OneD&D UA - THE CLERIC AND REVISED SPECIES

[Oramac]

And, it's up.

Basic link with the video: https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/one-dnd/cleric-revised-species

Direct to PDF: https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/one-dnd/cleric-and-revised-species/tr8jAj5cc33uQixi/UA-2022-ClericandSpecies.pdf?icid_source=house-ads&icid_medium=crosspromo&icid_campaign=playtest3

[KorvinStarmast]

And, it's up.

Basic link with the video: https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/one-dnd/cleric-revised-species

Direct to PDF: https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/one-dnd/cleric-and-revised-species/tr8jAj5cc33uQixi/UA-2022-ClericandSpecies.pdf?icid_source=house-ads&icid_medium=crosspromo&icid_campaign=playtest3 I can only say that I really hate that they do this through DDB and not at the WoTC dnd/wizards site.

[LudicSavant]

Giving a quick look at the Cleric... the main concern I have is that it seems like it takes too long for them to take on an identity (and even when they do, they have less of one than before).

There's no longer any distinguishing features at level 1 (since the subclass got pushed back to 3, and level 1 domain spells are gone entirely). A low rank Cleric of every god will simply look the same, which is not a fun worldbuilding prospect. Every Cleric has the same Channel Divinity until all the way at level 6. And you get your second non-CD feature at level 10.

You basically wait until level 6 to have almost as much of a sense of individuality and unique playstyle as Clerics used to have by level 2. You wait until level 10 to get Blessed Healer, basically eliminating an important part of the Life Cleric's old tier 2 playstyle.

Even heavy armor and martial weapons got pushed back to level 2. I can see people justifying this delay of a Cleric getting their identity as "but it was too easy for Wizards to armor dip with them!" But the armor dip was for medium armor and shields, which they still get at level 1. You now just have this awkward case where basic Strength Clerics are worse at level 1 because they're not statted for medium armor.

One of the strengths of the Cleric design in 5e was that their playstyles all seemed meaningfully distinct from each other. A Light Cleric felt like a blaster right from the get-go, and so forth. Doesn't look like that'll be the case any more.

[Marcloure]

Dazed is back as a condition. Nice!

[Unoriginal]

And, it's up.

Basic link with the video: https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/one-dnd/cleric-revised-species

Direct to PDF: https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/one-dnd/cleric-and-revised-species/tr8jAj5cc33uQixi/UA-2022-ClericandSpecies.pdf?icid_source=house-ads&icid_medium=crosspromo&icid_campaign=playtest3

Thanks!

Well, I must say I'm pretty puzzled on many points, especially on how Jump is still an action. Before the big stuff, though, I got a question: was the way to get out of the Grappled condition already a Saving Throw in the last playtest?


Giving a quick look at the Cleric... the main concern I have is that it seems like it takes too long for them to take on an identity (and even when they do, they have less of one than before).

There's no longer any distinguishing features at level 1 (since the subclass got pushed back to 3, and level 1 domain spells are gone entirely). Every Cleric has the same Channel Divinity until all the way at level 6. And you get your second non-CD feature at level 10.

You basically wait until level 6 to have almost as much of a sense of individuality and unique playstyle as Clerics used to have by level 2.

Even heavy armor and martial weapons got pushed back to level 2. I can see people justifying this delay of a Cleric getting their identity as "but it was too easy for Wizards to armor dip with them!" But the armor dip was for medium armor and shields, which they still get at level 1. You now just have this awkward case where basic Strength Clerics are worse at level 1 because they're not statted for medium armor.

One of the strengths of the Cleric design in 5e was that their playstyles all seemed meaningfully distinct from each other. A Light Cleric felt like a blaster right from the get-go, and so forth. Doesn't look like that'll be the case any more.

On top of that it seems all the spells, including lvl 0 ones, are entirely "you choose what you want each day".

So yeah, less identity overall.

EDIT:

The wording of the Holy Order: Scholar feature is really odd. You select two new Skills in which you get Proficiency, and you can add your WIS mod to those specific Skills. But all those Skills are what the Cleric can get at lvl 1, so... you can't be a Scholar at a Skill you already have? Or alternatively, you can be a Scholar at the Skill you already have, but if you do you don't get an additional skill and just the WIS mod to the skill?

[Xervous]

Ardlings looking fine mechanically but they 100% don’t belong in core. There’s still zero lore or tradition grounding them. Exactly the sort of thing to serve up in a splatbook.

Attack replacing breath returns! But seriously WotC, we don’t want the flight you have at home.

Goliaths now teleport, cut the rest of the text. Proficiency bonus x 5.5 damage per long rest? Prof x 3.5 with a 10ft slow? Prof x 4.5 that eats your reaction? All garbage. The auto prone is potent for lower tier play against fliers. The endurance is more HP. Teleport and auto prone are miles beyond the rest.

[nickl_2000]

The resistance spell is absolute amazing now.

Reaction after a save failure. You or others. 10 foot range. Add 1d4 to a save with no limit of uses.

This is effectively a must have cantrip.

[tokek]

So the thing that stands out to me is that the dip multiclass is far less appealing with this new version. You can dip for armor and weapon prof but you don't get the subclass features until level 3 which is a serious investment.

That will fix a lot of the rather gamey builds all by itself. Whether you want that or not will entirely depend on whether you like those builds I think.

This delayed subclass will feel odd to some players but I quite like the way it fits with many of the gods having different domains or aspects and you do not really gain a magical benefit from that aspect until you are more developed in your devotion to the god. It works for me even if I can see that other players will rather struggle with the concept.

[Catullus64]

Stuff I Like:

A compact and clearer listing of examples of difficult terrain.

I'm uncertain, but I think that on balance I like the changes to the Grappled condition. Hard to say until I see if the Grapple action itself has received changes, which I believe this document does not cover.

Help Action being separated into two types, and having Skill Assistance be restricted to your own skill proficiencies. While there are circumstances where I don't think such a limitation should apply, I think it's a useful rule of thumb and appreciate it being enshrined here.

Having Inspiration be auto-generated from dice rolls is still not to my taste, but I like it better from Natural 1s than from Natural 20s.

Making Hidden a condition, along with the specific benefits you get from it, is a good change.

On the whole, the new Social mechanics are actually nice; for the most part, they're just a clarification and bringing to the front of stuff that was already buried in the core rules as best practices. I like that it's now an action, because mid-combat negotiation without an action cost always feels silly to me. See the section below for my big gripe, however.

I don't know if this was already present in a previous iteration, but getting a Short rest from a 1+ Hours interrupted Long Rest is neat.

Some good clarifications on running Movement.

Spiritual Weapon is Concentration. Maybe now its use will require a little thought, instead of Clerics casting it in basically every combat they can.

Ooh, the Study action is a pretty cool thing to get codified into rules. I hope Inquisitive Rogues get it as a bonus action on top of Search.

Prayer of Healing is less terrible now! Well, sorta. Getting an accelerated Short Rest may not mean a lot if virtually no abilities are actually tied to a Short Rest now.

Stuff I Don't Like:

My absolute least favorite change is shifting the Cleric's subclass to 3rd level. The deity or other divine entity should absolutely be central to the character from level 1. This is a persistent beef I have with these changes, is flattening out interesting differences and asymmetry between classes and options for the sake of uniformity. It's the same reason I dislike everything being put on the Proficiency-bonus-per-long-rest timer.

They took the wording of Turn Undead, which was very clear and useable, and changed it to something that I'm pretty sure is going to cause more confusion and arguments at the table, not fewer.

Incorporation of multiverse fluff into Species writeups is annoying to me as ever, but equally easy to ignore.

Because there weren't quite enough races with Darkvision yet, Dragonborn get it now too.

You know what this game needed? To make Guidance spam even easier and more prevalent! And to make Resistance spam even more viable!

I don't get the rationale for the changes to Aid and Barkskin. Here's two very different spells with very different theming, and now they're just slightly different distributions of temporary HP.

I assume that the change in wording to Disciple of Life is intended to close off the infamously strong Goodberry combo (although you can still extract some benefit if everybody around you Readies actions to scarf a berry as soon as you cast it). But this also closes off synergy with some other healing spells, ones native to the Cleric spell list, and I don't know how intentional that was. Off the top of my head, Aura of Vitality and Regenerate are both affected. Shifting how a spell works so dramatically based on one memetically popular combo seems silly to me, but there could be different reasoning at work here.

Redefinition of the Hide action is confusing to me; I don't think you even needed anything more than "The DM decides when it is appropriate to hide." Why is there now such a steep floor for success? Especially since ultimate success is still dependent on the opponent's roll. Ditto for the DC 15 floor for the otherwise-cool Influence action. Did we learn nothing from 3rd Edition and its abusable fixed DCs?

[Jervis]

Thoughts in order
I like the cleric holy order stuff, they decoupled proficiency from subclass which is good. They are not balanced against each other but oh well. Blessed strikes come online earlier and has both options which is good but why did they remove scaling?

Ardlings are straight up descendant from a celestial animal now? HOW DID THEY MAKE ARDLINGS WORSE!?

WHY ARE GOLIATHS A CORE RACE AND NOT AASIMAR!? Also this is entirely personal and petty but I hate Goliaths due to a bad experience with a player that used them exclusively and made the most obnoxious 4 Int Barbarian in history so I can’t be fair to them.

[stoutstien]

Basically killed aid and SW as spells.

Thaumaturgy is so much better than the other options it's silly once subclass CD come online.

2...maybe 3 good ideas and the rest is crap. Might be the motivation I need to actually finish my homebrew system.

[Pooky the Imp]

Clerics seem a little... odd.

Not choosing your deity at Lv1 seems weird. One would think this would be a pretty core element but apparently not. Come to that, who is giving your Cleric spells when he's Level 1-2 if he hasn't devoted himself to a deity yet? Is it like a lottery where any interested deities can just buy-in and hope he chooses them?

Moving on, on the one hand, I can kinda see the logic in letting you choose whether you want to be a heavily-armoured front-liner or a more backline caster. At the same time, that seems to undermine the actual subclasses.

What sticks out to me even more is that the Heavy Armour clerics get to have their cake and eat it as they also get extra damage on their Cantrips (arguably a minor bonus but nevertheless one that used to be reserved for the more lightly-armoured priests).

Incidentally, I can't help but notice that the extra damage for weapons and Cantrips is now just always Radiant damage, regardless of Cleric subclass or Cantrip damage. :smallconfused:

"Hah, feel your flesh wither with the necrotic energies of Toll the Bell! Oh, and also feel the radiant energies, I guess."

As for subclasses, it's hard to judge when we only have one to compare. It would have been nice to see what, say, Light or Trickery Clerics get, now that every Cleric can be skilled and gets extra damage as standard.

The last thing I wanted to bring up is that, unless you pick a specific Order, Channel Divinity can now be used a number of times per day equal to your Proficiency Bonus, and you regain all uses when you finish a Long rest. Is anyone else thoroughly sick of this mechanic? Also, one might have thought that it would be wise to try and balance the rest dependency of the various classes, instead most Clerics gain absolutely nothing back on a short rest.


Moving on, I like that Ardlings aren't just Furry-Assimar now. Though some of their animal-based traits feel a little wonky.

e.g. Climber - "once per turn when you deal damage with your Unarmed Strike to a target, you can increase the damage to that target by an amount equal to your Proficiency Bonus"

Am I missing something here? :smallconfused:

Why not just give them a natural claw attack that does 1d4+Str/Dex slashing?

The other thing I'd add is that I think the races feel a good deal more empty after the removal of stuff like Ability Score Modifiers. The Ardling seems like a good candidate for giving a different bonus depending on subtype (similar to how Shifters currently work). Alas.


I don't have much comment on the other races. Sorry, "species". :smallsigh:


It's nice that Dazed is back.


Lastly, Epic Boons are hilariously unbalanced. 'Cast one extra spell of Lv5 or lower each day' vs. 'Permanent 60ft True Sight.'

[Telwar]

Splitting the domain and subclass features feels weird, but on the other hand, it had so much front-loaded that it was just too good. And it makes a thematic sense; you can worship your god at 1st level, but you don't get your subclass until later, which, if it's fine for fighters, it's fine for clerics.

I really don't like the need to have spells prepared equal to the spell slots. Most of that, though, is because for the most part 2nd level spells suck.

Goliaths look better with more options.

I still don't see the need for ardlings, especially since we already had shifters for the people who wanted to play animal people. But these look better, especially since they don't have a spell as their defining difference.

[Pooky the Imp]

I still don't see the need for ardlings, especially since we already had shifters for the people who wanted to play animal people. But these look better, especially since they don't have a spell as their defining difference.

Yeah, WotC really seem to be struggling to carve out any sort of meaningful niche for Ardlings without treading on the toes of either Assimar or Shifters.

[Unoriginal]

Am I missing something here? :smallconfused:

Why not just give them a natural claw attack that does 1d4+Str/Dex slashing?

I think they're actively removing that kind of attacks from player options.


Sorry, "species". :smallsigh:

Eh, it took them long enough, but species is definitively a better term for what it represents.




Lastly, Epic Boons are hilariously unbalanced. 'Cast one extra spell of Lv5 or lower each day' vs. 'Permanent 60ft True Sight.'

Indeed.

Plus as the ultimate capstone for a character who didn't multiclass they appear to be... very unfitting to me.

[skaddix]

Ardling has some weird division. I get the idea but still weird.
Maybe instead just subdivide with something like Beast, Reptilian, Avian or Aerial, and Aquatic.

I still think Clerics need something impressive above Level 14...at like 18. Some sort of Avatar Mode would make sense.

As for Dragonborn better though the bar was low...though I think Flight at Level 5 might be a bit too strong. Maybe scale that flight time to character level.

There is something very weird about Healing Spells being under Necromancy. I suggest a new name for Healing and Death Magic that encompasses both.

[Pooky the Imp]

I think they're actively removing that kind of attacks from player options.

Ugh.

In that case, perhaps they should maybe think again about including a furry race in core?



Eh, it took them long enough, but species is definitively a better term for what it represents.

Sure. So why are they still eschewing putting ability scores on species for reasons entirely related to the word 'race'? :smalltongue:

[Rafaelfras]

For the cleric, the core class seems more interesting now, but I agree that your divine domain should come earlier. The orders are in my opinion ver unbalanced with each other, there isn't a world where some skills or a cantrip + a chanel use can compete with proficiency on martial weapons and heavy armor. I can't see any of those 2 been taken over that last one at the beginning and at least for thaumaturgy one, it doesn't matter anymore if is taken as a second choice.
Also WoTC need to understand that an epic boon MUST be epic, it needs to be better than greater divine intervention or this is not going to work

[PhoenixPhyre]

This UA extends what's become quite a pattern--so far there is nothing in OneD&D that I've found really exciting. No compelling "yeah, that's a change that makes me want to buy all new core books". There are some ok rewordings, but critically they can be effortlessly ported into 5e's framework. All of the "new" stuff is either utterly meh or actively bad.

And this is the worst case--it doesn't even irritate me enough to stay interested for hating reasons. I'm just bored with it. It feels like "publish a new edition as a cash grab" rather than something worth actually getting people to rebuy all their stuff for.

[GooeyChewie]

It's really weird to me that Life Domain clerics have two ways to use Channel Divinity to heal, but Disciple of Life, Blessed Healer and Supreme Healing fail to work with them. They only apply to Spells.

[Oramac]

I agree with most of what people are saying here, so I'm going to bring up one thing that, honestly, makes me legitimately angry.

Wording. In most cases, they've managed to word everything like they're talking to a ****ing toddler. Take the Life Cleric fluff, for instance (my emphasis added).


The Clerics who tap into this domain are masters of healing, using that force of life to cure many hurts.

Seriously? "Cure many hurts"? What the actual ****. I'm not 5 years old, nor are any players I've ever met. Then, in the Goliath description, they use the word "internecine". Make up your damn mind. Are we toddlers or scholars?

/rant

[stoutstien]

This UA extends what's become quite a pattern--so far there is nothing in OneD&D that I've found really exciting. No compelling "yeah, that's a change that makes me want to buy all new core books". There are some ok rewordings, but critically they can be effortlessly ported into 5e's framework. All of the "new" stuff is either utterly meh or actively bad.

And this is the worst case--it doesn't even irritate me enough to stay interested for hating reasons. I'm just bored with it. It feels like "publish a new edition as a cash grab" rather than something worth actually getting people to rebuy all their stuff for.

That sums it up nicely. Bland and uninspired carbon copy that might be a tad easier to use with online play.

[Pildion]

Between not getting Heavy Armor \ Martial Weapons until level 3 and the absolute NERF that is Blessed Strikes over Divine Strike I can really only believe that WotC wants ONLY caster clerics.....

Also the new Resistance spell is probably to good to be used every turn, going to be spammed like Guidance.

[KorvinStarmast]

- Like Divine Spark, do not like what they did with Turn Undead on its face. But not a huge objection.
- Like Holy Order idea, not sure if three choices is all but it's an interesting start. Like using Wis as bonus to the Scholar bits.
- Thaumaturge: hmmm, might be a bit strong compared to the two others (extra cantrip and extra CD per SR? they seem to be contradicting their basic framework of PB pe LR). This leans into a particular kind of cleric play style. On first blush, I'd remove the bonus CD. (On second blush, since you can take another later, go ahead and leave it alone).

So where are the interesting / differing uses of CD for each sub class? Gone. Color me sad, my knowledge Cleric skill monkey will stage a protest somewhere on the west coast. :smalltongue:

I seem to be missing the "destroy Undead" table for higher level clerics: clear out the mooks! :smalltongue:
- Like the smite undead.
- Like blessed strike.
- at 9: another Holy Order feature. OK. Everyone becomes a Protector at 1 and a Thaumaturge at 9, right?.
- Divine intervention delayed to 11. Fine. Any Divine Spell. Pretty much like it is now.
(at 18, Greater DI before level 20, I like it, more or less (any divine spell) once per 2d4 days.
====================
Prepared Spell suggestion: OK, not a bad load out.
=====================
Life Domain
- Dislike loss of level 1 domain spells, but can live with it as spell slots are few and Divine Spark takes care of some healing.
- Disciple of life no-workee with Divine Spark. That's fine.
- Preserve Life: delayed such that it can't save a low level party. Not sure I like that, but so it goes.
- Blessed Healer: same but later.
- Supreme Healing: OK.
=================================
Life Cleric seems to be intact more or less. Domain Spells are fine. Heal Bot role fulfilled.
===================================
Ardlings; get rid of it. Make Aasimar core, this is (IMO) garbage. (I don't like Harengons either, and can do without tabaxi...).
:smallfurious::smallfurious:They are still screwing up Jump by making it an action. :smallfurious::smallfurious: rather than movement. See the Flyer Entry: when you take the Jump Action, you can flap your wings to gain Advantage on that Action’s Ability Check. We hates it forever!
===================================
Racer Dog Monks, here we come.
========================
Free Divine cantrips: but you have to be a furry to get them. How about just make Aasmiar core to complement Tiefling? Is that so hard?
++++++++++
OK, I'll take a breath
++++++++++
Dragonborn: OK, so far. (I kind of like the "wings appear to be of the energy used by your breath weapon"
=============
Goliaths
---------------
Strom's Thunder: lousy feature. You have to be hit for this to work? The other ones are volitional, and Stone's Endurance DR is much better. Need to re figure this one.
Large Form/Powerful Build: like, a lot.
--------------------
Epic Boon of Fate: Bardic inspiration, ish? At level 20? Can this be used to reduce an enemy's saving throw roll? I think so. Hmmm.
----------------------
Not sure how this one stacks up; one Free spell, level 5 or lower per LR. Epic Boon of Spell Recall.
Hmmm, I guess that's OK as a level 20 feature.
-----------------
Epic Boon of Truesight: I like it.
----------------
Still don't grok why Shatter is now transmutation, except for the restriction on bard spell schools.
----------------
Aid: OK, new version, more creatures, fine.
--------------------------
Banishment nerf: hate it. They get to roll a save 10 times to come back? Why the nerf? They'll just do the "Ahnold" and say "I'll be back" ...
-----------------------------------------
Barkskin: not a big fan, but whatever. Lose the concentration, eh? Mage Armor does not require concentration, nor does Aid.
------------------------------------------
Need more ways to remove exhaustion. (Lesser and Greater restoration?) They remove conditions, eh?
---------------------------------------------
Guidance is better than the last time, but at least it does not use concentration. Livable.
------------------------------------------
Jump still an action not movement. Bad WoTC. :smallfurious::smallfurious:
Idea: if they refuse to keep it in movement, why not make it a bonus action so that martials are not penalized for being martials who like to jump around and attack things? WoTC: Come on, man! :smallfurious::smallfurious:
--------------------------
Rest interruption, OK, that seems more playable.
-----------------------
Musical Instrument: does a kazoo still cost 20 GP? :smallbiggrin:
-----------------
Prayer of Healing: too fiddly, have to keep track of LR blah blah. Interesting Upgrade, though, but needs another scrub.
-------------------------------
Resistance: OK, like guidance, livable.
-------------------------------
Paladins can now cast Det Magic as a ritual? Good.
--------------------------
Spiritual Weapon nerf: requires concentration. Why fix what it not broken?
We hates it forever, precious!
-------------------------------------

So that's a first take. Meh.

[skaddix]

For the cleric, the core class seems more interesting now, but I agree that your divine domain should come earlier. The orders are in my opinion ver unbalanced with each other, there isn't a world where some skills or a cantrip + a chanel use can compete with proficiency on martial weapons and heavy armor. I can't see any of those 2 been taken over that last one at the beginning and at least for thaumaturgy one, it doesn't matter anymore if is taken as a second choice.
Also WoTC need to understand that an epic boon MUST be epic, it needs to be better than greater divine intervention or this is not going to work

I really think the second tier should give you something more impressive for Holy Order instead of Pick 2.

Extra Attack for the Protector.
Bonus Spell Casts 1-3 Level Spells for Thaumaturge.
Widsom Mod to Saves Against Magic for Scholar?

[KorvinStarmast]

I really think the second tier should give you something more impressive for Holy Order instead of Pick 2. Extra Attack for the Protector.
Not at second level, extra attack is a 5th level ability.

Bonus Spell Casts 1-3 Level Spells for Thaumaturge. What do you mean by that? Domain spells come on line at level 3.

Widsom Mod to Saves Against Magic for Scholar? What does "save against magic" mean?

[Oramac]

Not at second level, extra attack is a 5th level ability.
What do you mean by that? Domain spells come on line at level 3.

If I'm not mistaken, he's talking about the 9th level feature that lets you pick a second Holy Order.


What does "save against magic" mean?

Save against the new (stupid) Magic Action, maybe? IDK.

[Damon_Tor]

In general I don't find myself caring too much about the cleric changes. I never liked clerics much, and nothing about the changes made me like them more. So I'll abstain from having any opinion on this one so those of you who care can have your voices heard.

They're using "species" instead of "race" now. Probably a good idea, though it feels weird to read it. It's less of a fantasy term: I don't feel like any characters from Tolkien would ever use it. But I'll adjust and am OK with it.

I'm pleased the Ardlings are just generic beastfolk now. I still don't like them. But I dislike them less.

I don't like the new Aid spell. You took a spell that did a cool thing other spells didn't do any made it do a boring thing lots of other spells do.

I feel like "equip" and "unequip" need to be defined. From/To were can you equip/unequip weapons? If you grab someone's weapon after disarming them can you "unequip" it into your backback where they can't get it back?

Guidance has no usage limit, it's just a great reaction ability and a must-have? I didn't like the way they made it a pseudocantrip before, but I don't like this either. It's just way too strong now. Unless I'm missing something. Resistance is like this too now.

Spiritual Weapon is nerfed to require concentration. Eh. Probably had it coming. But I'm not sure it's worth using now that it has to compete with things like bless.

[Psyren]

Giving a quick look at the Cleric... the main concern I have is that it seems like it takes too long for them to take on an identity (and even when they do, they have less of one than before).

There's no longer any distinguishing features at level 1 (since the subclass got pushed back to 3, and level 1 domain spells are gone entirely). A low rank Cleric of every god will simply look the same, which is not a fun worldbuilding prospect. Every Cleric has the same Channel Divinity until all the way at level 6. And you get your second non-CD feature at level 10.

You basically wait until level 6 to have almost as much of a sense of individuality and unique playstyle as Clerics used to have by level 2. You wait until level 10 to get Blessed Healer, basically eliminating an important part of the Life Cleric's old tier 2 playstyle.

Even heavy armor and martial weapons got pushed back to level 2. I can see people justifying this delay of a Cleric getting their identity as "but it was too easy for Wizards to armor dip with them!" But the armor dip was for medium armor and shields, which they still get at level 1. You now just have this awkward case where basic Strength Clerics are worse at level 1 because they're not statted for medium armor.

One of the strengths of the Cleric design in 5e was that their playstyles all seemed meaningfully distinct from each other. A Light Cleric felt like a blaster right from the get-go, and so forth. Doesn't look like that'll be the case any more.

I completely agree with you on the identity point, but having now watched the devblog video I can understand where they're coming from too. Crawford rightly stated that picking your subclass at 1st level can easily be an "analysis paralysis" barrier moment for newer players, and even some experienced players who are trying that particular class for the first time, as you need to make this critically build-defining choice for your character the moment you sit down whereas other players don't. He also pointed out the weirdness that currently takes place whereby you get a subclass/domain at 1st level, then you get channel divinity afterward which comes packaged with subclass feature needing you to kind of double back in your progression to the subclass section/book to see what you got, rather than your abilities being made available more organically.

Regarding all subclasses being granted at 3rd level, I readily admit I was wrong about not predicting they would do that. With that said though, Cleric was the one I was least concerned about this move with. Yes it's a little odd to have this divine power without properly explaining where it came from, but in cleric's case it's at least trainable, so I can understand starting out as a more generalized neophyte/acolyte before diving into the full mystery of your deity's domain. I'm less convinced that this will feel as natural for a sorcerer or warlock, who generally don't get their powers from any kind of formal training, but I'm open to being pleasantly surprised by WotC.

Lastly, concerning cleric blasting at level 1 - the new channel divinity does allow for that at least (and 2d8 radiant 2x per day 30ft at level 1 is pretty good), not to mention you can enhance that further by picking Thaumaturge at 2 and under current guidelines get that level of blasting up to 4x per day. That's 8d8 total damage output in a day at level 2, before spell slots and cantrips!

[Jervis]

Ok I now that I have a minute I went back to read Ardling. “You are descended from a celestial animal.” I got the whole thing about some of their descendants being bipedal but this just sounds like one of your ancestors was a bard that had a thing going on with a talking horse.

[Psyren]

Well, I must say I'm pretty puzzled on many points, especially on how Jump is still an action.



