Class Showcase: Cleric & Occultist (2023)

Given that it's nearly Halloween, it seemed like Occultist was an obvious choice for today's post. And since D&D's cleric class famously was based off of the vampire-hunter Van Helsing, that seemed like another solid candidate.

• The Cleric (d4/d10)
• The Occultist (d10)

Like many classes, the Cleric breaks down into essentially a melee subclass (Battle Priest) and a ranged subclass (Invoker). In the 4e paradigm where [role + power source = class], it makes sense to split Invoker off from Cleric; in a paradigm closer to 5e, Invoker just seems like a specialized cleric, with particular spells picked. I chose to give the Cleric class a d10, so that the Invoker could have a few extra reserves to burn for powering their abilities (rather than putting debuffs on themself to power them, as in 4e) -- this is also why the Invoker is one of the first real instances where the newly-defined debilities make an appearance, within a class' features.

Beyond that, I felt like a "healing word"-esque spell and a buff like Bless sort of neatly encapsulates the basic Cleric's toolkit in 5e -- barring specific flavours from domains beyond the obvious divine-ish types.

The Occultist was a class I actually took a long time to settle on a name for. I eventually picked this one after it came up as a class in Darkest Dungeon. In earlier iterations, I had the Animate Dead ability as exclusive to the Necromancer, and the Eldritch Blast ability as exclusive to the Warlock. In the previous iteration, I decided to make both of these abilities available to all Occultists (mainly because they both required a standard action to use) and treated Necromancer and Warlock more as 'roles' rather than distinct subclasses. This lastest version kind of splits the difference; the two aforementioned abilities remain universal, but the curses remain specific to each subclass. The Banishment ability was changed to a controller ability from a Necromancer ability, the Hellish Rebuke ability was changed from a Warlock ability to a striker ability, and Vampiric Touch was added as a support ability.

Generally the ethos in TNP has been to try (as much as possible) to fit the abilities of each class into 3 features, which are sometimes bundles of smaller features -- almost akin to how feats work in 5th Edition D&D. There is some bending of this rule; a class might have one feature and each subclass might have 3 of their own features, in addition to that (such as the Cleric... sort of.) The Occultist essentially has 4 features (one of which has 2 different subsets, depending on subclass) and 3 possible role features, on top of that. In the earliest versions of TNP, the idea was that ALL classes should be able to fit onto one sheet of paper; now, it's usually 3, but some of the simpler classes make in at 2 (with the 1st page essentially being the key, basic statistics for each class loadout.) Hopefully this allows the game to overall strike the right balance between complexity as well as range of character options.

...

Check back for the next post on November 10th!

Of Holy Light and Vile Darkness -- The Cleric and The Mystic (Beta 4)

Today's post introduces two classes  from two different slates:

• The Cleric

In earlier betas, I had made a couple of unsatisfactory attempts at writing a cleric class. What started off as a d12 Warlord class morphed into a Cleric, but was ultimately scrapped. The big question I kept asking myself throughout this process was, "what is the Cleric's iconic attack?" In a system that doesn't utilize the wide spectrum of damage types or monster types that other RPGs tend to use, slapping "radiant" damage onto attacks or having a "Turn Undead" ability just doesn't work.

When I finished the first two slates back in Beta 3, and then quickly thereafter completed the Archer (d4) and Fighter (d6), I had tentatively settled on rounding out the third slate with a Cleric (d8), Warden (d10), and Deathknight (d12). When I started looking at the possibility of expanding the roster to 5 slates, the idea of an Invoker class for the "divine" slate was something that popped up.

The 4th Edition take on Invoker was a controller class, that generally slapped debilities onto itself, in exchange for slapping bigger ones onto its enemies. This doesn't particularly translate to The Next Project, since I want to avoid "hard control" mechanics. So my idea for an Invoker more closely resembled this game's Sorcerer; a d6 class that focused on stacking damage and attacking crowds of enemies. Giving the class double its normal share of Reserves would put them on par with a d12 class in that regard, but those resources would be used to fuel damage -- an idea that mirrored the 4e namesake class a bit -- wounding yourself to smite your enemies even harder.

Eventually I settled on doing only 3 slates, and the Invoker idea was scrapped.

When I set out to work on this latest Cleric class, I had decided early on that d8 would be a good fit for more than one "support" class, and so I was leaning that way for their slot. When the slate itself came together, it was kind of the last piece of the puzzle.

After I had completed the "starter set" version of the Cleric, I let it sit for a while. When I picked it back up again to start work on the full class, I felt that I wanted to give it a ranged archetype, and a melee archetype (similar to how the Acrobat turned out.) It also seemed to make sense for a d8 class.

Invoker seemed like a natural fit for a more spellcasting-focused Cleric; as for melee, names like Knight, Warpriest, and Cavalier had been on my radar during the "5 slate" experimentation phase (particularly with this game being sort of a love letter to Essentials.) Ultimately, I settled on Crusader. I think the archetype itself feels more like the Warpriest of the Essentials line, but with Paladin already having a Priest archetype, I wanted a name that would avoid any confusion.

On top of this, I decided to keep the Domains as a layer of customization; I had originally intended to have about 6 or 8 Domains spread across 3 classes (had I kept with 5 slates) but they didn't all lend themselves well to the mechanics of this game. War and Life domains seemed the easiest to wrangle, and I think they both work with either of the archetypes presented.

• The Mystic

In earlier iterations, what now constitutes the Mystic were archetypes for two other classes. The original Mystic had Warlock and Sorcerer as its archetypes, and was a d6 class, sharing a focus on charisma. The original Necromancer was an archetype of a Summoner class (from which the Beastmaster archetype was ripped, and subsequently hung onto the Ranger.)

The name "mystic" was sort of the first thing that popped into my head when I initially came up with the idea for the class, but looking it up, the word means someone who seeks lost or forbidden knowledge. I think thematically, this works really well for both a Warlock (someone who makes a pact with otherworldly powers) as well as a Necromancer (someone whose magic blurs the lines between the living and the dead.)

In the "5 slate" experimentation phase, the idea of having a slate based on a "shadow" power source was one I really wanted to work. But I found there just wasn't enough to flesh it out. The Deathknight never materialized (although what few ideas I could come up with for it may yet appear, elsewhere) and other than that, it never really got beyond the Rogue (namely, Assassin) and Mystic; having Blackguard already in place as a Paladin archetype also threw a wrench in the works.

At any rate, when I decided to separate the Warlock and the Sorcerer, it made sense to keep Warlock as a damage-stacking class, but didn't seem to make sense to have them as the exact same die; in that case, why bother separating them at all?

So Sorcerer merged with Bard to become the Trickster (d6), and Warlock merged with Necromancer to become the new Mystic (d10). The idea to give the Warlock a Reserve-burning mechanic came late in the lead-up to this post, but I think it fits both the themes of the class, and the mechanics of it using a d10. I like that the Warlock kind of straddles the same line between striker and controller that it did in 4th Edition; I also think the Necromancer does a good job of capturing the iconic abilities of its main inspiration (for me, it's the Diablo 2 version.)

---

Coming up on the next blogpost:

• The Guardian
• The Warrior

Check back on Dec. 10th!