D&D 5E What is the Deal with the Twilight Cleric?

[Paul Farquhar]

This actually annoyed the heck out of a DM of mine once. We entered a room where there was writing on an archway. Once someone said they were looking around for traps/enemies, he chortled and said "Explosive Runes!".

To which I replied, "but DM, you said before we can't read anything if we're using infravision. Nobody has a light source lit at the moment."

I mean, eventually someone did get hit by the Runes when we decided we wanted to examine the writing, but the look on his face made me wish I had a camera on hand!

In one 5e adventure I included a tapestry which had a clue hidden in it, but it was only visible in colour vision (like a colour blindness test). Since 5e darkvision can only see in black and white, the hidden message was invisible.

 

[Horwath]

In one 5e adventure I included a tapestry which had a clue hidden in it, but it was only visible in colour vision (like a colour blindness test). Since 5e darkvision can only see in black and white, the hidden message was invisible.

this is a good way to limit darkvision and not remove it.
basically make useful only for combat value, anything remotely skilled based that requires sight is at disadvantage or impossible.

 

[Staffan]

this is a good way to limit darkvision and not remove it.
basically make useful only for combat value, anything remotely skilled based that requires sight is at disadvantage or impossible.

5e Darkvision has two effects:
1. Dim light is treated as bright light (so a torch that normally produces 20 ft of bright light and 40 ft of dim light would be seen as 40 ft of bright light).
2. Darkness is treated as dim light, which gives disadvantage on sight-related Perception checks, and additionally you only see shades of grey rather than colors in what would otherwise be darkness.

That said, shades of grey would normally suffice for reading unless the writing is specifically designed to not be readable without light (by using ink/paint and a writing surface of different hues but the same value).

 

[Stormonu]

For 5E, I like inserting the BS logic that since undead have ties to the negative/shadow plane they don't register to darkvision because that sort of vision is "stripping away the darkness*", and thus supresses the essence of undeath.

* D&D has always treated both cold and darkness not as the absence of its opposite, but as an actual existing counter-force.

 

[James Gasik]

For 5E, I like inserting the BS logic that since undead have ties to the negative/shadow plane they don't register to darkvision because that sort of vision is "stripping away the darkness*", and thus supresses the essence of undeath.

* D&D has always treated both cold and darkness not as the absence of its opposite, but as an actual existing counter-force.

Does that mean undead can't see each other with their darkvision?

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I usually only ban subclasses if I don't like the fluff--and I often try to tweak the fluff a bit to make it fit first. Subclasses that are over or underpowered I can just fix without much trouble. After all, I paid for this and I want it to be available.

After looking at it for a bit, I just banned Twilight cleric. It's an absolute mechanical mess, and fixing it would essentially involve just taking the twilight concept (so basically good for Selune, and maybe some fantasy-historical moon gods) and making completely different mechanics for a relatively niche concept. Light domain can cover moon theme. On the other hand, I'm going to fix the mechanics on Mike Mearls Darkness domain, because that's a much broader concept that works for different things (including if the theme you are going for is more about night than moon).

Before somebody points out that I said only ban subclasses for fluff, but then criticized this subclass for mechanics before banning it for fluff, completely making any mechanical criticisms irrelevant--that'snt what I said or did.

I uniquely banned it for mechanical reasons, and indicated that the fluff was also weak enough that I wasn't going to go through the extraordinary rebuilding I would have to do to mechanically fix it. Heck, even if I loved the fluff, I would have to essentially completely mechanical create a replacement. Had it been a more compelling concept I might have done so, and it would have been more work than any other subclass.

I brought up that extra info that could be confusing at first glance because I personally value informational context rather than "just the facts". It's more useful.

 

[Seramus]

I understand most of the fluff for Twilight Cleric. They are the Night Watchman that stands against the horrors of the night. The defender who will valiantly guard the wall until dawn comes. Someone who endures through the worst and makes it to the end. It's a reasonably common mythological trope. Heavy Armor, Eyes of the Night, Vigilant Blessing, Twilight Sanctuary, and Twilight Shroud all make sense under that theme.

Steps of Night is the only one that makes me really scratch my head and wonder how it fits in.

