D&D 5E Divine Casters

[I'm A Banana]

True, but I think the problem a lot of people have with the cleric is why two clerics of different gods have a shared identity at all. A cleric of the god of death and a cleric of the god of fire are both, ultimately, white mages with a sidebar of some fire or death abilities.

Yeah, but if you squint too hard at this horizon, the Cleric as a class becomes entirely superfluous.

Why doesn't the god of trickery have a rogue build? The god of war a fighter build? The god of nature a druid build (or just be druids)? The god of light maybe a sorcerer build (favored soul!) or a paladin build? The god of knowledge a wizard build? Why do we need a cleric class? Why can't we just have divinely inspired characters of ANY class?

If two clerics can have an almost entirely unique suite of abilities so that there's very little overlap between them, I'd argue that you're only a few short hops away from not needing a cleric class - being "a cleric" at that point already doesn't say much that is meaningful about the character.

 

[TwoSix]

Yeah, but if you squint too hard at this horizon, the Cleric as a class becomes entirely superfluous.

Why doesn't the god of trickery have a rogue build? The god of war a fighter build? The god of nature a druid build (or just be druids)? The god of light maybe a sorcerer build (favored soul!) or a paladin build? The god of knowledge a wizard build? Why do we need a cleric class? Why can't we just have divinely inspired characters of ANY class?

If two clerics can have an almost entirely unique suite of abilities so that there's very little overlap between them, I'd argue that you're only a few short hops away from not needing a cleric class - being "a cleric" at that point already doesn't say much that is meaningful about the character.

Does it suffice to say I agree with your logic and would have no problem with the game progressing to a point where the cleric IS superfluous?

I would agree that I would expect priests of the War God to be fighters, priests of the Trickster god to be rogues, and priests of the Death god to be necromancers. That feels right to me. The general D&D pantheon is so disparate, and the standard array of cleric spells so focused, that it feels like the game is stating something important about the nature of gods within the cosmology that isn't borne out by the rest of the text.

I guess, fundamentally, I like the fiction of magic in-game to support the cosmology, while for D&D in general the cosmology exists merely as a framework to support the pre-existing character concepts. I'm not saying that it's wrong, it's just something I think could be addressed within the game, but sadly isn't.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Does it suffice to say I agree with your logic and would have no problem with the game progressing to a point where the cleric IS superfluous?

I would agree that I would expect priests of the War God to be fighters, priests of the Trickster god to be rogues, and priests of the Death god to be necromancers. That feels right to me. The general D&D pantheon is so disparate, and the standard array of cleric spells so focused, that it feels like the game is stating something important about the nature of gods within the cosmology that isn't borne out by the rest of the text.

I guess, fundamentally, I like the fiction of magic in-game to support the cosmology, while for D&D in general the cosmology exists merely as a framework to support the pre-existing character concepts. I'm not saying that it's wrong, it's just something I think could be addressed within the game, but sadly isn't.

I'm in! Personally, the cleric has always felt like mechanics looking for a fictional home to me, even back in OD&D. DOMAINS FOR EVERYBODY!

 

[TwoSix]

I'm in! Personally, the cleric has always felt like mechanics looking for a fictional home to me, even back in OD&D. DOMAINS FOR EVERYBODY!

I'm OK with the classic wizard/cleric/druid divide the closer the setting is to a sort of pseudo-Medievalism, where clerics work for the church, druids are the old pagan beliefs, and wizards are the delvers into heretical thinkings. I don't feel the Greek-style brawling pantheon most D&D settings use suits that feel. The published settings that it does work for, to my mind, is Eberron, with the Sovereign Host being a unified pantheon and the Silver Flame having a strong Medieval Church feel. Al-Qadim, with its unified religious practices, also fits in traditional clerics well.

 

[jrowland]

Yeah, but if you squint too hard at this horizon, the Cleric as a class becomes entirely superfluous.

Why doesn't the god of trickery have a rogue build? The god of war a fighter build? The god of nature a druid build (or just be druids)? The god of light maybe a sorcerer build (favored soul!) or a paladin build? The god of knowledge a wizard build? Why do we need a cleric class? Why can't we just have divinely inspired characters of ANY class?

If two clerics can have an almost entirely unique suite of abilities so that there's very little overlap between them, I'd argue that you're only a few short hops away from not needing a cleric class - being "a cleric" at that point already doesn't say much that is meaningful about the character.

I'll chime in as agreeing, let's kill the cleric, but I'll also play Devil's Advocate:

Changing the spell list to a limited list does not change a lot of the Cleric Feel. In many ways, Cleric is a Generic Class that adds armor and attacks to become a fighter (domain of war, eg) or adds unique spells to become a white mage (Domain of Light, eg) and that is what makes clerics "unique: their design flexibility. Spells help define further, but even a generic cleric can do that on their own by self-limiting their choices to thematic ones.

