D&D General The Crab Bucket Fallacy

[Neonchameleon]

Technically you can't be a cleric of Cthulhu or any GOO in D&D.

On the other hand I believe you can be both cleric and GOO warlock of Thuruzdun. The question is legit

 

[Minigiant]

On the other hand I believe you can be both cleric and GOO warlock of Thuruzdun. The question is legit

Gods can make clerics and warlocks.
Patrons can only make warlocks

 

[Neonchameleon]

So a hermit priest of Pelor is a warlock, not a cleric?

He's a priest, therefore invested.

Why does what sort of organisation you belong affect the metaphysics of your magic?

Because of the filtering involved.

That's not good enough for me, that's the issue.

Get used to disappointment.

Then why their magic works completely differntly then? At most I'd imagine this resulting warlock hawing slightly more personalised spelllist compared to the cleric.

Why at most?

Why?

Filtering through church and more standardised deals with some of the rough edges.

But those methods are similar to the other classes.

And an oak is genetically more similar to a dandelion than a redwood.

Sure, if you interpret sorcerer broadly enough, i.e. "has magic somehow." But that's really not what sorcerers are about, they're about intuitive innate magic that is part of their being.

You're changing tack now the actual fluff was pointed out. And wizard magic is part of them - rather than given by an outside like warlocks or clerics, or being primal. All study changes is how they made it part of them.

Practical questions should be informed by the underlying concepts that the mechnics are attempting to represent.

But literally none of your questions are practical. The practical questions are the what. The questions you are asking are theoretical whys.

If you don't know what you're even trying to represent the end result will be incoherent.

You mean like biology taxonomy in the real world. Where fish are incoherent? What you are representing is a window into a world more complex than one person can imagine. The practical questions are answered by the mechanics.

Yes they do. Rapidly recharging magic and always-on magical powers both represent an innately magical being better than the little unique mechanics that the sorcerers have.

No they don't. An innately magical being is one that actively needs to use their own energy which means that they recharge slowly. Fast recharging magic and always on magical powers represent a connection to a power source that is far far bigger than the one person can ever have which is why it refills so fast. It's like drinking from a firehose.

You could do that. But you'd need to add the spellbook and scroll learning.

Which is why you make the wizard a subclass which has a scroll as its big thing.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

No they don't. An innately magical being is one that actively needs to use their own energy which means that they recharge slowly. Fast recharging magic and always on magical powers represent a connection to a power source that is far far bigger than the one person can ever have which is why it refills so fast. It's like drinking from a firehose.

Then why just the warlock has this quality? Wouldn't by this logic all divine casters have this rapidly recharging magic as their magic comes from even bigger hose, the gods?

Basically my issue is that your interpretation makes the warlock metaphysically extremely similar to the cleric, yet they are mechanically pretty much as different than two casters in 5e can be. I think that is a bad fluff to rules conversion.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Sounds like we're circling "two classes: Hero, Mage"

 

[Neonchameleon]

Then why just the warlock has this quality? Wouldn't by this logic all divine casters have this rapidly recharging magic as their magic comes from even bigger hose, the gods?

Filtering. The warlock is drinking directly from the stream, the cleric is getting things filtered through the church for much slower flowing and more controllable waters.

Basically my issue is that your interpretation makes the warlock metaphysically extremely similar to the cleric, yet they are mechanically pretty much as different than two casters in 5e can be. I think that is a bad fluff to rules conversion.

And as I'm pointing out things that in one way are alike can be exceptionally different in nature.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

@Neonchameleon OK, I think this has gone on for long enough. Agree to disagree I guess.

 

[Micah Sweet]

As a subclass of sorcerer. Take away the tedious "you get this random thing like dice manipulation tricks" subclasses.

Why not make sorcerer a subclass of wizard? It has just as much of actually happening in WotC D&D.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Why not make sorcerer a subclass of wizard? It has just as much of actually happening in WotC D&D.

Mechanically every single sorcerer subclass has something different going on (even if the early ones are painfully weak). The sorcerer is using its subclass spaces, and it's very hard to confuse an Aberrant Mind with a Divine Soul in play. Meanwhile the wizard isn't so much and the subclasses basically just give a wizard-gimmick rather than shaping how the class plays. You don't lose much if you drop the wizard subclasses while you do if you drop the sorcerer subclasses.

Thematically the wizard gets their power from books and learning - while where the sorcerer gets their power from is different for each subclass. So you can make a wizard "the sorcerer who gets their power from books" - but can't do this the other way round.

So both mechanically and thematically there's only one way this can go.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Mechanically every single sorcerer subclass has something different going on (even if the early ones are painfully weak). The sorcerer is using its subclass spaces, and it's very hard to confuse an Aberrant Mind with a Divine Soul in play. Meanwhile the wizard isn't so much and the subclasses basically just give a wizard-gimmick rather than shaping how the class plays. You don't lose much if you drop the wizard subclasses while you do if you drop the sorcerer subclasses.

Thematically the wizard gets their power from books and learning - while where the sorcerer gets their power from is different for each subclass. So you can make a wizard "the sorcerer who gets their power from books" - but can't do this the other way round.

So both mechanically and thematically there's only one way this can go.

I look forward to seeing your homebrew sorcerer subclass wizard then.