5E, we've had tons of backgrounds that are fairly similar to ones that have come before. A Marine is somewhere between a Soldier and a Sailor. A Cloistered Scholar is pretty similar to a Sage. A Knight kind of gives you Noble-like vibes, but with a different kind of angle.

Already, in the PHB, we have the Sage and Scribe backgrounds. The Sage gives us Arcana and History, proficiency in Calligrapher's Supplies (and the supplies themselves,) as well as the Magic Initiate (Wizard) origin feat and potential boosts in Constitution, Intelligence, and Wisdom. The Scribe - admittedly not as explicitly a student of the arcane, gives us Investigation and Perception, the Skilled Feat, Calligrapher's Supplies as well (I mean, if anyone should get it...) and potential boosts to Dexterity, Intelligence, and Wisdom.

Still a bit SOL on a Strength boost for my character, but the point is that you could have a background like "Librarian" where you might have gotten strong from lifting heavy books.

If we could be inundated with backgrounds that have tons of different angles on various character concepts, it might be ok.

I mean, to be sure, there's an argument that there should just be custom backgrounds all the way - if neither Sage, Scribe, nor any other background that fits your concept has the right feat you want.

Again, this could all be moot when the DMG comes out in November, but I do wonder, if it doesn't, if this will prompt some future "customize your background" rule in a big rules-expansion book.

Updates to the Tasha's Summon Spells in PHB 2024

 Generally speaking, most of the things that came with Tasha's Cauldron of Everything that got put in the new Player's Handbook remained largely unchanged.

That book introduced a number of "Summon" spells, which were designed pretty clearly to function as a replacement for the old "Conjure" spells, which had a tendency to gum up the board and leave players flipping through the Monster Manual for far too long in the middle of combat.

The PHB2024 made this all pretty official by redesigning most Conjuration spells to not even use a stat block anymore (though, notably, Necromancy spells like Animate Dead and Create Undead are basically the same, other than that they use the updated stat blocks... in theory. I guess technically in this brief window you could use 2014 Ghouls with 2024's Create Undead).

I've been a big fan of these summon spells and the way they function - each using a scaling stat block (and usually three variants for what kind of thing you want to summon).

However, while the way these spells work (and their costly material component) haven't changed in general, there are some subtle tweaks that I think are worth noting:

First, a note on damage types:

Generally speaking, I think the power of these summoned creatures varies primarily in the kind of damage type they do. A Summon Beast spell at level 6 is doing pretty comparable damage with a Summon Aberration, but the fact that it deals Piercing damage rather than Psychic (in the case of two of the Aberrant Spirit options) is potentially a big downside. We don't have the new Monster Manual and won't until next year, and so we don't know if most supernatural creatures will have resistance to "physical" damage (i.e., Bludgeoning, Piercing, and Slashing).

What we have seen is that all references to attacks "counting as magical" in class features like a Monk's 6th level "Empowered Strikes" now instead let you change the damage to Force (or Radiant in the Circle of the Moon Druid's case, which is nearly as rarely resisted).

To me, this change suggests that we're probably going to see more creatures with a blanket "resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage," but whether that then means that a +1 Longsword will be doing Force damage now remains to be seen (that we'll at least find out sooner when the DMG comes out).

The point is: I suspect that Summoned creatures that do physical/kinetic damage will continue to be a little less powerful than those that can do other damage types - and that's why it's actually quite notable that some of them have gotten new damage types to deal.

So, let's go into what has changed.

Summon Aberration has had a tweak to the flavor of it.. The "Star Spawn" option for your Aberrant spirit has been replaced with "Mind Flayer," though they are functionally the same. Still, not that Star Spawn aren't formidable, but there's something pretty crazy about summoning an Ilithid to fight for you. My guess is that the Beholderkin will probably be your safest bet here, as it can fly and shoot ranged attacks, making it much more likely to survive combat. The Slaad option will be very resilient if it survives a fight, as its regeneration should continue outside of combat and effectively top itself off. (Though this is less appealing if casting the 1-minute duration version as a 14+ level Great Old One Warlock).

I can't recall for certain, but I believe the Clay Construct Spirit's Berserk Lashing reaction didn't use to allow them to move without provoking opportunity attacks upon getting hit with damage (it still lets them instead hit back, but you have a more survival-focused option as well). This spell is listed as Wizard-only, but I think we can easily carry it over for Artificers (I haven't checked if this will work on D&D Beyond).

