leonardoraele
First Post
If you pay attention, every feature of every class in PHB qualifies the level they get the feature, and they refer to actual class level, not character level.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
D&D 5E Life Cleric Multiclass armor prof
- Thread starter Arvin Natsuko
- Start date
If you pay attention, every feature of every class in PHB qualifies the level they get the feature, and they refer to actual class level, not character level.
BoldItalic
First Post
Do they really? Deary me, I hadn't noticed.
leonardoraele
First Post
Conclusion: class level
BoldItalic
First Post
Conclusion: except at first level.
Multiclass rules explicitly overrule class rules relating to proficiencies normally gained at first level. That's because first level is the only level at which you can enter a class after initial character creation. You don't automatically get all the proficiencies granted at first level by the single-class rules.
Got it yet?
*shakes head*
*mutters about "youth of today", "no education", "world going to dogs"*
Last edited:
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Well, that's fine, but it's not the ruling you stated before, which was essentially "if it says 'when you select this subclass...' then you don't get that feature by multiclassing." Now it's, "subclasses never provide any bonus proficiencies for the first level of that class, even if bonus proficiencies are listed as part of the first class-level benefits." Which is certainly an improvement, since that averts most of the issues of your previous offering (as most characters don't pick their subclass until at least level 2).
While this may have been a joke (I certainly hope it was a joke), I don't think it was in very good taste. Insulting the intelligence and/or education of the people you're trying to explain something to isn't going to improve your chances of persuading them.
Also, I'll have you know that I'm in my late 20s, with a college education.
BoldItalic
First Post
Yes, it was a joke. But it was a joke against me, not against you. I was lampooning myself. Because I'm an old man in my dotage, and old men like me are allowed to mutter about the youth of today (meaning everyone under about 60) and how poorly educated you all are because the whole education system had gone downhill, and how the world has been going to the dogs since at least Roman times &c. &c. When you get old and you can look back over a long stretch of time, you will understand.
Thought so.
But now that we've got that out of the way, are you prepared to accept that there is indeed a point in the rules that is open to interpretation in two different ways, each equally valid? And that your interpretation is not the only possible one? Can I at least educate you that far?
BoldItalic
First Post
Forgive me, but that's a bit like saying that bananas should be straight because otherwise apples can't be round.
We are considering a possible conflict between the multiclassing rules and the Life Cleric rules vis a vis armour proficiency. What other cleric domains do, or even what other classes do, is not a very good guide. You may take other cleric domains as a precedent if you wish, but then you have to extend the debate to them too and that just complicates things unnecessarily. The wording of the rules is different in each case (except that War and Tempest are identical) so you would have to consider them separately and reflect on whether the differences of wording are significant or not before linking them. There would be eight possible points of view and we are finding it hard enough to cope with just two, are we not?
leonardoraele
First Post
Bolditalic you can insist how much you want, doesn't change that this is an assumption. Your interpretation of RAI. You can homebrew this way, but RAW says the character gets the proficiency.
Multiclassing rules says that you get the proficiencies in the table instead of the initial proficiencies of the class, but you still gain features as normal, and clerics receive heavy armor proficiency through a feature. There's nothing saying about "proficiencies at first level", you are just making up this part.
If the rules were as you say, multiclassing rogues won't get expertise because it is a 1st-level feature, which is one of the main features of the exploration and interaction pillars of the class. Just like the bard too. And the proficiency Nature clerics gain at 1st level. Just imagine a war cleric without martial weapons wtf. Doesn't even make sense. Just like Ezekiel said earlier.
Multiclassing rules says that you get the proficiencies in the table instead of the initial proficiencies of the class, but you still gain features as normal, and clerics receive heavy armor proficiency through a feature. There's nothing saying about "proficiencies at first level", you are just making up this part.
If the rules were as you say, multiclassing rogues won't get expertise because it is a 1st-level feature, which is one of the main features of the exploration and interaction pillars of the class. Just like the bard too. And the proficiency Nature clerics gain at 1st level. Just imagine a war cleric without martial weapons wtf. Doesn't even make sense. Just like Ezekiel said earlier.
Actually it is important because the possibility of there being a conflict hinges on the question whether there is any intention in the MC rules that you should never gain heavy armor prof from doing it under any circumstances.
If the other domains are clearly handing out heavy armor prof as part of a class feature, we no longer need to try to come up with any reading of the life cleric to resolve a conflict that doesn't exist in the first place. Because that proves that the MC restrictions are only affecting base class profs and not profs later added by class features.
Especially when the required reading nerfs other domains and subclasses that have nothing to do with heavy armor prof.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
