Personally, I think all classes should get their subclass at level 1, so the basic feel of a character is in place. However, I think all the subclass features need to be dialed back. A Hexblade needs the Cha attack bonus at level 1, or survivability becomes an issue. However, they do not need Hexblade’s curse at level 1 (additional armor could also be held off). this creates a much more balanced offering.
In most instances, simply swapping the 1st and 3rd level abilities can give a subclass at level 1, and in many cases, the swap even feels better.
The most hilarious example of the thematic silliness is the Cleric of TBD, and damn it, they are passionate about it. 😂
I truly believe, with a little work, subclasses at level 1 is a great idea. As I said, it allows a character to achieve a better idea of how their character will play over the course of their career. That said, a lot of subclass features need to be toned back, which to me is the real issue, not subclasses themselves. If the various abilities are pared down, and spread out across a few levels, I think it would be a better solution than all the silliness created by having a subclass chosen at level 3… The cleric of TBD will thank you! Just my $.02…
It's like people don't read the things I type sometimes.
I will say it again, and I hope people in the back can hear me......deities are not their divine domains. Those are two different things. A deity is a sentient massively powerful supernatural entity with divine power that can channel some of said power into mortals to do their bidding. A divine domain is an aspect of the universe (physical or abstract) that deity holds power over, and a deity can have one or multiple such domains.
Sure, but gods wouldn't have control over every domain. If you are worshiping Frolicker god of puppies and dancing through meadows taking the subclass of undeath seems a bit out of place. They are not their domain, but who they are effects their domains.
People are right this seems off. Mechanics should support the narrative not fight it.
Sure, but gods wouldn't have control over every domain. If you are worshiping Frolicker god of puppies and dancing through meadows taking the subclass of undeath seems a bit out of place. They are not their domain, but who they are effects their domains.
People are right this seems off. Mechanics should support the narrative not fight it.
Does a deity absolutely have to grant their domain-specific powers to the cleric right away? Or maybe, they could grant a cleric general powers first? Nothing stops you from saying "I worship Talos" at level 1. Nothing can force Talos to make you a full warpriest at level 1.
As far as the mechanics go… Yeah, they are. However, even from a purely fluff standpoint, having subclasses at level 1 just fills a lot of narrative holes (or never creates them in the first place), and that is a very real benefit. In my opinion, 1st level subclasses (although very dialed down) works better both mechanically, and in terms of fluff. I think forcing the solution WotC is currently working toward feels, forced… It id not very intuitive with how many of the classes work. The solutions I offered work fix almost all of the current issues, without creating any unusual situations in terms of fluff and lore.
And I will say all of this again no matter how many times you say your thing again… 😏
As far as mechanics go, you're wrong. 1st level features like Hexblade's Cha melee are breaking the game. A hexadin is simply better than a paladin. That's what they're addressing. And getting a subclass feature at level 1 means you're not getting an actual class-defining feature until level 2 or 3.
This feels really backwards to me since your bloodline is not a choice, it's set in stone, but meta-magic IS a choice (at least mechanically). So it makes much more sense to have the actual choice happen when people are making the choices.
Does your particular magical mutation absolutely have to manifest at level 1? Because what defines sorcerer is innate magic and metamagic.
They are casting magic naturally so it is kind of determined. When the powers come online can vary, but the origin of the character should be at level 1. I don't mind various features coming online at level 3, if hexblade still has the chr/attack feature sure let it kick in at level 3. But with how they have currently written warlocks the pact would come as you pick level 1. Like I said I think they can change the fluff of warlocks so they gain general arcane abilities through their research as arcane magic works as a learned ability instead of granted. And then have them make a pact at level 3. I think it would fit better to switch the main stat to int then which is my preference so hey have at it. But for clerics and sorcerers its a harder sell.
It is a RPG role playing game, both parts of that matter the game part and the role playing part. It feels like they are trashing the RP part a bit to much for the G part with this idea.
Personally, I think all classes should get their subclass at level 1, so the basic feel of a character is in place. However, I think all the subclass features need to be dialed back. A Hexblade needs the Cha attack bonus at level 1, or survivability becomes an issue. However, they do not need Hexblade’s curse at level 1 (additional armor could also be held off). this creates a much more balanced offering.
In most instances, simply swapping the 1st and 3rd level abilities can give a subclass at level 1, and in many cases, the swap even feels better.
The most hilarious example of the thematic silliness is the Cleric of TBD, and damn it, they are passionate about it. 😂
I truly believe, with a little work, subclasses at level 1 is a great idea. As I said, it allows a character to achieve a better idea of how their character will play over the course of their career. That said, a lot of subclass features need to be toned back, which to me is the real issue, not subclasses themselves. If the various abilities are pared down, and spread out across a few levels, I think it would be a better solution than all the silliness created by having a subclass chosen at level 3… The cleric of TBD will thank you! Just my $.02…
It's like people don't read the things I type sometimes.
