Nyaricus's Tasty Bits (a thread about threads)
Nyaricus
First Post
naw man, i am leaving room to build this up. I am still basically a noob here at EN World, but i have quite a few entries and points of interests i will eventually post up.
The main thing is, is that i needed to put in at least 3 letters for each post - so the title is down there instead of the title line untill i can get some links posted . . . and boy (!) do i have many. Patience is the key here, but i'll start to build this up as time goes by.
Remember that since i am only "editing" the entries, this post will not go to the top of the forum page; so if people want to check this out, it'll always be in my sig, or even better, just bookmark it! Hope that answers your (an others) questions and potential questions.
cheers
The main thing is, is that i needed to put in at least 3 letters for each post - so the title is down there instead of the title line untill i can get some links posted . . . and boy (!) do i have many. Patience is the key here, but i'll start to build this up as time goes by.
Remember that since i am only "editing" the entries, this post will not go to the top of the forum page; so if people want to check this out, it'll always be in my sig, or even better, just bookmark it! Hope that answers your (an others) questions and potential questions.
cheers
Thia Halmades
First Post
Ah, okay. For a moment I thought I was going to be treated to a 'best of' symposium where we went over all the times we argued. 
No. Seriously. I had no idea what the plan was here. But I'm down for a point of reference. 'Tasty Bits' is a pretty questionable thread title, though.
No. Seriously. I had no idea what the plan was here. But I'm down for a point of reference. 'Tasty Bits' is a pretty questionable thread title, though.
Nyaricus
First Post
I'll look into making a new post just for those XDThia Halmades said:Ah, okay. For a moment I thought I was going to be treated to a 'best of' symposium where we went over all the times we argued.
huh, i wasn't thinking i was being elusive at all . . . actually, sorta cleverThia Halmades said:
. My sig explains it better though > and since i wasn't expecting to get even this much traffic in this thread (rather, just continually editing posts) i figured that my sig would be the main draw into this thread. Alas, that has been proven otherwise, what with you meddling kids!!! (jk, jk)Anyways, i hope that once i get some more info in here, you peeps can find some cool topics.
Sravoff
First Post
Sorry to spam this place, Great idea, I'll check back frequently, but I had a questin on the sorcerer you had.
well, actually I don't understand any of it really. He seems to get spells known...thwen get a feat, that gives him a WHOLE bunch more spells know. Then he seems to cast vitually none per day....I am probably reading this wrong.
So, was there a thread that explained a bit more of it? Or anything to that nature?
Once again sorry to intrude into your thread here. I'll get rid of this post once I understand the sorcerer.
Thanks
-Sravoff
well, actually I don't understand any of it really. He seems to get spells known...thwen get a feat, that gives him a WHOLE bunch more spells know. Then he seems to cast vitually none per day....I am probably reading this wrong.
So, was there a thread that explained a bit more of it? Or anything to that nature?
Once again sorry to intrude into your thread here. I'll get rid of this post once I understand the sorcerer.
Thanks
-Sravoff
Nyaricus
First Post
hey man, don't worry about spamming this post at all - i made all the basic areas which i can edit things into already. I am completely cool with you guys posting in here, if there's something you simply don't understand.
In the sorcerer, you might not have noticed a link in the upper right corner whihch leads you back to the main thread. I didn't notice anyhting out of whack with spells per day/known, etc, but i don't like to play spellcasters in general, so i mihgt not have noticed that. Basically, getting bonus feats like a wizard, and Eschew Materials were the main points i wanted to leach from that sorc - they make them a more viable base class, otherwise they end up going PrC ASAP - and making the sorcerer base class a "few level dip" class for prereqs.
What i will also be implimenting is that wizards must choose item creation feats or spell mastery - making them "scholar types" and with the sorc doing meta-magic, they are the balsters. It makes sense in my mind, so i am going with it.
Hope that helps man.
In the sorcerer, you might not have noticed a link in the upper right corner whihch leads you back to the main thread. I didn't notice anyhting out of whack with spells per day/known, etc, but i don't like to play spellcasters in general, so i mihgt not have noticed that. Basically, getting bonus feats like a wizard, and Eschew Materials were the main points i wanted to leach from that sorc - they make them a more viable base class, otherwise they end up going PrC ASAP - and making the sorcerer base class a "few level dip" class for prereqs.
What i will also be implimenting is that wizards must choose item creation feats or spell mastery - making them "scholar types" and with the sorc doing meta-magic, they are the balsters. It makes sense in my mind, so i am going with it.
Hope that helps man.
Sravoff
First Post
I took a look back to the thread, but the class didn't seem to be discussed, atleast not on any of the points I didn't understrand. I'll look back over it.
I never even considered the sorcerer a weak class, they ahve always been one of my favorites, but that is perhaps because we never bother with components, unlless they are really expensive.
Sorcerer Barbarians were always favorites of mine, but I guess that is all preference ,as I have seen a lot of people trying to "fix" the sorcerer.
I'll look back over the sorcerer and edit if I find, or fail to, anything out.
Thanks again for the thread, Sravoff
-edit- Ok, I understand the spells now, mostly, though the spells known is still a bit confusing. Can the sorcerer only learn spells on his spell list, by way of the spell schooling feat? Or is spells known learned from any list?
