How practical would collapsing the primary spellcasters be?

[VoxRationis]

I've been thinking about creating a setting and I think that the clear distinction between class spell lists get in the way of ambiguity about the divinity of gods, which can be an interesting part of the setting. In 3rd edition, Unearthed Arcana suggested the generic spellcasting class, which had access to all spell lists (but had a sorcerer-style limit on spells known). This appeals to me; however, I feel that 5th edition's more robust class features (besides spells) for clerics, wizards, etc. would make it more difficult to collapse the primary spellcasters into one class. What do other people think?

[JNAProductions]

Honestly, just give them a Wizard's Arcane Recovery and you're probably set. It'd be a tad weaker than most classes are now, but not seriously with their crazy spell list.

[Angelmaker]

Collapsing druids ( loosing their shapechange ) would be terrible for them. Other classes loose a stack of abilities as well. I dont see this concept from 3.5 working in 5e in terms of flavour. Might balance them a bit with martials, but id rather see martials buffed in interesting ways.

[SharkForce]

why would they need the same spell list? just assume it's a different source, but not necessarily a deity (canonically, in 2e at least, level 1-2 spells came from the priest's faith, not the deity, and in eberron deities are certainly rather different... you've got a lich with a cult of undeath, a fanatical warforged who wanders around the mournlands, a bunch of elven undead creatures, a schizophrenic pillar of light, and basically those are the only "gods" that anyone has ever seen (there are also a number of gods that nobody has ever actually met at all)... and none of them really even have anything to distinguish them from roughly identical things that aren't gods except that people worship them, and some of the worshipers can perform miracles but don't even necessarily have to act in a way the deity would approve to be able to do so.

if you want to introduce uncertainty about the gods, just... don't provide certainty about the gods.

[Scarab112]

Something of note with spellcasters in this edition is that wizards have a much broader spell list than other casters, with Clerics and Druids being the most narrow. What might work would be combining the Cleric and Sorcerer lists and putting them both on the base wizard class, giving them a list of spells known as the sorcerer.

The various schools can help distinguish as domains of various faiths, helping deities be more ambiguous. An issue is that such a caster would lack many spells known, missing the standard domain spells from a cleric. For this, I would recommend giving them their choice of circle of the land spells to pad out their known spells.

[Knaight]

A simple collapsing would cause problems. With that said, if you're willing to homebrew an actual generic spellcaster class, this could work just fine. It will cut off options that were otherwise there, but that's not actually a problem if the players are on board with the changes, and it fits the setting. It might also be worth keeping multiple lists to pick between, and just breaking them up differently.

[Stan]

I don't think collapsing is needed for ambiguity of religion. Clerics, Druids, Paladins, Warlocks, sorta Sorcerers, and maybe even Bards all get powers from other worldly contacts. If people with opposite beliefs and methods are getting spells, there is already ambiguity unless the gods come forth and lecture on the details of their mythology, who knows what's right. Some of those with spiritual contacts are casting arcane spells, and the arcane/divine division is less pronounced in 5e.

Maybe it's the faith that matters and the magic was inside all along? Or maybe that's new age crap and you need contact with another being but you never really get to know them as they are so alien and have relations with many casters? Different groups can have very different beliefs but still zap you with magic.

[Millface]

If you want a class that has access to all spell lists the 5e Bard already does this.

Why would you want to take half the classes in the game and remove their unique differences and strengths? This makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Am I reading this right that the reason is so that people aren't sure whether or not gods exist? There are plenty of big characters in the setting who already doubt the nature of gods and divine magic, some even despite direct interaction with "gods". Ambiguity is there as long as you want it to be, it has nothing to do with spell lists.

[Slipperychicken]

the reason is so that people aren't sure whether or not gods exist? .

I mean, it's kind of hard to argue when clergymen can literally wave a rosary, shout "the power of [diety name] compels you!", and then explode every zombie within 30 feet. Or when faith-healing is not only indisputably effective, but instantly cures any mortal injury or disease, and can even raise the dead.

[Mellack]

I mean, it's kind of hard to argue when clergymen can literally wave a rosary, shout "the power of [diety name] compels you!", and then explode every zombie within 30 feet. Or when faith-healing is not only indisputably effective, but instantly cures any mortal injury or disease, and can even raise the dead.

Add to that having higher level spellcasters summon an angel/devil and ask them who they work for. Travel to another plane and visit them. Even talk to the dead and ask about the other side.

[Doug Lampert]

I mean, it's kind of hard to argue when clergymen can literally wave a rosary, shout "the power of [diety name] compels you!", and then explode every zombie within 30 feet. Or when faith-healing is not only indisputably effective, but instantly cures any mortal injury or disease, and can even raise the dead.

