Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is the major thing that's disappointing about Sorcerers is the lack of sorcery point options?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jago" data-source="post: 6908484" data-attributes="member: 6855130"><p>I know that Clerics do not have to be precisely what I said. Just so much as a Wizard does not have to be an old man with glasses, a Barbarian does not have to be Conan, a Fighter does not have to be an uncharismatic idiot, and a Druid does not have to be a hippie. </p><p></p><p>But I am trying to highlight that if I wanted to play a Sorcerer with a divine concept, I want to play a Sorcerer with a divine concept. I don't want to Turn Undead or get Domain powers. I want metamagic and the like. </p><p></p><p>Clerics are pretty thematic and they work. I'm all for people playing Knowledge Clerics like Magical Indiana Jones, or Trickery Clerics like shadow-touched Robin Hoods, or Nature Clerics as like Park Ranger/Wardens. I don't think I've ever once played a Cleric as I've described: I've worshiped in taverns and at the helms of ships, and I have championed the faith as someone who does not quite understand why they have these blessings but wants to help others just as much as someone who 100% understands what they are and uses that to take advantage of the hapless and the hopeless. </p><p></p><p>But their blood is not Divine. Their casting comes from Wisdom, not Charisma. They do not gain the same abilities and skills as the Sorcerer. It is, simply, not the same.</p><p></p><p>The Warlock is not really stealing the theme of a Cleric: Domains have been a part of D&D for quite awhile, and it works quite the same way as always. Honor the God who provides your domain, do their good work, feel your connection with them, and don't piss them off or you're suddenly going to be lacking some of that divine might.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I reiterate: creating my own subclass is <em>not a solution</em>. It is a patch on something that needs actual attention. </p><p></p><p>I don't want to play a Divine Wizard with my spellbook and my rote and practice. I want to play raw magical power, from the force of my personality and presence. And adapting the Domains lead to the Favored Soul, which again, may not be allowed, and some people actually claimed was <em>too</em> powerful for a Sorcerer (strictly because they got a bigger spell selection). </p><p></p><p>Can I reflavor a Cleric to do this? Yes. Absolutely. Sure. </p><p></p><p>But as I said, it's not the same. The skills are not the same. The abilities are not the same. I still have to present a Holy Symbol to call down magic, <em>why</em>? <em><strong>I </strong><strong>am Magic</strong></em>. This cannot be understated. </p><p></p><p>If I want to play Magical Shadow Incarnate, I should not be looking at Monk to do so. If I want to create a whirling power of sand and wind that was born from the very soul of a Djinni, I should have more options than just a Druid. </p><p></p><p>I can reflavor a Barbarian to act like a Fighter. I can reflavor a Rogue to act like a Barbarian. But they're <em>not the same</em>. If they can give attention to the Ranger and give a rework where it now can fit several different concepts of Ranger, the Sorcerer should receive the same attention and a thorough look at the class.</p><p></p><p>If the answer is consistently "Find another class/archetype to play your concept" or "Create your own archetype" when I <em>want</em> to play a Sorcerer for my concept because thematically it <em>does</em> fit, then there is an issue. I can take a Wizard and turn that into anything. I can take a Cleric and turn that into anything. Why can I not do the same with the 2nd biggest raw Arcane Spellcaster in the game?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jago, post: 6908484, member: 6855130"] I know that Clerics do not have to be precisely what I said. Just so much as a Wizard does not have to be an old man with glasses, a Barbarian does not have to be Conan, a Fighter does not have to be an uncharismatic idiot, and a Druid does not have to be a hippie. But I am trying to highlight that if I wanted to play a Sorcerer with a divine concept, I want to play a Sorcerer with a divine concept. I don't want to Turn Undead or get Domain powers. I want metamagic and the like. Clerics are pretty thematic and they work. I'm all for people playing Knowledge Clerics like Magical Indiana Jones, or Trickery Clerics like shadow-touched Robin Hoods, or Nature Clerics as like Park Ranger/Wardens. I don't think I've ever once played a Cleric as I've described: I've worshiped in taverns and at the helms of ships, and I have championed the faith as someone who does not quite understand why they have these blessings but wants to help others just as much as someone who 100% understands what they are and uses that to take advantage of the hapless and the hopeless. But their blood is not Divine. Their casting comes from Wisdom, not Charisma. They do not gain the same abilities and skills as the Sorcerer. It is, simply, not the same. The Warlock is not really stealing the theme of a Cleric: Domains have been a part of D&D for quite awhile, and it works quite the same way as always. Honor the God who provides your domain, do their good work, feel your connection with them, and don't piss them off or you're suddenly going to be lacking some of that divine might. I reiterate: creating my own subclass is [I]not a solution[/I]. It is a patch on something that needs actual attention. I don't want to play a Divine Wizard with my spellbook and my rote and practice. I want to play raw magical power, from the force of my personality and presence. And adapting the Domains lead to the Favored Soul, which again, may not be allowed, and some people actually claimed was [I]too[/I] powerful for a Sorcerer (strictly because they got a bigger spell selection). Can I reflavor a Cleric to do this? Yes. Absolutely. Sure. But as I said, it's not the same. The skills are not the same. The abilities are not the same. I still have to present a Holy Symbol to call down magic, [I]why[/I]? [I][B]I [/B][B]am Magic[/B][/I]. This cannot be understated. If I want to play Magical Shadow Incarnate, I should not be looking at Monk to do so. If I want to create a whirling power of sand and wind that was born from the very soul of a Djinni, I should have more options than just a Druid. I can reflavor a Barbarian to act like a Fighter. I can reflavor a Rogue to act like a Barbarian. But they're [I]not the same[/I]. If they can give attention to the Ranger and give a rework where it now can fit several different concepts of Ranger, the Sorcerer should receive the same attention and a thorough look at the class. If the answer is consistently "Find another class/archetype to play your concept" or "Create your own archetype" when I [I]want[/I] to play a Sorcerer for my concept because thematically it [I]does[/I] fit, then there is an issue. I can take a Wizard and turn that into anything. I can take a Cleric and turn that into anything. Why can I not do the same with the 2nd biggest raw Arcane Spellcaster in the game? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is the major thing that's disappointing about Sorcerers is the lack of sorcery point options?
Top