PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next Kryx's Sorcerer/Warlock Combination (Draft)



Kryx
2017-10-12, 07:31 PM
I've recently been inspired to explore combining the Sorcerer and Warlock as a result of the discussion in I don't get the Sorcerer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?538605-I-don-t-get-the-Sorcerer).

This document should be considered a very rough draft. I've polished what I've come up with so far, but the ideas are no where near final. Normally I wouldn't post this until I've thought about these ideas for several more days, but I'm going on vacation for the weekend and a few people asked, so here it is:

Kryx's Sorcerer/Warlock (https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BxGh_mU9ihaPZ3lwTVExR2FXNms) (Draft)

The concept is to combine the two classes. The basic motivation:

Consider the following subclasses:

Dragon - Sorcerer subclass and popular Warlock homebrew subclass: 1 (https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/4e46zb),
2 (https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/6b6fnp), 3 (https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Dragon_Patron_(5e_Archetype)), 4 (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/5gns6b), 5 (http://www.dmsguild.com/product/185907/Dragon-Warlock-Patron-Revisited), 6 (http://www.dmsguild.com/product/185841/The-Dragon--Warlock-Patron), 7 (http://www.dmsguild.com/product/172964/5e-Content-Pack--Dragon-Magic)
Fey - Warlock subclass and popular Sorcerer homebrew subclass: 1 (https://daemonsanddeathrays.wordpress.com/2016/02/23/sylvan-bloodline-faerie-blood-sorcerers-for-dd-5th-edition),
2 (https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/3hef5j/), 3 (http://www.dmsguild.com/product/176659/Heroes-of-the-Mists),
4 (http://www.dmsguild.com/product/217092/Sorcerous-Origin-Fey-Bloodline), 5 (https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Fey_Bloodline_(5e_Archetype))
Fiend - Warlock subclass and popular Sorcerer homebrew subclass: 1 (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2016/10/infernal-heritage.html), 2 (http://www.dmsguild.com/product/173133/MTC--Sorcerous-Origin-Fiendish-Bloodline), 3 (https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/3g82xd/5e_sorcerer_archetype_fiend/), 4 (https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Infernal_Bloodline_(5e_Archetype)), 5 (https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Fiend_Bloodline_(5e_Archetype))

I'm sure I could find similar results for other subclasses of these classes as well.

There is an incredible amount of crossover in the themes of the classes. Should we just have 2 of the same subclass - one for each class? It could be a workable option, but both classes are lacking by RAW imo. The Sorcerer is especially lacking an identity and worthwhileness in comparison to other classes which simple fixes nor even complex fixes like mine really solve perfectly. Warlock struggles less, but is significantly more enjoyable with spell points and slightly altered pacts so that Blade is viable. Since the classes already need some touch ups, my thought is why not go for it?

The invocation system is perfect for allowing the player to choose precisely the type of caster they want to build - whether they want to focus more on the occult, more on the arcane, more on the elements, etc. From a mechanical perspective I believe this is a mcuh better option for players.

Things missing:

More invocations
Spell list refinement
More fluff
Better fluff in some areas
18th and 20th level features for GOO and Seeker
More refinement


Thanks for any feedback provided.

Deleted
2017-10-12, 08:17 PM
It's a bit busy with the way the spellcasting works for this but I do like it.

Is there a specific reason why Boons and Invocations are separate things? It seems like the fluff of both overlap a bit.

Kryx
2017-10-12, 08:33 PM
It's a bit busy with the way the spellcasting works for this but I do like it.
It's quite similar to the warlock, but points instead of the max level slots. I'm unsure about that 20th level arcanum, but the rest is much more straightforward than RAW warlock I believe.


Is there a specific reason why Boons and Invocations are separate things? It seems like the fluff of both overlap a bit.
The same reason that a warlock's pact boon and invocations are not combined: a boon defines how the character plays while an invocation is a nice to have.

In this case the boons quite heavily define the playstyle of the sorcerer/warlock by presenting 3 options:
- Stronger spellcasting (Arcane)
- Stronger melee (Blade)
- More utility in a pet (Chain)

Whereas invocations are generally not playstyle defining nearly as much (hex would be the strongest playstyle defining one I think).



Side note: if I can I will see if I can merge my summoner into this class. I think that'd be nice as well.

Deleted
2017-10-12, 09:15 PM
It's quite similar to the warlock, but points instead of the max level slots. I'm unsure about that 20th level arcanum, but the rest is much more straightforward than RAW warlock I believe.


The same reason that a warlock's pact boon and invocations are not combined: a boon defines how the character plays while an invocation is a nice to have.

In this case the boons quite heavily define the playstyle of the sorcerer/warlock by presenting 3 options:
- Stronger spellcasting (Arcane)
- Stronger melee (Blade)
- More utility in a pet (Chain)

Whereas invocations are generally not playstyle defining nearly as much (hex would be the strongest playstyle defining one I think).



Side note: if I can I will see if I can merge my summoner into this class. I think that'd be nice as well.

Well, even the original Warlock has the same issue. Had a player trade out the pact of chain for an invocation until I asked how they had so many invocations and he explained it to me. New players can be fun lol.

Choosing invocations can define your play style just as much or even moreso than your boon. Picking up Misty Visions over Frost Lance is a much bigger choice since it will determine if I'm going to be a sneaky bastard or a blaster.

The other cantrips will be nice to have as back up but won't compare to my EB (especially with more Invocation support), a weapon is nice if I have other tools to compliment it (armor or healing), and the familiar is something that if I really wanted could get a suitable replacement for a feat.

The big thing though is that all the boons is something someone else can readily do. So making a big deal out of them seems a bit off. Someone else is going to have those cantrips and use them more often, someone else is going to be swinging a weapon a lot more and for a lot longer, and anyone can have a pretty good familiar (even if you aren't the most generous DM with the rules). These boons seem more like the Sorcerer dabbling in other areas as even the support of the boons are found in invocations (such as the Chain Meld invocation).

So throwing these boons under invocations really won't hurt anything, but it will help streamline this sorcerer.

supergoji18
2017-10-12, 10:50 PM
I really like it. The way it is combined makes the class able to fit a whole bunch of archetypes all by itself, which is fantastic for roleplaying without having to sacrifice power or time by multiclassing. I do have a few things I want to talk about though.

1. I think they should get light armor proficiency, so a spellsword becomes more viable with this class. It might be redundant with the Sorcerous Resilience feature, so maybe incorporate an extra benefit into Sorcerous Resilience at higher levels to encourage its use and create a more important choice between wearing a set of magic light armor or just using the Sorcerous Resilience's features. Something unique for each origin would be really cool, like a frost cloak effect for the Boreal origin, or increased strength for Dragon origin.
2. The option from your earlier Warlock rewrite to have INT as a spellcasting ability should be present in my opinion. Just to add more variety.
3. I think the class should get an extra cantrip at higher levels (16 and above).
4. Not really that important, but I like the name Mystic Arcanum more than Arcanum. It sounds more... mystic
5. I'd suggest adding in some of the features from the subclasses of your old Warlock rewrite either as part of the features of the equivalent subclasses or as invocations. For example, Hoard Sense from the Ancient Dragon patron.

I will attempt to come up with ideas to help you with figuring out the Seeker's and Old One's 18th and 20th level features when I am not so tired. But overall I really like this new class rewrite, easily my new favorite.

InspectorG
2017-10-12, 11:12 PM
I've recently been inspired to explore combining the Sorcerer and Warlock as a result of the discussion in I don't get the Sorcerer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?538605-I-don-t-get-the-Sorcerer).

Thanks for any feedback provided.


I've recently been inspired to explore combining the Sorcerer and Warlock as a result of the discussion in I don't get the Sorcerer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?538605-I-don-t-get-the-Sorcerer).


Thanks for any feedback provided.

Personally, i dont see the need to merge the classes, but...

Your Doc is nicely done. Reminds me of RIFTS(rpg), for some reason, but laid out a lot better. I would advice chopping it down and making it more concise.

Seems like it would fit a certain campaign. You homebrew any campaigns?

Kryx
2017-10-13, 04:57 AM
So throwing these boons under invocations really won't hurt anything, but it will help streamline this sorcerer.
It would lessen the explicitly stated, mandatory bonuses which could potentially create clarity, but it would also have design consequences:

The current structure allows for mutually exclusive options. For example a Blade boon shouldn't be compatible with the Arcane boon. Giving both strong melee and strong magic is problematic
Too many options/Major power points could be easy to miss. This issue is a positive for some people and a negative for others - new players will want something that forces choice a bit more while players with system mastery will want more open ended options. A balance should be struck here.

On reflection I'm inclined to make the chain boon invocations - it isn't a playstyle defining choice and could easily be added on to melee or stronger casting without balance concerns.

I'll need to think through this idea - I think there is some room for adjustment, but "main playstyles" still feel like they belong in a separate track to invocations. I'll see how the summoner merge would work with these as well.

======================


I really like it. The way it is combined makes the class able to fit a whole bunch of archetypes all by itself, which is fantastic for roleplaying without having to sacrifice power or time by multiclassing.
...
overall I really like this new class rewrite, easily my new favorite.
Thanks for the encouragement!


1. I think they should get light armor proficiency, so a spellsword becomes more viable with this class. It might be redundant with the Sorcerous Resilience feature, so maybe incorporate an extra benefit into Sorcerous Resilience at higher levels to encourage its use and create a more important choice between wearing a set of magic light armor or just using the Sorcerous Resilience's features.
Light armor is strictly inferior to the Sorcerous Resilience feature. 13 + Dex > 12 + Dex. I did consider 10 + Dex + Cha, but that is too much for a 9th level caster.


2. The option from your earlier Warlock rewrite to have INT as a spellcasting ability should be present in my opinion. Just to add more variety.
I'm not sure about this. A Lore Bard focuses heavily on learning, but provides no Intelligence option. A Knowledge Domain Cleric relies heavily on knowledge, but provides no Intelligence option. Even if I increase the flavor of knowledge seeking for some Sorcerers I'm unsure if an INT option is warranted.

Hear me out:
The spellcasting of a Sorcerer (one who developers innate powers or is given powers by their patron) is a matter of outward manifestation of their power that now lies within them. Intelligence has nothing to do with such manifestation of power. It could allow them to learn new powers to manifest and I wish Intelligence was more represented in 5e in such a capacity, but it feels like the wrong choice for a spellcasting ability for this class.


