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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Plane Sailing" data-source="post: 3447309" data-attributes="member: 114">Funny! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />Nearly right - OD&D had the fighting man, magic user and cleric (thief came in in supplement 1 - Greyhawk). The cleric was a hybrid of fighting man and magic user in a way though (back in those days clerics didn't even get their first spells until 2nd level, and you had to kill a heck of a lot of orcs to make it to 2nd level!)Personally I agree with your premise though - I think that the division between arcane and divine magic is completely unnecessary. I much prefer systems with a single spell list and perhaps different people describe their magic as coming from different sources - so the priest chants, says the holy words and says 'my god sends divine fire from the heavens!", while the wizard chants, says the mystic words and says "I conjure fiery doom by unlocking the arcane wards!".True20 is a nice example of distinguishing between Warrior, Expert and Adept, probably bringing it down to the most basic level of distinction possible in a class-based system.FWIW I think that the most sacred of cows that make something "D&D" are class/level/xps. You could change everything else (even -gasp- hit points!) and still be recognisably D&D as long as you have classes, levels and xps.Cheers</blockquote>

Verification