Summon Draconic Spirit is now Summon Dragon, and joins the Tasha's spells after having been introduced in Fizban's. It is, however, Wizard-only now (I think the old version was also available to Druids and Sorcerers) but Draconic Sorcerers will get this as one of their subclass spells. As before, its breath attack will never do a ton of damage, but is a freebie on top of its primary attacks. This is one of the few Large sized summons, so you can ride it, but note that if you want to make use of its attacks, you'll need to have it as an "uncontrolled mount," meaning you'll have to do your full turn before taking advantage of its movement (though it will still be right after you in initiative).

Summon Elemental will, I think, be a much more attractive option. While the old version let Fire Elementals do fire damage on their hits, the other three types only did bludgeoning - the new version lets Air Elementals do Lightning, Water Elementals do Cold, and just Earth Elementals will do bludgeoning - so as long as you're not facing a powerful demon with resistance to all four of those, you should have some good options.

Summon Fey's Fey Spirit has a subtle change - the old version did 1d6 Force damage plus 1d6+3+the spell's level in Piercing damage. This meant that, against a piercing-resistant foe, the damage that even got boosted with upcasting was resisted. Now, the damage is pure Force damage, which is very unlikely to be resisted. On top of this, the Fey now has a Fly speed, though both its normal and fly speed are at 30, rather than its old 40-foot walking speed. Finally, the cube of darkness it creates with its Tricksy Fey Step option is now 10-feet on a side up from 5. Honestly, the change to all force damage is probably the thing that makes this version best - in all of 5E so far, only a handful of gem dragons and the Helmed Horror style of monster are immune to Force.

Summon Fiend's only change that I've noticed is that the Devil form's Hurl Flame is now Fiery Strike, which can be either a melee or ranged attack. I'd generally say that unless you're fighting something immune or resistant to Fire, the Devil version is probably your best bet, but the Demon's necrotic damage is also pretty good (and the Yugoloth is very mobile).

Finally, Summon Undead's Putrid option no longer requires multiple saving throw failures on the part of its targets to become paralyzed - its Rotting Claw attack will just paralyze a poisoned target that it hit, no save. Likewise, the Ghostly form's Deathly Touch automatically gives the Frightened Condition, no longer allowing for a save. I typically use the Skeletal form because of its ranged attacks, but cutting down on the target's ability to save out of things, I think that the melee versions are now really, really good (a 6th level Ghostly spirit pretty reliably frightening three creatures a round? Not too bad. The paralyzation from the Ghastly form is obviously amazing if it does go off).

Delves - a Game Changer

It remains to be seen if Blizzard makes good on its promise to make Delves an "evergreen" feature, which will carry on to future expansions.

For over a decade, they've sought to create some kind of more low-key version of dungeons. In Mists of Pandaria, they had Scenarios. In Legion, they had some solo content like the Withered Army Training. In Shadowlands, we had Torghast (something that players in the Beta and early in the expansion were ecstatic about and somehow it later became one of the many things people moaned about).

But they've also always kind of struggled with what they should reward for such things - for so long, the philosophy was that you couldn't allow players doing something on their own to get something as good as what you could get in organize play.

Raiding, of course, has long been the centerpiece of the WoW experience. And as I understand it, you'll still never be able to get better gear than you can find in Mythic Raids (unless Mythic + dungeons hit that level?)

But, remarkably, Delves will apparently allow you to get Hero-level (as in, Heroic raid-level) gear from them - something you can do solo.

Now, I've taken some characters into tier 7 and one tier 8 delve (which award Champion, or normal-raid-level gear) and while it certainly keeps you on your toes, it's doable - I even took my Mage in there.

As someone who doesn't really do organized raiding anymore (my guild kind of fell apart and I reserve my weekly gaming sessions for D&D) it's really exciting that there's something I ought to be able to do and get some serious gear out of.

Of course, what I wonder is what this will mean for things like LFR. Gear-wise, at this rate I'm going to be at least on-par with gear from the new raid before the last LFR wing is open. I'm still planning on running it to see the raid in all its glory, but I can imagine a world in which I run through it on my main once (well, probably the first couple wings a few times) and then wildly outgear it thanks to Delves.

The limiting factor, of course, here is the keys - you can only get so many keys for the Reinforced Chests each week, and there are also only so many bountiful delves per week (though I think the keys are the tighter limitation). But, also, with Delves and other world content now on the Great Vault, it's going to potentially mean gearing up that much faster.

I've only done a little Delving with a friend - I wonder to what extent when you get to big groups (potentially with a healer and a tank) that it starts to just feel like a dungeon. I'm also curious to see how many delves it takes to progress the seasonal storyline - with already a fair number of alts at the level cap (see the name of the blog) I was able to get past the first little node on the progress bar. But then, I have to remind myself it's literally the first week of the new season.

