D&D 5E New Unearthed Arcana: Heroes of Krynn Revisited

WotC's Jeremy Crawford has announced a new Unearthed Arcana article today with redesigns from the prior Heroes of Krynn UA based on feedback, and in the following video he discusses that feedback and what's in the article:

• New iteration of Kender based on feedback survey, due to mixed response. This time is a back to basics, aiming to capture 1E AD&D fearlessness, curiosity and taunting skills. Delve into their origins from Gnomes in deep history.
• Kender are no longer fey creatures who grab objects from the Feywild
• Tweaked Feats from prior article
• Tweaked Backgrounds from prior article
• Brand new rule giving a list of free Feats for ANY Background
• Free Feat rule for Level 4 for all characters that doesn't take the ASI away, based on a curated list
• Reveals that in the Adventure, healing magic is already back.

Heroes of Krynn Revisited | Unearthed Arcana | Dungeons & Dragons

Explore updated character options from the Dragonlance setting! This playtest document presents revised races, subclasses, backgrounds, and feats.

dnd.wizards.com

 

[JEB]

Alignment is one of the few things that I'm genuinely happy is dying. It deserves it. The fact that it makes a bunch of older gamers that regularly call for things that I enjoy to be excluded from D&D angry is just the icing on the cake.

Alignment is just as bad as zodiac symbols and buzzfeed personality tests. If either of those ever died, I would be ecstatic. I'll have the same reaction when this stupid sacred cow is finally slaughtered.

So, yeah. You should be happy that WotC is even choosing to compromise on this. Because if they weren't, it would be gone already.

I suspect the window for alignment to actually go away for good has been missed - they outright tried to delete it in 2021 and had reversed course by the end of the year. The logical conclusion is that more D&D fans liked alignment than you, or Wizards, expected. As such, it's hard to believe that it was only "older gamers that regularly call for things that I enjoy to be excluded from D&D" who were upset by its removal...

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Indeed. It's one thing to be a traditionalist when the thing being defended at least basically worked in its day but is just "out of fashion" in some way. But if the thing being defended was always an obvious mistake that's a different matter.

The idea that all the evil mages in the setting where so committed to evil for evil's sake that they would join an evil club together, and willingly go around wearing the club colors because evil, or that the good mages would cooperate with them on maintaining this order of things, or that the remainder of the mages would be not just rather indifferent to good or evil but have a firm commitment to some sort of balance of the two, is one of the goofiest ideas in the history of fantasy fiction (hardly a genre unfamiliar with goofy ideas). It is the alignment system adhered to ad absurdum and the limitations of alignments as a useful storytelling concept made manifest. Be rid of it, oh devotees of Krynn. The Dragonlance setting and the alignment system will both be on firmer ground without this nonsense.

I think how the UA is hinting how it will be is better I think. White Robes being those who desire to become protectors of the people, Black Robes being those who desire to gain power for themselves above all else, and Red Robes those who desire to maintain the Balance of the World.

 

[SakanaSensei]

When you're used to the game, alignment is reductive and unnecessary. It also has a tendency to paint entire groups of culture-having species with a MASSIVE brush.

When you're new to the game, DM or player, alignment is a lifesaver, giving you an easy-to-grok guide on how something should generally act.

I can definitely say I've thought a HELL of a lot more about alignment out of game than I ever have in prep for my games or in my games themselves. It feels like something that's mostly there at this point for people to argue about online as we all drift further and further toward being Warlocks with the WWW patron.

 

[Bill Zebub]

MUCH better. I like how now not all kender are going to be picking up random bits (or pulling out of the Feywild, per last UA). T

Yeah, although I was looking forward to fluffing that ability so that every item I conjured was pulled out of my, um, let's just say "nether region".

 

[Mistwell]

Alignment is an awful system for defining morality, and it never should have determined mechanics in-game. A ton of people hate alignment. You should be happy that it's even still in the game at all, because, with how bad it is at actually describing characters, it has no real place in the hobby anymore.

A ton of people also still like alignment. Your declaration that it has no "real" place in the hobby anymore is gatekeeping and unwelcome. You don't have to use it in your games for it to still have a place in the hobby in the games of those who still like it.

Truly, I grow tired of the badwrongfun claims.

 

[Faolyn]

They'll all be non-evil. Players loooove to play against type.

I mean, who saw a non-good Drow PC after Drizzt?

Probably anyone who played in evil parties.

Certainly wouldnt affect my game, as I'd never allow it to happen.

Right, so why care if they don't have a required alignment?

 

[Mistwell]

WotC puts out some playtest material and asks people what they think. People respond, "Cowards," mad face, "how could they?" Remind me never to ask these people if my shirt goes with my pants. Sheesh.

It does not. But it's OK. It's a distinctive look. Black horizontal stripes on a white background is a bold choice.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

You are free to feel that way, but considering the whole 'yuck my yum' line you've pulled, its ironic.

If your yum has been repeatedly used to bludgeon people me in my games, I'm perfectly fine with yucking it. If someone attacked you and how you played based on the new style of D&D at your table and almost got you banned from the table for that . . . I'd be perfectly fine with you yucking it, too.

I'd be fine with alignment existing if it was completely harmless. It isn't, so I'll be happy when it's gone. Since it basically has no mechanical meaning in 5e, adding the occasional two word descriptor to your own game should be easy to do for the people that like it. But including it in the game still encourages in-game alignment debates and player conflicts in destructive ways.

It's not "ironic" to legitimately despise something that's been used as a weapon against you in the past.

 

[Scribe]

Right, so why care if they don't have a required alignment?

As we have discussed many times, because it should be there.

 

[Vaalingrade]

How can anyone be bothered by Evil white robes specifically in DL?

This is a setting where the world when to hell because people got so Good they turned evil, so the gods send one dumbass to warn them, who fails utterly and they give up and go with plan B: genocide. In response to people being too good, they murdered thousands, then noped out of fixing their atrocity.

I'd have more of an issue with literally anyone in the setting being considered Good... for so many and layered reasons.