D&D 5E WHY is there (still) no Class that allows you to use both Arcane and Divine magic...?

[Umbran]

And you have been on this board for what? A year?

And you've been here for what? Fourteen years? And still only 13th level? Fascinating. I'm already 12th level and I've only been here for less than a year. Hmmmm...

Wow. You two still in the schoolyard?

Greg, you should know better.

Chris, for all those levels, you can't seem to grasp the most basic rules of the boards.

We will not tolerate this geektosterone-driven body part sizing. Neither one of you is to post in this thread again.

Next time, people, don't make it personal. Pull this crud again, and you can expect a vacation from the site.

 

[Aldarc]

On the other hand, only a fool tears down a building he has just come across without considering why the building is there and who might be in it.

Change is great! But while foolish traditions shouldn't be followed, it is not only the passage of time that sanctifies; it is the practice.

As I said, "for better or worse," but I don't particularly agree with the spirit your sentiment, and much less how it does often seem to play out in practice. But such a discussion is unfruitful as that is a discussion of preferences and not dogma. Or at least, D&D practices and traditions should not be treated as dogma.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Ashrym]

It's definitely not just tradition. Tradition did give 1e rangers, multiclassing, PrC options in at least one very clear case, bards, and supplements supporting arcane healing. Even some basic spells like vampiric touch or polymorph self allowed arcane healing and wish / limited wish aren't unknown concepts. The tradition comments seem to do nothing except try and finger point a non-issue at "grognards" like any perceived issue no matter how minor should be blamed on on specific group of players simply because as an outdated method of play. It's way off base. The argument given is to allow for 5e to include something from tradition, which it does replicate in it's own ways.

The reason this is a non-issue starts with the fact that arcane vs divine magic doesn't really mean much. The PHB sidebar clearly separated arcane casters as arcane tricksters, bards, eldritch knights, sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards while divine casters are listed as clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers; monk spells are listed as the magic of ki and monks using spells were not listed as arcane or divine. 5e doesn't actually distinguish magic as arcane or divine. Whether a spell is arcane or divine rests solely on the spell caster (not the spell) and the spell caster is only defined in either based on the source of the magic. IE the spell is the same spell regardless of what class cast it or where the power / knowledge to cast the spell in the first place originated. Classes are listed as arcane or divine and not the actual spells. Under 5e mechanics, the OP is simply asking for spells originating from multiple sources.

Arcane vs divine spell casters is flavor and can be completely ignored. The only thing relevant is that classes have their own lists, which is the actual mechanic in play and the OP isn't really asking for mixed magic. He or she is asking for mixed spell lists.

A wizard can go with wish, the philosopher's stone, healer feat, and proficiency in medicine to easily have a healing wizard. The character can also use feats to pick up basic magical healing and multiclassing is definitely a traditional method to mix spell lists, one that was the basis for the mystic there. Aside from the philosopher's stone, most of that applies to warlocks and sorcerers as well.

It's also disingenuous to argue that feats and multiclassing are optional when a DM is more likely to allow rules or exceptions to rules as an enabler of a basic concept for a player instead of willfully denying it arbitrarily. It's an argument requiring an assumption of denial while ignoring the probable approval. DM approval can be assumed both ways as part of the DM role, generally favors anything reasonable, and is as simple as working together discussing the concept.

Aside from any focus towards sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards as examples attempting to demonstrate an issue, it becomes important to look at where the opportunity already exists.

Clerics, druids, and bards are major spell casters who already have the spell list to mix spells in their basic lists. They have direct damage, combat, and utility spells on their lists with no medications. Clerics customize the list via domain spells with several domains applicable to mixing in wizard spells. Land circle druids use a similar feature in circle spells but also have a similar functionality in basic wizard functions, and even replicate arcane renewal with natural renewal. Bards have a very clear mix of cleric, druid, and wizard spell options. Bards customize the spell list via magical secrets instead of domain / circle spells.

The type of mixed spell lists the OP is looking for is obviously available in those three classes. A land circle druid or lore bard fits classic mage tropes very well. Since what the OP is asking can be found it is not an issue. It doesn't matter if a player starts with a druid (divine class) and adds wizard spells via circle or starts as a bard (arcane class) and learns cleric / druid shared spells from the bard list or using magical secrets. The opportunity to mix spell lists clearly exists. Since the opportunity exists in multiple ways, focusing on where it doesn't exist instead of where it does is flawed logic.

Of course, the issue brought up not really being an issue shouldn't prevent some creative creation. Creating a custom class can have it's own merits. ;-)

Ash's 2cp

 

[Quickleaf]

I do like the idea of the themed caster, I've done something kind of similar with an updated 5e Dragonlance mystic and sorcerer using the sorcerer class as the base. I've split the spells up into the various spheres and realms and, although a mystic/sorcerer can choose any spell from each of the spheres/realms (Mystics choose from spheres and sorcerers from realms), there are one or two abilities in the archetype that benefit them focusing on some spells from the same realm over a large amount of diverse spells.

