CapnZapp
Legend
Addendum: it was obvious to me, but maybe not to you, so I'd better spell it out: a "mystic" War Cleric upgrades light armor proficiency to medium only. Otherwise she'd get divine Arcane Recovery for free.
Splitting cleric's subclass into domain and archetype
I'm not sure on the implementation, but I love the concept!
This is what could/should have been the Cleric's breakdown from the get go...and let it be [have been] the precedent setter for why/how other classes could have the same structure (as opposed to Warlocks just being this odd anomaly).
You pick a domain at 1st, then an archetype("subclass": Crusader, Mystic, etc...) at 3rd.
Warlocks: Pick a pact (analogous to the domain of a deity, the warlock has a pact with a patron...who that patron is is fluff) at 1st, then an archetype ("Binder, Cultist," whatever else...) at 3rd.
Bards? Pick a college (valor, lore, etc...) at 1st, then an archetype (minstrel, chronicler, judiciar, etc...) at 3rd.
...maybe, even, Rangers: Pick a "lodge" (use a beast companion, study more magic, get more stealthy/speed/movement, etc...) at 1st, then an archetype (hunter, defender, slayer, etc...) at 3rd.
This is what could/should have been the Cleric's breakdown from the get go...and let it be [have been] the precedent setter for why/how other classes could have the same structure (as opposed to Warlocks just being this odd anomaly).
You pick a domain at 1st, then an archetype("subclass": Crusader, Mystic, etc...) at 3rd.
Warlocks: Pick a pact (analogous to the domain of a deity, the warlock has a pact with a patron...who that patron is is fluff) at 1st, then an archetype ("Binder, Cultist," whatever else...) at 3rd.
Bards? Pick a college (valor, lore, etc...) at 1st, then an archetype (minstrel, chronicler, judiciar, etc...) at 3rd.
...maybe, even, Rangers: Pick a "lodge" (use a beast companion, study more magic, get more stealthy/speed/movement, etc...) at 1st, then an archetype (hunter, defender, slayer, etc...) at 3rd.
cbwjm
Seb-wejem
Early days yet, I'm still working through it but thought posting the work I had done may bring in some feedback that might catch some things that I didn't consider. There may be a bit of shuffling around of abilities. The real trick is finding levels that I can add things as well as looking at what the cleric class has that can be taken out and perhaps brought back in for a specific archetype. I also need to consider how some of the current domain powers interact with the various archetypes. If you make a mystic of the god of war, the level 1 bonus weapon attacks might be almost useless for the archetype focused on being a caster.
cbwjm
Seb-wejem
Sure I can try to explain better.
1. Make your changes under a "Domain of the Faithful" (place holder, free to pick as you want)
-Why? This leaves the rest of the clerics intact so your changes only impact the subclass and another cleric at the same table can play normally without any conflict as a result your homebrew can be more widely excepted as an optional addition instead of risking being seen as an invader. Sure, you can have two characters playing at the table with different rules or maybe only one cleric and no issue but I think in general you will get less push back.
2. Like the totem barbarian sub class list all the domains and give each a minor and major ability. When a player chooses the "Domain of the Faithful" they select any deity and can choose ether to take 2 related minor domain abilities or one Related Major domain ability which will continue consistently down the "Domain of the Faithful".
Example: If the pick Thor they can chose the "Domain of the Faithful" major feature of Tempest ... or ... "Domain of the Faithful" major feature of War ... or "Domain of the Faithful" minor features of Tempest War.
- Why? This allows a unique blend and more accurate "portrait" of each deity because the followers of the deity can respect one side and not the other or both. Also, it allows you to make micro adjustment to each domain type similar to how warlock patrons very but its way more open to deity choices because you are not tying the abilities to the deity but to a specific deity but the domains the deity allows so any new deity, player made or Wizards of the cost made will automatically work unless they add a new domain. Then you just add one major and one minor ability option for that new domain and your cover all new deities that use it.
3. Add "Path of the mystic" and "Path of the Crusader" as class choices at level 3 the way warlocks add Pact of the Blade, Pact of the Chain, and Pact of the Tome to define how you play the class.
- Why? This allows variation in Mystic and Crusader under the same patron the way you wanted and you can fix one Path without breaking the other.
