D&D 5E D&D Next Q&A: 01/24/2014

[Argyle King]

first thoughts...


1) I guess I see where he's coming from. However, at an actual table, it does seem kinda lame to be playing a class that doesn't have 'cool stuff' yet while somebody else is already getting it. Overall, I think I support his point of view, but it does seem to go against what I've come to expect from 5E.


2) So different classes will have different break points... I understand why, but I find myself curious how this will interact with multiclassing.


3) Makes sense considering how things are worded. Without seeing the finished product, I can't comment on how I feel it may or may not cause problems during play.

 

[Klaus]

Eh. I'm not in favor of "one size fits all," so I'm cool with this. The way that 5e is conceiving of the cleric's story, they can't heal wounds without a god, so they should probably have a god at Level 1.

I might like them to gain some OTHER sign of tradition at level 3. Like perhaps they get some sort of initiation or something? But that's kind of unnecessary, I guess.

I'm also okay with some classes choosing first.

BUT, if I had to create a way around it:

Cleric: At 1st level, a cleric is a mere acolyte, learning the basic prayers and proficiencies of his order (for instance, Turn Undead). At 3rd level, the cleric becomes an initiate, after being allowed to participate in the deeper mysteries of his faith (such as the deity-specific Channel Divinity, the domain spells, etc).

Warlock: At 1st level, a would-be warlock enters a pact with an unseen patron. Frankly, the warlock is still too feeble to warrant the patron's attention, and must earn his hexes. At 3rd level, the warlock has proven himself enough that the true nature of the patron is revealed (often to the warlock's horror!), and the full pact is now in effect.

Sorcerer: At 1st level, the new sorcerer can somehow manipulate magic, performing minor tricks and cantrips, and might start searching for his true origins. At 3rd level, enough magic courses through his veins that his bloodline fully manifests (often to the sorcerer's horror!).

 

[Sadrik]

Bit of a sidestep with the article, but what struck me in it was what is the difference between a pact and a domain. I still don't like it. One extraplanar creature grants you spells because you worship it and another grants you spells because you bargain with it... Ok whatever.

So 5e magic is:
Wizard - You unlock a difficult magic code and use it correctly to create effects
Bard - You can perform music or oratory so well it unlocks magic that creates effects
Druid & Ranger - You venerate nature's code and use it correctly to create effects
Cleric & Paladin - You worship a creature that grants you spells to create effects
Warlock - You make a deal with a creature that grants you spells to create effects
Sorcerer - You are innately born magical which allows you to create effects

The 5e classes that I lament are in 5e:
Barbarian - would have been fine as a fighter or ranger path
Warlock - would have been fine as a cleric, druid, or sorcerer path
Monk - would have been fine as a fighter, rogue or even a mystical path being a cleric or even sorcerer.

All for the same reasons that an Assassin is not a base class essentially, stepping on the toes of other more core classes too much.

 

[Remathilis]

Basically, I'm ok with Clerics picking their domain at first, but not getting anything special from that choice (save weapon/armor proficiency) until 3rd level. Same with Sorcerer bloodlines and warlock pacts.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Bit of a sidestep with the article, but what struck me in it was what is the difference between a pact and a domain. I still don't like it. One extraplanar creature grants you spells because you worship it and another grants you spells because you bargain with it... Ok whatever.

I would expect the warlock to remain a seperate class in 5e because legacy buzzword shenanigans.

BUT

I'm sympathetic here. It seems like the major difference is the TYPE of patron: a "god" vs. some other entity. That distinction can't help but be kind of arbitrary.

And I like the vibe of a divine warlock. It creates a much better story for dark magic, a dichotomy between the "approved" gods and the "dark" gods that is rife with interesting distinction and variety. A warlock makes a much better evil priest than the cleric!

I don't think it'd be a major problem to do that re-write, though.

Cleric: At 1st level, a cleric is a mere acolyte, learning the basic prayers and proficiencies of his order (for instance, Turn Undead). At 3rd level, the cleric becomes an initiate, after being allowed to participate in the deeper mysteries of his faith (such as the deity-specific Channel Divinity, the domain spells, etc).

Warlock: At 1st level, a would-be warlock enters a pact with an unseen patron. Frankly, the warlock is still too feeble to warrant the patron's attention, and must earn his hexes. At 3rd level, the warlock has proven himself enough that the true nature of the patron is revealed (often to the warlock's horror!), and the full pact is now in effect.

Sorcerer: At 1st level, the new sorcerer can somehow manipulate magic, performing minor tricks and cantrips, and might start searching for his true origins. At 3rd level, enough magic courses through his veins that his bloodline fully manifests (often to the sorcerer's horror!).