I will say it again, and I hope people in the back can hear me......deities are not their divine domains. Those are two different things. A deity is a sentient massively powerful supernatural entity with divine power that can channel some of said power into mortals to do their bidding. A divine domain is an aspect of the universe (physical or abstract) that deity holds power over, and a deity can have one or multiple such domains.
Sure, but gods wouldn't have control over every domain. If you are worshiping Frolicker god of puppies and dancing through meadows taking the subclass of undeath seems a bit out of place. They are not their domain, but who they are effects their domains.
If you are worshipping Frolicker, what's stopping you from taking the Death Domain at Level 1 anyway?
If someone is weird enough to choose an unfitting domain for their character's deity at Level 3, what difference would it make that they'd get that choice at any other level?
The features you get at Levels 1 and 2 in this playtest are fairly generic, and are things that can fit on basically any cleric, regardless of which deity they serve.
Because in the setting you wouldn't be able to. If its at level 1 the god determines what domains you can choose and vice versa, if you want to choose the domain of undeath you would only have access to 2-3 gods. Sidelining the choice to level 3 just does not make narrative sense. You can have the the abilities kick in at level 3 but who you gain your powers from is something that does not make sense to wait for. Your 1st level spells are coming from them, so you already determined the god. Which should limit your domain options. Which goes counter to their design goal. I do not think the design goal is worth the narrative costs.
Even in 5e, your domain is not strictly limited by the deity you follow. There are suggested domains listed in the back of the PHB, but they aren't the only ones you have access to. Any domain is available to any cleric of any god. The book only says to consider the suggested domains.
The one place it makes a special note is for Life and Death domains. It says they tended to suggest the Life domain for deities associated with healing, protection, childbirth, nurturing, or fertility. But that any non-evil god could have it. And for the Death domain they said this is mostly for evil NPCs, but you can still do it if your DM approves.
With the ever shrinking role of alignment in DnD each edition, I imagine the new PHB won't even mention those parts.
Honestly, there are some ways that I think the delayed subclass choice can make for even better roleplay opportunities. You could play the spiritual leader of a small village who is responsible for speaking to all of your local gods, but you find your focus on the adventure. You could worship Helm at first, but during your adventure you decide your true calling is to Lathander. You could be totally devoted to Oghma, but at level 3 you receive a vision and are gifted with special powers now as a proven disciple.
The same is true for Warlocks and Sorcerers. Everyone currently resigns their origin to their backstory. It could be so much more fun to have part of it play out in the game instead. You know you have magic powers from somewhere, and you can control spells in ways that wizards can't. But it's not until later that you learn where the source of that power comes from. When it manifests as a sheen of dragon scales that protect you from a fire. Or you made a dark deal with something in the shadows, or whispers in the library late at night. But it doesn't reveal itself to you until later, and the bargain is sealed. Or maybe you made a deal with the wrong one, and another strange entity comes along to offer you a better arrangement, with its own strings attached.
These events could could be so much more interesting to play out in the actual game. And for those who aren't interested in doing that, nothing will stop you. You can still say you're a follower of Tempus right from day 1. You can still say you are a Draconic Sorcerer. You can still say you already met your Patron and they're a weird Fey. You just don't get their full gifts until later. Nothing has to change for anyone that knows what they want.
But it could actually open more RP opportunities in game to delay these choices to level 3. At the very least, it won't hurt anything. And it can help new players, which is always a good thing.
Idk, I think that just because they are testing this with the cleric, doesn't mean they plan to push back sublcass to level 3 for everything.
It's specifically problematic for sorc and warlock unless you are going to rework the early levels of those classes.
If you put invocations at level 1 like someone suggested, then that opens up several cans of worms with things like Devil sight + Darkness combo, or that you'd only need a single level in warlock to gain Eldritch blast, Agonizing+Repelling blast, and hex.
My guess is that they will push back some of the subclass abilities until level 2-3 like the shield and armor proficiencies from Hexblade, but you will still pick your sub, at level 1.
If you look at the current cleric progression it makes a lot of sense why they'd want to redesign it. Everything is so frontloaded on cleric that it's kind of ridiculous, you get all your good stuff at level 1, including heavy armor profs and those things don't scale with cleric level, but with Wis mod or Prof bonus. You get almost nothing but some pretty weak/situational channel divinity until level 6 (other than normal spell progression). This is probably why they are redoing channel divinity and spreading out some of the gains in power as you level up.
As for better roleplaying opportunities, I do not share that opinion, but to each their own. Most players I know (including those I DM) would prefer more customization at the start… In fact, I guarantee this fact. I think have too generic of starting characters is a mistake. I understand that others may feel differently, however, I suspect both sides of this issue possess significant populations.
