D&D 5E 5e Dragonmarks thematically problematic?

[Mercule]

Wouldn't backgrounds be a better mechanic?

Nope. I think there should be a "House Scion" background that's somewhere between Guild Artisan and Noble, but that's a different matter. Dragonmarks are way too potent for a background.

There are really only three ways I can see to do it:
1) DMO: Treat it like treasure and/or boons (I think that's what the DMG calls them). If you're willing to be unbalanced, just go ahead and admit you're winging it.

2) Feats: I built my own, but the UA versions are serviceable. If you don't like not having them manifest until 4th level, then either allow PCs to trade in their stat bonus (maybe let humans use the alt build and take the feat) or grant everyone a feat at first level. I chose the later, which makes the whole group more powerful, but that's Eberron's cinematic feel, right? FWIW, I implemented Action Points as an x/long rest (don't remember x) that counted as a feat; if the player wants the easy path, they just have action points.

3) New subsystem: Adding some sort of perk/flaw system would probably be the ideal, but takes a lot more work. It would also allow a variety of other tweaks. I envision it as a zero-sum system that can be easily ignored. The general pattern I've seen for these has been three tiers (minor/average/major) of both perks and flaws, but it could also be equated to a stat point buy value. Maybe a feat is an average perk worth 4 points. The player could just have 4 less stat points to spend, or take the Hunted flaw, which is also worth 4 points. A double dip in background might be a minor perk worth 2 points. That's all spitballing, but you get the idea. It's a dangerous path, though, because it makes D&D start to look like a character point or classless system, which it does not do well.

 

[ninjayeti]

I think you could do dragonmarks at first level one of two ways:

1) As a background but you must ALSO spend your 4th level feat on the dragonmark. In other words the background benefit is that you get the feat earlier than you otherwise would. The character only has the benefit of the least dragonmark before that anyway so I don't see this as terribly unbalancing.

2) One feat = +2 to an ability score. So a non-human character takes a -2 penalty to their main ability score in exchange for a free feat at first level. At 4th level they get the two points back. So once the character hits 4th level they are identical to a regular character that opted for the feat at 4th level.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I like the dragonmarked feats. I have no problem giving them to zero level commoner NPCs. They're special, they break the rules.

 

[I'm A Banana]

If you want to do it as a background, you'd need to water down the power of the dragonmark to the point of being an RP feature (at 1st level), not a character power feature. A "house scion" background is probably better for that.

The way I'd probably do it at 1st level is via attunement - it takes up a magic item slot for you. Which wouldn't be a big deal at 1st level, but would make you "more powerful" than the rest of the party, at least for a little while. Maybe to compensate I'd give everyone a magic doodad from some limited list at 1st level that represents some story-based plot point for them - magic sword from your grandfather, wand of your teacher, kind of thing.

 

[Lackhand]

Seconding +kamikazemidget (and +Mercule, and others!)'s suggestion, I think modeling them as feats is okay, but modeling them as magic items would have been great.

We already have boons, which these basically are; yes, playing with these boons available from first level would make your characters more powerful than those from a different setting but it seems pretty reasonable to me to have a high magic setting like Eberron start with a bit more magic available to characters.

They wouldn't have a direct GP equivalence, of course, but as one goes up in level one can -- at the DMs option, via plot coupons -- increase the power of one's 'Mark, putting them squarely back into the realm of the Draconic Prophecy. These would be tied to increasing rarity of the mark-as-a-boon-as-a-magic-item.

Then, for the DM, there would just be a character with an additional magic item of whatever rarity running around. They can take whatever counterbalancing steps that they'd like, or roll with it.

 

[TreChriron]

Personally, I would make the dragonmarked scion a class. I would model it after the Cleric, giving a regular increase to Dragonmark powers over the levels, with customization based on that house's focus. Then, you could start out and multi-class later if you wanted to play a "disenfranchised" scion or pick up scion later as you "come into your powers".

If a players wants to start at 1st level in a non-scion class but have the option to move into a scion class later, they can start with a "birthmark" that looks like a small dragonmark that later manifests when the "come into their power".

 

[Tony Vargas]

Apologies if this has been posed already, but I was reading the 1st Unearthed Arcana article (Eberron for 5e), and the Dragonmarks have me scratching my head.

I know that the UA articles are basically beta rules, but it seems odd that the Dragonmarks are written as Feats. Yes, they were Feats in 3.5, but Feats work a bit differently now. I like the more powerful, streamlined take in 5e, but Dragonmarks are a bit of a conundrum since a human character is the only race that can manifest one at 1st level, leaving the other Dragonmarked races to wait until 4th level.

Thoughts?

I'm not sure there's anything innate wrong with manifesting something like a Dragonmark later in your career. I mean, they weren't originally feats you could take only at 1st level or anything like that, were they?

However, aren't Dragonmarks supposed to be hereditary, showing up in certain houses or family lines? Seems like a Background would be an appropriate place for them. Plus, as a Background, you wouldn't have the issue of a DM who wants to use Dragonmarks also being obliged to bring in feats (which he may or may not want to do, feats being nominally optional rules). Though, of course, you'd have the issue of everyone in a Dragonmarked family being unable to become Scholars, Soldiers, or anything else if they have a Dragonmark... :shrug:

 

[I'm A Banana]

Seconding +kamikazemidget (and +Mercule, and others!)'s suggestion, I think modeling them as feats is okay, but modeling them as magic items would have been great.

We already have boons, which these basically are; yes, playing with these boons available from first level would make your characters more powerful than those from a different setting but it seems pretty reasonable to me to have a high magic setting like Eberron start with a bit more magic available to characters.

Yeah, it would NOT be that shocking if a veteran of the Last War had a magical kajigger that helped save their life in the battlefield, or a Sharn native had some magical trinket to make their lives easier, or whatnot.

Some advantages of tying them to magic items...

• You can model increasing power in a dragonmark by additional attunement slots and/or increasing the rarity of the mark. You can do this instead of awarding a magic item in an adventure, tying the development of the mark directly to going on adventures and gaining power and experiencing risk, which dovetails with the story.
• It's not a problem if a mark goes aberrant or gets burned out or suddenly gets suppressed or something. Magic items are additive, so losing a dragonmark or developing a "cursed" one can be a real possibility that doesn't suddenly rob a character of a feat.
• You don't need to worry about a dragonmarked character feeling like they have to have high ability scores or have to forgo other feats in order to participate in the setting - being a dragonmarked crossbow-shooter or sentinel or actor or whatever doesn't put you "behind the curve" at all.

 

[Klaus]

Oooooh, I like modelling a dragonmark as an Alternate Reward!

 

[RealAlHazred]

I actually did up some Dragonmarked House backgrounds and Dragonmark feats in order to get my 5E Eberron campaign started. Now that I look them over, I think I want to simplify the House backgrounds to one background, maybe.

I liked my idea of tying certain magic items to the backgrounds through Tool Proficiencies that would be unattainable any other way (that way, people without could try to use lightning reins but be at Disadvantage, maybe). That was my port for Mark-specific items.