Unearthed Arcana New Year Unearthed Arcana Brings Back Those Old 2E Kits

The scout fighter looks like yet another take at a ranger, but one I'm personally more likely to use. For the Cavalier I might want some more feature related to social interaction, not just the horse part and a proficiency. Something along the lines of what the Banneret/Purple Dragon Knight got in SCAG or a new use of superiority dice.

The bard colleges seem nice, but "Tumble" might have a bit too many benefits compared to Rogue Cunning Action.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

What the game really needs is a few more Sorcerous origins. Unfortunately, Sorcerers weren't a thing in AD&D 2nd Ed, so it's not coming from this source. Nice to see the Cavalier back in commission though.

There are plenty of Prestige Classes in 3e that would make nice Sorcerer subclasses in 5e. Some may need to be trimmed back a bit and others expanded. I would rather see new subclasses than bring back Prestige Classes. A lot of them had ideas and some mechanics that would port over pretty well without breaking anything.
Anyway, thumbs up for the UA.

If they ever do get around to publishing splat books, a big 320 page volume of subclasses inspired by the 2E Complete books and some of the 3E Prestige Classes turned into subclasses or single dip feats wouldn't go wrong here. I would like to see more UAs like this anyway. I realize that this was them demonstrating how easy it is to homebrew this stuff with the kits from previous editions. It just makes me want to see more of this kind of thing from them though.

 

[Klaus]

I don't know that I'd totally agree with that. It's one subclass. I know spellcasting is pretty ubiquitous in 5e, but SD doesn't seem any more part and parcel of "martial power" in 5e than the Champion's improved crits or the assassin's Assassinate.

From where I'm sitting, "action economy" is where martial classes dominate - through Extra Attacks, through Action Surge, through "bonus action actions" (from the monk and the rogue), characters that don't use spells tend to fit bigger effects into a smaller space than other characters can.

The extra actions are big part of lots of classes, of varying origins (from bonus action spells to expending spells to convert points, to additional attacks from a Fighting Style, to more effects). But the Battlemaster's Superiority Dice arose as the most different, uniquely-5e aspect of the Fighter, something that arose from the first alpha playtest and remained until the final product. It is a new mechanic (as opposed to extra attacks, which were in previous editions, to one degree or another), and it managed to incorporate 4e's martial exploits into a new ruleset, without them feeling too similar to spells (thus avoiding the "all classes play the same" criticism 4e suffered).

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

That's part of why the Scout and the Cavalier are having problems here I think! Everyone else who uses the BM manuevers is saying, in some way, "your BM CAN'T be this." Expanding the BM manuever suite is saying instead "BMs are a flexible subclass that lots of different characters can be."

If there is one thing that seems a bit off in 5e, it is the Fighter subclasses. They are more containers for mechanics than a concept. The Battlemaster probably suffers the most from it since other than the feature that gives you the ability to assess your foes stats and stuff, it really doesn't have a whole lot of conceptual focus. The Champion's main selling feature is that it is a "simple fighter" with not much to go on except taht it is apparently athletic. Even the Eldritch Knight doesn't seem near as focused as its Rogue relative the Arcane Trickster. The spell school restrictions on spell allotment was meant to be a nudge in that direction, but it just comes off for as persnickety rather than opening up role playing opportunities.

Anyway, these new subclasses seem to be a lot more flavorful and more in line with the way these subclasses work in a lot of the other classes. I like it.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The extra actions are big part of lots of classes, of varying origins (from bonus action spells to expending spells to convert points, to additional attacks from a Fighting Style, to more effects). But the Battlemaster's Superiority Dice arose as the most different, uniquely-5e aspect of the Fighter, something that arose from the first alpha playtest and remained until the final product. It is a new mechanic (as opposed to extra attacks, which were in previous editions, to one degree or another), and it managed to incorporate 4e's martial exploits into a new ruleset, without them feeling too similar to spells (thus avoiding the "all classes play the same" criticism 4e suffered).

They're not an aspect of the Fighter, though, they're just an aspect of the Battle Master, and they're not an aspect of any other martial subclass.

