Yea, like my vigilante idea will almost certainly identify more as a sorceress or something else, but the dual identity thing plays in very well with my concept of someone experimented-into-magic, and who can actually fight.
Dungeons and Dragons Megathread
- Thread starter Havocfett
- Start date
Yea, like my vigilante idea will almost certainly identify more as a sorceress or something else, but the dual identity thing plays in very well with my concept of someone experimented-into-magic, and who can actually fight.
FaeGlade Plural
Semper Legens
- Location
- Land of Bureaucracy
- Pronouns
- Plural/They
I agree - a lot of classes will exist as in-universe descriptions for people.
But they can also just be mechanical building blocks for a character.
I mean, there's certainly going to be, say, Druids in most worlds.
As in "people who commune with the land and animals, and cast magic and are friends with animals".
Or as in "members of a certain religion/philosophy, who tend to have some of those abilities".
You'll have clerics - "priests who get to perform miracles in the name of their deities".
"Wizard" is a good term for "has learned magic through studying".
People might differentiate between Witches and Shamans and Oracles too, at least some of them
And in some cases, all of those above terms aren't clear-cut anyway.
The Hunter-class from Pathfinder can easily be mistaken for a Druid, and can indeed easily be members of a Druidic order (they don't speak druidic, but eh that can be fixed). The same goes for the Ranger-class.
The same goes for Inquisitors and Clerics - to most people, they'd be interchangeable. But you can also have an Omnyoji-Spiritualist as pretty indistinguishable from a Cleric, and if you can cast the right typically divine spells you'll likely fall into that category as well (heck, Pathfinder even has a whole church of Sorcerers pretending to be Clerics).
And of course that's really only magical classes so far. They do tend to have distinguishable power sources attached to them after all.
Mundane classes?
People will have all sorts of names for all sorts of professions. Mundane classes demonstrate nicely that you really don't have to use class-names in-universe. I think it's good to apply the same to magical classes as well.
So there'll be Wizards.
But there'll also be Illusionists - which mechanically are also Mesmerists and Illusion-focussed Sorcerers and some Bards.
There'll be Summoners or Callers or such - not just members of the Summoner-class, but also Spiritualists and Shamans and Wizards and Sorcerers and even Clerics.
There'll be healers and seers, and they'll belong to all sorts of classes (really anyone with the right spells).
There'll be Herbalists which are Alchemists and Investigators, but also Witches and Clerics and even some Rogues with Craft (Alchemy) and Profession (Herbalism).
And so on and so forth.
But they can also just be mechanical building blocks for a character.
I mean, there's certainly going to be, say, Druids in most worlds.
As in "people who commune with the land and animals, and cast magic and are friends with animals".
Or as in "members of a certain religion/philosophy, who tend to have some of those abilities".
You'll have clerics - "priests who get to perform miracles in the name of their deities".
"Wizard" is a good term for "has learned magic through studying".
People might differentiate between Witches and Shamans and Oracles too, at least some of them
And in some cases, all of those above terms aren't clear-cut anyway.
The Hunter-class from Pathfinder can easily be mistaken for a Druid, and can indeed easily be members of a Druidic order (they don't speak druidic, but eh that can be fixed). The same goes for the Ranger-class.
The same goes for Inquisitors and Clerics - to most people, they'd be interchangeable. But you can also have an Omnyoji-Spiritualist as pretty indistinguishable from a Cleric, and if you can cast the right typically divine spells you'll likely fall into that category as well (heck, Pathfinder even has a whole church of Sorcerers pretending to be Clerics).
And of course that's really only magical classes so far. They do tend to have distinguishable power sources attached to them after all.
Mundane classes?
People will have all sorts of names for all sorts of professions. Mundane classes demonstrate nicely that you really don't have to use class-names in-universe. I think it's good to apply the same to magical classes as well.
So there'll be Wizards.
But there'll also be Illusionists - which mechanically are also Mesmerists and Illusion-focussed Sorcerers and some Bards.
There'll be Summoners or Callers or such - not just members of the Summoner-class, but also Spiritualists and Shamans and Wizards and Sorcerers and even Clerics.
There'll be healers and seers, and they'll belong to all sorts of classes (really anyone with the right spells).
