D&D Launches New Eberron-Themed Playtest With Dragonmarked Feats

The D&D design team has launched a new Unearthed Arcana playtest focused on the upcoming Eberron: Forge of the Artificer book, featuring Dragonmarked feats and a new Artificer subclass. The new packet contains rules for a Cartographer subclass for the Artificer, along with a handful of new magic item options and over 25 Dragonmarked feats. The Artificer base class rules also received a few tweaks to some of its features, with an eye towards more general versatility.

The other big feature is the new Dragonmarked feats, most of which are considered either Dragonmarked Feats or General Feats. The Dragonmarked Feats are specifically limited to Eberron campaigns and allow only one Dragonmark per character (thus preventing Warlocks from accumulating Dragonmarks). The General Feats are Greater Marks and specifically upgrade existing Dragonmarks as a requirement. It's interesting that D&D is keeping with campaign setting specific feats and feat trees, as both of these design traits were found in the Dragonlance: Shadow of the Dragon Queen book.

You can check out the full playtest on D&D Beyond.

 

[Corinnguard]

What more Bender vibes do they need? They all already get 2-3 elemental spells plus a few unique abilities. I think they are in a good place now, honestly.

Keep in mind Genasi are unique. It’s not a single species that taps into any element, they have parents from specific elements.

Now, I would love to see paraelemental Genasi like Ash and Steam.

True. Lately I have been musing about the Genasi and @Xeviat 's Elementalist class for Level Up. A couple of their 5e traits resemble some of that class's 1st-level Adaptations. I keep wondering if it's possible to give them something more without them being crafted for just that class.

I know. Well the 4e version of the Genasi, for a while, could manifest more than one element. Then they went back to being their regular selves in 5e.

Same here with regards to the Para-Genasi.

 

[Aldarc]

It adds versatility and supports PC exceptionalism at relatively little cost, so I'm OK with it. In my own narration, most of the houses will be primarily made up of members of the house's "classic" ancestries, but some enclaves or just particular individuals will be off the norm.

In my own Eberron, I tend to encourage racial cosmopolitanism over a strict siloing, so lots of people both within and without the Five Nations have two or more ancestries in their background. A Khoravor might have a dwarven great-grandfather, or a shifter might some hobgoblin and orc ancestors.

Do what works best for your games. IMHO, there are upsides and downsides to this approach.

 

[Azzy]

I also find myself amused at the idea that everyone sees Goblins and Hobgoblins woth guns and just assumes they are Fey magic, while the Goblins keep trying to explain scientific principles and being dismissed as inscrutable Fey Folk.

"No, you stupid hairless ape, you don't need an incantation—it's physics, not magic!" —some irritated hobgoblin somewhere in Khorvaire.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I hope this is true, but every time they talk about the FR books they specifically leave out species as added options, while species is one of the first things they mentioned for Eberron.

I suspect we won’t get any species in FR, and instead we may get a line pointing to the Genasi in the Monsters of the Multiverse book.

It's possible, maybe likely they aren't in the book, but it's also possible that any species options in the book aren't finalized yet, Forge of the Artificer is going out months before FRCG, like August I think vs November.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

One typically wouldnt, but it is odd to make a point about it.

So, I think this is a good thing.

5E's initial attitude seemed to be similar to that of 4E, which is that essentially, all material was potentially for all campaigns. Not in a hardline doctrinal way but still.

Official 5E books saying material is specifically "campaign-specific" to certain campaigns opens up doors for more tightly-designed and specific campaigns. Its a minor thing but I think it's the right direction.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Dragonmark feats, this is new: "(Prerequisite: Eberron Campaign)". The options for the Eberron setting are officially locked into the Eberron setting. In other words, as if, one cannot have a dragonmarked character in Forgotten Realms. One typically wouldnt, but it is odd to make a point about it. Meanwhile, the Spelljammer setting would have characters that intermingle various settings.

Possibly the thinking is, the flavor of the feats is highly dependent on the specific cultures in Eberron. Thus to remove the option from the setting would neutralize its intended flavor.

Still, all around odd.

Dragonlance also had setting locked feats.

Planescape & Spelljammer didn't, but that makes sense because they are designed interact and have a presence in other settings more then Eberron or Krynn, and sort of FR in theory, in practice FR has a history of crossovers.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Interestingly enough Strixhaven doesn't have campaign prereqs for it's Strixhaven Initiate feats either, but I'd assume one would need to be a student to get one, which would most likely be in those school backgrounds. As Strixhaven was perhaps the second instance of the 2024 type backgrounds, Ravenloft was sort of the start with Dark Gifts sort of being origin feats with conditions attached.

For the species, I'm guessing it's mostly going to be an update of the ones in Rising From the Last War, with Khoravar as an addition. Though I'm curious if they'll try to make it mechanically different from the Half-Elf in the past, like more interesting mechanically.

I wonder if this book will bring back some subclasses in classes that aren't the Artificer, after all I felt the Inquisitive Rogue was definitely a subclass built for Eberron. It's basically the Detective or Investigative Journalist subclass. I guess the Mastermind can also come back too.

But it also sounds like they might just leave a lot of things in Rising From the Last War with some updates, if they plan to sell a revised Rising along with Forge of the Artificer.

 

[Kurotowa]

Interestingly enough Strixhaven doesn't have campaign prereqs for it's Strixhaven Initiate feats either, but I'd assume one would need to be a student to get one, which would most likely be in those school backgrounds. As Strixhaven was perhaps the second instance of the 2024 type backgrounds, Ravenloft was sort of the start with Dark Gifts sort of being origin feats with conditions attached.

Just for the record, Ravenloft was second and Strixhaven third. The first was Mythic Odyssey of Theros with its Supernatural Gifts. They usually gets forgotten because Theros didn't make a huge impact and the Supernatural Gifts were way less interesting and flavorful than Ravenloft's Dark Gifts, but it was the first example of the idea in 5e.

In other words yeah, they've been iterating on the concept for years, and Origin feats are just the end state.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

So one of the promotional art pieces show 5 characters, I'm guessing this is supposed to be the Artificer subclasses (though not necessarily the pictures for the featured subclass art, as it lacks D&D species diversity given that 4 out of 5 of them look Human).

I think it's quite clear which one is the Battlesmith, Alchemist, Armorer and Artillerist. I'm guessing the one with the glasses holding a magnifying glass is supposed to be the Cartographer.

 

[dave2008]

So, I think this is a good thing.

5E's initial attitude seemed to be similar to that of 4E, which is that essentially, all material was potentially for all campaigns. Not in a hardline doctrinal way but still.

Official 5E books saying material is specifically "campaign-specific" to certain campaigns opens up doors for more tightly-designed and specific campaigns. Its a minor thing but I think it's the right direction.

I agree, but it remains to be seen it WotC takes advantage of the opportunity.