3. I think the class should get an extra cantrip at higher levels (16 and above).
There are several cantrips progressions in the game:
2->4: Bard, Druid, RAW Warlock
3->5: Cleric, Wizard
4->6: RAW Sorcerer

I've put this Sorcerer on the middle track by giving 1 cantrip per subclass. If a Sorcerer wants more cantrips then the Arcane boon is their best option. With the Arcane Boon's ability to pick up 3 cantrips I believe that is already pushing the limit.


4. Not really that important, but I like the name Mystic Arcanum more than Arcanum. It sounds more... mystic
I renamed it for a few reasons:

It could remind people of the new Mystic class
"Mystic" emphasis the occult side of the class, which isn't for all Sorcerers. Some may focus on the occult, but that shouldn't be core to the class.



5. I'd suggest adding in some of the features from the subclasses of your old Warlock rewrite either as part of the features of the equivalent subclasses or as invocations. For example, Hoard Sense from the Ancient Dragon patron.
This is something that I expect to cover under the "More refinement" that I listed in the OP. 1st level features of subclasses could use a bit more flavor. Perhaps you could provide some examples of flavor missing. I believe I have captured all of my Warlock into this class. The Ancient Dragon patron isn't a creation of mine, but I will reference it when I seek to refine the subclasses further - that author is quite good.

====================


Personally, i dont see the need to merge the classes, but...

Your Doc is nicely done. Reminds me of RIFTS(rpg), for some reason, but laid out a lot better.

Seems like it would fit a certain campaign. You homebrew any campaigns?
Muahaha, if I can impress naysayers with my formatting then at least I've done something good! Thanks for the kind words.

I run campaigns based on Pathfinder Adventure Paths.


I would advice chopping it down and making it more concise.
What do you mean by "chopping it down and making it more concise"? I plan to expand it with more subclasses, images, and invocations. What, currently, isn't straightforward enough?


Thanks for the feedback everyone. I'll think on some of these and itterate on the class next week.

Kryx
2017-10-13, 06:23 AM
One option to consider: Allow the Sorcerer to cast a different cantrip as a bonus action if they cast a cantrip on their turn (scale up to allow it on a 1st level spell at 5th level). This would actually do less damage than EB spam and would allow for Sorcerers to be the cantrip masters. This would require removing "Agony" (+Cha to cantrip damage), limiting Booming Blade/GFB (which I do in my games already), and potentially adjusting Hex. This could actually be a workable option in terms of unique identity, diversity of options, and mechanical prowess as long as I get the balance correct.

Azreal
2017-10-13, 01:41 PM
Hey there big fan of your homebrews on general. So Im not an expert on balance by any means but this new Sorc seems super feature heavy to me. With being a full Caster it seems they get a lot more then most classes. So I guess I'm just asking what you what made you give them that amount of features?

Kryx
2017-10-14, 11:15 AM
Hi Azreal,

The chassis of the class is quite similar toy warlock chassis which is quite similar to the RAW warlock chassis. I believe there are a fair amount of features currently, but perhaps I've missed something.

supergoji18
2017-10-14, 11:38 AM
Thanks for the encouragement!

You're welcome :smallsmile:


Light armor is strictly inferior to the Sorcerous Resilience feature. 13 + Dex > 12 + Dex. I did consider 10 + Dex + Cha, but that is too much for a 9th level caster.

Fair enough, though I think there should still be features of sorcerous resilience unique to each subclass. Like a passive armor of agathys for the boreal origin or a holy aura for celestial origin. This should only be gained at later levels though so that at lower levels the sorcerer isn't super broken.


I'm not sure about this. A Lore Bard focuses heavily on learning, but provides no Intelligence option. A Knowledge Domain Cleric relies heavily on knowledge, but provides no Intelligence option. Even if I increase the flavor of knowledge seeking for some Sorcerers I'm unsure if an INT option is warranted.

Hear me out:
The spellcasting of a Sorcerer (one who developers innate powers or is given powers by their patron) is a matter of outward manifestation of their power that now lies within them. Intelligence has nothing to do with such manifestation of power. It could allow them to learn new powers to manifest and I wish Intelligence was more represented in 5e in such a capacity, but it feels like the wrong choice for a spellcasting ability for this class.

Fair enough. I just like the idea of giving players the option. In case you can't tell, I'm a big fan of diversity and wide variety of options in roleplaying games.


There are several cantrips progressions in the game:
2->4: Bard, Druid, RAW Warlock
3->5: Cleric, Wizard
4->6: RAW Sorcerer

I've put this Sorcerer on the middle track by giving 1 cantrip per subclass. If a Sorcerer wants more cantrips then the Arcane boon is their best option. With the Arcane Boon's ability to pick up 3 cantrips I believe that is already pushing the limit.

You make a good point. I forgot about the Arcane Boon for a minute.


I renamed it for a few reasons:

It could remind people of the new Mystic class
"Mystic" emphasis the occult side of the class, which isn't for all Sorcerers. Some may focus on the occult, but that shouldn't be core to the class.


That's a good point.


This is something that I expect to cover under the "More refinement" that I listed in the OP. 1st level features of subclasses could use a bit more flavor. Perhaps you could provide some examples of flavor missing. I believe I have captured all of my Warlock into this class. The Ancient Dragon patron isn't a creation of mine, but I will reference it when I seek to refine the subclasses further - that author is quite good.

Ancient dragon pact isn't one of your creations? I didn't know, my bad. In any case, I'm glad to hear that you're still considering adding features.

supergoji18
2017-10-14, 12:24 PM
Hey there big fan of your homebrews on general. So Im not an expert on balance by any means but this new Sorc seems super feature heavy to me. With being a full Caster it seems they get a lot more then most classes. So I guess I'm just asking what you what made you give them that amount of features?

This reworked sorcerer isn't a full spellcaster. It's using the casting system of the warlocks, which is considered distinct from the way other spellcasting works in the game. In fact, this sorcerer at max level only has the ability to cast up to 15 1st level spells. Compared to the Paladin, which has a total of 15 spell slots at the same level, of which all but 4 are higher than 1st level, the Sorcerer actually has weaker spellcasting by itself. The extra features are designed to bring this rewritten sorcerer to the same power level as the other classes.

Kryx
2017-10-14, 12:27 PM
this sorcerer at max level only has the ability to cast up to 15 1st level spells. Compared to the Paladin, which has a total of 15 spell slots at the same level, of which all but 4 are higher than 1st level
The game is balanced around 2 expected short rests so this isn't really the best representation of the Sorcerer's capabilities.

Azreal
2017-10-14, 02:00 PM
The chassis of the class is quite similar toy warlock chassis which is quite similar to the RAW warlock chassis. I believe there are a fair amount of features currently, but perhaps I've missed something.

Ah okay I completely missed it was based on Warlock casting and not full Caster. I retract my question. My bad.

supergoji18
2017-10-14, 02:09 PM
The game is balanced around 2 expected short rests so this isn't really the best representation of the Sorcerer's capabilities.

Missed the part about them recovering all spell points during a short or long rest. I thought it was just a long rest. In any case, this is a strong class but it's not gamebreaking and it's far from the most powerful class available

Terra Reveene
2017-10-14, 05:38 PM
It... Feels very patchy. A lot of the desciptions are very clearly either sorcerer or warlock descriptions tacked onto each other, combined, or mix and matched (things like "depending on your power source", it feels like you're supposed to make a choice that matters, but that choice never really happens. It doesn't matter which power source you choose because they're all combined and do the same thing essentially. So why have a choice there at all?)

Suppose that is why it's called a draft, but I can't help but feel like it'll remain just as patchy unless you make most of the descriptions ambiguous. But that's rather difficult to do when the power sources of both the Sorcerer and Warlock have such key differences.

Sorcerers: Born with their powers or gifted (difference) or gained through a pact (similar)
Warlock: Gained through search of otherworldly secrets and knowledge (difference) or gained through a pact (similar)

To make it less patchy, I think one would have to combine these three different power sources into one somehow.


Just to throw an idea against a wall: Combine said three power sources (gift/born with it + search for knowledge/secrets + make a pact) into one under one name (sorcerous spark, or something similar), and have all of them gain more power through feeding their spark with a combination of the old sorcerer and warlock power sources.

A sorcerer might discover that they have their spark from birth and decides to make a pact with a devil for knowledge on how to unlock and grow their spark to gain more power than they had at birth for example. Or perhaps they searched for knowledge and eventually accidentally ended up in contact with an angel and they gifted them power, and they now just grow in power through trial and error, the angel contacting them at times by giving them directions for more secret knowledge to fuel their spark. Both of these examples combine aspects of all three power sources from both classes.


EDIT: I hope I'm making some sort of sense. It feels like I don't, and if so, then perhaps I should take some more time to gather my thoughts and then come back. Let's hope my comment is worth a read regardless.

Kryx
2017-10-15, 03:07 PM
It... Feels very patchy. A lot of the desciptions are very clearly either sorcerer or warlock descriptions tacked onto each other, combined, or mix and matched (things like "depending on your power source"
This isn't intended to be a new class, but a class that covers both the Sorcerer and Warlock niche. It is based on the idea that they are very very similar options so wording was reused and adjusted appropriately.

If you think there are specific sections of the core class that needs to be cleaned up please let me know. The subclasses need a fair amount of wording work - hence the draft. ;)


It doesn't matter which power source you choose because they're all combined and do the same thing essentially. So why have a choice there at all?)
You're right - there is no mechanical difference in the flavor choice - that's by design.


the power sources of both the Sorcerer and Warlock have such key differences.
They don't, that's the whole point of this project. The Sorcerer and Warlock both use their force of will to manifest their powers outwordly. The difference between the classes by RAW is how they get that power - via some kind of bloodline, pact, or experience.


Sorcerers: Born with their powers or gifted (difference) or gained through a pact (similar)
Warlock: Gained through search of otherworldly secrets and knowledge (difference) or gained through a pact (similar)
A Warlock does not gain Pact Magic via otherworld secrets. See the first section in the Warlock: "A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being"

The class I've made allows for acquisition of power via Curse (Sorcerer), Bloodline (Sorcerer), Extraordinary event (Sorcerer), or Pact (Warlock).


Just to throw an idea against a wall: Combine said three power sources (gift/born with it + search for knowledge/secrets + make a pact) into one under one name (sorcerous spark, or something similar)
I did exactly this. It's named "Sorcerous Magic".


A sorcerer might discover that they have their spark from birth and decides to make a pact with a devil for knowledge on how to unlock and grow their spark to gain more power than they had at birth for example. Or perhaps they searched for knowledge and eventually accidentally ended up in contact with an angel and they gifted them power, and they now just grow in power through trial and error, the angel contacting them at times by giving them directions for more secret knowledge to fuel their spark. Both of these examples combine aspects of all three power sources from both classes.
That is a very different flavor than the RAW Sorcerer or Warlock or the implementation that I have created. How the power is acquired is up to the player in my case - there are several options above, none of which are mandatory.

