I assume this subclass is supposed to be the opposite of the Wild Magic Sorcerer, so maybe some average damage ability for spells?
Mechanus has a trait that does that for all damage rolls, so it'd make sense that this sorcerer would have something like that. But it'd have to be handled carefully IMO.
I imagine something akin to minor reality control, with some effort, of course; they're only partially blooded.
Plus, little flavor things like looking at an NPC and telling them they they'll die a grandparent.
Having read a screenshot of the Love Cleric's Channel Divinity, I can see how the phrasing would cause people to be upset, but in this instant, the fact that it lasts a single turn and brings up that you can use it on an ally to react and defend you keeps it from being too cringey. And as to Charm Person being a Domain spell I guess, when you look at some of what the deities of love did in mythology, right or wrong, it fits into the wheelhouse of several of them.
I feel that this is a case of each table deciding if it is ok for their group, and when you compare it to the myths at hand, its not an instance of Wizards stepping out of bounds. I do however, understand where the possibilities that it could bring up are a bad look, and agree that a sidebar to remind readers of consent would be a good addition.
Having read a screenshot of the Love Cleric's Channel Divinity, I can see how the phrasing would cause people to be upset, but in this instant, the fact that it lasts a single turn and brings up that you can use it on an ally to react and defend you keeps it from being too cringey. And as to Charm Person being a Domain spell I guess, when you look at some of what the deities of love did in mythology, right or wrong, it fits into the wheelhouse of several of them.
I feel that this is a case of each table deciding if it is ok for their group, and when you compare it to the myths at hand, its not an instance of Wizards stepping out of bounds. I do however, understand where the possibilities that it could bring up are a bad look, and agree that a sidebar to remind readers of consent would be a good addition.
Exactly. I get the impression that the people who are most upset about it are the people who haven't actually read it yet. Flavor-wise, I'd imagine that any cleric using their abilities in such an untoward manner (as some are suggesting) would instantly find that cleric having fallen out of favor with that diety. Mechanics-wise, there's nothing unsavory that a love cleric could do that couldn't be accomplished in the same manner by any number of characters/spells/abilities/items.
I could respect and seriously enjoy the CD, if it had one word. "Willing". Being able allow an ally to make a weapon attack as a reaction is useful (although Order Domain worries me, given that it is a less powerful version). It is more the fact that you can force someone else to do it who does not want to.
Edit: And I read the thing less than an hour after it leaked, as well as have a copy open on my computer, and have for days.
Grave gods, the evil isn't in the spells or tools you have at your disposal, it's in the nature with which they are utilized. Have some faith in your fellow players, or find better friends.
Yes, Charm Person is a spell that depends on how it is used. Impulsive Infatuation is a roofie Channel Divinity. It forces someone else to love you. This is unambiguous, this is how it is flavored, there is no way around this.
If your solution is "ignore what it says and do your own thing" then it is bad content. If homebrewing is the solution to make your character not the worst possible interpretation of "love", then it is bad content.
This Channel divinity option forces people to "admire" you, and it lasts a single round. That admiration doesn't have to be captial L Love. It doesn't have to be romantic, it doesn't have to be sexual, they even provide a side bar on the different kinds of love in the domain description directly providing the player with a plethora of options and ideas. It can be as simple as an enemy being distracted for a round thinking "Damn, I know he's my enemy but that guy is SO COOL." Using it in a skeevy way and/or against other players without player consent is entirely on the player.
A roofie takes longer to act and has far greater duration than a measly 6 seconds allowing for much, much greater abuse and damage to be done to a person. I know a lot can happen in D&D within six seconds but it's not a fair comparison at all, especially when the thing offers a wisdom save to keep a creature from (re)acting against their will. It's there and gone almost immediately.
Further the channel divinity option is literally named "Impulsive Infatuation." Infatuation does not equal love. I don't have the text available to go over and reread the feature but at this point I don't recall if it used the word "love" directly in the feature's description. Regardless, infatuation is famously flighty and temporary, and this feature is even more temporary than real life infatuation.
