|
Allowing paladins and clerics to use shields and cast does raise the worldbuilding question of "if a shield is a valid spellcasting focus, why would anyone ever be trained to use anything else?" Mechanically, we don't have arcane spell failure in 5e and since shields have no strength requirement, we can assume that it's not a case of puny caster arms not being strong enough to pick one up. Two feats or one level dip in hexblade and you've got the proficiency without needing to consider base stats or anything else. At a narrative level, it feels very weird that wizards and sorcerers wouldn't just start incorporating what we would mechanically call shield proficiency into their base training on how to use a spell focus, since within the world as constructed there is no reason not to. On a meta level, yeah everyone having shields kinda fucks with the class fantasy of what wizards and sorcerers look like, but the whole point is that they've been chipping away at that for multiple editions now and it's gotten to the point of absurdity as they've taken every shield-using class and given them the possibility of spellcasting with a shield but not given the reverse back to sorcerers and wizards.
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 23:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:18 |
|
|
Azathoth posted:Allowing paladins and clerics to use shields and cast does raise the worldbuilding question of "if a shield is a valid spellcasting focus, why would anyone ever be trained to use anything else?" I think for Clerics and Paladins specifically, it's that they have their holy symbol emblazoned on it, so it's like brandishing a giant cross. Less useful for arcane Wizard magic.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 23:45
|
|
|
Asterite34 posted:I think for Clerics and Paladins specifically, it's that they have their holy symbol emblazoned on it, so it's like brandishing a giant cross. Less useful for arcane Wizard magic. The example items listed for spell focus do not make me think that there is anything to the shape of the item, and while wands are allowed, there's nothing in the rules to suggest a gun or bow-like aiming mechanism is necessary, since the orb is right there as an example.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 00:10
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure it's a reference to literal Crusaders painting the cross on their shields, and since Paladins are just "what if Crusaders had Actual Magic?" that's why they can do it.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 01:22
|
|
|
Magic is based on fashion and a shield just doesn't go with a wizard's outfit, darling
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 01:32
|
|
|
Monathin posted:I'm pretty sure it's a reference to literal Crusaders painting the cross on their shields, and since Paladins are just "what if Crusaders had Actual Magic?" that's why they can do it. Well yes, but in 5e the powers don't come from the gods, they come from the individual. A paladin's spells aren't powered by tapping into their deity but rather their own well of faith/willpower/energy. It's why you can have a paladin with Oath of the Crown who gets their power literally from their faith in the king or government or whatever. The point is that the holy symbol (or arcane spell focus) isn't the source of the power, it's just a lens that focuses it or directs it. Given all the different forms they take, the idea that a shield is a step too far is unreasonable to me. You can definitely say that, as I said before, that wizards and sorcerers using shields isn't part of the class fantasy, but that's not my point. My point is that within their worldbuilding and attendant conception of magic that there's no reason shields could not and should not be spell focuses and so it is very weird from a narrative perspective that two classes avoid them entirely for no reason.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 01:36
|
|
|
Nah it’s not weird
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 01:48
|
|
|
That's like saying, because there are swords that count as spell focuses, why don't wizards simply learn to use swords. While you were studying the blade, and shield, they were wizarding out. But, they can use swords and shields, you just need to class or feat yourself to get shield proficiency, to reflect your abnormal shield wizard training.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 02:01
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:Well yes, but in 5e the powers don't come from the gods, they come from the individual. A paladin's spells aren't powered by tapping into their deity but rather their own well of faith/willpower/energy. It's why you can have a paladin with Oath of the Crown who gets their power literally from their faith in the king or government or whatever. The point is that the holy symbol (or arcane spell focus) isn't the source of the power, it's just a lens that focuses it or directs it. Given all the different forms they take, the idea that a shield is a step too far is unreasonable to me. Oath of the Anal Retentive
