D&D 5E are spells Divine and Arcane anymore?

[GMforPowergamers]

This came up in the thread about roles. One of the posters said all healing magic was divine, another poster pointed out Bards, who can cast healing with no rules for weather they are arcane or divine spells. I started to think and I read through the book, and none of the spells have a type listed. I just type it out in that thread and will just paste it here...

Cure wound 1st-level evocation
Casting Time: one action
Range: Touch
Components: V&S
Duration: Instant
A creature you touch regains a number of hit points equal to 1d8 + your spellcasting ability modifier. This spell has no effect on undead or constructs.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, the healing increases by 1d8 for each slot level above 1st.

so I then thought about how warlocks and bards both have spells that are not on wizard but are on cleric lists...

so I know wizards and warlocks are arcane casters, and clerics and paladins are Divine, but the spells themselves aren't anymore... inless I missed something...

 

[KarinsDad]

Pretty much that.

 

[Paraxis]

And if you multiclass you can freely use spell slots from either class to cast any known/prepared spell.

So you could be a warlock using the power from the great old ones, to cast your cleric spells for the day or vice versa.
Now I want to see a cleric of knowledge who delved too deep into old forgotten books, adding this npc to my campaign later today.

 

[Sebkha]

Although the spells aren't arcane/divine, they're still differentiated based on which class grants them. So for example the cleric version of Cure Wounds is considered distinct from the bard version of Cure wounds. The only difference the class of a spell makes is that it determines what ability score attacks and saves use. Spell slots aren't tied to class at all.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

so I know wizards and warlocks are arcane casters, and clerics and paladins are Divine, but the spells themselves aren't anymore... inless I missed something...

That's how it worked in 3E and 3.5, as well. An arcane spell is one cast by a wizard or bard, and a divine spell is one cast by a cleric or druid.

Some spells might be de facto arcane or divine, if there's no way for the other side to learn or cast it. From what I remember of the 5E rules, though, they don't even separate casters into arcane and divine. Although, it's late, so I'm not placing high confidence on that recollection.

 

[SirAntoine]

It's nothing short of an attack on the cleric and other priest classes.

 

[Paraxis]

The only person who consistently dips into the "divine" spells is the bard, the others with them are cleric, paladin, druid, ranger. So if you can accept rangers tap into the same magic as druids instead of casting wizard spell like in 1e, and bards are by their very nature jack of all trades, it works out.

I like the fact that bards get raise dead on their spell list along with most of the healing spells, and if you want to smite like a paladin or revivify like like a cleric you can pick those up with magical secrets class ability.

But it does mean that the power over life and death is not solely in the hands of deities/clerics/churches the wandering minstrel can sing a song and use a diamond to bring your loved ones back from the dead.

 

[Prism]

It's nothing short of an attack on the cleric and other priest classes.

Its revenge for the cleric stealing fireball!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

It's nothing short of an attack on the cleric and other priest classes.

what do you mean?

 

[Minigiant]

Spells are just magical effect.

Arcane and Divine (and Psionic) is just the method uses to get them.
With arcane, you create the effect via magic-science.
With divine, the divine being gives you the effect.
With psionic, your mind creates the effect.