Everyone is going to have their own opinions, and that's totally great. I'm not going to try to change anyone's minds. This is just the way I look at it:
In 5e right now, I can make a Cleric of Tymora, goddess of luck and good fortune. There really isn't a luck domain, so I'll just pick something. Maybe Trickery or Life or Twilight or even Death. I feel obliged to take a domain. So I pick one and then go about my adventure as a Twilight Domain Cleric (of Tymora.)
While in 1DnD I can make a Cleric of Tymora, goddess of luck and good fortune. And I start my adventure just focused on being the best Cleric of Tymora I can be. Then at level 3, maybe something cool happens. Maybe I go through a ritual to be accepted in a higher level of the church to get my domain. Maybe I am visited by Tymora in a dream. Maybe a challenge to test my faith is set before me. Or maybe I just pick a domain and carry on. At the very least, it's no different than it would have been in 5e. At its best, it opens even more opportunities for roleplay. And even better, a Cleric is focused more on their chosen deity than their domain.
The domain is purely mechanical. The roleplay is what we make of it. And from a mechanical perspective, yes it does limit some of the level 1 customization, for a few games. But the Holy Order covers most early features and it comes in pretty quick. And we get a better Channel Divinity with 3 options right from the start. The customization is just spread out a little more, so you get to make choices every level up to 5. That's pretty cool to me.
Everything is mechanical, that is what matters. Fluff can be altered as you like, but the mechanics matters. To me, as an example, Channel Divinity should come after a cleric’s Domain, as the domain should define the specific Channel Divinity ability, as each domain should offer different choices. With some classes, the definition of a subclass is very important to the feel of the class. Thus, I just find the idea of 1st level subclasses best. However, I only support this with pared down features provided by the subclass, and features possibly spread out more. I know my players are big fans of choices during character creation, it was a big reason a lot of them were excited about earlier OneD&D offerings, that included such ideas as a feat along with your background. I can guarantee that if I asked every player I know if they would prefer their subclass at level 1 over any other feature for a class levels 1-3… Almost every last one would want to get their subclass right away. When creating a new character, the additional choice, and the scope it offers appeals to the players… A LOT!
I think subclasses at level 1 are an easy thing to balance once committed to the idea, and Imreally like my players feeling like they are “unique”, they are more content in such circumstances, and that leads to a better time at the game table. I do not give my players anything for free, but if the rules give the. A better sense of individuality, that really seems to help players get into their characters. Everybody is going to have their own opinion about which route is best, and WotC apparently has already chosen a winner, so… I doubt there is going to be any serious modification from the direction they are currently headed.
Yeah I totally get that. There are a lot of ways they could make all subclasses work at level 1 instead. I'd be okay with that too. They would be changing even more classes though, and while I don't personally care about backwards compatibility, a ton of people do. So the more they change the harder that is.
I would even be cool if they separate domains, patrons, and draconic bloodlines from the subclass altogether. That's the way I would have probably gone if I was writing it. Let the players choose their faith or power origin first. Then make the subclasses just be variants on how you use the powers. It makes far more sense and cuts down on the dozens of subclasses needed for some classes. But again, I do recognize it would be a nightmare for the backwards compatible fans.
I'm just trying to be optimistic really. People had concerns about how the fluff could make sense with later subclass choices. I can see bright sides to it from a roleplaying perspective. The classes have changed so many times over the editions. We never had a domain to choose at all in early versions and it didn't hurt anything. I've even seen a domain be detrimental to roleplay in 5e as people sometimes focus on it more than their deity. I'm not real concerned about the mechanics as long as they are balanced. Every class being on the same page with subclass progression feels more balanced to me. And choices every level sounds fun. 1st and 2nd level only last a few games anyway. But everyone will want different things and prioritize them differently. So at least we get to take part in the process and provide feedback.
A big part of the reason for no subclasses at level 1 is for new players. It is so that players who are playing for the first time can get a feel for the base class before they have to choose a subclass, which is something they will be stuck with the entire game.
In general more experienced players start at level 3 anyway because other classes don't get their subclass to level 3. So for most people whether you put the subclass at 1 or 3 it won't make a difference, the difference will be in multi-classing dips.
So here's a question. You're talking about moving sub-class to level 3... But then what DO they get at level 1? Is a level 1 Sorc just a wizard who uses CHA instead of INT and knows fewer spells but more cantrips? Is a Warlock just EB with maybe a few slots on the side until they hit level 3? What do these classes actually GET early on?
So you're telling me it never crossed your mind that Metamagic might actually be moved further down the level list from Level 3 to 2 or 1?
