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

 

[Ashrym]

Plus you can use a Smite Spell AND divine smite for extra extra damage. Why not?

Concentration and burning through slots even faster. A paladin using an actual smite spell is the exception and not the rule, IME.

I wouldn't mind seeing them all on the cleric list, tbh.

 

[THEMNGMNT]

My current campaign has a 10th level vengeance paladin and he definitely favors divine smite over smite spells.

I think adding smites to the cleric list would go a long way toward making melee clerics more viable in the higher tiers.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Clearly said by someone not practiced at minmaxing...

Lol I know all about minmaxing. Your notion that rogues have to get two SA per round to not “fail” is the worst sort of hyperbolic CharOp nonsense.

 

[THEMNGMNT]

Brain Trust, I need your guidance.

One of my players believes the new Interception fighting style can be used on attacks that target yourself, rather than only attacks against allies.

At first, I presumed he was wrong. I don't think there's a fighting style meant to reduce incoming damage by 3 to 16 points per round. But, upon reflection, that doesn't necessarily break the game. And the wording could be interpreted to include yourself:

When a creature you can see hits a target that is within 5 feet of you with an attack, you can use your reaction to reduce the damage the target takes by 1d10 + your proficiency bonus (to a minimum of 0 damage). You must be wielding a shield or a simple or martial weapon to use this reaction.

What say you?

 

[Ashrym]

Brain Trust, I need your guidance.

One of my players believes the new Interception fighting style can be used on attacks that target yourself, rather than only attacks against allies.

At first, I presumed he was wrong. I don't think there's a fighting style meant to reduce incoming damage by 3 to 16 points per round. But, upon reflection, that doesn't necessarily break the game. And the wording could be interpreted to include yourself:

When a creature you can see hits a target that is within 5 feet of you with an attack, you can use your reaction to reduce the damage the target takes by 1d10 + your proficiency bonus (to a minimum of 0 damage). You must be wielding a shield or a simple or martial weapon to use this reaction.

What say you?

Technically, you are within 5 ft of yourself. I don't see anything that immediately disqualifies the fighter.

EDIT: I don't think that's the intent, however.

 

[tglassy]

Brain Trust, I need your guidance.

One of my players believes the new Interception fighting style can be used on attacks that target yourself, rather than only attacks against allies.

At first, I presumed he was wrong. I don't think there's a fighting style meant to reduce incoming damage by 3 to 16 points per round. But, upon reflection, that doesn't necessarily break the game. And the wording could be interpreted to include yourself:

When a creature you can see hits a target that is within 5 feet of you with an attack, you can use your reaction to reduce the damage the target takes by 1d10 + your proficiency bonus (to a minimum of 0 damage). You must be wielding a shield or a simple or martial weapon to use this reaction.

What say you?

Meh, it uses a resource, so they can’t do it every time. I wouldn’t vote against it, necessarily.

 

[Salthorae]

Meh, it uses a resource, so they can’t do it every time. I wouldn’t vote against it, necessarily.

if by "resource" you mean reaction, it does. Otherwise it doesn't use a resource, so they can do it every round.

I wouldn't let it apply to the PC themselves.

Question - can the Protection fighting style grant disadvantage on attacks against the Fighter who has it or only on other people?

It has the exact same wording as the Interception fighting style. I've never heard anyone ask if that can be applied to the fighter themself, but maybe some of you out there have.

 

[tglassy]

Yep, I read that wrong. I thought he was talking about a Maneuver. I don’t know if I’d let them use it on themselves.

But then, Rogues get the ability to use their reaction to half damage coming at them, so I don’t think it would break anything. And it is their fighting style, so they aren’t using Dualing or Defense.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Also I’ve been building for and playing around with a “2 SA per round” rogue recently (over the last 6 months, to test the insistence that it’s required in some way, and it’s really easy. Sentinel and Mage Slayer make it trivial.

 

[Tony Vargas]

And the wording could be interpreted to include yourself:

When a creature you can see hits a target that is within 5 feet of you with an attack,

What say you?

Well, Protection style qualifies it "other than you," specifically.

Likely an oversight.