Thanks again for the comments. Its all good and helps work through the concepts to find what works and makes sense and what doesnt.
haiiro said:
I like the idea, but it makes me think, "Why play a rogue?" Particularly in a party with both a stealth sorcerer and a rogue, I think there's too much overlap.
Sure, the rogue can sneak attack (big) and use a few more skills, plus she's better at dodging things -- but the sorc can find traps, use plenty of skills, and dish out lots of spells (even with the reduction).
Looking at it, I guess I'd also say I think it's a bit unbalanced when compared to the battle sorcerer. I think trapfinding is a lot more useful than MWP, particularly for the stealth sorc, and the huge jump in number of skills overbalances what's left.
I'm not trying to knock you, Khaalis -- you've put forth a lot of cool sorcerer concepts, including this one -- I just don't think the numbers match up well.
Why play a rogue? Well, in all reality, the PHB rogue is basically designed as a combat machine with a skill backdrop. In my personal opinion I am not a fan of the currently rogue. For example, why would a Fence or a Second Story Man or a Cracker, etc. be trained in Sneak Attack? Not all, and in fact very few, rogue archetypes would be trained in the specialized slaying style of sneak attacks. Yet the core rogue is an assassination machine. Everything else is basically secondary. The only reason the rogue gets so many skill points is because there are SO many skills that make up the arena of the rogue.
The idea of a sorcerous rogue isn’t a far stretch. Especially when the classic Gish was presented in the battle sorcerer.
/rant on
In my personal opinion, its the same beef I have with the XPH. We get a core Psychic Warrior, but no other melded classtype. If you can have a Psychic Warrior why not a Psychic Rogue?
/rant off
Honestly, what would you see as an adaptation to sorcerer to give them the feel of being involved in the underworld of the rogue? They have to have at least a wider access to rogue skills, even if they don’t get trapfinding (relying on spells instead).
Merlion said:
I think perhaps I would say that the stealth sorcerer would be fine with low BAB. If its not going to try and fill the Rogue's combat role at all, then it doesnt really need that.
Also, 4 skill points per level probably wouldnt hurt. Also if its to be the "stealth" sorcerer, some of the more mechanical skills like disable device may not be neccesary But, unfortunitly the rogue is a very easy class to trample on. Its specialist is skills...and skills represent things that just about anyone could easily get to be good at. And as to trapfinding...well I'm of the school of thought that their should be a feat for that anyway. Theres no logical reason why only rogues can find traps.
Well from the comments presented how is this?
Benefits:
* Increase HD from d4 to d6
* Gain Light Armor Proficiency feat
* Gain ability to cast in Light armor at no Arcane Spell Failure
* Gain 6+INT skill points
* Gain as class skills: Appraise, Balance, Climb, Decipher Script, Diplomacy, Disguise, Escape Artist, Forgery, Gather Information, Hide, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge (local), Listen, Move Silently, Open Lock, Perform, Search, Sense Motive, Sleight of Hand, Spot, Swim, Tumble, Use Magic Device and Use Rope.
Costs:
* Reduce spell slots by 1 per spell level
* Reduce spells known by 1 per spell level
Differences from Battle Sorcerer are:
* 1HD increase less
* Gain most Rogue class skills (no disable device) and 6 skill points in place of extra HD, Intermediate BAB, and Martial Weapon Proficiency
I am also thinking of a limited spell selection, oriented specifically toward roguish spells (themed).
Merlion said:
Well, and this is mostly personal taste but I wouldnt really include "priest" neccesarilly...I've never really thought that was a common enough archtype.
But it depends. with stealth and combat you've pretty much got the nonmagical roles.
Many of the others (Nature, Defense, Healing, etc) would smack more of spell list changes and a few minor class changes than real class combo kind of deals.
However, with Nature you could have both a spell list alteration, skill alterations and perhaps a limited wild shape, or special animal, plant or element manipulating abilities.
Also, as a sort of variant of the combat variant I could see a sort of monk-like aesthetic sorcerer.
Bard-sorcerer doesnt really work because thats sort of what the bard already is.
something along the lines of a sage/loremaster sort of deal...although again thats mostly a spellcasting focus..
Why not priest? Why couldn’t a sorcerer be involved I a priesthood without having to be a cleric? What about if the sorcerous ability is divinely granted? Being a priest doesn’t necessarily mean a healer either.
I was thinking something like this.
Benefits:
* Increase HD from d4 to d6
* Gain Light Armor Proficiency feat
* Gain ability to cast in Light armor at no Arcane Spell Failure
* Gain as class skills: Diplomacy, Heal, Knowledge (religion, planes)
* Gain 2 Domains, gaining the powers and access to the domain spells as part of the sorcerer’s spell list
Costs:
* Reduce spell slots by 1 per spell level
* Reduce spells known by 1 per spell level
* No familiar
Differences from Battle Sorcerer are:
* No familiar
* 1HD increase less
* Gain 4 class skills instead of 1
* Gain 2 domain powers in place of Familiar and Martial Weapon proficiency
I am also thinking of a limited spell selection, oriented specifically toward religion oriented spells (themed).
As for Nature it would likely revolve around an animal companion instead familiar, wild empathy, gaining Handle Animal, Heal, Knowledge (nature) Listen, Spot and Survival as class skills, and 4 skill points. (Maybe animal or plant domain instead of wild empathy?)
I think you are correct on Bard, its already a jack-of-all-trades.
In any even, been up over 24 hours, me off to sleep. Comments and further thoughts much appreciated.
