D&D without the Cleric

[harperscout]

As soon as I am out of work tonight I will get the xls sheet posted. Thanks for the feedback.

ARandomGod - You have a point here. We divided them up because we thought of them as positive vs. negative energy and less about the notion of necromacy as a whole sphere. I would say that we aren't saying that you don't know one side or the other, we are saying that a caster chooses to practice only one side and not the other. With that laid out there, would you still think we should combine them?

 

[mirivor]

Very cool. I am anxious to see the results. I have often wanted to do this, but just didn't know exactly how to go about doing it. I look forward to seeing your sheet.

Later!

 

[ARandomGod]

As soon as I am out of work tonight I will get the xls sheet posted. Thanks for the feedback.

ARandomGod - You have a point here. We divided them up because we thought of them as positive vs. negative energy and less about the notion of necromacy as a whole sphere. I would say that we aren't saying that you don't know one side or the other, we are saying that a caster chooses to practice only one side and not the other. With that laid out there, would you still think we should combine them?

I personally would combine them. For two reasons... firstly, I admit, because I like the feel. Secondly because that would give "life mages" some offensive power. I do think that conceptually most 'cleric' scholars aren't very likely to use the 'dark side' of the power, they aren't likely to learn death magics. However death mages are very likely to learn life magics, because they're so utilitarian. And I think that some of the better spell concepts simply must be a combination of life and death. Curing disease simply must also be killing that disease. It's not like you're catching it and releasing it into a more begnin area where it "won't harm anyone". And if you ARE< that's better read as "won't harm anyone I care about", and an offensive spell in it's own right!

(Edit, three reasons. Existing "death magic" spells are very few compared to other schools of magic, leaving a death specialist to have to do spell research. Something I've encountered with necromancy specialists in 3.X)

I've read lots of fantasy, and the ones where those two spheres are combined are definitely more fun.

Of course, looking at all the schools... you said originally 11, let's assume 10 with this combined... That's 8 schools still in. I think I'd further the limitation to three spheres unknown. So you could know 7 out of 10, that's still 70% of the spells out there (theoretically, assuming all type have equal representation, which if you're using RAW they clearly don't...)

But that's a secondary and cosmetic type change, and I suppose depends a little on what bonuses you're giving the specialist school. However I think giving up 30% of the spell range is more along what specialist wizards in 3.X generally do.

What about only giving up 2, but having an advanced specialization for giving up one more spell school? But I'm digressing into side thoughts. ... Yes, I would strongly recommend you combine death and life magics into one sphere.

 

[engrishonly]

How about Vitality points & Wound points versus the homogenized Hit point system?

The necessity to "heal" wound damage would require miraculous intervention... but being clear about Vitality points as non-wounding, and the ability to regenerate Vitality much quicker and more believable pace than homogenized Hit points - I think this can make Clerics go bye bye.

Vitality-based healing can be accomplished by non-Priestly spells, IMO.

"True healing"... curing diseases, mending wounds. That should be reserved for true miracles. (This is how I imagine the original Dragonlance setting).

Looking at d20/OGL books that don't have Clerics in them can help give some ideas. (In my ideal universe, I'd also dump spells and go more with skill-based & mana-based magic like the Star Wars d20 Force system.)

 

[harperscout]

I am hoping that I add the attachment correctly this time. For those of you who wanted to see how we had broken down the spells into Spheres.

ARandomGod - I see what you are saying about the Necromacy sphere. Once you take a look at the document attached, maybe you can give me some more feedback. Something that this design doesn't prevent is taking both the life and death spheres. there is nothing in this build that prevents that. For some casters, it would make perfect sense to take both, for others, it won't... it will all depend on what the player feels he wants to see the character become.

Moving forward, please give me your feedback on what you see in the spell lists. We are planning on designating certian spheres for the minor spell casting classes.

Wizard: All wizards must be specialists, they may specialize in one sphere, and be barred from two others of their choice. They gain access to all the spheres of their chosing at the beginning of the game.

Sorcerers: All Sorcerers begin play with 3 spheres of their choice, every 4 levels there after they gain access to another sphere, they may gain access up to 8 spheres.

Bards: Bards will be limited to 3 spheres, which they will begin play with. We aren't sure if it will be 3 spheres and if that is the magic number, which 3 those will be.

Rangers: Rangers will be limited to 1 or 2 spheres and may even be able to choose which sphere they have access to from X number of spheres. On a positive note, their spell casting will be shifted upward. Rangers will begin play casting spells. We are just going to shift their progression so they max out spells 4 levels earlier.

Paladins: Paladins will be limited to 1 or 2 spheres and may even be able to choose which sphere they have access to from X number of spheres. On a positive note, their spell casting will be shifted upward. Paladins will begin play casting spells. We are just going to shift their progression so they max out spells 4 levels earlier.

Druids: Druids won't change much. Progression will likely stay the same, and we will give them a number of spheres that they may choose 3 or 4 from.

Clerics: Cut from the list. Any class will be able to become a Priest/Priestess and will have a feat tree that they may follow to further develop their Priestly abilities.

Let me add a bit of a disclaimer as well: I cannot take full credit for any of this. A friend of mine who may or may not have seen this post yet is what really precipitated us getting on this track. I just wanted to make sure I give credit where credit is due.

Finally: Thanks for all the feedback guys and feel free to give me bad marks if you think this is all heading in the wrong direction.

R

 

[Nyaricus]

oh crap the crapping crappers, i don't have Excel. Do you perhaps have this in a word doc?? (please please please say you do!)

Thanks

 

[Aus_Snow]

Hey, Nyaricus: Hope this helps. It's 10 megs, I know. But still.

 

[Nyaricus]

Aus Snow, thanks so much man. All i had the chance to do was DL Excel, so this "magic sphere system" will have to be looked at tomorrow. Thanks for watching my back you'd make a wicked rogue in my D&D game, lmao.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Aus Snow, thanks so much man. All i had the chance to do was DL Excel, so this "magic sphere system" will have to be looked at tomorrow. Thanks for watching my back you'd make a wicked rogue in my D&D game, lmao.

Rogue eh?

 

[harperscout]

Nyaricus - Did you get it all straight?