PDA

View Full Version : [3.5e/d20r] The Sorceror: What's More Important?



Fax Celestis
2009-01-03, 06:37 PM
Sizing up my options for a revamp on the Sorceror class, and I'm curious: is it more important for a Sorceror to have class features that mitigate spell level adjusts and allow him to alter his spells naturally; or is it more important for them to have 'heritage' class features, eventually progressing them towards a racial apotheosis (dragon, demon, angel, or otherwise)? I'm uncertain I can fit both into the class.

Lert, A.
2009-01-03, 06:44 PM
I would say the former. Blood may be the means by which the sorcerer gains access to his magic, but he himself is about magic, not the blood itself.

I would think that Eschew Materials would be a base and then work from there.

Flickerdart
2009-01-03, 06:45 PM
Hm. Well, the flavour of the Sorcerer is a magic-user that takes its talents from innate will, not study. Spells are a lot more important to this concept than the heritage.

However, if the sorcerer would choose a race from which his abilities stemmed and then be limited in spell choice to that particular race's (such as Fire spells for Red Dragon heritage or Evil spells for Demonic) the heritage thing could work a lot better, and make the Sorcerer vastly different from the Wizard. Maybe make this concept a Prestige Class, if you're keeping those for d20r.

Kurald Galain
2009-01-03, 06:48 PM
I would say the latter. His powers draw from his heritage, and are an artistic and intuitive form of magic. The one who takes the scientific approach and understands how to logically alter (or reduce level adjustments of) his spells is the wizard.

thegurullamen
2009-01-03, 06:48 PM
I believe the former is the stomping ground of the wizard class, hence bonus metamagic feats versus the sorc's nothing. However, I have yet to see a sorc remake that can make the undead/magic/fey/demon heritage incarnate/aspect/avatar/paragon/whatever work without adding class features a sorc doesn't need or that don't just plain suck.

If you can make the latter work without seeming forced or subpar, then I recommend that one. Otherwise, augments it is.

TheStranger
2009-01-03, 06:58 PM
Definitely the former. Personally, I find the "heritage" aspect of the Sorcerer fluff to be forced. I prefer to ignore it, and I'd hate to have the class throw it in my face in such a concrete way. Making heritage abilities a major part of the Sorcerer class really constrains fluff/roleplaying options; metamagic-type abilities are going to be useful for any Sorcerer, and players can embrace or ignore the heritage fluff through roleplaying.

pyrefiend
2009-01-03, 07:04 PM
The heritage is more important. It's what makes the sorcerer unique, and the former can all ready be achieved by the wizard, anyway. Racial abilities might be best represented with a variety of spell lists. The sorcerer would gain access to a few of them depending on his heritage, like Flickerdart suggested. To use one of his examples, a sorcerer with a red dragon heritage might have access to the dragon and fire arcane spell lists.

Zeta Kai
2009-01-03, 07:08 PM
Forget the latter option. The draconic heritage is an unproven theory that is just fluff speculation, & has never impacted the crunch. If you want a racial apotheosis, go for Dragon Disciple instead. Sorcerers are spellslingers, pure & simple. Let's just make sure that they are good at sorcery, & leave the dragons to the experts.

Zeful
2009-01-03, 07:12 PM
"Heritage" abilities are a generally large failure of logic at best. You have 1/100th to 1/1000th non-mortal blood while still being your chosen race and class. And because you gain all your spells/class features from this blood, the creature your descended from should be 100 to 1000 times more powerful that you ever will be. The only way "heritage" works if the heritage is from a creator race like the Sharruk (or however it's spelled), which supposedly undermines the concept.

That said you should keep the Sorcerous heritage concept the throw-away line that it is in the PHb, and simply write a new exclusive spell list for them.

Darrin
2009-01-03, 07:12 PM
Sizing up my options for a revamp on the Sorceror class, and I'm curious: is it more important for a Sorceror to have class features that mitigate spell level adjusts and allow him to alter his spells naturally; or is it more important for them to have 'heritage' class features, eventually progressing them towards a racial apotheosis (dragon, demon, angel, or otherwise)? I'm uncertain I can fit both into the class.

Here's what I did in my campaign: Sorcerers gain a bonus feat at 1st/5th/10th/15th/20th, similar to wizards. They can choose any metamagic, item creation, bloodline, or heritage feat. Trying to fit both some kind of lineage and metamagic is thus up to the player.

Oslecamo
2009-01-03, 07:13 PM
Sorcerer: because 9th level arcane spellcasting and bending the universe at will isn't enough for some people.

Well, if you insist in giving the sorcerer even moar power(wich he really doesn't need), then go the spell route. It's probably easier to balance and the sorcer is suposed to be magic incarnate anyway, not someone whose grandmother was raped by some random monster.

Fizban
2009-01-03, 07:13 PM
I'm with TheStranger: screw the heritage stuff, I'm sick of all the sorcerer goodies requiring you to be a dragon or some other wacko. If anything, you learn the magic first and then use it to jack draconic powers, or the magic is what makes the dragons dragony so you get it too, but no more bloodlines.

I'd say sorcerers should have more spontaneous magic manipulation. Not a new system for making spells on the spot, but drop the limits on spontaneous metamagic and give them some bonus feats, maybe even reduce the level on the ones that don't give you more numerical mechanical effect (like widen). There's a PrC in Bestiary of Krynn that lets you actually reduce the level of your spells by reverse engineering those feats, which effectively gives you a whole extra tier of spells per day. That's a little overboard, but I like the idea.

Fax Celestis
2009-01-03, 07:21 PM
Sorcerer: because 9th level arcane spellcasting and bending the universe at will isn't enough for some people.

On that note, let me explain myself a little:

Because Sorcery isn't exactly a 'perfected' magic, sorcerors will have a chance when casting to have disrupted magic/extra effects/etc, rather similar to a Wild Magic zone. In exchange, I'm considering giving them the power to augment or alter spells on the fly and without metamagic: that is, take a fireball and change it from a 30' sphere to a 60' line. There'll also be the ability to mitigate level adjusts via the means of sacrificing some part of yourself: ranging from HP damage to ability damage to irreversible aging (a la Shannara). Further, sorcerors won't be restricted to one or two schools of magic.

Wizardry is more scientific and therefore isn't capable of being modded on the fly. In exchange, they don't suffer from wild magic. They will, however, have a more limited spell list, since they'll have to specialize into one of four schools.

Vexxation
2009-01-03, 07:24 PM
Awesome Stuff about how magic will work

Fax, how is it you were not put in charge of 4E?

Dogmantra
2009-01-03, 07:25 PM
I'm in the majority here: sorcerors are spellcasters first, dragon heritage-ed second, if at all.

Though, they could do with a new class feature, like reverse metamagic, maybe: you can reduce the level of a spell, by applying penalties.

Oh, just read your post Fax, and that sounds more awesome than reverse metamagic.

Fax Celestis
2009-01-03, 07:25 PM
Fax, how is it you were not put in charge of 4E?

You know, I ask myself that question all the time. I just settle with putting myself in charge of "3.Fax", as it's been dubbed on the homebrew forums.

Lert, A.
2009-01-03, 07:25 PM
Fax, how is it you were not put in charge of 4E?

Listens to the peasants he does.

How scandalous!

Glyphic
2009-01-03, 07:29 PM
How about a more beefy 'Favored spell' like the wu-jen gets?

Oslecamo
2009-01-03, 07:32 PM
Fax, how is it you were not put in charge of 4E?

Because of the following reasons. In his version:

1-Wizards only have one school of magic-the one wich has teleport
2-Sorcerers are the new frenzied bersekers, randomly killing party members when their spells randomly change and hit them.


So 3/4ths of magic get choped down since only sadic people who don't care about teamplay play Fax's "friendly fire" sorcerers, and the wizard is the only arcane caster left, and he will pick the school with teleport, wich probably will have most of the remaining best spells.

Lert, A.
2009-01-03, 07:34 PM
Way to prejudgethe house that hasn't had the foundation laid.

Maybe wait and see, before getting all snarky?

Fax Celestis
2009-01-03, 07:35 PM
Because of the following reasons. In his version:

1-Wizards only have one school of magic-the one wich has teleport
2-Sorcerers are the new frenzied bersekers, randomly killing party members when their spells randomly change and hit them.

So 3/4ths of magic get choped down since only sadic people who don't care about teamplay play Fax's "friendly fire" sorcerers, and the wizard is the only arcane caster left, and he will pick the school with teleport, wich probably will have most the remaining best spells.

You pretty obviously haven't read about anything I've done so far.

Wild Magic does not mean "the spell reverses and effects the caster"; it means "the spell might be at CL -3, might be automatically empowered, or might just be cast regularly."

kamikasei
2009-01-03, 07:40 PM
1-Wizards only have one school of magic-the one wich has teleport

Can I just point out that this reasoning is pretty specious given that psionics handles mandatory specialization without all psions being of the same discipline?

{Scrubbed}

FMArthur
2009-01-03, 07:41 PM
I feel like saying "do the heritage thing" because it's more interesting to me, but what happens to people who just want a spontaneous wizard? How much will the heritage concept differ from the classic sorcerer? Can you explore a spontaneous variant wizard concept for those people if your sorcerer is very different?

Sorry if these are dumb or irrelavent questions, since I haven't read through all of your other work (I will soon, I promise!). Also, you should know before you remake it that there's only one O in 'sorcerer'.

Oslecamo
2009-01-03, 07:41 PM
{Scrubbed}

Fax Celestis
2009-01-03, 07:41 PM
Can I just point out that this reasoning is pretty specious given that psionics handles mandatory specialization without all psions being of the same discipline?

I can?

Oh good.

Which is, in fact, exactly how I was going to model wizardry.

Fax Celestis
2009-01-03, 07:42 PM
Wow you also changed what wild magic is? Excuse me my error, I tought your work still had some connections with D&D, but it seems I was wrong. So what's empowered? And CL? And regularly? Cast is using magic, right?

Wouldn't it be better to just rebuild the system from scratch if you're changing so much stuff?

I said "akin to wild magic", not "wild magic". {Scrubbed}

kamikasei
2009-01-03, 07:48 PM
Which is, in fact, exactly how I was going to model wizardry.

I don't envy you that task - are you planning to rewrite many spells, or just change schools/levels?

Alleine
2009-01-03, 07:50 PM
I'd definitely say the first one. Heritage is cool and all, but not actually that helpful. I would rather have the natural spell adjusting on the fly.

Lert, A.
2009-01-03, 07:53 PM
Can I point out how you were comparing apples to cyborg elephants with laser swords? Can I ? Oh, good.