Or that they might get Font of Magic at Level 1? Or that Font of Magic might get changes made to it?
The reason I say this is that Font of Magic is literally the mechanical representation of the innate magic they have, and Metamagic is their ability to use that innate magic to do weird stuff with their spells. That is probably the biggest thing that sets them apart from wizards at the base level, aside from the number of spells known and spell preparation.
This feels really backwards to me since your bloodline is not a choice, it's set in stone, but meta-magic IS a choice (at least mechanically). So it makes much more sense to have the actual choice happen when people are making the choices.
While I do think Sorcerer and Warlock are the two classes where it'd be the most fitting to have their magical source (bloodline or patron) be defined at Level 1, the point I'm making is that it isn't impossible to justify having the specific bloodline or the nature of the patron come to light after the other lower level features show themselves.
That being said, in the context of subclass decisions, we have no idea what they'll do with these two classes beyond that they'll probably stick to the pattern of subclass features being at Level 3, 6, 10, and 14.
I'm not arguing that they can't have things manifest later. I'm arguing that, unless something changes, sorcs get two 'subclasses' (sort of) as it were. Their bloodline and their meta-magic. Either these are both waiting till level 3 meaning that, until then, sorcs are just worse casters, or we're giving them one of the two at the start. I don't see why that should be meta-magic. If I pick, I dunno, Storm Soul sorcerer I want to PLAY a Storm soul! I don't want to start off as 'caster who has a bit of meta-magic THEN storm-soul!' Especially when I choose my bloodline at character creation (ignoring multi-class here) but, at the least, I pick up more meta-magic as I level up.
It feels really ass-backwards to insist that, between the two choices, it's METAMAGIC we should get at level 1 and not our actual bloodline, innate, abilities. The thing we made an immutable, unchangable (without GM intervention), choice to take. Whereas if I chose to skip, say, subtle spell when I got metamagic I can pick it up later.
This, honestly, feels more like you feel there is something you want to do and are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole; especially when said square peg was already in a square hole that was the perfect size and shape for it.
Idk, I think that just because they are testing this with the cleric, doesn't mean they plan to push back sublcass to level 3 for everything.
It's specifically problematic for sorc and warlock unless you are going to rework the early levels of those classes.
If you put invocations at level 1 like someone suggested, then that opens up several cans of worms with things like Devil sight + Darkness combo, or that you'd only need a single level in warlock to gain Eldritch blast, Agonizing+Repelling blast, and hex.
My guess is that they will push back some of the subclass abilities until level 2-3 like the shield and armor proficiencies from Hexblade, but you will still pick your sub, at level 1.
If you look at the current cleric progression it makes a lot of sense why they'd want to redesign it. Everything is so frontloaded on cleric that it's kind of ridiculous, you get all your good stuff at level 1, including heavy armor profs and those things don't scale with cleric level, but with Wis mod or Prof bonus. You get almost nothing but some pretty weak/situational channel divinity until level 6 (other than normal spell progression). This is probably why they are redoing channel divinity and spreading out some of the gains in power as you level up.
WotC said in the video that they are pushing all subclasses to 3rd. That part has been stated directly and clearly. WotC even went so far as to say why, and the reason is that it is more new player friendly and fixes issues with multiclassing.
I think that sells short the intelligence of most players (icluding the new ones). The choice of subclass does not have to be rocket science, just how do I want my (X) to play. Again, I think people are artificial inflating the difficulty of the various solutions. I honestly think both meet the desired goal, I just think one offers a more satisfying result. To me, that is win/win…
Remember this is wizards stated goal. They don't want the new players who have to learn how a table top rpg works and how moving works and attacking works and role playing and casting spells and how all the basic fundamentals of the game work and, at the same time, have to make a permanent decision about what direction they are going to take their class at level 1 because in addition to learning their class + all the fundamental rules they would also have to learn EVERY subclass to make the decision. When the other option would be learn all the fundamentals and then when you have a grasp on the fundamentals of the game and the fundamentals of your class after 2 or 3 sessions you can make a choice as to what direction you want to take your character in.
Edit: for those who are wondering my experience with new players. I taught my 8 to 14 year old female cousins to play. They had never played a computer based RPG let alone a table top one before. I taught my Aunt to play, who's experience with games came down to Yahtzee and monopoly. I have taught people who have played skyrim and WoW and the like as well. This game can have a very wide appeal to all kinds, and no I dont teach the whole game in one go, I only teach as much of the mechanics as they are interested in learning at the time. Otherwise they learn and discover through gameplay. In most cases with those that have no gaming experience I let them choose premade characters. I would not have DREAMED of introducing subclasses to them until they got a grasp of the game. Someone with a gaming background, that is different. But it is all down to peoples familiarity with gaming and investment levels.
