Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Mages of Strixhaven

An Unearthed Arcana playtest document for the upcoming Strixhaven: Curriculum of Chaos hardcover has been released by WotC!

"Become a student of magic in this installment of Unearthed Arcana! This playtest document presents five subclasses for Dungeons & Dragons. Each of these subclasses allows you to play a mage associated with one of the five colleges of Strixhaven, a university of magic. These subclasses are special, with each one being available to more than one class."

News Archive | Dungeons and Dragons

Read the full archives of Dungeons & Dragons news, Sage Advice, Unearthed Arcana, and D&D Studio Blogs.

dnd.wizards.com

It's 9 pages, and contains five subclasses, one for each the Strixhaven colleges:

• Lorehold College, dedicated to the pursuit of history by conversing with ancient spirits and understanding the whims of time itself
• Prismari College, dedicated to the visual and performing arts and bolstered with the power of the elements
• Quandrix College, dedicated to the study and manipulation of nature’s core mathematic principles
• Silverquill College, dedicated to the magic of words, whether encouraging speeches that uplift allies or piercing wit that derides foes
• Witherbloom College, dedicated to the alchemy of life and death and harnessing the devastating energies of both

 

[Parmandur]

Doesn't work.

You can't learn to be a warlock. You have to be made or cursed into one.
If Titania cheats you into Silverquill, you'll be taught to be a bard or wizard. Your teachers cannot make you into a fey warlock unless one of them is a high fey who can make pacts.

That's the standard D&D flavor...but flavor is fungible, if needed, and they have fudged the core Class flavors for both Ravnica and Theros already.

 

[Charlaquin]

Why are they not Warlock (level 1)/Wizard (rest of the levels) multiclass then? If they eschew the gifts of their patron, why they gain more warlock spells and invocations etc? If these things can just be learned in a school, how is this thematically and metaphysically different from wizardry?

Frankly, I don’t think most people care about that.

 

[Yaarel]

Ok, maybe “universal” is a bit of a stretch, but calling them “multiple-class subclasses” would be even more confusing, and calling them “classless” would be just plain wrong.

"Shared archetypes"?

 

[Faolyn]

Why are they not Warlock (level 1)/Wizard (rest of the levels) multiclass then? If they eschew the gifts of their patron, why they gain more warlock spells and invocations etc? If these things can just be learned in a school, how is this thematically and metaphysically different from wizardry?

To continue with my art analogy, I'm naturally pretty decent with pen and pencil. If I take a class on figure drawing or landscape art to hone my skills, I learn to improve the way I draw people or landscapes when I use a pen, but I don't suddenly become good with watercolor or clay sculptures or digital art.

Sorcerers and warlocks are taking classes that improve their innate (or granted) magic, but they aren't learning wizard magic, which is a different type. A sorcerer, a warlock, and a wizard may take the same class, but they aren't using the same form of magic, even if their spells produce the same result.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The issue is that the more they do this, the more the old material becomes outdated. Take, for example, the recent trend of races and feats that grant spells X times between long rests now also allowing you to use your own spell slots to cast those spells. Fantastic innovation, and something that in the 4e era they would have gone back and errata’d old races and feats to do. But since WotC is allergic to errata this edition, those old features are just stuck feeling outdated forever. A new edition, or at least a revised edition, would allow them to bring those old features into line with more recent design innovations.

Yeah. And not errating the old stuff creates newbie traps. How are new gamers supposed to know that the stuff in older books is weaker?

 

[Faolyn]

Yeah. And not errating the old stuff creates newbie traps. How are new gamers supposed to know that the stuff in older books is weaker?

I imagine that the people who introduced them to the game will tell them that the new stuff is stronger.

And if it's a group of people who, despite having no prior knowledge of how to play D&D, then it probably doesn't matter.

Also, I've noticed, on reddit at least, that people are willing to do lots of research on this matter, in the form of googling "what's the best fighter subclass?"

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I imagine that the people who introduced them to the game will tell them that the new stuff is stronger.

And if it's a group of people who, despite having no prior knowledge of how to play D&D, then it probably doesn't matter.

Also, I've noticed, on reddit at least, that people are willing to do lots of research on this matter, in the form of googling "what's the best fighter subclass?"

This should not be responsibility of the players. Intentionally creating newbie traps is utterly terrible design.

 

[Minigiant]

That's not necessarily how Warlocks work in MtG, though. Warlocks don't have specific Patrons, they just use Black Mana. It seems that these options eschew the flavor of a patron entirely, while keeping the overall structure.

MTG typically don't have specific patrons but they still some sort of black mana creature to start the process and draw power from.

What makes you a warlock is that power from another being unlocks or fuels your spells. A caster who uses black mana but never draws power from a black creature would advance as a wizard, sorcerer, cleric, or bard, not a warlock.

 

[Parmandur]

MTG typically don't have specific patrons but they still some sort of black mana creature to start the process and draw power from.

What makes you a warlock is that power from another being unlocks or fuels your spells. A caster who uses black mana but never draws power from a black creature would advance as a wizard, sorcerer, cleric, or bard, not a warlock.

The PHB and Xanathar's both point towards flavor options to minimize and essentially eliminate the Patron as an active entity
A Warlock is a short-rest recharging full caster, the flavor can be negotiated.

 

[Faolyn]

This should not be responsibility of the players. Intentionally creating newbie traps is utterly terrible design.

Well, actually, it kind of should be on the players to determine what class best fits what they want to play. (Also, don't forget that this is a playtest, and UAs are always a bit high-powered and then get nerfed a lot.)

But at any rate: if a newbie gets into D&D because of Strixhaven, they'll likely buy the PH and this book, and that's it. That's a very limited number of archetypes to look through and compare.

Also, is it really good to perpetuate the idea that you have to be powerful in order to "win" D&D?