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).

Status
Not open for further replies.
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!"
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Salthorae

Imperial Mountain Dew Taster
I'd say they improved it.

Regardless of how you feel about the change, a change was made to it that appears based on social media backlash.

My statement of disappointment isn't related to the domain itself, but the ability of social media backlash to influence decision making in such a rapid manner. Especially for something that is just playtest material.

I wish they had stuck to their guns and taken the feedback in their surveys as the UA mechanic is designed to work, and THEN made any changes to the domain and either re-issue in a new playtest or publish as the changed version.
 

log in or register to remove this ad




prabe

Tension, apprension, and dissension have begun
Supporter
Regardless of how you feel about the change, a change was made to it that appears based on social media backlash.

My statement of disappointment isn't related to the domain itself, but the ability of social media backlash to influence decision making in such a rapid manner. Especially for something that is just playtest material.

I wish they had stuck to their guns and taken the feedback in their surveys as the UA mechanic is designed to work, and THEN made any changes to the domain and either re-issue in a new playtest or publish as the changed version.

They got feedback, they changed the class. This happened more quickly than you (or I) might have preferred, but they got to a better end point, probably closer to the whole tying-people-together thing they were aiming at. People who haven't been following the tempest in the Internet's teapot will be able to react to and judge the material without subtextual date rape lurking or looming. I do not have a problem with this.
 


Celebrim

Legend
And who said Charm spells should be removed from the game exactly?

I don't think anyone has said that directly, but if we take seriously some of the claims made, then absolutely we should either remove them from the game or explicitly tag them as "[Evil]" and move them to a supplement on evil.

Let's approach the question in a slightly different game and setting:

Should a Light Side Jedi be allowed to use a Jedi Mind Trick without acquiring a Dark Side point?
 



prabe

Tension, apprension, and dissension have begun
Supporter
I don't think anyone has said that directly, but if we take seriously some of the claims made, then absolutely we should either remove them from the game or explicitly tag them as "[Evil]" and move them to a supplement on evil.

Let's approach the question in a slightly different game and setting:

Should a Light Side Jedi be allowed to use a Jedi Mind Trick without acquiring a Dark Side point?

I think it depends, but I am not (at this point) inclined to see charm spells as inherently evil. Heck , I don't even think necromancy needs to be inherently evil (though I haven't entirely houseruled it not to be (yet)).
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top