It's the most punishing class to multiclass out of, but it may actually be more emotionally punishing to play a non-Mercy Monk through an entire campaign.
Hot take: monks shouldn't exist at a class, but rather a subclass of fighter or maybe barbarian with options within the subclass like Land Druid or totem barbarian. It would make monks mechanically better and more interesting.
@@jperk6528 I would be inclined to agree if there weren't so many variants of Monks. Far better to untangle Ki from _everything_, provide meaningful choices, and stop penalizing multiclassing in a world where every other character is free to optimize towards a goal but Monks can't without realizing they'd generally have been better off playing the other class from level 1.
@@jperk6528 Literally wrote a paper on this topic because of this comment. You've inspired me today, friend, and I hope you enjoy the read. Let's establish what a "class" in D&D is trying to do. In my opinion, a class is an archetype of hero that has been seen multiple times throughout all sorts of media, something that's been rehashed in different scenarios with different characters who all share a number of very similar traits. Each class has many notable examples that fit their archetype, not just through something like their class title, but through their skillsets. Aragorn, for instance, is not just a ranger because people call him that, but because he's a master wildsman, tracker, animal handler, and swordsman/bowman. On to the topic at hand. First, with what it's trying to portray, the monk makes no sense as a barbarian subclass. They are completely different archetypes. The monk is based on a highly technical, graceful combatant who often fights at their best when they are at their most serene (sometimes even reaching that state only in the final battle when it is most needed), while the barbarian is a powerfully built behemoth with weapons to match, who overpowers their opponents through both their incredible strength and stamina and is at their best when at their most enraged. However, I can see how as a fighter subclass you could make the case, but it seems to me that there really is an archetypal difference in media between the two. Monks encapsulate the supernaturally gifted martial artist, who calmly dodges and parries the attacks of heavily armored and armed foes through foresight and mysterious, artful technique using either a one handed blade, a staff, or most commonly bare hands, and then delivers ultra-accurate strikes to vital areas in similarly artful attacks that look both smooth and lethal (often in slow motion). Oftentimes their access to their centered minds and mastery of their martial arts allows them to fly through the air, catch fast moving projectiles out of midair, absorb blows with no damage that would severely injure most, and break through stone or even steel with their bare hands. Some can manipulate the elements or other forces of nature through use of their flowing technique or extreme focus. Usually fighters in these movies are opponents in these movies, shows, etc., and are presented by the flunkies who will get trounced in quick succession, before finally battling a corrupted or inferior mirror of themselves. Their stylistic technique is mostly portrayed as superior to the fighter's technique, who is supposed to represent average and relatively untrained opponents. That said, there are exceptional fighter types in these movies who can keep up with the monk. They are still almost always villains, and are usually larger and stronger than the monk, use more ridged movements, and are pretty comfortable with the fact that they are using a different, possibly more lazy style (as the martial artist is shown to have his art be a way of life, not just a profession) to get the job done in a very proficient way. In modern media this happens a lot when the main character is Chinese or Japanese and the opponent is European, though it can also be applied to battles between Ninja (monk) and Samurai (fighter) and the like, and the difference is both purposeful and pronounced from a narrative perspective. The fighter as a hero is also very different from a monk. They have a more practical fighting style that seems far less supernatural (even if they perform impossible feats, it's usually portrayed as possible), involves a balance of strength, speed, and technique, and often a good amount of "scrappyness." Unlike the monk, the hero fighter almost never escapes unscathed, and is much more likely to show the detriment of thier injuries than, say, the barbarian archetype does. Noteably, when the hero is a fighter, monks almost never make an appearance because a monk's archetype depends on its perceived superiority, so the fighter would either learn the monk's ways and become one themselves or seem underpowered and out of place. Given all this, I believe that monk keeps its standing as a class all its own.
I think its quite clear. We all know how mounting normally works. This feature simply extends the normal rules. And by extend I mean gives extra benefits. There is no good reason to assume anything else. If for example others were not allowed to mount the drake it would probably have to say so directly, since it would not only contradict the normal mount mechanics (not just extend them) and take away from a different PCs usual capabilities. Something that we dont tend to see features doing. Something like: Your drake is a proud and intelligent creature and will not tolerate any rider other than the one it has bonded with, you.
@@toufexisk to me it is clunky. It does sounds like the only benefits is "If you are the same size as the drake (medium size), you can still ride it" Overruling the normal text for mounted combat. But when **YOU** mount it, it cannoy use its fly speed. So, If we're using the normal rules for mounted combat, as long as the ranger commands the drake the let itself be ridden by [small size ally], then it retains its flying speed
I think Infused Strikes is a little better than you consider because of turn order. The drake always acts after you, so if it still has its reaction on your turn (provided it's not round 1) it can be used to make one of your attacks do the extra damage, since it applies to whenever another creature - in this case, the ranger - hits an attack against a target. That is very good "action-economy-wise" because it will always have a sink to use its reaction, pumping your damage a little bit. In this case, infused strikes is the fail case for a turn where the drake couldn't make an opportunity attack. It would be very cool if it applied to all attacks made by that creature, because it would be a very viable two weapon fighting build.
@@goodgulfgas Give them stuff like Chromatic Orb, Fear, Elemental Bane, and SUMMON DRACONIC SPIRIT! How baller would it be to have 2 dragons at your command?!