Kryx
2017-10-15, 05:37 PM
Changes:

Added Summoning Boon - effectively merging my Summoner class into this class. Added eidolon info, invocations, and 2 spells for it.
Added a 15 + Dex (max 2) option for Blade Boon so they are less MAD.
"Varied Cantrips" renamed to "Assorted Arcana" and moved to an invocation. It allows you to choose 2 cantrips, not 3. It will be significantly stronger with the following change:
Arcane Boon's 2nd level feature (formerly "Varied Cantrips") is now "Quickened Cantrips": "When you cast a cantrip, you can cast a different cantrip as a bonus action." There are some limitations to prevent SCAG cantrips and stacking Charisma on top of cantrips
Eldritch Blast adjusted to scale as follows: 1st level: 1 beam for 1d10, 5th level: 1 beam for 2d10, 11th level: 2 beams, one for 2d10 and 1 for 1d10, 17th level: 2 beams for 2d10.


Boon choices:

Arcane = more cantrips (slightly less damage than RAW EB most likely)
Blade = melee focused
Summoning = Eidolon. Eidolon damage is basically equivalent to a cantrip and he would absorb invocations to make stronger

Terra Reveene
2017-10-16, 10:10 AM
Fair enough. I suppose this just isn't something I particularly like then (at least not at the moment). I'll keep an eye on it though, because this amalgamation does look very interesting to me, and it's getting more interesting with your summoner thrown into the mix as well. If I find anything that looks odd or out of place I'll let you know. I'm not sure I'd have any suggestions worth considering, but if any good ones crop up I'll throw them at you as well.

Kryx
2017-10-16, 10:51 AM
Changes:

Wording for subclass introductions redone
Added a Sea Sorcery subclass
Renamed formerly Warlock subclasses (GOO -> Aberrant, Seeker -> Astral), refactored some of their features, and added 18th and 20th level features.
Adjusted the 20th level features of several classes
Moved Life Tap and Transmogrify to the Summoning Boon section
Added Hoard Sense to Draconic

Kryx
2017-10-16, 10:52 AM
I suppose this just isn't something I particularly like then (at least not at the moment).
I've released a more updated version. What is missing from it in your eyes? What is not up to par with my old Sorcerer/Warlock/Summoner?


This project is getting pretty far along now. I'll likely use it and replace my Sorcerer/Warlock/Summoner with this class soon. So please feel free to heavily nitpick.

Terra Reveene
2017-10-16, 01:35 PM
I've released a more updated version. What is missing from it in your eyes? What is not up to par with my old Sorcerer/Warlock/Summoner?


This project is getting pretty far along now. I'll likely use it and replace my Sorcerer/Warlock/Summoner with this class soon. So please feel free to heavily nitpick.

If it's just a compilation class of those three classes, then I think it's about as good as it's gonna get. If it's not supposed to represent a kind of new class combining the ideas of Sorcerer, Warlock, and Summoner (which I had originally thought), I have a couple of things only (with it being a sorcerer/warlock/summoner hybrid in mind):

Give the eidolon a heavy armor option that requires a certain amount of strength, giving a flat amount of AC. I just feel like it's missing. Did you have a reason not to include it?

3 evolutions is not a whole lot, it's a shame that it has all of those options but is only allowed to pick 3 of them (2 if you don't pick monstrosity). You have the invocations that can give more evolutions, sure, but the main problem I have is that those evolutions are going to be used to improve your eidolon's combat abilities only. It's very similar to the old feat problem you solved a good while back. I'd love for you to not run into that same problem again. I'd split the non-combat centered evolutions with the combat centered ones and give the eidolon a few of both (there's not that many flavorful evolutions, but I think they deserve being used, yeah? You could even add some more to make them less alone. Take inspiration from the normal 'traits').

I'm not a fan of Transmogify. Although I suppose it does fit a similar role to what I suggested above, as well as filling a similar role to Find Familiar's ability to change its shape. I suppose it's not supposed to be as static as the old summoner's eidolon. Still, I'll leave my suggestion here anyways. Just in case.

Rambling
There are some spelling errors, some weird names, and just general weirdness around, but I don't have time to look through and catch all of it right now. Some of it might even be from me not liking the name and associating it with one of the three classes that had it as a defining difference.
For example, 'Sorcerous Weapon' just feels wrong. I can't not read that and thinkg "that's supposed to read 'Pact Weapon'". It's just very deeply engraved into my head, I can't stop thinking it's weird. But here's the thing: I know that for your amalgamation, this is the correct name. It's just supposed to have the name that it has.
That name is easy for me to look at and think "yeah, it's weird, but that's supposed to be right. But there are some other names and flavor I look at and I can't tell if it's supposed to be that way or if it's a mistake (it's easy to make mistakes when creating amalgamations. I know this for a fact. I've made plenty of them myself). Am I making any sense?

The other classes I've went through and checked out were all easy to understand, and if I didn't understand something, I could just ask about it to get help with wrapping my head around your ideas. But this? I don't even know where to start. Flavor-wise, that is. It's just... an amalgamation. Like multiple bodies stitched together by a mad scientist, it was just supposed to be that way for its creator, even if it doesn't make sense for an outsider.

TLDR Your creation might be the correct way of solving the sorcerer's identity crisis, but it's a lot to swallow.

Final Thing
Aaah... Hmmm... What kind of heavy nitpicking do you want? Want me to assault your flavor decisions, mechanical ones, wording, ...?
Also, just to be clear (and making critique easier to give), this isn't supposed to be a new class, it's just supposed to collect all the different flavor aspects of the Sorcerer, Warlock, and Summoner, combine them into one, and allow players to pick either the Sorcerer, Warlock, or Summoner flavor aspects, correct?
And any mechanical stuff is just there to... Be there? Some of the things that belong to one class doesn't work in another (flavor-wise). This is mostly true for the Sorcerer and Warlock, as the Summoner's eidolon works rather well flavor-wise in both the Warlock and Sorcerer as it is.
If you're not supposed to pick either the sorcerer flavor or the warlock flavor (which I originally thought you wasn't trying to do), then... What do?
I'll stop here, since I don't think I could do anything more but to ask more questions. Color me thoroughly confused. /end

Kryx
2017-10-16, 01:58 PM
It's one class that is based on controlling power. They can acquire their power through several means:
Flavor:

Born with it
Experience it (elemental plane exposure)
Pact

They can then choose 3 main fighting styles:

Arcane = more cantrips (slightly less damage than RAW EB most likely)
Blade = melee focused
Summoning = Eidolon. Eidolon damage is basically equivalent to a cantrip and he would absorb invocations to make stronger

Beyond that everything else is one solid class. It incorporates the ideas of several classes, but it should all fit together. All the features from the old classes are incorporated into this class.


Give the eidolon a heavy armor option that requires a certain amount of strength, giving a flat amount of AC. I just feel like it's missing. Did you have a reason not to include it?
The eidolon is setup the way it is to prevent it being too strong. It will generally have less HP, but more AC than a Revised Ranger's Animal companion I believe. Giving the eidolon heavy armor would skew that scale too far in the eidolon's favor I believe.


3 evolutions is not a whole lot, it's a shame that it has all of those options but is only allowed to pick 3 of them (2 if you don't pick monstrosity). You have the invocations that can give more evolutions, sure, but the main problem I have is that those evolutions are going to be used to improve your eidolon's combat abilities only. It's very similar to the old feat problem you solved a good while back. I'd love for you to not run into that same problem again. I'd split the non-combat centered evolutions with the combat centered ones and give the eidolon a few of both (there's not that many flavorful evolutions, but I think they deserve being used, yeah? You could even add some more to make them less alone. Take inspiration from the normal 'traits').
The amount of evolutions for the eidolon is again limited for balance reasons. A Summoning Boon Sorcerer can choose to sacrifice their individual capabilities for the eidolon's capabilities.

I should definitely make the eidolon's type based on the sorcerer subclass chosen - I'll modify that in the next version.

Which evolutions do you think are underpowered enough to be traits? I believe most are worth an invocation, but maybe I'm missing some.


I'm not a fan of Transmogify. Although I suppose it does fit a similar role to what I suggested above, as well as filling a similar role to Find Familiar's ability to change its shape. I suppose it's not supposed to be as static as the old summoner's eidolon. Still, I'll leave my suggestion here anyways. Just in case.
Pathfinder's eidolon wasn't so static: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/t/transmogrify/

What is wrong with it? Eidolons are meant to be mostly static and changing them up takes resources.


There are some spelling errors, some weird names, and just general weirdness around, but I don't have time to look through and catch all of it right now. Some of it might even be from me not liking the name and associating it with one of the three classes that had it as a defining difference.
For example, 'Sorcerous Weapon' just feels wrong. I can't not read that and thinkg "that's supposed to read 'Pact Weapon'". It's just very deeply engraved into my head, I can't stop thinking it's weird. But here's the thing: I know that for your amalgamation, this is the correct name. It's just supposed to have the name that it has.
That name is easy for me to look at and think "yeah, it's weird, but that's supposed to be right. But there are some other names and flavor I look at and I can't tell if it's supposed to be that way or if it's a mistake (it's easy to make mistakes when creating amalgamations. I know this for a fact. I've made plenty of them myself). Am I making any sense?
That makes sense, but it doesn't really give me a route to resolve the problem. I agree the names "Sorcerous Weapon" and "Sorcerous Resilience" are lazy names. I couldn't think of better ones. Perhaps you have ideas?


The other classes I've went through and checked out were all easy to understand, and if I didn't understand something, I could just ask about it to get help with wrapping my head around your ideas. But this? I don't even know where to start. Flavor-wise, that is. It's just... an amalgamation. Like multiple bodies stitched together by a mad scientist, it was just supposed to be that way for its creator, even if it doesn't make sense for an outsider.
I think that perception may be flawed based on you knowing the old classes so well. If you took a fresh eyed player and asked them if anything was weird I expect that they wouldn't have the same perception.

Sorcerer and Warlock really weren't that different in terms of flavor - it was just the acquisition of their power that was different, some of which was already quite blurred.


What kind of heavy nitpicking do you want? Want me to assault your flavor decisions, mechanical ones, wording, ...?
If you find it interesting then feel free to assault everything where you can provide a better option or can clearly identify issues. Only specific really helps me improve.


And any mechanical stuff is just there to... Be there? Some of the things that belong to one class doesn't work in another (flavor-wise). This is mostly true for the Sorcerer and Warlock, as the Summoner's eidolon works rather well flavor-wise in both the Warlock and Sorcerer as it is.
Hmm? I'm not sure what you're saying here. The mechanics are intended to reflect the flavor of the class.


