Magician Spell List

[ryancaveney]

Divine bards devoted to Cuiraecen, Laerme, or Erik makes more sense, since it fits the setting better, and doesn't require a change in the class design.

What about Sidhelien or half-elven, non-divine bards? Do you think they have a place?

[kgauck]

I believe in as many class designs as the DM is willing to put up with. Because of the setting, I would tinker more with sidhe and arcane bards. I would make sidhe bards comform to the standard healing pattern I use for regular elves. If elves can cast healing spells, I see no reason to nerf bards. If elves cannot cast healing spells, then sidhe bards don't get them either.

Arcane bards, I think, would use the magician spell list and the bard's normal progression for learning and casting spells. Bards, it would seem to be, do not cast true magic, but would cast lesser magic.

The nice thing about divine bards, is that, AFAIC, you can play they right off the shelf, no tweaking needed to the class. Some context and fluff can be helpful, though the Rjurik book gives all this for skalds. I would also call bards of Cuiraecen "heralds" and call bards of Laerme "minstrals" or "troubadours".

[RaspK_FOG]

To be honest with you, I'm rather partial to fitting the bill to what the setting is before thinking of what fits the bill itself. For example, an important issue with the 2e setting is that, for example, dwarves are "non magical;" one wonders how much that decision was setting-specific or simply adopting the (A)D&D norm of dwarves that cannot cast spells.

Likewise, bards normally cast wizardly spells in 2e, and you will notice that the bards of Cerilia drastically differ from 3e bards in an important number of ways: first of all, their spellcasting, and secondly, their alignment. The Cerilian bard alignment restriction is an important aspect, but one I paid little hid to until recently, when I truly noticed how this difference works out, since Cerilian bards are prone to point at a problem rather than try to solve it.

Additional issues arise when converting to 3e, but the question remains: what do we strive for?

In my personal games, I assure you, there will be no differenciation between priests of Erik and druids; they will be as shown in 2e, or as close as I can conform them to. Clearly, there is need for me to work a lot on this, and I want to contribute more efficiently with other aspects of this project, so this will have to wait. :P

[AndrewTall]

Divine bards devoted to Cuiraecen, Laerme, or Erik makes more sense, since it fits the setting better, and doesn't require a change in the class design.

Sticking with bard-as-arcanist, serves very little purpose.

Certainly works in Rjurik - indeed almost is demanded by the setting. Laerme should surely be a patron of bards elsewhere as well. I think bards were arcanists originally to give them illusion spells and other 'entertainment magic' - would you remove that aspect or make a blended spell list?

Personally I'm thinking of a more radical approach of merging all the spell lists, then chucking out some of the blood and thunder spells for all (let fighters do the fighting), then allow lesser mages (priests, magicians and bards) get divinations, charms, illusions, minor healing and mending, and leave the rest to true mages. You lose the cleric class, but can have a similar role for a magician/fighter combo - the rest is just roleplaying. I'll have to think about the resulting spell lists and converting spell caster levels into granted powers in practice...

[ShadowMoon]

Bardic Colleges were established by Elves, to learn from Humans and to teach Humans ways of the Sidhe.

Since Elves cannot cast Divine magic, bardic magic must be Arcane. It is possible that Humans could develop Divine magic Bard (like Rjuven Skald, which is a Prestige Class in my campaign), but still in its core Bard is an Arcane spellcaster.

In regard of healing magic, it is ridiculous that a Wizard can Shapechange and heal with it, use Wish to emulate Divine spells, but cannot research simple healing spells. I know its a game balance, but still, magic is magic. In my campaign Wizards can heal, and all Wizards start as Magicians, but through experience they advance and learn greater Magic and True Magic, if they have what it takes (bloodline, talent, will, etc.)

[irdeggman]

Bardic Colleges were established by Elves, to learn from Humans and to teach Humans ways of the Sidhe.

Since Elves cannot cast Divine magic, bardic magic must be Arcane. It is possible that Humans could develop Divine magic Bard (like Rjuven Skald, which is a Prestige Class in my campaign), but still in its core Bard is an Arcane spellcaster.

Actually elves can cast divine spells. As a ranger, they just can't cast any deity inspired ones.

In regard of healing magic, it is ridiculous that a Wizard can Shapechange and heal with it, use Wish to emulate Divine spells, but cannot research simple healing spells. I know its a game balance, but still, magic is magic. In my campaign Wizards can heal, and all Wizards start as Magicians, but through experience they advance and learn greater Magic and True Magic, if they have what it takes (bloodline, talent, will, etc.)

This is an issue/opinion that pertains to the "core" D&D systeme itself and nothing that the BR setting itself calls out.

Now the ramifications for doing this in a BR setting are real dramatic. Since the elves "lost" the war against humans due to clerical magic (e.g., healing) allowing wizards to be able to duplicate divine spells via research would have allowed the elves to have mastery over all types of magic and thus they would not have lost the war.

