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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadrik" data-source="post: 6007845" data-attributes="member: 14506">Out of the six classes that have been shown. Two of them are too specific for my tastes. They feel like they should be in a campaign that is specifically tailored to them. I want generic classes, the sorcerer and warlock do not fit this bill as of now. I honestly don't need both of them in the game. Pick one and go with it. Two innate casters with whatever backstory however they acquire their magic don't need to exist. I think the caster that utilizes books i.e. the wizard and one that does not utilize any books whatsoever as all we need. I am not saying that what they created is not flavorful, it is, however it needs to be generic and fit into many campaign worlds. I don't want to have to account for all the different types of magic in my games. You have divine you have nature, bard, wizard, sorcerer, warlock, and psionics. Mechanically speaking the sorcerer, warlock and psion are all fairly similar concepts that could be housed under one roof. They're all innate casters. Refluff them with pacts or inner mental energy for any genetically infused magic. Bottom line is they have one way of using their magic, make it spell points, make it willpower, make it whatever... but they're all mechanically under one roof. No need to account for many different systems and all their nuances. One other thing specifically about the sorcerer is that it is a gish and A gish should not be a base class. Why not simply have a robust multi-classing system, that is well-thought-out and implemented.</blockquote>

Verification