Unearthed Arcana Revived, Noble Genie and Archivist Revisited in UA

The latest Unearthed Arcana replaces the Revived, Noble Genie, and Archivist subclasses with new versions called the Phantom, the Genie, and the Order of Scribes.

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

 

[Olrox17]

This is why we get to give feedback on UA stuff. I don't think there's anything wrong with the idea, it just maybe needs a little tidy around the edges.

Tbh, I still think this kind of "creative" spellcasting fits the sorcerer concept much more than the wizard's.

 

[Aldarc]

Phantom: Needs some way to be "ghosty" before high levels.

Misty Step?

 

[Marandahir]

I declare, every time they publish a UA, it has a different filename standard. How am I supposed to keep them in order? @WotC !!!* #uafilebroke......

I know, right? I hate that they can't just choose a coding system. Of course, if they did, it would be easier to guess the URL, and then you get fiascos like that Valentine's surprise…

I took to renaming each UA file as it's published, using an EN5ider style of just numbering them by release. I also put the year and the month. So my UA file folder looks like this:

UA 01 (2015 02) – Eberron Update v1.1
UA 02 (2015 03) – When Armies Clash
…
UA 33 (2017 03) – Psionics & The Mystic, Take 3
…
UA 66 (2019 11) – Variant Class Features
UA 67 (2019 11) – Psionics (Fighter, Rogue, Wizard)
UA 68 (2020 01) – Subclasses, P1 (Barb., Monk, Paladin, Warlock)
UA 69 (2020 02) – Subclasses, P2 (Bard, Cleric, Sorcerer)
UA 70 (2020 02) – Subclasses, P3 (Artificer, Druid, Ranger)
UA 71 (2020 03) – New Spells & Tatoo Magic
UA 72 (2020 04) – Psionics, Revisted (Fighter, Rogue, Sorcerer)
UA 73 (2020 05) – Subclasses, Revisited (Rogue, Warlock, Wizard)

I'm not going to write out the rest for love of time and digital ink space, but you get the idea.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Wizards needs to keep track of themed subclasses that people really like but have not received overwhelming support. And also release those.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I remember someone did an analysis of this in the past year or so. Fire resistance was the most common; however, it is still really rare. I don't think it is such a big issue.

It's not how common those creatures occur in the monster manual that matters, it how commonly those creatures are encountered by players.

And that depends on what sort of game you play. If you play against a lot of humanoid enemies, then damage type tends not to matter.

As it happens, humanoid opponents tend to be rare in my games.

Common: slimes (immune acid, sometimes lightning), undead (immune necrotic at least), elementals (immune to their element), flesh golems (immune lightning), shadows, zombies (vulnerable radiant).

Unheard of: PC clerics.

 

[Caitsith21]

I'm not that worried about this feature being too powerful. I'm worried about the hilariously unintended consequences of just swapping elements willy-nilly.
Things like:

• psychic lightning bolt and frost fireball that ignite flammable objects (how?)
• radiant fingers of death that turn people into zombies (I know, it's magic, it can do whatever, but the thematic dissonance is strong here)
• necrotic flaming sphere that ignites stuff (again, how?), and also sheds bright light!
• lightning ice storm that somehow creates difficult terrain (why?)
• poison fire shield that grants resistance to fire. Or cold. For some reason. Oh it also sheds light
• fire cone of cold that turns killed targets into frozen statues (huh?)

Also, I'm pretty sure that savvy players would use this (at will) feature to just turn everything into force or radiant damage. Efficient, and quite boring.

I dont know there is an awesome game on steam called Mages of mystralia. The joke is you find runes and then build your spells. Take fireball and swapp ice runfor fire run->iceball. And i imagine magic to be exactly like this, like a programming language. But sadly as magic is nit real i guess there are countless interpretation was it is.
And for example if you take all the fire away to somewher then the places where you have taken away will freeze for example. I am sure with enough creativity you could explain all the effects you mentiod, but I agree to lessen the guessing what could the enemy be resistent there will be a lot of force attack. How does a wizard get raidant damage? On my head i only remember cleric spells with that damage type? Or how does the crystall ball spell the name i just forgot work. Doesnt this let you choose the damge type as well?
nevertheless if you have never heard of it the game i really enjoyed it. One if the only solo games i finished probably in the last 5 years or so.

 

[dave2008]

As it happens, humanoid opponents tend to be rare in my games.

And they are by far the most common in my games. The only thing I can remember have resistances in our current campaign (lvl 15 now) are a dragon, some undead, and some demons. Probably about 2% of the foes the PCs have faced (if that). But I could be misremembering, it as been 5+ years of adventures.

 

[Kurotowa]

I think the's talking about stuff like Undead Fortitude, which Radiant damage just ignores, which might be helpful against a horde of zombies.

The two that come to mind right away are that and a vampire's Regeneration, which also turns off after taking Radiant damage. I'd have to do a book dive to see if those sort of "undead weakness to Radiant damage that isn't Vulnerability" traits are common or if they only feel common because zombies and vampires are really popular monsters to use.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

The two that come to mind right away are that and a vampire's Regeneration, which also turns off after taking Radiant damage. I'd have to do a book dive to see if those sort of "undead weakness to Radiant damage that isn't Vulnerability" traits are common or if they only feel common because zombies and vampires are really popular monsters to use.

Well if they are monsters that people like to use, doesn't that make the features common, regardless of how much that actually appears in statblocks?

 

[Fenris-77]

Well if they are monsters that people like to use, doesn't that make the features common, regardless of how much that actually appears in statblocks?

That would seem reasonable, yeah. This is one of the flaws in analyzing the MM entries as a whole to rate resistances and the like - it doesn't always reflect what makes the table.