I have to agree that more choice and flexibility are not inherently better that less choice and flexibility. My favourite character I've ever made was a RoguexWarlock - 2 spell slots, with 4-6 known spells, a bow, a sword, and Green Flame Blade cantrip. Just enough variety to keep it interesting without having to agonize while searching through a mountain of options. Lots of "problems" people come up with are not actual problems in the game design, but rather problems in the social interaction within a D&D group. The point of the game is to have fun with the people you are with, if someone is unhappy with their character b/c of X, Y, or Z they should just talk to the DM about changing it. We don't need every caster to be a preparation caster, and every class choice to be changable.
That warlock could change invocations at level up. Which is pretty much what people are arguing for, not the hyperbolic crap like change everything about your class every long rest.
I have to agree that more choice and flexibility are not inherently better that less choice and flexibility. My favourite character I've ever made was a RoguexWarlock - 2 spell slots, with 4-6 known spells, a bow, a sword, and Green Flame Blade cantrip. Just enough variety to keep it interesting without having to agonize while searching through a mountain of options. Lots of "problems" people come up with are not actual problems in the game design, but rather problems in the social interaction within a D&D group. The point of the game is to have fun with the people you are with, if someone is unhappy with their character b/c of X, Y, or Z they should just talk to the DM about changing it. We don't need every caster to be a preparation caster, and every class choice to be changable.
That warlock could change invocations at level up. Which is pretty much what people are arguing for, not the hyperbolic crap like change everything about your class every long rest.
TBH I don't really like that Warlocks can change invocations. I'd rather they get one or two additional invocations and then not allow them to change them. And we are also talking about how every caster in One D&D is a preparation caster which is weird. When they get to Sorcerer it's going to be super weird.. TBH, with how few class features arcane casters get they could just smoosh sorcerer and wizard together in 5e cause there won't be much to distinguish them.
Been playtesting the druid, won't be playing OneDND even if someone paid me at this point. Channel nature is beyond useless and does not scale at all. 5d4 or wilshape for less AC and lose all racial and spellcasting abilities...
I wouldn't judge 1D&D by the Druid. That was by far the worst UA so far and by a massive margin. That's not to say that 1D&S is necessarily for you, but it's all just playtests for the moment and not necessarily what will be in the final product...and the Druid was a monumental screw up even by those standards and what they had been releasing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I consider warlock just as big of a misstep. In both cases they are trying to appeal to the people who weren't big fans of the class and telling the people who actually liked the class that they did not serve their kind here.
I consider warlock just as big of a misstep. In both cases they are trying to appeal to the people who weren't big fans of the class and telling the people who actually liked the class that they did not serve their kind here.
No, while both were received poorly, the problems were very different.
Druid wasn't really a new concept, and I think most druid players were okay with templates as a concept -- it's just that the templates they made were unusable garbage.
The warlock was, essentially, a brand new class. Viewed in its own right it was okay (needed a bit of tuning) but if you liked the 2014 class... it's just not the same class.
I consider warlock just as big of a misstep. In both cases they are trying to appeal to the people who weren't big fans of the class and telling the people who actually liked the class that they did not serve their kind here.
I wouldn't judge 1D&D by the Druid. That was by far the worst UA so far and by a massive margin. That's not to say that 1D&S is necessarily for you, but it's all just playtests for the moment and not necessarily what will be in the final product...and the Druid was a monumental screw up even by those standards and what they had been releasing.
I tried clerics and I am also refusing to use one DND. The loss of dpr due to the nerf to spiritual weapon is huge. Add to the changing of when a cleric recieved their subclasses is just stupid.
I kinda see what they were thinking with standardizing subclass progression like that, but yeah on a flavor/lore level it hurts the ones who got their subs at 1st level because it was something intrinsic to the character. Honestly, Spiritual Weapon was OP, though. No concentration for a roving bonus action attack was a bit much.
I wouldn't judge 1D&D by the Druid. That was by far the worst UA so far and by a massive margin. That's not to say that 1D&S is necessarily for you, but it's all just playtests for the moment and not necessarily what will be in the final product...and the Druid was a monumental screw up even by those standards and what they had been releasing.
I tried clerics and I am also refusing to use one DND. The loss of dpr due to the nerf to spiritual weapon is huge. Add to the changing of when a cleric received their subclasses is just stupid.
I wouldn't be surprised if some specific changes like to SW end up being made even to the current books. It's a stand-alone change with no 2nd tier effects, unlike say, the changes to light weapons & getting a extra attack.
