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

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Honestly, I think anyone calling any of this stiff power creep is misusing the word.

Absolutely nothing presented here makes a more powerful character than the PHB.

 

[Kurotowa]

Looking over Warlock stuff, and I have to ask... is Investment of the Chain Master even close to worth it?

It doesn't seem to be. They're obviously trying to buff Pact of the Chain a bit, but I don't think this goes far enough yet. Right now the Chain pet is good for scouting and the Help action and that's about it. Really, I think they have to go all-in on one of those supplied stat blocks to be able to offer up a viable combat pet option. It works well enough for the Artificer and Ranger, Warlock is the logical next step.

 

[CleverNickName]

@doctorbadwolf Most of the items presented in this UA are described as "enhancements," and enhance means "to raise to a higher degree; to intensify, magnify, or increase." So I think many of these items could fairly be called 'power creep.'

I'm not saying that's a bad thing; I'm only saying it's accurate. (I kinda like what they've done here, tbh.)

 

[Salthorae]

the Chain pet is good for scouting and the Help action and that's about it

I've seen this kind of a statement a few times in this thread and others.

What is so wrong with Pact of the Chain being only good at scouting, help, and support roles? Why do they NEED a combat-capable pet??

Warlock already has a combat version or two: Hexblade and Pact of the Blade.

It seems like un-necessary blending within a single class that already has so many ways to be variant within itself.

So I think many of these items could fairly be called 'power creep.'

In one sense. In another sense, while yes 'power creep', many of them are more 'power something up to the level of other things'.

 

[CleverNickName]

In one sense. In another sense, while yes 'power creep', many of them are more 'power something up to the level of other things'.

Which is impossible to measure in most cases. What does "powerful" even mean in D&D, anyway? more hit points? more damage output? higher stats? more useful? compared to what?

And it has negative connotations, too, which I think is unfair. Making something more powerful, however you decide that is measured, isn't necessarily bad.

 

[Kurotowa]

What is so wrong with Pact of the Chain being only good at scouting, help, and support roles? Why do they NEED a combat-capable pet??

I think there's two factors.

One is that it feels like the Chain Pact is weaker than the other two. The Chain familiar isn't better enough than the normal Find Familiar results a Tome Pact Warlock can get to justify giving up the spell library that Tome Pact gets. I don't think I've ever seen someone suggest a Chain Pact character outside of a pure flavor build.

The other is that some people just really want to be a Warlock Pokemon master, standing back lending support and encouragement while their magical pet does a lot of the fighting. And I'll agree that it's a major character archetype that 5e doesn't currently offer elsewhere. Beastmaster Rangers are a completely different type of character. So those people are hungry for options that let them promote the Chain pet to an actual combatant.

 

[Salthorae]

Warlock Pokemon master

Why can't those people play a Circle of the Shepherd Druid or a Conjuration Wizard to achieve that?

Those two both focus on summoning things to do battle for you, the wizard comes with Find Familiar built-in, no need to stretch to get it even. Why does the Warlock have to expand to accommodate that concept?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Which is impossible to measure in most cases. What does "powerful" even mean in D&D, anyway? more hit points? more damage output? higher stats? more useful?

Versatility corresponds strongly to power, and more flexible or versatile and more useful tend to correspond pretty strongly. Hit points? Sure, if one PC has 7 hps and another 700 the latter is more powerful, but the difference between d8 & d10 HD, pretty minor. DPR, certainly, it's easily measured & compared - as little as and additional half a point of average damage difference will have a weapon judged superior to another, for instance - 5e paid attention to that and, if anything, probably has single-target DPR balanced more closely than it needs to be, or even should be, considering how imbalanced many other factors are.

compared to what?

Compared to what it was before it crept up?

And it has negative connotations, too, which I think is unfair. Making something more powerful, however you decide that is measured, isn't necessarily bad.

If it's already too powerful - like, say, every full caster in the game, or the Paladin - it's bad.

If it's already underpowered, OTOH, sure.

while yes 'power creep', many of them are more 'power something up to the level of other things'.

If those other things are already near the middle of the pack, and the class being powered up to that level is, overall, lacking, sure, that'd even be a good thing. The Ranger getting any kind of boost, or even just coherence. The Fighter getting any kind of versatility, the Rogue any sort of resources, etc.

Powering DPR up to the level of a GWM or SorLock or the like, OTOH, not really a great idea, taking the abusive build down a peg would make more sense. Same with Spell Versatility, it makes all the classes that get it more like the already-class-Tier-1 Wizard.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

@doctorbadwolf Most of the items presented in this UA are described as "enhancements," and enhance means "to raise to a higher degree; to intensify, magnify, or increase." So I think many of these items could fairly be called 'power creep.'

I'm not saying that's a bad thing; I'm only saying it's accurate. (I kinda like what they've done here, tbh.)

You can make definitions do anything you want.

Power creep is a term for when new options increase the overall power of PCs in general, even if leaving some builds behind.

In that sense, nothing printed after the phb is power creep in 5e. Nothing makes characters more powerful than you can be with PHB options. Hell, the PHB still contains the most powerful options in the game.

Increasing the power of weak options isn’t power creep. It’s just a balance patch.

Edit: it’s like the arguments over the Hexblade. A Hexblade Warlock PC isn’t more powerful than a Fiend Warlock PC. They’re about on par in a combat focused game for damage focused players.

For control and utility focused players, Archfey and GOO win over either.

The Hexblade is only “OP” if compared as a patron in the most superficial ways possible. It “gets more”, but it doesn’t actually make a stronger character. It just allows a different type of character than what the class normally allows.

 

[Kurotowa]

Why can't those people play a Circle of the Shepherd Druid or a Conjuration Wizard to achieve that?

Completely different character archetype. The Summoner is more akin to the Necromancer, throwing waves of disposable minions at your foes. It's the opposite side of the coin from having a single powerful magical pet that has a fixed identity and personality that you bond with and fight along side. Also the summoning rules are a complete PITA.

As the Shepherd Druid is to the Beastmaster Ranger, so the Conjuration Wizard is to the Chain Warlock. At least, in theory. In practice the Chain Warlock has never satisfied in that role, and that's why some people are looking for a way to upgrade it to fit.