Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Khaalis" data-source="post: 1369033" data-attributes="member: 2167">I disagree. I don’t own d20 Modern but there is nothing wrong with making the existing system mutable. Take for example the much argued Ranger. This class is so generic and broad that people are constantly fighting and arguing over what a Ranger should be. Is it Aragorn? Is it Legolas? Is it the Eagle Scout Nature Boy? Is it the militant Druid? Etc.  Or the Rogue – why do all Rogues train in Traps and Sneak Attack if not all Rogues are thieves and murderers? There is more difference between a Charlatan and a Thug than skill ranks. The system can be made to be mutable and still hold exactly the same “core” concept.For example, my Alt.Rogue. Instead of giving them Sneak Attack +1d6 and Trap Finding at first level, I give the class 2 Rogue Abilities (of choice).Basically the table changes to look like:1…..+0…..+0…..+2…..+0…..2 Rogue Abilities2…..+1…..+0…..+3…..+0…..Rogue Ability3…..+2…..+1…..+3…..+1…..2 Rogue AbilitiesExamples of Rogue Abilities attainable at level 1 (Gain 2): Bonus Feat*, Sneak Attack 1, and Trap Finding.Examples of Rogue Abilities attainable at level 2 (Gain 1): Evasion, Plus any ability from 1st level Not taken at 1st.Examples of Rogue Abilities attainable at level 3 (Gain 2): Sneak Attack 2 (If they have Sneak Attack 1), Trap Sense 1, Weapon Training, Plus any ability from 1st or 2nd level Not already taken.Example Bonus Feats (PHB): Acrobatic, Agile, Alertness, Athletic, Blind-Fighting, Combat Reflexes, Deceitful, Deft Hands, Diligent, Dodge, Improved Critical,  Improved Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike, Investigator, Magical Affinity, Mobility, Negotiator, Nimble Fingers, Persuasive, Quick Draw, Self-Sufficient, Skill Focus, Stealthy, Track, Weapon FinesseExample Bonus Feats (Song & Silence): Alluring, Arterial Strike, Charlatan, Chink in the Armor, Dash, Fleet of Foot, Flick of the Wrist, Hamstring, Jack of all Trades, Quicker than the Eye, TrustworthyWeapon Training (PHB): If the Rogue has a Base Attack bonus of +2 or higher, they may choose this ability to become proficient in any 2 Martial wepons or 1 Exotic weapon of choice, of up to Medium size.Its really not difficult to make the classes mutable and retain the standard abilities and progressions of the class.I don’t think this has too much of one or the other. The core sorcerer just has nothing. I just cannot understand what was going through the Dev team’s mind when they put that in the book other than that someone said we need a 2nd Pure Arcane Caster to balance with the dual divine casters (Cleric & Druid). There is nothing to distinguish the Sorcerer from a Wizard, even down to the familiar.As for imagination and mechanics. Having a good imagination is one thing, having no mechanics to support it is another. How far would a Fighter get using their imagination to say “I am an unarmored swashbuckling fighter,” when there are no mechanics to support that style of character? Not much farther than a quick 6’ down.  Role-playing and mechanics Have to meet at a middle ground somewhere or the entire endeavor of a class based system is worthless and pointless.Is that veiled hint?  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Yeah… me and math when busy posting and working at the same time don’t go together. IN fact I didn’t even use the right numbers now that I look at the poll again.  Its only 52% that think the core class is balanced and fine the way it is; 31% purely underpowered; 4% said overpowered (people who love Low-to-No magic worlds); 5% believe the class is purely worthless; 8% others that believe its basically not well written but no idea how to fix it.Not as gospel per say, but the class needs definition and the place a class gets its definition is its flavor text.  A class without accurate flavor text is nothing. What is a Sorcerer if it is not what is described in the flavor text? What is its purpose? What is its source? Why does it exist? If the flavor text isn’t to be used and is not to be used as the class definition – why include it?  However, without the use of its flavor text and creating new mechanics for the class – this isn’t going to happen. It will always be nothing more than a hedge-wizard with Spell Mastery.How does the class hand-hold the character and allow no freedom? The characters are still fully empowered to make a unique character or a generic character. They still choose their spells, can still choose feats and abilities unique to each sorcerer. If a character doesn’t want to “mess with” a heritage – they simply fall into the Arcane Orphan group and become a general sorcerer again. Even if they choose a heritage it doesn’t mean they have to develop heritage abilities – they could focus on standard feats instead. As for a hand-holding in a specific heritage, I don’t like the idea of NOT providing some form of structure to the heritage because otherwise it will be abused. You see it all the time on the “Rules” board. If it can be abused it will be. Thus there has to be some defined structure to the abilities within a heritage or you will end up with inappropriate and nonsensical matches - for example you will end up with Celestial sorcerers running around casting demonic spells or Draconic sorcerers with celestial auras.I also feel that these types of class abilities are essential to creating the right feel for a class such as this. What would a Druid be without its unique class abilities of Woodland Stride, Wild Shape, etc.? Or a Monk without Ki? Or Paladin without Smite?  There is nothing to make the Sorcerer unique – so I am trying to create something that does make it truly unique.What I don’t agree with is that the Sorcerer be made like a Druid or Monk or Paladin – in saying that every Sorcerer of level 1 gets X ability, and every Sorcerer of level 2 gets Y ability, and so and and so forth. I can see where this could be true to a point. What I don’t like is the path I think I see forming in your thoughts. Having a “Generic Sorcerer” that can later on CHOOSE a heritage to focus on? The Sorcerer is very difficult to work since its power is supposed to be innate which means the character has always had the power. Its actually more of a racial attribute than a class. How does that translate to a PrC? I can see how but again, it would require a re-write of the core premise of the Sorcerer’s flavor text to make them a generic spellcaster hedge-wizard.I didn’t mean it to come across as taking a shot. It wasn’t meant that way. I am simply saying that by saying there is too much writing for the masses to accept I think is an unfair assessment of the masses. There is a proven desire in the masses for more advanced and more detailed focus on character classes.Its actually combination of both. I give them a wide range of set abilities to choose from but they are also used as a template for what “should” be abilities relating to a class.  