D&D 5E New Unearthed Arcana Today: Giant Themed Class Options and Feats

A new Unearthed Arcana dropped today, focusing on giant-themed player options. "In today’s Unearthed Arcana, we explore character options related to the magic and majesty of giants. This playtest document presents the Path of the Giant barbarian subclass, the Circle of the Primeval druid subclass, the Runecrafter wizard subclass, and a collection of new feats, all for use in Dungeons & Dragons."

Giant Options | Unearthed Arcana | Dungeons & Dragons

Explore character options related to the magic and majesty of giants! This playtest document presents new subclasses for the barbarian, druid, and wizard, and a collection of new feats, all for use in Dungeons & Dragons.

dnd.wizards.com

New Class options:

• Barbarian: Path of the Giant
• Druid: Circle of the Primeval
• Wizard: Runecrafter Tradition

New Feats:

• Elemental Touched
• Ember of the Fire Giant
• Fury of the Frost Giant
• Guile of the Cloud Giant
• Keeness of the Stone Giant
• Outsized Might
• Rune Carver Apprentice
• Rune Carvwr Adept
• Soul of the Storm Giant
• Vigor of the Hill Giant

WotC's Jeremy Crawford talks Barbarian Path of the Giant here:

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

We should wonder about all the possible dinosaur and megafaun to be used to ride, or to carry load.

In my opinion all dinosaurs and megafaun from ice age as D&D monsters should be in the SRD because they aren't original ideas.

Now this is sounding like a mixture of Dinotopia and Valheim (survival + sandbox videogame).

Have you noticed this possible new setting with a tribal-punk look could become the "spiritual brother" of "Dark Sun"?

Can be shells used to craft armours? And these could be used by druids. Easier to be broken but also to be repaired by magic.

When I remember the dinosaurs from Ixalan, then I wonder this could be an Ixalan spin-off.

* How would be the cultural impact if they are visited by spelljammer traders? They could learn to build windmills or to use reinforced concrete.

* Has anybody wanted to play with grungs PCs after watching Disney's cartoon "Anphibia"?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Say a player wants an ASI or a different feat, and then wants the second feat in the chain.

They can't do that.

Is it because it's too powerful? Then is the first one too weak to offset? Bad design.

Take a look at Rune Carver Adept. You want to take that without Rune Carver Apprentice? Fine. "you can now mark a number of objects equal to your proficiency bonus with a rune from the Rune Carver Apprentice feat." I.e. it does nothing. The feat tree builds on the previous feat and lets you do something that would be overpowered if it was all loaded into one feat. The second feat does not make sense without the first feat.

Undoubtedly not all feats in 3e or Pathfinder where built like that, but to reject the concept because something else implemented the concept poorly is a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[Blue]

Take a look at Rune Carver Adept. You want to take that without Rune Carver Apprentice? Fine. "you can now mark a number of objects equal to your proficiency bonus with a rune from the Rune Carver Apprentice feat." I.e. it does nothing. The feat tree builds on the previous feat and lets you do something that would be overpowered if it was all loaded into one feat. The second feat does not make sense without the first feat.

Undoubtedly not all feats in 3e or Pathfinder where built like that, but to reject the concept because something else implemented the concept poorly is a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

If all feat chains only modify earlier feats then that's a different story. Looking at the preceding UA for Dragonlance that does not seem to be the case.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Have you read the Ravnica novels? The one I read was a modern-style police procedural, very much like Bright or Rivers of London. Ravnica might not be exclusively Urban Fantasy, but the novel I read fitted the subgenre exactly. It sure aint medieval, anyway. But then no D&D setting is.

I haven't.

But the setting as portrayed in the MtG cards and the D&D setting is definitely not Urban Fantasy, because it's not set on Earth, or a version of Earth, or a place that operates like Earth. It's basically set on Fantasy-Coruscant, and entirely fantastical setting with entirely fantastical (and not very plausible) politics, culture, and so on. I agree it's not medieval. Aesthetically it steals from the renaissance, enlightenment, and early industrial eras in a rather inconsistent way.