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
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)
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
But typically one does not start out as a generic cleric, even irl. You know what faith you're committing to from the outset. That was reflected by the level 1 subclass start, and it's weird for Clerics to now not have that initial connection.
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
But typically one does not start out as a generic cleric, even irl. You know what faith you're committing to from the outset. That was reflected by the level 1 subclass start, and it's weird for Clerics to now not have that initial connection.
It's not like until level 3, a Cleric just goes around with a sign saying "will spread your good word for magic powers." They're devoted to their god (or philosophy or whatever) from the get-go. It makes perfect sense that it takes some time as a Cleric for them to decide what aspect of said god they want to focus on, or even for their god to decide what domain they will be of.
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)
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
But typically one does not start out as a generic cleric, even irl. You know what faith you're committing to from the outset. That was reflected by the level 1 subclass start, and it's weird for Clerics to now not have that initial connection.
It's not like until level 3, a Cleric just goes around with a sign saying "will spread your good word for magic powers." They're devoted to their god (or philosophy or whatever) from the get-go. It makes perfect sense that it takes some time as a Cleric for them to decide what aspect of said god they want to focus on, or even for their god to decide what domain they will be of.
I worship the god of peace which is why I took the war domain at level 3.
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
But typically one does not start out as a generic cleric, even irl. You know what faith you're committing to from the outset. That was reflected by the level 1 subclass start, and it's weird for Clerics to now not have that initial connection.
It's not like until level 3, a Cleric just goes around with a sign saying "will spread your good word for magic powers." They're devoted to their god (or philosophy or whatever) from the get-go. It makes perfect sense that it takes some time as a Cleric for them to decide what aspect of said god they want to focus on, or even for their god to decide what domain they will be of.
I worship the god of peace which is why I took the war domain at level 3.
Congratulations. I worship the god of war, which is why I took the peace domain at level 1.
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)
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
But typically one does not start out as a generic cleric, even irl. You know what faith you're committing to from the outset. That was reflected by the level 1 subclass start, and it's weird for Clerics to now not have that initial connection.
It's not like until level 3, a Cleric just goes around with a sign saying "will spread your good word for magic powers." They're devoted to their god (or philosophy or whatever) from the get-go. It makes perfect sense that it takes some time as a Cleric for them to decide what aspect of said god they want to focus on, or even for their god to decide what domain they will be of.
It's still a weird feeling and something 5e did better. But that's been about half of 1D&D in a nutshell.
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
But typically one does not start out as a generic cleric, even irl. You know what faith you're committing to from the outset. That was reflected by the level 1 subclass start, and it's weird for Clerics to now not have that initial connection.
In real life? There isn't, so far as I'm aware, a real life analogue to "Domain". As a Cleric, you have a god or gods...but Domains aren't what gods you worship. You have Orders, but that's not what a Domain is. Domains aren't religions either. Domains don't really correlate to a real life thing for clerics.
Still, the uniform subclass progression is not something I agree with, nor all starting with level 3 (for every class, some classes it does make sense). If anything, I'd lean the other way - allow subclasses have their own level progression. The standardised progression.is, I feel, a result of WotC trying to take the easy route in balancing the classes - it's easier to balance if the progression is the same. It's just at the cost of flavour and complexity.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
But typically one does not start out as a generic cleric, even irl. You know what faith you're committing to from the outset. That was reflected by the level 1 subclass start, and it's weird for Clerics to now not have that initial connection.
In real life? There isn't, so far as I'm aware, a real life analogue to "Domain". As a Cleric, you have a god or gods...but Domains aren't what gods you worship. You have Orders, but that's not what a Domain is. Domains aren't religions either. Domains don't really correlate to a real life thing for clerics.
Still, the uniform subclass progression is not something I agree with, nor all starting with level 3 (for every class, some classes it does make sense). If anything, I'd lean the other way - allow subclasses have their own level progression. The standardised progression.is, I feel, a result of WotC trying to take the easy route in balancing the classes - it's easier to balance if the progression is the same. It's just at the cost of flavour and complexity.
You know what I meant. One knows what orders one is committing to when they commit themselves to a religion.
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
But typically one does not start out as a generic cleric, even irl. You know what faith you're committing to from the outset. That was reflected by the level 1 subclass start, and it's weird for Clerics to now not have that initial connection.
In real life? There isn't, so far as I'm aware, a real life analogue to "Domain". As a Cleric, you have a god or gods...but Domains aren't what gods you worship. You have Orders, but that's not what a Domain is. Domains aren't religions either. Domains don't really correlate to a real life thing for clerics.
