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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Khaalis" data-source="post: 1508182" data-attributes="member: 2167">Even though I have a different view of the sorcerer, I hate to see such things go without comment, so…I would suggest sharing the new flavor text you intend for the class. The flavor text defines what the class is.  How is it an alternate to the Wizard? What makes them different?  How are they different? Why are they different?  How do they become what they are? Where and how do they learn their talents?  Are they educated in their abilities the way wizards are?Also, if you plan on releasing this in any manner, I would suggest renaming the sorcerer as the one thing NOT OGL in the core book classes is the flavor text.I am going to base my comments on the opinion that you see the sorcerer as nothing more than a wizard that learns magic differently and thus an Alt.Wizard.All supports being an Alt.Wizard.Adding Diplomacy I agree with, as I think it is fitting to the class as well as to Wizards.  However – why Intimidate?  I don’t see wizards, or a wizardly sorcerer as being trained in Intimidation tactics. Considering the nature of the ability I would consider this a (SU) not an (EX) ability. I might also suggest basing this ability off of their primary stat – Charisma and make the uses per day equal to Charisma modifier times per day or 3+ChaMod (like Turning) rather than 1 + 1/5 levels; especially since many of the effects are quite minor.The numeric bonus is pretty hefty but not as high as something like Bardic Knowledge. Not sure I see a lot of value in it though since you cant ID Spell-Like Abilities (no verbal/somatic components), and IDing spells you already know, or know of, is what Spellcraft is in the first place. It’s a general knowledge of how magic works and the fundamental requirements of each spell and the outward effects they show once cast.  Thus, I am not sure I like the flavor of this since “technically” not every caster’s somatic and verbal components are the same for the same spell – which is why they aren’t defined. So just because one sorcerer points his index finger and mutters “akash” to trigger a magic missile, doesn’t mean that another sorcerer doesn’t point all his finger (except the thumb) and waggle them at the target while saying “blunderbuss” when casting magic missile.  So I am not sure where knowing a spell on your spells known list would necessarily make you any better at Spellcraft.  Only study and dedicated learning really make you better at it.Pretty substantial bonus but actually quite worthless unless the sorcerer knows mostly offensive spells.There was a long discussion about this on my sorcerer threads. It was basically deamed worthless to gain a 0-level Spell-Like Ability at such high levels. Having 3 innate 0-level spells at 20th level is not really worth much and will be easily discarded if given any opportunity for PrCs.IMPHO I think it is still too weak since most of the abilities you have given are rather weak. If you really want the class to be identical to the wizard except for spell use, I would simply make the skill lists the same, and give the sorcerer the same feat progression as wizards except replace Scribe Scroll with Mold Magic 3+ChaMod/day.  JMHO.</blockquote>

Verification