Not having read the novel in question I can't comment on whether it was an excellently-written novel that somehow made Ravnica seem far more real than it does in MtG or D&D, or merely a frustrated Urban Fantasy author who was ignoring how profoundly peculiar Ravnica is.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

a version of Earth

This is where you genre definitions become woolly. Rivers of London is a version of Earth. I've been to Russell Square, The Folly aint there. Ravnica does not happen to share it's name with a real world city, but it's law enforcement sure operates like one. If you get too hung up on genre-definition pedantry, you only end up tied in logical knots. Best just to accept then genre definitions are not set in stone and are subject to different interpretations.

 

[Demetrios1453]

By my count, there are about 70 monster stat blocks in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons.

If there were a Giant-focused monster book similar to Fizban's and it reprinted literally all of the non-M:tG variant Giants/Giantkin that would be:

• 6 True Giant stat blocks (Hill Giant Mouth of Grolantor, Frost Giant Everlasting One, Fire Giant Dreadnought, etc)
• 4 Ogres of War
• 5 Mutated Trolls
• 2 Verbeeg

That's just 17 additional monsters. The bestiary would need over 50 more giant-themed monsters in order to just match how many dragon-themed ones are in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons.

Is that really possible given the history of D&D? Have there ever been that many Giant-related monsters in one edition before? Even if the book were to bring back Titans as bigger versions of the True Giants, that doesn't get them anywhere near the amount required to get close to Fizban's.

I'll admit that Fizban's bestiary isn't just Giants, it includes some humanoids that worship Bahamut, Tiamat, and Sardior, and also stuff like Hoard Scarabs/Mimics. Maybe this book kind of book could include undead Giants (like the Frost Giant Zombie from Wildemount)? And some Annam worshipping priests or Giant-touched NPC stats. But, still, I think that Fizban's had way more to work with than a purely Giant-focused monster book.

The Player Option section could easily be the size of Fizban's, as could the Magic Item and Spells section, but the rest would be stretching it.

But D&D has had at least one Draconomicon in basically every edition, right? Giantcraft was just one book from one edition. About half the size of the typical D&D 5e book. And Giants haven't gotten a ton of additions through the editions on them like Dragons have.

Going off of the Forgotten Realms Wiki . . . there really aren't that many. Especially not when compared to Dragons. Seriously, go to the bottom of both of those articles and look at the section that compiles all Giantkin and Dragonkind into one spot. In my opinion, there are too many dragons from the history of D&D to even fit them all in a 5e book. Giants have the opposite problem. There's just over 30 of them from the history of D&D.

Hey, maybe they could squeeze another Fizban's-style monster book out of them. It would require reprinting a lot of monster stat blocks and lore (which would probably make people angry), but they might be able to do it. I just think that, given how few Giants there have been in D&D's history, it's not a good idea. If there were another Fizban's-style monster book coming out anytime soon, I imagine it would be for Aberrations or Undead before Giants. There's a lot they could do with those creature types in a book of that format. However, I don't think Giants would work as well, and I think WotC would recognize that too. And the fact that the Druid isn't Giant-themed at all and is "Prehistoric"-themed makes me think that WotC are misdirecting us once again (as they did with the Folk of the Feywild and Centaur/Minotaur UA) and we're getting a Prehistoric campaign setting as the next completely new D&D setting that we were told were being made awhile back.

To answer you're question on whether anynedition had enough giants for a book, just look over the endless 2e giant types....

Beyond that, there's still plenty of thematic room for true giant variant stat blocks. I produced dozens on a thread on this very forum, and @Dragonix has dozens more in his MME series. At the very least you have the leaders like frost giant jarls and fire giant dukes out there as low-hanging fruit for new stat blocks.

And that's just true giants. There are plenty of giantkin out there for variants as well; verbeeg would get a move to an "official" monster book, and voadkyn could finally be updated to 5e. Heck, we could get some firbolg stat blocks in the manner of the tortle druid in MotM. And beyond that, they could definitely create further ogre and troll variants. And there are plenty of other edition giants and giant-type creatures that can still be updated, above and beyond the voadkyn I mentioned.

Beyond that, there are definitely enough giant-type creatures for a good, full lore section.

