Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 3265123" data-attributes="member: 19675">Although you're absolutely correct in your instincts on one level- much of Kalevala magic is based in "songs of power"- Bard wouldn't really have captured the flavor (though the KoK Spellsinger might, or possibly the ToM Binder). He is stealthy & mobile, but more in the woodsman sense.  The skills & weapon list should be more akin to that of the ranger- like the heroes of the Kalevala, he is supposed to be largely self-sufficient, able to survive in the wilderness all alone if he has to.  A mighty warrior as well as spellcaster.  Had it not been for the Player's Option book, the likely build would have been Rgr/Cleric/MU, though that would not have been ideal (mainly because the PC would have too many spells that are too flashy).As for the arcane/divine split, most people in our group- myself among them- don't consider the divide to be trivial. That's kind of judgemental.  Give me a try- I might surprise you.That was not the concept, that was translating the concept into game terms.  The concept was (as I stated):To expand upon that, the PC was more or less on a "missionary" trip- exploring the warmer climes south of his people's territory, seeking knowledge of culture and science- anything to improve things for his village...and because of his youth, adventure along the way.  IF your DM allows the use of alternative rules or lets you customize things, which is not guaranteed.In point of fact, most of the DMs in our group do not use alternative rules, do not tweek classes.  Even on those occasions when we can use books beyond the core, we don't get to use classes beyond those in the PHB.(I'm one of 2 exceptions to this, but I'm not interested in running this as an NPC.) Which, as we both point out, involves a lot of customizations and HRs that are not Core, thus may not be available, which was my initial point: (emphasis mine)Furthermore, since you weren't there, you don't know: I asked to have certain abilities (like the tracking, Move silently, and Hide) limited to wilderness environs, but the DM refused.The "shopping list of abilities" reflected the aspects common to many characters of Finno-Russian legends- powerful in battle, capable of singing great songs of power (in game terms, both arcane & divine).  Its an animist type of magic, reflected more in classes like the OA or KoK Shaman than the PHB cleric.Not as flexible as the Spheres in 2Ed Players Option. While you're right, and the PO rules weren't perfect, access to Abjuration by a cleric wasn't anywhere near game-breaking.The failure of PO in this regard was that, unlike the way Spheres were handled- the better/more powerful the Sphere, the more it cost, so that Minor access (no spell higher than 3rd) to Combat or Healing cost as much as Major access (full access) to Guardian or Travelers*- all schools of wizardry were priced identically.  Divination or Abjuration would cost as much as Evocation or Conjuration.* Pricing was based upon a combination of the power of the individual spells and the absolute number of spells within the Sphere- some only had a few spells over 3rd level.That would be a 3.X version of Player's Option- which I, for one, would support.It sold 4 hardcover books in 2Ed, I don't see why it wouldn't work for 3.X.Instead of new base classes and PrCls, each supplement would present new options and how they would be priced for each class.++++Re: Paladins Well, full BAB, for one.</blockquote>

Verification