Unearthed Arcana New UA: 43 D&D Class Feature Variants

The latest Unearthed Arcana is a big 13-page document! “Every character class in D&D has features, and every class gets one or more class feature variants in today’s Unearthed Arcana! These variants replace or enhance a class’s normal features, giving you new ways to enjoy your character’s class.”

News Archive | Dungeons and Dragons

Read the full archives of Dungeons & Dragons news, Sage Advice, Unearthed Arcana, and D&D Studio Blogs.

dnd.wizards.com

 

[Parmandur]

So, you mean, you didn't see fighters throwing weapons a lot in the last 5 years, when it was a poorly-supported option. Well, now y'might.
And, yes, it'll be his main thing, since Combat Style channelizes each fighter into one approach (just no longer into one specific weapon, like weapon specialization used to).

I never saw it in 3E or 4E, either.

 

[Yaarel]

Regarding Marvel comics Thor. Remind me, can he ‘cast spells’ without his hammer?



Regarding Norse Þórr. He might be representable by a Paladin class after all. He personifies the spirit of oaths and social order, and his alignment is Lawful. For some traditions, he is a defender of human civilization, so is arguably Lawful Good. Especially regarding oaths and vows, a Lawful Good Paladin code seems appropriate.

He is a kind of Paladin who happily uses deception and trickery to further a Lawful Good cause.

Þórr relies on his magic items. But certain things when angry, like electrical eyes and snorting fire, seem close enough to cantrips, such as Shocking Grasp or Light. At the very least, the Thaumaturgy cantrip explains: the flashing eyes, the booming voice, rumble of thunder, quaking ground, and other intimidating ambiance.

This UA article now makes Paladin cantrips possible. So, this suits him.

Þórr can do magic. There is mention of him using Seiðr to seduce someone, but I need to doublecheck whether this is Edda or Saga. As warrior, he presumably knows warrior magic, such as protection from weapons (AC bonus), striking true (Bless), and so on. This is nonflashy magic, mainly abjuration. He was unable to remove a flint shard from his skull and brain, but Heal at slot 6 and Regenerate at slot 8 would be out of reach for the Paladin class anyway.

He is all about Smite. Compare Thunderous Smite, and Destructive Wave. Any irregular abilities can be part of a custom-selected oath spells. His hammer is itself the Lightning Bolt, dealing lightning damage as well as thunder damage, and probably force too, and perhaps radiant. Probably not bludgeon, since lightning is non-solid.

Keep in mind, Þórr is the actual thunderstorm itself − the observable thunderclouds and lightning. Nevertheless, in the Norse view, when a mind projects, it adopts a form, and when manifesting, really is this form. So, if a thunderstorm projects itself as if a human, this manifestation is a mortal human in some sense. It is easy to stat this as a kind of psionic avatar. Compare the Astral Projection spell, except everything is happening within the material world.

All in all, an epic level Paladin seems reasonable to stat Þórr as a projected personification of a thunderstorm.

 

[Salthorae]

Not to be entirely uncharitable... but it makes me strongly suspect none of these people have played a Sorcerer or Warlock. I have. I played a Warlock in a 2+ year campaign and tried a Sorcerer for a few months in another one. And this change is one that has me wishing had always been available.

If you try actually playing a Sorcerer or Warlock, you'll quickly find out just how restrictive having a smaller number of locked in spells in. You can't take anything situational, you can't react to changes in location or theme, all you've got is a single spell swap the next time you level up in two or three months. It really forces you to ...

Well to that I say Malarky.

Almost every character I build seems to be Sorcerer or Warlock either fully or multiclassed into.

I'm playing a Warlock in a long-running TBT game who is 8th level. I'm playing a Sorcerer in a long-running PBP game. Plus others who have come and gone over the years.

I would prefer having a handful more spells known for a sorcerer, but I like the locked-in nature of the class and having only level up swaps.

It makes you really think about your spells, their selection and whether you want to spend a spell known on something that is more broadly usable or something that is keyed into your concept/theme in some way.

These options just remove much of the requirement to think about what spells you want or need for your character's sorcerous origin and path. Because "oops" that spell isn't' right, oh well, I'll just swap it out tomorrow. Instead of having to live the with consequences of that spell selection for a whole level.

If I wanted an arcane class that did that, I would have played... a Wizard!

Warlock works just as intended. If you wanted a broader spell selection or spellcasting ability, then Warlock wasn't the right choice. Or at worst go Tome-lock (like I did) and pick up all those tasty rituals from all the other classes.

Tome-lock with Book of Ancient Secrets has always left me feeling just fine in Warlock spells known and utility options.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I never saw it in 3E

well, there were just so many potential fighter-based feat-combo builds in 3e, knife-fighter was one I got to, there were plenty I didn't, some of which you may well have seen
Of course, fighter was often restricted to just the more viable applications of extreme system-mastery, depending on the style of the table. I was in a more casual group, so I could often optimize for concept and still be viable.

or 4E, either.

No one played a Rogue? No Daggermaster? No Blinding Barrage? No cloud of steel?
...that's so sad.

