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

 

[Tony Vargas]

You also keep ignoring the satisfaction portion of my post.

It was a self-selected satisfaction poll. "We polled thousands of smokers and they were satisfied with both our regular and menthol products... so obviously this whole cancer thing is just scare tactics."

That’s nonsense. People will notice if the thing they’re playing doesn’t work, and it will lose popularity.

Sure, like how smokers noticed lung cancer and the whole thing never caught on.

Popularity just isn't proof of anything but popularity. (Even, painfully, in a case like this where the thing being proved is obviously true.)

 

[Hussar]

My memory isn’t great right now because I’m a bit ill, but I doubt I said Disadvantage is trivial.

/snip Also, hitting with on of your attacks in spite of disadvantage isn’t rare. Disadvantage isn’t a huge deal. It’s also possible (even easy, depending on Oath and/or group composition) to set up advantage to cancel it out.
/snip

Bold mine.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It was a self-selected satisfaction poll. "We polled thousands of smokers and they were satisfied with both our regular and menthol products... so obviously this whole cancer thing is just scare tactics."

Sure, like how smokers noticed lung cancer and the whole thing never caught on.

Popularity just isn't proof of anything but popularity. (Even, painfully, in a case like this where the thing being proved is obviously true.)

That is the most absurd comparison I’ve ever seen.

Rogues and DnD aren’t exceptionally addicting chemical compounds, for starters.

Further, the self selected respondent is exactly who it should be to get useful data. That is, people who play dnd 5e.

Dismissing the results is completely nonsensical for any purpose but to intentionally dismiss data that you don’t like.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Bold mine.

You...think those are the same thing?

Seriously?

 

[Tony Vargas]

That is the most absurd comparison I’ve ever seen.

That's the point. It's absurd to think popularity proves something is 'good' in every sense (or even any sense).

Dismissing the results is completely nonsensical for any purpose but to intentionally dismiss data that you don’t like.

I'm not dismissing the results, just pointing out that they don't prove anything beyond what they measured (which may not be exactly what they intended to).

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That's the point. It's absurd to think popularity proves something is 'good' in every sense (or even any sense).

This is a straw man.

Popularity proves that peoples’ actual play experience isn’t turning them off from the rogue. Satisfaction numbers show that dnd 5e players like the rogue as is, and feel it is doing its job.

People don’t generally keep doing things they don’t enjoy, and most people don’t say they like and are happy with stuff that is making them feel overshadowed and useless. If the rogue was woefully behind other classes, it would show. Somewhere. And yet, about 5 people MAX on an Internet forum is all I can find trying to argue that 5e rogues aren’t quite good.

The idea that the rogue is “woefully behind” is thus a pretty wild notion that flies in the face of the available evidence.

I'm not dismissing the results, just pointing out that they don't prove anything beyond what they measured (which may not be exactly what they intended to).

“Prove” is generally a useless term in a discussion like this. The evidence tends toward certain conclusions. There is no particular reason to distrust the evidence. “Self-selection” doesn’t actually rob the data of any relevance in this case, because the self selection was toward exactly who we are discussing. People who play dnd. It doesn’t select toward satisfied or unsatisfied players, just players. People who are in the dnd community.

Meanwhile, the evidence in the other direction is basically you and cap sayin so repeatedly.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Popularity proves that peoples’ actual play experience isn’t turning them off from the rogue. Satisfaction numbers show that dnd 5e players like the rogue as is, and feel it is doing its job.

No, popular demonstrates popularity. Satisfaction demonstrates satisfaction (but, not-at-all-seriously, is that just people who play rogues, because, then it's kinda self-fulfilling, or also people who don't, in which case they may feel satisfied with the rogue because it doesn't give their favorite class much competition?).

The rogue could be popular because it's archetype is popular, or because of the tradition of the Big 4. The Rogue, and even Thief were popular choices, back in the day, when they were demonstrably terrible, and stayed popular when they were completely different, mechanically, but better-balanced and re-focused on a combat role. So it's not an unwarranted supposition. Neither is it unwarranted to speculate it's popular because it holds up in play, for whatever reasons apply at a given table. Just neither (nor many other possible reasons) are proved. Only popularity is demonstrated.

The idea that the rogue is “woefully behind” is thus a pretty wild notion that flies in the face of the available evidence.

The more relevant available evidence is the rogue class, right in the PH, which is not, by the numbers, with SA & Cunning Action helping it out in combat, and Expertise and Dependable Talent helping out of combat, woefully behind in any pillar. It's not Tier 1, but it's not a Champion or Berserker out of it's depth the moment you drop out of initiative.

Meanwhile, the evidence in the other direction is basically you and cap sayin so repeatedly.

Capp is saying woefully behind in games that use feats. Feats are optional. That's not woefully behind in the standard game - no feats/MCs, 6-8 encounters/day - and what's the version of the game it's the top priority to balance? The standard game.

So you can count me out of whining about the rogue being inadequate, I'm too busy whining about the fighter, among other things, relative to the Rogue, with all his enviable multi-pillar adequacy.

 

[Hussar]

You...think those are the same thing?

Seriously?

So, which is it? Is disadvantage a big deal or not?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So, which is it? Is disadvantage a big deal or not?

“Not a big deal” and “trivial” aren’t the same thing.

 

[Hussar]

Ah, sorry, I'm not into pedantic word games. If something isn't a big deal, then it's not a problem, thus, it's trivial. But, if "trivial" is the problematic word, then fine, I'll use "not a big deal".

So, which is it? Is disadvantage a "big deal" or "not a big deal"?

God, I so hate all this pedantic crap that people try to obfuscate their points with. It makes trying to actually have a conversation bloody near impossible and so annoying.

If having disadvantage is "not a big deal" then fair enough, granting disadvantage to a target isn't a big deal either. And, if granting disadvantage isn't a big deal, then the Smite spells become less useful.

Given the choice between using a bonus action to drop a shield of faith or command a spiritual weapon, and potentially giving something disadvantage for maybe a round or two depending one whether or not it makes its saves, I know which one I think is more effective.