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

 

[Iry]

Actually expanding the PHB archetypes that were duds. Necromancers for exemple are pretty uninteresting. But they can't make a NEW Necromancer with as a pet subclass because... They already have a 'Necromancer'.

Tasha Beastmaster Ranger actually makes a great reskinned Necromancer. Entangle can become grasping skeletal hands, Fog Cloud has silent but screaming faces, Cordon of Arrows are sharpened bones, Spike Growth is an entire field of razor sharp bone shards, Conjure Animals are skeletal versions, etc.

Only strange part is deciding if you want to stick with cantrips, or reskin your weapon attacks.

 

[Charlaquin]

IMO neither should happen unless the player gives the green light.

That… is implicit in “the player and the DM work it out together,” yes.

As I get into later in this post...

That makes me intensely uncomfortable in the context of imagining myself as the warlock player in that paradigm.

Umm… Sorry? I don’t really know what to do with this information.

It seems to assume failure on the part of the PC, as a prerequisite to keep the dynamic you want.

Not at all. The PC can absolutely succeed - by rejecting their Patron’s power.

It also doesn’t allow for me to hypothetically use my power to directly physically fight my patron.

Yes, correct. Evil tools don’t achieve good ends. You can’t defeat the devil with power he gave you. You can deal with a bigger, badder devil, digging yourself deeper into the same hole, or you can make the hard choice and reject his power. Naturally, your patron is going to try to engineer situations where it seems like you have no choice but to use their power for the greater good. That’s the whole patron shtick, that’s how the manipulator wins. The way you win is by biting the bullet and taking the harder, but ultimately better, path.

Now, sometimes a patron is a creature that should be beyond even an Epic PCs ability to fight, but not always.

I agree. In fact, I think it’s generally more compelling if the patron can be fought and beaten, though generally as an endgame goal. And generally after the character has gone through some development and hopefully learned that using evil to fight evil is a losing strategy. Or not, if you’re into tragic protagonists.

And the manipulation angle doesn’t even need the “patron can take your powers” angle. The Ghost Rider dynamic is that the devil has no control whatsoever over Ghost Rider, but is constantly manipulating him and turning his victories into horrors. The writers could tell a story where Ghost Rider kicks the devil’s ass and then rides out of hell doing a wheely. All the devil can do about it is send minions to harass or kill him, or mete out retribution personally. What he will more likely do is, manipulate events to make Ghost Rider need his help or need soemthing he has, and smile wide when the Rider comes calling, all cards on the wrong side of the table, and ask what he’s willin’ to pay.

You seem here to have sandwiched a scenario with no tension between two scenarios that have excellent tension. Yes, I agree the devil should manipulate the Ghost Rider into situations where he has to rely on the devil’s power. That’s exactly what a good patron does. No, the Ghost Rider should not kick the devil’s ass and ride off doing a wheelie, that’s boring and lame and makes the devil look like a chump instead of a credible antagonist.

I can’t see any upside to a version of that story where the devil can take Ghost Rider’s power away on a whim.

It keeps the devil from looking like a chump. He knows what he’s doing, he’s not just handing out power that can be used against him, he’s lending it out to people he knows he can manipulate with it.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

How about we just make The Devil Went Down to Georgia the standard backstory for Fiendlocks?

On a more serious note, all this discussion prompted me to refresh myself on the story of Faust, and while the two major renditions - The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus by Marlowe, and Faust by Goethe - end differently (Marlowe''s Faust is eternally damned and carried off to Hell, while Goethe's Faust is saved by divine forces on account of his remorse and ultimately goes to Heaven), in both versions of the story, Mephistopheles never really demands that Faust do anything once the contract is signed. Rather, he seems to be content to assist in carrying out Faust's whims, the knowledge that the doctor's soul will be his upon death seemingly compensation enough.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That… is implicit in “the player and the DM work it out together,” yes.

Well, no. What I am saying is that it should up to the player, not the DM. That is not implicit at all in “the player and the DM work it out together.

Umm… Sorry? I don’t really know what to do with this information.

Not at all. The PC can absolutely succeed - by rejecting their Patron’s power.

If that choice is what the PC wants, sure.

