[3.5] Divine vs. Arcane

[esorscher]

Let me illustrate what's happened thus far in the campaign:

Three of the four players have made their characters and started the first adventure. They all have an ECL 3, there's a human cleric, a human barbarian, and a halfling beguiler 2/ halfling substitution rogue 1. The fourth character was going to play a warlock (so there would be some semblance of offensive arcane casting) but now wants to play a drow ranger, which I'm fine with, as I was planning on including drow in the setting anyway.

Now, let me pose the following question: Since the party has no offensive arcane casting (just the beguiler's illusory magic), should I change the adventure in any significant way? Maybe make divine magic the standard and arcane magic rare? Have them fight clerics instead of wizards?

Also, the halfling beguiler/ rogue needs a ot of help building his character. He wants to keep a kender-like theme from Dragonlance, but I also want his character to be able to hold his own in battle. He has zero melee ability, but his ranged sneak attack deals +2d6 damage. What feats, levels, etc., should he take to maximize his ranged damage dealing?

And, which is "better:" Divine or Arcane? What are the advantages/ disadvantages?

[Eldariel]

Arcane has more broken spells and is more efficient offensively (while divine magic has better healing and reviving). Basically, the only thing Wizards/Sorcerers have over Clerics is their spell list and that's enough to make up for two hit die sizes, fort-saves, turning, domains, armor and weapon proficiencies, etc. On the other hand, divine characters generally have some means of using some arcane spells putting them about on par with enough work.

And no, I wouldn't change the adventure; if anything, fighting something you don't have is more interesting. In general, planning your adventure around specific party make-up is largely unnecessary as long as the general powerlevel is right; they'll manage well enough. Look at all the preplanned modules; none of them have notes "if the party has no arcane casters, change these wizards into adepts". Basically, while the party will be slightly lacking in the offensive punch, the Cleric can make up for much of that and they'll really be just fine as long as the characters themselves are decent.

[Fixer]

What the party will lack is effective AoE damage. This will make combats versus large amounts of weaker creatures more tedious and potentially dangerous to the players than they would have if they had an arcane caster with an AoE spell.

If the characters are having too easy of a time at something, throw a bunch of mooks at them (mooks: low-level, numerous opponents). If they need a break, use one higher-level opponent.

[Telonius]

Be a little bit cautious in choosing the monsters you're sending them up against. Trolls, for example, will probably be extraordinarily deadly unless they're appropriately equipped (flaming or acid weapons). Flying foes will also be hard to defeat, unless they invest in items of flight, or somehow obtain flying mounts.

[Draz74]

I don't think even mooks will give them much trouble, as long as they aren't immune to fear, charm, or mind-affecting spells.

The Beguiler can really be a perfectly effective arcane caster with just his illusions and enchantments.

Of course, if he's going to be taking levels/feats/items to turn him into a somewhat effective archer, that's a different story. His spellcasting will quickly become nearly useless. I suggest not pressuring him anymore about being decent in combat (that's what the Ranger and Barbarian are for); he'll probably be more powerful sticking with the Beguiler shtick.

[Curmudgeon]

Don't change anything. The Cleric spell list includes a reasonable array of single-target damage spells (starting with Deific Vengeance (Spell Compendium) and Desiccate (Sandstorm) at level 2 and Searing Light at level 3) and just enough area of effect spells, though the Cleric will need to hunt around for those. Frost Breath (Spell Compendium) and Dance of Ruin (Book of Vile Darkness) at level 2 should get you started; Flame Strike at level 5 is when you start to get easy choices.

[Assassin89]

Divine spells do not suffer from spell failure, meaning that one can act spells in heavy armor. Arcane spells do suffer from such failure.

However, the better spells depends on one's favored strategies.

[Eldariel]

However, the better spells depends on one's favored strategies.

Fact is though that arcane spells are stronger. They pretty much have to be because of all the advantages divine casters have. Like, divine casting never gets anything on the level of Time Stop (except through Domains/cheese), and their level 1 spells aren't nearly as strong as Color Spray/Sleep/Grease, or level 2 up par with Web/Glitterdust. Also, Divine Phantom Steed (Air Walk) is a level 4 spell and so on.

