Dungeons & Dragons releases Villainous Options playtest

Wizards of the Coast has released a new playtest featuring four new "villainous" subclasses, along with two more feat paths designed to transform characters into either a lich or a death knight. Today, Wizards released a new "Villainous Options" Unearthed Arcana. The new document contains four subclasses - a Pestilence Domain Cleric, a Circle of the Titan Druid, a Hell Knight Fighter, and a Demonic Sorcerer, alongside feat paths intended to slowly transform a player character into either a lich or a death knight. While previous D&D books have brought back the concept of mini-feat trees, these villainous paths are intended to be used at every opportunity a feat can be taken.

The Pestilence Domain cleric's core ability allows it to confer exhaustion levels on opponents via use of Channel Divinity. Enemies who die while having one or more Exhaustion level can explode and inflict necrotic damage on others. The capstone ability allows the Cleric to transform into a swarm of pestilence-infused pests.

The Circle of the Titan Druid has a Wild Shape ability that transforms them into various kinds of kaiju-esque monsters, which eventually become gargantuan in size.

The Hell Knight Fighter deals extra Infernal damage that varies in type depending on the ability and eventually transforms foes into minor devils upon their death.

The Demonic Sorcerer likewise grants various kinds of sorcerer abilities Abyssal effects, culminating in the ability to summon a demon to the battlefield once per day for free.

The path feats are interesting - both culminate with a feat that can only be taken at Level 12 or higher and requires a player to have at least two other feats from the feat path. Death Knights gain a pool of Death Points that fuel various abilities, while the Lich gains a Soul Jar and eventually gains the mechanical benefits of being a lich.

The playtest is open now, with a playtest survey launching next week.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Who should it, they are not knights? Different classes are different. Making all classes the same, devoid of any lore or fluff, is what blandification is. If you don’t want class choice to have any significance you can play a classless system.

And this sort of attitude is why people dismiss class based design as only leading to cookie cutter characters where what you pick at level 1 dictates your destiny.

And if you think a paladin who is also a death knight is no different from a monk who is also a death knight then the problem is that you think that a paladin is no different from a monk (or that three feats utterly drowns out the underlying class, which simply isn't true). If that is the case then the problem has nothing to do with the fact that both can use feats to become a death knight on top of their class.

When it comes to being bland what D&D 5e is desperately short of is meaningful character development choices to make after level 3 without leaving your class. The choice to take transformational feats like the Death Knight set is finally something.

Two clones at level 4 in most classes will remain near clones by level 11, just equipped differently (remember that for most classes spells are equipment you change on a long rest) with precisely one different feat choice. This is irrespective of what both have done, with e.g. one campaigning through hell and the other dancing a dance of courtly intrigued. But a Death Knight is at least substantially different from a non-death knight.

To call this admittedly minor attempt to prevent characters being mechanically nearidentical no matter how they gain their levels "blandification" breaks my irony meter.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

Filled the survey, this UA has a lot of things to criticise

 

[Paul Farquhar]

And if you think a paladin who is also a death knight is no different from a monk who is also a death knight then the problem is that you think that a paladin is no different from a monk

Way to completely miss the point.

As already pointed out, death knight is a role playing choice . It has nothing to do with mechanics, it’s the story that is important. It’s the story of a character who falls (and is possibly redeemed) from a code of chivalry. Ergo, it’s the fluff of the class that matters, not the mechanics. Most paladins and some fighters are fluffed as knights. Monks are usually fluffed as mystics, holy men and pugilists. They have a different sort of code (and a different path that suited them better could be made). Conan the Barbarian does not became a death knight despite raping, murdering and plundering his way across the land, because he has no chivalrous code to break and get angsty about.

The blandness comes from removing the narrative themes that go with the class choice and reducing it to a set of mechanics.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Filled the survey, this UA has a lot of things to criticise

Yeah, made a bunch of suggestions for the titan, suggested a fix for warlock liches being broken after level nine and red lighted hell knight and demon sorcerer for being dull.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Way to completely miss the point.

As already pointed out, death knight is a role playing choice . It has nothing to do with mechanics, it’s the story that is important. It’s the story of a character who falls (and is possibly redeemed) from a code of chivalry. Ergo, it’s the fluff of the class that matters, not the mechanics. Most paladins and some fighters are fluffed as knights. Monks are usually fluffed as mystics, holy men and pugilists. They have a different sort of code (and a different path that suited them better could be made). Conan the Barbarian does not became a death knight despite raping, murdering and plundering his way across the land, because he has no chivalrous code to break and get angsty about.

The blandness comes from removing the narrative themes that go with the class choice and reducing it to a set of mechanics.

Way to completely miss the point. The Death Knight is a character who falls from a code - but because you want all members of all classes to be cookie cutter you are scrubbing away the uniqueness of individuals and then declaring other options to be "blandification".

