Unearthed Arcana New UA: 43 D&D Class Feature Variants

The latest Unearthed Arcana is a big 13-page document! “Every character class in D&D has features, and every class gets one or more class feature variants in today’s Unearthed Arcana! These variants replace or enhance a class’s normal features, giving you new ways to enjoy your character’s class.”

News Archive | Dungeons and Dragons

Read the full archives of Dungeons & Dragons news, Sage Advice, Unearthed Arcana, and D&D Studio Blogs.

dnd.wizards.com

 

[Gradine]

I like playing Wizards, and I like playing Fighters. Different animals, built for playing different styles.

This. For some (I would argue many, given the general popularity of Fightes across all editions, not just in 4e) that's where the appeal of the Fighter lies. One of my favorite "Ask Red Mage" responses from the old 8-bit Theatre about what class he thought was best, and he of course answered Bard (because Bard is the Red Mage of D&D; or more accurately Red Mage is literally the Bard of Final Fantasy I, which that site/comic was based on) but that he usually ends up playing Fighters for the reasons he described as follows:
DM: "You see a problem."
Me: "I hit it until it's not a problem anymore."

It turns out that many players actually prefer fewer decision points; odd as it may seem to 4e stans (who are all about decision points for obvious reasons) and charopers (who take as their central axiom, wrongly in my opinion, that versatility is the absolute key to power). Again, it's different strokes for different folks.

 

[Kurotowa]

What scares me about the popularity of this idea is... why people want the game to be EASIER?

In the video linked above, Crawford call them "pain points". Pain and inconvenience don't equal challenge. They certainly don't equal fun. Sure, there's a certain masochistic satisfaction to withstanding and overcoming pain, but there's also great deal of relief from making the pain stop. And demanding that other people suffer pain because you had to is just cruel.

What makes D&D fun for me? Spending time with my friends. Playing out a character's story. Overcoming challenges both tactical and strategic. Pushing myself to be clever and imaginative and resourceful. What's not fun about playing D&D? Spending an hour staring at the Warlock spell list agonizing over what spell to optimally pick because I know I'll be stuck with that choice for the next ten months and I need to pick something that will actually come up in play, not like that Darkness spell I've cast all of zero times because I've never found myself in a solo situation where the Darkness + Devil's Sight combo can be of use.

Removing that isn't making the game easier. It's removing a frustration that gets in the way of having fun. It shifts my choice matrix from "Must pick the most broadly optimal spell at level up because I'm basically stuck with it" to "We hit the dungeon tomorrow, what information do I have to help me pick which one spell to sacrifice and which one spell to gain". Is that easier? I don't think so. It's less punishing for making a wrong choice, but it's also asking you to make choices more often. On the balance that sounds more fun to me.

 

[Don Durito]

There are 16 maneuvers in the PH, all located on two facing pages in the BM sub-class description.

That's about as many choices for the player to concern himself with for his BM's entire career from 3rd through 20th, as a player of a Druid, Cleric, or even Paladin, needs to consider each long rest, for his 1st level spells, alone.

Each long rest. Not each combat round.

I don't think it's particularly bad. But, clearly it's a design concern for 5E being an entry level game. Mearls has said it's why Druids don't get Wild Shape until 2nd level. So new players are not learning spell casting and wildshape at the same time.

See also the backlash against Modiphius' Conan game, which a lot of people seem to think is highly complex. It's not really but it frontloads its complexity.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Maybe there is a way to allow more "versatility" to the warlock, but this would need a lot of pages in other sourcebook. The pact magic where the vestige would give a temporal list of gifts and known powers, like the list of spells of cleric's domains. As I have said, this would need lots of new pages.

 

[Gradine]

And, of course, the Champion remains virtually cognitive-load free, for any who do conform to the stereotype. Maneuvers are a BM feature, and the BM is meant to be there for anyone wanting to play a more complex 4e-style fighter, or an even more complex Warlord, or a 4e-style non-spellcasting ranger...

...one sub-class, 16 maneuvers, standing in for 3 full classes, 24+ builds, and well over a thousand exploits.
But we're worried it's too much cognitive load for the folks what liked having all that?

In fairness, the folks who liked having all that still have all that. 4e didn't disappear. But that style of class design did not endure for reasons that I would hope are fairly obvious at this point; namely, that there weren't enough folks who did, indeed, liked having all that. Many, many more folks wanted fewer decision points (or "pain" points, as I see being pointed out); that and they appear to have also wanted their traditional, spell-casting Ranger.

Don't get me wrong, I loved 4e's class design as much as the next 4venger, but I also see the much broader appeal of asymmetric class design catering to different preferred styles and complexity of play.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I don't think it's particularly bad. But, clearly it's a design concern for 5E being an entry level game.
Mearls has said it's why Druids don't get Wild Shape until 2nd level.

I'm sorry, but with so many full-caster classes with as-or-greater complexity from 1st level, including the Cleric in the basic pdf, that rings hollow.

 

[NotAYakk]

Wrong [...]Wrong [...]

Question: Spell Versatility only activates on a Long Rest. So on your very first long rest, you get to switch a spell. If I chose to switch a Cantrip, which the UA specifically states I can, what feature did I get that cantrip from?

The Spell Versatility feature, which enhances the spellcasting feature.

To mimic your style: Wrong.

The Spell Versatility feature did not grant you the Cantrip you where switching out. It could grant you the Cantrip you where switching in.

You had the Cantrip before you had the Spell Versatility feature. How in the world did you get the cantrip if it came from Spell Versatility, if you had it before you had Spell Versatility?

 

[Salthorae]

In the video linked above, Crawford call them "pain points". Pain and inconvenience don't equal challenge. They certainly don't equal fun. Sure, there's a certain masochistic satisfaction to withstanding and overcoming pain, but there's also great deal of relief from making the pain stop. And demanding that other people suffer pain because you had to is just cruel.

I mean... for casual players, it's a pain point release valve.

For players with any degree of system experience/mastery, it very much makes the game easier because any problem that arises that has a spell solution is just a long rest away.

If the goal is the relieve the pain of games where characters sit at levels for months or years of real-time, make it a downtime option like retraining, not a Long Rest swap. They don't have to wait for level up, but it's not a wide-open swiss-army knife ability for spontaneous casters.

 

[Yaarel]

See my post here, with a video link where Crawford discusses this feature exactly.: New UA: 43 D&D Class Feature Variants

I appreciate the link!

I feel his talk didnt specifically address where ‘one’ spell comes from. But it explains the intent of the Spell Versatility feature.

Essentially, there is no design ‘merit’ to forcing a player to ‘git gud’. Or as Crawford puts, players dont have to ‘eat their vegetables’, in the sense of being stuck with unfortunate earlier choices. The designers want players to like their characters and to be happy with them.

A problem was, for some groups, leveling was only a session or two away. But for other groups, leveling might be over a year away. So, being stuck with a subpar option was unacceptable.

 

[Don Durito]

I'm sorry, but with so many full-caster classes with as-or-greater complexity from 1st level, including the Cleric in the basic pdf, that rings hollow.

Clerics don't get 16 options they can choose from every combat round at 1st level. Their complexity ramps as they progress.

(Although I don't get this "rings hollow" thing? You mean that it's not convincing that the game designers limited the number of maneuvers that Battlemasters begin with in accordance with design principles they stated were generally a concern in 5E? Why do you think they did it then?)