Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Takes On Theurgy & War Magic

In the latest Unearthed Arcana from WotC's Mike Mearls and Jeremy Crawford, the wizard gets another look. This week's short two-page PDF includes two Arcane Traditions - Theurgy (wizards with divine patrons) and War Magic (wizards who use evocation and abjuration in combat). "After releasing the 28-page mystic last week, we have a short Unearthed Arcana installment this week: two Arcane Tradition options for the wizard. The Theurgy tradition has appeared in Unearthed Arcana before, but this time we’d like to gather playtest feedback on it. War Magic is an option we’re exploring after reading your feedback on Lore Mastery and seeing interest in a war mage option."
In the latest Unearthed Arcana from WotC's Mike Mearls and Jeremy Crawford, the wizard gets another look. This week's short two-page PDF includes two Arcane Traditions - Theurgy (wizards with divine patrons) and War Magic (wizards who use evocation and abjuration in combat). "After releasing the 28-page mystic last week, we have a short Unearthed Arcana installment this week: two Arcane Tradition options for the wizard. The Theurgy tradition has appeared in Unearthed Arcana before, but this time we’d like to gather playtest feedback on it. War Magic is an option we’re exploring after reading your feedback on Lore Mastery and seeing interest in a war mage option."


Screen Shot 2017-03-20 at 18.43.57.png
SaveSave
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lasymik

First Post
I like the Theurge wizard. First, I like the idea of character background besides one for a cleric of a character having their faith as an integral part of their identity and a source of power and influence on their skill set. Second, I think wizards as a character-class make a good match with a divine domain. There are certainly plenty of examples of wizards in fantasy literature with a spiritual, divine, or religious component. Third, it is a thematically appropriate way to give wizards a heal ability (I know there are various necromatic and "blood magic" spells that give heal abilities, too). I don't understand why clerics need to be the official "healers," it does not sound interesting to play a cleric as a "heal bot." Also, other classes have heal abilities and there are feats you can take to get heal abilities, so I do not see why people are concerned about the wizard getting some heal abilities. Fourth, since wizards have a special background in magic, I see no problem with giving certain cleric domain features to the wizard early at level 17. This subclass gets everything else LATER than a cleric would, so there should be some sweetener to choosing this subclass, or else why bother? Fifth, who cares that wizards already have access to lots of spells? Many of the official spells are weak or only useful in very specific situations. And, remember, you have to prepare spells in advance, which limits the benefit of having access to lots of spells. People throw silly fits about the wizard class being "overpowered" when there are so many magic-user classes now--nearly everyone and their mother can cast spells, and the wizard class lacks combat skills, wizards have to prepare spells, and ultimately they do not gain the same performance as many of the other classes as one progresses through the levels. Sixth, the Arcane Initiate feature of this subclass is really not that great because you have to take all the spells in your domain before you can choose other cleric spells. Many of the spells in many of the domains already ARE wizard spells (and you have to learn ALL spells in your domain), which means over the long course of leveling up, you are really only getting a limited number of cleric spells that you would really want. I would personally get rid of this "fill up your domain" requirement, as it would make this subclass easier to manage and more desirable to choose without really giving it that great of an advantage.

All in all, I think this is an interesting wizard subclass that would be fun to play and would add some flavor to a campaign. I do not see any problem with this subclass if it is played right and managed by the DM. And, as always if you don't like it, then don't use it in your game, but I see no reason why it should not be an "official" option for others to play.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