I want cyborg elephants with laser swords now.:smallfrown:

And maybe an apple.

kamikasei
2009-01-03, 07:58 PM
Anyway, on topic, I would suggest combining the two by giving the Sorceror options to alter their magic more readily than wizards but making them better at doing so for spells in some way associated with their heritage. Of course, the difficulty there is constructing "themes" for spells. An idea might be something like Person Man's domain Favored Soul variant.


Kamikasei:Psions can do that because 90% of the powers are available to you no matter what specialization you have. Wizards, on the other hand, have 90% of their spells divided in schools.

In fact, all psionic powers have a discipline, it's just that some are exclusive to specialists in that discipline.


Fax clearly says sorcers, unlike wizards, won't be limited to just one schools of magic. This means wizards are restricted to just one school. Wich means you get 1/4th the total of spells plus the 10% universal spells, meaning a much smaller percentage.

So your reasoning seems to be that if you a) assume that Fax's brief description of some of the changes in his sweeping revision project cover only changes to the classes with no accompanying changes to the spells, and b) assume that Fax is an idiot, then his ideas are bad. Sure, I'll grant that conclusion, given those assumptions.

Fax Celestis
2009-01-03, 08:05 PM
I don't envy you that task - are you planning to rewrite many spells, or just change schools/levels?

Rewrite those that need it, and reschool them all.

Jasdoif
2009-01-03, 08:15 PM
Sizing up my options for a revamp on the Sorceror class, and I'm curious: is it more important for a Sorceror to have class features that mitigate spell level adjusts and allow him to alter his spells naturally; or is it more important for them to have 'heritage' class features, eventually progressing them towards a racial apotheosis (dragon, demon, angel, or otherwise)? I'm uncertain I can fit both into the class.Definitely the former. I mean, there isn't anything inherently wrong with having heritage/apotheosis features in a class, but spellcasting should really be the primary focus of a Sorceror class. If you're choosing between those spell altering abilities or this transformation process, you should call the class something besides "Sorceror" if you go the latter route (and possibly not do as much of the general spellcasting thing in it).

Oslecamo
2009-01-03, 08:29 PM
So your reasoning seems to be that if you a) assume that Fax's brief description of some of the changes in his sweeping revision project cover only changes to the classes with no accompanying changes to the spells, and b) assume that Fax is an idiot, then his ideas are bad. Sure, I'll grant that conclusion, given those assumptions.

The title of the thread says 3.5e/d20r. But Fax's changing the base class. And base concepts. And the spells. And how the spells are organized. What's exactly left from 3.5e/d20r?

So yes, I inocently believed that since Fax gives no warning that he's changing the spells themselves that his homebrewed "sorcerer" will work with the same spells as the 3.5e/d20r list. I apologize for not having long range mental powers.

Fax Celestis
2009-01-03, 08:32 PM
The title of the thread says 3.5e/d20r. But Fax's changing the base class. And base concepts. And the spells. And how the spells are organized. What's exactly left from 3.5e/d20r?

So yes, I inocently believed that since Fax gives no warning that he's changing the spells themselves that his homebrewed "sorcerer" will work with the same spells as the 3.5e/d20r list. I apologize for not having long range mental powers.

Um.

"d20r" refers to "d20 Rebirth", the project in which I am essentially revamping 3.5 from scratch. So the implication, then, is that what is addressed within the thread pertains directly to that. See also: the link in my signature.

Pie Guy
2009-01-03, 09:11 PM
Everyone, let's let the little person stew in his own little world, and get back to making suggestions for something that will undeniably be awesome.

Also, I prefer spells over heritage. If I wanna be a dragon descendant, I'll just pick up a few dragon heritage feats.

Flickerdart
2009-01-03, 09:20 PM
However, I would very much like to see decent heritage classes as well, and more Paragon classes/more ways to get into them. Also, something to address the issue of, say, humans who were raised by dwarves in dwarven lands not having Stonecunning. Perhaps either a line of feats that qualifies them, or the addition of those abilities in Paragon classes? I'll leave it up to you, but I would love to see this happen.

AmberVael
2009-01-03, 09:24 PM
On one hand, I love the fluff of the heritage idea, but on the other hand, setting that as the fluff makes it a much more limited class concept (which is something I would tend to avoid).

So why not do both? Make it so a sorcerer can choose between one or the other in some way when they make their character. Perhaps give them bonus feats, and then create a few lists that might work for their fluff, or just say "choose between this line of abilities or that line of abilities."

Starsinger
2009-01-03, 09:31 PM
The former, Sorcerer is not dragon. :smallannoyed: The problem for me, with heritage based sorcery, is the implication that you can't just do magic, you either have to study it, or have an ancestor who dates outside the species.

Zeful
2009-01-03, 09:56 PM
However, I would very much like to see decent heritage classes as well, and more Paragon classes/more ways to get into them. Also, something to address the issue of, say, humans who were raised by dwarves in dwarven lands not having Stonecunning. Perhaps either a line of feats that qualifies them, or the addition of those abilities in Paragon classes? I'll leave it up to you, but I would love to see this happen.

Actually I think that better heritage feats would be the way to go. Low level heritage feats would grant a bonus feat that you can't use on heritage feats (so as to not burn feats on a developing heritage) but the big things wouldn't provide that bonus.

As for the Stonecunning point. Pull all the Dwarves' racial features except maybe the Fort bonus against poisons, and maybe the Con bonus. Then make everything else part of growing up in that Dwarven nation. Lather, rinse, repeat for all races.

Bonecrusher Doc
2009-01-03, 10:35 PM
Fax, my opinon is please do the former. The heritage stuff can be cool but I think to have it set in stone (by having a heritage-based progression), that sorcerers get their innate, non-scholarly mastery of magic through their bloodlines, to me makes things less flexible, potentially stifling DM creativity.

For example, I might want to have sorcerors in a campaign that takes a place in a world in which <gasp!> there is no such thing as a dragon. Admittedly I could tweak the class some for this to make sense but I'd rather you be the one who does all the work! :smalltongue:

Roland St. Jude
2009-01-03, 11:20 PM
Sheriff of Moddingham: Please keep it civil in here.

UserClone
2009-01-03, 11:20 PM
Fax, I too am inclined to say "give the sorcerer more flexibility in the form of ways he can alter his spells, and probably access to spell levels at the same class level as the Wizard, while keeping his spells known list fairly small. Keep the heritage stuff out of the base class, or make another base spellcaster based on heritage, if you feel up to it."

tyckspoon
2009-01-03, 11:46 PM
Fax, my opinon is please do the former. The heritage stuff can be cool but I think to have it set in stone (by having a heritage-based progression), that sorcerers get their innate, non-scholarly mastery of magic through their bloodlines, to me makes things less flexible, potentially stifling DM creativity.

For example, I might want to have sorcerors in a campaign that takes a place in a world in which <gasp!> there is no such thing as a dragon. Admittedly I could tweak the class some for this to make sense but I'd rather you be the one who does all the work! :smalltongue:

Having seen Fax's other stuff (the How-It-Should-Be Paladin seems particularly relevant to the possible development of a heritage-based sorcerer) I'm fairly confident he wouldn't be picking just one heritage to base the class on. You'd probably see something like "Heritage: at first level, the Sorcerer picks one bloodline... etc, etc," which could well be phrased to let you mix and match from multiple 'blood'lines. Or maybe that particular sorcerer doesn't have unusual heritage at all, and his native connection to magic simply manifests as traits of other naturally magical creatures in addition to his spellcasting. Fax don't do stuff half-way.

That said, I have to throw another vote for focusing on magic over blood. I've always felt the power-from-your-ancestors thing was just a moderately interesting potential explanation for where Sorcerers come from that WotC then took and completely ran into the ground. The dragon-centric nature of parts of it is just annoying fake-whipped-cream icing on the top.

Zeful
2009-01-04, 12:03 AM
Having seen Fax's other stuff (the How-It-Should-Be Paladin seems particularly relevant to the possible development of a heritage-based sorcerer) I'm fairly confident he wouldn't be picking just one heritage to base the class on. You'd probably see something like "Heritage: at first level, the Sorcerer picks one bloodline... etc, etc," which could well be phrased to let you mix and match from multiple 'blood'lines. Or maybe that particular sorcerer doesn't have unusual heritage at all, and his native connection to magic simply manifests as traits of other naturally magical creatures in addition to his spellcasting. Fax don't do stuff half-way.
I said it earlier, heritage stuff only works with creator races or enemies you can never hope to defeat. Because your power is derived from your blood of which you have a lesser amount than your great-to-the-nth-power grandparent, so logically your ancestor's entire race must be more powerful than you with epic level spellcasting. So no dragons, angels, demons, undead, or anything in the Monster Manual, because you can surpass and defeat them.


That said, I have to throw another vote for focusing on magic over blood. I've always felt the power-from-your-ancestors thing was just a moderately interesting potential explanation for where Sorcerers come from that WotC then took and completely ran into the ground. The dragon-centric nature of parts of it is just annoying fake-whipped-cream icing on the top.
I'm fine with classes like DD doing some of that or even a possible Heritage for anyone (why wouldn't a Fighter or Rogue benefit from Draconic ancestry after all?) in the form of feats that give feats. But the Sorcerer has one line of fluff in the PHb describing Draconic Heritage as an unproven-myth at best.

The Minx
2009-01-04, 12:15 AM
"Heritage" abilities are a generally large failure of logic at best. You have 1/100th to 1/1000th non-mortal blood while still being your chosen race and class. And because you gain all your spells/class features from this blood, the creature your descended from should be 100 to 1000 times more powerful that you ever will be. The only way "heritage" works if the heritage is from a creator race like the Sharruk (or however it's spelled), which supposedly undermines the concept.

That said you should keep the Sorcerous heritage concept the throw-away line that it is in the PHb, and simply write a new exclusive spell list for them.

Well, not necessarily. The bloodline may simply give you access to options not normally available to your race. For instance, perhaps only Dragons (and their kin) can become sorcerers at all, being a half-dragon or having some/enough dragon blood in you is something that allows you to "count as a dragon" for certain racial options.

Still, I agree that heritage is/should be less important as far as designing the class is concerned.

pyrefiend
2009-01-04, 12:17 AM
I said it earlier, heritage stuff only works with creator races or enemies you can never hope to defeat. Because your power is derived from your blood of which you have a lesser amount than your great-to-the-nth-power grandparent, so logically your ancestor's entire race must be more powerful than you with epic level spellcasting. So no dragons, angels, demons, undead, or anything in the Monster Manual, because you can surpass and defeat them.
Since when has D&D been reasonable? Half-Dragons don't have half the power of their dragon parent, and you're just as powerful being half-imp as half-pit fiend, because both use the half-fiend template.

