Talk:Chorister (3.5e Class)

Ratings

	Spanambula likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	I missed this class when it first came out, but looking it over now, I'm very impressed. Solid support role that lets you do fun stuff for yourself while also helping the party, and nice flavor. 8/10, would play.

	Eiji-kun favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	I came to see what all the hub-bub was about with the length of that talk page and the oppose. What I found was a pretty cool divine bard type thing. Good job.

	Leziad likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	It look like a pretty fun class. The formatting could use a little help, but yeah look fun.

	Tarkisflux likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	It's a solid buffer and support class for the balance range, capable of helping their party deal with a wide range of enemies and issues. They need a party though, as their support options (aside from spells) tend to be action intensive, which is a nice dynamic for the class I think.

	Ghostwheel opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	While I want to like this class, the fact that in my opinion it's out of the balance range I believe it should be in and the scaling on the RNG makes me feel as though it would ruin the gaming experience for a group that said "Any H-level stuff from the wiki is allowed".

Comments

This is just a quick note about the class for those who are curious as to my goal with it. The Bard is overall my favorite class in D&D, but in my years of playing, it's signature class feature Bardic Music, is woefully underused. Outside of Inspire Courage, I have never seen any of the performances used by other players or had them ask me to play a song for them. While I realize that Spells are King in 3.5, I wanted to make a class that had an interesting mechanic unique to them. I also made it a point to allow the chorister the option of taking Bardic feats and PrCs to improve and add to their musical repertoire. The ability to customize the spell list a little via the choice of domains was also there to allow the player to differentiate one chorister from another.

I will try to check the page for any questions or comments that you might have about the class. At this point the class is mechanically finished, though if you think that something needs to be tweaked, don't be afraid to speak up. At this point the only thing I am concerned with working on is the RP elements.

Feedback

Alrighty, let's put on our inspecting glasses and check this out. First thing I see is a lack of class abilities--now that's not exactly bad, because you still get spells, but some sort of minor flavor/story/fluff stuff might be nice instead of just having massive gaping holes in that-there levels.

Let's look over the spells now. For the most part I agree with them, the only minor problem I would have is that you're giving the CoDzilla 3 for the cleric, which are Divine Favor, Divine Power, and Righteous Might. Sure, they're gotten pretty late in the progression, but with the right feats (Divine Metamagic - Persistent Spell) they turn the character into something that makes martial adepts cry themselves to sleep. Apart from those, the only ones that might be an issue are those that definitely bump you up to VH-level, rather than H, which are the save-or-sucks (Blindness/Deafness, Bestow Curse). Those aside, I think I understand where you're going with the spells, and I like it for the most part.

The combat buff spells only make M martial classes cry themselves to sleep. H and VH martial classes have actual things they can be doing and don't care if you have full BAB and some other misc bonuses. The save-or-sucks are narrow and have a low save DC and are unlikely to push it over IMO. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

On to class abilities:

• Aura/Spells banned: Meh. It's fine. I dislike the alignment system, but it's there and you can have that. No biggy
• Domain: This probably pushes it into VH territory with the plethora of domains available, granting spells like Polymorph and the like. Prolly not kosher if you want to keep it H rather than bumping it to VH, which would make this fine.

Disagree. The problematic spells are sufficiently delayed with the casting progression as to make their saves rather weak. Simply having a couple of them at reduced effectiveness does not VH make. The domain stuff is going to be more useful for utility spells than combat stuff. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

• Holy Scripture: So basically like bard song.
• Verse of Valor: Ooooh, straight bump on the RNG, and increases even more as you level. No bueno in my mind--I would keep it static at +3 at the least, and rework it at the most. Something like temporary HP to all allies equal to caster level might be nice. If you keep it as-is, expect to face primarily monsters that target saves at higher levels as the DM will give up on using attacking monsters.
• Temerarious Council: See Verse of Valor--straight up changes to the RNG should be VERY sparsely used, and will may force the DM to bring their own AC-buffing stuff so that monsters can stay relevant compared to the attackers in the party. At least this one has a save, though I don't like the all-or-nothing nature of it since it means that if they save, your turn's for the most part wasted.