Meh. Not going to be able to change Wizard's mind, especially now, but I do worry that they're so focused on appealing to the newbies that they may be shooting themselves in the foot. Especially if they can also include a 'difficulty' or 'reccommended' tag or something to steer newcomers towards classes with lower learning curves.
Fortunately, nothing they've shown us so far is dumbing down the game at all. We have more options for character creation than before. There are 1st level feats, fully customizable backgrounds as standard, a new species, new options for old species, new ways to use old features like a choice of holy order and better channel divinity, new weapon features, and more feats that are actually worth taking. Some classes are going to double their number of subclass options in the PHB. They're trying to make it easier to learn the game. But they aren't taking away the system mastery from old players. They're giving us more ways to use the system that won't result in the same dozen builds being used again and again. Testing the rules has been fun, and character creation is one of the best parts. I'm not going to give them a blanket pass for every change. I've expressed real disappointment for some rules. But I really don't feel like the older players are getting left out at all.
Wotc will make every decision for multiple reasons. Simplicity and multiclassing are pieces of a whole picture. Even those topics have deeper pieces. Just having a general rule of subclasses at 3 means it's easy to remember and balance for. Some youtubers even suggested it might allow them to experiment with universal subclasses again(see strixhaven U.A). I think wotc holds the opinion thatThe main reason those subclasses failed was incompatible level advancement.
I like to look at it like this, the game is going to be rebalanced and I get only so many "votes" to change things. Level 3 subclasses dosen't seem a good hill to die on IMO. It would need alot of support to change and force alot of "problems" to be solved other ways.
I have other places where my energy would be better spent. Naratively and mechanically the game can readjust around subclasses at 3.
However other places in the platest (ranger, and rogue) make me think I prefer 5e design over 1 design. If those don't change a bit, I see no reason to move on to 1. Once we get the next few playtest results explanation videos, I will have a better idea as to whether or not to give up on one dnd. So maybe there will be a big enough crowd still using 5e warlock and sorcerer design if that is your hill.
A warlock studies occultism for the first 2 levels, at level 3 actually makes a pact.
And this is why I really hope Warlocks use Intelligence for spellcasting in 1DD. There's an argument for both Intelligence and Charisma but I think their overall "studying the occult" and "uncovering arcane secrets" theme suits Intelligence far better. If I recall correctly, even J-Craw (or another 5e designer) said they wanted it to be Intelligence, and they chose Charisma solely because it was Charisma in 3e-4e.
Overall I like the 3rd-level subclass change. It's weird but it definitely serves to make the game more consistent.
Wotc will make every decision for multiple reasons. Simplicity and multiclassing are pieces of a whole picture. Even those topics have deeper pieces. Just having a general rule of subclasses at 3 means it's easy to remember and balance for. Some youtubers even suggested it might allow them to experiment with universal subclasses again(see strixhaven U.A). I think wotc holds the opinion thatThe main reason those subclasses failed was incompatible level advancement.
I like to look at it like this, the game is going to be rebalanced and I get only so many "votes" to change things. Level 3 subclasses dosen't seem a good hill to die on IMO. It would need alot of support to change and force alot of "problems" to be solved other ways.
I have other places where my energy would be better spent. Naratively and mechanically the game can readjust around subclasses at 3.
However other places in the platest (ranger, and rogue) make me think I prefer 5e design over 1 design. If those don't change a bit, I see no reason to move on to 1. Once we get the next few playtest results explanation videos, I will have a better idea as to whether or not to give up on one dnd. So maybe there will be a big enough crowd still using 5e warlock and sorcerer design if that is your hill.
Everything in 1DD is subject to change. What do you think the purpose of playtest documents is??
A warlock studies occultism for the first 2 levels, at level 3 actually makes a pact.
And this is why I really hope Warlocks use Intelligence for spellcasting in 1DD. There's an argument for both Intelligence and Charisma but I think their overall "studying the occult" and "uncovering arcane secrets" theme suits Intelligence far better. If I recall correctly, even J-Craw (or another 5e designer) said they wanted it to be Intelligence, and they chose Charisma solely because it was Charisma in 3e-4e.
Overall I like the 3rd-level subclass change. It's weird but it definitely serves to make the game more consistent.
They chose Charisma for Warlocks in 5e because player feedback told them to stay with Charisma.
So, why does the community prefer Charisma over Intelligence? Especially when I've seen the majority of people say that we need more Intelligence casters?
For reference, I know I can just allow Warlocks to use Intelligence in my games. I do allow them.
A warlock studies occultism for the first 2 levels, at level 3 actually makes a pact.
