What's the difference between mage and priest spells?

[Thaluikhain]

I'm very unclear on this.

 

Apart from being less offensive than mage spells, and being able to cast them in armour, there doesn't seem to be much difference. Priests don't seem to have to worship any particular god/s...the Anama, Divine Lucre and Shrine of Happy Thoughts all seem to be purely secular groups (though the Sacred Item doesn't). You can learn priestly rituals the same way you learn mage spells.

 

Do priests get their spells and so on from deities and it's just glossed over, or is there something more complicated that I'm missing?

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: Thaluikhain

Do priests get their spells and so on from deities and it's just glossed over, or is there something more complicated that I'm missing?

Jeff included pretty much this exact question in the FAQ of one of the Exile games (it might have been Exile 1).

The answer was "Good question".

[The Mystic]

Originally Posted By: Thaluikhain

Do priests get their spells and so on from deities and it's just glossed over, or is there something more complicated that I'm missing?

I have no intention of starting a debate, but my guess is the former, and that each religion has different versions of the same set of spells, depending on the patron deity(ies).

The only real difference I've seen between mage and priest spells is that mages have more (and somewhat stronger) damaging spells, and priests have all the healing spells.

[Slawbug]

I was skeptical, but Thuryl's memory is mostly good, although the question doesn't connect the dots the way Thaluikhain's does. This came from a BoE "letters to Jeff" type thing:

 

Originally Posted By: Jeff Vogel

>6. Are there infinitely many gods on which priestly magics of the abundant

>different cults can call upon? Or are priest spells simply mage spells in

>disguise?

 

Whew. Good question.

[Celtic Minstrel]

There is one mechanical difference between mage and priest spells, if I recall correctly: mage spells cannot be cast if you have a total encumbrance greater than 2, but priest spells aren't restricted by encumbrance. So, mage spells involve (as D&D puts it) a somatic component (gestures), whereas priests spells are vocal (like prayers).

[Alorael at Large]

Already brought up in the first post. Also probably of note is the fact that Exile predates D&D 3E, and mage spells were impossible to cast in armor back in 2E rather than just being restricted by the need to gesticulate excessively.

 

—Alorael, who can still see a difference. Priests with organizations all seem to believe in something, even if it's not something strictly spiritual. Mages don't have to believe anything. On the other hand, there are also those pesky dual casters, like the vahnatai. Their mage-priests seem to have more arcane trappings than priestly ones.

[The Mystic]

Originally Posted By: Like Tears in Soup

On the other hand, there are also those pesky dual casters, like the vahnatai.

Or like my parties who, given a few points in dexterity and some good non-encumbering armor, they make excellent tanks as well.

Quote:

Their mage-priests seem to have more arcane trappings than priestly ones.

*shrugs* So?

Both types of spells are merely sets of tools to get the job done. The mage/priest combo, having more tools available, can do a lot more than someone who can do only either mage or priest spells. To quote a t-shirt I once gave my father: "The man who dies with the most tools wins."

[Alorael at Large]

Missing the point, though. We know they function the same way and that mage-priests are effective. THe question is whether in-setting they're the same.

 

—Alorael, who suspects this is another Jeff Vogel universe hole. The answer is on the bigger Shaper continent.

[The Mystic]

Point taken. To quote what you said earlier:

Originally Posted By: Like Tears in Soup

—Alorael, who can still see a difference. Priests with organizations all seem to believe in something, even if it's not something strictly spiritual. Mages don't have to believe anything.

To this, I offer a slight alteration: Priests have to believe in some kind of divine intervention for their spells to work; mages have to believe that magic is possible.

[Alorael at Large]

Divine intervention doesn't seem to be necessary, though. The Anama don't really seem to be a religious organization so much as a community organizing bunch of anti-magic leaders. Other temples don't seem to be very big on religion. There's the one guy (in Almaria?) who just celebrates combat in all its g(l)ory.

 

No one really has to believe magic is possible. Its possibility is rather evident from all the other mages who pull off their spells without a hitch.

 

—Alorael, who just can't buy into belief as the power operating on Ermarian.

[Ishad Nha]

Rhoads in Mertis, wants to open heads.

[Thaluikhain]

Ah.

 

So...as long as you know the rituals, you can go and believe in whatever you want, and they'll still work? But you still need the formal rituals that all priests know and teach each other?

[Celtic Minstrel]

Sure?

 

Originally Posted By: Sedate and Serious. (!Slarty)

Already brought up in the first post. Also probably of note is the fact that Exile predates D&D 3E, and mage spells were impossible to cast in armor back in 2E rather than just being restricted by the need to gesticulate excessively.

That, I didn't know. All my limited D&D knowledge is from d20.

[Randomizer]

It actually goes back to D&D 1st edition before the advanced edition.