Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EUREKA! THE ULTIMATE CROWN JEWEL OF CLASS ARCHTYPES!!!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MoonSong" data-source="post: 6203235" data-attributes="member: 6689464"><p>The bold part is the part where we don't agree. (more to that below) There is a huge difference between "I solve challenges using my magic" and "I solve challenges using my arcane knowledge of magic", the later excludes a big amount of characters the former embraces. (again more to that below)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I argue that having the ability to control something doesn't really matches with knowing that same thing, under your premise and ample meaning of <em>knowledge</em> (and to be honest is fair, such is the way people normally use the word knowledge, most people can safely exchange "I can cook" with "I know how to cook") <strong>Every character solves challenges through something and knowledge</strong>. and as consequence saying "magic and knowledge" is redundant, thus saying a <strong>wizard solves challenges with magic</strong> produces no dissonance to me. (see the next paragraph)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Under the amended expression "using magic", yes innate, learned, pacted, bestowed, cursed, inherited magic users are indeed a single class. The problem is this second instance of "knowledge" is a using the more restricted definition of knowledge, the one that translates as lores, academical knowledge, erudite knowledge, mental knowledge all of them beyond simple know how, then this second instance of "using magic and knowledge" is more restricted as reinforced by your view of the Druid. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again conflating the know how with the know why. Having the know how means you have the skill to control or do something, Having the know why translates in a whole different set of abilities. For example my brother is a great driver, has the right instincts when it comes to driving, has no problems understanding that he needs to refill the car with gas, when to do the changes and stuff. Yet he doesn't knows the why of all these things, the principle under which the motor works, the story of the internal combustion engine, who invented it, it's parts and the way they interact, how do you recognize the internal parts of a car, why fuel injection cars are turned on differently than older ones, how to find the source of mechanical failures, etc, I do know those things and can contribute with that knowledge when a situation arises while he doesn't, yet he is the better driver of the two and would gladly have him as the driver if we were being chased. I know what to do to drive because I understand the machine below, he knows what to do to drive because it works. If there was a generic driver class he would be the archetypal driver and I would be an example of a very specialized build, if driving a car was instead using magic, he would be a sorcerer and I would be a wizard but under your chart there would be no way to accurately represent him, despite he being the more generic and inclusive example. As long as the book-learned wizard remains the default, there is no place in the class for the sorcerer. (And that is why I like the sorcerer class, it allows me to make characters that couldn't be created under the wizard class and it also allows to create the same characters that could)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MoonSong, post: 6203235, member: 6689464"] The bold part is the part where we don't agree. (more to that below) There is a huge difference between "I solve challenges using my magic" and "I solve challenges using my arcane knowledge of magic", the later excludes a big amount of characters the former embraces. (again more to that below) I argue that having the ability to control something doesn't really matches with knowing that same thing, under your premise and ample meaning of [I]knowledge[/I] (and to be honest is fair, such is the way people normally use the word knowledge, most people can safely exchange "I can cook" with "I know how to cook") [B]Every character solves challenges through something and knowledge[/B]. and as consequence saying "magic and knowledge" is redundant, thus saying a [B]wizard solves challenges with magic[/B] produces no dissonance to me. (see the next paragraph) Under the amended expression "using magic", yes innate, learned, pacted, bestowed, cursed, inherited magic users are indeed a single class. The problem is this second instance of "knowledge" is a using the more restricted definition of knowledge, the one that translates as lores, academical knowledge, erudite knowledge, mental knowledge all of them beyond simple know how, then this second instance of "using magic and knowledge" is more restricted as reinforced by your view of the Druid. Again conflating the know how with the know why. Having the know how means you have the skill to control or do something, Having the know why translates in a whole different set of abilities. For example my brother is a great driver, has the right instincts when it comes to driving, has no problems understanding that he needs to refill the car with gas, when to do the changes and stuff. Yet he doesn't knows the why of all these things, the principle under which the motor works, the story of the internal combustion engine, who invented it, it's parts and the way they interact, how do you recognize the internal parts of a car, why fuel injection cars are turned on differently than older ones, how to find the source of mechanical failures, etc, I do know those things and can contribute with that knowledge when a situation arises while he doesn't, yet he is the better driver of the two and would gladly have him as the driver if we were being chased. I know what to do to drive because I understand the machine below, he knows what to do to drive because it works. If there was a generic driver class he would be the archetypal driver and I would be an example of a very specialized build, if driving a car was instead using magic, he would be a sorcerer and I would be a wizard but under your chart there would be no way to accurately represent him, despite he being the more generic and inclusive example. As long as the book-learned wizard remains the default, there is no place in the class for the sorcerer. (And that is why I like the sorcerer class, it allows me to make characters that couldn't be created under the wizard class and it also allows to create the same characters that could) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EUREKA! THE ULTIMATE CROWN JEWEL OF CLASS ARCHTYPES!!!
Top