Dungeons & Dragons Announces Horror Subclasses Unearthed Arcana

Dungeons & Dragons has announced a new Unearthed Arcana focused on horror subclasses. The new UA, available now on D&D Beyond, introduces a mix of new subclasses and thematic subclasses from 2014 5th Edition. The full list of subclasses are as follows:

• College of Spirits Bard
• Grave Domain Cletic
• Phantom Rogue
• Shadow Sorcerer
• Heblade Patron Warlock
• Undead Patron Warlock
• Reanimator Artificer
• Hollow Warden Ranger

The Reanimator Artificer is built around creating a reanimated companion that can act in combat and explodes when it dies. The Hollow Warden Ranger adds a Wrath of the Wild feature that activates when casting Hunter's Mark and adds various emanation effects while active.

No word on what this UA is related to, but there is a mystery product coming out in October and these horror subclasses could tie into a potential Ravenloft book.

You can check out the full Unearthed Arcana here.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

haha,
another ranger subclass that relies 100% on Hunter's Mark... why am I not surprised?

Because that's the way rangers work now. It would be surprising if it didn't work the way rangers work. You don't like the current ranger class? Don't play it. Its like "I want to play the Urglefurgle class, but I don't like it's mechanics, I demand they be changed to the way I think the Urglefurgle should work!"

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Reanimator Artificer with modular Construct companion is the core of what I wanted... for the Necromancer Wizard subclass.

As a half caster the artificer has more design zots left over for a companion. Indeed they were originally envisioned as a pet class. On a full caster the companion must inevitability be weaker and/or more limited.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I think the lawyers are guiding WotC and they're making a clear claim to their IP by releasing setting books for each of their settings.

There is no need, WotC's ownership of all of those remains beyond doubt. You can be sure that the instant any of them approached the public domain (95 years after original publication I believe) there would be a shedload of 3PP for them announced.

 

[humble minion]

As a half caster the artificer has more design zots left over for a companion. Indeed they were originally envisioned as a pet class. On a full caster the companion must inevitability be weaker and/or more limited.

Agreed.

I know I’m a broken record on this, but WotC needs to bite the bullet and write up a class that is primarily about the pet, with thematics/details customisable in the same way that the pact/patron/invocation choices let you customise a warlock. Tacking a pet on to a pre-existing class just makes for a feeble pet, because it’s always going to be an afterthought to the class’s primary abilities. But we’ve got a ranger pet subclass, one and soon two artificer pet subclasses, and going back to 5.0e you have wizard and sorcerer pet subclasses, a druid pet subclass, a warlock pet pact boon, another ranger pet subclass, and the FR UA foreshadowed a fighter pet subclass too. And I’m sure I’ve missed something along the way.

They all use slightly different mechanics, and all the pets are weak because they have to fit in the power space of a subclass.

Just make a class that does pets as its primary schtick. Have an invocation type mechanism for customisation, subclasses based on the nature of your pet - undead minion, guardian angel, faithful hunting beast, skilled war-mount, or whatever. Stop messing about, bite the bullet, and do the job properly.

 

[Horwath]

Agreed.

I know I’m a broken record on this, but WotC needs to bite the bullet and write up a class that is primarily about the pet, with thematics/details customisable in the same way that the pact/patron/invocation choices let you customise a warlock. Tacking a pet on to a pre-existing class just makes for a feeble pet, because it’s always going to be an afterthought to the class’s primary abilities. But we’ve got a ranger pet subclass, one and soon two artificer pet subclasses, and going back to 5.0e you have wizard and sorcerer pet subclasses, a druid pet subclass, a warlock pet pact boon, another ranger pet subclass, and the FR UA foreshadowed a fighter pet subclass too. And I’m sure I’ve missed something along the way.

They all use slightly different mechanics, and all the pets are weak because they have to fit in the power space of a subclass.

Just make a class that does pets as its primary schtick. Have an invocation type mechanism for customisation, subclasses based on the nature of your pet - undead minion, guardian angel, faithful hunting beast, skilled war-mount, or whatever. Stop messing about, bite the bullet, and do the job properly.

what WotC needed to to is not backtrack on universal subclass level and they needed to make every class have the same "power budget" for subclass.

then you open up space for universal subclasses.

with universal subclasses, you can have beastmaster, or dragon rider or undead commander, a subclass that any character can take.

 

[Minigiant]

haha,
another ranger subclass that relies 100% on Hunter's Mark... why am I not surprised?

Blame 2 groups

1) People who refuse to do alterations or conversions and demanded 2024 be 99% backwards compatible.

2) Powergaming Munchkins who would abuse Hunter's Mark if you offered any freedom on Hunter's Mark before Tier 3.

Ranger is held hostage by powergamers and people who can't talk to the DM.

 

[Horwath]

Blame 2 groups

1) People who refuse to do alterations or conversions and demanded 2024 be 99% backwards compatible.

agree.

2) Powergaming Munchkins who would abuse Hunter's Mark if you offered any freedom on Hunter's Mark before Tier 3.

Ranger is held hostage by powergamers and people who can't talk to the DM.

I have nothing against HM spell by itself, it's a mediocre spell that can be utilized good if you can manage some extra attacks on your turn.

I do mind that the whole class is based on mediocre 1st level spell.
a spell that requires concentration,
on a class that does not have Con saves,

current ranger is best as a 1 level dip on a fighter.
you have heavy armor, you have Con saves, you have more attacks and no competition for Conc slot, unless you go EK, but even then you have better options than a ranger for non-Conc spells.

 

[Minigiant]

current ranger is best as a 1 level dip on a fighter.
you have heavy armor, you have Con saves, you have more attacks and no competition for Conc slot, unless you go EK, but even then you have better options than a ranger for non-Conc spells.

Typing that right there is why Ranger is Hunter's Mark based.

 

[Leatherhead]

As a half caster the artificer has more design zots left over for a companion. Indeed they were originally envisioned as a pet class. On a full caster the companion must inevitability be weaker and/or more limited.

It happened before, it can happen again.

The Order of Scribes was once a Artificer Subclass. After being redesigned for the Wizard, it became one of the more popular Wizard Schools: Absolutely oozing with flavor, and good enough mechanics to make you feel like you weren't loosing out by not being a Diviner.

 

[Horwath]

Typing that right there is why Ranger is Hunter's Mark based.

Probably,
ranger can be salvaged from this by simply adding at 5th level that you can cast HM without Conc and duration reduced to 1minute, like already few class features from various classes that reduce Conc spell duration for removing Conc limit from the spell.