Put this idea through the works

What if we eliminated the seperation of divine/arcane and simply made the mage class (credit to a fellow in the D&D+supernatural=obsolete thread). His idea had 8 schools and only allowing someone to cast from 6 of them. Healing, evocation, illusion, etc.
We now add in the cleric, who takes the paladin's role as a melee healer. Give the cleric access to. say, 2 or 3 of the schools (predetermined) and eliminate the pally. He's always seemed a little redundant anywho, but that's my opinion.

I'm not saying this is the right way to go, but thoughts? 
You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
paladins are one of the most iconic dnd classes ever, i wouldn't hold my breath for their liquidation.

also, i like the separation of arcane/divine magic.
yeah the seperation does make some things easier; however I have been adding the cure spells to arcane spell lists lately (3.5) so the combinaation didn't seem horrible.

Call cleric paladin then? xD 
You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
...and while you are at it, drop this whole Conjuration (healing) junk and put healing magic back in Necromancy where it actually fits the described flavor of the school.

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

paladins are one of the most iconic dnd classes ever, i wouldn't hold my breath for their liquidation.

also, i like the separation of arcane/divine magic.



They're also one of the most historically problematic due to their baggage.  4e got rid of that, hopefully 5e will not pick it back up.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
...and while you are at it, drop this whole Conjuration (healing) junk and put healing magic back in Necromancy where it actually fits the described flavor of the school.



Agreed.

I wouldn't go with as many as six schools, though.  Just one would be best, I think, then let a character spend some character-currency (feats, skill points, multiclassing, something) to acquire more of them.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
yeah the seperation does make some things easier; however I have been adding the cure spells to arcane spell lists lately (3.5) so the combinaation didn't seem horrible.

Call cleric paladin then? xD 



More like a paladin is a specific build of cleric.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I personally like the separation of arcane and divine magic.  It's just personal preference, though.

Removing the separation, and making Healing one of the choosable arcane schools, simply removes the cleric's role as a viable class.  If this is what you want, then that's a good thing.  Personally I wouldn't like it.  An edition of D&D without a cleric is not an edition I'd play (again, this is based on personal preference; the system itself would work just fine).
I personally like the separation of arcane and divine magic.  It's just personal preference, though.

Removing the separation, and making Healing one of the choosable arcane schools, simply removes the cleric's role as a viable class.  If this is what you want, then that's a good thing.  Personally I wouldn't like it.  An edition of D&D without a cleric is not an edition I'd play (again, this is based on personal preference; the system itself would work just fine).



Not at all.  The Cleric and the Wizard can draw from the same, or similar, lists of spells.  it gives the cleric MORE viability, because it means he can be more than the healer/buffer.  Besides, how much sense does it make that every god gives their clerics healing abilities, or the same spells in general?

More choice, more options, more good.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I personally like the separation of arcane and divine magic.  It's just personal preference, though.

Removing the separation, and making Healing one of the choosable arcane schools, simply removes the cleric's role as a viable class.  If this is what you want, then that's a good thing.  Personally I wouldn't like it.  An edition of D&D without a cleric is not an edition I'd play (again, this is based on personal preference; the system itself would work just fine).



Not at all.  The Cleric and the Wizard can draw from the same, or similar, lists of spells.  it gives the cleric MORE viability, because it means he can be more than the healer/buffer.  Besides, how much sense does it make that every god gives their clerics healing abilities, or the same spells in general?

More choice, more options, more good.



So what differentiates a cleric from a wizard? A wizard who chose Healing as a school does not become a different class.

Would you have a cleric class, and clerics use the same spells as wizard, but with less spell slots, or what?  How would you do it?  Since they have access to the same spell list, what is the difference between the classes?
And a cleric who doesn't choose Healing as a school doesn't become a different class either.

I, personally, wouldn't care about a cleric class.  Don't like 'em, never liked 'em, wouldn't mind seeing them go away as a class concept.  Martial, Arcane, Psionic is all I need for power sources.  If someone wants to be a priest, they can just call themselves a priest.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
What if we eliminated the seperation of divine/arcane and simply made the mage class (credit to a fellow in the D&D+supernatural=obsolete thread). His idea had 8 schools and only allowing someone to cast from 6 of them.


I proposed this a year and a half ago in my Long Division series.  Except I had nine divisions and each class could cast only three of them.  The benefit was that the cleric and paladin remained separate classes.
As an exercise it would not hurt to break out each type of magic regardless if a cleric, wizard, psion, bard, etc. gets it in the long term as it helps determine what each class is good at. In the same sense they should take skills and break them out into categories so each class has a niche, as well as weapons and armor. Once all the core classes as addressed, then you can look at sub-classes or mulitclassing, versus addining a class ability like the Arcanist domain for the cleric when things are not settled.
I personally like the separation of arcane and divine magic.  It's just personal preference, though.

Removing the separation, and making Healing one of the choosable arcane schools, simply removes the cleric's role as a viable class.  


