Ur Priest casting non-cleric spells?

[barna10]

Has there ever been discussion of Ur Priests being able to pull spells from non-Cleric lists? Seems to make sense to me. Why would they steal from some gods, but not others? Or from the gods, but not nature?

edit: Would you allow an Ur Priest to add spells from these other classes' lists via spell research?

[Dusk Eclipse]

What they do in fluff is separate from crunch, mechanics wise CDiv (and BoVD IIRC) state that Ur-priest cast spells draw from the Cleric list, not from "any" divine list. Besides the cleric list is strong enough by itself and considering Ur-priest is one of the most broken classes in the game I don't see why you would want to boost their power by expanding their spell list.

Having said that I would say that allowing them to choose from which list to cast (cleric or Druid), chosen at the time they take their first Ur-priest level isn't that bad.

[erikun]

"The ur-priest spell list is identical to the cleric spell list." (Complete Divine, p. 70) That's pretty clear on the matter... I'm not sure how you would interpret it otherwise.

As for setting-reasons, the Cleric's powers are specifically given by the deities, and those powers are what the Ur-Priest is tapping into. The Blighter is the class that steals power from nature.

[barna10]

So, it's never come up?

Also, would you allow them to research specific spells off other lists?

[Crake]

So, it's never come up?

Also, would you allow them to research specific spells off other lists?

Considering they steal spells from clerics, they would be limited to whatever other clerics have researched. If you could maybe convince your DM that another cleric could have researched the spell you want, then maybe he would bite, but when it comes to spell research, that is entirely in the realm of the DM

[alchemyprime]

If I were running it, I'd make it from NEARBY clerics.

So if you're in a far off land with only Shugenja, SURPRISE! You can pick off that list!
You're only near druids? Druid list!
But I imagine it would follow a hierarchy -
Clerics/Priests
Shugenjas
Druids

And never Archivists. Too powerful then.

[barna10]

If I were running it, I'd make it from NEARBY clerics.

So if you're in a far off land with only Shugenja, SURPRISE! You can pick off that list!
You're only near druids? Druid list!
But I imagine it would follow a hierarchy -
Clerics/Priests
Shugenjas
Druids

And never Archivists. Too powerful then.

They don't steal power from Clerics, they steal directly from the gods:
"Ur-priests are canny and cunning, never stealing too much power from any one deity"


"The ur-priest spell list is identical to the cleric spell list." (Complete Divine, p. 70) That's pretty clear on the matter... I'm not sure how you would interpret it otherwise.

As for setting-reasons, the Cleric's powers are specifically given by the deities, and those powers are what the Ur-Priest is tapping into. The Blighter is the class that steals power from nature.

I can see the reasoning against Druid and Ranger spells, but why not Paladin spells? And yes, I can read and understand the text, but I see the class getting other spells as completely logical.

Maybe the ability to prepare and cast non-cleric divine spells could be gained via a feat. this could satisfy some play-balance issues and represent the ur Priest developing his powers beyond the norm.

Lastly, anyone ever notice that Siphon Spell Power does not need to be used with Ur Priest spell slots? It's pretty much the Versatile Spellcaster feat although a bit gimped.

[Thomasinx]

Maybe the ability to prepare and cast non-cleric divine spells could be gained via a feat. this could satisfy some play-balance issues and represent the ur Priest developing his powers beyond the norm.

That would hands-down be the most overpowered feat in the game. (one feat to gain Archivist spellcasting without any of the Archivist restrictions to gaining spells?) Ur-Priests are already one of the most overpowered classes (enough that I know several DM's that just ban it), giving it such a boost is beyond unnecessary.

Why are you so fixed on trying to get non-cleric spells on an Ur-Priest? If there is some specific spell you want, you can always talk to a DM about trying to get that individual spell through a specific method (magic items, research, etc), without opening the can of worms that is 'every divine spell in existence'.

[barna10]

That would hands-down be the most overpowered feat in the game. (one feat to gain Archivist spellcasting without any of the Archivist restrictions to gaining spells?) Ur-Priests are already one of the most overpowered classes (enough that I know several DM's that just ban it), giving it such a boost is beyond unnecessary.

Why are you so fixed on trying to get non-cleric spells on an Ur-Priest? If there is some specific spell you want, you can always talk to a DM about trying to get that individual spell through a specific method (magic items, research, etc), without opening the can of worms that is 'every divine spell in existence'.