@@insertphrasehere15 The Tasha's beastmaster is also not a new class; it swaps out one feature from the old beastmaster (the pet), but all the other class features are the same. Including features that don't really make any sense with the new companion. (The 7th level beastmaster feature lets you command your pet as a bonus action...which the Tasha's pet can already do at level 3, so...).
I like the cut of your jib. I'm currently playing a Bladesinger Githyanki and my GM green lit me flavoring my summons as Red Dragons. So I reflavored the Owl as a cute little red dragon, and once I get high enough for summon Fey I'll get a second one. They'll be named Tia and Mattis. My GM thought the word play was funny.
Yeee but then again the beastmaster doesn't receive bonus spells either. Personally I don't get what Wizards think about when they're determining which subclasses get extra spells and which dont.
@@snazzyfeathers I don't understand why they won't let non full casters have fly at lower levels. I mean fly is a 3rd level spell, that's level 5. But the ranger with a literal flying drake cant mount and fly its drake at lvl7? And the monk that can grow dragon wings cant actually fly with those wings at lvl 6?
@@sha2143 A lot of folks think flying at low levels of play break the game. As a player I don't see how that can be if the DM knows you have the ability to fly, but then again I have never DM'd before. But I agree. It's super weird that WOTC wrote that the Drake Warden PC can't fly on their drake at level 6 (I think its this level) but left it open to where other characters can. How can a DW ranger's bond be "enhanced" if they can't fly on their drake, but their buddies can? It's weird and I'm not a fan of it. If you can ride it as a mount the only purpose I'd see in really doing that is if it could fly...but it can't with you, the ranger bonded with it, but it can with others. Until like level 17 or 14 or whatever, when it can. Super dumb if you ask me
Another note on the drake companion defensively, the drake has d10 hit dice compared to the beast’s d8 hit dice. While this is only a small increase to short rest healing I think it is worth mentioning
With a little more HP +1 AC + reaction defense( + flight when compared to creature of the land) we might find that the drake staying alive a little longer than the beast options. But we'll see... time will tell.
It is pretty weird though. A beastmaster has d8 hit dice and thus the 5 hp per level makes sence. A d10 with 5 hp per level means that the drake actually is missing one hp per level
What I can also appreciate is that it can be summoned again without the typical one-minute delay we see in a lot of pets, including Beast Master, meaning that there is much less urgency to keep it from dying mid-fight, since if you really need it, you can get it back easily.
Shoutout to how your big lizard pet (i refuse to call it a dragon or a drake) doesn't ever get magical attacks; it even has a level 7 feature called MAGIC FANG but that just adds some elemental damage and doesn't make the attack magical. Even after getting EMPOWERED BITE it's still not magical! And, the beast master gets magical attacks at level 7, so... like... what the heck is going on here why does a beast master's pet lizard get magical attacks when the drakewarden's pet lizard doesn't? even the original PHB beastmaster could pick up some random lizard off the ground, go "you're my friend now" and now it has magical attacks
That’s cuz the Drake can get up to 2d6 extra elemental damage of your choice. Even with immunity to non-magical piercing, that’s 2d6 of your choice of damage! It’s not great, but it’s still pretty good
I love how the Drake can talk. DM willing that allows you to RP as two characters simultaneously, at least in a more in-depth way than any prior pet subclass. I can imagine a Kobold and Drake being a draconic tag-team troublemaking duo. I really want to play that.
@@marcialhd An normal Ranger via point buy would also likely have an 8 intelligence. 8 intelligence is just bellow average, it just means your a tad slow, it's not "Grog Smash" level of intelligence,
@@seacliff217 i only mentioned ot because WotC is infamous for not specifying what each amount of a stat represents when it comes to physical and mental capabilities of a character (also maybe YOUR ranger is bellow average but i personally never play a character with bellow 10 in intelligence, not much of a difference but i take it mostly for role play).
I'm playing a dragonborn drakewarden and the drake and my ranger were once a dragon that got split into 2 creatures by an ancient curse, it's my coolest character concept yet imo
reflective resistance: basically gives you resistance to every type of damage, including the weird ones, like force, it doesnt have to be the elemental damges
You forget that the drake can be resurrected in combat while the beast master's revive takes 1 minute. This also makes the 15th protection feature better used on the ranger.
I think this subclass and the beast master ranger's pets should be able to benefit from the new favored foe ability after the ranger uses it when they attack on their respective turns. Just a slight damage buff, that still has a limited resource pool, for the pets and it would make sense because they are magically bound to you and should be able to take advantage of the mystic nature of the favored foe ability.
Huh, I had the same kind of idea. I thought about giving my pet some sort of Hunter's Mark for itself. Came up with the idea of a "Bow of Marking", when I hit a creature, my pet hits with an extra d6. In the end my DM gave me a "Bow of Animal Bonding" it has 3 charges, recharges at dawn. When I hit a creature with my bow, I can use a charge to boost my pet for a minute. When attacking that creature, my beast has advantage on attack rolls and it deals an extra d6 damage to that target, no concentration required. Also gets the tracking benefits from Hunter's Mark. To kind of balance it, when I use my last charge, I roll a d20, on a 7 or lower, my companion gets confused and gains the charmed condition for... 10 minutes, I think. So yeah, loving that bow.