And this is why I really hope Warlocks use Intelligence for spellcasting in 1DD. There's an argument for both Intelligence and Charisma but I think their overall "studying the occult" and "uncovering arcane secrets" theme suits Intelligence far better. If I recall correctly, even J-Craw (or another 5e designer) said they wanted it to be Intelligence, and they chose Charisma solely because it was Charisma in 3e-4e.
Overall I like the 3rd-level subclass change. It's weird but it definitely serves to make the game more consistent.
They chose Charisma for Warlocks in 5e because player feedback told them to stay with Charisma.
So, why does the community prefer Charisma over Intelligence? Especially when I've seen the majority of people say that we need more Intelligence casters?
For reference, I know I can just allow Warlocks to use Intelligence in my games. I do allow them.
But as to why, I don't actually know. Some of the folks here who weighed in on why they prefer the class to have CHA is that they believe that Charisma is more fitting due to needing to have a force of personality to maintain your independent will against your patron, and you need to be able to negotiate the terms of the pact with your patron.
I guess that makes sense, though I really like the idea of a crazed lunatic with next to no social skills running around trying to convince people about the "Great Old One".
I'll probably start a thread on the topic of Intelligence Warlocks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[REDACTED]
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sure, but gods wouldn't have control over every domain. If you are worshiping Frolicker god of puppies and dancing through meadows taking the subclass of undeath seems a bit out of place. They are not their domain, but who they are effects their domains.
People are right this seems off. Mechanics should support the narrative not fight it.
Does a deity absolutely have to grant their domain-specific powers to the cleric right away? Or maybe, they could grant a cleric general powers first? Nothing stops you from saying "I worship Talos" at level 1. Nothing can force Talos to make you a full warpriest at level 1.
They are casting magic naturally so it is kind of determined. When the powers come online can vary, but the origin of the character should be at level 1. I don't mind various features coming online at level 3, if hexblade still has the chr/attack feature sure let it kick in at level 3. But with how they have currently written warlocks the pact would come as you pick level 1. Like I said I think they can change the fluff of warlocks so they gain general arcane abilities through their research as arcane magic works as a learned ability instead of granted. And then have them make a pact at level 3. I think it would fit better to switch the main stat to int then which is my preference so hey have at it. But for clerics and sorcerers its a harder sell.
It is a RPG role playing game, both parts of that matter the game part and the role playing part. It feels like they are trashing the RP part a bit to much for the G part with this idea.
Because in the setting you wouldn't be able to. If its at level 1 the god determines what domains you can choose and vice versa, if you want to choose the domain of undeath you would only have access to 2-3 gods. Sidelining the choice to level 3 just does not make narrative sense. You can have the the abilities kick in at level 3 but who you gain your powers from is something that does not make sense to wait for. Your 1st level spells are coming from them, so you already determined the god. Which should limit your domain options. Which goes counter to their design goal. I do not think the design goal is worth the narrative costs.
Even in 5e, your domain is not strictly limited by the deity you follow. There are suggested domains listed in the back of the PHB, but they aren't the only ones you have access to. Any domain is available to any cleric of any god. The book only says to consider the suggested domains.
The one place it makes a special note is for Life and Death domains. It says they tended to suggest the Life domain for deities associated with healing, protection, childbirth, nurturing, or fertility. But that any non-evil god could have it. And for the Death domain they said this is mostly for evil NPCs, but you can still do it if your DM approves.
With the ever shrinking role of alignment in DnD each edition, I imagine the new PHB won't even mention those parts.
Honestly, there are some ways that I think the delayed subclass choice can make for even better roleplay opportunities. You could play the spiritual leader of a small village who is responsible for speaking to all of your local gods, but you find your focus on the adventure. You could worship Helm at first, but during your adventure you decide your true calling is to Lathander. You could be totally devoted to Oghma, but at level 3 you receive a vision and are gifted with special powers now as a proven disciple.
The same is true for Warlocks and Sorcerers. Everyone currently resigns their origin to their backstory. It could be so much more fun to have part of it play out in the game instead. You know you have magic powers from somewhere, and you can control spells in ways that wizards can't. But it's not until later that you learn where the source of that power comes from. When it manifests as a sheen of dragon scales that protect you from a fire. Or you made a dark deal with something in the shadows, or whispers in the library late at night. But it doesn't reveal itself to you until later, and the bargain is sealed. Or maybe you made a deal with the wrong one, and another strange entity comes along to offer you a better arrangement, with its own strings attached.
These events could could be so much more interesting to play out in the actual game. And for those who aren't interested in doing that, nothing will stop you. You can still say you're a follower of Tempus right from day 1. You can still say you are a Draconic Sorcerer. You can still say you already met your Patron and they're a weird Fey. You just don't get their full gifts until later. Nothing has to change for anyone that knows what they want.
But it could actually open more RP opportunities in game to delay these choices to level 3. At the very least, it won't hurt anything. And it can help new players, which is always a good thing.
