That's no Sorcerer, that's a Paladin (of Bahamut) kinda.. sorta

[TrippyHippy]

Just for clarification, charismatic does not mean nice. It just means someone has a powerful personality.

At the risk of Godwinning (God-winning?) the thread, Hitler was a very charismatic man, and I'd dare say that not many people other than Eva Braun found him to be nice. Still, the man had an incredibly powerful persona.

That's charisma.

I do realize that, although what I am trying to get at is that I'd like to be able to play Sorcerers that are deeply repulsive. it's hard to reconcile that if they all have a good Charisma score.

 

[thewok]

I do realize that, although what I am trying to get at is that I'd like to be able to play Sorcerers that are deeply repulsive. it's hard to reconcile that if they all have a good Charisma score.

Then make him repulsive. Since Charisma has no bearing on physical attractiveness, make him just as fugly as you want. And then, have his charisma manifest as a kind of "get the f*** away" aura. He's so intense, so driven that people can sense it, and they hate him. Train in Intimidate, rather than Diplomacy, and make ample use of it.

Charisma simply means he has a powerful personality. It doesn't mean people have to like him at all.

 

[TrippyHippy]

I think that's stretching it about the definition of Charisma. While it doesn't pertain directly to attractiveness, is does denote that people want to follow someone with Charisma. You can't have a high Charisma and be repulsive. And I choose my words carefully on the matter.

 

[Steely_Dan]

It is a common approach in games to do so though. IMC a paladin is directly tied to a god. So Paladin of X is entirely appropriate.

Total, Lawful Good ones (the only kind).

 

[Gothikaiju]

I am 100% sure that this is only one aspect of the sorcerer and that by core we will have at least 3 such aspects to choose form.

Just like wizards will have several traditions, clerics will have several domains and rouges will have several schemes.

Warder
Warder

Yep. Along with fiery/elemental magic, the Sorcerer's armor/weapons emulate the claws/scales of a dragon. Other bloodlines will have other things, that make them play/fight like their kin (I think/hope).

 

[DEFCON 1]

I think that's stretching it about the definition of Charisma. While it doesn't pertain directly to attractiveness, is does denote that people want to follow someone with Charisma. You can't have a high Charisma and be repulsive.

Sorry... but there are a great many of us that feel the opposite. Charisma =/= Comeliness. That's part of the reason Comeliness got added as a 7th possibly ability score way back when. Charisma can include physical beauty... but it does have to.

Now if you don't believe that to be the case, that's fine. But it just means that if you are enough in the minority in your beliefs, then the possibility exists you aren't going to end up getting your wish that the Sorcerer have a CON-based build. Now maybe you will... but your beliefs on Charisma don't look to be shared enough across the board that it is going to be a absolute certainty.

 

[Minigiant]

Charisma is minor mind control.

Charisma is the ability to make others feel and think the way you want.

You can make like you, fear you, trust your lies, and even think you are someone you are not.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Total, Lawful Good ones (the only kind).

Yep, I only have LG paladins.

Short digression to campaign info (to set my approach into perspective).

There are no Evil Gods. The Good as a palpable force of alignment is because the gods are there, and is created by them just living.

Evil are demons and devils - not individually as powerful as any God but there are a whole bunch more of them. Their existence created the palpable force of the Evil alignment.

</digression>

 

[TrippyHippy]

Sorry... but there are a great many of us that feel the opposite. Charisma =/= Comeliness. That's part of the reason Comeliness got added as a 7th possibly ability score way back when. Charisma can include physical beauty... but it does have to.

Now if you don't believe that to be the case, that's fine. But it just means that if you are enough in the minority in your beliefs, then the possibility exists you aren't going to end up getting your wish that the Sorcerer have a CON-based build. Now maybe you will... but your beliefs on Charisma don't look to be shared enough across the board that it is going to be a absolute certainty.

No, you're not reading what I am saying. I am not saying that Charisma pertains to physical attractiveness. I am saying that Charisma denotes personal magnetism and appeal. You can't have magnetism and be repulsive. Indeed I'd like to play a sorcerer so repulsive that they are forced to live in exile as a recluse.

 

[Greg K]

I like the idea of innate magic. I like the 3e sorcerer. I like 3e heritage feats. So do my friends.

We don't like the Next Sorcerer or the Draconic Heritage. We prefer leaving the heritage as just an explanation as to why the caster can innately cast magic., because when we think of sorcerers as innate casters, we think of Merlin (Infernal Heritage), Merlin Scy Fy Channel (Dragonlord Heritage) Morgan La Fey (Fey Heritage in at least one story), "Bewitched" (Family Heritage), Charmed Witches and Warlocks (Family Heritage). We don't think of or want Yu-gi-Oh or Naruto as the default that the class is based around.
There is nothing wrong with manifestation as one of several options (like 3e heritage feats). Something like Yu-gi-oh or Naruto might be nice for a specific campaign. It just should not, in our opinion, be hardwired into a heritages like dragon. That is getting to specific for our tastes. Creating a specific heritage called dual soul though would be fine.

Furthermore, we don't see anything about Dragon heritage providing innate casting and giving extra armor and weapon proficiencies.

Add to the above that spell selection at low levels is just pathetic .
At the moment, the class is full of fail in our opinion.