Any character is going to miss out of things like higher level spells and subclass features if they only take a 1 level dip. The question is how much of the overall class theme is wrapped up in the first level? Taking 1 level in Bard or Ranger will feel like you have a little Bard or Ranger in your build. A Rogue is not quite as good. But Cleric is getting a larger share of its main theme and it keeps scaling better than any of the others. You get the shiny armor and weapons, a good amount of healing, radiant damage attacks, and turn undead. That certainly feels like a lot of the Cleric identity.
I think there is something to what Aquilontune is saying. It might be part of what's bothering me about Channel Divinity on some subconscious level. It's kind of like if a level 1 Wizard got a feature that gave them PB uses per day, and you got to choose between doing PBxd8 fire damage, teleport, or dispel magic. It's not everything a wizard can do, but it is a lot of their whole theme. And the Wizard1/ Fighter 19 will get to do that part just as well as the Wizard 20.
Just to give another example using ranger 5 cleric 1. I have my damage, not worried about that. Cleric is giving me the healing with CD and giving me turn undead with it's one level dip. I am also getting 2 divine cantrips, guidance and thaumaturge, not much else needed. And i get 2 first level divine spells, bless and sanctuary. Some of the most iconic, powerful and unique cleric spells are first level spells. I still have lesser restoration because primal list. I missing out on revivify, but that costs 300 diamond to cast and is intentionally super situational, probably prefer to just get a scroll for this. What am I missing? Did I just take a majority of the cleric role while not having to give up my role as a ranger as well? What job does cleric have that I am not fulfilling here?
Only thing I could think that I am missing is dispel magic and remove curse. Is that it? Or am I missing something?
Edit: So, from what I am hearing, it is just spirit gaurdians giving a different flavor of damage and that is it.
I know you said Ranger 5 Cleric 1, but if you only dip in Cleric, you do miss out on greater restoration, since you don't get that until 17th level in Ranger. And if you care about utility, speak with dead is decent utility that Rangers don't get but Clerics do.
I have said before the issue I have with greater restoration is the same as I have with revivify. It has a costly material component that the spell consumes and is super situational so I would rather just have a scroll. But speak with dead is kind of what I was asking about earlier. What are some of the cool stand out higher level spells. once you hit 11 divine intervention comes in and we are talking campaigns past the point most don't play, so I am really looking for stuff like this in the 3rd, 4th and 5th level spell range, heck even second level spells to a degree. What is some cools stuff because legitimately was struggling to think of them.
I think there is something to what Aquilontune is saying. It might be part of what's bothering me about Channel Divinity on some subconscious level. It's kind of like if a level 1 Wizard got a feature that gave them PB uses per day, and you got to choose between doing PBxd8 fire damage, teleport, or dispel magic. It's not everything a wizard can do, but it is a lot of their whole theme. And the Wizard1/ Fighter 19 will get to do that part just as well as the Wizard 20.
It's that you gain the feature at its full efficiency with only 1 level in cleric, and it's inconsistent with other classes' level 1 features, heavily incentivizing a 1-level dip in cleric. This has to be consistent with other level 1 features scaling. Frankly, I'm not worried about "stealing the theme", because, c'mon, it's not like you gain the entire divine spell list for 1 level dip. A fighter19/cleric1 will never substitute a full cleric as a support.
I think there is something to what Aquilontune is saying. It might be part of what's bothering me about Channel Divinity on some subconscious level. It's kind of like if a level 1 Wizard got a feature that gave them PB uses per day, and you got to choose between doing PBxd8 fire damage, teleport, or dispel magic. It's not everything a wizard can do, but it is a lot of their whole theme. And the Wizard1/ Fighter 19 will get to do that part just as well as the Wizard 20.
It's that you gain the feature at its full efficiency with only 1 level in cleric, and it's inconsistent with other classes' level 1 features, heavily incentivizing a 1-level dip in cleric. This has to be consistent with other level 1 features scaling. Frankly, I'm not worried about "stealing the theme", because, c'mon, it's not like you gain the entire divine spell list for 1 level dip. A fighter19/cleric1 will never substitute a full cleric as a support.
Right. The scaling makes it unbalanced against the other classes. I totally agree, but we've all been going around in circles on that one for days. I was just agreeing with Aquilontune too. That the scaling being so strong, and the variety of options with just one feature, helps lend to the feeling that it's stealing the theme more than the other classes on top of it all.
