Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana and Necrotic Undead hunting.

[Aldarc]

There is clearly a mismatch between the fluff and the crunch, and in this case I think it's the fluff that is wrong. Neither of these subclasses should be undead hunters. They clearly have an affinity with the plane of shadow and negative/necrotic energy. They're more likely to cultivate, befriend, command, or at least ignore the undead.

I think that is certainly true for the Death domain cleric, particularly given its inclusion in the "evil options" section of the DMG, but I suspect that is not the intention for the Grave cleric, which was marketed similarly as the comparative Repose domain in 3x.

The gods that the Grave domain are associated with are generally the ones that regard undead as anathema and against the true order of things. Likewise the Druids of Twilight.
Its unlikely that either would be willing to ignore, let alone befriend the undead.

I agree that the Grave cleric and Twilight druid should better reflect a disdain of undead than they do, or at least update the flavor text to more accurately reflect what the mechanics represent. I will again note that some of the gods associated with the Grave domain are also associated with the Death domain: i.e., Wee Jas, Hades, and Anubis.

I'm not a fan of the Grave cleric's design. As I have proposed already, the Grave cleric should be given the option to select between Radiant and Necrotic for its Divine Strike. That would better represent it standing at Death's Gate as a judge against the living and the undead.

Eyes of the Grave needs a revamp so it isn't so heavily reliant on GM fiat. Why not give the Grave cleric a modified version of the old Deathwatch spell or something comparative to the Battlemaster's Know Your Enemy? So the Grave cleric would be able to spend a minute to size up the living and the undead?

Sentinel at Death's Door may be too situational. The Grave cleric should probably have necrotic resistance to reflect that they are the "sentinel at Death's Door," a guardian for and from death. I'm thinking they could be given something else, but I'm not sure.

The War cleric has two Channel Divinity abilities, though they are essentially similar. Couldn't the Grave cleric also have two if there is a concern about it being too undead-focused? What if the Grave cleric had a boost to its undead turning (e.g. advantage on turning or an advanced destroy undead CR track)?

 

[CapnZapp]

People keep mentioning "unnamed damage"... that's not a thing in 5th edition; all damage has a type, even if it is inherited from the source it is providing a bonus to.

You are entirely correct.

When we talk about "unnamed damage", what we mean is that the damage type isn't changed (into necrotic in this case).

 

[Schmoe]

*New priest joins order of the grave*

New priest: Awesome, so glad to be here, what can I do?
God of the grave: YOU NOW CONTROL THE POWER OF THE GRAVE AND CAN BLAST THE LIFE FORCE OF THOSE WHO OPPOSE YOU!
New priest: Wow, that's awesome. Thanks. What will you have me do?
God of the grave: GO FORTH TO SEEK OUT THOSE WITH NO LIFE FORCE AND DESTROY THEM!!
New priest: *wtf*?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I'm not a fan of the Grave cleric's design. As I have proposed already, the Grave cleric should be given the option to select between Radiant and Necrotic for its Divine Strike. That would better represent it standing at Death's Gate as a judge against the living and the undead.

I still have issues with the gods of the death and the underworld's personal touch being bright, shiny radiant energy. (Although perhaps with an Egyptian-style guardian of the Sun underworld god it might fit.)
I likewise still don't see why a maximum of 1 or two d8s per round of a non-optimal energy type is a gamebreaker as far as the subclass is concerned.

Eyes of the Grave needs a revamp so it isn't so heavily reliant on GM fiat. Why not give the Grave cleric a modified version of the old Deathwatch spell or something comparative to the Battlemaster's Know Your Enemy? So the Grave cleric would be able to spend a minute to size up the living and the undead?

I think the idea is that this is where the "undead hunting" aspect of the subclass comes in: it allows the cleric to detect and locate them. You can both use it to tell you if there are undead haunting the village and where they lair and use it to tell you if the mayor greeting the rest of the party happens to be a vampire.

Sentinel at Death's Door may be too situational. The Grave cleric should probably have necrotic resistance to reflect that they are the "sentinel at Death's Door," a guardian for and from death. I'm thinking they could be given something else, but I'm not sure.