Idk, I think that just because they are testing this with the cleric, doesn't mean they plan to push back sublcass to level 3 for everything.
It's specifically problematic for sorc and warlock unless you are going to rework the early levels of those classes.
If you put invocations at level 1 like someone suggested, then that opens up several cans of worms with things like Devil sight + Darkness combo, or that you'd only need a single level in warlock to gain Eldritch blast, Agonizing+Repelling blast, and hex.
My guess is that they will push back some of the subclass abilities until level 2-3 like the shield and armor proficiencies from Hexblade, but you will still pick your sub, at level 1.
If you look at the current cleric progression it makes a lot of sense why they'd want to redesign it.
Everything is so frontloaded on cleric that it's kind of ridiculous, you get all your good stuff at level 1, including heavy armor profs and those things don't scale with cleric level, but with Wis mod or Prof bonus. You get almost nothing but some pretty weak/situational channel divinity until level 6 (other than normal spell progression). This is probably why they are redoing channel divinity and spreading out some of the gains in power as you level up.
Everyone is going to have their own opinions, and that's totally great. I'm not going to try to change anyone's minds. This is just the way I look at it:
In 5e right now, I can make a Cleric of Tymora, goddess of luck and good fortune. There really isn't a luck domain, so I'll just pick something. Maybe Trickery or Life or Twilight or even Death. I feel obliged to take a domain. So I pick one and then go about my adventure as a Twilight Domain Cleric (of Tymora.)
While in 1DnD I can make a Cleric of Tymora, goddess of luck and good fortune. And I start my adventure just focused on being the best Cleric of Tymora I can be. Then at level 3, maybe something cool happens. Maybe I go through a ritual to be accepted in a higher level of the church to get my domain. Maybe I am visited by Tymora in a dream. Maybe a challenge to test my faith is set before me. Or maybe I just pick a domain and carry on. At the very least, it's no different than it would have been in 5e. At its best, it opens even more opportunities for roleplay. And even better, a Cleric is focused more on their chosen deity than their domain.
The domain is purely mechanical. The roleplay is what we make of it. And from a mechanical perspective, yes it does limit some of the level 1 customization, for a few games. But the Holy Order covers most early features and it comes in pretty quick. And we get a better Channel Divinity with 3 options right from the start. The customization is just spread out a little more, so you get to make choices every level up to 5. That's pretty cool to me.
Yeah I totally get that. There are a lot of ways they could make all subclasses work at level 1 instead. I'd be okay with that too. They would be changing even more classes though, and while I don't personally care about backwards compatibility, a ton of people do. So the more they change the harder that is.
I would even be cool if they separate domains, patrons, and draconic bloodlines from the subclass altogether. That's the way I would have probably gone if I was writing it. Let the players choose their faith or power origin first. Then make the subclasses just be variants on how you use the powers. It makes far more sense and cuts down on the dozens of subclasses needed for some classes. But again, I do recognize it would be a nightmare for the backwards compatible fans.
I'm just trying to be optimistic really. People had concerns about how the fluff could make sense with later subclass choices. I can see bright sides to it from a roleplaying perspective. The classes have changed so many times over the editions. We never had a domain to choose at all in early versions and it didn't hurt anything. I've even seen a domain be detrimental to roleplay in 5e as people sometimes focus on it more than their deity. I'm not real concerned about the mechanics as long as they are balanced. Every class being on the same page with subclass progression feels more balanced to me. And choices every level sounds fun. 1st and 2nd level only last a few games anyway. But everyone will want different things and prioritize them differently. So at least we get to take part in the process and provide feedback.
A big part of the reason for no subclasses at level 1 is for new players. It is so that players who are playing for the first time can get a feel for the base class before they have to choose a subclass, which is something they will be stuck with the entire game.
In general more experienced players start at level 3 anyway because other classes don't get their subclass to level 3. So for most people whether you put the subclass at 1 or 3 it won't make a difference, the difference will be in multi-classing dips.
I'm not arguing that they can't have things manifest later. I'm arguing that, unless something changes, sorcs get two 'subclasses' (sort of) as it were. Their bloodline and their meta-magic. Either these are both waiting till level 3 meaning that, until then, sorcs are just worse casters, or we're giving them one of the two at the start. I don't see why that should be meta-magic. If I pick, I dunno, Storm Soul sorcerer I want to PLAY a Storm soul! I don't want to start off as 'caster who has a bit of meta-magic THEN storm-soul!' Especially when I choose my bloodline at character creation (ignoring multi-class here) but, at the least, I pick up more meta-magic as I level up.
It feels really ass-backwards to insist that, between the two choices, it's METAMAGIC we should get at level 1 and not our actual bloodline, innate, abilities. The thing we made an immutable, unchangable (without GM intervention), choice to take. Whereas if I chose to skip, say, subtle spell when I got metamagic I can pick it up later.