[kgauck]

Back in 2nd edition when the idea of non-diety inspired divine magic was addressed by forces, the list was very hostile to forces. The setting, it was explained, didn't support forces, only dieties. So where, precisely, does this non-diety inspired divine power come from?

I suspect this is just a post hoc explaination for the fact that the PHB describes the ranger as a divine spellcaster. Elves, as profoundly rejecting the divine, ought to have arcane rangers.

[EstebanDragonwing]

Personally I'm thinking of a more radical approach of merging all the spell lists, then chucking out some of the blood and thunder spells for all (let fighters do the fighting), then allow lesser mages (priests, magicians and bards) get divinations, charms, illusions, minor healing and mending, and leave the rest to true mages. You lose the cleric class, but can have a similar role for a magician/fighter combo - the rest is just roleplaying. I'll have to think about the resulting spell lists and converting spell caster levels into granted powers in practice...

This is an idea I have been toying around with myself. Currently I am documenting a setting of my own and at the moment the current consensus is to chuck all Divine caster classes (get rid of clerics and druids and use the non-spell variants for rangers and paladins. Also allow the shape shift ranger to compensate for the druid), then don't use the division between divine and arcane magic.

The bard will be completely rewritten so it won't have any spell casting at all (making the bard what it should be, a bard that sings,tells stories and entertains. If the bard wants illusions he can take a few levels of wizard).

The only classes left will be the magician, sorcerer and wizard. All three spell lists will be rebuild and the wizard will be rewritten so more specialization is possible (for example, able to drop the familiar or scribe scroll to use elemental channeling (turn/rebuke undead (negative/positive energy), fire-, water-, earth- or air energy) and able to specialize in a domain instead of a school).

A variant on this that I am looking at is allowing players to choose which attribute to use for casting (Wis, Int or Cha).

[AndrewTall]

A variant on this that I am looking at is allowing players to choose which attribute to use for casting (Wis, Int or Cha).

Are you instinctive (mostly granted powers with a few spells), wise (knowing a field of magic by rote) or simply able to bend magic to your will in the form desired?

The change means that priest becomes a title - so a temple may have a spellcaster who channels the faith into miracles, or a warrior who is divinely inspired, etc without a specific class for the role of 'priest' - you just mix and match from the base of fighter/rogue/mage to get the mix of combat ability, skills and spell power that you want.

I was toying with an approach of:

Magician: Standard BR, but with the healing at low level - hedge wizards, common priests and the like without a bloodline. Useful for potions and the like but not part of the fireball brigade. By far the most common spell caster outside elven lands.

Wizard: Knows 'book' spells only, so a role based on rote learning with a consequent distrust of those with a more flexible approach - popular in the churches. Can sacrifice spell levels for 'granted powers' such as lay on hands, turn undead, etc, and probably relatively select spell selection - say wizard plus a choice of one or two schools. Reasonable skill points as they need knowledge skills, diplomacy, etc, etc.

Sorcerer: An instinctive understanding natural to elves and suchlike, able to cast any magic on offer - I'd have a hybrid of wizard and sorcerer - a select number of spells known very well (i.e. standard sorcerer approach) a wider number known reasonably well (needing spell slots, but can be sacrificed for one of the 'sorcerer' spells, and a library of spells that can be studied over a few days and then cast if required - giving flexibility without 'to hand power' that could be problematic. As an elven, and possibly Lost staple this would probably be considered tainted by Azrai by the churches of course... To balance out the class I'd have the traditional pitiful hd, ac, etc, etc and add low skills.

I'd advise taking a flamethrower to area effect spells and 'omni role' spells - buffing spells for other PC's are fine as by their nature they encourage party co-operation, healing is actually a nil power - it avoids party down time, bad feelings over an unlucky role crippling a PC - it doesn't actually increase the power of the spell-caster in game play although it has a substantial role play effect. Anything that protects/shields the caster should probably be a no-no - the party should do that and such spells discourage caution amongst mages...

[ShadowMoon]

Elves lost not because Divine magic can heal, but because human gods dampened Sidhelien magic capability altogether.

And in my campaign Rangers are not Divine casters, firstly I use Scouts instead of Rangers, so by default they don't have magic capabilities at all. But they can learn to use Druidic magic, and thats Primordial magic (inspired by brilliant Green Knight's RoE BR PBeM).

Its like this in basics:

Magician and Bard: Lesser Arcane Magic
Wizard: Greater Arcane Magic
Paladin: Lesser Divine Magic
Priest: Greater Divine Magic
Ranger: Lesser Primordial Magic
Druid: Greater Primordial Magic

Arcane < Divine < Primordial

...

Edit: Note = In my campaign Magician and Wizard are same class, difference is later because if blooded one could learn greater Arcane and advance like a True Wizard, non-blooded is stuck with lesser Arcane. Paladins are Prestige Classes. Rangers are Scouts, a non-spellcasting variant that can learn the misteries of druidic lore.