You still need the Warrior/Healer Gish... it just gives us the Robed Healer non gish (and allows the former to be less of a uber healer specialist).
The division isnt something with much support in the real world the most common ability attributed to witches... and in fact any spellcasting / miracle working type has been healing (only the extremist christians denied healing to anyone but there own god).

Cant any class be a priest as a background (priests of Odin being the nobleman fighter leader who do rituals and ceremonies, and inspiration Warlord style... instead of miracle working)  
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 



I'd tackle it differently.

I'd remove the Paladin's casting ability and add in more of his flavour abilities.

Paladin spell progression always felt weak and needless to me, but his iconic abilities such as immunity to disease, to fear, smites and such, I find quite interesting.

I can't talk for the 4ed since I'm not familiar with its Paladin class.
But in 2ed and 3ed the Paladin always had his place in the Core as an iconic class. Marked by his unique abilities and flavour, far from seeming some generic battle-cleric.

Cleric is a caster who also is somewhat good at fighting.
Paladin is a full-scale combatant like the Fighter and Barbarian, but with his own flavour. 
I like the direction this idea is headed.  This would essentially collapse the "battle-mage" archetype into cleric, and shifts the "healer cleric" archetype to the wizard/mage, which might require fewer mechanical shenanigans than the current model.  I'm not really invested in the "white mage" thing, but giving the cleric more flexibility in spell selection/build would be brilliant.

Not sure about doing that through eliminating the arcane/divine distinction; that's more of a flavor thing as far as I'm concerned, so there doesn't need to be a hard mechanical distinction, but I think giving clerics full access to the wizards spell list (even with limitations) could prove problematic.  You'd have to be careful in choosing what schools they could access.  On the flavor-side, I'd want to see "schools" called something less wizardy that could apply to the expanded set of archetypes using them.

I definitely wouldn't eliminate the paladin though.  It's quite distinct from a cleric, not just a "melee healer," but a "holy warrior."  As Rastopolous put it, remove the paladin's spell slots and focus on other divine-oriented abilities -- leaving them with one healing ability, Lay on Hands, which should probably be optional, similar to 4e.

"I want 'punch magic in the face' to be a maneuver." -- wrecan

Or the cleric is the gish that heals and blesses, while other classes are gishes that do other things. Paladins are gishes that smite. Druids are gishes that control nature and the weather. Bards are gishes that ... you get the picture. The more classes that can fulfil the leader/healer role, the better.

Poe's Law is alive and well.



I'd tackle it differently.

I'd remove the Paladin's casting ability and add in more of his flavour abilities.

Paladin spell progression always felt weak and needless to me, but his iconic abilities such as immunity to disease, to fear, smites and such, I find quite interesting. 
I can't talk for the 4ed since I'm not familiar with its Paladin class.


Depends on the build... It has some nice defending my allies combat moves that partake of the original fighter with special abilities ... and after divine power its divine retaliation aspect could be de-emphasized an option that didnt present as "casty"
 
Paladin is a full-scale combatant like the Fighter and Barbarian, but with his own flavour. 


I have some ideas that involve using the Attunement rules and Boons/Blessings so the Paladin can have fighting styles and the like which go beyond just having a divine connection, I too feel at its core he is a fighter.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

What if we eliminated the seperation of divine/arcane and simply made the mage class (credit to a fellow in the D&D+supernatural=obsolete thread). His idea had 8 schools and only allowing someone to cast from 6 of them. Healing, evocation, illusion, etc.
We now add in the cleric, who takes the paladin's role as a melee healer. Give the cleric access to. say, 2 or 3 of the schools (predetermined) and eliminate the pally. He's always seemed a little redundant anywho, but that's my opinion.

I'm not saying this is the right way to go, but thoughts? 

How about this.
If the character is a mixed fighting and casting class, they get to use 2d6 for only 1 school and use a 1d8 for all other schools.

If the character is a dedicated casting class, they get to use a 3d4 for 3 schools and a 2d6 from any other schools.

My D&D5E JavaScript Roll Tracker http://dnd5.weebly.com/

What if we eliminated the seperation of divine/arcane and simply made the mage class (credit to a fellow in the D&D+supernatural=obsolete thread). His idea had 8 schools and only allowing someone to cast from 6 of them. Healing, evocation, illusion, etc.
We now add in the cleric, who takes the paladin's role as a melee healer. Give the cleric access to. say, 2 or 3 of the schools (predetermined) and eliminate the pally. He's always seemed a little redundant anywho, but that's my opinion.

I'm not saying this is the right way to go, but thoughts? 

How about this.
If the character is a mixed fighting and casting class, they get to use 2d6 for only 1 school and use a 1d8 for all other schools.

If the character is a dedicated casting class, they get to use a 3d4 for 3 schools and a 2d6 from any other schools.



3d4 and 2d6 are too similar.
Sign In to post comments