D&D 5E New Unearthed Arcana: Folk of the Feywild!

Wander into the magical realm of the Feywild with our latest Unearthed Arcana: Folk of the Feywild!

Your character can be a member of one of the new D&D races: fairy, hobgoblin of the Feywild, owlfolk, or rabbitfolk. Which will you choose?

Playtest now:

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

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Goliaths specifically exist due to 3E half ogres being.... Well, 3E half ogres. Goliaths were a new-race version of them at medium that didn't have the issues half ogres did

That's irrelevant. The point is I didn't need to fill a 10 foot square cube in order to feel like I was playing a big guy.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

How can a barbarian to defeat a giant? Like a bulldog against a thief. Attack first, faster and harder. If a real-life combat is longer five seconds then you have lost.

 

[Mind of tempest]

How can a barbarian to defeat a giant? Like a bulldog against a thief. Attack first, faster and harder. If a real-life combat is longer five seconds then you have lost.

yeah, but it is not against a thief it is a bulldog vs a polar bear and that is for some of the weaker giants.

 

[ccooke]

Hmm. Re flying in armour - I don't think I'd apply restrictions myself, but if I were going to I think something like this would fit the 5e principles rather elegantly:

"Wearing heavier armour while flying requires great Strength. If you have a non-magical flight speed and you are wearing armour with a minimum Strength requirement, you are limited to short burst of flight only; you fall if you end your turn in the air and nothing else is holding you aloft. This limitation does not apply if your Strengh score is at least two points higher than the minimum for your armour. "

5e goes for simplicity, and there is already a mechanic in the game for "heavier" armour. Co-opting it (and the limitations on Eagle totem flight) makes for a nice stepped approach. (And explicitly ruling out magical flight make sense. This would allow the UA fairy to fly in any armour they can wear, which I think is on-balance a plus).

 

[Warpiglet-7]

The spectacularly funny thing about this is you can search back into the early days of the forums, back to the 3e/3.5 days, and see this IDENTICAL criticism. Word for word. Since 3e came out 20 years ago, well, more actually, I'm really struggling to think that this is a new thing with a new zeitgeist.

Maybe that is where it really began to grow. Unless a DM said “no” the rules allowed for unanchored multiclassing and ye old baker/gymnast/wizard/mime/dogworshipper prestige class hijinx. It need not be tied to anything really and was not limited much.

regardless, I don’t think I am wrong about the current direction

if you mean zeitgeist is the wrong way to describe it or it’s not quite new I will just say “ok.” It hasn’t been overnight but we are sure doubling

I think we are just doubling down on some elements I did not like then. Why? Many people just want to “tell their story.”

In 3e we decoupled most mechanical limitations with multiclassing etc but now we are working hard to decouple meaning and anything traditional. As I said earlier the new direction seems very whispy, intangible and ungrounded now to me.

but we are not there yet. I am still playing first printing 5e. I am perhaps jumping to conclusions based on previews and rumors.

Time will tell for me but I am predicting it’s going to go too far in the new directions for my taste. I did play some 3e. I have largely enjoyed 5e.

Ymmv. I keep getting told I am not the target audience! WOTC wants those 20 somethings.
Go get ‘em!

 

[Minigiant]

Maybe that is where it really began to grow. Unless a DM said “no” the rules allowed for unanchored multiclassing and ye old baker/gymnast/wizard/mime/dogworshipper prestige class hijinx. It need not be tied to anything really and was not limited much.

regardless, I don’t think I am wrong about the current direction

if you mean zeitgeist is the wrong way to describe it or it’s not quite new I will just say “ok.” It hasn’t been overnight but we are sure doubling

I think we are just doubling down on some elements I did not like then. Why? Many people just want to “tell their story.”

In 3e we decoupled most mechanical limitations with multiclassing etc but now we are working hard to decouple meaning and anything traditional. As I said earlier the new direction seems very whispy, intangible and ungrounded now to me.

but we are not there yet. I am still playing first printing 5e. I am perhaps jumping to conclusions based on previews and rumors.