That bit is still slightly confusing, though for ow, I shall guess you have to use the spell schooling feat to learn any spells.... though that seems slightly silly, to require a class to take certain feats. -/edit-
I never even considered the sorcerer a weak class, they ahve always been one of my favorites, but that is perhaps because we never bother with components, unlless they are really expensive.
Sorcerer Barbarians were always favorites of mine, but I guess that is all preference ,as I have seen a lot of people trying to "fix" the sorcerer.
I'll look back over the sorcerer and edit if I find, or fail to, anything out.
Thanks again for the thread, Sravoff
-edit- Ok, I understand the spells now, mostly, though the spells known is still a bit confusing. Can the sorcerer only learn spells on his spell list, by way of the spell schooling feat? Or is spells known learned from any list?
That bit is still slightly confusing, though for ow, I shall guess you have to use the spell schooling feat to learn any spells.... though that seems slightly silly, to require a class to take certain feats. -/edit-
Last edited:
Hi, Nyaricus! Hi, Sravoff! I was the poster of the tweaked sorcerer, so I'd like to explain a bit here.
The basic idea behind my sorcerer tweak is that sorcerers learn spells piecemeal. They have no system or plan, and might not even be able to understand arcane writing (ie. scrolls). They just know how to focus their will 'this way' and create a fireball-type effect. They do not know 'why', just that it works.
Mechanically, the sorcerer can learn any spell in existance, but always as an arcane spell (so ASF always applies). They can even make up entirely new 'spells' that emulate creatures' spell-like abilities. If a sorcerer wants to learn 'cure light wound', he can do so. If he wants to learn 'holy sword', he can do so as well.
However, a sorcerer has no 'spell list' except for the spells he knows. So, if a 1st level sorcerer chose to learn 'cure light wounds' and 'sleep' as his two 1st level spells, then he CANNOT activate a wand of magic missile, as magic missile is not on his spell list. He COULD, however, activate wand of cure light wounds
Now if that same sorcerer took the Spell Schooling feat for Wizard spells once at 1st level, that sorcerer would have all 0th ~ 2nd level wizard spells on his spell list. So, the sorcerer would be able to activate a wand of magic missile, or a scroll of knock. The if the sorcerer had taken the Spell Schooling feat for Cleric spells once instead, he would be able to activate a wand of bless, but NOT a wand of magic missile.
You just have to 'get' the difference between 'spells known' and 'spells on your spell list'. You can only cast spells that you 'know', but merely need to have a spell on you 'spell list' toactivate a wand or scroll that stores that spell.
Clerics automatically 'know' all spells on thier spell list. Wizards (and the RAW sorcerer) may learn any spell that is 'on' their spell list, but do not actually 'know' a spell until he has learned it. My sorcerers may 'learn' any spell in existance (subject to DM approval, of course), but the only spells on his 'spell list' (ie the only spells that he can activate in wands or cast from scrolls) are the spells he actually 'knows'.
I hope this has made things clearer. If not, tell me and I'll try to do better. ^_^
As for the extra number of spells known... I have tweaked ALL casting classes IMC so that the spells-known and spells-per-day progress even beyond 20th level. I'll just edit it back so that the list is compatable with the original rules.
The basic idea behind my sorcerer tweak is that sorcerers learn spells piecemeal. They have no system or plan, and might not even be able to understand arcane writing (ie. scrolls). They just know how to focus their will 'this way' and create a fireball-type effect. They do not know 'why', just that it works.
Mechanically, the sorcerer can learn any spell in existance, but always as an arcane spell (so ASF always applies). They can even make up entirely new 'spells' that emulate creatures' spell-like abilities. If a sorcerer wants to learn 'cure light wound', he can do so. If he wants to learn 'holy sword', he can do so as well.
However, a sorcerer has no 'spell list' except for the spells he knows. So, if a 1st level sorcerer chose to learn 'cure light wounds' and 'sleep' as his two 1st level spells, then he CANNOT activate a wand of magic missile, as magic missile is not on his spell list. He COULD, however, activate wand of cure light wounds
Now if that same sorcerer took the Spell Schooling feat for Wizard spells once at 1st level, that sorcerer would have all 0th ~ 2nd level wizard spells on his spell list. So, the sorcerer would be able to activate a wand of magic missile, or a scroll of knock. The if the sorcerer had taken the Spell Schooling feat for Cleric spells once instead, he would be able to activate a wand of bless, but NOT a wand of magic missile.
You just have to 'get' the difference between 'spells known' and 'spells on your spell list'. You can only cast spells that you 'know', but merely need to have a spell on you 'spell list' toactivate a wand or scroll that stores that spell.
Clerics automatically 'know' all spells on thier spell list. Wizards (and the RAW sorcerer) may learn any spell that is 'on' their spell list, but do not actually 'know' a spell until he has learned it. My sorcerers may 'learn' any spell in existance (subject to DM approval, of course), but the only spells on his 'spell list' (ie the only spells that he can activate in wands or cast from scrolls) are the spells he actually 'knows'.
I hope this has made things clearer. If not, tell me and I'll try to do better. ^_^
As for the extra number of spells known... I have tweaked ALL casting classes IMC so that the spells-known and spells-per-day progress even beyond 20th level. I'll just edit it back so that the list is compatable with the original rules.