 

[Parmandur]

well, there were just so many potential fighter-based feat-combo builds in 3e, knife-fighter was one I got to, there were plenty I didn't, some of which you may well have seen
Of course, fighter was often restricted to just the more viable applications of extreme system-mastery, depending on the style of the table. I was in a more casual group, so I could often optimize for concept and still be viable.
No one played a Rogue? No Daggermaster? No Blinding Barrage? No cloud of steel?
...that's so sad.

Rogues, sure, but not a Fighter. As I said, throwing things is a Rogue gig in my experience.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Regarding Marvel comics Thor. Remind me, can he ‘cast spells’ without his hammer?

Comics Thor? No. In the recent Unworthy Thor run he had lost access to his hammer and therefore had no lightning, thunder, or flight.

He was still as strong and tough as always

MCU (Marvel Movie) Thor is another case entirely

 

[Tony Vargas]

Rogues, sure, but not a Fighter. As I said, throwing things is a Rogue gig in my experience.

Yeah, that doesn't mean much when it comes to modeling a character concept. In 5e the fighter is less locked-in to heavy armor and str-based combat styles, even less so than 3e, and in both a knife-fighter Fighter was at hypothetically least possible. Thanks to iterative attacks, quickdraw, rapid shot & TWF feats, you could get a whole lotta stabbing in with a 3e knife-fighting fighter (or fighter/ranger or fighter/ranger/rogue if you wanted some SA), melee or thrown, and the archetype was readily accessible from launch. In 4e, the Rogue was locked into dex-based fighting styles, particularly good with the dagger, and, in addition to SA 1/round (or turn), could get a lot of daggers in the air via a few crazy powers (and a whole lotta daggers & quickdraw - or just a magic dagger), so it did the archetype easily, by itself, out the box. In 5e, though, the rogue is locked out of multiple attacks, so, while he can stab you in the back, he can't cover the archetype - so the concept falls back to the fighter, where it has just now become viable.
Expect to see more of it, it can be pretty fun.

 

[Undrave]

Well to that I say Malarky.

Almost every character I build seems to be Sorcerer or Warlock either fully or multiclassed into.

I'm playing a Warlock in a long-running TBT game who is 8th level. I'm playing a Sorcerer in a long-running PBP game. Plus others who have come and gone over the years.

I would prefer having a handful more spells known for a sorcerer, but I like the locked-in nature of the class and having only level up swaps.

It makes you really think about your spells, their selection and whether you want to spend a spell known on something that is more broadly usable or something that is keyed into your concept/theme in some way.

These options just remove much of the requirement to think about what spells you want or need for your character's sorcerous origin and path. Because "oops" that spell isn't' right, oh well, I'll just swap it out tomorrow. Instead of having to live the with consequences of that spell selection for a whole level.

If I wanted an arcane class that did that, I would have played... a Wizard!

Warlock works just as intended. If you wanted a broader spell selection or spellcasting ability, then Warlock wasn't the right choice. Or at worst go Tome-lock (like I did) and pick up all those tasty rituals from all the other classes.

Tome-lock with Book of Ancient Secrets has always left me feeling just fine in Warlock spells known and utility options.

So your point is... "Git gud"?

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, that doesn't mean much when it comes to modeling a character concept. In 5e the fighter is less locked-in to heavy armor and str-based combat styles, even less so than 3e, and in both a knife-fighter Fighter was at hypothetically least possible. Thanks to iterative attacks, quickdraw, rapid shot & TWF feats, you could get a whole lotta stabbing in with a 3e knife-fighting fighter (or fighter/ranger or fighter/ranger/rogue if you wanted some SA), melee or thrown, and the archetype was readily accessible from launch. In 4e, the Rogue was locked into dex-based fighting styles, particularly good with the dagger, and, in addition to SA 1/round (or turn), could get a lot of daggers in the air via a few crazy powers (and a whole lotta daggers & quickdraw - or just a magic dagger), so it did the archetype easily, by itself, out the box. In 5e, though, the rogue is locked out of multiple attacks, so the concept falls back to the fighter, where it has just now become viable. Expect to see more of it.

Yeah, sure (and Rangers/Paladins). Just saying, it's not a core archetype, much like the Swarm Ranger or Rune Knight.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Yeah, sure (and Rangers/Paladins).

Not s'much in 5e where they use magic prettymuch from the get-go. In 3e you could finagle a build using up to 3 levels of ranger to pick up skills & bonus feats without any hippy magic. In 4e the ranger should have been a natural for a thrower build, but it's 'V' design did not work out well, you generally had to go all-melee or all-archery - until Martial Power 2, so you did wait over a year for the STR based alternative, not that axe-thrower is quite as prevalent out there as knife-thrower.

Just saying, it's not a core archetype

I believe what you're saying is that the knife-fighter, stabbing & throwing lots of daggers around, wasn't always well-supported in D&D, which is true, to an extent - it didn't start working in AD&D until weapon specialization came into, and it didn't start working in 5e until just now. But, in-between, 2e, 3e, & 4e, it worked quite well out of the box, in 3e, admittedly, with a fair bit of optimization to concept.

It is a common/familiar archetype, however, like I said, far, far more so than Vancian magic or mace-obligated clerics or many another quixotic D&Dism that 5e couldn't have dared let slide for even a moment.