What's the difference?
I'm not talking about the roleplaying interpretations of each magic, because that's going to change with each setting. What I mean to ask is this: What is the mechanical difference between the two magic types?
At a cursory glance, arcane magic is capable of "moving mountains." Its effects are overt, distinguishable, and often flamboyant. In raw damage vs. damage for the blasting type (an inferior version of spellcasting) arcane magic always wins, often with twice the damage capacity. Divine magic is more subtle, and has access to healing magic.
Except that's not really the case. As a primary divine caster, Druids are very near to Wizards/Sorcerers in terms of magically making things happen. Druids move mountains, conjure beasts, and explode plants to entangle enemies. Bards are sort of like Druids in the same respect, relying on the more subtle aspects of magic to achieve their goals. Ignoring the fact that bards are capable of casting healing magic (from it's offshoot of the druid class), Bardic magic hardly seems par for classification as arcane.
This is all pretty confusing to me, since arcanists suffer heavy drawbacks in comparison to their divine companions. Few know their entire spell list (beguiler, dread necromancer, & warmage being the exception), and all suffer heavy penalties to their spellcasting capabilities with arcane spell failure. The problem with this, though, is that most of the "best," or most mechanically effective spells exist on both sides of the fence- or at least have mechanical substitutes (command vs. suggestion, entangle vs. web, shield vs. shield of faith).
So really, what's the difference? What question do developers ask when they see a spell that allows them to allot it to one of the spellcasting classes, other than thinking "it's leafy/elemental, so give it to the druids" or "I could see merlin doing this, give it to the wizards"?
The biggest - and only absolute - difference is that divine magic comes from a divine source (a god, a philosophy, nature...) and arcane magic doesn't.
And the way I see it, spells are put on spell lists mostly on a "does it fit the concept" basis. There probably is some balancing, usually on a concept level, meaning they don't do the "can do all sorts of magic perfectly" concept.
Concerning mechanically substitutes:
Command isn't nearly as good as suggestion (command lasts for one round, and even greater command only lasts a couple of rounds, and you get a save each round), and shield is very different from shield of faith (shield bonus versus deflection bonus, personal versus touch).
Note that while wizards might not be able to wear armour without messing up their spellcasting (unless they stick to light armour and get feats), they have magic at their disposal that can make their armour class almost irrelevant.
Plus, except for the "cannot heal", the wizard's spell list is extremely versatile in general. They can protect. They can buff. They can hex, they cann destroy, they can kill, they can dominate, they can deceive....
What's the difference?
I'm not talking about the roleplaying interpretations of each magic, because that's going to change with each setting. What I mean to ask is this: What is the mechanical difference between the two magic types?
Divine magic basically always comes with a code of conduct attached. Violate the code, your magic goes away - for a time. They often have a hierarchy they have to answer to. Arcanists never have this problem - they do what they want, when they want, how they want. This might not come up in every campaign, so it's tempting to call it a 'roleplaying interpretation', but there _is_ a defined mechanic for clerics and druids losing their powers.
I think a lot of GMs are pretty lenient with players about it too. Being a cleric or druid shouldn't always be 'don't do X and Y' but also 'DO this and that' as well. Divine casters should always have strong convictions and motivations, or they wouldn't have their magic at all (IMO).
Divine magic is better at dealing with positive/negative energies - healing/restoration and necromancy, where arcane magic is better at using elemental damage (fire/cold/acid/sonic/etc.). Divine magic is better at summoning (or, at least, friendly summoning), while arcane magic is better at dimensional movement (especially astral/ethereal/shadow). Arcane is also better at illusion.
|
Personally I never really understood the arcane/divine separation. Not from a flavour point of view and not from a strictly mechanical point of view either. I mean... using Helic's examples, Clerics get healing, sure (which should be Necromancy...) but Wizards get Ray of Enfeeblement, Enervation, etc... and Clerics and Druids alike get some pretty good blasting spells, especially of fire and lightning.
Well, there's a reason I love Arcana Unearthed/Evolved's magic system, I guess, and that is in large part because it gets rid of the arbitrary arcane/divine divide. Instead it splits spells up into "Simple" (things most people with a smattering of magic can cast), "Complex" (things only the dedicated spellcasters can cast), and "Exotic" (very rare spells).