And in the end, if there truly aren't enough giant types, they could always do a 50/50 giant/elemental book, as some are suggesting...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This is where you genre definitions become woolly. Rivers of London is a version of Earth. I've been to Russell Square, The Folly aint there. Ravnica does not happen to share it's name with a real world city, but it's law enforcement sure operates like one. If you get too hung up on genre-definition pedantry, you only end up tied in logical knots. Best just to accept then genre definitions are not set in stone and are subject to different interpretations.

So Paul, I can't respect this opinion.

There are two ways I can read this:

1) You're confusing the Police Procedural approach to storytelling (arguably a genre of its own) with Urban Fantasy. Perhaps if you haven't read much Urban Fantasy, this is unsurprising. Both Urban Fantasy things you mentioned were also Police Procedurals - Rivers and Bright. Rivers of London is unusual, in that it's basically primarily a Police Procedural, but there's also magic. It qualifies as Urban Fantasy because it explores a lot the same themes, but actively avoid and subverts a lot of Urban Fantasy tropes. It's more of a reaction to Urban Fantasy than a clean example of it. The Ravnica book you're discussing is clearly a Police Procedural. But that doesn't make it "Urban Fantasy". I mean, look how many historical books are also Police Procedurals - Cadfael, for example. And sometimes the the policework is implausibly modern, especially if the author isn't that imaginative.

But what you've identified is Police Procedural, not Urban Fantasy.

2) You're making a bad-faith argument, i.e. one you know is false, in needless attempt to stick with calling something which definitely isn't Urban Fantasy, Urban Fantasy. I hope this isn't the case. It's not how you normally operate.

Let be me really clear on this, Urban Fantasy is a big genre that people like us, like everyone on this board, does NOT generally read. I cannot stress that not enough. The crossover audience between Urban Fantasy and Fantasy is shockingly small. It exists, primarily through some authors who write both Fantasy and Urban Fantasy, or have something that exists in-between (Clive Barker exists at a juxtaposition of Fantasy, Horror, and Urban Fantasy, incorporating tropes and concepts from all three, for example). Jim Butcher and Ben Aaronovitch are two of the rare authors who do have a crossover audience with Fantasy fans. Urban Fantasy has it own very distinct set of tropes and ideas from Fantasy, tends to be a lot more sexy/sexual than Fantasy (yeah, even more, I know, alright!), and it's not helpful to just misuse the term to describe a pure Fantasy setting that happens to have a single novel written in as a Police Procedural.

It's like seeing someone do a choregraphed and elaborate dance with some spins and calling it Ballet because that's what you associate spins with, or because that's what you think that's called, but when someone who likes Ballet sees the same dance, they'll wonder what on earth you were thinking, because this is obviously Interpretative/Contemporary dance and all you've managed to do is confuse people.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's not that Micah hates D&D, but they aren't very happy with decisions WotC are making with the product- it's becoming less a game they want to play, and moving towards becoming something else, and there isn't much they can do about it other than be the voice of one crying out in the wilderness.

I mean, here are your options when it comes to any ttrpg. If you like it, you play it. If an option comes out that you don't like, you have to not use it in your games and put up with it in others.

If there is a significant design shift, such as moving away from short rests, that you don't like, it's much the same way- ignore it in your games and put up with it in others.

This can eventually lead to a scenario where new content isn't worth very much to you since you'd need to adapt it to fit your game, and it might be based on a new design premise you don't care for.

At a certain point, you've become some sort of D&D Luddite that has been left behind by the new game, and the only new content that exists for you is what you make on your own. And when you mention this, people dismiss you, say you're a hater, or worse, tell you to go play some other game.

Not a great feeling. And take heed! As the game evolves and changes, this could happen to you!

That is pretty much where I am. I am going to bow out unless I have something constructive to say though. As was mentioned, its not like there's anything I can do about it, and there's always Level Up (which I love, and which fixes nearly all my issues with 5e that aren't IP related).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Speaking of primal and prehistoric settings, what I could use is a decent selection of statblocks for various 'dire' animals. Most of the animals in MM are pretty low CR, so they won't be decent opposition for long unless they come in huge packs. There could also be even more powerful and weird mystical 'totem' versions of animals in style of Princess Mononoke.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah. Giant-halfling is not really something I feel I've been missing.

Giant dwarf on the other hand...there's something there.