D&D 5E New Unearthed Arcana: Heroes of Krynn Revisited

WotC's Jeremy Crawford has announced a new Unearthed Arcana article today with redesigns from the prior Heroes of Krynn UA based on feedback, and in the following video he discusses that feedback and what's in the article:

• New iteration of Kender based on feedback survey, due to mixed response. This time is a back to basics, aiming to capture 1E AD&D fearlessness, curiosity and taunting skills. Delve into their origins from Gnomes in deep history.
• Kender are no longer fey creatures who grab objects from the Feywild
• Tweaked Feats from prior article
• Tweaked Backgrounds from prior article
• Brand new rule giving a list of free Feats for ANY Background
• Free Feat rule for Level 4 for all characters that doesn't take the ASI away, based on a curated list
• Reveals that in the Adventure, healing magic is already back.

Heroes of Krynn Revisited | Unearthed Arcana | Dungeons & Dragons

Explore updated character options from the Dragonlance setting! This playtest document presents revised races, subclasses, backgrounds, and feats.

dnd.wizards.com

 

[Medic]

I do not have even the slightest bit of intrest in being a doctor. BUT if I did and I was told I had to go take a test that would put me into a group of good/evil/neutral doctors that are all allowed to be good/neutral/evil I would be VERY worried why good doctors are allowing evil doctors to do ANYTHING... especially if we can test for them.

I don't know about you but I would not want an evil (insert your profession here) club to be allowed at all.

That is because 'evil' is a quality that a person can objectively possess in a figurative D&D fantasy world. The alternative to regulating evil wizard behavior to minimize the harm they can do would be to go door-to-door using divination spells and culling anyone unfortunate enough to 'ping' as evil, even if they haven't even committed any atrocities yet.

Intervening after innocents have suffered is also an option, though I don't see the point in this when making them answer to an organization is an option that's on the table unless you just don't care about preventing their shenanigans.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because stories without nuance are boring.

Which is why DL sucks. It's boring, simplistic, and has all the wrong messages. "You can do anything you like so long as you wear white you are the good guy".

So it's not for you. That means you should be happy leaving it alone for others to enjoy, right?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The Test of High Sorcery does not pass the smell test. It dangerous for no good reason and allow evil mages to do what they like as long as they wear the appropriate robe

take any profession. Your choice. Doctor, Lawyer, Cop, Customer Service Rep, Gas Station attendent. OR take any right Free speach, being armed, voteing

now lock that job/right (or anything really but right now it is a class) behind a leathal test that tells you who is good and who is evil... BUT the evil ones are NOT more likely to die... they just have to pick the right sports jearsy to wear... the test wont stop evil _____ just lable and organize them, and the good ones are OKAY with this... cause um... reasons.

 

[Maxperson]

There's tons of stuff on alignments online, so new players already have plenty of resources. For instance, this page on Lawful Good, which seems nice and in-depth.

I think you've vastly overestimating the average player's desire to go online to look up something like alignment. We forum goers are a special breed.

In this case, I was talking about how "LE god of evil magic" doesn't actually describe the god in any detail.

And AC 20 doesn't describe what is protecting the creature in any detail, yet you seem to be okay with using that.

And I'm sorry, but I find that pretty dull, if only because it gets in the way of me, the DM, having them act in the way I need to tell my side of the story. If I wanted to have ruthless elf or halfling soldiers that will gladly kill an entire village, I will--even though elves and halflings are traditionally Good.

Cool. Nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with using NE, either.

I'm pretty sure that nobody in the history of gaming has ever had an argument as to what AC 20 (or AC 0, back in the THAC0 days) actually means, whereas I personally have seen or been part of many arguments as to what any particular alignment means.

I've been in multiple debates over what AC means. On these forums even. It goes hand in hand with hit points and what hits represent. For example, if a hit isn't actually hitting and doing physical damage, yet still takes off hit points, what the hell does plate mail even do? It can't protect you from damage that isn't damage any better than leather or even no armor.

