Allowing Unearthed Arcana

[Trask]

I've run a few games of 5e so far and I'm playing in one and some of my players want to use stuff from unearthed arcana. Now I dont really keep up with UA i dont really know anything about it other than when people show me stuff from it, but i skimmed a bit and it seems like theres quite a lot of stuff in there. A few of my players really want to have all of it available to them and Im not sure if I really want that but I dont know enough about it. Is there anything in UA that I just allowed all character archetypes (not classes I dont want to mess with those) it would be unbalancing or just blatantly poorly thought out? Some of my players have suggested that theyll find the stuff and show it to me first for approval but I dont like that because my players tend to be kind of argumentative people and I dont feel like reviewing every UA archetype or feat they want to take on a case by case, i just dont have the time/energy for it.

Bottom line, are the UA archetypes and feats decent enough that they wont muck up my game? Im not overly concerned with game balance as long as its reasonable

[Naanomi]

A few are pretty pathetic, and a few (more) are fairly overpowered compared to the 'base' stuff... and none are built with any kind of thought put into multiclassing potential... but overall it is all OK in my opinion; particularly if you enforce a no-multiclassing with UA material clause

[pwykersotz]

Your answer is going to depend hugely on the way you run your game. Some people will insist, for example, that the new Mystic is completely playable. Others will say that it's too unbalanced.

When this thread eventually fills with some responses, I'd read the ones that get a lot of mention and allow them only if you personally think they meet your criteria.

I, for example, do not allow the Wizard Artificer or the Lore Wizard, and I haven't gone over Mystic yet. I allow most other subclasses and all the feats. I heavily encourage players to take the new modified ranger.

Edit: The no-multiclassing clause mentioned above is probably very important. I agree with it.

[Steampunkette]

If you allow people to used the UA Subclasses or Classes I -HIGHLY- recommend the rule that those characters cannot multiclass.

Most of them are pretty good on internal balance, overall. But once you start mixing and matching things quickly get out of hand.

[Lolzyking]

As long as you talk to everyone about it, ask them why this UA fits your idea, what your goals are with it, ect

[Geodude6]

My West Marches group allows most UA material, but there are a few things they don't allow:


Theurge Wizard: Takes too much from the Cleric, and in many ways just makes Clerics less interesting. At level 18 you can also make Cure Wounds one of your Spell Mastery choices, giving basically infinite free healing out of combat.
Spelless Ranger: Gets full features from another class' subclass at no cost, in addition to getting their normal subclass choices. Has strong out of combat healing choices. Is basically a better Battlemaster.
Favoured Soul (first draft): Gets way too much for free. Doubles the effective spells known for sorcerers (which is the sorcerers biggest weakness), leaving other subclasses in the dirt. Again, takes too much from Clerics, same as Theurgy. Second draft is allowed, and is much more balanced.
Loremaster Wizard: Outclasses other Wizard traditions, has better metamagic, metagamers dream and is also really overtuned.
Revenant subrace: The "single goal" doesn't work in an environment like WM, where you go on multiple different quests. It also basically means you cannot die.
Mystic: Too versatile, and some specific disciplines are somewhat unbalanced. It's also a pain to read.
Aarakocra and Winged Tiefling: Not UA, but free flight forever is just too strong.

We currently haven't banned it, and it's also not UA, but I'm currently campaigning to ban the Yuan-Ti Pureblood as well.

[tkuremento]

We currently haven't banned it, and it's also not UA, but I'm currently campaigning to ban the Yuan-Ti Pureblood as well.

Might I ask why? I'm not too knowledgeable about balance so I never claim to know if something is or isn't balanced. However this greatly confuses me because I just don't see it. Is it the Magic Resistance?

[Eunostus]

Might I ask why? I'm not too knowledgeable about balance so I never claim to know if something is or isn't balanced. However this greatly confuses me because I just don't see it. Is it the Magic Resistance?

I currently play a Yuan-Ti Pureblood warlock (Fiend/Chain), though my party hasn't found out yet. I love their flavour, but their poison immunity and magic resistance haven't even come up yet (lvl 5 currently), though perhaps that's because our DM seems to take it easy on us. Beforehand I did agree to a nerf though: Poison Immunity became Poison Resistance. So far, their racial features haven't actually been all that useful, so at least in my experience they're definitely not overpowered.

[Asmotherion]

My suggestion would be not to use it in a serious tone campain. It's supposed to be playtest material, and the basic idea is to only use UA material in one-shots.