Helic has the right of it - Divine magic has strings attached, and at the other end of those strings is a god. On the plus side, you don't have to be as precise with divine magic: it's your intent that matters more than the precise way you do things. Hence the lack of arcane spell failure.
Arcane magic, on the other hand, has to be precise because you are taking the reigns of the forces of the universe personally.
Bardic magic is really on the cusp of divine and arcane - they are dabblers who pick up a little here and a little there; a prayer from this place and an incantation from that. Most importantly, though, they don't get their power from homage to any particular god. They can pull off healing but they are by no means expert at it.
|
It's all about balance.
It's all metagame reasons.
The Fluff stuff: Divine comes from Deities with strings attached, Arcane casting methodology is hindered with armor, etc., is all a result of balancing the game over the years.
Think about it -- if you're inventing D&D back in the 70s and coming up with spells, what happens if you only give Druids nature spells, or clerics healing spells? What if wizards really could do everything?
You would create an unbalanced magic system. A wizard in full plate with access to all the magic you can imagine would be even more broken -- as it is now it's still the best class after 4th level.
A druid in that kind of system would be useless in a fight -- the core function of the D&D game. Same with a cleric.
You have to come up with some reasons to diversify the cleric and druid while toning down the wizard -- for metagame reasons.
|
Tasslehoff Burrfoot: Hey! She cast that spell without using those funny words! Why can't you do that, all powerful mage?
Raistlin Majere: She's channeling the power of a god, you dolt. I'm wresting arcane energies from the very fabric of the universe - it's completely different.
From the coolest mage ever, this is one explanation.
Arcane spells tend to be more powerful. Wizards control the battlefield like nobody else can, and have far more spells then clerics. On top of that, arcane magic tends to be more diverse and has a lot of utility spells that divine magic lacks.
|
|
The biggest mechanical difference is that divine casters get their spells back once per day at a specific time...rested or not, but not spell slots used within 8 hours of that time. Arcane gets their spells back after 8 hours of rest and can not get them back if not rested.
As for the idea that the divine spell list is somewhat inferior to the arcane...well that was true in 2nd ed when divine spells only had level 7 spells vs 9 for arcane, but with the 3.x and PF...well that is a load of bullocks. Especially in 3.x...especially with the druid...and if your using SC, well then druids win (because they weren´t broken enough in 3.5).
As for the god issue...that is pure DM fiat and the OP has already dismissed that.
|
|
Arcane list better/equal than Divine list??
Well, I don't mind admitting that I see it as superior. When making NPC clerics I always grumble because there's so little they can do compared to my NPC wizards. The Cleric list -- and the Druid list, is far weaker in my experience. Of course, I run wizards all the time so I know the spells quite well. Meanwhile, I rarely run divine casters so I don't know the spells as well, still....
It should be obvious that wizard spells are significantly better -- that's how come Clerics are designed with better Saves -- and can wear armor -- oh, yeah, and can fight considerably better -- oh, and lest we forget, get more HP.
Seems pretty clear that Clerics and Druids are given a whole bunch more than wizards to try to balance them out. Not that it matters, even though wizards have fewer HP, a weaker Save progression, essentially no BAB progression, and can't wear armor -- they're still better than Clerics and Druids (w/out animal companions).
And it's because their spells are better.
Personally I never really understood the arcane/divine separation. Not from a flavour point of view and not from a strictly mechanical point of view either. I mean... using Helic's examples, Clerics get healing, sure (which should be Necromancy...) but Wizards get Ray of Enfeeblement, Enervation, etc... and Clerics and Druids alike get some pretty good blasting spells, especially of fire and lightning.
Heck, Raise Dead should be necromancy.
|
|
I disagree that Divine is granted, by nature. It does not have to be. Different settings and different classes handle it in different ways, and there are some [Favored Soul and Archievist, also sort of the Ur-Priest] that really question if deities and other outside the cleric sources have any sort of real power or influence over a priest's magic (directly) at all. It might be that when the Cleric does something that "their deity doesn't like", the cleric actually loses their power because they have broken faith with themselves, and the deity doesn't have any part of it, or that the deity telling them they are falling away makes the cleric lose faith/conviction in themselves, and that (not the deity) is what caused the Divine magic to fail.
