Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 8393472" data-attributes="member: 92511">Oh, that's a HARD no, here. Rangers? No spells (just skills and learning). Paladins? No spells (just channel/be granted divine powers). Warlocks? No spells! Really. They &quot;receive&quot; powers from their patron...which may include a few spells. But they aren't spending their time researching and learning and training with things. The patron tells them what to do and &quot;gives&quot; them magic to do it. But they are more or less built around supernatural abilities from supernatural beings. They really don't need/shouldn't have a dependency on spell use.Or Sorcerers!! They have innate magic that is just a part of them/resulting from their origins. They just have magic to use/turn into a few [thematically related] &quot;At will&quot; powers...some of which can be shaped and changed (metamagics) into spells/spell-like abilities. But they, also, aren't spending time (necessarily, by D&amp;D's formation/archetype of the class) researching and learning and training with things. They just &quot;have magic&quot; they figure out how to work with more and more easily.So, either Sorcerer OR Warlocks should be removed as &quot;spell-dependent arcane magic-user&quot; of any substantial progression.Barbarians? No magic!!! So, no, abso-tively not, 6e should NOT make spells the ubiquitous way to incorporate supernatural abilities (which, imho, Barbarians and Rangers need not have, regardless) into all classes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 8393472, member: 92511"] Oh, that's a HARD no, here. Rangers? No spells (just skills and learning). Paladins? No spells (just channel/be granted divine powers). Warlocks? No spells! Really. They "receive" powers from their patron...which may include a few spells. But they aren't spending their time researching and learning and training with things. The patron tells them what to do and "gives" them magic to do it. But they are more or less built around supernatural abilities from supernatural beings. They really don't need/shouldn't have a dependency on spell use. Or Sorcerers!! They have innate magic that is just a part of them/resulting from their origins. They just have magic to use/turn into a few [thematically related] "At will" powers...some of which can be shaped and changed (metamagics) into spells/spell-like abilities. But they, also, aren't spending time (necessarily, by D&D's formation/archetype of the class) researching and learning and training with things. They just "have magic" they figure out how to work with more and more easily. So, either Sorcerer OR Warlocks should be removed as "spell-dependent arcane magic-user" of any substantial progression. Barbarians? No magic!!! So, no, abso-tively not, 6e should NOT make spells the ubiquitous way to incorporate supernatural abilities (which, imho, Barbarians and Rangers need not have, regardless) into all classes. [/QUOTE]

Verification