Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MessiahMushroom" data-source="post: 6811401" data-attributes="member: 6789613">There were two other kits provided in Dragon magazine (issue 198): the Sungazer wizard and the Priest-Defender both of which are interesting but may or may not want to be included. The article, titled "Scimitars against the Dark," also proposed adding psionics into the mix, but I absolutly do NOT recommend that.As far as the wizard subclasses go, I'll list my comments on each. <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Elemental Mage I think four linked origins would be best. I've got these pretty much covered and can put them together in an afternoon, no problem.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Sha'ir Though I love @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=20323" target="_blank">Quickleaf</a>'s version, I think it could use some minor rewording and additional parameters set in place. Particularly the genie binding feature could use some additional specifications (CR rating etc.). Maybe when we convert some more of the genies, this ability will be more balanced.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Sorcerer Totally, let's cut it. [side note: the Draconic sorcerous origin doesn't really have a place in Zakhara]</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Astrologer This tradition would need to be built from scratch but would be fun to do so <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Clockwork Mage The Artificer released in a previous UA article (<a href="http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/UA_Eberron_v1.pdf" target="_blank">http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/UA_Eberron_v1.pdf</a>) could be a good stand-in. The tinker feature of the rock gnome (or some other similar features) should make an appearance here.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Digitalogist I actually took a crack at this a year ago when I was a lil' baby to DM'ing but it's horrendous and confusing. <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?412345-Wizardly-Tradition-Digitalogist" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?412345-Wizardly-Tradition-Digitalogist</a></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Ghul Lord This as a sorcerous origin works because of spell points. I imagine it could be transformed into a wizard tradition simply enough by allowing Hit Die to replenish spell slots somehow.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Jackal I view this, the spell thief, as being a rogue subclass. And considering that arcane tricksters get a spell-thieving ability at 17, should we rebuild this?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mageweaver Needed to be made from scratch, I guess. I find this kit really confusing.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mystic of Nog I have a player right now who's role-playing as a mystic of nog. He's taken levels in both monk and the rune scribe prestige class. We've reflavored runes as being geomancy, once used in the ruined kingdoms. <a href="http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/UA_Rune_Magic_Prestige_Class.pdf" target="_blank">http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/UA_Rune_Magic_Prestige_Class.pdf</a></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Spellslayer let's scrap it.</li> </ul>looks like we've got our work cut out for us!</blockquote>

Verification