Verse of Valor and Temerarious Council aren't that bad are they? At level 18, they only change AC by 9 and 8 respectively. Would making the change a typed holy or unholy make any balance difference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

Let's say you normally had a 50% chance to hit someone, if AC scaled appropriately with attack (it doesn't in order to allow iterative attacks to hit some of the time, but take this as an example). At level 1, a +3 bonus to attack will shift you by 15%. At level 20, a +3 bonus to attack will also shift you by 15%. In other words, it's still just as good at level 20 as it is at level 1. Scaling on RNG-related stuff is bad, as a -8 to AC will make it so enemies are virtually never missed (+40% chance to hit), while a +9 to attack for allies will mean that they virtually never fail to hit. Combine those together and you get a whopping 17 difference on the RNG, which means that in order to have a 50% chance to hit with any specific attack, the AC had to be 28 higher than the attack roll modifier before using the abilities. --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I dropped the flanking bonus on Verse of Valor. -- Waker

The flanking bonus was far less of a problem than the scaling. --Ghostwheel (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to second the concerns here. 9 points of enemy AC decrease is going to be funneled into power attack damage boosts since attack bonuses already outstrip AC in most H games. 9 points of ally AC increase is going to leave weaker foes crit fishing and easily ignored. Neither of which is particularly necessary or even fun. It might be better to rework these as "fast healing/per round refreshing, non-stacking temp hp" for valor and "bonus damage" for temerarious fluffed as 'leaving themselves more open'. Similar effect in the end, without the annoyingly large d20 bonuses. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I changed the Verse and Council to only upgrading every five levels now, topping them at adjusting 5 AC by level 20. Also gave Verse a bonus to combat maneuvers equal to the chorister's charisma modifier to make it slightly more appealing without being too powerful as you guys put it. -- Waker

That's probably a small enough bonus to be workable, even if not my preference. I forgot to mention the save DC thing before though. I know that it's a bard legacy mechanic, but Ghost is right that it vastly outstrips save progressions by midgame. If you want to keep the perform check in there, you're basically making the ability no-save (or save on 20). If that's what you want, it's not game breaking or anything but I think standardizing the class around the same style of save as Remonstration of Sloth gets makes more sense. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 04:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I thought I had updated the save before, but that is the issue with reading and re-reading a long page like this, you sometimes skim over things. I have since updated it to follow the save mechanic that the others do. -- Waker

• Words of Restoration: I like this for the most part... except for giving out spells automatically and constantly that require an XP cost normally. However, as-is, expect never to face someone using ability damage, drain, poison, disease, and so on at higher levels. At that point the DM may just make stuff up and say that greater restoration doesn't affect it. I'd also make the fast healing improve faster.

Words of Restoration might seem great, but it's mostly there as a panic button. Remember that while you are using Scriptures, the Chorister isn't casting spells or making full attacks. They are sacrificing a lot of their actions just to keep everyone else on their feet. As for the xp expenditure, Greater Restoration only costs 500xp, which at 14 level is negligible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

Sure, but on the other hand, you can use it as an immediate action and just cleanse whatever the DM throws at you with very little in the way of action expenditure. Again about negating DM stuff. --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Using as an immediate action is certainly an option, but constantly using Wisdom of Brevity to speed up performances isn't going to leave you many uses of your performance. Balancing between the desire to immediately play a song or say prevent a critical hit will be important. Is this ability powerful? Yes, but it's big purpose is to help keep the other players in the game when they get hit by a Save or Suck effect. -- Waker

Actually using an immediate action isn't an option. Wisdom of Brevity is a swift action, not immediate. Not a gigantic change, but it does affect action economy a bit. I don't know if pointing that out will affect your opinion on the rest of the performances or not. -- Waker

Note that save-or-suck effects don't come into play too much at H level, and if they do they're usually short-term (~1-round in length) or not very debilitating. If you're looking to counter those, then they're more likely to come up in a VH game, where I'm convinced more and more this class fits. --Ghostwheel (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Not with Ghost on this one. The argument about DMs negating things seems trivially true regardless of the ability, and not really worth concerning yourself with. It's a weird sort of reverse oberoni argument, and I don't think it's worth concerning yourself with. If a DM wants to go out of their way to make shit up and negate your abilities and basically work around the rules rather than discussing the ability with you, that's on them.

That said, every ally within 60' is a bit nuts, and I'd consider toning that down. It's otherwise an entirely reactive ability with a limited daily use pulled from the same pool as your offensive capabilities, and doesn't seem out of line with H. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Changed Words range to 30ft. -- Waker

• Verse of Ardor: See above again about DM not using specific things that this will automatically counter. While it's good, it might be so good to the point where the DM begins to pull some pretty cheap tactics just to be able to negate you, which isn't fun for you since it'll make you feel like you took all those levels for nothing.

