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

 

[Yaarel]

In my game warlocks are just infused with power, so this doesn't apply to them, their power is their own once given. Though in theory the character could take some actions which might result that power being removed, for example a character infused with cthulhoid essence could seek to have that purified and removed somehow, and as that is the source of their powers the powers would go with it. But again this is something the player would knowingly choose. What they cannot decide, that they purify themselves of said essence and still retain their powers, as that goes against the established and agreed upon fiction.

I agree with this. Especially as DM, I prefer narrative adjudication − deciding what happens because that is what makes most sense according to the story. Only if the story itself is ambiguous, would there be dice rolling.

This particular narrative sounds more like a sorcerer to me, narratively, where the body is being infused with an aberrant nature. In which case, purifying the body would also remove the magical power source.

However, regarding the Warlock, the official narratives seem confusing or confused. For example, the Warlock does study magic and understand it. Ultimately, the patron is simply a mentor who teaches magic, and the Warlock is an apprentice who studies magic. The flavor is similar to Wizard, while the Warlock pact is more like a school enrollment. Once someone learns something, that knowledge cannot really be taken away.

In any case, the narrative explanation matters, and often defines what is narratively possible or impossible.

And ultimately in D&D the GM controls NPCs and other such setting elements. So sorry, I simply don't believe that the player can just declare that a god whose central stated purpose is the opposition of demons is suddenly super cool with their clerics summoning and cavorting with demons.

If there is a philosophical dispute, or an ethical dispute, that can unfold narratively. If I recall correctly, members of the same religious tradition can and do disagree with each other, and even schism. Multiple points of view are simultaneously possible, while each point of view continues to wield the divine power source.

Often, the immortal is simply one more person with an opinion about the divine power source − while multiple opinions are valid.

But I believe respecting the fiction, and things having consequences.

Yes.

If you leave your magic items unguarded in the middle of a market place teeming with thieves and other shadowy individuals, then you don't get to be upset if they got stolen even though they're part of your 'character concept.'

If it is on the player character sheet, tread lightly.

Personally, adventure situations such as a prison scene where all the items have been removed, are never fun. I would rather them not happen. If the scene is unavoidable because of narrative circumstances, certainly dont languish in the scene.

Similarly, an NPC thief who steals a precious item can be violating for some players. Make sure the players are into the possibility. And if taken, allow a sidequest to get it back. But again, this doesnt sound fun.

 

[Yaarel]

See that bolded point. That's what I mean by the DM holds all the power. Even if it's not 100%, it really doesn't matter. The power imbalance is so extreme that it might as well be 100%. The only option the player has is to vote with their feet. That's it. Either accept what the DM is cooking or don't play. Whereas the DM can do anything from booting the player from the group to completely accepting the player's idea.

How in the world is that NOT a completely imbalanced power relationship? And, frankly, what's wrong with being a "yes-man to the player's whims"? See, this right here is just so indicative of how deeply ingrained in the gaming culture that DM's must jealously guard every single thing or those poxy players will just take advantage of the game and destroy it. Loosen the grip. Honest. It makes for better games. There's a REASON that virtually no non-D&D style game published in the last 20 years builds that level of imbalance into the game. There's a very good reason why things like Fate and whatnot build upon the notion that EVERYONE at the table is responsible for everyone's good time and that consensus gaming is far, far preferable to top down.

The problem is, D&D hasn't really gotten that message yet. 5e is predicated on beliefs in how tables work from decades ago. No, the players are not going to turn you into a "yes man to their whims". Why would they do that? How would that be fun for them? They're not going to enjoy it, so, they don't do it. Why presume that your players are so immature that they can't be responsible for the campaign world?

Rotating the DM solves much of this.

Sometimes the players are inspired about what kind of adventure to do, and ask for a volunteer to DM it. Sometimes a DM has an adventure in mind and asks if the players are into it.

A DM typically runs the adventure until everyone levels up, but sometimes a DM can run for a tier (four levels), or even two or three tiers.

The same characters go thru different DMs. The cooler part is the new characters are often the kids of the high powered characters, or have some other connection to the earlier connections. So the inworld becomes rich and ambient, and players invest deeply.

 

[Weiley31]

I agree with this. Especially as DM, I prefer narrative adjudication − deciding what happens because that is what makes most sense according to the story.

