August's Unearthed Arcana

[DracoKnight]

We're just waiting now. I tweeted Mearles two days ago, and he said we're getting it today. Quote: "Yes, I should hope so - I wrote one!"

I hope it makes up for the...interesting article that we got last month :smalltongue:

[Quintessence]

We're just waiting now. I tweeted Mearles two days ago, and he said we're getting it today. Quote: "Yes, I should hope so - I wrote one!"

I hope it makes up for the...interesting article that we got last month :smalltongue:

Bracing myself for disappointment already, I expect nothing and WotC still lets me down.

[ZX6Rob]

He had another tweet out that mentioned "fixing something that had been bothering [him] for a long time about D&D" or something very much like it. I don't know if that means a new/improved character option, or if it's something more general to the system as a whole. He did say this morning that he's ruling out a fix for the Beastmaster ranger, as they're "not there yet". Still! Exciting. Looking forward to it -- UA's been good to me more often than it's been bad. Last month's was a letdown, especially after the delay caused me to get all anticipatory about it, but hopefully this one will be a solid entry.

[DracoKnight]

He had another tweet out that mentioned "fixing something that had been bothering [him] for a long time about D&D" or something very much like it. I don't know if that means a new/improved character option, or if it's something more general to the system as a whole. He did say this morning that he's ruling out a fix for the Beastmaster ranger, as they're "not there yet". Still! Exciting. Looking forward to it -- UA's been good to me more often than it's been bad. Last month's was a letdown, especially after the delay caused me to get all anticipatory about it, but hopefully this one will be a solid entry.

A better fighter, maybe?? Lol, the fighter's not too bad this Edition. I'd still rather play a barbarian or a rogue if I'm going martial, though.


Bracing myself for disappointment already, I expect nothing and WotC still lets me down.

Well, even if it is disappointing, at least it won't be overhyped like last month's :smalltongue:

[Belac93]

I hope it's a new character option, and not another bunch of expansion rules that should have been in the DMG from the start. I'm hoping for beastmaster rangers.

[ZX6Rob]

I hope it's a new character option, and not another bunch of expansion rules that should have been in the DMG from the start. I'm hoping for beastmaster rangers.

It's buried in the replies section of his Twitter feed, but someone already asked him this and he pretty much said "no".



"@jstormtracker1 that's a little soon, but I might have something I'm working on right now... #WOTCstaff"


We'll get there eventually, but it sounds like that's still a ways off.

[Anonymouswizard]

Bracing myself for disappointment already, I expect nothing and WotC still lets me down.

I'll be happy as long as it's actually functional, unlike last month's one. I mean, it's free so I'm not expecting anything spectacular, but I feel like I can ask for working.


A better fighter, maybe?? Lol, the fighter's not too bad this Edition. I'd still rather play a barbarian or a rogue if I'm going martial, though.

Yeah, I'm currently playing a fighter and it works, but I'm wishing that I had gone barbarian (as I'd have been less likely to multiclass). Oh well, if this character dies the next one will be a Variant Human Barbarian, hopefully with the UA Spear Master feat, looking to found his own mercenary company.

I'm hoping it's something to bring martials up to spellcaster levels, but who knows? Maybe it's rules for a non spell slots caster (which is actually what I'm hoping for).

[ZX6Rob]

I'm hoping it's something to bring martials up to spellcaster levels, but who knows? Maybe it's rules for a non spell slots caster (which is actually what I'm hoping for).

Well, they do have the spell points variant in the DMG. Was that not to your liking, or is there another system that you'd like to see for spellcasting?

[Anonymouswizard]

Well, they do have the spell points variant in the DMG. Was that not to your liking, or is there another system that you'd like to see for spellcasting?

Well, I don't own the DMG, but I meant one who isn't limited in how often they can cast. I sort of see spell points as a slots alternative, and I meant a spellcaster who doen't use the same limitations.

Okay, to put it better, a caster who's primary limitations aren't 'per unit of time'.

[Cybren]

Well, I don't own the DMG, but I meant one who isn't limited in how often they can cast. I sort of see spell points as a slots alternative, and I meant a spellcaster who doen't use the same limitations.

Okay, to put it better, a caster who's primary limitations aren't 'per unit of time'.

That is not the sort of thing you can fit in an unearthed arcana... that's more like "another game entirely"

[treecko]

A better fighter, maybe?? Lol, the fighter's not too bad this Edition. I'd still rather play a barbarian or a rogue if I'm going martial, though.

I feel like fighter will get so much better the more feats are released. If your DM bans feats than the class is far worse the barb/paladin. Rogues are about the same way, but more sneaky/skilled. The UA with the weapon feats was the best buff a fighter could ask for.

[Anonymouswizard]

That is not the sort of thing you can fit in an unearthed arcana... that's more like "another game entirely"

Yeah, I don't own the DMG because I don't run 5e because of this exact reason. However it could work, call it 'binder' or something and make it 'only X powers active at once'.

...I might need to head to the Homebrew section.

[Vorpalchicken]

Well there's the warlock with a bunch of at-will invocations. And certain monks have some flashy at-will powers. If you want your wizard to cast cone of cold all day every day though, the fighters are going to get a little envious.

Also concentration already limits most spells to amount active at one time = 1, so your "limitation" sounds more like an added feature..

[Belac93]

Yeah, I don't own the DMG because I don't run 5e because of this exact reason. However it could work, call it 'binder' or something and make it 'only X powers active at once'.

...I might need to head to the Homebrew section.

I like this idea. The mystic UA is kinda a hybrid between these two; they do have power points, but you also focus on a discipline to gain powers. I'm hoping that the final class will have the ability to concentrate on more than 1 at once.

[Anonymouswizard]

Well there's the warlock with a bunch of at-will invocations. And certain monks have some flashy at-will powers. If you want your wizard to cast cone of cold all day every day though, the fighters are going to get a little envious.

Also concentration already limits most spells to amount active at one time = 1, so your "limitation" sounds more like an added feature..

Eh, I'm thinking more along the lines of:

You have X... let's call them Vestiges, that you have active, out of a total list of Y. Each has a couple of powers, a 'passive' one that increases your abilities somewhat, and an 'active' one that acts more like a spell. However, the powers would be balanced to assume that, so instead of spamming Come of Cold all day long, you might something closer to a cantrip (maybe beefed up a bit).

But the idea is I want a caster type who has no 'per time unit' limits, even though I know it's probably too big for a UA.

[R.Shackleford]

Bracing myself for disappointment already, I expect nothing and WotC still lets me down.

Its... got a good idea but holy crap have I seen better homebrew.

The Theurge wizard is broken. Like... at least at first glance.


Notes

Divine Arcana: BA (uses channel divinity) +2 to next spell attack or next spell DC.

So 1 to 3 times per short rest you can use a bonus action to get a +2 DC on your next spell...

[treecko]

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/faithful

Here we are

[Anonymouswizard]

The Theurge wizard is broken. Like... at least at first glance.

Annoyingly I'm now trying to get the GM to let me change my character, as the Theurge wizard is actually what I wanted when my character multiclassed Cleric. Honestly, the Channel Divinity analogue isn't what I want, it's the entire flavour behind the class and the mixing of wizard and cleric spells. I'm not convinced of the high level ability, but I wasn't planning more than 10 spellcasting levels anyway.

[R.Shackleford]

Annoyingly I'm now trying to get the GM to let me change my character, as the Theurge wizard is actually what I wanted when my character multiclassed Cleric. Honestly, the Channel Divinity analogue isn't what I want, it's the entire flavour behind the class and the mixing of wizard and cleric spells. I'm not convinced of the high level ability, but I wasn't planning more than 10 spellcasting levels anyway.

The RAI of it seems to allow you, if you took both 1st level spells from the domain, to pick up any 1st Level cleric spell as a wizard spell going forward.

Holy crap is that... once you pick up 4 spells from the domain list you are looking at Spritual Weapon on the Wizard.

You get 2 free spells per level up... I need to look into this a bit more...

Fun times if you are a caster at least!


Edit

Might I add that the domains you can pick from have wizard spells on them?

Which means you can start picking the lower level ones up at first level and start grabbing cleric spells at level 2.

Now those lower level spells aren't too bad but... man... I was hoping they wouldn't just super charge wizards with options this time... options sure, but this might get crazy.


Edit
I really want to make a wizard who does this with the land druid tho. I mean, if we are doing it we may as well go all the way...

Time to brew!

[treecko]

So the mystic doesn't actually get to use his wizard level on cleric channel divinities that use that, like light. So looks like the best domains are ones where all the domain spells are good, the channel divinity is not gimped by having 0 cleric levels, and the lv 17 feature is good. War would be nice if a wizard could actually do melee, although a few fighter levels might patch it up a bit. The real winner here is the storm domain.

[Xethik]

Not sure what is better:
Wizard with Spiritual Weapon or +2 DC to your next spell cast?

Eh who cares, get both at the same time.


Might I add that the domains you can pick from have wizard spells on them?
Well I believe those are recommended domains for any Theurgist. Sounds like you can go with any domain that your deity offers, if you prefer.

[R.Shackleford]

Not sure what is better:
Wizard with Spiritual Weapon or +2 DC to your next spell cast?

Eh who cares, get both at the same time.


Well I believe those are recommended domains for any Theurgist. Sounds like you can go with any domain that your deity offers, if you prefer.

Holy crap you are correct, any domain is fair game :p

[JumboWheat01]

Ooh... I like that new pact for Warlocks. While I know any Warlock could be Good, this one really feels like it fits best with that alignment row. I might consider it a bit more.

[R.Shackleford]

Ooh... I like that new pact for Warlocks. While I know any Warlock could be Good, this one really feels like it fits best with that alignment row. I might consider it a bit more.

I feel like I need to make a sailor moon warlock.

[Anonymouswizard]

The RAI of it seems to allow you, if you took both 1st level spells from the domain, to pick up any 1st Level cleric spell as a wizard spell going forward.

Holy crap is that... once you pick up 4 spells from the domain list you are looking at Spritual Weapon on the Wizard.

Umm.. not quite.

You need to have all your domain spells before you can starting adding any cleric spell. Also, you only get one cleric spell per level if, for whatever reason, your newly 4th level wizard has both the 1st level and both the 2nd level spells from his domain in his spellbook then, RAW at the very least, you have to learn two wizard spells at level up. only at level 10, when you could theoretically have all the spells from your domain, can you start taking any cleric spell you want.

This is still really powerful, but not quite as broken as it seems. Of course, most people will take one of the cleric spells every level, and so be cherry picking cleric spells by 11th level at the latest, but it does give a rather nice divinely inspired wizard feel.

[MaxWilson]

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/faithful

Here we are

I had previously believed they were being very careful to ensure that cleric spells could never be gained as wizard spells, but apparently not because this UA completely violates that precept. Whoops! Here comes Spell Mastery: Cure Wounds!

[RulesJD]

Uhhhhh War domain or Tempest are clearly the best choices.

War for the domain spells, Tempest for the lol eat a maximized Chain Lightning twice per short rest.

I guess Life domain is solid as well if you basically want to be an awesome blaster (Spiritual Weapon + blast spells) + awesome healer. Aka completely negate the need for your party's cleric.

[R.Shackleford]

Umm.. not quite.

You need to have all your domain spells before you can starting adding any cleric spell. Also, you only get one cleric spell per level if, for whatever reason, your newly 4th level wizard has both the 1st level and both the 2nd level spells from his domain in his spellbook then, RAW at the very least, you have to learn two wizard spells at level up. only at level 10, when you could theoretically have all the spells from your domain, can you start taking any cleric spell you want.

This is still really powerful, but not quite as broken as it seems. Of course, most people will take one of the cleric spells every level, and so be cherry picking cleric spells by 11th level at the latest, but it does give a rather nice divinely inspired wizard feel.



"If you add all of your domain spells to your spellbook, you can subsequently opt to add any spell from the cleric spell list instead. The spell must still be of a level for which you have spell slots."

This can mean one of two things, but knowing wotc the rai will benefit the wizard drastically (I hope not)

1: once you learn all the domain spells that you can, you may start learning other cleric spells.

2: you need to learn all 10 spells (9th level ish ) then you may go back and add spells.

Either way, powerful.

However with how WotC tends to run these things, I'm guessing that 1 is RAI.

[jas61292]

Love the concepts, and I actually really like the Warlock.

But that Wizard is just hideously full of loopholes and exploits, and it doesn't even have many unique and interesting features. Its just a cleric subclass thrown on the wizard. The is absolutely nothing to like about this subclass other than its flavor.

[Belac93]

First impressions:

Seeker
Basic Idea: Alright, not my favourite, but a decent concept. Off to a good start.
Expanded Spell List: All of these seem good. Also, note that this is the only warlock patron that does not give any combat spells in their spell list.
Shielding Aurora: Seems alright. Resistance to all damage is a little iffy, but not unbalanced as it is only for 1 round. I'm wary of the automatic damage, but it isn't a lot. Makes this character instant death against any CR 0 creature.
Astral Refuge: The poor man's time stop. Like an action surge, but you can only use it for buffing. Not overpowered, but not terrible either.
Far Wanderer: Like a mix between the undying and fiend patrons. 2 resistances has the potential for abuse, but they already have resistance with their 1st level ability, and they don't have the option to switch it around like fiend warlocks do.
Astral Sequestration: One free short rest in 5 minutes. Pretty good ability, but not game breaking. Unless you are a party, entirely of these warlocks.

Overall, a pretty well thought out subclass, with a high potential for bladelocks. I would allow this in my game.

Pact of the Star Chain
Basic Idea: Seems a little boring, but we don't have a divination ability yet. I would change this to a crystal ball, and allow a warlock of any patron to take it.
Augury: Seems balanced, and tome warlocks can do this with book of ancient secrets.
Advantage on Intelligence Checks: Seems fine, not game breaking.

Pretty well done, but shouldn't be restricted to only the seeker warlocks.

Theurgy
Basic Idea: Nice concept, I like it.
Divine Inspiration: Doesn't actually have any mechanical effect.
Arcane Initiate: So, wizards can take cleric spells now? I could see life domain getting some abuse, and high level wizards can take any cleric spell. Kinda makes you wonder why you would play the priests in the first place.
Channel Arcana: In itself, doesn't do anything.
Divine Arcana: Holy jeezballs please god no! +2 to an attack roll or saving throw? And up to 2 times a rest through most of your career?! I do not like this ability, there is a reason we use advantage and disadvantage! Make it something different.
Arcane Acolyte: At least this doesn't let wizards have heavy armour. Decent ability.
Arcane Priest: Ehhh, this is getting too far into cleric territory.
Arcane High Priest: Alright, if you thought Divine Arcana was bad, say hello to this guy! Get the cleric's ability, 3 levels before they even get it!

Awesome idea, but they did if awfully. If you can be this then, from an optimizer's point of view, there is no reason to be a cleric!

[Cybren]

"If you add all of your domain spells to your spellbook, you can subsequently opt to add any spell from the cleric spell list instead. The spell must still be of a level for which you have spell slots."

This can mean one of two things, but knowing wotc the rai will benefit the wizard drastically (I hope not)

1: once you learn all the domain spells that you can, you may start learning other cleric spells.

2: you need to learn all 10 spells (9th level ish ) then you may go back and add spells.

Either way, powerful.

However with how WotC tends to run these things, I'm guessing that 1 is RAI.

I don't think any other human being on the planet would read it that way

[MaxWilson]

Awesome idea, but they did if awfully. If you can be this then, from an optimizer's point of view, there is no reason to be a cleric!

Playing Devil's Advocate here:

How about the fact that clerics (like druids) get access to their whole spell list? A wizard only gets access to a portion of that list, and he has to give up lots of his wizard spells in order to accomplish that. A wizard gets four 5th level spells; he probably has eight spells that he really wants, and can only take four of them; but if he's going to learn Raise Dead he now has to give up yet another spell, leaving him at three.

I dunno, man. I hate clerics from an RP angle, but mechanically they're pretty decent. (Druids are better.) Full spell list access is a significant mechanical benefit, unless you happen to be in a situation such that you can swap spells with other wizards, e.g. you have three wizards in the party already.

[RickAllison]

The Theurge is actually making me want to rebuild my wizard, though I'm not sure if I will. The theming of it is perfect for my wizard, though I would have to give up my Artificer subclass.

I am divided, though, because it means I lose my medium armor. Hmmmmm...

[MrStabby]

At first glance the arcane initiate seems to overrule the idea that you learn spells as a single classed character. It gives you a spell known for a level for which you have spell slots - but doesnt require them to be from the wizard class.

I am pretty sure this coupld open up some interesting (broken) multiclass opportunities. Want to get spiritual weapon on an eldritch knight - take 6 levels of EK and one of Theurge. Want spirit guardians run off a short rest - take 5 levels of warlock and on level of Theurge. For multiclass casters it seems like the best one level dip ever, and worth a revisit every time you fall behind in the top level of spells known.

[MaxWilson]

I am pretty sure this coupld open up some interesting (broken) multiclass opportunities. Want to get spiritual weapon on an eldritch knight - take 6 levels of EK and one of Theurge. Want spirit guardians run off a short rest - take 5 levels of warlock and on level of Theurge. For multiclass casters it seems like the best one level dip ever, and worth a revisit every time you fall behind in the top level of spells known.

Surely you mean "two of Theurge"? A first-level wizard doesn't have a specialization yet.

[MrStabby]

Surely you mean "two of Theurge"? A first-level wizard doesn't have a specialization yet.

Ah yes - a good point. Makes it a little safer, but I still worry.

[Ivellius]

Eh, I'm thinking more along the lines of:

You have X... let's call them Vestiges, that you have active, out of a total list of Y. Each has a couple of powers, a 'passive' one that increases your abilities somewhat, and an 'active' one that acts more like a spell. However, the powers would be balanced to assume that, so instead of spamming Come of Cold all day long, you might something closer to a cantrip (maybe beefed up a bit).

But the idea is I want a caster type who has no 'per time unit' limits, even though I know it's probably too big for a UA.

This is also going to be similar to an Incarnum adaptation.

For the actual UA: I love the Warlock options and kind of hate the Wizard one. The 14th level feature especially is dumb--they shouldn't be better than a cleric at clericing.

[ZX6Rob]

This is also going to be similar to an Incarnum adaptation.

For the actual UA: I love the Warlock options and kind of hate the Wizard one. The 14th level feature especially is dumb--they shouldn't be better than a cleric at clericing.

I don't hate it, myself -- far from it, I actually love the idea of a wizard-priest that doesn't require multiclassing -- but I do agree that the 14th-level feature is not cool. I'd like to come up with something to replace that with, since it just seems like a kick in the slats to the Cleric to start giving out his cool stuff early.

[MaxWilson]

I don't hate it, myself -- far from it, I actually love the idea of a wizard-priest that doesn't require multiclassing -- but I do agree that the 14th-level feature is not cool. I'd like to come up with something to replace that with, since it just seems like a kick in the slats to the Cleric to start giving out his cool stuff early.

I particularly hate the half-baked justification for giving out the cool stuff early. "Because, reasons. And magic, and blah blah blah." We all know the real reason is "because 14th level is when wizards have a hole in their class progression."

A tempest cleric would have the right to be pretty irked with the tempest Theurge on this score.

[Gignere]

Playing Devil's Advocate here:

How about the fact that clerics (like druids) get access to their whole spell list? A wizard only gets access to a portion of that list, and he has to give up lots of his wizard spells in order to accomplish that. A wizard gets four 5th level spells; he probably has eight spells that he really wants, and can only take four of them; but if he's going to learn Raise Dead he now has to give up yet another spell, leaving him at three.

I dunno, man. I hate clerics from an RP angle, but mechanically they're pretty decent. (Druids are better.) Full spell list access is a significant mechanical benefit, unless you happen to be in a situation such that you can swap spells with other wizards, e.g. you have three wizards in the party already.

How does he give up his wizard spells? Wizard spells can be learned from spell books and scrolls, hell 2/3rds of my wizard spells are looted from BBEG's spell book.

[MaxWilson]

How does he give up his wizard spells? Wizard spells can be learned from spell books and scrolls, ---- 2/3rds of my wizard spells are looted from BBEG's spell book.

In your case, you're obviously able to make good your losses by looting spells from elsewhere. Hence why I mentioned "unless you happen to be in a situation such that you can swap spells with other wizards, e.g. you have three wizards in the party already." Looting spells from a BBEG who happens to be a wizard is similar to swapping spells with other wizards.

In that case, great, take as many cleric spells as you want.

[Reosoul]

I mean, quite a few spell-casting classes can already shut down quite a few encounters(mass suggestion) from very early on(web) and have extended versatility besides that. Is giving them even more power really necessary?

