Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Yaarel" data-source="post: 8727639" data-attributes="member: 58172">If beholden to 2e mechanics, then the classes are unambiguous:2e = 5eCleric = ClericTemplar = Cleric (!)Druid = DruidDefiler = WizardPreserver = WizardDragon = Wizard/PsionAvangion = Wizard/PsionBut 5e isnt 2e. 2e mechanics is a blunt instrument. 5e has more nuanced options, and can probably do a better job of 2e Dark Sun than 2e can.There is much interpretive leeway.In my reading, the Cleric reveres the "elemental plane", not any particular elemental. Obviously, the Cleric can form alliances and understandings with powerful elementals, but the Cleric spells need not depend on them.Oppositely, the Druids form personal relationships with various "spirits of the land". These "spirits" are actually "geographic features", like a particular mountain (earth) or an oasis (water). The Druids and elementals become a community, sometimes even a family. The Druid protects them, and viceversa.I see • 5e Clerics whose cosmic powers are elements and positivity.• 5e Druids of Land, Wildfire, Moon, and maybe new circles.I am torn about Templar. Cleric, Paladin, and Warlock are good choices. With regard to mechanics, Paladin feels the best choice. With regard to flavor, Warlock feels the best choice. Cleric is a solid choice. The Templar wields Negative magic, but can heal. Cleric works, but the Templar is a bit more of a brute than a Cleric typically is. Paladin is great muscle. But flavorwise, a self-serving Warlock who both despises and ass-kisses the sorcerer-king is spot on. But if a Warlock, it would need to swap the spell list with the Cleric spell list, including healing and so on.The spells need to be divine, because the sorcerer-king pretends to be a god. It is a thing.Part of the 2e flavor is, the Templar is dependent on the sorcerer-king for divine spells. The sorcerer-king can and does deny the Templar spells, to prove who the boss is, and sadistically. But this arbitrary denial of character features is bad form in 5e, because it can feel violating or abusive. (Which in this case, of course, it is!)To roleplay this kind of relationship, I would rather the player character features be off-limits to the DM. Instead: for a player who wants to play a Templar, the sorcerer-king gives one an impressive magic item − that the player can become dependent on, and that the sorcerer-king can turn off at will.For the sorcerer-king, the Sorcerer class didnt exist in 2e. The sorcerer-king is a Wizard. Moreover, the setting themes of the destruction of the natural environment, requires the "magic" to be technological, artificial, and exploitative. It is definitely "wizardly" magic. Sorcerous magic feels to natural. It might be possible to flavor reflavor the Sorcerer as a humanoid who uses magi-tech to artificially transmogrify ones own body, by means of magi-tech, into a draconic Monstrosity. The higher the level, the more monstrous. The Sorcerer spell list seems spot on.With the appropriate reflavoring rewriting the classes from scratch:Preserver = WizardDefiler = Sorcerer</blockquote>

Verification