I think there is something to what Aquilontune is saying. It might be part of what's bothering me about Channel Divinity on some subconscious level. It's kind of like if a level 1 Wizard got a feature that gave them PB uses per day, and you got to choose between doing PBxd8 fire damage, teleport, or dispel magic. It's not everything a wizard can do, but it is a lot of their whole theme. And the Wizard1/ Fighter 19 will get to do that part just as well as the Wizard 20.
It's that you gain the feature at its full efficiency with only 1 level in cleric, and it's inconsistent with other classes' level 1 features, heavily incentivizing a 1-level dip in cleric. This has to be consistent with other level 1 features scaling. Frankly, I'm not worried about "stealing the theme", because, c'mon, it's not like you gain the entire divine spell list for 1 level dip. A fighter19/cleric1 will never substitute a full cleric as a support.
To be fair though, the channel divinity feature isn't that great. Turn Undead is situation for obvious reasons; it is better in certain campaigns where you deal with undead more often but on the flip side if you never run into an undead, it might as well not exist. The Healing itself is at best used for out of combat healing because it is an action to use in combat. You generally want to avoid to use your action to heal.
I really feel like people are making out the Channel Divinity from Cleric to be better than it really is. People are looking at the total amount of healing it can do, when we should be looking more at the amount of healing per use. It is an action to use, and at tier 2, heals for an average of 13.5 points (18 at late tier 2 when your PB bonus hits +4) with each use. At tier 4, it is an average of 27 points of healing per use. The healing doesn't exactly keep up with the damage output you tend to see in the game.
To compare to bard, Bardic Inspiration is now a reaction and has Proficiency bonus uses; a d6 is still on average a +3.5 to a roll, which can be very significant. Sure you aren't getting the full scaling, but I feel like an average +3.5 to a roll on reaction is far more useful than an Action Based Heal. If we are just looking at the features, I would take bardic inspiration over channel divinity any day. The armor proficiencies and access to cantrips and first level divine spell are far more useful than the channel divinity healing.
I think there is something to what Aquilontune is saying. It might be part of what's bothering me about Channel Divinity on some subconscious level. It's kind of like if a level 1 Wizard got a feature that gave them PB uses per day, and you got to choose between doing PBxd8 fire damage, teleport, or dispel magic. It's not everything a wizard can do, but it is a lot of their whole theme. And the Wizard1/ Fighter 19 will get to do that part just as well as the Wizard 20.
It's that you gain the feature at its full efficiency with only 1 level in cleric, and it's inconsistent with other classes' level 1 features, heavily incentivizing a 1-level dip in cleric. This has to be consistent with other level 1 features scaling. Frankly, I'm not worried about "stealing the theme", because, c'mon, it's not like you gain the entire divine spell list for 1 level dip. A fighter19/cleric1 will never substitute a full cleric as a support.
To be fair though, the channel divinity feature isn't that great. Turn Undead is situation for obvious reasons; it is better in certain campaigns where you deal with undead more often but on the flip side if you never run into an undead, it might as well not exist. The Healing itself is at best used for out of combat healing because it is an action to use in combat. You generally want to avoid to use your action to heal.
I really feel like people are making out the Channel Divinity from Cleric to be better than it really is. People are looking at the total amount of healing it can do, when we should be looking more at the amount of healing per use. It is an action to use, and at tier 2, heals for an average of 13.5 points (18 at late tier 2 when your PB bonus hits +4) with each use. At tier 4, it is an average of 27 points of healing per use. The healing doesn't exactly keep up with the damage output you tend to see in the game.
To compare to bard, Bardic Inspiration is now a reaction and has Proficiency bonus uses; a d6 is still on average a +3.5 to a roll, which can be very significant. Sure you aren't getting the full scaling, but I feel like an average +3.5 to a roll on reaction is far more useful than an Action Based Heal. If we are just looking at the features, I would take bardic inspiration over channel divinity any day. The armor proficiencies and access to cantrips and first level divine spell are far more useful than the channel divinity healing.
It really comes down to playstyle. Because there are only a handful of people here that aren't impressed with the healing. I don't think getting that much healing at the cost of an action is as bad as you do. At low levels it is likely to bring a character back to near full health. That way better than any Healing Word, and even Cure Wounds. At mid levels it's often enough to survive more than the next hit. Again better than actual spells or Bardic Inspiration.
But more importantly it's a lot of healing between encounters. It saves your party a ton of hit dice that they can use later. But as we've already discussed, that might not matter as much in certain games. Probably the kind of games you play. And that's totally okay.