Jump still an action not movement. Bad WoTC. :smallfurious::smallfurious:


I want to clarify something about recent feedback:

The "we analyzed the results and everything scored high so far" video was ONLY referring to the Character Origins UA. They have not yet analyzed the feedback on the Expert Classes UA, which is where the Jump action debuted. So Jump still being around does not mean everyone loved the Jump action and it's here to stay with some tweaks. If you hate it, as I do, continue downvoting it in this next survey as well!

[Dienekes]

Well, still not a fan of consolidating subclass levels, though it definitely seems like they're going that route with them. But then I definitely prefer fulfilling the class fantasy in a consistent way than what I consider generally minor mechanical benefits. If the class fantasy works around something tied to their subclass then they should get it when their class abilities come on. The Sorcerer is literally only special because of their origin, they should get their origin at level 1. Same goes for the Cleric and their beliefs be they tied to a god or philosophy, a Warlock and their patron, a Paladin and their Oath.

Other than that? I kinda like Holy Order. Am a bit confused why they get a second one. Are they jumping orders? They each seem to be promoting different styles of play/character focuses. I'd think they'd be more interesting doubled down on their initial choice rather than mitigate its impact.


Goliath was a surprise. Seems interesting. I'm getting the feeling Fire will be very powerful early game and then dramatically fall off.

Ardling. Right. It's more interesting. That I will give them. They lost their not-really-flight ability for one based around what animal they are. Cool. The animal part was the most interesting thing about the race. Only now looking at them, nothing is jumping out at me as vastly more powerful than the previously mentioned mad hops. And they lost their damage resistance, a spell at 3 and 5, and instead gained a skill and a bit more cantrip versatility. Honestly, I think they kinda need to let the divine magic part go a bit. They'd be more interesting if they really doubled down on the animal side of things. Give them Primal magic if they need any and actually allow a build-a-bear for how your animal parts work. I get that initially WotC wanted to create the counterpart to the Tieflings. But... the Tieflings already had a counterpart. A pretty good one. Now, admittedly that counterpart wasn't a mechanical mirror of the Tiefling. Personally I thought that made them more interesting. But, ok, you want to make the mechanical mirror you make a new race to do it. Only, now the race has been developed and it's no longer a mechanical mirror. So, why try and fill the same role as a different race? Double down on what makes this one unique and go all out on it. Sure, that will probably make this the most complicated race in the game to create. But I don't really see that as a problem.

I like Daze.

[paladinn]

Obviously going to need time to digest.

I don't think I care for not getting a domain till L3. I'm sure this is a way to "standardize" when characters get subclasses across all classes. But clerics, more than any other class, are/should be defined by their relationship with their deity/s.

The Holy Order feature is interesting, as it removes some features from association with domain. So if you go thaumaturge, you can still be a life cleric. If you go protector, you can still be a light cleric. I think this might be a good thing; but it wasn't Bad when it was yoked to domain. I wouldn't expect to find a light cleric wearing plate armor, but that's how it is.

It seems like Smite Undead has taken the place of Destroy Undead, and it's not bad I think. It does need clarification. If an undead makes a saving throw, it's not damaged, but is it still turned? Once the damage starts, there's no mere "turning"? Or does nothing happen at all? So by L5, either you're damaging the undead or nothing happens?

I think they have set up the cleric to fill the role of a paladin, especially if the protector order is taken. It'll be interesting to see what the paladin looks like, since they've been placed in the priest "group." I'm afraid it's going to lose even more of its unique identity.

I kind of like the goliath "species." If we have dragonborn, why not goliaths?

Ardlings.. still not a fan.. and since when is a triceratops a divine racer animal?

[skaddix]

If I'm not mistaken, he's talking about the 9th level feature that lets you pick a second Holy Order.



Save against the new (stupid) Magic Action, maybe? IDK.

Indeed. You would be correct.

[PhoenixPhyre]

. It'll be interesting to see what the paladin looks like, since they've been placed in the priest "group." I'm afraid it's going to lose even more of its unique identity.


Name checks out =)

But really, I think that last quoted sentence is the theme of OneD&D. Everything is losing even more of its unique identity. Just about everything is getting strapped to the Bed of Procrustes and forcibly homogenized. Settings? Yup, all forced into the multiverse model with the same cosmology, gods, species origin and everything. Races (sorry, species)? Yup, same overall shape with a limited palette of abilities (even if they have different names). Classes? Yup, with the changes to spell lists, class groupings, and subclasses it feels like they're becoming more and more similar.

[KorvinStarmast]

Only 50 million people have played D&D, and 10 million+ have played 5th Edition, so 39k seems like a nice number of Chosen few. I confess, I giggled.

Yeah, apparently every subclass is going to follow the 3-6-10-14 level format like the expert group. I had wondered about that with the Expert Class UA, but was quickly shot down. They are apparently working really hard on curbing multiclassing, eh? Yes. IMO that's a good thing. Make MC a cost.

Agreed on the Ardling. I'd much rather ditch the Ardling and add in Aasimar in its place. Yeah, I'll probably get thirsty and hungry up on my soap box about that, but Aasimar being core is far simpler and thematically consistent.

I don't think I care for not getting a domain till L3.
And paladins have to wait for level 3 for their oaths. I think some of this is 'trial by fire' or something like that.
[QUOTE]The Holy Order feature is interesting, as it removes some features from association with domain. So if you go thaumaturge, you can still be a life cleric. If you go protector, you can still be a light cleric. I think this might be a good thing; but it wasn't Bad when it was yoked to domain. I wouldn't expect to find a light cleric wearing plate armor, but that's how it is. It's a customizability feature, it seems to me.

I kind of like the goliath "species." If we have dragonborn, why not goliaths?
Yes, Goliath as core is fine to me if aasimar comes with.
Ardlings.. still not a fan.. and since when is a triceratops a divine racer animal? Since J Crawford's last binge on vodka and Red Bull, I guess. :smallbiggrin:
"Yes, mayonnaise in the Alchemy Jug. That's the ticket!"

[Tanarii]

Heavy Armor waiting until 2nd level helps mitigate cleric dips for HA.
But it really hurts regular clerics that want to use HA. If they Dex dump, which is one of the entire points of HA, they're looking at AC 12 at level 1 the the standard Chain Short.


I can only say that I really hate that they do this through DDB and not at the WoTC dnd/wizards site.
This alone is sufficient to indicate to me they're not really interested in feedback.

[Segev]

With subclasses being unified to the same levels, I wonDer how long until we get rules not just for multiclass in, but cross-classing your subclasses.

[KorvinStarmast]

... I wonder how long until we get rules not just for multiclass in, but cross-classing your subclasses. How about never? That's my vote.

[LudicSavant]

Heavy Armor waiting until 2nd level helps mitigate cleric dips for HA.
But it really hurts regular clerics that want to use HA. If they Dex dump, which is one of the entire points of HA, they're looking at AC 12 at level 1 the the standard Chain Short.

Not only does it hurt regular Clerics in a really silly way, it’s also not really doing much to the armor dips (since the bulk of the benefit is medium+shield, not the heavy part).

[Sorinth]

In principle I like the idea of pushing the subclass to 3rd level so that it's inline with other classes. However I'm not sure I like how it turned out, perhaps a better solution would be to do the opposite and bring the other classes' subclasses online earlier.

I like the Holy Order feature, but just getting your secondary choice at level 9 feels like a let down, I would prefer if there was simply a new benefit that came online at level 9 based on your original choice. It wouldn't have to be powerful but something to reinforce your selections instead of bringing more sameness between all clerics. I agree with others that waiting till 2nd level to get heavy armor and martial weapons when you want to build that frontline cleric type is kind of disappointing but it's probably not so bad in actual play so long as you are in a place where you can easily buy new armour once you reach level 2 (Which isn't every campaign). I love the Scholar feature of getting to add your Wisdom mod to a skill check, being able to be the Face as the cleric is a great (All classes should get a similar feature). I do wonder if it's a bit too much since it steps on the toes of Expertise, perhaps simply having Wisdom be a replacement instead of being a bonus would be better. I also would be tempted to give even more flexibility to the skill choice based on domain. A Trickery cleric that could use Wis for Stealth as an example would be cool, or a strength/wrestling focused deity allowing Athletics to be chosen, etc...

For the rest I mostly just skimmed,
I like the direction they are taking with Goliath though I think the abilities could still use a bit of work.
I prefer the old Aid since it was always useful, this one isn't bad, especially if you have a 6 people in the party but it will be in competition with many other Temp HP options which will likely overshadow it.
Happy with the Dazed and Slowed condition, though really it's just bookkeeping and not a real change.
Still hate how you can't jump as part of your regular movement.
The Verbal component being what breaks being hidden when casting spells is interesting, though the Hide rules are still a bit messy.
Prayer of Healing now seem really good if you have SR classes, and kind of makes me want to try some sort of Warlock/Cleric multiclass. Glad they made sure that it can only happen once per LR to prevent abuse.
I like what they've done with Resistance/Guidance, I'm not sure they need to be nerfed but if they do then removing yourself as a valid target could be good option.
I'm fine with Spiritual Weapon now requiring concentration, it's still a good spell, though perhaps increasing how much it can move would be a good idea now.
I don't really like the classification of creatures in the Study Action. I've always felt each of Arcana/History/Nature/Religion should be able to provide insights just that sometimes the info you get is going to be different. Now Wizards whose theme is summoning Fiends or creating Undead should take Religion over Arcana, want to learn how a wizard becomes a lich no need to learn the mysteries of magic just consult some religious texts. It's just bad.

[Psyren]

This alone is sufficient to indicate to me they're not really interested in feedback.

Yeah, they went through 39,000 responses because they're not interested in feedback :smallsigh:



EDIT: Also, does this UA feel light to anyone else? Mainly just a Class and 2 Races?

They said this one would be lighter in the last video.


Poor Warlocks going to lose a lot of flavor. But hey, I bet they get Eldritch Blast cantrip for themselves.

Also in the last video :smalltongue:

[Oramac]

This alone is sufficient to indicate to me they're not really interested in feedback.


Yeah, they went through 39,000 responses because they're not interested in feedback :smallsigh:

I don't think they're disinterested in feedback, but I would agree that they're extremely picky about WHO'S feedback they allow. 39k responses is a lot, but as was pointed out earlier, when compared to the global playerbase it's a hilariously low percentage of the total. And, on top of that, it's naturally biased towards DDB, with no regard for people who do not use DDB.

[KorvinStarmast]

Not only does it hurt regular Clerics in a really silly way, .For 1 level. In a game with bounded accuracy. Not seeing the harm.

[Catullus64]

Seriously? "Cure many hurts"? What the actual ****. I'm not 5 years old, nor are any players I've ever met. Then, in the Goliath description, they use the word "internecine". Make up your damn mind. Are we toddlers or scholars?

/rant

'Cure many hurts' doesn't sound like toddler-speak to me, it sounds like an attempt to invoke a more antiquated style. 'Hurt' as a substantive form of a verb, a la 'wound' is reasonably common in older prose.

Were there other instances of what sounded to you like infantile prose? I can't say I picked up on it.

[Bobthewizard]

With giving banishment a save every round to escape, I wonder if they'll do that for the other save-or-suck spells like hypnotic pattern, fear, and polymorph, and maybe plane shift and reverse gravity. And a way for targets to escape Otilukes sphere, wall of force, and forcecage. I feel like that would be a good change to bring those spells in line with others of their level.

[LudicSavant]

For 1 level.

That's one level too long.

[Psyren]

I like decoupling cleric martial proficiencies from their domain choice. As I went over previously (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?651974-OneD-amp-D-UA-THE-CLERIC-AND-REVISED-SPECIES&p=25647158&viewfull=1#post25647158) I'm a little less enthused about having to wait until 3rd for said domain, but Crawford's reasons for the change ultimately make sense to me.


I don't think they're disinterested in feedback, but I would agree that they're extremely picky about WHO'S feedback they allow. 39k responses is a lot, but as was pointed out earlier, when compared to the global playerbase it's a hilariously low percentage of the total. And, on top of that, it's naturally biased towards DDB, with no regard for people who do not use DDB.

Being a low percentage of the worldwide player population is not actually relevant, 39k is statistically significant. So long as we have no reason to suspect selection bias anyway, and DDB is as free and open to players from anywhere as any other web-based feedback method would be.

[Segev]

I don't think they're disinterested in feedback, but I would agree that they're extremely picky about WHO'S feedback they allow. 39k responses is a lot, but as was pointed out earlier, when compared to the global playerbase it's a hilariously low percentage of the total. And, on top of that, it's naturally biased towards DDB, with no regard for people who do not use DDB.

I mean, I don't use DDB for much at all. I have an account, though, and it's easy enough to make one if you want to add your feedback, even if you don't use it for anything else.

[Kurt Kurageous]

OneD&D just makes me sad. I've said this before, I'll say it again.

Why do we need a new version? Is it for nothing but a naked money grab?

If there were specific problems found with 5e, how does any of this OneD&D UA fix it?

We will never know. And this makes me sad.

I'd rather they go fix DDB first.

[Xervous]

I mean, I don't use DDB for much at all. I have an account, though, and it's easy enough to make one if you want to add your feedback, even if you don't use it for anything else.

I tried making one and the path led me into requests for my phone number. Dead end.

[GooeyChewie]

For 1 level. In a game with bounded accuracy. Not seeing the harm.

To me, the bigger issue is that you cannot start with chain mail from your class equipment. Even buying one at character creation won't work, because you start with 57g (50g from background, 7g from class) and chain mail costs 75g. Clerics who want to wear heavy armor will need to work with their DMs to ensure that they actually get that heavy armor. Obviously that's not an insurmountable problem; players should generally be working with their DMs anyway. But it does make the progression clunky.

[Oramac]

Being a low percentage of the worldwide player population is not actually relevant, 39k is statistically significant.

True enough.


So long as we have no reason to suspect selection bias anyway, and DDB is as free and open to players from anywhere as any other web-based feedback method would be.

DDB IS selection bias. It requires a dedicated DDB account and a google/twitch/apple account. This automatically disqualifies anyone who doesn't have BOTH of those. There are plenty of other survey sites they require absolutely nothing in order to use them, or WOTC could just create their own not bound by DDB. On top of that, one could make the case that the surveys are not truly anonymous since they require an account.

[No brains]

I have to think a little longer as to whether I think these changes are good or bad, but some recurring phrasing gets me.

What does being a 'default' cleric mean to people? Are we talking about the cleric playstyle or the cleric flavor? Because those can be drastically different things.

If we're talking about the assumption of playstyle (something that shine through as levels and adventuring days wear on) of 'dude who can take a bonk or two and then balm a bonk', then maybe learning what the 'default cleric' is early on might be good for people.

If we're talking about the flavor of being a devotee of a deity, then this could be bad. Someone who stans a god might not always want to be a front liner and healer. A devotee of a trickery cleric, even if their goal was to defend and prop up their faith, might do so through stealth and deceit, not (immediately) through taking a stand and curing the injured. Being stuck as a clanking, obvious devotee of lies and chaos for a few levels could work against you.

All of this collides against the kind of antiquated class name in 'cleric'. A cleric is a clerk. Etymology doesn't lie. That's why both of them do clerical work. A cleric isn't somebody who barges into battle and performs miracles. It's time to rename them to something closer to how they act. Maybe 'Prophet'? Or maybe some other charged religious term that I quake to mention here despite its immediate, yet IRL nonspecific relevancy.

[Sorinth]

With subclasses being unified to the same levels, I wonDer how long until we get rules not just for multiclass in, but cross-classing your subclasses.

Well they did it in Strixhaven and it will obviously work better now when classes are getting features at the same level so I've no doubt it's a matter of when not if.

[Dr.Samurai]

Who is asking for this ardling thing? And why would it be core? A triceratops head? Huh??? :smallconfused:

[Pooky the Imp]

OneD&D just makes me sad. I've said this before, I'll say it again.

Why do we need a new version? Is it for nothing but a naked money grab?

If there were specific problems found with 5e, how does any of this OneD&D UA fix it?

Thus far, I certainly can't say that any of my issues with 5th have been fixed in the preview material.

If anything, the issues have been significantly expanded. :smalltongue:

[KorvinStarmast]

That's one level too long. No it isn't.
OK, where do we go from here?

Why do we need a new version? Is it for nothing but a naked money grab? Yes.

If there were specific problems found with 5e, how does any of this OneD&D UA fix it? No idea, as it's still a work in progress.

I'd rather they go fix DDB first. That costs money and they want yours. :smallwink:

To me, the bigger issue is that you cannot start with chain mail from your class equipment. Even buying one at character creation won't work, because you start with 57g (50g from background, 7g from class) and chain mail costs 75g. Clerics who want to wear heavy armor will need to work with their DMs to ensure that they actually get that heavy armor. Obviously that's not an insurmountable problem; players should generally be working with their DMs anyway. But it does make the progression clunky. Remember to loot corpses and get loot! :smallbiggrin: (But your point on starting equipment is a decent one).

DDB IS selection bias. It requires a dedicated DDB account and a google/twitch/apple account. This automatically disqualifies anyone who doesn't have BOTH of those. There are plenty of other survey sites they require absolutely nothing in order to use them, or WOTC could just create their own not bound by DDB. On top of that, one could make the case that the surveys are not truly anonymous since they require an account. Yep.

Who is asking for this ardling thing? Nobody. . The animal PCs like tortle, tabaxi, harengon, et al (see Witchlight for more?) seem to have been reviewed as popular among those who played them.

And why would it be core? A triceratops head? Huh??? :smallconfused:See my previous comment about J Crawford, vodka, and red bull perhaps in a different thread.

[Psyren]

DDB IS selection bias. It requires a dedicated DDB account and a google/twitch/apple account. This automatically disqualifies anyone who doesn't have BOTH of those. There are plenty of other survey sites they require absolutely nothing in order to use them, or WOTC could just create their own not bound by DDB. On top of that, one could make the case that the surveys are not truly anonymous since they require an account.

That's not selection bias though; the accounts you mention are also freely accessible by everyone, and there's no significant group of people (beyond the unreasonably paranoid I suppose, or those living in countries with heavily restricted internet) that is unlikely to have at least one of the three.

More importantly, those methods of authentication help to prevent botnets from influencing the survey en masse. A completely open poll, or one using WotC-developed authentication measures which wouldn't be their strong suit, would not have such protection. By contrast, Twitch, Google and Apple have both the resources, expertise and a vested interest in keeping their platforms relatively free of such. Not saying it's perfect, but it's the best option available.


OneD&D just makes me sad. I've said this before, I'll say it again.

Why do we need a new version? Is it for nothing but a naked money grab?

If there were specific problems found with 5e, how does any of this OneD&D UA fix it?

We will never know. And this makes me sad.

Money is certainly part of it. At the end of the day they're a for-profit public company and they're spending a lot of capital and time on developing this new edition, so somebody somewhere calculated a positive ROI.

But it also makes sense from a design perspective. There are certain genetic building blocks in 5e that would be at best annoying and at worst impossible to fix via simple errata - things like Two-Weapon Fighting, baseline action economy and feat progression, or changing the very nature of what a Species represents in the game. Those are the sorts of things that you wait for a new edition to alter, even a x.5 edition.

But perhaps the most important reason is that by the time 2024 rolls around, 5e will be a decade old.

[LudicSavant]

No it isn't.

"It's only a silly problem for one level" doesn't somehow stop it from being a silly problem. There's room to improve the design.

And there are other silly problems at other levels, also discussed above. The level 1 problem is really just another manifestation of the larger issue that the elements that define your character's individual identity, role, and playstyle are significantly delayed. You wait until tier 2 to get about as much identity as old Clerics had at tier 1, and tier 3 to get as much as old Clerics had at tier 2.

[Dienekes]

Very nice indeed. I might try changing out my "Groggy" condition for Dazed and see how it works out for the yo-yo healing dealie.


Ooh, went up from Unconscious your first round you are Dazed. I like that.

[Nidgit]

Wow, Barkskin is even more terrible than it used to be. When a character unlocks it at 3rd level it offers 5 Temp HP to one creature for an hour, requiring concentration. Aid, meanwhile, does the same to multiple creatures with no concentration. Yes, Barkskin is a bonus action and it arguably scales better, but it's still hot garbage.

Splitting up movement speeds is still dumb, as is the Jump action.

As for the Cleric, the idea of Holy Order is decent. It needs a little balancing and configuring so, for instance, a PC isn't immediately looking for heavy armor but otherwise I like the modularity. And I really appreciate that you don't get all three options through level progression since that type of thing kills uniqueness (see: Tasha's Ranger).

Still, the conformity of subclass progression across all classes is a noticeable problem here. The only Expert class to lose a 4th-tier subclass feature was the Rogue and that was relatively inoffensive. Here we see Clerics getting a very diluted "capstone," and I fear we'll see the same for Paladins. The Domain choice at 3rd level is an issue too- Clerics of different domains receive way fewer unique features at low levels.

Clerics are down five prepared spells with this version, which I think will be particularly noticeable at low levels. Just add +Wis modifier to the number prepared and it should be fine.

I'm on board with Divine Spark, Turn Undead, and Smite Undead, though the language and naming needs to be cleaned up.

Permanent Truesight as an epic boon is excellent and at the level they all need to be at. The other two are laughable in comparison.

I'm mostly ok with the Racial options, though some (Storm Goliath) seem noticeably weaker than others. Dragonborn needs another pass but it's getting closer.

[Ortho]

No it isn't.
OK, where do we go from here?

We keep telling you you're wrong :smalltongue:

In all seriousness, it puts the cleric in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

If a heavy armor cleric starts without heavy armor, then they have lackluster AC at the level when characters are the most fragile. Plus, since heavy armor isn't part of their starting equipment, the cleric will have to buy armor later, which is a tax that doesn't need to exist (and they have to do it with 1st-level quest reward money, too).

If the heavy armor cleric starts with heavy armor at 1st level, they can't cast spells in it.

So either way, the cleric loses.

[Psyren]

In principle I like the idea of pushing the subclass to 3rd level so that it's inline with other classes. However I'm not sure I like how it turned out, perhaps a better solution would be to do the opposite and bring the other classes' subclasses online earlier.

That would exacerbate the problem Crawford has stated they're trying to solve by pushing subclasses for everyone back to 3rd.


'Cure many hurts' doesn't sound like toddler-speak to me, it sounds like an attempt to invoke a more antiquated style.

This is how I read "many hurts" too.


With giving banishment a save every round to escape, I wonder if they'll do that for the other save-or-suck spells like hypnotic pattern, fear, and polymorph, and maybe plane shift and reverse gravity. And a way for targets to escape Otilukes sphere, wall of force, and forcecage. I feel like that would be a good change to bring those spells in line with others of their level.

I'd say Banishment will still be good, because for most monsters (especially the most dangerous melee ones), Charisma saves will still suck. Even with a chance to escape every round, chances are that a lot of them will still be gone for the 3-4 rounds it will take for your party to gain the upper hand, patch themselves up, escape etc. Keeping them gone for the full 10 to trigger eviction will be much harder, but that was always a more niche usage of the power anyway.

What I find interesting is the subtle buff the spell received, i.e. you can voluntarily fail the save now. This means you can use Banishment defensively to save an ally that is about to die or that ate a nasty debuff, and they can keep themselves gone for the duration of the combat.


We keep telling you you're wrong :smalltongue:

In all seriousness, it puts the cleric in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

If a heavy armor cleric starts without heavy armor, then they have lackluster AC at the level when characters are the most fragile. Plus, since heavy armor isn't part of their starting equipment, the cleric will have to buy armor later, which is a tax that doesn't need to exist (and they have to do it with 1st-level quest reward money, too).

If the heavy armor cleric starts with heavy armor at 1st level, they can't cast spells in it.

So either way, the cleric loses.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but Scale Mail + Shield even with 8 Dex get you to 15 AC at level 1, no? That's a perfectly fine starting point, especially for a full caster, and double especially since every cleric has a decent ranged offensive option now besides SF/TTD.

[Oramac]

That's not selection bias though; the accounts you mention are also freely accessible by everyone, and there's no significant group of people (beyond the unreasonably paranoid I suppose, or those living in countries with heavily restricted internet) that is unlikely to have at least one of the three.

More importantly, those methods of authentication help to prevent botnets from influencing the survey en masse. A completely open poll, or one using WotC-developed authentication measures which wouldn't be their strong suit, would not have such protection. By contrast, Twitch, Google and Apple have both the resources, expertise and a vested interest in keeping their platforms relatively free of such. Not saying it's perfect, but it's the best option available.


I mean, sure, it sorta prevents spamming the survey. But not really. I personally have 4 different google accounts. There's no reason I couldn't make 4 DDB accounts either. Yes, it removes the automation of a botnet spamming the survey, but it hardly prevents it.



Money is certainly part of it. At the end of the day they're a for-profit public company and they're spending a lot of capital and time on developing this new edition, so somebody somewhere calculated a positive ROI.

But it also makes sense from a design perspective. There are certain genetic building blocks in 5e that would be at best annoying and at worst impossible to fix via simple errata - things like Two-Weapon Fighting, baseline action economy and feat progression, or changing the very nature of what a Species represents in the game. Those are the sorts of things that you wait for a new edition to alter, even a x.5 edition.

But perhaps the most important reason is that by the time 2024 rolls around, 5e will be a decade old.

This is valid. At the end of the day, Hasbro is a company that needs to make money.

[OvisCaedo]

Looking at the specific wordings, is it just me, or does being invisible now not even allow you to hide unless you are ALSO heavily obscured or in cover?

[stoutstien]

Looking at the specific wordings, is it just me, or does being invisible now not even allow you to hide unless you are ALSO heavily obscured or in cover?

I'll have to pull out the first one UA but if I recall correctly being unseen is the same as being heavy obscured

[Catullus64]

So... what's up with these DC floors on Influence and Hide actions? I struggle to comprehend the rationale behind them, and 15 seems punishingly high. There's already a kind of pressure for only the people with the highest bonuses to attempt something, and I fear that this will only reinforce that. I'm kind of worried that this heralds similar changes to resolution mechanics as a whole, in which the role of the DM as arbiter and improviser is de-emphasized in favor of standardized interactions & resolutions.

[Psyren]

The original Invisible condition includes this helpful line: "for the purpose of hiding, the creature is heavily obscured."



I mean, sure, it sorta prevents spamming the survey. But not really. I personally have 4 different google accounts. There's no reason I couldn't make 4 DDB accounts either. Yes, it removes the automation of a botnet spamming the survey, but it hardly prevents it.


Having their own username and password as you suggested would not stop this either, and be significantly worse at detecting and stopping an actual botnet/mass spoof/etc. (And the surveys being wide open with no authentication at all would be even worse.)


So... what's up with these DC floors on Influence and Hide actions? I struggle to comprehend the rationale behind them, and 15 seems punishingly high. There's already a kind of pressure for only the people with the highest bonuses to attempt something, and I fear that this will only reinforce that. I'm kind of worried that this heralds similar changes to resolution mechanics as a whole, in which the role of the DM as arbiter and improviser is de-emphasized in favor of standardized interactions & resolutions.