This, honestly, feels more like you feel there is something you want to do and are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole; especially when said square peg was already in a square hole that was the perfect size and shape for it.
WotC said in the video that they are pushing all subclasses to 3rd. That part has been stated directly and clearly. WotC even went so far as to say why, and the reason is that it is more new player friendly and fixes issues with multiclassing.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Time Stamp 4:00 ish
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Remember this is wizards stated goal. They don't want the new players who have to learn how a table top rpg works and how moving works and attacking works and role playing and casting spells and how all the basic fundamentals of the game work and, at the same time, have to make a permanent decision about what direction they are going to take their class at level 1 because in addition to learning their class + all the fundamental rules they would also have to learn EVERY subclass to make the decision. When the other option would be learn all the fundamentals and then when you have a grasp on the fundamentals of the game and the fundamentals of your class after 2 or 3 sessions you can make a choice as to what direction you want to take your character in.
Edit: for those who are wondering my experience with new players. I taught my 8 to 14 year old female cousins to play. They had never played a computer based RPG let alone a table top one before. I taught my Aunt to play, who's experience with games came down to Yahtzee and monopoly. I have taught people who have played skyrim and WoW and the like as well. This game can have a very wide appeal to all kinds, and no I dont teach the whole game in one go, I only teach as much of the mechanics as they are interested in learning at the time. Otherwise they learn and discover through gameplay. In most cases with those that have no gaming experience I let them choose premade characters. I would not have DREAMED of introducing subclasses to them until they got a grasp of the game. Someone with a gaming background, that is different. But it is all down to peoples familiarity with gaming and investment levels.
Meh. Not going to be able to change Wizard's mind, especially now, but I do worry that they're so focused on appealing to the newbies that they may be shooting themselves in the foot. Especially if they can also include a 'difficulty' or 'reccommended' tag or something to steer newcomers towards classes with lower learning curves.
Fortunately, nothing they've shown us so far is dumbing down the game at all. We have more options for character creation than before. There are 1st level feats, fully customizable backgrounds as standard, a new species, new options for old species, new ways to use old features like a choice of holy order and better channel divinity, new weapon features, and more feats that are actually worth taking. Some classes are going to double their number of subclass options in the PHB. They're trying to make it easier to learn the game. But they aren't taking away the system mastery from old players. They're giving us more ways to use the system that won't result in the same dozen builds being used again and again. Testing the rules has been fun, and character creation is one of the best parts. I'm not going to give them a blanket pass for every change. I've expressed real disappointment for some rules. But I really don't feel like the older players are getting left out at all.
Wotc will make every decision for multiple reasons. Simplicity and multiclassing are pieces of a whole picture. Even those topics have deeper pieces. Just having a general rule of subclasses at 3 means it's easy to remember and balance for. Some youtubers even suggested it might allow them to experiment with universal subclasses again(see strixhaven U.A). I think wotc holds the opinion thatThe main reason those subclasses failed was incompatible level advancement.
I like to look at it like this, the game is going to be rebalanced and I get only so many "votes" to change things. Level 3 subclasses dosen't seem a good hill to die on IMO. It would need alot of support to change and force alot of "problems" to be solved other ways.
I have other places where my energy would be better spent. Naratively and mechanically the game can readjust around subclasses at 3.
However other places in the platest (ranger, and rogue) make me think I prefer 5e design over 1 design. If those don't change a bit, I see no reason to move on to 1. Once we get the next few playtest results explanation videos, I will have a better idea as to whether or not to give up on one dnd. So maybe there will be a big enough crowd still using 5e warlock and sorcerer design if that is your hill.
And this is why I really hope Warlocks use Intelligence for spellcasting in 1DD. There's an argument for both Intelligence and Charisma but I think their overall "studying the occult" and "uncovering arcane secrets" theme suits Intelligence far better. If I recall correctly, even J-Craw (or another 5e designer) said they wanted it to be Intelligence, and they chose Charisma solely because it was Charisma in 3e-4e.
Overall I like the 3rd-level subclass change. It's weird but it definitely serves to make the game more consistent.
[REDACTED]
Everything in 1DD is subject to change. What do you think the purpose of playtest documents is??
[REDACTED]
So, why does the community prefer Charisma over Intelligence? Especially when I've seen the majority of people say that we need more Intelligence casters?
For reference, I know I can just allow Warlocks to use Intelligence in my games. I do allow them.
[REDACTED]
I guess that makes sense, though I really like the idea of a crazed lunatic with next to no social skills running around trying to convince people about the "Great Old One".
I'll probably start a thread on the topic of Intelligence Warlocks.
[REDACTED]