D&D 5E WHY is there (still) no Class that allows you to use both Arcane and Divine magic...?

Cognomen's Cassowary said:

Arcane cleric, tempest cleric, light cleric, bard. The line between divine and arcane is so thin that it's really more a matter of how you conceive of those two types than any real difference in the game mechanics.

Click to expand...

This. Other than the fact that wizard, bard, sorcerer, and warlock spells are defined as "arcane", and cleric, druid, paladin, and ranger spells are defined as "divine", the terms have absolutely no meaning whatsoever. Heck, you could replace them with nonsensical, made-up terms of your own, like "baatezu" or "tanar'ri". You know, gibberish.

Such a class could not be made for 5e as it would break the main design rule "Thou shall not scare the Grognards, for they must be appeased".

It might be important to note that spells are no longer divided into Arcane and Divine in 5E. The wizard and sorcerer are pretty solidly in the old school Arcane, as is the Cleric and Paladin in the old school Divine. Warlock gets there powers from an other-world being, which is very similar to Divine Magic. Bards (as they have since 3E) blur the lines considerably. Druids (and maybe Rangers) seem to get their magic from nature itself (which may or may not be Divine, depending on the setting). In general, I think the source matters more than the type (since all spells, regardless of source, are treated the same).

I also don't think a new Class is really even needed. The Favored Soul (from UA) as a sub-class of Sorcerer allows for both arcane and divine spells. The Arcana Domain in the SCAG also allows for both arcane and divine spells. You could also design your own sub-class for Wizard that allows access to divine spells.

The Favored Soul from the Unearthed Arcana gives a good look at what one type of blend could be

TwoSix said:

Heck, you could replace them with nonsensical, made-up terms of your own, like "baatezu" or "tanar'ri". You know, gibberish.

Click to expand...

Watch it, bub! Don't you dip your facetious little toes in the Blood War pool, lest you find them bitten off most heinously!

TwoSix said:

Other than the fact that wizard, bard, sorcerer, and warlock spells are defined as "arcane", and cleric, druid, paladin, and ranger spells are defined as "divine"...

Click to expand...

Even that's downplayed a lot in 5E. I don't recall them ever calling the bard or warlock "arcane" or the druid or ranger "divine".

EDIT: The warlock entry does use the word "arcane" and the druid does use "divine". But only once each.

[MENTION=6779993]Elderbrain[/MENTION] To be fair, there's a bit of abstraction and tweaking that's necessary with most magic-based classes in D&D to approximate a particular literary character. Actually, when I think of characters like Dresden, Harry Potter, Gandalf, and Walker Boh their magic was actually more thematically narrow than the smorgasbord of the 5e wizard.

IF you wanted a class that could choose ANY spells, you'd need to develop a way to limit its spell list to balance it against other spellcasters in 5e D&D.

One idea I've played with before (and I may come back to) is the idea of a "domain mage" who would select domains like "Dream", "Healing", "Fire", or "Chicanery." Each domain would then include its own spell list tightly constructed around its theme, along with a thematic cantrip or a minor ability of some kind. For # of domains a character knows, I'd probably use a similar progression to Warlock Invocations (topping out around 8-10).

So each mage would have their own unique spell list — constructed from each domain they selects, NOT a master class list — but allowing for the creation of a specific vision of a character without worrying about distinguishing between clerical/druidic/warlock/wizardly magic. Pretty much any PHB caster class is going to have a larger spell selection at any given moment, but with the "domain mage" you get almost exactly just the spells you want.

As a DM I like this because it encourages a more thematic approach to magic that I can easily understand. "Oh, you're playing an Air, Fire, Dream, and Light mage? Ok, that gives me a feel for the character's capabilities right away!"

However, when I tinkered with the idea, it proved to be a real design challenge making each domain have roughly equivalent # of spells on its list. In the end, I realized that given the spells in the PHB (even including the ones in EE too), some domains would just have fewer spells. So the question then became: What sorts of secondary minor abilities can be added to domains with fewer spells to make them equally attractive?

The other challenge of a "domain mage" in 5e is what sorts of sub-classes do you create for a build-your-own-caster-kit class?

Elderbrain said:

So why is there no such "blended" Class in D&D?

Click to expand...

TRADITION!

Actually, there has been. Sorta. There was the Mystic Theurge 3.5 PrC. There have been 'Magic' Domain clerics able to use some wizard spells. There's been the effing Chosen of Mystara. In 4e you could hybrid a divine & an arcane class. And there's been multi-classing for a long time (in 1e, a half-elf could be a Cleric/Magic-User).

In 5e, you can come at it from a variety of angles: Backgrounds like a Cleric (Sage w/Arcana) or Wizard (Acolyte). Optionally: Multi-Classing. The Magic Initiate feat. If SCAG is in use: Cleric with the Arcana Domain.

A Wizard Tradition that was devout and had access to some Cleric spells wouldn't be any further out of line than the Bladesinger.

TwoSix said:

Heck, you could replace them with nonsensical, made-up terms of your own, like "baatezu" or "tanar'ri". You know, gibberish.

Click to expand...

... there are some VERY ANGRY Fiends who would like a word with you...!

*Deleted by user*