No, it wouldn't even come close to being the most overpowered feat, and it's not what I was talking about. I was saying a feat for each type of divine spell; a feat to gain paladin spells, one for druidic, one for ranger, etc.

None of this would change the number of spells per day the Ur Priest has and the taking these feats would most likely mean either postponing or never gaining DMM.

I know many people equate options to power, but options without resources are nothing.

Lastly, this is about flavor not play balance. If an Ur Priest is stealing this knowledge, why would he restrict himself?

[Lord Il Palazzo]

If a player asked me, I might be convinced to let him be use a different spell list than the cleric one (making, for example, an Ur-Druid as it were) but it would absolutely be in place of the cleric list, not in addition to it.

[barna10]

I see a lot of fear but not much logic as to why this is a bad idea.

I have a better idea: as an ACF, lose ability to rebuke undead (and DMM fuel) for increased spell access.

This makes a ton of sense. The ability to rebuke undead should be a granted/channeled ability and not one easily stolen. Also, without access to DMM, the class drops a tier or two. Any increased power from greater spell access shouldn't be an issue.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Lastly, this is about flavor not play balance. If an Ur Priest is stealing this knowledge, why would he restrict himself?

Flavor wise-Ur Priest has the generic cleric list, because he's "not stealing too much power from any one god". Trying to copy a domain spell would probably force him to dip too indiscreetly into one gods pool. Druid spells don't come from gods, Paladin spells may be too alien, may come with a built in "must be lawful good" tag, should be rebalanced if the other hurdles could be overcome since many Paladin exclusive spells are overpowered for their spell level and are balanced by Paladin's half caster access.

As for original spell research it depends on how your group views cleric spells as working.

Do Clerics pray for spells and are given energy that they then solidify into spells in their heads because they can't just hold raw power (that's what favored soul's do)? If yes, then I suppose an Ur-Priest could research his own spell and turn stolen energy into that spell. However, this spell would have to be one the DM approves being added to the mother list, rather than a alternative spell to fit a domain slot or something so this really should be a huge hurdle.

Alternatively, Clerics could pray for spells which come conveniently prepackaged in spell form. This doesn't mesh well with how Ur-Priests work, but it was called out as working this way in the AD&D DMG with passages explaining how the DM could fiat a cleric's god giving the different spells than what they asked for. Under this method, absolutely not, no new Ur-Priest spells ever.

One boost to Ur-Priest versatility I do use is allowing them to use, but not craft, divine magic items keyed to specific gods and domain access. Basically, the idea was giving them a kind of free UMD that only applies to divine(cleric flavor). On further thought these abilities should probably be tied to a specific level of Ur-Priest maybe 5 for domain copying and 9 for relic use.

[toapat]

Paladin spells may be too alien, may come with a built in "must be lawful good" tag, should be rebalanced if the other hurdles could be overcome since many Paladin exclusive spells are overpowered for their spell level and are balanced by Paladin's half caster access.

Paladin spells come directly from the cosmic forces of good or evil.

The reason why Ur-priests can't steal is because they are clerics who deny that their god is dead.

[barna10]

The reason why Ur-priests can't steal is because they are clerics who deny that their god is dead.

Er..only if you adapt the class to be the worshiper of a dead god. The normal Ur Priest steals his power from the Gods.

[Doxkid]

Paladin spells come directly from the cosmic forces of good or evil.

The reason why Ur-priests can't steal is because they are clerics who deny that their god is dead.

Wait, what?

[mattie_p]

An ur-priest could always dip a level of contemplative (CD) for a domain, then use substitute domain (CC) to pick up these (http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/domains.html) on a case-by-case basis.

[barna10]

Druids, Rangers, Paladins, and all of the other non-cleric divine casters get their spells just like clerics, either from a god OR from communing with a force. The same wording is used to define how/where clerics get their spells as is used in describing the rest.

So again, logically, if you can steal from one god, why not steal from another?

I can agree with not getting Domain spells as those might be noticed, but stealing a druid or ranger spell from a nature deity shouldn't be any harder than stealing a cleric spell.