However, if you have a light tone campain based on RAF (Rules as Fun), I see no problem with allowing it.

An other option would be to allow it in a hardcore optimisation campain, after discussion with the players.

[Geodude6]

Might I ask why? I'm not too knowledgeable about balance so I never claim to know if something is or isn't balanced. However this greatly confuses me because I just don't see it. Is it the Magic Resistance?

It would fit right in with the things you'd find on dandwiki. Magic Resistance and Poison Immunity are both way too good for a PC. Gnomes have a limited version of MR that works only on Int/Wis/Cha saves, and they're considered to be a strong race. Immunity to an entire damage type is also extremely good: if your party is going up against anything that deals poison damage, which many monsters do, you'll be extremely advantaged compared to your party-mates, even those that are dwarves. To my knowledge it's also the only race to grant immunity to a status condition. Darkvision and innate spellcasting are good too, but not unbalancing in and of themselves. It also has a racial bonus to charisma, and the four charisma-based classes currently in the game are all quite strong. All of this combined makes the Yuan-Ti Pureblood one of the strongest player races by a significant margin. The nature of the race also encourages players to backstab and betray their party, which obviously does not make for a fun game for the other players, unless you're playing an evil campaign.


I currently play a Yuan-Ti Pureblood warlock (Fiend/Chain), though my party hasn't found out yet. I love their flavour, but their poison immunity and magic resistance haven't even come up yet (lvl 5 currently), though perhaps that's because our DM seems to take it easy on us.

Your DM is indeed taking it easy on the party.


Beforehand I did agree to a nerf though: Poison Immunity became Poison Resistance.

This does seem like a reasonable nerf.

[Naanomi]

The 'two stats that don't synergize' help the yuan-ti from being too preposterous, but still near the top at the very least

[Pex]

The DMs I play with don't use Unearthed Arcana at all. If it's not officially published it's not in the game, and even then there are differences. One DM just wants PHB only while another is more lenient and allows any book, just "official", and a third is case-by-case for non-PHB book stuff.

[Temperjoke]

Unearthed Arcana content is not considered "final", so all of it should be taken with a grain of salt. It's definitely not designed for multi-classing, so I wouldn't allow a player to multi-class with it. When people describe a class as balanced or unbalanced, it usually refers to several factors, generally in comparison to the classes that have been officially released. It's imprecise and subjective, largely based on personal opinion, which is why new UA article posts typically have tons of responses and discussion.

I would find out which UA class the player wants to play, then look for the relevant discussion post here. That should help you decide if you want to allow it or not.

[Squiddish]

It definitely has to be case-by case. A lot of UAs (Theurge, Favored Soul, Lore Master) seem to step on the toes of other classes, while some are a bit unbalanced. Many of them strike me as the kind of thing where if you're trying to break the game, you definitely can.

[MrStabby]

My West Marches group allows most UA material, but there are a few things they don't allow:


Theurge Wizard: Takes too much from the Cleric, and in many ways just makes Clerics less interesting. At level 18 you can also make Cure Wounds one of your Spell Mastery choices, giving basically infinite free healing out of combat.
Spelless Ranger: Gets full features from another class' subclass at no cost, in addition to getting their normal subclass choices. Has strong out of combat healing choices. Is basically a better Battlemaster.
Favoured Soul (first draft): Gets way too much for free. Doubles the effective spells known for sorcerers (which is the sorcerers biggest weakness), leaving other subclasses in the dirt. Again, takes too much from Clerics, same as Theurgy. Second draft is allowed, and is much more balanced.
Loremaster Wizard: Outclasses other Wizard traditions, has better metamagic, metagamers dream and is also really overtuned.
Revenant subrace: The "single goal" doesn't work in an environment like WM, where you go on multiple different quests. It also basically means you cannot die.
Mystic: Too versatile, and some specific disciplines are somewhat unbalanced. It's also a pain to read.
Aarakocra and Winged Tiefling: Not UA, but free flight forever is just too strong.

We currently haven't banned it, and it's also not UA, but I'm currently campaigning to ban the Yuan-Ti Pureblood as well.

Pretty close to my list of things to never, ever touch. I would add in forge cleric and stipulate that there is no MC and there is a rule of PHB+1 and UA counts as +1 (so no booming blade on a UA class for example). I don't mind the spelless ranger so much but the 1st revised ranger with 2d6 HP is right out.

