Unearthed Arcana Poll: How will the US Class Feature Variants be brought to Market?

[Charlaquin]

If I could, I would vote for a combination of options 4 and 5. Their publishing model for 5e seems to be to bundle a bunch of player, DM, and fluff content together in a book built around a common theme. Even Xanathar’s, the closest thing we’ve gotten to a “player’s guide” this edition followed the model, it just has a flimsier theme than Volo’s or Mordenkainen’s. My money is on another one of this style of book, with the unifying theme being interplanar travel, that will serve as a low-key Planescape setting guide. “Elminster’s Guide to the Planes” or something like that.

 

[Parmandur]

If I could, I would vote for a combination of options 4 and 5. Their publishing model for 5e seems to be to bundle a bunch of player, DM, and fluff content together in a book built around a common theme. Even Xanathar’s, the closest thing we’ve gotten to a “player’s guide” this edition followed the model, it just has a flimsier theme than Volo’s or Mordenkainen’s. My money is on another one of this style of book, with the unifying theme being interplanar travel, that will serve as a low-key Planescape setting guide. “Elminster’s Guide to the Planes” or something like that.

Well, both GGtR and RftLW already are kind of XGtE like in style and substance.

 

[Parmandur]

Perhaps, you can clarify, but I have never really read into Planescape, I was not playing D&D at the time and I have always had a dislike for the D&D alignment system. Also a strong dislike for the Great Wheel planar topology.
It is my belief that Planescape is very tied in to both. I know that it is fairly popular here but I much prefer the looser 4e planar landscape.
So my question is, must Planescape have the alignment system and the Great Wheel or could it be presented without them, one, the other or both?

Well, the Alignment & Great Wheel cosmology are built into Plaescape, but they are also assumed in 5E. The universe as presented in the PHB & DMG is Planescape. Any book exploring that further, ala Manual of the Planes, will also be Planescape.

 

[OB1]

Dan Dillon is talking about these variants in Twitter,and he is talking about then being printed in a hardcover, explicitly. These are meant for a book of some sort, not a PDF only.

Yes, they will be available in subsequent prints of the PHB and via PDF for those who have an older version

 

[Parmandur]

Yes, they will be available in subsequent prints of the PHB and via PDF for those who have an older version

Extremely doubtful, since they have remained committed to not making any change whatsoever to the PHB, this is quite certainly intended for a new book. Here is what he said, at any rate.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

No vote option for "As a 6th edition"?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The only Manual of the Planes equivalent I would ever expect to see for 5E is a Planescape Setting book, now that they've cracked the code for making Setting books properly.

Maybe, but I don't think we will ever see Planescape or Spelljammer as a book specifically for themselves. A book that incorporates them but is about the multiverse in general, though, I could see.

 

[Parmandur]

Maybe, but I don't think we will ever see Planescape or Spelljammer as a book specifically for themselves. A book that incorporates them but is about the multiverse in general, though, I could see.

Well, we do have a fairly detailed overview of the multiverse in the Core books to start with, and heavy deep dives are well suited to Adventure products like Descent to Avernus. A new book containing a multiverse Gazeeter, however, inevitably with Sigil in the center as Sharn is in RftLW based on what we have already outlined in the DMG, seems like any play options and monsters would be...Planescape options, basically by default.

 

[Sunsword]

At least until a 5.5E, if there ever is one.

That is what has me worried, the enhancements scream of 5.5, IMO. This is not a knock, but we've had such an influx of players in the last few years and it could be very confusing, like trying to decide between BECMI and AD&D when I was a kid.

 

[Parmandur]

That is what has me worried, the enhancements scream of 5.5, IMO. This is not a knock, but we've had such an influx of players in the last few years and it could be very confusing, like trying to decide between BECMI and AD&D when I was a kid.

a few pages of character variant options doesn't suggest a 5.5 or a 6E, to my mind.

 

[Sunsword]

a few pages of character variant options doesn't suggest a 5.5 or a 6E, to my mind.

Respectfully, I disagree. I don't see the need for the enhancements otherwise.

 

[Parmandur]

Respectfully, I disagree. I don't see the need for the enhancements otherwise.

To sell another book of options, as with XGtE or any of the Setting books, simple enough. These are fully compatible with 5E as-is, being an exceptions based system, and doesn't entail a re-writing the way a .5 edition would be. Whats more, 3.5 was apparently a bit of a disaster marketing wise, so WotC has discounted that as a future possibility.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Respectfully, I disagree. I don't see the need for the enhancements otherwise.