There'll be Herbalists which are Alchemists and Investigators, but also Witches and Clerics and even some Rogues with Craft (Alchemy) and Profession (Herbalism).
And so on and so forth.
- Location
- Somewhere
Oracles can be differentiated, because as soon as they gain magic powers, a magical, incurable curse seems to follow them around. That would probably be one of the easier classes to identify in universe, along with Clerics (divine symbol things for casting) and Druids (the whole rules against certain types of material and ability to just influence animals).
But yeah, Hunters and certain flavors of Rangers would get lumped with Druid, or whatever in universe term is used, while more urban Rangers are probably lumped with Maguses and other spell casting fighting type people. Eldritch Soldier/Knight is probably a good term, even in universe, for that type of character.
Warlocks, Pathfinder Witches, and other things that get their magic from pacts are going to be some of the hardest to identify, since they will usually not be the most open practitioners of magic. They most likely self identify with a type of casting, and then put on the appearance of it, most likely sorcerer or wizard.
But yeah, Hunters and certain flavors of Rangers would get lumped with Druid, or whatever in universe term is used, while more urban Rangers are probably lumped with Maguses and other spell casting fighting type people. Eldritch Soldier/Knight is probably a good term, even in universe, for that type of character.
Warlocks, Pathfinder Witches, and other things that get their magic from pacts are going to be some of the hardest to identify, since they will usually not be the most open practitioners of magic. They most likely self identify with a type of casting, and then put on the appearance of it, most likely sorcerer or wizard.
And no-one calls experts 'experts.' Even if they use the word, it's just a modifier, like "expert smith," "this builder is an expert, etc.". Tradespeople is probably the most common catchall, I'd think.
Adepts are most often called (some other spellcasting term). Hedge-wizard not too rarely, but wizards and sorcerers get called that too.
Commoners get called commoners, but so do most non-commoners!
Heh, that'd be fun to play with.
"I need you to defeat this band of commoners who's been causing trouble, they've been burning businesses and threatening nobles with extortion- even the ones who took many in during the goblin raids!"
"Right-o! Quick work."
*Gets butt kicked*
"Why didn't you say they were capable warriors and had magic users??"
"Because they're low-born!"
Adepts are most often called (some other spellcasting term). Hedge-wizard not too rarely, but wizards and sorcerers get called that too.
Commoners get called commoners, but so do most non-commoners!
Heh, that'd be fun to play with.
"I need you to defeat this band of commoners who's been causing trouble, they've been burning businesses and threatening nobles with extortion- even the ones who took many in during the goblin raids!"
"Right-o! Quick work."
*Gets butt kicked*
"Why didn't you say they were capable warriors and had magic users??"
"Because they're low-born!"
Chloe Sullivan
Subdefective
- Location
- 1630 Revello Drive, Sunnydale CA
That is true, although fighter is much more generic than wizard.
Your world also assumes no one ever invented names for people that learned and practiced magic in similar manners. Do physicists and chemists use their name interchangeably, despite studying different things? Likewise, shouldn't the same apply in DnD? Not necessarily the words used in classes, but someone at some point is going to come up with categories for people that get magic from their blood (Sorcerers) vs. people who have to spend years studying books (Wizards) vs. people who just pray and something gives them spells.
I do agree that class names are not always correct. No one is going to call their profession "Fighter," but someone from a Nordic style area would probably call themselves a Skald if they are that class (and also probably if not that class, although being a good Skald requires some Bard or Skald levels).
A Vigilante, conversely, will probably not refer to themselves that way, since their costumed identity often wants to add legitimacy to their actions, while their social identity is probably willing to distance themselves from the masked crime fighter and thus would call themselves a Vigilante.
Class name being an in universe thing is perfectly logical in some situations, while silly in others, like Anti-Paladin and Rogues are never going to call themselves that. But at the same time, someone in universe had to come up with a term to differentiate people who got magic from different things.
Haven't gotten to argue DnD metaphysics in a while, thanks for your time
You're thinking like a PF fan, and not like a 339er. Which is fine, I don't expect people to think like 339ers, but it means you are making assumptions that are very PF. Those assumptions are not the assumptions I work off of.
classes are entirely metagame. people multiclass, and it doesn't actually require they make any change in character. If you want tp tell tour story that way you can say you're using the same magic you have been using, even if for book keeping, your charsheet says both "incarnum" and "psionics." No one else can see your charsheet, and who is to say that your own mahic works any way but the way you say it does?