[BurgerBeast]

I don't allow it as a DM. I know other DMs in my group who do. If I had to make a suggestion based on your original post, I'd recommend that you don't allow it.

That being said, I think people have given you good advice for what to do if you decide to allow it, including which classes to watch out for. I would not let characters multi-class.

Somebody, somewhere on these forums, pointed out some of the assumptions that come along with UA. I'm going from memory and paraphrasing, but hey were something like:

1. They are meant to be play test material
2. The designers erred on the side of too-powerful to encourage the material to be used
3. The designers specifically stated that the material is not balanced for multi-classing

Apologies if I've gotten this wrong.

[Logosloki]

I allow UA material on the basis that there is no multiclassing into or out of UA stuff and it does come in on any long term campaigns. Of course I also have a houserule "if the pcs can do it so can the npcs" which does tone down on some of the more odorous choices. Additionally I have yet to see the lore wizard and mystic in play and the only time I have had a theurge in play was when it was the only (pseudo)divine caster.

[Sigreid]

The only UA in our campaign is the latest revised ranger. Reason being that I think UA as they are written would be a significant power creep that I'm not willing to deal with. I like a lot of the concepts, but I don't consider them ready for prime time. Apparently neither do WoTC as the ones that have made it into official material have been toned down significantly.

[Kane0]

Yeah most of it is fine.

[djreynolds]

Someone has to playtest it.

Otherwise they write crap like the original beastmaster and take 2 years to fix it.

I like the spell-less ranger its cool and flavorful and makes you want to play the class for 20 levels

That's the sign of a good class, you want to see where 20 levels will take you but its fun the entire 20 levels

[joaber]

Mystic: Too versatile, and some specific disciplines are somewhat unbalanced. It's also a pain to read.


Believe, if you really make a playable build, you'll see they aren't so versatile and unbalanced when you start to choose just 3,5,6 disciplines. The pais to read part still true, but at lvl 1, you don't need to read any 3+ psi point effects.

OP:
The easier way to let things more balanced if you let players use UA:
-no multiclass with UA (the initial text in UA already say that)
-use always the last version (they made an update for some reason)

For me, the only unquestionable "don't allow this!" in UA is tunnel fighter fighting style. I saw a lvl 6 polearm master make 15 attacks in one round after the sorcerer cast fear. If you use it, limit the number of OA by round.

[KorvinStarmast]

I've run a few games of 5e so far and I'm playing in one and some of my players want to use stuff from unearthed arcana. Now I dont really keep up with UA i dont really know anything about it other than when people show me stuff from it, but i skimmed a bit and it seems like theres quite a lot of stuff in there.
1. Tell them no for "anything in UA."
2. For a given UA request, download the FREE material from WoTC and you review it yourself, as compared to a different class/archetype/subclass, etcetera.
3. Do you want to see it played? If yes, allow it. If no, don't.
4. As above, don't multiclass UA stuff. It's already unbalanced/not balanced.

As to published material, the new races in the Volos guide, to include the monstrous races, are already showing signs of power creep.

Our old group is getting back together and our DM has ruled the following:
Most humans are recommended as VHuman so that at level 1 there is some equity.
Our alt DM agrees.
I have yet to get the Pro Roll20 subscription, will probably do it this week, and then I'll be DM number 3 for our group.

None of us wants UA, even though a couple of people want to use 3rd party material.

[nickl_2000]

I'm currently playing a low level bard using the UA college "College of Glamour" due to a characters background it really made sense with the character more than the other bardic colleges.

So far, I haven't found anything to be completely earth shattering. The Mantle of Inspiration Bardic Inspiration feature has been the thing that I have used most in the campaign. Being able to give 2d6 HP 4 times a day is amazingly powerful at the low levels, add into that being able to control the battlefield by allowing up to 4 allies who can see me and are within 60 feet to move ther movement towards me as a reaction with no AoOs. It really gets the team moving around more in combat and helps my more squishy character assist more in combat.

I've used the enthralling performance feature a few times, which appears to be powerful in reading. However, in use it can be challenging to get someone to sit and listen to me for the 10 minutes required to use the skill.

Still, I really liked the character flavor and it's been fun.