Alternatively, Divine magic can come from within the individual, [Mystic]. The only real defining aspect of Divine Magic vs Arcane/Psionic/The Force/Etc. . .is that Divine is channeled through an individuals faith, (though the source of that faith does not necessarily therefore "grant" it) [Eberron]. It can be more of an individual spiritual awereness or connection [Ur-Priest, Dark Sun] that the priest is able to channel without any sort of outside source (like a deity) passing down.
At it's base, Divine magic, like Arcane, is truely about the individuals understanding of something, and how to focus it through themselves.
|
|
Arcane list better/equal than Divine list??
Well, I don't mind admitting that I see it as superior. When making NPC clerics I always grumble because there's so little they can do compared to my NPC wizards. The Cleric list -- and the Druid list, is far weaker in my experience. Of course, I run wizards all the time so I know the spells quite well. Meanwhile, I rarely run divine casters so I don't know the spells as well, still....
It should be obvious that wizard spells are significantly better -- that's how come Clerics are designed with better Saves -- and can wear armor -- oh, yeah, and can fight considerably better -- oh, and lest we forget, get more HP.
Seems pretty clear that Clerics and Druids are given a whole bunch more than wizards to try to balance them out. Not that it matters, even though wizards have fewer HP, a weaker Save progression, essentially no BAB progression, and can't wear armor -- they're still better than Clerics and Druids (w/out animal companions).
And it's because their spells are better.
Your assuming that it´s actually balanced. I do believe it is quite clear that the classes, even in PF is NOT balanced. So the fact that the clerics and druids get so much more in addition to spells when compared to the wizard and sorcerer does not make things more balanced...but less so. I wanted to see how much the druid got nerfed in PF so we did a small test with a party of 4 druids going through the first book of council of thieves...and umm...yeah, it was a joke how easy it was. I mean they ain´t no 3.5 druids...but still they are still pretty butch. Yes you can play divine casters badly...but an arcane caster played badly is just as weak. And I have seen some pretty badly played arcane players...but that doesn´t mean arcane magic is weak.
Eh, I would say that, in Pathfinder, there's enough of a difference between arcane and divine spells. If I'm incorrect then show me where, but from my viewings, PF wizards are the masters of battlefield control bar none, and they have utility magic that clerics/druids lack.
You brought up SC, but that's not a Pathfinder product.
That said, it's also very noteable that wizards can leave spell slots open, which is what allows for utility magic to work so well. That can be a pretty huge deal.
|
|
Clerics (any divine) can also leave open slots, and everything you just said about Wizards works for Clerics, too. Clerics are master battlefield controlers, bar none, have utility spells, (and every single other type of spell catagory) that Wizards do not.
Even that Arcane deals more damage, while sometimes true, is not always the case. Sometimes even divine is better there too. (Rare)
Ok, I know the whole "it's up to your god" deal, which is total DM fiat, and I know the differences between the classes- I guess I didn't word my question very well.
What I was curious to find opinions on is exactly what makes a spell arcane or divine. When a spell is built, what determines if it will be an arcane spell or a divine spell, and who will get it?
There have been some really interesting answers so far.
|
|
I would say that flavor has a tiny bit to do with it, but much less than you might imagine. And by that I mean throughout the entirety of 3E/PF. If the spell has to do with the elements, it is probably a Druid and Wizard spell. For preventing, lessening, or removing status affects, more a Cleric spell. In 3E, there was a guideline formula for spell effect creation, hat stated that generally Divine (damaging) spells did about 1/2 the dice pool damage as Arcane, but also used d8's, while Arcane used d6's.
Arcane spells tend to have bigger areas, ranges, and offensively, affect more targets with a better range of targetting weakneses, (such as different Saves).
Divine spells tend to have less direct affects, but have built in possible bonuses. They also tend to be more single target focused, or when they affect multiple targets deal less damage but have a built in bonus (Soundburst = damage and stun, Flamestrike = half fire/half divine, Prayer = ally buff & enemy debuff). Spells that deal with Positive/Negative Energy damage, Alignment(or sometime creaturetype or groups) tend towards Divine, though not exclusively.
