|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 3:36PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2011
|
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?
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 Pulp "Encumbrance"
Show
http://rottenpulp.blogspot.com/2012/06/matt-rundles-anti-hammerspace-item.html
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 3:44PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2006
|
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.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 3:47PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2011
|
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
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 Pulp "Encumbrance"
Show
http://rottenpulp.blogspot.com/2012/06/matt-rundles-anti-hammerspace-item.html
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 4:40PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2007
|
...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.
Careful, man. That much logic might be illegal on the internet. - Salla
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 4:42PM
#5
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 4:42PM
#6
|
|
|
...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.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 4:42PM
#7
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 6:44PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Aug 26, 2008
|
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).
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 6:52PM
#9
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 9:07PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Aug 26, 2008
|
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?
|
|
|
