Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 6575449" data-attributes="member: 5100">I agree that hyper-optimization is a bit annoying, in game. When talking hypothetically, it's natural to focus on one or two key things and worry about those. I don't expect/want every sorcerer to be focused on death-death-death, but it's a pretty straightforward measure of magic vs. mundane, so why not use it for discussion purposes? If desired, I could certainly have had a similar train of logic for creative sorcerers or smithing sorcerers, etc. The conversation started with weapon proficiencies and why sorcerers don't automatically get more. I just kept my discussion within the original scope. The kettle logic indicates that there's some other question or that there really isn't room for a conversation.My point wasn't really about training -- that's more of a wizard conversation. Sorcerers are "naturally big", so to speak. Magic comes (relatively) easy to them, so they'd tend to favor it. They certainly could favor sticking people with a sword, but that wouldn't really be exercising the Sorcerer class. Maybe my point was lost. After a fashion, you're asking why a high-strength, average-dexterity character doesn't have as many bonuses on bows as a high-dex, low-strength character does. Is it possible for a person to be be strong and agile? Duh, of course it is, which is one good argument for rolling dice for character creation. Assuming you're using point-buy, though, you have to make choices and priorities. If you want to play an archer who detests melee -- and is good at archery -- I'd recommend you put points in dexterity. If you want to play a character who is good at swinging a sword, I'd recommend playing a class that gets sword proficiency.Is it game-breaking to give a sorcerer, say, one martial proficiency of their choice? I doubt it. Does it fit with the core concept of the class? Not really, from my perspective. There's a reason I haven't said much about the balance, other than a vague platitude or two. If that's your concern, then do it (assuming the DM is down with breaking RAW). If the problem is understanding why it's not part of the sorcerer's core wheelhouse, that's where I've tried to give examples. From flavor, it just breaks down to the sorcerer class being designed to represent a character that's a natural at magic and overflowing with it. To give a martial proficiency to all sorcerers just doesn't click, with me, flavor-wise. The class/level based nature of D&D means you need to multiclass or take a feat to pick up stuff from other arenas.If the main concern is that sorcerers just are too weak in combat, that's possible. Not my experience, but not outside of possibility. I'd look for an answer that made them more magical, rather than more mundane. Maybe all sorcerers should get to add their Charisma modifier to their cantrip damage. Maybe the dragon-blooded sorcerer is fine, but the wild sorcerer should get Improved Critical (19-20) on their cantrips and/or other spells that need an attack roll.</blockquote>

Verification