Spelljammer Dark Sun confirmed? Or, the mysterious case of the dissappearing Spelljammer article...

[Parmandur]

that is daft just let people defile whenever, as making it a subclass makes it so it is every setting problem.

That's how they've said they would handle it.

 

[Parmandur]

The actual rules don't exist, but it is referred to in the 5e DMG as a category of magic. Arcane magic defiles.

While I like the idea of limiting warlocks to being the new templar class, I don't think you would need to ban bards or sorcerers at all. What I would do is create a defiling effect for any casting of arcane magic. End of story there. Then I would build in a static XP penalty or perhaps require feats to be taken in order to preserve that could be applied to any arcane casting class.

Static XP penalties are not really something I see wWotC doing as they move away from XP.

Mearls did caveat that he would put in a sidebar of "Hey, maybe your character is the only Bard on your Athas, work it out at your table," but was speaking to how WotC would formally present the Setting (similar.to what theybdid with the Magic Settings).

 

[Mind of tempest]

That's how they've said they would handle it.

it is a terrible idea to use a subclass when it does not make the mechanic work, defieing magic should be a temptation not a subclass.

Static XP penalties are not really something I see wWotC doing as they move away from XP.

Mearls did caveat that he would put in a sidebar of "Hey, maybe your character is the only Bard on your Athas, work it out at your table," but was speaking to how WotC would formally present the Setting (similar.to what theybdid with the Magic Settings).

that is a more practical idea.

 

[Parmandur]

it is a terrible idea to use a subclass when it does not make the mechanic work, defieing magic should be a temptation not a subclass.

that is a more practical idea.

Based on their current design trends, a Feat chain based kn Background seems probable.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Based on their current design trends, a Feat chain based kn Background seems probable.

better than a sub-class but the temptation would be far more evocative and show how easy it is to start the road to ruin.

 

[Parmandur]

better than a sub-class but the temptation would be far more evocative and show how easy it is to start the road to ruin.

Yeah, just...don't get your hopes up.

 

[Maxperson]

Static XP penalties are not really something I see wWotC doing as they move away from XP.

Mearls did caveat that he would put in a sidebar of "Hey, maybe your character is the only Bard on your Athas, work it out at your table," but was speaking to how WotC would formally present the Setting (similar.to what theybdid with the Magic Settings).

Then a background feat spent at 1st and 4th level to enable preserving would be a decent cost.

As for bards, they're basically a different flavor of wizards/sorcerers that uses music in their casting. I don't see a need to change them or make PCs unique. They'd receive the same stigma any other arcane caster would and have to hide who they are. They'd defile if they didn't take the preserving background feats. And so on.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Mechanic. Every last spell cast by an arcane caster is an arcane spell. Every last spell cast by a divine caster is a divine spell.

What is an arcane caster? By what mechanic can we know them?

If it’s just arcane and divine as presented via class, as you claim, every class that can use a wand would talk about arcane magic, surely? Yet, I just searched the writeup for Bards, and the word never appears. Edit: oops, bards can’t use wands, after all.

Finally, feats which grant spell use do not allow you to use Spellcasting focus items to cast the granted spells. Because the ability to use them is a class feature, not a general rule.

 

[Maxperson]

What is an arcane caster? By what mechanic can we know them?

Anyone who casts arcane spells. And you don't need a general mechanic to know them. Which classes they are are told to you, and we have other mechanics that interact with the most story categories of arcane magic and divine magic.

If it’s just arcane and divine as presented via class, as you claim, every class that can use a wand would talk about arcane magic, surely? Yet, I just searched the writeup for Bards, and the word never appears.

It's not. The categories are listed in the magic section of the PHB. The classes just specify(for the most part) which of those categories an individual class appears. For bards, they are included as an arcane caster in the magic section of the PHB.

Finally, feats which grant spell use do not allow you to use Spellcasting focus items to cast the granted spells. Because the ability to use them is a class feature, not a general rule.

1) feats are optional rules. 2) feats are an explicit example of specific beats general. 3) feats can be taken by any class and therefore would not include knowledge of HOW to use an arcane focus.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Crawford says that there is no general rule for arcane or divine magic. The "moatly" is pointing towards the Class specific rules that gesture towards the narrative, though those are themselves riddled with exceptions.

You may bot be aware of this, but Arcane and Divine used to he hard distinctions baked into the Spells themselves, that had a lot.of universal rule applications regarding things like wearing armor and Spell failure. That is all gone.

Yeah, I really liked that distinction.