And now that we have it, I think a fighter subclass that wants to use SD needs to figure out how it is NOT a Battle Master.

I'm not sure these do it. Their SD options are essentially maneuvers. Shades of "all SD classes play the same."

There's ways to do it. Like, spellcasting is fairly ubiquitous, but wizard spellcasting and sorcerer spellcasting manage to be distinct. You could do similar things with SD (maybe Scouts recover SD when they move, 3e-style. Maybe Cavaliers recover SD when they charge! Mearl's Iron Heroes and 3e's Book of Nine Swords aren't bad places to loot for these mechanics!).

If there is one thing that seems a bit off in 5e, it is the Fighter subclasses. They are more containers for mechanics than a concept.

Yeah, I think it's related to the problem of "Concrete Meaning" (as discussed at length in http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...ses-Have-Concrete-Meaning-In-Your-Game/page65). Fighters and their subclasses have little "Concrete Meaning," in contrast to many 5e classes. To a certain degree, I'm sure this was intentional - people expect the fighter to be a flexible class, to represent many different character types, and the 5e fighter delivers on that, at the expense of being "generic."

I like the idea of subclasses with more concrete meaning, I just don't want them to be BM knock-offs.

 

[jodyjohnson]

Mounted Mastery. As a cavalier, your mount becomes an elite fighting machine. You can use your bonus action to give allow your mount to take the Help, Disengage, Dodge, or Attack action."

Just to take an opportunity to state the default Mount action list:

It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage, and Dodge.

A class ability to grant Help and Attack would be powered based on the Mount's attack or the rider's attack. A warhorse hits like a Greatsword. The best utility for the Advantaged attack is probably a Greatsword as well. Bonus action for a mount attack would be very good for a bonus action (instead of say the butt attack of PAM or potential bonus attack of GWM).

The effect would be shifted as the Rider's attack bonus increases and the Mount's static bonus lessens in comparison.

However 'Mounted Combatant' already covers the Help option with frequently on advantage from being mounted.

In addition Help would have to change the wording since a Lance attack works best at reach and the Mount wouldn't be able to grant Help without being adjacent by default.

 

[Li Shenron]

That's part of why the Scout and the Cavalier are having problems here I think! Everyone else who uses the BM manuevers is saying, in some way, "your BM CAN'T be this." Expanding the BM manuever suite is saying instead "BMs are a flexible subclass that lots of different characters can be."

I liked the article and its ideas, particularly because finally we had some bards subclasses also!

About your take on BM and non-BM superiority dice... I don't have a strong opinion yet, but my first feeling was exactly that they don't want all these SD abilities to be Maneuvers, and it might be best.

Not that it would be wrong to have them as Maneuvers. But if you start having Maneuvers that got nothing to do with combat, why still calling it a BATTLEmaster?

It might be better to have any new ability that uses SD be officially a Maneuver, and as such be available to BM and via Martial Adept, ONLY if it'martial.

Then it makes sense to have other subclasses with access to special, non-martial uses of SD.

 

[Remathilis]

The idea of "let us know what kits you want converted" got me intrigued...

I pulled up a list of 2e kits here. I ignored the world-specific ones and only focused on the PHBR and DMGR ones. Let's take a quick look.

First, A LOT of them exist as either backgrounds or have been handled by other subclasses. Secondly, the racial ones were often redundant with the class ones as far as flavor goes, and there were a lot of repeats save only for class (peasant fighter, peasant priest, peasant druid...). So what is left?

Complete Fighter's Handbook: There might be design room for Gladiator (I know its an alt background already) and samurai, and that's it. Everything else is covered by the Barbarian class or by the Noble/Folk Hero/Soldier/Outlander backgrounds.

Complete Priest's Handbook: Pacifist Priest and Prophet Priest are the only uniques in the bunch; as backgrounds soak up 90% of them and the Monk class exists to totally outshine the figthting monk. Perhaps a Monkish/Shugenja Domain might have room.

