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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Merlion" data-source="post: 871072" data-attributes="member: 10397">Actualy my starting base was 1 more spell per day than the Wizard, one more spell known than Monte Cook's variant Sorcerer. The Bard is a minor spellcaster. The PHB sorcerer is underpowered. Additionaly, I am not totaly eliminating any of his lack. Also your reasoning is flawed...a class having more of a certain something or being more powerful in a certain area doesnt make that a more powerful class overall. The Sorcerer has far greater access to firepower and several forms of utility than the Mystic. Also remember again that things work differently in my world...in my world sorcerers can do essentialy all the things a mystic can in terms of spells including healing. the Mystic is a better healer and probably better at defense than the Sorcerer, but the Sorcerer is better at damage and most utilities. I disagree with this on a number of levels. What do you mean by "max" their spellcasting stat? If you mean that all casters put their highest starting ability score in their spellcasting ability your mostly right. the large majority do. Some dont however..some opt to put the second score their and the first in Dex or Con. and the Mystic also must have a decent Charisma for their special abilities. Either way even with a Wisdom of 18, thats only bonus 4th level spells. Most are more likely to have a 15 or 16 which is at most bonus 3rd level spells. Most Mystics will be able to cast a single spell per day of a given spell level at the wizard-level for it, for the lower and mid levels. Thats hardly irrelevant. Now if you mean maxing with items well perhaps to an extent. I dont feel that every spellcaster spends all their resources on items to improve their casting stat however. That aside, magic items are not going to be quite as common in my world as in standard DnD anyway. We wont know for sure until its playtested of course though, it might have to be changed. Truth is in standard DnD where magic items are so easy to aquire the difference in spells per day between the wizard and sorcerer...one of the great balance factors between them...becomes quite a bit less. Its called character concept. Roleplaying. Theme. That aside, one extra spell is one extra spell. plus the spellcraft benefits.  That aside it seems rather odd to me that you seem to think all of my work is overpowered...the sort of thing that theirs no "reason not to take" but then this comment seems to say that specialization should give greater benefits than nonspecialization. Truth is, I want the two to be as balanced as possible. I dont want everyone who plays a mystic to automaticaly specialize, or automaticaly not. I want the decsion to be based on taste and character development. Again I think you are identifying the Mystic a little to much with the Cleric. It is "replacing" the cleric only in a limited technical sense. I am taking out the Cleric and putting in the Mystic. and the Mystic will be the best healer...well even that isnt entirly 100% true...IMC Druids will have the same access to healing magic as the Mystic so the only real advantage is the casting on the fly...so just dont fall into thinking of the Mystic as some sort of variant cleric.  As to the last part...well you must not be looking very closely. No Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Ice Storm, Melfs Acid Arrow, Flaming Sphere, Cone of Cold, Acid Fog, Delayed Blast Fireball, Invisibility Circle, no Illusions(Besides Invisibility which I am considering taking out...i'm not sure it fits), no Dominate spells, no Incendiary Cloud, no Disintegrate, no Meteor Swarm, no Fire Shield no Otiluke's Sphere spells,  no Wall of Fire or Ice, No Horrid Wilting, no Wail of the Banshee, No Passwall, Vision, Legend Lore, Mordenkainen's Sword, Bigby's Hand spells...in short plenty of good wizard spells got left off. I used the Spell Lists for Variant spellcasters section of the DMG as my guide when writing the Mystic spell list. I assigned it strengths and weaknesses.  the vast majority of their spells involve defense healing and divination. Their pretty decent at a couple of other forms of utility. the have some offense, litle of it involving damage. they essentialy have no illusion powers. I am very happy with the spell list...I think its perhaps the best part and the one that will need the least work. I disagree wth that...even a wizard often has to make hard choices when learning spells...I know, I played one for 15 levels. However, the spells known/per day IS one of the areas most likely to need tweaks after and possibly even before playtesting. I dont think its as bad as you say though. No to the specfic metamagic feats. To generic, to little flavour, and to much like a lesser version of the wizards bonus feats. I tried to make the first 2 abilities for each sphere about on par with a good feat, the 13th level ability along the lines of a really good feat or a bit above, and I just went all out with the 20th level abilities(also, all classes will be getting special things at 20th level IMC). I think the specialization part is going to work out pretty well. The Gifts themselves might need a little tweaking...playtesting will tell. Many around here complain that base classes give to little reason to stay wth them rather than take a Prestige Class....in a way I am trying to adress that...the Mystic gets benefits at all levels instead of having most of them scrunched up before 6th level or so like most of the base classes. Thats essentialy what I did. We just disagree about what constitutes to much utility. Phantasmal Killer is not out of place...most of a Mystic's attack spells are either death spells or alignment related. Their spiritual nature gives them many life and death related powers. My campaign will be using Monte Cook's Sorcerer which also has 4 skill points. I will probably be bumping the Wizards as well. I think more skills are rarely a bad idea across the board....they make great roleplaying aids and tools with little chance of negative balance ramifications when used in a manner that fits a groups playstyle.All of this being said remember in case you missed it...this is a first draft, and a work in progress. Its not perfect. I think its pretty decent. I hope to get to playtest it soon, and I'm sure changes will be made. However I get a somewhat condescending vibe from you. This may well be unintentional but either way I find it a tad...annoying. try to remember that everyone's style of play and concept of balance is different. Rember also that I post rough drafts to recieve ideas and constructive criticism...for my fellow EN worlders to point out mistakes and concerns. your posts have felt more like lectures. Its probably unintentional but I just wanted you to know your coming across that way a tad.</blockquote>

Verification