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 02:52
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:Well yes, but in 5e the powers don't come from the gods, they come from the individual. A paladin's spells aren't powered by tapping into their deity but rather their own well of faith/willpower/energy. It's why you can have a paladin with Oath of the Crown who gets their power literally from their faith in the king or government or whatever. The point is that the holy symbol (or arcane spell focus) isn't the source of the power, it's just a lens that focuses it or directs it. Given all the different forms they take, the idea that a shield is a step too far is unreasonable to me. It's never a shield, though, not even if you're a cleric or a paladin. If you're using the emblem variety of holy symbol (the kind that lets you use a shield) it's not the shield that acts as the focus for a divine caster, it's the emblem itself, a symbol of a god or pantheon. The power of a paladin or cleric's focus comes from the abstract pattern of the symbol, which is why you can engrave it on a shield, but the focus is always the emblem, not the object it happens to be on. By contrast an arcane focus is always a physical object that channels power--rods, staffs and wands are objects which can direct power, while crystals and orbs can literally focus things. Apparently, a drawing can't do that. Which makes sense from a worldbuilding perspective, since although near-vestigial in practice, a distinction is still drawn in 5e between arcane and divine spells (if nothing else, you can see this in the descriptions of arcane focus and holy symbol. How this would be justified could vary from setting to setting, but just off the top of my head, if you had an ancient greek-style setting: Kinetic (Arcane) casting is a process by which you channel Potentiality through Kinesis into Energy, a purely physical process that changes the world from one state to another; Pneumatic (Divine) casting is a way of manifesting your Pneuma (Breath of Life, spirit) in a way that animates the world around you. Ultimately both come from within, but they have different effects, and the reason you can use a holy symbol for divine casting is that part of your Pneuma is connected to the gods (your soul), so you can manifest it through a holy image. Or you can just say "Wizards can use shields", of course. But I don't think the converse is unreasonable, is my point.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 03:11
|
|
|
That's fair, though I do still think everything would be better if that vestigial distinction between those spell types was done away with.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 03:16
|
|
|
I feel like a crafty magic user who knows how to use a shield could figure out a way to incorporate magic paraphernalia of some kind into it, but as DM at bare minimum I'd say it'd take money, downtime, and/or a special magic item.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 03:31
|
|
|
This kinda goes back to the old "cold iron" restriction. Magic (so the story goes) can't flow out of a person's body when they're wearing iron or steel; cold iron absorbs magic. So it's like shooting lightning while wearing a Faraday cage. Divine magic doesn't have this restriction because the magic comes from an extradimensional source, not the cleric. The cleric is just asking nicely. I don't remember if they still trot out the cold iron stuff, but that used to be the reasoning why wizards were glass cannons.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 03:44
|
|
|
Now I'm imagining a world where wizards stand out not because they're the guys in robes but because they wear bronze armor so that it doesn't block their magic
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2023 03:03
|
|
|
Mirage posted:I don't remember if they still trot out the cold iron stuff, but that used to be the reasoning why wizards were glass cannons. Arcane Spell Failure Chance hasn't been a thing since like 3e I'm pretty sure, so not really. Mechanically, the main thing stopping Wizards from wearing heavier armor is 1) Proficiency (which you can alleviate if you so choose, but I think mechanically it's pretty drat hard to get anything that will trump Mage Armor), and 2) Strength Requirement, since anything heavier than Chain Mail requires you have a positive STR mod to wear in addition to the proficiency. There's nothing saying a Wizard *can't* do those things, but I think it's pretty realistic that Wizards are glass cannons due to the effect of "why would I train myself to wear armor when I can just cast a spell?"
