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!"

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Some people really want a roofie domain, I guess!

Sure. Why not? We have far more depraved domains than that really. Myself and other people like their good and evil to be rich and complex. ESPECIALLY their evil. What i find more bizarre, personally, is that there are many people at all that DONT want one. Granted i understand why. Doesnt change that its bizarre. It's like not wanting a corruption domain. Or not wanting the various domains of sin thay archdukes reign over. Its weird to me.

 

[Horwath]

that's not the point, having love out of spontaneity is not the same as someone zapping it in your brain.

it is until you zapp out of it. Then you might have something to say to the zapper

Mike Mearls or whoever: "oh man guys, the survey gave the Love domain a 7.2, that means it's not morally objectionable no matter what twitter says!"

I would say that in general it is prudent to not take ANYTHING from twitter seriously.

 

[Panda-s1]

it is until you zapp out of it. Then you might have something to say to the zapper

and that magically undoes anything they might have done to you before you "zapp" out of it?

I would say that in general it is prudent to not take ANYTHING from twitter seriously.

okay tell that to the people who call it raving mob.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Well, that answered the question of whether or not they pulled the document because of the negative response to the Love domain. Honestly, I had suspected they simply pulled it because it was accessed early, and all this talk was just a bunch of people searching for a spicier narrative. But I guess I was wrong.

Really, though, they just deferred the issue. Unity is for all intents and purposes a completely different domain; the example Greek deity is Athena rather than Aphrodite (although if I may nitpick it sounds more like should be Hera or Hestia to me). So the question of "what would a Love domain look like?" is still out there. Maybe they kicked the can down the road because they want more time to work on the problems it presents. Maybe they decided they don't want to touch it at all.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Its startling how in some parts of twitter you can literally just look at what has a high approval rating to FIND many of the most morally objectionable things. Twitter's moral compass is generally bankrupt. No point even paying attention to it. Unless you wanna do what i just mentioned. Thats basically its only consistant use.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Or it could just be proof of philosophical incoherence on the part of the writers, akin to the sort of presumed incoherence of creating a Love domain and filling it with mind control magic. Should we not condemn the incoherence of good guys using mind control to dominate the weak willed now that we are aware of the problem, and for the same reasons?

You say incoherent writing, Marvel Comics calls it "Doctor Doom is a rich and multifaceted character. Oh, and Magneto, too."

And sorry, I thought I was clearer than I apparently was: Yes, Obi-Wan and company using Jedi mind tricks are, at best, using problematic superpowers. It's one thing when Rey does it to get released from shackles and the like, but there have been examples over the years of Jedi cavalierly using it in ways that almost certainly ruined or ended the lives of their victims, often when there was another way to accomplish their goals.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Its startling how in some parts of twitter you can literally just look at what has a high approval rating to FIND many of the most morally objectionable things. Twitter's moral compass is generally bankrupt. No point even paying attention to it. Unless you wanna do what i just mentioned. Thats basically its only consistant use.

Man, there are a lot of people on this message board who seem very intimidated by a larger, less moderated message board.

 

[Horwath]

and that magically undoes anything they might have done to you before you "zapp" out of it?

No, it does not. That is why I said they might have something to say. Something can be some words(probably profanity) or a simple hammer to the face.

okay tell that to the people who call it raving mob.

But seriously, I am not making my business decision based on twitter posts, us posting here about our hobby is just "shooting the breeze"

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Well, that answered the question of whether or not they pulled the document because of the negative response to the Love domain. Honestly, I had suspected they simply pulled it because it was accessed early, and all this talk was just a bunch of people searching for a spicier narrative. But I guess I was wrong.

Really, though, they just deferred the issue. Unity is for all intents and purposes a completely different domain; the example Greek deity is Athena rather than Aphrodite (although if I may nitpick it sounds more like should be Hera or Hestia to me). So the question of "what would a Love domain look like?" is still out there. Maybe they kicked the can down the road because they want more time to work on the problems it presents. Maybe they decided they don't want to touch it at all.

I like the idea of using ancient greece's original love deity hermaphrodite (this is actually a deity AND yes, its name was "hermaphrodite". Im not making it up. It was very early greece and from this concept breaking apart we eventually got aphrodite, eros, and hermes. It was a hermaphroditic deity. And i think it was cooler and less shallow than aphrodite.)

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

There is nothing in the class as published originally that was sexual assault.

There was an ability called "impulsive infatuation" that caused a target to use their reaction to make a weapon attack against a target you designated.

Oh and the Domain had the charm spell.

Mind control isn't Love. Read the 5E description of Charm. Victims know what's been done to them and don't like it.

The entire domain, as it was, was undercooked. We now have a better, more thought-through version.

Even without the presence of a social media site that upsets some people on this thread, I think it's very likely that WotC would have said this wasn't a publication-ready domain.