Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Mages of Strixhaven

Marandahir · Jun 8, 2021

DnD Warlord said:
No game will last twenty years.

We can agree to disagree.

Parmandur · Jun 8, 2021

Marandahir said:
Whoops, you're right. Problem of spell level vs class level nomenclature, sorry, got turned around. You understood my point though - they're too high a level to use. But if he can't cast them until the end of his career, then the subclass is actually UNDERPOWERED for the Paladin, since its granting features that are supposed to kick in twice as fast as he's actually getting them.

Yeah, I don't forsee Subclasses applying to all Classes...that didn't work in the Next playtest fir some good reasons. But making Subclasses that fit bands of Classes..that is interesting.

doctorbadwolf · Jun 8, 2021

Marandahir said:
I didn't consider it at the time, but my friends said that it was, and now in hindsight I know that it was. It wasn't as BIG a shift as 3.0 -> 3.5e; it didn't invalidate my PHB and require me to buy everything over again (I did need to download errata for 2008-2009 books to bring them into continuity with 2010-2012 books, though). I think this is similar. It may open the floodgates and redo subclass design into D&DNext style thematic design for the rest of 5e. I don't think they will issue errata for past subclasses to make them open to various classes; instead, they'll have soft replacements like The Undead was for The Undying patron. They'll probably create multiclass subclasses that step all over the toes of previous subclasses, to my chagrin, like they're doing with Silverquill stepping all over the Order of Scribes and doing what Scribes should have done in the first place (well, I still think Artificer should have access to it, but Strixhaven subclass design doesn't work with non-full casters).

I DO think this points the way to what the design process is looking like internally for 6e. I'm still dubious that that's going to be 2024, though - I don't think there's enough development time to do a full turn over, and I don't think 5e is unpopular enough to do a hard right turn just because it's the 50th anniversary.

We might get a decade or more of design like this before a refresh of the game in 2034 that FINALLY retires the 2014 books and starts over with something more like this for every class archetype in time for the 60th anniversary. And I wouldn't be surprised if we get a Rules Cyclopedia in 2024 that collates rules like sea battles from Ghosts of Saltmarsh, planar effects from Tasha's, lineage feats from Xanathar's, optional class features from Tasha's, custom lineages and supernatural gifts, patrons, etc.

I guess I just cannot agree with defining a new edition or half edition or whatever as anything less than rewriting the existing classes and saying, use one or the other but not both. I never saw a single game that used Essentials but didn't allow the rest of 4e. Essentials was just part of 4e, especially in hindsight, IMO. After essentials came more content of both types, and stuff influenced by the entirety of 4e. To me it's absurd to think of Essentials as being in any way separate from 4e.

Nathaniel Lee · Jun 8, 2021

Weiley31 said:
Hold on let me see: Well there is

Pyromancy - DND 5th Edition

dnd5e.wikidot.com

(Kaladelsh Plane Shift PDF is the origin source)

I would've put Poisoner down, but it seems like it is ignoring resistance to Poison.

Poisoner - DND 5th Edition

dnd5e.wikidot.com

(oh what the sam goody.)

Weiley31 said:
Roll20 - Compendium and Rule Set Directory

Browse and reference your favorite RPG rule sets for systems including D&D, Pathfinder, Call of Cthulhu, and Cyberpunk RED.

roll20.net

Flesh Rot option

Hallow

You touch a point and infuse an area around it with holy (or unholy) power. The area can have a radius up to 60 feet, and the spell fails...

www.dndbeyond.com

Energy Vulnerability option

Pyromancer is the only one of those four that say anything about immunity being treated as resistance, and it's not official material.

I myself have used "ignore resistance" in conjunction with "immunity is now just resistance" for a homebrew subclass or two, though. I went with the following wording structure for that:

"Any spell or magical effect you create that deals necrotic damage ignores resistance to necrotic damage and treats immunity to necrotic damage as resistance to necrotic damage."

doctorbadwolf · Jun 8, 2021

Parmandur said:
Yeah, I don't forsee Subclasses applying to all Vlasses...that didn't work in the Next playtest fir some good reasons. But making Subclasses that fit bands of Classes..that is interesting.

Yeah, making subclasses that fit any arcane full caster is one thing. Making a subclass that works for all 13 classes would necessarily be a very limited idea.

They won't rework the subclasses to work like this generally, they'll just add subclasses that work like this.

Minigiant · Jun 8, 2021

1)

I am intrigued in the idea of classes sharing subclasses.

2)

I fear subclass sharing as it was not designed with the classes in mind. So there will be balance issues and little to no direct interaction with class features.

Zaukrie · Jun 8, 2021

I love the concept, and don't care about balance, so this works well for me as mechanics that support fluff, which is great. I'm intrigued by this book.

DnD Warlord · Jun 8, 2021

Marandahir said:
As I said in the other thread:

This makes me think that subclass structure should have been built to be able to trade around between classes from the beginning - like Heroic Themes, Paragon Paths, and Epic Destinies in 4e.

Obviously many if not most subclasses should be specific to a class, but this opens up a world of options within that layer. Why couldn't a Purple Dragon Knight be both Fighter and Paladin? Why can't Eldritch Knight be both Fighter and Artificer? Arcane Archer be both Fighter and Ranger?

I would love a dualist that was for any class or even an assassin.

the only issue would be giving generic “Use the eldritch knight/arcane trickster chart for spellcasting sub classes of non spell casting classes”

Minigiant · Jun 8, 2021

doctorbadwolf said:
Yeah, making subclasses that fit any arcane full caster is one thing. Making a subclass that works for all 13 classes would necessarily be a very limited idea.

They won't rework the subclasses to work like this generally, they'll just add subclasses that work like this.

It straight won't work.

Classes like ranger and fighter get huge combat bonuses from subclasses whereas rogues and paladin use subclasses more often to lean outside of combat and do tweaks if they stay in.

It'll be unlikely we see a lot of this outside of full casters.

Weiley31 · Jun 8, 2021

vincegetorix said:
I like those.

I think I'd let any class with the spellcasting/pact magic features takes those, in my games.

Sure it removes a lot if the weight behind the classes, but it moves it to the subclasses, making it the important part of the character's theme.

Want to be a Witherbloom paladin? Go ahead, make sense of it in game!

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!!! This is the one true way for this. I am totally gonna put that in the survey. Heck, this maybe my fave house rule in regards to this UA. I see no probs with this and its awesome!