All of which looks a lot like spell-casting, and spells don't need gods.

In fact, a Bard who doesn't worship anyone can do lots of that; and if the cleric is ACTUALLY calling on the power of an actual god, then why does he ever run out? Are we supposed to believe that when a level 1 cleric has cast two level 1 spells the GOD is out of power? Or do we believe that the Cleric is the one who's out of mojo.

And if it's the cleric whose out of mojo, then how do we know the god is involved at all? Wizards run out of mojo too, but we don't need gods to explain it.

Clerics having a limit on spells prepared or spells per day (much less both), really only makes sense if the cleric is the one providing and using the power.


Add to that having higher level spellcasters summon an angel/devil and ask them who they work for. Travel to another plane and visit them. Even talk to the dead and ask about the other side.

All problems that exist in the setting, not in the spells. If the setting says "the gods may not actually exist", then in fact you can't plane-shift and visit something that's clearly a god.

[VoxRationis]

I mean, it's kind of hard to argue when clergymen can literally wave a rosary, shout "the power of [diety name] compels you!", and then explode every zombie within 30 feet. Or when faith-healing is not only indisputably effective, but instantly cures any mortal injury or disease, and can even raise the dead.

Bingo. This is especially true when clerical magic (and druidic, for that matter) is objectively different from that of wizards, even from the perspective of an unlettered peasant watching the two.
I've been running a 3e campaign where the gods are entirely composed of the collective will and faith of their worshipers, but it's been ringing hollow, since unpopular gods, like the god of serpents and blind, unthinking malice to all others, still give their clerics the same amount of juice as more widely appealing deities.
Plus, in the end, whether or not the gods are sitting on a cloud somewhere looking down upon the world, in a world with clerical magic, they're still "real" in that something is giving you this supernatural power, and that power is indisputable.

[SharkForce]

I mean, it's kind of hard to argue when clergymen can literally wave a rosary, shout "the power of [diety name] compels you!", and then explode every zombie within 30 feet. Or when faith-healing is not only indisputably effective, but instantly cures any mortal injury or disease, and can even raise the dead.


Add to that having higher level spellcasters summon an angel/devil and ask them who they work for. Travel to another plane and visit them. Even talk to the dead and ask about the other side.

again, look to eberron. the planes don't have deities. angels and devils have never seen the deities they serve. the dead don't go to the land of their deities. and clerics don't have to do the will of their deities to be empowered, but do have to think they're doing the will of their deities.

the only deities you can physically meet are a warforged who is largely indistinguishable from a high-level warforged warrior, a lich, a group of positive energy undead who are created by mortals, and a pillar of light that is actually the merged souls of a couatl and a rakshasa. and there is nothing about them that definitively says "this is a god, not just a regular mortal (or undead creature)". the rest of the gods nobody has ever seen. and in all cases, you can be doing horrible despiccable things in the name of a "good" deity (or at least, what is presumed to be a good deity) and still be a cleric of that deity. in some cases, a concept can even take the place of a deity.

are the gods real? do they actually exist, or are they just stories and ordinary people pretending to that position? who knows. they have servants, they have churches, but still, there are no firm clear answers to the question of whether or not gods even exist. arguments can be made either way; vol is just a regular lich, the undying court are just elven mummies, the lord of blades is just a high level warforged, and the silver flame is just two outsiders who have merged souls constantly fighting a war for control of their combined manifestation. the sovereign host have never actually been seen, the path of light is just a concept, siberys/eberron/khyber only "exist" in the form of parts of the world, and there are plenty of god-like beings that make no pretense of being gods; the daelkhyr are known to have created a number of different races, the leaders of the monster kingdom (three hags) are practically worshipped like gods, the inspired are basically considered demigods, and so on. the dragons basically "worship" the idea of a draconic prophecy, and the giants, honestly, i'm not sure if they worship anything (but if they do, it's probably the giant who stopped the dal quori invasion whose name i can't remember). the drow worship a god called "vulkoor" that everyone else basically insists is just one of the sovereign host as well...

and none of them are definitively something you can point to and say that they are, beyond a shadow of doubt, gods.

edit: *is* there an objective difference between druid and wizard spellcasting? i mean, they get different spells, but that doesn't prove what the source is, and may not even prove that the source is different.

[Millface]

Right! There's ambiguity already. Are there beings that can grant mortals power if they shout the right words? Yes! But that doesn't mean they're "gods", that doesn't mean they're all powerful or infallible or ultimately the only choice for afterlife.

