D&D (2024) The Cleric should be retired

[Neonchameleon]

What is gained by retiring the Cleric?

Being able to flesh out all the things they overlap with more without the cleric trying to grab the real estate.

And indeed, what is gained by condensing all the classes down to four, and making the rest all subclasses?

Have I ever said I want this? Subclasses are good however. If a subclass can do something effectively it's a good idea that it should.

Especially because adding mechanics to the game is a negative for anyone not directly using them as it makes the game more complex. So doing so elegantly is good.

 

[Retros_x]

Right, the historical connection is clear, but I think the White Mage archetype as it exists now differs from the classic cleric specifically in that:

• It doesn't wear armor
• It isn't effective with weapons
• It primarily casts spells in combat
• It isn't tied to a specific religion, but is generically "holy"

I mean 3 of these are true for D&D clerics too. They are not really effective with weapons and thus cast primarily spells in combat, maybe with the exception of some domains. And it also is not tied to a specific religion (domains are not religions).

 

[Stalker0]

My main issue with the cleric is it doesn't bring any real connection to the church or religious organization the cleric as a part of, and that in theory is one of the main story cruxes of the cleric.

I agree that something like the celestial warlock much better represents the "person chosen by a deity to act in the world under their name", sort of an avatar like concept. divine soul sorcerers handle the "innate divine power or blood" concept.

To me what makes the cleric the cleric is the church. They are its representative, its enforcer, its PR campaigner, or maybe even a church leader. None of that is really brought in to the class, and I think the archetype is diminished before of it.

 

[Bagpuss]

And the third is that thanks to the nature of prepared casting that their magic is very cookie cutter with, other than domain spells, all clerics being able to prepare the same spells.

Yeah they fixed the Cleric in 2nd Edition with Skills and Powers made them much more interesting and varied. Would love to see something similar for 5th.

 

[DarkCrisis]

My main issue with the cleric is it doesn't bring any real connection to the church or religious organization the cleric as a part of, and that in theory is one of the main story cruxes of the cleric.

I agree that something like the celestial warlock much better represents the "person chosen by a deity to act in the world under their name", sort of an avatar like concept. divine soul sorcerers handle the "innate divine power or blood" concept.

To me what makes the cleric the cleric is the church. They are its representative, its enforcer, its PR campaigner, or maybe even a church leader. None of that is really brought in to the class, and I think the archetype is diminished before of it.

Sounds like an RP issue. I'd say it's up to the player to act within his cleric's faith and/or the DM to enforce it.

 

[Yaarel]

This leads me to an interesting thought exercise... You could have three Base Classes with four subclasses organized around Martial, Primal, Divine, and Arcane.

Warrior (Battlemaster, Ranger, Paladin, Hexblade)
Expert (Assassin, Scout, Priest, Bard)
Spellcaster (Evoker, Druid, Cleric, Wizard)

Or something like that!

4e did something like that.


A 5e version can be:

Source: Arcane, Divine, Martial, Primal, Psionic
Role: Gish (blend), Mage (range), Rogue (stealth, mobility), Warrior (melee)

 

[Tonguez]

imc I explicitly made Cleric = Temple Knight specifically trained to protect Temples and battle Demonic forces and Necromantic forces. Most members of religious orders arent Clerics (and many Priests may infact be Celestial Warlocks or Bards)

 

[AnotherGuy]

Yeah they fixed the Cleric in 2nd Edition with Skills and Powers made them much more interesting and varied. Would love to see something similar for 5th.

And I was recently told Skills and Powers was not good.
I think there were some fine ideas in that book.

 

[AnotherGuy]

imc I explicitly made Cleric = Temple Knight specifically trained to protect Temples and battle Demonic forces and Necromantic forces. Most members of religious orders arent Clerics (and many Priests may infact be Celestial Warlocks or Bards)

I like this idea. Are Paladins then seen as field agents of temples?

I keep going back and forth between whether I want the Cleric and the Paladin rolled into one or as a possible subclasses of another class, whatever that is. I can't seem to make up my mind.

 

[Tony Vargas]

What is gained by retiring the Cleric?

By itself, shuffling free of the christian imagery of the original?
There are arguably other classes that should be at the head of the line for purging RL references that could be offensive, tho.

And indeed, what is gained by condensing all the classes down to four, and making the rest all subclasses?

Now, that could be something. Actually, not making anything be subclasses, either, could be part of it. Classes & sub-classes are straightjackets.

But, 5e used 3e's level-by-level multiclassing. If you had only a handful of classes, each focused on very specific ability sets, like y'know, divine casting, arcane casting, combat, skillz, then players could mix them in the proportions they wanted to get the character they were after.
A traditional Cleric could be constructed with a lot of divine casting levels and a few combat levels, for instance.