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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ciaran" data-source="post: 731866" data-attributes="member: 756">Azzemmell wants to run a game without divine magic, and is asking for help in doing so.  Telling him that you don't like the idea doesn't do him any good.I'm planning to run a game without divine magic at some point, so I've put some thought into the idea.  I'd simply incorporate healing magics into the arcane repertoire; this makes wizards more flexible, but since they have to sacrifice other spell slots to make room for healing, I don't think that it increases their power level significantly.  Certainly they won't tread on the toes of the clerics, since there are no clerics in the setting.  Convenient, eh?  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />As to the proposed Devotee feat, I think that it defeats the purpose of the whole exercise.  Putting that in simply allows for a kind of "divine" magic under another name.  If you want to differentiate priestly magic from arcane magic, then domain spells don't really help; you're still using spells.  Try checking out the Swashbuckling Adventures rulebook; there's no divine magic in the setting, but there are rules for miracles and faith-based powers.The advantage to removing "divine" magic entirely is that you gain access to a whole slew of morally grey plotlines, such as church corruption, that are very difficult to accomplish in a standard D&D setting without complicated workarounds.  Here, "priestly" magic is just the work of wizards who happen to be pious members of a church, and you can't assume that any powerful churchman in a "good" church will be a good guy (or a Secretly Disguised Potent Villain) that you can rely on for help without question.- Eric</blockquote>

Verification