Anyway, are they restricted to being "not open license" like the warlock?
IIRC yes.
Anyway, are they restricted to being "not open license" like the warlock?
Yes, they are restricted just like the Warlock is. If it is not on found here, it can not be used. That site contains all of the Open Content published by WotC for D&D. (With one exception that I know of - the Level Independent XP awards section from Unearthed Arcana is Open Content, but not on that site.)
The only other classes that WotC put out that are Open Content (that I know of) and not on that site are the classes from D20 Modern and d20 Future.
The concept of a binder or truenamer could be used, but entirely new mechanics would have to be created.
|
Was just reading the post about the warlock, and got to thinking about per classes I would Iike to see made into Pathfinder.
Particularly, I very much liked the Binder and ShadowCaster from Tome of Magic. Didn't like the TrueNamer so much, but oh well...
Anyway, are they restricted to being "not open license" like the warlock? Does anyone have a rebuild they have done on their own, or a 3rd party build they could direct me to?
Tome of Magic had a lot of potential, and the classes were great on the thematic level. Unfortunately, I think the book suffered from lack of play testing.
My group had to do some overhauling to get the classes reasonably playable. Minor tweaking on the Binder, moderate on the ShadowCaster, and extreme amounts on the TrueNamer. Did anyone else find they needed to do the same changing?
Yes yes yes on the ShadowCaster! I was just thinking about that. I want a Shadowcaster class to come to Pathfinder.
|
|
A Warlock class and a Shadow Magic class are not restricted by anything. The actual classes that Wizards created are but not the terms.
Making a Hellfire slinging Warlock can be achieved from the ground up and a master of Shadow Magic can be created as well. I hope the designers step up to the challenge.
|
|
A Warlock class and a Shadow Magic class are not restricted by anything. The actual classes that Wizards created are but not the terms.
Making a Hellfire slinging Warlock can be achieved from the ground up and a master of Shadow Magic can be created as well. I hope the designers step up to the challenge.
I guess that lawyers of WotC would die from happiness if a "Warlock" class doing something similar to 3.5 Warlock would appear in a Paizo product. Remember kids, in US a lawsuit can kill you before it even reaches the court.
Yes yes yes on the ShadowCaster! I was just thinking about that. I want a Shadowcaster class to come to Pathfinder.Was just reading the post about the warlock, and got to thinking about per classes I would Iike to see made into Pathfinder.
Particularly, I very much liked the Binder and ShadowCaster from Tome of Magic. Didn't like the TrueNamer so much, but oh well...
Anyway, are they restricted to being "not open license" like the warlock? Does anyone have a rebuild they have done on their own, or a 3rd party build they could direct me to?
Tome of Magic had a lot of potential, and the classes were great on the thematic level. Unfortunately, I think the book suffered from lack of play testing.
My group had to do some overhauling to get the classes reasonably playable. Minor tweaking on the Binder, moderate on the ShadowCaster, and extreme amounts on the TrueNamer. Did anyone else find they needed to do the same changing?
Here is a conversion that I did, Shallowsoul. I'm not . . . quite sure it works, though. So if you want to offer any advice or suggestions, I would be grateful. Master Arminas's Pathfinder Shadowcaster
Master Arminas
|
|
I guess that lawyers of WotC would die from happiness if a "Warlock" class doing something similar to 3.5 Warlock would appear in a Paizo product. Remember kids, in US a lawsuit can kill you before it even reaches the court.A Warlock class and a Shadow Magic class are not restricted by anything. The actual classes that Wizards created are but not the terms.
Making a Hellfire slinging Warlock can be achieved from the ground up and a master of Shadow Magic can be created as well. I hope the designers step up to the challenge.
The terms "Warlock" and "Hellfire" are not owned by Wizards of the Coast. A magic slinger shooting blasts out of their hands is not owned by Wizards of the Coast.
It is rather easy to use these terms and create your own thing. The designers at Paizo are more than capable of doing this.
|
|
I guess that lawyers of WotC would die from happiness if a "Warlock" class doing something similar to 3.5 Warlock would appear in a Paizo product. Remember kids, in US a lawsuit can kill you before it even reaches the court.A Warlock class and a Shadow Magic class are not restricted by anything. The actual classes that Wizards created are but not the terms.
Making a Hellfire slinging Warlock can be achieved from the ground up and a master of Shadow Magic can be created as well. I hope the designers step up to the challenge.
The terms "Warlock" and "Hellfire" are not owned by Wizards of the Coast. A magic slinger shooting blasts out of their hands is not owned by Wizards of the Coast.
It is rather easy to use these terms and create your own thing. The designers at Paizo are more than capable of doing this.
And good lawyers are more than capable of filling a lawsuit that would likely ultimately be resolved in Paizo's favor, but the attorney fees and proceeding costs along the way would kill or cripple the company. It's called strategic litigation - you can't win, but you don't need a victory, you need attrition, which you can absorb, and the opponents cannot. Skirting along the borders of copyrighted and open content/public domain stuff is risky.