 

[TwoSix]

I'll chime in as agreeing, let's kill the cleric, but I'll also play Devil's Advocate:

Changing the spell list to a limited list does not change a lot of the Cleric Feel. In many ways, Cleric is a Generic Class that adds armor and attacks to become a fighter (domain of war, eg) or adds unique spells to become a white mage (Domain of Light, eg) and that is what makes clerics "unique: their design flexibility. Spells help define further, but even a generic cleric can do that on their own by self-limiting their choices to thematic ones.

To play devil's advocate to your devil's advocate (archon's advocate?), I'd identify the core of the cleric as boiling down to one idea: healing. Every change made to cleric since OD&D has been to add more specificity in the form of abilities themed to a patron diety or focus of worship, and to attach them the central core of patching up hit points and status ailments.

 

[Greg K]

I would agree that I would expect priests of the War God to be fighters

I can also see a War God priest as a non-warrior robed figure that incites war rather than going to war

priests of the Trickster god to be rogues

Or simply a robed caster that uses illusions and skilled at deception.

and priests of the Death god to be necromancers.

Or perhaps instead of raising undead, someone entrusted with laying spirits to rest, keeping the dead buried, and destroying undead, but also can shoot rays of necrotic energy or use death spells

 

[I'm A Banana]

I can also see a War God priest as a non-warrior robed figure that incites war rather than going to war


Or simply a robed caster that uses illusions and skilled at deception.


Or perhaps instead of raising undead, someone entrusted with laying spirits to rest, keeping the dead buried, and destroying undead, but also can shoot rays of necrotic energy or use death spells

I think the first step would be to decide what kinds of gods you're looking to support as PC options, and the second step would be to embody them in subclasses of appropriate classes. Like, your first option might work good as a Bard subclass - invoking emotions in others. This doesn't invalidate some other god of war (or another sect of the same god of war) being a fighter subclass, or a paladin subclass, or whatever.

Changing the spell list to a limited list does not change a lot of the Cleric Feel. In many ways, Cleric is a Generic Class

If the cleric's already Generic, there's not a lot of Cleric Feel to change. I think the D&D cleric has an identity as a support character - healing, buffing, divining, usually heavy armor and a shield but not often heavy weapons. Currently, that identity informs the cleric chassis independent of domain - clerics of life, clerics of trickery, clerics of death, clerics of war, clerics of light, all have access to solid defenses, and healing, buffing, and divining ability. They protect and enhance their party members.

Changing the spell list changes that identity.

Of course, you might argue that a god of trickery might not be concerned about protecting and enhancing their party members, and fair enough! That's why a class might not be an appropriate place to stick the fictional character archetype of "faithful to a deity." LOTS of fantasy characters are faithful to gods - one class probably isn't big enough to hold all the different kinds of characters that should fall into that!

 

[Connorsrpg]

I think people are moving a long way away from the intention of our little rule here. It does NOT change the cleric. The cleric in this system still chooses CLERIC only spells. They can just choose from more than those presented in the PHB. So they can still be generic, healing focused, whatever. It just opens the opportunity to specialise more in the appropriate spells if the player wants to. Nothing forcing them to, but most of my players like such thematics to the point I no longer need to restrict lists, add descriptors, create new lists, add more domains etc. 1 domain each helps to add other spells and feel and then the player can take that further by choosing their 12 1st level spells to narrow in further on that idea... or not.

Just an easy way to keep the cleric (and other divine casters with no end to their lists) moving forward.

FWIW: I have always loved clerics, but I also did not mind systems like Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed where there were no clerics, but there was a Priest feat where anyone could be a 'cleric' and claim their powers came from a divine source. But, this is not what this is about.

(Yes, sorry, I did use examples in OP asking why such a deity would grant certain spells, but I am not ruling it out either - IF that player chooses seemingly opposing spells in their 12, then I might ask for a reason for this and I am sure the player would have one to choose such a range of spells).

 

[TwoSix]

I think people are moving a long way away from the intention of our little rule here. It does NOT change the cleric. The cleric in this system still chooses CLERIC only spells. They can just choose from more than those presented in the PHB. So they can still be generic, healing focused, whatever. It just opens the opportunity to specialise more in the appropriate spells if the player wants to. Nothing forcing them to, but most of my players like such thematics to the point I no longer need to restrict lists, add descriptors, create new lists, add more domains etc. 1 domain each helps to add other spells and feel and then the player can take that further by choosing their 12 1st level spells to narrow in further on that idea... or not.

Just an easy way to keep the cleric (and other divine casters with no end to their lists) moving forward.

FWIW: I have always loved clerics, but I also did not mind systems like Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed where there were no clerics, but there was a Priest feat where anyone could be a 'cleric' and claim their powers came from a divine source. But, this is not what this is about.

(Yes, sorry, I did use examples in OP asking why such a deity would grant certain spells, but I am not ruling it out either - IF that player chooses seemingly opposing spells in their 12, then I might ask for a reason for this and I am sure the player would have one to choose such a range of spells).

It's a fine rule. That or something similar should have been the baseline cleric in the PHB. Open ended access to a spell list is problematic, unless the spell list is designed to support a certain narrow focus (like the warmage or beguiler from 3.5).