| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| slay_4_pay |
Posted - 22 Dec 2007 : 20:53:12
For a while now I've been thinking about a way I can open up a whole new avenue of stories. I want to make religion in my campaign a little more realistic. When the gods are granting spells and openly showing their hand it kind of takes some of the mystery and ability for misuse out of organized religion. You can't really have a group preaching one thing and then acting completely different if their god can just strip them of their spells or smite them openly with an avatar. So, what I want to do is combine the mage and cleric classes together, into one magic using class. The problems I am having is in the balance of power, and how to assign the various priest spells to wizard levels. I have some ideas, but since there are lots of experienced and knowledgeable players and DM's on this forum, I thought I would ask you all for some advice. |
| 21 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| slay_4_pay |
Posted - 11 Jan 2008 : 09:52:57
quote:
Originally posted by Daniel
I think the easiest way to accomplish what you want would be to simply say that priests don't get their spells granted to them by a deity, instead they draw on the weave or some other source of power. You could then keep the classes separate, but still open the story possibilities you were discussing earlier.
Yeah Daniel, that was actually one of the first things I considered doing. Something along the lines of just calling the Cleric class Sorcerer, or something like that. And it is my fall back option if I can't work anything else out. It does seem like the easiest if not the most satisfying way of going about it. Thanks for the input. |
| slay_4_pay |
Posted - 11 Jan 2008 : 09:49:00
quote:
Originally posted by Eremite
quote:
Originally posted by slay_4_pay (snip)Hey sirreus are you sure it's Unearthed Arcana? Because I'm looking at a copy right now and the only classes I see are Cavalier: Paladin, Druid, Fighter: Barbarian and Ranger, and Thief: Thief-Acrobat. Am I missing something?
Yes, you're missing the smiley at the end of your sentence to indicate that this is a joke. I am sure you have noticed that most people on this site play 3E/3.5E so it goes without saying that you would also naturally deduce that the version of Unearthed Arcana being referred to is the 3.5E version.
All that said, why are you asking your non-FR questions on a FR-specific site? Why not try rpg.net or enworld.org or, better yet, go to dragonsfoot.org where they specialise in the pre-3.xE versions of D&D.
What exactly is your problem? First of all the wink could mean just about anything including "hope this helps" or "I just like to use emoticons". As far as noticing what edition most people on this site are playing, I actually never really gave it much thought. Silly me, for thinking that because this is a great site full of experienced gamers (most of whom are really friendly and helpful) it might be a good place to go for some advice. But, what I'm really wondering is, if you have such a big problem with my post why bother replying at all? |
| Daniel |
Posted - 05 Jan 2008 : 22:22:36
I think the easiest way to accomplish what you want would be to simply say that priests don't get their spells granted to them by a deity, instead they draw on the weave or some other source of power. You could then keep the classes separate, but still open the story possibilities you were discussing earlier. |
| Eremite |
Posted - 02 Jan 2008 : 10:38:06
quote:
Originally posted by slay_4_pay (snip)Hey sirreus are you sure it's Unearthed Arcana? Because I'm looking at a copy right now and the only classes I see are Cavalier: Paladin, Druid, Fighter: Barbarian and Ranger, and Thief: Thief-Acrobat. Am I missing something?
Yes, you're missing the smiley at the end of your sentence to indicate that this is a joke. I am sure you have noticed that most people on this site play 3E/3.5E so it goes without saying that you would also naturally deduce that the version of Unearthed Arcana being referred to is the 3.5E version.
All that said, why are you asking your non-FR questions on a FR-specific site? Why not try rpg.net or enworld.org or, better yet, go to dragonsfoot.org where they specialise in the pre-3.xE versions of D&D.
|
| slay_4_pay |
Posted - 02 Jan 2008 : 08:38:36
quote:
Originally posted by sirreus
have you checked out the unearthed arcana's generic spellcaster? it's in the class variant section(which i don't have on me) but meshes the arcane and divine pretty well.
