changing a few core things.

[spacemonkeydm]

I am changing a few core things.
So I am swallowing the cleric spell list into the magic user spell list to create a magician class for an early middle ages world. Even well there is a big catholic church like structure I did not like the idea of clerics and liked the idea of members of the priest hood binding devils, summoning angels, speaking sacred names of Gods and such over the militant priest hood that casts spells.
Also this is one I am confused in how to do. I want to rewrite the elf spell list to make to feel more faerie. I am think of giving them spell that create phantasms, charm people or affect the natural world. Is there enough of a robust spell list to create this?
finally I was going to let any class use any weapons. I was going to restrict magicians to no armor, Elves to Chain and fighters with any. Do you think giving fighters any armor is a good enough edge or should I also restrict weapons from other classes? For the fact magic swords are very powerful and could give fighters a deeper edge.

[aldarron]

I think that's a very workable plan as is. If you want a ready made elf spell list, steal that of the AD&D or C&C druid. Frankly I think that those spells are better suited to elves than "druids" to begin with. Another possibility if you have access to it would be the "faerrie song magic" from Adventures in Fantasy.

My only other suggestion to you would be, considering the immunity elves have to undead in CM, to also let elves turn undead.

[cooper]

Saints and heathen-cum-christian warriors circa the time period of Beowulf, Prince Marko, and St. Olaf, are as much a part of what fantasy is in Anglo-Saxon culture as anything else is. The Anglo and Saxon epics in the first 5 centuries after christianity are all about the blending of old norse heroes and the new christian ones.

Do what you want with the cleric-hero, but nobody can say that it doesn't jive with an age fables. It may not work with a world of "sword and sorcery", but it certainly works in a world that tolkien wished for, that of a mythology of the Angles and the Saxons and the Franks and Germans instead of the mythology of the Greeks.

The problem many players have is that the D&D is exactly what tolkien wished for (a renaissance of English/German mythology of the 1st-6th century almost lost and smothered by the Greek/Roman rennaisance) which has flourished, first with Tolkien, then with Gygax and Arneson, then with books like Game of Thrones and video games like Skyrim. Beowulf was dealing with not only the old Norse mythology (Odin, thor) and the Greek, but also Christianity.

The problem D&D players have is some intrinsic dislike of the early german-christian mythology, even though it fits perfectly well into the milieu. They think christian symbolism is out of place in the game. Nothing could be further from the truth (and I say this as an unbeliver).

It's like people only want a greek style pantheon with their Beowulf-like adventures. Besides, turning undead is important because those are the only monsters who do not suffer morale in normal combat, getting rid of turning undead makes undead too difficult.

Clerics are more wedded to our ideas of western fantasy than most people understand. D&D without clerics is more greek than english. It pulls the campaign toward Perseus and away from Beowulf.

[spacemonkeydm]

I agree with you that DnD has a deep christian underpinning. My understanding is that Clerics don plate mail and maces fighting besides Charlemagne. Could that just be a fighter or do we need it always to be a saint is my question? The Church is very important in my world since I am basing it around Europe in the 7th century. Maybe I should leave the cleric in.
maybe i should sleep.

[coffee]

Priests (the job) are very important in a Christian world; Clerics (the class) may not be as much.

If you look at the Cleric class as more of a warrior-priest, like a variation of a Knight Templar (not strictly historical, obviously, but it's a fantasy game...) that might work.

That's just my two cp.

[waysoftheearth]

While all of the above may well be true, the single most important consideration is fun. It doesn't have to be historically, or culturally, or temporally accurate. It necessarily does have to be fun, however, else nobody would bother at all.

So with that in mind, overstep boundaries, challenge dogma, and laugh at limitations. Make the game your own! That is, after all, a huge part of the fun

[tombowings]

Feb 25, 2012 4:37:03 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

While all of the above may well be true, the single most important consideration is fun. It doesn't have to be historically, or culturally, or temporally accurate. It necessarily does have to be fun, however, else nobody would bother at all.

So with that in mind, overstep boundaries, challenge dogma, and laugh at limitations. Make the game your own! That is, after all, a huge part of the fun

Agreed.

I run a game set in the 13th century. does that stop me from having space aliens, Egyptian pyramids, and pagan clerics. Of course not. Just have fun. If your players are going to give you a hard time about it, find a new player. If you're giving yourself a hard time about it, ask, "is this making planing the more or less fun." If the answer is 'less,' time to scrap the limitations and branch out.