+ Log in or register to post
Results 61 to 70 of 140
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 02:44 AM #61
Myrmidon (Lvl 10)
Yuck and yuck if they only difference is resources. I think the spells need to be distinct. Ok, I'll stop typing that now.
- EN World
- has no influence
- on adverts that
- are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 02:53 AM #62
The Great Druid (Lvl 17)
Or, if you want the more positive slant, then getting that result is a very strong sign that maybe the sorcerer needs reworking so that this state of affairs is no longer true--rather than, say, going back to repacking spells in a slightly different fashion and pretending it was all that and a barrel of monkeys.
Good modular design tends to do that--among other things. It exposes facades for what they are. So then the mature reaction is to build up better (more truly flavorful) facades around the now stronger core elements.
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 02:54 AM #63
Superhero (Lvl 15)
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 02:57 AM #64
The Great Druid (Lvl 17)
Note in passing: There is no reason that putting the choice of magic mechanic systems in the DM's hands (however the DM consults with players) is in any way a requirement that the magic mechanic systems be in the DMG. It is only required that they be outside the class listings.
Such systems can be in the PHB in a dedicated chapter, part of the spell chapter, some split off into the DMG, added to in a separate book, or in a fit of near insanity, even have one or two included in the MM (e.g. "dragon magic" suitable for such monsters).
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 03:09 AM #65
My biggest concern is that these alternative spell resource systems will step on the toes of the Sorcerer and Warlock.
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 03:18 AM #66
Acolyte (Lvl 2)
at some level this is going to be about how a class's abilities augment the general spell pool, isn't it? That's where we'll probably see the most "flavour", as far as class goes. How will a wizard handle 'at will' differently than a warlock?
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 03:21 AM #67
The Great Druid (Lvl 17)
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 05:28 AM #68
Let's say wizards have 9 spell levels, sorcerers have 7 spell levels and warlocks 5 spell levels. That all assumes that they use spell levels. It doesn't assume they use the same spells, same versions of spells or anything like that.
If they all became at-will users, or ritual users or recharge or any combination. They will (or at least should) have power levels, spells and options based on certain assumptions. Those assumptions have little to do with which mechanics they are using.
You only run into troubles when all three classes have 9 spell levels and are all vancian and/or when all three could easily be confused with one another. If you can't take a warlock (regardless of mechanics) and slap on a wizard sticker then I'll be exceedingly happy with the outcome on this matter.
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 06:35 AM #69
By this standard fighters don't need CS, rogues don't need skill mastery or sneak attack, etc. Of course you can unify mechanics - there are plenty of RPGs that do just that. But D&D isn't one of them. Each class has its own quirks. By stipulating that all spell casters MUST be malleable in their mechanics you prevent a lot of cool, specific mechanics from being implemented. Just for example, as I've already mentioned, when does a Vancian draconic sorcerer start to grow scales and claws?You only run into troubles when all three classes have 9 spell levels and are all vancian and/or when all three could easily be confused with one another. If you can't take a warlock (regardless of mechanics) and slap on a wizard sticker then I'll be exceedingly happy with the outcome on this matter.
Right now, define the warlock and sorcerer. Do it WITHOUT describing HOW they cast spells. If you can't do it then this concern is already moot. If you CAN then there shouldn't be a problem if they all use vancian or not.
Last edited by ZombieRoboNinja; Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012 at 06:41 AM.
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 06:54 AM #70
Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)
What differentiated them was the spell list, rate of advancement, skills, equipment, saves, attack bonuses, and other class features. No one has ever accused a cleric and wizard of being interchangeable.
By that same token, it seems to me that you can build a wizard, sorcerer, and warlock around the same spell mechanic. It will be their other class features that differentiate them. And as long as those features can be designed to accommodate the different spell mechanic options the class distinctions should hold up.
I think maybe what some are struggling with is the fact that this mean having to add some other significant feature to the basic wizard to give it its own schtick compared to the sorcerer or warlock, and that feature cannot be the tried and true Vancian spell memorization. That will make the D&D wizard more complex than it's ever been. Spells and spells alone can no longer define it. And that's changing something that has been a fundamental part of our favorite fantasy RPG for anyone who came up prior to 4e. It's almost like asking die hard lifelong fans of a sports team to accept the idea that their team is going to change it's colors.
Last edited by GameDoc; Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012 at 02:39 PM.