https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/une...r-ranger-rogue
Printable View
Audience With Death is one of the coolest ideas they've had in a while.
the 13th level Revived feature is a bit OP. otherwise, I like it.
Huh, rune casting as a fighter subclass is a surprise.
Swarm ranger is Candyman incarnated. Once again surprising that it's not a druid.
The revived seems like it would be an awesome Barbarian subclass.
Overall lot of good ideas here they seem... misguided is the right word?
Looks like I was right that we would get all remaining classes :smalltongue:
Lot's of information in this UA btw.
Rune Knight: Long read. I like the flavor, reminded me of the PrC attempt they did a long time ago. Runes always have an active effect, which is cool. A bit of a bummer that you can't use Defensive Rune in yourself. Giant Stature seems like a ribbon, and usually ribbons are a 7th level feature for Fighters, kinda disappointing.
Swarmkeeper: A bit... weird? I thought this was gonna be a second attempt on Beast Master, but I was very wrong. Gathered Swarm is way too weak imo, at least remove the WIS/day limitation. All features are very long, I lost interest mid way through...
The Revived: Amazing flavor! Bolts of the Grave opens a lot of possibilities in terms of design, but it might be a little overpowered as it is with disengage + sneak attack + dodge all in the same turn.
2/3 for me. Great UA.
looks ok. Fighter subclass is really good imo, both thematically and mechanically. Not too strong, not weak.
Ranger one is meh... They really really have problems to make Rangers interesting or good in 5e...
Rogue one is kind of nice but I don't understand Bolts from the Grave feature. It says you can use it IMMIDIETLY after you use Cunning Action. Cunning action is bonus action, but it doesn't say if Bolts from the Grave are Action or Reaction? Also how would that work with Extra Attack feature?
Ok:
So Fighter is just a giant kin sorcerer made into a fighter subclass.
Most of the giant type abilities are fine except for the whole making you large size, giving you a better average damage and resistance like a barbarian.
It is like they could not make the brute fly so they are just ripping off the barbarian a different way.
Ranger is just very odd to me. This subclass seems like it is supposed to be on a druid. Other than that it does not seem that fun to play to me.
Now for the Rogue, my personal favorite class so let's see what they have...
So level 3:
They have 3 different abilities at level 3? Yeah no power creep in 5e or anything...
First one is a floating skill proficiency, on the most or 2nd most skilled class in the game... ok, nothing great but ok.
Next, is, "So your DM won't let you play a warforged?" or "Look I am a zombie.
3rd is... wait a second.
So I can bonus action cunning action to Hide, Disengage, or Dash, then I get to make a free Dex based ranged attack that does my sneak attack damage, and adds my stat... in 30 feet, with no requirements at all.
This is just stupid good. Que everyone taking 3 levels of rogue for a bonus action 2d6 + dex ranged spell attack with a free Dash/hide/disengage attached.
Crazy broken and so obviously so that I can't believe someone wasted the time to type it up.
Anyway, level 9, Connect with the dead, so I can speak with the dead, ok. Then I get a random ability from a table.
Meh.
Level 13:
Audience with death:
Who wrote this? Seriously.
When I make a death save I can ask "A spirit of death" a question that it answers truthfully and has the knowledge of "all those who have died"
This is the kind of stupid garbage I expect to see on DNDwiki or something.
Knowledge of all those who have died? Really, Ok well I always wanted to know if that powerful king from 100 years ago was really assassinated or not. Or if that guy that hired us is cheating us, or heck I want to know what the pass code for Elminster's tower is, I know he has had servants who have died.
Wait there is no limit to it either... Ok, well we are going to spend the next 2 days or so pogo sticking me to death and saving me flatliner style and ask a few hundred questions.
Level 17:
Bonus action 30 ft teleport with no limit... kind of mild compared to the other broken here.
Overall:
Fighter - Barbarian rip off and better.
Ranger - seems out of place and should be a druid
Rogue - horribly broken, multi class baiting, and does not seem roguish at all. It looks like a sorcerer or warlock subclass that was changed over.
This whole thing looks like it was thrown together from other classes.
Rune warrior giving a non spell way to gain large size makes for a grapple barbarian with a fairly low entry.
The Revived is cool, very cool, but it seems very forced as a Rogue subclass. It reads to me like it wanted to be a Warlock subclass (Pact of the Veil, Pact of Revival?).
