The dip also comes at the cost of delaying spell progression by a level and I consider that to be a massive detriment. I am not downplaying it at all. Spell Progression at a fullcaster is incredibly important and delaying all future spells by a level is quite huge, even at higher tiers.
Lightly Armoured gives you the armor and skilled proficiency and Magic Initiate can get you access to key first level spells like Bless. Sure it is not in one package, but it lets you keep on time spell progression.
I find on time spell progression to be incredibly valuable across all tiers of play.
Not saying that multiclass spell progression should change. The delay is needed for balance. However, I find the cleric dip to be of very questionable potency. I still think that feats should be based on character levels and martial characters should not have their first extra attack delayed, but the spell progression of casters should be delayed.
By that metric though no multi class is good as you ave basically said delaying spell casting is pretty much never worth it. But for all non full casters and probably some full casters its a massive add.
Which is a problem imo, not because you are necessarily wrong though I think you may be over stating it a bit but because it is really screwy if every class except full casters feels free to multi class as nothing they are delaying is that important but full casters almost never want to multi class as delaying their gains is too big of a cost. Every class should be like the casters where people seriously have to weigh delaying the next level vs a meaty 1 level dip. Wit the ranger for example about the only thing I'd delay is maybe before 5th level don't multi class, the rogue meh anything can wait a level.
The Cleric player (the character) picks half of their spells each morning. The DM (the gods) picks the other half. Call it a little divine inspiration. :)
"I woke up feeling like I need Revivify today. I was just going to do some laundry and check out the new carnival in town. Why do I need Revivify today, Lathander? Hello? Why?"
The Cleric player (the character) picks half of their spells each morning. The DM (the gods) picks the other half. Call it a little divine inspiration. :)
"I woke up feeling like I need Revivify today. I was just going to do some laundry and check out the new carnival in town. Why do I need Revivify today, Lathander? Hello? Why?"
This is a great idea until your god decides that find the path is their favorite spell.
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)
Ah, so that would just be true of any spellcaster for you then, that makes sense.
I was making a lot of characters last night using the 1DnD classes and options we have so far. Just to play around with multiclassing. I tried to leverage the Holy Order into some builds, thinking it would work nicely with certain classes. But coming in at second level, with no other benefits but the spell slots, I just couldn't make it work. It was too big of a hit to spell progression for just one feature. One that I could mostly replicate other ways.
I still think the 1st level of Cleric is worth it personally. You get a lot more from that, and a one level delay on spells isn't that bad to me.
But it did make me see that is probably going to be rare for anyone to take more than one level in Cleric when multiclassing. Moving the Domain to level 3 was good I think overall. There is just a side effect from breaking apart the benefits that usually came with it - useful Channel Divinity at level 1 and Holy Order at level 2. What remains of the Domain features is nice to have for the full Cleric, but not nearly as valuable investing 3 levels or more to multiclass except for very specific character concepts.
That's probably going to be true across most of the classes with the subclass standardization. None of the level 3 features we have seen are so tempting to make people go out of the way for them. First level is really good for everyone. Second level is hit or miss. But after that, I'm not sure. Combining that with the capstone features at level 18 and unimpressive Epic Boons, we might start seeing a lot of 1/1/18 builds, but not much more. It's not only the fact that it is the most that people might want to invest. It also feels optimal to always dip another class, especially in the same Group.
I'm not a big multiclasser in general, so it doesn't bother me a lot. I don't think I would have even noticed any of it without these conversations, so I think it's been great to talk through. I'm not sure how I feel about the way the classes are panning out overall, but it is interesting...
I multiclass prefer frequently, potentially due to my games regularly reaching late T3 and T4. I see people saying that the change will promote multiclass diversity, but I really don't see that being the case. Right now, I feel like One D&D will have less multiclass diversity than 5E. It's why I feel like Feats should be based on character level and the first extra attack should not be delayed if you only taken martial classes. Multiclassing in 5E is often seen as complex and tricky; I find a lot of people messing up with the multiclassing rules. Multiclassing should really be made more accessible.