@@juanlescano3646 That'd a good bow for sure! I think my fix is just slightly more optimal since favored foe is an ability all rangers get. You don't need to learn a spell or get a special magic weapon for it. But I'd definitely love to get that bow if I was playing a ranger haha
One thing with drakes breath is that you can have your drake do it while they are flying if you aren’t riding it so they can be better situated for it though you would have to get them into that position during the previous turn.
@@JonathanMandrake No, it becomes a 15 ft radius "sphere". The width of the cone area is equal to the distance to the point of origin, so the width of a 30ft cone at its end equals 30 ft. Which is a circle of 30 ft diameter and 15 ft radius. In other words, even with perfect positioning, it's still worse than Fireball.
@@antongrigoryev6381 It does scale to 10d6 at 15th level, so it's a Fireball with less AoE but more damage. Not bad if you're already concentrating on something like Conjure Woodland Beings.
I have an idea for a character that's a MC of tempest cleric and scribe wizard. As long as you have lightning spells on every spell level, then any spell you cast can do lightning damage.
15:15 But as you have mentioned before in so many other videos, most campaigns don't get to 15th level. Also it's stupid it wouldn't have been op at level 7, full casters get the flight spell at level 5. And the Drake is the main subclass feature of the drakewarden. And flying is what dragons do, instead we get a colourshifting resistance generator for 14 levels and only get to live the How to train your dragon fantasy at level 15+.
I just want to point out WoTCs massive design inconsistency here. Flight is a 3rd lvls spell, Genies get very liberal flight at lvl 6, same for Twilight clerics. A lot of Races can also get floght as early as lvl 1. But then they make a Dragon themed book, with 2 dragon themed classes, and what do they do? They give a big jump to the Monk, and they bar the Ranger from flying with their mount until lvl 15. Its just me or WoTC just doesn't like Monks and Rangers?
I think you guys are looking at the flight thing from the wrong perspective. Yes, the Genie Pact warlock gets a *relatively* liberal flight ability at 6th level (though I would argue against a grand total of 30-60 minutes' flight, in 10-minute increments ... which means if you're not fighting every 5 minutes while you're exploring an area because you need to do things like map and search for traps, which take time, then you *waste* ten minutes of flight for a combat that might only take 40 seconds ... as "very liberal"), but here's the thing: this is still using a strictly limited resource. So is the Fly spell. And the simple fact is, the Drakewarden at 14th level provides a fly speed limited *ONLY* by the drake's hit points and the ranger's available first-level spell slots. As far as racial flight ability goes, I know *MANY, MANY* DMs (myself included) who do not allow races with natural fly speeds, specifically because it's completely OP in a low-level party. If your DM doesn't feel that way, then play a flying race and a different subclass. Complaining that there are races that can fly is like complaining that fighters and rogues *CAN'T.* Like, ever. It's true, I suppose, but who cares? And please, let's quit *pretending* that the Twilight cleric *ISN'T* an overpowered monstrosity that should never have been allowed in the game, shall we? Instead, perhaps we should compare this ability to the paladin's Find Greater Steed spell. That, too, provides a fly speed limited only by the mount's hit points (griffons are pretty tough, pegasi significantly less so) and the paladin's available spell slots. The difference is, the paladin can only replace *its* mount with 4th-level spell slots and a 10-minute casting, whereas the ranger can replace the drake with a 1st-level slot and an action. And the paladin's mount will have the exact same number of hit points from 13th level to 20th, whereas the ranger's mount will gain 30 hit points over that time. Not an overwhelming gain by any means, but still significant. And let's not forget that the paladin needs to cast the spell in the first place in order to get its mount, whereas the Drakewarden ranger can re-summon its mount once daily for free. Griffons eat meat. Specifically, horse meat. Perytons devour human(oid) hearts. So are you going to try to convince the local constabulary to stable your (so-far-as-they-know) feral monsters in the local stables, surrounded by horses and stablehands with beating hearts? Or are you going to expend a 4th-level spell every day? Okay, okay ... that last point may be stretching things a bit. But I've seen DMs play up this very thing specifically to discourage players from taking "monstrous" mounts. In the meantime, I think the Drakewarden ranger does pretty well compared to the paladin. In fact, I think it comes out ahead, especially since the two-weapon fighting style really doesn't stand up to archery in the long run, which means a flying drakewarden is going to want to stay out of range of a lot of attacks anyway, whereas any paladin is going to want to get right up close where it can use its Divine Smites. If you're going to pity classes because of limited flight, pity the Ascendant Dragon monk, the Swarmkeeper ranger and the Psi Warrior fighter. The classes that receive utterly *CRAP* flight, the kind of "feature" that can be *FAIRLY* called "enhanced jump speed," need attention *FAR* more than this subclass, which is really pretty good.
@@morganpetros9635 Honestly I actually like the idea of getting the enhanced jump early on as a precursor to flight later. Maybe evern have it as a replacement for Step of the Wind on a base monk.
I think the flavor does slightly hold back the mechanics on the flight for the DW but at the same time, the drake can talk, so it can fly away and scout or whatever else, so it is still really cool, but they very obviously wanted the feeling of watching the drake grow into a proper dragon
I'll interpret the rules to say a small sized PC can ride a flying dragon at level 7 and the flight prohibition is due to a medium creature riding a medium creature. Medium riding a medium... sounds like a euphemism.
