Arcane or Divine [Archive] - Wizards Community

Arcane or Divine [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Xanaphia_Undomiel
03-28-07, 02:43 AM Is one type of magic inherently stronger than the other? The only evidence for me is that clerics get more spells than wizards, and are better at everything else, and have turn undead. Yes, wizards get familiars, but they aren't as good as turn undead.

That suggests that the sorcerer/wizard spell list is stronger than the cleric one. Maybe, it is because one cleric spell probably won't change an encounter dramaticly very quickly. Cure Critical Wounds will keep you fighting, but Ice Storm could kill a room of wizards. One cleric spell might be just as useful, just not as major.

With my class variant ideas, I assume there is no difference.

Here's my promised class variant ideas:

Prophet: Sorcerer with cleric list, 2 domains, turn undead, no familiar.
Shaman: Sorcerer with druid list, druid abilities(?).
Cantor: Bard with cleric spell list, can be lawful, bard abilities.

Here are the ones I'm not sure about:

Arcane Warrior: Cleric with wizard spells.
Arcane Crusader: Paladin who chooses his spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard list.

Please tell me if these are horribly unbalanced.
ArcTan
03-28-07, 02:56 AM Is one type of magic inherently stronger than the other? The only evidence for me is that clerics get more spells than wizards, and are better at everything else, and have turn undead. Yes, wizards get familiars, but they aren't as good as turn undead.

That suggests that the sorcerer/wizard spell list is stronger than the cleric one. Maybe, it is because one cleric spell probably won't change an encounter dramaticly very quickly. Cure Critical Wounds will keep you fighting, but Ice Storm could kill a room of wizards. One cleric spell might be just as useful, just not as major.

I'd say you're generally right, though you also have to factor in domain spells and how they're often better for their level than other spells (balanced by the fact that you only have one domain slot for that spell level and you can only get two domains).

With my class variant ideas, I assume there is no difference.

Here's my promised class variant ideas:

Prophet: Sorcerer with cleric list, 2 domains, turn undead, no familiar.

This idea is the idea behind Complete Divine's Favored Soul. I recommend taking a look at it.
Polaris
03-28-07, 03:09 AM Divine Magic overall as magic is better than Arcane Magic, hands down.

Divine Magic:

1. Has no arcane spell failure chance.
2. Does not depend (for the most part) on material components, relying on Divine Foci instead.
3. Does NOT require rest to recall spells. Thus a ring of sustance is a godsend to a divine caster who merely needs to pray at the appropriate time (and way) and (hypothetically anyway) otherwise need never sleep/rest at all.
4. All Divine Spells available for your class/level are readily available to you. Arcane spells are generally restricted.

I can't think of one thing that Arcane Magic has going for it that Divine doesn't, yet I could think of (at least) four for Divine magic without even trying.

Now, hypothetically Divine spell lists and spells are supposed to be weaker....even much weaker....to mitigate the above four advantages. Unforatunately, especially with Domain Spells (but even excluding those), that simply isn't the case. Divine Spells are nearly as potent overall level for level as Arcane Spells.

Given that, Divine Magic is better than Arcane Magic, hands down.

-Polaris
herceg
03-28-07, 06:47 AM :rofl:
tarkin
03-28-07, 11:27 AM Polaris, you are exhibiting signs of playing with a poor DM.

Divine vs. Arcane is to a certain extent, a DM balanced thing.

The Divine casters SHOULD have the following limitations:

1. Restrictions on which of the powerfull spells they can cast (i.e., yes the domain spells are equal to the arcane ones, but they should get FEWER domain spells, and only of a specific type.)

2. Restrictions on what they can/should do. No Lawfull cleric should be breaking his word (risk of atonement/excommunication). A Lawfull Mage can break his word and become Nuetral without serious issues. A Good cleric will not be casting Protection from Good, and a good mage could summon a Fiendish creature to attack him, while that Good mage is free to cast Protection from Good, and guess what, the Good cleric can not summon a Fiendish creature to attack the mage.

3. Publicity. Everyone should fairly easily be able to look at a Cleric, see his holy symbol and with a Knowledge (Religion) check know:

Whether they can spontaneously heal/inflict.
Whether they are likely to work with undead
Whether they are likely to keep their word
Whether they are going to try and kill you
What Domains they might have (Hm, that Cleric of a Fire God might possibly cast a fire spell at me)

But most of these issues are 'unstated' and something under the control of the DM. If the DM screws up, they can easily make the Clerics a far better class. If the DM plays well, the Clerics have many restrictions and come out about even with mages.
Salla
03-28-07, 11:49 AM 2. A Good cleric will not be casting Protection from Good, and a good mage could summon a Fiendish creature to attack him, while that Good mage is free to cast Protection from Good, and guess what, the Good cleric can not summon a Fiendish creature to attack the mage.

