OneD&D UA - THE CLERIC AND REVISED SPECIES

[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.

Spoiler: Cleric

Show

• 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.

Spoiler: Character Species

Show

• 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.

Spoiler: Feats and Others

Show

• 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.

Spoiler: Good vs Bad maths

Show

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…

Spoiler: Beautiful, see?

Show

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.