It matters a whole lot in my games. I'm not making it out to be better than it is. I'm saying it looks actually really good, for me and my table in particular. I would take Channel Divinity in a 1 level dip over Bardic Inspiration any day. I've never played a game without at least some undead. I've never played a game where hit dice aren't more valuable than a 1d6 reaction heal. I've never played a game where essentially free casts of upcast Cure Wounds, at a range, isn't a super useful offer. All of our playstyles are just as important.
If people can't agree whether it is just good or too good, but no one thinks it is bad, isn't that the sweet spot for where it should be? Shouldn't we be asking that all the first level abilities be in that spot? All dips/multiclasses be equally viable by all of them being good enough that people fight over which is best?
If people can't agree whether it is just good or too good, but no one thinks it is bad, isn't that the sweet spot for where it should be? Shouldn't we be asking that all the first level abilities be in that spot? All dips/multiclasses be equally viable by all of them being good enough that people fight over which is best?
I think there is something to what Aquilontune is saying. It might be part of what's bothering me about Channel Divinity on some subconscious level. It's kind of like if a level 1 Wizard got a feature that gave them PB uses per day, and you got to choose between doing PBxd8 fire damage, teleport, or dispel magic. It's not everything a wizard can do, but it is a lot of their whole theme. And the Wizard1/ Fighter 19 will get to do that part just as well as the Wizard 20.
Just to give another example using ranger 5 cleric 1. I have my damage, not worried about that. Cleric is giving me the healing with CD and giving me turn undead with it's one level dip. I am also getting 2 divine cantrips, guidance and thaumaturge, not much else needed. And i get 2 first level divine spells, bless and sanctuary. Some of the most iconic, powerful and unique cleric spells are first level spells. I still have lesser restoration because primal list. I missing out on revivify, but that costs 300 diamond to cast and is intentionally super situational, probably prefer to just get a scroll for this. What am I missing? Did I just take a majority of the cleric role while not having to give up my role as a ranger as well? What job does cleric have that I am not fulfilling here?
Only thing I could think that I am missing is dispel magic and remove curse. Is that it? Or am I missing something?
Edit: So, from what I am hearing, it is just spirit gaurdians giving a different flavor of damage and that is it.
I know you said Ranger 5 Cleric 1, but if you only dip in Cleric, you do miss out on greater restoration, since you don't get that until 17th level in Ranger. And if you care about utility, speak with dead is decent utility that Rangers don't get but Clerics do.
I have said before the issue I have with greater restoration is the same as I have with revivify. It has a costly material component that the spell consumes and is super situational so I would rather just have a scroll. But speak with dead is kind of what I was asking about earlier. What are some of the cool stand out higher level spells. once you hit 11 divine intervention comes in and we are talking campaigns past the point most don't play, so I am really looking for stuff like this in the 3rd, 4th and 5th level spell range, heck even second level spells to a degree. What is some cools stuff because legitimately was struggling to think of them.
Well I'm glad speak with dead satisfied your criteria. I would say some stand-outs, at least to me, are stuff like death ward, antilife shell, destructive wave (that's a divine spell in One D&D so Clerics can get it now), the One D&D version of Prayer of Healing.
My criteria was literally stuff that doesn't just do damage because everyone can do damage, and didn't have super costly components that it consumes. And I do like the new prayer of healing. I do want to say thank you for answering my question, because I was legitimately curious what else the cleric brings. Some cool stuff.
I think there is something to what Aquilontune is saying. It might be part of what's bothering me about Channel Divinity on some subconscious level. It's kind of like if a level 1 Wizard got a feature that gave them PB uses per day, and you got to choose between doing PBxd8 fire damage, teleport, or dispel magic. It's not everything a wizard can do, but it is a lot of their whole theme. And the Wizard1/ Fighter 19 will get to do that part just as well as the Wizard 20.
Just to give another example using ranger 5 cleric 1. I have my damage, not worried about that. Cleric is giving me the healing with CD and giving me turn undead with it's one level dip. I am also getting 2 divine cantrips, guidance and thaumaturge, not much else needed. And i get 2 first level divine spells, bless and sanctuary. Some of the most iconic, powerful and unique cleric spells are first level spells. I still have lesser restoration because primal list. I missing out on revivify, but that costs 300 diamond to cast and is intentionally super situational, probably prefer to just get a scroll for this. What am I missing? Did I just take a majority of the cleric role while not having to give up my role as a ranger as well? What job does cleric have that I am not fulfilling here?
