NOW LIVE! Sickness and Health: New diseases for your 5E game!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cadence" data-source="post: 8300524" data-attributes="member: 6701124">One of the things that I keep stumbling over is how the magic classifies in terms of source/flavor/type/usefulness, etc... and that the English language is horrible at distinguishing because all of the words were used interchangeably for so long. I like [USER=63508]@Minigiant[/USER] 's thoughts above and go down that route a bit below.Trying to separate them,  I wonder if one main categorizations isn't Arcane/Divine from past editions, but rather:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Incantation - the casting of spells and working of magic directly without individual intervention of a spirit/higher power - e.g. Wizards and Sorcerers.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Invocation - the casting of spells and working of magic requires the intervention of a spirit/higher power for that individual spell - Cleric spells level 3+ in 1e.  It feels like theurgy, some forms of witchcraft, maybe Vance's later wizards, and some implementations of shaman fall here.</li> </ul>[ATTACH=full]138129[/ATTACH]Within the invocation part is how they began to get those spells:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Training - anyone can do it (some Wizards; did Mouser just pick it up by being trained?)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Spark - it takes a special gift to do it, like some Wizards (Harry Potter) or Sorcerers</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Imbued - the spark was lit by someone, like Necromancers in 5e</li> </ul>Is there any use going down this rabbit hole?</blockquote>

Verification