Still, the uniform subclass progression is not something I agree with, nor all starting with level 3 (for every class, some classes it does make sense). If anything, I'd lean the other way - allow subclasses have their own level progression. The standardised progression.is, I feel, a result of WotC trying to take the easy route in balancing the classes - it's easier to balance if the progression is the same. It's just at the cost of flavour and complexity.
You know what I meant. One knows what orders one is committing to when they commit themselves to a religion.
No, I don't. As I said, Domains aren't orders.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That warlock could change invocations at level up. Which is pretty much what people are arguing for, not the hyperbolic crap like change everything about your class every long rest.
TBH I don't really like that Warlocks can change invocations. I'd rather they get one or two additional invocations and then not allow them to change them. And we are also talking about how every caster in One D&D is a preparation caster which is weird. When they get to Sorcerer it's going to be super weird.. TBH, with how few class features arcane casters get they could just smoosh sorcerer and wizard together in 5e cause there won't be much to distinguish them.
Been playtesting the druid, won't be playing OneDND even if someone paid me at this point. Channel nature is beyond useless and does not scale at all. 5d4 or wilshape for less AC and lose all racial and spellcasting abilities...
I wouldn't judge 1D&D by the Druid. That was by far the worst UA so far and by a massive margin. That's not to say that 1D&S is necessarily for you, but it's all just playtests for the moment and not necessarily what will be in the final product...and the Druid was a monumental screw up even by those standards and what they had been releasing.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I consider warlock just as big of a misstep. In both cases they are trying to appeal to the people who weren't big fans of the class and telling the people who actually liked the class that they did not serve their kind here.
No, while both were received poorly, the problems were very different.
Druid wasn't really a new concept, and I think most druid players were okay with templates as a concept -- it's just that the templates they made were unusable garbage.
The warlock was, essentially, a brand new class. Viewed in its own right it was okay (needed a bit of tuning) but if you liked the 2014 class... it's just not the same class.
See ranger.......
I tried clerics and I am also refusing to use one DND. The loss of dpr due to the nerf to spiritual weapon is huge. Add to the changing of when a cleric recieved their subclasses is just stupid.
I kinda see what they were thinking with standardizing subclass progression like that, but yeah on a flavor/lore level it hurts the ones who got their subs at 1st level because it was something intrinsic to the character. Honestly, Spiritual Weapon was OP, though. No concentration for a roving bonus action attack was a bit much.
I wouldn't be surprised if some specific changes like to SW end up being made even to the current books. It's a stand-alone change with no 2nd tier effects, unlike say, the changes to light weapons & getting a extra attack.
I really don't understand the people complaining about Cleric subclasses being at 3rd instead of 1st. There's a point to be made for other classes- a Warlock isn't a Warlock without a patron, a Sorcerer isn't a Sorcerer without an origin, and a Paladin isn't a Paladin without an oath. But a domain in no way causes you to be a Cleric, unlike all the other 1st level subclasses.
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)
But typically one does not start out as a generic cleric, even irl. You know what faith you're committing to from the outset. That was reflected by the level 1 subclass start, and it's weird for Clerics to now not have that initial connection.
It's not like until level 3, a Cleric just goes around with a sign saying "will spread your good word for magic powers." They're devoted to their god (or philosophy or whatever) from the get-go. It makes perfect sense that it takes some time as a Cleric for them to decide what aspect of said god they want to focus on, or even for their god to decide what domain they will be of.
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)
I worship the god of peace which is why I took the war domain at level 3.
Congratulations. I worship the god of war, which is why I took the peace domain at level 1.
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)
The two of you should get together and write a book. I'm certain it would be a best seller!
It's still a weird feeling and something 5e did better. But that's been about half of 1D&D in a nutshell.
In real life? There isn't, so far as I'm aware, a real life analogue to "Domain". As a Cleric, you have a god or gods...but Domains aren't what gods you worship. You have Orders, but that's not what a Domain is. Domains aren't religions either. Domains don't really correlate to a real life thing for clerics.
Still, the uniform subclass progression is not something I agree with, nor all starting with level 3 (for every class, some classes it does make sense). If anything, I'd lean the other way - allow subclasses have their own level progression. The standardised progression.is, I feel, a result of WotC trying to take the easy route in balancing the classes - it's easier to balance if the progression is the same. It's just at the cost of flavour and complexity.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
You know what I meant. One knows what orders one is committing to when they commit themselves to a religion.
No, I don't. As I said, Domains aren't orders.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.