Paul Farquhar
Legend
That’s not what I mean. Even in 1st edition NPCs could have class levels. But the overwhelming majority (99.99% in 1st edition) did not. NPCs might be exceptional too, but most are not.
D&D 5E (2024) WotC Should Make 5.5E Specific Setting
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
That's true. All editions were like that, even 3e which probably had the most NPCs with PC classes in it.
mamba
Legend
and I am going to say you are wrong, there were dwarven clerics, they just disappeared with the other clerics
Daewar Dwarf
The Daewar Dwarves (Dearest) are one of the clans of Dwarves who live in the underground kingdom of Thorbardin. They are known to be fanatical in their chosen pursuits and have the best trained and dedicated army beneath the mountain. They believe that they are the beloved of Reorx and many have...
dragonlance.fandom.com
“The Daewar Dwarves (Dearest) are one of the clans of Dwarves who live in the underground kingdom of Thorbardin. They are known to be fanatical in their chosen pursuits and have the best trained and dedicated army beneath the mountain. They believe that they are the beloved of Reorx and many have become Clerics dedicated to him.”
“When the Gods disappeared after the Cataclysm, the true clerics of the Daewar also disappeared.”
Pretty sure elves had clerics too, if you have gods, you kinda have to have priests and clerics
mamba
Legend
if they look the same in all settings, then there is nothing setting specific about it, that is just D&D, and as D&D changes, so can these things.
Setting specific are things that are unique to the setting, not things that are true in most settings / the PHB or MM
Paul Farquhar
Legend
Dragonlance overlapped into 2nd edition. So gained dwarven clerics. But I believe it was actually Unearthed Arcana that enabled dwarven clerics towards the of 1st edition, and there had been NPC dwarven clerics before that (a hard rule that PCs and NPCs were different).
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
This is from the 1e Dragonlance Adventures book, talking about Lord Soth.and I am going to say you are wrong, there were dwarven clerics, they just disappeared with the other clerics
Daewar Dwarf
The Daewar Dwarves (Dearest) are one of the clans of Dwarves who live in the underground kingdom of Thorbardin. They are known to be fanatical in their chosen pursuits and have the best trained and dedicated army beneath the mountain. They believe that they are the beloved of Reorx and many have...
“The Daewar Dwarves (Dearest) are one of the clans of Dwarves who live in the underground kingdom of Thorbardin. They are known to be fanatical in their chosen pursuits and have the best trained and dedicated army beneath the mountain. They believe that they are the beloved of Reorx and many have become Clerics dedicated to him.”
“When the Gods disappeared after the Cataclysm, the true clerics of the Daewar also disappeared.”
Pretty sure elves had clerics too, if you have gods, you kinda have to have priests and clerics
"Yet waiting for him along the way was a troop of elven clerical women who stopped him."
"His Knights, blind in their obedience to his will, remain with him still as skeleton warriors, the elven clerics reside there as well--banshees who sing each night to the fallen Knight of Solamnia, telling of his fallen and never-ending punishment."
Paul Farquhar
Legend
I seem to recall an elven druid in Dragonlance, which wasn’t in accordance with either core rules or the original setting book.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Yes, the UA has a table that opens up cleric to gray, hill, and mountain dwarves.
Edit: Of course no table I ever played at limited classes the way the 1e PHB did. If an NPC could do it, PCs could do it. That's probably what prompted the UA change.
Hussar
Legend
So, it's your contention that there were dwarven arch mages and elven high priests in the setting, but, they were just never mentioned because of reasons that have nothing to do with the edition for which the material was written? Is that about right? They were always there. Just "off screen" as it were. Always part of the setting, but, having zero impact on events.
And it's entirely coincidental that they start getting mentioned and talked about as soon as they are allowed by the rules. Again, has nothing to do with the mechanics of the game. It's still 100% system agnostic.
That's certainly an interpretation I suppose.
Although, I would repeat my earlier question:
Why are dragons color coded in EVERY D&D setting? Why are dwarves exactly the same in Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms? Why are elves identical? Right down to having the same deity. Totally coincidental I suppose. Again, totally system agnostic. Complete coincidence.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Do you not understand that only a miniscule fraction of the world(every setting ever made), it's cities and its history has been detailed out? The Suloise could have created tens of thousands of Dragonborn and had entire armies of them fighting in their wars. We don't know because their wars have not been detailed out. We only know about the Rain of Colorless Fire and that a great war or wars happened.
No setting will include more than a miniscule fraction of the races, classes, subclasses, prestige classes, feats, monsters, etc. that exist within that setting. It can't include more, because even a full encyclopedia set of information will leave the vast majority of it out. That means dragon people living, dying, and having great historical impacts not being mentioned isn't even unusual.
To answer your question, it's that prime world that is mentioned in the 5e books. The one that broke apart and created all the settings. And it's certain that there are settings out there where dragons are not color coded, because players have done that, and those settings are also part of that multiversal break up.
