D&D Launches New Eberron-Themed Playtest With Dragonmarked Feats

The D&D design team has launched a new Unearthed Arcana playtest focused on the upcoming Eberron: Forge of the Artificer book, featuring Dragonmarked feats and a new Artificer subclass. The new packet contains rules for a Cartographer subclass for the Artificer, along with a handful of new magic item options and over 25 Dragonmarked feats. The Artificer base class rules also received a few tweaks to some of its features, with an eye towards more general versatility.

The other big feature is the new Dragonmarked feats, most of which are considered either Dragonmarked Feats or General Feats. The Dragonmarked Feats are specifically limited to Eberron campaigns and allow only one Dragonmark per character (thus preventing Warlocks from accumulating Dragonmarks). The General Feats are Greater Marks and specifically upgrade existing Dragonmarks as a requirement. It's interesting that D&D is keeping with campaign setting specific feats and feat trees, as both of these design traits were found in the Dragonlance: Shadow of the Dragon Queen book.

You can check out the full playtest on D&D Beyond.

 

[Zaukrie]

The cartographer subclass is interesting. It's still so some things very differently with these subclasses, but I'm intrigued. Also, the dragonmark feats are good.

 

[Parmandur]

Dragonmark feats, this is new: "(Prerequisite: Eberron Campaign)". The options for the Eberron setting are officially locked into the Eberron setting. In other words, as if, one cannot have a dragonmarked character in Forgotten Realms. One typically wouldnt, but it is odd to make a point about it. Meanwhile, the Spelljammer setting would have characters that intermingle various settings.

Possibly the thinking is, the flavor of the feats is highly dependent on the specific cultures in Eberron. Thus to remove the option from the setting would neutralize its intended flavor.

Still, all around odd.

The Dragonmarks and Dragonshards, beyond culture, have specific ties to the metaphysics of Eberron. Probably that bit is for Orfanized Play purposes.

I expect we will see at least 13 Backgrounds here, one for each House an an Aberrant to make a Baker's Dozen.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Dragonmark feats, this is new: "(Prerequisite: Eberron Campaign)". The options for the Eberron setting are officially locked into the Eberron setting. In other words, as if, one cannot have a dragonmarked character in Forgotten Realms. One typically wouldnt, but it is odd to make a point about it. Meanwhile, the Spelljammer setting would have characters that intermingle various settings.

Possibly the thinking is, the flavor of the feats is highly dependent on the specific cultures in Eberron. Thus to remove the option from the setting would neutralize its intended flavor.

Still, all around odd.

Not really, it is to allow one to exclude the material on Beyond, I will bet. If not that then it also helps a DM to feel that they are not the bad guy if they exclude it from a FR or Greyhawk campaign.

 

[Parmandur]

The cartographer subclass is interesting. It's still so some things very differently with these subclasses, but I'm intrigued. Also, the dragonmark feats are good.

It's a fun take.

 

[Zaukrie]

The Dragonmarks and Dragonshards, beyond culture, have specific ties to the metaphysics of Eberron. Probably that bit is for Orfanized Play purposes.

I expect we will see at least 13 Backgrounds here, one for each House an an Aberrant to make a Baker's Dozen.

I agree that's likely for organized play, and I'd ignore it if I wanted.

 

[Remathilis]

The Dragonmarks and Dragonshards, beyond culture, have specific ties to the metaphysics of Eberron. Probably that bit is for Orfanized Play purposes.

I expect we will see at least 13 Backgrounds here, one for each House an an Aberrant to make a Baker's Dozen.

They started that trend in Dragonlance with the Knights of Solomnia and Mages of High Sorcery. They did something similar with Planescape.

 

[Yaarel]

Not really, it is to allow one to exclude the material on Beyond, I will bet. If not that then it also helps a DM to feel that they are not the bad guy if they exclude it from a FR or Greyhawk campaign.

Do you think the reverse will happen? Options that a character can only take if they are in the Forgotten Realms setting, etcetera?

 

[Yaarel]

They started that trend in Dragonlance with the Knights of Solomnia and Mages of High Sorcery. They did something similar with Planescape.

I think I am warming up to this approach.

It still feels slightly awkward − like the expression, "Theres the right way. Theres the wrong way. And theres the army way."

But generally, I like using feats to flesh out the details of a specific culture. These 'cultural feats' truly are setting dependent. You mentioning the 'Knights of Solomnia' reminded me of that.

Of course, a DM can mix-and-match for the worldbuilding for the table of players. But generally, I think I am on board with these prereqs that are about a specific culture.

 

[Kurotowa]

The cartographer subclass is interesting. It's still so some things very differently with these subclasses, but I'm intrigued. Also, the dragonmark feats are good.

The Cartographer confuses me. I'm not sure what it's supposed to do. It's got mobility, but no additional weapon skills to use with it. Only if it's supposed to be using cantrips, it's got no extra damage bumps like Alchemist and Artillerist. Instead it mostly seems to be about group buffs? Which I suppose is a niche, but it seems an odd fit for the subclass theme.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Do you think the reverse will happen? Options that a character can only take if they are in the Forgotten Realms setting, etcetera?

Who knows, thinking more on it. And looking at the dragonlance book, they have done this before, as in, the Dragonlance feats have a dragonlance prerequisite. As for the realms, I kinda doubt it but what do I know.