Sorcerer warlock heritage and maybe even psion heritage

[Yora]

I don't want heiritages.

 

[Sammael]

I still don't get why different sources of power that provide more or less identical effects warrant different classes. Variants, sure (and I have that in Fatebinder). But full classes? Redundant.

 

[Sadrik]

I still don't get why different sources of power that provide more or less identical effects warrant different classes. Variants, sure (and I have that in Fatebinder). But full classes? Redundant.

I agree fluff should be divorced from abilities. We never had that in previous versions of the game. The wizard, never came right out and said exactly how their powers were gained they just got them. Generalizing these classes or perhaps giving several suggestions would be good. They feel too specific.

Example: suppose the DM would like to have a campaign setting were there are fey spirits or demons that want to control people like clerics are vessels of the gods. Then the DM can say ok sorcerers powers are pact based.

Arguing they are different because the fluff is different is a path to make the game class bloated. Like I said before, I really liked the 2e feel of finite classes with campaign specific fluff for the classes.

 

[Yora]

You can't divorce fluff from crunch.

Otherwise you end up with a fighter who deal +2d6 points of damage and causes the immobilized condition as a standard action. You have to give some explaination of whats going on.

A wizard has a spellbook, which is because of fluff.
A cleric has a holy symbol, which is because of fluff.
Barbarians have Berserker Rage and Rogues have Sneak Attack. All because it has been decided that this is something that makes sense in the context in which the characters with these classes exist.

 

[Greg K]

I like having both separate. However, depending upon the campaign and where it draws "inspiration" for warlocks, one could use the sorcerer class and call yourself a Warlock and vice versa.

When I think of Next Warlocks, I think of 70's satanists from various occult horror movies, the book collector from the "Ninth Gate", John Constantine.

If I was looking at Warlocks from Charmed as inspiriation, I would go with Sorcerer as their ability is innate from a family heritage. The same would hold true for Warlocks in "Bewitched"

 

[Li Shenron]

- I don't want fewer classes for the sake of having fewer classes.

Yes, but OTOH I also don't want more classes for the sake of having more classes

The Warlock's concept of getting powers from a pact is definitely cool, it would be a pity to miss on that (although... you could also have a Wizard who got the spellbook i.e. spell knowledge from an evil pact with an outsider in order to get powerful faster).

However as currently implemented the Warlock class needs Invocations defined, which are a separate thing than arcane spells, which are shared between Wizards and Sorcerers (Warlocks also use those for rituals of course).

I just mean that currently to have a well-designed and well-developed Warlock class you need to allocate somewhat more space in the PHB compared to the Sorcerer which uses spells that are already there because of the Wizard. Maybe there is still plenty of space, maybe not.

My preference is that the PHB has a bunch of classes (8-10, maybe even 12 but not more) but each of them has plenty of material so that the player actually has a good array of choices... and you can make several different characters of the same class. I don't want to end up with so little material that every core-only Warlock has practically the same Invocations because there wasn't space to put more of them. I'd rather have less well-supplied classes in the PHB than many poorly-supplied classes.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

no , we cant do that because apparently we need a different way of expressing magic when it comes from different sources, even though clerics get their magic from a different source (Gods) other than wizards but cast them the same way (vancian).

edit: if you couldnt tell...this was sarcasming.

Since when are 5E clerics Vancian?

 

[Steely_Dan]

The Sorcerer and Warlock are synonyms for Wizard, so the whole thing is slightly unnecessary.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I agree fluff should be divorced from abilities. We never had that in previous versions of the game. The wizard, never came right out and said exactly how their powers were gained they just got them. Generalizing these classes or perhaps giving several suggestions would be good. They feel too specific.

Huh? The wizard is the most narrowly-defined spellcaster around. He can use specific spells which he must scribe in a spellbook, he has to recite magic words in a specific way, in previous editions usually with a bag of specific and gross spell components, with specific hand gestures. (The 1e AD&D PHB spends like a paragraph giving you rules for how your fingers are spread apart for Burning Hands.) Spells disappear from his mind when he uses them.

Example: suppose the DM would like to have a campaign setting were there are fey spirits or demons that want to control people like clerics are vessels of the gods. Then the DM can say ok sorcerers powers are pact based.

Or... those characters could be warlocks!

I can't be the only one here who's almost always played campaigns with SOME class/race restrictions. If the gods are dead, nobody gets to play a cleric.

However as currently implemented the Warlock class needs Invocations defined, which are a separate thing than arcane spells, which are shared between Wizards and Sorcerers (Warlocks also use those for rituals of course).

I just mean that currently to have a well-designed and well-developed Warlock class you need to allocate somewhat more space in the PHB compared to the Sorcerer which uses spells that are already there because of the Wizard. Maybe there is still plenty of space, maybe not.

Ok, here is the mechanical description of invocations from the playtest document:

Using Invocations: An invocation is a magical effect that functions as a spell in all respects, except that an invocation does not require you to have a hand free when you use it.

Now personally, I think they can afford to shrink down a picture of Hennett fighting a dire rat to make room for that much text.

 

[howandwhy99]

These 3 classes are far less about their descriptions and more about being daily, spell point, and AEDU spell systems at the same table. If you don't like the fluff, reskin it.