The assumption that your god is perfect, the only correct path for mortals to take, is where the faith comes in. Certainly not even close to everyone has that faith in the gods, even though priests can do cool things by invoking names, and celestials/demons sometimes work for higher beings.

A god is perfect and all powerful, the only proof to be found in casting priest spells is that there is a powerful being involved OR that faith, in and of itself, holds power. It definitely doesn't mean that there is "one true way" or that the being is a god. Tons and tons of ambiguity to be found with the system exactly how it is.

[xroads]

If you want to collapse all the spell lists into one, I think it's doable. But you'd probably have to simplify the system.


Drop all but one caster class (wizard? sorceror?).
Drop all of the hybrid classes (no bards, no paladins, etc.).
And drop all of the specializations that use magic (no eldritch knights or arcane tricksters).


This should leave you with fighter, monk, thief, & wizard (or whatever caster class you chose).

[JNAProductions]

Bard is a full caster class, not a hybrid.

[VoxRationis]

Right! There's ambiguity already. Are there beings that can grant mortals power if they shout the right words? Yes! But that doesn't mean they're "gods", that doesn't mean they're all powerful or infallible or ultimately the only choice for afterlife.

The assumption that your god is perfect, the only correct path for mortals to take, is where the faith comes in. Certainly not even close to everyone has that faith in the gods, even though priests can do cool things by invoking names, and celestials/demons sometimes work for higher beings.

A god is perfect and all powerful, the only proof to be found in casting priest spells is that there is a powerful being involved OR that faith, in and of itself, holds power. It definitely doesn't mean that there is "one true way" or that the being is a god. Tons and tons of ambiguity to be found with the system exactly how it is.

You keep using terms like "only" and "one true way," which may be where part of your dispute with the clerics as set up comes from. The clerics of most D&D settings don't say anything about there being one true way, because gods in D&D are less like Abrahamic conceptions of divinity and closer to those of the ancient polytheistic religions, where gods were powerful but fallible, and could exist alongside one another just fine. Perfection is not inherent or necessary for divinity, and deities are not mutually exclusive.

Edit: That said, we're getting off-topic. I'm not here to debate my opinions on theology in fictional settings or GitP's love affair with Eberron. I'm asking on the practicality of combining the spellcasting classes into one generalized, secular class that can nonetheless get healing spells and other effects associated with divine magic.

[Stan]

I'm asking on the practicality of combining the spellcasting classes into one generalized, secular class that can nonetheless get healing spells and other effects associated with divine magic.

You could do that by picking sorcerer or any class with a limited number of known spells and then allowing them to take spells from any list. I'd go with sorcerer as they are a bit weak and the options will give them a boost so they don't outshine noncasters.

This will kill the fun for many players. There's a reason why most of the classes have spells.

[Millface]

You keep using terms like "only" and "one true way," which may be where part of your dispute with the clerics as set up comes from. The clerics of most D&D settings don't say anything about there being one true way, because gods in D&D are less like Abrahamic conceptions of divinity and closer to those of the ancient polytheistic religions, where gods were powerful but fallible, and could exist alongside one another just fine. Perfection is not inherent or necessary for divinity, and deities are not mutually exclusive.

Edit: That said, we're getting off-topic. I'm not here to debate my opinions on theology in fictional settings or GitP's love affair with Eberron. I'm asking on the practicality of combining the spellcasting classes into one generalized, secular class that can nonetheless get healing spells and other effects associated with divine magic.

Whether or not something is practical has everything to do with what it is you're trying to accomplish. You want more ambiguity and less certainty with divinity. Us trying to offer up easier solutions to that problem should be taken as a vote of "no" from us doing so, we're just offering up alternative solutions to your problem. I.E. trying to be more helpful than just saying no.

If you want secular clerics you can easily homebrew that, the difference between divine and arcane magic in 5e no longer serves a mechanical purpose. Classes getting their own spell lists, and certain spells being omitted and granted to each, serves a HUGE mechanical purpose. If you're asking whether or not it's practical to destroy several base classes and create your own, singular replacement? There are easier ways to accomplish what I think you're trying to accomplish, so no, by definition it's not practical. It needlessly plays with balance. All you have to do is say that all magic comes from one source. Clerics cast heals and suports because that's what they focus on.

Spells like Divination and Commune can ask powerful outsiders these questions instead of gods. Or you can flavor it "Dresden Files" style so that faith of any kind has power of its own. Faith in a god, an idea, or a principle. A Paladin in this way can have faith in his order's ideals and still have access to magic without necessarily attaining that power from an obvious divine being.

