Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What Would Your Perfect 50th PHB Class List Be?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 8420115" data-attributes="member: 92511"><p>I rather like the idea of splitting up some, or even most, spell specialties to the different arcane classes...</p><p></p><p>I mean, if it were up to me, there wouldn't be so many to begin with, but that's never going to happen, now. So, here we are.</p><p></p><p>Wizards[Mages] are the masters of magic. They can figure out/use all the items. They can make the items. They can use just about any kind/"school" of spell [I would say, ritual also, even nature and divine ones] to some extent and some, even several, to a great extent. But, for the most part, the [most popular/best storied] specialist mages/caster types excel in other areas. </p><p></p><p>I think it's the Wizards that have the drive and intellect and, for some, madness/obsession to pursue the understanding and mastery of the secrets and powers of the multiverse. I think class options, a generalist is necessary and really should be...eight of ten wizards you encounter. The other types that are strong enough, both in D&D history and fantasy tropes, are the Illusionist and Necromancer, for sure. Conjurers seem pretty well established. Abjurers, then, I feel would both be a) a natural -as a foil to conjurers, but also just plain usefulness in a world where harmful magics abound- and b) has gotten short shrift for several editions. As I said, what is it you need magic for, most of the time? To go up against other magic. Whether that is to assist your fellows directly somehow or to cancel/thwart/mitigate harmful effects. The Abjurer, I feel, is a focal Wizard/Mage archetype that rarely gets its due (and the editions, for the most part, have not bothered to address at all. Though 5e does much better.). </p><p></p><p>Warlocks are cheaters, basically. Being given/granted powers and instruction, spoon-fed, to do with what they like. I second the association that this should be, predominantly the "emo-broody" casters guys. But I think it doesn't have to be entirely limited to necro and conjurations. The thing about the 5e warlocks with their patrons is very flavorful stuff and I think there is room to, at least, have two or three kinda of "emo-broodiness." </p><p></p><p>The gothy dark fear/darkness casters, sure. That's an established archetype. Hell, most "evil" casters in lit and pop culture are really these kinds of guys, versus actual mages or sorcerers (as D&D defines them) in their own right. But there's room for the Fae patron warlocks. If you want to talk emo or broody, or bright and bubbly, a fae patron with all of the machinations and intrigue they love to engage in is the way to go. Let them have the illusions and enchantments as good as -or at least to rival- an Illusionist [mage] or fae-descended "sorcerer." </p><p></p><p>Genies? I think there's some good stuff there to be mined. Being elementally tied to the element of their genie patron, some conjurations. Maybe even rival a fully "elementalist" type of sorcerer. So, I think there's room for a warlock to be more than just the necromancer/diabolist black leather and buckles guy. Though they are fun.</p><p></p><p>Sorcerers are just plain..."lucky," if not spoiled. The magic is just there, for them to play with. Fate. Genetics. Flukes of luck or rando super-magic experiences and POOF! They have/get magic. It's just given to them. They exist solely to give some new mechanic WotC decided they wanted in their D&D a place to live. I do think this class should be wiped clean, again, down to 3 or 4 options -maybe 6, tops- versus "any creature that exists anywhere that has/uses magic can make a sorcerer subclass..." The elemental/blaster association seems appropriate for this class -raw energies that need "figuring out," learning/manifesting control on your own, regardless of a spellbook or "imbued" understanding/power from a patron. </p><p></p><p>But where your "origin" comes from isn't really entirely relevant...or, at least, not in the intergral story angle that 5e tries to make it. Is daddy a dragon? Some ancient ancestor was cursed/blessed by an arch-lich-hag? Or you fell into a pond while a nixie was pissing in it?...Does it matter? No. What matters is what/which kind of magic you get to work with. Which element your magic is based around and, then, what other magics and supernatural powers might be associated with that element (I'd just go for the straight up classical and Tarot elemental associations) is what's important for the character's features. </p><p></p><p>Bards, to me, are [and should only be] primarily druidic and enchantment casters with some illusions, abjuring, and healing, and should be no more than half-casters. So I won't bother addressing them.</p><p></p><p>I do think/like the idea that the "specialist schools" could be something that any arcane caster could pursue. Why not a sorcerer necromancer or a warlock necromancer (the natural, perhaps) or Mage-Necromancer? It's just different practices/approaches to learning to produce the same magical effect. </p><p></p><p>Each specialist needs it's own spell list. Hands down. Should there be illusion spells in the "general" arcane spell list? <em>Disguise Self, Invisibility, Mirror Image</em>. Sure. A few useful "basics." But <em>Hypnotic Pattern, Phantasmal Killer, Shadow Magic/Monsters/Summoning</em>? Nuh-no. That's the Illusionist's beat. Whether that illusionist learned it apprenticing for a mentor illusionist or deciphers a dead illusionist's grimoire they found, had a fae grandmother, or made a pact with a djinn or ancient brass dragon, doesn't make them any more or less an "Illusionist" if those are the spells/powers they use/have/pursue.