Changing the Sorcerer?

[emerszi]

A Player in my game wants to create a Wildsoul sorcerer with the following changes:

All instances of DEX having affect are changed to be based upon INT. Charisma will still be the primary score.
He keeps a spellbook (but still only one spell per level).

He'd like the refluff his class to where he's an expert in esoteric lore, numerology, etc. Basically, he wants to be superbly intelligent instead of superbly dexterous at high levels.

Assuming he focuses primarily on 2 ability scores (and thus sacrifices DEX for INT), I see the following things he loses & gains:

Losses:
- His Initiative modifier will be much lower.
- DEX based skills will be much lower: Acrobatics, Stealth, Thievery. None of these are class skills for the Sorcerer, however.
- Generic DEX checks will be lower.
- Ranged attack rolls with weapons will be lower (but the Sorcerer gets a RBA spell anyway).
- Multiclass worse with some classes. (not applicable in his case)

Gains:
- INT skills will be higher (Arcana, History & Religion, 2 of which are class skills), and thus
- Rituals will be more effective (This is the main mechanistic reason he wants to make the change)
- Generic INT checks will be higher.
- Multiclass better with some classes, especially some that sinergize with the Sorcerer (Not applicable in his case, he's MC'd into Warlock).

In my game, at best guess, you're roughly equally likely to need to make a DEX check and an INT check, but a penalty for failed DEX check is much more likely to hurt you. Plus, generally, you only need one person to MAKE that INT check.

Mechanistically, he'd likely trade high initiative for better rituals.

Assuming this list covers everything, I'm likely to allow the change for free. Anything I'm missing? I'd charge a feat if I thought he was gaining too much.

 

[Garthanos]

well he can get better initiative with a feat
or he can get better rituals with one so. ;-)

I'd say go for it.. myself, the spirited intellectual
would be satisfying for me personally to play
as well.

Swapping one Reflex stat for another reflex stat
is probably the least invasive change you might
choose. IMHO

 

[keterys]

Sounds totally fine to me.

 

[Wightbred]

This looks fine. In my game I'd give this player a qualified yes. The qualification would be if they wanted to multiclass later (like into a swordmage) or use new rules from a book just released (that changed the Int to Dex balance) I'd get the right to veto it.

 

[Garthanos]

This looks fine. In my game I'd give this player a qualified yes. The qualification would be if they wanted to multiclass later (like into a swordmage) or use new rules from a book just released (that changed the Int to Dex balance) I'd get the right to veto it.

I would let them have it even for swordmage... but then they dont get the MC with the ranger as nicely? Im not yet sensitized as to what mc can accomplish in 4e it is so feat taxed to death.

 

[DracoSuave]

Hmmmm.

I'd force this player to come up with a damn awesome background. He'd better be coming to my table with a long lifestory, and I'd make him plead with his background for this strange and unusual change.

Then I'd allow it.

I like this change. But that doesn't mean the -player- needs to know that.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I'd be fine with it.

 

[Wightbred]

I would let them have it even for swordmage... but then they dont get the MC with the ranger as nicely? Im not yet sensitized as to what mc can accomplish in 4e it is so feat taxed to death.

I'd probably let them MC to Swordmage as well. I'd just be qualifying my approval so I didn't create a problem later.

 

[yesnomu]

I wouldn't let them MC wizard, because it'd be way too easy to pick up something like Stinking Cloud and wreak havoc with attribute-stacking. Other than that, I'd allow it.

 

[Garthanos]

That is too picky and pointed (IMHO)... are you thinking stinking cloud is too good? it may be the better of its class/level, but as I said the feat tax on multiclassing makes me inclined to just flow with it.