If you read the reactions to the UA in that post, people seem pretty happy with the additions. They're inclusion also doesn't turn 5E into "5.5E." I'm not even sure what that means; that one UA doc doth not a new edition make.

To me, it's one of three things;

1. Re-released PHB, that incorporates these changes into a re-printing. I really doubt it is this because it will make people confused and talk about "Is this 5.5?" but it is also not unprecedented in game systems. Hey, Tyranny of Dragons just happened too.

2. It's a new Xanathar's Guide. This is the likeliest to me, because although what we've seen so far only points to 35 pages (not including art), this is what we've gotten so far. There can be more material that they're confident it, or even more UAs down the line.
And more than half of Xanathar's was tools for the DM, not the players.

3. It's a setting book. This is possible, but this material is a lot more generic and pointed to any game as opposed to a specific setting's game. And I think the main point of a setting book is, well the setting and not the player options (unless the player options are specifically tailored to the setting, which these aren't really).

So I'm thinking this is a Xanathar's, though it will obviously be called something else. I could very easily see it called something like Chandra's Planeswalker's Playbook (or some other person or whatever), integrating more generic rules on how to be a planeswalker and play in Magic the Gathering settings more generally. Maybe provide fluff for how the MtG planes fit within D&D's cosmology. Not really a setting book, not entirely a player's book either (you know, like Xanathar's).

 

[Parmandur]

If you read the reactions to the UA in that post, people seem pretty happy with the additions. They're inclusion also doesn't turn 5E into "5.5E." I'm not even sure what that means; that one UA doc doth not a new edition make.

To me, it's one of three things;

1. Re-released PHB, that incorporates these changes into a re-printing. I really doubt it is this because it will make people confused and talk about "Is this 5.5?" but it is also not unprecedented in game systems. Hey, Tyranny of Dragons just happened too.

2. It's a new Xanathar's Guide. This is the likeliest to me, because although what we've seen so far only points to 35 pages (not including art), this is what we've gotten so far. There can be more material that they're confident it, or even more UAs down the line.
And more than half of Xanathar's was tools for the DM, not the players.

3. It's a setting book. This is possible, but this material is a lot more generic and pointed to any game as opposed to a specific setting's game. And I think the main point of a setting book is, well the setting and not the player options (unless the player options are specifically tailored to the setting, which these aren't really).

So I'm thinking this is a Xanathar's, though it will obviously be called something else. I could very easily see it called something like Chandra's Planeswalker's Playbook (or some other person or whatever), integrating more generic rules on how to be a planeswalker and play in Magic the Gathering settings more generally. Maybe provide fluff for how the MtG planes fit within D&D's cosmology. Not really a setting book, not entirely a player's book either (you know, like Xanathar's).

That's a pretty good rundown. We really don't have enough information to make solid guesses about what they are up to, but 2 and 3 are the live possibilities. Though, the new style of setting guides are not that different from XGtE anyways.

 

[Salthorae]

I'd love to see this as a combination Setting (planescape or spelljammer please!) + XGE style book.

Less than 1% chance this becomes a re-published PHB or 5.5 style book.

 

[OB1]

If you read the reactions to the UA in that post, people seem pretty happy with the additions. They're inclusion also doesn't turn 5E into "5.5E." I'm not even sure what that means; that one UA doc doth not a new edition make.

To me, it's one of three things;

1. Re-released PHB, that incorporates these changes into a re-printing. I really doubt it is this because it will make people confused and talk about "Is this 5.5?" but it is also not unprecedented in game systems. Hey, Tyranny of Dragons just happened too.

2. It's a new Xanathar's Guide. This is the likeliest to me, because although what we've seen so far only points to 35 pages (not including art), this is what we've gotten so far. There can be more material that they're confident it, or even more UAs down the line.
And more than half of Xanathar's was tools for the DM, not the players.

3. It's a setting book. This is possible, but this material is a lot more generic and pointed to any game as opposed to a specific setting's game. And I think the main point of a setting book is, well the setting and not the player options (unless the player options are specifically tailored to the setting, which these aren't really).

