Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7615820" data-attributes="member: 996">… said no D&D player, ever.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />OK, maybe not none, ever, but, relatively few, and even fewer who have ever been frustrated in that ambition, since the traditional Cleric was the perfect fusion of utter necessity (only source of CLW @1st level, old-school undead encounters assumed Turning and were overwhelming without it) and complete lack of appeal (mace-wielding, pseudo-Christian, Van Helsing?)....And, Source was a keyword, so you couldn't(shouldn't?) really re-skin it.  A point of Dark Sun was no Gods, and you could excise the Divine Source from 4e without the devastating repercussions of traditional D&D sans the all-important Cleric.  Ardents & Warlords could admirably fill the leader role for any Dark Sun party.  No need of Clerics (or Shamans or Veiled Society Bards or Defiler Artificers, though that last might be interesting, very Mad Max...) That was one of the real strengths of Source/Role, if a setting didn't call for a given Source, you could still have functional parties (the exception, of course, being Martial-only, which lacked Controller coverage - though Controller was arguably the most dispensable role).</blockquote>