If DC's worked differently, the Cleric would be a terrifying NPC, with spells like Mark of Justice, Bestow Curse, Poison, Contagion, Geas/Quest, and other long term to permanent affects. Arcane spells tend towards more direct, important at the moment affects.
Out of character, another big difference in Arcane and Divine spells is that a lot of Divine spells are focused on entire party survival and not having long term imparements, (disease, level/ability drain, death), and are very much mre focused on benefiting other people, while a lot of Arcane spells are more focused on self preservation and offense, (even the defensive ones). Divine are more about slow and steady and Arcane hope to destroy threats as fast as possible.
What is this, CoDzilla vs GODwizard?
Arcane spells tend to be more powerful.
I wouldn't say that. It's all about specialisation.
Arcanists are usually better blasters. They also tend to be great at deception/misdirection, and turning things into different things.
On the other hand, divine casters are the undisputed masters of healing, they can even bring people back to live. All most arcanists can do is get some temporary HP or steal some life from an enemy. Bards can do a little bit of healing, but they don't get to cure much more than wounds, and they're not that great at it.
What is this, CoDzilla vs GODwizard?
Pfft. Losers. I'll just blast them with my mind powers.
What is this, CoDzilla vs GODwizard?Pfft. Losers. I'll just blast them with my mind powers.
Yeah, psionics are probably better at blasting than arcane magic, but they lose out in other areas badly.
Yeah, psionics are probably better at blasting than arcane magic, but they lose out in other areas badly.What is this, CoDzilla vs GODwizard?Pfft. Losers. I'll just blast them with my mind powers.
[off topic]
Ohhh Psionics...If you known how much I miss my 9th level Kineticist...
Funny character...
|
|
I'm not going to get into an arguement, but I don't think that Cleric (or Divine) is that powerful. :) It can be, but everything can with optimization and/or powergaming pretty dang easily.
I do agree, however, that Arcane and Divine have very little difference, even when it comes to flavor. Mechanics, the only thing I can think of definetly are a few (3E) abilities, class features, or similar things that specifically only affect one but not the other. For example, the Athar gives a lot of bonuses against Divine magic only. Most feats, prestige classes that off +1 type of spellcasting, or class features tend to be Arcane (if not both).
In all honesty, taking the entirety of 3Eness, I would say that Arcane was the culprit for this much more so than Divine. Practically every book that came out had three or more times the amount of material for Arcane than Divine. Intentionally or not, (not blaming anyone), that means that a lot of crossover is inevitable, and blurring the lines, (as well as trashing any sense of guidelines for new spells).
Yeah, psionics are probably better at blasting than arcane magic, but they lose out in other areas badly.What is this, CoDzilla vs GODwizard?Pfft. Losers. I'll just blast them with my mind powers.[off topic]
Ohhh Psionics...
If you known how much I miss my 9th level Kineticist...Funny character...
I'm involved with DSP's Pathfinder psionics project, is going rather well ... but the best blasters are wilders, no doubt about it.
Arcane spells tend to be more powerful.I wouldn't say that. It's all about specialisation.
Arcanists are usually better blasters. They also tend to be great at deception/misdirection, and turning things into different things.
On the other hand, divine casters are the undisputed masters of healing, they can even bring people back to live. All most arcanists can do is get some temporary HP or steal some life from an enemy. Bards can do a little bit of healing, but they don't get to cure much more than wounds, and they're not that great at it.
Again, my comment was refering strictly to Pathfinder, not 3.5 and other supplements ;)
Divine casters are the undisputed masters of healing, but healing really isn't that awesome to specialize in - it's actually rather terrible. The reason Wizards are so powerful isn't because of blasting, it's because of battlefield control and the ability to buff others. Clerics rock the self-buffs, no question, but wizards make the whole party mighty. Fireball isn't a good spell when compared to haste, sleet storm, or stinking cloud. Black Tentacles is "Hah hah no, we win."
