D&D General Weave Your Tale in the Forgotten Realms With 8 Epic Subclasses (D&D Beyond Article)

I mean, even if 5e had a coherent cosmology of "power sources" (it doesn't), 5e seems to lean pretty strongly towards class being more methodology and not a 1-to-1 linkage between class and power source.

5e fully supports having a primal or arcane themed paladin, instead of divine.
5e doesn't support it at all. It also does not hinder the DM from making that the case for one of his Paladins. Not hindering =/= support.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I really wish they had come up with a better name than Scion of the Three, because I find it too setting-specific. If I wanted to use it in, say, Exandria, I suppose I could alter the three gods. Bane exists in both realms, but I’d have to change Bhaal to Gruumsh and Myrkul to ….. Vesh, I guess.

Still, they could have gone with something like Scion of Death or Scion of Malevolence rather than tying it to three specific gods. Then it would have been more setting-agnostic (but then they’d have to alter the Dread Allegiance feature, unless it has already been altered sine the last UA).
 
Last edited:

I really wish they had come up with a better name than Scion of the Three, because I find it too setting-specific. If I wanted to use it in, say, Exandria, I suppose I could alter the three gods. Bane exists in both realms, but I’d have to change Bhaal to Gruumsh and Myrkul to ….. Vesh, I guess.

Still, they could have gone with something like Scion of Death or Scion of Malevolence rather than tying it to three specific gods. Then it would have been more setting-agnostic (but then they’d have to alter the Dread Allegiance feature, unless it has already been altered sine the last UA).
It's being put out for a specific setting, so picking those specific gods makes sense. As you say, all you need to do is swap out the gods and it works just fine. Or you just axe those two gods and have it be Scion of Bane. The article didn't show the specific ability mechanics, but the way they were described I don't really see a need to keep three gods.
 


Why, if it doesn't come up anywhere in the text...?
What do you mean? It comes up in the 5e PHB in the magic section where it explains what the differences are. In the 5.5e PHB divine magic appears in the cleric class and a few other places. Arcane magic similarly comes up a few places in the text. The 5.5e DMG also speaks about what divine magic is and where it comes from.
 

What do you mean? It comes up in the 5e PHB in the magic section where it explains what the differences are. In the 5.5e PHB divine magic appears in the cleric class and a few other places. Arcane magic similarly comes up a few places in the text. The 5.5e DMG also speaks about what divine magic is and where it comes from.
Where does it come up in regards to Paladins in the current PHB...?
 

Where does it come up in regards to Paladins in the current PHB...?
HOLY SYMBOL (VARIES)
A Holy Symbol takes one of the forms in the Holy Symbol table and is bejeweled or painted to channel divine magic. A Cleric or Paladin can use a Holy Symbol as a Spellcasting Focus."

And the 5.5e DMG when speaking about divine magic calls out Clerics, Paladins, Druids, etc. as using it.
 

I also don't like the Oath of Genies lore stepping not just on the toes of Noble Genie Pact Warlocks, but right on their heads. Making pacts with Genies was supposed to be their thing.

They could have made it that Genies taught them a particular style of Oath, not that they are a source of their magic. Or that they are acting as an intermediary between the Paladin & their God/s in place of a more outsider divine servant.

They need to start playtesting lore changes.
 


Remove ads

Top