I also feel like there needs to be a bit more incentive to actually go deeper into classes when multiclassing. The only multiclass that goes deep into both classes in 5E are paladin based multiclasses where you generally take 6 or 7 levels of paladin then the rest in a charisma caster. I would like to see more options open up somehow.
I think it depends on what one means by multiclass diversity. I could definitely see a larger variety of multiclass combos in 1DnD. Classes combined in ways we don't normally see. More people taking a small dip. But I'm not sure there will be many people going deep into them. And we probably won't see it limited to just a few must-have combos like we see in 5e.
Most of that is probably a good thing. I would like to get away from the Charisma power combos. And I would like to see more people feeling encouraged to come up with creative class combinations. It would be great if every class had something equal to offer at level 1.
Not going deep into classes seems more likely though, and potentially a loss overall. The way they are spreading class features out more is probably good for getting people to try higher tier play. But maybe not great for this aspect.
The other wierd concern I have is that a level 1 dip might become almost standard. As the classes are shaping up now, it seems likely. If I were to make a support Bard, I'm almost always better taking a level of Cleric too. If I wanted a combat Bard, a level in Ranger is always going to be a good investment. Delaying extra attack by one level hurts for a few games, but the bonus expertise and the super hunters mark more than makes up for it in the early levels.
I don't know how I feel about that. It feels off. Some characters have great RP reasons to begin life as a Cleric and become a Bard later. But it would be really strange if half of them do. :/
Earlier today I saw something were they mentioned the possibility of a return of prestige classes. The standardization of class feature levels opens the door for that. It also opens the door for what they tried in stixhaven. Multiple classes having access to the same subclass.
Ultimately my point isn't that no-one should prepare these spells, because I like most of them. My point is that these spells aren't really all that useful in steering players to using other more situational spells.
Well, that's the deal with situational spells. They shine when they're applied in situations they're designed for, rewarding players for preparation. Simply handing that out for free and throwing away decision-making... Doesn't feel right. It's like if a rogue could pickpocket a master key to all the doors in location from the first random guard.
Ultimately my point isn't that no-one should prepare these spells, because I like most of them. My point is that these spells aren't really all that useful in steering players to using other more situational spells.
Well, that's the deal with situational spells. They shine when they're applied in situations they're designed for, rewarding players for preparation. Simply handing that out for free and throwing away decision-making... Doesn't feel right. It's like if a rogue could pickpocket a master key to all the doors in location from the first random guard.
There will always be people who don't value what they see as "situational" but certain players love it. They tend to find tools to plan ahead that others ignore. (Divination, phb ranger, spell scrolls/downtime crafting, tools/equipment)
A good goal is to reward preparation play without mis-balancing against those uninterested in it.
The new downtime/home base rules(yet to come) gives the possibility to make such preparation more digestible to more players. If that's the case we could see more scrolls in games allowing casting of such situational spells more.
Frankly scrolls are the only way I can stand playing limited casting classes. (Except rangers)
Sorcerer is easy: 1st 3 levels are the powers emerging. It isn’t until they develop and mature that the source of the powers becomes manifest. The player makes the choice at the 3rd level, but the character discovers the origin. Good story hooks there.
Warlock feels less elegant, but it’s still doable. The idea that they’re just students of occultism up until they make a pact at level 3 is fine, but clerics and wizards can, under the right circumstances, be called students of occultism. The idea that you aren’t worthy of a patron until level 3 works nicely. Those first two levels just feel awkward. Like it’s part of your background (e.g. cultist/acolyte). Are you surrounded by distinct dark voices until you choose one at level 3? Ok, that actually sounds cool. Can it be like my thoughts on sorcerer, where your patron was always what the player chooses at level 3, but was unknown to the character until the patron deemed them worthy at level 3? There’s room to work here. It’s just not quite as organic as the sorcerer, but it still can be fun.
Sorcerer is easy: 1st 3 levels are the powers emerging. It isn’t until they develop and mature that the source of the powers becomes manifest. The player makes the choice at the 3rd level, but the character discovers the origin. Good story hooks there.