I guess I kind of feel that way for all three of the subclasses. They all seem a bit cobbled together. They're unique for sure but all of them seem a bit out of place, if I had to pick one that seemed least out of place it would probably be the Rune Knight.
Love the Rune Knight. In combat and out of combat uses for a fighter? Hell yes.
Having played a fair amount of Pillars of Eternity, I will admit, the Rogue specialization tickles my interest something fierce. The advantage on death saving throws may be a bit of a thing, though.
The Fighter option also interest me, though not as much as the Rogue, and the Ranger one does strike me as amusing since you can run around shouting "BEES!" all the time.
I can finally play shino aburame?!?!
Agreed about the rogue subclass, could be a fun warlock subclass idea but Rogue feels a bit odd.Quote:
Originally Posted by ProsecutorGodot
And the Rogue is a Shadow Sorcerer made into a Rogue subclass. And that's great imo, it was really lame that the concept of "being born with the power" was only available as a spellcaster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Misterwhisper
The "fluttering birds" line for the swarmkeeper ranger makes me want to play a Disney princess character who is constantly surrounded by singing bluebirds.
I absolutely love the Ranger Subclass, or at least I DID until I read the fine print.
I thought it should be tiny fey creatures instead of tiny fey creatures that look like BEASTS, because then you could have faerie dragons, pseudodragons, pixies, sprites, will-o-wisps and really pull off a faerie king vibe that could be quite stunning and thematic. Especially for an Elven Ranger guardian of a hidden glade type deal. Really bring in some of that natures guardian and faerie spirit realm vibes.
Either way I love it.
I also love the Rune Fighter, it's a really exciting subclass.
I'm so-so on the Revived but a lot of people I've been talking to like it so I hope it goes through for them! Someone said it was The Crow (from the movie) haha.
Rune Knight seems really strong and flexible. +1d6 to attacks for a minute is a big deal and I'm already expecting some goofy PAM builds. "extra reach and 1d10+1d6+STR+10 damage per attack. Four attacks at level five or six if you surge!!" Seems a lot stronger than samurai or other similar options but that's just me.
Swarm is weird conceptually and I sort of like it? but mechanically it just seems bland. Woohoo, we now have two sources of hunter's mark! Never seen that before. The level 7 feature is cool though.
Revived. Seems likes a class for a 'roleplay-focused' character who doesn't want to actually have to roleplay. "My ability says they have to answer. I dropped myself to zero HP for this!!" Love the flavor, hate the implementation.
I'm real excited for that fighter. I love gish concepts, and that's a good one with a treasure trove of fun toys. They even remembered to give it out of combat and teamwork-focused powers!
Put one on a team with a Forge Cleric, a Battlesmith Artificer, a Transmutation Wizard, and a Thief Rogue. It's an item frenzy!
I stole archetypes from 4th Edition to add onto Clerics at 3rd level - kinda like Pact Boons for Warlocks. Rune Priest was one of them... interesting to see in implemented as a fighter subclass...
I agree, I think it strikes a nice balance of having a lot of options and still being comprehensible and flavorful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterdeep Merch
I imagine a flighty, cloudcoocoolander character who has translucent pastel butterfly and hummingbird spirits floating up and down their arms (and all over those around them) right up until someone threatens them, whereupon they become black, stark blue, and blood read millipede, scorpion, and wasp spirits (and that hummingbird on your shoulder becomes a skeksis-like skeletal magpie which squawks "I feast on the souls of the weak!"Quote:
Originally Posted by JumboWheat01
The biggest problem with the ranger archetype is that the 3rd, 7th, and 11th level features all only occur for wis-modifier # of minutes per day. Which, I'm sorry, is not what a ranger needs (They already have useful 1 minute long low-level spells which fill out that capacity just fine). They do at least get five useful spells.
I read it as a rider on the cunning action.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny89
The Rune Fighter is amusing for gigantic Halfling GWM fighters, but the really interesting one is the Revived Rogue. It's kind of an awkward fit on the Rogue chassis, but it's still very flavorful (Connect With the Dead and Audience With Death are very interesting) and seems like it would make an interesting novel. Would it make for interesting gameplay though? I'm uncertain, but the fact that the answer might be "yes" means it's the most thought-provoking UA I've seen in a while.