Actually, this is PHB RAW.

(Though I prefer the Eberron version that removes this restriction.)
Halaku
03-28-07, 12:10 PM I would like to add in that while a wizard or other arcane user is free to throw his alleigance around, almost all divine casters are bound by a god. Its a houserule in the games i play that a cleric has to have a god, no clerics of ideals, and that god will, at some point or another, start making demands of you for all the borrowed power. That and good luck getting nerul to grant you resurrect/raise dead without a dam good reason.
Polaris
03-28-07, 01:02 PM Polaris, you are exhibiting signs of playing with a poor DM.

I strongly disagree and I note that you haven't (nor has anyone else) countered my points.

Divine vs. Arcane is to a certain extent, a DM balanced thing.

Which is another way of saying that it isn't. RP restrictions are generally ineffective balance tools as most of you know perfectly well.

The Divine casters SHOULD have the following limitations:

1. Restrictions on which of the powerfull spells they can cast (i.e., yes the domain spells are equal to the arcane ones, but they should get FEWER domain spells, and only of a specific type.)

First of all there are domain spells. Then look at the cleric list itself. Almost without exception there is a clerical spell (and an unaligned....or multiple alignment...clerical spell at that!) that is either just as good or nearly as good as the arcane equivalent. That isn't to say that there are some areas of magic where arcane spells are superior but overall the lists are distressingly even even WITHOUT domain spell. Just go Spell Compendium if you doubt me. The classic example is of course Miracle which is better than Wish in every respect (and which btw can duplicate the best Arcane spells).

2. Restrictions on what they can/should do. No Lawfull cleric should be breaking his word (risk of atonement/excommunication). A Lawfull Mage can break his word and become Nuetral without serious issues. A Good cleric will not be casting Protection from Good, and a good mage could summon a Fiendish creature to attack him, while that Good mage is free to cast Protection from Good, and guess what, the Good cleric can not summon a Fiendish creature to attack the mage.

This works as well as Paladin restrcitions, i.e. they don't. What's more a cleric an (and typically does) pick alignment restrictions they would follow anyway, AND the best spells in the cleric spell list are either unaligned, or have multiple alignment varients which allows all clerics to effectively cast the same spell anyway. Only undead creation is really restricted this way, and only for clerics that are openly good.

3. Publicity. Everyone should fairly easily be able to look at a Cleric, see his holy symbol and with a Knowledge (Religion) check know:

Whether they can spontaneously heal/inflict.
Whether they are likely to work with undead
Whether they are likely to keep their word
Whether they are going to try and kill you
What Domains they might have (Hm, that Cleric of a Fire God might possibly cast a fire spell at me)

That depends on their knowledge religioin. It also depends on the cleric allowing you to SEE their holy symbol which they don't you know in order to cast. Yes they have to manipulate it, but that doesn't mean they have to let you see it. [Well for turning they do, but we are talking about spell casting.]

But most of these issues are 'unstated' and something under the control of the DM. If the DM screws up, they can easily make the Clerics a far better class. If the DM plays well, the Clerics have many restrictions and come out about even with mages.

Roleplaying restrictions aren't true restrictions. This is commonly known here.

-Polaris

Edit PS: One more point about publicity. You are assuming that the cleric follows a god at all, or even a well known philosophy. There is nothing in the rules that says that this has to be the case. A cleric could follow an obscure philosophy with a very obscure (if not nearly unknown) mandala or other symbol. So much for the publicity argument.
Polaris
03-28-07, 01:03 PM I would like to add in that while a wizard or other arcane user is free to throw his alleigance around, almost all divine casters are bound by a god. Its a houserule in the games i play that a cleric has to have a god, no clerics of ideals, and that god will, at some point or another, start making demands of you for all the borrowed power. That and good luck getting nerul to grant you resurrect/raise dead without a dam good reason.

