D&D 5E Cleric Love Domain Adjustments

[Sacrosanct]

Any particular reason why?

I mean, you're changing the class's primary stat entirely, which is... fishy, IMO.

Because love is more impacted by charisma (attraction) and seems to toss wisdom right out the window

 

[Harzel]

Because love is more impacted by charisma (attraction) and seems to toss wisdom right out the window

You're right flavor-wise, but game-wise we really don't need more CHA-based casters.

 

[Sacrosanct]

You're right flavor-wise, but game-wise we really don't need more CHA-based casters.

It should be based off of flavor and what makes sense, IMO. As a game designer myself, when you start designing classes based on some metagaming metric rather than what makes intuitive sense, you're going down a bad road.

"Well, we have this swashbuckler subclass, but we already have enough dex based classes, so we just have to make it an INT based one, because we don't have enough of those." Crazy talk. And it would cause confusion to most people who read the class and see a swashbuckler where DEX doesn't matter.

 

[dave2008]

You're right flavor-wise, but game-wise we really don't need more CHA-based casters.

Maybe change a different caster to something other than CHA?
EDIT: If it works for the flavor.

 

[Horwath]

Because love is more impacted by charisma (attraction) and seems to toss wisdom right out the window

together with intelligence

 

[Hawk Diesel]

It should be based off of flavor and what makes sense, IMO. As a game designer myself, when you start designing classes based on some metagaming metric rather than what makes intuitive sense, you're going down a bad road.

"Well, we have this swashbuckler subclass, but we already have enough dex based classes, so we just have to make it an INT based one, because we don't have enough of those." Crazy talk. And it would cause confusion to most people who read the class and see a swashbuckler where DEX doesn't matter.

I understand what you're saying, and I could see the argument going either way. But still what you have at its core is a cleric. They aren't utilizing the power of love through their own charisma or power of seduction. They are praying to a god of love to grant them a piece of their divine spark to manipulate the forces of love. Such gods or churches devoted to love gods may attract more attractive people, but love affects everyone regardless of their attractiveness or power of personality. For this reason, it seems as if Wisdom is still the most appropriate spellcasting stat. Love clerics don't embody love or attraction. They become vessels through which a god of love may act.

Additionally, wouldn't this open up a can of worms? Should the War domain use Strength as their primary spellcasting stat, or should Arcana clerics use Intelligence? It seems like a slippery precedent to set.

 

[Harzel]

Maybe change a different caster to something other than CHA?
EDIT: If it works for the flavor.

There are certainly good candidates. I've not heard a particularly compelling argument for why Sorcerers are CHA, and I'd have no trouble with Paladins going to WIS.

 

[Zardnaar]

There are certainly good candidates. I've not heard a particularly compelling argument for why Sorcerers are CHA, and I'd have no trouble with Paladins going to WIS.

MADs an issue with Paladin's unless you key aura off wisdom as well.

 

[Harzel]

MADs an issue with Paladin's unless you keyaure off wisdom as well.

Good point. You could also link it to proficiency bonus (maybe 1/2 prof. bonus), or just make it a constant, or a number dependent on level.

 

[Zardnaar]

Good point. You could also link it to proficiency bonus (maybe 1/2 prof. bonus), or just make it a constant, or a number dependent on level.

That was the 3E Paladin.

I think it was designed with the assumption of rolled stats but stat arrays and the way editions handle stat boosts makes more than 1 or 2 seats a pain.

They recognised this with the hexblade for example.