If that is true, then 90% of the time, people will play sorcerers with non-vancian casting. What's the problem here? I'm saying that you have the ability to choose. You want X, and can have X. What happens if WOTC defaults to something you don't like?
As long as the default allows for a clean way to accurately translate 3.x and 4e sorcerers and warlocks I don't think anybody will complain. (the version of the sorcerer they showed previously didn't allow for that and was over-the-top). All I'm asking is for a simple default, not an esoteric way to get something that looks simple from the outside but is fundamentally complex.
Simple default versus Sim-simple
Character creation:
* Simple: All you need is listed as is on the class page, people wanting soemthing more complex need to flip back and fort and make an effort to get what they want.
* Sim simple: Everybody has to flip back and fort to get what you want, people wanting something complex barely notice the difference, but if you want something simple you need to put more effort.
Level-up:
* Simple: You just take what it says on the table for your level, if you took somehting more complex you may need to crossreference.
* Sim-simple: Everybody has to crossreference tables to level up, if you want something simple you might need to crossreference further. Or worse case escenario, nobody but the players wishing something simple will have to crossreference.
My point is, without a simple deault you are punishing people who want to play something simple in order to spare people who want soemthing complex a little in the process or to somehow give them a sense of legitimacy. And in the case of sorcerers that is glaring because they have always been dead simple compared to wizards, those of us who play them are used to it, that is part of the charm of the class, failure to give a simple default that captures the essence of the class will only catter to sor-haters.
Ok, couple of points. Number one, it's been presumed throughout this thread that all casting will be balanced against each other. No option is better than another. And no amount of rules can save you from a douchebag DM. Besides all that, in all the years I've been on En World, I've never once seen anyone actually complain about the sorcerer or the warlock. I'm thinking that this is a pretty big hypothetical.
In order, from the very beginning I'm been very realistical about it, no amount of good will can change the fundamental nature of different casting systems, some are fundamentally different than others, what barely keeps in check one system will completely gimp another, what is a modest bump for one is a huge boost of power for another. YOU CANNOT BALANCE VANCIAN,AEDU, SPONTANEOUS, SPELL POINTS, RITUAL AND AT-WILL USING THE SAME NUMBERS, to achieve class balance you need to take into account what system each class is using, you have to balance classes as a whole not by parts.
And I know, I'm even very vocal about that no number of rules will solve problems with the people at your table, I've have even stated an almost equal quote before. But having a default really helps to achieve a better communication, for example with 3.5 and it's default sorcerer, a DM starting a game who doesn't like sorcerers has the option to outright state "no sorcerers" or "if you want to play sorcerer this are the changes", if you don't find such statements you can easily assume it won't be a problem and if you find them you just know better not to get involved, anyway, the exceptional nature of the changes just helps to highlight them when they happen. (More to this point below)
Finally, Enworld isn't the only rpg site, and they indeed exist -even here on Enworld- they just aren't very vocal. I've gotten at least a couple of outright "I don't like sorcerers" from posters here. Even if not outright hate, there is a lot of dismissiveness and contempt given to the classes.
Ok, I'm still rather baffled by this. There is virtually no mechanical difference between a sorcerer and a wizard in 3e. Both are strongly Vancian casters. The only real mechanical difference is the rate of gaining spells. Complaining that allowing Vancian sorcerers will "dilute" what a sorcerer means is pretty out there. I mean, looking at the two classes, what real differences are there mechanically? They have exactly the same spell list, exactly the same recharge mechanics (must sleep 8 hours), and their spells do exactly the same thing. Again, the only real difference is that a sorcerer gets less spells to choose from.
This is not a huge mechanical hurdle.
No, they are fundamentally diferent, they use a similar estructure and the same spells, but those are superficial differences. The 3e sorcerer isn't vancian at all, they are slot-based, but not vancian for any measure -in fact a vancian sorcerer is a huge no, a GARGANTUAN contradiction and not worth the extra effort needed to make room for it in the class-, there is zero fire-and-forget which is the whole point of vancian. And despite having a shared spell-list there were spells that still remained exclusive to one of the classes. And despite needing 8 hours of sleep sorcerers could retgain their spells even when tied, gag-mouthed and blindfolded and in fifteen minutes instead of a whole hour in front of a heavy tome. While the original sorcerer started very similar to the wizard, the class has been on the path of a divergent evolution, gainning more and more things of it's own.
If the various forms of casting are not balanced, then that is a failure on the part of WOTC. All three systems need to be developed in tandem and need to be kept in balance. Having one a default and then tack on another two as afterthoughts is the fastest way to have underdeveloped options that are never properly utilized. Instead, why not have all three systems balanced against each other?