Monk Building in 2024

 While in previous RPGs, I was never terribly excited about Monk-style unarmed combatants, there's something I really like about the way that D&D's 5th Edition presents them. The 10th/50th anniversary update to the class has taken a fun but flawed class and turned it into an absolute beast - while I do some napkin math here and there, I'm not an optimizer and I'm not intending to tell you what you have to do to deal the absolute most damage with this class. The way I play, the "optimization" I do for a character is really just to help it better fulfill the fantasy of the character (this is part of the reason I don't really like multiclassing, as I think the vast majority of multiclass character are less about crafting an interesting story and more about just eking out some more damage per round - though there are exceptions to be sure).

That said, it is fun to be effective in the game. I know there are people who enjoy playing a character who is really bad at certain things (my Wizard, for example, with a -1 to Wisdom, is utterly naive and credulous) but in general, I think you're going to have more fun if your character is at least good at the things they're supposed to be good at.

Of course, your definition of "good" can vary greatly. Personally, I think that the game is balanced such that a character who just plays things straightforwardly, taking ability score improvements at each level rather than feats (yes, I know that ASIs technically are feats now) should do just fine as long as they're not, you know, a Wizard with a +1 to Strength trying to primarily attack with a +1 Sword because it's magic (unless they're using the new True Strike!)

So this is more about things to consider rather than hard and fast rules.

Backgrounds (and Origin Feats)

You are going to see a lot more Monks who live a life on the sea. Sailors were always popular for getting Athletics and Perception proficiencies (both common skill checks) but on top of this, the new version gives Strength, Dex, and Wisdom as its potential ability boosts, as well as the Tavern Brawler feature, which is particularly attractive to a class that uses a lot of Unarmed Strikes.

    I will note here that I'm very curious to see how the new DMG handles custom backgrounds. Frankly, I think that the new Backgrounds feel like a step back in the sense that it was so liberating when Tasha's Cauldron of Everything started letting us swap out, say, Charisma and Intelligence boosts on a Tiefling for other abilities. While this makes Background choice more meaningful, I also fear that we'll see the same classes taking the same backgrounds every time.

But how important is Tavern Brawler to a Monk, and what might we get instead?

The feat does the following:

First, you can use a d4 for damage instead of 1 for unarmed strike damage, adding your Strength to it. This is fully redundant for us, as our Martial Arts feature now starts us off with a d6 (going up to a d12 by tier 4) and lets us use Dexterity for both the damage and the save DC for the Grapple and Shove options.

Second, we can reroll 1s we roll on the dice for our unarmed strikes. How much does this get us?

On a d6, we go from 3.5 to 3.9. On a d8, we go from 4.5 to 4.9. On a d10, we go from 5.5 to 5.95, and on a d12, we go from 6.5 to 6.96. If we consider a typical no-FP-cost turn level 5 and up, we're talking a difference of 1.2-1.3 damage. That's pretty marginal.

We also get proficiency in Improvised Weapons - but these are not Simple Weapons or Martial Weapons with the Light Property (hey, did you know a Hand Crossbow is a Monk Weapon now?)

So we're at best 1 for 3 so far. However, the last part is pretty enticing: Once per turn, we can push a creature 5 feet when we damage them with an unarmed strike. Note that unlike a Shove, there's no saving throw against this and no size restriction - this can technically push the Tarrasque back if you hit that AC 25 (or whatever it is in the new Monster Manual).

    Does this mean you have to be a Sailor?

I'd say it's definitely appealing, but it's not the only viable Background. Charlatans, Criminals, Guides, Scribes, Soldiers, and Wayfarers all get Dexterity and either Wisdom or Constitution.

Of these, I'm always a little hesitant to get a Magic Initiate or other spell-granting feat on a class that doesn't have spell slots, as it's nice to be able to cast those spells more than once a day. Some of these grant the Alert and Skilled feats, which are both solid. I'm less impressed by the new version of Lucky - which is now proactive advantage rather than a reactive re-roll. Savage Attacker, which you get from Soldier, feels like possibly the least powerful Origin feat, but the math of figuring out the whole "roll twice and take the higher amount" is too complex for my sleepy brain.

Now - let's talk loadout.

Monks don't get Weapon Mastery, and with Martial Arts dice all now bumped up (and starting with a d6) you'll probably want to start off with a d8 weapon (Quarterstaff and Spear are both good ones - the latter is part of the Monk's new starting equipment. Note that as a heavy melee weapon, a Greatclub will impose disadvantage on attacks if you don't have a 13 in Strength or higher).

