D&D (2024) How will the 5.5e Core Book & in general deal with MtG settings?

[Marandahir]

I don't think doing something else with subclasses would necessarily be impossible. Warlocks' patron/pact boon system essentially lets them choose one subclass from each of two categories. There's no reason Clerics couldn't do the same if the developers thought there was a compelling second category of subclasses.

As for multiple domains, the issue is that we presumably want domains to continue granting mechanical benefits, so having two is only going to be fair if the second comes with equivalent mechanical drawbacks (or if everyone's expected to have two).

1. There is a sort of second choice for Clerics: weapon-focused (special damage-type bonus to weapon attacks) or caster-focused (special damage-type bonus to potent cantrips). While this is usually defined by subclass choice in 5e, and reinforced by other mechanics like weapon or armour profs or bonus cantrips, as of Tasha’s it’s really just a choice for the Cleric. One could imagine that subclasses like say, Grave and Death, which have overlapping divine concepts (God of Death) but very different interpretations (offensive and violent vs. funerary and healery) could be a single domain whose interpretation is more determined by a separate pillar of cleric character development.

5e Cleric Domains-as-subclass grew straight out of 4Essentials Warpriest class’ builds, while 4E’08 and 3E had Domains as a separate pillar. 3E had mostly White Mage-y Clerics, but 4E’08 had Battle Clerics vs Caster Clerics, and 2009’s Divine Power even had a truly Pacifist Cleric build.

2. The unofficial Eberron supplement, Morgrave Miscellany, from setting creator @Hellcow Keith Baker and DM’s Guild adept (and additional designer on Wayfinder’s Guide to Ebberon) Ruty Rutenberg, features a Cleric Domain to all the Sovereign Host, essentially being a Pantheonic Cleric. This isn’t quite the multi-domain Cleric, but it is a more generalist concept with roots in the game and historic lore.

One could also imagine a One D&D concept that allows internal multiclassing - letting you take a MC level in your own class to gain a second subclass? Or perhaps 4E style MC feats that give you a variation of it.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I agree with those saying making Domain the subclass was a huge mistake, it cut off so many possibly priestly archetypes, and basically reduce it to cleric of fire/twilight/war/nature/arcane/life/trickery/forge/death/grave/knowledge/Tempest etc..., instead of so many more options.

Honestly the Divine Soul in some ways feels like a better cleric.

BUT, they aren't going to retool cleric subclasses into something else because it has to be compatible with Xanathar, Tasha's, etc..., so I would love a seperate Specialty Priest class.

 

[Haplo781]

I agree with those saying making Domain the subclass was a huge mistake, it cut off so many possibly priestly archetypes, and basically reduce it to cleric of fire/twilight/war/nature/arcane/life/trickery/forge/death/grave/knowledge/Tempest etc..., instead of so many more options.

Honestly the Divine Soul in some ways feels like a better cleric.

BUT, they aren't going to retool cleric subclasses into something else because it has to be compatible with Xanathar, Tasha's, etc..., so I would love a seperate Specialty Priest class.

You can obsolete the old subclasses without explicitly making them incompatible.

 

[cbwjm]

I agree with those saying making Domain the subclass was a huge mistake, it cut off so many possibly priestly archetypes, and basically reduce it to cleric of fire/twilight/war/nature/arcane/life/trickery/forge/death/grave/knowledge/Tempest etc..., instead of so many more options.

Honestly the Divine Soul in some ways feels like a better cleric.

BUT, they aren't going to retool cleric subclasses into something else because it has to be compatible with Xanathar, Tasha's, etc..., so I would love a seperate Specialty Priest class.

While I do think it is unlikely they will retool them, it could be possible. Backwards compatibility could be more to do with being able to play in a group with the original cleric and with a new retooled cleric with its own way of being built. Again, I think it is unlikely, but it could happen.

 

[CrashFiend82]

I know this is unlikely but I wish they complete disassociated subclass/domain from god's entirely. Each cleric focuses on an ideal War/Nature/Trickery etc. Then leave the deity information simply as fluff or at most part of a background. Let the player and DM decide upon a pantheon and pick the deity they worship and method of doing so. This allows for for settings with no deities and monotheistic traditions instead of forcing each world to have a pantheon of gods. Give a few examples (from different sources) in the PHB and move on. I have honestly never played in a game of D&D where the clerics deity mattered beyond what spells they cast.

 

[cbwjm]

I know this is unlikely but I wish they complete disassociated subclass/domain from god's entirely. Each cleric focuses on an ideal War/Nature/Trickery etc. Then leave the deity information simply as fluff or at most part of a background. Let the player and DM decide upon a pantheon and pick the deity they worship and method of doing so. This allows for for settings with no deities and monotheistic traditions instead of forcing each world to have a pantheon of gods. Give a few examples (from different sources) in the PHB and move on. I have honestly never played in a game of D&D where the clerics deity mattered beyond what spells they cast.

I mean, that's kind of how it works now, you don't need the god to pick a domain. You could be a gentle healer with the life domain or the embodiment of war or order and take the appropriate domains. Nothing about the cleric class actually requires a god, but they are part of DnD so they make sure to have sample pantheons which I think is still a good way to go.

 

[CrashFiend82]

I mean, that's kind of how it works now, you don't need the god to pick a domain. You could be a gentle healer with the life domain or the embodiment of war or order and take the appropriate domains. Nothing about the cleric class actually requires a god, but they are part of DnD so they make sure to have sample pantheons which I think is still a good way to go.

In the current PHB each domain has a list of Gods that fit the domain and many players read that as I must worship one of those gods. I would drop the lists and instead focus on how a singular god may attract different followers (domains) and leave a list in the appendix for a pantheon or 3, preferably FR, Greyhawk, and Eberron as examples.

 

[Marandahir]

In the current PHB each domain has a list of Gods that fit the domain and many players read that as I must worship one of those gods. I would drop the lists and instead focus on how a singular god may attract different followers (domains) and leave a list in the appendix for a pantheon or 3, preferably FR, Greyhawk, and Eberron as examples.

Yeah, those are examples to illustrate Clerics of those Domains in different settings and religions.

Dropping it would only serve to obfuscate and make it harder for players that need/want the examples to help them make the choices.

You can just ignore them as it is…

There are certainly cases where presence of a concept leads the players towards thinking that concept is a necessary inclusion. But by illustrating it with multiple pantheons, they’re showing the modular nature of the subclasses.

I’d make it even more clear by writing into the subclass’ language that “you might be just a particularly scholarly priest of any religion” for the Knowledge Domain, etc.

 

[CrashFiend82]

I understand stand the idea WOTC has but think the lists are the unnecessary obfuscation. Most new players read the title and generally understand the idea of War/Nature/Healing as a concept but upon reading the list often say oh I guess I also need to pick a deity. I just wish they dropped the connection to a deity as a whole, instead focus on an Ideal/Domain as the expression of faith. Then have the example pantheon in an appendix so a DM could state we are in the Forgotten Realms grab a deity from that list (if needed).

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I understand stand the idea WOTC has but think the lists are the unnecessary obfuscation. Most new players read the title and generally understand the idea of War/Nature/Healing as a concept but upon reading the list often say oh I guess I also need to pick a deity. I just wish they dropped the connection to a deity as a whole, instead focus on an Ideal/Domain as the expression of faith. Then have the example pantheon in an appendix so a DM could state we are in the Forgotten Realms grab a deity from that list (if needed).

I'm opposed to dropping the connection between dieties and divine magic, without Gods there is no flavour left, it's just arcane magic at that point. This is especially true for FR, but some setting can stray from this, like Eberron.