D&D 5E (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook reveal: "New Cleric"

[Remathilis]

To me, 5e is a big tent, and WotC is not the only 5e game in town. I see no reason not to discuss the whole family when I think it's relevant.

The number of domain subclasses in Doctors & Daleks is far too small and the community should address it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So, you came to a discussion about how there are not enough domains, where I said that they don't need more subclasses than the other classes do. Your response was (to quote you word for word) "To get a comfortable range of concepts mechanically supported, I think they do."

You say you meant that to mean that you need to get away from domains altogether and divide them using a different metric, but also that archetypes are the same as subclasses.

Level Up clerics have 5 Archetypes.
Adepts have 9
Artificers have 5
Bards have 9
Berserkers have 7

To speed things up, most classes in Level Up have more than 5, in fact 5 is the lowest number of all the classes, and only the Cleric and Artificer have that few.

So, I said "Clerics do not need more subclasses than other classes"

You said that they need more subclasses than other classes to be get a comfortable range of concepts supported, meaning that they need to get away from domains as the subclass concept and divide the subclasses in a different way, like in Level Up where clerics have the least number of subclasses compared to other classes.

And when I defended the PHB having 4 subclasses and that covering enough concepts, saying that the concepts that are lacking could either make do or be ported over, you declared that you were so glad you don't need to play with the limited material I am comfortable with, meaning that you find that FIVE subclasses is plenty to cover every concept, because the subclasses are divivded up in a different manner which has nothing at all to do with their number, which was the point being made.

Weirdly though you never once said, until right this moment after I've asked you how Level Up is relevant, a single thing about how Domains are separated. You just kept insisting that FOUR is too small of a number of subclasses for the cleric in particular. Defending the idea that to have a comfortable range of concepts, you clearly need MORE subclasses than any other class, like in Level Up, where clerics have FEWER subclasses than most any other class, tying for the fewest number overall.

I feel like you are either scrambling to find a way to suggest Level Up is relevant, or you responded with a sentence you expected to convey six paragraphs of context that have nothing to do with the sentence you used.

If you're going to use domains, or spell schools as your subclass metric, I think you need more of them to get a comfortable range. If you use a different metric like Level Up did you can get away with fewer. This is why the cleric and wizard subclasses in the 5.5 PH felt lacking to me. I admit it took me some time to articulate what my issue was, and I genuinely believe Level Up has the advantage over WotC 5e in every metric save proprietary IP, so I tend to sing their praises regularly. Sue me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The number of domain subclasses in Doctors & Daleks is far too small and the community should address it.

Haven't read that. Are you serious or is this a joke at my expense?

 

[Remathilis]

Haven't read that. Are you serious or is this a joke at my expense?

There are no clerics in Doctors & Daleks.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There are no clerics in Doctors & Daleks.

So it is a joke at my expense?

 

[Remathilis]

So it is a joke at my expense?

It's about as relevant to a discussion of the 2024 PHB as Level Up is.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's about as relevant to a discussion of the 2024 PHB as Level Up is.

My point is if you have an issue with how 5.5 handles an issue, maybe look at another 5e take?

 

[Chaosmancer]

If you're going to use domains, or spell schools as your subclass metric, I think you need more of them to get a comfortable range. If you use a different metric like Level Up did you can get away with fewer. This is why the cleric and wizard subclasses in the 5.5 PH felt lacking to me. I admit it took me some time to articulate what my issue was, and I genuinely believe Level Up has the advantage over WotC 5e in every metric save proprietary IP, so I tend to sing their praises regularly. Sue me.

Ok. So why is four subclasses divided as Paths absolutely plenty to be comfortable with the Barbarian, while missing The Ancestor Spirit themes and Guardian role of the Path of the Ancestral Guardian, or the elemental fury themes of the Path of the Storm Herald, or the explosions of magical energy that came with the Path of Wild Magic, or the beast within themes of the Path of the Beast?

Because, no one has at any point indicated that we don't have enough Barbarian subclasses to be "comfortable" but we still only have four of them, while losing some rather iconic themes in the process.

Or the Druid lacking the Circle of Spores to bring in themes of decay and undeath into the Druid class, or the Circle of Dreams to bring the Feywild touched flavor and a subclass focused on healing which is not a subclass focus for Druids anymore.

Four is good enough for everyone except the Cleric and Wizard, who demand more because.... you say so? Because you think Level Up is better so DnD 5e24 should copy them whole cloth? Even at the expense of cohesion within their own book?

 

[Chaosmancer]

My point is if you have an issue with how 5.5 handles an issue, maybe look at another 5e take?

But that isn't really the point. Because you are saying that in response to the argument that "clerics and wizards don't need to receive special treatment. Every class is missing subclasses important to various themes they have. If you need those themes and subclasses sooner, you can port them in, or use what does exist to make it work." Saying "or you can redesign the redesigned class to look like Level Up" isn't a counter-point demanding special treatment for clerics and wizards.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But that isn't really the point. Because you are saying that in response to the argument that "clerics and wizards don't need to receive special treatment. Every class is missing subclasses important to various themes they have. If you need those themes and subclasses sooner, you can port them in, or use what does exist to make it work." Saying "or you can redesign the redesigned class to look like Level Up" isn't a counter-point demanding special treatment for clerics and wizards.

You are as always welcome to disagree.