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2023 07:37
|
|
|
Agreed. The STR keeps the worst cheese down for pure wizards, and going for a dedicated fighter/wizard multiclass means spreading out your good ability scores (risking being worse at either of the classes). Still, medium armor wizard multiclass is okay if you can get it, it just isn't as good as dedicated abjuration defense for long.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2023 08:02
|
|
|
STR just slows them down by 10f if they don't match it though.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2023 12:43
|
|
|
That's still a third of your speed, unmodified, and you still need proficiency to cast any spells at all. You can get Medium Armor with some finagling (usually via multiclassing and, as stated, whether or not it's better than Abjuration spells is really an open question), but if you're really trying to wear heavy armor as a Wizard, you're either paying a feat tax to get Heavily Armored on top of however you acquired medium armor (since that's a prerequisite) or you're dipping a level of Cleric for one of the Domains that give you heavy armor. It's a chore, as it should be.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2023 13:10
|
|
|
Dwarves don’t get an heavy armor speed penalty for low STR.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2023 14:02
|
|
|
If you are a wizard 3 levels of artificer can get you a magic set of heavy armor that has no STR requirement (for you). OTOH you can sleep in your mage armor pajamas and never worry about being attacked while unarmored.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
nelson posted:Dwarves don’t get an heavy armor speed penalty for low STR. But you effectively get a -5 foot speed penalty for being a dwarf. 25 feet speed still hurts, even if not quite as bad as 20. (Also, if you're fine with 25 ft speed, you could also be a wood elf for 35-10=25 feet with heavy armor speed penalty, though hill dwarf is probably better if you plan on always being in heavy armor.) But depending on the setting/dm mithral plate might not be that hard to get your hands on. I think most people don't think of mithral/adamantine armor as actually being magical.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2023 19:58
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:If you are a wizard 3 levels of artificer can get you a magic set of heavy armor that has no STR requirement (for you). I wonder if mage armor is uncomfortable to sleep in. The force is described as tangible, meaning it'd definitely press into your body if you were lying down in it.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2023 22:40
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:If you are a wizard 3 levels of artificer can get you a magic set of heavy armor that has no STR requirement (for you). Back on the first hand, it only takes one action to re-don your armor with that Artificer 3 dip and your armor is always hidden away on your person when you don't want to wear it. As such, the only times you are truly unarmored are while you are sleeping and, at most, the first 12 seconds after waking up.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 02:12
|
|
|
News on Bigby's dropped today.  quote:Bigby the Great recounts his journeys into the history, myth, and society of giants in this guide to their realms in the worlds of Dungeons & Dragons. Here Bigby and the demigod Diancastra, child of the giants’ All-Father, Annam, unveil the secrets of Annam’s mighty descendants. Players will find a wealth of giant-themed character options: a subclass for barbarians, two backgrounds related to giants and their runic magic, and feat options that evoke the strength and primal magic of the giants. Dungeon Masters will gain inspiration for bringing giants to life, from maps of giant-built sites and big new monsters to tremendous treasures and intriguing trinkets in a giant’s bag! Let Bigby and Diancastra teach you everything about the iconic giants of D&D Wizkids also previewed some minis showing some stuff to expect for the Bestiary.   
