Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nonlethal Force" data-source="post: 3491971" data-attributes="member: 35788">True, of course.  However, given that the flavor of an FS is supposed to be even closer to a diety than a cleric ... I do not think KD's argument is a flavor-stretch.  RAW, I agree that it only pertains to the cleric, though.  In the end - all things considered - I agree with KD in that a DM could use the deity to limit spellcasting so long as he's consistant across the board in all cases.As for power, I would argue that FS's are equivalent to the CORE classes.  They're weaker than clerics and probably druids (although I despise wildshaping and am glad people I play with feel similar to it so I don't see them in play all that often).  I think the FS is similar in power to the sorcerer, although a bit weaker due to some MAD but stronger in the save department.  I would consider a FS stronger than a fighter and monk, certainly.  But this is purely opinion, of course.As for the earlier comment about the thaumaturgist build - you are correct that I am allowing the weapon focus/specialization go to waste.  But few character builds that I know of use every tool they are given (outside of clerics who are given casting and turning and that's about it).  It does make for a fun and useful character, and that's what I was after.</blockquote>