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.”

B080A4DE-6E00-44A2-9047-F53CB302EA6D.png


 

log in or register to remove this ad

Do your NPCs not consider spellcasting as dangerous as drawing a weapon?
Rarely. They also don't freak out when someone draws a weapon in a non-threatening manner.
A change I just brainstormed on this one is 1/day initially, and WIS-mod/day when you get your 6th Ranger level (which is the same level the Favored Enemy Ranger gets another pick of FE).
That would work, for sure. I'd also suggest a similar thing instead of breaking apart the movement one. I'd never choose "+5ft speed and a swim speed" over anything else in that spot, including the original feature. But I would choose it if I also get a climb speed a few levels later.

So yes, he hunted, but only at need on his journies. How he hunted is never stated.
Come on, its not that hard to just admit that it's silly to imagine Aragorn isn't proficient with a bow. There's literally no reason to think he didn't hunt with a bow.
Also, my memory is shakey on this for some reason (sad since I used to have the damn apendixes memorized), but didn't the Dunedain that showed up to fight alongside him later on use bows?

Being hyper-literal about the text of a story isn't particularly useful when talking about translating it's characters into a game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I'm regards to Favored Foe, which does more damage? The 1D6 from Hunters Mark or the +2/+4 to damage rolls from Revised?

Both. Until 6th level with Greater Favored Enemy, Hunter's Mark will deal more damage. After 6th at +4, that will average more damage.

The difference is that Revised Rangers can ALSO use Hunter's Mark as a spell in addition to their Favored Enemy damage.

The nice thing about Favored Foe is you get it for free a number of times per day, it is non-concentration, and it doesn't count against Ranger spells known.

So it's a straight up boost over PHB Favored Enemy, but is not as powerful as the Revised option.

Come on, its not that hard to just admit that it's silly to imagine Aragorn isn't proficient with a bow. There's literally no reason to think he didn't hunt with a bow.
Also, my memory is shakey on this for some reason (sad since I used to have the damn apendixes memorized), but didn't the Dunedain that showed up to fight alongside him later on use bows?

I never said he wasn't proficient. I'm sure he was as he fought in many battles over his years before LotR and he lived with the Elves who were consummate archers.

All I said was he is never depicted in any of the LotR books using anything except for Anduril as a weapon.
 

Both. Until 6th level with Greater Favored Enemy, Hunter's Mark will deal more damage. After 6th at +4, that will average more damage.

The difference is that Revised Rangers can ALSO use Hunter's Mark as a spell in addition to their Favored Enemy damage.

The nice thing about Favored Foe is you get it for free a number of times per day, it is non-concentration, and it doesn't count against Ranger spells known.

So it's a straight up boost over PHB Favored Enemy, but is not as powerful as the Revised option.



I never said he wasn't proficient. I'm sure he was as he fought in many battles over his years before LotR and he lived with the Elves who were consummate archers.

All I said was he is never depicted in any of the LotR books using anything except for Anduril as a weapon.
And all Garth was saying is that he absolutely used a bow off the page. (and also that the books are probably less relevant to most people's conception of the Ranger than the movies, wherein he is shown being pretty good with a bow)
 

Hmmm, so basically: I could use the damage output from Revised Rangers Greater favored foe, but give it the buffed UA Hunter's Mark to add on it.

And then still allow for selection of foe types.


Hmmmmm, ya know I think that's how I'll do that.
 

It's not so much a change in the class mechanics (though I would still argue it is a big change).

The main thing here is that it changes the identity of the character. A character who has few known spells and can only change 1 every level up has a lot of their identity tied in with those spells. The spells they can cast has a huge reflection on who they are. Change them every long rest and that is no longer the case.

We lose a tool for character identity.

There is nothing in the new rule that says you must change a spell every long rest. If this goes to print, it will be an optional rule. You don't have to follow it. Even if it becomes a hard and fast rule, and is retconned into the PHB, and enforced by WOTC police coming to your game and forcing the DM at gunpoint to allow it in his game, you, the player, still do not need to utilize it if you want your Sorcerer to be a Fire Sorcerer that only uses Fire attacks because that is your character concept. Identity preserved. Literally nothing changes.

But my Sorcerer is a Divine Soul who is able to tap into the vast cosmic powers of his Angelic Ancestry, and therefore my sorcerer is able to, instinctively, cast any spell on either list, but his human side limits how much he can hold at one time. Therefore, if he wants to learn a new spell, he must take a long rest and contemplate how to utilize that energy in a different way, thus 'forgetting' the old spell and 'learning' the new one.