Chullivan D&D worlds don't have guys who go out into the woods and commune with nature to become a Druid. They have guys who go out into the woods and commune with nature to become a "druid," but that's mechanically represented by Totemist2/Ardent10/Soul Manifester 8 or Formbound Surger5/Anyform Savant 10/Phenotype Impresionist5, or etc. Or you can actually be a Druid based build, but that's just a happy coincidence in nomenclature.
Your powerset determines if you're Thor or Ironman, but the mechanical method you use to get there is entirely opaque. Both Thor and Iron Man can be using the Ravaged Soul class to provide powers that thematically resonate with and allow them to perform the feats of Thor and Iron Man. Or Thor can be a Dragonfire Adept while Iron Man is a Formbound Spiritist.
Nothing says Iron Man has to be an Artificer or even mechanically be wearing armor. You can represent the suit using a suite (lol) of approrpiate powers.
Class agnostic can be hard for people used to playing Mideval Tolkeinesque to wrap their minds around, but well, thay's just how I roll.
Protip: Never invite me to one of your D&D Campaigns. I'm the sort of player who'd roll a Cleric of Ilmater with more Con and Str than Wis who only fights bare-handed and invests points heavily in stuff like Diplomacy and Heal.
You're invited, you just may not want to come since my D&D games are themed as Post-apocalyptic high tech soceties in recovery, not crapsack psuedo-medieval settings that makes no sense if caster evers bother to try and make life better for their countymen.
Also, I push people to play Alternate Magic Systems, so there is no way to play a Cleric of ilmater. you could play a priest, but you wouldn't be a Cleric.
- Location
- Somewhere
I was more referring to how in universe, magic comes from different sources and works different ways, so people will have categories for magic users that all get magic in similar ways. Like if you magic comes from your bloodline, meaning you don't have to pray, weren't cursed, and don't have to study, then you aren't going to be called the same thing as a person who has to study magic extensively to even be able to cast relatively minor spells.
If all of those get spells, in universe, the same way, and all cast in similar manners, then there is going to be a name for them for people to understand and lump them together.
I mean, if you houserule that it doesn't matter how a class states they gain spells, you can flavor it any way you want, then yeah, a name based on a class makes less sense. But saying that your character can cast spells without studying a book, even if your character sheet says you have to study a spell book, is kind of breaking the rules and screwing any attempt at power balance. Like, if a wizard 10 character just says "Oh, I wake up and know spells in the morning, cause my god gives it to me," that is apowerful upgrade to class powerlevel.
If those classes have rules for how their spell casting works, but people just ignore it, then yeah, there's no point in a name since the universe stops making rational sense. (Note, I don't know those classes, and google wasn't giving me any helpful links to anything but the Formbound Spiritist).
Even if flavoring abilities is allowed, I still prefer that things work in similar manners, and thus even if the classes are different, there will still only be a handful of ways to get magic, thus people will still be connected by a name for how they get magic (or claim to get magic).
This just seems silly to me. How do you even have balance then? I want to play a wizard, but I want to flavor it like a Cleric, can I just sleep and wake up with any wizard spell I want? That's hilariously overpowered. Why would anyone ever play anything, arcane or psionic, that didn't just get abilities like a Cleric then? Since it's all flavor?
I mean, even in DnD 2e, you still had to be a specific type of character to level up. Like a Druid couldn't take more than 14 levels without becoming the leader of all druids, IIRC. And Fighters after a certain level became literal lords of estates, and their class name in universe changed to reflect that.
Also, I'm not saying that if you are a Wizard, you will call yourself a "Wizard," I'm saying that in universe, if a bunch of people have to read a book to get spells, they will be called something. Likewise with people that seem to have magic voice powers that come out through performances. Etc.
