Unearthed Arcana Waterborne Adventures: New from Unearthed Arcana

I, for one, am very pleased with the different options for existing classes over completely different classes.

I don't really have an balance thoughts. Balance isn't an issue with me unless it's incredibly flagrant.

 

[Fion]

[H][/H]

I really don't like the Panache ability. It's a mixture of the 4e taunt ability and a non-magical charm.

I dislike it as well, but not the taunt part. At least in 4e when you used the taunt system of 'marking', it was an option. Does the marked foe go after the fighter he may not be able to harm very well or take a penalty to try and disable the squishy wizard standing 15 feet away? On the other hand Panache is basically perma-taunt with no chance to break the effect, no limitation on usage that forces the target to stick to you that not only is the best 'taunt' ability in the game but the best Charm class ability in the game. I think an easy fix would be indeed, giving the charmed hostile target a second contested roll if it hits the Swashbuckler as well as adding limited usage, something like 'usable [charisma modifier] times per day, refreshed after a long rest'.

Other than the issues with Panache and poor wording of Toujours l'Audace - Sneak Attack with any melee attacks against foes without an adjacent ally - this Unearthed Arcana is very solid.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I don't think it needs to specify that. It's a power that modifies Sneak Attack. Therefore, all rules and limitations of SA still apply, except for those that are specifically called out. It would only need to specify if it did change the weapon requirements.

Perhaps: as I say, it's not what they intend (and not what I'd use at my table), but I'm willing to bet some people will see "you can use Sneak Attack with any melee attack against a target" as superseding the limits in the PHB.

Disagree. How often do PCs lose their weapons? It happens, but not all that much.

1d10 weapon for an attack is not very powerful. A similar weapon costs what, 10gp? And how exactly does one magick them? Not easily, that's for sure. It's a flavor item, that's all.

Barbarians and monks can have decent AC wearing shorts. Is that overpowered? I don't think so. 1d10 damage is like a longsword two-handed, or a halberd without reach. Hardly anything to write home about.

You've quoted me, but none of this responds to my arguments.

I agree with the horns being heavy, but for the opposite reason as you. I would like to see them used beyond 4th level in a campaign where a PC took it. The negatives of looking like a monster would greatly outweigh the positives in many campaigns. Plus their stats aren't super awesome either. I like it, though.

So... we agree?

 

[Warmaster Horus]

I wonder if they'll do the other XMen in coming editions...

 

[pukunui]

While I like the content in theme and in theory, in particulars it strikes me as being even less polished than most of the other UA content we've had.

For instance, I'm pleased to see the presence of a medium-sized playable minotaur race - there was one in 4e, and I was hoping we'd see one in 5e*. However, I feel like it is too heavily focused on its horns. 1d10 damage also seems like a lot, considering that they're only medium size. Compare that to the 2d8 damage that the large minotaurs in the MM deal. I like the inclusion of the racial bonds, though. That's a nice touch. It'd be nice to see, say, a Dragon+ article that offers up some racial bonds for the PHB classes.

I'm with those who say the Mariner fighting style is a little too good. I like the swim + climb speed benefit, but the +1 to AC on top of that seems a bit much. Also, I wonder if it would've made more sense to make this a feat so it can grant some other benefits, like proficiency with water vehicles and a +1 to Dex or Str. To make it a more complete package of nautical abilities.

The swashbuckler as a roguish archetype makes sense. However, let's not forget the battlemaster fighter. I think it might've made sense for the swashbuckler to grant the rogue access to some battlemaster maneuvers. I agree that Panache is too good. It's even better than the completely magical Compelled Duel spell! Also: if you were to give a swashbuckler PC the Mobility feat, then Fancy Footwork becomes completely redundant. I can't think of any other feats that render a class ability completely useless, although I could be wrong about that.

I don't really have any thoughts on the storm sorcerer at this time, though I like their thinking behind the "ribbons".

All in all, I look forward to being able to provide some feedback on these options in an upcoming survey!




*For the longest time, I was against allowing monstrous races to be played in my campaigns (be it an Orc in D&D or a Gamorrean in Star Wars), mainly because I felt it would be too disruptive. During the playtest period, I finally came 'round to the idea that maybe it wouldn't be so bad after all, only to learn that the devs weren't going to include even basic stats for playing monstrous races in 5e like they did with 4e. Doh!

 

[Leatherhead]

I really like the greyed boxes, looking under the hood at the motivations for choices made. It helps make sense of what they're thinking ("ribbons" especially).

That was my favorite bit.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

This already exists in Dueling style, though, doesn't it?

Nope. The Dueling Style allows you to use a shield, hence it is balanced for you using a shield, and it is weak if you elect to leave that hand open.

... it strikes me as being even less polished than most of the other UA content we've had.

I have exactly the opposite impression.

 

[Minigiant]

I like how they had the grey box to explain how to swap tools proficiencies in races.

Thieves' tools proficiency = 1 Skill proficiency = 2 Tool proficiency which aren't thieves' tools = 2 Languages

 

[pukunui]

I have exactly the opposite impression.

Perhaps I feel that way because none of this stuff was run past us alpha testers first, whereas a lot of the preceding UA material was.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Nope. The Dueling Style allows you to use a shield, hence it is balanced for you using a shield, and it is weak if you elect to leave that hand open.

This has not been my experience in play. The flat +2 damage is quite effective as is, whether or not a shield is used.

 

[Larac]

My ruling will be, the Horns a are a Weapon.
Can be used as a Monk Weapon, but not as Unarmed strike.

So the MinoMonk Hits with weapon, (horn or weapon in hand), then Unarmed Strike with Hand or Hoof.
Might even go as far allowing Hoof to do +1 Damage but with a -1 To Hit, been hit with hoofs, hurts much more than fists

As for the Horns, I can see the Oils and such that works on other Weapons working on them.
As well as perhaps some covering on the tips to help protect them.

When goring I could also see if the Mino rolls badly perhaps having them stuck in a wall or tree. Say a 1-2 Nat on the Hit Roll, if there is something close (10 feet) for them to hit.

YMMV

Now the Panache, and Toujour l’Audace I have more than a few issues with.

Fancy Feet
Even Fancy Foot Work I would like better if it was If you HIT, not just Attack.

TA
The SA when your alone, seems to want to split the party.
This is also very easy to setup to get this most of the fight.
The Assassin Would want this ability as they would almost always have SA damage.
Not sure the change but feel it is a bit over shadowing the base.

Panache
Giving Taunt to a non-Fighter is not the greatest idea to me.
Let alone dual working as Charm.

Will have to look at other 9th abilities but feels wrong for the Quick in and out one to be taunting.

No doubt as written it is a two weapon fighters dream come true.

Start as Human with Feat and your a beast, pouring out damage at a constant rate.
Will let the Stat folks check but should be close to top DPS class.