Example: (I am just going to brought from the book, I recommend you make your own taking the idea of the abilities instead of directly copying them)
Edit, I did make up Channel Divinity: Destructive Strike just mixing the name of the channel Divinities as a stand in for a Mystic specific ability
Player choices Cleric "Domain of the Faithful" --> Thor --> Tempest Major (Tempest spells & Wrath of the Storm) --> Mystic (Channel Divinity: Destructive Strike)
Player choices Cleric "Domain of the Faithful" --> Thor --> Tempest Major (Tempest spells & Wrath of the Storm) --> Crusader (proficiency with martial weapons and heavy armor)
Player choices Cleric "Domain of the Faithful" --> Thor --> War Major (War spells & War Prist) --> Mystic (Channel Divinity: Destructive Strike)
Player choices Cleric "Domain of the Faithful" --> Thor --> War Major (War spells & War Prist) --> Crusader (proficiency with martial weapons and heavy armor)
Player choices Cleric "Domain of the Faithful" --> Thor --> Tempest Minor & War Minor (Tempest spells & War spells) --> Mystic (Channel Divinity: Destructive Strike)
Player choices Cleric "Domain of the Faithful" --> Thor --> Tempest Minor & War Minor (Tempest spells & War spells) --> Crusader (proficiency with martial weapons and heavy armor)
Any way you would need to figure out what you want for the major and for the minor abilities, I actually use them like two minor abilities above to show scale and that would work too but you could make more powerful single abilities for the solo domains and weaker abilities that reflect the same intent for the combination of 2 domains. I think there are 13 domains so you make/alter 13 major and 13 minor and you should be able to accommodate any deity.
I hope this clears up the the thought process for you. Best of luck.
Thanks for this, I will have a think on this, I quite like the ideas and will have a think on this.
It may or may not be appropriate...but there's a degree to which one must put up their hands and say "let the players, be players." Does it make sense to have a "mystic" archetype of the god of war, whose abilities grant weapon proficiencies and weapon attack/damage bonuses? No. Probably not. But if that's what the archetype says and a player still says, "I wanna be a mystic of the war god! Here's what I'm thinkin'..." Then, <shrug> it's for them to work it out and find they either love it or, perhaps, mixing diametrically opposed options in game, just because they are there, is not always a great idea.
As the designer there's only so much you can do about that...and it'sa weight, I personally, tend to shrug off as much as possible. I create and develop the options that I think are cool...some of them go together great! Some of them /can/ work. Some of them are not at all intended to go together...but if a player wants to, who am I?
In my own homebrew system, my classes follow something similar to this set up (or the 5e original idea of "themes" as more fleshed out "subclassy" styled backgrounds. All classes do, but we're talking clerics here so...As a cleric, you may select a theme from the "General" (available to all classes) or "Priest" [changing the name to Mystic, actually, myself] themes. As a sampling, these include such things as "Chaplain, Crusader, Healer, Undead Hunter, etc..." The different themes offer different skill proficiencies and/or bonuses -primarily to specific thematic skill rolls.
Does it make sense that the clerics of the pacifist order of the goddess of life and healing would take "Undead Hunter" or "Crusader"...taking a bonus to undead knowledge [religious lore] and turning checks or increased armor and weapon proficiencies? Really very much no. Completely out of character for the norms of the game world, the religious order, and the PC's place in the broader in-game "church" of this goddess. Does that make it a bad character or mean I have to somehow contort the features and abilities of every option to apply to every character? Nope. Not in a million years.
Does the god of battles have large cabals of "Healer" clerics within their own temple/orders...granting a special bonus to Healing checks and increasing HP restoration? Very probably not. It's certainly plausible...moreso than the above example, I think. But would be rather out of character for a branch of a temple/church that espouses tenets of excellence in battle, valor, weapons' use, and direct combat.
What I'm saying is, you don't have to make yourself nuts making sure all options work for all characters/people in all instances. Sometimes it's ok for an option to be -blatantly- "best for X. Ok for Y. Not really applicable to Z but if you, the player, want to give it a whirl...have at ye."
As the designer there's only so much you can do about that...and it'sa weight, I personally, tend to shrug off as much as possible. I create and develop the options that I think are cool...some of them go together great! Some of them /can/ work. Some of them are not at all intended to go together...but if a player wants to, who am I?
