3.5 Scoops Discussion

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I suspect they were trying to prevent the super-evoker who prohibits Divination and Necromancy -- but I suspect people will find a way around it.

 

[Nightfall]

I think you mean Illusion. If I'm an evoker I WANT access to Wail of the Banshee and other d20 necromantic sources.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

LOL, true, no powergamer should be without Horrid Wilting (or anyone else, for that matter ...).

 

[JoeBlank]

Sorcerer spell swaps: guess it's only one spell at each level. That's a nice feature, and balances nicely (though not as flavorful as thematic spell chains, but that would require reworking the whole mechanics).

I agree, it sounds like a nice perk, and something new to actually look forward to as a sorcerer gains levels. It also seems balanced, but maintains simplicity. I don't even mind the limit of only swapping one spell. (I have asked Roy and his partner in crime for clarification on this limitation, but it certainly sounds like only one spell at a time.)

Since sorcerer's get a new level of spells at even levels, it can be used so simulate thematic chains. A sorcerer with invisibility could take improved invisibility at 8th level, and swap out his 3d level invis. spell for something else. So no more putting off taking a lesser version of a spell, as you can swap it out when you gain the greater versions.

 

[JoeBlank]

And based upon the revised sorcerer skill list they posted:

"Bluff, Concentration, Craft, Knowledge (Arcana), Prefession, and Spellcraft."

it looks like the only change is the addition of Bluff. The loss of Scry and incorporation of Alchemy into Craft are the result of changes in the skills themselves.

Looks like WoTC heard the pleas that sorcerers needed a Cha-based skill, but did not want them to become diplomats. Makes sense to me, sneaky spellcasters always hiding their true intentions.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I third that. This is a truly boneheaded change. Instead of having people pick divination as an opposition school (and I don't know of any character who's done that in any of the games I've played), people will probably pick either enchantment, illusion, or necromancy. Evocation, Transmutation, and Conjuration are too important to give up if you have to give up something else AS WELL. Abjuration has a number of essential spells (like dispel magic). And Divination can't be chosen as a banned school.

As for the so-called super evokers with divination and necromancy prohibited, they weren't even legal in 3e. (And evokers weren't anything special anyway--Transmuters were the ones to worry about). An Evoker had to give up three schools if either divination or necromancy was on the list.

I think I agree with you. The schools aren't created equal -- and this effectively treats them all equally (except divination, which can't be ignored, for whatever reason).

I was hoping for a move more like the mechanics in HOHF:Elves, which assigned a point value to each school -- by specializing, you had to prohibit an equal point value of schools, but you could restrict any of them.

Maybe someone else can share a good argument in favor; right now I'm kind of

 

[Dr. Zoom]

And based upon the revised sorcerer skill list they posted:

"Bluff, Concentration, Craft, Knowledge (Arcana), Prefession, and Spellcraft."

it looks like the only change is the addition of Bluff. The loss of Scry and incorporation of Alchemy into Craft are the result of changes in the skills themselves.

Looks like WoTC heard the pleas that sorcerers needed a Cha-based skill, but did not want them to become diplomats. Makes sense to me, sneaky spellcasters always hiding their true intentions.

Since Innuendo has been eliminated and rolled into Bluff, that's actually two Cha skills all in one.

 

[Branduil]

Well, apparently all Half-Elves get in 3.5 is +2 to Diplomacy and Gather Information. So half-elves still suck unfortunately.

Half-Elves did not need more skill bonuses. They needed something that would make them unique and powerful enough so that you don't punish players just for choosing half-elf instead of humans or elves.

I don't see any reason why Dwarves should get a bunch of uber-abilities when they were already powerful and half-elves are left as sucky as ever.

 

[jasamcarl]

I third that. This is a truly boneheaded change. Instead of having people pick divination as an opposition school (and I don't know of any character who's done that in any of the games I've played), people will probably pick either enchantment, illusion, or necromancy. Evocation, Transmutation, and Conjuration are too important to give up if you have to give up something else AS WELL. Abjuration has a number of essential spells (like dispel magic). And Divination can't be chosen as a banned school.

As for the so-called super evokers with divination and necromancy prohibited, they weren't even legal in 3e. (And evokers weren't anything special anyway--Transmuters were the ones to worry about). An Evoker had to give up three schools if either divination or necromancy was on the list.

You are assuming, as usual, that the spell lists or the spells themselves are the same. There might easily have been an attempt at balance, with divination being a stop all utility school.

 

[Fedifensor]

An Evoker had to give up three schools if either divination or necromancy was on the list.

Evokers are all going to have the same prohibited schools - Enchantment and Necromancy. Illusion is useful because it has some good defensive spells (such as Mirror Image). Most Evokers don't like spells that you can save against for NO damage, something that Enchantment has in droves. And Necromancy, even with a few added spells like the ones on the WotC website, is the red-headed stepchild of spell schools.

This change really hurts those that took the less potent schools like Divination and Necromancy. A big thumbs-down in my book.