If you're not supposed to pick either the sorcerer flavor or the warlock flavor (which I originally thought you wasn't trying to do), then... What do?
You choose how you acquired your powers, just like you do on the Sorcerer and Warlock. That choice has flavor implications, but how that is handled is largely up to the Player and GM as it is by RAW.

Kryx
2017-10-16, 03:18 PM
Changes:

Eidolons updated to have more clear attacks and types
Keen senses combined into advantage on all Perception

Terra Reveene
2017-10-16, 03:50 PM
That's not an easy reply :d

I have a good view of what your 'new' class is supposed to be now, which is nice, but it raises more questions:

If you choose ONE way that you aquired your powers, then how does that decision affect the features? If I got my magic through being exposed to another plane (I'm not sure if this ever was a sorcerer thing. Is it new? I thought they got their powers through some sort of event, nothing specific attached to it? Or do you have a different take on that?), then how come I end up with a 'Sorcerous Weapon'? There's some bit of information missing there. I gained magical powers, not magical weapons, right?
Explanation: The reason why it's so weird is because normally the weapon is granted by another being. I get the 'a wizard did it' feel about it. Like you just happened to get this weird weapon-like thing that you can wield from being exposed to a plane.

And what if I got my powers through a pact? Why would ALL beings in a pact with another creature grant them 'Sorcerous Resilience'? The flavor doesn't always line up that well for me. In other cases it's great and it works, but because of how modular this class is in how many combinations you can have, it ends up producing a few weird ones around with the normal and the great.
Explanation: The reason why it's weird is because the Sorcerer normally gained their added toughness due to having their body being modified by the event, but in this case it's granted through the pact, and it's ALWAYS granted from a pact. It becomes an universal thing. "all pacts result in the one accepting the pact being able to modify their bodies". I guess it's not THAT weird, it appears throughout a lot of different fantasy stories, but it just... Feels weird.

You bring up a good point on me having a skewed view on all of this, because I know the Sorcerer and Warlock so well, and have a really good idea on what they're both supposed to be as individual classes. Looking past that and looking at this like it's a completely new class is rather difficult, since it's got so many themes from the other two classes as well as literally having the same name as one of them, as well as haivng it appear all over the place.

Heavy Nitpicking. (EDIT: I'm not deleting this part and downwards, just telling you not to read it. It's not worth it. Feel free to not take my advice, but I will be posting a new comment tomorrow that I think'll be much easier to read regardless of your choice.)
If you want to replace both the Sorcerer and Warlock with this amalgamation of three different classes (technically two, the summoner is kind of weak flavor wise imo), then there are several things that needs to be sorted if I were to give you my approval of it (I guess... Big deal, why should you care right? You seem to like everything you have and only want small details, while I see glaring holes. Our opinions are pretty incompatible, but here goes...)

* There should be some sort of reason why a Sorcerer gets their 'Sorcerous Boon'. Right now, they just sort of have it, they just get it. I'd be okay with you just writing "your past event manifests itself into one of these boons, or your experience with your magic has granted you..., or your patron bestows you with a boon", but that feels very lazy since this is supposed to be a new class.
* I wouldn't be too happy with having this 'either this, this, or this' text slapped onto any feature. I know that doesn't really give you a route to solve that issue, but I'm not sure if there is any way to solve it with the way you currently have things set up. Either there is exactly one easy solution which is difficult to find, or there exists exactly zero solutions. You can always change up how the sorcerer gains their powers, but you don't want to go for that, which is understandable.




Which evolutions do you think are underpowered enough to be traits? I believe most are worth an invocation, but maybe I'm missing some.

Most of the speed or sense evolutions I don't think are worth taking most of the times, as well as the amphibious, camouflage, small and limbs evolutions. Even if you can change the eidolon's evolutions on the fly, I don't think there'd ever be a situation where you'd want to take any of those evolutions (save for perhaps the evolution that gives you a flying speed, for obvious reasons). My suggestion is that you just give the eidolon the option of picking one of those evolutions for free and have it as a trait that can't be changed, similarly to how you can't change the evolution you gain from your chosen types or shapes.



Pathfinder's eidolon wasn't so static: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/t/transmogrify/

What is wrong with it? Eidolons are meant to be mostly static and changing them up takes resources.
No we're on the same page here! You misunderstood me, but that's fine.



That makes sense, but it doesn't really give me a route to resolve the problem. I agree the names "Sorcerous Weapon" and "Sorcerous Resilience" are lazy names. I couldn't think of better ones. Perhaps you have ideas?
Ideas are pending.



Sorcerer and Warlock really weren't that different in terms of flavor - it was just the acquisition of their power that was different, some of which was already quite blurred.
the 'some' part is quite small imo, which is why this is such a difficult thing for me to accept.

Look at the Cleric. Why aren't you including it in this amalgamation? The only thing that's special about it is that it gets their powers from another being, a god. Which is very similar to how the warlock gets their powers from an otherworldly being. The only thing that's special about the cleric is that they are commonly thought of as being in mainstream churches while warlocks are more commonly viewed as more cult-like underground religions.

Take a look at the Wizard, they literally have nothing special going for them. The only thing that's special about the wizard is how they aquired their magic, the rest of the features can be slapped onto almost anything and it'll look good. You proved just that with your Magus (and I believe your psion as well?).

The Druid gains their powers from nature, also very similar to the Cleric and Warlock if you consider Nature to be another being. The only thing they have going for them that is uniquely theirs is how they aren't in any mainstream churches or underground, they're hidden from society as a whole.

I could go on, but my main point is this (RANT): How a spellcaster gained their powers is the biggest thing that differentiates them from other spellcasters. Everything else is quite small and largely based on what each individual campaign has to offer. You seem to say that the Sorcerer and Warlock are very similar in how they aquired their powers, but that just isn't the case. Look at the other classes and ask yourself if all of it just isn't quite the big blur. The only thing I see when I look at a spellcaster class is: 'how they aquire their powers + a bunch of features which are offsprings to their way of aquiring their powers'. Sure, the Sorcerer's and Warlock's 'offspring' parts can be quite similar and overlap in some areas, but their aquisition of power is vastly different. And other classes' 'offspring' can be quite similar as well. But that doesn't really change the fact that their core is different.
TLDR: The way a spellcaster aquires their powers is everything that the spellcaster is. The rest is hanging loosely from the class. You've already plucked the hanging parts from one class (the Wizard) quite a lot and added it onto other classes. If anything you should know just how little those hanging parts mean to the core of a class better than most. If you want to combine the core of a Sorcerer (magic is suffused with the caster, their magic and bodies as one) and a Warlock (magic is aquired from a patron, they seek more power through following the patron's instructions), then I think a better job has to be done. There is no common ground in the core ideas at all, and you seem to be looking at the hanging parts and go "this can be combined!".

If you want to try and combine them regardless of that, then I am willing to help and watch. But I don't agree with this being anything more than 'interesting'. I'm not really that good with telling people what's wrong about something, so I'll give you an example:

I think this next bit under here is the only important thing that could come out of my messy reply and messy brain from just above there ^. Sorry, but I'm really tired, trying to get my brain to put a structure on thing isn't really going to work right now. If you can't tell, I'm not good at explaining things to people. The best I can do is say the same thing in as many ways as I can to try and get other people to home in on what I intend. If you have any good solutions for solving that problem of mine, then feel free to lecture me on how to communicate better with other people xD)




Hmm? I'm not sure what you're saying here. The mechanics are intended to reflect the flavor of the class.
The mechanics (hanging parts) are supposed to reflect the core idea of the spellcaster. What I said originally was that some of the hanging parts you're trying to combine don't really fit with the core idea of the other that well. A 'Sorcerous Weapon' doesn't really fit the idea of a Sorcerer that's suffused with magical powers. A Warlock with a patron on the other hand could easily be gifted a weapon by their patron.
In short, it's hard to justify the Sorcerer gaining that boon without having to add something else into the mix that wasn't there from the beginning. You seem to be trying to combine these two ideas together without adding that 'something' into the mix. If you'd add something like "the magic that suffuses you can be (word that I can't think of right now... argh!) into a weapon", then it'd be all good. You now have something in place to hold one of the hanging things. See? If you combine two cores, and attempt to combine all of the hanging things, then some of the things will fall off. They'll look weird.
You remedied this in some areas, but I don't like the way you remedied them. It feels way too choosy. The 'core' of your class is a bunch of different ideas together, and that's why it's so choosy, and so that's why I said "I guess I just don't like this". If I were to combine every single spellcasting class in the game into one and have extremely long descriptions for every feature saying "You gain this from nature, your studying in magic, your patron, your god, your convictions, or your whatever, etc." and then state a mechanical benefit, then that'd look really messy. There's a good reason why we split up the core ideas into classes and hang things from each separate one, and that's because it'll look messy otherwise. Too much text in the hanging things referring to far too many cores.

Different bit
Sure, they give out the same exact mechanical benefit, but it's the cores that give them that shine that makes them different. In a lot of cases, the mechanics don't really reflect the flavor of the class, rather, it's the core that defines which mechanics the class can have! And the mechanics, in turn, can point towards that core.

Look, I'm really tired. My mind is super messy. I think I have an idea as to how I could explain this to you in a very mechanical way. It'd probably be far better than my emotional way of writing, which only ever surfaces when I'm tired. If you got anything out of reading this reply, then... Good. That means it wasn't a completely wasted read!
If you have, as I said earlier, anything that could help me explain this to you in a manner that makes complete and total sense to you, then feel free to tell. I have absolutely no idea on how to best communicate with people, even if I do try my best.

This is probably the "Stream of Consciousness" you mentioned at some point in the past, yeah? I can't make that stop. At least not right now. More structured things are for the first hour or so of me being awake. That or several hours poured into something while I'm like this. But that generally only ever produces a few lines of text covering far less ground, and that just doesn't work this time. Sorry.

supergoji18
2017-10-16, 04:04 PM
Changes:

Added Summoning Boon - effectively merging my Summoner class into this class. Added eidolon info, invocations, and 2 spells for it.

Eldritch Blast adjusted to scale as follows: 1st level: 1 beam for 1d10, 5th level: 1 beam for 2d10, 11th level: 2 beams, one for 2d10 and 1 for 1d10, 17th level: 2 beams for 2d10.



So summoning is taking the place of the familiar? or is it in addition to the familiar?