Warlock feels less elegant, but it’s still doable. The idea that they’re just students of occultism up until they make a pact at level 3 is fine, but clerics and wizards can, under the right circumstances, be called students of occultism. The idea that you aren’t worthy of a patron until level 3 works nicely. Those first two levels just feel awkward. Like it’s part of your background (e.g. cultist/acolyte). Are you surrounded by distinct dark voices until you choose one at level 3? Ok, that actually sounds cool. Can it be like my thoughts on sorcerer, where your patron was always what the player chooses at level 3, but was unknown to the character until the patron deemed them worthy at level 3? There’s room to work here. It’s just not quite as organic as the sorcerer, but it still can be fun.
My interpretation would be that the Warlock sees visions/messages/has some contact with their to-be-patron for levels 1-2, while the patron effectively gives the Warlock a taste of magic, to tempt them to form a pact. Then at 3rd level, the Warlock finally makes a deal.
Sorcerer is easy: 1st 3 levels are the powers emerging. It isn’t until they develop and mature that the source of the powers becomes manifest. The player makes the choice at the 3rd level, but the character discovers the origin. Good story hooks there.
Warlock feels less elegant, but it’s still doable. The idea that they’re just students of occultism up until they make a pact at level 3 is fine, but clerics and wizards can, under the right circumstances, be called students of occultism. The idea that you aren’t worthy of a patron until level 3 works nicely. Those first two levels just feel awkward. Like it’s part of your background (e.g. cultist/acolyte). Are you surrounded by distinct dark voices until you choose one at level 3? Ok, that actually sounds cool. Can it be like my thoughts on sorcerer, where your patron was always what the player chooses at level 3, but was unknown to the character until the patron deemed them worthy at level 3? There’s room to work here. It’s just not quite as organic as the sorcerer, but it still can be fun.
My interpretation would be that the Warlock sees visions/messages/has some contact with their to-be-patron for levels 1-2, while the patron effectively gives the Warlock a taste of magic, to tempt them to form a pact. Then at 3rd level, the Warlock finally makes a deal.
To me, and this just totally my personal opinion, that sounds way more fun to play out in a game than the current 5e version of having it all happen in your backstory before level 1.
Warlocks, Clerics, and Paladins receive their powers from an outside source. They should declare that source at 1st level in order to receive powers from that source. Any dip-worthy benefit, however, should be withheld until 3rd level.
Clerics can have a deity they worship but not be blessed with additional powers until 3rd level. Heck, in most fantasy worlds probably about 90%+ of all clergy are not even Clerics. Just devout laypeople in service to their deity. You can be a follower of XYZ deity but not choose (if the character even chooses) your domain, or the deity chooses the domain for your character, until you have proven yourself worthy.
Same for the Paladin. You could be following the precepts of certain Paladinic (is that even a word) virtues, but not decide on, or take up, a path until later. Kind of like a student going to medical school, but not deciding on the specialty until much later (you might not decide when your 18 yrs old that you want to be a neurosurgeon, but know you want to be a doctor and go to medical school)
Warlocks, I agree are the trickiest, but I can see them as dabblers in the occult. They gain some measure of power (spellcasting at level 1) not because they made a deal with an entity, but because their studies, desire for power, or delving in dark places, has led them to tap into the energies that fuel arcane magic (they are not trained like wizards so have limited spellcasting abilities/spell slots) and it is when they gain a certain amount of power that, either by choice or accident, contact with an entity happens and opens up the true power of the patron they interact with. I could see spellcasting at level 1 and Pact Boon (like Holy Orders) at level 2. Pact of the Blade, Chain, Tome, and Talisman are all generic enough that a patron isn't needed to gain these powers. And then maybe invocations not until level 3 when they make their deal with a patron.
Clerics can have a deity they worship but not be blessed with additional powers until 3rd level. Heck, in most fantasy worlds probably about 90%+ of all clergy are not even Clerics. Just devout laypeople in service to their deity. You can be a follower of XYZ deity but not choose (if the character even chooses) your domain, or the deity chooses the domain for your character, until you have proven yourself worthy.