I could see Monk, Sorcerer, or Ranger getting some tweaks, not because they're bad, but it's a headache to play them/they're missing stuff that seems like a no-brainer.

[Sigreid]

In your case, you're obviously able to make good your losses by looting spells from elsewhere. Hence why I mentioned "unless you happen to be in a situation such that you can swap spells with other wizards, e.g. you have three wizards in the party already." Looting spells from a BBEG who happens to be a wizard is similar to swapping spells with other wizards.

In that case, great, take as many cleric spells as you want.

Well...in proper murder hobo fashion some of us actively hunt other wizards for their spellbooks...

[RickAllison]

Well...in proper murder hobo fashion some of us actively hunt other wizards for their spellbooks...

Who needs to hunt them down? I plan to bribe other wizards with the expensive components they need for spellcasting. I get to have my spells, and they get to have their rubies. It's a win-win!

...Then you tip the thief of the group off, and he goes to steal them. Then we have everything:smallamused:

[Sigreid]

Reading through it, at least the wizard path doesn't say anything about the cleric spells being based on their intelligence as the casting stat. So, there's that.

[Quintessence]

Its... got a good idea but holy crap have I seen better homebrew.

The Theurge wizard is broken. Like... at least at first glance.


Notes

Divine Arcana: BA (uses channel divinity) +2 to next spell attack or next spell DC.

So 1 to 3 times per short rest you can use a bonus action to get a +2 DC on your next spell...

They really seem to like to give buffs to things that were fine already while the 4-element monk just sits and rots...

Side note: Life Domain Wizard is going to be pretty hilarious :D

[Sigreid]

They really seem to like to give buffs to things that were fine already while the 4-element monk just sits and rots...

Side note: Life Domain Wizard is going to be pretty hilarious :D

It's the tendency to power drift in the quest for the new cool that I, at least, am a little worried about starting the latest class arms race.

[AnimusBane]

It isn't stated if you write these cleric spells in your spell book but if you do, as I'd assume you would, could you then copy your domain spells from spell scrolls? If not are you also restricted from creating a back up spell book by being unable to scribe the domain spells at all?

Both of those questions are as a set up for the following, could they scribe their domain spells from other spell books into their own? If they could then if a collage or church of these wizards works together they could learn all of their domain spells without needing to give up their own gained spells. Then to follow if they know all their domain spells could they scribe any cleric spell? If yes, enough of these wizards came together could learn or have available the spell's of both classes.

Of course with this being UA I'm not suprised that this is not adressed.

[DracoKnight]

It isn't stated if you write these cleric spells in your spell book but if you do, as I'd assume you would, could you then copy your domain spells from spell scrolls? If not are you also restricted from creating a back up spell book by being unable to scribe the domain spells at all?

Both of those questions are as a set up for the following, could they scribe their domain spells from other spell books into their own? If they could then if a collage or church of these wizards works together they could learn all of their domain spells without needing to give up their own gained spells. Then to follow if they know all their domain spells could they scribe any cleric spell? If yes, enough of these wizards came together could learn or have available the spell's of both classes.

Of course with this being UA I'm not suprised that this is not adressed.

They specifically say "when you level up, you may swap 1 wizard spell for one of your domain spells." So, no, you can't copy them from spell books.

[Sigreid]

It isn't stated if you write these cleric spells in your spell book but if you do, as I'd assume you would, could you then copy your domain spells from spell scrolls? If not are you also restricted from creating a back up spell book by being unable to scribe the domain spells at all?

Both of those questions are as a set up for the following, could they scribe their domain spells from other spell books into their own? If they could then if a collage or church of these wizards works together they could learn all of their domain spells without needing to give up their own gained spells. Then to follow if they know all their domain spells could they scribe any cleric spell? If yes, enough of these wizards came together could learn or have available the spell's of both classes.

Of course with this being UA I'm not suprised that this is not adressed.

My interpretation is that the ability to scribe domain spells is a divine gift of understanding. I would rule that you could make extra copies of your spell books, and scrolls, but you wouldn't have the divine guidance to copy divine spells that you did not get via your class features from other people's spell books. Short answer, in my ruling you'd only get the ones you were granted via your class.

[AnimusBane]

They specifically say "when you level up, you may swap 1 wizard spell for one of your domain spells." So, no, you can't copy them from spell books.

Then like all your spells as a wizard are they in your spell book? If not my point doesn't hold water but if they are contained within your spell book then you should be able to at least copy them into a back up spell book.

The rest is just expanding on that what if the the most ridiculous degree.

[Gignere]

That theurge is patently ridiculous, no reason to play a pure casting cleric if you can play a theurge. Hell it is almost so good to obsolete the other wizard schools. Want to play the class with access to two of the best spell lists in the game. Play a theurge. As if the wizard chassis wasn't strong enough already. Definitely banning in my game.

[RickAllison]

Then like all your spells as a wizard are they in your spell book? If not my point doesn't hold water but if they are contained within your spell book then you should be able to at least copy them into a back up spell book.

The rest is just expanding on that what if the the most ridiculous degree.

As Sigreid elaborated, it seems as though you cannot copy down spells through this like you would wizard spells, though I think nothing would prevent you from creating new spellbooks.

[thepsyker]

Am I missing something or is the Star Chain Pact not very good. You get augury as a ritual and Advantage on Inteligence checks once a short/long rest. Can't you already get augury as a ritual with the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation for the Tome pact on top of everything else pact of the Tome gives you?

[Gignere]

Am I missing something or is the Star Chain Pact not very good. You get augury as a ritual and Advantage on Inteligence checks once a short/long rest. Can't you already get augury as a ritual with the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation for the Tome pact on top of everything else pact of the Tome gives you?

You're comparing it to the best pact. It is probably around where the blade pact in effectiveness is.

[twas_Brillig]

Then like all your spells as a wizard are they in your spell book? If not my point doesn't hold water but if they are contained within your spell book then you should be able to at least copy them into a back up spell book.

The rest is just expanding on that what if the the most ridiculous degree.

The last sentence of Arcane Initiate reads

Other wizards cannot copy cleric spells from your spellbook into their own spellbooks.
Which at least implies that you can copy your own spells like regular wizard spells.

Of course, it also calls them cleric spells, and nothing that I can see in the ability technically adds them to your spell list or turns them into wizard spells for you, just spells in your spellbook. So by the stupidest possible reading of Preparing and Casting Spells...

You prepare the list of wizard spells that are available for you to cast. To do so, choose a number of wizard spells from your spellbook equal to your Intelligence modifier + your wizard level (minimum of one spell). The spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots
...you can't actually cast these cleric spells.

[AnimusBane]

The last sentence of Arcane Initiate reads

Which at least implies that you can copy your own spells like regular wizard spells.

Of course, it also calls them cleric spells, and nothing that I can see in the ability technically adds them to your spell list or turns them into wizard spells for you, just spells in your spellbook. So by the stupidest possible reading of Preparing and Casting Spells...

...you can't actually cast these cleric spells.

Managed to miss that line somehow thanks for pointing it out.

In my opinion it should work or at least be worded like magical secrets to avoid that obviously unintended RAW implication and make the spell attacks and DCs based off intelligence.

I'd personally like if instead of saying that wizards can't copy the cleric spells that non Theurge wizards can't copy the spells just because of how generally wizards and their spell list function. However I admit that this atm is not RAW of the UA and at best could be argued to be RAI.

[Joe the Rat]

You're comparing it to the best pact. It is probably around where the blade pact in effectiveness is.Chain gives you a single ritual, with seriously upgraded familiar options, and access to some potent invocations. Tome on its own is three cantrips... and access to the best ritual option in the game.

What Starskey and Hutch is needs here is unique invocations to"power it up"

Name wise... it sounds like you have a Mi-Go on retainer. Pact of the Rune (as used in augury, and representing knowledge) is my take on a generic name, though Eye, or even Seeker would work better.

[Fflewddur Fflam]

I guess this just shows us what we've already known, 5e creators have a hard-on for wizards over every other class.

[RickAllison]

I guess this just shows us what we've already known, 5e creators have a hard-on for wizards over every other class.

I can't complain, they've given my three favorite classes (wizard, rogue, and monk) lots of love.

[Inchoroi]

Eh, I'm thinking more along the lines of:

You have X... let's call them Vestiges, that you have active, out of a total list of Y. Each has a couple of powers, a 'passive' one that increases your abilities somewhat, and an 'active' one that acts more like a spell. However, the powers would be balanced to assume that, so instead of spamming Come of Cold all day long, you might something closer to a cantrip (maybe beefed up a bit).

But the idea is I want a caster type who has no 'per time unit' limits, even though I know it's probably too big for a UA.

I wanted to mention that Middle Finger of Vecna did a Binder class that was pretty damn good...

[Corran]

I guess this just shows us what we've already known, 5e creators have a hard-on for wizards over every other class.
Well..... wizards of the coast... it's in the name.:smalltongue:

I quite like the wizard subclass myself, though I think it steps a bit on the toes of the arcane cleric. Also, I am not sure how wise it was to give the 17th cleric feature to a 14th level wizard, but since it is UA I am not that concerned. Anyway, my next character for an upcoming campaign was going to be an arcane cleric, but a theurgist would fit just as good my concept, if not better. So I have one more option to consider. And that is all I expect really from UA material, to give me food for thought and present me with opportunities to experiment, either in a campaign or just on paper.

ps: Actually, on second thought, I am no sure if I would like to see that arcane tradition made official. I mean, what purpose would an arcane cleric serve then? Or is there a clear distance between those two subclasses, that allow for different characters of more or less the same concept, with each such character having their unique strengths and weaknesses? Is there a bladesinger - EK in nature distinction between the theurgist and the arcane cleric, or is just the theurgist a better version of an arcane cleric and so renders it unplayable?

[Easy_Lee]

Arcane High Priest...they thought this was okay? Let's give wizards the cleric archetype benefit three levels earlier.

See, this is why I've always taken issue with the way archetypes were setup. If all archetypes offered benefits at the same levels, it would be so easy to make a really cool cross-class archetype system. A rogue with shadow monk abilities! A fighter with a ranger's beast companion! A sorcerer with a cleric's domain!

But no, they didn't. And now, here we see what happens when someone at WotC tries to force a cross-class archetype, anyway.

To DMs out there: if you can, balancing archetypes in this way could be a cool project. That said, WotC has implicitly given you justification to create new class archetypes just by sticking one class' archetype on another class.

[DragonSorcererX]

I liked the Theurge, it makes better priests than Clerics because they don't wear armors and wield weapons, and INT is their highest ability score wich means they would be good with Religion, also, Gandalf is totally a Theurge of Illúvatar.

[Nicrosil]

Well, it's better than last month's.

The Warlock pact is pretty good, but I would make the pact boon available to any pact as a crystal ball type thing. Astral Refuge needs a limit to it, like once per short rest maybe. I'm not sure if there's anything game breaking with casting two self-only spells in one action, but we'll see.

As for the Theurge, I think saying the domain spells count as wizard spells, but cannot be copied into another spell book, would prevent some headaches. And the 14th level ability definately needs to be reworked. Maybe you gain two 1st level spells from the cleric list for free? I'm not sure.

[jas61292]

The Warlock pact is pretty good, but I would make the pact boon available to any pact as a crystal ball type thing. Astral Refuge needs a limit to it, like once per short rest maybe. I'm not sure if there's anything game breaking with casting two self-only spells in one action, but we'll see.

Well, for much of your career, casting two spells is casting all your spells. I find it would be the rare situation that I would actually want to do that.

[Fflewddur Fflam]

I can't complain, they've given my three favorite classes (wizard, rogue, and monk) lots of love.

Yeah, I'm a monk-lover and am happy with everything (except the 4 Elements Monk).

I'm also a sorcerer-lover, and, well...... that's a different story.

[Nicrosil]

Well, for much of your career, casting two spells is casting all your spells. I find it would be the rare situation that I would actually want to do that.

Huh. Good point! I don't play Warlocks much. :smalltongue:

Also, the Channel Arcana definately needs a rework.

EDIT: Oh, one of my player's would love the new pact. Her go-to character is a Warlock researcher, so this fits perfectly.

[Belac93]

Well, for much of your career, casting two spells is casting all your spells. I find it would be the rare situation that I would actually want to do that.

Very true. This seems good for a nova against a boss (is there such thing as a defensive nova?).

[ES Curse]

Yoooo the 6th level Nature Theurge could get Shilleagh. I was wondering when a way for wizards to get that spell with INT would happen.

[RickAllison]

Yeah, I'm a monk-lover and am happy with everything (except the 4 Elements Monk).

I'm also a sorcerer-lover, and, well...... that's a different story.

Sorcerers have received quite a bit of love. Favored Soul and Shadow have UA, and it even got an official Storm Sorcerer.

Compare that to Barbarians (Battlerager, which you hardly hear of because it is rather lackluster), Bards (nothing except instruments), and Druids (nothing but DMsG reviews). Sorcerer has been rather fortunate, though the loss of the special spellcasting lists was a harsh blow.

[MeeposFire]

Sorcerers have received quite a bit of love. Favored Soul and Shadow have UA, and it even got an official Storm Sorcerer.

Compare that to Barbarians (Battlerager, which you hardly hear of because it is rather lackluster), Bards (nothing except instruments), and Druids (nothing but DMsG reviews). Sorcerer has been rather fortunate, though the loss of the special spellcasting lists was a harsh blow.

Bards did get the blade sub class though it is not well thought out considering that two weapon fighting and its war magic both use bonus action.

[RickAllison]

Bards did get the blade sub class though it is not well thought out considering that two weapon fighting and its war magic both use bonus action.

Ahh, and i forgot that they also received the tumbling subclass, the one that was rather OP.

[Sigreid]

Yoooo the 6th level Nature Theurge could get Shilleagh. I was wondering when a way for wizards to get that spell with INT would happen.

Unlike bards with magic secrets and tomelocks, it says absolutely nothing that would indicate that the wizard gets to use his Int with his cleric spells. Unless I missed something big when I read it.

[JackOfAllBuilds]

Does the Arcana Domain 17th level feature work on a 14th level Theurge Wizard?

You gain a 6th 7th 8th and 9th level wizard spell to your domain spell list

[Tanarii]

Is there anything to indicate that a member of the School of Thuergy (that name tho) casts these Cleric spells using Int instead of Wis as her casting stat?

[Giant2005]

Is there anything to indicate that a member of the School of Thuergy (that name tho) casts these Cleric spells using Int instead of Wis as her casting stat?

I think WotC's opinion is that as long as the class's spellcasting ability denotes a specific casting stat, then that casting stat applies to all of their spells unless they gain spells via a means that specifically uses a different casting stat (Magic Initiate, Spell Sniper, or Multiclassing). A Wizard doesn't actually have an ability to use any other casting stat but Intelligence.
I assume that was the same logic behind the Tomelock too, as until it was clarified in the Errata, it was assumed to use Charisma for its non-Warlock spells even without explicitly mentioning so.


Am I missing something or is the Star Chain Pact not very good. You get augury as a ritual and Advantage on Inteligence checks once a short/long rest. Can't you already get augury as a ritual with the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation for the Tome pact on top of everything else pact of the Tome gives you?

It is useful if for some reason you really, really cared about Augury but didn't want to spend an Invocation on it.

[Nicrosil]

Anyone else notice that the Theurge is essentially 10 new subclasses, one for each domain? Compare that to the other arcane/divine hybrid, the Arcana domain. The Arcana domain doesn't give 8 different spell lists for each school, it gives 1 list of wizard-y spells. Why doesn't this subclass do something similar?

There could be a kind of "meta-domain" of classic cleric spells that you can chose from as you level up, similar to what's presented here. For example, at second level, instead of getting two wizard spells for free, you can get, say, bless or cure wounds. Now, this can be problematic as these spells would probably be the best of the cleric spells, meaning the Theurge could outshine the cleric, and that if we're doling out these spells like a domain, why not, you know, just use domains? And at that point, we're back to square one.

Another option is to create a "divine spell school" made up of cleric spells that can be learned and copied like normal spells by the Theurge. This is problematic though, since that's potentially a lot of spells added to the wizard list (even though it's for only one subclass) and it would be hard to pick what cleric spells would go into this "divine school."

A third option would be to get rid of the Arcana domain spells and make 8 domain spell lists based off of each school of magic, but that's a bit weird, and may be stepping on the toes of the wizard subclasses.

A fourth option would be doing nothing since this entire post is me just being nitpicky and mad that they're showing favoritism to wizards. Honestly, the best bet to making this subclass balanced is adding the domain spells to the list of spells you can learn leveling up, clearing up what casting stat they use and how copying and spell books work with them, and changing Channel Arcana and Arcane High Priest.

[SharkForce]

Is there anything to indicate that a member of the School of Thuergy (that name tho) casts these Cleric spells using Int instead of Wis as her casting stat?

having a spellcasting attribute is a class feature. go ahead, check it out; you'll find that every single class tells you what spellcasting modifiers you have, and how they are used.

there is precisely ONE spellcasting attribute that wizards have that can even possibly govern these spells. no more. no less. we are left to conclude either that you have to multiclass into cleric for these spells to even have a save DC, attack roll, or spellcasting modifier of any sort, or indeed to actually prepare or cast the spells at all, if the spells do not count as wizard spells.

please do not try to fix stupid with more stupid. the theurge has flaws, absolutely. if you don't want to allow it, then just don't allow it. this is explicitly unofficial homebrew that hasn't been playtested yet. if you desperately want to use it, then there is a better solution than allowing it but trying to make it literally non-functional.

that better solution is to fix the class. like, actually make it better. getting more channel divinity than a cleric sounds ridiculous to you? then change that. getting a channel divinity that can push the wizard's save DC out of bounded accuracy sounds like a problem? (if it isn't for you, it sure is for me)... then change that too. getting to poach the overloaded domain abilities (because the cleric itself has next to no abilities, and relatively little power loaded into the spell list compared to a wizard at least) sounds unreasonable? well, change that as well. take the things it has that are too much, and tone it down. channel divinity can be used once per short rest at level 2, and twice per short rest at level 14. the +2 DC channel divinity disappears, and is replaced with something a bit more balanced... say, double duration (maximum 8 hours) or range (the +2 to hit could also stay without breaking anything, but does feel out of place in a game that has tried quite hard to not have stacking bonuses to everything). the level 14 ability being that you gain the level 17 cleric ability is too much? instead they can learn a couple of cleric spells freely. getting to poach the best cleric spells after level 9 or 10 is too much? so take it away, they don't need to learn every domain spell any more and the level 14 ability gives them the option to poach up to level 7 spells (but only a couple), which is more than enough (in addition to the previously mentioned second channel divinity per short rest)

now, it's a bit depressing that i literally just came up with these suggestions as i was writing, and that they'd be necessary before i'd even let a player in a game i'm DMing even think about being a theurge. but at least it leaves the subclass in a playable state (further balance tweaks may be required, but this would sort out most of my biggest concerns at least, and maybe a slight upwards adjustment would even be needed, but your players are unlikely to complain about getting a bit better in the middle of play anyways).

infinitely better than trying to render the subclass non-functional in a desperate attempt to ensure nobody will play it (again, if you're that dead-set against allowing or modifying it, then just don't allow it).

[Strill]

That theurge is patently ridiculous, no reason to play a pure casting cleric if you can play a theurge. Hell it is almost so good to obsolete the other wizard schools. Want to play the class with access to two of the best spell lists in the game. Play a theurge. As if the wizard chassis wasn't strong enough already. Definitely banning in my game.

I'd just say you can only learn the domain spells, not general cleric spells. Some general cleric spells might be learnable with GM approval, but I think giving free reign to the Cleric spell list is too much.

I'd also make the Channel Divinity be 1/short rest, not 2 or 3. Wizards already have Arcane Recovery.

[Sneak Dog]

I'd just say you can only learn the domain spells, not general cleric spells. Some general cleric spells might be learnable with GM approval, but I think giving free reign to the Cleric spell list is too much....

Not sure you caught the limitations in the UA: You can only learn the domain spells and only one per wizard level above first. Only once you've already learned all the domain spells do you gain access to all the cleric spells. There's 5th level domain spells...


That theurge is patently ridiculous, no reason to play a pure casting cleric if you can play a theurge. Hell it is almost so good to obsolete the other wizard schools. Want to play the class with access to two of the best spell lists in the game. Play a theurge. As if the wizard chassis wasn't strong enough already. Definitely banning in my game.

So what you get to pick from is the wizard spell list and a very select set of cleric domain spells.
Only at level 11+ can you get cleric spells outside of the domain spells, for only then have you acquired the full set of domain spells. (You unlock 5th level spells at level 9 and there's two 5th level domain spells.) I feel like this might not be intended but that's the rather clear wording to me.