Regarding the Eldritch Blast, I have two things to say about it.
1. The new scaling is weird for 5e in my opinion. Something more simplistic would be better in my opinion.
2. There was once a discussion a long time ago about having Eldritch Blast as a class feature as opposed to a cantrip, which I think would be a much better idea since that would open up more options for changing it and/or adding effects from invocations focused on it. Plus, I think it would make eldritch blast just cooler in general.


Changes:

Renamed formerly Warlock subclasses (GOO -> Aberrant, Seeker -> Astral), refactored some of their features, and added 18th and 20th level features.


I like the change from Seeker to Astral, but personally I'm not too keen on Aberrant. How about calling it Eldritch Origin?

Regarding expanding on Eldritch Blast, I have some ideas for it. I think if it's done properly it could be a very cool feature of the class as opposed to just being a stronger than normal cantrip:
- Have Eldritch Blast be a class feature instead of a cantrip. Have it usable a limited number of times per day.
- Make its damage type dependent on the Sorcerer's Origin (ex: Boreal = Cold, Celestial = Radiant, Aberrant = Psychic, etc.)
- At higher levels (around levels 5, 11, and 17) give a new feature for it depending on the origin (ex: Draconic deals extra damage over time, fey briefly charms them, fiend does hellfire damage, etc.)
- have the boon affect some aspect of the eldritch blast (ex: Arcane Boon strengthens the damage, Blade Pact lets you attack with your weapon right after using the blast as part of the action, Summoning Boon lets your summon use the Eldritch Blast).

EDIT: just to clarify, these are merely suggestions. I'm not telling you to do anything, I just want to give you some ideas to use. I know I have a tendency to come off as being demanding or sounding like I'm telling people to do things, so I just want to clarify. Feel free to use my ideas as you like, modify them, or completely ignore them. It's all up to you.

Kryx
2017-10-16, 04:36 PM
If you choose ONE way that you aquired your powers, then how does that decision affect the features?
It is a flavorful choice that has no mechanical consequences, just like it is for the RAW Sorcerer.


If I got my magic through being exposed to another plane (I'm not sure if this ever was a sorcerer thing. Is it new? I thought they got their powers through some sort of event, nothing specific attached to it? Or do you have a different take on that?)
Player's Handbook page 99, 3rd paragraph: "Sorcerers carry a magical birthright conferred upon them by an exotic bloodline, some otherworldly influence, or exposure to unknown cosmic forces." The RAW Sorcerer is literally the same flavor as this Sorcerer. Several other RAW Sorcerer sections have similar implications.


then how come I end up with a 'Sorcerous Weapon'? There's some bit of information missing there. I gained magical powers, not magical weapons, right?
Explanation: The reason why it's so weird is because normally the weapon is granted by another being. I get the 'a wizard did it' feel about it. Like you just happened to get this weird weapon-like thing that you can wield from being exposed to a plane.
I'd love to write wording that is more clear for boons.

That said it's not really that weird. A Sorcerer can channel some of their power into a weapon - fairly simple explanation. Always empowering an existing weapon would probably work better from a fluff perspective.


And what if I got my powers through a pact? Why would ALL beings in a pact with another creature grant them 'Sorcerous Resilience'? The flavor doesn't always line up that well for me. In other cases it's great and it works, but because of how modular this class is in how many combinations you can have, it ends up producing a few weird ones around with the normal and the great.
Explanation: The reason why it's weird is because the Sorcerer normally gained their added toughness due to having their body being modified by the event, but in this case it's granted through the pact, and it's ALWAYS granted from a pact. It becomes an universal thing. "all pacts result in the one accepting the pact being able to modify their bodies". I guess it's not THAT weird, it appears throughout a lot of different fantasy stories, but it just... Feels weird.
Why does this feel weird? There is plenty of explanation for examples of the manifestation of such features (ice armor, scales, leathery hide, etc). I used to have different mechanical results for several subclasses, but having it in the core class is significantly easier to process and takes up less space.


* There should be some sort of reason why a Sorcerer gets their 'Sorcerous Boon'. Right now, they just sort of have it, they just get it. I'd be okay with you just writing "your past event manifests itself into one of these boons, or your experience with your magic has granted you..., or your patron bestows you with a boon", but that feels very lazy since this is supposed to be a new class.
As above I agree that the wording of the general boon should be reworded or even the whole name reimagined. The wording you use isn't lazy - it's just taking the existing options and giving a reason for the boon for each.


* I wouldn't be too happy with having this 'either this, this, or this' text slapped onto any feature. I know that doesn't really give you a route to solve that issue, but I'm not sure if there is any way to solve it with the way you currently have things set up. Either there is exactly one easy solution which is difficult to find, or there exists exactly zero solutions. You can always change up how the sorcerer gains their powers, but you don't want to go for that, which is understandable.
The class can achieve power through many means - so can the original Sorcerer. The wording has to provide various options if it goes into detail about how the feature is given.


Most of the speed or sense evolutions I don't think are worth taking most of the times, as well as the amphibious, camouflage, small and limbs evolutions. Even if you can change the eidolon's evolutions on the fly, I don't think there'd ever be a situation where you'd want to take any of those evolutions (save for perhaps the evolution that gives you a flying speed, for obvious reasons). My suggestion is that you just give the eidolon the option of picking one of those evolutions for free and have it as a trait that can't be changed, similarly to how you can't change the evolution you gain from your chosen types or shapes.

Sense - I combined it into 1 in the last revision. It's now advantage on Perception which could be very worth it on a scouting Eidolon
Burrow/Climb/Fly/Swim allows you to bypass DM obstacles - worth it for out of combat utility. Some are more niche than others depending on the campaign, but they aren't weak in those scenarios imo.
Amphibious - imagine a pirate campaign or an aquatic campaign. This evolution becomes more valuable for those, but is generally niche.
Camouflage - Similar to Sense in that it is useful on a scout to avoid being detected.
Limbs is generally weak. +10 speed isn't terrible, but it's weak.
Small is potentially useful for scouting or other purposes, but it is very weak - I should remove this option

All of those except limbs and small have value - especially when Transmogrify is available. Limbs was intended to provide more options for crazy creatures things like octopus.

I tried to avoid evolution points like PF did it (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/unchained-classes/summoner-unchained/eidolons-unchained/), but perhaps that'd have value. I honestly haven't looked too much at my summoner until recently.



the 'some' part is quite small imo, which is why this is such a difficult thing for me to accept.

Look at the Cleric. Why aren't you including it in this amalgamation? The only thing that's special about it is that it gets their powers from another being, a god. Which is very similar to how the warlock gets their powers from an otherworldly being. The only thing that's special about the cleric is that they are commonly thought of as being in mainstream churches while warlocks are more commonly viewed as more cult-like underground religions.
The Cleric is incredibly different - their power is granted by their deity and their deity can take it away any time. A Cleric literally channels their deities' power. Conversely a Warlock (or this Sorcerer) is given power by a powerful creature, but that power is now the Sorcerer's power and the being can't take it away on a whim. A Sorcerer/Warlock exerts their power their force of will while a Cleric is an intermediary. These flavors are very very different while a Sorcerer/Warlock only differ on the acquistion of power, and even the acquisition methods that I use on this Sorcerer are present on the RAW Sorcerer - they are just made more clear. That said - my writing is intermediary and isn't my strongest asset.


Take a look at the Wizard, they literally have nothing special going for them. The only thing that's special about the wizard is how they aquired their magic, the rest of the features can be slapped onto almost anything and it'll look good. You proved just that with your Magus (and I believe your psion as well?).
Mechanically and flavor-wise the Magus and Wizard are very similar, but those classes are very different to the Sorcerer/Warlock. They study for their magic - it's about logic, not manifestation of will.


How a spellcaster gained their powers is the biggest thing that differentiates them from other spellcasters. Everything else is quite small and largely based on what each individual campaign has to offer. You seem to say that the Sorcerer and Warlock are very similar in how they aquired their powers, but that just isn't the case.
I would challenge you to read the RAW Sorcerer. All of the options I use are in the Sorcerer's RAW description.


If you want to combine the core of a Sorcerer (magic is suffused with the caster, their magic and bodies as one) and a Warlock (magic is aquired from a patron, they seek more power through following the patron's instructions), then I think a better job has to be done. There is no common ground in the core ideas at all, and you seem to be looking at the hanging parts and go "this can be combined!".
Now we're getting to the meat of the issue - playstyle difference. But here's the thing - a RAW Sorcerer who just acquired power from an elemental plane could surely be just as power hungry as a Warlock who acquired their power from an elemental being. Source of power =/= playstyle. A character can choose how much they focus on their (now) internal power or how much they focus on growing their power - that's entirely a character motivation choice for the player, not a choice bound by the class.


The mechanics (hanging parts) are supposed to reflect the core idea of the spellcaster. What I said originally was that some of the hanging parts you're trying to combine don't really fit with the core idea of the other that well. A 'Sorcerous Weapon' doesn't really fit the idea of a Sorcerer that's suffused with magical powers.
It surely does. Eldritch Knight, my Magus, and several other homebrew classes have weapons suffused with magical powers - there is no patron required for such a feature. I can make this wording more clear, though I'd be happy to have a better justification for boons in general.


I'm skipping over the recap as I believe I have covered most of that above so I'll avoid repeating it and sounding defensive.




This is probably the "Stream of Consciousness" you mentioned at some point in the past, yeah? I can't make that stop. At least not right now. More structured things are for the first hour or so of me being awake. That or several hours poured into something while I'm like this. But that generally only ever produces a few lines of text covering far less ground, and that just doesn't work this time. Sorry.
Don't apologize - your replies are stream of consciousness, but they generate discussion and that allows me to be introspective and improve. Thanks for contributing!

Kryx
2017-10-16, 04:51 PM
So summoning is taking the place of the familiar? or is it in addition to the familiar?
Familar is now an invocation. Summoning is a new Boon. A familiar is a useful choice and it still has a bit of invocation support, but that choice isn't going to define the class and let it compete with other strong choices like cantrip damage, melee damage, or a pet.


Regarding the Eldritch Blast, I have two things to say about it.
1. The new scaling is weird for 5e in my opinion. Something more simplistic would be better in my opinion.
2. There was once a discussion a long time ago about having Eldritch Blast as a class feature as opposed to a cantrip, which I think would be a much better idea since that would open up more options for changing it and/or adding effects from invocations focused on it. Plus, I think it would make eldritch blast just cooler in general.
1. Green-Flame Blade, Booming Blade, and Lightning Lure aren't as simple as other cantrips either. My goal was to reduce the attacks from 4. I think the current option works quite well, but if you think there is a better way to accomplish that or better wording for my way, please do suggest it. In 3.5 Eldritch Blast simply dealt more single target damage, but transposing that to 5e would simply make it a clone of Fire Bolt that does force damage. It would be a rather large nerf.
2. I've considered a class feature for it, but I don't see the need. The main reason is multiclassing, but if fixing that is a goal then several classes would need to be significantly adjusted (Fighter, Paladin, Warlock). I'm happy to make adjustments where possible (Like I did with Paladin Smite), but the goal should be clear and the reasoning should be strong. In this case a Sorcerer could surely choose to never pick up Eldritch Blast. For example a Boreal Sorcerer could shoot Ray of Frost and Frostbite every round - never using Eldritch Blast. It isn't a core concept for all Sorcerers.