I strongly dislike the "15 default" too. They have a perfectly serviceable difficulty system that encourages DMs to consider 10, 15, and 20.

Again though, they haven't accounted for Expert Class feedback yet.

[GooeyChewie]

That would exacerbate the problem Crawford has stated they're trying to solve by pushing subclasses for everyone back to 3rd.

Perhaps. But Crawford also stated that Clerics have consistently gotten very high satisfaction ratings throughout 5e, so I'm not convinced that the feared analysis paralysis is actually a problem. Or at least I don't see it as any more of a problem at level 1 than at level 3. Crawford also stated that they want to keep what people love about Clerics, and the fact that they get their subclass immediately.

[Oramac]

Having their own username and password as you suggested would not stop this either, and be significantly worse at detecting and stopping an actual botnet/mass spoof/etc. (And the surveys being wide open with no authentication at all would be even worse.)


True. I suppose at the end of the day, there is no good way to make it both completely anonymous and spoof-resistant.



So... what's up with these DC floors on Influence and Hide actions? I struggle to comprehend the rationale behind them, and 15 seems punishingly high. There's already a kind of pressure for only the people with the highest bonuses to attempt something, and I fear that this will only reinforce that. I'm kind of worried that this heralds similar changes to resolution mechanics as a whole, in which the role of the DM as arbiter and improviser is de-emphasized in favor of standardized interactions & resolutions.


I strongly dislike the "15 default" too. They have a perfectly serviceable difficulty system that encourages DMs to consider 10, 15, and 20.

Again though, they haven't accounted for Expert Class feedback yet.

I mentioned this in the Expert Class UA as well, which Psyren correctly points out has not gone through [public] iteration as yet.

In any case, I fully agree.

[Atranen]

I haven't kept up with all of the playtest, but I play Clerics most often, and...eesh I'm not happy with these changes.


I can only say that I really hate that they do this through DDB and not at the WoTC dnd/wizards site.

Yeah, I don't get that. I don't want or need a DDB account.


"It's only a silly problem for one level" doesn't somehow stop it from being a silly problem. There's room to improve the design.

And there are other silly problems at other levels, also discussed above. The level 1 problem is really just another manifestation of the larger issue that the elements that define your character's individual identity, role, and playstyle are significantly delayed. You wait until tier 2 to get about as much identity as old Clerics had at tier 1, and tier 3 to get as much as old Clerics had at tier 2.

This sums up a lot of my thoughts--it seems like they didn't like how often people took cleric dips and decided to backload the whole class in a way that doesn't make narrative sense because of it. Why, for example, does the scholar holy order affect new skills? You were not proficient at all in a skill, and now its your best skill? Coupled with the heavy armor thing, the lack of level 1 domain spells...basically they 'fixed multiclassing' by making level 1 lack anything defining. I play a lot of tier 1 games; I prefer them. Playing this cleric in tier 1 means not having a consistent character. You'll be jumping all over the place in terms of flavor, combat role, and abilities. (Also, if it is fully backward compatible, people can just multiclass with the old PHB cleric. Given the rules, that's what I'll play as a single class cleric anyway. So what is this solving?)

And for high levels, if I understand correctly, the new rules for 'prepared spells' basically ruin the choices clerics used to have. The 'spell slots' table now also dictates how many spells of each level you can prepare. Rather than my 11th level cleric having a flexible pool of, say, 15 spells to spread across all levels, I must select 4 1st level, 3 2nd level, 3 3rd level, and so on. I don't see any reason for this change and I suspect it will make clerics feel much more generic--because there's no space to take flavorful spells if they aren't the strongest option for that level. This gets especially bad at 6th level, where I'll generally prepare multiple spells for the single slot; now you just get 1.

Other thoughts: guidance and resistance spam is dumb. The right way to deal with it would be to specify clearly when and where they can be used (no, you can't obviously cast guidance to boost a persuasion check in front of the mayor, people don't like being magically influenced).

I have no interest or desire for Ardlings. Goliaths growing extra big magically...seems to go against the feel people want as a goliath.

[J-H]

I'm not a fan of some of the wording, including calling things a D20 Test... it seems formal and gamified. IDK.

Goliaths are now OP.

Dragonborn now get innate flight, which was pretty rare before. It kind of fits but... flight, and a breath weapon, and Darkvision, and stats are decoupled from species. Making a Fighter Dragonborn hard-solves two big fighter problems (AOEs and mobility) instantly. So why play a non-dragonborn?

Holy Order balance:
Protector: Requires a feat to copy, plus MWP
Scholar: About equal to the half feat that gives +1 stat, Expertise in 1 skill, and Proficiency in 1 skill
Thaumaturge: 1 cantrip and one CD use. I rarely see CD used.
Not balanced.

I am definitely not doing OneD&D. I'm not sure whether I should even follow these or not.

[stoutstien]

I missed that Goliath are fast Boi now lol. Not only do they have 34 base speed they can go super size for 10 more on top of that.

[Oramac]

And for high levels, if I understand correctly, the new rules for 'prepared spells' basically ruin the choices clerics used to have. The 'spell slots' table now also dictates how many spells of each level you can prepare. Rather than my 11th level cleric having a flexible pool of, say, 15 spells to spread across all levels, I must select 4 1st level, 3 2nd level, 3 3rd level, and so on. I don't see any reason for this change and I suspect it will make clerics feel much more generic--because there's no space to take flavorful spells if they aren't the strongest option for that level. This gets especially bad at 6th level, where I'll generally prepare multiple spells for the single slot; now you just get 1.

Agreed. This was another thing I brought up in my survey about the Expert Classes (still not public), and something I will be touching on for this survey as well. It's one of those things that, even if it does make it into the core books, I personally will not be enforcing it at my tables.


I'm not a fan of some of the wording, including calling things a D20 Test... it seems formal and gamified. IDK.

On the one hand, I agree. It does feel kinda gamey. OTOH, as someone who writes a lot of homebrew, it makes the writing WAY simpler. Now, instead of saying something like "When you make an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw, you can do XYZ", I can just say "When you roll a d20 test, you do XYZ thing". Personally, I'm ok with that, but I can see how others might not be.

[Psyren]

I missed that Goliath are fast Boi now lol. Not only do they have 34 base speed they can go super size for 10 more on top of that.

I'm curious how their ability to grow at 5th interacts with Powerful Build, do they count as Huge?


Perhaps. But Crawford also stated that Clerics have consistently gotten very high satisfaction ratings throughout 5e, so I'm not convinced that the feared analysis paralysis is actually a problem. Or at least I don't see it as any more of a problem at level 1 than at level 3. Crawford also stated that they want to keep what people love about Clerics, and the fact that they get their subclass immediately.

The problem he's citing there isn't a Cleric-only problem though, so the Cleric satisfaction scores may not apply to it in the same way. Rather, it's one that all newcomers to a level-1-choose-your-subclass class may experience - and as he mentioned, newcomers to a given class might not even be newcomers to D&D.

The issue that IS cleric-specific meanwhile is the admittedly awkward "hit level 2, read your class to understand the feature you just got, now go back and read your subclass, which may be in another section or even another book" thing. It's essentially a "stealth subclass feature," and you get it before you've even gotten the chance to get comfortable with Channeling Divinity normally.

[Phhase]

Do not like these cleric changes, for the most part. Holy Order is ok. The Scholar option could be combined with expertise to add double your proficiency bonus AND two ability scores to the skill, which is cool. But no domain at level 1? So what, who am I a cleric of then? That's bull. Aid now sucks. Banishment is now utterly useless.

I will never forgive WOTC for removing the Life Cleric + Goodberry combo.

Dragonborn: better.

Ardling: Still embarrassingly vestigial.

[Pex]

Overall I like the cleric, but there are minor annoyances.

They're doubling down on number of spell slots equals numbers of spells prepared, so it's not restricted to formerly spells known classes. I was fine with this for spells known classes, but I'd prefer spells prepared classes to keep their versatility.

Losing the ability to outright destroy undead is nostalgia sad. Doing damage looks good on paper, but if the idea is just make the undead go away you're not attacking them so it's a waste. If you do attack them why Turn? I suppose if you're ok with Turn Undead when it's Smite Undead to mean a way to do burst damage as a matter of hit point attrition, not really to make them go away, it's fine I guess. It's not terrible, but I miss destroying undead.

I'm not really bothered Spiritual Weapon is Concentration, though it does mean no more Spirit Guardians/Spiritual Weapon. However, it does make heavy armor melee clerics a bit of trouble because they're taking blows and could lose the spell. They're not supposed to be as good at fighting as warriors, but it is a significant difference. It's noticeable, not hysterical seething anger.

I'm not bothered by new Guidance and Resistance, but I can definitely see how others will be.

That Aid is now temporary hit points is neutral to me. I didn't want to cast the spell before. I still don't. I know others praise the spell in its original form, but the spell never appealed to me. I like the idea behind it but not the implementation. The ratio between the amount of hit points and spell slot used is inefficient to me. I find more value using the spell slot for something else, even if it's healing.

Non-cleric stuff.

Crawford is wrong. Fizban Dragonborn are the Dragonborn to use.

All Goliath PCs teleport. All of them.

I still don't want Ardlings in Core.

I'm glad they got rid of autosuccess/autofailure.

I'm mad Jump is still an action.

[Luccan]

WHY ARE GOLIATHS A CORE RACE AND NOT AASIMAR!?

Critical Role. Which is funny because Grog never seemed like a particularly good example of the default 5e Goliath

Edit: also, weird thing, Aasimar are core in 5e, they're just used as an example in the DMG for building your own races. Eladrin are also core as an elf subrace in the same section of the DMG

[Sorinth]

That would exacerbate the problem Crawford has stated they're trying to solve by pushing subclasses for everyone back to 3rd.

Like I said I do like the idea in principle, it's just this feels kind of a meh implementation. Perhaps following the Warlock model where there isn't just one big choice but two important choices, Patron and Pact. So for example they expanded the Holy Order feature set it would perhaps help the class hit the mark a little better. Or even make the Holy Order the subclass and the Domain a smaller feature set that has more thematic/fluff stuff. In this case you choose the deity at level 1 but the domain is a choice between Good, Evil, Law, Chaos, you get some interesting magic features that help form the theme of your character like Channel Divinity and some domain spells but the actual Subclass is the various Holy Orders.

But to be perfectly honest I don't really buy the complaint that new players can't handle all the extra choice, or it's too important a choice for level 1/2. In terms of too much choice and analysis paralysis, the way they do spells is the same problem that's arguably just as big. Perhaps the problem was making so many different subclasses in the PHB to start with, maybe had they kept it to 2-3 subclasses in the PHB like most other classes their wouldn't have been an issue. In terms of making such an important choice so early before you get a feel, that can easily be solved by retraining type rules, why not just make AL rules where you can just freely change things about your character part of the normal rules?

[Tanarii]

Not only does it hurt regular Clerics in a really silly way, it’s also not really doing much to the armor dips (since the bulk of the benefit is medium+shield, not the heavy part).Yes MA is usually enough benefit for a caster type, but there's multiple classes to get that with a 1 level dip without starting in the off-class. Cleric currently the only way to get HA with a 1 level dip without starting in another class. With this change it'd take 2.


For 1 level. In a game with bounded accuracy. Not seeing the harm.
Level 1 AC 12 instead of AC 16 (before shield) means sitting in the back instead of being the off tank. In a traditional 4 person party it means you're down to one tank when you need it most, and the first session when a TPK is most likely just became even more so.

Also it just feels really bad to start off a level or two with really suck AC while waiting for your better armor so you can then drastically change your play style. It's one of the things I like least about Valor Bards already, so it jumped out at me.

Also it just feels wrong that a Cleric can't be a HA wearer at level 1. That's a drastic departure from every prior edition of D&D.

[Dr.Samurai]

Can't comment much on the cleric, as I don't have a lot of experience with them.

The races... oh man. Well, the Ardling is just strange. A bit too strange for me. I mean... that's not bad, but, I don't think it needs to take up space in these playtests or in core. Animal-headed people?

The dragonborn... change back to Attack Action is good. Saving Throw DC should be a choice between Str/Dex/Con to be in line with other racial traits that will eventually have a maximized DC because they're based on Int/Wis/Cha (anything Con should allow choice for Str/Dex/Con). I don't like draconic flight. I HATE the aesthetics of temporary "spectral" wings. On top of that, I hate how many races can just overcome physical obstacles, which is one of the last bastions of strength based characters. Stop giving everything flight and teleportation. Speaking of which...

Goliaths can now teleport prof/day. I can't say that I'm happy they took a hulking brute race and now made it as magical as every other creature in the game. Sucks. Oh well, I like versatility so it's nice that the race offers so many options. But mostly meh.

Epic Boons continue to be absolutely underwhelming.

Long Rest gives everything back (HP, HD), and this seems like it will lessen the resilience gap between martials and non-martials.

My hope going forward is that warriors are totally badass, but I'm skeptical. My second hope is that my group doesn't adopt everything whole cloth and just picks and chooses the bits that work for us.

[KorvinStarmast]

In all seriousness, it puts the cleric in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
No, it doesn't.

If a heavy armor cleric starts without heavy armor
You aren't a heavy armor cleric until level 2, in this version.
So no, it's not a problem. With bounded accuracy, medium armor and sheild suffices at level 1.
If the cleric needs heavy armor (chain mail is heavy armor) it's (1) not that expensive to get and (2) the party will likely recover stuff and money during their first adventure{s}. So spend it on chain mail. If the party fights hobgoblins, they'll get chain mail from the dead ones. :smallyuk:
Or, ya know, role play a little and make a deal with someone to provide that as pay off for doing {whatever starting question the loon with the exclamation point over his head offers up as a quest}

[Jervis]

Who is asking for this ardling thing? And why would it be core? A triceratops head? Huh??? :smallconfused:

Furries. It’s so furry players can play their fursona in the game without homebrew I suspect. The mix breed rules also let you play a half Ardling for cat girls. Furries are a decent chunk of the TRPG audience so I suspect this race was made with the intention of giving them something to play in core only. I just wish the lore wasn’t so distracting, shifter exists and being part Lycan is considerably easier to integrate into the lore than holy cyanophly people.

[GooeyChewie]

The problem he's citing there isn't a Cleric-only problem though, so the Cleric satisfaction scores may not apply to it in the same way. Rather, it's one that all newcomers to a level-1-choose-your-subclass class may experience - and as he mentioned, newcomers to a given class might not even be newcomers to D&D.
It may not be Cleric-only, but it is supposedly a problem with Clerics. And if it is actually a problem, then I would think it would have an impact on the satisfaction scores of all such classes, including Clerics. It just seemed really counterintuitive for Crawford to state that Clerics had such a high satisfaction score and that they wanted to keep all the things people love about them, only to also state that they've got this massive analysis paralysis problem that requires a complete reworking of their progression.

Admittedly, my own bias is coming into play here. Clerics are by far my favorite class to play, and the fact that they get their subclass at level 1 is a big part of the reason why I love them so much. That's why when I heard Crawford's contradiction I fell on the side of "love it - don't change" rather than "analysis paralysis - please change."


The issue that IS cleric-specific meanwhile is the admittedly awkward "hit level 2, read your class to understand the feature you just got, now go back and read your subclass, which may be in another section or even another book" thing. It's essentially a "stealth subclass feature," and you get it before you've even gotten the chance to get comfortable with Channeling Divinity normally.
I'll admit, the way Channel Divinity is presented in 5e is a bit unwieldy. In particular, the table on PHB 57 should probably indicate that you've got something to check in your subclass. I don't really see a problem with having to check in another section or another book, though. That's the case for all subclass features. The PHB just needs to be more upfront about the fact that Channel Divinity involves a subclass component, rather than burying it in the Channel Divinity text.

[Tanarii]

No, it doesn't.
You aren't a heavy armor cleric until level 2, in this version. So no, it's not a problem. With bounded accuracy, medium armor and sheild suffices at level 1. If the cleric needs heavy armor (chain mail is heavy armor) it's (1) not that expensive to get and (2) the party will likely recover stuff and money during their first adventure. If they fight hobgoblins, they'll can get chain mail from the dead ones. :smallyuk:
Or, ya know, role play a little and make a deal with someone to provide that as pay off for doing {whatever starting question the loon with the exclamation point over his had offers up as a quest}
How about I just appeal to your well earned grognard-ness? Shouldn't Clerics (that want to) be able to start with traditional heavy armor and mace? :smallbiggrin:

[KorvinStarmast]

Level 1 AC 12 instead of AC 16 (before shield)
Where are you getting that? You can have scale mail at level 1.

STARTING EQUIPMENT
As a 1st-level character, you start with the following equipment, or you can forgo it and spend 110 GP on equipment of your choice.
Chain Shirt Holy Symbol Mace Priest’s Pack Shield 7 GP
Chain Shirt is AC 15 with shield. You can buy scale mail, right? Start with AC 16 with shield (or with a Dex of 12, start with AC 17). Earn enough dough to arfford chain mail, and the problem is what at level 2?

How about I just appeal to your well earned grognard-ness? Shouldn't Clerics (that want to) be able to start with traditional heavy armor and mace?
Yes, TBH, that's a fine appeal. But the problem starts with basic 5e: basic 5e only gives cleric medium armor, and by exception (Life, Tempest, Nature(???) and War offers heavy, if that's what you want to criticize.

[Psyren]

But no domain at level 1? So what, who am I a cleric of then?

You're still a cleric of {deity} but you don't get access to their iconic powers until later on when you're no longer an acolyte. Just like a low level wizard could be seen as an apprentice etc.


I will never forgive WOTC for removing the Life Cleric + Goodberry combo.

Should never have existed imo.



All Goliath PCs teleport. All of them.


I dunno, Fire and Frost could be interesting on a nova build. There's no limit to how many times you can add the damage per turn as written other than your number of attacks/uses.


Like I said I do like the idea in principle, it's just this feels kind of a meh implementation. Perhaps following the Warlock model where there isn't just one big choice but two important choices, Patron and Pact. So for example they expanded the Holy Order feature set it would perhaps help the class hit the mark a little better. Or even make the Holy Order the subclass and the Domain a smaller feature set that has more thematic/fluff stuff. In this case you choose the deity at level 1 but the domain is a choice between Good, Evil, Law, Chaos, you get some interesting magic features that help form the theme of your character like Channel Divinity and some domain spells but the actual Subclass is the various Holy Orders.

But to be perfectly honest I don't really buy the complaint that new players can't handle all the extra choice, or it's too important a choice for level 1/2. In terms of too much choice and analysis paralysis, the way they do spells is the same problem that's arguably just as big. Perhaps the problem was making so many different subclasses in the PHB to start with, maybe had they kept it to 2-3 subclasses in the PHB like most other classes their wouldn't have been an issue. In terms of making such an important choice so early before you get a feel, that can easily be solved by retraining type rules, why not just make AL rules where you can just freely change things about your character part of the normal rules?

1) They solved the spell complexity issue though, by giving every caster suggested preparations at every level. Moreover you can swap those out on a long rest, so even if you end up not liking the suggested ones you're never far away from a change. The same is not true of a subclass - even if you add retraining rules, retraining on a long rest would be a headache for everyone.

2) We know for a fact that every class in the PHB will have 4 subclasses to choose from.

3) We also know for a fact that Warlock is getting changed to get their subclass (which may or may not be their patron, though I can't imagine it wouldn't be) at 3rd level too.


Where are you getting that? You can have scale mail at level 1.
Yes, TBH, that's a fine appeal.

My guess is they assumed Chain Shirt is the only starting option for some reason.

[KorvinStarmast]

My guess is they assumed Chain Shirt is the only starting option for some reason.
I guess they assume dumping Dex also?

Granted, in their defense, the Basic Rules at time of release - 4 classes, F, Cl, Wz Rog, had Cleric, Life, as the standard, and they get/got heavy armor but not martial weapons as proficiency. Tempest got both. So Tanarii's bit about 'core template from Original game has some standing in terms of them mucking about with what 5e did well: blend all of the editions.

[Jervis]

I can understand moving the profs back. This allows them to hand those out to anyone and not just the designated subclasses (which I think is a good thing). Level 1 without a martial weapon is a little annoying but it’s one dpr. Clerics getting to chose that at L1 along with a subclass would give them a loooooot of stuff at L1

[Jervis]

I guess they assume dumping Dex also? Granted, in their defense, the Basic Rules stripped down game, at time of release, had Cleric, Life, as the standard, and they get/got heavy armor but not martial weapons as proficiency. Tempest got both.

I wouldn’t exactly hold up Tempest as a paragon of class design.

[Dienekes]

I dunno, Fire and Frost could be interesting on a nova build. There's no limit to how many times you can add the damage per turn as written other than your number of attacks/uses.

Max you're getting is 6 a day though. At low levels fire's +1d10 is pretty huge. But I suspect (and I have not done the math so probably wrong) first hit knock prone with to get advantage on all further attacks might scale better. Of course there are a lot of enemies that are bigger than large. But then there are a lot of enemies that are going to be reducing fire and cold damage as well.

[KorvinStarmast]

I can understand moving the profs back. This allows them to hand those out to anyone and not just the designated subclasses (which I think is a good thing). Level 1 without a martial weapon is a little annoying but it’s one dpr. Clerics getting to chose that at L1 along with a subclass would give them a loooooot of stuff at L1
Mace is a simple weapon, right? It is ... unless they change the weapons table also. :smalltongue:

I wouldn’t exactly hold up Tempest as a paragon of class design. Since I wasn't doing that, what point are you trying to make? And Tempest is a sub class.

Response to Pex:

Crawford is wrong. Fizban Dragonborn are the Dragonborn to use.
All Goliath PCs teleport. All of them.
I still don't want Ardlings in Core.
I'm glad they got rid of autosuccess/autofailure.
I'm mad Jump is still an action.
Yep.

[Jervis]

Mace is a simple weapon, right? It is ... unless they change the weapons table also. :smalltongue:
Since I wasn't doing that, what point are you trying to make? And Tempest is a sub class.

Response to Pex:

Yep.

Mostly just complaining about how tempest as a subclass got done dirty. Has some good features but i’m practice it’s a bit awkward.

[Sorinth]

1) They solved the spell complexity issue though, by giving every caster suggested preparations at every level. Moreover you can swap those out on a long rest, so even if you end up not liking the suggested ones you're never far away from a change. The same is not true of a subclass - even if you add retraining rules, retraining on a long rest would be a headache for everyone.

2) We know for a fact that every class in the PHB will have 4 subclasses to choose from.

3) We also know for a fact that Warlock is getting changed to get their subclass (which may or may not be their patron, though I can't imagine it wouldn't be) at 3rd level too.

If suggested spells solves the complexity then I could argue just having a suggested subclass solves the complexity of subclass choice so it would be a non-issue right? As for re-training being a headache I would imagine that in 99% of cases it would be happen between sessions, and even if it was done in session I've seen spell prepration on a long rest take ages too. And frankly I've not seen a DM who would really say no to a player that wasn't happy with their subclass choice and wanted to change it not allow for some kind of retconning. I mean this is a game where you can just have your character commit suicide and roll up a new one.

For the other points we'll have to wait and see what they actually come up with, because until the new PHB is printed it's not a fact, it's merely the goal right now and that might change. And regardless of what changes happen with the warlock the point still stands you could give cleric a choice at level 1 that allows for them to differentiate themselves from every other level 1 cleric and still give the subclass at level 3.

[Snowbluff]

I'm here, waiting for something to improve. Like, it's barely worth discussing anymore, they're just invested in making a worse game at this point.

Channel divinity seems like a forced way to use dazed. Dazed is a soft control effect. Eh. It's now a long rest feature but unlike Bard's Inspiration, this washes out instead of sucking.

Holy order: Get bent. This is the opposite of the reasoning as to why hexblade got cha attacks by the way. This encourages changing your armor stat from dex to str mid leveling.

Subclass: 2 levels 2 late.

Smite Undead: Channel divinity really does seems like a watered down and useless version of its 5e self. Upside is it does some damage. This is destroy undead but it doesn't kill them outright. Downside is you have to guess they're gonna die when you use Turn Undead.

Blessed Strikes: Hey the damage bonus is sooner. Hey is this not scaling now? Ok, thanks for nothing.

Holy Order: Again!

Divine Intervention: Ok.

So cleric already has this problem of feeling kinda of empty as you level. I don't think ODD cleric is really fixing that. I think clerics are pretty good and cool as is, but I would like them to become more interesting. Their level 5 feature only working on a single creature type is just kind of lame. Moving back the subclass selection DOES NOT WORK nearly as well as say, Rogue getting one at 6th level. Also there's still no domain spells post 5th spell level, so again late game clerics will be using samey spells.

Jump is still an action in the glossary. Like I disagree on a fundamental level but it also takes movement and you can't use it if your remaining movement is 0. Remember how elegant and useful 5e's movement rules are? This is the opposite of that.

[Atranen]

You're still a cleric of {deity} but you don't get access to their iconic powers until later on when you're no longer an acolyte. Just like a low level wizard could be seen as an apprentice etc.

So...what mechanically makes you a cleric of that deity? It's nothing, just flavor. You can't really play a 'first level cleric of Loki'. As someone who really enjoys the lower levels, that's a big loss. But in the designers view, 1st & 2nd are just tutorials, so they don't really matter. And we all know no one plays past 10th...

[KorvinStarmast]

Mostly just complaining about how tempest as a subclass got done dirty. Has some good features but i’m practice it’s a bit awkward.

If the bog standard cleric takes the Acolyte/Magic Initiate, this allows them to select shield if they want to be more tanky.
@Snowbluff

Remember how elegant and useful 5e's movement rules are? This is the opposite of that.
Yep. Agree.

[Psyren]

Apologies for the lengthy reply but this is a fast-moving thread and I don't want to double-post and risk wrath of mod.


With bounded accuracy, medium armor and sheild suffices at level 1.

Especially a full caster! And unlike Druids they can wear metal.


I guess they assume dumping Dex also?

To be fair, for a planned heavy armor user I'm probably shooting for 8-10 Dex max too. But overall I'm on your side, 15 AC at level 1 for a full caster is perfectly fine, especially one with d8 HD that can heal themselves.


Level 1 without a martial weapon is a little annoying but it’s one dpr.

They're also getting a 2d8 30ft blast at level 1 that doesn't use a spell slot, you're one-shotting wolves and goblins with that.


Edit: also, weird thing, Aasimar are core in 5e, they're just used as an example in the DMG for building your own races. Eladrin are also core as an elf subrace in the same section of the DMG

I mean sure, but the DMG Aasimar is beyond bland. At level 1 you get darkvision, a cantrip that's useless to you because of your darkvision, and two damage resistances, one of which will almost never come up.

Moreover, now that Aasimar and Eladrin are in MPMM, I expect those examples will be excised from the new DMG.


