D&D General Using interchangeable power sources for the Sorcerer, Warlock, Paladin and more. (+)

[DEFCON 1]

Honestly i think it’s kind of detrimental to the best potential DnD experience people can have that there is such an emphasis on ‘playing exactly by the books’ rather than making their own things, not to say everyone should be making up rules or content or doing whatever they just want to do arbitrarily just because they can, but just things like you said, just creating a custom spell list to fit a character concept rather than trying to awkwardly cobble together bits and pieces from classes and feats all over the place that never really end up fitting together how you really wanted them to.

It's also just creating players who are perpetually upset. They want the game to match their expectations and thus be able to say "I'm playing by RAW"... but get unnecessarily bent out of shape when WotC won't design the game in the way they want it.

For me it's always been simple-- if I don't care how something plays, I'll just use what WotC has given me in the rulebooks. It's easy, it's written down, and my players have easy reference to it. But if I DO care how something plays (and the rules as written don't give me what I want) I will adjust said rules myself so that I can play the game how I prefer right from the start.

Other people, however, seem to just want to sit and stew in their own anger, waiting/expecting for WotC to eventually get around to making the changes they want. And I'll never understand those people.

 

[cbwjm]

If I'm understanding this correctly, it sounds similar to PF2e's primal, arcane, divine, and eldritch (or occult, I always forget the name of this one) which I think is a better way of defining the overarching magic schools, but since my friends and I use dndbeyond, I don't think we'll ever move to this sort of grouping.

I actually had a thought about this very thing the other day. I was imagining a cleric that was a cultist of a demon lord using the warlock spell list instead of the cleric list.

 

[CreamCloud0]

If I'm understanding this correctly, it sounds similar to PF2e's primal, arcane, divine, and eldritch (or occult, I always forget the name of this one) which I think is a better way of defining the overarching magic schools, but since my friends and I use dndbeyond, I don't think we'll ever move to this sort of grouping.

I actually had a thought about this very thing the other day. I was imagining a cleric that was a cultist of a demon lord using the warlock spell list instead of the cleric list.

Oh really? Does PF2e do anything interesting with it or is it just variable spell lists like what I described here more or less?

 

[CreamCloud0]

I’m curious if anyone has any or has had played any previous characters who would’ve fit their concept much better using this hypothetical mechanic than what they would be able to build using the character creation RAW? The original character I mentioned in the first post was going to be ‘the child stolen by the fey and replaced’ being released from the realm of the fey grown up, who bargained their freedom by becoming a warlock in service to the faerie queen, now the archfey pact is great and all but the warlock spell list lacks that really nature-y vibe the druid list has that i was looking for and multiclassing just wouldn’t of been the same.

 

[jgsugden]

We already mix the streams. Celestial Warlocks? Got em. Divine Sorcerers? Yup. Arcane Clerics? Yes. Nature/druidic Paladins? Yes. The concept is there already. You're just taking the guard rails off the designs.

The only character ideas I have not been able to manifest in 5E are psionic in nature. However, my psionic ideas are a bit different than where psionics have been evolving over the editions, so I am a bit out of luck, there. Beyond that, every idea I have for a character I can map to either a single or multiclass concept. A lot of the gish ideas end up on a bard build. Some of them require reskinning.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

We already mix the streams. Celestial Warlocks? Got em. Divine Sorcerers? Yup. Arcane Clerics? Yes. Nature/druidic Paladins? Yes. The concept is there already. You're just taking the guard rails off the designs.

since new sorcerer bonus spells have the ability to swap of those spells at each level... I would love for fey locks to be able to trade for Druid spells

 

[CreamCloud0]

We already mix the streams. Celestial Warlocks? Got em. Divine Sorcerers? Yup. Arcane Clerics? Yes. Nature/druidic Paladins? Yes. The concept is there already. You're just taking the guard rails off the designs.

The only character ideas I have not been able to manifest in 5E are psionic in nature. However, my psionic ideas are a bit different than where psionics have been evolving over the editions, so I am a bit out of luck, there. Beyond that, every idea I have for a character I can map to either a single or multiclass concept. A lot of the gish ideas end up on a bard build. Some of them require reskinning.

That’s great if you can make satisfying manifestations of your character concepts with the current systems (sorry about psionics though) but some people might feel differently and if they do I’d like to hear their thoughts.

Personally while I haven’t seen much stuff outside of the basic PHB material i notice with that within it it tends to only give you a small limited access dip into manifesting alternative concepts that ‘cross the streams’ and i like having more build choices to use to make my character as accurate to the concept in my head, maybe I wouldn’t be saying this if I’d seen more material, but maybe I still would be too.

 

[cbwjm]

Oh really? Does PF2e do anything interesting with it or is it just variable spell lists like what I described here more or less?

Just variable spell lists. Most classes are locked into one of them, but the sorcerer can end up with a different spell list based on their bloodline.