Hey sirreus are you sure it's Unearthed Arcana? Because I'm looking at a copy right now and the only classes I see are Cavalier: Paladin, Druid, Fighter: Barbarian and Ranger, and Thief: Thief-Acrobat. Am I missing something? |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 02 Jan 2008 : 03:42:18
You can pick up the book online from here:
http://www.frpgames.com/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=8966
On top of that, you may be able to find it at a local hobby shop. Its published by Green Ronin under the d20 license, but Green Ronin has been trying to get out of the d20 business, so it might not be that easy to find. |
| slay_4_pay |
Posted - 02 Jan 2008 : 03:33:53
Something else I should mention, and another thing I probably should have mentioned from the start. We are playing in Second Edition. We are familiar with 1st (and have several of the 1st edition resources), and we've played a little 3rd (though no one I'm currrently playing with has any of the 3rd edition books), but 2cd is just what we've always used and what we are most comfortable with. So take that into account and let me know if you have any ideas. Oh and just to be clear, I'm not opposed to changing editions if anyone thinks it would be alot easier to do this in 3rd, but I would prefer to do it 2cd if possible (I think I should be very familiar with a rules set before I change it, and that makes me think I should probably stick to Second for this undertaking).
Thanks Folks  |
| slay_4_pay |
Posted - 02 Jan 2008 : 03:18:44
I feel I should clear something up, I don't run the Realms. I am a Realm's Player. My idea about merging the classes is for a homebrewed world. I should have made this clear from the beggining but I didn't think it would make a difference which world it was for. Which of course it dosn't logistically, but I didn't take into account people's deep attachment to the setting and how they might react to the idea of a major change like that. So, why did I ask a question that really has nothing to do with the Realms in a forum that is devoted to the Realms? The answer to that one is really easy. This is the best D&D related site I've ever been able to find, and I'm not trying to kiss mod @ss, so that when they find out this thread isn't realms related they won't delete it or something, this really is the most usefull and interesting D&D site around as far as I'm concerned.
So now that we have that out of the way...
I would like to thank Snotlord, KnightErrantJR, and Aureus for their advice. And, I have a question for KnightErrantJR. The Spellmaster's class sounds like it might be exactly what I'm looking for, so what I'm wondering is where can I find the Advanced Player's Manual? It's not something I'm familiar with. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 01 Jan 2008 : 23:08:55
Oh, as far as general spellcasters go that blur the arcane/divine division, you may want to check out Green Ronin's Advanced Player's Manual, and the Spellmaster class, which can learn and cast spells from more or less any class, regardless of the source of the spell. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 01 Jan 2008 : 23:07:33
Eh . . . I've played a Mystic Theurge a few times, and I don't think they are really that broken, at least not for how I was playing him (I wasn't really pushing any limits, just trying to fill the cleric/sorcerer role at the same time). You have to choose between what role you want to fill, because you can't enhance your allies, heal them, and blast enemies at the same time, so you still can only deal with one spell per round, barring metamagic feats and the like.
On the other hand, I don't think that a mystic theurge really addresses the problem that the original poster perceives, i.e. he wants more mystery in the nature of the divine and if there is a difference between divine and arcane magic at all. |
| Aureus |
Posted - 01 Jan 2008 : 22:24:07
but there is the PrC Mystic Theurge which draws powers from both the arcane and divine, and if my calculations are not too deranged, it's very potent (or broken) so to speak |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 29 Dec 2007 : 17:33:04
While I wouldn't do this for a Realms campaign, I've toyed with the idea of running a Lanhkmar campaign where the spell casting classes were wizard (for Black magic users) and archivists (for white magic users) and making the alignment requirements for wizards any non good and for archivists any non evil.
But that's as close as I've gotten to seriously pondering anything like this. |
| Snotlord |
Posted - 29 Dec 2007 : 17:18:20
quote:
Originally posted by slay_4_pay
When the gods are granting spells and openly showing their hand it kind of takes some of the mystery and ability for misuse out of organized religion.
I don't see this as a rules change, but rather a different way to play the gods. Several of my homebrew campaigns has focused on fickle and uncaring gods, with rampant heresy, inquisitions and church in-fighting. Lots of good adventure material here, if you like mystery and investigation scenarios. I find that it works very well inside the established classes.
An extension of this would be changing the classes. This is not really my cup of tea, but I would consider a Sorcerer/Favored Soul/Mystic Theurge variant, an Archivist variant (Heroes of Horror) or simply a beefed up Adept variant for starters. That is, if the Unearthed Arcana don't work, I don't have that book.
Good luck with your new ideas, and keep posting.
I will certainly watch this thread. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 29 Dec 2007 : 16:39:14
quote:
Originally posted by slay_4_pay
I already know it's something I want to try out, and not only for the abuse of power in organized religion angle, but also because I want to make it questionable whether or not the gods actually exist (I would imagine it's a lot easier to have faith when your god gives you the ability to heal or magically smite your enemies).