My Warlock is buddy buddy with his Patron, and likes being prepared like a Wizard, but got kicked out of the Wizard college for sleeping with the Headmaster's daughter. He went to the Patron to learn, and took the Tome for extra cantrips and rituals, and he prepares for his day by looking through which spells his Patron knows, since his Patron knows all of them, and deciding which would work best for the day. His whole spiel is that he's a versatile caster, able to do all kinds of magic, but is limited because he only has 2 slots a short rest, so he does what he can to be versatile without being a Wizard. Invocations would likely be ones that allow for at will casting of spells, for more versatility.

My Bard is a dabbler in magic, and has been a book worm his whole life. His understanding of lore and magical history is vast, and he knows all kinds of things that most Wizards wouldn't even remember. Granted it's because most of it is useless, but his studies have given him a great insight on how spells work. Using his artistic ability, he is able to work out how to do the different spells on his list, but like the Sorcerer he is only human, and can only keep so much in his head. Thus, he can switch out a spell at a long rest.

Nothing is lost in Identity. The Identity of the character is in how you play him, not what class mechanics they use. If you want to use more difficult rules because it fits your character, then more power to you! Another Sorcerer concept I've used (that was amazing, by the way) treats the Sorcerer Class more like the X-Men, where all the spells follow a specific theme. No spell changes needed. Like my Human Dragonic Sorcerer. I took spells that made him like a Dragon. Darkvision, Enlarge/Reduce, Dragon Breath, Fly, that kind of thing. It was awesome. He wouldn't benefit from switching spells every long rest, because there are only a few spells that make me feel like I'm accessing his Draconic heritage. But I'm not going to say the class shouldn't be able to, just because it doesn't fit one kind of character concept.

It's not always about accidentally picking bad spells, either. It's about being forced to pick spells before you know what situations you'll be in, but only having an extremely limited selection, and then being stuck until you level up. Wizards don't have that problem, they get spells aplenty. You turn lvl 5 Sorcerer, and you think "Oh, Fireball! And Fly, yes!" And then you go underground in a flooded cavern and have to bum a Waterbreathing Spell from an ally, and now your fireball doesn't work and Fly is useless. Your third level spell picks are shot to hell and you feel like a dope because you didn't know what was going to happen. And those are two of the six spells you even know at this point, whereas the Wizard's got 14 spells in his book, at least 9 of which are prepared and the rest are likely rituals. Yeah, the Sorcerer gets meta magic. So he can subtly cast his useless Fireball. With Spell Versatility, you can be like "Ok, cool, let's sleep on it, and I'll switch Fireball for Lightning Bolt." Or if you specifically have a fire motif, you can switch Fly for something that will help with underwater stuff.

I'm just saying, the "identity" argument doesn't fly, because there are plenty of character concepts that can fit being able to switch out a single spell every day. And it doesn't step on the Wizard's motifs any more than the Cleric, Druid, or Paladin do.
 

Hmmm, so basically: I could use the damage output from Revised Rangers Greater favored foe, but give it the buffed UA Hunter's Mark to add on it.

And then still allow the for selection of foe types.


Hmmmmm, ya know I think that's how I'll do that.

You could but I wouldn't. Favored foe and the Revised Ranger's Favored Enemy both revise the PHB Favored Enemy, so you'd be doubling up revisions on the same feature. If you wanted to be technical about it, the Favored Foe says that it "replaces Favored Enemy", so you shouldn't gain the Revised Favored Enemy either if you go with Favored Foe.

The Revised Ranger was never printed for some reason, and we now have a new set of options for the Ranger that should in theory supplant any previous UA articles. I wouldn't mix them.

And all Garth was saying is that he absolutely used a bow off the page. (and also that the books are probably less relevant to most people's conception of the Ranger than the movies, wherein he is shown being pretty good with a bow)

I never disputed that he knows how to use a bow.

Garth kept pushing on the fact that Aragorn was weaponless, which I did dispute with the repeated phrase of "in the books Aragorn uses Anduril and before that had the shards of Narsil". Whether he could use a bow or not, he never does in the pages of the book.

Whether people's conception of the Ranger comes more from the LotR movie adaptation or not doesn't change the fact that in the books, he is never shown to use anything but one sword.

And I'm done debating Aragorn's martial skill set as depicted in any form of media with this post. Thanks.
 