My favorite thing about the drake is that you can make it immune to lightning damage then cast lightning arrow and it won't care about the splash damage
This subclass just shows a problem with WOTC that has been around since 5e came out in that they are so inconsistent. You have two nearly identical features between the BM an DW, yet they work slightly differently. You have a 7th level ability that is ambiguously written that could easily have been clarified, and instead it becomes subject to rules lawyering. Wisdom is not required at all from 1-10, but then the level 11 ability requires your Spell DC. Why? Then from a logical standpoint, at 15th level you have a mountable dragon that flies at ~4.5 miles per hour, and if it sprints it can top out at 9mph. Honestly, they should have just added more options to the Beastmaster where at higher levels you could alter the flying beast into a Drake and be over with. So silly.
Ya ranger already has a pet subclass, I feel like this was unnecessary. Would of loved a barbarian dragon trainer subclass, you know like how to train a dragon.
I personally enjoy the theme of a dragon rider but i agree that the design choses are od. I would personally allow the medium drake to fly and give it other nunuses then large, maybe speed related
There is a subclass which gives you a dragon companion and even lets you ride it?! That's so cool! Dragons are awesome and I absolutely would love to play that!
Find greater steed from Xanathar’s Guide to Everything + Fixban’s Treasury of Dragons which allows that spell to also include Dragonnels I think gets you what you want. I have a bard lined up to do this which I spoke with my DM about a while ago. New Bard won’t get that option with the Magical Secrets once the updates for D&D One or whatever they call it (5F, 6?) but Paladins get find greater steed by default at some point and I’m sure you can work it in with a feat to other classes. --From Fizbahn’s TOD--- “DRAGONNEL STEEDS With the DM’s permission, a paladin can summon a spirit in the form of a dragonnel using the find greater steed spell, which appears in Xanathar’s Guide to Everything.”
@@TreantmonksTemple maybe open up a way for lance and shield ranger? unfortunately the mounted combat wont be much useful for attack until level 15 though since by 13 if ur doing a str build you can use the Str Guardian of Nature
@@evans178 Melee mounted combat is a little awkward when your mount goes after you in initiative. Definitely still doable, but it means you would technically need to hold your action (which uses your reaction and only allows 1 attack) whenever your mount needed to move into position to attack something. Kind of painful. I expect most DMs would allow you to work more organically, but that's how it would need to work by RAW.
@@ZacharyKatzStein i dont knoe if its allowed RAW but in my table you can just take it as a controlled mount on the turns you need to move before attack , it wont be able to attack that turn outside reaction but thats not much of a problem unless ur on a place you cant use it to attack with reach and dash away. It also frees bonus action to to charge hunter mark or something
this subclass seems really cool. My only disappointment is that the large size of the drake comes very late, and it would've been fun to get mounted combattant earlier. I wish it had traded the flight for the size between level 7 and 15
It should be level 7. Its absurd that the ranger with a pet drake that can fly, has to have a caster use a 3rd lvl spell in order to fly because "it just cant"
18:30 A freaking paladin, every paladin regardless of subclass, get summon greater steed at level 13 but the drakewarden has to wait to 15 to fly on their main subclass ability. Why do WotC hate rangers?
You have to consider that its a 4th level slot. It takes 10 minutes and at 13th level, if you use that 4th level slot, immediately to get it, you are now down a slot, and if it dies, you can't summon it back mid combat. Drakewarden can summon their drake at 13th level 11 times if they didn't use any of their slots, and 12 times, if at 15th level, and it only takes an action. The difference between a paladin's greater steed and this is, consistency
@@highdie84 thats honestly irrelevant. Full casters get the fly spell at lvl 5. Genie warlocks can basically just fly almost as much as they want at lvl 6. The ranger subclass that gets a DRAGON as a pet can't fly until lvl 15. at lvl 15 you couldve payed a group of adventurers to go out can capture you a flying mount. Or even just bought one.
@@sha2143 Its true full casters can fly at this point, which does suck for half casters. But we are comparing Paladins, another half caster, with the ranger, which they get the ability to fly by themselves, when they use greater steed. As for buying or finding, that is a possibility, but keyword is possibility, as you are not guaranteed and the DM can just not have any to buy/tame. With this option it is a guarantee.
Honestly, I can see the Drake not being able to fly with a medium creature at the second upgrade, but no flight for a small ranger either? And it only excludes you by RAW? Honestly, if I am DMing and my PC is a small race with a medium sized drake, I am gonna let them fly. Maybe lower the speed. Make it clumsy since it JUST got wings. For me this is definitely a rule of cool moment.
I'm really torn, because on the one hand, where do you go with the power curve of a pet that is essentially a flying steed if you make it available at 7th level? On the other hand, without flight, while it may be more combat functional than a Find Greater Steed Spell which casters can get at 7th level, I'm not sure the attack stats make it worth waiting until 15th level for flight. I think I might treat it as a jump/glide kind of deal, where they start on the ground at the beginning of movement and need to have somewhere to land, but can reach/travel in ways others can't. Definitely would allow for a slow fall effect when mounted. Honestly, those RAW sound more ridiculous than usual and I don't think I want separate rules for small vs medium PC's, so I'd probably just hand wave it as the drake being at the upper or lower ends of medium-sized dependent on PC and allow it to apply for both.
@@cjd2889 Yeah, that would definitely be interesting. But maybe keep the flight mostly limited to combat, by keeping it to a minute duration (per short or long rest) so it functions like the extra boost barbs get from rage(but mobility based not damage). I'd still be super wary of giving out-of-combat flight to a lvl 7 pc, personally, but a more experienced DM might be a little more flexible around this stuff. What do you think about halfing movement speed unless the drake uses their action as a dash? If the enemy is out of reach or v. mobile it seems like a reasonable sacrifice, but if an enemy stays in place in a turn it would free the mount to use their attack next turn.