But I do see potential issues. One concern with Connect With the Dead's mechanics is that they're simultaneously unreliable (1/3 chance of getting what you need most in a given situation) and too permissive (if you need Con save proficiency, any old goblin corpse will do). I would have swapped it around so that instead you choose what you're trying to extract from the corpse (language, skill, or saving throw proficiency) and the DM tells you what you get, without revealing whether it came from the corpse or your past self.
Audience With Death lets you swap your personality around whenever you're at death's door, but frankly you could do that anyway, and the reason you do it is probably not because the DM would tell you "no" and more because you don't want to and don't find it dramatically appropriate.
Closing impression: The Revived is very thought-provoking, but ultimately as a DM or a player, I think I'd be inclined to simply lift the Revived's flavor and stick it in a background instead of a subclass. A schizophrenic wizard who believes he contains the selves of multiple past lives, and achieves a new dominant personality every time he wakes up in the morning: why not?
The Rune Knight should've been a Barbarian subclass, and that's all I'll say on the matter.
It took me a second read to get it, but Swarmkeeper seems really interesting. The damage bump they get at 3rd level is non-targeted and includes forced movement, which is a really interesting way of handling a skirmisher. Writhing Tide is an awesome piece of mobility. Scuttling Eyes is a really good feature for scouting ahead and gives you a mobile teleport point - I also love that you can get more uses of it by burning spell slots, and want to see more of that. And Storm of Minions is a pretty neat AoE. Can we get more Ranger subclasses like this one? kthnxbai
The Revived is... I'm not a fan. The flavor is really cool, but it's another UA subclass with three features at its first level, which include a floating skill proficiency and a stupidly good Sneak Attack enabler (especially in conjunction with Ethereal Jaunt). Audience with Death is thematically cool, but it doesn't feel like it fits with 5e's general design. Seriously, it's essentially advantage on death saves + a free Commune whenever you're dying + a ribbon (it's not like stuff like your Flaw matter). I dunno, it feels pretty messy.
It may just be me, but I like the revived on the rogue. I could see having a blast playing it as him not knowing where/how he got all his skills and abilities because they were picked up in past lives. Could be really fun to play a character that kind of creeps himself out.
Then they should add the standard "as part of the same action" because it kind of strangely worded now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigreid
As for subclass itself I really like it. Makes really thematic Rogue and have tons of roleplay value. And having Rogue with some sort of Warlock splash with his Bolt is kind of cool idea.
I'm glad someone else sees the potential in the Swarmkeeper. Really I want to provide feedback it should just be tiny CREATURES not fey spirits that look specifically like beasts. I think Pixies, Sprites, Will-O-Wisps and other such creatures (pseudodragons...) could be a really beautiful/cute aesthetic and really make it feel like its connected to the feywild and nature and the spirits. Hell I don't even know how Sylph isnt a creature in D&D...Quote:
Originally Posted by Amechra
I'm glad that there are people out there that like these. In reading them I feel like they are a mess, the abilities seemed forced into the theme and don't match all that well, and the flavor feels like it is all over the place. These just don't feel polished or even close to done, even for UA content.
Luckily for me, I don't have to read them again or play with them. So, I'm glad there is love for them in others.
My thoughts:
Fighter subclass is nice. I think it’s fairly balanced. I’d like to see another Rune option or two, but I enjoy seeing them have out of combat uses. Nothing to complain about here.
Ranger... Maybe I am biased because I was really hoping for the Alternative Ranger Class Features we were promised (see my other topic), but I’m not impressed. The ability to essentially send a familiar somewhere to scout, then teleport to it is fairly cool. I like that. But it doesn’t do much for me outside of that one ability, and it’s all very wordy.
Rogue gets.... Rogue gets the Sun Bolt ability from Sun soul Monks, but can sneak attack with it. Which is cool. I see some saying it’s super OP... Not really. It’s Necrotic, which is an OK damage type but far from a good one. You can’t use Feats like Sharpshooter with it. It’s still connected to your bonus action to prevent action economy abuse. I think the ability itself is fine. It might be the most unique archetype we’ve seen in awhile, which is refreshing. I do tend to agree that I don’t... It doesn’t scream ROGUE to me. It screams spellcaster. Warlock or Sorcerer, I could even see Druid with the whole circle of life thing, but not Rogue.
How are people interpreting “carried” with the rune knight?
It would seem intuitively clear that a dagger in its sheath should count...
At least the way I see it.
Given that you can have rather more runes than you can use without awkwardness or juggling otherwise.