So only 80 or so years effectively weaponless
And sorry the movie is Aragorn for as many or more than the books
We only know for sure that that's the specific weapon we carried for the campaign in the Lord of the Rings. When he knew from Gandalf that the Ring had been found which was the sign that it was time to reforge his sword and reclaim his birthright and claim the united throne of Arnor and Gondor or die in the fight against the Shadow.

Mind you there was only one Combat encounter before the sword was reforged in that Campaign, where he wielded torches to scare off the 5 Ringwraiths because those dudes were totally weak against fire.

As far as the 20 or so years spent as a soldier in Rohan and victorious Captain of Gondor I I think it unlike that he would wield something as recognizable as the broken blade of Narsil in battle while being so careful to hide his identity with a pseudonym. Likewise the next 40ish years of journeying of wandering the wild.

I think it most probably that he got the shards from wherever he was hiding them (maybe in his pack?) and strapped it to his waist shortly before going looking for some shire hobbits in Bree town. Now remember Frodo was supposed to receive a letter introducing Aragorn which starts of with a poem about a broken blade being reforged. So he could have been carrying it as a sign to show Frodo (which he does, having some fun at the same time) that he is who Gandalf said he is.

Likely at the same time (or upon reaching Rivendell) retiring his mundane weapon(s) in favor of the soon to be reforged legendary weapon from the First Age.
 

Regarding spell swapping...

"Whenever you finish a long rest, you can replace one spell you learned from this Spellcasting feature with another spell from the bard spell list."

The one swapped in is always the one swapped out. Changing entire spell lists wouldn't be possible under that wording. ;)

It's not referring to the enhanced feature. It's referring to the class' spellcasting feature.

It is "enhancing spellcasting". It is an addition to their spellcasting feature, not its own feature.

There is no keeping track of what your original spell was. Once it is swapped out that is your new spell list. They would not intentionally make something so finicky.
 

It's certainly not reasonable or helpful or anything to do so, when you know perfectly well that without those, you're basically asking for either the specific exact thing you want to happily coincide with one of the surprisingly few and narrow archetypes 5E uses! :p

Re: archetypes, yeah none of those, including "punchy" are really "fantasy barbarian" archetypes at all. The Incredible Hulk is a superhero, not a fantasy archetype. Raging brutes are reasonably common in fantasy - they are almost always are armed with clubs or axes, using fists (and teeth!) only when deprived of their weapons.

I would also actually say that while it is a little weird to see "Holy Barbarians", the person driven into a frenzy by fanatical zeal, wearing little-no armour, and probably wielding a mace or flail (likely dual-wielding) is a more common fantasy archetype. Certainly, divorced from the name "barbarian", more common than a punch-y half-naked berserker who wades into armed melees with nothing but a loincloth and his fists.

I am genuinely struggling to think of an example of the latter. I keep coming up with cavemen-types but they always have weapons, and I don't think Frankenstein's Monster really counts, because he's not actually good at punching or anything, just incredibly, terrifyingly strong.
Well hold your horses there pal, Why wouldn't my punchy Barbarian wield a weapon too, just like Kensei monks or any monk wielding a staff, short-sword or other monk weapon?

Mixing weapons and unarmed strikes is just as enabled by punchy style as purely focusing on unarmed strikes, and I agree with you no D&D character should be focused purely on unarmed strikes even the ones most enabled to do so, namely said Monk class.

Even on a Fighter with the new fighting style I still would want a weapon in one hand on most occasions, because if I was grappling a target I could get 1d6+1d4+str damage on each hit, but I could get 1d8+1d4+str wielding a Martial weapon. And on account of the fact that their punches won't count as magical attacks like a weapon would.

So let me rephrase. I want a Barbarian that is equally (or even nearly equally) enabled to brawl, punch, and grapple as well as any Fighter without paying a feat tax. Edit: And I don't think said Barbarian is more niche than said Fighter in the slightest.
 
Last edited:

It's not so much a change in the class mechanics (though I would still argue it is a big change).

The main thing here is that it changes the identity of the character. A character who has few known spells and can only change 1 every level up has a lot of their identity tied in with those spells. The spells they can cast has a huge reflection on who they are. Change them every long rest and that is no longer the case.

We lose a tool for character identity.
I feel like the amount of times you long rest compared to the amount of times you level is really campaign dependent, and really changes how much of an impact you see this rule to be. Personally, I don't see it as a big deal, but we rarely get more than 3 long rests between levels.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top