I can't say that I'm happy they took a hulking brute race and now made it as magical as every other creature in the game. Sucks.

I'm not saying I'm fully in favor of teleporting Goliaths - but you may want to read the Cloud Giant entry, this isn't coming out of nowhere.


It may not be Cleric-only, but it is supposedly a problem with Clerics. And if it is actually a problem, then I would think it would have an impact on the satisfaction scores of all such classes, including Clerics. It just seemed really counterintuitive for Crawford to state that Clerics had such a high satisfaction score and that they wanted to keep all the things people love about them, only to also state that they've got this massive analysis paralysis problem that requires a complete reworking of their progression.

Admittedly, my own bias is coming into play here. Clerics are by far my favorite class to play, and the fact that they get their subclass at level 1 is a big part of the reason why I love them so much. That's why when I heard Crawford's contradiction I fell on the side of "love it - don't change" rather than "analysis paralysis - please change."

I wouldn't rely too heavily on the scores in this case. For one, they're not the only avenue the design team have for feedback and decisionmaking, and for two, there is selection bias there in that most people with an opinion on a given class played it, or at least have some familiarity with it. For example, the people who wanted to pick up Cleric but ended up bouncing off it because of the level 1 choices being a barrier to them might have simply selected N/A or not answered at all, but that is valid information too.


I'll admit, the way Channel Divinity is presented in 5e is a bit unwieldy. In particular, the table on PHB 57 should probably indicate that you've got something to check in your subclass. I don't really see a problem with having to check in another section or another book, though. That's the case for all subclass features. The PHB just needs to be more upfront about the fact that Channel Divinity involves a subclass component, rather than burying it in the Channel Divinity text.

Most classes don't give you a major class feature and a major subclass feature at the same time though, especially on top of you having to make one or more spellcasting choices too.


So...what mechanically makes you a cleric of that deity? It's nothing, just flavor. You can't really play a 'first level cleric of Loki'. As someone who really enjoys the lower levels, that's a big loss. But in the designers view, 1st & 2nd are just tutorials, so they don't really matter. And we all know no one plays past 10th...

Your channel divinity can still be tailored to your deity. If I'm a cleric of Ilmater for example, I'm probably sticking to the healing spark, while if I'm an aspiring Grave cleric I'm probably zapping left and right.

[Tanarii]

Where are you getting that? You can have scale mail at level 1.
Starting equipment Chain Shirt, Dex 8. That's AC 12.

Add a Shield from somewhere (first enemies killed?) and you've got AC 14.

Current HA cleric domains start with Chain and Shield, so AC 18.

4 pt difference either way (shield or no). 3 if you find some scalemail that fits and isn't chopped up by your allies weapons.


Yes, TBH, that's a fine appeal. But the problem starts with basic 5e: basic 5e only gives cleric medium armor, and by exception (Life, Tempest, Nature(???) and War offers heavy, if that's what you want to criticize.I was hoping it'd win out. :smallbiggrin:

And I don't criticize it currently because it is 4/7 PHB domains, but more importantly they start with it right away.

[Psyren]

Starting equipment Chain Shirt, Dex 8. That's AC 12.

Starting equipment includes shield, so 14. And you can go gold buy instead for scale mail+shield, i.e. 15.

14/15 AC is fine for a level 1 full caster.

[Nidgit]

You know, I think Smite Undead would calculate out to about on par with Destroy Undead if you simply doubled the dice:

A CR 1/2 Skeleton Warhorse has 22 HP and would killed by either base level Destroy Undead or 6d8 Smite Undead damage.

A CR 1 Ghoul also has 22 HP so it would be killed by a Level 8 Destroy Undead or the same 6d8 Smite Undead at level 5.

Smite Undead wouldn't kill a CR 2 Minotaur Skeleton or Ogre Zombie at any level, but dispatches a Will-o-wisp well before Level 11 Destroy Undead.

A CR 3 Wight would be killed by Smite Undead half the time by Level 13-14, and a Mummy would barely survive it.

For CR 4, Smite Undead can potentially kill a Ghost several levels earlier but is likely to leave a Banshee just barely alive at Level 17-18.

On the whole they feel pretty similar. Doubled Smite Undead is better against low HP enemies with lots of resistances and higher CR Undead but worse against big brute types.

[Jervis]

I'm here, waiting for something to improve. Like, it's barely worth discussing anymore, they're just invested in making a worse game at this point.

Channel divinity seems like a forced way to use dazed. Dazed is a soft control effect. Eh. It's now a long rest feature but unlike Bard's Inspiration, this washes out instead of sucking.

Holy order: Get bent. This is the opposite of the reasoning as to why hexblade got cha attacks by the way. This encourages changing your armor stat from dex to str mid leveling.

Subclass: 2 levels 2 late.

Smite Undead: Channel divinity really does seems like a watered down and useless version of its 5e self. Upside is it does some damage. This is destroy undead but it doesn't kill them outright. Downside is you have to guess they're gonna die when you use Turn Undead.

Blessed Strikes: Hey the damage bonus is sooner. Hey is this not scaling now? Ok, thanks for nothing.

Holy Order: Again!

Divine Intervention: Ok.

So cleric already has this problem of feeling kinda of empty as you level. I don't think ODD cleric is really fixing that. I think clerics are pretty good and cool as is, but I would like them to become more interesting. Their level 5 feature only working on a single creature type is just kind of lame. Moving back the subclass selection DOES NOT WORK nearly as well as say, Rogue getting one at 6th level. Also there's still no domain spells post 5th spell level, so again late game clerics will be using samey spells.

Jump is still an action in the glossary. Like I disagree on a fundamental level but it also takes movement and you can't use it if your remaining movement is 0. Remember how elegant and useful 5e's movement rules are? This is the opposite of that.

Holy order 2 electric boogaloo should really give improved features instead of picking another one. That aside the lack of scaling is something they stealthed in via the optional features a while back. I don’t like it but the fact it’s 1/turn is worse. It means arcana cleric can’t take BB or GFB to double down on it. That was what made arcana such a good cantrip spammer.

[Atranen]

Your channel divinity can still be tailored to your deity. If I'm a cleric of Ilmater for example, I'm probably sticking to the healing spark, while if I'm an aspiring Grave cleric I'm probably zapping left and right.

The player will always have some choice in how to flavor their abilities and which ones to use. But the system isn't doing anything to support you here. They made level 3 the new level 1 and decided actual levels 1 & 2 are only useful as tutorials.

[Psyren]

The player will always have some choice in how to flavor their abilities and which ones to use. But the system isn't doing anything to support you here. They made level 3 the new level 1 and decided actual levels 1 & 2 are only useful as tutorials.

I don't think it's so odd that a cleric will grasp the basics as an acolyte or supplicant before being opened up to the full direction of their deity though. And you still get interesting choices to make at levels 1 and 2 even though subclass isn't one of them anymore.

Sorcerers and Warlocks are where I'm more skeptical however, those will necessitate a flavor shift I'm not completely on board with yet.

[Ortho]

Starting equipment includes shield, so 14. And you can go gold buy instead for scale mail+shield, i.e. 15.

14/15 AC is fine for a level 1 full caster.

But not good for a cleric, since 5e allows for a STR cleric* to start with chain mail and shield for 18 AC. A DEX cleric** (either edition) can also start with 18 AC, via scale mail and a shield.

Either way, 18 AC at 1st level for everyone... except a 1st-level 1D&D STR cleric.


So no, it's not a problem. With bounded accuracy, medium armor and sheild suffices at level 1.

"Suffice" being the operative word here, I think. It's a workaround for an issue that shouldn't even exist in the first place. Everyone else starts with the proficiencies and equipment they need at level 1, including the 5e cleric, so why should the 1D&D cleric have to jump through this hoop?

*15 Strength, 8 Dexterity
**8 Strength, 15 Dexterity

[Atranen]

I don't think it's so odd that a cleric will grasp the basics as an acolyte or supplicant before being opened up to the full direction of their deity though. And you still get interesting choices to make at levels 1 and 2 even though subclass isn't one of them anymore.

This is what I mean by 'level 3 is the new level 1'. The default in the game world is still that most people do not have class levels. Having class levels is important; it means your character is set apart, special in some way. This should be true, in my opinion, even at level 1. But the way it's written, level 1 means 'you're a little special, but really you're just an acolyte or some other low level thing. You haven't been initiated into the mysteries yet'. Ok; but then level 1 characters are not special, are they?

You can make it make sense internally, but it doesn't match my feeling of what a level 1 character should be.

It really bothers me too, that this seems to be entirely a response to multiclassing concerns. If multiclassing is an issue, then address it directly; don't make the base classes worse to paper over it.

[Psyren]

This is what I mean by 'level 3 is the new level 1'. The default in the game world is still that most people do not have class levels. Having class levels is important; it means your character is set apart, special in some way. This should be true, in my opinion, even at level 1. But the way it's written, level 1 means 'you're a little special, but really you're just an acolyte or some other low level thing. You haven't been initiated into the mysteries yet'. Ok; but then level 1 characters are not special, are they?

I mean, the same was true of level 1 druids wasn't it? It's not unheard of.


But not good for a cleric, since 5e allows for a STR cleric* to start with chain mail and shield for 18 AC. A DEX cleric** (either edition) can also start with 18 AC, via scale mail and a shield.

Either way, 18 AC at 1st level for everyone... except a 1st-level 1D&D STR cleric.

Yes yes, I agree that the poor full caster is ever-so-slightly more MAD now. Put a 10 in Dex so you have 16 AC, even if it's no different than an 8 once you get HAT from Holy Order one level later your initiative will thank you.

[Sorinth]

I don't think it's so odd that a cleric will grasp the basics as an acolyte or supplicant before being opened up to the full direction of their deity though. And you still get interesting choices to make at levels 1 and 2 even though subclass isn't one of them anymore.

Sorcerers and Warlocks are where I'm more skeptical however, those will necessitate a flavor shift I'm not completely on board with yet.

What interesting choice do you make at level 1?

[Atranen]

I mean, the same was true of level 1 druids wasn't it? It's not unheard of.

I don't think the scenarios are equivalent. Even if they were, that doesn't make it a good choice here.

[Kane0]

I tried not to gather any bias with other takes before my usual read-through and note-taking, so let's get stuck in.

Random note: Both the Mage and Priest groups get 'Utility' explicitly listed in their capabilities, which is notably lacking in the expert and warrior groups. Feels one step away from saying two particular groups are straight up more flexible/versatile than the other two.

Cleric Channel
Magic action eh? Sounds like an update to the 'cast a spell' action to further encompass magic that isnt spells and bring them under the 'not more than one levelled spell per turn' rule. Which would be nice to clear up and streamline, but I may just be inserting my preferences into the gap here.

Divine Spark: Nice to have the option, but I feel like the damage option wont see much use seeing as you have cantrips and it uses up a resource.

Turn Undead: Dazed is a nice condition to add, seems fine.

Spellcasting: Preparing a number of spells equal to your spell slots still feels wrong and will bite the devs in the ass as they're removing number of spells available as a dial they can adjust for balance, especially between different casters (prepped vs known, full vs partial progression, etc).

Holy Order: Definitely feels like the double-split like the warlocks pact and patron, and I approve. Good stuff. And they all feel useful too! I especially like the 'short rest returns one use of long rest pool' option which has been odiously absent from similar prof-times-per-long-rest class features.

Subclass: Following the same layout as other classes, nice.

Smite Undead: Pretty lame really, it's not optional like the divinity option so it falls into the favored enemy design trap.

Blessed strikes: All well and good, carry on except for the fact that it doesn't scale.

Holy Order II: No thanks, especially if i've chosen the one I really wanted and the other two don't fit my character. This would be the same as a warrior choosing a second fighting style, or warlock choosing a second boon. Give me an improvement instead, then the secondary option of picking a second level 2 option.

Divine Intervention: With how the video commented on the Thief's use an object bonus action I really expected this to have changed. But still, it's a remnant of older style D&D that i'm glad is present even in this vestigial form.

Life Domain:
Bonus spells: All well and good, but exacerbates the above problem of spell selection (for devs, not players).

Disciple of Life: Doesn't work with your Divine Spark, boo!

Preserve Life: Still as good as it's ever been, still a shame any overflow healing is wasted, encouraging you to wait until the sh!t has really hit the fan before you use it (assuming you don't get KO'd yourself).

Blessed Healer: Still good, but still relies on you getting hurt (that's a bad thing if you are the healer). Any second target within a short range (which could be yourself) would be fine.

Supreme Healing: Still great

Overall: Pretty happy on this front, barring some minor missteps. It's kinda hard to mess up seeing how rocksolid the 5e Cleric already is.


Ardling:
- Moving away from tiefling/aasimar counterpart and more towards beast-folk, thankyou for choosing one direction and sticking with it (but even now I can see you trying to smuggle in the celestial aspects). We already had plenty of beastfolk races to choose from, but I guess this is consolidation?
- Why do they live so long?
- Why does gliding use your reaction? You can choose to fall somewhere you know, it's not always forced upon you. But then again, there is that stupid jump action which I will refuse to use in any shape or form.
- Racer speed bonus can lead to some ludicrous movement, which is funny and cool.
- Swimmer gets bonus cold resistance which seems out of place compared to the climber and glider.

Still feels like its floundering for design space just a bit, like we already have plenty of races that do these things and have more flavor for each. Like i said, perhaps consolidation.

Dragonborn:
- Breath weapon replaces one attack now, awesome once again
- You get Darkvision now, awesome once again
- Bonus action flight that doesn't use concentration from level 5, awesome

Very solid all around, nothing fancy but plenty of reason to pick one. This might actually become the gold standard for warrior races.

Goliath:
- Fire and Storm will quickly lose steam because of a lack of scaling. Frost too but at least it has a rider
- Large form is cool, and actually makes you move faster rather than adds bonus damage
- Cloud, Hill and Storm all feel roughly balanced against each other and have reasons to be chosen
- Powerful build now helps with grappling, good

Epic Boons
Fate: feels appropriately strong, stacking with (dis)advantage and other roll manipulation. Poor experts and warriors can't use it though, best they can get is the Lucky feat.

Spell Recall: Kinda vanilla as far as capstones go, but perfectly functional. Only available to 'real' casters, sorry Bard (and Artificer).

Truesight: Again feels appropriately strong, but is Priest group only. Sorry Monks, Rangers, Rogues and blind-fighters but you can't have nice things.

These Epic Boons are starting to look much more Epic, but this class categorization stuff has reared it's ugly head to ruin the fun. Bit of a slap in the face really.

Spells:
Aid: I can see why it was nerfed, but now it isn't worth a 2nd level slot. Make it 10 THP and then we'll talk.
Banishment: Now offers a new save each turn, fine
Guidance: Back to normal, except reaction instead of ahead of time now. I don't really care either way, it still has the V and S components to keep it in check.
Prayer of healing: Gives you a short rest plus a bit of extra healing on top, I like it. You could just make it a flat 3 targets +1 per upcast, that'd be simple enough.
Resistance: Uses a reaction, far more useful now. Approve!
Spiritual Weapon: Now uses concentration, and upscales for +1d8 per spell level instead of per two. Still a good spell, just can't combine with guardians now.

I'll let others handle the intricacies of the spell lists.

Misc changelog:
Attack: Can equip/unequip a weapon for each attack, nice tidbit there
Grapple: Still interesting and useful
Influence: Cannot be used on PCs and the DC is 15 or INT score, whichever is higher. I do appreciate that this is getting refined rather than dumped.
Light weapon: Still rolling TWF into the attack action, very strong in Tier 1 prior to other ways of getting more attacks becoming available.
Magic action: As I suspected, rolls together spellcasting, magical features and magic items. Casting something with a long cast time disrupting concentration still sucks.
Truesight: Codified but doesn't appear noticeably different, carry on.


Overall, mildly pleased with this UA. Cleric is hard to mess up, and it seems the feedback is slowly being registered. Some minor points here and there but nothing really worth screaming into the void over from my end.

[Psyren]

I don't think the scenarios are equivalent. Even if they were, that doesn't make it a good choice here.

Why not, and why not?

Druid and cleric power sources are very similar (even identical in some settings e.g. FR.)


What interesting choice do you make at level 1?

Species, background, feat, spells, gear, proficiencies, ability scores? Level 1 is incredibly frontloaded :smallconfused:

[Ortho]

Oh, here's a pleasant change that I just noticed - suggested species height are back! We might actually be done with the lazy "about the same height as humans" modifier that WotC's been putting in recent books.

Ardlings are between 3 and 7 feet tall, Dragonborn are 5-7 ft, and Goliaths are 7-8 ft. It's nice to have that guideline back.

[Atranen]

Why not, and why not?

Druid and cleric power sources are very similar (even identical in some settings e.g. FR.)

Druids are typically flavored less hierarchically. If you're a 1st level druid unassociated with a circle, you're still a druid. If you're a 1st level cleric an have a minor position in a hierarchy, you're a trainee, not a cleric.

[Psyren]

Druids are typically flavored less hierarchically. If you're a 1st level druid unassociated with a circle, you're still a druid. If you're a 1st level cleric an have a minor position in a hierarchy, you're a trainee, not a cleric.

You're still a cleric too; my use of "acolyte" and "supplicant" wasn't literal.

I'm not seeing a world in which a level 1 druid is a full-fledged druid before their subclass but a level 1 cleric somehow can't be. Either they both are or they both aren't.

[Leon]

I like the cleric changes, still disappointed its just another domain as subclass but at least its on par with everyone else who has to wait to 3rd for theirs and hopefully signals that its going to be a Unified 3rd level subclass for all.

Goliaths, you were cool and interesting but no more. Now your just giantkin/Quasi half-giants.

Ardlings: Splatbook material, not core. We already have the Celestial aligned Planetouched and they have been around a long time awaiting fair inclusion.


Wow, Barkskin is even more terrible than it used to be. When a character unlocks it at 3rd level it offers 5 Temp HP to one creature for an hour, requiring concentration. Aid, meanwhile, does the same to multiple creatures with no concentration. Yes, Barkskin is a bonus action and it arguably scales better, but it's still hot garbage..

Not many sources of refreshing Temp HP ~ Aid is one and done, Barkskin is a slightly scaling renewing source, much better than the weird AC boost it currently offers

[Nidgit]

Not many sources of refreshing Temp HP ~ Aid is one and done, Barkskin is a slightly scaling renewing source, much better than the weird AC boost it currently offers
I missed that it refreshes each turn! That's much much better.

[Atranen]

You're still a cleric too; my use of "acolyte" and "supplicant" wasn't literal.

I'm not seeing a world in which a level 1 druid is a full-fledged druid before their subclass but a level 1 cleric somehow can't be. Either they both are or they both aren't.

The druid circles are voluntary associations one can choose to be a part of or not. One could not associate with any druid circles and still be a druid. One can't (ok you can, but not following the flavor text typically used and the way clerics are typically thought of) neglect to worship a deity and be a cleric. In every edition of d&d, clerics worship deities, front and center. It's core to the class. You could easily excise the circles and still have a druid. It's not core to the class.

So delaying any domain based abilities makes it feel like you're playing an incomplete cleric, in a way that delaying circle based abilities doesn't do for druids.

[Brookshw]

Seriously? "Cure many hurts"? What the actual ****. I'm not 5 years old, nor are any players I've ever met.

/rant

Well, my 5 yro daughter plays, and one of my player's kids who plays with us started at 6. There are definitely young kids in the game.



Ardlings.. still not a fan.. and since when is a triceratops a divine racer animal?

Bring back Saurials! C'mon, you already gave us Dragonbait!

[Sorinth]

I'm fine with the idea that you are still an "acolyte" the first few levels so you don't choose subclass yet, however in that case the subclass shouldn't be based on the source of your magic powers, ie which Deity/Domain you serve it should be the how you serve them.

And it's not like Cleric is particularly special in this regards, Warlocks and Sorcerers will have the same issue. Now we can wait and see how they do it for those classes but it just seems like it would be much cleaner if they changed the subclass from the source of your power to a more generic how that power is used type of subclass. So as an example for Warlocks rather then have the subclasses be Fiend/Fey/Goo the subclasses should be Blade/Chain/Tome and the Patron is instead just some level 1 feature not associated to the subclass.

[Kane0]

I'm fine with the idea that you are still an "acolyte" the first few levels so you don't choose subclass yet, however in that case the subclass shouldn't be based on the source of your magic powers, ie which Deity/Domain you serve it should be the how you serve them.

And it's not like Cleric is particularly special in this regards, Warlocks and Sorcerers will have the same issue. Now we can wait and see how they do it for those classes but it just seems like it would be much cleaner if they changed the subclass from the source of your power to a more generic how that power is used type of subclass. So as an example for Warlocks rather then have the subclasses be Fiend/Fey/Goo the subclasses should be Blade/Chain/Tome and the Patron is instead just some level 1 feature not associated to the subclass.

Or handle it like the Paladin or Wizard or Artificer. For the first level or two you're absolutely [what you are going to pick], you just haven't figured out your particular specialty or been entrusted with the particular powers just yet.

I'm fine with the frontloading being spread out a bit.

[Hael]

My initial thoughts upon reading this document is.. that it is both good and original.
Except to borrow an overused cliche, the part that is good is not original, and the part that is original is not good.

Its absolutely aggravating that they are repeating the same mistakes that were made years ago and that were actually acknowledged as such and designed around, only to be repeated in these documents (see the UA1 dragonborn).

Here I mean things like the lvl 9 feature for cleric. I thought by now it was acknowledged that giving a feature that was available many levels earlier (minus the original ‘optimal’ choice) was known to be bad design.

Of course they didn’t seize the opportunity to actually put in new interesting things for the cleric at later levels. Divine intervention was a not great idea of 5e (mostly b/c its DM dependant, and was essentially the entirety of the t3/t4 experience for a cleric sinking in two features of opportunity cost). Of course that wasn't really changed.

Of course they still don’t understand damage and action/concentration opportunity cost. So eg the damage side of divine spark is a feature that makes absolutely zero sense at various points (essentially a newbie trap). Ditto with the new spiritual weapon.

Also, the Life cleric still uses ‘level’ instead of ‘proficiency’, so I guess we retain both mechanics going forward.. That fine I suppose, I just had assumed they were getting away from that.

Anyway, my confidence that they are going to get this right is steadily deteriorating. There are just too many basic mistakes and a glaring lack of new interesting content.

[Kane0]

Its absolutely aggravating that they are repeating the same mistakes that were made years ago and that were actually acknowledged as such and designed around, only to be repeated in these documents (see the UA1 dragonborn).

Here I mean things like the lvl 9 feature for cleric. I thought by now it was acknowledged that giving a feature that was available many levels earlier (minus the original ‘optimal’ choice) was known to be bad design.

Sounds like new hires have replaced the old and they haven't learned those lessons or read the handover documentation.

[Sorinth]

Or handle it like the Paladin or Wizard or Artificer. For the first level or two you're absolutely [what you are going to pick], you just haven't figured out your particular specialty or been entrusted with the particular powers just yet.

I'm fine with the frontloading being spread out a bit.

That pretending is what should be avoided, we do it for Paladins and I very much dislike it. Wizards and Artificer on the other hand don't have that issue since the source of their magic doesn't come from the subclass instead the subclass is what they are specializing in.

[Dienekes]

Or handle it like the Paladin or Wizard or Artificer. For the first level or two you're absolutely [what you are going to pick], you just haven't figured out your particular specialty or been entrusted with the particular powers just yet.

I'm fine with the frontloading being spread out a bit.

See you can do that. But I've been mildly annoyed for years now on how the Paladin is set up. Not like it's a make or break thing for me. But if I had a grand poobah powers for a day I might make Paladin's oath come in on 1st level. The whole point of the class is their dedication to their Oath is what grants them supernatural powers. Why did they get supernatural powers if the mechanics of the class don't even enforce them taking an oath yet? It'd be something if levels 1 and 2 the Paladin had no magical abilities. But they blatantly do.

Which is what's probably going to happen with Cleric and Sorcerer and Warlock. Will I condemn the game as utterly unplayable with the change for everyone to subclasses at 3? No. Will it be a minor annoyance I have with the system the entire time I play it? Yes. Probably.

[Zevox]

So, personal thoughts after a first pass on this:

Cleric - Seems fine by me. I like the new Holy Order feature. Doesn't honestly feel like a heck of a lot changed.

Aardling - Leaning more into the animal traits is a good call, makes them feel less like they're trying to replace Aasimar. Nonetheless, my feeling that either Aasimar or a proper animal-person race like Tabaxi or Shifter (or both, if they feel both the celestial-person and animal-person niches need filling) would be better as a PHB choice remains unchanged.

Dragonborn - Better, though I still prefer the Fizban's versions. "Spectral wings" doesn't really feel right to me - if you want to give them wings, give them actual physical wings, magical ones seem out of place. But then they can't justify their flight being limited-use, so they won't do that. In which case, maybe wings just isn't a good idea for the race, eh?

Goliath - Very surprised to see these here. I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, mechanics look good, and I'm cool with them being a PHB race. On the other hand, they've never been descendants of the normal Giant types before, but cousins, and I don't know that I like that lore change to justify the mechanics, personally.

Epic Boon of Truesight - See this WotC? This is what an Epic Boon should be. It's actually Epic. By comparison, the other Epic Boons in this document are pretty underwhelming. Maybe take a look at that.

Banishment is now "repeat the save each turn," in addition to requiring concentration? Makes it a hell of a lot weaker. Not a fan.

The "get inspiration on a natural 1" thing is still around. That's a pity.

Resistance is now way better - but that 10 foot range might make it okay, actually. Keeping your party members that close to you at all times is not easy during a lot of fights, just ask any Paladin.

[Psyren]

Yeah, and a Chain Shirt and Scale Mail both cost 50 gp so it's a pretty easy change to make.

Indeed.



Goliaths, you were cool and interesting but no more. Now your just giantkin/Quasi half-giants.

You can play them exactly like they were originally though, just pick the stone option and ignore the rest. More thematic options are good.


The druid circles are voluntary associations one can choose to be a part of or not. One could not associate with any druid circles and still be a druid. One can't (ok you can, but not following the flavor text typically used and the way clerics are typically thought of) neglect to worship a deity and be a cleric. In every edition of d&d, clerics worship deities, front and center. It's core to the class. You could easily excise the circles and still have a druid. It's not core to the class.

So delaying any domain based abilities makes it feel like you're playing an incomplete cleric, in a way that delaying circle based abilities doesn't do for druids.

I still disagree. For starters, druids can be just as god-dependent as clerics, as stated in their description on PHB 64 (and enforced in settings like FR), and that doesn't stop them from being subclassless at level 1. Second, domains are also a voluntary association: "Choose one domain related to your deity." There is no thematic necessity for that decision to need to take place at 1st level; changing clerics so that you have to get to know your god a little bit before deciding which of their spheres of influence you want to most closely associate with is not just reasonable, I can see it as a thematic improvement over the original.

