Unearthed Arcana WotC Removes Latest Unearthed Arcana

WotC has removed this week's Unearthed Arcana from its website. Not only has the article's web page itself been removed, the actual PDF has been replaced with last month's "Subclasses, Part 1" PDF (although it's URL still reads... /UA2020-Subclasses02.pdf).

The article included three new subclasses, the bardic College of Creation, the cleric's Love Domain, and the sorcerer's Clockwork Soul.

[NOTE - NSFW language follows].

I don't know if it's linked, but WotC came under criticism on Twitter for its treatment of the Love Domain. The main argument isn't that mind-control magic has no place in the game, but rather that coercive powers should not be described as "love", and that the domain might be poorly named.

People like game designer Emmy Allen commented: "It seems WotC have tried to create a 'Love' domain for clerics in 5e. By some sheer coincidence they seem to have accidentally created a 'roofie' domain instead. Nothing says 'love' like overriding your target's free will to bring them under your power."


That domain was introduced as follows: "Love exists in many forms—compassion, infatuation, friendly affection, and passionate love as a few facets. Whatever form these feelings take, the gods of love deepen the bonds between individuals."

The powers were Eboldening Bond, Impulsive Infatuation ("Overwhelm a creature with a flash of short-lived by intense admiration for you, driving them to rash action in your defense”), Protective Bond, and Enduring Unity.

Whether the criticism was a factor in the article's withdrawal, I don't know. It might be that it just wasn't ready for prime-time yet. It seems the domain itself would be better named a "control" or "charm" domain than a "love" domain, which seems to be the main thrust of the criticism on Twitter.

WotC's Jeremy Crawford commented: "The official version of the Unearthed Arcana article “Subclasses, Part 2” is still ahead of us, later this week or sometime next week. Our team will hold off on answering questions until you’ve seen the real deal!"

 

[Undrave]

Leaving aside the question of whether they 'caved to the rage mob' or 'heard feedback from a couple of people and realized that they were saying something they probably didn't mean to say, and revised the material in an attempt to be as inclusive as possible', I guess what I find surprising is the attachment that some folks are feeling to the original version of the document. Like, its sanctity has been violated or something. It wasn't given a chance to live! I don't know, it feels like we've raised the stakes here way beyond what the developers probably felt about it.

Seriously!

We're not OWED any theme in this game, nor are UA ever 100% assured to be published. It's playlets content and WotC is in their right to interpret the feedback they get any way they want. In this case it happened quickly to a product that was probably not even ready for release to begin with, that's all.

We'll get an Enchantment heavy domain later and you can give it to your Love Cleric all you want people.

 

[Salthorae]

Some people really want a roofie domain, I guess!

Sorry, but this is the kind of misleading stuff I have an issue with..

Where was the “drug someone and get them to have non-consensual intercourse” in the domain?

 

[Panda-s1]

If mind control goes into your brain through the neurons that are designated to be used for love, then to the target of that ability it is one and the same.

And domain is called love, as it uses love as a tool.

Sure, it can be called mind or charm or whatever, but love is also correct.

yeah, no, just... ugh. we call it "mind control" for a reason.

Also, I like mechanically new domain better, it's more refined, but I do not like the way Love domain was bulldozed out of the playtest before giving it it's one month of playtesting.

I think that there is room for both, but now Love domain should focus more on control that protection, and it had more protection than control in the first place.

again the developers didn't see fit to give it it's "one month of playtesting", given the changes made all around they're not as attached to it as some people want them to be.

 

[Panda-s1]

It should have stayed till the next round of UA, survey would have told what the broader community thinks of it.

Now it was just few loud people on Twitter, being loud=/=being right.

In the survey, we could have had questions:

1. Do you like the name Love domain?
A: Yes
B: No. Why "no" and what name can you suggest instead?

or

2. Did you like the general theme of the domain?

Yes

or

No, If no then why not and what should change?

etc...

and that's different from listening to social media how?

 

[Horwath]

and that's different from listening to social media how?

it's official tool for playtesting...?

twitter is NOT!

 

[Mr. Patient]

It should have stayed till the next round of UA, survey would have told what the broader community thinks of it.

I get it, and I respect your take here. But I still think there's a pretty good possibility that the developers themselves, once the concern was pointed out them, were glad to pull it and rethink their approach, rather than feeling pressure to do so. Like @Salthorae said upthread, we can't really know this, and, well, fair enough. I have zero proof. But I think if you have a look at the social media feeds, public statements, and overall online personae of (most of) the developers, you'd have a pretty good impression of where they stand on these sorts of issues.

 

[Panda-s1]

it's official tool for playtesting...?

twitter is NOT!

and........?

 

[Horwath]

yeah, no, just... ugh. we call it "mind control" for a reason.

what's with the "ugh"?

And partially, you are correct. It is mind control.

Lots of things in D&D are mind control. If you want to threw it all in the same bucket.

But, it can be separated in subcategories of what kind of mind control is.
And using your ability to love against you is one of the many ways it can work.

 

[Olrox17]

and that's different from listening to social media how?

Are you implying that professionally crafted surveys are going to yield feedback of the same quality than a bunch of comments on Twitter?
Because if that’s what you’re saying, I disagree.

 

[Panda-s1]

what's with the "ugh"?

And partially, you are correct. It is mind control.

Lots of things in D&D are mind control. If you want to threw it all in the same bucket.

But, it can be separated in subcategories of what kind of mind control is.
And using your ability to love against you is one of the many ways it can work.

that's not the point, having love out of spontaneity is not the same as someone zapping it in your brain.

Are you implying that professionally crafted surveys are going to yield feedback of the same quality than a bunch of comments on Twitter?
Because if that’s what you’re saying, I disagree.

Mike Mearls or whoever: "oh man guys, the survey gave the Love domain a 7.2, that means it's not morally objectionable no matter what twitter says!"