AmberVael
2009-01-04, 12:25 AM
I said it earlier, heritage stuff only works with creator races or enemies you can never hope to defeat. Because your power is derived from your blood of which you have a lesser amount than your great-to-the-nth-power grandparent, so logically your ancestor's entire race must be more powerful than you with epic level spellcasting. So no dragons, angels, demons, undead, or anything in the Monster Manual, because you can surpass and defeat them.
Logically, magic doesn't exist. If it DID exist, the rules around it would have to be created from scratch, so I don't see how you can draw such a conclusion when the few rules we DO have contradict you completely.

My guess is that hereditary magic is closer to a binary system. If you have it somewhere in your lineage, you have a chance of having magic- not a chance of having weaker magic, or stronger magic, just magic in general.

FMArthur
2009-01-04, 12:30 AM
The problem he was pointing out is that heritage-centric progression focuses on making you more and more like your ancestor. When your ancestor is just a CR 15 dragon or something, then how can you surpass it when you reach higher levels? Granted, I think this is remedied by the existance of epic dragons, but there may be other similar complications with the other heritages.

Neek
2009-01-04, 12:31 AM
Sizing up my options for a revamp on the Sorceror class, and I'm curious: is it more important for a Sorceror to have class features that mitigate spell level adjusts and allow him to alter his spells naturally; or is it more important for them to have 'heritage' class features, eventually progressing them towards a racial apotheosis (dragon, demon, angel, or otherwise)? I'm uncertain I can fit both into the class.

To answer this startling and difficult question, we must first answer: What is that a Sorcerer does? As far as 3.x is concerned, a sorcerer is an arcane caster who specializes in spamming. They get a massive number of spells per day, but a low amount of spells to choose from. They can access metamagic feats, but with no bonus feats to expend on them and a few selection of spells, metamagicking spells will only be done on a small selection.

You propose one of two concepts: Either give them metamagic at some cost other than feats, or dive into the fluff. How do we address the correlation of Wizard to Sorcerer (Spell selection > spells per day versus spells spell selection < spells per day)? Is this still kept, or are we going a different route?

Are their spells the same as Wizards, that is in design intent with some overlay, or are they different in some way or another?

Those questions don't answer the madness you've already wrought, so here's my opinion:
- A sorcerer is, by fluff, supposed to be a strong-draconic aligned creature, which is explored further through PrCs and heritage feats.
- A sorcerer is an innate spellcaster, not relying on study whatsoever.

Both concepts can be married.

Here's my suggestion on implementation:
Heritage is a class feature, open-ended like domains. By intent, heritages aren't supposed to be latent blood coming to fruition with your power, but latent blood altered by your own power. Heritages are chosen by selecting a racial progenitor (Dragon, Demon, Fey, et qqd.). Each racial progenitor has a selection of heritages to pick from, though I'd limit selection to 2. A racial progenitor provides level-scaling abilities, or abilities that become available at certain levels, as well as an addendum to their spell selection (they don't have to take those spells when they learn new ones).

This also gives us posters the ability to design our progenitor heritages, build new sets, whatever. It also provides options, and a sort of build-your-own-fluff. If people dislike the concept, there can be a "generic" racial progenitor, "Bloodline." Add your own heritages to taste.
Power mitigation is a class feature that lets them control factors of the spell to apply additional effects at trade offs. I'm not sure how much akin you're pointing to wild magic, and I've love to see it tried. If there was a measure of control involved, it might be very formidable.

AmberVael
2009-01-04, 12:35 AM
The problem he was pointing out is that heritage-centric progression focuses on making you more and more like your ancestor. When your ancestor is just a CR 15 dragon or something, then how can you surpass it when you reach higher levels? Granted, I think this is remedied by epic dragons like Bahamut and Tiamat, but there may be other similar complications with the other heritages.

It's not so much making you "more" like your ancestor as it is focusing on your racial traits. Just because your great great grandfather was a wimpy dragon doesn't mean you have to be a very wimpy descendant- maybe your heritage just worked out for you.
Human adventurers push and go beyond the human limit of abilities all the time- why couldn't a descendant of a dragon go beyond the limit of their ancestor's abilities?
Look in myths and fantasy- the whole "Son that becomes stronger than the father" thing is HUGE. I don't see why that couldn't apply here.

MammonAzrael
2009-01-04, 12:55 AM
I always thought Warlocks felt the most Heritage focused in 3.5. But too limited to just demons. While I think it would be really cool to see a class, or PrCs based on heritage, I think the Sorcerer should be based on the former idea. Being able to take the "normal" spells a wizard studies and memorizes and be able to twist and change them through pure force of will or belief is what I think captures them the best.

Zeful
2009-01-04, 01:08 AM
Well, not necessarily. The bloodline may simply give you access to options not normally available to your race. For instance, perhaps only Dragons (and their kin) can become sorcerers at all, being a half-dragon or having some/enough dragon blood in you is something that allows you to "count as a dragon" for certain racial options.

Still, I agree that heritage is/should be less important as far as designing the class is concerned.Then you ignore the Rakasasha (or however their spelled, not the point) but many Sorcerer "fixes" that show up in the internet tend to deal with absolute statements about heredity and magic, many even going so far as to exclude non-ancestor-rape options, meaning the magic all comes from the blood, you only gain the skill to wield it. Therefore the things you gain it from must be more powerful than you by the fraction of their ancestry. If you have 1/100 dragon blood, every dragon must be 100 times as powerful as you, otherwise where are you getting this power from?


Since when has D&D been reasonable? Half-Dragons don't have half the power of their dragon parent, and you're just as powerful being half-imp as half-pit fiend, because both use the half-fiend template. Dragons don't have the power of full dragons if you use any form of Heritage magic, because if you with 1/100 or less blood of you ancestor managed to defeat them shouldn't they have 100 times your potential?


Logically, magic doesn't exist. If it DID exist, the rules around it would have to be created from scratch, so I don't see how you can draw such a conclusion when the few rules we DO have contradict you completely.
My logic summarized:
A=B
A=1/x of C
C=xA or xB

Again, many sorcerer "fixes" and even general conceptions about them indicate that their magic is all derived wholly from their blood. If that is true then you must never be able to beat the weakest member of your ancestor's race. Which also means that no one can beat the weakest member of your ancestors race, which means they can't have stats of any kind (stats indicate killablity, if it has stats someone can kill it).


My guess is that hereditary magic is closer to a binary system. If you have it somewhere in your lineage, you have a chance of having magic- not a chance of having weaker magic, or stronger magic, just magic in general.If this were true it would be easier to accept (I still wouldn't), but I would be able to accept it's validity. I'm not okay with the thought that a character has to have some special magical great grandparent in order to have powers, because it precludes otherwise awesome characters (like a Sorcerer Prince able to trace back his human ancestry "back before the Dragons") from existing. Also I like the mystique the uncertain power-source gave, was he divine descendant or did the Random Number God just like him better? I'm against anything that takes that away.

Lert, A.
2009-01-04, 01:18 AM
I would think that a rebuilt of actually useful bloodlines should be provided at some point. These bloodlines should be made available to everybody, not just to one class that has the mojo. Classes would therefore be heritage free, and a player can choose whether or not he wants to add the flavor to his character.

Deth Muncher
2009-01-04, 01:22 AM
I always thought Warlocks felt the most Heritage focused in 3.5. But too limited to just demons. While I think it would be really cool to see a class, or PrCs based on heritage, I think the Sorcerer should be based on the former idea. Being able to take the "normal" spells a wizard studies and memorizes and be able to twist and change them through pure force of will or belief is what I think captures them the best.

Nitpick: Warlocks actually had the ability to have the Fey-Pacts as well as Demon-Pacts in 3.5. It's just that they didn't get all the weird bonus b'jank that 4e Warlocks do.

Anyway, Fax. As a personal fan of the Sorceror class, I approve of what you're doing 100.1% I'm kinda split between heritage and power mitigation, although i believe it is a fairly simple solution as to how to do both. On the subject of bloodlines, I say make it completely a PrC based thing. All PrCs are is fluff with stats to back it anyway, right? Leave the bonus Metamagics etc etc to the base Sorceror class, and leave the heritage to the PrCs. The Heritage PrCs could function basically like the Dragon Disciple Class, with the possible addition of the Heritage Feats from the Complete Blah Series.


For example, we have Bob the Sorceror. Bob has taken a few levels in Sorceror, and has aquired some nifty power mitigation feats by figuring out what he likes to do on the battlefield, be it the Batman Role, or the Blastorceror, or whatever. After a few levels, Bob wants to research his heritage, and finds out he actually has Fey ancestry, so he goes and tries to find out how to tap this power within him.

AmberVael
2009-01-04, 01:30 AM
Dragons don't have the power of full dragons if you use any form of Heritage magic, because if you with 1/100 or less blood of you ancestor managed to defeat them shouldn't they have 100 times your potential?


My logic summarized:
A=B
A=1/x of C
C=xA or xB

Again, many sorcerer "fixes" and even general conceptions about them indicate that their magic is all derived wholly from their blood. If that is true then you must never be able to beat the weakest member of your ancestor's race. Which also means that no one can beat the weakest member of your ancestors race, which means they can't have stats of any kind (stats indicate killablity, if it has stats someone can kill it).
I understand your logic, I'm just pointing out that it is baseless. Yes, sorcerer magic is derived from heritage. That doesn't meant that percentage of the bloodline you're in has a major basis in it. You're making an assumption which isn't necessarily true. (As such, your logic- while valid- is built on a faulty hypothesis).


If this were true it would be easier to accept (I still wouldn't), but I would be able to accept it's validity. I'm not okay with the thought that a character has to have some special magical great grandparent in order to have powers, because it precludes otherwise awesome characters (like a Sorcerer Prince able to trace back his human ancestry "back before the Dragons") from existing. Also I like the mystique the uncertain power-source gave, was he divine descendant or did the Random Number God just like him better? I'm against anything that takes that away.
Now you're bringing in unrelated points. I've never argued that sorcerers HAVE to be that way, just that if they did- or COULD be that way, it doesn't have to work on your percentage based system
If you'll look up at my first post in this thread, you'll note that I supported the inclusion of heritage and non-heritage based sorcerers.

The Minx
2009-01-04, 01:49 AM
Then you ignore the Rakasasha (or however their spelled, not the point)

Raksasha. But I don't get what you mean, what about them? :smallconfused:


but many Sorcerer "fixes" that show up in the internet tend to deal with absolute statements about heredity and magic, many even going so far as to exclude non-ancestor-rape options, meaning the magic all comes from the blood, you only gain the skill to wield it. Therefore the things you gain it from must be more powerful than you by the fraction of their ancestry. If you have 1/100 dragon blood, every dragon must be 100 times as powerful as you, otherwise where are you getting this power from?