Also, are we supposed to assume that each of these flavors of divine magic have different mechanics? The text says no. Seriously, it's right in the text "A paladin prepares and casts spells the way a cleric does", "A ranger prepares and casts spells the way a cleric does", and "A druid prepares and casts spells the way a cleric does". The mechanics are the same, only the source is different. Again, why not steal from several sources?

[barna10]

An ur-priest could always dip a level of contemplative (CD) for a domain, then use substitute domain (CC) to pick up these (http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/domains.html) on a case-by-case basis.

I would argue that Ur Priests can't access ANY domain simply because domain powers and spells are specifically granted by the deity. Any of the domain shenanigans should be disallowed for them.

[mattie_p]

Umm, you don't need a deity to get domains. Ideals are fine. And p20 of CD lays out what to do with extra domains, even for spellcasting classes like wizard and sorcerer. Domain shenanigans are perfectly acceptable for an already broken-good class.

[barna10]

Umm, you don't need a deity to get domains. Ideals are fine. And p20 of CD lays out what to do with extra domains, even for spellcasting classes like wizard and sorcerer. Domain shenanigans are perfectly acceptable for an already broken-good class.

Good point. Nevermind then.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Few points.

Ideals are not the default in most campaign worlds, ideals are an option that is denied in many games and specifically disallowed in some worlds. Interacting with ideals also kinda feels contrary to the flavor of Ur-Priests to me. They run off of god hatred, if ideals worked they should probably just be Clerics of the ideal of hating the gods. Also, since there's no central intelligence to an ideal stealing power willy nilly could be perfectly safe or at least safer.

Yes Druid spells can come from a diety as per the text of the druid class, but drawing directly from nature is the default. Personally I find it simpler and more logical to ignore this and say a Druid that worships a nature god is no different than a wizard that worships a magic god, because a cleric that changes philosophy has to atone to his new god there are no such rules for a druid that fails their god and not nature itself. So, a Druid of Elhonna that turns evil, but doesn't violate druidic tenants should be able to draw power from nature the next morning. So it really seems to make more sense to ignore the text in the religion section, which contradicts the characteristics section.

Note: In Forgotten Realms, Druids must worship a diety and draw power from them, so in FR you have a stronger argument for reaching for Druid spells.

Though I agree that Contemplative and substitute domain work, an Ur-Priest is not a cleric of an ideal so the domain will have to be an alignment based one, not that that's a big deal with substitute domain.

[barna10]

Few points.

Ideals are not the default in most campaign worlds, ideals are an option that is denied in many games and specifically disallowed in some worlds. Interacting with ideals also kinda feels contrary to the flavor of Ur-Priests to me. They run off of god hatred, if ideals worked they should probably just be Clerics of the ideal of hating the gods. Also, since there's no central intelligence to an ideal stealing power willy nilly could be perfectly safe or at least safer.

Yes Druid spells can come from a diety as per the text of the druid class, but drawing directly from nature is the default. Personally I find it simpler and more logical to ignore this and say a Druid that worships a nature god is no different than a wizard that worships a magic god, because a cleric that changes philosophy has to atone to his new god there are no such rules for a druid that fails their god and not nature itself. So, a Druid of Elhonna that turns evil, but doesn't violate druidic tenants should be able to draw power from nature the next morning. So it really seems to make more sense to ignore the text in the religion section, which contradicts the characteristics section.

Note: In Forgotten Realms, Druids must worship a diety and draw power from them, so in FR you have a stronger argument for reaching for Druid spells.

Though I agree that Contemplative and substitute domain work, an Ur-Priest is not a cleric of an ideal so the domain will have to be an alignment based one, not that that's a big deal with substitute domain.

I agree with you somewhat. I prefer Druids as communers with nature instead of worshiping a nature god. That being said, I still think Ur-Priests would be able to steal from nature and have an easier time of it than stealing from the gods. An ideal or cosmic force would be less likely to resist or discover the intrusion.

That being said, I would require Knowledge Nature 8 and the expenditure of a feat OR the loss of the ability to rebuke undead (which I don't think the Ur should have anyway) to be able to tap into the Druid list.

[eggs]

Do you also let wizards learn trapsmith or bard spells?

[Mithril Leaf]

Do you also let wizards learn trapsmith or bard spells?

Druids can learn Ranger spells too, right?

[barna10]

Do you also let wizards learn trapsmith or bard spells?