Same for the Paladin. You could be following the precepts of certain Paladinic (is that even a word) virtues, but not decide on, or take up, a path until later. Kind of like a student going to medical school, but not deciding on the specialty until much later (you might not decide when your 18 yrs old that you want to be a neurosurgeon, but know you want to be a doctor and go to medical school)
Warlocks, I agree are the trickiest, but I can see them as dabblers in the occult. They gain some measure of power (spellcasting at level 1) not because they made a deal with an entity, but because their studies, desire for power, or delving in dark places, has led them to tap into the energies that fuel arcane magic (they are not trained like wizards so have limited spellcasting abilities/spell slots) and it is when they gain a certain amount of power that, either by choice or accident, contact with an entity happens and opens up the true power of the patron they interact with. I could see spellcasting at level 1 and Pact Boon (like Holy Orders) at level 2. Pact of the Blade, Chain, Tome, and Talisman are all generic enough that a patron isn't needed to gain these powers. And then maybe invocations not until level 3 when they make their deal with a patron.
This is one of those odd things. In the very earliest versions of D&D, it's assumed that 1st level characters are effectively newbies. They're teenagers or heck, preteens, who've been shoved out the door with a pot on their head and a stick in their hands and told 'go do stuff'.
Then Traveler came along and redefined their characters as veterans who've retired from the military and the equivalent, and all other game systems have been playing catchup ever since, moving their equivalent of 1st level farther and farther down careers of the characters. Now in D&D, backgrounds assume you've had pretty much a full life and training before you became an adventurer.
I'm not saying anyone here is wrong, it's just a thing I've noticed over the years.
This is one of those odd things. In the very earliest versions of D&D, it's assumed that 1st level characters are effectively newbies. They're teenagers or heck, preteens, who've been shoved out the door with a pot on their head and a stick in their hands and told 'go do stuff'.
Then Traveler came along and redefined their characters as veterans who've retired from the military and the equivalent, and all other game systems have been playing catchup ever since, moving their equivalent of 1st level farther and farther down careers of the characters. Now in D&D, backgrounds assume you've had pretty much a full life and training before you became an adventurer.
I'm not saying anyone here is wrong, it's just a thing I've noticed over the years.
Well, if teenagers could decimate goblin tribes, how is anything in the world in any danger? Makes sense that an adventurer stands out from the beginning. Why would anyone entrust teens with saving lives and killing things or even sentient beings?
Clerics can have a deity they worship but not be blessed with additional powers until 3rd level. Heck, in most fantasy worlds probably about 90%+ of all clergy are not even Clerics. Just devout laypeople in service to their deity. You can be a follower of XYZ deity but not choose (if the character even chooses) your domain, or the deity chooses the domain for your character, until you have proven yourself worthy.
Same for the Paladin. You could be following the precepts of certain Paladinic (is that even a word) virtues, but not decide on, or take up, a path until later. Kind of like a student going to medical school, but not deciding on the specialty until much later (you might not decide when your 18 yrs old that you want to be a neurosurgeon, but know you want to be a doctor and go to medical school)
Warlocks, I agree are the trickiest, but I can see them as dabblers in the occult. They gain some measure of power (spellcasting at level 1) not because they made a deal with an entity, but because their studies, desire for power, or delving in dark places, has led them to tap into the energies that fuel arcane magic (they are not trained like wizards so have limited spellcasting abilities/spell slots) and it is when they gain a certain amount of power that, either by choice or accident, contact with an entity happens and opens up the true power of the patron they interact with. I could see spellcasting at level 1 and Pact Boon (like Holy Orders) at level 2. Pact of the Blade, Chain, Tome, and Talisman are all generic enough that a patron isn't needed to gain these powers. And then maybe invocations not until level 3 when they make their deal with a patron.
That explanation for Warlocks also explains away something I've had issues with; namely, the Magic initiate: Warlock feat. If a patron supplies the spells and slots to use them, then how do you, a presumably patron-less adventurer, come to cast these Warlock spells? The answer is all Warlocks can derive some measure of power from the study of the occult and extraplanar. The feat explains how Pre-Warlocks start off: as dabblers of these corners of reality that provide some small magic. It's not so much researching, as just uncovering esoterica related to one of those reality corners. When they become immersed in their particular flavour of power, like a Great Old One Warlock discovering said corner happens to be 380°, then they're ready to form the actual pact with one of those beings.