If it were any other way, it would be really stupid to be a Wizard as a Cleric has d8 HD, 3/4th BAB, good Fort-saves, Domains, all spells known for free, Heavy Armor and Turn Undead vs. Wizard's d4 HD, ½ BAB, Scribe Scroll & 4 bonus feats and Familiar.

[JupiterPaladin]

Don't be so quick to rule out offensive spell for your party Cleric. Sure, WotC didn't write up many officially, but if you turn to pages 35 and 36 of your v3.5 DMG you'll find a nice little table from which they built the damaging spells in the first place. You can let the Cleric learn new spells from independent study. It's really easy to see that you can have a 4th level divine equivalent for Fireball and ends up being a better deal than the pre-written spells like Flamestrike. All you do is check the dice damage cap, add an energy type, and choose a spell shape (cone like cone of cold, pillar like flamestrike, spread like fireball but shorter range 100ft+ instead of 400ft+, bolt like lightning bolt, ray for single target higher damage and possible critical with ranged touch). Also, if the Cleric chooses the right domains, he can get access to a lot more arcane spells not covered by that. My favorites are

Time
1 - True Strike
2 - Gentle Repose
3 - Haste
4 - Freedom of Movement
5 - Permanency
6 - Contingency
7 - Moment of Prescience
8 - Foresight
9 - Time Stop

and

Travel
1 - Longstrider
2 - Locate Object
3 - Fly
4 - Dimension Door
5 - Teleport
6 - Find the Path
7 - Teleport, Greater
8 - Phase Door
9 - Astral Projection

which covers a lot of the best arcane spells! Clerics are definitely sexy beasts if built and played to at least near-full potential

[Riffington]

I really wouldn't worry about the lack of arcane spells. Especially in a low-level game, the cleric (and all the others) hold their own quite well. By the time you're high level enough for it to be a big issue, the party dynamics will have changed.

The question I've got is about the beguiler/rogue. I'm not sure you'll get much synergy between those two classes, and the flavors can be pretty similar - why does he want to be both?

[Kaiyanwang]

Don't change. I'm sure you players will find a way to overcome challenges anyway.

- Maybe you will have less spell damage, but melee damage will be more than fine. Terrain and smart play will do part of the job, too.

- Beguiler has control spells anyway, and even the Cleric could conjure walls or creatures to fill a gap sometimes.

- Lack of travel spells? More travel adventures. Is fun grow up a character able to teleport the party, making instantaneous a travel needing months time before, but is ANYWAY fun have always to travel from a place from another. Is a SOURCE of adventures.

-UMD can fix many things, and find a NPC able to cast a particular arcane spell (maybe a Wu jen in the far east?) could be a source of adventures, too.

- Nothing bad having Warlocks and Wizards as enemies. They can be good recurring enemies to hate/love, that's all, IMHO.

In short:

Arcane: More tricks/strange things, and as a general rule, more damage/spell level, and more manipulation spells, even more spells manipulating magic itself (even if it could depend from clerical domain). Some standard Action (or even immediate action) utilities are AWESOME (timestop, celerity)

Divine: Healing. And it could be enough. More powerful buffs, maybe. Generally better save, Base attack and HD (see even shugenja: more or less a sorcere with healings, but d6 HD -is fair for several factors anyway). Some temporary (and "breakable"role filling spell to be better in melee, as an example).

We could write a book on the topic anyway, IMO

I'll put Clerical Divine MAgic and Arcane Magic at the same level of power.
Druid one isMAYBE a lillte bit weaker, but... it's magic. Is anyway awesome. More, we all know that druid strenght is not only his magic.

[Paul H]

What the party will lack is effective AoE damage. This will make combats versus large amounts of weaker creatures more tedious and potentially dangerous to the players than they would have if they had an arcane caster with an AoE spell.

If the characters are having too easy of a time at something, throw a bunch of mooks at them (mooks: low-level, numerous opponents). If they need a break, use one higher-level opponent.