If they research them, yes. However, they cast them at their the "wizard" version's level, if there is one.

What's your point?

[barna10]

Druids can learn Ranger spells too, right?

If they research them, yes. What's your point?

[eggs]

What's your point?
To find information. That's usually what those little interrogative squiggles at the end of sentences mean.

If you're using the fiction to justify rules arguments, your group would seem to play much faster and looser with the rules than any I've seen, and those in turn tend to be looser than people on these boards tend to assume.

[barna10]

To find information. That's usually what those little interrogative squiggles at the end of sentences mean.

If you're using the fiction to justify rules arguments, your group would seem to play much faster and looser with the rules than any I've seen, and those in turn tend to be looser than people on these boards tend to assume.

The whole game is fiction, lol. What non-fiction are you using?

[mattie_p]

The whole game is fiction, lol. What non-fiction are you using?

The Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 Core Rulebooks I, II, and III are found in my county library system under nonfiction call number 793.93 (They use Dewey). Looks like non-fiction to me. :smallbiggrin:

[Norin]

If you want to houserule it somehow, you could rework Ur-Priest to work like the Archivist - learning basically any divine spell out there (druid, ranger, pala, cleric, etc).

A bit too powerful i suppose, but if you allow it as dm or get your dm to approve, why not? :smallwink:

I would never allow it though, Ur-Priest is quite powerful enough as is imo.

[RFLS]

I agree with you somewhat. I prefer Druids as communers with nature instead of worshiping a nature god. That being said, I still think Ur-Priests would be able to steal from nature and have an easier time of it than stealing from the gods. An ideal or cosmic force would be less likely to resist or discover the intrusion.

That being said, I would require Knowledge Nature 8 and the expenditure of a feat OR the loss of the ability to rebuke undead (which I don't think the Ur should have anyway) to be able to tap into the Druid list.

First off, I have to say that I'd expressly disallow one of the most broken PrCs in the game from gaining more power. Don't ask for in game reasoning, because there isn't any. If I had a munchkin enough player use Ur Priest and then ask for more power, I'd probably throw the DMG at them. It's silly and broken to let them have access to more stuff..

Broader note- I think most people here have seen your other two recent threads on the topic of Ur Priest. I feel as though you're asking us to justify your cheesed out character to some poor DM somewhere.

[Acanous]

Doesn't the Ur-Priest already get the ability to steal abilities from other things as a capstone?
Want Wish? Steal it from a Genie. Want Gate? Steal it from a Solar!

I don't see what the problem here is.

[candycorn]

I see a lot of fear but not much logic as to why this is a bad idea.

I have a better idea: as an ACF, lose ability to rebuke undead (and DMM fuel) for increased spell access.

This makes a ton of sense. The ability to rebuke undead should be a granted/channeled ability and not one easily stolen. Also, without access to DMM, the class drops a tier or two. Any increased power from greater spell access shouldn't be an issue.

It makes sense, from a fluff and logic perspective. It makes no sense, from a perspective considering class power. Ur-Priest already has access to the entire spell list of a Tier 1 class. That Tier 1 class gets that rating almost exclusively from its spell list.

In addition, the Ur-priest gets access to Rebuking undead, which is the only other place a cleric gets its powers.

In addition, an Ur-priest can get access to 9th level spells 3-4 levels before a cleric can.

This means, when a Cleric is throwing 7th level spells, an Ur Priest is throwing 9th's.

Add on that the druid list has a very different theme, focusing on massive widespread damage, and also melee supremacy.

This would take two classes which are each tier 1, exclusively due to their spell list, give their combined list to a class, give it access to spells several levels earlier.

Feats are not a high enough cost for this. A feat might be reasonable for allowing 1 prepared spell per day from another divine class's list, but no more. There are simply too many problematic combinations between the lists that were not originally foreseen, and which would make a class which is already more than strong enough, even stronger.

If you wish to increase options, I recommend:

Savage Bard 9 / Ur Priest 2 / Sublime Chord 2 / Mystic Theurge 8.

That will get you 9th level cleric spells, and 9th level wizard spells, along with access to the bard list. If you need spells from other lists, Miracle can duplicate them without additional XP cost, as long as they are level 7 or below.

Again, from the perspective of thinking logically about the class description, your argument is sound. From a balance perspective, it is not even close.