|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:42PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Aug 15, 2011
|
So, there's a bit of kerfuffle here and there about 'vancian=wizard' and so forth, and people who might like to, say, use the wizard spells without being restricted by their casting mechanisms.
So, here's a thought ... why not have the game's spells *not* organized by class? No such thing as 'wizard spells', 'cleric spells', 'warlock spells', 'druid spells' or whatnot. Each class might have its own casting mechanism, but all you need to do is not get hung up on names. Scratch off 'warlock' and write in 'wizard' and go to town.
Instead, organize spells by damage type, theme, school, or whatnot. You might have a list of Fire spells, Divination spells, Storm spells, Plant spells, Summoning spells, Healing spells, Necromancy spells, etc etc.
At character creation, you select a certain number of these groups to have access to; for argument now, we'll say two (possibly an option to just be really good at one if you really want to just kill it with fire). Your Pelorite cleric might pick Healing and Light, your blasty-happy wizard may select Fire and Lightning. HOWEVER, you could have a warlock who also has Healing and Light, as his pact was with a beneficent entity rather than the more traditional options. The player would work with the DM to select categories appropriate to his character concept. A cleric of a more aggressive god might take the Fire and Lightning combo.
As a level-up option (not every level, of course), you could choose to either diversify or specialize. You could add an additional spell group to your repertoire, or choose to gain some kind of benefit (damage, additional spells, something) with a spell group you already have.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:44PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2012
|
i see what you are saying but explain to me why anyone would play a wizard over a cleric if the cleric can get the same spells AND do all the fighty things
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:46PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Aug 15, 2011
|
i see what you are saying but explain to me why anyone would play a wizard over a cleric if the cleric can get the same spells AND do all the fighty things
The wizard would also have class features to compensate, obviously. If nothing else, give the wizard more spell slots than the cleric.
That also makes assumptions about the cleric, of course, that they *would* automatically get armor, weapons, etc superior to the wizard. That's something else that needs adjusting, IMHO.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:46PM
#4
|
|
|
i see what you are saying but explain to me why anyone would play a wizard over a cleric if the cleric can get the same spells AND do all the fighty things
...while wearing armor with full weapon selections and turning undead, no less!
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:47PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2012
|
what if it was instead split into arcane and divine.
then it would come down to preffered casting style for that type
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:48PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2010
|
And this will also indeed make all classes play the same, the last time i played 3.5 (before 4e was released), i saw shared spells being shared as a HUGE flaw in the game, to make fun of it, i selected the same spells the wizard in the group almost always choose as a sorcerer, and i will always cast the same spell she caster after she cast it, this is to make the point that playing a wizard and a sorcerer was the exact same thing, because you cast the exact same spells.
Shared Spell List is one of the dealbreakers for me for D&DNext, all classes should have their own unique spell list not shared (some rituals being the exception), if not, what's the point of playing those diferent classes if they cast the exact same spells...
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:49PM
#7
|
|
|
And this will also indeed make all classes play the same, the last time i played 3.5 (before 4e was released), i saw shared spells being shared as a HUGE flaw in the game, to make fun of it, i selected the same spells the wizard in the group almost always choose as a sorcerer, and i will always cast the same spell she caster after she cast it, this is to make the point that playing a wizard and a sorcerer was the exact same thing, because you cast the exact same spells.
Shared Spell List is one of the dealbreakers for me for D&DNext, all classes should have their own unique spell list not shared (some rituals being the exception), if not, what's the point of playing those diferent classes if they cast the exact same spells...
...umm...Mexrage? Yah. Umm...no one thought they were supposed to be any different other than -how- they cast. That's why even the SRD has them on the same page.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:50PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Aug 15, 2011
|
i see what you are saying but explain to me why anyone would play a wizard over a cleric if the cleric can get the same spells AND do all the fighty things
...while wearing armor with full weapon selections and turning undead, no less!
Not necessarily. Firstly, not all clerics should turn undead, only those whose gods actually have some truck with the concept (Sun, healing, life, light, death or undeath). Absolutely no reason a god of Storms would have turn undead, and a god of Battle would be more like 'get over here so I can beat you up' rather than 'run away from me'.
Secondly, I don't think armor should interfere with anybody's spells.
Thirdly, I don't think armor and weapon proficiencies should be class-based either. Make them theme-based or background-based. More flexibility, more good.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:50PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2012
|
And this will also indeed make all classes play the same, the last time i played 3.5 (before 4e was released), i saw shared spells being shared as a HUGE flaw in the game, to make fun of it, i selected the same spells the wizard in the group almost always choose as a sorcerer, and i will always cast the same spell she caster after she cast it, this is to make the point that playing a wizard and a sorcerer was the exact same thing, because you cast the exact same spells.
Shared Spell List is one of the dealbreakers for me for D&DNext, all classes should have their own unique spell list not shared (some rituals being the exception), if not, what's the point of playing those diferent classes if they cast the exact same spells...
Or how about, not a shared list but instead merely some repeated spells.
for example, why could a sorceror NOT cast fireball?
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 02, 2012 - 9:51PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2010
|
...umm...Mexrage? Yah. Umm...no one thought they were supposed to be any different other than -how- they cast. That's why even the SRD has them on the same page. 
And that's one of the things that SHOULD be changed
|
|
|