I'll admit that I do the same thing/or view it like that when it comes to a few rulings I have done. My very first ever time in DMing a session, there was a Druid in this party of 3(composed of a Necromancer and a Barbarian as well). They took a detour through a Forest that was so dense with trees, the sunlight couldn't really peak through. They were then ambushed by a group of about 7 Goblins. Now due to the location, said Goblins had Sunlight Sensitivity.

So the Druid casts Moonbeam, and I ruled, upon the beam hitting the ground, that the impact point of said beam slammed into the ground hard and caused a bright flash in the general vicinity of the woods, where the fight was taking place. I ruled that the sudden bright flash took the Goblins by surprised and triggered their Sunlight Sensitivity because their eyes were too accustomed to the lack of sunlight coming down through the trees. This caused the ENTIRE group of Goblins to all fall down and become prone on the ground and the party rolled for surprise. The actual Moon Beam damage itself probably only took out two Goblins legitly at best.

Yes I was fully aware that I had given this fight to the PCs on a Silver Platter. To me, however, the idea of a sudden blast of light, going off in close proximity to beings, who have a sensitivity to light, would have that kind of effect. Which made sense. Shrugs.

 

[Yaarel]

People keep ignoring my character death question, but it's no joke; it is the same thing.

Heh, I dont recall the question.

But yes, the death of character can be traumatic in reallife. Especially, the first character death of a new player who invests.

Even so, D&D has workarounds, even for the death. It is even possible for a DM to do an adventure for the ghost. Plus there is resurrection magic that teammates can implement or acquire, or even a nearby philanthropic mage who notices what transpired.

I feel strongly, the Reincarnation spell needs to be a slot 1 spell, available at level 1. It should allow a player to write up a new character who incarnates the earlier character with continuity of memory and so on, to soften the blow of the death blow.

I remember the death of my first character, a level 6 multiclass Elf. In highschool, that was definitely traumatizing, and I still remember the character vividly. But now, in 5e, there are many possibilities to recontinue this particular character. Actually the character was killed by a werewolf, so perhaps technically might not be dead, but instead become a werewolf. A werewolf can be a playable character, especially with Tashas custom lineage. I am torn whether to represent the Fighter/Wizard a 5e Bladesinger or a 5e Eldritch Knight. In D&D, it is possible to heal a past harm.

So death is violating, yet not necessarily the end of the story.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

This particular narrative sounds more like a sorcerer to me, narratively, where the body is being infused with an aberrant nature. In which case, purifying the body would also remove the magical power source.

However, regarding the Warlock, the official narratives seem confusing or confused. For example, the Warlock does study magic and understand it. Ultimately, the patron is simply a mentor who teaches magic, and the Warlock is an apprentice who studies magic. The flavor is similar to Wizard, while the Warlock pact is more like a school enrollment. Once someone learns something, that knowledge cannot really be taken away.

Official warlock fluff is messy and confused. Either they continuously channel the power from the patron, in which case why they're not clerics? Or the patron just teaches them magic, in which case why are they not wizards? Or, as you note, if the patron permanently infuses the warlock with power, how they're different from sorcerers? My answer to this was that they're not different from sorcerers, so I combined the two classes into one and there is no separate sorcerer class. So that's why my metaphysics sounded sorcerery.

If there is a philosophical dispute, or an ethical dispute, that can unfold narratively. If I recall correctly, members of the same religious tradition can and do disagree with each other, and even schism. Multiple points of view are simultaneously possible, while each point of view continues to wield the divine power source.

Often, the immortal is simply one more person with an opinion about the divine power source − while multiple opinions are valid.

I mean if the metaphysics are that the deity directly channels power to the clerics, the god's opinion kinda matters a bit more!

Though your comment reminded me of the old joke of four rabbis arguing about some theological question, one disagreeing with other three. The rabbi with divergent opinion prays for the God to give sign that he's right. Clouds part and from the midst of blinding light a booming voice is heard, "Yes, you're correct!" The other three rabbis shrug and say: "So now it's three against two. So what?"

Personally, adventure situations such as a prison scene where all the items have been removed, are never fun. I would rather them not happen. If the scene is unavoidable because of narrative circumstances, certainly dont languish in the scene.