Hi

Actually Beguilers do have AoE spells, like Sleep, Glitterdust, Whelming Burst, Legion of Sentinels, Slow, Vertigo Field, Crushing Despair, Confusion, Mas Whelm, Incite Riot, etc. You can also take Shadow Binding or Shadow Spray with Advanced Learning.

If the GM allows, you could also take Eclectic Learning in lieu of Advance Learning (PHBII, Pg 67). Listed in Warmage section, but both Warmage & Beguiler have Avanced Learning, so I'd have no problems with this.

Lastly, some items in MIC allow you to change one spell into another. Eg Goggles of the Sun allows you to cast Fireballs. (Though the DC is set at DC14).

Beguilers just do things differently. Their spells often do non-lethal damage, damage stats, or compel targets to act differently. As opposed to direct damage such as a Fireball.

My Warmage/Cleric/Mystic (total lvl 12) Theurge recently did less to win combat than his (Wiz 1/Beguiler 9) cohort!

Cheers
Paul H

[Person_Man]

Tell the Halfling that Beguiler and Rogue don't synergize at all together. You just end up with weak spells and weak Sneak Attack. Although it isn't very apparent at low levels, once he gets to ECL 5 it will be obvious.

The drow better be focusing on the bow, and stay far away from combat. The +2 LA kill his hit points.

There's no reason to take more then 2 levels of Barbarian. But given how weak 3/4 of the party is, it shouldn't be a big deal.

But really the only thing you have to do is ask the Cleric not to go CoDzilla. As long as he's not dominating everything, it doesn't matter how weak the other players are. As DM, you can always reduce the difficulties of encounters as needed.

[Oslecamo]

There's no reason to take more then 2 levels of anything. Just become Pun-Pun at second level.

Here, fixed it for you, since clearly maximum power is everything that matters. Indeed, why simply take levels of barbarians when I can waste countless hours of my life looking trough all the possibilities and seeking the perfect combination wich still is crushed by Pun-pun? Specially when the rest of the party doesn't bother to do so

[Paul H]

Hi

Ninja'd whilst amending my last post!

I agree with Person Man that multiclassing Rogue/Beguiler isn't that good unless you're going for a PrC.

Multiclassing slows the mix of more powerful spells & Beguiler class abilities, such as Cloaked Casting, Advanced Learning, etc. I've only done it twice. Once because the special Cohort already had a level of Wizard (Favoured Class), the second was a level of Warlock to go Eldritch Theurge. (+19 Search isn't the max for Changeling Beguiler 6/Warlock1)!

Cheers
Paul H

[Thurbane]

If the Cleric has (or gets) the magic domain, he can use Wizard wands (and scrolls) without too much problem.

[Zeful]

Here, fixed it for you, since clearly maximum power is everything that matters. Indeed, why simply take levels of barbarians when I can waste countless hours of my life looking trough all the possibilities and seeking the perfect combination wich still is crushed by Pun-pun? Specially when the rest of the party doesn't bother to do so

Because the DM has this fun ability called "**** you Pun-Pun" it's better known as "rule 0" which allows them to retroactively change any creature's abilities for any reason. So why waste your time trying to get ultimate power when the DM can say, "Your character is unmade." and win this arms race.

[Artanis]

Regarding Divine vs. Arcane, it depends on what you mean by "better".

If by "better" you mean "do the more effective casters tend to be arcane casters or divine casters?" Then it's debateable, as this thread itself shows.

If by "better" you mean "is Spell X better if cast as an arcane spell or if cast as a divine spell?" then divine is better, period. The only difference between a spell being cast as arcane versus the same spell being cast as divine is that divine doesn't have ASF. For example, the only difference between Dispel Magic being cast by a Cleric vs. Dispel Magic being cast by a Wizard is that the Cleric doesn't have ASF.