This is one of those odd things. In the very earliest versions of D&D, it's assumed that 1st level characters are effectively newbies. They're teenagers or heck, preteens, who've been shoved out the door with a pot on their head and a stick in their hands and told 'go do stuff'.
Then Traveler came along and redefined their characters as veterans who've retired from the military and the equivalent, and all other game systems have been playing catchup ever since, moving their equivalent of 1st level farther and farther down careers of the characters. Now in D&D, backgrounds assume you've had pretty much a full life and training before you became an adventurer.
I'm not saying anyone here is wrong, it's just a thing I've noticed over the years.
Well, if teenagers could decimate goblin tribes, how is anything in the world in any danger? Makes sense that an adventurer stands out from the beginning. Why would anyone entrust teens with saving lives and killing things or even sentient beings?
Because in the oldest editions, a party of 4 1st level characters could be significantly challenged by a single giant rat. :) Heck I have memories of playing the original white-box edition of D&D and never getting to combat because the 1st level party TPKed just trying open the door to get *into* the dungeon.
To be clear, I'm not advocating going back to that, just stating that it's a bit of a cultural shift from the olden days. Adventurers are now assumed to be *starting* as seasoned professionals, and anybody wanting to play as newbies just starting their careers are going to have problems bending things to replicate that feel. Which is how this whole thing is relevant to the thread: When you think a character should to pick their subclass is going to depend on where you think the character is in their 'maturity': Are they teenieboppers with tin pots on their heads, or are they thirty-something veterans who left the military to become farmers but nobody will leave them alone and *keep dragging them back in*.
i personally dislike the change from first level subclasses as that is a large part of what draws me toward clerics and sorcerers but i can understand that someone else might prefer this
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
if i say something inflammatory the intention is not to trigger an emotional response and the fact that it does so is purely accidental and I sincerely apologise if it does
Since this got resurrected I ill say looking through the book. i am not sure why they did it. It made sense when all sub classes were at 3,6,10,14. Sure it would still feel off for sorcerers, warlocks, clerics but at least you got why due to standardization. This is especially weird to me as they kept subclass progressions on classes where it has been repeatedly noted how poorly they are spaced out like the rogue. None of the rogue sub class features would break the game if kept as is at levels 3,6,10,14. Same for paladins features etc. they just don't compete with 7th level spells so who cares.
It doesn't make sense for a sorcerer's BLOODLINE not known until level 3.
Just because the sorcerer (or Warlock or Cleric or Paladin) does not yet get the extra mechanical benefit from their bloodline (or patron/deity/oath) does not necessarily mean they don't know it at levels 1 and 2. Before 3rd level the powers gained by the bloodline/patron/deity/oath are only enough to provide the basic class abilities. In the case of Sorcerer, a player could certainly choose to role play that the character has no idea about the source of their power until specific powers start to manifest at 3rd level, though.
It doesn't make sense for a sorcerer's BLOODLINE not known until level 3.
Just because the sorcerer (or Warlock or Cleric or Paladin) does not yet get the extra mechanical benefit from their bloodline (or patron/deity/oath) does not necessarily mean they don't know it at levels 1 and 2. Before 3rd level the powers gained by the bloodline/patron/deity/oath are only enough to provide the basic class abilities. In the case of Sorcerer, a player could certainly choose to role play that the character has no idea about the source of their power until specific powers start to manifest at 3rd level, though.
This. Exactly this. I don't know why so many people struggle with this. It's as simple as "I have dragon blood running through my veins. That's why I can cast this and this spell, use metamagic, etc."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
By that metric though no multi class is good as you ave basically said delaying spell casting is pretty much never worth it. But for all non full casters and probably some full casters its a massive add.