I disagree. It's fine, it's more than fine it's fun. Sure, permanently losing the items might not be so great, but being temporarily limited is perfectly fine. This is a super common narrative trope and it can be explored in games just fine.

 

[Yaarel]

I'll admit that I do the same thing/or view it like that when it comes to a few rulings I have done. My very first ever time in DMing a session, there was a Druid in this party of 3(composed of a Necromancer and a Barbarian as well). They took a detour through a Forest that was so dense with trees, the sunlight couldn't really peak through. They were then ambushed by a group of about 7 Goblins. Now due to the location, said Goblins had Sunlight Sensitivity.

So the Druid casts Moonbeam, and I ruled, upon the beam hitting the ground, that the impact point of said beam slammed into the ground hard and caused a bright flash in the general vicinity of the woods, where the fight was taking place. I ruled that the sudden bright flash took the Goblins by surprised and triggered their Sunlight Sensitivity because their eyes were too accustomed to the lack of sunlight coming down through the trees. This caused the ENTIRE group of Goblins to all fall down and become prone on the ground and the party rolled for surprise. The actual Moon Beam damage itself probably only took out two Goblins legitly at best.

Yes I was fully aware that I had given this fight to the PCs on a Silver Platter. To me, however, the idea of a sudden blast of light, going off in close proximity of beings having a sensitivity to light, would have that kind of effect, which made sense. Shrugs.

The beauty of this approach is, all the players start thinking narratively, visualizing what is in the scene (that they can exploit to their benefit!). So the game becomes immersive and fluid.

And a tactic that works in one situation wont necessarily work the same way in an other situation.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I feel strongly, the Reincarnation spell needs to be a slot 1 spell, available at level 1. It should allow a player to write up a new character who incarnates the earlier character with continuity of memory and so on, to soften the blow of the death blow.

I feel strongly that all resurrection magic, (except Revivify which is basically just intensive CPR) should be removed from the game. I don't like character death being common in games, but death should absolutely matter. Removing death is massive drama and tension killer.

 

[Yaarel]

I mean if the metaphysics are that the deity directly channels power to the clerics, the god's opinion kinda matters a bit more!

Though your comment reminded me of the old joke of four rabbis arguing about some theological question, one disagreeing with other three. The rabbi with divergent opinion prays for the God to give sign that he's right. Clouds part and from the midst of blinding light a booming voice is heard, "Yes, you're correct!" The other three rabbis shrug and say: "So now it's three against two. So what?"

An immortal is only one among many who learn how to channel the divine power source. It seems anyone can learn how to do it. Consider the Paladin who wields the divine power source by means of an ethical oath.

Regarding Rabbinic Judaism, the different points of view are all the Divine point of view. For one thing, the discussion with people who disagree (constructively, honestly, and in good faith) helps each person move beyond ones own finite point of view, and collectively become more open to the infinite, and more sensitive to the Divine Infinite. By contrast, "my way or the highway" is almost a kind of idolatry in the sense of serving a finite image.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

An immortal is only one among many who learn how to channel the divine power source. It seems anyone can learn how to do it. Consider the Paladin who wields the divine power source by means of an ethical oath.

This simply is a matter of specific setting's metaphysics. In many settings paladins are also part of certain sects and their power comes from a deity. You can have things to work in any way you want in your setting. Personally I want divine magic to be characterised by the caster being an intermediary; it's not their power, they're channelling power of deity/spirit. That in my mind it sets it apart from the arcane.

 

[Yaarel]

Regarding the conflictive narratives of the Warlock, I lean toward Wizard mentor and apprentice, you lean toward Sorcerer bodily transformation. Both are fine. And whichever narrative the character creation adopts has narrative consequences.

I feel strongly that all resurrection magic, (except Revivify which is basically just intensive CPR) should be removed from the game. I don't like character death being common in games, but death should absolutely matter. Removing death is massive drama and tension killer.

The possibility of death is important because it creates tension when a player takes a risk, and is good for the game and is good for the story.

Even when afterlife and resurrection are available, death often comes with extreme narrative consequences. So the narrative consequences of death still cause tension. There usually is some kind of loss. There is a sense of failure. The current adventure often ends. Those precious items might be elsewhere or found and who knows where. The reincarnated is no longer the earlier identity. The outofbody mind as an immaterial spirit is a different mode of being and the earlier mode is dead. Or so on.