The example in question is of the monk - and stereotypically the monk is the most physically disciplined class in the game (Drunken Masters not withstanding). Does physical discipline often go with moral codification? Yes. So are paladins often physically disciplined and monks morally codified? Also yes. They are neighbours. And despite being not the same often have overlapping themes

Now is it likely that Conan the Barbarian would become a Death Knight? No. Not for probably most barbarians. But Ilmore the Zealot becoming a Death Knight? Sure; he's paladin adjacent anyway even if he can't lay on hands and has serious anger issues. Jaz the Orc Slayer giving up his life and soul to be able to kill more orcs? Again yes. Not all barbarians are cookie cutter clones of Conan despite your best efforts to scrub the detail and uniqueness out of the game. (I'd also argue Conan isn't part of the barbarian class in 5e but that's another story).

Your position is absurd as telling musicians that because notes are in the middle of the range of one instrument other instruments may not play it. In any piece of music. Now I get that going classless makes every instrument into a piano - but there is utterly no reason to mark a phrase of music "trumpets only" just because it is in the middle of the trumpet range. Especially if the trombone is also doing trombon-y glissandos that the trumpet simply can't do as part of the wider piece that the trumpet can't do and the trumpet is also going into its high register and using valve work the trombone can't. And I've nothing against the violin picking up the same musical phrase - which doesn't turn the violin into a trumpet. Now me? I like leitmotifs being shared between different instruments - and that doesn't somehow mysteriously make them the same instrument.

 

[abazaba]

The Survey is not working for me. It opens a page to download the PDF but no link to the survey.

That's odd. When I log into my DNDBeyond account, the link to the survey is right here :
Claim Unearthed Arcana now! - D&D Beyond
(https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/ua/villainous-options)

Perhaps you looked to soon, before the survey was live ? You might just have looked before it was made available.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Does physical discipline often go with moral codification

Different code, different tropes. You could have a dark path suitable for a monk, but it needs to be different from the death knight, with its focus on knightly tropes like wrathfully smiting enemies with a big sword and galloping around on a fiendish horse.

Death Knight is an example of a dark path, its not the only one the game will ever have.

Monk - I would go for someone who whilst meditating sent their spirit wandering too far into the astral plane and came into contact with a GOO. Because that’s a monk type dark path story that would have monk type abilities attached. Which would key off wisdom.

 

[Remathilis]

Different code, different tropes. You could have a dark for a monk, but it needs to be different from the death knight, with its focus on knightly tropes like wrathfully smiting enemies with a big sword and galloping around on a fiendish horse.

Death Knight is an example of a dark path, its not the only one the game will ever have.

Monk - I would go for someone who whilst meditating sent their spirit wandering too far into the astral plane and came into contact with a GOO. Because that’s a monk type dark path story that would have monk type abilities attached. Which would key off wisdom.

It's like a dark monk idea would be tied strongly to the monk identity. Like it's subservient to the monk class. A sub class, if you will.

Also it's called the way/warrior of Long Death. Bring it back WotC, you cowards!

 

[Neonchameleon]

Different code, different tropes. You could have a dark for a monk, but it needs to be different from the death knight, with its focus on knightly tropes like wrathfully smiting enemies with a big sword and galloping around on a fiendish horse.

Death Knight is an example of a dark path, its not the only one the game will ever have.

Monk - I would go for someone who whilst meditating sent their spirit wandering too far into the astral plane and came into contact with a GOO. Because that’s a monk type dark path story that would have monk type abilities attached. Which would key off wisdom.

And that is because you want cookie cutter classes where members of a class may not do things like another class unless they are explicitly permitted to and the options are kept as few as possible. And you literally want to pre-writte the stories before seeing what happens in play.

And your "monk type dark path" is based round an ability that monks only got at level 18 in 2014 and no one noticed when it disappeared in 2024. It's not a very good monk type dark path because it's based on an incidental thing very few monks can do and even fewer have as a focus.

So let's write a better one. A core of the monk is physical discipline. So let's amp that up and take it on a dark path. The flesh will do what it is told. And not only the monk's flesh but the monk becomes an expert in making the flesh of others do what it is told, hurting them more with attacks. Until eventually the flesh of the monk only does what is told and doesn't even breathe without instruction. Their heart doesn't even beat without instruction. For all practical purposes the flesh of that monk is dead.

That is a monk path based on core monk themes. And mechanically what is the difference between that and the existing Death Knight path? Basically the fireball.

But because you want cookie cutter non-overlapping classes you are trying to prevent this from happening all in favour of some nonsense round a peripheral ability the 2014 monk didn't get until level 18 and is so peripheral the 2024 monk doesn't get it at all

 

[Neonchameleon]

It's like a dark monk idea would be tied strongly to the monk identity. Like it's subservient to the monk class. A sub class, if you will.

Also it's called the way/warrior of Long Death. Bring it back WotC, you cowards!

The problem with subclasses that tells a story is that the story is pre-written. You gain the abilities at the preset levels no matter what you have done or decided in the meantime. Hit that subclass at level 3 and you are locked in for the next 17 levels unless you die, the campaign ends, you stop monking, or the DM lets you change subclasses entirely, effectively erasing your past.

Subclasses are good for many things - but they are terrible at "lure of power" stories or other stories based on choices made by the character. Feats aren't ideal but are way better.