Which is a problem imo, not because you are necessarily wrong though I think you may be over stating it a bit but because it is really screwy if every class except full casters feels free to multi class as nothing they are delaying is that important but full casters almost never want to multi class as delaying their gains is too big of a cost. Every class should be like the casters where people seriously have to weigh delaying the next level vs a meaty 1 level dip. Wit the ranger for example about the only thing I'd delay is maybe before 5th level don't multi class, the rogue meh anything can wait a level.
Okay new idea.
The Cleric player (the character) picks half of their spells each morning. The DM (the gods) picks the other half. Call it a little divine inspiration. :)
"I woke up feeling like I need Revivify today. I was just going to do some laundry and check out the new carnival in town. Why do I need Revivify today, Lathander? Hello? Why?"
This is a great idea until your god decides that find the path is their favorite spell.
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)
Earlier today I saw something were they mentioned the possibility of a return of prestige classes. The standardization of class feature levels opens the door for that. It also opens the door for what they tried in stixhaven. Multiple classes having access to the same subclass.
Well, that's the deal with situational spells. They shine when they're applied in situations they're designed for, rewarding players for preparation. Simply handing that out for free and throwing away decision-making... Doesn't feel right. It's like if a rogue could pickpocket a master key to all the doors in location from the first random guard.
Like Marilyn Manson.
There will always be people who don't value what they see as "situational" but certain players love it. They tend to find tools to plan ahead that others ignore. (Divination, phb ranger, spell scrolls/downtime crafting, tools/equipment)
A good goal is to reward preparation play without mis-balancing against those uninterested in it.
The new downtime/home base rules(yet to come) gives the possibility to make such preparation more digestible to more players. If that's the case we could see more scrolls in games allowing casting of such situational spells more.
Frankly scrolls are the only way I can stand playing limited casting classes. (Except rangers)
Sorcerer is easy: 1st 3 levels are the powers emerging. It isn’t until they develop and mature that the source of the powers becomes manifest. The player makes the choice at the 3rd level, but the character discovers the origin. Good story hooks there.
Warlock feels less elegant, but it’s still doable. The idea that they’re just students of occultism up until they make a pact at level 3 is fine, but clerics and wizards can, under the right circumstances, be called students of occultism. The idea that you aren’t worthy of a patron until level 3 works nicely. Those first two levels just feel awkward. Like it’s part of your background (e.g. cultist/acolyte). Are you surrounded by distinct dark voices until you choose one at level 3? Ok, that actually sounds cool. Can it be like my thoughts on sorcerer, where your patron was always what the player chooses at level 3, but was unknown to the character until the patron deemed them worthy at level 3? There’s room to work here. It’s just not quite as organic as the sorcerer, but it still can be fun.
My interpretation would be that the Warlock sees visions/messages/has some contact with their to-be-patron for levels 1-2, while the patron effectively gives the Warlock a taste of magic, to tempt them to form a pact. Then at 3rd level, the Warlock finally makes a deal.
[REDACTED]
To me, and this just totally my personal opinion, that sounds way more fun to play out in a game than the current 5e version of having it all happen in your backstory before level 1.
Warlocks, Clerics, and Paladins receive their powers from an outside source. They should declare that source at 1st level in order to receive powers from that source. Any dip-worthy benefit, however, should be withheld until 3rd level.
Clerics can have a deity they worship but not be blessed with additional powers until 3rd level. Heck, in most fantasy worlds probably about 90%+ of all clergy are not even Clerics. Just devout laypeople in service to their deity. You can be a follower of XYZ deity but not choose (if the character even chooses) your domain, or the deity chooses the domain for your character, until you have proven yourself worthy.