[Knaight]

I mean, it's kind of hard to argue when clergymen can literally wave a rosary, shout "the power of [diety name] compels you!", and then explode every zombie within 30 feet. Or when faith-healing is not only indisputably effective, but instantly cures any mortal injury or disease, and can even raise the dead.

On the other hand, other people are perfectly capable of doing the exact same thing with arcane magic. The spells which don't have an obvious analog (which are a bit short in the blowing things up category) work better here, but it's hardly implausible that there is no divine magic, just arcane magic that religious orders keep to themselves.

[VoxRationis]

On the other hand, other people are perfectly capable of doing the exact same thing with arcane magic. The spells which don't have an obvious analog (which are a bit short in the blowing things up category) work better here, but it's hardly implausible that there is no divine magic, just arcane magic that religious orders keep to themselves.

The problem here is that a) they don't do the exact same things, and b) they don't do them in the same way, which might not be immediately observable to a peasant but is immediately obvious to a player looking at the class setups. A priest needs to have faith to do their magic—even in settings like Eberron where they can do things objectively against the principles of their church, a cleric needs to believe that they are doing the right thing by their god/principle. Furthermore, a cleric's magic functions differently. All clerics, no matter how unlettered or forgetful, automatically know all the spells on their lists, and while a single combat's demonstration of skill won't show the difference between that and a wizard's way, a long campaign will, in-game and on the character sheet. Lastly, wizards, no matter how lettered or well-researched, no matter how many sacred tomes they wrest away from the dead hands of priests and pore over for decades, can't get spells from the cleric list, and wizards are the sorts of people who should be able to copy any effect, if all magic comes from the same source.

[PotatoGolem]

The problem here is that a) they don't do the exact same things, and b) they don't do them in the same way, which might not be immediately observable to a peasant but is immediately obvious to a player looking at the class setups. A priest needs to have faith to do their magic—even in settings like Eberron where they can do things objectively against the principles of their church, a cleric needs to believe that they are doing the right thing by their god/principle. Furthermore, a cleric's magic functions differently. All clerics, no matter how unlettered or forgetful, automatically know all the spells on their lists, and while a single combat's demonstration of skill won't show the difference between that and a wizard's way, a long campaign will, in-game and on the character sheet. Lastly, wizards, no matter how lettered or well-researched, no matter how many sacred tomes they wrest away from the dead hands of priests and pore over for decades, can't get spells from the cleric list, and wizards are the sorts of people who should be able to copy any effect, if all magic comes from the same source.

But the game already supports casters who get their power in all sorts of different ways and having that impact both the spell list and the mechanics of spellcasting. Wizards get it by study, Sorcerers by blood, Warlocks though a deal, Druids and Rangers... somehow. If you import the idea from 3.x that clerics can be a cleric of an ideal, then the fact that they have a different spell list or casting mechanic says nothing about whether the gods are real. Maybe those spells are cleric-only because the gods truly give unique powers to their priests, or maybe they're cleric-only because accessing magic through force of will and belief manifests differently from accessing it through study. Just like accessing it through study already gives you a way different spell list and mechanics from, for instance, warlocks bargaining for magic. There's a number of warlock-only spells that a wizard can never know. Same with bard or sorcerer.

[pwykersotz]

As a suggestion, the Bard might be the best chassis for the generic spellcaster, simply because they can already have any spell they want (to a more limited degree). As such, if there IS an interaction regarding class features and spells that isn't known yet, this should sidestep it nicely and still provide options for subclasses. 1/2 and 1/3 casters shouldn't cause trouble.

[Millface]

But the game already supports casters who get their power in all sorts of different ways and having that impact both the spell list and the mechanics of spellcasting. Wizards get it by study, Sorcerers by blood, Warlocks though a deal, Druids and Rangers... somehow. If you import the idea from 3.x that clerics can be a cleric of an ideal, then the fact that they have a different spell list or casting mechanic says nothing about whether the gods are real. Maybe those spells are cleric-only because the gods truly give unique powers to their priests, or maybe they're cleric-only because accessing magic through force of will and belief manifests differently from accessing it through study. Just like accessing it through study already gives you a way different spell list and mechanics from, for instance, warlocks bargaining for magic. There's a number of warlock-only spells that a wizard can never know. Same with bard or sorcerer.

This. At the very least you could change the Clerics over to Pact Magic, but instead of Evil or Chaotic beings they pact with Celestials or Elementals. You can remove the pantheon entirely and still have viable clerics/paladins/rangers/druids.

Bottom line: If you can't figure out a way to solve the problem you're looking to solve simply by changing how you describe magic in your world you're not trying hard enough. Or you've already decided you're going to collapse the classes and no amount of good solutions are going to change your mind. Which is fine, play how you want.