Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana is Here - and it's all about EBERRON!

Pretty awesome that this series has started

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/unearthed-arcana-eberron

Will Greyhawk or Dragonlance be next??

Probably Dragonlance. Does Greyhawk have any particular crunchy player bits that aren't covered by the PHB already?

 

[Sir Brennen]

I'm pretty underwhelmed.
I mean, that is it for a month? Really?

I don't mean to complain about free content. But, I'll happily pay for more.

That's it for a month for this column. There's every likelihood that the website will be back to having other columns and features besides Unearthed Arcana updated on a monthly or weekly basis.

 

[steeldragons]

Artificer's Lore and Tinker (which grants prof with artisan [tinkers] tools) from the Rock sub-race Gnome's traits seem like they should be a no brainer addition to the class. Like, take those, and the tradition offered...and I think you're mostly there. Throw in light armor...and shields, I guess. Or just get the armor via feats if you use them...and Martial Adept for more "fightery" artificer's.

Almost sounds like they might be better served as a Sorcerer Origin, but then my understanding is that they are something that can be studied/taught and learned. Not really an "innate magic" thing.

As for "Plate Warforged" then, yes they should be a sub-race if you are going to insist they should exist. Seems to me, if you want them having plate, you pay for plate like everyone else...and then just fluff it that it is "built on" instead of worn. Insisting you should be able to get a plate armored warforge PC at level 1 (by having a separate sub-race) seems like a PGing grab to me. But, I am not well-versed in Eberron's history, flavor expectations, etc...

 

[Paraxis]

I'm curious as to what Keith Baker thinks about this--if he can/will share his thoughts. It might not be politic or in his best interests to comment, however.

Well he did a 5e version of the Artificer here http://keith-baker.com/extra-life-hacking-the-artificer/

I like it much better than the WoTC one. Basing it on Cleric makes the mechanics fit better I think.

 

[Sir Brennen]

I've never played an artificer, but had one as a fellow PC in a game. Seems to me that with the combat and trap-finding aspects, a new Bard college for them might have made a better option.

 

[steeldragons]

I've never played an artificer, but had one as a fellow PC in a game. Seems to me that with the combat and trap-finding aspects, a new Bard college for them might have made a better option.

Oh yes! Perfect. The learning spell slots. The lore. The skills/tools training.

Good call!

 

[Wrathamon]

Couple of free spells at 1st level? Then why wouldn't everyone take a dragonmark, even if they don't ever take the feat?

I am confused ... I never said they would get any free spells? what?

backstory: they have a dragonmark (it doesnt do anything) ... level 4 (i take the feat) now it does.

 

[Wrathamon]

Oh yes! Perfect. The learning spell slots. The lore. The skills/tools training.

Good call!

In that Eberron thread, I think most of us felt if they were going to just make a sub-class, bard was a better fit than wizard. Lore and Mechanics match up better.

warlock and cleric have lore issues that dont work.

Wizard and Bard are better starting points if you dont just make a new class.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I really like what I'm seeing here.

(1) I love that the rules are called out as draft. They encourage you to playtest and tweak. I want to see more of this approach in the future.
(2) I a not a big eberron fan, but I will definitely be using some of this for my dragon age(ish) world: Warforged, Artificers and Dragonmarks. Very awesome indeed!

This column is a definite win for me. Keep it up devs! I hope to see Kender next!

 

[Capital_Q]

I've noticed that Greyhawk has actually come in first in the "Which Non-Realmsian Setting Would You Like Next?" poll, and I'm curious if anyone can explain to me what Greyhawk offers that other campaign settings don't. (For example, Dark Sun, Eberron, and Spelljammer are wildly different enough from Forgotten Realms that I absolutely understand why someone would want to see those sooner rather than later.)

I've been playing since the early days of 1st edition and my guess is that the desie for a 5E Greyhawk is misplaced nostalgia. There is nothing in Greyhawk that sets it apart from a thousand other vanilla pseudo-euro-medieval campaign settings out there.

WotC should develop one baseline setting (Forgotten Realms) and not divide thier time between two settings that offer the same baseline experience.

That being said, I think they should contract development to outside studios to develop their other settings whether through print or electronic-only medium.

 

[Inchoroi]

I like everything save the artificer; I found one that my entire group loves and is balanced, so we'll continue using that one. I do like how it works, but prefer mine as it is more fun. Love everything else in the article, though.