Verse of Ardor is another one that is useful, but not gamebreakingly so. The performance only lets you ignore the effects, it doesn't cure or make them immune, so once the song stops, they feel it. Freedom of Movement for the party is another great one, but the performance only lasts 1 minute, so it doesn't work for long term travel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

Combat lasts on average 3-5 rounds in D&D 3.5, so I don't really see that as a viable excuse, since as soon as combat ends people can easily be cleansed of most things. --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

In all honesty, I can't think of that many situations where being fatigued or sickened has come up. FoM is certainly strong, but is the rest really that bad? -- Waker

Depends. Are you expecting to get slowed/paralyzed/dazed/exhausted? If the answer is yes, then it's likely you're playing in a VH game where the DM is using such abilities rather than relying primarily on damage for the most part. If not, then this ability for the most part becomes useless, since it's an H game or lower and the DM won't be throwing things at you that will completely cripple your ability to fight. --Ghostwheel (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Seconding my not being worried about this one (aside from the range perhaps). You wrote a divine healer and status remover. If a DM doesn't want you to use those sorts of abilities he shouldn't let you play the class in the first place. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Changed Verse to 30ft. -- Waker

• Remonstration of Sloth: Oooh. Slow. Bump this to VH if you want to keep it, seeing as how strong slow is (incredibly so). Especially since no enemy will be able to resist it, what with how quickly skills outscale saves. (Can get a +30 item to a skill, can't get the same for a save.)

Remonstration of Sloth was indeed powerful, I changed the DC to 10+1/2Chorister Level+Cha. That should definitely make it more manageable, though still powerful. If an opponent can teleport, they can probably make the save, but it isn't guaranteed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

Again, Slow is a VH-ability which shuts down anyone relying on multiple attacks. Bringing something like this to the table in AoE form is a definite sign of a VH class. --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Slow already is an AoE, the only difference is that this one doesn't specify a maximum number and is centered on the chorister. And there is even the added caveat that the enemies need to also be able to see and hear the player, if there is any kind of silence or fog effect it can't work on them.

Slow as an AoE is already a VH range ability due to how many enemies it affects, and that's not even talking about the range. If you have the caveat there, all that means is that all enemies with have blindsight and won't be able to see or hear so the DM isn't completely screwed over in an H game. At VH level though, this is very acceptable. --Ghostwheel (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

A 3+n round slow that costs you 1 standard action and n move actions doesn't seem that bad. It hurts full-attack guys, but there are classes with other things to do at H. The range and targeting is a bit much though, and I'd drop those a bit. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Changed Remonstration to affect a number of enemies equal to half her chorister level. -- Waker

• Words of the Immaculate Mind: Again with countering with the DM can bring to the table, which narrows down a DM's options for what to throw at the party.

Words of the Immaculate Mind is useful against creatures with a constant aura or who likes to throw around spells/effects that attack you mentally I agree. But if the Chorister has to devote their actions to countering it, the DM is justified in using such a creature. The chorister can really save the party's bacon if one or more of them get hit with a mental whammy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

An... immediate action? As soon as you stop doing it, it's still good for 3 rounds, during which time the combat will probably already be over. And if not, you can always reactivate it afterwards. --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Again with the reverse oberoni. This is not a problematic ability at this balance level, and would already be mostly covered by magic circle against evil. The range still stands out as large though. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Change Words to 30ft. -- Waker

• Verse of the Inviolate: This is a good one--it doesn't counter the DM completely, while still bringing a lot of benefit to the party and reduces the damage they take rather than negating everything that's thrown at them. Very solid.
• Words of Equality: Goodbye, incorps and invisible creatures, goodbye, never to be seen again. Another DM counter.

Words of Equality is another bit of help for the melee. It really sucks when you play as a mundane and get thwarted by incorporeal types. As with most of the performances though, spending time using this means you aren't using a spell or other performance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

I agree, but effects like these that just completely hose a whole creature type and the like are usually the domain of spellcasters who are generally VH-level. --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't actually like the ignoring DR portion of this ability, but have no problem with the rest of it. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't think ignoring DR would be that big of an impact on combat. I put it in there as mostly a means of letting the less effective combatants still contribute when they don't happen to have the right weapon. The pure melee will probably do enough damage to punch through DR without slowing down, but what about the Rogue when he runs into a golem? --Waker