Only thing I could think that I am missing is dispel magic and remove curse. Is that it? Or am I missing something?
Edit: So, from what I am hearing, it is just spirit gaurdians giving a different flavor of damage and that is it.
I know you said Ranger 5 Cleric 1, but if you only dip in Cleric, you do miss out on greater restoration, since you don't get that until 17th level in Ranger. And if you care about utility, speak with dead is decent utility that Rangers don't get but Clerics do.
I have said before the issue I have with greater restoration is the same as I have with revivify. It has a costly material component that the spell consumes and is super situational so I would rather just have a scroll. But speak with dead is kind of what I was asking about earlier. What are some of the cool stand out higher level spells. once you hit 11 divine intervention comes in and we are talking campaigns past the point most don't play, so I am really looking for stuff like this in the 3rd, 4th and 5th level spell range, heck even second level spells to a degree. What is some cools stuff because legitimately was struggling to think of them.
Well I'm glad speak with dead satisfied your criteria. I would say some stand-outs, at least to me, are stuff like death ward, antilife shell, destructive wave (that's a divine spell in One D&D so Clerics can get it now), the One D&D version of Prayer of Healing.
My criteria was literally stuff that doesn't just do damage because everyone can do damage, and didn't have super costly components that it consumes. And I do like the new prayer of healing. I do want to say thank you for answering my question, because I was legitimately curious what else the cleric brings. Some cool stuff.
That being said I think the point was pretty solid. Sure that is not literally everything a cleric can do, they do have 9 levels of spells which covers a wide range of cool things. But a huge part of their core role was handled by that level 1 dip. The full on cleric outside whatever re-balancing they end up doing would likely be better due to being a full caster but the class core role was almost entirely handled with a 1 level dip.
I think there is something to what Aquilontune is saying. It might be part of what's bothering me about Channel Divinity on some subconscious level. It's kind of like if a level 1 Wizard got a feature that gave them PB uses per day, and you got to choose between doing PBxd8 fire damage, teleport, or dispel magic. It's not everything a wizard can do, but it is a lot of their whole theme. And the Wizard1/ Fighter 19 will get to do that part just as well as the Wizard 20.
It's that you gain the feature at its full efficiency with only 1 level in cleric, and it's inconsistent with other classes' level 1 features, heavily incentivizing a 1-level dip in cleric. This has to be consistent with other level 1 features scaling. Frankly, I'm not worried about "stealing the theme", because, c'mon, it's not like you gain the entire divine spell list for 1 level dip. A fighter19/cleric1 will never substitute a full cleric as a support.
To be fair though, the channel divinity feature isn't that great. Turn Undead is situation for obvious reasons; it is better in certain campaigns where you deal with undead more often but on the flip side if you never run into an undead, it might as well not exist. The Healing itself is at best used for out of combat healing because it is an action to use in combat. You generally want to avoid to use your action to heal.
I really feel like people are making out the Channel Divinity from Cleric to be better than it really is. People are looking at the total amount of healing it can do, when we should be looking more at the amount of healing per use. It is an action to use, and at tier 2, heals for an average of 13.5 points (18 at late tier 2 when your PB bonus hits +4) with each use. At tier 4, it is an average of 27 points of healing per use. The healing doesn't exactly keep up with the damage output you tend to see in the game.
To compare to bard, Bardic Inspiration is now a reaction and has Proficiency bonus uses; a d6 is still on average a +3.5 to a roll, which can be very significant. Sure you aren't getting the full scaling, but I feel like an average +3.5 to a roll on reaction is far more useful than an Action Based Heal. If we are just looking at the features, I would take bardic inspiration over channel divinity any day. The armor proficiencies and access to cantrips and first level divine spell are far more useful than the channel divinity healing.
It really comes down to playstyle. Because there are only a handful of people here that aren't impressed with the healing. I don't think getting that much healing at the cost of an action is as bad as you do. At low levels it is likely to bring a character back to near full health. That way better than any Healing Word, and even Cure Wounds. At mid levels it's often enough to survive more than the next hit. Again better than actual spells or Bardic Inspiration.
But more importantly it's a lot of healing between encounters. It saves your party a ton of hit dice that they can use later. But as we've already discussed, that might not matter as much in certain games. Probably the kind of games you play. And that's totally okay.
