Here it is:
I see that the index is on page 158, so $40 for a 160 page book. Definitely going Amazon on this one, or a local game store, if any of them will give a discount.
But other than that, there looks like a lot of good info in there, especially in the sidebars.
Also, it looks like the only new spells in the book are cantrips. But since cantrips can scale, that is not necessarily a bad thing.
http://www.extra-life.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=donorDrive.team&teamID=21011
We also know the name of a cantrip and a roguish archetype.
Greenflame Blade was a Swordmage at-will so I'm going to guess that cantrip is tied to the Bladesinger (which I'm guessing is a Wizard archetype). It was an Intelligence-based weapon attack that spread damage to enemies adjacent to your target in 4th.
I don't think Mastermind has a historical connotation within D&D. There's a prestige class in PF but doesn't seem quite the right fit to me.
Maybe mastermind is a warlord-esque rogue. In a lot of ways rogue would be a better subclass for a warlord than the fighter is.
Nice, looks like there's at least a good 50 pages of setting material. Thanks for posting!
What I find very disturbing is this: The Ranger
In the Player's Handbook, the Ranger was given two archetypes. However, as we all know, the hunter is usually preferred over the beast master since the beast master is radically inferior. The first survey into the edition revealed how unhappy people were with the beast master build. Duing a later UA article, they presented a spell less ranger, and indicated over different types of social media (including twitter) that the Ranger would be looked at.
During one of Wotc's podcasts, Mike Mearls himself had indicated that the Ranger had no real identity and that he would be redesigned from the ground up. With great anticipation, we waited for them to release the new Ranger. When they finally do, they basically presented the new Ranger as a watered down Shaman. So, once again, another disappointing release.
I had great hopes that this new book would finally give them the ability to finally fix this iconic class. However, looking at the index, we find that the Ranger is the ONLY class without any new information. In fact, they literally have been given only ONE page.
This is complete nonsense, in my opinion. If the core world is supposed to be Forgotten Realms, then why is the character class of one of the most iconic characters (Drizzt) being treated like it doesn't even matter?
If they have no intention of actually fixing the class, it would be far better to simply dump the class all together instead of giving several watered down "fixes".
The official 5th edition video game Sword Coast Legends, however, has several versions of the Ranger that are fantastic. Maybe the designers should speak with the people at N space on how to fix this beloved, iconic class.
On the contrary, jaden, this means they're taking the Ranger's issues very seriously. They've had 2 different attempts at fixing the Ranger via Unearthed Arcana. The most recent was last month. This book was sent to the printers several months ago. That's how printing works. If they had new Ranger builds or whatnot here, it would be part of the same broken system from the Player's Handbook. Instead, their efforts in improving the Ranger situation are getting a more close look. This book only has material that's ready to be part of the same game as the Player's Handbook material. If they had put any "fixes" for the Ranger in it, it wouldn't have been ready in time. Would you have wanted the 4e Shaman-like Ranger in this book? I know I wouldn't; as cool as elements of it are, it's not the Ranger I want. It's not ready yet, and that's why it went to Unearthed Arcana. However, stuff like the Storm Sorcerer and Swashbuckler Rogue were in Unearthed Arcana a long time ago, and are polished well-enough now to go to final printing.
I still think that after the first survey's results indicated how much people didn't like the Ranger, it should have been fixed first before all other projects. Fix what's broken before you add more things that could potentially need to be fixed.
I have no problem with the current hunter-ranger, the beast bit just needs a boost. Early in the play-test, they mentioned a pet module, that any class could take.
Looks like some decent character options. :D
jaden_stormtracker wrote:
jaden_stormtracker wrote:
Mistwell - can you link in SNL spoofing Hillary Clinton's announcement that she is running for President?
Staffer: Warm up your voice ... and remember who the most important person is...
HRC: Me me me mi mi mi mi
The_White_Sorcerer wrote:
BRJN wrote:
jaden_stormtracker wrote:
jaden_stormtracker wrote:
Marandahir wrote:
jaden_stormtracker wrote:
The problem seems to be that they are trying to make a whole new Ranger instead of fixing the ones we got. For some incomprehensible reason they believe that it is impossible to change the current Ranger.
WOTC: "What if someone likes it the way it is?! We can't make it better! We can't change something that is already printed! It's impossible! We can't do it! We just can't!" Runs off to weep in a corner.
Poor WOTC. I feel so sorry for them. 
( Not )
LordTwig wrote: