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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 6059140" data-attributes="member: 95493">You just described sorcerers as I have always seen them. Wizards train and learn and study and eventually master. Sorcerers have a magical spark that makes them able to do magic because they can feel it. In this case it is "innate" like in the Potterverse. Sorcerers then train, stretch, learn, grow and eventually learn new, stronger and better magic. That is how they grow, that is what rubs me wrong about these "they get magic, but then have all this extra free time to be a fighter too." No. You want to have innate magic, that's cool, play a sorcerer. Want to get better at it? Keep leveling in sorcerer. Want to pick up martial prowess? Stop advancing in sorcerer and start leveling in fighter - or however multiclassing works in that version.Now who is dictating what. Who says sorcerers have to be loners? Who says they can't go to school to train their "talent"? Their talent is entirely innate and within them, but who says they can't study to get better at it. Who says they shouldn't be able to even.I agree with divorcing mechanics from fluff, you just have to be careful with the fluff in that case. I think this is the major "it will be diluted" argument you keep seeing. If all casters in my game will use the psionics (pp) system, how do you say that they are different. After playing in 3e, and even seeing 4e material, I can say that fluff has much more to do with things than people will admit. More on that below.I get why you say this, but I don't agree. As already pointed out sorcerers and wizards use the same spell lists and recharge rate. They are different (almost) only in that one uses daily slots that they prepare and the other uses spells known cast spontaneously. But let me go further, do you have troubles differentiating bards and sorcerers? Both cast spontaneously from lists known per day. How about clerics and druids, both are divine casters with slots? I'd bet that you don't. I'd bet that you don't BECAUSE the method or mechanics they use aren't the important parts. I'd bet it has to do with the other aspects of their class, other features, abilities and even the fluff. None of this is different if they divorced mechanics from the classes in 5e. Or even if they set a default and gave you methods to easily change it as needed. That is what we are discussing here.I think that most games are predicated upon the DM makes the rules, the players live with it or quit. Good games and DMs will try to accomodate players but bad players will always try to push things through that are unacceptable. That is partially what tim was talking about, I think. I hate it, absolutely hate it, when players try to force me to run my game a certain way. Again, if they don't like something I've established they are welcome to quit and start their own game. But as long as I'm running it (DMing it) they have to, on some level, play by my rules.Now, I'm a lenient DM so I'll give my players the chance to change my mind, but they know that certain books and issues are not even going to be considered. Mostly that is due to abuse on the players behalf. And though I'm lenient, I'd still put that control in the DM's hands ultimately - which, from what I've seen, is what WotC is kind of doing with these rules anyway. So I don't see the issue.</blockquote>

Verification