@@haildorothygale I read that as HALFLING movement speed 3 times before I figured out what you were asking. I would definitely limit it in combat by making it a temp speed boost that costs a resource. Probably go with your suggestion of making it take the dash action and maybe even limit the number of times per encounter or give the drake a level of exhaustion similar to ending haste. The biggest issue with giving low level PCs flight really early is that you're basically cutting your list of effective enemies in half. Anything that doesn't have a ranged attack is forced to either sit there and get peppered with arrows from on high, or retreat and come up with a new plan of attack. Out of combat having flight also means you will want to add some verticality to your maps to keep them feeling fresh and fun, which can complicate things. Suddenly, city gates are no longer an obstacle, the rickety Bridge over the rushing River is non-issue. Getting to the top of a heavily fortified tower is a piece of cake.
@@haildorothygale okay, to be fair, when you say "casters" get find greater steed at 7th level, what you REALLY mean is bards, the best class in the game (I don't care that treatmonk says otherwise, this is one of the reasons why they're nutty, damnit!) Although really, because they get magical secrets at 6th and 10th level, they can only get it at level 10 unless your DM allows you to swap a magical secret spell out for another one when you level up. Its a little unfair to make that comparison, when otherwise the only way to get find greater steed is by being an 11th level paladin. Taking that into consideration, though, I WOULD have given the drake viability as a flying mount at 11th level instead of 15th.
Infused Strikes is basically guaranteed damage as you apply it after a hit. I would expect that to raise the Drakes average damage in comparison to the Beast of the Land.
A few players played this one in my games. The main power of the drake, no other pet-master have, is to resummon him again and again to tank, to die and to be called again. And it saved whole party in prison break scenario, when they had no weapons, armor and magic focuses, but 5 drakes.
Something worth pointing out, if the enemy deals elemental damage, they frequently have resistance or immunity to that damage type. In that case, you are either getting the use of the infused strikes (eventually 1-3d6/round), but almost never both.
@@TreantmonksTemple is this the first subclass feature that lets you add a damage die on a party member’s crit? I feel like we don’t see that very often.
@@DYMTWrecks a valor bard's inspiration can be used to increase the damage of an attack, too. Though in that case, it would be the attacker themself that chooses whether or not to use it.
We have a drakewarden in our campaign and we have had revised beastmaster and I think a few not major but certainly impactful differences. First drakes have 6 hp that’s a typo average d10 is 6. I don’t know how else to look at it. Beastmaster summon does not work the same. You can only summon at the time of a long rest and resurrect not summon a dead pet which takes a full minute within an hour of death. This means you cannot use the spell as a heal or a physical travel spell summon like with the drake. Also since drakewarden can sleep with their pet AND summon once a long rest this means every time your drake survives or you have 1 spell slot up when you long rest you bank essentially a free summon 1st level spell which as mentioned can be used in battle as a top up in one action. A 5th spell is not irrelevant. The reaction on the drake can be used in crits 2d6 like a smite AND has near 100% accuracy attaching to any hit a party member succeeds on. The charge has limitations and must hit on a single attack often made with a lower attack bonus and only crits if the beast crits on a single blow. Also when you mount the drake you have the option to control your mount which moves it to your initiative in the turn order. Also the mounted feat bonus of giving the ranger advantage on attacks has resulted in significant damage boosts.
I think this subclass would be fun. The breath weapon taking your action kinda sucks, but the dragon pet gets two (kinda crappy, yes) attacks at that point, right? So, yeah, would rather that be switched but I think it will still have its uses. One thing I really like about this is you get the feeling of your pet "growing up" with you. Think I'll call my female blond high elf character Raenerys. Totally different from anything from pop culture because of the R....
Understanding your reasonings from seeing all of your videos. I will say I completely agree with all but one detail. The fact that this pet can talk to you freely give it the added bonus that is weaker, but comparable to a familiars scouting abilities
I don't understand why they limited its ability to fly at 7th level. I know a fly speed is pretty broken in tier 1 but by this level the wizard and sorcerer could fly since 5th level. Also since it moves after your turn so it limits your ability to move while mounted in combat. I don't understand wizards sometimes. Atleast they removed the time limit from ua.
8:05 pet hit bonus: Drake = 3+ your prof. bonus(PB); beast of L = your WIS mod. I'm going to assume that due to the improved accuracy the drake will out DPR the beast of the land. Huh, they typo'd Melee on the bite action of the drakes chart. xD
Before watching the whole video: In a way, I think the optional beast master ranger wins out. Not only does your pet get to go ON your turn with you, it also gets the ability to interchange actions with you. As the ability to allow an attack action of yours for the beast to attack instead is still active. Giving you the opportunity to still cast a BA spell, and still get your creature to attack. Thus, if you ever get to the level of say, swift quiver. You can attack, sacrifice an attack for your beast to make 2 attacks, then bonus action 2 more attacks due to the spell. In the case of it going on YOUR turn with you, it gives it an advantage if you are a small creature and you use the beast of the land. Best mount class(Kobold for them pact tactics?). Downside, hate them being a bit MAD, darn wisdom based accuracy!