It matters a whole lot in my games. I'm not making it out to be better than it is. I'm saying it looks actually really good, for me and my table in particular. I would take Channel Divinity in a 1 level dip over Bardic Inspiration any day. I've never played a game without at least some undead. I've never played a game where hit dice aren't more valuable than a 1d6 reaction heal. I've never played a game where essentially free casts of upcast Cure Wounds, at a range, isn't a super useful offer. All of our playstyles are just as important.
At T1, it is 2d8 healing it is on average 9 points of healing. At level 1 it might bring you up to near full, but on the flip side, it is very easy for a hit to take you down at level 1. A high roll can very easily bring you down at first level so it is generally better to avoid taking damage to begin with. I always found 1st level to be the deadliest because of how easily a bad roll can ko you from full. On average it may be better than a cure wounds since Cure Wounds is at most a d8+3 which averages to 7.5, but I would still say Healing Word is better because you can bring someone back up and still be able to attack or cast a cantrip to further bring your opponents to 0.
Also, I don't think it is proper to compare bardic inspiration to a d6 reaction heal. The healing isn't the important part of bardic inspiration. It is the bonus to rolls that is important. A d6 is near double your proficiency at T1 and even at later tiers of play, including T4, remains a significant bonus. I've can't count the number of times where as an Artificer, I saved a party member with a flash of genius, giving that extra boost to a save; a reaction bardic inspiration has the same potential.
If people can't agree whether it is just good or too good, but no one thinks it is bad, isn't that the sweet spot for where it should be? Shouldn't we be asking that all the first level abilities be in that spot? All dips/multiclasses be equally viable by all of them being good enough that people fight over which is best?
To be honest, I am questioning whether even the cleric dip is worth taking. For example, is the dip in cleric worth the delayed spell progression when you could instead use your first level feat for similar benefits and maintain on time spell progression throughout your entire career.
If people can't agree whether it is just good or too good, but no one thinks it is bad, isn't that the sweet spot for where it should be? Shouldn't we be asking that all the first level abilities be in that spot? All dips/multiclasses be equally viable by all of them being good enough that people fight over which is best?
To be honest, I honestly am questioning whether even the cleric dip is worth taking. For example, is the dip in cleric worth the delayed spell progression when you could instead use your first level feat for similar benefits and maintain on time spell progression throughout your entire career.
Okay, I understand that it might not be as good to some players as it is to others. But it feels like you're downplaying it a bit much. There is no first level feat that can give you - medium armor and shields, 3 divine cantrips, access to all first level divine spells, 2 slots, and an ability that continues to scale up to 36d8 healing, or radiant damage, or turn undead.
A feat can give you the armor. Or it can give you a couple specific spells. But it can't give you both, and it certainly can't replicate Channel Divinity.
It's cool if the Cleric doesn't fit your particular way of playing, but it's not so easily replicated as to make it that pitiful. I could believe if someone says it feels about right compared to the Bard or Ranger. I wouldn't completely agree. It feels like a much stronger choice for a Wizard than either of them to me. I could at least see someone feeling it was comparable. Saying it's hardly worth taking sounds really strange.
If people can't agree whether it is just good or too good, but no one thinks it is bad, isn't that the sweet spot for where it should be? Shouldn't we be asking that all the first level abilities be in that spot? All dips/multiclasses be equally viable by all of them being good enough that people fight over which is best?
Wouldn't mind it, actually. Though now I'm scratching my head on how to make sneak attack scale with PB...
If people can't agree whether it is just good or too good, but no one thinks it is bad, isn't that the sweet spot for where it should be? Shouldn't we be asking that all the first level abilities be in that spot? All dips/multiclasses be equally viable by all of them being good enough that people fight over which is best?
Wouldn't mind it, actually. Though now I'm scratching my head on how to make sneak attack scale with PB...
my thought would be to remove the once per turn limitation on it, have it be a number of d6= to your PB and give them extra attack at level 5. but that won't happen because monks would make the best rogues.
If people can't agree whether it is just good or too good, but no one thinks it is bad, isn't that the sweet spot for where it should be? Shouldn't we be asking that all the first level abilities be in that spot? All dips/multiclasses be equally viable by all of them being good enough that people fight over which is best?
That's... not how balance works.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
my thought would be to remove the once per turn limitation on it, have it be a number of d6= to your PB and give them extra attack at level 5. but that won't happen because monks would make the best rogues.
