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).

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!"

 

[Minigiant]

Again personally I see the Love domain more about stuns and attention than mind control and enthralls. More Hold Person than Charm Person. More Presence than Dominate in VTM terms.

To me, a Cleric of Aphrodite or Freya is holding you still with a loving attention so you don't see the Assassin Rogue about to gut you.

~And IIIIIIIII will always looo-huurgurggle.~

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

Don't make light the traumatic experience of assault victims. That's pretty thoughtless.

I didn't. But I'll not ignore the fact that people discussing issues of morality in D&D could start by the fact that most D&D characters are ruthless contract killers with a natural bent for tomb-robbing and corpse-defiling before discussing if a love charm is a reasonable class feature. Isn't this the reason to have an "X Card" in the first place? It's always easier to remove things than put them back. If D&D cannot have a "cleric of Cupid" with proper Cupid powers, I'd argue that you're removing a whole branch of fantasy tales from the tree.

For myself, our games have been mostly PG-13 for the last 20 years or so, but I don't want to give a vocal Twitter minority the right to decide what has a place on my game or on anyone else's. We can choose it ourselves.

 

[Istbor]

The spell list could go with something like this:
1: Ceremony, Comprehend Language (the language of love!)
2: Warding Bond, Silence (speak now or forever hold your peace!)
3: Sending (love knows no frontiers), Life Transference
4: Aura of Life, Aura of Purity
5: Hallow, Dream

Channel Divinity: Follow the Heart
Allied creatures lose the charmed, frigthened, or any condition that would reduce their speed immediately and move up to their speed without provoking AoO. If they end their move next to an ally, their gain 5/8/10/15 thp.

You just HAD to say language of love didn't you!?

 

[gyor]

I would disagree here. From the perspective of emulating an acolyte of Aphrodite the powers are perfect. In the classic myths Aphrodite uses her powers to make people fall in love for her own personal gain or amusement. Making Helen fall in love with Paris being the most obvious example of this.

The question then becomes how much should one mind modern sensibilities when being inspired by stories nearly 3000 years old.

Also Cupids arrows making people fall in love. And love potion number 9.

Okay since my objections have largely been voiced by other already, how about true loves kiss as a Channel Divinity Power, kiss a creature and a mixed effect of Lesser and Greater Restoration and remove curse.

For spells I think Illusions would work well, disguise self, phantom force, major illusion.

Or the best opinion just rename it Passion Domain, which is easiest because this Domain was already very cool and I'd hate to lose it over people pearl clutching a little enchantment magic, it fiction after all.

 

[Panda-s1]

the fact that most D&D characters are ruthless contract killers with a natural bent for tomb-robbing and corpse-defiling

whoa there, I think we're hardcore projecting a bit on every D&D party ever here.

Isn't this the reason to have an "X Card" in the first place?

an X card is about helping people bring up they don't want to deal with a certain issue without having to go into a prolonged discussion.

It's always easier to remove things than put them back. If D&D cannot have a "cleric of Cupid" with proper Cupid powers, I'd argue that you're removing a whole branch of fantasy tales from the tree.

I don't think base D&D has ever shipped with a cleric that had love themed powers (maybe 2nd ed. had that as a sphere, I forget), so I'm not exactly sure what you're getting here when the article was "putting it back" in the first place.

For myself, our games have been mostly PG-13 for the last 20 years or so, but I don't want to give a vocal Twitter minority the right to decide what has a place on my game or on anyone else's. We can choose it ourselves.

and there's plenty of fanmade content to help you out with this. I find it a little hard to believe you've been upset about the lack of "Cupid" powers between now and the time 5e came out, unless this has been a thing in your campaign this entire time.

 

[gyor]

I didn't. But I'll not ignore the fact that people discussing issues of morality in D&D could start by the fact that most D&D characters are ruthless contract killers with a natural bent for tomb-robbing and corpse-defiling before discussing if a love charm is a reasonable class feature. Isn't this the reason to have an "X Card" in the first place? It's always easier to remove things than put them back. If D&D cannot have a "cleric of Cupid" with proper Cupid powers, I'd argue that you're removing a whole branch of fantasy tales from the tree.

For myself, our games have been mostly PG-13 for the last 20 years or so, but I don't want to give a vocal Twitter minority the right to decide what has a place on my game or on anyone else's. We can choose it ourselves.

I agree it's a shame we can't have nice things.

 

[Horwath]

Don't make light the traumatic experience of assault victims. That's pretty thoughtless.

no one is making light of anything.

some are just criticizing people that feel that they have a right to demand censorship on things.

By that standard, I could whine here that half of PHB should be scrapped.

And if everyone posted here what sh.t happened to them in real life, all that would be left of D&D would be to roll d20 and whoever rolls highest wins(I don't know what).

 

[Celebrim]

Wait until people find out 'Eros' isn't really well translated as 'love'.

Also, cupid arrows were rather defined by their power to overrule reason, so I'm really feeling like the problem here is people have never really seriously considered what a of a God(dess) of Eros actually implies, and are now shocked by the notion.

Strange how pendulums swing back and forth. At one time these opinions would have seemed "square" and prudish.

 

[ad_hoc]

because sometimes people just screw up, and if you persecute someone every time they make an honest mistake/reject someone who's trying to be better you're just setting up an impossible cliff to climb so why should people even bother.

Who is being persecuted?

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Who is being persecuted?

People who make honest mistakes.