Talk:Dragoon (5e Class)

-- wouldn't standard evasion be better than the 7th level aerial evasion? As it stands currently, it seems very niche, and when you pass the save you get a free attack with advantage and extra damage on the next turn. I feel normal evasion (on ground and in the air) would be a better addition, since it is a level 7 ability anyway (Rogue), and is always useful, as opposed to relatively niche, and the part about the reaction part seems like an afterthought, but feels much more useful than the evasion part.

FIXED: This class is incredibly broken, ignoring the jump attack and most of the abilities, the 5d10 of damage and 3 attacks a turn are absurd, with 20 strength that comes out to an average of 97.5 damage a turn, which doubles if the level 20 ability is used. This comes with a hit dice of 1d10 as well. Then there is the jump which adds even more brokenness allowing a player to dodge an attack, and can give them advantage on every attack with extra damage to boot. A fighter for comparison can get out a healthy 9 attacks out at level 20 with action surge and by duel wielding. This, with a great sword (I know you can’t duel wield these, but this is to make a point), is an average of 98.5 damage, and they can only do that twice a long rest. This does ignore multi-classing which boosts base dnd damage by a lot, but would also boost this classes absurdity. As a final point this also allows for the quarter staff to be used, which means a shield can also be equipped since that weapon is versatile and there is no reason to 2 hand it with this class. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 153.33.8.31 (talk • contribs) . Please sign your posts.

NEW COMMENT: First of all, nice job balancing this so far. I just have a couple minor comments to make about this class. First of all, the wording on jump attack could be clarified (You can cancel the Jump Attack and drop down as a bonus action if you do not want to complete it), since I am currently confused whether this would be same turn or the next turn. Also, do the jumping rules (have to move 10 ft for full modifier) apply to dragoon jumps, or can they standing jump that distance? Does this apply to their long jumps as well? Also, Aerial Takedown is currently listed as a level 15 ability on the table, and a level 7 in the text below. Finally, I am a tad concerned about the level 6 breaker ability, Battlefield Master. "Starting at 6th level, the Dragoon may use a bonus action to perform a Jump Attack takeoff. When you do it that way, it does not provoking opportunity attacks." - it seems pretty strong, since if the dragoon jumps, then combat is initiated, the dragoon can jump attack, extra attack, bonus action to jump again, ending his/her turn in the air, making it extremely hard for anyone but archers or mages to hit the dragoon. I'm not sure if adding a generous per long rest modifier would be a good idea, though, since a lot of the dragoon abilities are already rest dependent.

Hey there. I would've replied sooner but I'm still figuring out the format of this website and the discussion and talk pages. First of all, thanks so much, I put a lot of consideration into the changes I made. Awesome to know people have noticed. Secondly, I hadn't considered whether or not it would take an additional turn to cancel a jump attack. I would say probably not, considering nowhere in their ability to land without damage does it say they're slowing down. It's just regular falling, but with a certain resilience to momentum and fall breaking. Imagine it more like releasing concentration on the Fly spell, where you immediately plummet. I will specify that though, realizing the ambiguity. Thanks for letting me know. The answer to long jumps is not so obvious, but is included within the jump attack mechanics. You can only use the feature to land somewhere within 20 ft of the takeoff location. It's only intended for high jumps that can arc forward a bit. Also, Battlefield Master feature is intended to be sort of a mixture between rogue and battle master fighter slipperiness. So the ability to hop around on the battlefield, confusing the enemies as well as aggro juggling between you and other party members is an intended benefit. I don't think it's too strong, though I could see why you'd be concerned initially. Aerial Evasion works best if you remain in the air. On the ground, if you fail the save, you get no benefit, whereas with rogues and monks, you do. So a conditional bonus action that serves as an extra attack, functionally is fine. If you are getting a surprise round, and the Dragoon uses that to jump, that's no stronger than any other class's surprise round attack. Also, consider polearm master feat. You can do Land >>> Polearm Handle >>> Takeoff. And the difference is the handle would only be 1d4+STR and you risk opportunity attacks if you weren't using the reach of your polearm. (Which I assume most people will to try utilize positioning and reach to avoid opportunity attacks anyways.) This is a minor damage increase from 1 aspect of a feat, as well as a free disengage. I would compare this to a more pointed version of Rogue cunning action disengage. You can't use it to dash or hide. But it has the added benefit of setting you up for your key feature along with the disengage. Perhaps if you compare it to War Cleric extra attacks it might need to be =DEX/Long Rest. But personally I don't think it needs to be changed as it is right now. --Buchasaurus (talk) 00:00, 6 August 2018 (MDT)

I'm pretty sure there is a typo in channeled spears.

Under channeled spears it says weakness. I think that's supposed to be resistance and immunity, right?

You are correct. I've fixed the typo. Also I deleted your accidental repost. --Buchasaurus (talk) 23:59, 5 August 2018 (MDT)

My overhaul and continued editing contributions.

Hey guys, I absolutely love the class and just wanted to talk about some of the changes I've made. Trimming the fat on the increased weapon damage was probably the easiest but most important fix. Changing how jump attack mechanics work to make them a worthwhile option was and is also challenging. I'm currently playtesting and working with my GM on fair balancing changes proactively for this class. When I first found this, it definitely needed help, so I hope I've left and will continue to leave this class in a better state than I found it. I also appreciate the attention it's getting from Blobby recently, which I've noticed. If any of you guys have thoughts, ideas, or questions regarding this class, or even on a different homebrew page related to 5e specifically, I love new projects. So feel free to email me at buchalter97@gmail.com

--Buchasaurus (talk) 23:59, 5 August 2018 (MDT)

Polearms

Having proficiency in "polearms" is rather vague. It should specify exactly which weapons you gain proficiency in. SirSprinkles (talk) 00:32, 6 August 2018 (MDT)

Polearms are pretty well defined actually. Anything that is normally 1d10 reach 2 handed. Anybody that is confused, I would say they should ask their DM rather than the book as it varies game to game. Especially when weapons are the most common thing to be reflavored without considering it homebrew. Some people consider quarterstaffs to also be polearms, but that one doesn't matter because it's a simple weapon and thus included regardless. --Buchasaurus (talk) 01:57, 6 August 2018 (MDT)

Revising

Let an admin now when you finish redoing this again and we'll see about locking the page to prevent this cycle of bloating the page. ~ BigShotFancyMan 13:27, 9 May 2019 (MDT)