McNancy, I think we're blowing it a bit out of proportion here. None of the Divine classes released say you have to play a zealot in their fluff. The fluff doesn't tell you what your character's believes in, it tells you what sort of things your character does, and what background s/he is come from.
The Commanding Avenger is a good example of this - a more team-player build of the Avenger leaves itself to somewhat of a different feel than the other builds.
That's why classes are supposed to be broad, rather than just a build (hence why I was/a bit am skeptical about the Swasbuckler class you proposed). That broadness should includes thousands of different combinations of character, powers, feats, backgrounds, races, skills, etc. Your character is what you make of it. The class doesn't dictate it.
Yes, the fluff is mutable, and WotC have said this. But the fluff is also a great starting point, and I usually keep to the fluff for basic tropes of the classes and races and such. But I create my own setting too, so that means I'm immediately rendering some of the fluff obsolete (and in my case, more than just some). Think of it more as a toolbox (or sandbox) to work (or play) with. D&D should be primarily about you and your game, and what works for it. The fluff is great – that's why I continue to buy the books despite having Compendium access from DDi. But it doesn't always work for me, and I often find that it inspires me to do something variant on it – like this new Dusk Elves article in Dragon. I really like it, but some of the ideas don't mesh quite well with my setting. So I'm adapting them into my story of the Elven peoples, but doing it a bit differently, though using their fluff as a starting point. Similarly, my Haflings began with the normal river-boat fluff from the book, as I tried to escape Hobbiton-type fluff, and eventually became a race of swarthy, swashbuckling pirates and smugglers from swampy, marshy, sub-tropical coastlines. In my game, the Great Elder Spirits are older than the Gods and Primordials, and see both as interlopers towards the world, though the three races of great powers (along with Archfey and other great powers as well) have interwedded and gotten muddled.
I really don't think that you should get caught up over some people playing Avengers, Clerics, Invokers, and Paladins with zealotry. They don't need to. I know Clerics that are timid, some Invokers that are religious scholars that stay in their studies until they're forced into adventuring, and Avengers who's only real purpose in serving their deity is because they have a common enemy, and aren't all that reverent. And especially with the last one, there's established fluff to back it up.
So we don't need a non-Zealot class. That would be like the old 3.5e classes like the Healer that were really just aspects of an already established class, for the sake of trying to emphasise one small detail.
Again, I'm really hoping this Ardent turns out to be the Psionic Defender (but I wouldn't be TOO upset if the Empath was just renamed Ardent, since Ardent has fiery emotions by dictionary definition and would probably be Charisma-based - hopefully with a Wis secondary or Con secondary).
A great man once said "If WotC put out boxes full of free money there'd still be people complaining about how it's folded." – Boraxe
Crunch is mutable too, but not as easilly. You can choose to houserule/homebrew from the framwork WotC provides, but you do so at your own risk.
Fluff, on the other hand, is a less grave matter. I can declare that in my setting, Shifters are fuzzy, Devas are all Rakashas, Changelings are Kitsune, and that the civilized races are Shifters, Gnolls, Minotaurs, Dragonborn, Kobolds, Kenku, Bulwugs, Rakashas and Kitsune, and things will still play just as smoothly as if I was playing the book straight.
< Mcnancy: I want some Divine classes that are not hung up on dogma for a change. >
Preach on!
I want Divine classes whose fluff lacks polytheistic gods.
For those of you who want your Divine characters to worship the creatures of the Astral Sea, you are welcome to refluff your characters any way you want. But I want the official fluff to not.
Isn't "Powers originate from Dieties" kinda the definition of the Divine source? Sure you can have a religious class unassociated with the Astral, but that wouldn't be Divine anymore.
The 3.5e Ardent was originally supposed to have Auras which gave certain bonuses to allies that were dependant on the Mantle they chose, but they were somehow deemed too powerful so this was split off into another class called the Divine Mind.
I could see the 4e Ardent having something similiar to the auras given to the Divine Mind, especially if the Ardent is a Leader class. Maybe it'll be as a class ability or as an aspect of powers. And I could see them getting this regardless of what their power source might be.
< Ax: Isn't "Powers originate from Dieties" kinda the definition of the Divine source? >
Rather, the definition of the Divine source is, 'powers originate from the Astral Sea'.