Yeah, a themed caster, that's a good way of describing it. Wolfgang Baur's "path mage", the "domain mage" from Unearthed Arcana, and powers-oriented spellcasting systems (e.g True20) would be similar examples.

I felt that the question in [MENTION=6779993]Elderbrain[/MENTION]'s OP had a glaringly obvious answer (i.e. there are LOTS of ways to play a caster using healing and combat magic, from a bard to multi-classing to feat selection), so I assumed that the question was asking about something deeper. Or I assumed a deeper question because that's the question I wanted to answer

A themed caster does more than what could be possible as a bard, multi-classed character, or a wizard with a feat. And it also goes beyond the rather mechanical mandate of "a class that can use healing and combat magic."

I feel the concept of a class should NEVER be rooted in mechanics, rather it should be rooted in compelling themes, literature, myths, stories, movies, etc.

The basic design precept of a themed caster might be that "even archmages never truly master all magic, so you can be a master of one or two types of magic, a jack of all trades, or something in between."

But it would need to go beyond that to occupy a meaningful design space alongside the PHB classes. So it would need to provide features that were meaningfully distinct from other casters. For example you might include (a) features linked to each spell theme (e.g. the fire theme provides an ability to suppress flames around you), (b) a fatigue mechanic for how it casts spells instead of slots/day OR allow it to cast certain lower level spells repeatedly, (c) improved ritual magic casting, (d) something to do with True Names, etc.

Or maybe it would better fit in a 3-class system (Mage, Rogue, Warrior).

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

Perhaps a distinction between 'arcane' and 'divine' is that divine spells are granted by deities, who fundamentally have a concern with preserving life, or in other words, maintaining and growing their customer base. If deities draw their power from the belief of their followers, the ability to heal/affect people is a key focus. No trees, no people = no people, no deity.

Arcane magic is not concerned so much with people but with the universe. Their magic originates on the material plane and is manipulated by entities (casters) who project that energy outward from themselves out into the world. Divine magic originates from the deity and is channelled into the person of the caster and from thence outward, thus making it inexorably linked to the physical corporeal vessel through which it flows.

Arcane casting is not therefore a reaching within and pulling out, but a reaching out and pushing/pulling around.

If that makes sense. Just a random ponder as to one way of looking at why never the twain in D&D.

In fantasy literature, divine casters are pretty rare. By fantasy lit I mean, 'source' lit as opposed to lit set in the D&D worlds with the baked in game rules assumed. Most fantasy lit casters cast spells. They're the only casters of spells, so all spells can be cast by a person called a wizard, because clerics don't exist, and healing/necromantic magic is useful - thus, the wizard casts it.

What do I know? It's late, I'm out of cigarettes, I am not wearing sunglasses and I'm a very long way from Chicago so I doubt I 'hit' it. But one possible reason.

As to how you can fix it so that wizards can cast all magic, is abolish clerics/Paladins and reassign the cleric spells (possibly involving a few name changes), amongst the schools of wizardry to give an expanded spell selection.

 

[Tony Vargas]

IOW, there is no "arcane magic" vs "divine magic" in 5e D&D. There are just individual classes, each one with its own backstory about why they are capable of spellcasting, and each one with its own spells list.

And some of them (Cleric, Paladin) have traditionally been 'divine' throughout D&D history, and others have been arcane (Wizard, Sorcerer, Warlock).
The Bard, Druid, & Ranger, OTOH, have waffled a bit.

In D&D 5E, the common character concepts can be fully explored through the combination of class (and sub-class) and backgrounds.

Surprisingly well, though I guess it depends on what you consider 'common.' Common-to-genre, maybe not so much, but classic-to-D&D, mostly.

The ever-popular Elven Fighter/Magic-User/Thief, for instance, EK with a Criminal Background.

Starting at first and/or eschewing feats & MCing makes some of them difficult.

The ever-popular 1/2-Elven Fighter/Cleric/Magic-User, for instance, struggles. EK with an Acolyte Background leaves you very light on the Cleric side (not that a 5 level limit didn't do that, too, just not from the get-go).

OTOH, start at 3rd and use MCing, and you can do any old-school character.

Hey all, stop with using tradition as the excuse.

but, but,... we're talking about D&D...

1e had a class with both divine and arcane spell casting in the phb....its called the ranger.

I was wondering if anyone would bring that up. Though whether Druids were/are really 'divine' is debatable. Back in the day, a lot of people tended to run that Druids 'got their power from nature' or some other such tree-hugg'n hippy ideas.