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 8420115, member: 92511"] I rather like the idea of splitting up some, or even most, spell specialties to the different arcane classes... I mean, if it were up to me, there wouldn't be so many to begin with, but that's never going to happen, now. So, here we are. Wizards[Mages] are the masters of magic. They can figure out/use all the items. They can make the items. They can use just about any kind/"school" of spell [I would say, ritual also, even nature and divine ones] to some extent and some, even several, to a great extent. But, for the most part, the [most popular/best storied] specialist mages/caster types excel in other areas. I think it's the Wizards that have the drive and intellect and, for some, madness/obsession to pursue the understanding and mastery of the secrets and powers of the multiverse. I think class options, a generalist is necessary and really should be...eight of ten wizards you encounter. The other types that are strong enough, both in D&D history and fantasy tropes, are the Illusionist and Necromancer, for sure. Conjurers seem pretty well established. Abjurers, then, I feel would both be a) a natural -as a foil to conjurers, but also just plain usefulness in a world where harmful magics abound- and b) has gotten short shrift for several editions. As I said, what is it you need magic for, most of the time? To go up against other magic. Whether that is to assist your fellows directly somehow or to cancel/thwart/mitigate harmful effects. The Abjurer, I feel, is a focal Wizard/Mage archetype that rarely gets its due (and the editions, for the most part, have not bothered to address at all. Though 5e does much better.). Warlocks are cheaters, basically. Being given/granted powers and instruction, spoon-fed, to do with what they like. I second the association that this should be, predominantly the "emo-broody" casters guys. But I think it doesn't have to be entirely limited to necro and conjurations. The thing about the 5e warlocks with their patrons is very flavorful stuff and I think there is room to, at least, have two or three kinda of "emo-broodiness." The gothy dark fear/darkness casters, sure. That's an established archetype. Hell, most "evil" casters in lit and pop culture are really these kinds of guys, versus actual mages or sorcerers (as D&D defines them) in their own right. But there's room for the Fae patron warlocks. If you want to talk emo or broody, or bright and bubbly, a fae patron with all of the machinations and intrigue they love to engage in is the way to go. Let them have the illusions and enchantments as good as -or at least to rival- an Illusionist [mage] or fae-descended "sorcerer." Genies? I think there's some good stuff there to be mined. Being elementally tied to the element of their genie patron, some conjurations. Maybe even rival a fully "elementalist" type of sorcerer. So, I think there's room for a warlock to be more than just the necromancer/diabolist black leather and buckles guy. Though they are fun. Sorcerers are just plain..."lucky," if not spoiled. The magic is just there, for them to play with. Fate. Genetics. Flukes of luck or rando super-magic experiences and POOF! They have/get magic. It's just given to them. They exist solely to give some new mechanic WotC decided they wanted in their D&D a place to live. I do think this class should be wiped clean, again, down to 3 or 4 options -maybe 6, tops- versus "any creature that exists anywhere that has/uses magic can make a sorcerer subclass..." The elemental/blaster association seems appropriate for this class -raw energies that need "figuring out," learning/manifesting control on your own, regardless of a spellbook or "imbued" understanding/power from a patron. But where your "origin" comes from isn't really entirely relevant...or, at least, not in the intergral story angle that 5e tries to make it. Is daddy a dragon? Some ancient ancestor was cursed/blessed by an arch-lich-hag? Or you fell into a pond while a nixie was pissing in it?...Does it matter? No. What matters is what/which kind of magic you get to work with. Which element your magic is based around and, then, what other magics and supernatural powers might be associated with that element (I'd just go for the straight up classical and Tarot elemental associations) is what's important for the character's features. Bards, to me, are [and should only be] primarily druidic and enchantment casters with some illusions, abjuring, and healing, and should be no more than half-casters. So I won't bother addressing them. I do think/like the idea that the "specialist schools" could be something that any arcane caster could pursue. Why not a sorcerer necromancer or a warlock necromancer (the natural, perhaps) or Mage-Necromancer? It's just different practices/approaches to learning to produce the same magical effect. Each specialist needs it's own spell list. Hands down. Should there be illusion spells in the "general" arcane spell list? [I]Disguise Self, Invisibility, Mirror Image[/I]. Sure. A few useful "basics." But [I]Hypnotic Pattern, Phantasmal Killer, Shadow Magic/Monsters/Summoning[/I]? Nuh-no. That's the Illusionist's beat. Whether that illusionist learned it apprenticing for a mentor illusionist or deciphers a dead illusionist's grimoire they found, had a fae grandmother, or made a pact with a djinn or ancient brass dragon, doesn't make them any more or less an "Illusionist" if those are the spells/powers they use/have/pursue. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What Would Your Perfect 50th PHB Class List Be?
Top