I don't know man, this subclass appears to me like an excuse just to give a flying speed to the ranger; absorb elements takes care of the resistance; infused strikes = other subclasses that gives d4 / d6 / d8 damage boost; the drake acts after you (primal companion can coordinate better in a fight); even when mounted, the drake can only move in the ranger's turn; this subclass doens't get a spell list :(
a flying mount at lvl 15 is inconsequential. With the amount of wealth and power a lvl 15 character should have they could literally hire a team of adventurers to go out and capture a flying mount for them.
Being in the middle of playing a drakewarden there are 3 things I think treantmonk overlooked You get a free summon of the drake which you don't do of the beast companion effectively giving u another 1st lvl spell slot The beast companion takes a minute to resurrect where the drake companion comes back immediately giving it a lot more longevity in a tough battle and also giving the drakewarden combo an amount of hp that can battle a moon druid at T1 Lastly if you have to compare it to both beast of the land and beast of the air doesn't that mean it is better then either one
When I saw the thumbnail, I thought you were reviewing the Oath of the Dragonlords Paladin from OftDL. One of my favorite 3rd party modules and Addons. Great video btw
The initial comparison of both pets being fairly similar is extremely accurate. A bit of a deeper comparison of the pets here shows how you may want to consider using them as they are certainly better used for different roles. Comparing at Ranger Level 3 with Wis 12-15. Drake Companion • Defensive CR of 1/4 • Offensive CR of 2 • Overall CR 1 • Role: More of a striker, going in to apply pressure on mid/back/squishy targets. • Thoughts: The reaction damage could be applied to the drakes offensive CR statistics here to increase their overall effectiveness on paper. I would also take this into consideration since the reaction can be used every round of combat. Beast of the Land • Defensive CR of 1 • Offensive CR of 1 • Overall CR of 1 • Role: This pet could be more effective at tanking, especially in cases where saves are important. • Thoughts: due to the Primal Bond trait, this is effectively giving the pet 6 proficient saves where the drake only has 2 saves by comparison. This is a big difference and gives a +4 effective AC bump even though the pets has the same amount of HP. Edit: added in the ranger level for initial comparison.
Could combo that breath weapon with Tempest Clerics max lightning damage for some very consistent damage, but it would take so long to come online. I really think the resistance is the best thing about the sub class
Level 7 Drakewarden - could be that the Drake can't fly and carry a medium-sized creature at the same time (let's say there's a weight limit), or has to fly at the 30ft walking speed most have. I mean, in The Dragon Knight series, by Gordon R. Dickson, the titular hero, despite being fairly strong in dragon form, can't fly and carry a human at the same time.
Fireball isn’t that great at that level, correct. But having it on a flying creature you can control from any distance away, without expending a spell slot, automatically upscaling to 5th while still using a 3rd slot on a half-caster, transmuted to whatever damage you like, and still having a useful bonus action? Certainly not bad
Drake's breath can't be counterspelled and is never going to be resisted, and you can choose the saving throw an enemy has to make to some degree (con or dex). That immediately bumps it up 1 or 2 levels above fireball. It is also more mobile in that both you or your drake can use it, which immediately bumps it up 1 or 2 levels above your standard cone spell. I don't know if you are fairly evaluating the ability as an addition to your standard ranger's arsenal, who generally does not have any option for worthwhile aoe damage. Maybe it doesn't matter in the end, but I would prefer the ability fairly evaluated.
@@TreantmonksTemple Perhaps I read too much into this, but in the review the impression I got was "Oh well this is a cone and is worse than fireball, so its not really useful or meaningful". I think it is really easy to unfairly disregard an ability that yes other classes might have gotten several levels ago, but YOUR class never would get access to without a 5 level multiclass, and you are still getting access to it in the "playable" tiers.
Now I'm not saying that is overpowered, buy I am questioning how did they look at this subclass and conclude that the " way of ascendant dragon" was the one that was too strong a subclass...
When you get there, a (no-Concentration) flying mount for an archer is excellent, and that fire breath may be more useful as well, as you can use your greater mobility to position it optimally. Still, that's a long wait for cool tricks that maybe there are other ways to get faster.
at lvl 15 the flying mount is inconsequential. Casters get the fly spell at level 5. a lvl 15 adventurer would have enough wealth to hire a part of low level adventurers to go and capture a flying mount for them.
I just wanna say one thing that sucks exponentially. Bards can steal find greater steed and use a flying mount at lvl 10 Palys get it at lvl 13 Rangers have to wait for level 15? That's so late in campaigns. It should be level 11
About mounting, I believe you can choose to have it controlled, and you should also be able to use your bonus action to order it to attack. There's a lot of contention about this topic but I believe this is how the rules were intended to work for this subclass. The level 7 feature specifically mentioned that you can use it as a mount (therefore you can follow the trained mount rules allowing you to command the mount freely to dash, disengage, and dodge during your turn while you are riding it), but you still have the option to use your bonus action to order it to do other actions, as stated in the level 3 feature. Otherwise it just doesn't make sense that the drake you have been training since its birth is a worse mount than a horse.
I don't know. If you're reading the first part about the flying speed ultra literally, that to me says that for anyone else it follows the normal rules for a mount, and thus they have to be a size smaller.
13:00 As I expected you like what I don't like. The colorshifting dragon. I know it's powerful, but I feel they sacrificed things like being able to ride your dragon early so they could give them this resistance at will ability, which I feel is stupid and video gamey.