In my own homebrew system, my classes follow something similar to this set up (or the 5e original idea of "themes" as more fleshed out "subclassy" styled backgrounds. All classes do, but we're talking clerics here so...As a cleric, you may select a theme from the "General" (available to all classes) or "Priest" [changing the name to Mystic, actually, myself] themes. As a sampling, these include such things as "Chaplain, Crusader, Healer, Undead Hunter, etc..." The different themes offer different skill proficiencies and/or bonuses -primarily to specific thematic skill rolls.
Does it make sense that the clerics of the pacifist order of the goddess of life and healing would take "Undead Hunter" or "Crusader"...taking a bonus to undead knowledge [religious lore] and turning checks or increased armor and weapon proficiencies? Really very much no. Completely out of character for the norms of the game world, the religious order, and the PC's place in the broader in-game "church" of this goddess. Does that make it a bad character or mean I have to somehow contort the features and abilities of every option to apply to every character? Nope. Not in a million years.
Does the god of battles have large cabals of "Healer" clerics within their own temple/orders...granting a special bonus to Healing checks and increasing HP restoration? Very probably not. It's certainly plausible...moreso than the above example, I think. But would be rather out of character for a branch of a temple/church that espouses tenets of excellence in battle, valor, weapons' use, and direct combat.
What I'm saying is, you don't have to make yourself nuts making sure all options work for all characters/people in all instances. Sometimes it's ok for an option to be -blatantly- "best for X. Ok for Y. Not really applicable to Z but if you, the player, want to give it a whirl...have at ye."
I may be coming late to the party but I'd like a little more elaboration of what the goal is.
I'll give what my current understanding is and my opinion but please correct my misunderstandings if I go off-topic.
The basic gist seems to be that each specific belief (domain) has very specific general troubleshooters (clerics) to the point that it limits character concepts, making more sedate sagacious worshippers of Thor or more aggressive devotees of a healing god seem less feasible.
If that is the case, I would almost recommend taking the conceptions of the cleric out of it entirely. The heavily militant branch of the god of healing and mercy's worshippers are clerics at all, but actually paladins by class, on the other hand those Kordites who spend much of their time studying the histories of great warriors to preach their mighty deeds may actually be bards, Wizards or even celestial warlocks (Kord as patron) or favored soul sorcerers.
I highly recommend looking hard at background choice using this method, picking acolyte much of the time.
They hold the same place in the story as a 'traditional' cleric but have mechanics more suited to the character concept, but don't require any big overhauls to a class's structure.
On the other hand if the goal is the creative fulfillment of tweaking a class, go for it. It is tricky but can be great fun.
I'll give what my current understanding is and my opinion but please correct my misunderstandings if I go off-topic.
The basic gist seems to be that each specific belief (domain) has very specific general troubleshooters (clerics) to the point that it limits character concepts, making more sedate sagacious worshippers of Thor or more aggressive devotees of a healing god seem less feasible.
If that is the case, I would almost recommend taking the conceptions of the cleric out of it entirely. The heavily militant branch of the god of healing and mercy's worshippers are clerics at all, but actually paladins by class, on the other hand those Kordites who spend much of their time studying the histories of great warriors to preach their mighty deeds may actually be bards, Wizards or even celestial warlocks (Kord as patron) or favored soul sorcerers.
I highly recommend looking hard at background choice using this method, picking acolyte much of the time.
They hold the same place in the story as a 'traditional' cleric but have mechanics more suited to the character concept, but don't require any big overhauls to a class's structure.
On the other hand if the goal is the creative fulfillment of tweaking a class, go for it. It is tricky but can be great fun.
cbwjm
Seb-wejem
The whole "Let players be players" is what I was thinking. I think when it comes right down to it. Some archetypes will fit some domains better so that they outnumber the other archetypes in the priesthood. War might have a 90/10 split of crusaders/mystics, for instance. Not worrying overly much about how well a certain domain fits a specific archetype will lead to much easier design I think.
cbwjm
Seb-wejem
You're pretty much correct, the latter (creative fulfilment) is the main reason I'm doing this. Certainly using background and applying it to different classes is a workaround but then paladins, bards, etc also miss out on the various domain powers that help define these followers of the gods unless they multi-class into cleric. Ideally though, I think that being able to choose the domain to signify the god-given powers of a cleric and then later an archetype to determine how the cleric follows their god, for me creates a much more interesting class.