It's not a big deal, I just don't think it fits the fluff of the rest of the ability. The rogue example is a poor one though, because they'll be dealing crap damage against something that can't be SAed (unless they have access to spells that allow that sort of thing, but that's hardly guaranteed at H) and should probably find another way to contribute. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 04:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Rogue wasn't meant the be the crux of my argument, but rather the first thing that popped into my head. The statement could be applied to anyone who isn't a dedicated combat brute, whether speaking about a Rogue, Monk, Incarnate or even the Chorister themselves. I realize that fluff-wise the powers seem a bit mish-mash, would it fit more in line if I dropped the See Invis/True Seeing aspect and just focused on Force and DR penetration? -- Waker

That would probably work. I don't think I'd negate DR entirely, but reducing it by your Chorister level seems fine. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 04:48, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Dropped See Invis/True Seeing and added the upper limit of DR negation. -- Waker

• Denying the Leyline: We've already talked about how perform way outscales saves, so from here on out the DM can't even use monsters with spells and the like.

Denying the Leyline was changed to opposed caster level checks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

Still doesn't address the main beef with the ability, that is, shutting down caster types completely if they fail the save, something that is generally VH-level (save or sucks). --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Failing the check only results in a lowered spell effect, it doesn't turn it off entirely. And many spells and abilities wouldn't even be affected by the lost of caster level if they don't scale by such a mechanic. As for the counterspell aspect, that requires that the chorister do nothing but spend a move action maintaining the performance and readying a standard action, so they are effectively wasting time if the enemy doesn't cast a spell. -- Waker

-12 caster level... That's a biggy. Though I guess it's not that bad now that it's not a skill check DC. --Ghostwheel (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

New format of this ability seems fine IMO. There are plenty of spells that don't care about CL that you can switch to. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

• Sacred Voice: Seems rather weak, since you're expending one of the above effects. I would make the spell also automatically maximized and quickened, perhaps? Unsure what's "too much".

Reach, and then eventual Mass seems like a fine set of upgrades for the cost to me. It covers the healing boost aspect nicely. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

• Solemn Prayer: Eh, it's fine. Nice flavor ability. Nothing special, as you've probably already got everyone to full HP by the time you rest for the night.
• Roar of the Just: Other way around would be better--get charisma modifier to hit and level to damage to it doesn't become a semi-true strike every time it's used.

Roar of the Just was meant to mimic Smite, got the bonuses turned around. Have since fixed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

• Blessings of Fortune: This one's fine, and I like it. Rerolling is good, negating the DM's actions is bad.
• Turn Undead: Meh. It's fine, and might come in handy unless you use SUPER FEATS to turn this crazy.
• Wisdom of Brevity: Probably fine. Is a nice upgrade.
• Hymn of Exhilaration: Granting standard actions is the stuff of action-economy breaking. If you bump the class to VH it should be fine, though.

Hymn of Exhilaration is powerful, on that I agree with you. Using it does require a resource that is tied up in just about every other class ability the chorister has though, so it shouldn't be getting used every combat. I did add in a clause that it can only be used once per round. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

See celerity, see VH, etc etc etc. --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

The Hymn is only as powerful as the members of your party. Using it requires a standard action, so it's pointless for the chorister themselves.

I guess so. At least you're not granting everyone an extra standard action, though setting up a strong combo and then finishing it off using the chorister's help could be very strong in a good, satisfying way. --Ghostwheel (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

[Edit Conflicted] I don't see the big deal about sacrificing one of your actions to give your party member an additional one. And giving everyone an extra move later on is pretty cool. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

• Turn the Blade: This one's cool, since it reduces damage but doesn't completely negate an enemy's action.
• Deny Fortune: Makes save-or-sucks always happen. Reroll is decent. Reroll with -12 penalty is bad. Fine in VH though.

Deny Fortune, kept the reroll but removed the penalty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

• Voice of the Soul: Decent upgrade to Turn Undead. Should be fine, though it might make the DM reskin enemies so that they're "semi-undead/outsiders" and not the real deal so you don't always turn-auto-pwn them.

Voice of the Soul isn't one I'm super worried about. The ability only works on outsiders who have an alignment subtype opposing yours, so unless your campaign is "ALL DEVILS AND DEMONS ALL THE TIME" it shouldn't be too bad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

And you'll never see demons or devils ever again :-P --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

You've never encountered undead before while playing as a cleric or paladin? -- Waker

As a paladin? Sure. They don't tend to have super-high Cha since they're pretty MAD, so it's not that much of a bother. But when playing with a cleric, there seem to be very few undead around, since they're effectively turned into non-encounters and the DM gets frustrated, and sends in something else since they don't pose any sort of challenge to the party--though this is fine in a VH game, since those kinds of tactics are often used on the PCs and on the NPCs alike. --Ghostwheel (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

And again with the reverse oberoni. This is a non-problem, though some clarification as to whether you can also destroy them or not would be nice. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Clarified that Outsiders cannot be destroyed by this ability. -- Waker

• Inspired Refrain: I don't particularly see a problem with this, as you should very rarely run out of spell slots.
• Voice of the Heavens: Cray-cray, for real-real, not fo' play-play. Depends on the scriptures taken. Still, a very, very nice capstone to cap off the class with.