The Astral Sea is a realm of Divine light. Divine classes can tap this Divine energy directly to use Divine powers. Immortal intermediaries are unnecessary. A Natural mortal can even become an Immortal emself, by tapping this Divine energy and transfiguring.
< Ax: Isn't "Powers originate from Dieties" kinda the definition of the Divine source? >
Rather, the definition of the Divine source is, 'powers originate from the Astral Sea'.
The Astral Sea is a realm of Divine light. Divine classes can tap this Divine energy directly to use Divine powers. Immortal intermediaries are unnecessary. A Natural mortal can even become an Immortal emself, by tapping this Divine energy and transfiguring.
The polytheistic deities are superfluous.
Point to me where WotC says that Divine gods get all their power from the Astral Sea, and that that's what the Divine Power Source means.
If it was what you say, it would be the 'Astral' Power source.
The Divine Power source is inherently tied in with the gods; otherwise, it would not be Divine.
Again, Haldrik, you're oversimplifying it. Beings of the Astral Sea don't grant divine spells. In fact, nobody grants divine spells – divine characters get their power from their faith. But you seem dead set on making each power source derive from a plane, rather than from what they actually derive from. Divine characters deal with divinities. The only reason why Invokers summon angels is because the Gods those angels have sworn to send them down at the Invoker's request.
Infernal Warlocks aren't divine, Dark Warlocks aren't Shadow, Vestige Warlocks don't derive their power form the source of whatever is associated with their current Vestige, and Fey Warlocks aren't Primal, nor are Star Warlocks Psionic or Divine. Illusionists, Charm-users, Psychic-damage power users, etc aren't Psionic unless the same power says "Psionic" within it's keywords.
The Astral Sea is the natural home of Divinities, but Divine characters share a special relationship with the Gods, rather than with Angels or Devils or Maruts. I've argued that there shouldn't be an Angel pact simply because Angels are most often seen in service of the Gods, and that would blur the territory a bit too much for some people.
The point is that Power Sources have more to do with mindsets and relationships, and might have nothing to do with planes. Martial has to do with self-empowerment, as does Psionic, but in different ways – Martial empowers through matter over mind, Psionic mind over matter. Primal deals with a relationship with the Spirits and animals and nature. Arcane deals with the fundamental laws of the cosmos. Divine deals with the powers of the gods and of the user's own faith in them. Shadow... we don't have a precidence enough to say, though it seems that it might deal with bargaining away a part of the self to the Shadowfell itself to gain power, making it the FIRST power source that derives particularly from a single plane.
WotC said from the very beginning they didn't want Power Sources based off planes, because then they'd become less effective when you go travelling to other planes.
Important tandum, Warlocks are not the catch-all class, drawing from each power source per pact; they're a class that makes deals with non-divine, non-primal beings of great power that can manipulate some of the laws of the cosmos, fitting it neatly in with the other Arcane classes that manipulate the cosmic physics, such as with the Artificer's trasmutation of local materials for his/her spells, the Wizard's understanding of the physics to manipulate pretty much anything, the Bard's music striking at a cosmic aesthetic, the sorcerer understanding his/her own body and it's relation to power, and the swordmage fusing the cosmic-knowledge with swordplay.
A great man once said "If WotC put out boxes full of free money there'd still be people complaining about how it's folded." – Boraxe
< Rose: Point to me where WotC says that Divine gods get their power from the Astral Sea. >
Full self-disclosure: Both. .. There are genuine ambiguities within the official flavor/mechanics. Plus. Personally, I dislike 'worshiping' creatures who have power over me (or my character). I despise loss of power. I dislike the 'servile' classes, that must cowtow to a 'more-powerful' creature. Such a relationship is slavery, obsequiousness, dehumanization ... disgusting.
Personally, only *infinity* (including ones own infinite potential) is worthy of worship. Worshiping a finite creature - with its limitations and errors - disgusts me. The moment an 'object' of worship becomes finite, it repulses me. It isnt plausible for me (or my character) to worshiping a fallible creature. Its disgusting.
Im not the only one who feels this way. Many have voiced similar objections.
