-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
its all in the interpretation
- Thread starter emanresu
- Start date
delericho
Legend
no wait I take that back I found heal mount and Holy sword...erm then I found glory domian5 has holy sword. So that leaves one spell, heal mount, that this refers to...I dont even think they would of wasted the ink in printing this, if this was the intent.
And I cant find 1 unique spell for the Rangers list. Im between phone calls at work, so attention is diverted (silly boss)
And I cant find 1 unique spell for the Rangers list. Im between phone calls at work, so attention is diverted (silly boss)
Last edited:
[h=4]Glory Domain Spells[/h]
delericho
Legend
Two things:
- The Bard has many more unique spells. They were mostly dealing with that, but included the Paladin and Ranger for completeness.
- Later books (not to mention third-party books) added many more spells, including more Paladin- and Ranger-unique spells. The wording they've used means they cover all of those for 'free'.
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him)
One other thing - just because it's on a domain list and available to a subset of clerics, that doesn't mean it's on the class's spell list. Holy sword may appear on the Glory domain list, but the intent is still pretty clear. It's a paladin spell that's not on the cleric's spell list and should be made available to the prestige class paladin.
Im not trying to weaken the prestigious classes, I am inquiring. So by posting the glory domian Im just showing that its not unique only to the Pali. And this feeds into my opinion that the designers, and all the oversights, wrote the Unique Spell paragraph for a total of what 3 spells, one of which is 0 level? I cant imagine they had that in mind. But when reading the paragraph that is a legitimate interpretation.
So then I think WTF were/are they thinkin? Personally I thought/think they meant spells not on your qualifying classes known list.
So then I think WTF were/are they thinkin? Personally I thought/think they meant spells not on your qualifying classes known list.
Jackinthegreen
Explorer
WotC has a history of poorly-worded or otherwise incomplete rules, and Unearthed Arcana is full of them. Sometimes they're meant to be open-ended to allow DMs to fudge things a bit, but given a rule set the size and scope that D&D 3.X turned out to be there are definitely going to be screwups, and the players and DM are expected to have their eye out for those.
One of the biggest offenders right in the PHB is monks don't technically get proficiency with unarmed strikes. No one in their right mind (and I expect many who are in their wrong mind) would play it that strictly though because it's incredibly obvious that it's an oversight given the other class features and the monk's kit in general.
That's the main reason I never play Read As Written. Whether a rule will work and be reasonable is very likely to be up to the players and DM and how they want to play, including repercussions of certain spells. Minor Creation, for example, can entirely screw with an area's economics by making a sizable amount of whatever vegetable/plant matter the caster wants. Even simple sugar and pepper have quite a high price in D&D compared to what we're used to.
As far as the interpretation of the Unique Spells for those prestige classes go, simply opening up the whole list of the normal class for only taking a single level in the prestige version could cause problems depending on the group. Some of the spells the bard, paladin, and ranger get later on are not "balanced" around the same spell level of wizard or clerics. And that goes both ways into possibly overpowered or definitely underpowered territory. An example of the latter is Cure Light Wounds being a 1st level spell even for paladins (who get it at 4th level, so 3 levels later than most casters) but rangers for some reason have it as a 2nd level spell and is thus only castable at 8th level of all things assuming the ranger has a high enough wisdom to get a bonus spell slot at that level because normally they'd have 0 2nd level spell slots then.
It comes down to taking the rules with a shaker of salt (not just a grain will do) and making sure to come up with reasonable rules interpretations that will work for the way the table is playing the game. Quite often something can be pulled out that can be broadly applied to pretty much all games, but others not so much.
Note that paladins technically have a 3.5 unique spell with Favor of the Martyr. However, in 3.0 it was printed in Magic of Faerun as Favor of Ilmater and still retains that name in the 3.5 transition book Player's Guide to Faerun.
One of the biggest offenders right in the PHB is monks don't technically get proficiency with unarmed strikes. No one in their right mind (and I expect many who are in their wrong mind) would play it that strictly though because it's incredibly obvious that it's an oversight given the other class features and the monk's kit in general.
That's the main reason I never play Read As Written. Whether a rule will work and be reasonable is very likely to be up to the players and DM and how they want to play, including repercussions of certain spells. Minor Creation, for example, can entirely screw with an area's economics by making a sizable amount of whatever vegetable/plant matter the caster wants. Even simple sugar and pepper have quite a high price in D&D compared to what we're used to.
As far as the interpretation of the Unique Spells for those prestige classes go, simply opening up the whole list of the normal class for only taking a single level in the prestige version could cause problems depending on the group. Some of the spells the bard, paladin, and ranger get later on are not "balanced" around the same spell level of wizard or clerics. And that goes both ways into possibly overpowered or definitely underpowered territory. An example of the latter is Cure Light Wounds being a 1st level spell even for paladins (who get it at 4th level, so 3 levels later than most casters) but rangers for some reason have it as a 2nd level spell and is thus only castable at 8th level of all things assuming the ranger has a high enough wisdom to get a bonus spell slot at that level because normally they'd have 0 2nd level spell slots then.
It comes down to taking the rules with a shaker of salt (not just a grain will do) and making sure to come up with reasonable rules interpretations that will work for the way the table is playing the game. Quite often something can be pulled out that can be broadly applied to pretty much all games, but others not so much.
Note that paladins technically have a 3.5 unique spell with Favor of the Martyr. However, in 3.0 it was printed in Magic of Faerun as Favor of Ilmater and still retains that name in the 3.5 transition book Player's Guide to Faerun.
Last edited:
the Jester
Legend
I have never seen or heard anyone try any interpretation other than #4 for something like this. It's honestly never even occurred to me that it might be otherwise. I don't see how it's all that questionable, but obviously YMMV. Anyway, the "I get confusion as a second level spell!" interpretation is pretty well broken, so I'd throw it out without a second thought. Honestly, if this ever came up for debate in my game, it would take a really convincing argument to sway me.
Similar Threads