Dragons don't have the power of full dragons if you use any form of Heritage magic, because if you with 1/100 or less blood of you ancestor managed to defeat them shouldn't they have 100 times your potential?

The idea that how much blood you have should matter does not follow. For instance, it could be that as long as you have the relevant gene(s) for that type of magic, you have access to the class and can advance in it normally, any other genes that make you more of a dragon are just gravy. In other words, either you count as a dragon for the purposes of being a sorcerer, or you do not. If you do, you can advance in the class, just as there are no upper limits anymore to whatever "regular" classes you have access to.

If you don't like that, you can simply have caps to advancement in the class, possibly making it a prestige class with the "Dragon Blood" feat as a prerequisite, with a higher level cap for characters with the full "Half-dragon" template.

In any case, you still need tons of XP to advance multiple class levels to get what the full dragon gets automatically simply by maturing. If you wanted them to be comparable, the human with dragon blood would have to get boosts to his ECL simply by advancing another age category, and to reach a whopping ECL 19 at venerable age. I don't think dragons need to earn XP to grow old, so they certainly have an advantage there. Remember that the ones in the MM are just the basic racial types, not the ones analogous to characters of humanoid races who have earned actual class levels.

EDIT: sorry, but I really had to fix a bad grammar blunder whih made the post hard to understand. Hopefully it's better now. :smallredface:

thegurullamen
2009-01-04, 01:51 AM
Then you ignore the Rakasasha (or however their spelled, not the point) but many Sorcerer "fixes" that show up in the internet tend to deal with absolute statements about heredity and magic, many even going so far as to exclude non-ancestor-rape options, meaning the magic all comes from the blood, you only gain the skill to wield it. Therefore the things you gain it from must be more powerful than you by the fraction of their ancestry. If you have 1/100 dragon blood, every dragon must be 100 times as powerful as you, otherwise where are you getting this power from?

See, this assumes a lot on the functionality of magic. There are (at least) several mitigating factors.

A) Personal growth. A wizard doesn't start out as powerful as he eventually becomes. He slowly builds himself up through training and practice to become the dreaded archmage. The same thing applies to the sorcerer. Just because he starts off weak doesn't mean he stays that way.

B) Math. So, you are 1/100th dragon. Does this mean that when you cast Sleep it has 1/100th the effect? No. You're drawing from the same power source as a wizard which means his Sleep and your Sleep are roughly but almost exactly the same. Your blood is just what allows you to cast. It's the spark that lights the fire. A foot in the door. A way in. It doesn't mitigate the power of your casting. This harkens back to point A. Personal power has a lot to do with it. Grow enough and you can even overcome gods, who give people of equivalent level their powers.

C) Magic logic. It's magic. You make fire from poop. Sans matches.

D) Here There Be Dragons. It can easily be argued that dragons are magic incarnate and any part of them, including even a single drop of blood, is motherf****** powerful mojo. This is just a flavor point, but it's one backed by the MM fluff.

Hope this helps clarify the issue.

TomTheRat
2009-01-04, 01:57 AM
Fax, don't let them dissuade you from the idea of a class based heavily on origins. I think it could work well as variants on the Warlock theme. You could have Fae, Demonic, Draconic etc. Have capstone abilities that engage the transformation ideas I think you started with.

Philistine
2009-01-04, 02:03 AM
Then you ignore the Rakasasha (or however their spelled, not the point) but many Sorcerer "fixes" that show up in the internet tend to deal with absolute statements about heredity and magic, many even going so far as to exclude non-ancestor-rape options, meaning the magic all comes from the blood, you only gain the skill to wield it. Therefore the things you gain it from must be more powerful than you by the fraction of their ancestry. If you have 1/100 dragon blood, every dragon must be 100 times as powerful as you, otherwise where are you getting this power from?

Dragons don't have the power of full dragons if you use any form of Heritage magic, because if you with 1/100 or less blood of you ancestor managed to defeat them shouldn't they have 100 times your potential?


My logic summarized:
A=B
A=1/x of C
C=xA or xB

Again, many sorcerer "fixes" and even general conceptions about them indicate that their magic is all derived wholly from their blood. If that is true then you must never be able to beat the weakest member of your ancestor's race. Which also means that no one can beat the weakest member of your ancestors race, which means they can't have stats of any kind (stats indicate killablity, if it has stats someone can kill it).

If this were true it would be easier to accept (I still wouldn't), but I would be able to accept it's validity. I'm not okay with the thought that a character has to have some special magical great grandparent in order to have powers, because it precludes otherwise awesome characters (like a Sorcerer Prince able to trace back his human ancestry "back before the Dragons") from existing. Also I like the mystique the uncertain power-source gave, was he divine descendant or did the Random Number God just like him better? I'm against anything that takes that away.

What is it that Morbo says? Ah, yes - Genetics Does Not Work That Way. The mother and father each contribute 50% of the genetic material that goes into their offspring, but it is usually the case that any given child of two parents will favor one parent or the other - or sometimes a more distant relative on one side, such as an aunt or uncle, or a grandparent. I've never seen or heard of an instance of a child displaying a perfect 50/50 split of traits from both parents.

So, yes. 1/100th part dragon, or fiend, or angel, could very well fluke out and give you most or all of the power of that distant ancestor, thanks to the wonders of recessive genes. It wouldn't be common, no - just as it isn't common for two parents who share similar colorations to produce a child with a very different coloration; but that does happen. And not just that - said descendant could even hope to ultimately become more powerful than that ancestor, thanks to the wonders of hybrid vigor. Just like some purebred dog breeds inherit serious health issues, which are much less common in mutts.

If you just don't like the flavor, that's all well and good. But your argument on genetics just is not sound.

Zeful
2009-01-04, 02:09 AM
I understand your logic, I'm just pointing out that it is baseless. Yes, sorcerer magic is derived from heritage. That doesn't meant that percentage of the bloodline you're in has a major basis in it. You're making an assumption which isn't necessarily true. (As such, your logic- while valid- is built on a faulty hypothesis).

Now you're bringing in unrelated points. I've never argued that sorcerers HAVE to be that way, just that if they did- or COULD be that way, it doesn't have to work on your percentage based system
If you'll look up at my first post in this thread, you'll note that I supported the inclusion of heritage and non-heritage based sorcerers.But it usually is. My logic is based on how seemingly everyone on the internet does Sorcerer "fixes". It's "All your magic power/talent comes from your ancestor's blood" rather than: "Your ancestor's blood is the catalyst for your magic", which I believe is your position. With a bloodline catalyst, it doesn't matter what your ancestor was, or if you have one at all. It will have at best a minimal character impact. The full-on heritage sorcery other's use is an integral part of the character for all 20 levels.

I don't want it to be that way, it doesn't have to be that way, but it's still the way it is a large majority of the time.

Neek
2009-01-04, 02:11 AM
But it usually is. My logic is based on how seemingly everyone on the internet does Sorcerer "fixes". It's "All your magic power/talent comes from your ancestor's blood" rather than: "Your ancestor's blood is the catalyst for your magic", which I believe is your position. With a bloodline catalyst, it doesn't matter what your ancestor was, or if you have one at all. It will have at best a minimal character impact. The full-on heritage sorcery other's use is an integral part of the character for all 20 levels.

I don't want it to be that way, it doesn't have to be that way, but it's still the way it is a large majority of the time.

Which is why I proposed an elegant solution: The catalyst becomes apparent through your power. The more powerful you are, the more the catalyst warps you. This shouldn't be reflected by the Heritage feats as presented, but by a different mechanic.

Zeful
2009-01-04, 02:36 AM
@Philistine,thegurullamen and The Minx: Apparently you are misunderstanding me. I'm pointing out the problem that arises when the whole of a character's class features are derived from heredity. If all a Sorcerer's power, their entire potential for magic comes from their special non-humanoid ancestor (which most sorcerer "fixes" describe). Then said special non-humanoid ancestor must have more potential. A lot more for the already immense power you get from the large dilution of their genes/blood, which is the source of all your power. If the creature is capable of being surpassed with but an arbitrary small amount of it's own power, then something is wrong.

kamikasei
2009-01-04, 02:43 AM
But it usually is. My logic is based on how seemingly everyone on the internet does Sorcerer "fixes".
...
I don't want it to be that way, it doesn't have to be that way, but it's still the way it is a large majority of the time.

Okay, but if Fax hasn't said that's how he intends to do it, and others here are suggesting better ways to do it, and you don't object to those suggestions the way you do to the "majority" solutions... it sounds to me more like you've described through this discussion how you think he should implement the idea rather than telling him not to do it at all.

JaxGaret
2009-01-04, 02:50 AM
Sizing up my options for a revamp on the Sorceror class, and I'm curious: is it more important for a Sorceror to have class features that mitigate spell level adjusts and allow him to alter his spells naturally; or is it more important for them to have 'heritage' class features, eventually progressing them towards a racial apotheosis (dragon, demon, angel, or otherwise)? I'm uncertain I can fit both into the class.

Why not have your cake and eat it too? Split the Sorcerer up into two classes, one called the Heritor and one called the Magicer, or whatever you want to call them. One gets the heritage stuff, and the other gets the natural casting manipulation abilities.

Zeful
2009-01-04, 02:53 AM
Okay, but if Fax hasn't said that's how he intends to do it, and others here are suggesting better ways to do it, and you don't object to those suggestions the way you do to the "majority" solutions... it sounds to me more like you've described through this discussion how you think he should implement the idea rather than telling him not to do it at all.

I'd rather it not done at all. I've said that. But Fax is generally good at these things, so if worst comes to worst, I'd rather have something closer to what Vael and others have suggested done well (ie. I can change the fluff with little character impact) rather than a another like Szatany's "Ultimate Sorcerer" (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-174004.html) or Pathfinder's where I'd have to write my own mundane bloodline.

I kind of get a little carried away about this.

EDIT: I also appose heredity based class features because everyone should benefit from a heritage, not just one class. So I'd prefer a feat system.

ZeroNumerous
2009-01-04, 02:57 AM
So. Radical idea here..

Why not have both?

Say, at character creation you pick either a powerful Outsider/Dragon/Fey heritage or intrinsic understanding of Magic. You then get racial/magical bonuses at regular intervals without any need to make more than one class or remove one of the two options entirely.

EDIT:
EDIT: I also appose heredity based class features because everyone should benefit from a heritage, not just one class. So I'd prefer a feat system.

Well having a heritage that makes it easier for you to swing a sword is significantly different from having a heritage descended from beings made of/capable of wielding/love screwing with magic.

