Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Cleric, Druid, Wizard Options

In another new Unearthed Arcana (these things are coming out fast right now!) the cleric receives a new Divine Domain option: the Twilight Domain; the druid gains a new Druid Circle option: the Circle of Wildfire; and the wizard gains a new Arcane Tradition feature: Onomancy, the magic of true names.

 

[Yaarel]

Many of the subclasses recently previewed just feel to me like old concepts from other classes re-applied to a new class. Twilight is basically a shadow option for clerics, Aberrant Mind a Sorcerer version of the GOO Warlock, Wildfire a (fire) elemental option for druids... I don't like this kind of crossover because I like classes to be separated, I don't like the idea of having the same theme across many classes. And it's starting to feel like half of these designs are generated by looking at gaps across classes.

When there are themes and mechanics that seem suitable for many classes, this when the idea of ‘mini-classes’, that are just 4, 8, or 12 or so levels long, become tempting for me. Not everything needs to be a 20-level base class. Even start at level 1 in a 4-level miniclass to get something useful, maybe like an animal companion or similar pet, and then switch to another class when that miniclass runs out.

 

[ZeshinX]

When there are themes and mechanics that seem suitable for many classes, this when the idea of ‘mini-classes’, that are just 4, 8, or 12 or so levels long, become tempting for me. Not everything needs to be a 20-level base class. Even start at level 1 in a 4-level miniclass to get something useful, maybe like an animal companion or similar pet, and then switch to another class when that miniclass runs out.

So a prestige class, basically.

 

[Raunalyn]

Melee clerics don't get extra attacks. Divine strike is what they use to help keep up in melee.

The war priest kinda does. They get a limited number of times that they can make a bonus action attack.

 

[Yaarel]

So a prestige class, basically.

The miniclass resembles the 3e prestige classes, but strictly deletes every convoluted prerequisite.

The only prerequisite to take a miniclass would be identical to take any base class, namely a key ability score of 13.

 

[Mister-Kent]

Twilight Cleric is solid. I like Druids who can find other uses for Wildshape slots, that should definitely be more of a thing. True Namer is neat in concept but feels like it should be, how to say it? More robust I guess?

Okay SO yeah I like these subclasses okay but anyway THIS

If you don't want something, you don't buy it. We do that every single day over millions of things. I don't want to eat Almond Joys and thus I don't buy Almond Joys. And this should not bother anybody whatsoever... even the people who love Almond Joys.

NO I AM TRIGGERED

 

[Reynard]

The miniclass resembles the 3e prestige classes, but strictly deletes every convoluted prerequisite.

The only prerequisite to take a miniclass would be identical to take any base class, namely a key ability score of 13.

Maybe you create something like a "theme" that allows you to replace subclass features at certain levels with theme features. Or maybe they could be analogous to feat chains, replacing your ability score increases.

 

[Undrave]

When there are themes and mechanics that seem suitable for many classes, this when the idea of ‘mini-classes’, that are just 4, 8, or 12 or so levels long, become tempting for me. Not everything needs to be a 20-level base class. Even start at level 1 in a 4-level miniclass to get something useful, maybe like an animal companion or similar pet, and then switch to another class when that miniclass runs out.

Animal companions as class features are dumb. They should just be their own character with level and full features and just be counted as an extra PC for the purpose of encounter balancing. And if you want to make a class good at teaming up with a such character, give them teamwork oriented features that stack with teamwork oriented features on the animal companion itself, but means they can still team-up with a regular PC.

 

[gyor]

If a game option isn't popular enough without more Intel, it might just not be a good idea?

Actually it can be, because context matters. The so called "Lore Wizard" that turned out to really be a Izzet Wizard is a great example of that.

 

[DEFCON 1]

When there are themes and mechanics that seem suitable for many classes, this when the idea of ‘mini-classes’, that are just 4, 8, or 12 or so levels long, become tempting for me. Not everything needs to be a 20-level base class. Even start at level 1 in a 4-level miniclass to get something useful, maybe like an animal companion or similar pet, and then switch to another class when that miniclass runs out.

Yeah, I'm with you on this in a lot of ways. I personally don't mind "multiclass" subclasses... where an entire class's theme is subclassed. Because for the most part, a class's "theme" or "flavor" tends to be rather wide, allowing for dozens if not hundreds of different stories or themes to come out of it. So the Eldritch Knight's layering of the Wizard on top of the Fighter or the Path of the Zealot's layering of the Cleric on top of the Barbarian, or the College of Sword's layering of the Fighter on top of the Bard-- it allows for the overlapping of a very wide thematic idea onto another class but doesn't steal the very specific schtick of the single class with its subclass. The College of Swords Bard/Fighter is still a very different thematic idea than the Fighter Samurai.

But when you have very narrow theming-- basically a subclass's theme-- and you layer THAT onto another class... it just reduces the individuality of the story need for both. The theming of what a Warlock is versus what a Sorcerer is, is already tenuous enough... but to then have both of them gain power from the exact same source just reduces the theming even further.

A PC somehow making a connection to some bizarre Far Realm entity and getting power from it is a really cool idea for a character, but it's an exceedingly narrow character theme-- only one out of tens of thousands of people "in-world" would ever actually have it (except in a specific case of a cult where EVERYBODY would have it.) So to then have two or more different classes give different ways of getting that theme just to me dilutes the flavor. This person made a deal with the entity to gain power.... this person just has the power of the entity running through them.

This person is a monk with the powers of shadow running through them. That person is a sorcerer with the powers of shadow running through them. That person is a ranger with the powers of shadow running through them. And now this person is a cleric with the powers of shadow running through them. YOU get to be shadow! And YOU get to be shadow! EVERYBODY gets to be shadow! To me this just feels like the sum is now less than its parts.

If I want a very isolated character idea of having this bizarre ancestral connection to a dragon somehow and in some way... would it kill me to just play a sorcerer? Do I really need to ask that a draconic druid get made too? Or a cleric domain about a wolf totem? Or a sun soul wizard subclass? When you get to that point I feel like the adage becomes more and more true-- when everything is special, then nothing is.

 

[DEFCON 1]

NO I AM TRIGGERED

DEAL WITH IT, KENT!