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 20:41
|
|
|
Oh also covers and descriptions for the other upcoming stuff. Planescape Adventures in the Multiverse posted:The campaign collection is sold as a box set containing three hardcover books: Sigil and the Outlands, a 96-page guide describing the setting and its central city Sigil, home to portals connecting to every corner of the multiverse; Morte's Planar Parade, a 64-page bestiary of "impossible beings" and "nonstop weird" monsters; and Turn of Fortune's Wheel, a 96-page adventure that takes players across the Outlands to discover "a plot to undermine the rules of reality."  Phandelver and Below posted:Phandelver and Below: The Shattered Obelisk is a 224-page adventure written "for fans of traditional dungeon crawls." The story brings players back to the sleepy frontier town of Phandalin, setting of the original fifth edition D&D starter set, and digs into the mystery of strange obelisks that have been discovered across Faerun.  Book of Many Things posted:The Deck of Many Things boxed set is a unique presentation of one of Dungeons & Dragons' oldest and most storied magical items; a legendary deck of enchanted cards, that when drawn by a player character, create wondrous —and often deadly— effects.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 21:11
|
|
|
A Satan, a Loki, and a... Tlaloc? Not really, probably wouldn't associate him with a macuahuitl.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
ooo the phandalin dungeon. interesting
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
I guess focusing mostly on Sigil is probably the safest option for them putting out a Planescape book
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 21:23
|
|
|
yay giant stuff
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 21:35
|
|
|
goatface posted:A Satan, a Loki, and a... Tlaloc? Not really, probably wouldn't associate him with a macuahuitl. The models are a Fire Hellion, Frostmourn, Stone Giant of Evil Earth, Goliath Chef, Giant Lynx. And the first one is a Death Giant Necromancer. IGN has posted more info on Bigby's https://www.ign.com/articles/everything-we-know-about-dds-glory-of-the-giants-sourcebook
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 21:49
|
|
|
Yusin posted:The models are a Fire Hellion, Frostmourn, Stone Giant of Evil Earth, Goliath Chef, Giant Lynx. And the first one is a Death Giant Necromancer. Those massive dinosaur/behemoth monsters seem really interesting (but it seems like they dropped the kaiju summoner druid subclass?)
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 21:58
|
|
|
Sigh, looks like Sigil is getting the Spelljammer treatment.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 22:57
|
|
|
imagine dungeons posted:Sigh, looks like Sigil is getting the Spelljammer treatment.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2023 23:10
|
|
|
We are getting a 96 page book on Sigil and the Outlands. A 64 page Bestiary, and a 96 page Adventure. So it's another 64 pages on Spelljammer, plus the Sigil book has no need to devote half the pages to ships statblocks and maps. I think an extra 64 pages would have greatly improved Spelljammer. 96 pages is what Sigil and the Outlands had in the original as well, though there is a big difference now. The Font is smaller (Also near every page in the old planescape book has those weird lines)  
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 07:35
|
|
|
It sounds like it's going to be better than what Spelljammer got, but not a whole lot better. That 96 page guidebook is going to have to also include material that was in the other two books from the old Planescape boxed set. Couple that with a lot more art and the layout differences Yusin notes, and we'll be lucky if we get much detail at all.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 18:59
|
|
|
You'd think they could afford a few writers to bulk the books out. Thin volumes of rules are nice, but I like source books to have heft.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 19:05
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:It sounds like it's going to be better than what Spelljammer got, but not a whole lot better. That 96 page guidebook is going to have to also include material that was in the other two books from the old Planescape boxed set. Couple that with a lot more art and the layout differences Yusin notes, and we'll be lucky if we get much detail at all.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 19:20
|
|
|
homeless snail posted:One of those books was the monster manual, that's a separate book in this set also. The player and DM guides in the original set are 128 pages combined and, a good third of that isn't remotely publishable in a 5e book. All the spell key and alterations stuff is a good 20 pages by itself and I doubt you're gonna see a hint of that. I wasn't counting the monstrous supplement as a book. It doesn't have a cover, so I think of it as a booklet or pamphlet.  The crunchy magic stuff is only 7 pages of the DM's guide. Aside from the new PC races and NPC stats here and there, the rest of those 128 pages are a lot of fluff. They can cut stuff like the details on the inner and outer planes to keep the focus on Sigil and the Outlands, but they still have to fit that, PC options, and any new mechanics into 96 pages. Basically, my point is: don't hope for Eberron: Rising from the Last War, expect Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:It sounds like it's going to be better than what Spelljammer got, but not a whole lot better. That 96 page guidebook is going to have to also include material that was in the other two books from the old Planescape boxed set. Couple that with a lot more art and the layout differences Yusin notes, and we'll be lucky if we get much detail at all. I am thinking we will get more info. The original book had a large font and had tons of obtrusive art.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:18 |
|
|
Ahh, my bad for misreading you.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 21:44
|
|