BryonD
Hero
Given the general level of hostility that came out of people(as a group) who were unhappy with 4E, not really.
perspective is an interesting thing
Given the general level of hostility that came out of people(as a group) who were unhappy with 4E, not really.
perspective is an interesting thing
I've read the MM front to back 2 or 3 times, and I've read sections of the DMG sporadically(I don't really DM anymore these days).
I tried to make this point before but I'll try to present my thoughts more clearly now...there are diminishing returns on knowing all spells... As an example what other spell provides the type of benefits (A totally safe haven where one can take a short rest and or hide) Rope Trick does at it's level? If there isn't one (which I don't think there is) what does it matter if I as a Wizard know 5 other spells that you don't? When it comes time to rest and/or we need safety I'm going to reach for Rope Trick... right? Only now instead of that being my time to shine...you can cast it and when necessary for an extra hour of duration which is always an advantage since it's there if necessary (say when hiding or scouting for a longer period of time) and not if it's not needed...
Sorry, I thought it was a ritual.Wait... how are Wizards not expending resources to cast this spell? They also have spell slots that are expended upon casting...same as a sorcerer. You're only spending sorcery points when you want to enhance the spells... something a wizard can't do.
No I don't think giving up all damage spells would be acceptable (or a good thing since ultimately if you're covering utility you may need to damage something... even if it's not in combat). The bloodlines I would be willing to work with you on as a DM (reduced spell points might be another aspect to evening out the added spells)... But ultimately I would want a final list of the spells you want to be able to cast outside of those on the Sorcerer's list and judge it off that.
It's not that I don't allow them, it's that my group has agreed to stay away from most of the UA stuff for now since it's not yet in a final form, though we do use SCAG and DMG options in our games. Interesting enough and in support of my first thoughts about this type of swapping with no cost... the Favored Soul is ranked gold (top tier/must take) and specifically called out as overpowered in the 5e sorcerer optimization guide... make of that what you will.
Meaning what?
But, in a sense, every system tries to. And, 5e, in particular, is signed up to give a certain sub-set of everyone (all past D&D fans) a certain sub-set of everything (everything they had in those past versions of D&D they were fans of).I understand that, but I'm also confused, no system, 5E, 4E, or 3E can give every one, everything.
Not really, and, no, none of that looks like a huge concern for one important reason: the Sorcerer is a 'known spell' class, not a 'prepared spell' class. Whatever some variant Sorcerer might have access to, it's fairly tied to the spells it actually knows, that's a fairly small number - the Druid, Cleric, or Wizard will always be vastly more versatile in what spells they can choose to have available in a given day.I think you are mis-representing my position. Is he just asking for Rope Trick? Because what I've seen is the spell list he wants grow as we've continued discussing to encompass basically his choice of wizard spells to the point that he's not even taking sorcerer spells anymore but instead is basically crafting his own spell list from whatever spells he wants on the Wizard list. Is it unbalancing... gamewise probably not spotlight wise... well let me ask this... would it be different if he wanted a nature themed sorcerer and wanted druid spells... or a healer themed sorcerer and wanted to cherry pick cleric spells?
Because the wizard already steps on so many toes and has so much versatility, already, perhaps?If not why is wizard different when it comes to stepping on toes and/or an increase in power/versatility?
The system itself really isn't that portable. 5e isn't designed to be this robust/elegant bit of code, it's natural-language suggestions and guidelines, any DM might run something differently than you might have expected, at any time...1. What you say probably applies to people who have a great table already, but to somebody who isn't already at an ideal table, plays at multiple tables of varying degrees, or moves around a lot, what you describe isn't portable or reliable. The system itself is far more portable, and the system doing it right out of the book is far superior to somebody who isn't in as stable of a situation.
One possible compromise for players - and a DM - who do want to play a game with that level of consistency is to impose that consistency ahead of time. Formal house rules that the DM will commit to sticking to, rather than off the cuff rulings. I seem to remember quite a lot of DMs running 1e that way.2. There are also matters of taste involved. Some people, including myself, find this sort of DM intervention not to our tastes. For me personally, I would either find something else in the system I'm more or less happy with, find some other table to play at that delivers what I want, or not game at all before I would be inclined to work with a DM to create what I wanted homebrew.
Meaning a simple nose count of who thought who was "hostile" would not go in favor of 4E fans. Which doesn't make them right or wrong. But does show that one should question the implicit bias of anyone claiming "hostility".
I see a whole lot less declarations that you simply fear change and hate progress here than was constantly thrown at people who expressed concerns about 4E which frequently mirrored your concerns with 5E.
Again, none of that is to say either side is right or wrong.
But you are reflecting perspective.
Not really, and, no, none of that looks like a huge concern for one important reason: the Sorcerer is a 'known spell' class, not a 'prepared spell' class. Whatever some variant Sorcerer might have access to, it's fairly tied to the spells it actually knows, that's a fairly small number - the Druid, Cleric, or Wizard will always be vastly more versatile in what spells they can choose to have available in a given day.
OTOH, if a Sorcerer wanted to pach spells unique to Bards or Warlocks, it might be a bigger potential issue.
Because the wizard already steps on so many toes and has so much versatility, already, perhaps?
Moonsong has me wondering to what extent this is still the case in 5e, but in 3e, the Wizard and Sorcerer essentially shared a spell list. In 5e, the Wizard has the most unique spells (not shared with any other class) at 33. The Sorcerer has 0.
Worst case, if a variant Sorcerer were getting too big for his britches, cut back his Sorcery points or metamagic options.
You're concerned the variant Sorcerer might squat on some of the wizard's 'best' spells? If it were a simple matter of letting any old sorcerer choose any wizard spell, I could see that being a potential issue. If it's a matter of pulling in spells based on a clear concept, less of one. One thing I suggested I might do in a situation like that is allow the Sorcerer spells from other lists, but choose them based on the concept, and reveal them to the player as she levels and the character 'discovers' them.Two words... diminishing returns.
Freakishly enough, in spite of exclusively running at quite low levels, yes. I wouldn't read a lot into that experience, though, it includes an elf wizard with extraordinarily lucky stat rolls, for instance.Have you actually experienced this in 5e?