Page 15 of 29
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 2:53 am
by Tsidkenu
Thread has only been open for three days. Should be another three days more at least before this gets locked at let some of the less frequent visitors have a read and an opinion.
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 6:38 am
by Garn Greymoon
As a side note. I like the name above " divine sorcerer " kudos!
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 9:24 am
by Steve
Garn Greymoon wrote:As a side note. I like the name above " divine sorcerer " kudos!
You mean Divine Soulcerer, I assume.
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 9:56 am
by Calodan
Why not Divine Channeler?
Definition of channeler. : a person who conveys thoughts or energy from a source believed to be outside the person's body or conscious mind; specifically : one who speaks for nonphysical beings or spirits.
At this definition it is similar to the Spirit Shaman but with a different spell book to draw from. For the Channeler the divine gifts are given by the god but they are not exactly the "VOICE DIRECTLY" of the god they serve but more guided instead by feeling rather than direct contact and "FAVORITISM".
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:01 am
by Akroma666
just a FYI: Thread will continue until it becomes derailed or QC asks for it to be locked for deliberation.
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:36 am
by Garn Greymoon
Divine channeler sounds pretty spot on class title.
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:22 am
by Sir Nathaniel01
Oracle
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 12:34 pm
by Eclypticon
I like both divine channeler and oracle. An oracle sounds more like someone with a focus on certain types of divination though.
In what ways would we change the class description though?
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 12:35 pm
by Garn Greymoon
Here's one from 4e. Invoker.
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 12:50 pm
by Akroma666
Profit?
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 1:04 pm
by Calodan
Mystic! Divine Mystic!
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 1:11 pm
by AlwaysSummer Day
Well I know that 5E basically just made it into a background/template (or whatever) for a type of sorcerer. They nerfed it quite a bit as well.
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 1:44 pm
by chad878262
posted this in the QC discussion, but thought I would place it here to see what the community thinks.
What if we came up with rules around FS that restricted multi-classing? some examples:
- FS cannot take Blackguard/Cleric/Paladin Levels (i.e. no EDM FS)
- FS cannot take any base class, PRC only (downside is only evil FS can get EDM)
- Come up with list based on Deity of classes/PRC's allowed for FS (i.e. Mask allows rogue type classes, Tyr allows Paladin, Bane allows BG, etc)
Any thoughts from the community? Like/hate/meh?
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 1:59 pm
by Akroma666
chad878262 wrote:
- FS cannot take Blackguard/Cleric/Paladin Levels (i.e. no EDM FS)?
This and leave it alone. It reduces the saves because they lose charisma to saves and they lose edm. That solves 2 big concerns the community had. Start small with this change and see how it affects everyone.
Re: Possible QC change - Community input appreciated
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 2:02 pm
by Calodan
Doesn't seem too far fetched. For me that fits. A set of RP rules is acceptable to me. Giving only evil the ability to get EDM may push more people to make evil characters but the only thing I worry about is PvP at this point. I know there is a big push to get more RP for Evil PCs out there that does not include player conflict since that seems to be a main sticking point for Evil RPers in some cases.