[sambojin]

I don't mind the Cleric. I would give them a lvl1 ribbon, and since this is 1dnd, I'd make it a spell. Or two. That don't really level all that well, but work pretty well on most of the campaign, so it's just a thing you can do. You follow your god, but how are you special in their eyes? About this special:

-------
Divine Service: At lvl1, you choose in which way you intend to serve your god. You have one of the following options, and always have these spells prepared (on top of your usual amount).

Healing: you always have the Healing Word, and Sanctuary spells prepared.

Martial: you always have the Heroism, and Shield of Faith spells prepared.

Knowledge: You always have the Detect Good and Evil, and Detect Magic spells prepared.
--------

This allows a heap of builds, isn't overly powerful (it's not adding slots, just preps), and allows flavouring to your God's service, straight from level 1. Be a knowledge'y protector of Life, or a martial thaumaturge (of Life so far), or whatever. Basically subs in for lvl1 domain spells, but it's not a huge choice, and adds flavour and variation to your domain and holy order.

I reckon it's a pretty good fix. It's not like they're powerful, but they are very cool. You could just prepare them anyway, but they're good enough that they'll still be used in a lvl1-10 campaign when needed (and any extra utility is nice. Knowledge even contains a ritual, for good measure).

Be a witch hunter, or follow the god of magic, or travel the world. Them not being tied to domain is nice, plenty of them being concentration is not, but they're there. So you can go all-in on being the servant of the war'iest war god that ever warred, or have a smattering of you in there (in how you serve such a god and your place in the religion and society surrounding it). Maybe they like to know stuff or not die too? Makes wars way easier.

Would work ok, and since it's like 2 lvl1 spell preps, that aren't tied to domain, it's pretty light on power but great on flavour. It's more of a "what do you want to do with this character?", rather than a "you'd better know everything you'll be doing, from lvl1!".

It's a bit of a "build a bear" Cleric, but I think it fits pretty well on the current magic system and theming. You are still very slot-limited on actually doing these things well, and they are only lvl1 spells. But they are pretty powerful and character defining on "you", not "your god/ holy order", which is good to have from the get-go.


((You could probably even expand this list a bit.

Dis/~/Order: Compelled Duel and Command.
Hidden: Disguise Self and Fog Cloud.
Temporal: Expeditious Retreat and Longstrider.
Natural: Speak with Animals and Hunter's Mark.
Magical: Guiding Bolt and Faerie Fire.
Illusion: Silent Image and Unseen Servant.

Etc etc...

Basically it's the gift that keeps giving for a lvl1 flavourful, on "totally not domain spells, just how my god noticed me, or how I will serve that god".
So yeah, sambojin: making clerics OP again, from the UA onwards. It just makes 1dnd Clerics "not crap", and even with the three original suggestions, lets there be plenty of flavour to the builds and characters created. Though making it a 1-of-3(or 9 now?) choice would really nail it well. If you've got to wait until lvl3 to be a "not-acolyte", I want some customisation on the way there, to show what sort of acolyte I was. There's nothing forcing you to use your spell slots on those spells, but it's nice that you can, with the 9-odd variations given))

[Psyren]

Dragonborn - Better, though I still prefer the Fizban's versions. "Spectral wings" doesn't really feel right to me - if you want to give them wings, give them actual physical wings, magical ones seem out of place. But then they can't justify their flight being limited-use, so they won't do that. In which case, maybe wings just isn't a good idea for the race, eh?

I too would prefer physical/scaly wings (that are generally furled), and they could justify their presence by letting them grant a slow-fall effect in addition to the very limited flight later on.



By comparison, the other Epic Boons in this document are pretty underwhelming. Maybe take a look at that.
...
The "get inspiration on a natural 1" thing is still around. That's a pity.


As a reminder - the feedback from Expert Classes is not reflected in this UA, so even if everyone absolutely hated all the previous Epic Boons and the Inspiration-on-a-1 rule, we won't be able to tell that by looking at this one. Only Character Origins feedback is reflected here, hence the new Ardling and Dragonborn.

[Jervis]

I just realized that they made spiritual weapon concentration :xykon: . Understandable from a balance perspective I suppose, even if i’m not a fan, but what does cleric even spend their BA on while concentrating on something else? That was kind of a important part of their DPR calculations and not being able to pair it with bless and SG is a pretty big nerf.

[Hael]

I just realized that they made spiritual weapon concentration :xykon: . Understandable from a balance perspective I suppose, even if i’m not a fan, but what does cleric even spend their BA on while concentrating on something else? That was kind of a important part of their DPR calculations and not being able to pair it with bless and SG is a pretty big nerf.

The optimal way to play nowdays isn't even to cast spiritual weapon (its viewed as a waste of a slot once you go much past lvl 5). You just get the telekinetic feat and push/pull people into your spirit guardians. Similar damage for your bonus action, and you save a slot at the cost of a half feat.

So I guess I disagree that it needed to be nerfed in the first place.

Lets see what they do to spirit guardians...

[Tanarii]

"The default DC for a check is 15, and it is rarely worth calling for an Ability Check if the DC is as low as 5, unless the potential failure is narratively interesting."

I see they're doubling down on not understanding their own system math. If they want to use this, they need to add a suggestion to only call for checks when the character can roll with their highest bonuses (or better yet highest bonus rolls for the entire party), or just acknowledge that adventurers are klutzes who can't succeed on most things requiring checks unless they have high ability scores combined with proficiency until high levels. It's not even a coin flip for 3 out of 6 ability scores for most characters.

[Kane0]

Yeah try 12 or 13 as a default

[Leon]

You can play them exactly like they were originally though, just pick the stone option and ignore the rest. More thematic options are good.


There's more "thematic options" and then there's tacking giantkin onto a race that has never had anything to do with Giants except live in the same mountains and have occasional conflict with giants. This is the time to introduce (as eventual spaltbook race looking at you ardlings) a new race of giant themed people to go with the eventual giant book (there'd not be a Druid subclass and whatever else dropping heavy giant magic hints if there wasnt one coming)

[sambojin]

Can't wait until they release Firbolgs again....

(And yep. We're all original Xcom soldiers here in 1dnd. Actually, the reverse. We can shoot/ punch, averagely or better, but are hopeless at everything else otherwise, and we don't get rocket launchers from lvl1. Lol)

[Tanarii]

Yeah try 12 or 13 as a default
I'd like 11 Medium, that gives Ability Score 10 without proficiency a 50/50 chance. And 6 for Easy, 75% chance.

My assumption here is that checks will be regularly called for things that have interesting/important failure states, but any adventurer should have a base chance of a coin flip for them, so we're not setting a baseline of check = failure.

It doesn't really matter if the default to DC is called Medium or not, but it should be 10 or 11, unless they make clear to DMs they should usually only be calling for interesting/important failure states that adventurers are expected to fail more often than not unless they are specialists.

(Note that this very much isn't the default for attacks, which are expected to come in at ~60%, or failing to save against PC cast spells at ~50%.)

[PhoenixPhyre]

There's more "thematic options" and then there's stuffing giantkin onto a race that has never had anything to do with Giants except live in the same mountains and have occasional conflict with giants.

Oddly enough, when I was deciding the origin of a bunch of my races about 6 years ago (so well before this came out), I decided that goliaths (which I call jazuu) and dwarves were actually both intimately related to the giant-kin. Specifically, jazuu are what giants come from. See, true giants in my setting aren't actually a species (or set of them). They're runic rewritings of jazuu. A process that rebuilds body and soul; the stronger and more skilled the person, the further they can go (and thus the higher the form of giant). Giants are sterile--in exchange for extreme long life, they give up reproduction. Non-true-giants (ogres, trolls, etc) are what happens if you fail too early in the process (depending on exactly where you fail). And, due to a quirk of ironic fate, they are fertile. So giant-kin outnumber giants tremendously. Most jazuu communities also include multiple giants, who may act as rulers, workers, warriors, or craftsman. And this is why jazuu cultures are so often competitive--they consider the giant transformation to be the highest status you can have, but only the strongest few are allowed to attempt it. All of this is an attempt to mimic their long-ago ancestors the titans, who were shapeshifting runic masters of creation and ordering.

Dwarves are the descendants of titans who were stripped of most of their power (and stature) by their compatriots as part of an ancient attempt to create a weapon against the ancestors of the modern dragons in the last of their wars. As such, they have an affinity for runes and for crafting. What happens if you try to put a dwarf through the giantification process? Dunno. No one's tried it and reported about it. Probably something bad, but possibly not fatal. There was a dwarven attempt at something similar, but more...technological. It failed, and then a goblin bard tried it and became, well...even weirder than he already was. :smalltongue:

[kazaryu]

so i haven't read all of it. cleric is already my favorite class, with life cleric actually my favorite subclass, so i was excited to see what they may have come up with and im...incredibly disappointed.

a level 20 life cleric will function...basically identically to what 5e with the exception of the changes to base cleric channel divinity, and the holy orders. but none of the actual subclass features changed, they just got pushed back (except for supreme healing which got pushed up). overall i think its just...a straight nerf to what was already one of the weaker cleric subclasses.

i DO however like that they're adding the ability to deal damage back into the base clerics channel divinity. that is definitely something i missed from PF.

[Segev]

The player will always have some choice in how to flavor their abilities and which ones to use. But the system isn't doing anything to support you here. They made level 3 the new level 1 and decided actual levels 1 & 2 are only useful as tutorials.To be fair, a lot of games I've seen treat it that way already.


Druids are typically flavored less hierarchically. If you're a 1st level druid unassociated with a circle, you're still a druid. If you're a 1st level cleric an have a minor position in a hierarchy, you're a trainee, not a cleric.

Ironically, in 1e, Druids were EXTREMELY hierarchical, being one of the classes (like the monk and assassin) that had to fight other druids to level up to the highest levels. There were limited numbers of druids who could possibly be of certain levels, with the last couple/few levels having only one druid at each of those levels. They had to challenge and defeat in a duel the druid of a level above them to gain the next level, and if they won, the druid they beat was either dead, or reduced by one level. If they lost, they are reset to the bottom of their current levle and have to gain exp to level up again before challenging them again.

[Jervis]

The optimal way to play nowdays isn't even to cast spiritual weapon (its viewed as a waste of a slot once you go much past lvl 5). You just get the telekinetic feat and push/pull people into your spirit guardians. Similar damage for your bonus action, and you save a slot at the cost of a half feat.

So I guess I disagree that it needed to be nerfed in the first place.

Lets see what they do to spirit guardians...

I’m skeptical as to if Telekinetic will survive, if it does it probably won’t be core. It fits the design of level 4 feats well so allowing it won’t break anything but if you don’t want to use legacy content it’ll be a problem. Speaking from experience a system jumping to .5 and still using stuff from half a system ago causes many problems.

Besides that it makes concentration spells that aren’t spirit guardians (assuming they don’t nerf it) even worse.

[sambojin]

=kazaryu;25647654
Snip
a level 20 life cleric will function...basically identically to what 5e with the exception of the changes to base cleric channel divinity, and the holy orders. but none of the actual subclass features changed, they just got pushed back (except for supreme healing which got pushed up). overall i think its just...a straight nerf to what was already one of the weaker cleric subclasses
Snip.
.

Yes, it is a straight nerf.
And, No, they won't function anything like a 5e cleric.

You WILL prepare 4xlvl1 spells, you WILL prepare 3xlvl2 spells, you WILL prepare 3xlvl3 spells, etc, by character lvl6. Which honestly, is a lot of spells, but wow would I love to not prepare them in those lower slots, and "slot-up" my preps to higher level "this *could* be useful" stuff, after just having Bless and Healing Word covered in the lower ones.

It's a very different game in that.
Hell, think of the poor Druids, that now can't compete with Wizards. I mean, think of the poor Wizards.... They actually have to prepare lvl1 spells, all-the-time.... No matter how many scrolls they "find/ get-given-by-the-DM". What are they going to do now?

Lol

[MisterD]

Thanks!

Well, I must say I'm pretty puzzled on many points, especially on how Jump is still an action. Before the big stuff, though, I got a question: was the way to get out of the Grappled condition already a Saving Throw in the last playtest?



On top of that it seems all the spells, including lvl 0 ones, are entirely "you choose what you want each day".

So yeah, less identity overall.

EDIT:

The wording of the Holy Order: Scholar feature is really odd. You select two new Skills in which you get Proficiency, and you can add your WIS mod to those specific Skills. But all those Skills are what the Cleric can get at lvl 1, so... you can't be a Scholar at a Skill you already have? Or alternatively, you can be a Scholar at the Skill you already have, but if you do you don't get an additional skill and just the WIS mod to the skill?

Hill Giant Goliath archer/spell caster knocking flying creature prone. nice.

[MisterD]

So, personal thoughts after a first pass on this:

Cleric - Seems fine by me. I like the new Holy Order feature. Doesn't honestly feel like a heck of a lot changed.

Aardling - Leaning more into the animal traits is a good call, makes them feel less like they're trying to replace Aasimar. Nonetheless, my feeling that either Aasimar or a proper animal-person race like Tabaxi or Shifter (or both, if they feel both the celestial-person and animal-person niches need filling) would be better as a PHB choice remains unchanged.

Dragonborn - Better, though I still prefer the Fizban's versions. "Spectral wings" doesn't really feel right to me - if you want to give them wings, give them actual physical wings, magical ones seem out of place. But then they can't justify their flight being limited-use, so they won't do that. In which case, maybe wings just isn't a good idea for the race, eh?

Goliath - Very surprised to see these here. I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, mechanics look good, and I'm cool with them being a PHB race. On the other hand, they've never been descendants of the normal Giant types before, but cousins, and I don't know that I like that lore change to justify the mechanics, personally.

Epic Boon of Truesight - See this WotC? This is what an Epic Boon should be. It's actually Epic. By comparison, the other Epic Boons in this document are pretty underwhelming. Maybe take a look at that.

Banishment is now "repeat the save each turn," in addition to requiring concentration? Makes it a hell of a lot weaker. Not a fan.

The "get inspiration on a natural 1" thing is still around. That's a pity.

Resistance is now way better - but that 10 foot range might make it okay, actually. Keeping your party members that close to you at all times is not easy during a lot of fights, just ask any Paladin.

Leave Goliaths as is. There is a giant book coming out next year. Have a Giant Kin lineage if you want to add the different giant type traits.

[Arkhios]

Did they say there were more than 39k feedbacks, and chose not to read more than that, or is it actually the number of feedbacks they've got (so far)?

For example, I'd say I'm a regular consumer of all things "D&D", and I haven't given them any feedback since way back. Not because I'm disinterested in doing so, but rather because I haven't had the time to sit down and focus on doing it.

I really doubt I'm the only one.

[Melil12]

Does shield of faith and a shield no longer stack? it’s still a low level spell if you have to run into melee for a brief period.

Level 1 usually goes by very quickly, some groups even skip it all together.

[Pex]

Heavy Armor waiting until 2nd level helps mitigate cleric dips for HA.
But it really hurts regular clerics that want to use HA. If they Dex dump, which is one of the entire points of HA, they're looking at AC 12 at level 1 the the standard Chain Short.


This alone is sufficient to indicate to me they're not really interested in feedback.

Chain shirt is AC 13. Heavy armor wanting clerics at level 1 will instead be in scale mail and shield for AC 16 with 10 DX. It's a nerf but not a devastating one.

[Atranen]

I still disagree. For starters, druids can be just as god-dependent as clerics, as stated in their description on PHB 64 (and enforced in settings like FR), and that doesn't stop them from being subclassless at level 1. Second, domains are also a voluntary association: "Choose one domain related to your deity." There is no thematic necessity for that decision to need to take place at 1st level; changing clerics so that you have to get to know your god a little bit before deciding which of their spheres of influence you want to most closely associate with is not just reasonable, I can see it as a thematic improvement over the original.

The druid relationship with a god is much less pronounced than the cleric one in every game I've played. And even so, 'god' is different than 'circle'.

I'm more amenable to your second point; it is possible to be a cleric of a God and choose which domain to follow later. But this only applies for deities with multiple domains, and at least in the PHB, most deities only have one. And even pushing the choice back, that still leaves you at level 1 without the system supporting you as a cleric of XYZ. You're just a generic...cleric.


I don't mind the Cleric. I would give them a lvl1 ribbon, and since this is 1dnd, I'd make it a spell. Or two. That don't really level all that well, but work pretty well on most of the campaign, so it's just a thing you can do. You follow your god, but how are you special in their eyes? About this special:

-------
Divine Service: At lvl1, you choose in which way you intend to serve your god. You have one of the following options, and always have these spells prepared (on top of your usual amount).

Healing: you always have the Healing Word, and Sanctuary spells prepared.

Martial: you always have the Heroism, and Shield of Faith spells prepared.

Knowledge: You always have the Detect Good and Evil, and Detect Magic spells prepared.

I think this is a great workaround, that restores the 1st level domain spells, gives you more flexibility, and lets you choose something that actually defines your character as a follower of whichever deity. If they have to keep the subclass at 3, I want them to add this.


Ironically, in 1e, Druids were EXTREMELY hierarchical, being one of the classes (like the monk and assassin) that had to fight other druids to level up to the highest levels. There were limited numbers of druids who could possibly be of certain levels, with the last couple/few levels having only one druid at each of those levels. They had to challenge and defeat in a duel the druid of a level above them to gain the next level, and if they won, the druid they beat was either dead, or reduced by one level. If they lost, they are reset to the bottom of their current levle and have to gain exp to level up again before challenging them again.

At high levels definitely. I don't recall how the flavor was dealt with at low levels...it would be an interesting comparison.

[Pex]

Ooh, went up from Unconscious your first round you are Dazed. I like that.

Tangent for another thread that talks about this, if you must have something to avoid pop-up healing I'm ok with using this Dazed condition than exhaustion rules, current version or D&Done version.

[Tanarii]

Chain shirt is AC 13. Heavy armor wanting clerics at level 1 will instead be in scale mail and shield for AC 16 with 10 DX. It's a nerf but not a devastating one.
The standard equipment for Clerics in the UA is a Chain Shirt and no shield, and Dex 8 is far more the norm IMX for HA wearing characters.

[sambojin]

Fix a Cleric/ Build-A-Bear Cleric on 1dnd from the current UA:

-------
Divine Service: At lvl1, you choose in which way you intend to serve your god. You have one of the following options, and always have these spells prepared (on top of your usual amount).

Healing: you always have the Healing Word, and Sanctuary spells prepared.

Martial: you always have the Heroism, and Shield of Faith spells prepared.

Knowledge: You always have the Detect Good and Evil, and Detect Magic spells prepared.
--------

++ (Or chose from any of these)

Dis/~/Order: Compelled Duel and Command.
Hidden: Disguise Self and Fog Cloud.
Temporal: Expeditious Retreat and Longstrider.
Natural: Speak with Animals and Hunter's Mark.
Magical: Guiding Bolt and Faerie Fire.
Illusion: Silent Image and Unseen Servant.
---------

^add to list above, but this is my current "Fix a Cleric" thing. Just lvl1 non-domain spell preps on a choice list. 1-of-9 currently, but pretty cool regardless. Choose your Holy Order at lvl2, and subclass/ domain/ big-god-bonus at lvl3, as normal. Would this fix Cleric properly, in your eyes?

[Aquillion]

Agree with everyone who has said that Thaumaturge seems blatantly better than the other two Holy Order options. Someone who wants to make a fighty Cleric might choose Protector, but Scholar seems completely, unthinkably terrible - the listed skills are basically flavor text in most games I've seen, not something that could remotely be considered as valuable as the other two.

I guess if you're a cleric who completely ignores combat you might take it at level 9, but even then it seems dubious.

Goliaths only being able to be Large for 10 minutes a day feels weird, thematically.

[sambojin]

I can't wait for the rules txt on whatever Wildshape ends up as though. Goliath Large teleporting kitty-cat is go!

Or Dragonborn Flying whatevers! The lightning breathing version, sometimes :)
It's totally not a 10min spell. Yayyy!!!! Flying warhorsies at lvl5!!!!!

I kinda like the Resistance just being a reflex action. It takes away some of the power of the lvl6 10' +3/+4 Pally all-resistance BS, and actually takes your reaction to do the +d4. You can stack them, but you can do stuff pretty well on that anyway to fill a non-Pally roll in the party.

They roll really low? Nope, you won't bother using your reaction, if there's better uses for it. But mostly you will anyway, because it's a somewhat narrative game, so helping your party members never goes out of style, as long as you're not being annoying about it.

[Goobahfish]

I'm still going keep calling this 5.1. It mostly feels like shifting deckchairs.

I mean... it doesn't feel very much different from the hundreds of 'Fixes' you might see on reddit's Unearthed Arcana. The only thing I think which is 'interesting' is using Channel Divinity to 'burn heretics'.

Subclasses at 3 is fine (and probably good if only for balance reasons). I feel like they need to 'colour' the subclasses very strongly at level 3 though to make them 'feel' like a subclass. Currently having identical CD until level 6 feels a bit lame.

Toolboxing out the proficiencies is also a good change.

Sprinting triceratops might become a meme?

[Kane0]

I'm still going keep calling this 5.1. It mostly feels like shifting deckchairs.
I mean... it doesn't feel very much different from the hundreds of 'Fixes' you might see on reddit's Unearthed Arcana.

Sprinting triceratops might become a meme?

Yes, it's musical 5e. Which isnt bad from a backwards compatibility standpoint but likely is from a wallet standpoint. I'm fine with D&D2024 just being a touched up 5e, it validates my homebrew and houserules plus feeds me more to blend in.

Racing dino-men batman!

[werescythe]

So we finally have a dog like race (well, sort of, and no shifters don't count) and they are so... Underwhelming. :(

[Waazraath]

I said it earlier, and with this new material I say it again: I see nothing that justifies a new edition. The cleric subclass is only marginally different from what it was. Why on earth would anybody spend money on a new edition that resembles the old one this much, while the question on whether it is really 'better' in the details where it does differ is seriously open to debate.

[Zalabim]

I don't think it's so odd that a cleric will grasp the basics as an acolyte or supplicant before being opened up to the full direction of their deity though. And you still get interesting choices to make at levels 1 and 2 even though subclass isn't one of them anymore.

Sorcerers and Warlocks are where I'm more skeptical however, those will necessitate a flavor shift I'm not completely on board with yet.

Sorcerers lived through an entire edition where they never got any flavor, and warlocks went through an edition where their flavor was to keep adding new pacts for more powers as they leveled. So I think that both of them can live with subclasses providing that at 3rd level. What sorcerer will need is an actual level 1-2 identity outside of their subclass.

[Arkhios]

I just noticed something, though I'm not sure if this is the first occasion in this playtest:

It seems they have moved away from having spell slots separately and an amount of spells prepared derived from the class level and primary ability score modifier, and rather taking a small step back towards the old Vancian system, with the spells prepared columns of the class table showing the exact number of spells prepared of each given spell slot level.

If I understood correctly, however, you can still cast any spell you have prepared as many times as you have slots for said levels; at least I hope they don't intend to go that far back to the "fire-and-forget" concept of 3rd edition.

For the most part I like this change, because it's more simple as you don't have to try and remember a calculation method (e.g. cleric level + wisdom = base number of spells prepared for the day) for each different class you may have, whether multiclassed or different characters in different games.

However, if the intent is to go back to the 3rd edition "fire-and-forget" spell slots where you prepare each spell with a spell slot and can cast each spell you have prepared only as many times as you have them prepared, then I'm strongly against that extent of complexity.

[animorte]

Before I get started, I want to be very clear. I’ve been a bit busy and haven’t had the time to even attempt keeping up with the pace of this thread. I have skimmed through previous responses and gathered a few recurring themes.

Obviously, parts of what I’m writing here are from personal experience and preference. I would expect nothing different from everyone else. However, I will make a worthy effort to include as much fact-checking as I can.

I do my best to approach new things with logic and an open mind.


I’m attempting to go in order as the things appear. I’ll lead with a basic “good” or “bad” followed by a descriptor. And if something is not listed, I very likely think it’s just “fine” or have no particular preference. I also apparently included “both” for ambiguity. :smalltongue:
Flavor text: Bad - I actually like it, but if they’re going to standardize all subclasses at 3rd level, the flavor text needs to reflect this decision (especially for the difficult to convince folks).
Channel Divinity: Good - Level 1 with two valuable options. I’m hoping statuses (such as daze) are better organized in the future so this isn’t too complex.
Holy Order (L2): Good - Determine your preference, I love it! It does look like Thaumaturge is the clear winner here though.
Subclass at level 3: Good - Yes, please standardize these across the board (I personally think level 2 is the sweet spot, but I’m happy with this).
Blessed Strikes: Good - It’s the same, just sooner. Where are people getting the idea that this ever scaled with level? Other things this functions with already scale. I’m fine either way.
Holy Order (L9): Bad - Why give every Cleric 2/3 of the options? It should instead be an improvement of the first in some fashion.
Divine Intervention: Bad - I’ve never liked it. I would rather it function more like the GenieLock’s limited wish. They’re talking about removing Mother-May-I and DM buy-in. Prove it. Same with Greater Divine Intervention.
Preserve Life: Both - Starting at 6th Level is fine*, but I’ve never cared for the limit of half-hit-point-max.