It works, it's just not always consistent with the expectations of the class. Lots of sorcerers have "accidentally burned up my family" as backstory (the minor tricks are for toddlers!). Clerics define their look by determining what deity they have emblazoned on their shield. Warlocks who don't know their patron don't know if it's fey or alien or what yet. By level 1, a character is usually assumed to be competent in their class (even if they're not focused).

I think I'd go the other way with it:

Cleric: At level 1, they are priests of their gods and wield divine magic. At level 3, they get initiated into deeper mysteries. Perhaps they can now bless items in the name of their gods! (Some kind of perhaps-temporary item creation?)

Warlock: At level 1, they have a pact with their patron. At level 3, they ...get initiated into deeper mysteries. Perhaps they are given a gift from their patron (free magic item?)

Sorcerer: At level 1, they have tapped into their bloodline. At level 3, they...maybe start to show a physical sign of that. Perhaps they mutate a little bit (natural weapon? AC bonus?).

 

[SkidAce]

I don't like it at all, as actual spellcastng clerics are the mid levels of my church hierarchies. Now they are telling me 1-2 levels are merely acolytes.

Ehh, if that's all I don't like, I can find a way to work around it. No worries.

 

[mlund]

Frankly, I don't think being a low-level Cleric has anything to do with rank in the hierarchy. The idea that being able to drop spells, sling a war-hammer, and wear heavy armor has anything to do with qualification to shepherd a congregation or maintain orthodoxy among various cities and nations for a faith. Character-class clerics are derived from battle-chaplains and religious chivalric orders from the Crusades. Advancing in the Cleric class is about evolving towards some sort of avatar of your Domain or Diety, hands and feet and terrible swift sword if the situation calls for it.

I think they could at least separate unlocking Domain Spells from the initial assumption of the Domain. Get your domain benefit at Level 1 with your domain. Get more spells at level 2. Unlock your Domain Spells at level 3.

Really, the whole "class initiation" thing is just window-dressing for casters since they have spell levels anyway.

- Marty Lund

 

[ccooke]

I don't like it at all, as actual spellcastng clerics are the mid levels of my church hierarchies. Now they are telling me 1-2 levels are merely acolytes.

Ehh, if that's all I don't like, I can find a way to work around it. No worries.

Well, 5e actually supports that better than previous editions.

The lower levels of your church hierarchies are priests, with the "Priest" background. They can be any class (even an NPC class, if you lile to do things that way). At the mid levels, you have Clerics with the Priest background.

Works, no?

 

[Falling Icicle]

I don't buy the idea that some classes must get their path at level 1, but not others. They mention things like a cleric's armor proficiencies as a reason why they have to get their domain at 1st level, but why wouldn't that also be the case for subclasses of other classes that might have different proficiencies than others of their class? I can imagine subclasses like war wizards that have better weapon or armor proficiencies than most wizards, or swashbuckler fighters that don't have proficiency in heavy armor, for example. They may not be planning on any such subclasses right now, but that design space should still be possible in the future, and they should plan accordingly.

As for action surge, this mechanic is terribly broken as written, and gives fighters ridiculous burst damage potential. I'd prefer for action surge to only give one extra attack. They could always give fighters more action surges between rests to compensate.

 

[Li Shenron]

I'd like all characters to choose their path at 3rd level. I believe a cleric, warlock or sorcerer in the levels 1-2 represents an individual of true faith/exceptional arcane talent searching for his place in the world. At 3rd level a cleric joins the ranks of his religious tradition, a warlock makes his pact and a sorcerer discovers his bloodline. As always, people who don't want to role-play this can always start at 3rd level.

I agree very much with this!

IMHO, they are now trying to narratively justify the domains at 1st level, but the truth is that they got stuck in this situation because they decided that domains should give bonus spells. So now, if you grant domain at 3rd level you would be in this weird situation when you all of a sudden get bonus spells of both 1st and 2nd level. It wouldn't be much of a deal for me to be honest, but I can see the weirdness of it. Moving domains up to 3rd level would require them to revise the mechanics for domains: I would do it, but obviously they don't want to because now it's too late for their schedule.

Well at least if many of the classes get the subclass choice at 1st level (since they suggest also Warlocks and Sorcerers will), the Cleric ceases to be an exception to the rule, so all in all it becomes more acceptable for my tastes. But so long for the concept of "apprentice levels"... those are not so believable anymore if in fact some classes "specialize" at 1st level.

---

That said, the 3rd Q&A is indeed a bit of an "ouch!" moment... multiplications have always been seen as potential cause of game-breakage in D&D, therefore it's weird that they would let the number of attacks multiply.

But maybe this is actually a way to boost fighters against spellcasters at very high level but... seriously... eight (8) attacks at 20th level? Even if it's max twice per battle (i.e. between short rests), it doesn't really sound likely that this will be the official rules. I would bet that they change their mind, and say in the final product that Extra Attack always applies once per round, and not once per attack action.