What's so great about the ambiguity of religion in the setting is that it allows for such diversity of beliefs, and that diversity allows for belief to be an important aspect of people's character. That some people can see the Black City and the Urn and visions and find proof enough to have faith, while others see them and find a perfectly logical explanation within the other rules of the world is frankly pretty awesome. Like most of the lore, nothing's really certain -- everyone has their beliefs, and everyone thinks they have plenty of evidence, but it's all still open to other interpretations.
Think of the two very different stories of Flemeth's origin we get from Leiliana and Morrigan. In all likelihood, neither one is perfectly true, and we'll never really know the absolute truth, and that actually makes the story far more interesting: it's a partly-illuminated mystery. Frankly, that different *players* can look at the same in-game evidence and draw differing conclusions is a pretty impressive sign that they've handled it just right.
So what would actual, present-day, confirmed divine Chantry magic do to that? Well, first, there'd be no point in developing the differing religions of the Qunari or the dwarves or the elves, since there'd be no meaningful uncertainty--everybody would just believe in the Maker, since He'd be standing there waving at you. Nobody would probably bother talking about their beliefs at all, since it'd no longer be a matter of faith. There'd be no real uncertainty to Leiliana's character--anyone who doubted the veracity of her visions could just go ask the Chantry if they were true, since they have the Big Guy's direct line.
It's no accident that fantasy settings usually end up assuming all faiths are valid, that there are dozens of gods out there competing for attention, because a 100% proven-beyond-a-doubt monotheistic deity makes for a pretty boring setting. It's pretty hard to create any kind of moral diversity, or really even to justify bad behaviour if a benevolent God is hanging out down at the Chantry signing autographs.
And the severely polytheistic settings like D&D aren't much better; with so many competing (and frankly often contradictory) faiths out there, all wielding divine power, gods become little more than superheroic spell dispensers. It's really hard to get worked up in service to one god when he's part of a divine bowling league, and really, at that point clerics are just mages with better costumes and a demanding boss.
That said, for story purposes, a well-done cleric-type character could be interesting, too, provided the air of uncertainty is maintained. Are they really wielding divine power? Are they just a mage with relgious delusions? Are they a well-orchestrated fraud? Are their powers coming from somewhere else altogether? Do they even know the truth?
*That* said, I'm not sure there's really much of a game-mechanic need for a new class, even if you wanted to add one to the story. Clerics as armored, fighting spellcasters tend to be overpowered unless you start applying a lot of really arbitrary limitations (like the distinction between "cleric magic" and "wizard magic" in D&D, or the "you can smack them to jelly with a mace, but not stab them with a knife" rule). Personally, I like that DA:O doesn't employ these arbitrary distinctions, but instead makes certain choices more viable than others. (If you want to put all Morrigan's points in strength, stick her in full plate, and give her a bow, go for it. She'll be crap as a mage and crap as an archer, but live how you want to live.)
As for the Arcane Warrior being too encumbered to be a sword-and-spellcaster, you don't actually *have* to use Combat Magic. If you want to wear armor, swing a mace/sword/axe, and cast spells, go for it. If you want to be *really good* at swinging said mace/sword/axe, use Combat Magic, but that skill comes at a price (and it should!) If you just want to be really good at everything all the time with no penalties, then you're just min/maxing. Install the overpowered cleric mod and have at it. To my mind, an Arcane Warrior is a pretty well-balanced warrior/mage (and by extension, warrior/cleric)--you can focus on being a warrior, you can focus on casting spells, or you can do a little of both, all without any one choice being too powerful. You pick the balance of mana, fatigue, spellcasting, armor, and weapon prowess you want.
On the other hand, Clerics as just divine spellcasters could be accomplished with mages. I mean, a new mage origin story and specialization for a religious "apostate" would present exactly the right uncertainty: it's possible they're divinely gifted, and it's possible they're not. Some people will believe them; some won't. A couple new cleric-y spells that *might* be gifts of the Maker or *might* be a heretofor undiscovered school of magic, and Bob's your uncle. Lots of the existing spells are perfectly OK for a cleric (I mean, is there really a game-mechanic difference between calling down *divine* fire and calling down *magical* fire?), and since the new spells are part of a specialization, you'd have to accept the Maker as your personal lord and saviour to get 'em, no?
As for the mage spell pool not being deep enough to cover clerics--well, there could always be more spells. Howabout some nature spells that focus on plants? Howabout summoning something other than skeletons or ranger pets? Howabout water magic? The thing about magic is there's always more you can do with it, and I'm just not seeing a good enough game mechanic reason that new possibly-but-not-necessarily divine magic can't be done within the rubric of the classes we have.
Modifié par hardvice, 06 janvier 2010 - 07:25 .
Retour en haut
