Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Spirits Bard and Undeath Warlock

We have a new UA release with two subclasses. The College of Spirits Bard is a fortune teller or spirit medium type character with a big random effect table. Meanwhile the Undeath Pact Warlock is a a do-over of the Undying Pact Warlock.

 

[Kurotowa]

UA isn't balanced for multiclassing, but it changes because of it. It seems like they should try to balance UA subclasses for multiclassing so they don't have to redo a ton after making something that would be abused with multiclassing and have to change it because of that abusable aspect in the subclass.

From all indications, D&D follows a similar class design process to what I've seen in video games. Start by trying to nail the big conceptual pillars. Better for initial drafts to be too strong and need tuning down than to start too weak and have to find ways to buff them. Boring is worse than imbalanced; most of the time you can fix balance with numbers tweaks, while boring indicates flaws that go to the very root.

That's why I'm excited by the Undead Patron Warlock. Even if some of the numbers have to be tuned down, the basic framework of "powerful undead patron" and "Rage-like temporary transformation buff" have me statting up rough character concepts already.

 

[Undrave]

Hey! Anyone remember how the War Mage is basically a mix of the Evocation and Abjuration schools of magic for wizards? If they moved the Spirits bard subclass to the Wizard, it could be a Necromancy/Divination based subclass, so we could actually have another subclasss that takes two schools of magic and merges them into one.

Anyone else like this idea? I personally wish they made more subclasses like this, that merge two schools of magic (Hypnotism from Illusion and Enchantment, Shadowfell from Illusion and Necromancy, Limbo-Mages from Conjuration and Transmutation, Fleshwarpers from Necromancy and Transmutation, etc).

Would work better if the schools weren't attributed on a weird mix of in-universe and meta criteria...

 

[Paul Farquhar]

"Making fun of white people is racism too."

If it's a white person doing it I don't think it is.

However, my intent was simply to use the D&D rules to illustrate a point that, whilst it seems obvious to most, seems to be difficult to understand for a small number of people.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

If it's a white person doing it I don't think it is.

However, my intent was simply to use the D&D rules to illustrate a point that, whilst it seems obvious to most, seems to be difficult to understand for a small number of people.

Just in case I completely misread you, can you clarify? In PM if you think it veers to much into politics or whatever. Like, you aren’t actually saying unironically that devotion Paladins should be obligated to protect the strong, because that’s what is “fair”, right?

Like, if two people are given apple slices to eat, and one gets a whole apple, and the other gets two small slices, we agree that fairness doesn’t demand giving both the same number of additional apple slices? It’s okay to just give the person with two slices some extra?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

At this point, it seems unlikely we'll see the new Race regime before the final book. This leaves me worried that either it might not be enough of a radical change, or insufficiently received by the community, though I guess we'll see...

The race changes are not being made because they are popular. They are being made because WotC think they are right.

So any popularity feedback would be irrelevant - the changes are happening.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Just in case I completely misread you, can you clarify? In PM if you think it veers to much into politics or whatever. Like, you aren’t actually saying unironically that devotion Paladins should be obligated to protect the strong, because that’s what is “fair”, right?

Like, if two people are given apple slices to eat, and one gets a whole apple, and the other gets two small slices, we agree that fairness doesn’t demand giving both the same number of additional apple slices? It’s okay to just give the person with two slices some extra?

My intention was ironic.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The problem, is that balance for multiclassing is being used as a reason not to like something, which leads to too many great concepts being thrown in the trash because the ridiculously high percentage WotC requires for consensus can't be met. It is one of the reasons we literally can't have nice things. Psionics stands out as an obvious example. I don't see any scenario where enough people are going to like what they put out for it to actually get published.

Absolutely. It looks like WotC are having trouble finding enough stuff to fill their new book because of an arbitrarily high criterion. Hence the barrel scraping.

 

[delph]

Maybe too late - but I hadn't time to read and here is 17 pages...
But still - Undead warlock is OP after 6. level. When I take common minmax combo halfelf with eleven accuracy feat on 4. lvl and agonazing blast. I'll get EB + hex 4d10 + 2d6 + 8 with cantrip every one round for 3 battles per longrest for every creature (without resistance or immunity to necrotic) . Hexblade can match him only for one fight with one enemy... Take than 5 of sorcerer and it wil be 12d10 + 6d6 + 30 dmg = 117 DPR (from second round) before hitchance reduction. Take Shadow sorcerer and with next 2 spellpoints you'll get 3 dice advantage..

 

[MarkB]

I’m super confused by you responding to it this way so it must have been a little subtle.

It's basically "All Lives Matter" dressed up in D&D clothing.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It's basically "All Lives Matter" dressed up in D&D clothing.

Wrong, that was not my intent. @doctorbadwolf has interpreted my meaning correctly. It was a rhetorical question - the answer should be self evident - the strong are capable of protecting themselves without the assistance of the paladin.