[WickerNipple]

My West Marches group allows most UA material, but there are a few things they don't allow:


Theurge Wizard: Takes too much from the Cleric, and in many ways just makes Clerics less interesting. At level 18 you can also make Cure Wounds one of your Spell Mastery choices, giving basically infinite free healing out of combat.
Spelless Ranger: Gets full features from another class' subclass at no cost, in addition to getting their normal subclass choices. Has strong out of combat healing choices. Is basically a better Battlemaster.
Favoured Soul (first draft): Gets way too much for free. Doubles the effective spells known for sorcerers (which is the sorcerers biggest weakness), leaving other subclasses in the dirt. Again, takes too much from Clerics, same as Theurgy. Second draft is allowed, and is much more balanced.
Loremaster Wizard: Outclasses other Wizard traditions, has better metamagic, metagamers dream and is also really overtuned.
Revenant subrace: The "single goal" doesn't work in an environment like WM, where you go on multiple different quests. It also basically means you cannot die.
Mystic: Too versatile, and some specific disciplines are somewhat unbalanced. It's also a pain to read.
Aarakocra and Winged Tiefling: Not UA, but free flight forever is just too strong.

We currently haven't banned it, and it's also not UA, but I'm currently campaigning to ban the Yuan-Ti Pureblood as well.

This is a very good list.

[Trask]

Thanks for the responses, there are a lot here. I could download and review the specific UA material but I've never had a huge eye for it and I feel like stuff that is potentially too good wouldn't reveal it to myself fully until it's played.
I appreciate that full list of stuff that is generally accepted to be too strong as well.

Also yeah Yuan-Ti pureblood is very dumb

[Simian]

My West Marches group allows most UA material, but there are a few things they don't allow:


Theurge Wizard: Takes too much from the Cleric, and in many ways just makes Clerics less interesting. At level 18 you can also make Cure Wounds one of your Spell Mastery choices, giving basically infinite free healing out of combat.
Spelless Ranger: Gets full features from another class' subclass at no cost, in addition to getting their normal subclass choices. Has strong out of combat healing choices. Is basically a better Battlemaster.
Favoured Soul (first draft): Gets way too much for free. Doubles the effective spells known for sorcerers (which is the sorcerers biggest weakness), leaving other subclasses in the dirt. Again, takes too much from Clerics, same as Theurgy. Second draft is allowed, and is much more balanced.
Loremaster Wizard: Outclasses other Wizard traditions, has better metamagic, metagamers dream and is also really overtuned.
Revenant subrace: The "single goal" doesn't work in an environment like WM, where you go on multiple different quests. It also basically means you cannot die.
Mystic: Too versatile, and some specific disciplines are somewhat unbalanced. It's also a pain to read.
Aarakocra and Winged Tiefling: Not UA, but free flight forever is just too strong.

We currently haven't banned it, and it's also not UA, but I'm currently campaigning to ban the Yuan-Ti Pureblood as well.

My ban list is a lot longer personally but I also allow full multi-classing and customization. To make it easier for my players I just made a list of what is allowed and where they can find it if it sounds interesting to them. As a plus most of them don't even know about the stuff that I've banned since it's not on the list. I've found that for the most part the races tend to be balanced or a bit weak as compared to other material, classes tend to be overpowered but there is still a healthy chunk that are either weak or balanced. Obviously I'm not going to stop someone from playing a weak class if that's what they want. Most of the weak classes can shine in some situations and it actually can be even more rewarding for the player when they do.

An example that I'm still on the fence on is the new ranger Monster Slayer subclass. Which is fairly balanced in general but can be incredibly powerful against certain powerful monsters, beholders for example, that rely heavily on saving throw based effects. 90% of the time it is going to be a great class, and 10% of the time (probably even exaggerating with 10%) it will trivialize an encounter. That being said it doesn't get too crazy until very high levels that you may not even achieve in your campaign. But the idea of an encounter going from fun and challenging and forcing my players to think to being trivial and just a waste of time (though of course the loot part is still fun) is enough to make me want to ban this subclass.

From this example you can see that I will lean heavily towards banning something if it is going to steal the spotlight all campaign long or potentially trivialize an entire category of encounters. I want all of my players to feel interesting and valuable and I want encounters to be safe for my players but still require them to use strategy and fight intelligently not just be able to fog a window.

I do like the latest (3rd iteration?) mystic though there are several individual pieces of it that are overpowered I was tempted to make a list specific to it but it would just be confusing for newer players. Maybe if you have a veteran player and you consult some guides on which pieces are potentially abuse-able but otherwise it's just easier to ban it. Too bad IMO because it deserves to be a played class, they put a lot of work into it and made it pretty interesting and most of it is fairly balanced and plays different enough from other classes to be a fun and unique experience.