Best I could come up with is increase the damage die every time PB goes up, so that it starts with 2d4 and ends with 6d12. But that makes progression rather uneven, bursty. Though it could be fine if 1-level dippers could get [PB]d6 Sneak Attack while rogues had their usual progression. Though rogues need a buff anyway. There's got to be be a purpose in leveling pure rogue rather than a ranger with 1 level dip in rogue for maximum power. Sneak Attack is rogue's main source of power, unlike Channel Divinity for clerics.
my thought would be to remove the once per turn limitation on it, have it be a number of d6= to your PB and give them extra attack at level 5. but that won't happen because monks would make the best rogues.
Best I could come up with is increase the damage die every time PB goes up, so that it starts with 2d4 and ends with 6d12. But that makes progression rather uneven, bursty. Though it could be fine if 1-level dippers could get [PB]d6 Sneak Attack while rogues had their usual progression. Though rogues need a buff anyway. There's got to be be a purpose in leveling pure rogue rather than a ranger with 1 level dip in rogue for maximum power. Sneak Attack is rogue's main source of power, unlike Channel Divinity for clerics.
Well for rogue my thought was a few level changes. I do kind of wish they made cunning action a first level feature of rogue and added a new second level feature. I think level 1-4 is mostly find for rogue. Level 5 only providing uncanny dodge is a little low for me, I would love to see level 5 become uncanny dodge AND expertise to really solidify skills for rogue. Then level 7 would be evasion again, level 9 would be where reliable talent kicks in level 11 would be where the new level 13 ability kicks in, and they could add something else to level 13 or even just bump evasion down to 13 and give a better level 17 feature. I do think Sneak attack has this weird issue where it is good at 1, 2, 3 and 4, then behind until level 9 and really good at super high levels of play.
I feel if rogue got its second expertise at level 5 it would be less rewarded for dipping out before 5. Ultimately, the issue for rogue right now is it really lacks an identity. All experts are skill monkeys not just rogue and sneak attack is just a different way of doing damage. The only thing that really gives the rogue an "identity" is cunning action, and I really feel it needs more to stand out.
Well for rogue my thought was a few level changes. I do kind of wish they made cunning action a first level feature of rogue and added a new second level feature. I think level 1-4 is mostly find for rogue. Level 5 only providing uncanny dodge is a little low for me, I would love to see level 5 become uncanny dodge AND expertise to really solidify skills for rogue. Then level 7 would be evasion again, level 9 would be where reliable talent kicks in level 11 would be where the new level 13 ability kicks in, and they could add something else to level 13 or even just bump evasion down to 13 and give a better level 17 feature. I do think Sneak attack has this weird issue where it is good at 1, 2, 3 and 4, then behind until level 9 and really good at super high levels of play.
I feel if rogue got its second expertise at level 5 it would be less rewarded for dipping out before 5. Ultimately, the issue for rogue right now is it really lacks an identity. All experts are skill monkeys not just rogue and sneak attack is just a different way of doing damage. The only thing that really gives the rogue an "identity" is cunning action, and I really feel it needs more to stand out.
I guess they need their own kind of maneuvers mechanic; they need options in combat, stuff to do other than just aim at whatever fits for sneak attack criteria. I'm thinking about something along the lines of exploiting weaknesses and exacerbating any possible inconvenience the target might have. Like decrease their movement speed if they're on difficult terrain, stun them if they're dazed, give your ally an advantage if there's two or more of your allies in melee range of the enemy, make them automatically fail a saving throw if they're under effect of a spell that can be disrupted by receiving damage, prevent them from standing up if they're prone, stuff like that. A synergetic gameplay.
Right. The scaling makes it unbalanced against the other classes. I totally agree, but we've all been going around in circles on that one for days. I was just agreeing with Aquilontune too. That the scaling being so strong, and the variety of options with just one feature, helps lend to the feeling that it's stealing the theme more than the other classes on top of it all.
And we're going to continue going in circles around it until 20th of January when we will hopefully get another UA to go in circles around)
Right. The scaling makes it unbalanced against the other classes. I totally agree, but we've all been going around in circles on that one for days. I was just agreeing with Aquilontune too. That the scaling being so strong, and the variety of options with just one feature, helps lend to the feeling that it's stealing the theme more than the other classes on top of it all.
And we're going to continue going in circles around it until 20th of January when we will hopefully get another UA to go in circles around)
Oh man I hope not, hahaha. :D
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Any character is going to miss out of things like higher level spells and subclass features if they only take a 1 level dip. The question is how much of the overall class theme is wrapped up in the first level? Taking 1 level in Bard or Ranger will feel like you have a little Bard or Ranger in your build. A Rogue is not quite as good. But Cleric is getting a larger share of its main theme and it keeps scaling better than any of the others. You get the shiny armor and weapons, a good amount of healing, radiant damage attacks, and turn undead. That certainly feels like a lot of the Cleric identity.