Second, clerics can be evil. Even PC clerics if they want to. Just because a love god is about love doesn't make them aligned with good or required to act responsibly. Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream is pretty much exclusively irresponsible behavior by godlike entities. And that involves actual long term and potentially damaging will subversion that lasts until it's undone. It's a part of fantasy in general so it makes sense as a part of D&D.
Players ought not to be evil. Player characters should be free to be as evil or controversial as their player, DM, and fellow players are okay with.
Also it's fantasy. It's fiction. Just because a feature or pattern of behavior might exist in D&D doesn't mean we condone it's existence in the real world or even refuse to condemn it.
.. Impulsive Infatuation is a roofie Channel Divinity. It forces someone else to love you. This is unambiguous, this is how it is flavored, there is no way around this.
Channel Divinity: Impulsive Infatuation 2nd-level Love Domain feature
You can use your Channel Divinity to overwhelm a creature with a flash of short-lived but intense admiration for you, driving them to rash action in your defense. As an action, you present your holy symbol and choose one creature you can see within 30 feet of you. That creature must make a Wisdom saving throw; a creature can choose to fail this saving throw if it wishes. On a success, the creature is unaffected. On a failure, the creature is charmed by you until the start of your next turn, and it must immediately use its reaction to make a weapon attack against a target you designate. If there are no valid targets, it uses its reaction to admire you.
So, if you'll forgive me for being blunt, what the bollocks are you on about, again? In what bloody world does the above ability and resulting actions constitute that ludicrous comparison of a roofie? Please, I would love to hear the justification for this one.
EDIT: And frankly, if you find this being used on a fellow player for its benefit to be in some way distasteful or violating, you can perfectly well opt *not* to automatically fail the saving throw to contest it, and have your character react accordingly after the 3 some-odd seconds of the effect if, for whatever logic-defying reason they constitute it as a hostile act, and your fellow party members all collectively roll their eyes.
Personally, I'm glad the Love Unity Domain is still here and didn't get nuked due to what could be seen as a mountain of negative feedback, if one was simply skimming this thread. Those giving that feedback will be glad to know that both the spell list and the channel divinity option have been changed. Take a look!
My first thought: Oh boy. Wizard gets hit by a fireball? Redirect all but 1 point of that damage to your Bear Totem Barbarian. Seems good.
Second thought: They added an expanded spell list for the Clockwork Soul!! Yesssss!
The Unity domain is better. it clears up all the mechanical confusion. Channel divinity and half the Domain spells are about charming and manipulating the mind, but all the class features are about protecting. This is much better.
Damn that is a powerful channel divinity. Maybe only the Resistances and immunities of the original target should apply? I mean, wow.
Otherwise things look pretty similar, but I only really scrutinized the cleric subclass.
The Unity domain is better. it clears up all the mechanical confusion. Channel divinity and half the Domain spells are about charming and manipulating the mind, but all the class features are about protecting. This is much better.
Damn that is a powerful channel divinity. Maybe only the Resistances and immunities of the original target should apply? I mean, wow.
Otherwise things look pretty similar, but I only really scrutinized the cleric subclass.
They upped the die for the Sorcerer Bulwark of Law ability from d6s to d8s, I think. They also explained Restore Balance and Trance of Order in plan English.
I like the camaraderie of Protective Bond, but I don't like that it takes your reaction. I can't think of what I would change though.
Huh. I guess the new one works? "Unity" feels less of a concept. I see that they changed it from "Aphrodite" to "Athena" in the god. I don't know, that makes less sense? Like, the flavor of it being love I was fine with, I wish they had still, at least, called it that? IDK. I like it mechanically (and think it would still work perfectly fine for a Love Domain), at least. I feel better about it, but it unfortunately came at the cost of the original identity, which I am less of a fan of. But, alas, if they are giving this to "love" but under a different name, I would be fine with that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I assume this subclass is supposed to be the opposite of the Wild Magic Sorcerer, so maybe some average damage ability for spells?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Note of Inspiration is so good it almost feels like it should be baseline for any Bard.