Not sure how strong it is honestly. Probably really rather effective after 10th level, but before that it seems just good, like divination.

[Strill]

Not sure you caught the limitations in the UA: You can only learn the domain spells and only one per wizard level above first. Only once you've already learned all the domain spells do you gain access to all the cleric spells. There's 9th level domain spells...

So what you get to pick from is the wizard spell list and a very select set of cleric domain spells.
Only at level 19 and 20 can you get cleric spells outside of the domain spells, for only then have you acquired the full set of domain spells. (You unlock 9th level spells at level 17 and there's two 9th level domain spells.) I feel like this might not be intended but that's the rather clear wording to me.

You have things mixed up. There's 5th level domain spells, which you obtain at Cleric level 9.

[Sneak Dog]

You have things mixed up. There's 5th level domain spells, which you obtain at Cleric level 9.

My bad, fixed.

[ES Curse]

So how would a high-level Bladesinger compare with a War Theurge?

[Regitnui]

I guess this just shows us what we've already known, 5e creators have a hard-on for wizards over every other class.

Actually, it goes further back than that; look at the sheer amount of prestige classes for 3.5; many of the subclasses are based off them to some degree or another, Assassin was a rogue subclass, for example. The prestige classes overwhelmingly favoured casters, even artificers, and 5e's closest equivalent to the 3.5 caster is the wizard. Theurge here is just the Mystic Theurge prestige class updated. Don't blame Mike Mearls for what he has to work with. I actually like how it's done. With a little tuning, it'll be ready for the next Fairly-Well-Known Realms supplement they release instead of expanding the D&D multiverse.

Admittedly, more love for the ranger and druid would be nice, when WotC grows a pair of eyes and looks back at Eberron *cough*children of winter*cough*ashbound*cough*greensingers* where they had more varieties of druid than 'nature priest' and 'wild shape'. The DMsG druid circles, put through their balancing and made official, could be perfect.

[Arkhios]

Recently I've been toying around with a concept of Eldritch Knight 11/Wizard 9; now, with Theurge I'm "mildly" interested in making one with Life domain, and becoming quite interesting combatant.

Capable of attacking three times per Attack action, and healing tremendous amounts of damage. The edge vs. Cleric is that I won't have to go "mad" to accomplish it. Focusing on Strength/Dexterity, Intelligence, and Constitution should be more than enough (in that order).


Does the Arcana Domain 17th level feature work on a 14th level Theurge Wizard?

You gain a 6th 7th 8th and 9th level wizard spell to your domain spell list

As mentioned before, it's untested unofficial playtest material, so it's likely to have as many flaws as any other homebrew might have. Along with this loophole.
I would guess the intent is to give you additional 6th and 7th level spells at 14th level, additional 8th level spell at 15th level, and finally additional 9th level spell at 17th level.
Besides, how would you even be able to cast spells for which you don't have the spell slots yet? ...that's right, you won't be. Even if you learned the spells beforehand, you'd have to wait for appropriate level to be able to cast them.


So how would a high-level Bladesinger compare with a War Theurge?

I'd reckon that Bladesinger would emerge better of the two hands down. Bladesingers get way stronger offensive and defensive capabilities than mere Domain features could provide. Theurgists won't get the 8th level domain features, so their regular weapon attacks will remain behind even those of a cleric. (Besides, if you read it to the letter, War Priest (the domain feature) would still depend on wisdom modifier in regard to its uses per day; even if you get it from Theurgy).

[dev6500]

While not even remotely on the same level as the theurge stuff, I do see Astral Refuge working very strongly with fiendish vigor. Any round you take a hit would be a good time to recast your at will false life on yourself. Now just find 1 more defensive spell ability to cast and you're golden.

[rollingForInit]

please do not try to fix stupid with more stupid. the theurge has flaws, absolutely. if you don't want to allow it, then just don't allow it. this is explicitly unofficial homebrew that hasn't been playtested yet. if you desperately want to use it, then there is a better solution than allowing it but trying to make it literally non-functional.

I don't see how it'd be stupid for the Theurge to have to cast cleric spells with Wisdom. It never says that the cleric spells you gain count as Wizard spells, which means they ought to count as Cleric spells. Since every other class that grants you cross-class spells explicitly mention which class they count as.

[Arkhios]

I don't see how it'd be stupid for the Theurge to have to cast cleric spells with Wisdom. It never says that the cleric spells you gain count as Wizard spells, which means they ought to count as Cleric spells. Since every other class that grants you cross-class spells explicitly mention which class they count as.

The only classes or sub-classes that I can think of explicitly mentioning that their cross-class spells count as their class spells are the Arcana domain Cleric and Bard, but these spells are gained through your current class' features which only let you choose from lists other than your current class. Being in a list doesn't key the spells into one class' ability modifier. It's just a list from which you choose your spells.

Circle spells, Domain spells, Oath spells, and Patron spells are a part of your sub-class choice, small lists that only add to your class list (the fact that most of these are automatically and always known doesn't matter in this regard). They are your class spells for each specific purpose already, there's no reason to believe otherwise. You use your Spellcasting Ability for all spells you gain from your class, period. Magical Secrets and the few wizard spells gained from Arcana domain are only slightly different in that compared to the other cross-class spells; they are not a fixed set - you get to choose them yourself. Otherwise, they come from your current class' features and thus are without a doubt your class spells from that point forward.

Same applies to Arcane Tradition: Theurgy. They gain a class feature which only allows you to swap your known spells for new spells from a list other than your own; that doesn't mean the spells wouldn't count as your class spells any less than the spells you swap for them. The Domain class feature is identical to that of the Cleric's - you get a small domain list of spells from which you can choose your spells - in addition to or in place of your normal spells. Domain is as much a wizard class feature for Theurgy Tradition as it is a cleric class feature for a Cleric.

[RickAllison]

Someone tweeted Mearls about the Spellcasting modifier:


@samiam8910 uses Int - prepared and cast as wizard spells

So it looks like the RAI of it is that the cleric spells added to the spell book are then treated as wizard spells. Int Spellcasting stat and all.

[Dimolyth]

I`ve been played precisely one mystic theurge character back at 3.5 for years. (Yeah we had all our progression terribly slowed, and then we played "untold histories of our characters" of early levels.
So, with release of 5e I have been trying to resurect the concept: nature cleric/mystic theurge/elven loremaster prestige class, who could excell at Int skills and drawing arts (well, basically he ended as Elven High Mage who cured mythals - but who cares about that epic crap).
The task was pretty difficult because I ought to have access to bless/web/silence/counterspell/plant growth/banishment/wall of ice/divine word (and those were his signature spells, besides "ready to anything 3.5 mystic theurge stuff").

So here am I, and a feel that "Theurge Tradition" is the solution desighned for me.
But sincerely, I prefer my nature cleric 3/lore bard X build who was really headache to pull of (and a lot of luck with rolling stats) to this overpowered UA tradition.
Just because I don`t want "an ultimate caster" who can do the work of three other PCs. I just want a caster who could manage control on the battlefield.

[Jjj111]

Does anyone know what the stats are for the star chain? There is no chain in the weapons section of the 5e PHB. I assume they wouldn't introduce a weapon without stats.

[Coyote81]

Does anyone know what the stats are for the star chain? There is no chain in the weapons section of the 5e PHB. I assume they wouldn't introduce a weapon without stats.

I don't think it's meant to be a physical weapon, it's an arcane trinket, similar to the book of untold secrets. You just kind of carry it on you and it empowers you.

[SharkForce]

I don't see how it'd be stupid for the Theurge to have to cast cleric spells with Wisdom. It never says that the cleric spells you gain count as Wizard spells, which means they ought to count as Cleric spells. Since every other class that grants you cross-class spells explicitly mention which class they count as.

it would be stupid because the wizard only has the ability to cast wizard spells, and only has the ability to use intelligence for that. also because, even if they count as cleric spells and we ignored the fact that the wizard has no ability to use cleric spells at all (which would mean that the spell would sit in their spellbook completely useless, unable to be prepared or cast and with no casting modifier possible, since wizards can only prepare and cast wizard spells), the spell itself does not have any attachment to wisdom as the result of being a cleric spell. clerics cast spells from their list with wisdom because they are clerics, not because the spell is a cleric spell. there is no rule that cleric spells use wisdom, there is only a rule that clerics cast cleric spells using wisdom.

[Tanarii]

I don't see how it'd be stupid for the Theurge to have to cast cleric spells with Wisdom. It never says that the cleric spells you gain count as Wizard spells, which means they ought to count as Cleric spells. Since every other class that grants you cross-class spells explicitly mention which class they count as.Exactly. This isn't an expanded list of spells, making them part of your own class list, like a domain, or Paladin or Warlock spell list. It's literally taking another classes spells and adding them to your spellbook. Like a Bard's Magical Secrets. Which is a class feature that very necessarily has to go out of its way to specify the spells count as a Bard spell for you.

Nothing seems to indicate these spells count as Wizard spells for a Theurgy Wizard. By the UA, they appear to be Cleric spells she can prepare and cast.

That said:


Someone tweeted Mearls about the Spellcasting modifier:



So it looks like the RAI of it is that the cleric spells added to the spell book are then treated as wizard spells. Int Spellcasting stat and all.
That's good enough for me. After all, a tweet from Mearls about UA is just as official as UA itself. :smallbiggrin:

[Jjj111]

I don't think it's meant to be a physical weapon, it's an arcane trinket, similar to the book of untold secrets. You just kind of carry it on you and it empowers you.

Ohhhhhhhh. That makes so much more sense. So, augury and a 1/short rest advantage on intelligence checks. Kind of a weak pact imo.

[gkathellar]

They really seem to like to give buffs to things that were fine already while the 4-element monk just sits and rots...

Have fun, kids. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1pdYIcfHauwNDM2My1XeWFYSDA/view)


Am I missing something or is the Star Chain Pact not very good. You get augury as a ritual and Advantage on Inteligence checks once a short/long rest. Can't you already get augury as a ritual with the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation for the Tome pact on top of everything else pact of the Tome gives you?

Yeah, it's garbage. It asks you to turn in your effective options for a couple of ribbons.

[Belac93]

Ohhhhhhhh. That makes so much more sense. So, augury and a 1/short rest advantage on intelligence checks. Kind of a weak pact imo.

Don't forget, if this was ever made official, there would be invocations that are linked to it. So, what we are seeing is the tome pact without ancient secrets, or the blade pact without lifedrinker/thirsting blade.

[tsuyoshikentsu]

Warlock making a pact with a divine seeker of knowledge?

Screw your LG stuff, I'm cuting a deal with VECNA! :D

[jas61292]

Don't forget, if this was ever made official, there would be invocations that are linked to it. So, what we are seeing is the tome pact without ancient secrets, or the blade pact without lifedrinker/thirsting blade.

Yeah, this. Everyone is comparing it to the invocations, and not the other pact boons themselves. Access to ritual of a powerful divination spell and some bonuses for certain checks is most certainly comparable to, if not superior to access to a couple cantrips.

[SharkForce]

depends on the cantrips. some cantrips are pretty danged good.

for example, that could be shillelagh, guidance, and mold earth (or maybe shape water in a more nautical campaign). that's a pretty solid set of at-wills in my opinion.

[BigONotation]

The Theurge is straight power creep. Clerics get a few wizard spells with Light or Arcana, if the Theurge only gained the bonus domain spells, I'd be okay with it. As it stands now it has no place at my table.

[Temperjoke]

I'm not sure I like the Pact of the Star Chain, it seems kind of underwhelming. You get a ritual spell and once per rest you get advantage on an Intelligence check, that's it. Tome pact can potentially get the same ritual spell, plus other spells, for example.

EDIT: Yeah, I forgot there would need to be accompanying Invocations for it. Still, I'm not sure what sort of Invocations would be good for this that don't exist for the others already.

[dev6500]

depends on the cantrips. some cantrips are pretty danged good.

for example, that could be shillelagh, guidance, and mold earth (or maybe shape water in a more nautical campaign). that's a pretty solid set of at-wills in my opinion.

Agreed, there are some seriously strong cantrip combinations. Warlocks can already get minor illusion, eldritch blast, and green flame blade so picking from the druid list like this can really round out the cantrip list and give you:

Green flame blade + shillelagh.

minor illusion + mold earth for hidden pit falls.

etc. But then again like others have said, comparing it to the strongest pact is unfair. It stacks up relatively well against pact of the chain.

[DracoKnight]

etc. But then again like others have said, comparing it to the strongest pact is unfair. It stacks up relatively well against pact of the chain.

Not really. A scout with blindsight, or Devil's sight is quite fantastic, made even more so when that familiar has Magic Resistance that it shares with you, and it can turn invisible.

I don't think that Pact of the Star Chain is at all comparable to Pact of the Chain (and I made sure that everything I listed wasn't through an invocation), I mean, advantage on ONE intelligence check/rest plus a single ritual... Meh...

[gkathellar]

Don't forget, if this was ever made official, there would be invocations that are linked to it. So, what we are seeing is the tome pact without ancient secrets, or the blade pact without lifedrinker/thirsting blade.

Yeah, but the other pacts are fine w/out invocations, and the invocations improve on them. Why should this be the only pact that's crap without investment?

[Drackolus]

Yoooo the 6th level Nature Theurge could get Shilleagh. I was wondering when a way for wizards to get that spell with INT would happen.
Oh heck, nice catch!

Strong as it seems at first, remember that as powerful as cleric spells are, they are, at best, equal to the power of wizard spells. Spiritual weapon and spirit guardians are awesome spells, but so are web and polymorph. And, the theurge is still a d6 mage armor charater. A cleric is tougher and has their respective lvl 8 ability (though I think divine strike is extremely weak personally). The theurge has nothing but a spell list - a fantastic one, mind you, but no damage boosts at all. Not even empower spell.
To be honest, I wouldn't necessarilly pick it over an Abjurer or Diviner or Evoker. And there's also the favored soul to consider.
And if spell list poaching was that good, lore bards would be king.
Which they are.
Hmmmm.

[Tanarii]

Not really. A scout with blindsight, or Devil's sight is quite fantastic, made even more so when that familiar has Magic Resistance that it shares with you, and it can turn invisible. Well yeah, if you give pact of the chain shared Magic Resistance, which isn't RAI and is only very tenuously RAW, it gets far more powerful.

[DracoKnight]

Well yeah, if you give pact of the chain shared Magic Resistance, which isn't RAI and is only very tenuously RAW, it gets far more powerful.

Even removing Magic Resistance (which is RAW) PotC is still a helluva lot more powerful than PotSC

[rollingForInit]

it would be stupid because the wizard only has the ability to cast wizard spells, and only has the ability to use intelligence for that. also because, even if they count as cleric spells and we ignored the fact that the wizard has no ability to use cleric spells at all (which would mean that the spell would sit in their spellbook completely useless, unable to be prepared or cast and with no casting modifier possible, since wizards can only prepare and cast wizard spells), the spell itself does not have any attachment to wisdom as the result of being a cleric spell. clerics cast spells from their list with wisdom because they are clerics, not because the spell is a cleric spell. there is no rule that cleric spells use wisdom, there is only a rule that clerics cast cleric spells using wisdom.


The only classes or sub-classes that I can think of explicitly mentioning that their cross-class spells count as their class spells are the Arcana domain Cleric and Bard, but these spells are gained through your current class' features which only let you choose from lists other than your current class. Being in a list doesn't key the spells into one class' ability modifier. It's just a list from which you choose your spells.

Circle spells, Domain spells, Oath spells, and Patron spells are a part of your sub-class choice, small lists that only add to your class list (the fact that most of these are automatically and always known doesn't matter in this regard). They are your class spells for each specific purpose already, there's no reason to believe otherwise. You use your Spellcasting Ability for all spells you gain from your class, period.

But all of these state that they are class spells for you. The Cleric's domain spell entry explicitly say that they count as cleric spells. The Land Druid's Circle spell feature says the same. Oath Spells say. The Warlock's Expanded Spell List feature say that they are added to the warlock spell list for you, which I take to mean the same thing.

There is no current class that gets spells from another spell list that does not specify that the spells count as the class's spell for you. The fact that Theurge doesn't then means that they do not count as Wizard spells. It would not be strange at all if the intention was that the Cleric spells you get should use Wisdom for being cast. It doesn't say so, obviously, but it wouldn't be far-fetched. All that would be needed would be for it to say "Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for cleric spells you get from this feature." And then the Wizard would be able to cast Cleric spells gained from the subclass with Wisdom. No issues. It would be a minor tradeoff for an extremely powerful class feature.

So I believe that would have been a good intention, even if it doesn't say it right now. Right now it's certainly valid to say that you cast them using Intelligence, even though they don't count as Wizard spells. But it's equally valid to say that they'd be cast with Wisdom, because it really doesn't say anything either way. There's a missing sentence somewhere. As you say, you can only cast Wizard spells with Intelligence. But if you count these new spells as Wizard spells, the class isn't only very, very powerful and unbalanced; it's outright broken.

[Vogonjeltz]

Well, I don't own the DMG, but I meant one who isn't limited in how often they can cast. I sort of see spell points as a slots alternative, and I meant a spellcaster who doen't use the same limitations.

Okay, to put it better, a caster who's primary limitations aren't 'per unit of time'.

So...how would you limit it then?

I mean, cantrips are unlimited spell use, but they're also the lowest level of powered spell;

How can you even have a limit on the amount of usage that isn't intrinsically tied to the passage of time?

[RickAllison]

But all of these state that they are class spells for you. The Cleric's domain spell entry explicitly say that they count as cleric spells. The Land Druid's Circle spell feature says the same. Oath Spells say. The Warlock's Expanded Spell List feature say that they are added to the warlock spell list for you, which I take to mean the same thing.

There is no current class that gets spells from another spell list that does not specify that the spells count as the class's spell for you. The fact that Theurge doesn't then means that they do not count as Wizard spells. It would not be strange at all if the intention was that the Cleric spells you get should use Wisdom for being cast. It doesn't say so, obviously, but it wouldn't be far-fetched. All that would be needed would be for it to say "Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for cleric spells you get from this feature." And then the Wizard would be able to cast Cleric spells gained from the subclass with Wisdom. No issues. It would be a minor tradeoff for an extremely powerful class feature.

So I believe that would have been a good intention, even if it doesn't say it right now. Right now it's certainly valid to say that you cast them using Intelligence, even though they don't count as Wizard spells. But it's equally valid to say that they'd be cast with Wisdom, because it really doesn't say anything either way. There's a missing sentence somewhere. As you say, you can only cast Wizard spells with Intelligence. But if you count these new spells as Wizard spells, the class isn't only very, very powerful and unbalanced; it's outright broken.

Mearls has addressed in a tweet that that was an oversight, and the spells are to be treated as wizard spells. With that, it becomes an error in publication rather than an ambiguity in the text. The RAI (and only not RAW due to bad editing) is that the spells are treated as wizard spells. If they weren't, after all, you couldn't prepare them.

[gkathellar]

But all of these state that they are class spells for you. The Cleric's domain spell entry explicitly say that they count as cleric spells. The Land Druid's Circle spell feature says the same. Oath Spells say. The Warlock's Expanded Spell List feature say that they are added to the warlock spell list for you, which I take to mean the same thing.

There is no current class that gets spells from another spell list that does not specify that the spells count as the class's spell for you. The fact that Theurge doesn't then means that they do not count as Wizard spells. It would not be strange at all if the intention was that the Cleric spells you get should use Wisdom for being cast. It doesn't say so, obviously, but it wouldn't be far-fetched. All that would be needed would be for it to say "Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for cleric spells you get from this feature." And then the Wizard would be able to cast Cleric spells gained from the subclass with Wisdom. No issues. It would be a minor tradeoff for an extremely powerful class feature.

So I believe that would have been a good intention, even if it doesn't say it right now. Right now it's certainly valid to say that you cast them using Intelligence, even though they don't count as Wizard spells. But it's equally valid to say that they'd be cast with Wisdom, because it really doesn't say anything either way. There's a missing sentence somewhere. As you say, you can only cast Wizard spells with Intelligence. But if you count these new spells as Wizard spells, the class isn't only very, very powerful and unbalanced; it's outright broken.

The writer says it's Int.

Anyway, you've got it backwards: it's broken now, since by RAW you can't prepare said spells period. Making them into Wizard spells, OTOH, will make it functional but very powerful and unbalanced. But then, quadratic wizards was already in effect, so this doesn't change much.

[DanyBallon]

I only read it once and the new wizard tradition will probably see a playtest run at my table.

