Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sadrik" data-source="post: 6425432" data-attributes="member: 14506">I guess it boils down to your view on house rules. Are you a RAW warrior? If so, the answer is... there's the spell list p. 209... in your game. If your sorcerer player had an idea outside the box on the list, there's the spell list p. 209. And why? Because... I have ever encountered and they certainly don't warrant altering the class mechanics or spell selection to accommodate.It is not wrong to think that way. It is just different than I do. I do not say here is the tool box build within the constraints only. I would say here is the tool box and look I added on this little side pouch and the tools in there are very cool too. Build your vision, that is cool.I do think the sorcerer compares very well to the wizard mechanically. The sorcerer is a limited version of the wizard with a few add on things. Thematically the sorcerer is unique and does have a lot of rich theme. Mechanically it is just as good as a blaster wizard and avoids all of the other stuff a wizard could do. For me, this reinforces the idea, why not allow sorcerers to learn any spell. At least, in one of their few spells they cast, it will really be a signature spell for the character. You want your sorcerer to cast entangle or cure wounds - go for it. Adds another healer to the party, never a bad thing in my experience.When I play D&amp;D, I almost exclusively play wizards. This edition has tempted me to break the mold. We are still in our Age of Worms 3e game but when we play 5e and if I do not DM I will certainly play a wizard again. Tempted... but not duped. Sorcerer is second class again in this edition by RAW.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sadrik, post: 6425432, member: 14506"] I guess it boils down to your view on house rules. Are you a RAW warrior? If so, the answer is... there's the spell list p. 209... in your game. If your sorcerer player had an idea outside the box on the list, there's the spell list p. 209. And why? Because... I have ever encountered and they certainly don't warrant altering the class mechanics or spell selection to accommodate. It is not wrong to think that way. It is just different than I do. I do not say here is the tool box build within the constraints only. I would say here is the tool box and look I added on this little side pouch and the tools in there are very cool too. Build your vision, that is cool. I do think the sorcerer compares very well to the wizard mechanically. The sorcerer is a limited version of the wizard with a few add on things. Thematically the sorcerer is unique and does have a lot of rich theme. Mechanically it is just as good as a blaster wizard and avoids all of the other stuff a wizard could do. For me, this reinforces the idea, why not allow sorcerers to learn any spell. At least, in one of their few spells they cast, it will really be a signature spell for the character. You want your sorcerer to cast entangle or cure wounds - go for it. Adds another healer to the party, never a bad thing in my experience. When I play D&D, I almost exclusively play wizards. This edition has tempted me to break the mold. We are still in our Age of Worms 3e game but when we play 5e and if I do not DM I will certainly play a wizard again. Tempted... but not duped. Sorcerer is second class again in this edition by RAW. [/QUOTE]

Verification