I imagine something akin to minor reality control, with some effort, of course; they're only partially blooded.
Plus, little flavor things like looking at an NPC and telling them they they'll die a grandparent.
Gnome Armorist - Artificer Subclass Homebrew
Having read a screenshot of the Love Cleric's Channel Divinity, I can see how the phrasing would cause people to be upset, but in this instant, the fact that it lasts a single turn and brings up that you can use it on an ally to react and defend you keeps it from being too cringey. And as to Charm Person being a Domain spell I guess, when you look at some of what the deities of love did in mythology, right or wrong, it fits into the wheelhouse of several of them.
I feel that this is a case of each table deciding if it is ok for their group, and when you compare it to the myths at hand, its not an instance of Wizards stepping out of bounds. I do however, understand where the possibilities that it could bring up are a bad look, and agree that a sidebar to remind readers of consent would be a good addition.
Exactly. I get the impression that the people who are most upset about it are the people who haven't actually read it yet. Flavor-wise, I'd imagine that any cleric using their abilities in such an untoward manner (as some are suggesting) would instantly find that cleric having fallen out of favor with that diety. Mechanics-wise, there's nothing unsavory that a love cleric could do that couldn't be accomplished in the same manner by any number of characters/spells/abilities/items.
I have read it. It is BECAUSE I read it that I found those features distasteful
And, it is partially because of the fact that the feature is designed to be used on allies (Read Player Characters) that makes me find it cringey.
I don't want to get dragged into this again. Everything I stated is a matter of opinion.
I could respect and seriously enjoy the CD, if it had one word. "Willing". Being able allow an ally to make a weapon attack as a reaction is useful (although Order Domain worries me, given that it is a less powerful version). It is more the fact that you can force someone else to do it who does not want to.
Edit: And I read the thing less than an hour after it leaked, as well as have a copy open on my computer, and have for days.
I've also read the Love Domain. It takes an already shakey flavour of spells down a nearly explicitly bad road.
Honestly the spells are all good except for Charm Person
To those who can't read it:
1st: Charm Person, Heroism
3rd: Enthrall, Warding Bond
5th: Beacon of Hope, Hypnotic Patterm
7th: Aura of Purity, Confusion
9th: Greater Restoration, Hold Monster
Grave gods, the evil isn't in the spells or tools you have at your disposal, it's in the nature with which they are utilized. Have some faith in your fellow players, or find better friends.
Yes, Charm Person is a spell that depends on how it is used. Impulsive Infatuation is a roofie Channel Divinity. It forces someone else to love you. This is unambiguous, this is how it is flavored, there is no way around this.
If your solution is "ignore what it says and do your own thing" then it is bad content. If homebrewing is the solution to make your character not the worst possible interpretation of "love", then it is bad content.
This Channel divinity option forces people to "admire" you, and it lasts a single round. That admiration doesn't have to be captial L Love. It doesn't have to be romantic, it doesn't have to be sexual, they even provide a side bar on the different kinds of love in the domain description directly providing the player with a plethora of options and ideas. It can be as simple as an enemy being distracted for a round thinking "Damn, I know he's my enemy but that guy is SO COOL." Using it in a skeevy way and/or against other players without player consent is entirely on the player.
A roofie takes longer to act and has far greater duration than a measly 6 seconds allowing for much, much greater abuse and damage to be done to a person. I know a lot can happen in D&D within six seconds but it's not a fair comparison at all, especially when the thing offers a wisdom save to keep a creature from (re)acting against their will. It's there and gone almost immediately.
Further the channel divinity option is literally named "Impulsive Infatuation." Infatuation does not equal love. I don't have the text available to go over and reread the feature but at this point I don't recall if it used the word "love" directly in the feature's description. Regardless, infatuation is famously flighty and temporary, and this feature is even more temporary than real life infatuation.
