The Illusionist: Class, Background or Theme?

[Kobold Avenger]

It hasn't been a class for the last 3 editions, so I don't think that will change in this next edition.

 

[steeldragons]

We know, however, that your spell list and basic resource management come from class not theme. If illusionists are to have a different spell list made for a different resource management system, it needs its own class.

Uh, no. I don't think so.

They have the same "resource management system" (by which I assume you mean the spell slots) as the Class, Mage. Why/how does that mandate a separate class to use a different spell list (which would be part of their Theme)?

 

[steeldragons]

I thought Chromatic Orb was an Evocation?

Like one of the few that was actually worth having.

Chromatic Orb was an Illuionist spell introduced in the 1e Unearthed Arcana. 1st level spell...random chance of the effect (depending on the color which the caster had no control over).

I wouldn't be surprised if it were affiliated as an "Evocation" since it was bringing energy into being...prolly the forefather of the gods awful "acid orb" and "ice orb" and/or whatever other "[insert energy type] orb."

But just cuz one is an Illusionist was not (at the time) the same as saying "I can't use Evocations". In fact, I would p[ose, to those without the former knowlege, that you could have spells that would, on their surface, be from multiple schools...but still be specific to a certain type of mage/wizard.

 

[Hussar]

We know, however, that your spell list and basic resource management come from class not theme. If illusionists are to have a different spell list made for a different resource management system, it needs its own class.

Different spell list? Naw, that can be handled by theme. I mean, it's not that hard to list different spells for a theme. Kits in 2e did it all the time.

Different resource management system? Yup, that would be a class. If illusionists used the Shadowcaster system from the 3e Tome of Magic, for example, it would be a new class.

OTOH, if Illusionist just means that you gain some spells earlier (maybe all illusion spells are treated as 1 spell level lower) or gain some serious oomph on those illusions (saving throw penalties/attack bonuses, possibility that all his illusions can actually animate and attack for some damage - that sort of thing), then you can cover it in a theme.

Anything you can summarize in about half a page should be a theme. If it's longer, then it's a class.

 

[Leatherhead]

Chromatic Orb was an Illuionist spell introduced in the 1e Unearthed Arcana.

Didn't know about the 1e Chromatic Orb. That's why I was so confused.

But I do know that the [energy type] Orbs are conjuration, which is the main reason everyone hates them.

 

[Oni]

I think that the pertinent question about whether something could be a theme or background is this - does it make sense for any class to have that as a background or theme? If it doesn't , then it shouldn't be a background or theme.

For me, a commoner illusionist rogue, or an illusionist guardian fighter don't seem to make sense, so I'd go for class.


Cheers

Really, why not?

Couldn't someone have been a commoner before becoming an illusionist, or a a runaway apprentice who took up soldiering? I mean isn't that what a background is, what you were before?