Once done, a few possible modifications would be to limit it to Arcana, and Knowledge domains only, clarifiy wording to state "cleric spells copied to your spellbook are treated as wizards spells for you only and cannot be copied by any other wizards", and that if you copied all spells on you domain list, you may copy any spell (that you have a spell slot for) on the cleric spell list up to 5th level spells.

these, I believe, would prevent this archetype to be too good, yet remaining interesting to play.

[rollingForInit]

Mearls has addressed in a tweet that that was an oversight, and the spells are to be treated as wizard spells. With that, it becomes an error in publication rather than an ambiguity in the text. The RAI (and only not RAW due to bad editing) is that the spells are treated as wizard spells. If they weren't, after all, you couldn't prepare them.

Aah, alright. But treating them as Wizard spells ... that's so insanely broken. I mean, I know that Wizards always get that way, but ... infinite healing? No need for the party to ever spend hit dice, ever again? I just can't see how anyone would see that as a viable idea to even playtest.

[MaxWilson]

Aah, alright. But treating them as Wizard spells ... that's so insanely broken. I mean, I know that Wizards always get that way, but ... infinite healing? No need for the party to ever spend hit dice, ever again? I just can't see how anyone would see that as a viable idea to even playtest.

To be fair, that is already achievable in effect, by level 10. 2000 HP of healing per long rest is more than any normal party is ever going to deplete.

[georgie_leech]

Aah, alright. But treating them as Wizard spells ... that's so insanely broken. I mean, I know that Wizards always get that way, but ... infinite healing? No need for the party to ever spend hit dice, ever again? I just can't see how anyone would see that as a viable idea to even playtest.

It's almost certainly an oversight that, divine inspiration or not, the Theurge can cast Cleric Spells better than an actual Cleric for a specific spell. If I were to play a high level game with this subclass, I'd specify that the a Signature Spell can't be one you get from your Arcane Initiate feature.

[rollingForInit]

To be fair, that is already achievable in effect, by level 10. 2000 HP of healing per long rest is more than any normal party is ever going to deplete.

How is it accimplished? And without spending any resources ...?


It's almost certainly an oversight that, divine inspiration or not, the Theurge can cast Cleric Spells better than an actual Cleric for a specific spell. If I were to play a high level game with this subclass, I'd specify that the a Signature Spell can't be one you get from your Arcane Initiate feature.

Mm. Honestly, I think that most issues would be solved by simply stating that the spells you gain from Arcane Initiate count as Cleric spells, not Wizard spells, and that they use Wisdom as the spellcasting ability. With a note that they can still "be prepared from your spellbook". That would overrule the general Wizard rules about only being able to prepare Wizard spells, but it would prevent them from being viable choices for Signature Spell and Spell Mastery. They would just be Cleric spells that the Wizard can prepare. The Wisdom thing seems like a decent tradeoff, as well, for the added versatility. The Wizard can certainly afford to be MAD if it wants to cast both arcane and divine spells really well.

Oh, and fixing the level 14 feature, of course.

[georgie_leech]

I'd disagree. It would make this spell poaching feature completely different from the other class features that poach spells from other lists. Why should the Wizard need WIS to cast spells on the Cleric List when Bards and Warlocks can use CHA just fine?

As for the Level 14 feature, I'd slap the Divine Intervention feature on it instead of the level 17 Domain feature, with a note that your effective Cleric level is your Wizard Level - 4.

[Easy_Lee]

Would the Theurge thing be okay if there was a Cleric archetype to take one of the Wizard archetypes, and learn any spell from that school from the Wizard's spell list?

[SharkForce]

But all of these state that they are class spells for you. The Cleric's domain spell entry explicitly say that they count as cleric spells. The Land Druid's Circle spell feature says the same. Oath Spells say. The Warlock's Expanded Spell List feature say that they are added to the warlock spell list for you, which I take to mean the same thing.

There is no current class that gets spells from another spell list that does not specify that the spells count as the class's spell for you. The fact that Theurge doesn't then means that they do not count as Wizard spells. It would not be strange at all if the intention was that the Cleric spells you get should use Wisdom for being cast. It doesn't say so, obviously, but it wouldn't be far-fetched. All that would be needed would be for it to say "Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for cleric spells you get from this feature." And then the Wizard would be able to cast Cleric spells gained from the subclass with Wisdom. No issues. It would be a minor tradeoff for an extremely powerful class feature.

So I believe that would have been a good intention, even if it doesn't say it right now. Right now it's certainly valid to say that you cast them using Intelligence, even though they don't count as Wizard spells. But it's equally valid to say that they'd be cast with Wisdom, because it really doesn't say anything either way. There's a missing sentence somewhere. As you say, you can only cast Wizard spells with Intelligence. But if you count these new spells as Wizard spells, the class isn't only very, very powerful and unbalanced; it's outright broken.

at that point, we have to ask ourselves: does it make more sense that they would forget a single sentence (which shouldn't be necessary, i must emphasise once again that you literally cannot prepare or cast cleric spells using the wizard class features, so the ability is literally impossible to use as written for a single-classed wizard, and they have previously given out spells from other class lists without specifying as well) or several paragraphs giving the subclass a second spellcasting modifier and such?

it isn't rational to assume that they intended for the subclass to not function at all but that they just never bothered to tell us that. yes, it is too powerful. no, the solution is not to try and jam stupid into it until it doesn't work any more.

[R.Shackleford]

They really seem to like to give buffs to things that were fine already while the 4-element monk just sits and rots...

Side note: Life Domain Wizard is going to be pretty hilarious :D

I wonder... and I haven't checked this out just yet... but...

How does a cleric/wizard work? Can they pick two different domains?

Do they get subclass features early if they go cleric first?

Do they not get anything if they already have that domain feature?

[georgie_leech]

I wonder... and I haven't checked this out just yet... but...

How does a cleric/wizard work? Can they pick two different domains?

Do they get subclass features early if they go cleric first?

Do they not get anything if they already have that domain feature?

In order, looks like it, nope, and probably. Fluff-wise I can half justify it by saying the Wizard and Cleric approaches to faith have little in common. Mechanically, I really do find 'slap a domain on a Wizard' as a bare bones idea at best, and lazy at worst. If they want to do it properly they should really wait and release a more careful, individual version for multiple domains.

[MeeposFire]

I believe the article says that you must choose a domain from your deity so I would think that it would be fine to choose for your domain from any your chosen deity provides. Each class would emphasize different aspects of the deity.

[ATHATH]

So...how would you limit it then?

I mean, cantrips are unlimited spell use, but they're also the lowest level of powered spell;

How can you even have a limit on the amount of usage that isn't intrinsically tied to the passage of time?
How about requiring GP, XP, or the deaths of your (level-appropriate) enemies?

[mephnick]

Let's take the class that already has the most subclasses and give it access to all the subclasses of the class with the second most subclasses.

Eat it, everyone else.

*WotC drops mic*

[VoxRationis]

I kind of like the new classes. I obviously see the threat posed by the theurge wizard, though truth be told, I never liked how clerics and wizards compared anyway. Why can't a wizard learn a simple healing spell? Mastery of magic is literally their sole defining characteristic.
I am fond of the new warlock pact; I like how it focuses on defense, escape, and intelligence, rendering it rather different from the other warlocks (who end up being rather offensively minded).

[RickAllison]

I believe the article says that you must choose a domain from your deity so I would think that it would be fine to choose for your domain from any your chosen deity provides. Each class would emphasize different aspects of the deity.

It also said you could pick one of the arcane-friendly domains instead:


When you select this tradition at 2nd level, pick a
divine domain from your chosen deity’s list of
eligible domains. Alternatively, the following
domains are thematically appropriate and easily
compatible with the theurgist concept:
• Arcana*
• Knowledge
• Light

For example, you could have a Nature cleric who is tasked with understanding the Weave in order to reverse the deleterious effects it is having on the parts of the world.

Or how about the character that I am re-building with this (just got the A-OK from my DM). He is a servant of the Raven Queen (so Life or Death) and so acts as her disciple with those domains. His theurge levels focus on his application of her will, learning about this strange world and establishing her influence. To this end, he will use the Knowledge domain.

Really, having the cleric levels be your devotion and following of tenets and the theurge levels being a specific task makes a lot of sense. I think it would be awesome to have a PC who uses domains to interact in ways that one doesn't think of normally, and theurge seems to almost encourage it. The follower of Eldath who takes Tempest and harnesses the storms to replenish the waters that feed her springs, the Light follower of Mielikki who carefully burns away parts to encourage new growth and allowing certain species of flora to spread.

[Gastronomie]

The Warlock pact, I love.

The Wizard, not so much. I mean, I understand the concept, but I feel this sorta goes against what makes 5e good, which is how "each class has a different role in the party". Even if someone is "stronger" than another character, it doesn't necessarily mean that the weaker character can do nothing - in fact it's far from it. For instance, even if there was a Battle Master with six stats of 60, the party Wizard with point-buy stats can still be effective.

But this... it makes Wizards step on the Clerics' feet too much. It goes against the concept of "dividing jobs", which I feel is a crucial part of the game. I like the concept, but not how they designed it as a copy-paste of Clerics, except probably better in (not all, but) many ways.

[R.Shackleford]

This is what you get when you don't want to make new content/more base classes when your have a core game that isn't consistent with itself.

You get great ideas turned to crap.

The Theurgy could have been a base class that had its own spell list comprised of cleric and Arcane spells with balanced class features.

WotC is making this way too troublesome and sad, I need a new hobby, perhaps I'll pick up Python or R and learn to code.

[RickAllison]

The Warlock pact, I love.

The Wizard, not so much. I mean, I understand the concept, but I feel this sorta goes against what makes 5e good, which is how "each class has a different role in the party". Even if someone is "stronger" than another character, it doesn't necessarily mean that the weaker character can do nothing - in fact it's far from it. For instance, even if there was a Battle Master with six stats of 60, the party Wizard with point-buy stats can still be effective.

But this... it makes Wizards step on the Clerics' feet too much. It goes against the concept of "dividing jobs", which I feel is a crucial part of the game. I like the concept, but not how they designed it as a copy-paste of Clerics, except probably better in (not all, but) many ways.

That being said, what if you have a party without a cleric? No one wants to be a cleric, so those toes getting stepped on do not exist. How does it fare at that point?

This is sort of hypothetical, but also relevant to me. My party lacks a cleric...

[R.Shackleford]

That being said, what if you have a party without a cleric? No one wants to be a cleric, so those toes getting stepped on do not exist. How does it fare at that point?

This is sort of hypothetical, but also relevant to me. My party lacks a cleric...

I'm surprised, I don't see many, if any, groups that don't have a cleric.

Once you get passed the "heal bot" description clerics really appeal to a lot of people and can be built many different ways.

But I just thought of a great Wizard Theurgy...

Death Domain. There has got to be some great combos with that domain...

[RickAllison]

I'm surprised, I don't see many, if any, groups that don't have a cleric.

Once you get passed the "heal bot" description clerics really appeal to a lot of people and can be built many different ways.

But I just thought of a great Wizard Theurgy...

Death Domain. There has got to be some great combos with that domain...

Well we had a cleric, but he dipped out early. Basically he showed up and kept his headphones on until it was his turn. His only major contribution to the plot was hitting on a twelve-year-old girl and thus becoming her outlet for fire-bombing, then using Revivify. I think we left him as a snack for some green dragon wyrmlings, along with out drunken fighter.

Our party now has an Arcane Trickster/Bard, an Open Hand Monk, a Moon Druid, and a Sorclock DMPC who kind of makes me cry because of how unoptimized she is. Oh, and my cleric/wizard. So the person whose toes would be stepped on is me, I guess.

[georgie_leech]

Well we had a cleric, but he dipped out early. Basically he showed up and kept his headphones on until it was his turn. His only major contribution to the plot was hitting on a twelve-year-old girl and thus becoming her outlet for fire-bombing, then using Revivify. I think we left him as a snack for some green dragon wyrmlings, along with out drunken fighter.

Our party now has an Arcane Trickster/Bard, an Open Hand Monk, a Moon Druid, and a Sorclock DMPC who kind of makes me cry because of how unoptimized she is. Oh, and my cleric/wizard. So the person whose toes would be stepped on is me, I guess.

Moon Druids especially can be turning extra slots into Good berries, which is an decent source of out of combat healing with a bit of downtime. It's nowhere near practical for heavy combat use if you want to avoid whack a mole fights, but it should be enough to take the edge off. For nastier conditions, it depends on level but you at least should be able to grab a scroll or two for emergencies.

[Gastronomie]

That being said, what if you have a party without a cleric? No one wants to be a cleric, so those toes getting stepped on do not exist. How does it fare at that point?

This is sort of hypothetical, but also relevant to me. My party lacks a cleric...Perhaps true. It might be good in how the party can now have a "Healer" (not "Healbot") without there being a Cleric (if no one wants to play Cleric, that is). But then again, Bards, Druids and Paladins do the job pretty nicely too.

My feelings for the wizard one are still mixed. At least I wouldn't play it if there was already a Cleric in the party...

[RickAllison]

Perhaps true. It might be good in how the party can now have a "Healer" (not "Healbot") without there being a Cleric (if no one wants to play Cleric, that is). But then again, Bards, Druids and Paladins do the job pretty nicely too.

My feelings for the wizard one are still mixed. At least I wouldn't play it if there was already a Cleric in the party...

Understandable. Bards and Paladins seem to still be better for in-combat healing (Aura of Vitality...), while our Druid... Come to think of it, he has never healed anyone! Even as a wizard with just health potions, I did more healing than him. I think he just enjoys being the mighty animal, beating up foes. He would prefer to drop a Flaming Sphere. Meanwhile, our AT/bard is more focused on the social aspects, only dropping a Healing Word when someone is down. I'll ask him, but I don't think he will mind much if I split that duty between the two of us...

Maybe it is just our particular group dynamic. Our Druid just wants to hit really hard, our monk wants to think tactically, our rogue wants to RP, I want to CaW sandbox the world, and our DM wants to dungeon crawl. Yet somehow we all enjoy the combination...

It actually balances rather well. The DM gets to build the encounters he wants, I act as a rules repository so he never has to worry about looking up rules at table and can make his ruling based on what the book says and his feelings, the Druid gets to feel powerful, the monk gets to skirmish, the rogue pulls off stunts while RPing, and I play a supportive character because I AM THE GOD WIZARD, KNOW MY POWER AND TREMBLE, MORTALS!!

Looking at my character sheet, I have one offensive cantrip that just deals damage (Sacred Flame) while everything else is utility like Shape Water or support like Frostbite. I have several offensive spells picked up from enemy spell books, but my go-to spells are all defensive/utility. Heck, my signature spells are Fabricate, Watery Sphere, and Wall spells. The only damage I've ever done with a leveled spell was Wall of Fire... Which is fine, the rest of the party has a high damage output.

[Regitnui]

Mm. Honestly, I think that most issues would be solved by simply stating that the spells you gain from Arcane Initiate count as Cleric spells, not Wizard spells, and that they use Wisdom as the spellcasting ability. With a note that they can still "be prepared from your spellbook". That would overrule the general Wizard rules about only being able to prepare Wizard spells, but it would prevent them from being viable choices for Signature Spell and Spell Mastery. They would just be Cleric spells that the Wizard can prepare. The Wisdom thing seems like a decent tradeoff, as well, for the added versatility. The Wizard can certainly afford to be MAD if it wants to cast both arcane and divine spells really well.

Oh, and fixing the level 14 feature, of course.

I'd support this idea. After all, the mystic theurge's big gimmick was being both a wizard and a cleric. Why shouldn't that apply to the theurge subclass?

[Arkhios]

I'd support this idea. After all, the mystic theurge's big gimmick was being both a wizard and a cleric. Why shouldn't that apply to the theurge subclass?

Well, I don't know... name me one 5e class that has two separate ability modifiers affecting their class abilities. (AFAIK, there is none. It's a core design philosophy as far as I can tell)

[rollingForInit]

I'd disagree. It would make this spell poaching feature completely different from the other class features that poach spells from other lists. Why should the Wizard need WIS to cast spells on the Cleric List when Bards and Warlocks can use CHA just fine?


Because the Theurge is more like part Wizard, part Cleric, without multiclassing. It isn't just poaching a couple of spells like the Bard. The other classes that have access to other class's spells only have very limited access. The Bard can pick anything, only very few. The Theurge on the other hand has access to the vast majority of all spells in the game. It can't learn all Cleric spells, since they cannot be scribed into the book, but you by level 20 you could have half your spells known be any Cleric spells you want. That's significantly more powerful, and really adds to the Wizard's main strength which is its great spell list.


no, the solution is not to try and jam stupid into it until it doesn't work any more.

You still have not explained why it is stupid to use Wisdom for Cleric spells, or that Cleric spells should be treated as Wizard spells. It does not require "several paragraphs" to get around the limitations in the Wizard's spellcasting section.

"You can prepare these spells from your spellbook as if they were wizard spells and you can cast them as rituals (if they have the ritual tag) if they are in your spellbook, but they count as Cleric spells when interacting with other class features. Your spellcasting ability for these cleric spells is Wisdom rather than Intelligence. You can use a Cleric's spellcasting focus when you cast the cleric spells."

There. One paragraph. It can probably be improved upon, but isn't exactly rocket science. And even if it required an extra parapraph or so to cover some other situation, I don't really see the issue. There are plenty of long-winded class features.

[Traginous]

Well, I don't know... name me one 5e class that has two separate ability modifiers affecting their class abilities. (AFAIK, there is none. It's a core design philosophy as far as I can tell)
Both the Edlritch Knight and Arcane Trickster subclasses.

[Arkhios]

Both the Edlritch Knight and Arcane Trickster subclasses.

Hmm, fair point. Although even these are slightly different, because everyone can find use for Strength or Dexterity; even clerics and wizards can - and often will - use either strength or dexterity for weapon combat.
I suppose I should've been more specific. There are no classes that would use two separate abilities for one class' abilities which refer to a spellcasting modifier. Each spellcasting class has only one ability which they refer to.

[Traginous]

Hmm, fair point. Although even these are slightly different, because everyone can find use for Strength or Dexterity; even clerics and wizards can - and often will - use either strength or dexterity for weapon combat.
I suppose I should've been more specific. There are no classes that would use two separate abilities for one class' abilities which refer to a spellcasting modifier. Each spellcasting class has only one ability which they refer to.
That's fair, and TBH I agree that it makes no sense to have two spellcasting stats. Also I would never play a Theurge, mostly because I think an Arcana cleric does a better job mixing Wiz/Cleric.

[Regitnui]

Hmm, fair point. Although even these are slightly different, because everyone can find use for Strength or Dexterity; even clerics and wizards can - and often will - use either strength or dexterity for weapon combat.
I suppose I should've been more specific. There are no classes that would use two separate abilities for one class' abilities which refer to a spellcasting modifier. Each spellcasting class has only one ability which they refer to.


That's fair, and TBH I agree that it makes no sense to have two spellcasting stats. Also I would never play a Theurge, mostly because I think an Arcana cleric does a better job mixing Wiz/Cleric.

There is no precedence for this in the PHB. There's no way I or anyone can "prove" putting the Theurge's cleric spells as Wisdom-based to be a good or bad idea by referring to a book that has nothing to say about it. The only thing we can do is look at similar features. This isn't a feature. It's the defining aspect of a subclass.

Since the Theurge is a direct crossing of two spellcasting classes, it makes more sense to treat it like the Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight; make it Two-Ability Dependent. The PHB classes work with STR/DEX (primary class) and INT (secondary or sub-class). The Theurge would work with INT (primary class) and WIS (secondary class). Does it still seem strange?

[georgie_leech]

There is no precedence for this in the PHB. There's no way I or anyone can "prove" putting the Theurge's cleric spells as Wisdom-based to be a good or bad idea by referring to a book that has nothing to say about it. The only thing we can do is look at similar features. This isn't a feature. It's the defining aspect of a subclass.

Since the Theurge is a direct crossing of two spellcasting classes, it makes more sense to treat it like the Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight; make it Two-Ability Dependent. The PHB classes work with STR/DEX (primary class) and INT (secondary or sub-class). The Theurge would work with INT (primary class) and WIS (secondary class). Does it still seem strange?

Well, yeah. The STR/DEX dependence has nothing to do with those subclasses and all to do with the mechanics of the game as a whole. There aren't any EK abilities that get better for having a high STR, they just do more damage because of how weapons work. While DEX enables their sneaky maneuvering, there aren't any bonuses or DC increases for an AT that has a high DEX. There aren't any classes whose features run off of more than one ability score at a time.

[RickAllison]

Well, yeah. The STR/DEX dependence has nothing to do with those subclasses and all to do with the mechanics of the game as a whole. There aren't any EK abilities that get better for having a high STR, they just do more damage because of how weapons work. While DEX enables their sneaky maneuvering, there aren't any bonuses or DC increases for an AT that has a high DEX. There aren't any classes whose features run off of more than one ability score at a time.