[Nohwl]

Arcane: More tricks/strange things, and as a general rule, more damage/spell level, and more manipulation spells, even more spells manipulating magic itself (even if it could depend from clerical domain). Some standard Action (or even immediate action) utilities are AWESOME (timestop, celerity)

Divine: Healing. And it could be enough. More powerful buffs, maybe. Generally better save, Base attack and HD (see even shugenja: more or less a sorcere with healings, but d6 HD -is fair for several factors anyway). Some temporary (and "breakable"role filling spell to be better in melee, as an example).

if youre comparing clerics and wizards spell lists then yes, but i think an archivist has an advantage over wizards. i havent really seen a full list of arcane spells though. and i dont know of a class that has access to all arcane spells like an archivist has access to all divine spells, that would probably be better to compare. theres a favored soul variant that allows you to get any wizard spell of 6th level or lower onto the divine list. im not sure if masters of the wild is legal or not, i can never remember, but hexer does the same thing except with all wizard spells. (you can get a lot of the higher level wizard spells anyway if it isnt.) then you have divine bard for divine versions of those spells. an archivist can cast all divine spells, meaning all of the wizard spells that qualify and all of the bard spells can be on your list. (what the dm will allow is a different story.)

[Lappy9000]

You'd be surprised the madness that a party consisting of a melee, 2 sneaks, and a divine caster can wreak. So, no, the party should be fine.

[Llama231]

Divine magic is the most powerful at low levels, arcane at high levels.

[monty]

If by "better" you mean "is Spell X better if cast as an arcane spell or if cast as a divine spell?" then divine is better, period. The only difference between a spell being cast as arcane versus the same spell being cast as divine is that divine doesn't have ASF. For example, the only difference between Dispel Magic being cast by a Cleric vs. Dispel Magic being cast by a Wizard is that the Cleric doesn't have ASF.

Not necessarily. There are feats that only affect arcane spells, such as Arcane Thesis, and on the other hand you have DMM and its ilk. Those should be taken into account as well.

[Kaiyanwang]

if youre comparing clerics and wizards spell lists then yes, but i think an archivist has an advantage over wizards. i havent really seen a full list of arcane spells though. and i dont know of a class that has access to all arcane spells like an archivist has access to all divine spells, that would probably be better to compare. theres a favored soul variant that allows you to get any wizard spell of 6th level or lower onto the divine list. im not sure if masters of the wild is legal or not, i can never remember, but hexer does the same thing except with all wizard spells. (you can get a lot of the higher level wizard spells anyway if it isnt.) then you have divine bard for divine versions of those spells. an archivist can cast all divine spells, meaning all of the wizard spells that qualify and all of the bard spells can be on your list. (what the dm will allow is a different story.)

You are right, Archivists are out of the challenge, I think.

If Master of The Wild is legal is up to the DM... but is 3.0, so many DM don't allow it (and anyway, most of the material inside has been updated - goodbye forever, auto-crit power critical... I'll be missing you...)

Not necessarily. There are feats that only affect arcane spells, such as Arcane Thesis, and on the other hand you have DMM and its ilk. Those should be taken into account as well.

Yeah. And there are effects affecting only Arcane or Divine casters (see the Shadowlads in Oriental Adventures, or the Purple Rain in the VIle Darkness).

[tcrudisi]

I don't think even mooks will give them much trouble, as long as they aren't immune to fear, charm, or mind-affecting spells.

The Beguiler can really be a perfectly effective arcane caster with just his illusions and enchantments.

Of course, if he's going to be taking levels/feats/items to turn him into a somewhat effective archer, that's a different story. His spellcasting will quickly become nearly useless. I suggest not pressuring him anymore about being decent in combat (that's what the Ranger and Barbarian are for); he'll probably be more powerful sticking with the Beguiler shtick.

I have to reply just to support this entire statement 100%. When I play a wizard, I am almost always either an enchanter or an illusionist. I rarely take AoE or damage-type spells. They are unnecessary. Anyone with some creativity can make enchantment or illusion spells as offensive as evocation. Also, Beguilers hold their own in combat. I'd take a Beguiler over a Rogue for combat any day.

The Beguiler will be more powerful sticking with Beguiler. Trying to turn a Beguiler into an Archer is probably a quick way to a crappy class. Of course, I'm not privvy to everything that's happening, but I just can't see a Beguiler being a good Archer.