I'm hoping we'll see Wraps of Unarmed Mastery (which come in +1/+2/+3 variants and provide a bonus to the attack and damage rolls of your Unarmed Strikes), introduced in the Book of Many Things, added to the new DMG, but if they're not or your DM just forgets they exist, you might want to still fight with a weapon so you can have a +1 or otherwise magically boosted thing. However, I'm assuming the Wraps will be there, in which case you should be able to safely swap to pure Unarmed Strikes once you hit level 5.

If you want to squeeze one more attack in, you could potentially grab Weapon Mastery via a feat or a multiclass dip in order to grab a weapon with the Nick property. By tier 3, even a lowly dagger in the off hand will be hitting for 1d10. A fighter could get you a Nick weapon and a Vex weapon for your main hand, as well as the Two Weapon Fighting Style so that nick weapon is also adding your Dexterity modifier. But this will also delay your Monk progression (and, if you have a chance of hitting level 20 in your campaign, will prevent you from getting what is probably the best level 20 capstone feature for any class).

Now, one of the huge changes for Monks is actually a general change for Unarmed Strikes - where previously these were just hitting something with your fist, foot, or other part of your body and doing damage, now an Unarmed Strike covers both this option as well as Shoving and Grappling.

This means that our bonus action Unarmed Strike and Flurry of Blows can potentially have us do a ton of Grappling and Shoving (though we'll probably only be able to grapple at most two creatures at a time - a very lenient DM might allow a Plasmoid to grapple more).

For this reason, I think no class will be as attracted to the Grappler feat as the Monk will. Grappler both boosts either Dexterity or Strength by 1 (we'll obviously take Dexterity). Once a turn, it will allow us to both hit the target for damage with an unarmed strike and attempt a Grapple (remember that we use our Dexterity to set the DC, so at level 4, if we started off with a 17 in Dexterity and got it to 18 with the feat, we're looking at a DC 14). We also gain advantage on attacks if we're grappling a target. And finally, we aren't slowed down if we're dragging a grappled creature.

In our ideal scenario, even at level 4, we could grapple one creature with our Attack action and then a second creature with our Bonus Action unarmed strike (and one of these could also damage them if we hit) and then we could drag both of these creatures at our full, enhanced Monk speed. We could even jump off a ledge and then use Slow Fall to protect ourselves from falling damage while they both take the full force of it (though this leaves us without Deflect Attacks to protect us if they survive and want to take revenge).

But even if there aren't any convenient ledges, we're also going to be able to protect our allies by keeping foes away from them. And thanks to the quite excellent Deflect Attacks, we'll be much better at standing up on the front lines.

Now, there are other feats you might consider - Speedy, for example, can boost our Dexterity while increasing our movement speed by even more. But even though the new rules make feats a lot more attractive, I might still push for ASIs simply because Monks benefit so much from having high Dexterity and Wisdom (and Constitution, though no more than anyone else).

Thoughts on D&D Moving Forward

 With the PHB kinda-sorta out, I've been going nuts on D&D Beyond creating updated versions of characters I've played, and some brand-new characters as well.

Here are my general thoughts:

    First, some functionality on the site needs work - there's no way to designate a Pact Weapon, for example, so you don't get the weapon with its proper attack and damage stats (nor that you're proficient in it). Also, I re-created my very first D&D character and it puts all of his Patron spells as simply "at will." If that were the case, I'd very happily create an endless army of Aberrant Spirits at level 14, but I think my DM might have a problem with that.

    As it stands, D&D Beyond has a lot of things marked as "legacy." You can pick a legacy class or species or even spells, but so far, I don't see a button to just say "legacy character" or "legacy campaign," so, for example, even with the 2014 Warlock I made for a campaign while I'm out of town, the "unarmed strike" section of the action tab has the new version of it - and this was a copied version of an existing character I'd created prior to the changeover.

    On a more design-side of things: we desperately need either many more backgrounds or the ability to customize them. Right now, as it stands, every Monk is going to want to be a Sailor, as it's the only background that gives the Tavern Brawler origin feat, which enhances Unarmed Strikes (though one aspect of it is redundant, as it lets you use a d4 for unarmed strike damage, when a Monk already starts with a d6 now). I understand a desire to make Background a more meaningful mechanical choice, which it sure is now, but it also kind of funnels players into certain archetypes a little like the old method of tying ability scores to what is now called species did. To me, a Background should be mostly a flavor choice, but if these rules were in place when I made my Eldritch Knight back in the day, I'd be very hesitant to give him the Sage background because I'd be starting off with less than 16 in Strength.

Perhaps we could get similar backgrounds with slightly different bonuses, but at that point why not just make them fully customizable?

Indeed, in the playtest, backgrounds were presented as examples, with the primary intention being that most people would make a custom background.

