Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="irdeggman" data-source="post: 4431819" data-attributes="member: 16285">Arcane - just like a cure light wounds spell scribed by a bard, which can't be used by anyone other than a bard without using the UMD skill.Or as another example - a wizard and a cleric cooperate to create a scroll of heal.  The wizard is the "creator" and thus gives up his xp.  Is the scroll arcane or divine?  The RAW states it is arcane - which means that neither character can use it without using UMD.Unfortuneately not everything in D&D "makes sense" as we have discovered repeatedly when looking at the RAW. That is one of the main reasons for people using house-rules, so that the rules they use make sense to them.And what else is not stated that should remain the same here?You have at least one  reference to warlocks functioning in the arcane world and no references that state otherwise (that they are neither arcane nor divine).  The class is located in the Complete Arcane with supplemental material in the Complete Mage. No reference to them in the Complete Divine or other Divine related books.Note that there is a Prestige Class in the Complete Mage that combines Warlock with a Divine casting class. So the combination is inherently possible and yet that book does not make the not to apply the +1 arcane casting class rules from Complete Arcane to a warlock's invocations - which is something that "logic" dictates they should have done if they had intended for the class to be neither arcane nor divine. (Oh wait that again assumes that everything in the D&D rules makes sense - which we (EnWorlders) have repeatedly pointed out they don't).The only class that is neither arcane nor divine is the artificer and that is a campaign specific class.  Using something written for a specific campaign (that inherently has differences from the generic rules - for example dragonmarks and more specifically use of Action Points) as a basis for a "generic" (as in non-campaign specific) class is more of a shakey basis IMO than applying the "base rules". Or it could mean that it is an arcane class at its core.Correct. And what is the issue that is not written that should be applied here?There is no such thing as a caster that is neither arcane nor divine other than a campaign specific one.  None of the Core nor any of the supplemental books addresses such a case at all.  That is one of the important pieces of evidence to consider.</blockquote>

Verification