I have said before the issue I have with greater restoration is the same as I have with revivify. It has a costly material component that the spell consumes and is super situational so I would rather just have a scroll. But speak with dead is kind of what I was asking about earlier. What are some of the cool stand out higher level spells. once you hit 11 divine intervention comes in and we are talking campaigns past the point most don't play, so I am really looking for stuff like this in the 3rd, 4th and 5th level spell range, heck even second level spells to a degree. What is some cools stuff because legitimately was struggling to think of them.
It's that you gain the feature at its full efficiency with only 1 level in cleric, and it's inconsistent with other classes' level 1 features, heavily incentivizing a 1-level dip in cleric. This has to be consistent with other level 1 features scaling. Frankly, I'm not worried about "stealing the theme", because, c'mon, it's not like you gain the entire divine spell list for 1 level dip. A fighter19/cleric1 will never substitute a full cleric as a support.
Right. The scaling makes it unbalanced against the other classes. I totally agree, but we've all been going around in circles on that one for days. I was just agreeing with Aquilontune too. That the scaling being so strong, and the variety of options with just one feature, helps lend to the feeling that it's stealing the theme more than the other classes on top of it all.
To be fair though, the channel divinity feature isn't that great. Turn Undead is situation for obvious reasons; it is better in certain campaigns where you deal with undead more often but on the flip side if you never run into an undead, it might as well not exist. The Healing itself is at best used for out of combat healing because it is an action to use in combat. You generally want to avoid to use your action to heal.
I really feel like people are making out the Channel Divinity from Cleric to be better than it really is. People are looking at the total amount of healing it can do, when we should be looking more at the amount of healing per use. It is an action to use, and at tier 2, heals for an average of 13.5 points (18 at late tier 2 when your PB bonus hits +4) with each use. At tier 4, it is an average of 27 points of healing per use. The healing doesn't exactly keep up with the damage output you tend to see in the game.
To compare to bard, Bardic Inspiration is now a reaction and has Proficiency bonus uses; a d6 is still on average a +3.5 to a roll, which can be very significant. Sure you aren't getting the full scaling, but I feel like an average +3.5 to a roll on reaction is far more useful than an Action Based Heal. If we are just looking at the features, I would take bardic inspiration over channel divinity any day. The armor proficiencies and access to cantrips and first level divine spell are far more useful than the channel divinity healing.
It really comes down to playstyle. Because there are only a handful of people here that aren't impressed with the healing. I don't think getting that much healing at the cost of an action is as bad as you do. At low levels it is likely to bring a character back to near full health. That way better than any Healing Word, and even Cure Wounds. At mid levels it's often enough to survive more than the next hit. Again better than actual spells or Bardic Inspiration.
But more importantly it's a lot of healing between encounters. It saves your party a ton of hit dice that they can use later. But as we've already discussed, that might not matter as much in certain games. Probably the kind of games you play. And that's totally okay.
It matters a whole lot in my games. I'm not making it out to be better than it is. I'm saying it looks actually really good, for me and my table in particular. I would take Channel Divinity in a 1 level dip over Bardic Inspiration any day. I've never played a game without at least some undead. I've never played a game where hit dice aren't more valuable than a 1d6 reaction heal. I've never played a game where essentially free casts of upcast Cure Wounds, at a range, isn't a super useful offer. All of our playstyles are just as important.
Just to put it out there.
If people can't agree whether it is just good or too good, but no one thinks it is bad, isn't that the sweet spot for where it should be? Shouldn't we be asking that all the first level abilities be in that spot? All dips/multiclasses be equally viable by all of them being good enough that people fight over which is best?
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
This is a fantastic question.
My criteria was literally stuff that doesn't just do damage because everyone can do damage, and didn't have super costly components that it consumes. And I do like the new prayer of healing. I do want to say thank you for answering my question, because I was legitimately curious what else the cleric brings. Some cool stuff.
That being said I think the point was pretty solid. Sure that is not literally everything a cleric can do, they do have 9 levels of spells which covers a wide range of cool things. But a huge part of their core role was handled by that level 1 dip. The full on cleric outside whatever re-balancing they end up doing would likely be better due to being a full caster but the class core role was almost entirely handled with a 1 level dip.