Again, I'd rather have a simple default that captures the essence of the class and allows for a propper balancing OF THE CLASS, having to worry about balance of different casting systems for a class that has traditionally being second rate will only produce incentives to balance it using the strongest casting system instead of the system that goes better with the class. Most of the time the different systems of casting are inherently different in power, not being able to balance them with the same numbers would hardly be WotC's fault, not balancing classes propperly by wasting time on a fools errand would. And sacrificing the value of a simple default in the name of it all doesn't make it better.
Basically what you are saying here is that because YOU play online... you don't want to take the extra 15 minutes out of your day to look through a large list of modules that the DM is offering forth in his game. You want it all neatly wrapped up in a cute little package so that you don't even have to think about how the game is going to play.
Well, I'm sorry... but D&DN isn't being designed just to make your life easier. It's to allow EVERYBODY to play the kind of D&D game they wish to play (or as close as they can get.)
First of all I'm not the only one who plays online, about other seventy thousand people do too -and that is only Rpol's numbers-, not being able to have a steady group doesn't makes me a third-rate gamer. And this isn't about wanting to save 15 minutes readying and understanding a large list of modules, on more dedicated pbp sites it isn't uncommon to have to swallow pages and pages of game information before even being able to apply to join a game, this isn't just about convenience, this is about finding the game I want to play. Lacking common ground and assumptions makes it harder to find a suitable game, when there are defaults everybody can focus on the important stuff -like setting, mood, pace, if it is going to be combat centric or not- you can even say this is a Gestalt Game, this is a PHB 1,2,3 only game, anything goes but not essentials, etc. Having a default allows those cases to highlight themselves from the rest and every DM that changes a fundamental assumption about the game knows before hand that there will be consecuences, that you will turn some people off, while Dm's that don't care don't even need to make a statement. But in a world where d&d lacks any assumption at all, all of it becomes noise. You just force everybody to take a stand or risk facing a wacky out of control endless mess that they won't be able to handle (nothing kills an online d&d game faster that unlimited unrestricted options), and without a solid baselines DM's can only take a guess on how to turn the dials, they no longer know if what they are picking will turn off the mainstream of d&d gamers or not, conversely a player looking for a game no longer knows if a DM who says "sorcerers are vancian" really means it or is just taking an educated guess, which translates on players being turned off from games that they would normally apply to and trying to apply to games were they really aren't expected, which also creates more work for DM's:
Appart from the normal time to set up a game -create a setting, advertise, stating houserules and excceptions, decide who to take in between submisions - they now need to fiddle individually with every single dial for every single class hoping not to scare away the players they want while also dealing with the extra workload that is implied by the needed clarifications -"did you really truly mean x? is it ok if I use y instead?"-. What before was an extra effort exclusive to those explicitly wanting to go counter current is now mandatory for everyone just to give out an open sense of legitimacy.
Not exactly. I'm all for having default flavour for classes. That's the best way, IMO, to differentiate between classes. Wizards are arcane sages, sorcerers are natural talents, warlocks are bound to some extra planar being, that sort of thing. So, no, I've never had any problem with there being a default flavour for the class. To me, that's what a class is - the flavour.
My issue is that I don't feel that mechanics are necessarily needed to be included in that default. Sorcerers aren't different from wizards because of spontaneous casting mechanics. They're different because they have very different approaches in the game world - wizards as uber-geek students and sorcerers as mutants. ((Ok, that was a joke
))
I mean, mechanically, there is very, very little to distinguish a 3e fighter from a 3e ranger. Ranger gets a pet, which a fighter could get through the Leadership feat (and he has feats to spare). Rangers are two weapon fighters - which again the fighter could be if he so chose. You could pretty easily make a fighter that looks a lot like a ranger. Yet, no one is saying that fighters should use entirely different combat mechanics from rangers in order to distinguish the two classes. Why are we insisting that caster classes must be differentiated by using entirely different caster mechanics?
However I do think mechanics should be part of that default, one thing is to want a mechanical default and another entirely different is to want that mechanic to be hard codded to do only one or two things, one thing is to wish for all sorcerers to be non-vancian and get propperly balanced as that, and another entirely different to want all sorcerers to be blasters on a very speciffic way.
I do agree that the most significant difference between a wizard and a sorcerer is from flavor, but without a mechanic to back up that flavor, it becomes meaningless, useless and dispossable fluff. -The same way than in 4e the music instruments listed were worthless, because they were only fluff without any mechanic to back them up like the perform skill, or allowing them to work as normal implements for bards, heck they couldn't even be used as a focuss for bard rituals-. I want sorcerers to have a mechanic that goes along with their flavor, not one that is dissociated from it. I'm against the mechanical dilution of what a sorcerer is, specially if it is to please wizard players who hate vancian, I don't care if they make it possible to make a wizard that cast in the same way a sorcerer would, I only care that sorcerers are sorcerers instead of empty fluff because of needless simmetry.
