How different should Arcane and Divine magic be?

[Slife]

I'd be all for getting rid of the distinction, myself. If I wanted more distinction now, I'd get rid of clerical spells and replace them with rituals that granted long-duration continued effects.

In previous campaigns, I've made the distinction a simple roleplaying one: you could never multiclass an arcane casting class with a divine casting class. The differences between the two approaches were so fundamentally different and oppossed to each other that it was simply impossible. The divine caster says 'Thy will be done' and the arcane caster says 'My will be done'.

But my character is so narcissistic he worships himself!!!111eleven

 

[DamnedChoir]

I definitely like this idea of the Cleric as a Divine Leader with Charisma, buffs, auras, healing, like the Paladin.

But Unlike the Paladin, the Cleric is focused much more on powers and healing. It's an awesome idea...it's too bad my inner cynic thinks that that's not what's going to be happening in 4E

 

[Arkhandus]

Not that my opinion matters, 'specially with my rabid, burning hatred of 4E (and its total disrespect toward gnomes, even moreso!), but I'd prefer just a moderately wider distinction between arcane and divine magic than has existed so far in current/previous editions of D&D. I don't think they should be combined (it's a D&Dism! and it's not like it's a disruptive one), but I don't think they should be totally different in core D&D either.

 

[Gloombunny]

Flavortext.

(ie, they shouldn't be different at all in mechanical terms)

This viewpoint baffles me. I can understand liking games where a player can build her own suite of magical effects with whatever flavor she wants, like HERO or something, but to have a magic system as... specific as D&D's, but use that system for multiple very different fluff backgrounds... I just don't get it. Why is that a good thing?

 

[lukelightning]

I'd prefer the "no spells for clerics, it's miracle working instead." Sure, there should be some transparency to it, but the divine caster archetype normally doesn't cast spells, he/she invokes the power of their deity/religion. In my thinking, all cleric spells in 3e should have been evocation, as they are evoking (or rather, invocing) the power of their religion.

Is suppose there would be some religions that are different, the practitioners themselves are taught secret magic spells, etc. that are independent of a faith/prayer framework. However I would rather treat those practitioners as wizards in a magico-religious tradition.

I'd be all for getting rid of the distinction, myself. If I wanted more distinction now, I'd get rid of clerical spells and replace them with rituals that granted long-duration continued effects.

I'd be for this, but a cleric does not necessarily have to be restricted to ritual/long term magic. There is certainly a place for powers like "Save me baby Chthulhu! Save me!" that are basically "instant prayers."

 

[EricNoah]

They should either be really, really distinct, or the distinction shouldn't exist at all. As a DM I happen to like just pulling any spell/power from any source to use with NPC cultists, weird monsters, etc.

 

[GreatLemur]

Quite happy to agree with the thread majority, here: If we're going to make any distinction at all--and, in my book, even having a Cleric class is a distinction--it should be a much more significant one than we've seen previously. Spell-casting holy men are one of those blatant D&Disms that never sat right with me, and I'd much rather see a system for divine power that isn't just spells cast while waving a holy symbol.

...But, on the other hand, I could just as happily scrap the Cleric all together, put healing spells on the Wizard's list, and reserve any actual miracle-working for the occasional NPC prophet or avatar.

 

[Mallus]

I can understand liking games where a player can build her own suite of magical effects with whatever flavor she wants, like HERO or something

That's my preference. I'm currently playing in a M&M 2e game where I run the Egyptian God of Mexican Wrestlers, and have 'wrestling moves' like the Cheops Drop, which drops a modestly-sized pyramid on foes.

...but to have a magic system as... specific as D&D's, but use that system for multiple very different fluff backgrounds... I just don't get it. Why is that a good thing?

See, I don't think D&D really has a 'magic system'. It's got a laundry list of spells divided into arbitrary categories. What I like to do when I DM is to give each spellcasting class (or even player) access to a particular subset of the spell lists which suits their PC's theme.

For example, a PC priest of the 'Goddess of Storms and Piracy' would get destructive air/water/lightening spells, regardless of what list they came from.

 

[Lord Zack]

I think they should be distinct. As different from Arcane Magic as Psionics and Incarnum are. Cleric Powers should be known as Miracles, not Spells.

 

[lukelightning]

I'm currently playing in a M&M 2e game where I run the Egyptian God of Mexican Wrestlers...

That is all kinds of win. Maybe he can do a tag team with my superhero character, Harmadillo.