RTGoodman
2009-01-04, 03:04 AM
Because Sorcery isn't exactly a 'perfected' magic, sorcerors will have a chance when casting to have disrupted magic/extra effects/etc, rather similar to a Wild Magic zone. In exchange, I'm considering giving them the power to augment or alter spells on the fly and without metamagic: that is, take a fireball and change it from a 30' sphere to a 60' line. There'll also be the ability to mitigate level adjusts via the means of sacrificing some part of yourself: ranging from HP damage to ability damage to irreversible aging (a la Shannara). Further, sorcerors won't be restricted to one or two schools of magic.

I really, REALLY like this idea. I think it makes the Sorcerer different enough to stand out, as was the problem for me in 3.x, and it *gasp* gives it class features! Maybe have a way to say, if you try to change a spell on the fly, you've got an even BIGGER chance that something will go awry. So, you could cast a fireball and have only a small chance for something to happen, or you could try to cast one that's widened to 60' (for instance) but take a much bigger risk of something changing. It's like a cost-benefit analysis type thing.

If you still decide you'd like Sorcerers (or others) to have SOME sort of connection to their heritage, I think feats like the Abyssal Heritor feats from FCI (where the more you have, the more different powers you have AND the better each is) would be a good way to do it, instead of just feats called X Heritage that add spells to your list or whatever.

Zeful
2009-01-04, 03:06 AM
Well having a heritage that makes it easier for you to swing a sword is significantly different from having a heritage descended from beings made of/capable of wielding/love screwing with magic.

True but stuff like wings, fire-breath, and scales are all part of the Dragon's heritage and benefit everyone, plus you can add feats to give other adjustments based on the creature. Of course sense feat slots are precious and you are forcing a racial progression on yourself, so you could give bonus feats that can't be spent on Heredity feats for the less useful ones, but the starting feat and the better ones would take a feat in and of themselves.

The Minx
2009-01-04, 03:26 AM
@Philistine,thegurullamen and The Minx: Apparently you are misunderstanding me. I'm pointing out the problem that arises when the whole of a character's class features are derived from heredity. If all a Sorcerer's power, their entire potential for magic comes from their special non-humanoid ancestor (which most sorcerer "fixes" describe). Then said special non-humanoid ancestor must have more potential. A lot more for the already immense power you get from the large dilution of their genes/blood, which is the source of all your power. If the creature is capable of being surpassed with but an arbitrary small amount of it's own power, then something is wrong.

I did understand what you were saying. I think you may have missed the reasoning behind my response. :smallsmile:

Firstly: Humans of draconian descant ARE more limited than dragons, since a dragon gets his ECLs automatically as he ages, whereas the humanoid has to earn XP to unlock his powers.
Therefore, a dragon with no class levels in sorcerer is vastly more powerful than a dragon blooded humanoid without class levels in sorcerer.
Monsters can have class levels too.
Going by all the above, a dragon with X class levels in sorcerer is vastly more powerful than a dragon blooded humanoid with the same number X of class levels in sorcerer.

Secondly, the "potential" for magic may be limited to a handful of genes, which you either have or not. All the other genes provide the Colossal size, the scaly skin, the lizardine body shape, the huge SR, the wings, the breath weapon, etc.

Third, there was a fix I provided that allows limits to your Sorcerer class levels based on how much dragon blood you have. So you can use something like that instead. :smallwink:

sonofzeal
2009-01-04, 03:53 AM
Fax - as to your original question, I'm reeeeeally leery of anything that reduces metamagic cost. In 3.5 that's a total recipe for disaster (DMM, Incantrix, and Arcane Thesis being three of the most common examples, and all three being broken beyond belief). I do like Sorcerer magic being more flexible but more wonky though. Perhaps the boosts available should increased the chance of wonkiness?

As to a heritage system, I don't think we need to worry about characters overpacing the source of their heritage - after all, humans routinely exceed their parents, and an epic level character should be actively working to increase their own power rather than just coasting on natural talent. Whether working on it involves studying, or physical practice, or mental self-improvement/attunement, high level characters should have a large degree of their force coming from their own dynamic essence, though a heritage can certainly shape that. And a limited heritage system should be good, assuming you have enough options. It's more work, but it really cripples things when you can't match the flavor you want, so I'd try to represent all the major source. I'd have, if possible... Celestial (grants diplo?), Abysal (grants damage?), Infernal (boosted enchants?), Draconic (grants fright?), Fey (better wonkiness?), Shadow (better stealth?), Coatl (decreases/predicts wonkiness?)

Anywho, just my thoughts.

Philistine
2009-01-04, 06:51 AM
@Philistine,thegurullamen and The Minx: Apparently you are misunderstanding me. I'm pointing out the problem that arises when the whole of a character's class features are derived from heredity. If all a Sorcerer's power, their entire potential for magic comes from their special non-humanoid ancestor (which most sorcerer "fixes" describe). Then said special non-humanoid ancestor must have more potential. A lot more for the already immense power you get from the large dilution of their genes/blood, which is the source of all your power. If the creature is capable of being surpassed with but an arbitrary small amount of it's own power, then something is wrong.

I understand what you're saying just fine. It's just wrong, that's all. This is not a simple arithmetical problem, and the fractions you've been throwing around - 1/100th, 1/1000th - don't actually mean anything. All they influence is the likelihood that a recessive gene will be reinforced instead of masked - which doesn't matter in this discussion, because by definition we're only considering those individuals in whom the trait does manifest. The magnitude of the effect is an entirely separate issue.

Take a genetically-coded disease, like Cystic Fibrosis. A very good analogy, BTW: until recently CF sufferers rarely survived long enough to have children, so you don't have a lot of direct descendants of CF patients running around. Instead, you get a lot of people diagnosed with CF who have no recorded history of the disease in their families at all, or whose connection to a previous CF sufferer is very distant. But those people don't get 1% of the disease, just because they're only 1% related to a previous sufferer. By your logic, at some point in the past there must have been one person with a kind of "Super-CF" which was 100 to 1000 times more severe than the modern disease, from whom modern CF sufferers are descended. But that makes no sense at all when you consider that as recently as the 1950s few people diagnosed with CF lived to reach five years old; so this hypothetical turbocharged version of the disease would have to have killed its victims within days of birth. Or, CF would have been bred out of the species within a single generation, which also clearly hasn't happened.

Also, I'd be quite happy to never again see talk of "diluting the power of the blood." The particular bells that rings are... Well, let's just say it's an unfortunate choice of words. You wouldn't be happy to be compared to the other people I've known to speak in those terms.

Oslecamo
2009-01-04, 08:17 AM
I say, when you think of sorcerer, what do you think first?

A-Guy who does magic trough sheer force of personality.
B-Genetic abomination.

I personally think A first. Also, it would be easier to balance, since the sorceror is suposed to be a caster anyway, so whatever class features it receives should be geared towards improving his spellcasting, not giving him claws/wings/scales/fangs that the player probably doesn't need and doesn't want.

Also, like already mentioned, the heritage system would also make one ask why then we can't have a barbarian of giant heritage or a rogue of cloacker heritage. So your grandfather power's only manifest if you have big charisma? That's really strange.

Aquillion
2009-01-04, 08:44 AM
The heritage is more important. It's what makes the sorcerer unique, and the former can all ready be achieved by the wizard, anyway.Disagree. Heritage is a strictly optional fluff for the sorcerer, one of several options. The difference between the sorcerer and the wizard is that the sorcerer's magic is innate. There are no other concrete definitions for the source of the sorcerer's power in the SRD, and the 'heritage' optional fluff is a sort of a fluff-tumor that, IMHO, metastasized far beyond anywhere it ever should have gone.

Sorcerers are not required to have, and should not at any point be mechanically implied to have, any sort of special bloodline at all. Some people want to play characters who have magical natural talents without being descended from magical creatures, and there's no reason why the class should stomp all over their face; for instance, viewing magic as an innate random gift that any sentient creature can sometimes have, regardless of heritage, is just as logical as humans descended from dragons.

I would recommend not using heritage at all, since it places severe shackles on the sorts of characters your sorcerer class can represent; or, alternatively, making various optional feats and sorcerer-only spells for people who want their sorcerers to represent that, while leaving room for other people to simply have people with a natural magical gift of indeterminate origin.

Base classes should support a wide variety of different fluffs, and should be able to represent an extremely broad number of possible options. If I want to create an innate, intuition-based untrained spellcaster whose innate magical ability comes being the seventh son of a seventh son, or being born under a particularly rare star, or from exposure to green rocks, the Sorcerer, I think, ought to be a good choice (yes, yes, there's that stupid PRC with the green skin that gives up half their spell levels and turns into a construct. Shut up.)

It is like with clerics: The class is set up to preserve the option for a wide variety of different types, including clerics who have no deity at all. Insisting that every sorcerer have some sort of magical bloodline in their fluff is like insisting that every cleric worship Pelor.

(And that would be stupid, because your setting should have some good-aligned clerics, too. :smallamused:)

Oslecamo
2009-01-04, 09:07 AM
What he said above. Lots of people want to play sorcerers whitout being tied to some powerfull creature.

Satyr
2009-01-04, 09:15 AM
The important thing to make the sorcerer clearly distinct from the wizard, not only in the mechanical set-up but also in the way the class feels when played, look like etc. Both a distinct mechanical setup, like a specific kind of spellcasting and an individual background is necesary.
That said, I think the different herritage trees are a particularly bad background and should be replaced with something less stretchy than a descendance from dragons etc.

Morty
2009-01-04, 10:57 AM
I'll throw in my vote for "screw the heritage" option. As in, kill it with fire and never look back. It, along with some actual distinguishing class features might even make be use a sorcerer in one of my games, something I never considered in core 3ed.

Aquillion
2009-01-04, 11:44 AM
You know... to move away from the heritage discussion, there's something else that bothers me about the sorcerer. And I noticed a few people here said the same general thing...

There's this conception (supported by the rules) that Wizards are metamagic specialists, while sorcerers have a few rote spells and can cast nothing else.

Isn't that... backwards? Wizards should be the ones who are comparatively confined to the rote spells they have scribed in their spellbook. They should be able to scribe more, sure, and access much more variety like that, and maybe laboriously alter a spell if they spend the time to go over its formula and apply the relevant changes... but think about it for a moment. Which class makes more sense as the expert at saying "I think I'll make my fireball bigger this time?" The one who carefully casts fireballs using a precisely-crafted, carefully-researched formula written by someone else? Or the one with a loosely-defined, inherent ability to cause fiery explosions?

The wizard should be able to use metamagic, sure -- but I would argue that, in fact, the Sorcerer should be better at it. Maybe even to the extent of simply taking away all the wizard's bonus metamagic feats, and giving them to the sorcerer instead. Maybe let sorcerers cast metamagic quickly innately... would that be too imbalanced?

