Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6920838" data-attributes="member: 92511">So, I'm re-re-rewriting my World of Orea RPG for my World of Orea campaign setting.(Yes, I'm the Bob's Burgers of game/setting design)The fighters are the fighters. The mages are the mages [wizards/&quot;magic-users&quot;]. The Thieves are the thieves/rogues, &quot;Supports through Skill.&quot; The Clerics, insofar as my vision of what the &quot;default Priest category&quot; class is supposed to be, is the general &quot;Support&quot; class. The &quot;hold your own -or better- in a fight and hold your own -or better- when dealing with magic/supernatural threats.&quot;With that in mind, and a little homage/harkening back to Basic's clerics not getting spells until 2nd level, would it be...disruptive, I guess, to people's expectations or immersion to hold off &quot;Spellcasting/Divine Magic&quot; until, say 3rd level. The idea is making &quot;Channel Divinity&quot; the first level/initial power. Limited effects - turn undead, detect evil, etc... Limited uses. But still &quot;magical powers&quot; to kind of build up your &quot;divine energy cred&quot;, prove your devotion, so to speak. Then, the spells come in at 3rd level (as if you were a 1st level cleric, btb) and progress as expected.So, your &quot;core big four&quot; class defaults are the fighter being the &quot;full on weapons&quot; guy. The mage being the &quot;full on magic guy.&quot; The cleric being the &quot;part weapons, part magic guy&quot; [with variations on those parts depending on the focus of the deity/order in question] and the thief stays the &quot;full on skills,&quot; or &quot;part weapons, part skills&quot; depending on how you like your rogues. Is that too big a paradigm change from D&amp;D's (and derivatives) Cleric = &quot;full caster [progession] of divine magic&quot; or do people think it could work? Not just the mechanics, I mean. That's obviously easy and doable. But would the flavor be off-putting? Is not being able to cast spells at 1st level somehow going to &quot;ruin&quot; the cleric?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 6920838, member: 92511"] So, I'm re-re-rewriting my World of Orea RPG for my World of Orea campaign setting. (Yes, I'm the Bob's Burgers of game/setting design) The fighters are the fighters. The mages are the mages [wizards/"magic-users"]. The Thieves are the thieves/rogues, "Supports through Skill." The Clerics, insofar as my vision of what the "default Priest category" class is supposed to be, is the general "Support" class. The "hold your own -or better- in a fight and hold your own -or better- when dealing with magic/supernatural threats." With that in mind, and a little homage/harkening back to Basic's clerics not getting spells until 2nd level, would it be...disruptive, I guess, to people's expectations or immersion to hold off "Spellcasting/Divine Magic" until, say 3rd level. The idea is making "Channel Divinity" the first level/initial power. Limited effects - turn undead, detect evil, etc... Limited uses. But still "magical powers" to kind of build up your "divine energy cred", prove your devotion, so to speak. Then, the spells come in at 3rd level (as if you were a 1st level cleric, btb) and progress as expected. So, your "core big four" class defaults are the fighter being the "full on weapons" guy. The mage being the "full on magic guy." The cleric being the "part weapons, part magic guy" [with variations on those parts depending on the focus of the deity/order in question] and the thief stays the "full on skills," or "part weapons, part skills" depending on how you like your rogues. Is that too big a paradigm change from D&D's (and derivatives) Cleric = "full caster [progession] of divine magic" or do people think it could work? Not just the mechanics, I mean. That's obviously easy and doable. But would the flavor be off-putting? Is not being able to cast spells at 1st level somehow going to "ruin" the cleric? [/QUOTE]

Verification