But the reason people aren't accepting your idea is because it contradicts established Realmslore. We know there isn't an abuse of power in organized religion, and the people of the Realms know for a fact that the gods exist.
When you speak of casually chucking a major facet of the setting out the window, it's pretty much an expected response for people to say why it isn't a good idea.
If you want to run with it, fine. Just don't expect a bunch of Realms fans to support the idea of ripping the setting in half.
I apologize if this comes across as sounding harsh... But you have to understand your audience. If you're wanting advice, you need to use something we could actually advise you on. |
| slay_4_pay |
Posted - 29 Dec 2007 : 09:20:03
I've noticed alot of resistance here to the idea of my tinkering with the rules, but I didn't ask if anyone thought I should do it. I already know it's something I want to try out, and not only for the abuse of power in organized religion angle, but also because I want to make it questionable whether or not the gods actually exist (I would imagine it's a lot easier to have faith when your god gives you the ability to heal or magically smite your enemies). Besides that, I just like to try new things sometimes. I mean the worst thing that can happen is it dosn't work out and I scrap the idea, and go back to the old tried and true way of doing things. So, once again if anyone has any advice or suggestions on what they think is a good way to go about this, I would appreciate it.
Oh, and thanks to sirreus for the suggestion. I don't have a copy of Unearthed Arcana, but I think a friend of mine does. I will borrow it and take a look. |
| sirreus |
Posted - 26 Dec 2007 : 20:48:12
have you checked out the unearthed arcana's generic spellcaster? it's in the class variant section(which i don't have on me) but meshes the arcane and divine pretty well. |
| Ergdusch |
Posted - 25 Dec 2007 : 19:44:05
I thought abput this during my campaign as well. Actually, it would take most of the deity's attention nto watch after all his priests all day long. Can't really be the purpose of a god, now - don't you agree?! Therefore instead of stripping the cleric off of his powers I simply
1. talked to the player (out of game) to keep the characters role in mind.
2. modified the spell list of clerics in the way as to remove those spells that were most contradictory (like evil spells for good deities and vice versa) to give a certain guidance.
3. kept track of the heretic acts during game play to be able to judge the characters personality.
However, all of this did not really help to solve the issue.... so my advice is: leave it be! |
| Brynweir |
Posted - 25 Dec 2007 : 16:09:25
I have to agree with the others. Although the dieties are very powerful (and often vengeful) there is no reason to think that they are going to nit-pick every single action of the members of their respective churches. Many of them are probably so busy with the "divine" plots and intrigue, out-witting and manipulating each other, that they simply don't have time to smite every one of thier followers who happens to have thier own agenda. Also, the granting of spells would be a given, unless the worshipper had openly defied the god - IMO
And, as Wooly said, sometimes they just want to see how things play out... |
| Shilo99 |
Posted - 25 Dec 2007 : 13:38:09
Hi slay_4_pay,
It would be interesting to see the outcome of your combined class.
My thoughts would be to keep both divine & arcane magic and the roles of priests & wizards/sorcs separate: the former because the combo is too powerful and simplifies the delicious complexity of the D&D magic system, and the latter because it adds depth and differentiation to the game.
Wooly Rupert makes excellent points, lots of them!
Following his points, and referring the treatise on the subject in Power of Faerun, I'd say just go with ideas: make things realistic, have a heresy, have infiltration and undermining of the standard message of a faith (isn't that the premise behind the recent adventure, Cormyr: The Tearing of the Weave?
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Dec 2007 : 22:22:04
Yeah, a god can directly strip spells from their followers... But that would require intentional action on the god's part. For one thing, the granting of spells and such tends to be almost an automatic function on the part of the deity -- they don't really think about it, they just do it. For another thing, deities do have a strong tendency to interact with their followers, but not to the point of sending an avatar every time someone does something wrong. That's one of the things mortal followers are for. Yet another point is that churches tend to be mortal organizations -- meaning the deity gave some guidelines a few centuries ago, and what's now the church is a result of human interpretation of those guidelines. Still another point is the fact that deities work in ways mortals don't always get... So what seems a heresy on the surface may be something that the deity is either doing deliberately, or is watching to see how it plays out.
I don't see any problem here, and certainly nothing requiring such a drastic change. You're talking about changing something that has long been one of the basic precepts of the game. |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 22 Dec 2007 : 21:37:37
Simple...don't!
Doctrine and action are a thing that isn't only going wrong in the real world, but also in Faerun. Check out the Amaunator heresy in Lathander's church... think it was shown in Power of Faerun |
|
|