The point is, a sorcerer's spells known should represent the foundational types of magic that they've learned, like a Psion's powers -- it makes no sense for a sorcerer to be rigidly confined to specific magical effects the way a wizard is, because that's simply not how you'd expect natural magic to work. My sorcerer didn't read a book and learn how to cast fireballs, she honed her natural fireball-igniting talent -- and unlike with a wizard, there's no particular reason why every fireball she casts would be so similar. A wizard who wants to make a fireball 50% bigger has to laboriously go over the formula and modify it -- but for a sorcerer, shouldn't it just be a matter of saying "I'm going to put a bit more of my natural umph into it, and make it bigger this time?" They're not following a formula, they're directly applying their magical ability to influence reality and produce supernatural effects. Heck, even the idea of the sorcerer being confined to spells is a kludge used to keep things simple.

Solaris
2009-01-04, 01:13 PM
What Aquillion said.

Even if I do like the heritage aspect (hey, I like genetic abominations), I agree with the group consensus that it shouldn't be forced on players. We got feats for that.
And a Dragon-heritage barbarian would be awesome.

Weirdlet
2009-01-04, 01:40 PM
Agreed that the heritages shouldn't be forced on anyone, although I do personally love the whole 'exploring weird potential' as both a background and a goal for a sorcerer, at least for me.

One of the things I've seen, which I rather like, is things where a sorcerer can take ability damage to fuel metamagic without raising the level of the spell. I can see where it could be something you'd want to be as optional as the heritages, but at the same time, for me at least, it really fits the idea of the stuff being innate- and digging into your own reserves, physical, mental, spiritual, to empower your abilities.

Eldariel
2009-01-04, 01:49 PM
In a world that contains Magic, every race should have gifted persons able to naturally manipulate it, especially if anybody is able to learn manipulating it with enough study. It's just natural evolution; if magic is so omni-present in a world, it's unavoidable that every race has some individuals who become able to naturally manipulate it (and even many beasts could naturally be magically aligned).

Therefore, the heritage is completely unnecessary. Hell, I hate the heritage-aspect for some of my characters. Sometimes I want a hero who relies on no outside power; whose power comes completely from within. In such a character, it's incredibly annoying to state that "he's only awesome 'cause a dragon shagged his ancestor". I want the power to be his, not some sexually driven monstrous ancestor's. I say get rid of the heritage-crap entirely and good riddance. If some character wants monstrous heritage, they can get it, but don't force it on everyone of any type.

Triaxx
2009-01-04, 02:20 PM
I don't think either approach is acceptable. The second is fluff that serves no purpose unless the character is actually half-dragon.

The first feels... right, but wrong at the same time. I'm not sure what exactly you want magic to be, but I don't see it working. If the Wizard has Vancian casting, why not give the sorceror MP to work with, so he can metamagic naturally, but instead of having to use a higher slot, he just has to burn more MP to do it. In comparison, gaining Swift Spell at first level, and being able to burn six cantrip slots for a Swift Magic Missile, instead of casting it as a level 4 spell.

Inyssius Tor
2009-01-04, 02:52 PM
What Aquillion said.

Even if I do like the heritage aspect (hey, I like genetic abominations), I agree with the group consensus that it shouldn't be forced on players. We got feats for that.
And a Dragon-heritage barbarian would be awesome.

Yes this.

(why does "exploring your dragon heritage" mean weird spells like time stop that dragons generally don't know anything about? I mean, sure, dragons have a limited natural spellcasting ability, but they also have claws, a bite attack, wings, and a breath weapon. You don't see sorcerers getting that stuff, do you?)

Deth Muncher
2009-01-04, 02:54 PM
(why does "exploring your dragon heritage" mean weird spells like time stop that dragons generally don't know anything about? I mean, sure, dragons have a limited natural spellcasting ability, but they also have claws, a bite attack, wings, and a breath weapon. You don't see sorcerers getting that stuff, do you?)

You do, but with only half-casting progression, as I recall.

Kalirren
2009-01-04, 03:32 PM
In response to Aquillion et al.: Seconded and elaborated.

I've thought about this same issue for a long time and I've come to the conclusion that the more viable model (if only because it jives better with many peoples' a priori notions about how prepared magic versus innate magic should work) is that wizards should -trail- sorcerers, not lead them. My suggestion for how to implement this is to not touch the wizard, and redefine the sorcerer spell table so that they get spells of any given level one class level -earlier- than wizards do, instead of one class level later. Maybe give bonus feats here and there to even things out. Because of their limited spell selection, sorcerers already tend to choose their spells synergistically; one might or might not decide to further define this by saying that any given sorcerer only has the ability to create effects of a certain school or theme.

Effects of this, as I see them:
1) The balance is better established between focus and versatility. Sorcerers are more specialized and learn more advanced powers faster than wizards do. They have a more closely-defined niche, and they fill that niche earlier and better than a wizard will usually be able to do. Wizards, on the other hand, are the turtles who learn everything and whose job it is to be the arcane Batman, capable of mixing and matching spells/tactics to fit any given situation.

2) It would be easier to multiclass into sorcerer than it would be to multiclass into wizard, because only 2 levels of multiclassing will already get you level 2 arcane spells. This is also reasonably convenient, since most multiclass arcane casters just want a few special tricks.

3) To prevent the class from being useful only for a 2-level dip, you could distribute bonus feats over the last 10 levels of the class. Such feats would be able to accommodate either a metamagic-focused or a heritage-focused feat chain should one be desired by the player. A more extreme measure to fix this would be to introduce 10th-level spells that only sorcerers could cast when they reached level 18, and perhaps move some 9th-level wizard spells into this category.

4) This would improve the viability of, though maybe still not fix, the dual-casting-progression PrCs like Theurge; a sor2/clr3/MTh 10 would only be one spell level behind in both cleric and sorcerer casting when compared to the standard cleric progression, never two. A sor2/clr3/theurge10/archmage 5 would still have 9th-level sorcerer spells at level 19, though they would not have access to the 8th- or 9th-level cleric spells, nor would they receive 10th-level sorcerer spells pre-epic should that idea be used concurrently. While this would be too much to give up for the more high-powered games out there, I think it would be a viable option for ToB-level powered games.

Thoughts? I do not see wizards becoming useless because of this. Wizards are still as dangerous as they always were. Sorcerers just become more competitive.

Human Paragon 3
2009-01-04, 03:37 PM
If the Wizard has Vancian casting, why not give the sorceror MP to work with, so he can metamagic naturally, but instead of having to use a higher slot, he just has to burn more MP to do it. In comparison, gaining Swift Spell at first level, and being able to burn six cantrip slots for a Swift Magic Missile, instead of casting it as a level 4 spell.

I agree with this sentiment. I'd like to see the sorcerer moved a little closer to the psion, base spells powered by MP which you can use to cast and augment them. As you say, being able to alter the shapes of spells would be interesting, as well as raising DCs and tacking on extra special effects, increasing durations etc. Heritage never seemed like an important part of the sorcerer to me, especially because the PHB is very "some people believe..." about it.

FMArthur
2009-01-04, 04:28 PM
I don't see how that is in any way still a sorcerer, then. You've just described a psion, which is a great idea, already exists, and is definitely not a sorcerer. If you want a hybrid, give them a daily pool of points that they can use to modify their still-vancian casting in different ways.

Collin152
2009-01-04, 05:28 PM
Time for my tuppence, I suppose.
I really dislike the idea of draconic, or any other sort of ancestry being the root of a sorcerer's power, but more than that, I dislike having more than magic result from it.
So, your great great great great great great great great granpappy bed a wyrm? Well, that's nice, so I guess that explains the magic, but where'd you get the wings, and the firebreath?

So I say go for the ,odular magic. It's simple enough to attribute it to heritage anyways.


Also, I really like the sound of this project, especially your take on wizards. It sounds like something I would enjoy playing, so I think I'll look into your work a little more now.

Aquillion
2009-01-04, 07:28 PM
I don't see how that is in any way still a sorcerer, then. You've just described a psion, which is a great idea, already exists, and is definitely not a sorcerer. If you want a hybrid, give them a daily pool of points that they can use to modify their still-vancian casting in different ways.Well, honestly, the thing about the Psion is that they have decent mechanics but a fairly controversial fluff -- lots of people with no objection to its mechanics refuse to use it in their game because, well, psionics. So an arcane class that borrows most of the psion's mechanics might not be such a bad idea, for groups that wouldn't use psionics otherwise.

Knaight
2009-01-04, 08:31 PM
Back to the original question. I'm going to have to support the meta magic side, the ancestor thing is just too restrictive. Mechanically what could work is for the sorcerer to get meta magic like options that nobody else does. So a wizard can learn a fireball thats much bigger, a sorcerer can throw a lightning bolt and turn it several times along its course(any line spell really), or arc a ray over a wall, or all that sort of stuff. It gives them metamagic like stuff without the potential brokenness.

MeklorIlavator
2009-01-04, 10:57 PM
I'm going to echo the meta-magic side, though I think that a ancestor themed class could also exist, most likely being something like a warlock.

FMArthur
2009-01-04, 11:55 PM
Well, honestly, the thing about the Psion is that they have decent mechanics but a fairly controversial fluff -- lots of people with no objection to its mechanics refuse to use it in their game because, well, psionics. So an arcane class that borrows most of the psion's mechanics might not be such a bad idea, for groups that wouldn't use psionics otherwise.

But there are two already existing solutions to that problem (which should work in d20r to the same extent that they worked in 3.5). The best is to simply refluff psionics as normal magic. If your DM is afflicted with severe autism that prevents him from playing D&D with even a tiny hint of improvisation, there is also the established variant, the spell points system (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/spellPoints.htm), whose overpoweredness might be slightly remedied by Fax's spell revisions.

Greg
2009-01-05, 05:38 AM
Make a few prestige classes based on heritage to gain some funky abilities.

bosssmiley
2009-01-05, 06:30 AM
But there are two already existing solutions to that problem (which should work in d20r to the same extent that they worked in 3.5). The best is to simply refluff psionics as normal magic. If your DM is afflicted with severe autism that prevents him from playing D&D with even a tiny hint of improvisation, there is also the established variant, the spell points system (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/spellPoints.htm), whose overpoweredness might be slightly remedied by Fax's spell revisions.

Personally I'd re-write the Sorcerer as: spell points + Frank's thematic Sorcy spell lists (http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG/feedback/alpha2/racesClasses/sorcerersAndDreadNecromancersFIX) + spontaneous metamagic per the XPH. No access to item creation feats.

Sorcerers have magic in the blood and should - by rights - be the kings of metamagic. They're the 'magus as artist' archetype.
Wizards should be the masters of codifying magic and binding it into items. They're the 'magus as scholar-scientist' archetype.