What does healing do? It saves you on rest time. It's what you do after the battle. And worst of all, it's unneccesary with a wand of healing.
|
Personally I never really understood the arcane/divine separation. Not from a flavour point of view and not from a strictly mechanical point of view either. I mean... using Helic's examples, Clerics get healing, sure (which should be Necromancy...) but Wizards get Ray of Enfeeblement, Enervation, etc... and Clerics and Druids alike get some pretty good blasting spells, especially of fire and lightning.
Well, there's a reason I love Arcana Unearthed/Evolved's magic system, I guess, and that is in large part because it gets rid of the arbitrary arcane/divine divide. Instead it splits spells up into "Simple" (things most people with a smattering of magic can cast), "Complex" (things only the dedicated spellcasters can cast), and "Exotic" (very rare spells).
QFT
What does healing do? It saves you on rest time. It's what you do after the battle. And worst of all, it's unneccesary with a wand of healing.
Yeah, I invite you to play with a GM that isn't a wimp, and you'll change your opinion on that. You'll find that healing saves you on resurrection/building and introducing a new character time.
If you're facing something more dangerous than a rheumatic kobold, you won't survive with a little nap time and a heal stick alone. Not if resting takes hours, the stick heals 5,5 per round and the enemies deal more than a quarter of your HP per hit.
Yeah, psionics are probably better at blasting than arcane magic, but they lose out in other areas badly.What is this, CoDzilla vs GODwizard?Pfft. Losers. I'll just blast them with my mind powers.
Say that to my face if you dare - after I sapped all your confidence with an ego whip or ten.
What does healing do? It saves you on rest time. It's what you do after the battle. And worst of all, it's unneccesary with a wand of healing.Yeah, I invite you to play with a GM that isn't a wimp, and you'll change your opinion on that. You'll find that healing saves you on resurrection/building and introducing a new character time.
If you're facing something more dangerous than a rheumatic kobold, you won't survive with a little nap time and a heal stick alone. Not if resting takes hours, the stick heals 5,5 per round and the enemies deal more than a quarter of your HP per hit.
You aren't proving me wrong.
You're right, the stick heals 5 per round. Guess what? The cleric heals that much, too. The only time healing will heal more damage then the enemies do is when you actually cast Heal, which you don't have until much later.
In almost any situation, the cleric or druid is far, far better off doing things like summoning, attacking, buffing, or throwing other spells then they are healing. In 90% of situations you're in, you want to kill the enemy first, not try to patch up people while they're still taking damage.
Then, after the battle, then you heal up. Because healing isn't seen in terms of healing per round (unless it's Heal), because that number will always be far lower then damage taken. Healing is in terms of health per cast. That's why Lesser Vigor is such an awesome spell - one spell heals 11 hit points? Or even better in a wand! It's also why healing potions are so meh, because you're spending a lot of money and a full action to heal less then a third of the damage being done to you.
Say that to my face if you dare - after I sapped all your confidence with an ego whip or ten.Yeah, psionics are probably better at blasting than arcane magic, but they lose out in other areas badly.What is this, CoDzilla vs GODwizard?Pfft. Losers. I'll just blast them with my mind powers.
Say that to my wilder and you'll be a pair of smoking boots and a vanishing cry of "Cccllleeerrriiiccc!"
You're right, the stick heals 5 per round. Guess what? The cleric heals that much, too. The only time healing will heal more damage then the enemies do is when you actually cast Heal, which you don't have until much later.
Healing magic - and channeling - can, and often will, delay the death of a party member.
I've seen characters saved by a healer a killion times.
Sure my example (critters dealing huge amoungs of damage) was one extreme - but yours (critters dealing not enough damage to force you to do some healing in between) is the other extreme.
There are situations where the enemies cannot kill in a single round, but they can kill you in a couple of rounds, and you cannot kill them before they do. That means you'll have to delay the moment of death. This works especially in cases where your healing output is better than the enemy's damage output.
There might be situations where the cleric can make the the fight and in the round before someone dies, but that's quite a specific scenario. Often enough, the cleric cannot end the fight in that round, but he can delay the party's death for another round, enabling the better damage dealers to finish the fight with their damage output.
Plus, there's the thing where the heal spell is part of that healing thing, and actually part of the stuff that is exclusive to divine healing.