Yes, correct. Evil tools don’t achieve good ends. You can’t defeat the devil with power he gave you.

Why not?

You can deal with a bigger, badder devil, digging yourself deeper into the same hole, or you can make the hard choice and reject his power. Naturally, your patron is going to try to engineer situations where it seems like you have no choice but to use their power for the greater good. That’s the whole patron shtick, that’s how the manipulator wins. The way you win is by biting the bullet and taking the harder, but ultimately better, path.

But that whole story, even if I agreed it was somehow the only good version of that story, doesn’t require the devil to be able to take the power away.

I agree. In fact, I think it’s generally more compelling if the patron can be fought and beaten, though generally as an endgame goal. And generally after the character has gone through some development and hopefully learned that using evil to fight evil is a losing strategy. Or not, if you’re into tragic protagonists.

You seem here to have sandwiched a scenario with no tension between two scenarios that have excellent tension.

Why on earth would the fight in hell not have tension!?

Yes, I agree the devil should manipulate the Ghost Rider into situations where he has to rely on the devil’s power. That’s exactly what a good patron does. No, the Ghost Rider should not kick the devil’s ass and ride off doing a wheelie, that’s boring and lame and makes the devil look like a chump instead of a credible antagonist.

LOL what!? The Ghost Rider winning a physical confrontation and leaving as if he has actually won soemthing that matters only to find out that it meant nothing and he is still right where he was is lame and boring to you? Egads.

It keeps the devil from looking like a chump. He knows what he’s doing, he’s not just handing out power that can be used against him, he’s lending it out to people he knows he can manipulate with it.

I...just completely disagree. Nothing about the power not being able to be taken back makes the devil look like a chump.


Edit: Here’s the thing...I have never seen a story where the devil has control and could just flip the switch whenever they want, that does’t turn into a series of forced “gotchas” that reduce the player’s agency.

 

[Kurotowa]

If you say "The weapons of my enemy are tainted and will only lead down a dark path, we need to hold to the tools of the righteous even if it means a harder path" then congratulations, you're excellent Paladin material. However if instead you take the attitude "A tool is a tool, what matters is who wields it, and obviously my enemies have to be formidable to stand on my level, so their weapons must be potent and thus I should steal them the first chance I get" then the path of the Warlock is much more your speed.

Sure, the occasional Warlock stumbles into their pact via altruism or blind luck, but all of them are looking to take the crooked path to power. If you were willing to put in years of diligent study you'd be a Wizard and if you were capable of selfless service you'd be a Cleric. Warlocks are the people who said "There's got to be a better (easier) way" and were canny enough to score an actual good deal instead of falling for the mystical equivalent of clickbait scams that end with you being a disposable cultist to whatever dark power owns your soul.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

If you say "The weapons of my enemy are tainted and will only lead down a dark path, we need to hold to the tools of the righteous even if it means a harder path" then congratulations, you're excellent Paladin material. However if instead you take the attitude "A tool is a tool, what matters is who wields it, and obviously my enemies have to be formidable to stand on my level, so their weapons must be potent and thus I should steal them the first chance I get" then the path of the Warlock is much more your speed.

Sure, the occasional Warlock stumbles into their pact via altruism or blind luck, but all of them are looking to take the crooked path to power. If you were willing to put in years of diligent study you'd be a Wizard and if you were capable of selfless service you'd be a Cleric. Warlocks are the people who said "There's got to be a better (easier) way" and were canny enough to score an actual good deal instead of falling for the mystical equivalent of clickbait scams that end with you being a disposable cultist to whatever dark power owns your soul.

Exactly. John Constantine doesn’t win by taking the high road after learning a valuable lesson. In one book, he wins by using the city of New York as a power battery for a spell, and playing the Fae against some demons, and just barely staying one step ahead of all of them. That’s the sort of thing I’m at the table for if I’m playing a warlock whose Patron is antagonistic.

 

[Charlaquin]

Well, no. What I am saying is that it should up to the player, not the DM. That is not implicit at all in “the player and the DM work it out together.

What you said was “neither should happen unless the player gives the green light,” which, yes, is implicit in “the player and the DM work it out together.” If the player didn’t give the green light, the DM didn’t work it out with them, they just decided on their own. If what you meant was the player should decide and the DM should have no input then yeah, I disagree with that.

