I'm disappointed about no Oath of Liberty, but I'll take a look at what they are bringing, when they get around to getting the page to work.
First, it's barely a playtest. It's a concept test.
How many people do you actually think are testing these classes via play?
Giving away everything, including the content that doesn't need as much testing, turns these articles into previews.
Second, WotC is a business. They're not going to give away the entire contents of a book to publically test. Even Paizo doesn't do that for their mass playtests.
If they give away everything, fewer people will buy the final product. And that's a foolish move.
Third, releasing everything reduces the amount of useful feedback gained. There's more content to be absorbed, so small details will be missed in order to absorb it all. The amount of discussion won't significantly change, just the percentage per new option: fewer people are going to be talking about each new option. There's higher odds certain options will catch the attention at the expense of other more fringe options.
Fourth, they are getting feedback. From the private friends & family playtest groups. They've been testing and looking at options for years.
Which is probably why we saw the arcane archer at all.
Very likely there was some internal concerns and mixed feedback from the F&F playtesters, so they decided to get wider opinions. To see if it worked for fighters, or if it would be better for rogues or rangers or wizards.
There's nothing that prevents a DM continuing to allow levels via multiclassing.I just realised that the Treachery capstone says the bonus damage is equal to the paladin's level. Why bother saying that if it's always going to be 20 damage?
I doubt it, but future proofing for epic level play?
- Zynx, from the EN World mobile app
It specifies paladin level, not character level.There's nothing that prevents a DM continuing to allow levels via multiclassing.
Some of the wording of conquest could do with an adjustment that would make it much more generally useful. Currently the oath very much sounds like it prohibits you from being a member of an organization: Judge Dredd doesn't fit here because he's a policeman, not a ruling dictator.
The flavour text is far too heavy on "this is a bad guy".
Douse the flame of hope is fine as an oath: good or evil, having your foes NOT rise again is great.
Rule with an iron fist: Also fine, but perhaps remove the "once you have conquered".
Strength above all: This one is where it kind of falls apart, because it's the only one that forces you to rule. If you take this away, you can have Batman (willing to sort the place out, but unwilling to rule) and Judge Dredd (a member of an order keeping organization) under this Oath. Perhaps change it to "Never compromise: There is no partial compliance. There is no deal making. There is only law. Be strong enough to enforce it or fall to your own ruin".
That is true. They have said "major mechanical expansion", not "one book." Their publishing style has been more "one book", but who knows? Feelings towards most of these UA options seem bimodal (some love, some hate), so that could lead to 2 or more books......
My thoughts on the new Sacred Oaths. http://questinggm.blogspot.my/2016/12/unearthing-arcana-paladin-sacred-oaths.html
I wish people would stop talking about Conquest as if it has to be evil. Heck even Treachery doesn't have to be evil it can be an example of a coward paladin that has fallen from their ways or become disillusioned. Admittedly Treachery mechanically is a bit harder to explain.
But nothing out of the conquest abilities or even their oaths dictate that they have to be evil.
I don't understand the hate on the Oath of Treachery.
Oath of Conquest
Like it. Seems that the 7th & 15th level powers could both go to 7th level. Making room for a better 15th feature - even a reduced version of the 20th level feature.
Their channel divinity Conquering Strike uses fear.Yeah, that fear aura is super niche and weak. Unless I'm mistaken, the conquest paladin doesnt even have any fear spells on his list!
Their channel divinity Conquering Strike uses fear.
They aren't forced to be evil, that is true, but as written it is really really hard for them to be good. Ruling through Fear, brooking no dissent, at best they can go Lawful Neutral, but that sort of slavish devotion to might makes right and unquestioning devotion to an iron-fisted rule have some incredibly negative connotations in history and literature.
I think they should do just some minor tweaking to make them more law and less iron-fisted law, and that will help.