Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana October 2017: Fiendish Options

So a bunch of fiendish subraces but only a point of ABS besides Charisma moved to other skills and some Legacy spells swaps, plus some cult spells and features.

It doesn't do much for my game.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Given that the tieflings are all connected to archdevils, it is probably a bit much to expect them to vary much. They aren't just evil, they are lawful evil, and conformity is a thing, you know.

Now if tieflings linked to demon lords show up, I would expect weirder racial abilities (maybe two heads and can turn your arm into a tentacle for demogorgon, etc.).

It would be interesting if they would do something similar with the aasimar, drawing on the Hebsdomad, Prince Talisid and his buddies, and the Court of Stars, but I think it will be a long time before any of them show up in 5e.

 

[the_redbeard]

What I thought was interesting was the huge variation in the different boons of the Demons and Devils. There's a lot of different kinds of mechanics and recharge rates. I think, besides the notion of customizing common enemies, that the point of the UA was to test how players and DMs felt about different mechanics.

I also agree that between the Gith UA and this one that they are testing the popularity of a planar version of Volos.

 

[Saeviomagy]

It feels like you could just have a planetouched race that was "darkvision, +2 to a stat, +1 to another stat, pick an elemental resistance, choose a cantrip at 1st, a 2nd level spell at 3rd and another one at 5th", rather than iterating out all the possibilities...

I quite like the idea of the cult stuff... but a lot of the advantages are not going to be detectable to players. "Watch out, these guys get +2 damage once per combat!" or "Oh no, he's got advantage and someone else has disadvantage!". That stuff is noticeable when players have access to it, but on NPCs it's going to fade into the background.

I would have liked to see more non-combat things. Previous editions, for instance, had Grazz't cultists under the misapprehension that they were followers of Jodai, a minor god of luck. If the cult benefits are all combat ones, that doesn't really scan.

All up? Like a lot of UAs, feels a bit phoned in.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I think some of the criticisms are valid in an abstract sense, but fall into the category (seen often in these parts) of expecting something from 5e that 5e ain't.

For example, it would be perfectly valid/functional to go a la carte: choose stats that get +1/+2, pick an energy resistance type, pick a cantrip, pick a spell, etc. But this same criticism/suggestion could be made about many aspects of 5e (classes, backgrounds, weapons...). A la carte is not really how 5e does things.

 

[Mistwell]

The Tiefling stuff didn't do much for me. Then I went back to the UA and read the non-Tiefling stuff, and it's excellent! In fact this might be the best concise descriptions of the followers/victims of each specific fiend I've read in a long time. I can see almost an entire corrupt city, with different factions influenced by different fiends, with differing goals. It was really well done, and I like the differences in benefits each cult follower, leader, and boon contains.

 

[MechaPilot]

50+ posts and no one has said it yet?

[SBLOCK=My Response to this UA]
Hail Satan!

[/SBLOCK]

 

[Hawk Diesel]

Yet another bunch of boring, lazy options. More races with spells instead of imaginative, creative or interesting differences. And yet more power creep. Dex + Cha + minor illusion/disguise self and invisibility, really? That's 10x better than just about any other option aside from winged.

I agree with you. I can sub in and out spells and cantrips like they did. That's lazy design and I expect a bit more from WotC. If tieflings have different subtypes, I'd like to see more change than a stat adjustment and a swapping of spells. Gimme something interesting. Different demons and devils are differentiated by more than just their magic. Some are big and brutish. Others are cunning and subtle. While still others are seductive and devious. Rather than give us new and interesting mechanics to differentiate them, they took the lazy way out and gave us new spell combos. -_-

 

[Duan'duliir]

I disliked the Tiefling 'subraces' presented in this article. They felt like a lazy "Oh we need some player options for this UA or the people will probably riot. Oh I know: Tieflings are a player thing!" attachment to an otherwise good UA article.

IMO, the Tiefling subrace format presented in the That Old Black Magic UA article should have been used. The simple swapping out of spells and +1 ability felt quite cheap and lazy. Certainly, at least Levistus should have given cold resistance rather than fire resistance.

 

[ScaleyBob]

Not a bad UA over all. The tiefling stuff is nice for players who want a bit of difference, although it doesn't quite fit with my ideas on Tieflings, which is based fairly heavily on 4Es Baal Turoth background.
The Fiendish Cults stuff I do like a lot though. Reminds of the old Monster Themes from 4E, with additional or alternate powers/abilities that could allow you to customise any monsters or NPCs quickly and easily. My only complaint about it is that it's all Devils and Demons, and nothing for those of us who like Yugoloths. (Daemons!, don't hold with all this yugoloth nonsense.)

 

[Guest 6801328]

I agree with you. I can sub in and out spells and cantrips like they did. That's lazy design and I expect a bit more from WotC.

Then you haven't been paying attention. UA isn't meant to do the work for home brewers, it's to test out new ideas that will eventually get baked into official rules for Adventurer's League.