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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Petrosian" data-source="post: 618128" data-attributes="member: 1149">OK, this feels so much like a troll that i am hesitant to respond. You are asking so many questions with so basic and obvious answers that it feels like just an attempt to solicit response and not really a discussion.But, at the risk of looking like silly and naive trollbaitOK, maybe your book is very different than mine, but every class, in addition to every fighter class, chooses feats as they progress.If you think the fact that the fighter chooses more feats make them distinctive and differentiated from the other classes, then you would i figure also think the wizard gaining his own bonus feats makes him distinct from the sor?Yet, you seem to be saying repeatedly that the sor is not distinct from the wiz.So, this seems to be somewhat contradictory.Skills was ONE part of the process by which they differentiate themselves, not the entirety. Regardless, since i can look in my game right now and see a fighter who has almost maxed cross-class sense motive and in another game a fighter who has maxed cross-class wilderness lore, and another game where the fighter has maxed jump and see from these skills and their use in play distinction between the fighters, I will even go along with skills as a valuable method of player providing flavor to generic classes.I suppose in a game where players disdained cross-class skills as not efficient enough for their tastes that this might not be as reliable a method.As for the general "whats the difference in spells" the 500 lb gorilla difference in wiz and sor spell use is the incredible difference that spontaneous casting has vs prepared casting.i see this in play everytime i see a wizard play or a cleric play and a sorcerer play.If you do not see the serious and drastic differences these make in play, then i can fully and totally understand how you see sor and wiz as not distinct enough.An smusing issue but, if one wants sorcerers to be MORE distinvt from wizards why would one want them to gain the wizards "use and later lose" spell swapping? That makes them less distinctive.I love the fact that the sor sees different spells as valuable than wizards in some cases.By the lack of spellbooks and the lack of time devoted to preparation rituals.By the expenditure of lots of time recreating and socializing as opposed to lots of time writing into spellbooks.By the use of copious amounts of ready cash as opposed to spending lots of money on spell scribing.By the freequent, make that copious, use of metamagic in rather spontaneous situations.Of course, since the sorcerers were not all clones, these various traits apply to some of them, different traits to different guys, while the wizard traits apply to most if not all of the wizards.A notion for you to ponder... with the dependence on spellbooks, preparation and the drains on money and time that such usually entail, might it be the wizards who tend to turn out similar to each other, lacking flavor, much more often than the sorcerer?Perhaps the good players and bad classes thing explains wizards? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile    :-)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />As much as i have seen sorcerers distinct from each other, I have NEVER seen a sorcerer even close to being mistaken for a wizard in play. The wizard archtype is fairly limited and defined and at the very least the incredible difference between prepared casting and spontaneous casting makes them unmistably different in play by anyone with any experience.IIRC they did similar picking feats picking stats blah blah for most every class in every book. I took none of them as anything other than some advice, not an indication of the one way to play the class.uhh... in my experience the question of whether to represent aq given character as a druid or a cleric with nature domains has been a tough work thru for neqarly every druid i have seen. There are very large play-balance issues thqat make the nature cleric a choice tough to avoid.I have rarely seen such a quandry over sor and wizard because they bring very different things to the character. A player fairly quickly chooses one or the other.Well within the first 24 hours, the spellbook thing and preparation. Within probably the first 3 rounds of any combat the metamagic thing. need i go further.OK, no more trollbait risk for me.You seem rather oblivious to the meaty differences between the wiz and sor or just simply preferring to pretend you dont see them. Either way, more commentary from me to respond to you wont change that.enjoy your games</blockquote>

Verification