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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ARandomGod" data-source="post: 1738036" data-attributes="member: 17296">Oh, I agree. It's a horrible class as written. It's pretty much for people who are (sorry sorc lovers) too stupid to really roleplay, or for people who are making the campaign in the first place. It's a really nice NPC class for a GM. No need to worry about what to memorize, when, or why... you already know what you plan on going up against, so make the sorc whatever you want him to be. The GM doesn't have issues with inflexibility, that sorc is only there for one encounter (usually, or at least for limited encounters). AND no pesky spell book to have to worry about writing up as potential loot. It's not underpowered at all... but is lacks so much in flavor and flexibility that it's practically the antithesis of a mage the way mages are supposed to be.But still, that is THE disadvantage.Yes, it doesn't "remove" it. But I would say that it reduces it significantly. And the power, the flexibility that the sorc DOES have (and the sorc is extrememly powerful and flexible in his way) isn't correspondingly reduced. Sure, the current sorc has so few spells known as to be just pitiful. But the combinations available that he can cast grow exponentially, as he doesn't have to memorize. That spontanious casting is very, very good. And, unless I'm misinterpreting your statement of how many more spells known you'd be giving the sorc, I'd say that's very unbalanced... I'd say that it reduces the penalty to the point where it does not adequately compensate for the advantage they're given in exchange for this penalty. If you reduce the penalty, you have to reduce what they were given in exchange. Even adding one more would be increasing the total spells known by an incredible factor. And I can see this easily (so can you) by thinking of how much more appealing that sorc would be.  True. And as written that's the point of the sorc, that's what he pays for his incredible flexibility of spontanious casting. A sorc can still create them whenever he wants, however many he wants, and can have full use of as many as he can know. Once again, I'm not saying that the sorc is good as written. I think that the class is a horrorshow of poor writing and bad concept casting. It's like someone got a good idea and didn't bother to follow through with it, or perhaps like someone wrote a good idea and the GM shredded it predjudically without really thinking about it (if you haven't had something like that happen to you before you're either lucky or you don't come up with many ideas). But I AM saying that this is supposed to be the weakness of the sorc, not many spells... and correspondingly it's supposed to be the strength of the mage, the ability to do just about anything with some prep time. I'm not sure what you mean by this... although I'll point out again here my opinion that any wizard who takes metamagic feats is either lazy, stupid, or is a player who's GM is. It's just a waste of a feat. The mage should research that spell version that he's using "metamagic" for. You want a heightened fireball? Why waste the feat... research it! Now, a sorc who takes a metamagic feat is doubling his spells known. That's a different story altogether.Oh, yes, they're the same except for that particular thing... fewer spells known and spontanious casting. Now, spending XP... the only objection I have to that is, once again, it's unmeasurability. A fifth level sorc who's spent XP to gain 50 spells of levels one through three is still only fifth level, and still only needs enough XP to level up as a fifth level character. But that sorc is much much more powerful. Sure, depending on how much XP you made that cost he could potentially be more. But I say you're adding a level of complication that's not really needed (how much XP per spell level would you say? Impossible to really accurately judge).  Now, if you made that permanent XP, causing the sorc to gain levels, well that is a balance that's easier to judge. Could you do it the way you meantioned? Sure. Could you prevent it from being abused? Easily. It IS your campaign. Does it make a good rule in general? I say no.Now, that aside, look at the things I meantioned I'm already doing with the sorc. Obviously I agree with you. I've provided a way for the sorc to swap out spells basically at will, and a way for a sorc to gain extra spells known. And there are several people who've argued that even that gaining of spells known is too powerful. But then there are people who'll argue for the status quo in everything. I agree, there should be some good way to gain more spells known, and there needs to be a better mechanic for swapping spells, for that matter. What's there is completely fluff, no reason behind the mechanic... Once again, I do think that the sorc class as written is aweful. Every time a GM uses one I point out the hypocracy.(Which it is because none of them would play one as a PC)</blockquote>

Verification