For an interesting point of comparison, Fighter has ways to apply both Int to a DC, but also their choice if Str or Dex. The catch is one is mutually exclusive to the other, they made it so you can't have a system with two save DCs.

[Degwerks]

I was hoping to see more Warlock invocations that any warlock could use. Like a limited use Blast Shape, that could turn your EB into a small cone, line or small blast radius. Something to give you prof. in a skill for a short time, anything new really.

Something that would expand upon existing pacts. Maybe a mount option for PofC, pilfer a spell or 2 with Tome Pact, a fighting style or shilleagh like attack only bonus for Blade Pact.

I don't think the Theurge is a problem at all. He still sucks at making concentration rolls, armor class is a problem, and hit points are still low. He still only has so many spell slots, regardless of the number or type of spells known. In parties like mine where nobody wants to be the cleric, it could fill both rolls depending on a player's play style. Our style has been a fast offense and worry about healing later.

Still I think a Favored Soul can be better in some cases.

[Regitnui]

The favoured soul is also UA, but valid comparison. The theurge doesn't magically (heh) get more spell slots for taking cleric spells. I'm sure that'd be a nice balancing factor on whatever shenanigans can be thought out with higher-level spell slots.


Well, yeah. The STR/DEX dependence has nothing to do with those subclasses and all to do with the mechanics of the game as a whole. There aren't any EK abilities that get better for having a high STR, they just do more damage because of how weapons work. While DEX enables their sneaky maneuvering, there aren't any bonuses or DC increases for an AT that has a high DEX. There aren't any classes whose features run off of more than one ability score at a time.

OK, but you're missing the part where the Fighter and Rogue key off Strength and Dexterity. An EK has Strength for melee and Intelligence for magic. How is Intelligence for wizard spells and Wisdom for cleric spells so different that an analogy cannot be drawn? Having two spell save DCs is tricky, I'll admit, but I can certainly think of ways around it that wouldn't require additional rules or homebrew. It's just a little bookkeeping in an edition that's incredibly light on such things.

[JumboWheat01]

The favoured soul is also UA, but valid comparison. The theurge doesn't magically (heh) get more spell slots for taking cleric spells. I'm sure that'd be a nice balancing factor on whatever shenanigans can be thought out with higher-level spell slots.

But unlike the Favored Soul, the Theurge isn't sacrificing the amount of spells they know while grabbing their Cleric spells. In fact, they're adding onto their already MASSIVE spell list.

[Belac93]

I was hoping to see more Warlock invocations that any warlock could use. Like a limited use Blast Shape, that could turn your EB into a small cone, line or small blast radius. Something to give you prof. in a skill for a short time, anything new really.

Something that would expand upon existing pacts. Maybe a mount option for PofC, pilfer a spell or 2 with Tome Pact, a fighting style or shilleagh like attack only bonus for Blade Pact.

What about an invocation for the mount option? Something like this:

Eldritch Horseman
Prerequisite: Warlock level 3
Benefits: You add the find steed spell to your spells known, and can cast it as a warlock spell. Once your reach 10th level warlock, your steed also gains the benefit on your 10th level subclass ability.


So, what would balance out the Theurge? I would remove the 14th level ability, and put a couple of restrictions on the gaining spells. Not sure what I would replace the 14th level ability with though. Maybe that would be the thing to let you gain more spells.

[georgie_leech]

So on reflection, there is one other example where a class gets abilities that key off of multiple Ability Scores: a Berserker Barbarian has a feature that keys off of CON, and one off of CHA. I maintain that that's awkward design that breaks from the usual class design paradigm (in fact, I'm going to frown at them right now :smallannoyed: ), but I can't argue against using WIS as a balance point for the feature.

[Tanarii]

That being said, what if you have a party without a cleric? No one wants to be a cleric, so those toes getting stepped on do not exist. How does it fare at that point?Are you claiming no one ever wants to be a cleric? Or 'what if no one wants to be a cleric in this particular party?' I'm assuming the latter, but I def read the former the first pass.

IMX Cleric is one of the most common classes to see in 5e. Usually Tempest / War. The other is Warlocks, especially Infernal.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I'm quite disappointed in UA.

Is it tradition to just throw stuff together at the last minute? Cause this is what it feels like.

[Regitnui]

So on reflection, there is one other example where a class gets abilities that key off of multiple Ability Scores: a Berserker Barbarian has a feature that keys off of CON, and one off of CHA. I maintain that that's awkward design that breaks from the usual class design paradigm (in fact, I'm going to frown at them right now :smallannoyed: ), but I can't argue against using WIS as a balance point for the feature.

Thanks, Georgie_leech. I do think that keying the Theurge subclass spells off Wisdom may be a step towards balance. By no means am I confident enough in my mechanical abilities to do the entirety of the subclass (ask me to make a murderhobo guilty about destruction, sure. Ask me to balance a feat, no).

[Easy_Lee]

Favored Souls add cleric spells, but cast them from CHA. I don't remember anyone having a problem with that. I suspect it's because sorcerers are seen as UP and wizards OP.

[SharkForce]

You still have not explained why it is stupid to use Wisdom for Cleric spells, or that Cleric spells should be treated as Wizard spells. It does not require "several paragraphs" to get around the limitations in the Wizard's spellcasting section.

"You can prepare these spells from your spellbook as if they were wizard spells and you can cast them as rituals (if they have the ritual tag) if they are in your spellbook, but they count as Cleric spells when interacting with other class features. Your spellcasting ability for these cleric spells is Wisdom rather than Intelligence. You can use a Cleric's spellcasting focus when you cast the cleric spells."

There. One paragraph. It can probably be improved upon, but isn't exactly rocket science. And even if it required an extra parapraph or so to cover some other situation, I don't really see the issue. There are plenty of long-winded class features.

well, how about you have a look at every single other instance where a spellcasting modifier is given to a class. not one of them just says "here's your spellcasting modifier, figure the rest out yourself". every single time a class gets a spellcasting modifier, they explain, in detail, how it works, with several paragraphs. there is no general "here's how a spellcasting modifier works" section in the PHB, just like there's no general "unarmoured defense" section in the PHB that tells you to just take the attribute of your unarmored defense and your AC is 10 + dex + <attribute>

we know exactly how WotC tells you to use a specific attribute for casting spells. and "just use wisdom instead of intelligence" is not how it is done.

[Belac93]

I'm quite disappointed in UA.

Is it tradition to just throw stuff together at the last minute? Cause this is what it feels like.

Actually, that is the tradition. What tipped you off?

Seriously though, the articles pretty much scream: 5 minutes of work. I would say the best one so far was their 1st one.

I would rate the Theurge 3/10 (I like the favour, but hate the way they pulled it off), and the warlock 8/10 (I enjoy it, but there are a few minor things I have trouble with.)

[Regitnui]

Favored Souls add cleric spells, but cast them from CHA. I don't remember anyone having a problem with that. I suspect it's because sorcerers are seen as UP and wizards OP.

Well, I think part of the perceived OP of wizard is the fact that WotC decided on having one subclass for each type of magic, in some sort of overcompensating callback to favoured schools in 3.5. Honestly, if they'd just had "Evoker", "Beguiler", "Prophet" and "Binder" as subclasses, merging two or more school's bonuses, the wizard might not overshadow the sorcerer so much. There may also have been more acceptance of new UA subclasses like this, since they'd feel as novel as a new Sorcerer or Ranger subclass.

[Cybren]

Actually, that is the tradition. What tipped you off?

Seriously though, the articles pretty much scream: 5 minutes of work. I would say the best one so far was their 1st one.

I would rate the Theurge 3/10 (I like the favour, but hate the way they pulled it off), and the warlock 8/10 (I enjoy it, but there are a few minor things I have trouble with.)

They've been very transparent from the get go that Unearthed Arcana is unplaytested material meant to showcase concepts and not present table-ready options.


Well, I think part of the perceived OP of wizard is the fact that WotC decided on having one subclass for each type of magic, in some sort of overcompensating callback to favoured schools in 3.5. Honestly, if they'd just had "Evoker", "Beguiler", "Prophet" and "Binder" as subclasses, merging two or more school's bonuses, the wizard might not overshadow the sorcerer so much. There may also have been more acceptance of new UA subclasses like this, since they'd feel as novel as a new Sorcerer or Ranger subclass.

More specifically, the Favored Soul is addresses the core dislike people have with the sorcerer- not enough spells, whereas the core of most peoples like of the wizard is "learns a lot of and often the best spells".

[RickAllison]

Are you claiming no one ever wants to be a cleric? Or 'what if no one wants to be a cleric in this particular party?' I'm assuming the latter, but I def read the former the first pass.

IMX Cleric is one of the most common classes to see in 5e. Usually Tempest / War. The other is Warlocks, especially Infernal.

I think between everything it was rather clear I was talking about my party. Even went in depth later on about how the play style of the cleric never appealed to the other members of our group...

[Easy_Lee]

They've been very transparent from the get go that Unearthed Arcana is unplaytested material meant to showcase concepts and not present table-ready options.


More specifically, the Favored Soul is addresses the core dislike people have with the sorcerer- not enough spells, whereas the core of most peoples like of the wizard is "learns a lot of and often the best spells".

Thing is that the favored soul, lore bard, tome warlock, and similar establish that it's okay for an archetype to add another class' spells to your own list and allow you to cast them with your own spellcasting stat. If that trend is violated with a wizard subclass, it not only feels like a targeted attack on the wizard, but also discourages players from playing a theurge.

[Drackolus]

What about an invocation for the mount option? Something like this:

Eldritch Horseman
Prerequisite: Warlock level 3
Benefits: You add the find steed spell to your spells known, and can cast it as a warlock spell. Once your reach 10th level warlock, your steed also gains the benefit on your 10th level subclass ability.


I really like this actually. If it's pact specific, you could even call it a Star Steed.

I'm skeptical of the theurge being truly that powerful - granted, you definitely have to slap a "any sane dm" on using spell mastery on a healing spell, and potentially spiritual weapon (having infinite free shields and spiritual weapons would give you incredible action economy. Does sound incredibly rad though.) But consider this: what's better, a light theurge or an abjurer? A storm theurge or an evoker? A death theurge or a necromancer? Seeing as the wizard list is generally superior, lacking only spiritual weapon and maybe spirit guardians (less useful on a squishy wizard), you're sacrificing the ability to improve already better spells to cast generally weaker spells. And really, spiritual weapon is a great spell, but web, hold person, and phantasmal force can win encounters easier.

As a bard player, my general order of poaching has been wizard->paladin->cleric (whilst lacking pretty much any other spellcasters). Heck, if the Bard list didn't already include a lot of the great wizard spells, it's probably all I would grab. And it's not like I prefer wizards - actually, healing is my favorite, followed by defensive spells... but wizard spells are SO good at pretty much everything but healing that it's not much of a choice. wall of force or mass cure wounds? Why would you even ask that question? Heck, even as a life theurge, I'd probably cast wall of force.

The real winner of the theurge is the channel divinity, but even that isn't clearly better than, say, portent or transmuter's stone.

Other than spell mastery abuse (signature spell doesn't really get any better) and potentially pissing off your priestly pal by precociously poaching his penultimate power, the theurge doesn't seem so clearly out of line to me. I'd like to bring up that these same boards exploded at the favored soul, but that turned out to just be a decent choice.

(Oh whoops I built a wall)

[Cybren]

Thing is that the favored soul, lore bard, tome warlock, and similar establish that it's okay for an archetype to add another class' spells to your own list and allow you to cast them with your own spellcasting stat. If that trend is violated with a wizard subclass, it not only feels like a targeted attack on the wizard, but also discourages players from playing a theurge.

Well, those are all different classes and different situations with different needs.
1) The Favored Soul was them playing at different ways to approach new sorcerer subclasses. Seeing that the Storm Sorcerer lost its extra spells when it went to print should indicate where they stand on that conceptually.
2) The Bards magical secrets is an outlier. I have to assume it's meant to address the bard having such a narrow spell list, while maintaining their feel of "jack of all trades, master of none". I would hazard a guess that in a future iteration of 5E the magical secrets ability will have a bit more limitation to it.
3) The warlock itself has a Very Different version of magic. Having one option that let's them learn cantrips & rituals isn't exactly the same level of niche infringement as a wizard with cure wounds is.

I don't even think the bonus spells are the bad part of theurge. It's the cribbing of other domain features that feels off. It doesn't give the Theurge enough of its own identity (in the way that War Magic does for Eldritch Knights or the way Mage Hand Legerdemain does for Arcane Tricksters) while making similar clerics of that domain feel less special.

[Regitnui]

They've been very transparent from the get go that Unearthed Arcana is unplaytested material meant to showcase concepts and not present table-ready options.

I'm also fairly sure that the UA they give us is much like the Plane Shift series; stuff that someone in the company thinks is fun and a step away from publishing, but that they're not sure will make it into a book and can't be put onto the DMsG for legal reasons. They're a labour of love (mostly) and are essentially "housebrew"; homebrew done in-house.


More specifically, the Favored Soul is addresses the core dislike people have with the sorcerer- not enough spells, whereas the core of most peoples like of the wizard is "learns a lot of and often the best spells".

An interesting solution would be for them to put out a bunch of "monster" spells that the sorcerer can know from their ancestry or learn like a Final Fantasy blue mage, but a wizard cannot. The in-game reason why is up to you, but WotC can just leave them off the wizard's spell list. Flipping through the MM, I can see a few interesting options: the Chasme's drone, a Horned Devil's Hurl Flame, a Gold Dragon's Weakening Breath as a cloud, a Marid's Water Jet, and a one-hit version of the Tarrasque's Reflective Carapace. Heck, it might be all sorts of fun to trigger a Frightful Presence as a spell, flavoured as having a ghostly monster loom over you. It'd take a better homebrewer than I to take that project on, but if someone wants to take it to fruition, let me know.

[Easy_Lee]

Well, those are all different classes and different situations with different needs.
1) The Favored Soul was them playing at different ways to approach new sorcerer subclasses. Seeing that the Storm Sorcerer lost its extra spells when it went to print should indicate where they stand on that conceptually.
2) The Bards magical secrets is an outlier. I have to assume it's meant to address the bard having such a narrow spell list, while maintaining their feel of "jack of all trades, master of none". I would hazard a guess that in a future iteration of 5E the magical secrets ability will have a bit more limitation to it.
3) The warlock itself has a Very Different version of magic. Having one option that let's them learn cantrips & rituals isn't exactly the same level of niche infringement as a wizard with cure wounds is.

I don't even think the bonus spells are the bad part of theurge. It's the cribbing of other domain features that feels off. It doesn't give the Theurge enough of its own identity (in the way that War Magic does for Eldritch Knights or the way Mage Hand Legerdemain does for Arcane Tricksters) while making similar clerics of that domain feel less special.

1) I don't think it's fair to say that this magic is different from that magic, then use it to justify completely different guidelines for separate classes.

2) The mystic theurge not feeling unique enough is a value judgement

3) Most seem to agree that mystic theurge shouldn't get cleric features three levels before the cleric. However, I don't believe wizards casting cleric spells makes clerics any less special, anymore than sorcerers are less special than wizards for having a strictly inferior spell list.

[Drackolus]

Would the Theurge thing be okay if there was a Cleric archetype to take one of the Wizard archetypes, and learn any spell from that school from the Wizard's spell list?


Divine Domain: Arcanist
-fluff here-
Arcane Studies
When you select this domain at level 1, you also choose a school of magic. Your abilities in this class are taken from the respective school's Arcane Tradition.
In addition, rather than having a set of domain spells, you may choose two spells on the Wizard's spell list that you have not added already using this feature and treat them as domain spells. The spells you choose must be of a level you can cast. They otherwise act as cleric spells and they are always treated as prepared, as usual for domain spells. You may add two more spells at levels 3, 5, 7, and 9.
You also gain your Arcane Tradition's level 2 benefits.
Certain Wizard schools (Abjuration, Enchantment, and Necromancy) don't actually have at least 2 spells per spell level. It is, however, possible to get at least 2 spells at the points where you should get 2 spells, albeit sometimes from lower levels.
Channel Divinity: Divine Arcana (copy-pasted)
Starting at level 2, you may use your channel divinity to improve your spellcasting. As a bonus action, you speak a prayer to control the flow of magic around you. The next spell you cast gains a +2 bonus to its attack roll or saving throw DC, as appropriate.
Divine Student
At level 6, You gain your respective Arcane Tradition's level 6 benefits.
Divine Adept
At level 8 You gain your respective Arcane Tradition's level 10 abilities.
I felt it was okay to, instead of using a damage boost at level 8, throw in another wizard ability. Feels somewhat in line with throwing a multiattack on a bard/wizard/whatever's level 6 ability. This whole thing runs into the problem of clerics basically having 3 abilities + their level 8 vs. a wizard's 4 abilities.
Divine Savant
At level 17 you gain your respective Arcane Tradition's level 14 ability.
The Arcana Cleric's "Arcane Mastery" would be a perfect fit here. Mostly didn't include it due to lack of space for more abilities, and not wanting to overload any level's benefits.

Also, NO FAVORED SOULS OR THEURGES ALLOWED. Favored soul taking Arcanist may not be the end of the world, since it's basically just giving sorcerers a few wizard spells they might already have had. Arcanist already can't take Theurge since it's not a spell school. But Theurge taking Arcanist would just be a wizard with free channel divinity. No-no.


Here you go. Something to compare to and consider. I'm actually more happy with this than I expected.

[Cybren]

1) I don't think it's fair to say that this magic is different from that magic, then use it to justify completely different guidelines for separate classes.


??? This magic is frequently different from that magic. Most classes have different spell lists, and different methods of interacting with those spell lists (be it with arcane recovery, font of magic, pact magic, etc).



2) The mystic theurge not feeling unique enough is a value judgement

And?


3) Most seem to agree that mystic theurge shouldn't get cleric features three levels before the cleric. However, I don't believe wizards casting cleric spells makes clerics any less special, anymore than sorcerers are less special than wizards for having a strictly inferior spell list.

You'll note I said I think giving the wizard domain spells is cool, and that cribbing archetype features was what I thought made them less special. I specifically said that the spells are cool and the features aren't- without regard to the level they're gaiend.

[Easy_Lee]

??? This magic is frequently different from that magic. Most classes have different spell lists, and different methods of interacting with those spell lists (be it with arcane recovery, font of magic, pact magic, etc).


And?


You'll note I said I think giving the wizard domain spells is cool, and that cribbing archetype features was what I thought made them less special. I specifically said that the spells are cool and the features aren't- without regard to the level they're gaiend.

So you think that one class using another class' archetype makes the second class less special?

[Cybren]

Yes, I think one class using another classes archetype makes it less special.

[Easy_Lee]

Divine Domain: Arcanist
-fluff here-
Arcane Studies
When you select this domain at level 1, you also choose a school of magic. Your abilities in this class are taken from the respective school's Arcane Tradition.
In addition, rather than having a set of domain spells, you may choose two spells on the Wizard's spell list that you have not added already using this feature and treat them as domain spells. The spells you choose must be of a level you can cast. They otherwise act as cleric spells and they are always treated as prepared, as usual for domain spells. You may add two more spells at levels 3, 5, 7, and 9.
You also gain your Arcane Tradition's level 2 benefits.
Certain Wizard schools (Abjuration, Enchantment, and Necromancy) don't actually have at least 2 spells per spell level. It is, however, possible to get at least 2 spells at the points where you should get 2 spells, albeit sometimes from lower levels.
Channel Divinity: Divine Arcana (copy-pasted)
Starting at level 2, you may use your channel divinity to improve your spellcasting. As a bonus action, you speak a prayer to control the flow of magic around you. The next spell you cast gains a +2 bonus to its attack roll or saving throw DC, as appropriate.
Divine Student
At level 6, You gain your respective Arcane Tradition's level 6 benefits.
Divine Adept
At level 8 You gain your respective Arcane Tradition's level 10 abilities.
I felt it was okay to, instead of using a damage boost at level 8, throw in another wizard ability. Feels somewhat in line with throwing a multiattack on a bard/wizard/whatever's level 6 ability. This whole thing runs into the problem of clerics basically having 3 abilities + their level 8 vs. a wizard's 4 abilities.
Divine Savant
At level 17 you gain your respective Arcane Tradition's level 14 ability.
The Arcana Cleric's "Arcane Mastery" would be a perfect fit here. Mostly didn't include it due to lack of space for more abilities, and not wanting to overload any level's benefits.