Same for the Paladin. You could be following the precepts of certain Paladinic (is that even a word) virtues, but not decide on, or take up, a path until later. Kind of like a student going to medical school, but not deciding on the specialty until much later (you might not decide when your 18 yrs old that you want to be a neurosurgeon, but know you want to be a doctor and go to medical school)
Warlocks, I agree are the trickiest, but I can see them as dabblers in the occult. They gain some measure of power (spellcasting at level 1) not because they made a deal with an entity, but because their studies, desire for power, or delving in dark places, has led them to tap into the energies that fuel arcane magic (they are not trained like wizards so have limited spellcasting abilities/spell slots) and it is when they gain a certain amount of power that, either by choice or accident, contact with an entity happens and opens up the true power of the patron they interact with. I could see spellcasting at level 1 and Pact Boon (like Holy Orders) at level 2. Pact of the Blade, Chain, Tome, and Talisman are all generic enough that a patron isn't needed to gain these powers. And then maybe invocations not until level 3 when they make their deal with a patron.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
This is one of those odd things. In the very earliest versions of D&D, it's assumed that 1st level characters are effectively newbies. They're teenagers or heck, preteens, who've been shoved out the door with a pot on their head and a stick in their hands and told 'go do stuff'.
Then Traveler came along and redefined their characters as veterans who've retired from the military and the equivalent, and all other game systems have been playing catchup ever since, moving their equivalent of 1st level farther and farther down careers of the characters. Now in D&D, backgrounds assume you've had pretty much a full life and training before you became an adventurer.
I'm not saying anyone here is wrong, it's just a thing I've noticed over the years.
Well, if teenagers could decimate goblin tribes, how is anything in the world in any danger? Makes sense that an adventurer stands out from the beginning. Why would anyone entrust teens with saving lives and killing things or even sentient beings?
That explanation for Warlocks also explains away something I've had issues with; namely, the Magic initiate: Warlock feat. If a patron supplies the spells and slots to use them, then how do you, a presumably patron-less adventurer, come to cast these Warlock spells? The answer is all Warlocks can derive some measure of power from the study of the occult and extraplanar. The feat explains how Pre-Warlocks start off: as dabblers of these corners of reality that provide some small magic. It's not so much researching, as just uncovering esoterica related to one of those reality corners. When they become immersed in their particular flavour of power, like a Great Old One Warlock discovering said corner happens to be 380°, then they're ready to form the actual pact with one of those beings.
Because in the oldest editions, a party of 4 1st level characters could be significantly challenged by a single giant rat. :) Heck I have memories of playing the original white-box edition of D&D and never getting to combat because the 1st level party TPKed just trying open the door to get *into* the dungeon.
To be clear, I'm not advocating going back to that, just stating that it's a bit of a cultural shift from the olden days. Adventurers are now assumed to be *starting* as seasoned professionals, and anybody wanting to play as newbies just starting their careers are going to have problems bending things to replicate that feel. Which is how this whole thing is relevant to the thread: When you think a character should to pick their subclass is going to depend on where you think the character is in their 'maturity': Are they teenieboppers with tin pots on their heads, or are they thirty-something veterans who left the military to become farmers but nobody will leave them alone and *keep dragging them back in*.
i personally dislike the change from first level subclasses as that is a large part of what draws me toward clerics and sorcerers but i can understand that someone else might prefer this
if i say something inflammatory the intention is not to trigger an emotional response and the fact that it does so is purely accidental and I sincerely apologise if it does
It doesn't make sense for a sorcerer's BLOODLINE not known until level 3.
Since this got resurrected I ill say looking through the book. i am not sure why they did it. It made sense when all sub classes were at 3,6,10,14. Sure it would still feel off for sorcerers, warlocks, clerics but at least you got why due to standardization. This is especially weird to me as they kept subclass progressions on classes where it has been repeatedly noted how poorly they are spaced out like the rogue. None of the rogue sub class features would break the game if kept as is at levels 3,6,10,14. Same for paladins features etc. they just don't compete with 7th level spells so who cares.
Now it seems off and weird for no gain.
Just because the sorcerer (or Warlock or Cleric or Paladin) does not yet get the extra mechanical benefit from their bloodline (or patron/deity/oath) does not necessarily mean they don't know it at levels 1 and 2. Before 3rd level the powers gained by the bloodline/patron/deity/oath are only enough to provide the basic class abilities. In the case of Sorcerer, a player could certainly choose to role play that the character has no idea about the source of their power until specific powers start to manifest at 3rd level, though.
This. Exactly this. I don't know why so many people struggle with this. It's as simple as "I have dragon blood running through my veins. That's why I can cast this and this spell, use metamagic, etc."