So if AC isn't from being hard to physically hurt, what is AC? Hell if I know.

So I could convert an orc to good and then immediately kill it so it won't backslide, and that's a lawful good act, right? I mean Gygax thought so and he invented the system, so he should know.

According to him, yes. According to alignment as written, no.

Or, if not sacrificing a child means that the Demon will rise and devour a thousand people body and soul, what alignment would you put the act of sacrifice as?

Evil. It can't be anything else no matter how many are saved. The separate act of saving the people would be good.

You've murdered a child(evil) and saved people(good).

Would it matter if the child was willing, because she was lawful good enough to put the needs of her people above her own life?

No. It wouldn't matter.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

So it's not for you. That means you should be happy leaving it alone for others to enjoy, right?

Sure. I did point that out earlier in the thread.

 

[Scribe]

please show me were we see evil=good. I may have only read the first few novels and the basic book but even then the balance was never good=evil

The general flow is, if I remember.

Good was too powerful = Istar gets blown up.
Bad rises up and is getting ready to take over.
Rest of the Gods return, and the balance is restored.

Eventually, in the Summer Flame book, Good (Paladin) makes way for Evil to ascend again, as its needed to combat Chaos.

Something like that?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

That is because 'evil' is a quality that a person can objectively possess in a figurative D&D fantasy world. The alternative to regulating evil wizard behavior to minimize the harm they can do would be to go door-to-door using divination spells and culling anyone unfortunate enough to 'ping' as evil, even if they haven't even committed any atrocities yet.

again... if we are killing spell casters (test is lethal) and outlawing some from useing magic (there are still renagageds) why not the evil ones? Why have a test that pulls good and evil out and have the good agree the evil have the right to still progress?

Intervening after innocents have suffered is also an option, though I don't see the point in this when making them answer to an organization is an option that's on the table unless you just don't care about preventing their shenanigans.

except this ISn't about stopping shenanigans as long as they wear the right club color

 

[Helena Real]

yeah sorry how is too much good a bad thing?

I think the problem is that RAW, the setting books say "good" when they mean lawful good. As you can probably guess, the problems arise when lawful good people start caring more about law than good.

In the same fashion, when DL mentions "neutral" it should say "neutral authentic" or "neutral neutral". "Evil", as expected, should be "chaotic evil".

The interesting thing is that most stories/adventures set in the setting explore what happens with the other 6 alignment types. What happens when lawful good turns into lawful neutral (and, finally, into lawful evil [although, perhaps, unknowingly])? You get a tyrannical, xenophobic regime that threatens to enslave all of reality. What happens when neutrality discovers that chaotic evil has become too powerful and influential? They join the side of lawful good (and the rest of x-good alignments) to stand against it. What happens when chaotic evil discovers that they need structure in order to succeed? They create an order of lawful evil knights in contrast with the lawful good ones—and so on and so forth.

I know that it's an often repeated opinion that DL/Krynn is Manichean in nature, that it doesn't matter what you do as long as you identify as good (or evil, for that matter), but that is not what the setting material nor the fiction support. It's as complex and nuanced as many other fantasy worlds, even it has a bad rep, in my opinion.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The general flow is, if I remember.

Good was too powerful = Istar gets blown up.
Bad rises up and is getting ready to take over.
Rest of the Gods return, and the balance is restored.

Eventually, in the Summer Flame book, Good (Paladin) makes way for Evil to ascend again, as its needed to combat Chaos.

Something like that?

So the ideal situation is one in which good and evil take turns in ruling the world.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The general flow is, if I remember.

Good was too powerful = Istar gets blown up.
Bad rises up and is getting ready to take over.
Rest of the Gods return, and the balance is restored.

Eventually, in the Summer Flame book, Good (Paladin) makes way for Evil to ascend again, as its needed to combat Chaos.

WHAT?!?!?! in a later book Paladine (fizbin the good guy) just LETS evil win... god I hate this. I am so glad I didn't finish reading this... the Platinum god of justice LETS EVIL WIN?!?!?!