I like the change from Seeker to Astral, but personally I'm not too keen on Aberrant. How about calling it Eldritch Origin?
I think Eldritch is a better choice, thanks!


Regarding expanding on Eldritch Blast, I have some ideas for it. I think if it's done properly it could be a very cool feature of the class as opposed to just being a stronger than normal cantrip:
- Have Eldritch Blast be a class feature instead of a cantrip. Have it usable a limited number of times per day.
- Make its damage type dependent on the Sorcerer's Origin (ex: Boreal = Cold, Celestial = Radiant, Aberrant = Psychic, etc.)
- At higher levels (around levels 5, 11, and 17) give a new feature for it depending on the origin (ex: Draconic deals extra damage over time, fey briefly charms them, fiend does hellfire damage, etc.)
- have the boon affect some aspect of the eldritch blast (ex: Arcane Boon strengthens the damage, Blade Pact lets you attack with your weapon right after using the blast as part of the action, Summoning Boon lets your summon use the Eldritch Blast).
I do like the idea of damage type dependent on the Sorcerous Origin and I like the idea of it gaining new features, but that's basically what cantrips do right now. For example Ray of Frost slows and does more damage while Frostbite gives disadvantage and does some damage. I could alter EB to be dependent on the Origin, but instead I chose to simply allow more cantrip casting which therefore buffs those options and makes them viable choices. Why take this approach instead? It feels like it's basically duplicating the current cantrips.





just to clarify, these are merely suggestions. I'm not telling you to do anything, I just want to give you some ideas to use. I know I have a tendency to come off as being demanding or sounding like I'm telling people to do things, so I just want to clarify. Feel free to use my ideas as you like, modify them, or completely ignore them. It's all up to you.
Thank you for contributing to the discussion - it's an exchange of ideas so I'm happy to have your opinion given here.

Kryx
2017-10-16, 05:32 PM
Changes:

Sorcerous Weapon -> Weapon Bond with much of the wording changed.
Aberrant Origin -> Eldritch Origin
Formerly EB Invocations now work on any cantrip - Arcane Spears and Grasp of Hadar. Frost Lance removed as it's just Ray of Frost, but now that cantrips are more accessible it isn't needed.
Removed Small Evolution

supergoji18
2017-10-16, 07:55 PM
Familar is now an invocation. Summoning is a new Boon. A familiar is a useful choice and it still has a bit of invocation support, but that choice isn't going to define the class and let it compete with other strong choices like cantrip damage, melee damage, or a pet.

1. Green-Flame Blade, Booming Blade, and Lightning Lure aren't as simple as other cantrips either. My goal was to reduce the attacks from 4. I think the current option works quite well, but if you think there is a better way to accomplish that or better wording for my way, please do suggest it. In 3.5 Eldritch Blast simply dealt more single target damage, but transposing that to 5e would simply make it a clone of Fire Bolt that does force damage. It would be a rather large nerf.
2. I've considered a class feature for it, but I don't see the need. The main reason is multiclassing, but if fixing that is a goal then several classes would need to be significantly adjusted (Fighter, Paladin, Warlock). I'm happy to make adjustments where possible (Like I did with Paladin Smite), but the goal should be clear and the reasoning should be strong. In this case a Sorcerer could surely choose to never pick up Eldritch Blast. For example a Boreal Sorcerer could shoot Ray of Frost and Frostbite every round - never using Eldritch Blast. It isn't a core concept for all Sorcerers.

I think Eldritch is a better choice, thanks!

I do like the idea of damage type dependent on the Sorcerous Origin and I like the idea of it gaining new features, but that's basically what cantrips do right now. For example Ray of Frost slows and does more damage while Frostbite gives disadvantage and does some damage. I could alter EB to be dependent on the Origin, but instead I chose to simply allow more cantrip casting which therefore buffs those options and makes them viable choices. Why take this approach instead? It feels like it's basically duplicating the current cantrips.

Thank you for contributing to the discussion - it's an exchange of ideas so I'm happy to have your opinion given here.
Good points all around. I still think Eldritch Blast as a class feature would be awesome, but you are correct it really isn't necessary. Also, good to see the invocations changed to affect more cantrips.

A few more things I want to discuss. One minor thing and one major thing.

The first thing is regarding the resistances and immunities for Celestial origin and Shadow origin. It feels strange to me that Shadow origin sorcerers only have resistance to necrotic damage while Celestial sorcerers can gain full immunity to it despite being more focused on light (and also only retaining resistance to radiant damage at the same time). I know solars get this too, but to be honest I found it to be a strange thing on them too.

The bigger thing I wanted to talk about is regarding the Summoning Boon. I love it's design and I think this is what summoning and what familiars/animal companions should have been to begin with in standard 5e. That said, I feel it is much more powerful compared to the other two options. While I'm not against there being a difference in power between certain features or choices in the game, I feel that it shouldn't make someone feel like they're missing out on something or that their character is somehow weak because they didn't take the blatantly better option. In this case, I think the Summoning Boon is very much like that.

The first major advantage the Eidolon has other the other two boons is that it scales with the player throughout every level of gameplay. As the sorcerer gets stronger, so does the Eidolon. Every level the sorcerer gains, the Eidolon essentially gains a level itself gaining a significant spike in power. The other two do not have any such scaling. They stop gaining benefits after level 5. You can improve them with invocations, but you can do the same with the Eidolon as well.

Second, choosing the Eidolon is essentially like controlling two characters at once, one of which is a spellcaster and the other is essentially a melee fighter or a tank to draw enemy agro. The fact that it can be commanded for free makes this even more true. It would be like controlling a fighter and a wizard at once, and calling it one character.

My suggestion for evening out the power gap here would be to
- nerf the Eidolon in some way, either its hit points, damage, and/or making commanding it cost a bonus action or action
OR
- buff the other two boons so they also gain similar scaling and benefits
OR
- meet half way by giving small nerfs to the Eidolon while also giving some buffs to the other two boons to even out the power

Kryx
2017-10-17, 04:45 AM
The first thing is regarding the resistances and immunities for Celestial origin and Shadow origin. It feels strange to me that Shadow origin sorcerers only have resistance to necrotic damage while Celestial sorcerers can gain full immunity to it despite being more focused on light (and also only retaining resistance to radiant damage at the same time). I know solars get this too, but to be honest I found it to be a strange thing on them too.
Celestial is now immune to radiant and poison damage at 20th level instead of necrotic and poison.


The bigger thing I wanted to talk about is regarding the Summoning Boon. I love it's design and I think this is what summoning and what familiars/animal companions should have been to begin with in standard 5e. That said, I feel it is much more powerful compared to the other two options. While I'm not against there being a difference in power between certain features or choices in the game, I feel that it shouldn't make someone feel like they're missing out on something or that their character is somehow weak because they didn't take the blatantly better option. In this case, I think the Summoning Boon is very much like that.

The first major advantage the Eidolon has other the other two boons is that it scales with the player throughout every level of gameplay. As the sorcerer gets stronger, so does the Eidolon. Every level the sorcerer gains, the Eidolon essentially gains a level itself gaining a significant spike in power. The other two do not have any such scaling. They stop gaining benefits after level 5. You can improve them with invocations, but you can do the same with the Eidolon as well.

Second, choosing the Eidolon is essentially like controlling two characters at once, one of which is a spellcaster and the other is essentially a melee fighter or a tank to draw enemy agro. The fact that it can be commanded for free makes this even more true. It would be like controlling a fighter and a wizard at once, and calling it one character.

My suggestion for evening out the power gap here would be to
- nerf the Eidolon in some way, either its hit points, damage, and/or making commanding it cost a bonus action or action
OR
- buff the other two boons so they also gain similar scaling and benefits
OR
- meet half way by giving small nerfs to the Eidolon while also giving some buffs to the other two boons to even out the power
There are several factors of balance to consider for the Summoning Boon/Eidolon:

Total hp: This issue was somewhat mitigated with my summoner as the summoner himself had d6 hd. In this version the Sorcerer has d8. The eidolon has a d8 (as it is a medium creature), or a d10 if it goes up to a large creature. These numbers shouldn't change as that is the hp amount for a creature based on those sizes. For the other defensive factors consider the comparison below.
Scaling - Both melee and cantrips would scale. As would the Revised Ranger's wolf. Cantrips definitely continue to scale until level 17. Blade Boon scales a bit less and I may need to address that by making thirsting blade available for free or some other solution, but I would wager it isn't far behind. The rates of scaling are pretty similar, though I'll have to check the damage and do some more comparisons.
Action economy - The extra attack is not so different than extra attack from the Blade Boon or cantrips that scale and casting multiple cantrips per turn from Arcane Boon. All 3 options allow you to target at least 2 creatures. Blade could target 3 creatures if it uses TWF. Arcane would allow you to target 3-4 creatures (4 if you use acid splash). Summoning would allow you to target 3 creatures.
Damage - if you look at my DPR of Classes for my old summoner (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=432396216) you'll see that my old Summoner was in line with Eldritch Blast damage when the eidolon had 8 evolutions. I will need to recalculate some damage numbers for Arcane, Blade, and Summoning, but I've reduced the number of evolutions from 8 to 2 so the eidolon should do a fair bit less damage than those numbers.


If we compare this to the Wolf from Revised Ranger:

HP: Both the wolf and the eidolon have d8 hd, with the wolf 1 hit dice behind as his hd doesn't scale until after 3rd level.
AC: The Wolf has 13 AC + proficiency = 15-19 AC without considering increases to the wolf's dexterity while the Eidolon has 16 or 17 AC.
Base ability scores: The eidolon can be better allocated, but it's marginally different
Scaling: The same Ability Score Improvements basically
Skills: Animal companion has 2 proficient skills plus 2 from the wolf while the eidolon has 1 - I should add more to the eidolon
Saving throws: The animal companion is proficient in all while the eidolon is proficient in 1. The beast gets advantage on all eventually
Utility: The eidolon can get more utility with evolutions, but those are few and far between. The beast also gets their 11th level ability to attack all adjacent enemies and the ability to halve damage as a reaction
Damage: The wolf can get advantage on attacks and its bite does good damage and knocks enemies prone - quite nice. The eidolon can get more utility via evolutions.

