New Unearthed Arcana Released, With 8 New Forgotten Realms-Themed Subclasses

spellfire.jpg


Today, Wizards of the Coast has announced a new Unearthed Arcana playtest featuring eight new Dungeons & Dragons subclasses that will appear in the upcoming Forgotten Realms Player's Guide. The new subclasses include five classes tied to Forgotten Realms regions, as well as the return of the Knowledge Domain Cleric subclass from the 2014 Player's Handbook and the Bladesinger Wizard subclass and Purple Dragon Knight Fighter subclass from the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.

Each of the five remaining subclasses are themed to one of the five regions explored in the Forgotten Realms Adventure Guide also coming out in November. The College of the Moon Bard subclass is tied to the Moonshae Isles, the Winter Walker Ranger subclass is tied to Icewind Dale, and the Oath of the Noble Genies is tied to Calimshan. The Scion of The Three is tied to the Dead Three (of Baldur's Gate fame). Meanwhile, Spellfire Sorcery dates back to 2nd Edition and can both heal allies and harm foes.

The eight new subclasses can be found below:
  • College Of The Moon (Bard)
  • Knowledge Domain (Cleric)
  • Purple Dragon Knight (Fighter)
  • Oath Of The Noble Genies (Paladin)
  • Winter Walker (Ranger)
  • Scion Of The Three (Rogue)
  • Spellfire Sorcery (Sorcerer)
  • Bladesinger (Wizard)
The Forgotten Realm's Players Guide comes out on November 11th.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer

Spellfire Review:
Lore: I barely know about Spellfire (Laeral Silverhand has it, right?), and I don't really care. This subclass is at least easier to reflavor to other settings. I could see this being used for a Silver Flame Sorcerer in Eberron or a maybe a pyromancer subclass connected with Phoenixes. The premise for this subclass is more interesting than the Moon Bard, but less interesting to me than the Genie Paladin or Winter Ranger.

Spellfire Burst: This weirdly incentivizes you to use sorcery points less often, as it's a free ability that triggers once a turn when you use sorcery points as part of your action or bonus action. So if you want to get the full potential of this ability, you need to limit your sorcery point usage to once on your turn. If you cast Heightened or Distant Counterspell you don't get the benefit of this ability. If you Quicken a leveled spell and then casting a Seeking cantrip, you only benefit from Spellfire Burst a single time. I don't really understand this. Is it really OP to give 1d4+CHA temporary hit points or deal 1d6 damage to two people in a turn? And triggering it on a reaction spell would be really cool and probably not too powerful. Imagine a spellcaster with low hit points casts a spell, so then you counterspell it preventing their action, and then deal enough damage to them to kill them. That could make for an amazing moment in a campaign, especially when combined with the later Absorb Spells.

Spellfire Spells: I'm still disappointed the new Sorcerer expanded spell lists dropped the ability from Tasha's to switch them out for spells of a certain school. That was really cool.

Anyways, all of the level 1 and 2 spells are good. Aura of Vitality is better than in 2014 and maybe it will be used more if you Quicken it, but it's not great. All of the other spells seem good.

Absorb Spells: Neat. Kind of sucks that this is your only level 6 ability.

Honed Spellfire: These buffs are pretty significant. Very nice.

Crown of Spellfire: Another demonstration that WotC does know how to design cool and interesting capstone abilities at least some of the time. Reducing damage by 5d6+18 without requiring a reaction is very nice. Flight is good, especially with hover. Magic Evasion is also very good.

A pretty solid subclass. I agree that it's kind of a replacement of my beloved Divine Soul Sorcerer, but it's pretty good. It could use some tweaks and maybe a short mention of how it could be used in other settings.

Bladesinger Review:
Lore
: Mentions how it was started by elves, but how some non elves are also Bladesingers. Also everyone loves them. Cool.

Bladesong: No longer works with armor, but you use Intelligence for attack and damage rolls with weapons, and also you can use it an amount of times per long rest equal to your Intelligence modifier. Funny how they keep changing that last part. Bladework should probably just be a feature of the subclass instead of only active when you use this ability.

Training in War and Song: You get more weapon proficiencies and a few options for the skill proficiency. And you can use your weapon as a spellcasting focus. Pretty good, opening up the types of weapons you can use is good and broadens the archetype. Not every bladesinger needs to be the same and use a longsword.

Extra Attack: Mostly the same as before. My only complaint isn't about this subclass, it's the fact that they keep not giving this to other Gish subclasses! Why can't Armorers and Battle Smith Artificers use this!?!

Song of Defense: It is almost always better to just cast Shield or Absorb Elements instead of using this ability. Only situationally worth using. I've never liked this ability and would prefer for it to be replaced with something else.

Song of Victory: Pretty good, I guess. Definitely not going to be significant damage. Probably weaker than the original version, especially on dual wielding Bladesingers.

