Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ZombieRoboNinja" data-source="post: 6001867" data-attributes="member: 54843">It sounds to me like having mages, wizards, and sorcerers &quot;basically the same&quot; except for some fairly minor mechanical differences suggests that they actually shouldn't be separate classes in 5e, but rather different kits (&quot;origins&quot;/&quot;bloodlines&quot;/&quot;traditions&quot;) within the same class. So two points here:1. We've only seen one sorcerous origin (draconic) and zero wizard traditions (they're not yet implemented). I'd bet the farm that there will be at least one cloth-wearing d4-HP sorcerous origin (maybe wild or fiendish), and probably at least one leather-wearing d6-hp origin too (fey or shadow). So if you like the mechanics of the new sorcerer but not the martial focus, just wait for the glass-cannon origin to come out and reskin it as draconic.2. By the same token, wild magic has been mentioned as a possible &quot;tradition&quot; for wizards, suggesting that those traditions will potentially have some pretty hefty mechanical and flavor implications (beyond just &quot;evoker&quot; and &quot;illusionist&quot;). So it may well be the case that in your particular campaign, all your wizards, mages, and sorcerers will translate to different arcane traditions in the wizard class. Certainly, if you want to directly translate a 3e sorcerer who has access to the entire wizard spell list, that'll probably be the way to do it.WOTC has taken pains to show us a range of very disparate arcane casters. The draconic sorcerer, fey-pact warlock, and vanilla wizard all have very different focuses which displays a great breadth of options. I'll be interested to see how the classes compare when we are looking at, say, the evocation-heavy glass-cannon version of all three...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ZombieRoboNinja, post: 6001867, member: 54843"] It sounds to me like having mages, wizards, and sorcerers "basically the same" except for some fairly minor mechanical differences suggests that they actually shouldn't be separate classes in 5e, but rather different kits ("origins"/"bloodlines"/"traditions") within the same class. So two points here: 1. We've only seen one sorcerous origin (draconic) and zero wizard traditions (they're not yet implemented). I'd bet the farm that there will be at least one cloth-wearing d4-HP sorcerous origin (maybe wild or fiendish), and probably at least one leather-wearing d6-hp origin too (fey or shadow). So if you like the mechanics of the new sorcerer but not the martial focus, just wait for the glass-cannon origin to come out and reskin it as draconic. 2. By the same token, wild magic has been mentioned as a possible "tradition" for wizards, suggesting that those traditions will potentially have some pretty hefty mechanical and flavor implications (beyond just "evoker" and "illusionist"). So it may well be the case that in your particular campaign, all your wizards, mages, and sorcerers will translate to different arcane traditions in the wizard class. Certainly, if you want to directly translate a 3e sorcerer who has access to the entire wizard spell list, that'll probably be the way to do it. WOTC has taken pains to show us a range of very disparate arcane casters. The draconic sorcerer, fey-pact warlock, and vanilla wizard all have very different focuses which displays a great breadth of options. I'll be interested to see how the classes compare when we are looking at, say, the evocation-heavy glass-cannon version of all three... [/QUOTE]

Verification