I think that the support aspect of the ability should be maintained. Perhaps expand it to include hits that would reduce an ally to below 0hp: - either causing the attack to deal minimum damage, or only drop the ally to 0, rather than negatives? I'm actually thinking that some capability relating to death saves might fit better. As a reaction when an ally within 60ft fails a death save, to treat it as a success? Refreshes on Short or long rest?

The War cleric has two Channel Divinity abilities, though they are essentially similar. Couldn't the Grave cleric also have two if there is a concern about it being too undead-focused? What if the Grave cleric had a boost to its undead turning (e.g. advantage on turning or an advanced destroy undead CR track)?

The Grave Cleric's current Channel Divinity options already fit well. Increasing the ability to destroy undead through turning could work, but it's aimed at very low-threat undead at the moment, and allowing it to destroy high-CR undead might be too powerful. Possibly just a rider to turning undead that causes some damage without breaking the turning effect.

You are entirely correct.

When we talk about "unnamed damage", what we mean is that the damage type isn't changed (into necrotic in this case).

Are there any instances in either of these subclasses where damage type is changed into necrotic damage rather than additional necrotic damage being added as dice to an existing effect with its own separate damage type?

 

[Waterbizkit]

I've only been able to skim the thread so if this has been mentioned already here or elsewhere, my apologies, but has anyone considered simply adding in something akin to the Death domains Inescapable Destruction ability? Simply allow the damage from Harvests Sythe and Grave domains Divine Strike to bypass necrotic resistance and/or immunity.

For a slightly "more balanced" version word it such that it only impacts necrotic damage from those specific abilities or go whole-hog and make it identical to Inescapable Destruction and have it apply to all necrotic damage dealt by the character. Personally I prefer the former, but I suppose an arguement could be made for the latter.

 

[CapnZapp]

additional necrotic damage being added as dice to an existing effect with its own separate damage type?

separate

We use the verb change because if the rule didn't say otherwise the additional damage wouldn't be necrotic.

We want to point out that the rule specifically changes the additional damage into something useless against the foes the subclass purportedly fights against.

We want to highlight the fact that the additional damage would be strictly better if the rule didn't specifically call out the absolute worst damage type (after poison) for the character concept as described.

There's nothing wrong with restrictions to abilities. But don't give out something that is decidedly useless against the intended targets.

 

[Aldarc]

I still have issues with the gods of the death and the underworld's personal touch being bright, shiny radiant energy. (Although perhaps with an Egyptian-style guardian of the Sun underworld god it might fit.)

That's fine, but please keep in mind that these are the same clerics of death deities who in older editions would have channeled positive energy and cast cure wounds instead of inflict wounds. Or if they were neutral (death) deities, the cleric would have been given a choice.

I likewise still don't see why a maximum of 1 or two d8s per round of a non-optimal energy type is a gamebreaker as far as the subclass is concerned.

It represents a stark dissonance of subclass flavor text and mechanics.

I think the idea is that this is where the "undead hunting" aspect of the subclass comes in: it allows the cleric to detect and locate them. You can both use it to tell you if there are undead haunting the village and where they lair and use it to tell you if the mayor greeting the rest of the party happens to be a vampire.

But this is also an ability (as written) that has spurred a lot of dissent in the UA domain thread, here and elsewhere, due to the nature of how it depends too heavily on GM fiat. You use your ability. Your GM doesn't know. You have wasted your ability. That's one of the reasons why I support a revision to this ability such that it can be applied more readily, broadly, and reflect a wider range of the archetype's responsibilities that you have mentioned before. Doom awaits as the grave cleric knows your hit points, hit dice, and or other weaknesses.

The Grave Cleric's current Channel Divinity options already fit well. Increasing the ability to destroy undead through turning could work, but it's aimed at very low-threat undead at the moment, and allowing it to destroy high-CR undead might be too powerful. Possibly just a rider to turning undead that causes some damage without breaking the turning effect.

