Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 8351646" data-attributes="member: 87792">This is always a huge problem. Roughly 40% of the PHB of every edition except 4e is made up of spells, and if we're tearing out the D&amp;D magic system and starting from scratch we're down to fighters, rogues, barbarians, and monks (and even there not every subclass).Using a &quot;least changes&quot; approach we need our casters to have very limited spell lists by D&amp;D standards. Fortunately there are four candidates; the Sorcerer, the Warlock, the Ranger, and the Artificer. Alkemi are Artificer (Alchemist)s, end of story. I'm not sure about durasts - but they should hack the Artificer rules.The Corporalki and Etherialki on the other hand need a vastly pruned spell list and to work out whether they are primarily warriors/skill users (i.e. hacked ranger + subclass), mostly casters (sorcerer) or casters with spammy tricks (warlocks with custom invocation list)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 8351646, member: 87792"] This is always a huge problem. Roughly 40% of the PHB of every edition except 4e is made up of spells, and if we're tearing out the D&D magic system and starting from scratch we're down to fighters, rogues, barbarians, and monks (and even there not every subclass). Using a "least changes" approach we need our casters to have very limited spell lists by D&D standards. Fortunately there are four candidates; the Sorcerer, the Warlock, the Ranger, and the Artificer. Alkemi are Artificer (Alchemist)s, end of story. I'm not sure about durasts - but they should hack the Artificer rules. The Corporalki and Etherialki on the other hand need a vastly pruned spell list and to work out whether they are primarily warriors/skill users (i.e. hacked ranger + subclass), mostly casters (sorcerer) or casters with spammy tricks (warlocks with custom invocation list) [/QUOTE]

Verification