This Week in D&D
I would suggest that perhaps it is you that doesn't get it.
Mearls said that the Fighter was working well (presumably with CS and all). And now... they want to put in AN OPTION for a simpler Fighter. Not REPLACE the current Fighter with a simpler one... but add an option.
So you have the current Fighter with Combat Superiority... and then you have an option (or maybe even a "module"!) that allows you to play a simpler one. They pretty much had already said in the previous packet that the "basic fighter" could be accomplished by just always using a Fighter's Expertise Dice as strictly a bonus to damage. Now perhaps all they want to do is codify it in the rules. They write up that sidebar officially with the rules on how to interpret Expertise Dice as basic damage for the easy Fighter. That way they might get a whole bunch of people to actually playtest it that way.
Steely_Dan
First Post
I'm wary of a catch-all "magic user" (though i have no problem calling the wizard that), part of class identity for me is the way they cast/use magic.
Ratskinner
Adventurer
It's also odd that they're thinking that the Sorcerer could be a gish. Y'know what a gish looks like in the game? The Cleric. Gish since OD&D, with heavy armor and a fairly robust weapon selection and better beatin' on things potential than anyone other than the Fighter.Not that there's not room for two. Just that there's always this weird mental block with the cleric in the game.
Totally agree with this idea. I think mental block is just because a) Clerics having to use bludgeoning weapons and b) being the only source of healing kinda overwhelmed other aspects of the class. If they just make one unified spell list...including letting wizards cast healing spells...this all could be cleared up so neatly.
I'm very glad to see an expansion of skills and its a great improvement for them to separate skills from ability scores again. I hope we see Athletics and Endurance make a come back on the skill list too.
Finally seeing some love for Super-Classes / Class Categories makes me smile.
- Marty Lund
Finally seeing some love for Super-Classes / Class Categories makes me smile.
- Marty Lund
ZombieRoboNinja
First Post
So does this mean warlocks and sorcerers won't be in the next playtest?
A lot of the changes sound positive, and I'm glad the warlock still gets to be "special," but I'm frustrated that they might ditch the awesome flavor for the draconic sorcerer and/or morph them into spell blades or something.
A lot of the changes sound positive, and I'm glad the warlock still gets to be "special," but I'm frustrated that they might ditch the awesome flavor for the draconic sorcerer and/or morph them into spell blades or something.
howandwhy99
Adventurer
Turn Undead is really more channel positive or negative energy by the AD&D setting. At least, sort of. Undead existed in two planes simultaneously, the prime material and the negative energy planes. Turning via the focus of the cleric's holy symbol could affect undead in a blunt way. It could also affect extraplanar creatures too, so it wasn't entirely about being undead.
The difference between Arcane & Divine casting was that the magic user studied as an academician to use the power already inherent in the prime material plane like our historic alchemists would. They try and "unlock the secrets of the multiverse" and then speak, move, and use material to cast spells. Prepping was study and learning spells was done by studying the world, like how monsters work and the environment (including other inner planes).
Divine casters sought answers in their deity through meditation, prayer, fasting, or, basically, ritual. This is part of their training. Their preparations is reconnecting with those mannerisms. They prepared spells conveyed upon them from their deity. They channeled these and could choose as desired from what their deity offered. The spells were delivered via a focus, a symbol or whatever might represent the deity.
Turn Undead is the cleric (a term like magic-user or fighting-man that's meant to be very generic) channeling energy out in undifferentiated formlessness. It affects undead so well, because good cleric's positive energy harms negative, while negative energy bolsters itself. We reverse this when dealing with positive energy creatures like evil clerics turning devas or even paladins.
There are some unique features, like how monks are mystics who gain divine energy via meditation and bolster their own bodies and minds (the historic D&D brand being a type of shaolin monk, which could use some switching up a bit). Druids, who revere the natural world as deific, unlike all magic-users who study and dissect it, aren't channeling an other worldly power. They are like cleric's who have died and reside in their patron's demesne. They are part of the prime material world's power. They alter the world around them as almost as an extension of themselves. They aren't a gateway further and further opening to another realm, but an ongoing becoming that manifests their own.