< Maran: Haldrik, you're oversimplifying it. >
To be fair, its difficult to express a complex point-of-view, in 100 words or less.
< Beings of the Astral Sea don't grant divine spells. >
That is exactly the official ambiguity Im talking about: the creatures of the Astral Sea, themselves, dont actually grant the Divine powers.
So, what grants the powers? I say, the energy of the plane itself, which the 'beings' tap.
< In fact, nobody grants divine spells – divine characters get their power from their faith. >
You say, subjectively, an individuals 'faith'. I say, objectively, the plane itself. Yes, your statement correctly expresses the 'worldview' of the D&D tradition.
However, the criticism of the D&D tradition is, 'faith-alone' can become absurd. The D&D webcomic, Order Of The Stick, parodied this tradition by having a Bard character multiclass, in order to worship the handpuppet, 'Banjo The Clown', to acquire Divine powers. Pure 'faith' isnt convincing enough.
Having the plane of the Astral Sea (not the individual) grant Divine powers, gives the DM a position of 'objectivity'. In reallife, what makes a religion a 'religion' is the ability of its archetypes to organize actual cultural 'reality' and behavior. While the archetypes of an individual are insanity (compare schitzophrenia!), the archetypes of a whole culture are 'truth' (what society takes for granted as true).
It can make sense to 'personify' such an archetype as if a person ... poetically. It even makes sense to have a finite creature 'represent' an archetype. (Eberron does this by having a finite human 'prophetess' speak on behalf of the infinite Silver Flame.) However, it is the archetype itself that matters, the way it abbreviates categories that the culture uses to function, not the creature itself.
Anyway, as far as the D&D game goes ...
Letting a characters 'faith' grant Divine powers invites too many obsurdities. By contrast, saying the Astral Sea itself grants Divine powers gives the DM a reasonable position to define what 'religious concepts' make sense or not, because the societies themselves - as the DM defines them - may perceive these ideals-or-nightmares as meaningful or not.
In sum, its better for both players and DMs to say the Astral Sea grants the Divine powers. For the players, their character concepts wont be limited to officially published gods. For the DMs, the Divine powers must cohere within the DMs campaign setting.
Usually I'm all for that mentality, but not when it comes to future releases.
Because then you are saying that you don't care about the quality of writing in the books you just want crunch, and if you really don't care about fluff then go play Mutants & Masterminds where there is no fluff and you get to make up all the crunch yourself.
It's one thing to say okay, what do I have to work with and how can make the most out of it, but it's another thing to have no standards and to accept a pile of dog**** with a smile on your face.
Having played both Mutants and Masterminds and D&D 4E, I can tell you how 4E, with an understanding of completely immutable fluff, would be much more preferable to Mutants and Masterminds, even though it has less fluff to ignore.
Points bloat.
Get high enough up in the levels and your character can have points spread out so wide that he is basically capable of everything and reliably capable and competant at nothing. Or you can have a character with his points sunk into so few things that he is unchallengeable at those tasks and completely incapable of anything else. Or you can have your character be anything else along that spectrum.
And if the other players and/or the GM aren't building their characters at the same point along that spectrum that you are, then you risk a very unfulfilling game experience.
Tying everyone down to pre-planned classes with a highly specific progression eliminates the vastness of the spectrum by a large degree and gets everyone closer to being on the same page.
And as for the question of why should there be fluff attached, loosely as it is, to the classes if all we need is the mechanical framework?
Because this is supposed to be a "new-player friendly" game. Having fluff there for if it's needed (if the new players in question can't think of anything on their own or in quite such eloquent terms), but also easily dismissed if the new players already do have something in mind instead, comes close to the best of both worlds.
It's like a springboard in gymnastics. Envision one if you will. The gymnast is running towards the bar, ready to vault over it with the assistance of the springboard and what happens? Does the gymnast plant her feet on the springboard, stick there, and not move (just swaying back and forth)? Hilarious (absurd, but something I'd still love to see on AFV). No, the springboard gets used for what it can provide and then it is good and rightly left behind.
I've finally figured out how to put in a sig. Yes, I'm including this here for no other reason than to express how happy I am that I could finally do this. For goodness' sake, change these forums back (or just change, I don't care).
