OneDnD UA Groups: Expert, Mage, Priest, Warrior


log in or register to remove this ad


Marandahir

Crown-Forester (he/him)
Yea, these are reminiscent of previous things but are not the same.

Primal for instance is more like how they are grouping spells.

Correct, but so is Divine. So calling a Druid a Divine class group member but then locking off the Divine spell list from them would be a problem.
 


I agree that the nomenclature for the "divine" group is problematic, as you can't use divine as it refers to a power source, and that priest, cleric and mystic seem too narrowly defined for one reason or another.

That said, I'm not sure of the utility of grouping things into four superclasses, twelve classes and forty-eight subclasses in the first place; it seems to be more of an aesthetic conceit to achieve some kind of symmetry, rather than a practical one.
 

UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
I agree that the nomenclature for the "divine" group is problematic, as you can't use divine as it refers to a power source, and that priest, cleric and mystic seem too narrowly defined for one reason or another.

That said, I'm not sure of the utility of grouping things into four superclasses, twelve classes and forty-eight subclasses in the first place; it seems to be more of an aesthetic conceit to achieve some kind of symmetry, rather than a practical one.
The stated reason is that it enables feats and other subsystems to be restricted by grouping. Which seems reasonable to me.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
The same way the terms 'D&D Next' and 'One D&D' were/are being used for these playtest events but didn't/won't actually appear as the name of the game once published... there's always a chance that these spell groups and these class groups won't actually appear in the published documents either. We are still probably a year out from finalization... plenty of time for them to decide to keep all the classes on their own, all spells to be re-divided into individual class lists, and for feats to be individually assigned.

For all we know, all these class groups end up being are just their way of deciding which trio of classes appear in each playtest packet.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
The same way the terms 'D&D Next' and 'One D&D' were/are being used for these playtest events but didn't/won't actually appear as the name of the game once published... there's always a chance that these spell groups and these class groups won't actually appear in the published documents either. We are still probably a year out from finalization... plenty of time for them to decide to keep all the classes on their own, all spells to be re-divided into individual class lists, and for feats to be individually assigned.

For all we know, all these class groups end up being are just their way of deciding which trio of classes appear in each playtest packet.
Well, they are testing for more than that, but none of this is set in stone.

My gut says the Groups stay, though.
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
In 1e, the Paladin and Ranger were subclasses of the Fighter class.

Where UA reassigns the Fighter, Paladin, and Ranger to different groups − namely Warrior, Priest, and Expert, respectively − it feels like a commitment to give the Ranger a distinctive identity as a reason to exist as a separate class.
 


Micah Sweet

Legend
I want to go on record as disliking the term "Experts", because aren't the other classes experts, too? It strikes me as a "working title" for a group of classes that they didn't know where else to put.
I bet that what we got for group names in the UA will be in the final product.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
I want to go on record as disliking the term "Experts", because aren't the other classes experts, too? It strikes me as a "working title" for a group of classes that they didn't know where else to put.
All of the group names are a bit imperfect. Every class should be an "Expert" at their role. Most classes are "Mages" (in the sense that they can cast magic). More than 3 classes can be considered "Warriors". And "Priest" doesn't really fit Paladin or Druid all that well, while I personally think that the Cleric would be better if renamed to "Priest" ("Clergy" might work better because it applies to people of all religious roles, but that's too close to "Cleric").
 

Marandahir

Crown-Forester (he/him)
I want to go on record as disliking the term "Experts", because aren't the other classes experts, too? It strikes me as a "working title" for a group of classes that they didn't know where else to put.
Expert is the historical term for non-magical NPC skillmonkies. See the NPC classes in Essentials Kit and Tasha's Cauldron of Everything for it appearing in 5e: Warriors, Experts, and Spellcasters (that last of which had subclasses; Mages = Mage Group, Healers = Priest Group, and Thaumaturges are split up now because they were created essentially in 5e to represent the NPC charismatic generic arcane spellcaster that was something like bards, sorcerers, and warlocks).
 

rules.mechanic

Craft homebrewer
I'm also not keen on Priest/Divine/Clergy as the name of that group. Devout does seem broader, which is good. I saw someone suggest Favoured in a different thread, which would be good if included the warlock too. Spiritual? Mystic?
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
The names I like are:
• Mystic
• Adherent
• Devoted

Also:
• Reverent

Reverent means "revering", to regard with awe and dignity.

(Not to be confused with reverend, one who is revered by others.)



All of these terms are in relationship with a Cosmic Force, whatever it is for a particular sacred community.
 
Last edited:

Yaarel

Mind Mage
The term mystic relates to "mystery".

Properly, the mystery sotospeak refers to the aspects of a transcendent experience that cannot be expressed in words − such as unity with the Divine or the enlightenment of Nirvana.

Alternatively, the mystery can also refer to any esoteric traditions that are intentionally kept secret from the public, and having initiation rites and private transmission of traditions.

As a D&D term, a Mystic can mean any kind of magical tradition that requires personal participation in the magic itself.
 

rules.mechanic

Craft homebrewer
Yeah, I think it's mainly that second one - mystic and mystery derive from a Greek word for secret, usually used with secrets related to religious rites etc, just like you describe (in modern Greek it's spelt μυστήριον and pronounced mistEErion). Seems a good fit for the group
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
Yeah, I think it's mainly that second one - mystic and mystery derive from a Greek word for secret, usually used with secrets related to religious rites etc, just like you describe (in modern Greek it's spelt μυστήριον and pronounced mistEErion). Seems a good fit for the group
For me its mainly the first one, where "mysticism" is in the context of "mystics" in the Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, and Hindu traditions, and referring to similar accounts among those adherents who try to describe their transcendent experience. The mystics tend to self-identify with each other, regardless of religious tradition, and each of them is intentionally going beyond the routines of their religious tradition.

Then again, in the ancient context, it is mainly the second one, where it often refers to the "mystery religions".

But when referring to modern esoteric traditions with secret rites, I pretty much never hear it described as "mysticism" − unless it is transcendent.

In any case, Mystic is a great fit for the D&D group.
 

One of the big differences from the real world is there's a whole other group that effectively works with the supernatural in a very detached, mechanical fashion, more like modern-day scientists and engineers than anything else.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top