* I like the new subclass progression. You still have an identity through several other features. It used to be too front-loaded, in fact it is currently still being discussing, getting too many features early and then gaining nothing new for 11 levels, eleven. You can’t have it both ways, people.
Ardling: Good - Overall, I don’t care for it, but I’m just being objective and honest here. If they’re going to keep it in anyway, at least it’s a significant improvement over the hot garbage it started as.
Animal Ancestry: Good - It looks to me like they’re trying to consolidate the concept of various other pre-existing beast-like races species. These actually make sense.
Divine Magic: Bad - This would likely be received better if they removed the concept of divine altogether. Just embrace the obvious bestial theme and use Primal instead, please.
Breath Weapon: Good - Replace an attack, nice. Scales with level and proficiency, well done. Choose one of two different AoEs instead of a different one for each element, better.
Draconic Flight: Good - I like how they’re balancing flight. As far as thematic purposes, they could use “vestigial” instead of “spectral.”
Goliath: Good - Again, it looks like they’re trying to consolidate the concept of various other pre-existing species.
Giant Ancestry: Both - Imbalanced as expected. Cloud > Hill > Stone > Others. Different ones are still valuable for different play-styles though. Scales with proficiency, nice.
Epic Boons: Both - I believe they have no hope whatsoever of balancing these.
Aid: Good - It’s ultimately the same end result, different terminology. More targets is better.
Attack Action: Good - The use of the word or within Equipping Weapons should not be overlooked.
Banishment: Both - Two nerfs in range and more attempts to save; I don’t understand the former, but the latter is fine (that resembles most spells actually, get over it). Interesting bit: target can willingly fail the save, neat.
Barkskin: I don’t know - It’s fine, but I don’t think anybody knows what they want to do with this. Why not provide some sort of Damage Resist (= proficiency perhaps) instead? Just throw us out about 4 different ideas at the same time and let people vote.
Difficult Terrain: Good - Solid pile of examples. For the people that appreciate a guideline, very nice.
Exhausted: Good - I actually really like this. It still has an impact while not being too specific, it’s easy to remember, and doesn’t spiral wildly out of control.
Guidance: Good - Much better. Still a cantrip and doesn’t get in the way of other concentration effects. It would still make more thematic sense if, say, it just lasted until the end of your next turn, giving somebody 6 seconds to use it. Fine by me currently though.
Heroic Inspiration: Both - It functions fine, except we finally have official wording confirmation that Halflings have absolutely no use for it*. ”That 1 must be on the d20 used for the test’s total, not on a d20 that was rerolled or discarded.” I still say just give each PC one upon finishing a long rest.
Influence Action: Good - I absolutely love this. It helps to streamline the concept of interacting with NPCs and provides some reliable examples of what that might look like.
Jump Action: Bad - We all know by now. Putting excessive force into your “already moving” just seems natural. They’ll fix it.
Long Rest: Good - They cleaned up some more language on this and it keeps getting better. Now leave it alone while you’re ahead.
Magic Action: Good - It looks like they’re looking to standardize some terminology for future reference. Keep it clean.
Move: Both - With special speeds, I understand what they’re trying to do because technical math is silly. I’m kind of fine with it, but listen to the people!
Prayer of Healing: Both - I’m fine with the spell effects as is except the fact that it could easily just leave a couple members of your party out of that sweet short rest benefit.
Resistance: Good - Same as Guidance except this one makes a little more thematic sense as a reaction.
Ritual Casting: Good - Finally functioning the way it always should have. My glove is out challenging all who oppose me to a duel on this matter. Bring it.
Spiritual Weapon: Good - Sure it uses concentration now, but the damage also scales with spells slots twice as well.
Truesight: Good - Clarification for multiple different scenarios is appreciated.
Unarmed Strike: Good - Language is clear and looks reliable. I’m sure class features (Monk) will modify this properly.

Other notes:
- I like the incorporation of Surprise in different areas. It’s very consistent. Nice.
- Various actions (search, study, etc.) are doing a good job of providing examples relevant to different skills. This bridges the gap better between 3.5e and 5e skill systems. Nice.

* I struggled with this for some time. I like my Halflings and the gaining Inspiration method makes it kind of useless. However, rolling a 1 always gets a free re-roll, which is strong enough for me. You just aren’t allowed to use your re-roll when you want (to gain advantage). I don’t care, keep your silly Inspiration.

My final count came out to*:
Good - 21
Bad - 5
Both - 5
I don’t know - 1

Unmentioned - Plenty, because they’re probably either “fine” or I have no preference in the matter.

* Guarantee, I miscounted. Close enough.
If we’re going to consistently have cross-class (and cross-group) things as features, like extra skill options, fighting styles,etc… I look forward to eventually having a completely modular class-less system in which you customize everything per options at certain levels. Sounds fun.

I’m sure this is all going to get lost in the ocean of words and opinions. Oh well. Thanks anyway!

Edit: Here’s a part I forgot… For those of you that really dislike the idea of subclasses at 3rd level, let’s be completely honest. Most people were already starting games at 3rd level+ anyway. Maybe more classes will feel a little closer to the same power level naturally.

[diplomancer]

The standard equipment for Clerics in the UA is a Chain Shirt and no shield, and Dex 8 is far more the norm IMX for HA wearing characters.

Shield is in the starting equipment. And I've played HA characters many times, never dumped Dex, usually dump Intelligence. Might choose not to dump Intelligence if my DM (wrongfully) did not allow me to make smart decisions In combat. And this editions makes it more evident that you have the choice of starting gold, so if a player lazily gets the Chain Shirt instead of the Scale Mail (which costs the same)
and then complains about his poor AC, he gets very little sympathy from me.

My general impressions:

Agree that giving a choice of a few free non-domain associated prepared 1st level spells is a very good idea.

I think people are overreacting about Heavy Armor users and I also think that of the 3 second level choices the weakest one is Heavy Armor and Martial Weapons. Clerics are Casters, not Martials, they simply get less benefits from Martial Weapons than martials do (and as has been discussed in another thread, Heavy Armor is not inherently superior to Medium Armor)

I dislike pushing the domain choice to 3rd level, but don't think it's terrible.

When they published the Bard and made them prepared casters but with very restricted spell choice by level I thought "well, obviously, to balance it out, the current prepared casters won't have the same restrictions". Looks like I was wrong, and think this is a mistake by the devs. Current prepared spell casters should still keep both more preparations (+wis to Clerics and Druids, +Int to Wizards),and more flexibility in preparations (no silly "slots=preparations" rule).

Ardlings are now fine, but still should not be core. Everything else in the UA is alright, though I dislike the nerfs both to Banishment and to Spiritual Weapon. Banishment is specially appalling... it's now a slightly better Tasha's Hideous Laughter (because it uses Cha instead of Wis... but that's really not worth 3 spell levels).

[Arkhios]

Edit: Here’s a part I forgot… For those of you that really dislike the idea of subclasses at 3rd level, let’s be completely honest. Most people were already starting games at 3rd level+ anyway. Maybe more classes will feel a little closer to the same power level naturally.

In all honesty, I like the new direction they seem to have with subclass levels. And yes, in most games I've played or DM'd the game started at 3rd level, for relatively obvious reasons.

The levels 1 and 2 usually serve as introduction to the game for the new players, or when otherwise experienced player is trying a class they've not played before, and given how low the XP limits for first three levels are, you won't be stuck in them for very long, so it hardly matters if subclass gets chosen at 3rd level instead of 1st or 2nd.

[Psyren]

The standard equipment for Clerics in the UA is a Chain Shirt and no shield, and Dex 8 is far more the norm IMX for HA wearing characters.

Imagine that, dumping a physical stat might actually be dangerous at level 1...



Healing: you always have the Healing Word, and Sanctuary spells prepared.

Martial: you always have the Heroism, and Shield of Faith spells prepared.

Knowledge: You always have the Detect Good and Evil, and Detect Magic spells prepared.

If they must do this, they would need an "offensive/evil caster" category for it to work, e.g. "you always have Inflict Wounds and Command prepared," or "Guiding Bolt and Bane" etc. But I still see it as unnecessary.


The druid relationship with a god is much less pronounced than the cleric one in every game I've played. And even so, 'god' is different than 'circle'.

"Domain" is also different than "god." Again, I think your distinction between "I choose to opt into this aspect of divine power and therefore it's justifiable that I do that after first level" and "I choose to opt into this other aspect of divine power therefore it's unjustifiable that I do that after first level" is both inconsistent and arbitrary.


I'm more amenable to your second point; it is possible to be a cleric of a God and choose which domain to follow later. But this only applies for deities with multiple domains, and at least in the PHB, most deities only have one. And even pushing the choice back, that still leaves you at level 1 without the system supporting you as a cleric of XYZ. You're just a generic...cleric.

Given that we'll only have 4 domains in the PHB, yes the chances that a given sample deity there (if there even are any) having more than one are slim. But that doesn't mean gods actually only get one domain, domains are retroactively added to gods all the time in D&D (even before 5e.) This does not come with some metaphysical shakeup of the world, rather it's simply assumed these were domains the gods always granted access to, and official rules simply weren't present for them.

[paladinn]

I just noticed something, though I'm not sure if this is the first occasion in this playtest:

It seems they have moved away from having spell slots separately and an amount of spells prepared derived from the class level and primary ability score modifier, and rather taking a small step back towards the old Vancian system, with the spells prepared columns of the class table showing the exact number of spells prepared of each given spell slot level.

If I understood correctly, however, you can still cast any spell you have prepared as many times as you have slots for said levels; at least I hope they don't intend to go that far back to the "fire-and-forget" concept of 3rd edition.

For the most part I like this change, because it's more simple as you don't have to try and remember a calculation method (e.g. cleric level + wisdom = base number of spells prepared for the day) for each different class you may have, whether multiclassed or different characters in different games.

However, if the intent is to go back to the 3rd edition "fire-and-forget" spell slots where you prepare each spell with a spell slot and can cast each spell you have prepared only as many times as you have them prepared, then I'm strongly against that extent of complexity.

My solution to the whole thing is spell points. You can have one pool of points. If you repeat-cast, fine. If you upcast, fine. Metamagic? Fine. It all comes out of one pool. You can adjust your number of points/day (I mean "long rest") by your Cha mod or Wis or even Int. And I saw one variant of SP where if you completely run out of points, you can't even cast a cantrip till you recover some. But then, some classes get the Arcane Recovery feature. It's a great exercise in resource management.

[Pooky the Imp]

So we finally have a dog like race (well, sort of, and no shifters don't count) and they are so... Underwhelming. :(

WotC confirmed as catboys.

[Segev]

Imagine that, dumping a physical stat might actually be dangerous at level 1...


While I get where you're coming from, the issue isn't "it shouldn't be dangerous" so much as "your build choices shouldn't be so dramatically different if you start at level 2."

If you are going to build for heavy armor, having to build for medium armor at level 1 (and only level 1) is bad design.

Generally speaking, unless there is a lot more going for the transition in the very concept of the class, having your build change how much it can dump a stat as it goes up levels is generally poor design, at least when that change is an increase in the states irrelevance. Now, maybe the extra -1 to AC is not that big of a deal, so it is a flaw we can live with. I certainly don't see it as the end of the world. But it is not risible to point out that it is a problem.

When a cleric who starts his career at level 2 can safely have an 8 in Dex while one who started at level 1 needed that at least at 10, that's less than desirable.

[Oramac]

Sounds like new hires have replaced the old and they haven't learned those lessons or read the handover documentation.

LMAO!! You honestly think there is any documentation? I'd be shocked if there was; even more shocked if it was actually useful.


* I like the new subclass progression. You still have an identity through several other features. It used to be too front-loaded, in fact it is currently still being discussing, getting too many features early and then gaining nothing new for 11 levels, eleven. You can’t have it both ways, people.[/spoiler]


I want to touch on this. I [mostly] like the new subclass progression, with one MASSIVE caveat: Tier 4. Your last subclass feature is at 14th level, and the only class thing you get in T4 is the level 18 'capstone'. I've long believed that a) capstones should be subclass-specific (with a couple exceptions), and b) most capstones are laughably underpowered.

For this reason, I think the Epic Boon idea is utter garbage, and if they want to stick with the 3/6/10/14 progression, they need to add a subclass feature at either 17th or 18th level and bring back ACTUAL capstones. I know in all the homebrew I write, I will be making subclass-specific epic boons as a workaround for capstones.

[Psyren]

If you are going to build for heavy armor, having to build for medium armor at level 1 (and only level 1) is bad design.

No, it isn't. You chose a class that doesn't start the game with heavy armor proficiency, so it's going to take longer than 1st level to get going with that concept. That's intended. It means that you are free to dump dex at level 1 like other heavy armor users would, but you will face a drawback of being slightly less protected at level 1 than they would be for doing so.



But it is not risible to point out that it is a problem.

I'm not laughing at anyone, I'm acknowledging that this is a nerf. But it appears to be an intended one. Clerics are not intended to be able to override their base proficiencies at first level anymore.

And hell, this could have been much worse - it could have still been tied to domain like it was before, meaning you'd have had to wait until 3 instead of 2.

[Melil12]

Would it be a big difference to move CD to level 2 and Order to level 1?

How much does that wreck their class structure?

[Talij]

I think Holy Order should be swapped with Channel Divinity at level 1. Yes, that puts 1 lvl dips for heavy armor back in play, but I fall into the camp that switching which stats matter for your ac at level 2 and having to rebuy a lot of gear at level 2 when most campaigns you can't afford or like have an opportunity to is too awkward. Yes medium armor ac is manageable, but you'll be relying on you DM giving you the means and opportunity to potentially replace all your main gear at level 2. Talk about "mother may I" mechanics.

Plus the scholar order issue isn't getting enough discussion. I get to pick 2 more proficiencies I didn't pick at level 1. Great. But these are the proficiencies I'll be extra good at? So if I want my cleric to be really good at religion checks, I have to NOT take proficiency in that at lvl 1 or be penalized by missing a new proficiency at level 2?

I agree these aren't huge, game breaking problems, but I still think it's poor game design for the optimal choices for your character at level 2 and beyond are to design yourself to specifically be suboptimal at level 1.


Fix a Cleric/ Build-A-Bear Cleric on 1dnd from the current UA:

-------
Divine Service: At lvl1, you choose in which way you intend to serve your god. You have one of the following options, and always have these spells prepared (on top of your usual amount).

Tying first level domain spells to your holy order might be a good way to get them (and I agree they are sorely missing here). If you're going to add 9 different options you're basically just trying to give them their domain back at level 1. Or maybe change Thaumaturge's second ability to you can choose 2 first level spells from any spell list (might have to limit that, but just divine isn't big enough). These are always prepared and cannot be changed.

I also agree with the idea that level 9 should be an improvement in your existing domain. Perhaps move the CD back on short rest here, protector maybe extra attack (I hesitate to give this here but is 4 levels later than martials), and scholars get expertise in 2 skills that use mental stats? You could even keep the option of picking the base order ability from one of the other two, but picking up the second choice from an earlier pick is not ideal.

[GooeyChewie]

Would it be a big difference to move CD to level 2 and Order to level 1?

How much does that wreck their class structure?

I think WotC's concern there is multiclassing. Players could take a one-level dip into Cleric and get heavy armor proficiency.

EDIT: Ninja'd!

[PhoenixPhyre]

I think WotC's concern there is multiclassing. Players could take a one-level dip into Cleric and get heavy armor proficiency.

EDIT: Ninja'd!

One of the biggest issues I have with multiclassing as it stands is that it severely warps the rest of the system to prevent (or mitigate) the broken things it causes.

Maybe, just maybe, instead of making everything else work way worse to mildly reduce (because you can still two level dip for heavy armor) issues caused by multiclassing...you can just fix multiclassing.

Fix the things that are causing the pain, don't warp everything else to avoid it. That's just bad design and hurts all the people who don't use that variant system. Which is a majority based on all the data I've ever seen. If 10% are causing issues...fix them. Don't hurt the 90% to mildly make the 10% less annoying.

It's the same issue with PvE in MMOs getting whacked to balance PvP.

[Psyren]

Gentle reminder that when the devs listed the reasons for pushing subclasses back to 3rd, multiclassing/dipping was not one of the reasons they gave.

[Melil12]

Hmmm … I don’t think players getting training in heavy armor was such a big deal.

You want to fix armor dips add the rule that you can only cast spells in armor if that class/subclass gave you that armor proficient or you took the Heavy Armor/Warcaster feat.

Some one can word it better but wizard who dips cleric (with armor prof) can only cast cleric spells while in armor.

Or … just talk to your DM and he probably will just allow you to wear the armor. Without issue.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Gentle reminder that when the devs listed the reasons for pushing subclasses back to 3rd, multiclassing/dipping was not one of the reasons they gave.

But...here's the thing. If you have to think at level 1 "well, I'm going to take the heavy armor <thing> at level <X>, so I should build my character like <this>" or else end up with significant issues (yes, stat allocation at levels > 1 is a major issue and this is as bad or worse than the whole "species" ASI issue), that goes exactly contrary to everything they did say about why they were doing it. You still have to do the analysis and make those future decisions, but now you don't even see the benefits for a few levels. And are actually harmed by it.

So yeah, it doesn't pass a smell test. It'd be much simpler and more in keeping with what they've said are their goals to just say "ok, all clerics wear medium armor. Certain types get bonuses that improve their durability later on" (things like getting Medium Armor Master-equivalent features for free or getting a source of temporary hit points or whatever that isn't heavy armor proficiency with all the curliques that entails).

[animorte]

I want to touch on this. I [mostly] like the new subclass progression, with one MASSIVE caveat: Tier 4. Your last subclass feature is at 14th level, and the only class thing you get in T4 is the level 18 'capstone'. I've long believed that a) capstones should be subclass-specific (with a couple exceptions), and b) most capstones are laughably underpowered.

For this reason, I think the Epic Boon idea is utter garbage, and if they want to stick with the 3/6/10/14 progression, they need to add a subclass feature at either 17th or 18th level and bring back ACTUAL capstones. I know in all the homebrew I write, I will be making subclass-specific epic boons as a workaround for capstones.
Do you have any idea how beautiful and organized the spread looks? I’ve done this exactly and have strongly considered any homebrew I ever do to follow the subclass progression: 2/6/10/14/18…




Level
Feature


1



2
Subclass


3



4
ASI


5



6
Subclass


7



8
ASI


9



10
Subclass


11



12
ASI


13



14
Subclass


15



16
ASI


17



18
Subclass


19
ASI


20


All even levels are subclass features and ASIs. All odd levels are cleared up for base class features.
You know, except that weird level 19 ASI.

However, I do think the standards at 10 and 14, whatever may follow, at least probably helps to get more people playing long to get through Tier 3 and into Tier 4.

It would also help if more modules/adventures/campaigns were designed in the image of wider-range levels of play.

[GooeyChewie]

Gentle reminder that when the devs listed the reasons for pushing subclasses back to 3rd, multiclassing/dipping was not one of the reasons they gave.

Timestamp 3:08 (thru 3:29) of the "Cleric, Life Domain and Subclasses | Unearthed Arcana: Cleric and Revised Species | One D&D" video, Crawford does list multiclassing as one of the factors driving the Cleric changes.

EDIT: And then go on to have a longer discussion about multiclassing from timestamp 6:37 thru 8:03. They did say that their main concern was having such an impactful decision so early in the progression, but multiclassing was very specifically mentioned as a reason for pushing certain features out of the first level or two.

[Psyren]

Timestamp 3:08 (thru 3:29) of the "Cleric, Life Domain and Subclasses | Unearthed Arcana: Cleric and Revised Species | One D&D" video, Crawford does list multiclassing as one of the factors driving the Cleric changes.

EDIT: And then go on to have a longer discussion about multiclassing from timestamp 6:37 thru 8:03. They did say that their main concern was having such an impactful decision so early in the progression, but multiclassing was very specifically mentioned as a reason for pushing certain features out of the first level or two.

Fair enough - though he did indeed list the frontloading of multiple momentous build-defining decisions as the primary concern, he does indeed at your second timestamp discuss making minmaxy dips less attractive being a factor.


But...here's the thing. If you have to think at level 1 "well, I'm going to take the heavy armor <thing> at level <X>, so I should build my character like <this>" or else end up with significant issues (yes, stat allocation at levels > 1 is a major issue and this is as bad or worse than the whole "species" ASI issue), that goes exactly contrary to everything they did say about why they were doing it. You still have to do the analysis and make those future decisions, but now you don't even see the benefits for a few levels. And are actually harmed by it.

People who think about their builds ahead of time will always eke more power out of them than people who don't. The only way to remove that is to remove multiclassing itself (or at least to excise most if not all of the benefits of it), which I know you'd be in favor of, but would be a nonstarter for the vast majority I'm fairly confident in saeying.

[PhoenixPhyre]

People who think about their builds ahead of time will always eke more power out of them than people who don't. The only way to remove that is to remove multiclassing itself (or at least to excise most if not all of the benefits of it), which I know you'd be in favor of, but would be a nonstarter for the vast majority I'm fairly confident in saeying.

It's not a matter of "well, if you think ahead you'll be better", it's if you don't think ahead, you'll actively be worse. Well, if you don't think ahead you'll be even worse than if you do.

Basically, this change screws over all clerics, multiclassed or not for the sole (reasonable) purpose of making multiclassing for heavy armor slightly less efficient (now you need 2 levels, not 1). I reject the "it's too big a deal to make people decide stuff at level 1" objection because, frankly, they're already making the vast majority of their choices at level 1. And heavy armor isn't linked to subclass anymore at all--they could just have said that you get your Divine Order at 1 and Channel Divinity at 2. Then you have no issue whatsoever...except in regards to multiclassing.

And as I said, fixing multiclassing by patching all the places it breaks instead of, you know, fixing multiclassing so it doesn't break things is utterly 100% pants-on-head stupid. And guarantees an endless chase of making those who don't use that variant option's lives worse chasing an impossibility (making multiclassing as it stands now work without breaking things).

[Melil12]

Change Multiclass so spells outside of the class that gave you armor proficiency can’t be cast in armor.

Problem solved.

Add a tab to Warcaster or Heavy Armor training to allow you to cast in said armor.

[Veldrenor]

Would it be a big difference to move CD to level 2 and Order to level 1?

How much does that wreck their class structure?

It probably doesn't wreck the class structure but it does create one oddity: the Thaumaturge gives you a quick-recharge on Channel Divinity when you wouldn't yet have the Channel Divinity feature.

[Melil12]

It probably doesn't wreck the class structure but it does create one oddity: the Thaumaturge gives you a quick-recharge on Channel Divinity when you wouldn't yet have the Channel Divinity feature.

Would be true … I wonder how that works with Paladin MC or Druid (If channeling is the priest thing.) Would it work On theirs? All of a sudden we have a new master MC Dip.

[paladinn]

Change Multiclass so spells outside of the class that gave you armor proficiency can’t be cast in armor.

Problem solved.

Add a tab to Warcaster or Heavy Armor training to allow you to cast in said armor.

As off-the-wall as this sounds, it's not bad..

[PhoenixPhyre]

Change Multiclass so spells outside of the class that gave you armor proficiency can’t be cast in armor.

Problem solved.

Add a tab to Warcaster or Heavy Armor training to allow you to cast in said armor.

Yeah. This is a proper response to the "multiclassing for armor is too easy and too good" issue--fix multiclassing!. I wouldn't add the feature to Warcaster, personally. It's already too potent of a feat.

[Melil12]

Yeah. This is a proper response to the "multiclassing for armor is too easy and too good" issue--fix multiclassing!. I wouldn't add the feature to Warcaster, personally. It's already too potent of a feat.

Saddly warcaster would be more thematically appropriate. But that is why I hesitated to just list it. Other than making another feat entirely.

[ZRN]

But...here's the thing. If you have to think at level 1 "well, I'm going to take the heavy armor <thing> at level <X>, so I should build my character like <this>" or else end up with significant issues (yes, stat allocation at levels > 1 is a major issue and this is as bad or worse than the whole "species" ASI issue), that goes exactly contrary to everything they did say about why they were doing it. You still have to do the analysis and make those future decisions, but now you don't even see the benefits for a few levels. And are actually harmed by it.

So yeah, it doesn't pass a smell test. It'd be much simpler and more in keeping with what they've said are their goals to just say "ok, all clerics wear medium armor. Certain types get bonuses that improve their durability later on" (things like getting Medium Armor Master-equivalent features for free or getting a source of temporary hit points or whatever that isn't heavy armor proficiency with all the curliques that entails).

I think you're mixing different categories of player here.

The type of player who is intimidated by too many choices at level 1 probably isn't going to be min-maxing his Strength and Dex to optimize his AC. And the type of player who does care about min-maxing can probably suffer through a single session at level 1 before getting his plate armor at level 2. (And if we're actually playing by the rules, nobody can afford plate armor at level 1 anyway.)

I think your second paragraph here misunderstands the point of the heavy armor feature: the point is to feel like a tough guy with a big heavy weapon and huge chunky armor, not just to get a moderate increase to durability.

[Segev]

But...here's the thing. If you have to think at level 1 "well, I'm going to take the heavy armor <thing> at level <X>, so I should build my character like <this>" or else end up with significant issues (yes, stat allocation at levels > 1 is a major issue and this is as bad or worse than the whole "species" ASI issue), that goes exactly contrary to everything they did say about why they were doing it. You still have to do the analysis and make those future decisions, but now you don't even see the benefits for a few levels. And are actually harmed by it.

So yeah, it doesn't pass a smell test. It'd be much simpler and more in keeping with what they've said are their goals to just say "ok, all clerics wear medium armor. Certain types get bonuses that improve their durability later on" (things like getting Medium Armor Master-equivalent features for free or getting a source of temporary hit points or whatever that isn't heavy armor proficiency with all the curliques that entails).I am liking swapping "order" and "CD" more and more. I appreciate giving the cleric the divine power thing at level 1 for true iconic-ness, and also to make level 1 very cut-and-dried with minimal choices, but I think the avoidance of analysis paralysis is too great, here. Let them have a choice beyond their skills to differentiate this cleric from that at level 1. Level 2 is when they start getting the holy powers of their god; no choices there, but that's fine because they already made a choice and they get another choice at level 3.


It probably doesn't wreck the class structure but it does create one oddity: the Thaumaturge gives you a quick-recharge on Channel Divinity when you wouldn't yet have the Channel Divinity feature.Good point. Though I would personally give that featurette to every cleric, and apply it to every PB/long rest ability in the game while I'm at it.

Shadow Sorcerer did solve this problem, itself, too: just word it as, "When you gain Channel Divinity at level 2, you may recover one use of it with a short rest," if you don't want to go all in with my prior suggestion of making CD recharge that way no matter your order.


Yeah. This is a proper response to the "multiclassing for armor is too easy and too good" issue--fix multiclassing!. I wouldn't add the feature to Warcaster, personally. It's already too potent of a feat.I... actually just don't see 1 level dips as a problem. They are their own cost. You are slowing progression in your other class. If level 1 dips are a problem because they're so badly front-loaded that later levels in other classes aren't worth getting ASAP, then the problem isn't with level 1 dips or multiclassing; it's with higher-level features not being cool enough.

Playing a wizard with a level 1 dip in cleric for flavor and skill reasons, I am not behind on spell slots, but believe me, I feel the pinch every odd level when I am a level behind in actual spell access. And that's just a single level dip. (I didn't take a heavy armor cleric domain, and I don't even wear armor, though I do use a shield. I have a spell similar to mage armor from Valda's Spire of Secrets I use, instead.) If a wizard dips fighter or even cleric (twilight) for heavy armor, he's paying a price for it, and I don't see that price as being too low. Heavy armor is nice, and all, but ultimately it is the hp count that makes higher-level PCs durable. As the game moves to higher and higher levels, you will get hit.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I think you're mixing different categories of player here.

The type of player who is intimidated by too many choices at level 1 probably isn't going to be min-maxing his Strength and Dex to optimize his AC. And the type of player who does care about min-maxing can probably suffer through a single session at level 1 before getting his plate armor at level 2. (And if we're actually playing by the rules, nobody can afford plate armor at level 1 anyway.)

I think your second paragraph here misunderstands the point of the heavy armor feature: the point is to feel like a tough guy with a big heavy weapon and huge chunky armor, not just to get a moderate increase to durability.

Except...it's not a minimal thing. Now everyone who wants heavy armor has to pay for it, in coin at least. Because you can't start with it unless you give up your medium armor...and if you do, you can't wear it yet.

