D&D 5E WotC Shares Theros Table of Contents

WotC has shared the table of contents of Mythic Odysseys of Theros. Well, part of it, at least.

Update -- thanks to "obscureReviewer" on Twitter, here's a fuller image!

 

[Parmandur]

And no reason it needs to be limited to that time frame

With UA, timeframe is vital due to their publishing schedule. There was only one spell, a general damage cantrip, in the Theros phase, recall, the Psionics test started in the Q4 product timeframe after they shifted focus.

How much? I will take that bet for the Astral monk coming back.

One bazillion Internet points!

 

[Weiley31]

It seems that it is simply a variant rule that just gives every character a Feat at Level 1, with some new Feats, whether or not the best usual Feat variant is in play or not. The text goes so far as to just point to the Feats in the PHB as good additional options for the rule.

So what your trying to tell me, is that I'm now gonna have my players start off with ONE racial feat from the Racial Feat UA and ONE Supernatural Gift feat at level 1?

Sure, I'll allow it.

 

[Weiley31]

Im still surprised to see no hoplite fighter archetype.
Something that makes spears good.

Odyssey of The Dragonlords Players Guide actually HAS the Hoplite Fighter Archetype, Hoplite fighting style, and a damage die increase for Spears.

And I see no probs at all with the idea of combining Theros and Odyssey of the Dragonlords together for all your Greek D&D needs.

 

[3catcircus]

Yep, just one more in a long line of 5e products I could care less about.

 

[Mistwell]

I said Theros would be the next MtG setting back when Ravnica was announced. Just...here to remind everyone. ^^

And what will be next after that, you think?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I am not defending the blackface. Far from it.

Your explicit argument is that "no one" was bothered by Oriental Adventures, and it was just "they" decided it was a problem:

Cultural appropriation was not a thing back then and no one was offended by it.

Blackface was always racist.

Oriental Adventures was always a bunch of white people from colonialist powers describing the region in terms that, even at the time, were condescending and clueless. People complained at the time and asked how come TSR couldn't find anyone from, you know, Asia to be involved. (People in Asia spoke English in the 1980s, in fact, and Gygax made a big deal of bringing in a Frenchman to work at the company, so bringing in international writers could be done.)

People did not "decide" decades later this stuff was a problem. It was always a problem. People said so. But other people didn't want to listen.

Trotting out your "Oriental" friends who said they were OK with it doesn't make it better.

 

[Parmandur]

Yep, just one more in a long line of 5e products I could care less about.

I'll alert the media.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't believe this at all. They would never put 12+ subclasses in a setting book. Let's list them:

1. Barbarian and Monk. The barbarian is wild-magic/fey in theme. The monk is the Astral Self. Both of these are Planescape, not Magic: the Gathering or Theros.
2. Sorcerer and Warlock. The sorcerer is the Aberrant Mind, which is connected to the Far Realm, but is now the Psionic Sorcerer. The Warlock is the Lurker in the Deep, which is more connected to the Elemental Plane of Water or krakens than M:tG or Theros.
3. The two theros subclasses.
4. Cleric, Druid, Wizard. The cleric seems to be shadowfell, if they're doing Planescape, but I'm not sure. Druid is Wildfire, which is 100% elemental plane of fire. The Wizard is Onomancy, which is true naming, so that's the Lower Planes/Fiends. That's Planescape, not M:tG.
5. Fighter, Ranger, Rogue. Fighter is the Rune Knight, not M:tG. Ranger is Swarmkeeper, which is connected to fey, so that's Planescape. The rogue is now the Phantom rogue, which is undeniably connected to planescape, not M:tG.

Those are the 12 subclasses that lead up to the class feature variants. I don't see any of those being connected to Theros or M:tG.

Feywild theme, Shadowfell theme, true naming, wildfire, and phantom rogue...none of these are necessarily related at all to Planescape.

They don’t have much obvious tie to MtG either, though they each do have pretty clear mana color applicabilities, but neither are they “undeniably” Planescape related.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

When they add subclasses, they have to ask themselves two questions: "Does it Fit D&D?" and "Does it Fit this book?"

The first question is actually harder to answer, for the most part, than the second (and it's the question they're trying to answer in the UAs) In addition, the first question needs to consider the mechanics more (though it also needs to consider that the subclass needs a unique story identity). The second question just needs to ask if the theme is at all appropriate for the book. It's relatively easy to bend the fluff to fit a book's theme. (In particular because they are all D&D).

What a subclass in a book doesn't have to do, is to be the only subclasses that would fit that book. What I mean here, is that if they have a subclass that (for example) would fit Theros, but it's not ready in time, they can tweak it to go in a future book easily enough. As long as they pick the best few subclasses that are ready to go, they can keep the rest that are in development for later.

 

[Parmandur]

Feywild theme, Shadowfell theme, true naming, wildfire, and phantom rogue...none of these are necessarily related at all to Planescape.

They don’t have much obvious tie to MtG either, though they each do have pretty clear mana color applicabilities, but neither are they “undeniably” Planescape related.

WotC is pretty dedicated to making any option fairly transplantable. That the 5 UA in September-October last year were for Theros seems pretty obvious now, due to the publishing window and the involvement of F. Wesley Schneider in writing those articles per the bylines (Schneider is the first credited writer in Theros, not coincidentally). That they fit Magic thematically helps.