However, I find that if you let players run off on their own with too little mechanics to reign them in – they will Always find a way to abuse it. You see it constantly on the “Rules” boards even with the core mechanics.I do feel that overall arcane and divine spells are balanced. They each have their own purpose and their own strengths and weaknesses. It all depends on what you want to do. Personally if I wanted to play a Melee/Spellcaster type I would go Fighter/Cleric any day of the week over any arcane mix, Especially if the Mystic is a viable option or the new rules from Unearthed Arcana. Now if you only want to gage balance by combat spells? Then arcane magic is much stronger because wizards rely solely on their spells while a Cleric or Druid is just as likely to don armor grab a weapon and bash your skull in.  But when comparing balance – which is more powerful: being able to smite enemies a few times per day or be able to cure your party as well as smite foes in melee? Or more fundamentally which is more powerful Slaying or Healing?If the flavor text is “irrelevant” – why is it there? In that argument, the entire class should just be scrapped and tossed and go back to just being Wizards. The flavor text is the Only thing that differentiates the Sorcerer from the Wizard. Without the flavor text – the Sorcerer is just nothing more than a weakened wizard with automatic but limited Spell Mastery.  On a more general note – game mechanics are based on flavor text in all other aspects of the game – why is it to be ignored for the sorcerer?As for components, they may be a mechanic used for its set purpose but it doesn’t mean that everything in the game should have to be bound by them nor are they.  As for Dragons etc. they also gain Spellcasting not just spell-like abilities. As I mentioned above – the Sorcerer’s power is supposed to be innate which is more of a racial trait than a class, but to make it fit a class we have to focus on the mechanic that makes it work.  I don’t take it as an insult. Its all a matter of perception and opinion. With that said, I have to disagree here. As has been stated earlier, flavor text cannot be ignored. If the Sorcerer is not supposed to be an innate caster and is nothing more than a variant hedge-wizard with Spell Mastery – it needs to be described as such.  A Druid’s powers are designed to fit its flavor text – why does it not apply to the Sorcerer?  Most classes have a “set” view in people’s mind of what they are because they have been around forever, and because their flavor text matches the class design. This doesn’t hold true on either account with the sorcerer.  The sorcerer is designed to fill a nitch from fantasy literature that ISNT based on the classic pointy-hat wearing, staff bearing, chanting, arm-waving Gandolf. There are scores and scores of fantasy literature that use magic that is not based on the “component” system and it can work in the game mechanic as well. The rules already exist. Its just a matter of taking the step “out of the box” and using them.As I have said, I may also make a pass at a “generic” sorcerer build but when I do, the first thing to be done will be to re-write the Flavor text to match the new class concept.I have checked it out. I haven’t joined the boards, as I don’t want to disrupt the general consistency of the posts. You have a strong following for your build and that’s cool. In review of your version, I will be taking an idea from the related discussion about it: Aura. It fits the mechanic already in precedent for Clerics and is very fitting for the sorcerer.  Aura (Ex): A sorcerer has a particularly powerful aura of magic about them since they are a focus of innate raw magic. When viewed by detect magic or arcane sight the sorcerer radiates with the presence of a single magical aura of universal origin unless the sorcerer is of a heritage that lends them to a specific type of magic, or they have specialized their spell selection in a school of magic, such as a Shapechanging Sorcerer will more than likely radiate a Transmutation aura. The DC to determine a specific type of magic to the aura requires a successful Spellcraft check (DC 15+Sorcrerer class level).As for the Thematic specialization I already use Spell Paths.Evolving Spell-Like Abilities: Sorcerer spell-like abilities can also grow in time and evolve into more powerful versions of old spell-like abilities. This concept is based on the concept of spell paths (by Sean K. Reynolds), a series of spells that build and grow upon the same basic premise.     When a sorcerer acquires new known spell-like abilities, and they have a spell-like ability that exists on a spell path with an appropriate higher-level spell-like ability available, the sorcerer can choose to “upgrade” the spell path spell-like ability they already know, replacing the original spell-like ability with the upgraded spell-like ability. They may then fill the abandoned spell-like ability slot with another spell-like ability that is available to them of the same spell level. A sorcerer can only upgrade one spell-like ability at any given level, even if they have multiple options for upgrading. Example: Vond is a Sor5 who knows the invisibility spell-like ability. Upon reaching Sor6 he chooses to acquire 2 new 3rd-level spell-like abilities known. Invisibility is a 2nd-level spell-like ability on the Path of Invisibility and invisibility sphere is a 3rd-level spell-like ability on the Path of Invisibility. Vond decides to upgrade his invisibility to invisibility sphere, which uses one of his new 3rd-level spell-like ability known slots. He now has an open spell-like ability known slot at 2nd level (formerly occupied by invisibility), which he may use to learn any other 2nd-level spell-like ability available to him.Well back to work for me.  Looking forward to more comments.</blockquote>

Verification