Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jasin" data-source="post: 3784747" data-attributes="member: 7531">IMO, the sorcerer is a cool concept, but the beguiler, dread necromancer and, to a lesser extent, warmage are the superior execution. Not sure what would be the best way to do this without one class/specialization, though. Perhaps heavier use of spell descriptors (possibly too fiddly) and associated talent trees (possibly too long a list)?Warlock as it is in 3E is a decent splatbook class, but I think it's a bit too specific in concept for the PHB. I think &quot;my fey bloodline giving me cool powers&quot; cis just as valid a concept as &quot;my fiendish bloodline giving me cool powers&quot;, and I'd rather see a class that could encompass both (which would be much the same thing as what I wrote in the previous paragraph).In short, I'd like to see arcane casters differentiated as acquired/toolbox vs. innate/thematic rather than preparation vs. sponatneous.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jasin, post: 3784747, member: 7531"] IMO, the sorcerer is a cool concept, but the beguiler, dread necromancer and, to a lesser extent, warmage are the superior execution. Not sure what would be the best way to do this without one class/specialization, though. Perhaps heavier use of spell descriptors (possibly too fiddly) and associated talent trees (possibly too long a list)? Warlock as it is in 3E is a decent splatbook class, but I think it's a bit too specific in concept for the PHB. I think "my fey bloodline giving me cool powers" cis just as valid a concept as "my fiendish bloodline giving me cool powers", and I'd rather see a class that could encompass both (which would be much the same thing as what I wrote in the previous paragraph). In short, I'd like to see arcane casters differentiated as acquired/toolbox vs. innate/thematic rather than preparation vs. sponatneous. [/QUOTE]

Verification