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.

 

[SkidAce]

To be fair, Soth is based off Vader

You are not wrong, just a feeling I have is Vader's in a different category

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Both belongs to the trope of fallen hero.

 

[Merlecory]

Of Death Knights are so tired to paladins, why are they not a subclass? They went to the effort of making this a feat chain, but not the effort to make it appeal broadly to martials?

 

[Not a Decepticon]

Sure. It's also bad for anyone who doesn't hit people with weapons. And the lich is a mechanically bad choice for anyone, but particularly for non-casters, since it's strongest ability restores spell slots.

Lich Initiate is honestly pretty good on a damage dealer, if you keep killing enemies every turn iy is better damage than a dip into Fey Wanderer or Frost Walker Ranger. Transfer Life works with any Armor of Aghatys build to ensure you have temporary hit points too.

Poster boy Soth wasn't a paladin. Nothing forces fighters to have a bad charisma. And whilst having spell slots makes it slightly less bad mechanically, it's far from required.

However, the way D&D is balanced the game pretty much punishes you for not investing only in the Ability Scores important for the specific build. And Death Knight as an archetype is rather broad - a powerful undead warrior in vein of a Nazgul. Why just put such arbitrary limits to deny the chance to see how would one look on Barbarian or Monk?

And let's be honest, Solamnic Knights weren't Paladins only because paladins were not invented yet. One of Legends books even suggests old Solamnics pre-Cataclysm WERE Paladins and could cast divine spells.

These two paths are designed for a very specific type of player. They are not intended to be worth considering by every PC choosing feats.

Again, this limit feels arbitrary and against the design philosophy we have seen in 5.5, even if they are only roleplay focused feats, limiting them just limits possibilities of roleplaying by using them.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Can anyone think of an example of a female Death Knight from popular-ish media?

Anyways, as to the "why is this charisma-based?" question, I think there are two workarounds:

1. Make it player's choice as suggested
2. If they plan on releasing many feat-chain options (if the player base doesn't hate the concept) then perhaps they already have int-based and wis-based ideas in mind? I'm not entirely sure what those would be (actually Bladesinger would be a good one but that's taken)

 

[abazaba]

.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Can anyone think of an example of a female Death Knight from popular-ish media?

Asajj Ventress while in full night sister mode.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

Can anyone think of an example of a female Death Knight from popular-ish media?

Sylvannas Windrunner in WoW, Kalistra in League of Legends, Saber Alter in Fate: Heven's Fell, Joan d'Arc in Drifters.

Also, I know this is limited to my preferences, but Soulcatcher from Ten Who Were Taken in Chronicles of the Black Company.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Solamnic Knights weren't Paladins only because paladins were not invented yet.

Yes they were. Paladins were added to the game in the 1st edition AD&D PHB in 1978, Solomnic Knights (as a class) were added in Dragonlance Adventures (1987). Soth appeared before then (around 85), but with a Deathknight monster stat block.

Again, this limit feels arbitrary and against the design philosophy we have seen in 5.5, even if they are only roleplay focused feats, limiting them just limits possibilities of roleplaying by using them.

I think they may have started to notice that the blandification of 5.5 has gone too far. There is a lot of roleplay fluff for the Deathknight and Lich in the UA, with tables suggesting how they go their powers, etc. Note that UA normally cuts out most of the fluff. It's included here because it's important.

 

[Distracted DM]

Lich Initiate is honestly pretty good on a damage dealer, if you keep killing enemies every turn iy is better damage than a dip into Fey Wanderer or Frost Walker Ranger. Transfer Life works with any Armor of Aghatys build to ensure you have temporary hit points too.

However, the way D&D is balanced the game pretty much punishes you for not investing only in the Ability Scores important for the specific build. And Death Knight as an archetype is rather broad - a powerful undead warrior in vein of a Nazgul. Why just put such arbitrary limits to deny the chance to see how would one look on Barbarian or Monk?

And let's be honest, Solamnic Knights weren't Paladins only because paladins were not invented yet. One of Legends books even suggests old Solamnics pre-Cataclysm WERE Paladins and could cast divine spells.

Again, this limit feels arbitrary and against the design philosophy we have seen in 5.5, even if they are only roleplay focused feats, limiting them just limits possibilities of roleplaying by using them.

Yes they were. Paladins were added to the game in the 1st edition AD&D PHB in 1978, Solomnic Knights (as a class) were added in Dragonlance Adventures (1987). Soth appeared before then (around 85), but with a Deathknight monster stat block.

I think they may have started to notice that the blandification of 5.5 has gone too far. There is a lot of roleplay fluff for the Deathknight and Lich in the UA, with tables suggesting how they go their powers, etc. Note that UA normally cuts out most of the fluff. It's included here because it's important.

One big reason Solamnic Knights weren't paladins when we met them in the original Dragonlance books is because there were no holy powers in Krynn at that time. The gods had peaced out.

However they were founded because of a vision sent by the gods of good, they served said gods of good, they upheld oaths of honor ... honestly they're about as paladin-ey as you can get without being the proper class.