Oberani Fallacy. Clerics don't need a god and thus aren't restricted in this fashion (nor are ressurect spells aligned in any way)

-Polaris
Halaku
03-28-07, 01:11 PM Oberani Fallacy. Clerics don't need a god and thus aren't restricted in this fashion (nor are ressurect spells aligned in any way)

-Polaris

True and point ceeded, i was pointing out how the imbalance is corrected in games that i play/dm because a properly prepaired cleric will win, nevermind the many things a cleric brings to the table. The main strength in my eyes is how with every new book, every single cleric/druid/divine caster other then favored soul and archivist, gets exponetialy stronger as their spell list and spells known increase. Imagine a wizard with every spell on the wizard list in their spell book, without the time/cost of hunting them all down.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Xanaphia_Undomiel 03-28-07, 02:43 AM	Is one type of magic inherently stronger than the other? The only evidence for me is that clerics get more spells than wizards, and are better at everything else, and have turn undead. Yes, wizards get familiars, but they aren't as good as turn undead. That suggests that the sorcerer/wizard spell list is stronger than the cleric one. Maybe, it is because one cleric spell probably won't change an encounter dramaticly very quickly. Cure Critical Wounds will keep you fighting, but Ice Storm could kill a room of wizards. One cleric spell might be just as useful, just not as major. With my class variant ideas, I assume there is no difference. Here's my promised class variant ideas: Prophet: Sorcerer with cleric list, 2 domains, turn undead, no familiar. Shaman: Sorcerer with druid list, druid abilities(?). Cantor: Bard with cleric spell list, can be lawful, bard abilities. Here are the ones I'm not sure about: Arcane Warrior: Cleric with wizard spells. Arcane Crusader: Paladin who chooses his spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard list. Please tell me if these are horribly unbalanced.
ArcTan 03-28-07, 02:56 AM	Is one type of magic inherently stronger than the other? The only evidence for me is that clerics get more spells than wizards, and are better at everything else, and have turn undead. Yes, wizards get familiars, but they aren't as good as turn undead. That suggests that the sorcerer/wizard spell list is stronger than the cleric one. Maybe, it is because one cleric spell probably won't change an encounter dramaticly very quickly. Cure Critical Wounds will keep you fighting, but Ice Storm could kill a room of wizards. One cleric spell might be just as useful, just not as major. I'd say you're generally right, though you also have to factor in domain spells and how they're often better for their level than other spells (balanced by the fact that you only have one domain slot for that spell level and you can only get two domains). With my class variant ideas, I assume there is no difference. Here's my promised class variant ideas: Prophet: Sorcerer with cleric list, 2 domains, turn undead, no familiar. This idea is the idea behind Complete Divine's Favored Soul. I recommend taking a look at it.
Polaris 03-28-07, 03:09 AM	Divine Magic overall as magic is better than Arcane Magic, hands down. Divine Magic: 1. Has no arcane spell failure chance. 2. Does not depend (for the most part) on material components, relying on Divine Foci instead. 3. Does NOT require rest to recall spells. Thus a ring of sustance is a godsend to a divine caster who merely needs to pray at the appropriate time (and way) and (hypothetically anyway) otherwise need never sleep/rest at all. 4. All Divine Spells available for your class/level are readily available to you. Arcane spells are generally restricted. I can't think of one thing that Arcane Magic has going for it that Divine doesn't, yet I could think of (at least) four for Divine magic without even trying. Now, hypothetically Divine spell lists and spells are supposed to be weaker....even much weaker....to mitigate the above four advantages. Unforatunately, especially with Domain Spells (but even excluding those), that simply isn't the case. Divine Spells are nearly as potent overall level for level as Arcane Spells. Given that, Divine Magic is better than Arcane Magic, hands down. -Polaris
herceg 03-28-07, 06:47 AM	:rofl:
tarkin 03-28-07, 11:27 AM	Polaris, you are exhibiting signs of playing with a poor DM. Divine vs. Arcane is to a certain extent, a DM balanced thing. The Divine casters SHOULD have the following limitations: 1. Restrictions on which of the powerfull spells they can cast (i.e., yes the domain spells are equal to the arcane ones, but they should get FEWER domain spells, and only of a specific type.) 2. Restrictions on what they can/should do. No Lawfull cleric should be breaking his word (risk of atonement/excommunication). A Lawfull Mage can break his word and become Nuetral without serious issues. A Good cleric will not be casting Protection from Good, and a good mage could summon a Fiendish creature to attack him, while that Good mage is free to cast Protection from Good, and guess what, the Good cleric can not summon a Fiendish creature to attack the mage. 3. Publicity. Everyone should fairly easily be able to look at a Cleric, see his holy symbol and with a Knowledge (Religion) check know: Whether they can spontaneously heal/inflict. Whether they are likely to work with undead Whether they are likely to keep their word Whether they are going to try and kill you What Domains they might have (Hm, that Cleric of a Fire God might possibly cast a fire spell at me) But most of these issues are 'unstated' and something under the control of the DM. If the DM screws up, they can easily make the Clerics a far better class. If the DM plays well, the Clerics have many restrictions and come out about even with mages.