Talya
2009-01-05, 09:22 AM
A few things:

(1) Even fluffwise, the sorcerer's special "heritage" is not a proven thing, but merely speculation. Even if it is true, few sorcerers would ever be able to prove or even be aware of the details of their unusual lineage.
(2) People focus too much on the draconic aspect. As the OP seems to be aware of, any magical creature/outsider/whatever that can breed with the major races will suffice if you choose to go the route of the odd bloodline being the source of a sorcerer's innate power.
(3) Sorcerers tend to still be somewhat scholarly toward the arcane--Hence, Spellcraft & Knowledge (Arcana) are class skills. While they cast through a different method than wizards, an understanding of how magic works can greatly help a sorcerer. Even in the writeup of sorcerer casting, they can greatly increase their versatility by expanding into alternative spell lists if they study the magic of other casters. So spend much time with a cleric, studying how his magic works, a sorcerer might learn to cast Heal. There is still an intuitive, instinctive aspect to this -- the wizard can't do the same thing -- but it does require a more scholarly approach than most people give the sorcerer credit for.

My longtime sorceress has an FR regional feat "Bloodline of Fire" (which indicates her efreeti heritage and provides some minor bonuses for it), which is enough of a mechanical heritage indicator for me, and represents a stronger than normal connection to her magical heritage than most sorcerers have. She also has max ranks in Knowledge (arcana), Spellcraft, and (thanks to a bard level) quite a few ranks in Use Magic Device. She can discuss arcane theory quite comfortably with the average wizard (and does so, frequently.)

Oslecamo
2009-01-05, 09:44 AM
Sorcerers have magic in the blood and should - by rights - be the kings of metamagic. They're the 'magus as artist' archetype.
Wizards should be the masters of codifying magic and binding it into items. They're the 'magus as scholar-scientist' archetype.

With all due respect, between an artist and a scientist, wich one is actually expected to make something that works in a viable time?

Anyway, sorcerers already are better metamagickers than wizards, whitout need of homebrew or anything. A wizard must choose if he wants metamagic or not at the begining of the day and then he's stuck with it. A sorcerer chooses to use metamagic when he damn pleases, and with the right feats, whitout need to spend a fullround action(where the wizard spends an hour preparing his metamagic, mind you).

Person_Man
2009-01-05, 10:42 AM
The two paths are actually a good shorthand for two general game design philosophies:

1) Generic: Mechanics should be fun, understandable, and roughly balanced. Including specific fluff as part of the class abilities punishes players for roleplaying something different, and/or it forces them to to homebrew different abilities (or at the very least, different descriptions for those abilities). The Fighter is probably the best example of a generic class. But if you want a 100% generic system, you're probably better off going with one that is point based (GURPS, Storyteller) instead.

2) Specific: Mechanics are written to fit into a specific campaign world and/or view of what the class "should" be about. The mechanics directly support roleplaying and/or specific characterization. The Paladin is the clearest example, but really this concept applies to most classes in some way (Barbarian cannot be Lawful and gets angry a lot, the Bard must Perform, the Druid is very nature oriented, Rogues often try to Flank, etc).

If you're trying to do your own version of Pathfinder - a more balanced version of 3.5 with your own cool ideas mixed in - then you should go with a more generic design concept.

If you want to be a small press publisher, I think the second way is better. People who want an alternative to 3.5 have generally migrated to 4E, Pathfinder, or their own homebrew systems. So if you want them to buy your book(s), then you need to hook them with a unique campaign world and/or a new way of doing things.

Honestly, I think you could do either quite well Fax. But if you try to do both, you'll probably just end up with a muddled and confusing mess (ie, 3.5).

valadil
2009-01-05, 10:56 AM
If you really must use heritage stuff, why not use it as flavor for enhancing metamagic?

Like, the player picks a type of dragon. A red dragon sorcerer gets cheaper metamagic on spells with the fire descriptor. Maybe they get bonus spells too. Like scorching ray or fireball in addition to the regularly known spells.

The problem with sorcerer heritage as we've seen it is that it's fluff with little to do with magic. The magic is the reason people play a sorc. Tie the heritage into the magic and people might start to care about it.

endoperez
2009-01-05, 11:18 AM
With all due respect, between an artist and a scientist, wich one is actually expected to make something that works in a viable time?

(Visual) artists make graphics for games, plan and make advertisements, draw covers for books, make movie posters - and make webcomics. There's very little understanding if any of these are late.

Besides, the "magus artiste" archetype doesn't have anything to do with what real-life artists do or don't do, what it with being "magus artiste" AND an archetype.


Anyway, sorcerers already are better metamagickers than wizards, whitout need of homebrew or anything. A wizard must choose if he wants metamagic or not at the begining of the day and then he's stuck with it. A sorcerer chooses to use metamagic when he damn pleases, and with the right feats, whitout need to spend a fullround action(where the wizard spends an hour preparing his metamagic, mind you).

Sorcerers might be better, if they didn't have to spend all their feats for both "the right feats" and the metamagic feats themselves. In 3.5 where Wizards gets free metamagic, average wizard does it better than a sorcerer who hasn't spesifically focused on it.
That's what I heard, any way.

Telonius
2009-01-05, 12:00 PM
I'll go with spell alteration over heritage. I can't recall a single Sorcerer I've played or seen who made a big deal about the fact that his great x 100grandfather was a dragon.

Sorcerers, in general, do things that are bigger, flashier, and quicker; but more slapped together haphazardly. Evocation spells are their thing (since they tend to be big and flashy), but transmutation (particularly spells dealing with disguising the self) fits the archetype as well. In 4e terms, they're a striker, not a controller.

The best example I can think of comes from the movie Amadeus:
Salieri = Wizard
Mozart = Sorcerer

Oslecamo
2009-01-05, 12:05 PM
(Visual) artists make graphics for games, plan and make advertisements, draw covers for books, make movie posters - and make webcomics. There's very little understanding if any of these are late.

Besides, the "magus artiste" archetype doesn't have anything to do with what real-life artists do or don't do, what it with being "magus artiste" AND an archetype.


That would be a valid argument. If not for the fact that those people you used as artist examples just happen to be also scientists. You can't use a computer program for graphics if you didn't do your math and computer programing homework and you half the webcomic artist out there seem to have taken science courses, not art courses.

As for the magus archetype, it's a very complex thing. Every magus ends up having to do some heavy study and training, and every magus has spontaneous moments of creativity. All I'm saying it's the diference between the wizard and the sorcerer isn't in the way they think but in their methods to achieve their goals.



Sorcerers might be better, if they didn't have to spend all their feats for both "the right feats" and the metamagic feats themselves. In 3.5 where Wizards gets free metamagic, average wizard does it better than a sorcerer who hasn't spesifically focused on it.
That's what I heard, any way.

Well, then in that case just give the sorcerer extra metamagic feats and be done with it. I don't think there's really need for some wonky backdraw random mechanic wich will be a nightmare to balance. Specially when the wizard also doesn't have any wonky personal mechanic himself.

Telonius
2009-01-05, 12:49 PM
This comic (http://cowbird.110mb.com/46.html) gives a good illustration of what you're saying. :smallbiggrin:

I'd call Sorcerers "magical engineers" if that archetype weren't already even more fully occupied by the Artificer.

If they are confronted with a new observation or general prinicple, Scientists and Wizards generally worry more about integrating it into a simpler and more accurate theory of how the world works. Artists, engineers, and Sorcerers generally worry more about the application of the general principle to a particular problem. Neither set of reactions is totally exclusive of the other. Some of the best-known scientists were also able to apply their theories to real-world situations (Einstein suggesting nuclear weapons research comes to mind).

Arbitrarity
2009-01-05, 01:17 PM
With all due respect, between an artist and a scientist, wich one is actually expected to make something that works in a viable time?


Artist. Scientists don't make stuff, Engineers make stuff. Scientists observe, hypothesize, draw conclusions.

Also, if, for some odd reason, someone was changing a system, and by extension, the classes, perhaps they don't care about what already exists in that system, so much as they care about what they are going to produce. And perhaps assuming that all the other classes will be left the same, as if the class will be added back into a 3.5 context, isn't the most accurate perspective.

Oslecamo
2009-01-05, 01:29 PM
Artist. Scientists don't make stuff, Engineers make stuff. Scientists observe, hypothesize, draw conclusions.


You're mistaking scientists for philosophers now. Scientists experiment. And those experiments demand the scientist to create things himself in order to test his/her theories. Many of our inventions were created by scientists trying out their theories.

Philosophers, now, those are the guys who don't make any stuff at all and just observe, hypothetize and draw conclusions. The act of experimenting your theories to see if they actually work is the big diference that created scientists.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-01-05, 01:32 PM
My idea of a Sorcerer, which somewhat dovetails with your idea, is as follows:

* A Sorcerer does not (initially) study magic. He/she is born with the innate ability, which manifests at some point in their life. From there, a Sorcerer may try to 'study' magic, however a Sorcerer actually breaks quite a few 'known laws of magic' as studied by wizards, by virtue of their innate abilities. Thus, this confuses the Sorcerer, and infuriates the Wizard.

* A Sorcerer will likely have a number of smaller effects that he/she has mastered, and can perform them upon request. These effects are generally more 'static' than traditional magic, being specific effects which can be altered. While performing these effect the Sorcerer has mastered, there is no chance of 'something going wrong'. The Sorcerer in question has intuitively mastered the effect, and is as familiar with using it as he/she is with walking.

*A Sorcerer, while under duress, may attempt something outside his/her normal repertoire, however, to do so courts peril. Because the Sorcerer is not truly and intimately familiar with the way magic works (like wizards), the effect may have unintended consequences or byproducts.

* As a Sorcerer grows in power, he/she gradually increases the number of effects that he/she has mastered. Furthermore, he/she finds that the properties can be somewhat altered, a fireball can also be used in a cone or line effect. However, to attempt to alter magic that has not yet been mastered is to court disaster, as it drastically increases the odds that something goes wrong with the already unstable magic.

*Some sorcerers receive their power via a bloodline, and these sorcerers, as they grow in power, become more like this paragon progenitor. However, to seek the power of the ancestor is to turn one's back on the mutability of magic, but does gain some in power. A Sorcerer with an infernal heretige, for example, may find that many powers which are infernal in nature come easy to master, however he looses the flexibility of the sorcerer who seeks to understand the harmony of pure magic itself.

In other words, some magical effects for sorcerers should just be innate. These are people who live and breathe magic, after all, it should be fairly familiar to them. Outside these mastered effects, they can produce other effects... but, not having mastered them yet, things can get... interesting. As it has not been mastered yet, unknown variables may come into play.

As Sorcerers gain levels, they get to alter many of the properties of the spells they have mastered. As long as they stick to mastered effects, they're quite safe. When one starts altering the properties of magic not yet mastered, however, the odds of something going wrong start going way up.