Time will tell for me but I am predicting it’s going to go too far in the new directions for my taste. I did play some 3e. I have largely enjoyed 5e.

Ymmv. I keep getting told I am not the target audience! WOTC wants those 20 somethings.
Go get ‘em!

I think the core idea is that WOTC is letting DMs and worldbuilders can freely design new settingss and worlds with explaining a whole mess of changes. People not curating from there is not D&D's problem. People have to make the fey campaign.

I find that many advertised official and homebrew settings are just too similar. And with medieval fantasy being a the common theme in board and video games, playing to the world doesn't have any freshness for even newcomers. I find more deep or different world building in board games than pen and paper RPGs these days. I think this is pulling people into making their own story rather that putting themselves in the world.

Tell me your game has owlfolk and rabbitfolk and my first expectation would be a worker placement board game.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Maybe that is where it really began to grow. Unless a DM said “no” the rules allowed for unanchored multiclassing and ye old baker/gymnast/wizard/mime/dogworshipper prestige class hijinx. It need not be tied to anything really and was not limited much.

regardless, I don’t think I am wrong about the current direction

if you mean zeitgeist is the wrong way to describe it or it’s not quite new I will just say “ok.” It hasn’t been overnight but we are sure doubling

I think we are just doubling down on some elements I did not like then. Why? Many people just want to “tell their story.”

In 3e we decoupled most mechanical limitations with multiclassing etc but now we are working hard to decouple meaning and anything traditional. As I said earlier the new direction seems very whispy, intangible and ungrounded now to me.

but we are not there yet. I am still playing first printing 5e. I am perhaps jumping to conclusions based on previews and rumors.

Time will tell for me but I am predicting it’s going to go too far in the new directions for my taste. I did play some 3e. I have largely enjoyed 5e.

Ymmv. I keep getting told I am not the target audience! WOTC wants those 20 somethings.
Go get ‘em!

what exactly do you want in stead?

 

[humble minion]

I haven't got Theros, Ravnica, or Eberron, so can someone tell me if the Fairy is the first PC species we've seen that isn't of Humanoid type at all? Even the three lineages from the Gothic UA had the Humanoid type along with another type.

This is a pretty handy low-level feature, isn't it? Complete immunity to Hold Person, Charm Person, Dominate Person? Enchanters are going to hate them. What other humanoid-only spells are there? And are there any beneficial humanoid-only spells a fey-type PC would not be able to benefit from?

Edit: on the other hand, Protection From Evil And Good would make your life suuuuuck.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I haven't got Theros, Ravnica, or Eberron, so can someone tell me if the Fairy is the first PC species we've seen that isn't of Humanoid type at all?

No. Satyrs and centaurs (Theros) are Fey.

It has benefits, but also has some drawbacks.

 

[Reynard]

I think the core idea is that WOTC is letting DMs and worldbuilders can freely design new settingss and worlds with explaining a whole mess of changes. People not curating from there is not D&D's problem. People have to make the fey campaign.

I find that many advertised official and homebrew settings are just too similar. And with medieval fantasy being a the common theme in board and video games, playing to the world doesn't have any freshness for even newcomers. I find more deep or different world building in board games than pen and paper RPGs these days. I think this is pulling people into making their own story rather that putting themselves in the world.

Tell me your game has owlfolk and rabbitfolk and my first expectation would be a worker placement board game.

I think the inspirations for the current new generation of D&D fans are sufficiently different that D&D itself is changing -- as it always does and always should. Most revealing to me are fan art and character art, showing worlds and characters inspired by Harry Potter and Avatar and Stephen Universe and more. I don't personally like that aesthetic or the mechanics is drives, but I'm part of the fading GenX fan base: WotC absolutely shouldn't be catering to me over younger fans.