Complete Wizard's Handbook: Witch is pretty much redundant with the Warlock flavor-wise, but there might be some design space for a traditional "potions, hexes, and charms" witch. Besides that, Wu Jen for an elementalist/alternative caster is pretty solid.

Complete Thief's Handbook: None? Swashbuckler and Assassin are the only real "alternative" thieves, and they're done. Everything else is a background (Charlatan, Pirate, Spy) or barely worth a background (cutpurse and fence).

Complete Bard's Handbook: I'd love to see Gypsy-Bard for my Ravenloft game, but I can wager its probably a no-go (or a background as best). Everything else seems to be doable already.

Complete Paladin's Handbook: Inquisitor, Ghosthunter, and Skyrider all have some potential.

Complete Ranger's Handbook: Feralan was fun for a "raised by wolves" ranger, and Greenwood Ranger's "power of trees" might be cool. Oh, and a REAL Beastmaster would be nice. ;-)

Complete Druid's Handbook: Again, 90% of these are backgrounds. Hivemaster (Bug-based) and Lost Druid (a fallen druid who wages war on civilization) would both be cool and doable.

Complete Book of Dwarves: None again. Almost everything here is a background or covered by another subclass.

Complete Book of Gnomes & Halflings: See Dwarves.

Complete Book of Elves: With Bladesinger done (and done well) the rest of the kits are fairly redundant. Maybe Undead Slayer or Archer (as if archery needs more power).

Complete Book of Humanoids: Inferior versions of regular class kits. Shaman is the only concept I want out this book, and not in any fashion CBoH handled it. The races, on the other hand, they can convert those!

Complete Ninja's Handbook: There is nothing here that isn't being done by the Rogue or Monk classes currently.

Complete Barbarian's Handbook: Wizard Slayer might be a fun guy to convert.

Complete Necromancer's Handbook: A subclass for a subclass? Nothing seems interesting, perhaps Anatomist as a Doctor/Surgeon Background...

So ignoring the four they already did, perhaps we have a few worth doing. If it were up to me: Path of the Wizard Slayer, Pacifist Domain, Circle of the Lost, Oath of the Inquisitor, Oath of the Ghosthunter, Greenwood Archetype, and the Witch Tradition are perhaps the best bets, with Samurai, Wu jen, and Fighting-Monk/Shugenja or some Kara-Tur book later.

 

[Li Shenron]

With relation to the Cavalier and Scout specifically, the FIRST ability of each is not combat-related, although it can be used in combat if needed. So it sounds better to me they are unique to these subclasses. All the others however would be better as official Maneuvers.

In addition, I would probably prefer that the additional Maneuvers were not fixed but chosen from a list, especially the scout.

 

[Scribe]

Ah my old friend, the Berzerker.

 

[Tony Vargas]

So I don't get it. These aren't kits. They are subclasses. Am I wrong?

They are sub-classes, yes. It seems to me that most kits, at least, most earlier ones, were much more like 5e Backgrounds than 5e sub-classes. But, there were a few that were more like 4e Themes or PF archetypes or even 3.5 PrCs - changing the nature of the class and with abilities that grew with you as you leveled. There were definitely some kits that were a lot more like backgrounds and had little business being linked specifically to a class.

Even though kits were class (or, later, race) specific, I think most of 'em would do better as Backgrounds. The level of impact and feel of backgrounds is just closer. Amazon, for instance, was a fighter Kit in 2e. It doesn't make a lot of sense that an Amazon couldn't be a Champion or a Battlemaster - or something other than a fighter. As a Background it just works better. Besides, it is a background, literally (though, yeah, the same could be said of 'barbarian').

Even if they are under the rubric of 'Kits,' though, Cavalier was a class 1e UA and Scout a class in 3.5, so they're hardly out of place as sub-classes.

My biggest takeaway from this is that there are ways to have Superiority Dice without Maneuvers. I like that shift for other custom subclasses.

It's an interesting design choice. Rather than give sub-classes SD, and expand the list of Maneuvers (and leverage the existing list), each thing each sub-class can do with SD is walled off in that sub-class.