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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MoonSong" data-source="post: 6225332" data-attributes="member: 6689464">Well last week we learned Warlocks were going to be shapped around being the classic warlock, hexblade or Binder intersecting with the different patrons and probably having some degree of "recharge" powers. Sorcerers being casters with a reduced spell list and metamagic with flavor coming from a bloodline. Sound pretty distinctive to me.I dare to say most of the concepts I mentioned were very troublesome to express with a magic user/mage before sorcerers existed. While the current flexibility of casting could help, the wizard/mage/MU is just too loaded thematically on other direction. There are lots of things that get in the way like the spellbook, non commital spell list and the scholarly flavor everywhere.I like your suggestion, but at that point I think I could have more luck convincing a 2e DM to let me use the sorcerer from Baldur's Gate than try to reinvent the wheel with Next. (after all it is already balanced to the MU)  That is still there, sorcerer has always been the barbarian to the wizard's fighter, the performer to the wizards tactician, I don't discuss that it could have been better expressed mechanically on previous editions, but it is always been there.This was already possible in 4e, and has no reason to change. The wizard is still the one to study hard for the test, the sorcerer the one to get lucky and the warlock the one shagging the teacher for the grade.Like I said it takes more than just tactical flexibility to express some characters that the W/M/MU class has always been a poor fit to (the W/M/MU is very loaded with flavor that gets in the way of character concepts, it has never been generic enough, no matter how hard you tried, the Mage/wizard/MU would always have a hard time making a believable fresh of the farm confused kid or someone who doesn't want his/her power and doesn't understand it). And sorcerers already have a niche, is being there to cover those characters and specialized flavor casters. (I dare to say that unless you play a sorcerers for their mechanics, you don't play it to be smart, you play it to be dumb, something a wizard cannot ever be)Now while a wizard could get more MM feats in 3.x, that wasn't necesarilly the case, they could always fill bonus slots with spell mastery or crafting feats, but sorcerers were the ones who actually derived most of their power from metamagic, and a pair of their exclusive spells dealt with mixing spells. Giving sorcerers metamagic as a thing makes a greater service to the class fans than turning all sorcerers into monstruous characters and taking away the tematic flexibility of the class, 4e burned enough bridges when it made sorcerers nothing but blasters, (and the current scheme  still allows for enough monstrous sorcerers, it just has to be at subclass level, no need to taint a versatile class by hardcoding that unstable stuff at class level).</blockquote>

Verification