This feels like a tank build. Grab mounted combatant for advantage on most attacks at 15. Plus more damage mitigation. This looks like a fun class to play, not a power build from surface level so great for most any setting outside of kill the taurask in one turn.
I don't know if this is a particularly powerful class but... it sure seems the most fun. You're getting such amazing growth all the way to level 15 your dragon buddy is growing in powers, there's great reasons to not multiclass but stick with this class all the way through.
At 7th Level, it is still a youthful Drake, which pridefully agreed to be a mount a little too early, flying is difficult with you on it. However, gleefully so, it can Grapple you and lift you into the air with it. This subclass works best with Spell Points to keep the cost of Summoning & Drake's Breathe minimal & more uses available.
TL/DR Let the kobold ride their dragon at 7th level! I think to acknowledge two main points: - at my table, I’d let a small character ride it flying at 7th, exactly to your point of people wanting to do it, and waiting to 15th is just not reasonable. Having a kobold/gnome/halfling riding atop their drake with a small lance living out their Flagonlance fantasies is exactly why we all play this game, and one small tweak allows for it in the rules, go for it. You all will be talking about it for years. - 5.5 Ed has been soft announced. Any money being thrown at buying books is pretty much a waste when those new rules come out. So for the aware of your customers (who are probably your most geeky ones), they are the only ones buying things. And, at this point in 5.0, there are enough “broken” classes/subclasses (*cough*Twilight Cleric*cough) and the power curve growing over time (clockwork soul, echo knight), trying to keep things balanced in the twilight years of 5.0 is just not a priory IMO. Actually, this is the time they should be intentionally putting out broken classes 1. As a reward for folks sticking with them 2. A good reason for folks to pony up the money on an end of lifed system and 3. You can let 5.5 sort it all out to balance things instead of “trying” to balance at this point. They should be up front that any new subclasses are more powerful intentionally, and GMs make the call if they want them in their game, and have fun. “Better to burn out than fade away!” - Mr. Krabs
Bingo. The non-simultaneous turn is a killer for any pet mount. You can choose to have the drake be controlled, but then you're giving up the attacks for some additional movement? Poorly written rules for mounting kill this class for me.
Honestly it makes no sense, the drake is both intelligent AND bonded to the ranger and so should be capable of inferring where you want to go without commands
@@Valwryn00 You can choose to have it controlled, but you should also be able to use your bonus action to order it to attack. There's a lot of contention about this topic but I believe this is how the rules were intended to work for this subclass. The level 7 feature specifically mentioned that you can use it as a mount (therefore you can follow the trained mount rules allowing you to command the mount freely to dash, disengage, and dodge), but you still have the option to use your bonus action to order it to do other actions, as stated in the level 3 feature. Otherwise it just doesn't make sense that the drake you have been training since its birth is a worse mount than a horse.
11:00 well, I think if people are going to be nitpicky about the 'While YOU are riding your drake' language of that last sentence, then they need to apply that name nitpickiness to the sentence before, which says 'YOU can use the drake as a mount'. Therefore, that ability is specifically granting only the drakewarden the ability to ride it, and no one else. And I think that would also apply thematically, because others wouldn't suddenly have proficiency in drake riding like the ranger would have assumed to have been training with his drake to do up to that level. Same as a cavalier wouldn't necessarily expect a different character to suddenly be as proficient riding a horse if someone else rode his horse.
The HD is different as well, although minor, the drake has d10s instead of d8s. I think they might've missed the +3 from its Strength score with the Bite attack as well, though that could be intentional.
You ever notice that swarms of summoned creatures can act without eating any of your actions, but a single ranger pet still eats at least one of your bonus actions?
One thing, that, you might have glossed over is that you can switch whether the drake has a swimming speed, and able to breathe underwater, or have a flying speed, each time you summon it. It makes it very versatile, and can be compared to the beast of air and beast of water
Right, to examine and partly defend Drakewarden's Breath ability. To start, it really does feel a bit anemic when compared to other classes. Full casters get 6th level spells at that time, which includes such standouts as Disintegrate (10d6+40 Force Damage) and Harm (14d6). But that might be comparing apples to oranges a bit. When compared to Paladins it isn't a bad ability if you look at it as a 1/day spell; Pallys best 3rd level spell is Blinding Smite (+3d8 to next attack) but it's only a bonus action. Third-casters get it even worse, since EKs and ATs don't get fireball until lv 13. Furthermore, if you treat it as a free 1/day spell, the breath weapon suddenly becomes more appealing, especially since you can adjust the damage type (in the rare case you come across a vulnerability) and the damage output does slightly improve once you hit lv 15. Overall it still feels a bit weak, but it isn't total garbage. Maybe if the breath weapon was 1/2 proficiency rounded down per long rest it'd be better.
