D&D 2E 2E Priests Vs 5E Domains

Zardnaar · Jul 1, 2019

Modern D&D has done a lot if things that have generally improved the game. I don't miss THAC0 nor do I use it.

However 2E had a fairly unique way dealing with priests. The broke the cleric and Druid spell lists into spheres. Spheres usually had a theme such as protection, elemental, healing, sun etc. Different priests, clerics and specialty priests would have access to different spheres so there was no spell list as such, more of a sphere list.

A specialty priest was basically a priest of a specific deity such as a sunlord of lathendar. Druids were a specialty priest. Other types of priests were usually cleric variants such as a Crusader.

You could also have major and minor access to a sphere. Minor access was level 1 to 3, major access was up to level 7.

The system was also good for low magic settings as you might only have a few spheres. DM doesn't want magical healing well no priest has that domain. Same thing with raise dead.

It was a but all over the place though. Some were very weak and you had things like some if the FR specialty priests.

So overall more interesting than 5E but also a bit of a mess ymmv of course if you designed your own.

R_Chance · Jul 1, 2019

I liked it. It helped define the deities and the interests of their priests. It also reigned in the power of Clerics vs. other classes in terms of spell access. The Complete Priests book adding various granted powers in the place of the generic turn undead ability gave more flavor. The priests access to weapons and armor varied with their magical prowess too. There was a version of it on the Paizo boards for 3.5 / PF iirc. I'd love a version of this for 5E (and have messed around with doing it for both 3.x and 5E).

Fanaelialae · Jul 1, 2019

Yeah, this gets brought up at my table from time to time, in the sense of things we miss from older editions. Particularly with regard to The Complete Book of Priests.

Shiroiken · Jul 1, 2019

Conceptually I liked the spheres from 2E, but I remember the biggest downside: players needed to pick a deity with access to the Healing sphere, as magical healing was absolutely necessary. With 5E, it might not be as necessary, but I think most players would still choose a deity that grants them access to healing. I think a better system would have been to allow most priests minor access to most spheres, with only a few deities not granting Healing, but limiting major access to only a few. This way low level healing would be available to almost everyone, but greater spells like Raise Dead would require a true healer.

Personally, I think the concepts of the domains to be acceptable, as it allows different types of priests with as simple a system as possible. In the Greyhawk Boxed set for 1E, there were different benefits that could be granted to clerics of certain gods, and I feel the domains help bring this idea about in a balanced way.

gyor · Jul 1, 2019

The Speciality Priests of Faiths and Avatars, Demihumsn Deities, and Powers and Pantheons in 2e were awesome, but it's unlikely anything like speciality priests will be in 5e, unless they make it an alternate class feature for clerics like the alternate features we know the Ranger is going to get.

For now the closest we get to a speciality Priest is the Divine Soul, which is a mix of 2e Mystic (a class related to Speciality Priests) and 3e Favoured Soul.

gyor · Jul 1, 2019

Shiroiken said:
Conceptually I liked the spheres from 2E, but I remember the biggest downside: players needed to pick a deity with access to the Healing sphere, as magical healing was absolutely necessary. With 5E, it might not be as necessary, but I think most players would still choose a deity that grants them access to healing. I think a better system would have been to allow most priests minor access to most spheres, with only a few deities not granting Healing, but limiting major access to only a few. This way low level healing would be available to almost everyone, but greater spells like Raise Dead would require a true healer.

Personally, I think the concepts of the domains to be acceptable, as it allows different types of priests with as simple a system as possible. In the Greyhawk Boxed set for 1E, there were different benefits that could be granted to clerics of certain gods, and I feel the domains help bring this idea about in a balanced way.

There is also the possibly of deity related feats.

Or none cleric, priestly subclasses, like the Divine Soul for Sorcerer or Zealot for Barbarians.

I think a Divine Spellcasting Bard like the 3.5e Choir would be cool for many Gods.

Gadget · Jul 1, 2019

I think AD&D relied far more on class spell lists and class weapon proficiency/restrictions to differentiate various classes than 5e does. You could do a lot more with class/subclass flavor by playing with these dials. With a la carte multi-classing, feats and various abilities to raid other class's spell lists, that is not as much a thing anymore. It is no longer that big of a deal to say "Look everybody, my cleric/priest can wield a sword!" And the domain system does try this by granting different weapon and armor proficiencies. While I can't remember all the various details with specialty priests from 2e, it seems that some of them--especially in the various Complete books--were basically different classes in large part, which is a bit of a heavy mechanical burden to hang on the domain/sub-class framework of 5e.

Azzy · Jul 1, 2019

They were neat, but an unbalanced mess. I'll take the current subclasses over them.

Blue · Jul 1, 2019

I find that 5e priests tent to play the same from game to game, so something that encourages more differentiation would be welcome. That said, I would be wary of ending up with something like: "3 of these 5 'best' domains are the only ones picked, so now clerics have a narrower list in actual play so there's even less variation. Oh, and only have the deity list gives access to them so there's less variation in who you worship as well - your RP choice of another god can hamstring you mechanically".

An issue is that there really are some stand-out cleric spells so you see them over and over. If there were more spells of that very high caliber we'd see more variation, even without enforcement. But I haven't seen a cleric without most of spirit guardians, spiritual weapon, guidance, bless, and a few other staples basically ever in 5e.

Blue · Jul 1, 2019

Outside the question if 5e would benefit from such a split, I'd like to suggest some variations on what Minor Access would do instead of just limiting spell levels, which would not have a huge effect in the Tier 1&2 gamespace that most games spend the majority of their time.

Minor access could mean (pick as many as you like):

No access to ritual versions of the spells.
Only WIS spells can be prepared total from Spheres with Minor access any given day. (I'd actually prefer [PROFICIENCY] spells so it scales, but that's a bit of a different mechanic then other classes use)
Max spell level prepared is one less than that normal. (So if you could prepare 3rd level cleric spells, you can only perpare 1-2 level minor access spells.)
No access to Cantrips (in other words Cantrips only from Major access spheres).
Spells from minor spheres can't be upcast.
DC/Spell Attack does not add proficiency for minor spheres. (Same as if using an unproficient weapon.)

This is just an idea list, not meant to all be in play at once. Some address the same restriction - like limited selections or no access to add-ons (upcast/ritual) - and shouldn't all be picked.

D&D 2E 2E Priests Vs 5E Domains

Zardnaar

Legend

R_Chance

Hero

Fanaelialae

Legend

Shiroiken

Legend

gyor

Legend

gyor

Legend

Gadget

Adventurer

Azzy

ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

Similar Threads