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.

 

[Guest 6801328]

You're right. I would have much preferred they released this UA without the tiefling subraces at all.

Because it's too much trouble to read something you won't use? I will assume that's because you are a busy professional, and not that you are lazy.

 

[Dausuul]

Sometimes it's not a question of how simple (or even "lazy," if you like) an idea is, but simply coming up with it.

Sure, anyone can swap out the spell options and the stat bonuses to create different tieflings connected to different devils. But did anyone? Everyone saying "I could have done this," sure you could have, but had you actually thought to do it prior to this?

The general principle of "you can tweak things by swapping out spells for other spells of the same level" is well-established. No, I had not had occasion to apply that principle to tieflings' Infernal Legacy. But I've done it with other racial spell abilities, class abilities, etc. And previous editions have done it with tieflings. In fact, the very first iteration of tieflings ever--Planescape in 2E--designed them with a "mix-and-match" approach that included an array of innate spell abilities.

Spell swapping to create new concepts was indeed an idea of brilliant simplicity... when it was first thought up. That was decades ago. It's not brilliant to say "And we can use a hammer on this nail, too! Did you ever actually use a hammer on this particular nail? No, you did not."

Sometimes, you float something easy, simple, even lazy, just to see if there's interest, and if so, how much. You spend an hour whipping up something serviceable, but no more, to see if it's worth spending longer at it.

Well, if they're looking for feedback on this particular approach to tiefling subraces, the message from this forum seems clear: No, it is not worth spending longer on this. Try something else.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

Well, if they're looking for feedback on this particular approach to tiefling subraces, the message from this forum seems clear: No, it is not worth spending longer on this. Try something else.

I certainly hope that's the message they receive. Although based on how some people are responding, God forbid anyone have a critique against the great and powerful WotC. They should clearly not be judged on their level of creativity and innovation, but rather we should be thankful they put something out for free. And while some here are happy to engage in thoughtful discussion regarding our reasoning for our critique and the standard we hold WotC to, others seem to prefer to troll and attack the words we use rather than the reasons behind our use of words. So who knows.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I certainly hope that's the message they receive. Although based on how some people are responding, God forbid anyone have a critique against the great and powerful WotC. They should clearly not be judged on their level of creativity and innovation, but rather we should be thankful they put something out for free. And while some here are happy to engage in thoughtful discussion regarding our reasoning for our critique and the standard we hold WotC to, others seem to prefer to troll and attack the words we use rather than the reasons behind our use of words. So who knows.

I'm too lazy to do this, but it would be interesting to go through the thread and do an actual count of how many liked it and how many didn't. My gut feel is that you may be jumping to conclusions (again, confirmation bias on both of our parts, etc.)

And nowhere did I say your opinion about the usefulness/quality of the material was invalid (in fact I very clearly said the opposite) just that you presented your opinions with entirely unnecessary insinuations about the people who wrote it. I'll also point out that those designers are more likely to pay attention to your feedback if you don't insult them.

(Why I am trying to coach you on how to persuade them to do the opposite of what I want is a good question. And, anyway, this is a D&D forum not finishing school so I'll drop it.)

 

[Hawk Diesel]

And nowhere did I say your opinion about the usefulness/quality of the material was invalid (in fact I very clearly said the opposite) just that you presented your opinions with entirely unnecessary insinuations about the people who wrote it. I'll also point out that those designers are more likely to pay attention to your feedback if you don't insult them.

(Why I am trying to coach you on how to persuade them to do the opposite of what I want is a good question. And, anyway, this is a D&D forum not finishing school so I'll drop it.)

Hahaha! I really hope the designers are not reading these forums. This isn't the place to sway the designers (that's what the UA survey is for). This is the place to discuss our reactions and opinions. If I were directly speaking to the designers I would certainly adjust my message, just as I am not so harsh in my feedback to posters in the 5e homebrew threads (unless of course I have a personal rapport with that individual and that is our established way of communication). While my feelings and words regarding this particular UA may have been strong and harsh, I don't see anything I have said as inappropriate given the intent of this forum and this thread in particular.

 

[Morrus]

Hahaha! I really hope the designers are not reading these forums.

I think you’re safe.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Hahaha! I really hope the designers are not reading these forums. This isn't the place to sway the designers (that's what the UA survey is for). This is the place to discuss our reactions and opinions. If I were directly speaking to the designers I would certainly adjust my message, just as I am not so harsh in my feedback to posters in the 5e homebrew threads (unless of course I have a personal rapport with that individual and that is our established way of communication). While my feelings and words regarding this particular UA may have been strong and harsh, I don't see anything I have said as inappropriate given the intent of this forum and this thread in particular.

That's actually really interesting. Why would you use different language here versus in official UA feedback? Wouldn't you want to be your most persuasive in either case?

 

[Azzy]

Um, since you guys don't seem to be likely to convince each other of your points, can we stow that line of discussion in favor of actually discussing the UA article itself?

 

[Mephista]

Yes, lets talk.

So, Glyssa and Dispater seem to have a criminal organization versus spy thing going on. Considering that those seem to be very close to each other, should the writers give up one or the other? Try a different angle on them, such as the spy focus more on divinations than on sneaky magic?

What other of the Nine do you consider too close?

How do you feel about demons, consdering lots of them seem to be just blessing random individuals?

 

[Wrathamon]

I'll tell you something else, speaking as a designer.

Sometimes, you float something easy, simple, even lazy, just to see if there's interest, and if so, how much. You spend an hour whipping up something serviceable, but no more, to see if it's worth spending longer at it.

That's what playtests and public participation are often for. UA isn't just about, and was never promised to be about, wild and out-there stuff. This is the best way to determine--yes, better than just asking a question without context--if there's an interest in source-specific tiefling subraces.

THIS!!!

bunch of arm-chair QBs