I like the flavor of the drake growing as you level and the limitations on mounted flight early on. Like, I GET that the Fly spell exists, but there's a better comparison: it's almost the exact same progression from Find Steed to Find Greater Steed, and only at a level or two later than the Paladin gets both of those things, but it'd be like if find steed could fly if we weren't sitting on it. Straight upgrade, there. So if we compare this creature to those spells, it's VERY similar and in many ways better. And considering it is less intelligent than a pegasus, one of the creatures you can get from that spell, I can't imagine too many DMs arguing against allowing either (or both) the controlled and intelligent mount rules as long as you pick one and stick with it, at least per combat. That said, I'm interested in a discussion of the ramifications of turning this into a controlled mount, and where the general vs specific rules apply if you do. Because I THINK, if I read correctly, that even if you allow this particular creature to be a controlled mount, then you still need to use your bonus action to tell it to dash or disengage, because this specific creature requires a bonus action command for actions other than dodge in a way other mounts do not, and nothing about the controlled mount rules override that. Considering how much slower the drake is than either a warhorse or a pegasus, and that its actions are already limited by and require your bonus action to begin with, then you may as well just leave it intelligent in most cases even if your DM DID allow it to be fully controlled.
That really depends on the DM. As I see, you could choose if you wanted to use it as a controlled mount (no action or bonus action required from you, but it will take an action from your drake just to dogde, disengage or dash) or intelligent, that could do every other action, but only after your turn and at a cost of your bonus action. Even Jeremy Crawford recommended allowing players to choose from controlling or independent at the start of the round if I'm not mistaken, so I think it's viable
I think the issue is right there in front of you, a load bearing subclass ability is comparable to a single preparation slot that only has to be done when the paladins mount dies. A big part of the fantasy of the character is riding a cool dragon and any 9th level wizard sorcerer or druid can do it but you can't. Same goes for 10th level bards. Comparing this to even just a subclassless paladin, at 13th level they get a permanent flying mount, and also all upgraded abilities, while you as a character with time and subclass investment dedicated to the idea of being a draconic warrior don't get a flying mount for no real discernable reason.
I think that Drake’s Breath is better than a normal cone attack because rangers are melee fighters. It’s much easier for rangers and drakes to position a cone area of effect than it is for a sorcerer, warlock, or wizard.
I think it comes online way too late for it to be useful. Most campaigns dont take it to lvl 15. By that time most classes have features that give them temporary flight or have access to spells that can do so.
I was waiting for this one. I think compared to Beastmaster, both have pros and cons, and are pretty balanced between them. It's a shame the Drake doesn't get a magical attack like the Primal Companion. I can trade extra attack for an aoe, but still, YOU have to use your action instead of commanding the Drake to do it as a bonus action, and that's a shame. Overall, yeah, very solid subclass that is quite balanced against the Beastmaster. It even got buffed from the UA, but FOR SOME REASON they decided to nerf the monk... Good job on this subclass at least, Wizards...
I'm not sure I agree with your interpretation of the Drake Mount wording. You can use the Drake as a Mount if you are medium or smaller... its the medium bit that's important. You could have been using it as a Mount all along if you were small, I think... Either way it can't fly with you on it...
One important thing that the drakewarden does not get is magical weapon attacks, which means that in the later stages of your campaign, you're going to be running into resistance/immunity to nonmagical attacks a lot.
I think the Beast of the Land being able to knock enemies prone is enough to give it the edge over the Drake at level 3. That means melee Ranger’s have a way to get advantage on their attacks semi-reliably.
The old beastmaster has more versatility than the new one. Pack tactics and trip? Yes please. 3d6 poison damage. Yup! All they needed to do to fix that class was to give it a bit more hit points and the ability to not die at zero hit points like a PC has. These disposable dragons and beasts are thematically not at all what most people are looking for when they want to play these options.
Am I the only one sad at not flying at seventh level? I feel like while mechanically sound this subclass fails to deliver on it's mission statement for 14 whole levels. Especially since the summon draconic spirit spell is a thing. Any 9th level druid sorcerer or wizard (or a bard who waits till a whopping 10th level), can just decide to be a dragon rider before the dragon subclass can. It feels so odd to cut off the flight considering how warlock and cleric now get concentration free flight at 6th from certain subclasses, but the ranger can't cause..... Reasons lol. It feels like this class was supposed to make you feel like hiccup from how to train your dragon, or Eragon , but instead you're the dragon babysitter for 14 levels, and then if you hit the unlikely 15th you get to be what your suclass was advertised as.
Huge fan of the class, currently a dragonborn doing this subclass, I did homebrew it to stay until death, but takes a 30 minute ritual to resurrect, first time free in a day after that, a 1st level spell slot. Currently only level 5 but I imagine I'll ask for magical damage at 7th
@@TreantmonksTemple I don't understand your position on this one. Wouldn't it be better for it to replace an attack made as part of any Attack Action, allowing the Drakewarden to also make the rest of the attacks offered by Extra Attack (and, potentially, any of the various bonus action attacks available), as well as synergize it with Action Surge? If you're saying you're glad it doesn't have a Ki-like feature - well, so am I!
Something that bothers me about this and the other updated pet class is the ephemeral nature of the summon. I think thematically, they should be tangible, physical creatures that are alive and can die, not spirits that can be summoned willy nilly. It's fine to incorporate some kind of teleport ability to move them into combat when needed, but thematically I don't like that you can just conjure up a new one as needed. It should feel like one creature you're bonded with.
The thing I totally don't like with these drakes is the fact, you summon him just for 10 min instead of having him around like Beastmaster or Warsmith. For roleplaying having your pet around all the time is much cooler. You can also use him to do different stuff like scouting, guarding, etc. But even for combats having your pet around all the time is better - if your Drakewarden is ambushed he ha either to spend his first action to summon his drake or fight without him. He will also spend some spellslots to resummon drakes during the day, if there are multiple combats per day, but they are more then 10 min apart.