At T1, it is 2d8 healing it is on average 9 points of healing. At level 1 it might bring you up to near full, but on the flip side, it is very easy for a hit to take you down at level 1. A high roll can very easily bring you down at first level so it is generally better to avoid taking damage to begin with. I always found 1st level to be the deadliest because of how easily a bad roll can ko you from full. On average it may be better than a cure wounds since Cure Wounds is at most a d8+3 which averages to 7.5, but I would still say Healing Word is better because you can bring someone back up and still be able to attack or cast a cantrip to further bring your opponents to 0.
Also, I don't think it is proper to compare bardic inspiration to a d6 reaction heal. The healing isn't the important part of bardic inspiration. It is the bonus to rolls that is important. A d6 is near double your proficiency at T1 and even at later tiers of play, including T4, remains a significant bonus. I've can't count the number of times where as an Artificer, I saved a party member with a flash of genius, giving that extra boost to a save; a reaction bardic inspiration has the same potential.
To be honest, I am questioning whether even the cleric dip is worth taking. For example, is the dip in cleric worth the delayed spell progression when you could instead use your first level feat for similar benefits and maintain on time spell progression throughout your entire career.
Okay, I understand that it might not be as good to some players as it is to others. But it feels like you're downplaying it a bit much. There is no first level feat that can give you - medium armor and shields, 3 divine cantrips, access to all first level divine spells, 2 slots, and an ability that continues to scale up to 36d8 healing, or radiant damage, or turn undead.
A feat can give you the armor. Or it can give you a couple specific spells. But it can't give you both, and it certainly can't replicate Channel Divinity.
It's cool if the Cleric doesn't fit your particular way of playing, but it's not so easily replicated as to make it that pitiful. I could believe if someone says it feels about right compared to the Bard or Ranger. I wouldn't completely agree. It feels like a much stronger choice for a Wizard than either of them to me. I could at least see someone feeling it was comparable. Saying it's hardly worth taking sounds really strange.
Wouldn't mind it, actually. Though now I'm scratching my head on how to make sneak attack scale with PB...
my thought would be to remove the once per turn limitation on it, have it be a number of d6= to your PB and give them extra attack at level 5. but that won't happen because monks would make the best rogues.
That's... not how balance works.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Best I could come up with is increase the damage die every time PB goes up, so that it starts with 2d4 and ends with 6d12. But that makes progression rather uneven, bursty. Though it could be fine if 1-level dippers could get [PB]d6 Sneak Attack while rogues had their usual progression. Though rogues need a buff anyway. There's got to be be a purpose in leveling pure rogue rather than a ranger with 1 level dip in rogue for maximum power. Sneak Attack is rogue's main source of power, unlike Channel Divinity for clerics.
Well for rogue my thought was a few level changes. I do kind of wish they made cunning action a first level feature of rogue and added a new second level feature. I think level 1-4 is mostly find for rogue. Level 5 only providing uncanny dodge is a little low for me, I would love to see level 5 become uncanny dodge AND expertise to really solidify skills for rogue. Then level 7 would be evasion again, level 9 would be where reliable talent kicks in level 11 would be where the new level 13 ability kicks in, and they could add something else to level 13 or even just bump evasion down to 13 and give a better level 17 feature. I do think Sneak attack has this weird issue where it is good at 1, 2, 3 and 4, then behind until level 9 and really good at super high levels of play.
I feel if rogue got its second expertise at level 5 it would be less rewarded for dipping out before 5. Ultimately, the issue for rogue right now is it really lacks an identity. All experts are skill monkeys not just rogue and sneak attack is just a different way of doing damage. The only thing that really gives the rogue an "identity" is cunning action, and I really feel it needs more to stand out.
I guess they need their own kind of maneuvers mechanic; they need options in combat, stuff to do other than just aim at whatever fits for sneak attack criteria. I'm thinking about something along the lines of exploiting weaknesses and exacerbating any possible inconvenience the target might have. Like decrease their movement speed if they're on difficult terrain, stun them if they're dazed, give your ally an advantage if there's two or more of your allies in melee range of the enemy, make them automatically fail a saving throw if they're under effect of a spell that can be disrupted by receiving damage, prevent them from standing up if they're prone, stuff like that. A synergetic gameplay.
And we're going to continue going in circles around it until 20th of January when we will hopefully get another UA to go in circles around)
Oh man I hope not, hahaha. :D