Unearthed Arcana Light, Dark, Underdark - November's Unearthed Arcana

Interesting stuff.

 

[Z. H. Darkstar]

Okay, after thinking about it some more I'm a little miffed. Where are the additional Warlock Invocations specific to the Undying Light archetype? Just perusing the choices you get, few fit the thematic changes that the new archetype creates. Kinda dropped the ball on that Mearls and Co.... Also Searing Vengeance might be tooo gooood....

There haven't been any patron-specific invocations, only pact-specific ones. What I would like to see is a new pact option. The Warlock is unique in that it has two separate subclass choices, yet we've only seen new patrons.

 

[Salamandyr]

I can pretty much say I won't allow close quarters fighting in games I run; I don't like encouraging ranged weapon use in melee. Trying to shoot a bow at an enraged warrior swinging a sword at you should seem like a bad idea. I like to encourage my ranged characters to need a backup melee weapon, just like I want my melee characters to need a backup ranged weapon.

 

[Marandahir]

As far as I can tell, future Pact Boons are not in the works – the Warlock is a unifying chassis for what were previously Binders, Hexblades, and Warlocks (i.e. Occult Magic Summoners, Occult Magic Warriors, and Occult Magic Users). The Pact Boons are less a subclass and more a variation on themes. The Patrons are the real subclasses, and this is a good thing, because they're easier to invent more of.

I think I'll refluff the Undying Light Warlock as a Celestial Pact Warlock. Was trying to figure out features for it earlier today, even.

I might be the only person disappointed in the Shadow Sorcerer. I REALLY, REALLY want a Vampiric Bloodline for the Sorcerer, but the Shadow Magic Sorcerer seems to step on a bit of its thematic toes…

All of it is really rough, but I like the thought process they're going with. Positive Energy plane is silly though.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Thinking on this more, I've decided I don't like the random table of quirks. It's not that I mind having quirks offered, but I really, really don't like the soft implication that you have to have one. So, it's probably just a presentation thing.

I would agree, but they have us covered in the text:

"At your option, you can pick from or roll on the following table..."

While one could interpret that as meaning that you have to either roll or pick, I'm pretty sure it is intended to mean that the whole thing is optional. The other one is even clearer:

"As an optional way to add more flavor to your character, you can pick from or roll on the following table..."

I'm pretty sure the first one was supposed to mean the same thing as the second one.

So guys, can we just stop and talk about the fact that with the way the article is written RAW Deep Stalker can "Always cast these spells" rather than "Always have these spells prepared"

You don't have Spell Slots? You can cast these spells
You don't have the Components (Including the Verbal Component)? You can cast these spells

It may not be RAI, but atm, it is RAW to the playtest and will have to be changed/clarified if that wasn't the intention.

I saw that right away too. They were avoiding using the term "prepared" because rangers don't prepare spells. What they needed to say is that rangers add those spells to their known spells, which is clearly what was intended.

 

[MoonSong]

Yay, yet another sorcerer who just can't blend in the crowd...

 

[Li Shenron]

Not true, as the stance only lasts until the start of your next turn. As such, you would need to spend a bonus action each turn in order to keep the benefits from round to round.

Aha, ok! It's a bit strange, that you need to keep 'spending' a bonus action to maintain a stance. As I said, I'd prefer it simpler.

 

[Celtavian]

what do you think is the problem with unlimited AoOs?

It allows a player with the fighting style to swing far more times than character without that fighting style when a large number of AoOs are allowed. It also creates problems if they create feats like Polearm Master that allow for AoOs when approaching a player or Sentinel when allowing AoOs for a player that moves away regardless of using Disengage. It will create long-term problems with any feat that allows an AoO for other situations. I watched this crap with Combat Reflexes in Pathfinder with abilities like Come and Get Me where the player was able to swing an absurd number of times. Combat Reflexes that maxed AoOs at a Dex modifier + 1 was bad enough. When the Mythic Adventures book came out allowing for unlimited AoOs, Come and Get Me and some similar abilities can't remember the name of became ridiculous.

Allowing an unlimited AoO abilities opens the door to absurdity. It becomes worse when some game designer forgets and puts in an ability that synergizes with a feat to create ridiculousness. 5E is already far too easy a game. A fighting style like this just makes a DM's ability to challenge more difficult.

I've dealt long enough with extra AoO min-maxing in Pathfinder. It's one of the things I hated about that game. AoOs are supposed to be limited. I'm putting a limit on the AoOs. I hope Mearls gets control of this kind of crap quickly.

On top of that, being able to swing that many times compared to say something with much better reflexes looks stupid in my mind's eye. I

 

[Duganson]

There haven't been any patron-specific invocations, only pact-specific ones. What I would like to see is a new pact option. The Warlock is unique in that it has two separate subclass choices, yet we've only seen new patrons.

True, my meaning is that the Invocations are thematically tied to either Infernal, Fey or Far Realm types, none of the current ones really fit with the Positive Energy Plane theme, whether they are require for a specific Pact or not. Its disconcerting, as the idea has merit but the chassis of the class can't follow through, IMHO.

I do like the idea floated here and elsewhere that it should be a Celestial Patron, then at least I get my Lantern Archon familiar....

 

[Celtavian]

For me this article points out two things:

1) I love the fact that 5e is so easy to make stuff up in. Imagine putting out 4e classes and subclasses this regularly. It would be a headache.

2) I am worried about things like the +CHA to Fire and Radiant. Not from a power point of view, but from having to care about damage types as a DM. I hated the fact that in 4e I could not just let somebody reskin a frost attack to be fire etc, or a hammer to be a mace as even tiny changes like this could break the balance wide open. It looks like a 1 level dip gives you +cha to damage with certain types. I don't want to have to keep a close eye on stacking bonuses to damage, or damage type substitutions.

I think they should have given ability damage to every PC's base attacks including cantrips.

 

[Leatherhead]

Yay, yet another sorcerer who just can't blend in the crowd...

We all look the same
When we turn off the light.

Now for some PDF inspired thoughts.

Close Quarters Shooter
I'm tempted to take this, and all the archery/crossbow feats and styles, chop them up, and make a Marksman Subclass for the Fighter.

Tunnel Fighter
I don't particularly care for this style of combat. Having one person be the sole meat shield tends to break combat math, and mess with pacing. But on the up side, I think I finally have a loose grip on the 5e Action Economy.

Deep Stalker
Wow, It flat out tells players to exploit the Darkvision range of their opponents. Stalker’s Flurry is also kind of cool.

Shadow Origin
Interesting that they chose the Shadowfell for this. It's could work as slightly more generic Quasi-undead Origin too. A mildly interesting bit is how they use force damage as magical displacement damage. I wonder if the "Force damage is the nuclear destabilization of D&D magic" idea caught on with them. Free darkvision is nice for those who don't have it.

The Undying Light
More like "The Silver Flame" But it could work for an angel or phoenix, maybe even a "good" fire primal pact of some kind. Also: Radiant/Force at-will damage damage options. there is like one monster in all of 5e that resists that combo iirc. Needs more Invocations, and a few different pact options (like familiars)