Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MoonSong" data-source="post: 6200033" data-attributes="member: 6689464">I'm not a fan of placing classes on these kind of silos, but that aside I believe You have it backwards with the wizard equating him with "the archetypal wizard" because it isn't, the D&D wizard is a poor fit for the two most cited examples of wizards, as they are more accurately described as sorcerers with a mix of a traditional druid (Gandalf was an angel, Merlin was the scion of a demon, even if we go back to the Odisea, Circe was a minor goddess, none of them were specially thought of as extremely smart, Gandalf and Merlin were Wise, and Circe was as cunning as imposing). In my view if we were to have this system, the wizard would be only a feat track available to sorcerers warlocks bards and druids. A similar thing happens with the cleric, the cleric is the Templar, the crusader, the vampire hunter, so would be obtainable by applying a martial feat track to a more general priest class. Also I would pick archetypes by "what you are" instead of a "what you do". In this view we would have: The "witch" species(sorcerer), The worshiper(cleric, shugenja, warlock, witch inquisitor), The tradition keeper (bard, druid, wu jen),  The saint/champion (paladin, oracle, favored soul, Healer), The hunter/commando (ranger), The warrior (Barbarian, Fighter, cavalier) , the scholar (Magic-user, alchemist), the mystic (monk, psion) and the rogue</blockquote>