|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:34PM
#161
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Man, there are so many character archetypes that fit under wizard that it makes total sense that there would be a buttload of wizard subclasses.
Bah, Warlock / Sorcerors no less so Wizard isnt any more generic.
And technically Historically the distinction between arcane/divine is minimal.
One mans sainted miracle worker is his adversaries witch or sorceror.
A wizard with positive connotations is a priest.
I don't really agree. The flavor of arcane vs divine classes is immensely different.
Study actual history.. there is next to no distinction miraculous acts were considered based mostly on the point of view, calling upon the divine to attack your enemies with curse like effects entirely religious when you were the one doing it and obviously witchcraft when it was the other guy.
One mans god is his adversaries devil.. again and again and again.
I am not talking about actual history. I am talking about a game that is not a history simulator.
Character archetypes come from legend, fiction, myth and history. You want you game to talk to somebody other than people who played it before. You consider all the sources. (not just previous edition nostalgia).
Gandalf is very often cited as inspiration for the D&D wizard shrug.... never could have even built him in AD&D
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:37PM
#162
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
I think there is actually some interesting dichotemies that can be explored because there is a distinction between Arcane and Divine (in some ways its a reflection of the adversarialism of science vs faith for instance).
I just think lumping all of arcane under a wizard banner is not useful as it undermines the other possiblities. Which was my original response.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 13, 2012 - 6:20AM
#163
|
Date Joined:
Aug 30, 2009
|
www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4...They mention the Elementalist and Sha'ir, but talk about the Monk as being two new Monastic Traditions--did they scrap the Shugenja? Also, the themes sounds pretty awesome, but missing an air-based one, as well as a generalist one (maybe the Janissary?). Finally, the powers sound cool, and neat as that Wizard 29 is, it isn't quite as good as Visions of Wrath. Also it notably lacks the "Elemental" keyword. Discuss here!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 13, 2012 - 7:07AM
#164
|
|
|
i have to say i am very excited about the monk material in this book. the 'watershaper' theme sounds awesome-very bruce lee
"If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle and it becomes the bottle. You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water my friend."-bruce lee
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 8:25PM
#165
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2002
|
Arcane is a method, based on secrets, more than an actual source of power. But such is the nature of decades worth of baggage.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 10:53PM
#166
|
Date Joined:
Sep 23, 2011
|
So Gandalf was really an invoker in D&D terms?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 25, 2012 - 12:09AM
#167
|
Date Joined:
Aug 23, 2007
|
So Gandalf was really an invoker in D&D terms?
Theoretically yes. A deva invoker to be specific. All the "wizards" in his work were.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 25, 2012 - 7:48AM
#168
|
|
|
So Gandalf was really an invoker in D&D terms?
Theoretically yes. A deva invoker to be specific. All the "wizards" in his work were.
Yep. It's an important part of (the devoutly Catholic) Tolkien's work that 'magic' is not something that can ever be learned independently by mere mortals. If you can do magic, then you're either a Maia/Vala (essentially an angel) or a descendant of one (e.g. Galadriel or Elrond) and can use (what mortals think of as) 'magic' because you helped Eru Iluvatar (God) to sing the world into being in the first place (and so modifying that creation is what you yourself were created for); or you've been granted (evil) sorcerous powers by Morgoth or Sauron (who themselves fit into the first category as fallen 'angels'). Any mortal in Tolkien's works who claims to be able to do magic but doesn't fit into one of those categories is delusional or a charlatan.
If you wanted to use the 4e rules to run a fluff-accurate LotR campaign, the only power sources would be divine and martial. Characters like Gandalf, Elrond and Galadriel would be invokers or clerics. The Witch King would be a warlord with a magic item (his ring) that lets him use some divine powers granted by Sauron (although you could possibly change the warlock class to be divine in order to represent servants of Sauron and Morgoth). The arcane, primal and psionic power sources just don't fit with anything in Tolkien's works, and he'd probably be extremely offended by the idea of trying to fit the (profoundly non-Christian) concepts they represent into his work.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 25, 2012 - 4:58PM
#169
|
|
|
So Gandalf was really an invoker in D&D terms?
Theoretically yes. A deva invoker to be specific. All the "wizards" in his work were.
Yep. It's an important part of (the devoutly Catholic) Tolkien's work that 'magic' is not something that can ever be learned independently by mere mortals. If you can do magic, then you're either a Maia/Vala (essentially an angel) or a descendant of one (e.g. Galadriel or Elrond) and can use (what mortals think of as) 'magic' because you helped Eru Iluvatar (God) to sing the world into being in the first place (and so modifying that creation is what you yourself were created for); or you've been granted (evil) sorcerous powers by Morgoth or Sauron (who themselves fit into the first category as fallen 'angels'). Any mortal in Tolkien's works who claims to be able to do magic but doesn't fit into one of those categories is delusional or a charlatan.
Off the top of my head Beorn turning into a bear comes to mind, as does the musical duel between Finrod Felagund and Sauron in the Lay of Leithian.
See Silmarillion page 201 (at least in my copy), or the Lays of Beleriand page 276 (Lay of Leithian line 2173): "He chanted a song of wizardry/Of piercing, opening, of treachery/Revealing, uncovering, betraying./Then sudden Felagund there swaying,/Sang in answer a song of staying,/Resisting, battling against power,/...Backwards and forwards swayed their song./Reeling and foundering, as ever more strong/The chanting swelled, Felagund fought,/And all the magic and might he brought/Of Elvenesse into his words..."
For that matter, I'm sure there are other examples of Elves (the Noldor in particular) wielding magic (crafting Rings of Power being another example), and while Elves may not be mortal, per-se, they're by no means divine beings (aside from those descended from Melian, a Maia, and Thingol, an Elf; Elrond and Luthien being the most well-known). It's made pretty clear that Elves share more in common with Men, being the Elder and Younger (respectively) children of Iluvatar.
Regarding Tolkien's faith, don't quote me on this, but I'm pretty sure I've read that he grew frustrated with C.S. Lewis' overt use of Christian themes in his work. In other words, while Tolkien was indeed Catholic and it certainly influenced his work, it wasn't that pervasive.
But yes, everyone is spot-on regarding Gandalf being an Invoker.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 25, 2012 - 4:59PM
#170
|
Date Joined:
Jan 10, 2012
|
Personally I like to see the pixie be able to be one of these new classes effectively. Most people laugh at pixies but they make great executioners, well build depending.
|
|
|