If that choice is what the PC wants, sure.

It’s something we’d work out together.

Why not?

Because that’s a theme I don’t want to compromise on in my game?

But that whole story, even if I agreed it was somehow the only good version of that story, doesn’t require the devil to be able to take the power away.

Again, the appeal for me is in the unbalanced power dynamic. If the patron doesn’t hold the power in the relationship, what’s the point?

Why on earth would the fight in hell not have tension!?

LOL what!? The Ghost Rider winning a physical confrontation and leaving as if he has actually won soemthing that matters only to find out that it meant nothing and he is still right where he was is lame and boring to you? Egads.

I...just completely disagree. Nothing about the power not being able to be taken back makes the devil look like a chump.

Whatever, I guess Ghost Rider isn’t a great analogy. Like I said, I’m not very familiar with the comic.

Edit: Here’s the thing...I have never seen a story where the devil has control and could just flip the switch whenever they want, that does’t turn into a series of forced “gotchas” that reduce the player’s agency.

Ok, now we’re getting somewhere. I find this is usually at the heart of most objections to the DM being able to make calls like this. I’m sorry that’s been your experience, but that’s not how I run the game. I’ve said a couple times now that I’ve never had a patron take away a warlock’s powers in actual play, and that I imagine if I ever did it would be something that unfolded over the course of a campaign, with buy-in from the player. At a certain point you either believe me or you don’t.

 

[Charlaquin]

If you say "The weapons of my enemy are tainted and will only lead down a dark path, we need to hold to the tools of the righteous even if it means a harder path" then congratulations, you're excellent Paladin material. However if instead you take the attitude "A tool is a tool, what matters is who wields it, and obviously my enemies have to be formidable to stand on my level, so their weapons must be potent and thus I should steal them the first chance I get" then the path of the Warlock is much more your speed.

Yes, warlocks do indeed tend to be tragic characters who fall into bad deals out of a misguided desire to turn the tools of evil to good purpose. That’s part of the appeal of the character archetype. And part of the fun is playing to find out if that gets the better of them and ends tragically, or if they eventually learn better and turn it around.

Sure, the occasional Warlock stumbles into their pact via altruism or blind luck, but all of them are looking to take the crooked path to power. If you were willing to put in years of diligent study you'd be a Wizard and if you were capable of selfless service you'd be a Cleric. Warlocks are the people who said "There's got to be a better (easier) way" and were canny enough to score an actual good deal instead of falling for the mystical equivalent of clickbait scams that end with you being a disposable cultist to whatever dark power owns your soul.

Yes, warlocks do seek an easy path, but the easy path is never good. And while they may think they’re the one who’s clever enough to have found an easy path, to think they’ve outsmarted the devil, it is this very hubris he preys on most effectively.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The DM really needs to keep their own moral code out of it. It's up to the players to decide if the ends justify the means, or if they want to win from a moral high ground. This is where player agency is most important. In a fantasy story, "players win" is an almost inevitable outcome. Buy HOW they win is the player's choice.

 

[Charlaquin]

On a more serious note, all this discussion prompted me to refresh myself on the story of Faust, and while the two major renditions - The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus by Marlowe, and Faust by Goethe - end differently (Marlowe''s Faust is eternally damned and carried off to Hell, while Goethe's Faust is saved by divine forces on account of his remorse and ultimately goes to Heaven), in both versions of the story, Mephistopheles never really demands that Faust do anything once the contract is signed. Rather, he seems to be content to assist in carrying out Faust's whims, the knowledge that the doctor's soul will be his upon death seemingly compensation enough.

Which is pretty consistent with how I portray my warlock patrons. There’s no actual contract the way I run them, simply an offer of patronage. Again, the patron mostly just wants to see what the warlock will do with the power once given to them, and is largely content to leave the warlock to use it however they see fit. But, as an artist’s patron might do, they may occasionally suggest something - usually something seemingly quite reasonable. The warlock is under no obligation to do it, of course. There’s no contract, no terms of service. But your patron so generously gives you this power, demanding nothing in return. What’s a little favor to keep them happy with the arrangement?