All of this gets into the D&D cosmology, how magic works, and why there are certain division or differentiations peculiar to D&D. And the subclasses I listed are hardly the only ones possible. The key difference between arcane and divine though, is not (so much) a mechanical one. It is a matter of focus. Sword wielders are focusing on the fight, Wizardry is in mastering the multiverse, but clerics are in spreading the rituals of their deities. This could be planting crops for an agricultural god (lots of those in history) or spreading pestilence across the land.
There used to be an alignment/morale system for clerics to explore like fighters get the combat and wizards the magic systems. This included Followers too (henchman, hirelings, cohorts, and associates) But all of that is kind of unpopular nowadays, so I think the whole spectrum of the divine classes are being subsumed into the other two. Like others have said, a gish, which it could be if you drop all the cleric-y stuff.
The difference between Arcane & Divine casting was that the magic user studied as an academician to use the power already inherent in the prime material plane like our historic alchemists would. They try and "unlock the secrets of the multiverse" and then speak, move, and use material to cast spells. Prepping was study and learning spells was done by studying the world, like how monsters work and the environment (including other inner planes).
Divine casters sought answers in their deity through meditation, prayer, fasting, or, basically, ritual. This is part of their training. Their preparations is reconnecting with those mannerisms. They prepared spells conveyed upon them from their deity. They channeled these and could choose as desired from what their deity offered. The spells were delivered via a focus, a symbol or whatever might represent the deity.
Turn Undead is the cleric (a term like magic-user or fighting-man that's meant to be very generic) channeling energy out in undifferentiated formlessness. It affects undead so well, because good cleric's positive energy harms negative, while negative energy bolsters itself. We reverse this when dealing with positive energy creatures like evil clerics turning devas or even paladins.
There are some unique features, like how monks are mystics who gain divine energy via meditation and bolster their own bodies and minds (the historic D&D brand being a type of shaolin monk, which could use some switching up a bit). Druids, who revere the natural world as deific, unlike all magic-users who study and dissect it, aren't channeling an other worldly power. They are like cleric's who have died and reside in their patron's demesne. They are part of the prime material world's power. They alter the world around them as almost as an extension of themselves. They aren't a gateway further and further opening to another realm, but an ongoing becoming that manifests their own.
All of this gets into the D&D cosmology, how magic works, and why there are certain division or differentiations peculiar to D&D. And the subclasses I listed are hardly the only ones possible. The key difference between arcane and divine though, is not (so much) a mechanical one. It is a matter of focus. Sword wielders are focusing on the fight, Wizardry is in mastering the multiverse, but clerics are in spreading the rituals of their deities. This could be planting crops for an agricultural god (lots of those in history) or spreading pestilence across the land.
There used to be an alignment/morale system for clerics to explore like fighters get the combat and wizards the magic systems. This included Followers too (henchman, hirelings, cohorts, and associates) But all of that is kind of unpopular nowadays, so I think the whole spectrum of the divine classes are being subsumed into the other two. Like others have said, a gish, which it could be if you drop all the cleric-y stuff.
What elements do you think they could include to attract the so-called "old school" crowd, then?
Note, I am not asking what elements that they should exclude to get the attention of old school fans. At this point exclusion is cutting off the nose to spite the face. I am just curious as what they should include. Since Next is supposedly all about modularity, it should be completely possible for them to run these supposed "old school" mechanics alongside their new ideas, and let players and DMs pick and choose.
FitzTheRuke
Legend
I'll settle for "Magic-User" with Wizard, Sorcerer, and Warlock under it only if I get "Fighting-Man" with Fighter, ranger, and Berzerker.
After that they can give us "Rogue" with thief and bard
After that they can give us "Rogue" with thief and bard
GrahamWills
Hero
Sounds like Monte Cook's Numenéra's system: Three classes; Glaives, Nanos and Jacks.