Choosing the heavy armor one now creates trap options. All for the sake of making multiclassing not quite so bad for the health of the game. But multiclassing is a variant rule--changing the base rules to accommodate it is a bad idea in its own right. You're penalizing (and yes, it's a penalty) everyone for the sake of the small percentage who abuse this feature.

And yes, @Segev, it is an abuse. Flat out. 100%. The cost (being one level delayed on wizard spells) is tiny and mostly counteracted by an increase in versatility. And you get more HP out of it (ok, a tiny amount, but every bit counts). You have a massive increase in durability[1], which drastically reduces the primary weakness of the base wizard, for a tiny reduction in something they're already leaps bounds and lightyears ahead of everyone else in.

[1] if all you ever throw at the party is boss-caliber CR = level + X monsters in big solo fights, you don't see it as much. But against the (system-expected) norm of CR ~ level / 2 monsters? The difference is tremendous. It turns a wizard from one of the squishiest, having to actively use resources just not to die, into one of the tankiest, who still has resources to boost that even further.

[animorte]

I... actually just don't see 1 level dips as a problem. They are their own cost. You are slowing progression in your other class. If level 1 dips are a problem because they're so badly front-loaded that later levels in other classes aren't worth getting ASAP, then the problem isn't with level 1 dips or multiclassing; it's with higher-level features not being cool enough.
I… kind of agree, but I honestly think it’s both. If people aren’t spending very much time at level 1 or 2, why does the class need to be that front-loaded? I honestly don’t see any reasoning for extreme front-loaded nonsense.

Higher level features do need to be more enticing. One of the comments I made on the Epic Boons was in the way they should design them (because they’re erratic and wildly unbalanced). If taking a 1-level dip in a different class is more valuable than reaching level 20, then taking level 20 is not strong enough*.

* This likely includes the Epic Boon and any class features that benefit from scaling with an additional level.

[ZRN]

I am liking swapping "order" and "CD" more and more. I appreciate giving the cleric the divine power thing at level 1 for true iconic-ness, and also to make level 1 very cut-and-dried with minimal choices, but I think the avoidance of analysis paralysis is too great, here. Let them have a choice beyond their skills to differentiate this cleric from that at level 1. Level 2 is when they start getting the holy powers of their god; no choices there, but that's fine because they already made a choice and they get another choice at level 3.

I think this is a bad change. It's weird enough that now a level 1 cleric of Baal is mechanically identical to a level 1 cleric of Pelor; changing it so that clerics DO get a choice at level 1, but that choice has nothing to do with their god and instead is about what kind of armor they wear? Like, "I definitely know I want to wear some badass platemail; I'll figure out that whole Good vs. Evil thing later"?

Overall I think the move from level 1 to level 3 subclass makes mechanical sense for reasons they discussed in the video - my biggest concern is that saying level 1 is when you figure out how to Be A Cleric and you decide what kind later means that your identity as A Cleric is supposed to be more important than what god you worship.

I really don't like how this would play out for sorcerers down the line, either. Like, level 1 I start casting Mage Armor and Magic Missile and stuff because that's what a Sorcerer does, and then after I kill a few dozen goblins I finally figure out whether I can cast Magic Missile because my grandpa was a dragon, or because Zeus thinks I'm hot, or because my soul has been twisted by eldritch horrors? Hm.

[GooeyChewie]

I think you're mixing different categories of player here.

The type of player who is intimidated by too many choices at level 1 probably isn't going to be min-maxing his Strength and Dex to optimize his AC. And the type of player who does care about min-maxing can probably suffer through a single session at level 1 before getting his plate armor at level 2. (And if we're actually playing by the rules, nobody can afford plate armor at level 1 anyway.)

I think your second paragraph here misunderstands the point of the heavy armor feature: the point is to feel like a tough guy with a big heavy weapon and huge chunky armor, not just to get a moderate increase to durability.

The type of player who is intimidated by too many choices at level 1 is probably going to take the chain shirt in the standard equipment, without considering that they could transition into heavy armor at level 2. And then when that player hits level 2, they'll see that they could get heavy armor proficiency, but decide not to take it because they don't have heavy armor. It's clunky progression, which gets in the way of the overall design of the class.

[OvisCaedo]

I'd also point out that just "acquiring heavy armor at level 2" isn't always going to be an actual option. Not every campaign is going to have you fighting people in heavy armor to loot from immediately, or have free access to towns+shops.

[Aquillion]

Change Multiclass so spells outside of the class that gave you armor proficiency can’t be cast in armor.

Problem solved.

Add a tab to Warcaster or Heavy Armor training to allow you to cast in said armor.
Another, broader possibility:

Add an "If this is your primary class..." rider to certain class abilities (or "primary only" for certain options), which you only get if you take the class at level 1. Mostly this would be attached to level 1 abilities that are intended to give you immediate competence but which wouldn't be appropriate to get with a one-level dip later on.

[Tanarii]

Really they just need to give Clerics HA as a proficiency and be done with it.

Fix Multiclassing dip for armor problems by fixing Multiclassing, not by screwing with the classes.

[ZRN]

Except...it's not a minimal thing. Now everyone who wants heavy armor has to pay for it, in coin at least. Because you can't start with it unless you give up your medium armor...and if you do, you can't wear it yet.

Choosing the heavy armor one now creates trap options. All for the sake of making multiclassing not quite so bad for the health of the game. But multiclassing is a variant rule--changing the base rules to accommodate it is a bad idea in its own right. You're penalizing (and yes, it's a penalty) everyone for the sake of the small percentage who abuse this feature.

We're talking, what, 25 gold wasted on a chain shirt you resell for half price? And you think that the entire multiclassing system has to be junked to avoid that 25g "trap"?

I mean, if you don't want a gp cost attached to your important class abilities, you probably shouldn't be playing a spellcaster to begin with, given expended and unexpended material component costs.

And again, as others have said, multiclassing dips are only a small part of why they want subclasses at 3.

There are reasons to not like moving subclasses to 3 but I really don't think the minimal cost of nonmagical armor and weapon at level 2 is a determinative one.

[Bobthewizard]

I'm not sure the cleric changes were made solely for multi classing. Clerics were maybe the most powerful class at levels 1 and 2, so pushing some abilities back makes sense from a balance standpoint. It also allows more uniformity in class progression to give everyone's subclass features at the same levels.

For those of us used to clerics getting their subclass at level 1, having to play a generic cleric feels weird, but it's no weirder than a generic fighter that goes on to be an eldritch knight or rune knight. You are a priest of whatever god or goddess, but you don't get your full subclass powers until you get more powerful. D&D has always been about progression of power. This just changes the cleric's progression.

I was happy to see the changes for rogue subclasses. Now that I see it on clerics, though, I'd rather they give subclasses at level 1, but I understand why they are waiting. Most people don't make as many characters as some of us do, so this lets them ease into a new class.

[Segev]

I think this is a bad change. It's weird enough that now a level 1 cleric of Baal is mechanically identical to a level 1 cleric of Pelor; changing it so that clerics DO get a choice at level 1, but that choice has nothing to do with their god and instead is about what kind of armor they wear? Like, "I definitely know I want to wear some badass platemail; I'll figure out that whole Good vs. Evil thing later"?

It doesn't bother me as much because I assume that there are RP elements in play. "I'm studying to be a cleric of Baal" and "I'm studying to be a cleric of Pelor" may not have a huge difference, mechanically, but that's fine. "I'm training to be a warrior serving the King" and "I'm training to be a warrior who sells his sword to the highest bidder" is also very different, RP-wise, but will NEVER have mechanical backing, at least not unless 5.1 makes subclasses for Fighter depend on who you serve.

I see what you're saying, but "I'm in training right now, but I know I'll get (un)holy powers when I've learned enough to serve Baal/Pelor," is fine with me. The kind of cleric you'll be in terms of warrior/scholar/mage is more something you can start training from the get-go, though.

[Bobthewizard]

Really they just need to give Clerics HA as a proficiency and be done with it.

Fix Multiclassing dip for armor problems by fixing Multiclassing, not by screwing with the classes.

I think that's the right answer. You don't even need to change multiclassing. Clerics already just give medium armor for multiclassing, just like fighters and paladins.

Just give clerics heavy armor, then the martial option just gives martial weapons... and maybe extra attack?

[Psyren]

It's not a matter of "well, if you think ahead you'll be better", it's if you don't think ahead, you'll actively be worse. Well, if you don't think ahead you'll be even worse than if you do.

Basically, this change screws over all clerics, multiclassed or not for the sole (reasonable) purpose of making multiclassing for heavy armor slightly less efficient (now you need 2 levels, not 1). I reject the "it's too big a deal to make people decide stuff at level 1" objection because, frankly, they're already making the vast majority of their choices at level 1. And heavy armor isn't linked to subclass anymore at all--they could just have said that you get your Divine Order at 1 and Channel Divinity at 2. Then you have no issue whatsoever...except in regards to multiclassing.

And as I said, fixing multiclassing by patching all the places it breaks instead of, you know, fixing multiclassing so it doesn't break things is utterly 100% pants-on-head stupid. And guarantees an endless chase of making those who don't use that variant option's lives worse chasing an impossibility (making multiclassing as it stands now work without breaking things).

I think "screws over" is a massively overblown viewpoint. Even if you go the "suboptimal" route of having 14 Dex on your heavy armor cleric, that stat is still very useful despite not factoring into your AC past 2nd level. And if you instead "dump" Dex to 8-10, you'll still be starting the game with 15/16 AC as long as you grab Scale Mail + Shield. In short, it's fine.


I think that's the right answer. You don't even need to change multiclassing. Clerics already just give medium armor for multiclassing, just like fighters and paladins.

Just give clerics heavy armor, then the martial option just gives martial weapons... and maybe extra attack?

Extra Attack should be specific to War Domain imo.

[paladinn]

I think that's the right answer. You don't even need to change multiclassing. Clerics already just give medium armor for multiclassing, just like fighters and paladins.

Just give clerics heavy armor, then the martial option just gives martial weapons... and maybe extra attack?

Looking back, traditionally All clerics were proficient with All armor. Maybe not all shields, but all armor.

[animorte]

Really they just need to give Clerics HA as a proficiency and be done with it.

Fix Multiclassing dip for armor problems by fixing Multiclassing, not by screwing with the classes.
Actually I would go the opposite way. Instead of just making the Cleric a “full-caster-better-Paladin,” actually embrace the caster trope with a few subclass options that would bring it back to what the Cleric is now. I know this ideal doesn’t resonate with the majority, which I’m fine with.

Completely agree on multi-classing.

[GooeyChewie]

We're talking, what, 25 gold wasted on a chain shirt you resell for half price? And you think that the entire multiclassing system has to be junked to avoid that 25g "trap"?

I mean, if you don't want a gp cost attached to your important class abilities, you probably shouldn't be playing a spellcaster to begin with, given expended and unexpended material component costs.
I don't think the multiclassing system needs to be junked; I think it needs to be fixed such that WotC doesn't need to junk early class progression to avoid multiclass combos. The 25g tax isn't the biggest trap. The biggest trap is that a player who takes WotC's advice and plays a just a cleric at level 1 without thinking about their level 2 and level 3 choices at character creation will be ill-equipped to actually make the Holy Order choice when they hit level 2. The second biggest trap is assuming that all clerics will have ready access to selling their level 1 weapon and armor and upgrading upon hitting level 2.


And again, as others have said, multiclassing dips are only a small part of why they want subclasses at 3.

There are reasons to not like moving subclasses to 3 but I really don't think the minimal cost of nonmagical armor and weapon at level 2 is a determinative one.
Multiclassing is a smaller part of why they want subclasses at level 3, compared to the intimidation factor. But they talked a fair bit about multiclassing in the video, so I wouldn't call it a small part.


It doesn't bother me as much because I assume that there are RP elements in play. "I'm studying to be a cleric of Baal" and "I'm studying to be a cleric of Pelor" may not have a huge difference, mechanically, but that's fine. "I'm training to be a warrior serving the King" and "I'm training to be a warrior who sells his sword to the highest bidder" is also very different, RP-wise, but will NEVER have mechanical backing, at least not unless 5.1 makes subclasses for Fighter depend on who you serve.

I see what you're saying, but "I'm in training right now, but I know I'll get (un)holy powers when I've learned enough to serve Baal/Pelor," is fine with me. The kind of cleric you'll be in terms of warrior/scholar/mage is more something you can start training from the get-go, though.

I would like to see Divine Spark offer a choice between Radiant and Necrotic damage to help with the RP element. Other than that, I agree with you that who a cleric serves doesn't have much (if any) mechanical impact.

[Kane0]

I just noticed something, though I'm not sure if this is the first occasion in this playtest:

It seems they have moved away from having spell slots separately and an amount of spells prepared derived from the class level and primary ability score modifier, and rather taking a small step back towards the old Vancian system, with the spells prepared columns of the class table showing the exact number of spells prepared of each given spell slot level.

It was in the bard as well.
As a player its meh, instead of freely choosing X number of spells spread across your available spell levels you now have set numbers for each spell level to prepare.
As a dev, you're chopping off a valuable variable you can use for class balance, especially when you add in features that grant extra spells known (like domains).



Holy Order (L9): Bad - Why give every Cleric 2/3 of the options? It should instead be an improvement of the first in some fashion.

I’m sure this is all going to get lost in the ocean of words and opinions. Oh well. Thanks anyway!

I'm glad pretty much everyone agrees on this

I read it! And i'm in agreement pretty much across the board.



LMAO!! You honestly think there is any documentation? I'd be shocked if there was; even more shocked if it was actually useful.

Well yeah, theres never the correct handover docs and if there are its too uncoordinated or much to actually go through.

Ironically we have things like these here forums and the DM Guild for the devs to check in on in real-time to get a feel for things, plus any archived results of their own surveys and playtests from the last 8 years.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I don't think the multiclassing system needs to be junked; I think it needs to be fixed such that WotC doesn't need to junk early class progression to avoid multiclass combos. The 25g tax isn't the biggest trap. The biggest trap is that a player who takes WotC's advice and plays a just a cleric at level 1 without thinking about their level 2 and level 3 choices at character creation will be ill-equipped to actually make the Holy Order choice when they hit level 2. The second biggest trap is assuming that all clerics will have ready access to selling their level 1 weapon and armor and upgrading upon hitting level 2.


I agree (contrary to my own personal preferences) that the "right" way (for the product as a whole) is to fix, rather than junk multiclassing.

----

Personally, I think that front-loading is a strong feature, not a flaw. I'd love if most classes followed a roughly logarithmic or (x)^(1/2) curve--they start out really strong, the first few levels are big, impactful stuff, all your important (thematically) elements are online and kicking by level 3, level 5 at the very latest, even if not at full power. And then from then on the power curve starts slowing down and (more importantly) broadening.

Say your strong areas are labeled A1 and A2. As a (not-fleshed-out) example, think "A1 = party support and A2 = melee combat". Rating these on a hypothetical 0-10 scale, with 0 being "cannot do this at all" and 10 being "I can succeed at this in any circumstance without party support, I'm the best there ever can be". Numbers chosen to show relative scaling, not actual power levels.

At level 1, you're like
2/10 in area A1 and 1/10 in area A2.
0/10 in all other areas A3 ... AN.

By the end of T1 you might be, say,
5/10 in area A1 and A2
2/10 in area A3
0/10 in area A4, ... AN

By the end of T2, you're at
7/10 in Area A1, 6/10 in area A2
4/10 in areas A3, A4, and A5,
0/10 in areas A6, ... AN

By the end of T3, you're at
8/10 in area A1, 7/10 in area A2,
5/10 in Area A3 and A4
4/10 in area A5 and A6
1/10 in areas A7, ... AN

And by level 20 you're at
8/10 in areas A1 and A2
5/10 in areas A3 and A4
4/10 in areas A5 and A6
3/10 in areas A6, ... AN

A level 20 (in this model) is better at all areas than a level 1 is at their specialty. On the other hand, the growth in power in any one area slows down tremendously and plateaus. And then different classes, even if they follow the same scaling model, can have different mixtures of strengths.

[Psyren]

I would like to see Divine Spark offer a choice between Radiant and Necrotic damage to help with the RP element.

I can get behind that.


I don't think the multiclassing system needs to be junked; I think it needs to be fixed such that WotC doesn't need to junk early class progression to avoid multiclass combos. The 25g tax isn't the biggest trap. The biggest trap is that a player who takes WotC's advice and plays a just a cleric at level 1 without thinking about their level 2 and level 3 choices at character creation will be ill-equipped to actually make the Holy Order choice when they hit level 2. The second biggest trap is assuming that all clerics will have ready access to selling their level 1 weapon and armor and upgrading upon hitting level 2.

For the first "trap": Is that really going to be a common occurrence? I would argue even new players think about things like "do I want to be a healer who wears heavy armor or not." Most video games or other media either put that question front and center, or steer the player toward one choice or the other.

For the second one - even in the unlikely event the character can't get their hands on basic equipment during 2nd level to grab chainmail, being stuck with Scale Mail + Shield slightly longer isn't the end of the world.


Hot Take for the Armor Debate:

Dexterity should not negatively affect a person wearing armor if they're proficient in said armor. Added + bonuses are fine.

For heavy armor, it doesn't. For the other two categories it does, as they cover less "area." I think that's fine.

[Jakinbandw]

Interesting that a level 2 cleric can be better at persuasion than a Bard. +8 at level 2 is really solid, especially as the new social rules have all checks be made against a dc15.

Honestly this is the biggest win for me. I love the high Charisma preacher cleric archtype, and now dnd allows for it without mticlassing.

[Segev]

I think "screws over" is a massively overblown viewpoint. Even if you go the "suboptimal" route of having 14 Dex on your heavy armor cleric, that stat is still very useful despite not factoring into your AC past 2nd level. And if you instead "dump" Dex to 8-10, you'll still be starting the game with 15/16 AC as long as you grab Scale Mail + Shield. In short, it's fine.I find this rich when you've in the past argued that having a +2 baked into a non-optimal stat adjustment based on race inhibits you from playing the character you wanted to play. But somehow having to put a 14 into a stat you wanted to dump is totally fine, because it's useful even if you later do make it less so with the build choices you actually wanted.

If we were discussing halflings having to have +2 to dexterity rather than floating stats, you'd be (if you haven't changed your position) siding with those angered that we would dare quash their character options by making them play a halfling wizard who can't have that +2 to Intelligence or a halfling barbarian who can't have that +2 to strength.

But when it's a clear class-intended design to play a heavy-armor cleric, it's fine to expect you to either suffer the actively sub-optimal choice early or be actively sub-optimal later within the class itself. No problem forcing that +2 to Dex over what you want, or even a +4 to Dex. After all, that doesn't change a concept at all, by requiring you to put a lower stat somewhere else. All clerics are known for being moderately dexterous, after all. It's not quashing your creativity for punishing a low dexterity at level 1, or punishing a high dexterity by making you waste resources by overriding part of it at higher level.

But heaven forbid a tiefling fighter have to have +2 charisma when he really wants +2 strength.

[Psyren]

Interesting that a level 2 cleric can be better at persuasion than a Bard. +8 at level 2 is really solid, especially as the new social rules have all checks be made against a dc15.

Honestly this is the biggest win for me. I love the high Charisma preacher cleric archtype, and now dnd allows for it without mticlassing.

I agree that clerics who are great at Persuasion (and Religion!) is overdue. I think it's awkward though that to get the full benefit of the feature, they have to not take those skills at level 1, so I'll be arguing for changes in the survey.

As far as being better than Bards though - that requires the cleric to have max Wis and Cha, in which case they probably should be. If they don't max out both stats, the Bard wins by having Expertise and only needing to max out one.


I find this rich when you've in the past argued that having a +2 baked into a non-optimal stat adjustment based on race

Nope, not going here yet again. If you don't get it by now you never will.

[Segev]

Nope, not going here yet again. If you don't get it by now you never will.

I do get it. It's just that your reasoning for it equally applies AGAINST your justification of punishing clerics who want to be heavy armor wearers by requiring them to have dexterity be moderate rather than low at level 1.

[Tanarii]

Actually I would go the opposite way. Instead of just making the Cleric a “full-caster-better-Paladin,” actually embrace the caster trope with a few subclass options that would bring it back to what the Cleric is now. I know this ideal doesn’t resonate with the majority, which I’m fine with.
Nonstarter. Clerics can wear all armor is a defining feature of the D&D class, a sacred cow. Even having some domains limited was a bad idea in the first place.

[Segev]

Nonstarter. Clerics can wear all armor is a defining feature of the D&D class, a sacred cow. Even having some domains limited was a bad idea in the first place.

Eh, medium armor only never bothered me on most of the cleric domains thus limited. And I tend to be one of those defending sacred cows as crucial to keeping D&D being D&D.

[Psyren]

I do get it. It's just that your reasoning for it equally applies AGAINST your justification of punishing clerics who want to be heavy armor wearers by requiring them to have dexterity be moderate rather than low at level 1.

It doesn't equally apply, and strength/HA clerics are not "required" to have moderate dexterity at level 1. 15-16 starting AC for a full caster is plenty.


Nonstarter. Clerics can wear all armor is a defining feature of the D&D class, a sacred cow. Even having some domains limited was a bad idea in the first place.

Pathfinder demoted them to medium armor and the sky didn't fall. It wouldn't be the first idea 5e lifted from that game. (See ki points for example.)

[Segev]

It doesn't equally apply, and strength/HA clerics are not "required" to have moderate dexterity at level 1. 15-16 starting AC for a full caster is plenty.

And a 14-15 starting primary stat is plenty, as well.

[Unoriginal]

A negative Dex modifier already doesn't affect someone wearing Heavy Armor. So why should I get dinged if I'm wearing a Medium Armor Chain Shirt and not Heavy Armor Chain mail?

Because one is Medium Armor and the other Heavy Armor.

The mechanical difference between those categories is specifically "how much can DEX affect me when I'm wearing it?".

The reason behind that is that the game want to mechanically represent the thematic archetypes of "lightly armored but good at dodging character" and "heavily armored but bad at dodging character", with "somewhat armored, somewhat decent at dodging" in-between.

If Light and Medium Armors are not affected by negative mods to DEX it's buffing those two armor categories for no reason AND removing the niche for Heavy Armor.

[Psyren]

And a 14-15 starting primary stat is plenty, as well.

I never said it wasn't. I said that ability scores and armor class are different things with different implications. Take your false equivalency elsewhere, I won't be entertaining it further.

[Jervis]

Actually I would go the opposite way. Instead of just making the Cleric a “full-caster-better-Paladin,” actually embrace the caster trope with a few subclass options that would bring it back to what the Cleric is now. I know this ideal doesn’t resonate with the majority, which I’m fine with.

Completely agree on multi-classing.

Doesn’t work. Cleric is a control/tanking class, they don’t set in the back line, they’re suppose to be front or midline

[animorte]

I read it! And i'm in agreement pretty much across the board.
Yay, that’s now one of two strong things that made my day! Thanks a ton.


Nonstarter. Clerics can wear all armor is a defining feature of the D&D class, a sacred cow. Even having some domains limited was a bad idea in the first place.

Doesn’t work. Cleric is a control/tanking class, they don’t set in the back line, they’re suppose to be front or midline
Yes, absolutely. I understand. It’s been well established as such and will continue in this direction, and I’m fine with that and have always liked Clerics since I started playing.

Just throwing out that it would have made a little more sense to me if they didn’t start out years ago with armor proficiency to begin with.

Edit: I came across too agreeable (also throwing in another quote). Paladins and Clerics have always had that unnecessary overlap (same goes for Druid/Ranger). Why should any full caster automatically have armor proficiency? Doesn’t make sense to me. They have other ways of achieving survivability and other ways of controlling the battlefield. I would have preferred they be designed for filling the same role from the back-line. You know that trope, “there’s the healer, get him!” Subclasses exist to create a more gish build. Either way, like I said, I’m fine with where it currently is, just a nit-pick.

[Oramac]

Change Multiclass so spells outside of the class that gave you armor proficiency can’t be cast in armor.

Problem solved.

Add a tab to Warcaster or Heavy Armor training to allow you to cast in said armor.

Yes. All of this. Hell, make a new feat for it if necessary.


If level 1 dips are a problem because they're so badly front-loaded that later levels in other classes aren't worth getting ASAP, then the problem isn't with level 1 dips or multiclassing; it's with higher-level features not being cool enough.

100% this. I've been yelling that capstones aren't strong enough for years (and even in this thread). If a 1st-level feature is more exciting than a 20th level feature, there's a big problem.

[Atranen]

"Domain" is also different than "god." Again, I think your distinction between "I choose to opt into this aspect of divine power and therefore it's justifiable that I do that after first level" and "I choose to opt into this other aspect of divine power therefore it's unjustifiable that I do that after first level" is both inconsistent and arbitrary.



Given that we'll only have 4 domains in the PHB, yes the chances that a given sample deity there (if there even are any) having more than one are slim. But that doesn't mean gods actually only get one domain, domains are retroactively added to gods all the time in D&D (even before 5e.) This does not come with some metaphysical shakeup of the world, rather it's simply assumed these were domains the gods always granted access to, and official rules simply weren't present for them.

A circle isn't really an aspect of divine power, is it? It's an organization, which perhaps passes down knowledge in the form of spells and such, but you're not *drawing on* the druid circle, you're *learning from* it. A voluntary organization is different than a source of divine power.

I wouldn't mind them retroactively adding domains; the coverage for the existing Gods is not always great (you can't be a Tempest Cleric in FR without worshiping an evil God, at least picking from the standard list of deities). If they properly align the flavor text it can make internal sense. But that still doesn't solve the issue that you don't feel like a cleric of XYZ at first or second level.


I... actually just don't see 1 level dips as a problem. They are their own cost. You are slowing progression in your other class. If level 1 dips are a problem because they're so badly front-loaded that later levels in other classes aren't worth getting ASAP, then the problem isn't with level 1 dips or multiclassing; it's with higher-level features not being cool enough.

I'm confused by why they feel the need to deal with multiclassing at all. Outside of a few combos (mostly of CHA casters), the dips are not *that* much stronger than normal characters. And frankly, shouldn't players with system knowledge who want to make stronger characters be able to? As long as there's interesting choices to be made, which I think there are.

Just want to add, this is something that bothered me about the video. Jeremy talks about 'changing options that people don't choose as often'. But why? If they're underpowered and people want to play them, that's one thing. But a lot of Cleric domains (for example) are fine, just not what people think of first when they pick Cleric. Trickery, for example; despite a lackluster CD, its spell list makes it very fun and relevant at the right table. There should be some less common options for players who want something different.


I… kind of agree, but I honestly think it’s both. If people aren’t spending very much time at level 1 or 2, why does the class need to be that front-loaded? I honestly don’t see any reasoning for extreme front-loaded nonsense.