Overall the eidolon is pretty comparable to the Revised Ranger's Wolf I think. I should probably find a better way to scale the eidolon's damage and make a few other smaller adjustments though. Based on this comparison I think the overall comparison is at a decent balance level to the Revised Ranger's Wolf.

I'll need to do some more comparisons to the Arcane Boon and Blade Boon, but looking at my old numbers and making a gut call before I do any comparisons I believe the Boon options should be relatively comparable, though they will likely need some adjustments. Overall I should aim to have the Summoning boon do about 10% less damage than other builds to account for the increased tankiness of the eidolon.

supergoji18
2017-10-17, 12:13 PM
Celestial is now immune to radiant and poison damage at 20th level instead of necrotic and poison.

ok, sounds good to me.



Scaling - Both melee and cantrips would scale. As would the Revised Ranger's wolf. Cantrips definitely continue to scale until level 17. Blade Boon scales a bit less and I may need to address that by making thirsting blade available for free or some other solution, but I would wager it isn't far behind. The rates of scaling are pretty similar, though I'll have to check the damage and do some more comparisons.
Action economy - The extra attack is not so different than extra attack from the Blade Boon or cantrips that scale and casting multiple cantrips per turn from Arcane Boon. All 3 options allow you to target at least 2 creatures. Blade could target 3 creatures if it uses TWF. Arcane would allow you to target 3-4 creatures (4 if you use acid splash). Summoning would allow you to target 3 creatures.

Cantrips scale, but they don't scale nearly as well as the eidolon does. The cantrips gain an extra die of damage every 5 or 6 levels, but the eidolon gets increased damage, hit points, ac, and special traits as it increases in level, and at every level.

It's not just action economy. It's the action economy in conjunction with the extra utility. For example, if an Eidolon takes the Innate Spellcasting feature, they could potentially have access to Entangle. In a single round, the Eidolon can cast Entangle, essentially trapping everyone within the area, while the Sorcerer prepares a Fireball or some other strong AOE spell and gets to nuke them at his leisure. Alternatively, it could work the other way around, where the Sorcerer prepares Arms of Hadar and the Eidolon is the one casting the AOE damage spell.

Arcane Boon grants extra utility, but not to the same level because it doesn't break the action economy the same way. It lets you cast two cantrips in a round, while the Eidolon essentially lets you cast 2 spells of much higher level in the same round. The Blade Warlock gets to do more in a round, but it doesn't come with the same utility. The Summoning Boon grants the best of both worlds, on top of potentially other powerful benefits.

Mith
2017-10-17, 01:24 PM
On the topic of Warlock/Sorceror flavour text, would it work to envision the pacts as blood pacts? So the sorceror makes a pact of service to gain their power. The effects of this service includes the resilience feature. Perhaps "Supernatural Resilience" would be a better name?

As for the weapo boon, the pact sorceror agrees to serve the patron as a soldier, while the bloodline sorceror finds innate talents for the use of weapons?

Kryx
2017-10-17, 04:53 PM
Cantrips scale, but they don't scale nearly as well as the eidolon does. The cantrips gain an extra die of damage every 5 or 6 levels, but the eidolon gets increased damage, hit points, ac, and special traits as it increases in level, and at every level.
Cantrips scale significantly more than the eidolon does. At 17th level the cantrip caster will be doing 4d10 and 4d10 per turn - abut 8d10 damage if they hit with both Eldritch Blast and Fire Bolt. The eidolon wouldn't be able to reach that level of damage even if they used both evolutions and 8 invocations to increase their damage. At best they'd have 11d4 + 4. I probably have to change the eidolon's scaling to be higher, but I'll have to run the numbers to see.


It's not just action economy. It's the action economy in conjunction with the extra utility. For example, if an Eidolon takes the Innate Spellcasting feature, they could potentially have access to Entangle. In a single round, the Eidolon can cast Entangle, essentially trapping everyone within the area, while the Sorcerer prepares a Fireball or some other strong AOE spell and gets to nuke them at his leisure. Alternatively, it could work the other way around, where the Sorcerer prepares Arms of Hadar and the Eidolon is the one casting the AOE damage spell.
Spellcasting is a valid point. Though the eidolon could only cast 2 1st level spells and 2 2nd level spells if it takes 2 evolutions. Impactful and should probably be adjusted, but you're overselling it a bit. I believe giving the eidolon spell points and less to use for those invocations and don't allow it on the same turn as the Sorcerer would be perfectly fine. The eidolon would generally have quite a low DC unless they focus on casting which would weaken their martial capabilities


Arcane Boon grants extra utility, but not to the same level because it doesn't break the action economy the same way. It lets you cast two cantrips in a round, while the Eidolon essentially lets you cast 2 spells of much higher level in the same round. The Blade Warlock gets to do more in a round, but it doesn't come with the same utility. The Summoning Boon grants the best of both worlds, on top of potentially other powerful benefits.
1st and 2nd level spells are not "much higher" they are some of the weakest spells in the game as the game progresses, but I think the ways to address it above are ok.

===================


On the topic of Warlock/Sorceror flavour text, would it work to envision the pacts as blood pacts?
A Sorcerer gains their pact the same way a Warlock does. Terra Reveene's complaint is that the classes are combined. Changing the way the pact is acquired isn't a goal of mine nor do I believe it would remove his complaints.

Mith
2017-10-17, 05:21 PM
Fair. I was trying to think of a way that unifies the Sorceror origin and Warlock Origin from a flavour perspective by tying the power to their blood and will. The RAW sorceror is born with supernatural characteristics, while the RAW warlock's pact changes them. The end result becomes the same.

Kryx
2017-10-17, 05:22 PM
The RAW sorceror is born with supernatural characteristics, while the RAW warlock's pact changes them. The end result becomes the same.
The end result is the same by RAW and my rules: Both classes by RAW and this class have power within them that is channeled via force of will.

supergoji18
2017-10-17, 05:36 PM
Cantrips scale significantly more than the eidolon does. At 17th level the cantrip caster will be doing 4d10 and 4d10 per turn - abut 8d10 damage if they hit with both Eldritch Blast and Fire Bolt. The eidolon wouldn't be able to reach that level of damage even if they used both evolutions and 8 invocations to increase their damage. At best they'd have 11d4 + 4. I probably have to change the eidolon's scaling to be higher, but I'll have to run the numbers to see.


Spellcasting is a valid point. Though the eidolon could only cast 2 1st level spells and 2 2nd level spells if it takes 2 evolutions. Impactful and should probably be adjusted, but you're overselling it a bit. I believe giving the eidolon spell points and less to use for those invocations and don't allow it on the same turn as the Sorcerer would be perfectly fine. The eidolon would generally have quite a low DC unless they focus on casting which would weaken their martial capabilities


1st and 2nd level spells are not "much higher" they are some of the weakest spells in the game as the game progresses, but I think the ways to address it above are ok.


I suppose I am overselling it. Perhaps you are right, but I still feel the versatility of the eidolon greatly outweighs the benefits of the other two options. Scaling up the eidolon's damage is ok, as long as the other options are given something in return to balance them out, because then the Summoning Boon would easily be the most powerful option. And I don't think just adding more damage is always the best way to increase something's power. Adding special effects can serve the same purpose while also creating fun and interesting options. For instance, giving the Blade Warlock a lifesteal effect on-hit would be unique and thematic way to improve the boon without increasing the DPR of the sorcerer.

Kryx
2017-10-17, 05:39 PM
I'll have to run the numbers to see.
Ran some numbers: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1372301824

Basic numbers at 11:

Blade Boon TWF: 29 DPR
Blade Boon GWM: 30 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm: 30 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm+GWM: 32 DPR
Blade Boon S&B: 26 DPR
Arcane Boon EB + Fire Bolt: 28 DPR
Summoning Boon EB + Eidolon: 30 DPR
Summoning Boon Fused Eidolon: 23 DPR

Basic numbers at 20:

Blade Boon TWF: 40 DPR
Blade Boon GWM: 43 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm: 42 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm+GWM: 46 DPR
Blade Boon S&B: 30 DPR
Arcane Boon EB + Fire Bolt: 47 DPR
Summoning Boon EB + Eidolon: 41 DPR
Summoning Boon Fused Eidolon: 25 DPR


General idea so far:
Blade Boon is exactly where I want it.
Arcane Boon is good until 17th level and then is a bit too high. I would like to aim for ~38-40.
Summoning Boon is slightly too high. I'd like to aim for ~36-38
Summoning Boon Fused is far too low. I'd like to aim for 38-40.
Not sure how to effectively fix these - I will need to brainstorm.

Kryx
2017-10-17, 05:43 PM
I suppose I am overselling it. Perhaps you are right, but I still feel the versatility of the eidolon greatly outweighs the benefits of the other two options. Scaling up the eidolon's damage is ok, as long as the other options are given something in return to balance them out, because then the Summoning Boon would easily be the most powerful option.
The Blade Boon is the power level I'd aim for. If Summoning is too powerful in comparison then it needs to come down, otherwise the class is too strong compared to other classes.

If you haven't read the Revised Ranger's Animal Companion yet then I'd suggest you check it out - it is the baseline that I use to compare my pet subclass to.


And I don't think just adding more damage is always the best way to increase something's power. Adding special effects can serve the same purpose while also creating fun and interesting options.
Damage isn't the end all be all - it's just the easiest thing to compare straight up. Arcane Boon for example offers a fair amount of versatility in being able to use 2 cantrips per turn. Slow and disadvantage on the next attack are great options.


For instance, giving the Blade Warlock a lifesteal effect on-hit would be unique and thematic way to improve the boon without increasing the DPR of the sorcerer.
Did you perhaps miss Vampiric Blade?


Vampiric Weapon
Prerequisite: Blade Boon feature

When you score a critical hit or reduce a hostile creature to 0 hit points, you gain temporary hit points equal to your Charisma modifier + your sorcerer level (minimum of 1).

supergoji18
2017-10-17, 10:46 PM
The Blade Boon is the power level I'd aim for. If Summoning is too powerful in comparison then it needs to come down, otherwise the class is too strong compared to other classes.

If you haven't read the Revised Ranger's Animal Companion yet then I'd suggest you check it out - it is the baseline that I use to compare my pet subclass to.


Damage isn't the end all be all - it's just the easiest thing to compare straight up. Arcane Boon for example offers a fair amount of versatility in being able to use 2 cantrips per turn. Slow and disadvantage on the next attack are great options.