Also, NO FAVORED SOULS OR THEURGES ALLOWED. Favored soul taking Arcanist may not be the end of the world, since it's basically just giving sorcerers a few wizard spells they might already have had. Arcanist already can't take Theurge since it's not a spell school. But Theurge taking Arcanist would just be a wizard with free channel divinity. No-no.


Here you go. Something to compare to and consider. I'm actually more happy with this than I expected.

Seems fine, to me. I don't like the +2 thing, but I didn't like it on the theurge, either. Overall, it's less impactful than Diviner Portent.

[Cybren]

Seems fine, to me. I don't like the +2 thing, but I didn't like it on the theurge, either. Overall, it's less impactful than Diviner Portent.

Yeah, the +2 thing feels odd. It makes the Clericy Wizard better at Wizardy Wizard things in a strange way. That seems like the sort of ability that should be on a "generalist" wizard subclass.

[georgie_leech]

So you think that one class using another class' archetype makes the second class less special?

The archetype isn't 'casts healing spells' though. Bards, Druids, and Paladins can all do that too. The archetype is 'divinely inspired agents of god(s).' This is reflected in them being one of the classes that gets their subclass at first level, having a number of divine boons gifted to them from their deities. Even the Arcana Domain isn't them stealing from the Wizard's shtick of being the magical bookworm, it's some god of magic directly empowering them. Theurge though, that is definitely stealing the Clerics shtick, as it's taking the features that represent the powers granted to the faithful. Studying their magical techniques, fine. Stealing their divine boons, significantly less so.

[Easy_Lee]

The archetype isn't 'casts healing spells' though. Bards, Druids, and Paladins can all do that too. The archetype is 'divinely inspired agents of god(s).' This is reflected in them being one of the classes that gets their subclass at first level, having a number of divine boons gifted to them from their deities. Even the Arcana Domain isn't them stealing from the Wizard's shtick of being the magical bookworm, it's some god of magic directly empowering them. Theurge though, that is definitely stealing the Clerics shtick, as it's taking the features that represent the powers granted to the faithful. Studying their magical techniques, fine. Stealing their divine boons, significantly less so.

So you're generally fine with cross-class archetypes, but not when it's a cleric domain?

[R.Shackleford]

So you're generally fine with cross-class archetypes, but not when it's a cleric domain?

I think cleric domains shouldn't have been the subclass in the first place...

[georgie_leech]

So you're generally fine with cross-class archetypes, but not when it's a cleric domain?

To an extent. Eldritch Knights are taking from the Wizard list, but they have a distinct Martial spin on it. Likewise for an Arcane Trickster, but with a subterfuge flair. That's a kind of borrowing that I can accept. Likewise, some kind of Shaman-ish archetype for a Barbarian that borrows from Druid with their own wild and primitive Shtick, a more magical totem set or something, would be fine. What I don't want to see is a Barbarian of the Moon, or a Bard of Devotion, or, more relevant to this thread, a Life Wizard. By all means, have archetypes that borrow themes from other classes, but straight lifting mechanics is a bit much. It needs to be better thought out than that, taking the theme you're looking for but through the lens of the class.

And no WotC, getting Divine boons three levels early because you studied them lots does not count. :smallsigh:

[Easy_Lee]

I think cleric domains shouldn't have been the subclass in the first place...

That's fine. I'm just trying to figure out where people stand on this. That said, I don't know what else the cleric domain would have been. As far as I know, anyone can worship a God in d&d. The theurge just gets some of the same benefits as a cleric for doing so. Clerics must worship a God, get general cleric benefits for any God, and some specific domain benefits depending on the chosen God. A God might choose to extend those benefits to other chosen ones.

[R.Shackleford]

That's fine. I'm just trying to figure out where people stand on this. That said, I don't know what else the cleric domain would have been. As far as I know, anyone can worship a God in d&d. The theurge just gets some of the same benefits as a cleric for doing so. Clerics must worship a God, and get general cleric benefits for any God and some specific domain benefits depending on the chosen God.

Favored Soul (picking up sorcerer spells)
Defiler
Archivist
Druid
Shaman


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prestige_classes

(look under complete divine to start)

:)

[Cybren]

Favored Soul (picking up sorcerer spells)
Defiler
Archivist
Druid
Shaman


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prestige_classes

(look under complete divine to start)

:)

I think domains are a good approach to cleric subclasses. I also think I like the idea of favored souls as a sorcerer subclass (admittedly partly because I dislike both Draconic and Wild Magic sorcerers)

[Drackolus]

Seems fine, to me. I don't like the +2 thing, but I didn't like it on the theurge, either. Overall, it's less impactful than Diviner Portent.

Well, if you chose divination, you'd get Portent.

My goal wasn't really so much as make an argument, but provide something to compare it too. I specifically kept a lot of the same abilities for that reason. So, I suppose what I'm really trying to ask with this is; would simply swapping the two make two of the same class? IE, would the Arcanist and the Theurge feel like the same character, or would there still be some level of distinction? Obviously, the cantrips would be different, and the cleric gets access to ALL cleric (simultaneously, unlike the theurge) and the Wizard gets ALL the wizard abilities. Also, the cleric gets better armor and health, but they do miss out on arcane recovery (not the biggest loss) and they get channel divinity instead of a domain channel (but both get the weird +2 thing).
Hard to say without playing them, but I personally feel that while they'd obviously be very similar, even then it'd be different enough. For example: say we have a storm theurge, a storm cleric, an evoker wizard, and an evoker arcanist. Is the evoker arcanist closer to the storm cleric (same class) or evoker wizard (same specilization)?
Again, I'm not really trying to make a specific point, just trying to make it easier to think about. Mostly for myself, but I figured it might be interesting for someone else.
I will agree that this is a bit more awkward than the favored soul, which only took the spell list. Honestly, I think the whole thing would be less weird if they just dropped the whole channel divinity thing and gave them a unique ability instead. That said, in terms of balance, barring the infinite healing thing, I don't know if it's necessarily too strong.

[Easy_Lee]

Favored Soul (picking up sorcerer spells)
Defiler
Archivist
Druid
Shaman


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prestige_classes

(look under complete divine to start)

:)

I was saying that I don't know what else domains would have been for clerics. They make sense as a cleric archetype, and made sense at level 1 since clerics don't just pop up without a god.

And assuming that they are the cleric archetype, then I don't know how one could allow cross class archetypes while specifically disallowing anyone from choosing cleric archetypes. IMO, it's either okay for all classes, or not okay for any.

[R.Shackleford]

I think domains are a good approach to cleric subclasses. I also think I like the idea of favored souls as a sorcerer subclass (admittedly partly because I dislike both Draconic and Wild Magic sorcerers)

I think it makes the cleric rather... bland.

I want subclasses that are specific and full of fluff. If four clerics are in a line up, I want it to be really simple for someone to say "yep, that one is x, that one is y, and that one is z".

You could still have domains and domain spells. Just tie them to the core class as an option.

Cleric
1: Spells, Channel Divinity
2: Subclass (call it domain, or some other fancy name)
3: Channel Divinity (Deity Based)
4: ASI
5: Basic Cleric Class Feature
6: Subclass Feature
7: Boost Cantrip/Weapon Attack
8: ASI
9: Channel Divinity (Deity Based)
10: Subclass Feature

Each cleric gains bonus spells based on their deity (or domain if you wish). As normal, but these come from the core cleric and not the subclass.



edit


I was saying that I don't know what else domains would have been for clerics. They make sense as a cleric archetype, and made sense at level 1 since clerics don't just pop up without a god.

And assuming that they are the cleric archetype, then I don't know how one could allow cross class archetypes while specifically disallowing anyone from choosing cleric archetypes. IMO, it's either okay for all classes, or not okay for any.

Those prestige classes would make perfect subclasses for the cleric. You really don't need a domain or subclass at level 1. At level one, like most other classes, you could just be "some guy", yeah you worship a deity but they haven't fully recognize you just yet.

Fighter or Rogue wants to take a "cleric" subclass then they gain the subclass abilities and not really anything from the core cleric levels. (for this to work then everyone's subclasses come from the same levels).

Cleric Subclass

Radiant Servant of Pelor

"At 2nd Level you have been fully recognized by Pelor. You gain the following features..."

Have the subclass about being fully recognized by the church/deity/ideology.

[Drackolus]

I think it makes the cleric rather... bland.

I want subclasses that are specific and full of fluff. If four clerics are in a line up, I want it to be really simple for someone to say "yep, that one is x, that one is y, and that one is z".

You could still have domains and domain spells. Just tie them to the core class as an option.

Cleric
1: Spells, Channel Divinity
2: Subclass (call it domain, or some other fancy name)
3: Channel Divinity (Deity Based)
4: ASI
5: Basic Cleric Class Feature
6: Subclass Feature
7: Boost Cantrip/Weapon Attack
8: ASI
9: Channel Divinity (Deity Based)
10: Subclass Feature

Each cleric gains bonus spells based on their deity (or domain if you wish). As normal, but these come from the core cleric and not the subclass.

Makes me think of warlock. You could choose your domain (deity) at level 1, and then at level 3 (or so) choose your "style." Like, cloister cleric, battle cleric, and evangelist (off the top of my head).

That actually sounds pretty neat.

[Cybren]

I was saying that I don't know what else domains would have been for clerics. They make sense as a cleric archetype, and made sense at level 1 since clerics don't just pop up without a god.

And assuming that they are the cleric archetype, then I don't know how one could allow cross class archetypes while specifically disallowing anyone from choosing cleric archetypes. IMO, it's either okay for all classes, or not okay for any.

Use the domain just for spells and maybe the 2nd level channel divinity (much later) then have the rest be "clericy" abilities.

[R.Shackleford]

Makes me think of warlock. You could choose your domain (deity) at level 1, and then at level 3 (or so) choose your "style." Like, cloister cleric, battle cleric, and evangelist (off the top of my head).

That actually sounds pretty neat.

What is a warlock than a bastard cleric?

[JumboWheat01]

Makes me think of warlock. You could choose your domain (deity) at level 1, and then at level 3 (or so) choose your "style." Like, cloister cleric, battle cleric, and evangelist (off the top of my head).

That actually sounds pretty neat.

That's actually not too far off from what 4e had to offer (for pretty much all classes, really.) Every cleric had their set of stuff they could do, but some could become an Angelic Avenger, others a Divine Oracle, and so on and so forth, that had their own extra bit of fluff and stuff.


What is a warlock than a bastard cleric?

...You know something, I never quite thought of it like that. That is a very clever idea. I'll have to see if I can work something around that.

[Drackolus]

What is a warlock than a bastard cleric?

True that.
The gears are turning now. I might throw together an alternate cleric class if anyone's interested. Mostly just be copying over and rearranging the abilities already there, so it wouldn't be much work.
At work right now, so I might have to wait until I get home to put it all down. I'll start a new thread if I do over in the homebrew section, since that's way off topic.


That's actually not too far off from what 4e had to offer (for pretty much all classes, really.) Every cleric had their set of stuff they could do, but some could become an Angelic Avenger, others a Divine Oracle, and so on and so forth, that had their own extra bit of fluff and stuff.


4e's the only one I never played, so I didn't know that. I'll do some research before I get to writing, probably take some of their ideas.

[Easy_Lee]

While we're on warlocks, they're especially weird as far as archetypes go. You would think it was their pact, but they only get one level of pact features. The others come from technically optional invocations. Meanwhile, the patron has the appropriate number of features for an archetype, but is very similar to a cleric domain.

[R.Shackleford]

True that.
The gears are turning now. I might throw together an alternate cleric class if anyone's interested. Mostly just be copying over and rearranging the abilities already there, so it wouldn't be much work.
At work right now, so I might have to wait until I get home to put it all down. I'll start a new thread if I do over in the homebrew section, since that's way off topic.

I've thought of this a few times, just never really went with it.


invocations become prayers.

I would like it if every class had one or two... cousin classes. They are designed with the same

Cleric - Warlock (gets power from outsiders, somewhat the "easy route" to magic)
Druid - Wizard (knowledge is power, but so is reshaping reality or oneself)
Barbarian - Rogue (consistent damage, maneuvers/feats, protects their groups)
Paladin - Ranger (burst damage, some magic some maneuvers/feats, protectors of the cities or woodlands)

[georgie_leech]

While we're on warlocks, they're especially weird as far as archetypes go. You would think it was their pact, but they only get one level of pact features. The others come from technically optional invocations. Meanwhile, the patron has the appropriate number of features for an archetype, but is very similar to a cleric domain.

Hang on, when use Archetypes, are you talking the use of their broad image and themes, or the way Pathfinder uses it to encompass a number of related abilities?

[Cybren]

While we're on warlocks, they're especially weird as far as archetypes go. You would think it was their pact, but they only get one level of pact features. The others come from technically optional invocations. Meanwhile, the patron has the appropriate number of features for an archetype, but is very similar to a cleric domain.

The patron IS the archetype. The Pact boon is just a special benefit.

[Easy_Lee]

Hang on, when use Archetypes, are you talking the use of their broad image and themes, or the way Pathfinder uses it to encompass a number of related abilities?

I'm talking specifically of how they get used in 5e.

[R.Shackleford]

I'm talking specifically of how they get used in 5e.

I don't th8nk WotC really knew what they wanted mechanically with archetypes.

Some classes rely heavily on then while others could, mostly, care less.

Wizards and Clerics get neat things from subclasses, but their power comes from spells.

Barbarians and Fighter rely on their Subclass to keep up with what they do.

So it feels like, on a fluff level, they knew what they wanted... But mechanically they borked themselves

[Easy_Lee]

I don't th8nk WotC really knew what they wanted mechanically with archetypes.

Some classes rely heavily on then while others could, mostly, care less.

Wizards and Clerics get neat things from subclasses, but their power comes from spells.

Barbarians and Fighter rely on their Subclass to keep up with what they do.

So it feels like, on a fluff level, they knew what they wanted... But mechanically they borked themselves

Well, I still hold that archetypes should have the same number of benefits, and at the same levels. Something like 1, 3, 7, 11, 15.

[R.Shackleford]

Well, I still hold that archetypes should have the same number of benefits, and at the same levels. Something like 1, 3, 7, 11, 15.

Oh, definitely.

They should also carry the same amount of weight toward a base class.

I think...

Level 2, 6, 10, 14 works out well for a subclass.

You could probably smoosh existing subclasses together to make such a thing work (mostly).


Edit

I like the first level you are just "a guy" approach to the classes. Level 2 comes pretty fast.

[georgie_leech]

I'm talking specifically of how they get used in 5e.

Gotcha, the mechanical sort. Then what I'll say is that I'm against straight borrowing packages like this Theurge is doing, but '[class] lite' works just fine for subclasses. The important thing is that it's done through the lens of the base class. Like, we've got three Wizard Lites for subclasses already.

We've got Eldritch Knight, which borrows some Theming from Wizards in that they use arcane Int-based magic, but it's got the Martial focus of the Fighter; the default spell selection isn't optimized for it, but it's clearly supposed to be a caster that can mix it up on the frontlines in a fight.

The Arcane Trickster is the same sort of thing, but it's got the Rogue's emphasis on playing dirty and sneaking. It's features reflect an eye for subterfuge, and give the AT subtle effects that can keep from getting noticed or give him an edge in combat.

We've also got the Arcane Domain for Clerics, the inverse of the Theurge presented in the UA. Again, wizard powers through a Cleric lens. Rather than studying their magic like a wizard, a deity of magic divinely empowers the Cleric with Arcane powers. It's reflected in their Domain spells, their minor features, and their subclass capstone is broadened spell access/knowledge.

The Theurge though is different. It's not the Wizard studying clerical practices and getting some unique benefits, it's just grabbing the Domains pretty much whole cloth. That's not a wizard with a hint of cleric theming, that's a Wizard with a Cleric stapled onto them.

In short, for cross-class archetypes to be done well, I think they usually need to be designed individually for each class, with an eye to blending the class you're borrowing from with the native talents of the base. This is less important for modular systems like Legend, but for a class based system like D&D it's crucial.

[Easy_Lee]

Gotcha, the mechanical sort. Then what I'll say is that I'm against straight borrowing packages like this Theurge is doing, but '[class] lite' works just fine for subclasses. The important thing is that it's done through the lens of the base class. Like, we've got three Wizard Lites for subclasses already.

We've got Eldritch Knight, which borrows some Theming from Wizards in that they use arcane Int-based magic, but it's got the Martial focus of the Fighter; the default spell selection isn't optimized for it, but it's clearly supposed to be a caster that can mix it up on the frontlines in a fight.

The Arcane Trickster is the same sort of thing, but it's got the Rogue's emphasis on playing dirty and sneaking. It's features reflect an eye for subterfuge, and give the AT subtle effects that can keep from getting noticed or give him an edge in combat.

We've also got the Arcane Domain for Clerics, the inverse of the Theurge presented in the UA. Again, wizard powers through a Cleric lens. Rather than studying their magic like a wizard, a deity of magic divinely empowers the Cleric with Arcane powers. It's reflected in their Domain spells, their minor features, and their subclass capstone is broadened spell access/knowledge.

The Theurge though is different. It's not the Wizard studying clerical practices and getting some unique benefits, it's just grabbing the Domains pretty much whole cloth. That's not a wizard with a hint of cleric theming, that's a Wizard with a Cleric stapled onto them.

In short, for cross-class archetypes to be done well, I think they usually need to be designed individually for each class, with an eye to blending the class you're borrowing from with the native talents of the base. This is less important for modular systems like Legend, but for a class based system like D&D it's crucial.

I suspect that would take prohibitively long to do for all possible combinations.

[R.Shackleford]

I suspect that would take prohibitively long to do for all possible combinations.

What? Like we don't have time between WotC's product release dates?

:smallbiggrin:

[Easy_Lee]

What? Like we don't have time between WotC's product release dates?

:smallbiggrin:

http://www.timelinecoverbanner.com/cliparts/wp-content/digital-scrapbooking/xhappy-grin.png.pagespeed.ic.K8bszTYeqS.png

[georgie_leech]

I suspect that would take prohibitively long to do for all possible combinations.

Which is probably why WotC is taking the lazy way and stapled a Cleric to a Wizard :smalltongue:

I really hope this is just to gauge interest in a proper Cleric-ish subclass for Wizards, and if it does ever actually get released, it won't be anything like what they've got in this UA.

[R.Shackleford]

True that.
The gears are turning now. I might throw together an alternate cleric class if anyone's interested. Mostly just be copying over and rearranging the abilities already there, so it wouldn't be much work.
At work right now, so I might have to wait until I get home to put it all down. I'll start a new thread if I do over in the homebrew section, since that's way off topic.



4e's the only one I never played, so I didn't know that. I'll do some research before I get to writing, probably take some of their ideas.

Here is my quick take on the cleric. I expanded the cleric a little, I don't like when a class has dead levels but then adds two or more features in a single level.

I would update the warlock as well to match more this style (allowing them to have have floating spells from their patron and give them the choice of Int or Cha casting)

http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/r1KbWmeF

[SharkForce]

I really like this actually. If it's pact specific, you could even call it a Star Steed.

I'm skeptical of the theurge being truly that powerful - granted, you definitely have to slap a "any sane dm" on using spell mastery on a healing spell, and potentially spiritual weapon (having infinite free shields and spiritual weapons would give you incredible action economy. Does sound incredibly rad though.) But consider this: what's better, a light theurge or an abjurer? A storm theurge or an evoker? A death theurge or a necromancer? Seeing as the wizard list is generally superior, lacking only spiritual weapon and maybe spirit guardians (less useful on a squishy wizard), you're sacrificing the ability to improve already better spells to cast generally weaker spells. And really, spiritual weapon is a great spell, but web, hold person, and phantasmal force can win encounters easier.

As a bard player, my general order of poaching has been wizard->paladin->cleric (whilst lacking pretty much any other spellcasters). Heck, if the Bard list didn't already include a lot of the great wizard spells, it's probably all I would grab. And it's not like I prefer wizards - actually, healing is my favorite, followed by defensive spells... but wizard spells are SO good at pretty much everything but healing that it's not much of a choice. wall of force or mass cure wounds? Why would you even ask that question? Heck, even as a life theurge, I'd probably cast wall of force.

The real winner of the theurge is the channel divinity, but even that isn't clearly better than, say, portent or transmuter's stone.

Other than spell mastery abuse (signature spell doesn't really get any better) and potentially pissing off your priestly pal by precociously poaching his penultimate power, the theurge doesn't seem so clearly out of line to me. I'd like to bring up that these same boards exploded at the favored soul, but that turned out to just be a decent choice.