    Planning a character out is going to be a more meticulous process now that feats are better - at the moment, I'm going feat-crazy because you can still max out your primary stat with them. For example, I made a version of my 12th level Monk (with some alterations) I played in Adventurer's League but he's got a lower AC now that he has slowed his advance to 20 Dexterity because he took the Grappler and Speedy feats (and I think Sentinel?) Still very worth it, because now he can grapple a target and run a full 65 feet with them (or 130 if he uses Step of the Wind,) and Monk survival I think is going to lean less on AC and more on negating attacks with Deflect Attacks.

    Also, feats are going to make characters a little more complex. For players who want to covert higher-level characters from existing campaigns, I suggest really taking your time familiarizing yourself with everything that has changed. It might be worth it to simply rebuild the character level-by-level.

Anticipating PHB 2024 Today

 Having ordered the whole digital/physical bundle (something I wish they could have involved my local game store in) and having a subscription to D&D Beyond, I am, apparently, going to have access to the new PHB in an hour and twenty minutes or so.

I've been following the development of the new core books very closely, so I'm not anticipating any huge surprises, but I have been thinking about what I want to do with it.

The first real question, of course, is whether the entire character-building system will be fully working after the site comes back from maintenance. If it isn't fully implemented, then I'll obviously have to wait.

But I think my plan is to start by reconstructing my three original D&D characters with the new system.

The first is a human Great Old One Warlock. This subclass got one of the biggest glow-ups of the revisions, which I'm very excited about. While the improved Pact of the Blade is certainly enticing (and I'm tempted to make another Warlock with that whole thing, possibly an Undead Warlock if I can extend the "Expanding Spell List" into the new "Patron Spells), this character actually has his Tome/Book of Shadows written into his backstory, so I'll definitely be sticking with that. I was so-so on Nobles getting the Skilled feat (if I recall correctly) but given that he's human, he'll get his pick of the other ones, so I'll need to think about which he should take (Tough is always appealing, if a bit boring).

The second is my Dragonborn Eldritch Knight fighter. Unlike the Warlock, I actually got to play him for a long time, getting him to level 12. While the changes to spellcasting have made Fireball-Action Surge-Fireball impossible (they've even killed Thunderwave-Action Surge-Thunderwave, sadly, even with the weird exemption where Fighters are casting spells as part of the attack action, though you can still Green-Flame Blade-Action Surge-Green-Flame Blade) I overall think the character will be much more powerful, especially as he'll be able to weave in Lightning breaths along with his attack cantrips and his normal attacks (here I'll be curious to see how easy it is to use spells from older non-PHB books, as GFB and Booming Blade are pretty core spells for an Eldritch Knight, with no real replacements in the new PHB).

Finally, I've got a character I also played up to level 12, but I'll probably be making a lot of adjustments. Initially conceived as a Wood Elf Shadow Monk (largely due to the fact that Wood Elves got bonuses to Dexterity and Wisdom in the 2014 PHB) it'll be hard not to take the Sailor background to get Tavern Brawler. This might have to actually be a new character, but I'm thinking a Monk, either Way of Mercy or Way of Shadow (while the new Elements Monk is cool, I'm still skeptical about having to spend an FP to engage their "battle-mode"). Obviously, I'm going to build this character to start with Tavern Brawler and pick up Grappler at 4th level. Now, I could go with my original "expanded" concept of making him an Air Genasi, but I'm now playing an Air Genasi Rogue in a Wild Beyond the Witchlight game, so I might try something else. Even if not going Drunken Master (the subclass of my original Monk) I could play that up and maybe be a Dwarf. Alternatively, I could be a big hulking Goliath (particular ancestry... honestly Hill makes a lot of sense, but I could imagine going with nearly all of them...) Hold on, if we make him a Cloud Goliath sky pirate? One who has gotten really good at grappling so he can throw foes off of airships? Yeah... this is kind of an amazing idea. And Way of Shadow works kind of for a Pirate/Ninja idea.

Anyway, I'll also want to just read the PHB cover to cover (so to speak).

I've been tentatively talking about allowing players to convert to the new rules, though I'll need to upgrade to a Master subscription and create a campaign so I can share it all. For the DMs in the two games I'm playing in, I haven't gotten official word, but I think both are probably enthusiastic to let us try (and the Witchlight game is only at level 2, so it's not like we're really set in our ways yet).

I am very excited to start my next campaign with these rules from the start. I have a sense that characters will just feel a little more capable at level 1 (which, to be fair, is better news for a bunch of experienced players like mine than someone just getting into the game).

Anyway, I've killed about 19 minutes writing this, so hopefully the site will be back up when it's scheduled to be.