I disagree with your initial assertion. The grave cleric exercises little control over their channel divinity ability as they are instead overly reliant upon whatever damage source provides the next hit. They have no control over what or when that might be. That is way too "swingy" and chaotic. There is little to no agency in that. A knowledge cleric can read thoughts. A life cleric has controlled healing. A light cleric summons a blinding light. A nature cleric can charm plants and animals. A tempest cleric can maximize elemental dice damage. A trickery cleric can cast an illusionary duplicate. A war cleric can imbue +10 to an attack. A death cleric can deal extra necrotic damage when they hit. The channel divinity options of the published cleric domains all demonstrate a greater degree of agency than what the grave cleric gets when they make the choice to expend their alternative channel divinity option.

For the record, the old specialty priests for Kelemvor back in 2e allowed for a second attempt to turn undead. That sounds like giving advantage on turn undead attempts would be appropriate for Grave clerics. That could be given as part of their 2nd level feature. It enhances the Channel Divinity feature that they also get at 2nd level. Then maybe a Grave cleric's Channel Divinity, which we could also call Eyes of the Grave, could then pertain to locating undead as well as determining the hit points, vulnerabilities/weaknesses, resistances/immunities, and such of a given foe.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

separate

We use the verb change because if the rule didn't say otherwise the additional damage wouldn't be necrotic.

We want to point out that the rule specifically changes the additional damage into something useless against the foes the subclass purportedly fights against.

We want to highlight the fact that the additional damage would be strictly better if the rule didn't specifically call out the absolute worst damage type (after poison) for the character concept as described.

There's nothing wrong with restrictions to abilities. But don't give out something that is decidedly useless against the intended targets.

I think that that is being a little incorrect there. Without the ability, there is no additional damage. It isn't changing existing additional damage, it is changing an existing effect into the same effect with added necrotic damage. Its not changing a 2d8 Bludgeoning mace strike into a possibly less damaging strike, its changing a d8 Bludgeoning mace strike into a d8 bludgeoning + d8 Necrotic strike.

I'm aware that you think that the additional damage should be of another type. But what you were saying was potentially giving the false impression that the ability was making an existing capability worse, rather than making it better, but not in the most optimised fashion.

But this is also an ability (as written) that has spurred a lot of dissent in the UA domain thread, here and elsewhere, due to the nature of how it depends too heavily on GM fiat. You use your ability. Your GM doesn't know. You have wasted your ability. That's one of the reasons why I support a revision to this ability such that it can be applied more readily, broadly, and reflect a wider range of the archetype's responsibilities that you have mentioned before. Doom awaits as the grave cleric knows your hit points, hit dice, and or other weaknesses.

Why does your DM not know whether there are undead within 1 mile? Its not like they are a common occurrence in the world normally, and a mile is not a huge area unless you're in building-scale operation - at which point the DM should have a pretty good idea whether there are undead in the city or not.
Its only every short rest, so it can't be used repeatedly, and the default is going to be none unless you're close enough to an area plot-relevant enough for the DM to know whether there are undead there or not.

I disagree with your initial assertion. The grave cleric exercises little control over their channel divinity ability as they are instead overly reliant upon whatever damage source provides the next hit. They have no control over what or when that might be. That is way too "swingy" and chaotic. There is little to no agency in that. A knowledge cleric can read thoughts. A life cleric has controlled healing. A light cleric summons a blinding light. A nature cleric can charm plants and animals. A tempest cleric can maximize elemental dice damage. A trickery cleric can cast an illusionary duplicate. A war cleric can imbue +10 to an attack. A death cleric can deal extra necrotic damage when they hit. The channel divinity options of the published cleric domains all demonstrate a greater degree of agency than what the grave cleric gets when they make the choice to expend their alternative channel divinity option.

So your objection is that it is too much of a teamwork and not a personal DPS capability? The cleric is losing agency because another party member could be the one to deliver the strike that the target would be vulnerable to?
If the ability specified that it was only the next spell or attack from the Cleric that the target was vulnerable to and that would use up the ability, would that be better? (Possibly also make activating it a bonus action ? Or would that be a bit too powerful?)