(Oh whoops I built a wall)

theurge is pretty ridiculous. their channel arcana is absurdly strong. the increased spell list isn't much of a problem until they get to start poaching from the full cleric list (yes, the wizard list is really strong, but it clearly isn't getting any weaker when they can also poach the top 10-11 cleric spells as well). with just the domains, it's mostly fine. with the domain list and then the cleric's top 10 greatests hits, that's a bit too much.

but mostly, it's the divine arcana that's the biggest problem. some of the other abilities can be pretty strong (knowledge domain expertise on 2 int-based skills is a pretty nice benefit to say the least, and the largely undetectable mind reading with a save that can be turned into a suggestion without an additional save is pretty hilarious, the light domain's corona of light is pretty hilarious when combined with sunbeam to blind large groups of enemies, and tempest domain is a fair bit stronger on a wizard than it is on a cleric). it's got some pretty good stuff that i'd say is enough to make them comparable to other wizard subclasses.

but then you tack on that 1-3 times per short rest, they can boost their save DC on a spell (not a single creature making a single save, which is the closest any other ability comes to the level of impact on enemy saves this ability gives, and most of those carry a much harsher resource cost) by 2. by level 9, you have the save DC of a level 17 character in the things you care about most. and i don't mean some lame fireball, either. i mean at level 5, you're tossing around DC 17 hypnotic pattern. should you ever get to level 17, you'll be tossing around DC 21 spells 3 times per *short* rest. it was an incredible ability at level 2. it got better every single time you got a +2 int or +1 proficiency modifier. and by the time you get to level 17, it's crazy how good it is. if you can find a saving throw where your enemy doesn't have at least +1, they *cannot* save against it, period. if they do have a decent but not amazing save (+3 or +4), their chance to make their saving throw just got cut in half.

it's ridiculous. it gives you DCs that are extremely high for your level, and begins to allow you to just break bounded accuracy at very high levels (the +2 to hit actually does not break bounded accuracy, because it doesn't prevent anyone from being able to participate; it *does* break the guideline about not introducing a bunch of fiddly bonuses that turn character optimization into a quest to find all the little +1 and +2 bonuses to stack together until you can just stomp all over reasonable DC checks with impunity, but not bounded accuracy). any enemy that has a +0 save modifier on any saving throw you can target means that you can just dumpster them with no chance of failure once you hit level 17. drow mages? sorry, no con save bonus, enjoy your no-save blind, see how well you do when all of your "thing that you can see" spells work now. a tribe of hill giants go from being a tough battle to your minions with no chance to resist because of mass suggestion. a lot of enemies that previously could potentially be part of a tough fight in large enough numbers (or as a support to a tougher monster) suddenly became literally unable to contribute against a theurge that knows what they're doing. a lot of the really high DC monsters remain (barely) viable but are still highly likely to fail saves as well.

+2 DC isn't the small increase it looks like. it is *huge* in its implications.

[Drackolus]

theurge is pretty ridiculous. their channel arcana is absurdly strong.
-snip to save scrolling time-
+2 DC isn't the small increase it looks like. it is *huge* in its implications.

Whelp, you've convinced me. I already thought adding channel divinity was odd (they probably wanted to add more of the archetype, since they drop the level 8 ability as divine strike is not appropriate on a wizard), and I agree that small plusses are weird (that's why I didn't like the recent weapon feats in the unearthed arcana. Flat +1). Though, while right that one roll doesn't make attack rolls necessarily stop play for the target; give a barbarian a +2 greataxe and when he can kill creatures with frightening speed. And dead monsters take no actions. I actually don't give flat + bonuses in this edition under any circumstance. No +1 armor, no +1 swords, no nothing. It doesn't fit with the design philosophy of this edition and, frankly, they're incredibly boring and completely forgotten in a single session (until they say "why do I have a +7 to attack again? Oh yeah, magic sword.")

You could probably just axe that specific part, give them turn undead or even nothing at all, and I think the rest is, if not necessarily creative, at least balanced (and thus, a matter of taste).

[Arkhios]

You know, Theurgist (as they are called; not Theurge) as we see them now, is intended to being playtested; it's not a final product yet. It's better to make the first version a bit too powerful to see where they need fine tuning.

A flat +2 to a single attack roll or the DC of a spell might seem a bit high at first. But have you noticed that the War Domain grants a Channel Divinity that gives a +10 to single attack roll? How is that not broken, but this is?
It's not like Theurgist would get this channel option every turn. Heck, not even every encounter, unless your DM was lenient about taking short rests after each fight, no matter how long they were (a short rest lasts 1 hour, mind you!)

And what comes to the poaching of any cleric spells and not just the domain spells. First of, you'd have to be at least a level 12 wizard in order to replace one of your spells with any cleric spell, because you have to have all domain spells first before you can do this.


Arcane Initiate:
Beginning when you select this tradition at 2nd level, whenever you gain a wizard level, you can choose to replace one of the wizard spells you add to your spellbook with a cleric domain spell for your chosen domain. The spell must be of a level for which you have spell slots.
If you add all of your domain spells to your spellbook, you can subsequently opt to add any spell from the cleric spell list instead. The spell must still be of a level for which you have spell slots.
Other wizards cannot copy cleric spells from your spellbook into their own spellbooks.

And secondly, you could only know up to 19 cleric spells ever. You can't study cleric spells and add them to your book. The only option for you to get a cleric spell into your spellbook is one by one per level starting from 2nd.

[Cybren]

The +2 to DCs for a spell can be put on effects that are far more debilitating over a far larger number of enemies than +10 to an attack roll. As mentioned, it makes it possible to No-Save some enemies with certain spells at higher levels

[Arkhios]

The +2 to DCs for a spell can be put on effects that are far more debilitating over a far larger number of enemies than +10 to an attack roll. As mentioned, it makes it possible to No-Save some enemies with certain spells at higher levels

Even so, A Channel Divinity (or Channel Arcana in this case) is a resource that depletes a lot faster than spell slots and a character can't use it more than once (sure, twice at 6th level and finally three times at 18th level) per short rest, but even then it's a resource which use should be carefully considered. Channel Arcana/Divinity is a powerful ability in itself since it's not a spell, and thus it works where magic otherwise wouldn't. Of course it can and should bestow a powerful effect. So what if you chose to cast a spell once in a full moon that could prove more difficult to resist? You can't spam it from round to another. Yes, some spells combined with this can be fatal, but in all honesty, that's not a game breaking thing. The game even has Magic Items that increase your spell attack rolls and save DC's.

[Cybren]

Magic items are not the same as class features. A DM has total control over the availability over magic items, and while they can ban a class from the table, that has different connotations than not handing out a particular magic item.

Edit: I should add, I don't necessarily think it's too good, but it is [i]very[/] good, and seems thematically a poor fit for "clericy wizard".

[Arkhios]

Magic items are not the same as class features. A DM has total control over the availability over magic items, and while they can ban a class from the table, that has different connotations than not handing out a particular magic item.

Edit: I should add, I don't necessarily think it's too good, but it is [i]very[/] good, and seems thematically a poor fit for "clericy wizard".

Yet, magic items are intended to emulate the lack of class abilities, amplify ones you already have, or give you entirely new abilities. In the long run, having access to a limited channel divinity to increase one spell's DC is worse than the magic item that can do the same thing, except for each spell you choose to cast.

I agree that the Theurgist isn't perfect and that Divine Arcana is a feature of lazy design (it doesn't fit the concept too well), but in fact, IIRC, a 3.5 Mystic Theurge had a similar limited ability, which increased the save DC of their spells, so it's not uncalled for either. But, maybe it should've been approached from different angle instead of a flat bonus?

Plus, that 14th level feature should be changed. In fact I wouldn't mind if Theurgist gained Divine Strike or alternatively Potent Spellcasting. Or maybe they could have the 10th level Divine Intervention?

[Cybren]

3.5 mystic theurge did nothing except advance your spellcaster progression in a divine and arcane spellcaster class. The Ultimate Magus, a prepared/spontaneous prestige class, had Arcane Power, which increases their Spellcaster Level for both classes. (With caster level and progression being two different but parallel things)

[JumboWheat01]

Even so, A Channel Divinity (or Channel Arcana in this case) is a resource that depletes a lot faster than spell slots and a character can't use it more than once (sure, twice at 6th level and finally three times at 18th level) per short rest, but even then it's a resource which use should be carefully considered. Channel Arcana/Divinity is a powerful ability in itself since it's not a spell, and thus it works where magic otherwise wouldn't. Of course it can and should bestow a powerful effect. So what if you chose to cast a spell once in a full moon that could prove more difficult to resist? You can't spam it from round to another. Yes, some spells combined with this can be fatal, but in all honesty, that's not a game breaking thing. The game even has Magic Items that increase your spell attack rolls and save DC's.

Channel Arcana/Divinity is on a short rest recharge, which means with the standard two short rests a day thing, you can use it up to nine times in one day, a fairly respectable total. It also applies a flat +2 to DC, no matter how many targets are in the spell's effect or how many times they need to make that saving throw. Let's compare that to the Sorcerer's Heightened Spell, which provides Disadvantage, a great effect, to only ONE target in a spell's effect on their first saving throw only.


When you cast a spell that forces a creature to make a saving throw to resist its effects, you can spend 3 sorcery points to give one target of the spell disadvantage on its first saving throw made against the spell.

And that costs three sorcery points, which, without burning precious spell slots, a Sorcerer can only use up to six times a day at the same time a Theurge Wizard can use their Channel Arcana up to nine times in the same day. And the Sorcerer has a LOT more competing for those sorcery points than a Theurge Wizard does for their Channeling.

[BurchardOfEn]

The Theurge has a whole slew of messes around it. The Channel Arcana allows for the Batman God Wizard that plagued 3.5E to be able to make it really hard to not be able to at least sometimes control the battlefield, and they can get infinite healing at 18th level as an overwhelming layer of icing on top. I think that the necessity of maintaining that these are "Cleric spells" and not Wizard spells is important for Spell Mastery and less so for Signature Spell even if it does not affect the casting stat.

The Seeker is something that I think is quite good, but I feel like their 14th level feature enters into the "Almost Useless to Absolutely Broken" territory depending on the difficulty of securing a safe short rest which is largely dependent on the DM. Obviously if a safe 5 minutes means that you probably have a safe hour with said DM then the Seeker's 14th is nigh useless unless you're really counting away at the clock. I'm also somewhat unsure as to the amount of utility that the 6th level feature really has as the main self buff spell that the Warlock has is Armor of Agathys that I can think of off-hand.

[R.Shackleford]

The Theurge has a whole slew of messes around it. The Channel Arcana allows for the Batman God Wizard that plagued 3.5E to be able to make it really hard to not be able to at least sometimes control the battlefield, and they can get infinite healing at 18th level as an overwhelming layer of icing on top. I think that the necessity of maintaining that these are "Cleric spells" and not Wizard spells is important for Spell Mastery and less so for Signature Spell even if it does not affect the casting stat.

The Seeker is something that I think is quite good, but I feel like their 14th level feature enters into the "Almost Useless to Absolutely Broken" territory depending on the difficulty of securing a safe short rest which is largely dependent on the DM. Obviously if a safe 5 minutes means that you probably have a safe hour with said DM then the Seeker's 14th is nigh useless unless you're really counting away at the clock. I'm also somewhat unsure as to the amount of utility that the 6th level feature really has as the main self buff spell that the Warlock has is Armor of Agathys that I can think of off-hand.

To be fair, Batman God Wizard wasn't a bad thing for 3e, it was that no one else (besides very few optimized options) also had that option.

[Cybren]

To be fair, Batman God Wizard wasn't a bad thing for 3e, it was that no one else (besides very few optimized options) also had that option.

no, it was a bad thing for 3e. D&D is a class based game. Letting 1 class do any and everything is bad gameplay.

[georgie_leech]

no, it was a bad thing for 3e. D&D is a class based game. Letting 1 class do any and everything is bad gameplay.

Last I checked, Treatmonk's God Wizard was a Wizard designed to turn his allies into crazy effective killing machines, no? That they could do the Fighter's job better than the Fighter was distinct from that.

[Cybren]

Last I checked, Treatmonk's God Wizard was a Wizard designed to turn his allies into crazy effective killing machines, no? That they could do the Fighter's job better than the Fighter was distinct from that.
I'm not sure how referencing a particular build guide is relevant; you don't want to have the game system encouraging too much niche-overlap, and someone that is already good-to-the-best at everything is overlapping with everything. (incidentally, there was The Logic Ninja's Guide to Wizards: Being Batman, which was about doing exactly that, so it's not as if there weren't people who did play wizards that way)

[gkathellar]

To be fair, Batman God Wizard wasn't a bad thing for 3e, it was that no one else (besides very few optimized options) also had that option.

Batman Wizard and God Wizard are two very different approaches to the class. It wasn't a good thing that wizards had both of those approaches, mind, but they were two different approaches.


no, it was a bad thing for 3e. D&D is a class based game. Letting 1 class do any and everything is bad gameplay.


Last I checked, Treatmonk's God Wizard was a Wizard designed to turn his allies into crazy effective killing machines, no? That they could do the Fighter's job better than the Fighter was distinct from that.

See, I'm pretty sure one of you is responding to Batman, and one of you is responding to God. The issue with this is noted above.

God wizard was fine, at least from a hypothetical, "a class should be able to do this kind of thing," standpoint. Batman wizard was not fine, as it was the whole, "do everything better than everyone," approach that made wizard and artificer so repugnant.

[BurchardOfEn]

I'm not sure how referencing a particular build guide is relevant; you don't want to have the game system encouraging too much niche-overlap, and someone that is already good-to-the-best at everything is overlapping with everything. (incidentally, there was The Logic Ninja's Guide to Wizards: Being Batman, which was about doing exactly that, so it's not as if there weren't people who did play wizards that way)

I honestly referred to them jointly as it's been years since I looked at those guides and just remembered that there was God and Batman, so my memory blurred the lines and what they each did (yes, I know, I forgot some optimization guides for 3.5E, I'm certain that's considered a heresy somewhere). My apologies for the confusion that seemed to have caused.

It doesn't change that Channel Arcana with an "encounter-ender/battlefield controller" would be able to pretty significantly shift the odds in the Theurge's favor, and I would say that a decent increase in the chance of an encounter being ended(via Hypnotic Pattern or a similar spell) is something to worry about compared to a +10 to an Attack roll.

@Below: I was referring to both of the playstyles simultaneously in a muddled together fashion more so than anything.

[Cybren]

Well, I was assuming he wasn't referring to the particular guide threads, but rather the concept of the wizard as being super powerful, and using the names of the wizard builds people used just to indicate "really farkin strong"

[Easy_Lee]

I don't think it's bad that class A can fill class B's role, unless class A can also fill a different role at the same time. Consider the blade pact warlock, who kind of fills the wizard role and kind of fills the fighter role, but isn't as good at either as the base class. Putting two blade pact warlocks with different spells in the party could effectively fill both roles, but one by himself can't take two roles.

Similarly, eldritch knights and arcane tricksters fill about 1 and 1/3rd roles. But their casting isn't quite 1/3rd of a wizard when the wizard's school benefits are considered. Bladesingers can enter combat, but are only about 1/2 to 1/3rd as effective as a fighter.

Clerics and druids made better fighters than fighters, in addition to their casting, in 3.5e. That was a problem. But I haven't seen anything like that in 5e.

Concerning the theurge, I think people are forgetting that it doesn't get the higher HP, armor, or shield proficiencies that a cleric gets. A theurge who heals his allies with his spells will quickly find himself the target of abuse. He's more like a white mage than a cleric.

[JumboWheat01]

I just looked at the Seeker Warlock's Astral Sequestration again, and remembered the warlock capstone as well. Going with my general assumption of two short rests per day, plus Astral Sequestration and Eldritch Master, that's 20 Fifth-level spells a Warlock can chuck out a day. That's actually quite impressive.

[Cybren]

Concerning the theurge, I think people are forgetting that it doesn't get the higher HP, armor, or shield proficiencies that a cleric gets. A theurge who heals his allies with his spells will quickly find himself the target of abuse. He's more like a white mage than a cleric.

back in my day white mages had pretty good defense, could use hammers, and learn one of the most powerful damage spells in the game.

Now, 4 black mages. THAT was hard mode.

[R.Shackleford]

back in my day white mages had pretty good defense, could use hammers, and learn one of the most powerful damage spells in the game.

Now, 4 black mages. THAT was hard mode.

The final Fantasy thread is that way *points down the main 5e page*

:smallbiggrin:


But anyways...


Higher HP, defenses, and whatever else doesn't really matter when you have healing spells and can refresh slots.

*and you don't get up close and personal.

[JumboWheat01]

Higher HP, defenses, and whatever else doesn't really matter when you have healing spells and can refresh slots.

And also when you have all of a Wizard's delicious control spells. Nothing says HP and AC is worthless like some good ol' fashioned hard control.

[Easy_Lee]

Higher HP, defenses, and whatever else doesn't really matter when you have healing spells and can refresh slots.

*and you don't get up close and personal.

I dunno. I feel like high HP, armor, and shield proficiency are always pretty useful. Especially if there's a chance you'll be ambushed, or if an enemy caster carries counterspell.

[RickAllison]

I dunno. I feel like high HP, armor, and shield proficiency are always pretty useful. Especially if there's a chance you'll be ambushed, or if an enemy caster carries counterspell.

Still useful if one doesn't want to be a humanoid pincushion...

[BurchardOfEn]

High HP, armor, and shield proficiencies are exceedingly useful if a DM follows massive damage rules, but it's also generally useful to make sure that an enemy can't nova you into smithereens since unless there's another person who can heal in the party, you can't heal yourself up from that (okay, in a good few cases you can).


I just looked at the Seeker Warlock's Astral Sequestration again, and remembered the warlock capstone as well. Going with my general assumption of two short rests per day, plus Astral Sequestration and Eldritch Master, that's 20 Fifth-level spells a Warlock can chuck out a day. That's actually quite impressive.

I've heard in a few places that Warlocks are assumed to get like 4 short rests per day normally, but I'm uncertain if Astral Sequestration would grant them another short rest with a good few DMs (where a safe five minutes has a decent chance of meaning a safe hour). I'd say that the problem with the feature isn't that it's useless, but it's either useless because of how the DM runs stuff or could shatter their assumptions on Warlocks. The amount of usefulness that this feature has is really hard to gauge without knowing the DM, and I don't really feel like a capstone's utility should be almost entirely based on how the DM runs things.

[RickAllison]

High HP, armor, and shield proficiencies are exceedingly useful if a DM follows massive damage rules, but it's also generally useful to make sure that an enemy can't nova you into smithereens since unless there's another person who can heal in the party, you can't heal yourself up from that (okay, in a good few cases you can).

Ermagersh, I completely forgot to consider what Contingency could be combined with!

[R.Shackleford]

I dunno. I feel like high HP, armor, and shield proficiency are always pretty useful. Especially if there's a chance you'll be ambushed, or if an enemy caster carries counterspell.

You are talking like the base wizard doesn't work without armor, hp, and shields.

Which isn't the case. Even without a Subclass the wizard is a beast.

[RickAllison]

You are talking like the base wizard doesn't work without armor, hp, and shields.

Which isn't the case. Even without a Subclass the wizard is a beast.

The wizard works, but there is a good reason why Cleric 1 and Fighter 2 dips are so highly rated. Getting to save a slot on Mage Armor, any Shields he casts, as well as anything he uses like Misty step to remain out of reach, those add up very quickly. The base wizard works because he can spend his resources to make up for his deficiencies. Not having to make up for those saves him those resources.

Additionally, not needing to bolster Dex for AC (as armor-level Strength or Dexterity for heavy or medium armor is well within point-buy) means those ASIs can go to feats or to improving Constitution for more HP and better concentration saves.

[Easy_Lee]

The wizard works, but there is a good reason why Cleric 1 and Fighter 2 dips are so highly rated. Getting to save a slot on Mage Armor, any Shields he casts, as well as anything he uses like Misty step to remain out of reach, those add up very quickly. The base wizard works because he can spend his resources to make up for his deficiencies. Not having to make up for those saves him those resources.

Additionally, not needing to bolster Dex for AC (as armor-level Strength or Dexterity for heavy or medium armor is well within point-buy) means those ASIs can go to feats or to improving Constitution for more HP and better concentration saves.

Pretty much what I was getting at.

[SharkForce]

You know, Theurgist (as they are called; not Theurge) as we see them now, is intended to being playtested; it's not a final product yet. It's better to make the first version a bit too powerful to see where they need fine tuning.

