NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6172190" data-attributes="member: 7006">If WotC wants alternative casting methods in the game that people can choose to use (which it appears they do)... their choices are either just a strict mechanical explanation in the DMG of those alternate methods... or illustrate them by overlaying a narrative and story on top of the mechanics, just like is done with every other class in the game.Thus the warlock and sorcerer serve a purpose.  They give story to bland mechanics, which seems to be something WotC always wants to do.  They don't want mechanics without reason.  If there's a mechanic they're putting in... there has to be a narrative reason for its existence.Thus the question is... what is gained (if anything) by putting them into the 5E's version of the "Arcane Power Source", known as the Mage class?  Is there a reason?  There's the one I think Rodney Thompson mentioned, which was being able to assign magic items to all three classes in one fell swoop (and that's probably true with other rules/stuff that they'd want to apply to all three classes that they just haven't mentioned yet.)  Then there's another reason... which I think is more psychological than anything:Players seem to have a harder time taking stuff away from something in existence and replacing it with something else... than they do creating something out of several parts.  For some reason, that seems to sit weird with a lot of people.  So if the wizard, sorcerer, and warlock were all three separate classes... in order for someone to decide they wanted to play a wizard but not want to use the pseudo-Vancian casting... they'd have to select the wizard class, strip out the casting method, and then replace it with the casting method of either the warlock or sorcerer.This is opposed to the other way... which would be that a person would decide they want to play an arcane caster, so they decide to play a mage... and they create their mage by taking the narrative of the wizard and the casting method of the warlock or the sorcerer.  They are building up, not tearing down.It is a very subtle difference there... but I think its a psychological one that does seem to have credence.  It seems a much more positive experience.  If you come into the game knowing that if you want to be an arcane spellcaster, you're going to play a Mage... creating that mage out of a couple parts that work for you (if that's what you choose to do) is more satisfying than having to deconstruct a class first, before then adding in other parts.Personally?  I think that psychological difference is so miniscule that I have no way of even considering that as a real problem... but I know I ain't most people.  They get hung up on all sorts of things.  And wanting to play a Wizard but having to break it apart first seems less satisfying that wanting to play a Mage and taking the best parts available to create it.</blockquote>

Verification