So I'm thinking this is a Xanathar's, though it will obviously be called something else. I could very easily see it called something like Chandra's Planeswalker's Playbook (or some other person or whatever), integrating more generic rules on how to be a planeswalker and play in Magic the Gathering settings more generally. Maybe provide fluff for how the MtG planes fit within D&D's cosmology. Not really a setting book, not entirely a player's book either (you know, like Xanathar's).

1. I'm not sure this would cause that much confusion, and would ultimately amount to a 5.1 version that is auto distributed to several million users via DDB in the same way this line was added to the DDB and newer PHBs for the Ranger Beast Master"You can use your action to verbally command it to take the Attack, Dash, Disengage, or Help action. If you don't issue a command, the beast takes the Dodge action." That change may have been a test to see if those types of changes would cause confusion. Perhaps these will push the idea of live updating the game one step further. I believe that is the endgame with this edition, to change incrementally over the years while staying fully compatible with OG5e, which these rules do.

2. I think this would be the second best choice, especially combined with the other recent sub-class UAs, but why not also print the PC options in new PHBs? I didn't list that as a choice in the poll, but maybe should have. Love the idea that the next book could be Chadra's Planeswalker's, and agree that this would be a good way to introduce these alternate rules.

3. I think this is the least likely unless Chadra's is also a setting guide which could make a lot of sense. Half Players book, half DMs book.

 

[Parmandur]

1. I'm not sure this would cause that much confusion, and would ultimately amount to a 5.1 version that is auto distributed to several million users via DDB in the same way this line was added to the DDB and newer PHBs for the Ranger Beast Master"You can use your action to verbally command it to take the Attack, Dash, Disengage, or Help action. If you don't issue a command, the beast takes the Dodge action." That change may have been a test to see if those types of changes would cause confusion. Perhaps these will push the idea of live updating the game one step further. I believe that is the endgame with this edition, to change incrementally over the years while staying fully compatible with OG5e, which these rules do.

2. I think this would be the second best choice, especially combined with the other recent sub-class UAs, but why not also print the PC options in new PHBs? I didn't list that as a choice in the poll, but maybe should have. Love the idea that the next book could be Chadra's Planeswalker's, and agree that this would be a good way to introduce these alternate rules.

3. I think this is the least likely unless Chadra's is also a setting guide which could make a lot of sense. Half Players book, half DMs book.

Errata is one thing, but this is not errata. These are new options.

The main reason not to print the new options in the PHB is that it would increase the page count considerably (because they would need to add more than 13 pages to get 13 pages in), and make all the bazillions of PHBs they already released worthless: not going to happen, same reason all new PHBs still have the awful index.

Whether a new book is a Setting guide in the style of Ravnica or a new Xanathar's, mixing PC and DM options is inevitable. that's what 5E books do.

 

[Azzy]

The main reason not to print the new options in the PHB is that it would increase the page count considerably (because they would need to add more than 13 pages to get 13 pages in), and make all the bazillions of PHBs they already released worthless: not going to happen, same reason all new PHBs still have the awful index.

13 pages or a UA pdf may be more or less when added to an actual book (there's font sizes and other formatting involved), so it gets even more complex than just errata. Regardless that's still more pages—and all of this wouldn't be stck at the end of the book, class features would got to the appropriate class section. Which mean text overflow and necessitates redoing the layout for the entire book (which is alot of work).

No, this ins't going into a revised PHB, this is definitely a Xanathar's-like supplement.

 

[Parmandur]

13 pages or a UA pdf may be more or less when added to an actual book (there's font sizes and other formatting involved), so it gets even more complex than just errata. Regardless that's still more pages—and all of this wouldn't be stck at the end of the book, class features would got to the appropriate class section. Which mean text overflow and necessitates redoing the layout for the entire book (which is alot of work).

No, this ins't going into a revised PHB, this is definitely a Xanathar's-like supplement.

Some sort of supplement, definitely.

 

[OB1]

The main reason not to print the new options in the PHB is that it would increase the page count considerably (because they would need to add more than 13 pages to get 13 pages in), and make all the bazillions of PHBs they already released worthless: not going to happen, same reason all new PHBs still have the awful index.

You'd likely need to increase the page count either 16 or 32 pages, which, once you add in the Artificer and the Psion classes, would fit quite nicely

What I really don't get is how it makes and current PHB worthless. They didn't change any rules, they added additional ones to it. Adding this to new printing of PHB no more makes the old ones worthless than putting the rules into another supplement does. But it does mean that every new player gets these choices at their entry point to the game, and gets around PHB+1 issues for AL.