None of these changes excite me. I've always liked the idea of an arcane gish, but don't really like any implementation of it. Bladelock is the best execution, but doesn't have the flavor or abilities I'd prefer.


Overall this UA is filled with some pretty good hits (Knowledge Cleric, Genie Paladin, Dead Three Rogue) as well as some pretty big misses (PDK, Moon Bard). I like most of the ideas and mechanics, but some things need to be rethought. Pretty interesting getting 8 subclasses at once, this took a while to review. Hopefully we can get another UA version of some of these before the deadline for the book comes.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

I kinda think knowledge domain is the only real generic subclass and it was added because there are a lot of knowledge/magic gods, some of important status like Mystra, and they wanted to reflect that. (SCAG also has the Arcana domain, and the new knowledge domain feels like the live child of both).

But the rest feel pretty FR specific (at least as specific as spores druid and lunar sorcerer). One representing each new area, one that is a unique magic type (Spellfire) and one tied closely with the Realms (bladesong) even if it didn't originate there.
The Bladesinger is generic—it originated from a generic splatbook in 2e (The Complete Book of Elves) before FR swallowed it whole in 3e.
 


Not liking the PDK is totally valid. Hell, even not liking the lore change being this drastic is valid. But to shun any form of evolution just because someone wrote a novel in 1998 just leaves everything stagnant and boring.
This is an odd take.

The Realms have advanced by nearly a century and a half. A lot has changed. Heck, I remember Ed at GenCon talking about how the Realms must change.

Cormyr is a case in point. 4E and 5E saw a boatload of new lore about Cormyr in the form of several novels, Dragon/Dungeon articles, and a bunch of free information from Ed via Twitter and his Patreon/Discord.

Nobody is "shunning" change. People are, rightly, objecting to exceptionally crappy change.

The PDK, as written, is about as far afield from modern day Cormyr as you can get. It doesn't fit the nation or its history.

There are better ways to insert dragon riders into Cormyr.
 


After a discussion with one of my players, I had a thought about the Bladesinger. I have always hated the fact that they changed it for anyone other than an Elf to use, especially the Lore behind it, in that it is supposed to take almost 30 years to master the basics. However, I think I have hit upon the solution. Rename the Subclass Swordmage. Swordmage actually has some FR connections, being introduced in 4E FR Player's guide. It never appeared anywhere else, to my knowledge. This would seem to be much more 'FR' than the generic Bladesinger. That way, Elven Swordmages are 'Bladesingers', Dwarf & Goliath Swordmages are Rune Warriors, Orcs are Bloodmages, etc....you get the idea. Flavor maintained, FR specific and you can name whatever you want your 'type' of Tradition to be. Well, this just made it into my House Rules.
 

After a discussion with one of my players, I had a thought about the Bladesinger. I have always hated the fact that they changed it for anyone other than an Elf to use, especially the Lore behind it, in that it is supposed to take almost 30 years to master the basics. However, I think I have hit upon the solution.
Alternatively: NPC elven Bladesingers spent centuries mastering the full style and get NPC stats based on the overpowered 2e version. PC Bladesingers use a simplified version of just the basics that's taught to outsiders and can be learned in only a few years, which gives the 5e subclass package.
 

Rename the Subclass Swordmage.
I understand why you suggest this (esp given your handle), but renaming it doesn't over-write the pre-2024 version, which is what they want to do. They certainly don't want the 2014 Bladesinger and this subclass both existing simultaneously -- that's obvious duplication and overlap, and would be a bad and confusing design choice.

The name is fixed, and so the question then becomes is this an acceptable updating of the subclass? And I think, pretty clearly, it is. Because so many people wanted (demanded) backwards compatibility, rightly or wrongly, we're now in a position where the names of subclasses can't be changed easily, especially when there is a substantial niche or conceptual overlap, as there is here.
 

Queen Raedra, the Mage Royal, the Wardens of the Easter and Western Marches, and not a few others would object; it’s not the place of a commander to make deals like that.

Some dragons might take it as tacit recognition by the humans of the draconic claim over Cormyr. They would see humans riding dragons as humans serving dragons.
Or you know, you could write it better than that. <Shrug>
 

I understand why you suggest this (esp given your handle), but renaming it doesn't over-write the pre-2024 version, which is what they want to do. They certainly don't want the 2014 Bladesinger and this subclass both existing simultaneously -- that's obvious duplication and overlap, and would be a bad and confusing design choice.

The name is fixed, and so the question then becomes is this an acceptable updating of the subclass? And I think, pretty clearly, it is. Because so many people wanted (demanded) backwards compatibility, rightly or wrongly, we're now in a position where the names of subclasses can't be changed easily, especially when there is a substantial niche or conceptual overlap, as there is here.
The problem with this argument is they renamed multiple PHB subclasses for 2024. Wildheart Barbarian, the Monk Warrior subclasses, all the Wizards, etc.

To be clear I don’t want to change the name of Bladesinger. But the argument that the name is fixed is disproven by just cracking open the PHB.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top