Salla 03-28-07, 11:49 AM	2. A Good cleric will not be casting Protection from Good, and a good mage could summon a Fiendish creature to attack him, while that Good mage is free to cast Protection from Good, and guess what, the Good cleric can not summon a Fiendish creature to attack the mage. Actually, this is PHB RAW. (Though I prefer the Eberron version that removes this restriction.)
Halaku 03-28-07, 12:10 PM	I would like to add in that while a wizard or other arcane user is free to throw his alleigance around, almost all divine casters are bound by a god. Its a houserule in the games i play that a cleric has to have a god, no clerics of ideals, and that god will, at some point or another, start making demands of you for all the borrowed power. That and good luck getting nerul to grant you resurrect/raise dead without a dam good reason.
Polaris 03-28-07, 01:02 PM	Polaris, you are exhibiting signs of playing with a poor DM. I strongly disagree and I note that you haven't (nor has anyone else) countered my points. Divine vs. Arcane is to a certain extent, a DM balanced thing. Which is another way of saying that it isn't. RP restrictions are generally ineffective balance tools as most of you know perfectly well. The Divine casters SHOULD have the following limitations: 1. Restrictions on which of the powerfull spells they can cast (i.e., yes the domain spells are equal to the arcane ones, but they should get FEWER domain spells, and only of a specific type.) First of all there are domain spells. Then look at the cleric list itself. Almost without exception there is a clerical spell (and an unaligned....or multiple alignment...clerical spell at that!) that is either just as good or nearly as good as the arcane equivalent. That isn't to say that there are some areas of magic where arcane spells are superior but overall the lists are distressingly even even WITHOUT domain spell. Just go Spell Compendium if you doubt me. The classic example is of course Miracle which is better than Wish in every respect (and which btw can duplicate the best Arcane spells). 2. Restrictions on what they can/should do. No Lawfull cleric should be breaking his word (risk of atonement/excommunication). A Lawfull Mage can break his word and become Nuetral without serious issues. A Good cleric will not be casting Protection from Good, and a good mage could summon a Fiendish creature to attack him, while that Good mage is free to cast Protection from Good, and guess what, the Good cleric can not summon a Fiendish creature to attack the mage. This works as well as Paladin restrcitions, i.e. they don't. What's more a cleric an (and typically does) pick alignment restrictions they would follow anyway, AND the best spells in the cleric spell list are either unaligned, or have multiple alignment varients which allows all clerics to effectively cast the same spell anyway. Only undead creation is really restricted this way, and only for clerics that are openly good. 3. Publicity. Everyone should fairly easily be able to look at a Cleric, see his holy symbol and with a Knowledge (Religion) check know: Whether they can spontaneously heal/inflict. Whether they are likely to work with undead Whether they are likely to keep their word Whether they are going to try and kill you What Domains they might have (Hm, that Cleric of a Fire God might possibly cast a fire spell at me) That depends on their knowledge religioin. It also depends on the cleric allowing you to SEE their holy symbol which they don't you know in order to cast. Yes they have to manipulate it, but that doesn't mean they have to let you see it. [Well for turning they do, but we are talking about spell casting.] But most of these issues are 'unstated' and something under the control of the DM. If the DM screws up, they can easily make the Clerics a far better class. If the DM plays well, the Clerics have many restrictions and come out about even with mages. Roleplaying restrictions aren't true restrictions. This is commonly known here. -Polaris Edit PS: One more point about publicity. You are assuming that the cleric follows a god at all, or even a well known philosophy. There is nothing in the rules that says that this has to be the case. A cleric could follow an obscure philosophy with a very obscure (if not nearly unknown) mandala or other symbol. So much for the publicity argument.
Polaris 03-28-07, 01:03 PM	I would like to add in that while a wizard or other arcane user is free to throw his alleigance around, almost all divine casters are bound by a god. Its a houserule in the games i play that a cleric has to have a god, no clerics of ideals, and that god will, at some point or another, start making demands of you for all the borrowed power. That and good luck getting nerul to grant you resurrect/raise dead without a dam good reason. Oberani Fallacy. Clerics don't need a god and thus aren't restricted in this fashion (nor are ressurect spells aligned in any way) -Polaris
Halaku 03-28-07, 01:11 PM	Oberani Fallacy. Clerics don't need a god and thus aren't restricted in this fashion (nor are ressurect spells aligned in any way) -Polaris True and point ceeded, i was pointing out how the imbalance is corrected in games that i play/dm because a properly prepaired cleric will win, nevermind the many things a cleric brings to the table. The main strength in my eyes is how with every new book, every single cleric/druid/divine caster other then favored soul and archivist, gets exponetialy stronger as their spell list and spells known increase. Imagine a wizard with every spell on the wizard list in their spell book, without the time/cost of hunting them all down.