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

 

[Salthorae]

I’d also really like to see a Fighter Fighting Style that gives them cantrips, if Ranger and Paladin are getting such things. Let my EK be magic from day one.

Agreed here. they probably just thought the Fighter was getting the Superior Technique and Maneuver Versatility so didn't want to give too much.

If the Ranger/Paladin ones do see print (which I hope they do), I'm definitely going to allow Fighters to have an Eldritch Warrior Fighting Style that does the same thing, but with Wizard cantrips. Why should Ranger/Paladin get to save that Magic Initiate feat when Fighters don't?

 

[maceochaid]

Agreed, but only with those classes, Cleric, Druid, and Wizard, with Religion, Nature, and Arcana, respectfully. Or maybe give it as a later level bump that reads something like "You gain proficency in Nature, or if you are already proficient in Nature you gain expertise in Nature."

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Agreed here. they probably just thought the Fighter was getting the Superior Technique and Maneuver Versatility so didn't want to give too much.

If the Ranger/Paladin ones do see print (which I hope they do), I'm definitely going to allow Fighters to have an Eldritch Warrior Fighting Style that does the same thing, but with Wizard cantrips. Why should Ranger/Paladin get to save that Magic Initiate feat when Fighters don't?

Yep. I still wish that they’d come up with a more interesting way, that doesn’t just give the Fighter options that compete with the Attack Action, but I’ll take what I can get.

I mean, why not let the Fighter be the one weapon user that can have magical weapon attacks with 1 or 2 bonus damage, and a choice of damage type, from level 1?

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Lately, I've been of the mind that every single class should be allowed to "expertise" one (and only one) of the skills on their class skill lists. That'd eliminate the oddity of Rogues being better at Arcana than Wizards, Religion than Clerics, Nature than Druids, etc.

Rogues and Bards (and Rangers with Canny in this doc) can retain their Expertise features as normal, that just means those classes get to Expertise more skills than everyone else.

I've been thinking that for a while. There should at least be an option for the non-multiclass members of every class without the (race-locked) prodigy feat to be experts in a core skill of their class. Perhaps something like "at 10th level everyone gains one additional skill or expertise in one skill in which they are already proficient" which would support characters who ended up making heavy use of a skill in which they are still not proficient.

I've dipped a wizard into Arcane Trickster partly just to make him an expert in Arcana. In that case it made sense (he spent his early days dealing legally and otherwise in magical items and so naturally is a master of identifying them), but usually it would not.

Alternatively it might make even more sense to key it to one of their background based proficiencies. The "I spent 20 years doing X but never became as good as a random rogue or Bard could be" situation bothers me. I've experimented with just giving them all a +1 to a background skill of their choice, which certainly felt sensible without any major balance implications.

 

[Salthorae]

Agreed, but only with those classes, Cleric, Druid, and Wizard, with Religion, Nature, and Arcana, respectfully. Or maybe give it as a later level bump that reads something like "You gain proficency in Nature, or if you are already proficient in Nature you gain expertise in Nature."

Expertise/Expertise-like features are now so ubiquitous that the gaps in it stand out more than the feature itself.

The last real gaps, that I see, are 1) that a Rogue is better at Nature/Survival than either the Ranger (not anymore I guess) or Druid. and 2) that Cleric & Rogue can both be better at Arcana than a wizard.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Expertise/Expertise-like features are now so ubiquitous that the gaps in it stand out more than the feature itself.

The last real gaps, that I see, are 1) that a Rogue is better at Nature/Survival than either the Ranger (not anymore I guess) or Druid. and 2) that Cleric & Rogue can both be better at Arcana than a wizard.

It doesn't so much bother me that they are better at these things than some wizards, rangers, etc. but giving them the ability to be better than any member of these classes ever could be is pretty ridiculous.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I've been thinking that for a while. There should at least be an option for the non-multiclass members of every class without the (race-locked) prodigy feat to be experts in a core skill of their class. Perhaps something like "at 10th level everyone gains one additional skill or expertise in one skill in which they are already proficient" which would support characters who ended up making heavy use of a skill in which they are still not proficient.

I've dipped a wizard into Arcane Trickster partly just to make him an expert in Arcana. In that case it made sense (he spent his early days dealing legally and otherwise in magical items and so naturally is a master of identifying them), but usually it would not.

Alternatively it might make even more sense to key it to one of their background based proficiencies. The "I spent 20 years doing X but never became as good as a random rogue or Bard could be" situation bothers me. I've experimented with just giving them all a +1 to a background skill of their choice, which certainly felt sensible without any major balance implications.

Honestly, I don't think it would do anything bad to the game to just give the Wizard prof in Arcana, and perhaps offer a variant feature where you give up some measure of power (perhaps arcane recovery) in exchange for gaining Expertise in Arcana, and proficiency in History and Religion, gaining Expertise if you already have those trained. Or hell, if you're giving up actual power for it, just make it Expertise in Arcana, History, Alchemist Supplies, and gain a language?

Ya know, let the wizard player choose to be a scholar over being more powerful in a direct and flashy way.

But I'd also just give each class a bonus proficiency like the rogue has with theives tools. Bards get 3 instruments and Jack of All Trades, so they're fine. Rangers get Survival, as do Barbarians. Druids get Nature. Paladins and Clerics get Religion. Fighters get Athletics. Monks get Athletics or Acrobatics? Warlocks and Wizards get Arcana. Sorcerers...honestly I don't wanna give them Arcana, but...what else would it be? There isn't an endurance skill this time around, so...Intimidation?

 

[Gradine]

There are 16 maneuvers in the PH, all located on two facing pages in the BM sub-class description.

That's about as many choices for the player to concern himself with for his BM's entire career from 3rd through 20th, as a player of a Druid, Cleric, or even Paladin, needs to consider each long rest, for his 1st level spells, alone.

Doesn't seem like that'd be a concern.
Also don't see how balance could be a concern.

I do like the idea of retraining them as a downtime activity, though - more thematic - also, going all 'training montage' and letting an ally temporarily learn a maneuver as a downtime activity would be pretty cool.

I may be wrong, but isn't the appeal of the Fighter versus those other classes the reduced cognitive load?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It doesn't so much bother me that they are better at these things than some wizards, rangers, etc. but giving them the ability to be better than any member of these classes ever could be is pretty ridiculous.

Well, the thing is, they aren't.

A rogue cannot lead a group through the wilderness as well as a Ranger. Not even Scout Rogue, unless they also take Outlander.

And the game assumes that you are using the whole "don't require checks for stuff that is a no brainer" guideline, which obviously applies to clerics knowing about religious stuff, druids knowing about the natural world, wizards knowing about magical stuff, etc.

Now, the UA variants do take away some of the Ranger's power in exploration, but since they give it back in the form of expertise, I'm cool with it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Hey wasn't there an errata to Primeval Awareness that let you use it without expending a spell slot once per day or something? Did they end up taking that back?