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

 

[Hussar]

I know it's a bad experience for a player to have their powers taken away. I just dont see why the patron would go along with a deal that one-sided logically. Internally consistent world-building is important to me. It's not just about appeasing the players who don't want their toys ever taken away.

But, that's almost impossible to answer.

What are the goals of a Far Realms power? Who knows? That's the point. Heck, the patron might not even be aware of the warlock's existence.

Good grief, the only outright evil basis for warlocks is the fiend pact. There's a boatload of other options here.

Personally I love the fact that DM's who think that a warlock should be bossed around by a patron would absolutely freak out if the same thing was suggested for clerics, who are FAR more intertwined with their diety. It's hillarious that I can play my cleric, never once referencing my deity, never once setting foot in a temple devoted to my deity, and basically being a fighter with healing spells, and that's perfectly fine. But, a warlock that doesn't let the DM tell him what to do? Oh hell no.

What a joke.

 

[Cadence]

In DTD there are multiple Elrics, and he walks a (literal) path between infinite multiple realities.

So, it's a different Elric (as there are multiple ones, and the other died)?

 

[Cadence]

But, that's almost impossible to answer.

What are the goals of a Far Realms power? Who knows? That's the point. Heck, the patron might not even be aware of the warlock's existence.

Good grief, the only outright evil basis for warlocks is the fiend pact. There's a boatload of other options here.

Personally I love the fact that DM's who think that a warlock should be bossed around by a patron would absolutely freak out if the same thing was suggested for clerics, who are FAR more intertwined with their diety. It's hillarious that I can play my cleric, never once referencing my deity, never once setting foot in a temple devoted to my deity, and basically being a fighter with healing spells, and that's perfectly fine. But, a warlock that doesn't let the DM tell him what to do? Oh hell no.

What a joke.

I feel like I missed a post. Who said they would enforce things on some/all Warlocks in their game but not on any of the Cleric or Paladins? It would seem bizarre to me to do for the former but not the later. Does the PhB not have similar words for those classes about working out what their duties are with th DM (like it does for the Warlock) and similar parts saying which powers they get from their own merits and which are granted?

 

[Iry]

Sure, and a very valid PC concept. But the default cleric is one with a good-faith relationship with their god.

I agree. Stereotypes exist for a reason, and must exist to be subverted. Need a candle to cast a shadow, and all that.

 

[Maxperson]

So, it's a different Elric (as there are multiple ones, and the other died)?

Sounds like it. So Elric lost. A different being with the same name did other things.

 

[Cadence]

Sounds like it. So Elric lost. A different being with the same name did other things.

Are they different... Bah. I get too much of that excrement in Marvel Comics.

 

[Maxperson]

Are they different... Bah. I get too much of that excrement in Marvel Comics.

Yes and no. I suppose on some level they are the same being, just like Elric, Erikose and Hawkmoon are all the same being. Different incarnations, though. On that level they are different and one can die while the others live.

 

[Cadence]

Yes and no. I suppose on some level they are the same being, just like Elric, Erikose and Hawkmoon are all the same being. Different incarnations, though. On that level they are different and one can die while the others live.

Who is Jean Grey this week?

(Undoing UXM #137 all the schlocky ways they have over the years, Claremont or not, is unforgivable).

 

[Greg K]

Who is Jean Grey this week?

(Undoing UXM #137 all the schlocky ways they have over the years, Claremont or not, is unforgivable).

The X-Men ended pretty much ended for me with Uncanny X-Men vol 1 227.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Umm… That’s a weird request. I mean, my own games. Also, like, every old-school killer dungeon?

It is absolutely an asymmetrical game, though in my opinion the DM’s goal isn’t to win, but to keep the game going. The players’ goal is to win (which is to say, to succeed in their goals, which may be character driven or adventure driven) and sometimes they fail to do so.

This is one way of DMing. Not the only way, certainly not the only good way, and not my preferred way. “Illusionism” is not something I strive for as a DM, and not something I want from the DM in a game I was playing in.

That's hardly a "good chunk". Your games, and petty lunchroom DM's out to kill their friends... so, yeah, some, but not representative. Most games the PC's win, because who wants to show up to get sand kicked in your face by a friend who holds all the power in the relationship?

I feel if you believe this, you simply haven't looked far enough behind the curtain and thought about your own biases and actions while DM'ing. You tils the axis when designing challenges, adventures, and the off-screen actions of the antagonists, allies, etc. You determine the odds, and how the story unfolds if the adventure goes off what was previously written, even moreso if you are improvising on the spot. Your own biases play into that, even subconsciously. If the players win, it's because you wrote a win condition that is achievable. The zen is accepting that it doesn't matter, and it's fun anyways.