Thus, a mid-level Sorcerer with Fireball mastered can chunk around fireballs without needing to worry about Bad Things happening. He may even know how to shape the Fireball into a Cone or Line effect. However, this Sorcerer in question does not have Cone of Cold as a Mastered spell, but at least can attempt it. Trying to cast it would incur a chance of something Going Wrong. Now, if he were further to try to shape the Cone of Cold into a line or ball effect, the odds of something Going Wrong would exponentially increase. The more he messes with it, the greater the chance of Bad Things occuring.

I was thinking the Mastered Spells can actually end up being Spell-Like Abilities (since these guys live and breathe magic). He would also have a list of spells 'known but not yet mastered', which he has the chance of 'Oops' happening. I was thinking the Mastered Spells would be very limited, maybe one per spell level, or maybe as many as one per character level.

Like the core Ranger, the Sorcerer has a choice: Heritage or Magical manipulation? If he choses Heritage, then he cannot learn how to alter magical effects, however he gets more Mastered effects, which must be related to his Heritage. If he chooses Magical Manipulation, then he does not get the benefit of more Mastered effects, but he learns how to alter his effects.

Arbitrarity
2009-01-05, 01:35 PM
I'll agree with the experiment element, forgetting that is silly. Then again, this is a ridiculous argument, considering it's about a metaphor.

Then again... who do you expect will produce more varied results through improvisation?

Oslecamo
2009-01-05, 01:59 PM
The engineer of course:smalltongue:

Metaphors aside, I think people are complicating things a little too much. It's a base class, it's suposed to be simple, and unless Fax intends to nerf spellcasting into oblivion(wich I don't think he will from what I saw so far), then full spontaneous spell casting should be more than enough to represent the sorcerer, and any other bonuses should be very minor stuff, like an extra metamagic feat here and there.

This is, balancing the arcane spells by itself it's an huge task, so going out there and giving the sorcerer big wonky extra abilities when one doesn't know how "basic" magic is going to work it's pretty much impossible in my opinion.

Well, we could always just create a spell list for wizards and another for sorcerers, just like druids and clerics have diferent spell lists. Simple. Easier to balance. And flavourfull. Then add domains/specializations on top of that and let it be.

Fax Celestis
2009-01-05, 02:03 PM
Well, we could always just create a spell list for wizards and another for sorcerers, just like druids and clerics have diferent spell lists. Simple. Easier to balance. And flavourfull. Then add domains/specializations on top of that and let it be.

That's actually not a bad idea.

Telonius
2009-01-05, 02:25 PM
I'll agree with that - it does seem to me that there should be some spells the Sorcerer can do that the Wizard just can't, and vice versa. What those spells should be ...?

Oslecamo
2009-01-05, 02:27 PM
That's actually not a bad idea.

Thanks. This way it's both easier to stop rules abuse and to give the sorcerer that special feel.

For example, about that fireball changing thingy:

Wizard fireball:
Deals 1d6 fire damage per CL in a 20 feet radius. If the enemy has any fire resistance, decrease it by an amount equal to half your CL.

This represents the wizard being more focused. He can only make a ball of fire, but he knows how to make it really hot.


Sorcerer fireball:
Deals 1d6 damage per CL in either a 20 feet cone, line or radius.

This represents the sorcerer being more wonky. His fireball can actually be shaped into a diversity of shapes.

Since each special ability is tied to the spell itself, it's much harder to breack, in comparison to granting general abilities that the player can apply to any of dozens of spells, much harder to keep track.

Person_Man
2009-01-05, 02:35 PM
Well, we could always just create a spell list for wizards and another for sorcerers, just like druids and clerics have diferent spell lists. Simple. Easier to balance. And flavourfull. Then add domains/specializations on top of that and let it be.


That's actually not a bad idea.

I'd take it a step further, and say that the best way to save Vancian casting would have been to break down Wizard and Sorcerer into a large number of specialized caster classes, each with its own spell list and interesting supplemental class abilities. Beguiler, Warmage, Dread Necromancer, Hexblade, etc.

Arbitrarity
2009-01-05, 02:35 PM
I'll agree with that - it does seem to me that there should be some spells the Sorcerer can do that the Wizard just can't, and vice versa. What those spells should be ...?

Wings of Cover, Wings of Flurry, Mordekainen's Lucubration
:smallwink:

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-01-05, 02:45 PM
So, rather than split up the Sorcerer into Abjuration, Conjuration, Evocation, and Transmutation, what shall we split the Sorcerer's magic into?

Here's my idea:

Elementalist: Lots of 'blasting' and elemental effects. Things like Fire Shield, Flame Wall, Fire Seeds... all kinds of stuff like this. If it's an elemental effect, they should probably be able to pull it off.

Summoner: Everything from Summoning to Calling effects. These guys have 'connetions' in the various planes of existance. Maybe they can also make pacts with specific beings to summon them over and over, which not only makes it easier to summon them, but maybe also lets the NPC gain xp, somewhat like a Minion from Leadership, only without the abuse potential.

Illusionist: Never trust one's senses around these guys. If it's a sensory input, these guys can likely fool it. Can also probably work merry havoc on any form of scrying, if they choose to. Basically, gank the Beguiler's spell list.

Probably one more, but that's all I can think of off hand.

Note that most of these things are very 'flashy', very noticeable. The Sorcerer's effects are not unseen yet deadly, they are very noticeable (in the illusionist's case, very noticeable on purpose, as they conceal). They do not understand the inner workings of magic, and so focus on the tangible magics which they learn to master.

Oslecamo
2009-01-05, 02:45 PM
I'd take it a step further, and say that the best way to save Vancian casting would have been to break down Wizard and Sorcerer into a large number of specialized caster classes, each with its own spell list and interesting supplemental class abilities. Beguiler, Warmage, Dread Necromancer, Hexblade, etc.

Yeah, that was an old idea that popped out but aparently got forgoten.

Like the beguiller, warmage and friends showed, casters really don't give problems when their spell selection is severly limited. Each one of them has good spells, but since none of them has ALL the good spells, they really have trouble being overpowered. A beguiller might make himself invisible and displaced, but he can't teleport himself or summon monsters to mental control.

The only possible problem is that we end with a lot of base classes with this method.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-01-05, 02:46 PM
Yeah, that was an old idea that popped out but aparently got forgoten.

Like the beguiller, warmage and friends showed, casters really don't give problems when their spell selection is severly limited. Each one of them has good spells, but since none of them has ALL the good spells, they really have trouble being overpowered. A beguiller might make himself invisible and displaced, but he can't teleport himself or summon monsters to mental control.

The only possible problem is that we end with a lot of base classes with this method.

So make it one class with four different 'specializations'. Beguiler, Warmage, Necro, and Illusionist. Same basic class abilities, different areas of focus.

Telonius
2009-01-05, 02:52 PM
Another option would be to treat it like a more restrictive Cleric Domain. Have certain spells that any old Sorcerer (or Wizard) could cast, but only the ones who chose that particular specialty could cast the ones on the list.

Fax Celestis
2009-01-05, 02:55 PM
Another option would be to treat it like a more restrictive Cleric Domain. Have certain spells that any old Sorcerer (or Wizard) could cast, but only the ones who chose that particular specialty could cast the ones on the list.

You mean like Psionics?

Telonius
2009-01-05, 03:19 PM
I'm thinking Clerics, for the Sorcerers at least. Gain the spell list, plus an extra shiney inborn/chosen/(whatever fluff) power along with it. Wizards might not get the extra shiney power, since they only acquire things through study, not through divine fiat or personal charisma.

I've never played Psionics, so I couldn't say whether it's like them or not.

Fixer
2009-01-05, 03:54 PM
Well, we could always just create a spell list for wizards and another for sorcerers, just like druids and clerics have diferent spell lists. Simple. Easier to balance. And flavourfull. Then add domains/specializations on top of that and let it be.
I liked this up until the domains/specializations part. That makes them smack more of a cleric than I would like. Perhaps more of a modular-style design. Like an artist choosing a particular style, but able to abandon it to try something else.

I also appreciate ShneekeyTheLost's concept of the sorcerer and wonder how that could be integrated. Allow some magical effects (minor, compared to what a similar level wizard could use) to be usable at-will but also

ashmanonar
2009-01-05, 04:23 PM
(Visual) artists make graphics for games, plan and make advertisements, draw covers for books, make movie posters - and make webcomics. There's very little understanding if any of these are late.

For real. Deadlines are serious business, man. Woe unto you if you miss one. :(

Of course, "editors," bosses, or any other such authority figure usually doesn't know beans about the business and doesn't grasp how long some things take, so "deadlines" should be examined with a grain of salt.

Oslecamo
2009-01-05, 04:26 PM
You mean like Psionics?

I donn't know if you noticed, but certain cleric spells can only be prepared if you have the right domain, and nobody else has acess to them.

Fax Celestis
2009-01-05, 04:30 PM
I donn't know if you noticed, but certain cleric spells can only be prepared if you have the right domain, and nobody else has acess to them.

Right, but what he was describing (common pool of "everybody" spells with particular discipline spells) sounded more like psionics than cleric domains to me.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-01-05, 04:50 PM
I was thinking four different 'colleges' of magic, much like Wizard's magic is split up into Abjuration, Conjuration, Evocation, and Transmutation.

Each Sorcerer, in effect, must be a 'specialist' in one, with severe penalties for accessing the others.

Telonius
2009-01-05, 04:51 PM
Okay, I've read up on d20 srd about psionic powers a bit, and I think what I'm suggesting would split the difference between the two. The Sorcerer disciplines would be lists of spells that nobody but they could access. But they'd get an extra something (not just extra class skills) for it.

For example, "Magic Missile" seems to me like a spell that every sorcerer ought to be able to cast (probably Wizards, too). Elementalist's extra first level spell might be Burning Hands; only Elementalists can cast it. (There are probably better spells than that to choose, but just for the example). The extra ability could be to half of an energy spell into that any type he wants, minus sonic and force. (Again, there could be better choices than this; just as an example). Sam the Sorcerer is an Elementalist, and he chooses to convert half the damage of Magic Missile into Acid damage. His friend Bob the Sorcerer is a Summoner. He can't cast Burning Hands at all, but as a Summoner his Summoned Creatures last for +3 rounds, have extra HP equal to their HD, and an extra +1 to attack and damage rolls (stacks with Augment Summoning if applicable). His first level spell might be Mount.

Rei_Jin
2009-01-05, 04:58 PM
I'd love to see it done similarly to the Shadowcaster in Tome of Magic, with Mysteries and Paths (renamed, of course) allowing the Sorceror more power over his spells, but with specialisation along specific lines to provide that power.