- Location
- Drachyench on Discord
Oh, I have no problem with that. I'm just saying that I'm the type of person who might be told "Your stat spread is terrible, your class would be sub-optimal even optimized - and it clearly hasn't been - , and in a no holds barred fight you'd be lucky to do anything noteworthy before we even start scaling encounters for later-play" and respond with "Yes, and? Oh yeah I forgot to mention I used my free feat to take Bar Fighting so my Ilmateri Cleric can do 1d4 Damage with my fists. Would it be impossible to house-rule non-lethal damage in?"
Also, there'll be names even if the characters themselves often lie about which ones they are and stuff.
To put it another way, people'll make categories, which may or may not always fall onto class lines, right?
Chloe Sullivan
Subdefective
- Location
- 1630 Revello Drive, Sunnydale CA
@The Imperator, i at no point said anyone gets to ignore any mechanical rules. you still have to follow all the rules for the classes you use, but you can reflavor them.
The only difference between "i cast my Teleport Spell" and "I energize the teleportation module in my armor" is in how you describe things.
it's kinda like how in Mage the Ascension a Hermetic casting Fireball and a Technocrat firing a Plasma Gun are mechanically doing the same thing.
Player A's Binder is a shaman who describes all his vestige powers as abolities granted by ancestral spirits who posses him to lend him their aid.
Player B's Egoist is also a shaman, and she describes all her psionic powers as abilities granted by ancestral spirits who posses her to lend her their aid.
This is all fine.
The only difference between "i cast my Teleport Spell" and "I energize the teleportation module in my armor" is in how you describe things.
it's kinda like how in Mage the Ascension a Hermetic casting Fireball and a Technocrat firing a Plasma Gun are mechanically doing the same thing.
Player A's Binder is a shaman who describes all his vestige powers as abolities granted by ancestral spirits who posses him to lend him their aid.
Player B's Egoist is also a shaman, and she describes all her psionic powers as abilities granted by ancestral spirits who posses her to lend her their aid.
This is all fine.
Last edited:
Mithrandir
Endurance and victory!
- Location
- Lighting the Blue Beacons.
Hmm. Well, my thoughts for the Binder would kind of rely heavily on houserules. There would be two possible differences.
The first was that instead of using the given vestiges, he'd leech off the prestige given to local legends and historical figures, essentially changing the powers given to him as he changes countries/areas.
The other was to create vestiges based off actual fictional characters.
Any problems?
- Location
- Somewhere
I mean, that makes sense to me, and I understand what you mean now.
That wasn't what I was saying though, I was saying that, in universe, if a group of people all cast the same way, then they are going to have a name for them. Regardless of how the mechanics define things.
But then that means that Wizards are always wizards. They get their spells from their spell book, and can't reflavor that, since anything else would be changing how they worked as a class. Sure, reading spells from something else that's not a book works, but that's still within the realm of a wizard having to learn spells and write them down.
They can't be given spells from a God, because the wizard has to read his spell to prepare it, it's clearly not a god giving him that power, since gods give power all the time and don't make you read each individual spell you need to prepare. They also have to mechanically write down spells on a certain number of pages per spell level, and spell books can only be a certain length, and it costs X gold per spell, etc. Wizards are hard to reflavor anything without breaking them, since many of their flavor stuff is tied into mechanics stuff.
But regardless of my pedantic wizard argument, I see what you're saying. I do have a slightly different opinion, in that I often encourage players to play to the class and not just change how something works (in flavor), although some fudging is allowed. It's just weird to me to be like "Yeah, this character is actually a technology guy, despite me choosing druid who take penalties when having metal items and such." It's just odd to me to have someone want to play a Druid while playing the opposite of a druid.
AuraTwilight
The Sorcerer of Smiles
- Location
- The Silver City
I am the insane cat lady who caravans with a shitload of cats. Each cat knows a spell, and through petting, playing with, feeding, and grooming my kitties, I can prepare the spells they represent. Learning new spells means befriending new kitties.
The costs for writing spells is procuring toys, treats, etc. to befriend the kitties. Since they are my precious spell kitties, I will of course, never ever let them fight.
Chloe Sullivan
Subdefective
- Location
- 1630 Revello Drive, Sunnydale CA
this can be done with just reflavoring. which is not only allowed, but expected.
this on the other hand is homebrewing. which is pretty fraught. I'm leery about that because most peopel are not good at it.
anyway, i think i've basically made a callback to this old post of mine, which makes everything in D&D sci-fi.