Edit: If I have a player that found something that I have banned and is really excited about it and wants to play it I will try to work with them to rewrite the offending features into something that I feel more comfortable allowing. Like with the Monster Slayer ranger I might make it so the final ability (I'm lazy and didn't look up the name) gave advantage to the saving throw rather than an automatic success.

Also for advice on how to tell if something is overpowered use 3 measures:

1) Can it trivialize parts of the game
2) Can it make 1 character consistently outshine the other players or minimalize the other players contribution to the game
3) Is any feature clearly superior in many respects to other comparable abilities without any additional drawbacks or weaknesses to balance it

That's my turing test of overpowered, if it fails any of these 3 then I just ban it to be safe. Also, for myself, I factor in combinations with other existing features/abilities for the first 2 questions, but that adds a level of complexity.

[McNinja]

An example that I'm still on the fence on is the new ranger Monster Slayer subclass. Which is fairly balanced in general but can be incredibly powerful against certain powerful monsters, beholders for example, that rely heavily on saving throw based effects. 90% of the time it is going to be a great class, and 10% of the time (probably even exaggerating with 10%) it will trivialize an encounter. That being said it doesn't get too crazy until very high levels that you may not even achieve in your campaign. But the idea of an encounter going from fun and challenging and forcing my players to think to being trivial and just a waste of time (though of course the loot part is still fun) is enough to make me want to ban this subclass.
Isn't that the point of a monster slayer though?

[GorogIrongut]

My approach is a simple one, anything unofficial has to be approved by myself.

In the end I'm sure I'm more permissive than most DM's.
1. Revised Ranger should be automatically included as an option.
2. I currently won't allow the Loremaster Wizard. Anything else has to be justified and may or may not have specific negatives added in by myself to counteract perceived strengths for my SPECIFIC campaign.
3. I allow winged tieflings and aarakocra. So far only one player has taken a winged tiefling and that character is currently the one about to be lost as he is currently free fall spiraling down a bottomless pit vomiting and trying to catch all of his magical equipment as it goes flying off of his person. Another couple rounds and the G forces are going to cause the character to black out.
4. I allow, with my permission of course, multi classing with UA material.

I personally believe that as DM's we owe it to our players to allow them to make cool characters that they will enjoy. And yes, some will say that we're permitting them to have characters that break the game... But really, if we control the game, we can choose what they face. With a little creativity and control, you can take ANY character out of their comfort zone. Stop giving them bog standard encounters and really challenge them. You'll become a better DM for it and they and their super powered alter egos will never know what hit them.

[hymer]

My approach is a simple one, anything unofficial has to be approved by myself.

I agree entirely with this. Such stuff gets reviewed on a case by case basis, and if I felt unsure, I'd bring it up in a place like this forum and see what people had to say about it.

[jaappleton]

UA is allowed at my table. However, there's a few we don't touch:

Lore Wizard
Theurge Wizard (Tempest specifically)

Everything else is game, and Homebrew content is allowed with DM approval.

Nothing is too far out of balance. A few step on the toes of established base classes (I can see a Paladin getting a little jealous of the Tranquility Monk's healing), for example. I played a Tempest Theurge for about 5 sessions before saying, "Ok. Too much. We can't allow this one."

[D.U.P.A.]

We currently haven't banned it, and it's also not UA, but I'm currently campaigning to ban the Yuan-Ti Pureblood as well.

Yuan-ti are monstrous race and are not meant for every campaign, just like goblins and kobolds. Not in the mechanical point of view, but storywise.

[Spiritchaser]

I don't allow tunnel fighter or lore wizard, and mystic hasn't cone up yet, but others are on the table.

If anyone wanted to MC UA they would have to do so on a case by case basis but I won't arbitrarily rule it out

I would, for example allow a fighter/Hexblade MC

The big problem is that one might get one character eclipsing the party, but so far that hasn't happened.

I would say that there is often a greater delta between base classes than between most UA vs. non UA.

[Foxydono]

I'm currently not allowing flying races, but this depends on the campaign. UA will be looked upon in a case by case basis, but I'm pretty lenient, so I'll usually allow it unless there is something broken. I might allow homebrew if asked, but since the party is pretty new I'm reluctant to do so.