Second, clerics can be evil. Even PC clerics if they want to. Just because a love god is about love doesn't make them aligned with good or required to act responsibly. Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream is pretty much exclusively irresponsible behavior by godlike entities. And that involves actual long term and potentially damaging will subversion that lasts until it's undone. It's a part of fantasy in general so it makes sense as a part of D&D.
Players ought not to be evil. Player characters should be free to be as evil or controversial as their player, DM, and fellow players are okay with.
Also it's fantasy. It's fiction. Just because a feature or pattern of behavior might exist in D&D doesn't mean we condone it's existence in the real world or even refuse to condemn it.
Channel Divinity: Impulsive Infatuation
2nd-level Love Domain feature
You can use your Channel Divinity to overwhelm a creature with a flash of short-lived but intense admiration for you, driving them to rash action in your defense.
As an action, you present your holy symbol and choose one creature you can see within 30 feet of you. That creature must make a Wisdom saving throw; a creature can choose to fail this saving throw if it wishes. On a success, the creature is unaffected. On a failure, the creature is charmed by you until the start of your next turn, and it must immediately use its reaction to make a weapon attack against a target you designate. If there are no valid targets, it uses its reaction to admire you.
So, if you'll forgive me for being blunt, what the bollocks are you on about, again? In what bloody world does the above ability and resulting actions constitute that ludicrous comparison of a roofie? Please, I would love to hear the justification for this one.
EDIT: And frankly, if you find this being used on a fellow player for its benefit to be in some way distasteful or violating, you can perfectly well opt *not* to automatically fail the saving throw to contest it, and have your character react accordingly after the 3 some-odd seconds of the effect if, for whatever logic-defying reason they constitute it as a hostile act, and your fellow party members all collectively roll their eyes.
Hey friends, the UA is now officially released!
https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/UA2020_02_06_Subclasses2.pdf
Personally, I'm glad the
LoveUnity Domain is still here and didn't get nuked due to what could be seen as a mountain of negative feedback, if one was simply skimming this thread. Those giving that feedback will be glad to know that both the spell list and the channel divinity option have been changed. Take a look!My first thought: Oh boy. Wizard gets hit by a fireball? Redirect all but 1 point of that damage to your Bear Totem Barbarian. Seems good.
Second thought: They added an expanded spell list for the Clockwork Soul!! Yesssss!
Partway through the quest for absolute truth.
Deleted my comment; no longer relevant.
Gnome Armorist - Artificer Subclass Homebrew
The Unity domain is better. it clears up all the mechanical confusion. Channel divinity and half the Domain spells are about charming and manipulating the mind, but all the class features are about protecting. This is much better.
Damn that is a powerful channel divinity. Maybe only the Resistances and immunities of the original target should apply? I mean, wow.
Otherwise things look pretty similar, but I only really scrutinized the cleric subclass.
The friendship is magic cleric lost its teeth.
They upped the die for the Sorcerer Bulwark of Law ability from d6s to d8s, I think. They also explained Restore Balance and Trance of Order in plan English.
I like the camaraderie of Protective Bond, but I don't like that it takes your reaction. I can't think of what I would change though.
Gnome Armorist - Artificer Subclass Homebrew
They also enhanced Clockwork Cavalcade allowing you to restore HP and giving you a Spell list for the sorcerer. Dude... Heat Metal?! With a twinspell?
The swapped the level timing on the animating performance and the conjuriting object thing
Huh. I guess the new one works? "Unity" feels less of a concept. I see that they changed it from "Aphrodite" to "Athena" in the god. I don't know, that makes less sense? Like, the flavor of it being love I was fine with, I wish they had still, at least, called it that? IDK. I like it mechanically (and think it would still work perfectly fine for a Love Domain), at least. I feel better about it, but it unfortunately came at the cost of the original identity, which I am less of a fan of. But, alas, if they are giving this to "love" but under a different name, I would be fine with that.