If any post deserves a meow rating, it's this one!
Chloe Sullivan
Subdefective
- Location
- 1630 Revello Drive, Sunnydale CA
This is awesome, can i steal this idea?
Like, if you wanted to re-flavor a Wizard into a power-from-god character, you'd simply make the spellbook into a holy book. Different feel, but doesn't affect balance.
There's a number of options, but, yea, no-one's going to top AuraTwilight's cat herd spellcasting.
Hm, I still have the issue that I'm totally down for avoid high-tier classes for reasons of balance and such, but I don't like point-pool systems for my characters, neither incarnum nor psionics appeal to me.
There's a number of options, but, yea, no-one's going to top AuraTwilight's cat herd spellcasting.
Hm, I still have the issue that I'm totally down for avoid high-tier classes for reasons of balance and such, but I don't like point-pool systems for my characters, neither incarnum nor psionics appeal to me.
Last edited:
Come play 2e with usssss!
Chloe Sullivan
Subdefective
- Location
- 1630 Revello Drive, Sunnydale CA
It is kinda a class of it's own.
How do you feel about cooldowns?
Tome of Battle and Pact Magic do that.
- Location
- Somewhere
That fundamentally alters wizards in a harmful way, though. Because now you have a constant upkeep cost, making the class now incredibly sub-optimal bordering on unplayable
Also, how will you keep track of literally dozens of cats in any feasible, playable way?
Like, how does the mechanics of that work? How do you keep all the cats near you? Do they listen to you? If so, how do you keep them out of harms way during fights? It just raises too many questions
AuraTwilight
The Sorcerer of Smiles
- Location
- The Silver City
By all means. My group shares your philosophy of "Customize alllll your flavor!" so the current party in my campaign also has a Muscle Wizard.
It functions exactly the same, but his spells are prepared into his muscles and the spells known are stored in muscle memory. Costs for learning spells is just taking supps and using training equipment. Physical ability scores are pumped only for roleplay so he can punch people for contact spells.
Even though both are Pact-based one uses magic powers the way that an Outsider or Fey would and the other is obviously casting spells.
Archivist and Shugenja.
Last edited:
AuraTwilight
The Sorcerer of Smiles
- Location
- The Silver City
That fundamentally alters wizards in a harmful way, though. Because now you have a constant upkeep cost, making the class now incredibly sub-optimal bordering on unplayable
Sir, cats can hunt for food on their own. They're pretty low-maintenance.
Also, how will you keep track of literally dozens of cats in any feasible, playable way?
The cats come and go as you need them. Sometimes impossibly so. They are magic. So long as you keep the Magic Cat Knip Box on your person (the spell book), the cats will come.
Like, how does the mechanics of that work? How do you keep all the cats near you? Do they listen to you? If so, how do you keep them out of harms way during fights? It just raises too many questions
See above. The cats know when to hide because cats are smart and dexterous. Sometimes they slip straight into impossible exits like they just vanish. It's very weird and magical, but the cats always return if called for.
Seriously, this is a problem of imagination, not mechanics.
Last edited:
- Location
- Somewhere
I guess trying to weasle out of mechanical limitations (like having to carry around books, having to have multiple books, etc.) just feels scummy to me. I know, I seem to be the odd one out here, so I'll shut up If I ever play a game you all run, I will just have to play the most by the book, literal character ever.... Probably an anti-technology hippie druid or a Lawful Stupid Paladin
EDIT: I am not a fan of either of those archetypes, but I have to play one now to voice my discontent with reflavoring how classes work
If I ever play a game you all run, I will just have to play the most by the book, literal character ever.... Probably an anti-technology hippie druid or a Lawful Stupid Paladin EDIT: I am not a fan of either of those archetypes, but I have to play one now to voice my discontent with reflavoring how classes work
Link is dead.
I guess trying to weasle out of mechanical limitations (like having to carry around books, having to have multiple books, etc.) just feels scummy to me. I know, I seem to be the odd one out here, so I'll shut up
EDIT: I am not a fan of either of those archetypes, but I have to play one now to voice my discontent with reflavoring how classes work
Link is dead.
Link is fixed.