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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6058962" data-attributes="member: 22779">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?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.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.  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?</blockquote>

Verification