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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sonofapreacherman" data-source="post: 1368236" data-attributes="member: 2315">It was ... so you're welcome.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I couldn't agree more. The first class I revised when 3.0 came out was the monk. It drove me mad that each monk who ascended the level ladder ended up exactly the same. Version 3.5 tried to fix this, but didn't go far enough in my opinion. Still, a balance has to be reached in Dungeons and Dragons between core character class "flavor" and strong heroes, fast heroes, quick heroes, and so forth. People who want a completely mutable character generation method should switch to d20 Modern and tailor it for fantasy.Yes and no. Role-players (read: good role-players) don't need abilities to fuel their imagination. That said, good role-players are not a dime a dozen. I consider myself an "okay" role-player. As such, the best sorcerer build (to my way of thinking) doesn't hand-hold me with abilities to feel like a sorcerer, but it isn't shy with the abilities either. I think both sets of ideals should be represented in any well-designed character class. Too much of one of the other is a mark of failure.I think that's because Monte's sorcerer didn't go far enough, while some sorcerers variants go too far.Well, you can only do so much for the faith driven, but the other 44% (34%?) are definitely growing in number.While the sorcerer description is certainly colorful, the trick is not to get carried away. This is where that balance I was talking about needs to come into play. That colorful sorcerer description is flavor text; not gospel. Which is funny, because you're treating the flavor text as gospel.We agree that the sorcerer is the weakest of the core character classes. It definitely needs more revision to separate it from the game mechanics of wizards.The thing is, your sorcerer abilities hand-hold characters through their heritage, when really, wouldn't you rather empower characters to do that for themselves (through spell choice and feat choices)? You have not given players enough generic sorcerer abilities to do so. You, and the contributors of this thread, have created those heritages instead. To be honest, I don't blame you. That's the fun part after all.Don't be so quick to judge. While many prestige classes are based on +1 level of existing arcane spellcasting class, very few are specifically designed for sorcerers. The material you have created here, however, is ripe for it.Couple of things. First of all, don't paint me as the bad guy by claiming I am not giving people enough credit. That's cheap. Second of all, the Quintessential Mongoose lines operate on the premise of quantity first. No offense to their prolific writers. There are good ideas in everything.Insert your level of imagination here. We must be thinking along the same lines because this relates directly to what I already said. Do you create all the options for your players and then let them choose? Or do you empower players by giving them just enough game mechanic and flavor text to run off on their own?Sounds like material for your specific campaign setting (rather than the sweeping changes being proposed here).<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused    :confused:"  data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" />Then say to me (with a straight face no less) that arcane spells and divine spell are equally balanced.You are arguing a game mechanic issue with a flavor text issue, and (not to put too fine a word on it) irrelevant flavor text at that. Demons and dragons start out with spell-like abilities. Player characters do not. Components are a game mechanic that creates game balance between the spellcasters. You are kicking that game balance out the door without so much as a how do you do?Sorry Khaalis, not at the expense of game balance. And quoting flavor text like scripture doesn't change that. Believe me. I did the same thing when I first started a thread on these very boards called "The Sorcerer (A Quintessential Revision)". It lasted several months. And yes, that was before Mongoose released their first "Quintessential" sourcebook. I'm not trying to insult you Khaalis. It's just that your argumentative tactics are very similar to my own flawed arguments at the time. You have to argue game mechanics with game mechanics and flavor text with flavor text.Tell you what ... if you are genuinely interested in that sorcerer build, please visit my web site and sign up on the message boards. But I won't clutter your sorcerer thread with my own. I'll send you an E-mail instead.Take care for now.Kolja</blockquote>

Verification