In all honesty, I like the new direction they seem to have with subclass levels. And yes, in most games I've played or DM'd the game started at 3rd level, for relatively obvious reasons.

The levels 1 and 2 usually serve as introduction to the game for the new players, or when otherwise experienced player is trying a class they've not played before, and given how low the XP limits for first three levels are, you won't be stuck in them for very long, so it hardly matters if subclass gets chosen at 3rd level instead of 1st or 2nd.

Others in the same vein I missed...I just disagree with this design philosophy; I don't think 1st and 2nd level should be fake tutorial levels, they should be part of a real game. If you're playing Tier 1, that perpetually locks half the content into 'tutorial'. And there's no need to.


Change Multiclass so spells outside of the class that gave you armor proficiency can’t be cast in armor.

Problem solved.

Add a tab to Warcaster or Heavy Armor training to allow you to cast in said armor.

A simple, elegant way to deal with the problem via the multiclass system, rather than messing around with the base classes. I'm a fan.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Yes. All of this. Hell, make a new feat for it if necessary.


Proposal:

Armored Caster
Choose one of your classes that grants either the Spellcasting or Pact Magic feature.
* + 1 to the casting stat of that class
* You can cast <class> spells in any armor with which you are proficient, regardless of source.

[animorte]

Others in the same vein I missed...I just disagree with this design philosophy; I don't think 1st and 2nd level should be fake tutorial levels, they should be part of a real game. If you're playing Tier 1, that perpetually locks half the content into 'tutorial'. And there's no need to.
I agree with this. Subclasses coming in at different levels locked some PCs out of participating at those levels, thus everybody just started when everybody could have a similar contribution to their class identity.

However, pretending a character doesn’t have identity without its subclass comes across as incredibly short-sighted. Many other features are easily accounted for.

[GooeyChewie]

For the first "trap": Is that really going to be a common occurrence? I would argue even new players think about things like "do I want to be a healer who wears heavy armor or not." Most video games or other media either put that question front and center, or steer the player toward one choice or the other.
In practice? I think it will be a rare occurrence. But that’s because I think the vast majority of players will consider their level 2 Holy Order and level 3 subclass options at character creation. It’s only going to be a problem if players decide they want to try out the class without making those supposedly intimidating decisions at the outset… which Crawford laid out as the stated primary goal. You are absolutely right that other games put the option right up front. I think D&D should do so as well, rather than waiting until level 2.


For the second one - even in the unlikely event the character can't get their hands on basic equipment during 2nd level to grab chainmail, being stuck with Scale Mail + Shield slightly longer isn't the end of the world.
It’s not the end of the world, but it is an extra and unnecessary hurdle towards getting to the character the player actually wants to play.

[sambojin]

Thinking of another idea for the lack of preps and slight blandness of clerics in general (instead of the level 1 choice I suggested). What if at lvl3 when you got your subclass, you got four spell preps known, 2xlvl1 and 2xlvl2 spells?

Life would probably get Healing Word, Bless as well as Lesser Restoration and Prayer of Healing. Sort of back-filling your domain spells, and making the transition from acolyte to "proper preist-of X" a pretty big step.

It would also allow more theming of stuff as well. So you go from "kinda generic cleric #2023" to "yep, actual Life Cleric" in one easy step. Tempest can get zappy and boomy. Nature can nab a couple of Primal spells. Etc etc.

If this was the standard for magic subclasses and lvl3, you could do plenty of fun stuff, even sprinkling off-list cantrips and stuff in there as well, not just for clerics, but for wizards and druids (and even pallies) for theming purposes. It'd open a lot of design space for different subclasses and "feels" to them. Stops some dipping (ala 5e Arcana Cleric for heaps of cantrips at lvl1), while retaining the same overall impact that a domain or circle choice would give.

I liked the Build-A-Bear Cleric style better, and some probably don't even see it as a problem needing a solution, but it still would work pretty well. I know lack of spell prep options seems to be a design goal of 1dnd, probably to reign-in caster power, but it's one that I see as boring and bland. The lvl1 spells tend to end up as flavour anyway, so why not keep it flavourful?


(Having Life as the only example to work from is pretty bad to show any potential versatility, because they tend to heal and heal-more, but I think there would be plenty of fun little combos and quirks and flavour available in conjunction with CDs and subclass features, so you really do feel like a Cleric of "X")

((PS. I like the new Prayer of Healing. 10min short rests sound great, and with Thaumaturge giving a CD back on a short rest, you can trade a lvl2 slot for an extra CD 1/day when required. That's quite a lot of healing at lvl6 for a Life Cleric, plus whatever other short rest resources your party recovers from it))

(((Pps. Clerics get smites too now, and with TWF being ok'ish (or just sword'n'board), and a lvl1 feat, you probably could go a bit smite happy with a Cleric after a few levels if you wanted to. Gear/ build/ feat for it, but compared to other non-warrior characters, you should be able to keep up a bit, even with SW as concentration now)))

[Atranen]

Thinking of another idea for the lack of preps and slight blandness of clerics in general (instead of the level 1 choice I suggested). What if at lvl3 when you got your subclass, you got four spell preps known, 2xlvl1 and 2xlvl2 spells?

Life would probably get Healing Word, Bless as well as Lesser Restoration and Prayer of Healing. Sort of back-filling your domain spells, and making the transition from acolyte to "proper preist-of X" a pretty big step.

It would also allow more theming of stuff as well. So you go from "kinda generic cleric #2023" to "yep, actual Life Cleric" in one easy step. Tempest can get zappy and boomy. Nature can nab a couple of Primal spells. Etc etc.

If this was the standard for magic subclasses and lvl3, you could do plenty of fun stuff, even sprinkling off-list cantrips and stuff in there as well, not just for clerics, but for wizards and druids (and even pallies) for theming purposes. It'd open a lot of design space for different subclasses and "feels" to them. Stops some dipping (ala 5e Arcana Cleric for heaps of cantrips at lvl1), while retaining the same overall impact that a domain or circle choice would give.

This is also a good solution, but as you mention, I'm afraid it goes against the "everyone gets the same spell list" design. Which...why? Separate spell lists was one of the best ways to make classes feel unique and different...it's a great idea if they decide to start making good decisions.

[Tanarii]

Edit: I came across too agreeable (also throwing in another quote). Paladins and Clerics have always had that unnecessary overlap (same goes for Druid/Ranger). Why should any full caster automatically have armor proficiency? Doesn’t make sense to me. They have other ways of achieving survivability and other ways of controlling the battlefield. I would have preferred they be designed for filling the same role from the back-line. You know that trope, “there’s the healer, get him!” Subclasses exist to create a more gish build. Either way, like I said, I’m fine with where it currently is, just a nit-pick.
Because the idea of clerics is they're off-tanks with less blast-y full casting, more healing and defensive buffs. They make up part of the lack of blasting by getting in there and whacking occasionally with a beat stick, and (in 5e) some nice shorter range damage options, especially Spirit Guardians, which goes along with off-tank well. Clerics aren't what's come about in later video games, White Mages or Healers.

Druids get less AC but more than arcane full casters because they are a bit more blast-y, but also (in 5e) they're concentration control / DoT oriented and have Wildshape for extra HPs.

Bards are the support/buff class with the weakest defenses, unless you go specific subclasses. And also one of the weaker classes in 5e because of it. It's a shame really, they were originally Fighter/Thieves with Druid magic layered on top. They've been in bad shape ever since 2e, although 5e is passable if you either regelate them to arcane squishy caster or go Valor.

[Jervis]

Because the idea of clerics is they're off-tanks with less blast-y full casting, more healing and defensive buffs. They make up part of the lack of blasting by getting in there and whacking occasionally with a beat stick, and (in 5e) some nice shorter range damage options, especially Spirit Guardians, which goes along with off-tank well. Clerics aren't what's come about in later video games, White Mages or Healers.

Druids get less AC but more than arcane full casters because they are a bit more blast-y, but also (in 5e) they're concentration control / DoT oriented and have Wildshape for extra HPs.

Bards are the support/buff class with the weakest defenses, unless you go specific subclasses. And also one of the weaker classes in 5e because of it. It's a shame really, they were originally Fighter/Thieves with Druid magic layered on top. They've been in bad shape ever since 2e, although 5e is passable if you either regelate them to arcane squishy caster or go Valor.

Something a lot of people forget about clerics is that their original role was to fill the same design space as a Gish. Not quite as strong or tanky as a fighter and not quite as good at blasting as a wizard. They can fight, they can buff, they can support, they even got healing which was lacking from wizards, but the can’t blast it use the same broken spell effects as a wizard.

[Melil12]

So I have a question and it has already sparked lunacy in my private group.

What if we remove spirit guardians from the game?
Would the cleric all of a sudden become unplayable?
How can we break their reliance on 1 spell?

[sambojin]

Is wotc really moving away from short rest resources? Considering there's already a lvl2 spell that gives you a 10min short rest (with a bit of healing to boot)?

So far we've only got the lvl7 bardic inspiration, and thaumaturge's +CD on a sr, but martials tend to be short rest based, as does druid wildshape. Are all 'locks coffeelocks now, at least 1 extra break per day? Or even if all these classes end up being prof uses/lr, there seems to be a "but now it's also per sr" option or level-cap for two (out of four) classes so far. And Fighters/BMs and warlocks will exist in 1dnd, I can only assume.

Could it now be considered a 2sr+1PoH and 1lr workday now? Prayer of Healing seems really good in a "let's screw over the resource system" kinda way. Even in those 5min workday campaigns, it's probably not hard to extend that out to 20mins if it means *Moar novas!!!*

("Back compatible" they said.... "Here, have a "class spell" in a UA that would normally be considered grubby cheese homebrew" they said....
Spell tax, or Class feature??? Hmmm.
Might even make for some interesting "protect the Cleric!" scenarios, as your party's warriors desperately try and help you keep concentration for 10mins, so they can go into hyper-mode again. It actually seems like a pretty fun spell for DMs to play with 😎
Sort of fun from a narrative perspective too. "Yeah, my God's a-coming! He'll be here real soon! (Oh please bloody hurry up!). Real soon, and he'll grant us all mega-powers! (Hurry, please...))

[Speely]

I like the new direction in some ways. I don't mind postponing heavy armor until level 2 for those who want it because level 1 is generally where we spend the least amount of time anyway and it discourages quick dips. Divorcing it from domain is also fine and even interesting, BUT...

While I like the Holy Order direction, I think the implementation is flawed. I strongly feel that allowing a second option from the list at level 9 is both a homogenization of identities for how a cleric serves their deity and also unexciting. "Hey, now you can pick the one you didn't want before."

Now, sure, maybe you did want the other choice but just not as much, but making that choice should be binding, imo, because...

The level 9 option should 100% double down on the level 2 choice. That would be infinitely cooler and more interesting, not just because it makes the initial choice matter more, but because it's something NEW, not something we saw at level 2.

Another reason I am adamantly in support of the second option being a double-down is that it could make the perhaps least "powerful" option (Scholar) more competitive by offering a really hefty level 9 feature that makes the investment feel more justified.

The way it is now, the level 9 feature just makes every cleric more alike than different. You will literally never meet another cleric who doesn't share at least one of the options with you, and I'd wager that most clerics will just pick the two most useful combat options. This is a squandered opportunity for more diversity in build types for the base cleric class imo.

[Jervis]

So I have a question and it has already sparked lunacy in my private group.

What if we remove spirit guardians from the game?
Would the cleric all of a sudden become unplayable?
How can we break their reliance on 1 spell?

At high levels yeah. They upcast the spell up til 6 or 7 a lot of the time. Without it they kinda just don’t have damage. You would need a major rework of their spell list and class features to make up for it

[sambojin]

I actually think if there were more options in Holy Orders, it'd feel way better. If it was a list of five (or more?), but you knew you could eventually pick two, it'd be a lot better. That'd give the Build-A-Bear Cleric thingo, with a bit of subtlety and nuance to your character.

Maybe even make a list of six, some with synergy but moderately powerful alone (the war'iest war god that ever warred thing/ or magic'd/ or knew stuff), but you could kind of sprinkle a bit of flavour as well without gimping yourself.

Two synergistic "focuses" of an Order, or fairly wide and diverse, your choice. It might even be best if they were all pretty diverse choices, yet all moderately powerful, and it's up to you to find the synergies in what you do and your party make-up.

So, yeah. More options, even just an extra 2-3, all moderately good without synergies (you do have an actual domain and spell list for that). So it's not a 2-out-of-3 thing by lvl9. If it was 2-out-of-6 + domain choice, it would feel a heap more personalised.

[Speely]

I actually think if there were more options in Holy Orders, it'd feel way better. If it was a list of five (or more?), but you knew you could eventually pick two, it'd be a lot better. That'd give the Build-A-Bear Cleric thingo, with a bit of subtlety and nuance to your character.

Maybe even make a list of six, some with synergy but moderately powerful alone (the war'iest war god that ever warred thing/ or magic'd/ or knew stuff), but you could kind of sprinkle a bit of flavour as well without gimping yourself.

Two synergistic "focuses" of an Order, or fairly wide and diverse, your choice. It might even be best if they were all pretty diverse choices, yet all moderately powerful, and it's up to you to find the synergies in what you do and your party make-up.

So, yeah. More options, even just an extra 2-3, all moderately good without synergies (you do have an actual domain and spell list for that). So it's not a 2-out-of-3 thing by lvl9. If it was 2-out-of-6 + domain choice, it would feel a heap more personalised.

This could work as well.

One thing I really love about the Holy Orders is the possibilities for DMs and players to explore subplots dealing with the relationships not just between different orders within one religion, but similar orders among other religions. There's a lot of narrative meat to dig into there, potentially.

[kazaryu]

Yes, it is a straight nerf.
And, No, they won't function anything like a 5e cleric.

You WILL prepare 4xlvl1 spells, you WILL prepare 3xlvl2 spells, you WILL prepare 3xlvl3 spells, etc, by character lvl6. Which honestly, is a lot of spells, but wow would I love to not prepare them in those lower slots, and "slot-up" my preps to higher level "this *could* be useful" stuff, after just having Bless and Healing Word covered in the lower ones.

It's a very different game in that.
Hell, think of the poor Druids, that now can't compete with Wizards. I mean, think of the poor Wizards.... They actually have to prepare lvl1 spells, all-the-time.... No matter how many scrolls they "find/ get-given-by-the-DM". What are they going to do now?

Lol
thats a good point. i *did* more mean the fact that none of their actual abilities changed. but you're right that the fact they don't have as much freedom to prepare whatever they want. and that is a big deal. i do think its an exageration to say that they won't function anything like 5e clerics, but they will definitely have a siginficant difference in feel. at least if this method of spell casting makes it to the book.

[Goobahfish]

Heavy armour at level 2 is a bit narratively clunky... isn't it.

I don't think there is a good solution here. Actually there is.

All you need is a kind of Medium armour that has a static AC of 14. Fixed. :smallbiggrin:

Ducks.

---

Clerics wearing heavy armour has always been a bit of a eyebrow raiser for me anyway. It seemed to muddy the Cleric vs Paladin aesthetics. It seems to me that heavy armour cleric shouldn't be the norm and obviously PF and games like WOW have accepted this.

I'm not sure granting armour proficiency at any level except 1 is a great idea. Frontloading clerics is also a dangerous idea. Not sure they can get around "I want to play my character" without frontloading though... who knows?

[sambojin]

I'd almost go on the other side of this. I'd not only stand on toes of other classes with Cleric, I'd smash them with a sledgehammer, so those classes became better designed and more unique. Yet still being able to "do things other ?sub/classes? can".

So "Protector" Holy Order also gets the Resistance cantrip for free. If they already have this cantrip, they may choose another off the Divine list.

BAM! Done. Flavourful. Pretend you're a gish or mini-paladin or something (you're not). Well, you do have heavy armour, and smites on your list, and full spell progression, so whatever. You can do that, you're just not good at it.

And paladin lvl6 *super-power-aura* gets redesigned because of it, so they are way more paladin'y and stuff in their oaths and choices and character.

(Geez I hope they give clerics more cantrips to choose from. Even some Arcane or Primal ones. The list is pretty bare)

[Pex]

I think you're mixing different categories of player here.

The type of player who is intimidated by too many choices at level 1 probably isn't going to be min-maxing his Strength and Dex to optimize his AC. And the type of player who does care about min-maxing can probably suffer through a single session at level 1 before getting his plate armor at level 2. (And if we're actually playing by the rules, nobody can afford plate armor at level 1 anyway.)

I think your second paragraph here misunderstands the point of the heavy armor feature: the point is to feel like a tough guy with a big heavy weapon and huge chunky armor, not just to get a moderate increase to durability.

It's not about plate armor. It's about chainmail and being able to dump DX for wanting to be a ST cleric or at least have DX as an option to dump along with IN and CH. Gives flexibility. The cleric in D&Done can still have AC 16 with splint mail, shield, and 10 DX, which is not bad, but it's still a nerf to heavy armor clerics of 5E. Its a question of whether that's a feature or bug, understanding the bug is intended not accidental. For some people it's a bug, and I don't find them being unreasonable about it.

Personally I noticed the change upon first reading it. I was disappointed, but not entirely because I appreciate the choice of going ST or not. As a personal matter when playing a cleric in 5E I choose the Domain for the abilities I want to enjoy. Armor is not a consideration. Once chosen then if given heavy armor I go ST 16 DX 10. If not DX 14 it is and ST is whatever is left over at least 10, but that's the min-maxer of me. With D&Done ST or DX and armor is more about my mood at the time. Being given this choice compensated my disappointment. Still it is irksome because in 5E I can always have AC 18 at first level cleric with medium or heavy armor. In D&Done, to get an 18 AC I have to go DX 14 ST and heavy armor or not. It's a nerf. It's not a seething anger of a nerf to me, but it is a nerf.

[Kane0]

Is wotc really moving away from short rest resources?


Yes, that is absolutely the trend and has been for a while, it appears there just hasnt been enough pushback on it.

[Schwann145]

That's a perfectly fine starting point, especially for a full caster...

Especially a full caster!

Yes yes, I agree that the poor full caster...

Why should any full caster automatically have armor proficiency?

So... I mean... There's an entire lengthy thread about how "Full Caster" doesn't really mean what people insinuate it means. A "full caster Cleric" is a wildly different beast than a "full caster Wizard," and we all know it. Pretending they're on the same level (even close to the same level) is crazy.

[animorte]

So... I mean... There's an entire lengthy thread about how "Full Caster" doesn't really mean what people insinuate it means. A "full caster Cleric" is a wildly different beast than a "full caster Wizard," and we all know it. Pretending they're on the same level (even close to the same level) is crazy.
Yes, it’s been agreed that Wizard easily stands above the rest. So pointing that out is equally irrelevant.

Wizard > Full Casters > Paladins > Everything else

Going to add here that I don’t play Wizards, so this is based on what I’ve witnessed in the community, and what you literally just stated yourself.

[sambojin]

Standard 5e guff. It's totally up to the DM. But how I'd fix 1dnd clerics:

Ok, the fully definitive, list:
(sambojin "fixing" clerics)
-------
Minor Domain/ Belief/ Ability: At lvl1, you choose in which way you intend to serve your god, or how you came to their notice originally, and the powers you have gained in their service. Or that which you gained from your beliefs, or blessings from a higher power.
You have one of the following options, and always have these spells prepared (on top of your usual amount as a Cleric).

Healing: Healing Word and Sanctuary.
Martial: Heroism and Shield of Faith.
Knowledge: Detect Good and Evil, and Detect Magic.
Dis/~/Order: Compelled Duel and Command.
Hidden: Disguise Self and Fog Cloud.
Temporal: Expeditious Retreat and Longstrider.
Natural: Speak with Animals and Hunter's Mark.
Magical: Guiding Bolt and Faerie Fire.
Illusionary: Silent Image and Unseen Servant.
Destructive: Inflict Wounds and Hex.
Elemental: Burning Hands and Thunderous Smite, either may be any element's damage-type on casting.

Side-text-box:
While there are only 11 Minor Domains listed, it is up to the DM to create ones more fitting for the world they have created, and the societies and civilisations they have crafted. And for their player characters to use (or fight against or for), amongst these cultures and beliefs. This merely gives a small insight to the differences between Clerics of similar subclasses, such as Life etc, and is not meant to be a division amongst them, merely help show the broad spectrum in a belief and how it is utilised and perceived from even similar minded peoples, or the differences amongst.
It also shows how even very different beliefs can work towards common goals, regardless of gods or social structures, even amongst those of otherwise conflicting world-views on things. Sometimes, Clerics are just people too.

[Aquillion]

Just throwing out that it would have made a little more sense to me if they didn’t start out years ago with armor proficiency to begin with.It is worth pointing out that if we're talking about the original Clerics, they were not quite what we would call full-casters. Prior to (I think) 3e D&D, Divine casting simply didn't go past 7th level, fullstop. 8th and 9th level spells were the domain of wizards and wizards alone.

Of course, they learned new spells at the same rate as a wizard up until 6th level spells (their 7th and final level of spells was delayed a level for some reason, coming at 14th rather than 13th), and would actually learn them a tiny bit faster because they required less XP to level up. But their spell list as a whole was also far worse in 2e than it was in 3e and beyond.

That said...


So... I mean... There's an entire lengthy thread about how "Full Caster" doesn't really mean what people insinuate it means. A "full caster Cleric" is a wildly different beast than a "full caster Wizard," and we all know it. Pretending they're on the same level (even close to the same level) is crazy.
Wildly different is overstating it. Most people agree that wizards are stronger overall, but in 3e and 5e, a Cleric is quite capable of resolving or drastically altering fights with a single well-chosen spell, and can do so regularly and consistently as they progress, especially at higher levels. If you consider the way tiers are usually defined it is really hard to construct a reasonable argument for Clerics to be below tier 1.

[Gignere]

It is worth pointing out that if we're talking about the original Clerics, they were not quite what we would call full-casters. Prior to (I think) 3e D&D, Divine casting simply didn't go past 7th level, fullstop. 8th and 9th level spells were the domain of wizards and wizards alone.

Of course, they learned new spells at the same rate as a wizard up until 6th level spells (their 7th and final level of spells was delayed a level for some reason, coming at 14th rather than 13th), and would actually learn them a tiny bit faster because they required less XP to level up. But their spell list as a whole was also far worse in 2e than it was in 3e and beyond.

That said...


Wildly different is overstating it. Most people agree that wizards are stronger overall, but in 3e and 5e, a Cleric is quite capable of resolving or drastically altering fights with a single well-chosen spell, and can do so regularly and consistently as they progress, especially at higher levels. If you consider the way tiers are usually defined it is really hard to construct a reasonable argument for Clerics to be below tier 1.

In 3e Clerics were equal to if not stronger than wizards. That’s where the term Codzilla came from. Clerics can be built to fight better than the fighter, have nearly as many different spells as wizards, and have crazy healing all at once in 3e using enough splat books.

[Warder]

Urrgh, this is so DULL. I have no idea what the design intent with D&Done is, but it's just so boring so far. They have a chance to inject some magic back into the increasingly formulaic 5e, but this is what we get instead. I'm happy for everyone who is being catered to with these updates, it's just so obvious that it is not me.

[Tanarii]

It is worth pointing out that if we're talking about the original Clerics, they were not quite what we would call full-casters. Prior to (I think) 3e D&D, Divine casting simply didn't go past 7th level, fullstop. 8th and 9th level spells were the domain of wizards and wizards alone.
Thats because their 7th level spells were on par with Wizard 9th level spells. A spell level wasn't a power equivalence thing across classes.

For that matter, a class level wasn't a power equivalence thing across classes. Two classes of he same XP were expected to have different levels. A cleric could easily be 2-3 (or more in BECMI) class levels ahead of a Wizard for the same amount of play.

[animorte]

Wildly different is overstating it. Most people agree that wizards are stronger overall, but in 3e and 5e, a Cleric is quite capable of resolving or drastically altering fights with a single well-chosen spell, and can do so regularly and consistently as they progress, especially at higher levels. If you consider the way tiers are usually defined it is really hard to construct a reasonable argument for Clerics to be below tier 1.
I would probably say that wildly different is still accurate, because they absolutely are. However, I agree completely agree with you on the matter of power level.

[Melil12]

Is that the role of the cleric class? Damage dealer? Or is it a support class like the bard?

I think their role is Support/Control/Tanking.

[Arkhios]

Is that the role of the cleric class? Damage dealer? Or is it a support class like the bard?

I think their role is Support/Control/Tanking.

Channel Divinity: Divine Spark, 2d8 to 6d8 damage or healing, 2 to 6 times between long rests, is hardly something that would make or break their role. It's just an additional option they have for their turns. Damage Dealer should be able to use something like that much more often. I wouldn't say Clerics would have their role changed towards Damage Dealer. If anything, Divine Spark helps them with Support/Control/Tanking roles.

[stoutstien]

Is that the role of the cleric class? Damage dealer? Or is it a support class like the bard?

I think their role is Support/Control/Tanking.

5e doesn't really do roles in that sense. One is definitely shifting it that way which I fiercely oppose.
Even using the only the player handbook you can build about any class to do anything well enough to get by. That's a good thing IMO.

[animorte]

5e doesn't really do roles in that sense. One is definitely shifting it that way which I fiercely oppose.
Nicely put, I hadn’t directly thought of it that way, but on a personal level, I feel exactly the opposite. I like the roles being embraced a little better. However, I don’t perceive that One is accomplishing that concept nearly as accurately enough to bring it to life.


Even using the only the player handbook you can build about any class to do anything well enough to get by. That's a good thing IMO.
Agreed. This looks more like the direction One is attempting to embrace. With everything getting a little more modular and customizable, each class is going to have more ways to resemble what others are capable of, not less.

[stoutstien]

Nicely put, I hadn’t directly thought of it that way, but on a personal level, I feel exactly the opposite. I like the roles being embraced a little better. However, I don’t perceive that One is accomplishing that concept nearly as accurately enough to bring it to life.


Agreed. This looks more like the direction One is attempting to embrace. With everything getting a little more modular and customizable, each class is going to have more ways to resemble what others are capable of, not less.

Yes and no. They are increasing the illusion of flexibility but because everything is getting shifted to a monolithic progression with clear winners/losers it's falling into the 3.x trap.

They're shifting stuff around without actually addressing the actual problem where some classes just don't have the space within the subclass capture certain concepts. Or if they do the progression is lop sided.

Player options can and should have an affinity for certain roles in the gamist sense but to at the expense of the initial freedom that 5e provides. For example if I want to play a skirmishing dirty trick combatant I shouldn't be required to take one particular combination to accomplish this. In the same vein is something is integrally required to make something function I shouldn't have to go lookong for it.(I adamantly oppose feat taxes and chain)

[Jervis]

I had a interesting discussion elsewhere about spiritual weapon and how bad the nerf is for it. Now it’s competing with 1st level bless and 3rd level spirit guardians for concentration so I don’t think people will actually use it much