Voice of the Heavens was meant to be impressive. I mean, you stayed in the class all the way! Good going! Even so, when compared to the power of 9th level spells, I don't exactly tremble at the thought of it being abused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waker (talk • contribs) at

Level 9 spells are the domain of VH spellcasters for the most part--even the Healer (a class that people would laugh at you, were you to posit that it's VH) gets Gate at 9th level, a spell that can by itself destroy multiple combats. Instead of comparing this to the highest of VH classes to measure its worth (and that's why I said below that it's low-VH, but still VH), try comparing it instead to, say, martial adepts, for example. Or the psychic warrior class. But of course it'll look weak compared to super-VH classes. That doesn't mean though that it's not VH itself. --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I realize that 9th level spells are the crème de la crème and wasn't intending to compare to them directly as far as power balance. My goal was a rather useful power that required you to not only reach the highest pre-epic levels (something that rarely happens in most games) and that you resist the urge to multi-class or enter into a prestige class. Sadly, most of the 3.5 classes don't offer such an incentive. But what makes the ability so powerful in your eyes? I realize it will allow for some interesting combinations between performances. I added a sentence clarifying that the ability still requires the normal expenditure of Scripture uses, including with Wisdom of Brevity. -- Waker

I don't have a problem with it--as I mentioned earlier, I quite like it for how powerful it is. It fits well in either VH or H--though the power of the other abilities would put this much more in VH category than H. --Ghostwheel (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

[Edit Conflicted] Also not worried about this one. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

So overall I like the class. That said, you might want to bump it up to VH with the many things that you have in here, since article balance is a range, rather than a single point. While this might be on the low end of VH (compared to the White Mage, which is on the higher end of VH, or the Marshal which is on the higher end of High), I think between all the abilities and how strongly you can negate what the DM throws at you, this sits solidly at the low end of VH. Change the balance point to VH and it's good in my opinion, keeping all the scaling and negating and everything, as you actually need those to survive in VH games. --Ghostwheel (talk) 07:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Some context for the above - there is disagreement about what falls into the different balance levels, particularly on the subject of Rocket Tag and access to save-or-suck abilities. Ghost is of the opinion that having even one, regardless of DC or acquisition level or other mitigating factors, is probably going to push you up to VH. I disagree rather strongly with that, and you're seeing some of that above.

Anyway, I do not think that this is a VH class overall. What this class has is a lot of counters for PC ability reduction, things that make a fight harder for the PCs, and they are primarily defensive in nature as a result. It doesn't have the breadth or the multitude of answers to problems that VH classes have, and there are numerous challenges that would cause this class to have a problem even if it is good at reducing the problems caused by those enemies. There are a few things in it that I think could be better though, as discussed above. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Two points about the balance categories: Adept seems to be near the boundary between High and Very High. If you aren't intending to use the balance categories in your gaming, it is better to change the balance category to fit the class than vice versa. --Ideasmith (talk) 19:52, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

The second point is worth repeating - if you don't care about balance points you can ignore them, write the class that you want, and then tag it whatever because it's a label that doesn't matter to you. That will annoy some people on the wiki who want things to be consistent in their power and fit into nice power bands, but it's a completely valid (if uneven) approach to creation. So if that's how you want to roll, it's worth pointing out. It changes the discussion from "I'd suggest you change X to better fit within the power band" to "there's enough things outside of your specified power band that I'd recommend changing the listed band". I don't think it's particularly relevant for your class right now, since I don't think it's VH despite my targeting concerns and wouldn't push for that change even if you ignored my thoughts entirely, but it's a good thing to remember going forward.

On the first point, I'd argue that Adept is not VH (and probably not even H) and instead just very poorly designed, but this isn't the place for that as it's not a particularly relevant comparison. The Bard is though, and that's an H class (though Ghost does not agree on that point because of some of their optimization options). You've traded out the Bard's combat applicable spells for a stronger focus on divine magic and enhanced their songs with a bunch of condition counters, and that doesn't seem enough to me to push it up. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 20:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)