Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Romulus LoneWolf 04-28-07, 07:26 PM	One of the things that bothers me the most about standard D&D is the arbitrary split between Divine magic and Arcane magic, which effectively serves to do nothing more then justify the equally arbitrary pre-defined roles of the standard spellcasting classes. So, here's my proposal: do away with the arbitrary divine/arcane split in magic entirely. Instead, the standard spell selection for the spellcasting classes represents "standard training" for those classes; Clerics learn Healing magic because they're expected to take care of their flock, while Wizards generally don't bother with it. But any class would have the ability to research spells of other classes, only learned at a level above then spells from their own list. And each class would keep it's own innate abilities, of course. Thus, a Wizard could learn "Cure Light Wounds", but as a 2nd level spell. And could only cast it if he's prepared it.
Tequila_Sunrise 04-28-07, 08:02 PM	Yeah, d&d is full of arbitrary stuff like arcane/divine magic. Your HR shouldn't cause much chaos, though I'm sure someone will pipe in to say that you've just ruined the game.
SD 04-28-07, 08:10 PM	You've just ruined the game. I'd tread water on this one before diving into the deep end. See how it affects your players and campaign at low levels. I heartily suggest somebody play a warmage or another class that can cast their entire spell list without preparation for an effective acid test. Also, you're very "divine x arcane is lame rar" but how do you feel about cleric x druid or other splits within the same magical source? As I read the post, that got swallowed up in the abolition.
Sorentia 04-28-07, 09:33 PM	Back in 2nd Edition I had a mage who by the goof of the DM and myself (we were still new to the game) managed to learn a few healing clerical spells. By the time we realized the mistake, he said screw it. We bumped the spell levels up one and basicly did what you are preposing on accident. It didn't turn out to bad, but then again I was the only spell slinger of the group. So the little bit of healing I prepared was helpful.
Sylian 04-29-07, 12:52 PM	Divine magic is given by the gods, while arcane magic isn't in the same way. They have different flavor points. You could remove them and say that all magic is given by the gods or researched.
Eldritch_Lord 04-29-07, 01:05 PM	Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed and Arcana Evolved go a bit further--they do away with arcane/divine split, but also combine the class spell lists into one big shared list. They seem to work out fine, so I don't see why simply allowing research of other classes' spells would break anything.
Nadaka 04-29-07, 01:37 PM	The issue I have is that the divine spellcasters have a much stronger chassis than arcane spellcasters do on the assumption that divine spells are not as good as arcane. While this falls apart in many circumstances there are good reasons for this. You might want to drop the HP and BAB of divine casters a bit of you go with a combined spell list.
Otto the Bugbear 04-29-07, 10:00 PM	It shouldn't be a big deal. The limiting factor is the number of spells per day, so even a caster that knows both enervation and restoration will have to be careful how much to use them. I went the opposite direction, dividing it into Arcane, Divine and Nature. That allowed me to just make, for example, rangers nature casters instead of having separate spell lists for each class. Check it out on my home page, in my sig.
Sorentia 04-30-07, 08:23 AM	Perhaps if you do away with the Divine/Arcane split you should also just do away with the Wizard/Cleric split. Combine Wizard/Cleric into one class to make a new class and Sorcerer/Druid into one class. Don't know what you'd call the class's but the primary difference would be how they cast. the Wizard/Cleric combo would require a spellbook and preperation, the Sorcerer/Druid combo would be instant cast and have a limit on how many they know. Perhaps give each class a HD of d6, poor BAB, and then give each new class the special abilities of the previous class. Might be overpowered, but eh. For the Sorcerer/Druid I'd go with Animal Companions, Wizard/Cleric gets familiars.
DreadArchon 04-30-07, 02:17 PM	Done already by Unearthed Arcana. Giving Sorcerers access to all Cleric, Druid, and Wizard spells doesn't really unbalance anything (nor does giving them Wizard bonus feats at the same time, actually... Sorcerers are really somewhat weak...). I played as one such character for a while. Giving Clerics and Druids access to other lists... hmm. Archivists already kinda do it... actually, depending on how you handled it, I don't think it'd come up much. Under your proposed system, a Wizard can scribe a Cleric spell to his book for later use and a Bard or Sorceror can add a Cleric spell to his Spells Known, but since Clerics and Druids never learn spells on their own (i.e. their lists are preset and they can't do anything about it), I don't think they'd benefit from such a change at all, except when using scrolls. Thus, they'd not need to be rebalanced. So, from both experience and theory, your idea should work fine. (Unless I misunderstood or something.)
DMFUBAR 05-01-07, 11:44 AM	Doing it right now in fact. I am working on a campaign using the Unearthed Arcana generic classes of Warrior, Expert and Spellcaster using the Spell Point System (using the Wizard tables for number spells known and spell points available - any spell known may be cast but spells not memorized cost double the spell points to cast). There are no clerics, there are just people with Knowledge Religion, so you may have a High Priest that is a skilled Fighter. Turn Undead is a feat that anyone with enough ranks in Knowledge Religion can take.