A flat +2 to a single attack roll or the DC of a spell might seem a bit high at first. But have you noticed that the War Domain grants a Channel Divinity that gives a +10 to single attack roll? How is that not broken, but this is?
It's not like Theurgist would get this channel option every turn. Heck, not even every encounter, unless your DM was lenient about taking short rests after each fight, no matter how long they were (a short rest lasts 1 hour, mind you!)

i already explained what makes the +2 DC broken while the +10 to hit is not. the +10 to hit enables someone who otherwise wouldn't be able to do something to do something. that's perfectly fine. it's powerful, it's useful, but the something you can do generally doesn't completely trivialize anything so it's perfectly ok. the +2 to DC makes it so that many things no longer even need to bother showing up to a fight. they may as well just not even be there, because they're not adding anything substantial. while +10 to hit increases the chance of doing something, a +2 to DC guarantees that targets won't be able to do anything. that's a problem in balance, and it's a problem when a defining part of your game design philosophy is that nobody (including monsters and such) should ever be unable to contribute meaningfully.


And what comes to the poaching of any cleric spells and not just the domain spells. First of, you'd have to be at least a level 12 wizard in order to replace one of your spells with any cleric spell, because you have to have all domain spells first before you can do this.

And secondly, you could only know up to 19 cleric spells ever. You can't study cleric spells and add them to your book. The only option for you to get a cleric spell into your spellbook is one by one per level starting from 2nd.

sure, it's fine for the first while (though actually, some wizards can get all the domain spells by 9th if they want, allowing them to pick whatever they like at 10th. though that isn't without a cost, certainly...)

but then the wizard gets to start grabbing the best cleric spells.


Last I checked, Treatmonk's God Wizard was a Wizard designed to turn his allies into crazy effective killing machines, no? That they could do the Fighter's job better than the Fighter was distinct from that.

treantmonk's god wizard is designed to do all the work without looking like you're doing all the work so that your party doesn't feel like they're getting carried. it isn't that the wizard isn't soloing everything... it's that they're manipulating everything without anyone noticing so that it looks like their "champion" (like the big dumb fighter) did all the work.

those who know better will be able to see the god wizard's hand intervening to do all the work every step of the way. the guide even explains how he had a wizard that he brought in when the group claimed they were optimizing hard (but weren't prepared for a charger to come in and kill everything) so he brought in a wizard and suddenly a campaign where PCs were dropping like flies started having no PC deaths, and none of the people in the party attributed *any* of it to the wizard... in other words, the wizard showed up and started dominating every fight, it just wasn't noticed.

[RickAllison]

i already explained what makes the +2 DC broken while the +10 to hit is not. the +10 to hit enables someone who otherwise wouldn't be able to do something to do something. that's perfectly fine. it's powerful, it's useful, but the something you can do generally doesn't completely trivialize anything so it's perfectly ok. the +2 to DC makes it so that many things no longer even need to bother showing up to a fight. they may as well just not even be there, because they're not adding anything substantial. while +10 to hit increases the chance of doing something, a +2 to DC guarantees that targets won't be able to do anything. that's a problem in balance, and it's a problem when a defining part of your game design philosophy is that nobody (including monsters and such) should ever be unable to contribute meaningfully.



sure, it's fine for the first while (though actually, some wizards can get all the domain spells by 9th if they want, allowing them to pick whatever they like at 10th. though that isn't without a cost, certainly...)

but then the wizard gets to start grabbing the best cleric spells.



treantmonk's god wizard is designed to do all the work without looking like you're doing all the work so that your party doesn't feel like they're getting carried. it isn't that the wizard isn't soloing everything... it's that they're manipulating everything without anyone noticing so that it looks like their "champion" (like the big dumb fighter) did all the work.

those who know better will be able to see the god wizard's hand intervening to do all the work every step of the way. the guide even explains how he had a wizard that he brought in when the group claimed they were optimizing hard (but weren't prepared for a charger to come in and kill everything) so he brought in a wizard and suddenly a campaign where PCs were dropping like flies started having no PC deaths, and none of the people in the party attributed *any* of it to the wizard... in other words, the wizard showed up and started dominating every fight, it just wasn't noticed.

Indeed. Being a god wizard (according to Treantmonk) is doing things like dropping Wall of Force to split a force so the party can clean up the one side before dealing with the other (basically, dropping the CR by splitting the encounter into two different fights), keeping minions locked with Hypnotic Pattern while the party neutralizes a boss, and protecting the party from a hail of arrows by putting up Fog Clouds.

Paraphrasing his guide, a healer is a reactive and visible support person, fixing up wounds after the damage is done. The god wizard is proactive and invisible, looking like he has done little because his damage negation is prevention.

[R.Shackleford]

The wizard works, but there is a good reason why Cleric 1 and Fighter 2 dips are so highly rated. Getting to save a slot on Mage Armor, any Shields he casts, as well as anything he uses like Misty step to remain out of reach, those add up very quickly. The base wizard works because he can spend his resources to make up for his deficiencies. Not having to make up for those saves him those resources.

Additionally, not needing to bolster Dex for AC (as armor-level Strength or Dexterity for heavy or medium armor is well within point-buy) means those ASIs can go to feats or to improving Constitution for more HP and better concentration saves.

Which again, wizards don't need to boost (AC) Dex all that much. They have spells that work around that (disadvantage on attacks against them) and shield. Plus the fact that the main tactic is to stay away from harm, you even get spells like misty step.

Most ppl play 1 - 10, the wizard is boosting Int at 4 and 8. There is no room for boosting Dex.

So y'all can stop over blowing how crucial this is to a wizard. It's nice, but not needed at all.

Fighter 1 and Cleric 2 are popular because of wants not because of needs.

Most of the time people want a specific type of character design that needs heavy armor and those are the two easiest ways to get it.

What 5e did right when it comes to classes is made each class work just fine within itself and for what they designed them to do (what some are designed to do is just sad but that isn't the point). Each class has everything they need to work well in the game, especially at 1 - 10).

This notion that the wizard is somehow worse with a cleric Subclass because the wizard doesn't get high Hp, ac, and profs... is silly at best.

The base wizard is straight up phenomenal, adding any subclass to it only makes it better. Wizard spells + cleric subclasses would do just fine and wouldn't change the cleric v wizard dynamic because the wizard is still full of what makes the wizard a powerhouse (wizard spells).

[RickAllison]

Which again, wizards don't need to boost (AC) Dex all that much. They have spells that work around that (disadvantage on attacks against them) and shield. Plus the fact that the main tactic is to stay away from harm, you even get spells like misty step.

Most ppl play 1 - 10, the wizard is boosting Int at 4 and 8. There is no room for boosting Dex.

So y'all can stop over blowing how crucial this is to a wizard. It's nice, but not needed at all.

Fighter 1 and Cleric 2 are popular because of wants not because of needs.

Most of the time people want a specific type of character design that needs heavy armor and those are the two easiest ways to get it.

What 5e did right when it comes to classes is made each class work just fine within itself and for what they designed them to do (what some are designed to do is just sad but that isn't the point). Each class has everything they need to work well in the game, especially at 1 - 10).

This notion that the wizard is somehow worse with a cleric Subclass because the wizard doesn't get high Hp, ac, and profs... is silly at best.

The base wizard is straight up phenomenal, adding any subclass to it only makes it better. Wizard spells + cleric subclasses would do just fine and wouldn't change the cleric v wizard dynamic because the wizard is still full of what makes the wizard a powerhouse (wizard spells).

1) Nobody claimed that the wizard wasn't a beast. How you could interpret that from anyone is just... I really can't understand how you reached that conclusion.

2) Already addressed your point about how the wizard neutralizes those problems using his spells. The fact stands that he is giving up long rest resources in order to do little more than what other classes can do for free (and that is intentional!). Every Shield, Blur, and Misty Step he drops in order to make up for lower HP and AC is one less Longstrider, Fog Cloud, or Hold Person. I've gone both ways (my wizard had the proficiency for medium armor through a cleric dip, but didn't come with medium armor). The difference in his spell consumption before and after he gathered up 60 pounds of steel to make half-plate was massive.

3) The theurgist lacking all the other goodies of the cleric does not mean the theurgist is weak, but that the cleric is still relevant.

[Vogonjeltz]

and they can get infinite healing at 18th level as an overwhelming layer of icing on top.

Well they aren't Wizard spells.


1) Nobody claimed that the wizard wasn't a beast. How you could interpret that from anyone is just... I really can't understand how you reached that conclusion.

Most Wizards are humanoid so they can use the verbal/somatic/material spell components... heh.

[BurchardOfEn]

Well they aren't Wizard spells.

Every other type of feature like this has them count as their class's type of spells, and there didn't really seem to be anything in this to invalidate that especially since they are intended to use Intelligence for the casting stat which generally follows that the spells are treated as your class's form of spells. The only reason that they'd explicitly be noted to still not be Wizard spells is purely to stop Spell Mastery from being absurd. I don't think that's a bad idea to go through with by any means either if the Theurgist as a design must be made.

[JackOfAllBuilds]

"The Domain and Cleric spells gained through this feature only count as wizard spells for the purposes of Spellbook preparation and the Spellcasting feature, including the Spellcasting stat.
(Thus they can not be chosen for Spell Mastery or Signature Spells.)

Any Domain feature that references your Wisdom instead uses your Intelligence, and counts Wizard levels instead of Cleric levels."

Thoughts?

[Regitnui]

"The Domain and Cleric spells gained through this feature only count as wizard spells for the purposes of Spellbook preparation and the Spellcasting feature, including the Spellcasting stat.
(Thus they can not be chosen for Spell Mastery or Signature Spells.)

Any Domain feature that references your Wisdom instead uses your Intelligence, and counts Wizard levels instead of Cleric levels."

Thoughts?

Looks feasible. Wouldn't "The spells gained through through this feature cannot be chosen for your Spell Mastery and Signature Spell features" be better wording?

[Millstone85]

So after we got warlock patrons called the Undying (SCAG) and the Undying Light (UA), we now have warlock boons called the Pact of the Chain (PHB) and the Pact of the Star Chain (UA). Why are they inviting confusion like this? I also dislike the idea of a patron-restricted boon.

[Belac93]

So after we got warlock patrons called the Undying (SCAG) and the Undying Light (UA), we now have warlock boons called the Pact of the Chain (PHB) and the Pact of the Star Chain (UA). Why are they inviting confusion like this? I also dislike the idea of a patron-restricted boon.

Change it to pact of the orb, make it a crystal ball that can be used as a spellcasting focus.

[Millstone85]

Change it to pact of the orb, make it a crystal ball that can be used as a spellcasting focus.That would avoid confusion at my table but I think it is too late for forums like this one.

Also, the first thing that chain, orb or whatever should be usable as is the 25 gp components of the augury spell.

[Sigreid]

Funnily enough I was just looking at the DMG guide on modifying and making new classes and making new spells and it cites giving the wizard access to a cleric's magic as something specifically not to do.

[Easy_Lee]

Looks feasible. Wouldn't "The spells gained through through this feature cannot be chosen for your Spell Mastery and Signature Spell features" be better wording?

Inclusive vs exclusive. Do we want to include only certain features, or specifically exclude only certain features?

[Regitnui]

Funnily enough I was just looking at the DMG guide on modifying and making new classes and making new spells and it cites giving the wizard access to a cleric's magic as something specifically not to do.

Perhaps something WotC believed it was best done in-house, if at all. The theurge we see here is just a possible way of doing it, and illustrates the reason why they said you shouldn't try it at home.


Inclusive vs exclusive. Do we want to include only certain features, or specifically exclude only certain features?

Good point. I don't know much about mechanics, I've said it often enough.

[Vogonjeltz]

Every other type of feature like this has them count as their class's type of spells, and there didn't really seem to be anything in this to invalidate that especially since they are intended to use Intelligence for the casting stat which generally follows that the spells are treated as your class's form of spells. The only reason that they'd explicitly be noted to still not be Wizard spells is purely to stop Spell Mastery from being absurd. I don't think that's a bad idea to go through with by any means either if the Theurgist as a design must be made.

Does Arcane Initiate (that's the ability right?) contain something in the vein of the following?

"The chosen spells count as bard spells for you"
"If you have a domain spell that doesn't appear on the cleric spell list, the spell nonetheless is a cleric spell for you."
"If you gain access to a spell that doesn't appear on the druid spell list, the spell is nonetheless a druid spell for you."
"If you gain an oath spell that doesn't appear on the paladin spell list, the spell is nonetheless a paladin spell for you."

I was under the impression it did not, but instead went to some lengths to not have the spell actually be considered on the Wizard spell list as that would carry a number of consequences for the higher level abilities. For example, the feats that grant spells don't count them as the character's class for casting nor do they add them to that character's class spell list, instead using the native class of the spell.


How about requiring GP, XP, or the deaths of your (level-appropriate) enemies?

My gut reactions are:

GP = Justification?
XP = Revulsion
Deaths of Enemies = This would be usable substantially less than once per day...maybe once per adventure even.

None of those seem as good as just operating once per time period (i.e. a spell slot that refreshes on a long rest).


Well, I still hold that archetypes should have the same number of benefits, and at the same levels. Something like 1, 3, 7, 11, 15.

Level 2, 6, 10, 14 works out well for a subclass.

so 4-5 or 4.5 average? A cursory examination of all the current classes from the PHB suggests this is already the case.

Barbarian: 3rd, 6th, 10th, 14th
Berserker - 4
Totem Warrior - 5 (2 @ 3rd)

Bard: 3rd, 6th, 14th
Lore - 4 (2 @ 3rd)
Valor - 4 (2 @ 3rd)

Cleric: 1st, 2nd, 6th, 8th, 17th
Knowldge - 6 (1st level feature is 2 proficiencies, comparable to the 2 features most other domains get)
Life - 7
Light - 7
Nature - 7
Tempest - 7
Trickery - 6 (1st level ability is probably more powerful than other domains)
War - 7

Druid: 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th
Land - 6 (Circle spells would be the 'extra' feature over moon druids)
Moon - 5

Fighter: 3rd, 7th, 10th, 15th, 18th
Champion - 5
Battlemaster - 5 (10th and 18th are categorically the same feature)
Eldritch Knight - 6 (2 @ 3rd)

Monk: 3rd, 6th, 11th, 17th
Open Hand - 4
Shadow - 4
Four Elements - 2 (Each discipline is technically its own feature)

Paladin: 3rd, 7th, 15th, 20th
Devotion - 5 (2 @ 3rd)
Ancients - 5 (2 @ 3rd)
Vengeance - 5 (2 @ 3rd)

Ranger: 3rd, 7th, 11th, 15th
Hunter - 4
Beast Master - 4

Rogue: 3rd, 9th, 13th, 17th
Thief - 5 (2 @ 3rd)
Assassin - 5 (2 @ 3rd)
Arcane Trickster - 5 (2 @ 3rd)

Sorcerer: 1st, 6th, 14th, 18th
Draconic - 5 (2 @ 1st)
Wild Magic - 5 (2 @ 1st)

Warlock: 1st, 6th, 10th, 14th
Archfey - 5 (2 @ 1st)
Fiend - 5 (2 @ 1st)
Great Old One - 5 (2 @ 1st)

Wizard: 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th
All - 5 (2 @ 2nd)

[R.Shackleford]

so 4-5 or 4.5 average? A cursory examination of all the current classes from the PHB suggests this is already the case.

Barbarian: 3rd, 6th, 10th, 14th
Berserker - 4
Totem Warrior - 5 (2 @ 3rd)

Bard: 3rd, 6th, 14th
Lore - 4 (2 @ 3rd)
Valor - 4 (2 @ 3rd)

Cleric: 1st, 2nd, 6th, 8th, 17th
Knowldge - 6 (1st level feature is 2 proficiencies, comparable to the 2 features most other domains get)
Life - 7
Light - 7
Nature - 7
Tempest - 7
Trickery - 6 (1st level ability is probably more powerful than other domains)
War - 7

Druid: 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th
Land - 6 (Circle spells would be the 'extra' feature over moon druids)
Moon - 5

Fighter: 3rd, 7th, 10th, 15th, 18th
Champion - 5
Battlemaster - 5 (10th and 18th are categorically the same feature)
Eldritch Knight - 6 (2 @ 3rd)

Monk: 3rd, 6th, 11th, 17th
Open Hand - 4
Shadow - 4
Four Elements - 2 (Each discipline is technically its own feature)

Paladin: 3rd, 7th, 15th, 20th
Devotion - 5 (2 @ 3rd)
Ancients - 5 (2 @ 3rd)
Vengeance - 5 (2 @ 3rd)

Ranger: 3rd, 7th, 11th, 15th
Hunter - 4
Beast Master - 4

Rogue: 3rd, 9th, 13th, 17th
Thief - 5 (2 @ 3rd)
Assassin - 5 (2 @ 3rd)
Arcane Trickster - 5 (2 @ 3rd)

Sorcerer: 1st, 6th, 14th, 18th
Draconic - 5 (2 @ 1st)
Wild Magic - 5 (2 @ 1st)

Warlock: 1st, 6th, 10th, 14th
Archfey - 5 (2 @ 1st)
Fiend - 5 (2 @ 1st)
Great Old One - 5 (2 @ 1st)

Wizard: 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th
All - 5 (2 @ 2nd)


Yes however there are two issues.

1: not all Subclass features are created equal. Divine Domain is worth more (armor, weapon, spells) than thief.

2: Some classes rely on their Subclass while others can ignore it.


So even if you switched the level on each class for this subclass... you still have issues.

[BurchardOfEn]

I was under the impression it did not,

It doesn't, but I'm noting that it's the only feature of its kind granted by a class or subclass that doesn't state that. It also doesn't state anywhere that you use Intelligence as the casting stat. I get the RAI, but I was meaning that I could see confusion based on how this is set up. If it just stated "You use your Intelligence as your casting stat, but these do not count as Wizard spells for you," then that would have resolved the issue. Instead, they somehow forgot to include that you use Intelligence(which they confirmed), and they also just happened to forget to include if they're Wizard spells or not. You can kinda figure how forgetting those together proves a problem following all other like features.

The only similar thing that I can think of that doesn't count something as a "your class spell" is the Magic Initiate feat, but that uses whatever class's casting stat rather than "your class's." It's also a feat.

[Cybren]

Does Arcane Initiate (that's the ability right?) contain something in the vein of the following?

"The chosen spells count as bard spells for you"
"If you have a domain spell that doesn't appear on the cleric spell list, the spell nonetheless is a cleric spell for you."
"If you gain access to a spell that doesn't appear on the druid spell list, the spell is nonetheless a druid spell for you."
"If you gain an oath spell that doesn't appear on the paladin spell list, the spell is nonetheless a paladin spell for you."

I was under the impression it did not, but instead went to some lengths to not have the spell actually be considered on the Wizard spell list as that would carry a number of consequences for the higher level abilities. For example, the feats that grant spells don't count them as the character's class for casting nor do they add them to that character's class spell list, instead using the native class of the spell.



It's an unearthed arcana, they aren't play-tested at all and probably only get a cursory editing pass. I think you're reading too much into the wording of the ability rather than the intent

[R.Shackleford]

It doesn't, but I'm noting that it's the only feature of its kind granted by a class or subclass that doesn't state that. It also doesn't state anywhere that you use Intelligence as the casting stat. I get the RAI, but I was meaning that I could see confusion based on how this is set up. If it just stated "You use your Intelligence as your casting stat, but these do not count as Wizard spells for you," then that would have resolved the issue. Instead, they somehow forgot to include that you use Intelligence(which they confirmed), and they also just happened to forget to include if they're Wizard spells or not. You can kinda figure how forgetting those together proves a problem following all other like features.

The only similar thing that I can think of that doesn't count something as a "your class spell" is the Magic Initiate feat, but that uses whatever class's casting stat rather than "your class's." It's also a feat.

Warlock Tome Pact is the best place to look for this issue.

Unless you gain a feature from an outside source, feats or multiclassing, then everything works off the class you gained the feature with.

Mostly.

[BurchardOfEn]

Well, yeah, Tome Warlock treats the spells that they get as Warlock spells. Magical Secrets treats the spells as Bard spells. So on and so forth. That's why I referenced those initially.

[R.Shackleford]

Well, yeah, Tome Warlock treats the spells that they get as Warlock spells. Magical Secrets treats the spells as Bard spells. So on and so forth. That's why I referenced those initially.

What I meant is that originally it didn't say that the cantrips used charisma and they later explained their intent.

I doubt their intent would change. Especially since it is in the best interest of the Wizard for the intent to no change.

[jas61292]

Funnily enough I was just looking at the DMG guide on modifying and making new classes and making new spells and it cites giving the wizard access to a cleric's magic as something specifically not to do.

Could be worse.

They could have written an article specifically about how to make custom archetypes. In that article they could have given some basic rules for how to do archetypes for each class, with things like "don't expand the number of spells a sorcerer knows." And then could have given an example archetype in the same article that breaks those exact rules they just laid out.

Oh... wait....