Argyle King

Legend
I like the Theurge wizard. First, I like the idea of character background of a character besides a cleric having their faith as an integral part of their identity and a source of power and influence on their skill set. Second, I think wizards as a character-class make a good match with a divine domain. There is certainly plenty of examples of wizards in fantasy literature with a spiritual, divine, or religious component. Third, it is a thematically appropriate way to give wizards a heal ability (I know there are various necromatic and "blood magic" spells that give heal abilities, too). I don't understand why clerics need to be the official "healers," not does it sound interesting to play a cleric as a "heal bot." Also, other classes have heal abilities and there are fears you can take to get heal abilities, so I do not see why people are concerned about the wizard getting some heal abilities. Fourth, since wizards have a special background in magic, I see no problem with giving certain cleric domain features to the wizard early at level 17. They get everything else LATER than a cleric would, so yes, there should be some sweetener to choosing this subclass, or else why bother? Fifth, who cares that wizards have already have access to lots of spells? Many of the official spells are weak or only useful in very specific situations. And, remember, you have to prepare spells in advance, which limits the benefit of having access to lots of spells. People throw silly fits about the wizard class being "overpowered" when there are so many magic-user classes now--nearly everybody and their mother can cast spells, and the wizard class lacks combat skills, has to prepare spells, and ultimately doesn't outperform many of the other classes as one progresses through the levels. Sixth, the Arcane Initiate feature really is not that great because you have to take all the spells in your domain before you can choose other cleric spells. Many of the spells in many of the domains already ARE wizard spells, which means over the long course of leveling up, you are really only getting a limited number of cleric spells that you would really want. I would personally get rid of this "fill up your domain" requirement, as it would make this subclass easier to manage and more desirable to choose without really giving that great of an advantage.

All in all, I think this is an interesting wizard subclass that would be fun to play and add some flavor to a campaign. I do not see any problem with this subclass if it is played right and managed by the DM. And, as always if you don't like it, then don't use it in your game, but I see no reason why it should not be an "official" option for others to play.



Choose the Arcana Domain and you likely already know all of the spells from that domain as a wizard.
 

Arnwolf666

Adventurer
I think they Theurgy archetype is way better than what they were doing in other editions. I'm not keen on warmage. I would like to swap out one of the abilities in warmage for that stupid spell sculpting ability where you may hurt your allies or you may not hurt your allies.
 

Lasymik

First Post
Choose the Arcana Domain and you likely already know all of the spells from that domain as a wizard.

Not in the beginning, and that is my point why it ends up being a burdensome restriction. If you choose the Arcana tradition at 2nd level as a wizard, you would not have all these spells in this domain in your spell book. You would have to add all these spells first before you could start swapping out cleric spells from other domains for wizard spells. If most of the spells in your chosen domain are already wizard spells, you have to add them to your spell book to fill up your domain requirement before you can branch out into cleric spells from other domains.
 

Hussar

Legend
Considering how many iconic wizard spells are poached by cleric domain lists, is it really a big deal to give a wizard a number of cleric spells to choose from?
 


jayoungr

Legend
Supporter
They have gotten love.

9 subclasses in the PHB. 1 in SCAG. 1 in an earlier UA. 2 here. That is 13 options.

And its a popular class with many popular options. Its not like sorcerer or ranger. Anyways, only the cleric came close to range of options in the PHB, and its not clear they needed to add 4 more.
UA options aren't official. And anyway, in this current round, everybody is getting more. It's not a zero-sum game.
 

Eubani

Legend
UA options aren't official. And anyway, in this current round, everybody is getting more. It's not a zero-sum game.
I think the point is that the time, effort and other resources spent on the Wizard would be better utilized elsewhere. The designers have pointed out design issues among several other classes and the Wizard already has so much that the attention is better spent on the classes that both the designers and feedback show need it far more. Books have limited space and for once in 40 odd years would it be such a terrible thing if the Wizard class stepped back a bit so that other classes can get what they need?
 

cbwjm

Seb-wejem
I think the point is that the time, effort and other resources spent on the Wizard would be better utilized elsewhere. The designers have pointed out design issues among several other classes and the Wizard already has so much that the attention is better spent on the classes that both the designers and feedback show need it far more. Books have limited space and for once in 40 odd years would it be such a terrible thing if the Wizard class stepped back a bit so that other classes can get what they need?
I think so. If all of the subclasses we've seen are for the mechanics expansion book out later this year, then I think every class should be represented even if some classes only have a single subclass added to the game.
 

jayoungr

Legend
Supporter
... for once in 40 odd years would it be such a terrible thing if the Wizard class stepped back a bit so that other classes can get what they need?
But this isn't preventing other classes from getting what they need. WotC has been working on the other classes too, and arguably working harder on them than on wizards.

Besides, I don't see why wizards should be singled out as the class that needs to "step back." As has been pointed out, there are more cleric options currently than wizard options. And let's face it, almost nobody currently plays some of the existing wizard options as PCs--I bet you don't see many conjurors or diviners, for example.

ETA: Also, if this is about an underlying worry about wizard dominance, the new options won't be absurdly powerful from what I'm hearing. If they even make it into the book.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top