Mystics and Domains

[ShurikVch]

This is a (possible?) continuation of argument with Selene Sparks (from this thread)


Now, the answer to the last post:

No, I'm saying that bringing ACFs, like bringing in feats or PrCs, is outside the bound of the tier system as a whole(which you'd know, if you'd read the numerous times it was posted), and that diplomacy is better than fighters. This is very much akin to someone saying that rangers aren't a weak class because you can totally make a mystic wildshape ranger with Sword of the Arcane Order.

In other words, yes, you can, in fact, if you want to, make a fighter than functions better than what you'd expect a monk to. But by that token, I can create single-classed monk with 9th level spells, and then we go right down the slope until everyone becomes indistinguishable from(or killed by) Pun-Pun. And this is why, when we're talking about a class's strengths and weaknesses in a general sense, we're referring to the class by itself, not bringing alternate class features or whatnot unless specifically referring to them, because an alternate class is not the same thing as the default class by definition.

Your knowledge of the Tier System is, apparently, very very scarce
Different variants are used Dungeon Crasher and Zhentarim soldier, thus ACFs are not just OK, but expected
Also, I don't mentioned any of PrCs (they have their own Tier System anyway)

Fighter is highly regarded among the other T5 classes:

Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, OA Samurai, Paladin, Knight, CW Samurai (with Imperious Command available)

Classes in blue are on the high side of their Tier and can easily move up.

On the 1d4chan:

Examples: Expert, fighter+, healer, knight, monk, ninja, paladin+, samurai^CW (with Imperious Command feat), samurai^OA, soulknife, swashbuckler

The "+" says "Could easily be considered tier 4"
The Monk, on the other hand, is a solid T5 everywhere

And? Your point?

You brought up Dragon magazines as a veritable definition of "cheese".
I shown you the true cheese.

Clerics explicitly don't need gods, in the PHB.

Except the feat required "Patron deity"; this requirement wouldn't just go away because your Warrior is an atheist, and in the no-deities settings - would be completely unachievable

I've specifically pointed out that his is incorrect.

Where? Show me!

Reread it; "A Mystic chooses one domain available to clerics, including those from the Player's Handbook... and the new domains presented in Chapter 3..." clearly says that "those domains from the Player's Handbook" and "the new domains presented in Chapter 3" are subsets of "domain(s) available to clerics" that Mystics may choose from. There is no other way to parse it, and you don't get to just cut a few words out of a sentence because you don't like what they say.

You're, apparently, seen some text which is just isn't there, because - no, I couldn't see where it says

"the new domains presented in Chapter 3" are subsets of "domain(s) available to clerics" that Mystics may choose from.

Also, I'm not the one who included ellipsis into my quote, so, apparently it isn't me who cutting a words out of sentence

And they're a variant rule specifically.

Isn't all rules which outside of Player's Handbook are "variant rules"?

I see nothing at all limiting clerics, who are free to take essentially whatever domains they feel like, from taking Shaman domains, so Shaman domains would be a subset of cleric domains(or, you know, just domains), unless I'm missing something.

And now you asking to prove the negative
If Cleric can take Shaman domains, then why Fighter can't? Is it forbidden somewhere?

On a slightly more serious note, there are two points vs Cleric taking Shaman's domains:

1. Cleric is a banned class in the Oriental Adventures
2. Which deities would grant those domains?

Gonna need a source there. Where do the rules say, exactly, that being able to rebuke undead categorically renders one incapable of ever turning undead.

Because those are not a two separate abilities, but one and the same: channel energy.
Those clerics who are able to spontaneously Cure are incapable to Rebuke/Command, and those who're Inflict - to Turn/Destroy
And in case Cure/Inflict would be switched at some point (such as taking a level in Infused Spellcaster PrC), Turn/Rebuke will switch too

And, furthermore, that's fundamentally irrelevant. The utility of the domain to clerics is not in question, only the fact that it is available to clerics

Please, re-read the description closer:

Turn or destroy undead as a good cleric. Use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier. This is a supernatural ability.

The very phrase "as a good cleric" pointing this domain isn't for Cleric

and we know it is because we know Mystics can take it, and being available to clerics as explicitly what is required for mystics to take it.

[Citation needed.]

In case I needed any more evidence I was dealing with a Gish gallop, I guess the internet delivers.

What's the "Gish gallop"?

I feel it's really worth keeping in mind that "Oh, yes, theoretically maugs or tauric creatures are playable" is seriously being used to respond to the point that two feats for evasion is an open option anyone that doesn't involve wasting levels on on Generic Warrior.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but the Maug is playable, have LA, and printed in the Fiend Folio.
While suboptimal it may be, TO it is not

Also, in order to have a Feet chakra, your PC (surprise!) should have a feet. Bad news to Naga who wanted that Evasion...

Yes, every necropolitan in the context of optimization is a spellcaster, because if you're not, being a necropolitan is a bad deal.

How about the Stealth-focused characters?
Immunity to all those nasty poisonous traps, ability to be underwater indefinitely, protection vs lifesense (and, maybe, even mindsight)...

But even disregarding that for a moment, you obviously polymorph into another form to do your meldshaping. This interaction is old news.

Qualification via short-time transformation?
Are you aware of number of DMs who would LOL it away?

I'll even make it simple for you; find any text explicitly separating the domains that mystics get specifically as a specific category distinct from those that clerics get. That's what you need to do, because I've cited text and you haven't.

There it is:

A mystic chooses one domain from among those available to clerics, including the domains in the Player's Handbook (even Sun[/B], which is not granted by any of the living deities of Krynn, but not Magic) and the new domains presented in Chapter 3: Magic of Krynn (including several that are available only to mystics).

The "and" pointing "the new domains presented in Chapter 3" aren't necessarily a Cleric domains, and ignoring the line which says "only to mystics" is just plain dishonest

Also:

A mystic who chooses the Sun domain gains the ability to turn undead as her granted power, and she cannot perform a greater turning.

This line point to one of two possible conclusions:

1. The only ones who could ever take the Dragonlance Sun domain are Mystics
2. The domain works this way only for Mystics; any other possible classes would get Greater Turning instead

EDIT: Actually, the second variant is the most likely of them - domains are may work differently for different classes; domain is Cleric Domain when Cleric take it, and Mystic Domain when Mystic take it, and so on...