For the record, the old specialty priests for Kelemvor back in 2e allowed for a second attempt to turn undead. That sounds like giving advantage on turn undead attempts would be appropriate for Grave clerics. That could be given as part of their 2nd level feature. It enhances the Channel Divinity feature that they also get at 2nd level. Then maybe a Grave cleric's Channel Divinity, which we could also call Eyes of the Grave, could then pertain to locating undead as well as determining the hit points, vulnerabilities/weaknesses, resistances/immunities, and such of a given foe.

Advantage to turning undead is a good idea: it doesn't allow a cleric to do anything too powerful that they couldn't do already, it just makes them better at it.
I wouldn't mess with the second ability though. Path to the Grave is an interesting effect that will work on most creature types, and represents the idea that death can come for anything. Turning it into just another anti-undead ability would not only overly focus the subclass onto a single aspect of its theme, it doesn't give the cleric an ability that it can use in more general circumstances. As you have demonstrated earlier, most domain-specific channel divinity abilities are giving an option for the ability that can be used more generally.

 

[Aldarc]

Why does your DM not know whether there are undead within 1 mile? Its not like they are a common occurrence in the world normally, and a mile is not a huge area unless you're in building-scale operation - at which point the DM should have a pretty good idea whether there are undead in the city or not.
Its only every short rest, so it can't be used repeatedly, and the default is going to be none unless you're close enough to an area plot-relevant enough for the DM to know whether there are undead there or not.

I am the GM. In general, I dislike abilities like this and the UA Ranger's Primeval Awareness. I dislike this as a player and a GM. If this ability must exist, then make it like the paladin's Divine Sense.

So your objection is that it is too much of a teamwork and not a personal DPS capability? The cleric is losing agency because another party member could be the one to deliver the strike that the target would be vulnerable to?
If the ability specified that it was only the next spell or attack from the Cleric that the target was vulnerable to and that would use up the ability, would that be better? (Possibly also make activating it a bonus action ? Or would that be a bit too powerful?)

It feels less like teamwork and more like a crapshoot. I do think that your alternative would be better, but that does not mean that this would necessarily be most appropriate to the flavor, spirit, or theme of the grave cleric, though you will likely disagree with me on that front.

Advantage to turning undead is a good idea: it doesn't allow a cleric to do anything too powerful that they couldn't do already, it just makes them better at it.
I wouldn't mess with the second ability though. Path to the Grave is an interesting effect that will work on most creature types, and represents the idea that death can come for anything. Turning it into just another anti-undead ability would not only overly focus the subclass onto a single aspect of its theme, it doesn't give the cleric an ability that it can use in more general circumstances. As you have demonstrated earlier, most domain-specific channel divinity abilities are giving an option for the ability that can be used more generally.

Indeed, hence my suggestion to possibly make their channel divinity akin to Know Your Enemy, since that would have a wider applicability than the Eyes of the Grave.

I'm curious though, Cap'n Kobold. Is there any fault or problem that you see with the Grave cleric? Do you believe that it is perfect or good as written? What would you change, if anything?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Fairly sure that they gain extra HP back if they use that ability on undead to make up for potential damage loss.

This is the one that has me scratching my head.

Grave Clerics dealing necrotic with their maces, neither here nor there. I'd prefer something different, but it doesn't change the majority of their ways of dealing with undead, just makes hitting them in the face with a weapon less effective than usual.


Twilight Druid is the one that seems messed up to me. I can see that they are connected to the world of Death and pulling up necrotic energy fits that, but saying they seek out and destroy undead, then give them a bonus when they use their damage ability to kill undead, while making that damage nearly as useless as possible against undead is mind boggling.


It'd be like if they were enemies of constructs, got bonuses for using an ability to destroy constructs, but that ability required the creature to be breathing to work. OR hunting fire elementals, getting bonuses when using an ability to kill fire elementals, and the ability does fire damage.


It simply makes no sense, if you want a druid who is connected to death, great and wonderful, Twilight could totally fill that niche of the druid who worships the ending of the life cycle, but don't give me an ability that is terrible against undead and then tell me to kill undead with it. It doesn't fit.