Yesterday, Wizards of the Coast expanded the ongoing playtest material for Dungeons & Dragons and published subclasses part 2.
It introduced the College of Creation for bards, the Love Domain for clerics and the Clockwork Soul for sorcerers.
Today, the page has been removed and the PDF of subclasses 2 replaced by subclasses 1.
While copies of subclasses 2 have been downloaded and no doubt exists in caches across the internet, it is clear that WotC does not want the content to be propagated any further at this time. Geek Native wishes to respect that and will not be sharing the download we have.
There’s been no official explanation, yet, as to why the content has been removed. However, there was controversy over the idea of the Love Domain overnight.
It’s speculation but could Wizards of the Coast be re-evaluating the content?
What’s in the Love Domain?
The Love Domain isn’t about sexual or erotic love, although it did mention fertility deities when citing examples where gods and goddesses in ‘real-life’ and fiction that could be associated with love.
The domain was introduced:
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.
Here are the powers, as initially published, with a summary of their effects.
Emboldening Bond – a bond is forged between two willing creatures. As a result of the bond, when the allies are nearby, they both have bonuses to certain roles.
Channel Divinity: Impulsive Infatuation – “Overwhelm a creature with a flash of short-lived by intense admiration for you, driving them to rash action in your defense.” The affected creature must attack a target you designate, and if there are no valid targets, then the creature admires you instead. The effect lasts until the start of your next turn.
Protective Bond – The bond you forge between people shields them from harm. If the bonded creatures are close enough together, then they can use their reactions to grant resistance to all damage to the other.
Enduring Unity – A bond that endures across vast distances. It grants advantage on some rolls, resistance to damage and a hit point transfer if one of the bonded creatures is reduced to 0 hit points.
The “Charm Person” spell is not new and part of the 5e SRD.
You attempt to charm a humanoid you can see within range. It must make a Wisdom saving throw, and does so with advantage if you or your companions are fighting it. If it fails the saving throw, it is charmed by you until the spell ends or until you or your companions do anything harmful to it. The charmed creature regards you as a friendly acquaintance. When the spell ends, the creature knows it was charmed by you.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, you can target one additional creature for each slot level above 1st. The creatures must be within 30 feet of each other when you target them.
You might like...
Is Wizards reconsidering the Love Domain
We don’t know.
There was something of a backlash against the Love Domain but it remains to be seen whether those concerns are centred around the idea of magically messing with ‘love’ or specific text in the playtest.
Wizards have removed the content. Perhaps, though, it was released ahead of schedule, perhaps other errors were spotted, the potential reasons for the removal are numerous.
However, it seems likely that when WotC are ready that Bards, Clerics and Sorcerers will get new subclasses for the Unearthed Arcana playtest in due time.
You're welcome to share observations about this article in the comments.
You showed the tweet that basically said it wasn’t ready to be released yet. My understanding was someone found it by blind guessing.
Also, charming people to “love” you is nothing new in D&D why is it suddenly causing an outcry? Many love dieties in mythology and fiction did force their target into love. Hell Cupid shoots you into loving someone whether you wanted to or not.
The new classes were openly published on the site. No guessing required.
There’s usually very strict protocols before anything is published on any site run by a publicly listed company. It is possible someone hit the button before everything was ready but it would be odd. Why would the web team even have an unfinished PDF. Not impossible, just strange, even if that’s what the tweet hints at.
I suspect we’ll be told the document was just published early and by mistake, though.
This is some clickbaity BS. Gotta make sure yall dont show up on my suggested feed again
I’ve approved this comment but I’m surprised and disappointed that you didn’t find the content of this post to match the headline. WotC have withdrawn subclasses 2 and there has been a debate over the Love Domain. Hopefully, both of those things weighed fairly in the post.
Hahaha, a female got upset about the Love Domain cleric, so WotC has to find a female to tell them if it is ok or not.
PS- There’s nothing wrong with the Love Domain. lol
That’s purely speculation though. Men and women were alarmed at the love domain. WotC removed subclasses 2. The question is whether the two are connected.
Wow guys. It wasn’t actually released. Someone found the link before it was officially published. Your entire article is based around unpublished material
Hi Lachlan. That’s incorrect. It was published in the Unearthed Arcana section of the D&D website. Here’s a link to a screengrab showing (a cached) version of the page
If this is about a perception of sexually inappropriate content, it would not be the first time. In similar scenarios, years ago the Magic branch of WotC stopped printing a card for the Planeswalker Garruk that appeared to show him grabbing Liliana by the throat and forcing her against a rock in a very sexual-predator-like pose. And the D&D branch of WotC quickly removed content from a con in the early 5e days after “Tyranny of Dragons” was misprinted missing a Y, turning it into a common slur used against trans people. WotC’s owner Hasbro is swift at removing potentially… Read more »
LOL @ “Tranny of Dragons”, what’s the challenge rating?