(I agree Twilight Sanctuary is the problem. I'm only speaking to the thematics)

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Of course, DMs are well within their purview to limit or ban any aspect of the game for the campaign they are looking to run. Nothing wrong with that at all, IMO.

That said, there are other ways to deal with the Twilight Cleric's abilities other than straight up banning or nerfing it.

Let's take Twilight Sanctuary which, below 6th level, the Twilight Cleric can only use once per rest.

1. Set up opportunities for there to be more than one combat between rests.
2. Have intelligent creatures learn about Twilight Sanctuary and temporarily (1 minute+) run away so it becomes at best a single use temp HP ability
3. Use enemies that can Charm or Frighten the PCs so the temp HP isn't "spammed" and the other benefit needs to be utilized for a round
4. Spread out the battlefield so melee focused PCs need to make the potential tradeoff of engaging vs staying in the sanctuary
5. Use enemies that have spells or abilities that can cause the Incapacitated condition (Myconid Sovereign, Harpy, Ghost, a low level wizard NPC with Sleep/Hold Person/Tasha's Hideous Laughter prepared, etc)
6. Have encounters in tight quarters that limit the effective range of the sanctuary

I'm sure the creative posters here can come up with more - and it would be helpful to hear them!

As for it taking up playtime/spotlight time with extra rolls, something we've done at our table is have each player roll their own d6 for the Temp HP quietly at the end of their respective turns.

 

[FrozenNorth]

That said, there are other ways to deal with the Twilight Cleric's abilities other than straight up banning or nerfing it.

The question is:
1. In a party that may have 4, 5 or 6 players, how much time and effort should a DM spend to address problems caused by the mechanics of ONE character? and
2. To what extent does addressing the problems created by the Twilight cleric cause different problems?

Let's take Twilight Sanctuary which, below 6th level, the Twilight Cleric can only use once per rest.

1. Set up opportunities for there to be more than one combat between rests.

Better hope the players enjoy the focus on extra combats.

2. Have intelligent creatures learn about Twilight Sanctuary and temporarily (1 minute+) run away so it becomes at best a single use temp HP ability

3. Use enemies that can Charm or Frighten the PCs so the temp HP isn't "spammed" and the other benefit needs to be utilized for a round
4. Spread out the battlefield so melee focused PCs need to make the potential tradeoff of engaging vs staying in the sanctuary
5. Use enemies that have spells or abilities that can cause the Incapacitated condition (Myconid Sovereign, Harpy, Ghost, a low level wizard NPC with Sleep/Hold Person/Tasha's Hideous Laughter prepared, etc)
6. Have encounters in tight quarters that limit the effective range of the sanctuary

You can address the issue by designing fights against a single PC. It tends to greatly limit the creatures you can use (you may as well give up using any creatures of the Beast and Ooze types and most Monstrosities). You may find yourself spending more time designing your fights. You may find yourself including additional fights that aren’t particularly fun and exist solely to drain resources. You may find yourself including creatures that don’t make sense but that are effective counters for the Twilight cleric.

The point goes back to my first line. As a DM, you are trying to make a fun game for all your players. If a single class is monopolizing your prep time, that class is a problem.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

The question is:
1. In a party that may have 4, 5 or 6 players, how much time and effort should a DM spend to address problems caused by the mechanics of ONE character? and
2. To what extent does addressing the problems created by the Twilight cleric cause different problems?
<snip>

Apparently my proposal was quite unclear as to be the inspiration for such ardent dissent.

Let me try simplifying:

Let's go with the assumption that the DM is choosing not to ban the Twilight subclass.
What are some tactics a DM might employ to offer a challenge to a party with a Twilight Cleric given that the Twilight Sanctuary is deemed a formidable ability?
Can you think of any such tactics that won't make unreasonable demands on DM prep and/or unbalance the spotlight during gameplay?

Here's one to add to the mix: an enemy caster that has Vortex Warp prepared - try to send that Twilight Cleric up to 180 feet away!


ETA: I don't mean to dismiss your cautionary points @FrozenNorth - they are absolutely valid and should be heeded. I just disagree that they are completely unavoidable in this particular case.