Did you perhaps miss Vampiric Blade?

I haven't yet, I'll give it a look over tomorrow.

And yeah, I did miss that... oops. Though what I meant was more along the lines of "each time you hit something you restore HP" as opposed to each time you kill something you gain temporary HP.

Kryx
2017-10-18, 03:42 AM
I haven't yet, I'll give it a look over tomorrow.
You should read it. It'll give a better perspective on the Summoning Boon.


Though what I meant was more along the lines of "each time you hit something you restore HP" as opposed to each time you kill something you gain temporary HP.
The feature I have is what the Fiend Warlock originally had, but also giving the hp on a crit. Other features like Necromancer Wizard also trigger off killing an enemy.

A 1st level spell heals for 4.5+3=7.5. Even getting 1 hp back on a hit could easily be 2-3 hp/round - effectively a 1st level spell every 3rd round. Far too powerful.

pagnabros
2017-10-18, 06:58 AM
I really, really like the idea to fuse together Sorcerer and Warlock (somenthing I also thought to do myself), in my opinion this could potentially solve problems with both the RAW singular classes (mechanicals as well as conceptuals). The problem in my opinion is the Summoning Boon and the Eidolon, I strongly opposed the idea of an "arcane companion class feature" and it is somenthing it should remain in Pathfinder I think. There are far too ways to "exploit" an addictional member of the party, and I think that should stay exclusive of the ranger beastmaster (and we all know how many problems it brings to designers).

Of course these are only my personal opinions and you could just ignore them, but I think that focusing more on the subclasses and in a more "natural" fusion of the class features should be your priority, not trying to balancing the Summoning option

Kryx
2017-10-18, 07:04 AM
The problem in my opinion is the Summoning Boon and the Eidolon, I strongly opposed the idea of an "arcane companion class feature" and it is somenthing it should remain in Pathfinder I think. There are far too ways to "exploit" an addictional member of the party, and I think that should stay exclusive of the ranger beastmaster (and we all know how many problems it brings to designers).
Why do you strongly oppose the idea? The Ranger and Warlock can fill somewhat similar roles. The normal ranger (hunter, deep stalker, etc) is comparable to an EB or Blade warlock while the beast master is comparable to the summoning subclass. What is inherently wrong with the summoning subclass idea? Why is it more problematic than the beastmaster?

Note: Revised Ranger Beast Master is quite heavily praised. The concern for balance and issues with the subclass largely disappeared with that UA release.

pagnabros
2017-10-18, 11:46 AM
Why do you strongly oppose the idea? The Ranger and Warlock can fill somewhat similar roles. The normal ranger (hunter, deep stalker, etc) is comparable to an EB or Blade warlock while the beast master is comparable to the summoning subclass. What is inherently wrong with the summoning subclass idea? Why is it more problematic than the beastmaster?

Note: Revised Ranger Beast Master is quite heavily praised. The concern for balance and issues with the subclass largely disappeared with that UA release.

Yes, I agree that with the UA release WotC get the beastmaster right and many problems were resolved, but I would like every classes (and every subclasses) to have somenthing unique from all others, if possible. I know this is a little idealistic and there will be always similarity between some classes, but still this is the main reason why I oppose to the idea. And don't forget the conjuring spells, they can fulfill your need to "more minions" quite well and I think they are more than enough for that role. In conclusion, IMO the Summoning Boon should be more an "utility pet" that a combat one, as it were in the original warlock class.

Kryx
2017-10-18, 02:40 PM
Changes:

Invocations -> Latent Sparks (also reworded description)
Sorcerous Resilience -> Resilient Husk (also reworded description)
Celestial 20th level is now immunite to radiant and poison
Hurl Through Hell reduced to 6d10 from 10d10 to be more comparable to 14th level features
Eidolon no longer gets +2 ability scores at 1st level to be more comparable to the wolf]
Eidolon now has 3 skills to be more comparable to the wolf's 4 skills
Eidolon Attacks increased from 1d4 to 2d4. Improved attack evolution removed.
Eidolon Swim Evolution combined into Amphibious
Eidolon Attack upgrades (Celestial Weapons, Elemental Weapons, and Poison) can only be taken once now
Eidolon spellcasting now allows your eidolon to choose up to 3 spells, but it can only cast 1 per long rest. Additionally it cannot cast it on the same round as you cast a spell for 1st level or higher


I'd still like to rename Sorcerous Boon and reword the description.

Kryx
2017-10-18, 02:45 PM
I would like every classes (and every subclasses) to have somenthing unique from all others, if possible. I know this is a little idealistic and there will be always similarity between some classes, but still this is the main reason why I oppose to the idea.
I agree with this goal and that goal is one of the primary reasons that I chose to combine these two classes instead of duplicating the subclasses across each class.

However I believe that the Beast Master and Summoning Boon Sorcerer are unique enough to co-exist.
The Beast Master Ranger only has beasts and focuses on finding a beast and improving it. The beast is rather static and cannot change much. The Ranger itself is more martial with more support type spells.
The Summoning Boon Sorcerer can have creatures of all types and focuses on summoning a creature. The creature is rather malleable and up to the player to choose how it works. By design every eidolon would be quite unique. The Sorcerer itself would be a cantrip caster with a wider range of spells where it can focus - offense, utility, defense, etc.

I believe these two roles are somewhat similar, but quite different enough to co-exist.

Mith
2017-10-18, 03:51 PM
Instead of Sorcerous Boons, what about Sorcerous Gifts?

supergoji18
2017-10-18, 04:25 PM
Changes:

Invocations -> Latent Sparks (also reworded description)
Sorcerous Resilience -> Resilient Husk (also reworded description)
Celestial 20th level is now immunite to radiant and poison
Hurl Through Hell reduced to 6d10 from 10d10 to be more comparable to 14th level features
Eidolon no longer gets +2 ability scores at 1st level to be more comparable to the wolf]
Eidolon now has 3 skills to be more comparable to the wolf's 4 skills
Eidolon Attacks increased from 1d4 to 2d4. Improved attack evolution removed.
Eidolon Swim Evolution combined into Amphibious
Eidolon Attack upgrades (Celestial Weapons, Elemental Weapons, and Poison) can only be taken once now
Eidolon spellcasting now allows your eidolon to choose up to 3 spells, but it can only cast 1 per long rest. Additionally it cannot cast it on the same round as you cast a spell for 1st level or higher


I'd still like to rename Sorcerous Boon and reword the description.

I like everything here except the name change from Invocations to Latent Sparks, though that's a minor thing so it doesn't really matter. Good job on this so far, keep up the good work.

Kryx
2017-10-19, 06:36 PM
Changes:

Removed 20th level Sorcerous Origin features and replaced it with Ingrained Spells as part of the core class. Several of the niche 20th level features have been moved to 1st level features to flesh them out a bit more
Boreal and Stone's 1st level hp bonus has been changed out for other features.
Reworded a bit of the intro description
Made items that have been changed from the RAW Sorcerer more apparent (with the pink color)
Fey renamed to Sylvan Sorcery
Renamed some origins so now all of them include "Sorcerery". Wild Sorcery for example or Draconic Sorcery.
Added image to Boreal

supergoji18
2017-10-20, 12:14 PM
Changes:

Removed 20th level Sorcerous Origin features and replaced it with Ingrained Spells as part of the core class. Several of the niche 20th level features have been moved to 1st level features to flesh them out a bit more
Boreal and Stone's 1st level hp bonus has been changed out for other features.
Reworded a bit of the intro description
Made items that have been changed from the RAW Sorcerer more apparent (with the pink color)
Fey renamed to Sylvan Sorcery
Renamed some origins so now all of them include "Sorcerery". Wild Sorcery for example or Draconic Sorcery.
Added image to Boreal


Is there still a copy of the sorcerer before these changes? I didn't save a copy on my computer so I can't compare this version to the last. This is a pretty big change here, so I'd like to get a better look at what changed.

Kryx
2017-10-20, 12:26 PM
Is there still a copy of the sorcerer before these changes? I didn't save a copy on my computer so I can't compare this version to the last. This is a pretty big change here, so I'd like to get a better look at what changed.
I have a copy of the Sorcerer before this whole change, but not between intermediate versions of this. I could get the text if you want to compare something specifically though.

Kryx
2017-10-20, 01:43 PM
Changes:

Cantrips have been rebalanced. Instead of adjusting every cantrip up to the level of Fire Bolt and Eldritch Blast I have lowered those cantrips to d8s. See Spell Balance (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1N4QC6EmXE0avgk8jK1aubJcaFoZDYw8b_DuPHh8aBTc/edit#gid=639488216) and the spells pdf of mine. Now I only adjust a few cantrips, mostly adjusting their damage upwards.
Fused Form now scales the number of attacks. From 1 to 4.
Fused Form now allows spellcasting if your form can perform the components necessary
Hex doesn't work for an eidolon anymore
Angelic Weapons -> Celestial Smite. Also reworked to be a once per short rest ability with larger damage and a condition
Elemental Weapons removed (Elemental Breath still exists)
Poison reworked to be a once per short rest ability with larger damage and a condition


Damage is much better now (DPR of Classes (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1372301824)):
Basic numbers at 5:

Blade Boon TWF: 23 DPR
Blade Boon GWM: 25 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm: 23 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm+GWM: 26 DPR
Blade Boon S&B: 19 DPR
Arcane Boon EB + Fire Bolt: 16 DPR
Summoning Boon EB + Eidolon: 19 DPR
Summoning Boon Fused Eidolon: 16 DPR

Basic numbers at 11:

Blade Boon TWF: 29 DPR
Blade Boon GWM: 30 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm: 30 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm+GWM: 32 DPR
Blade Boon S&B: 26 DPR
Arcane Boon EB + Fire Bolt: 24 DPR
Summoning Boon EB + Eidolon: 25 DPR
Summoning Boon Fused Eidolon: 24 DPR

Basic numbers at 20:

Blade Boon TWF: 40 DPR
Blade Boon GWM: 43 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm: 42 DPR
Blade Boon Polearm+GWM: 46 DPR
Blade Boon S&B: 30 DPR
Arcane Boon EB + Fire Bolt: 40 DPR
Summoning Boon EB + Eidolon: 34 DPR
Summoning Boon Fused Eidolon: 35 DPR

supergoji18
2017-10-20, 04:21 PM
I have a copy of the Sorcerer before this whole change, but not between intermediate versions of this. I could get the text if you want to compare something specifically though.

yes please, that would be very good

Kryx
2017-10-20, 04:37 PM
yes please, that would be very good
It sounds like you want to use the old version. I generally only distribute one copy of my works to avoid old versions sitting around and confusing people with versions that I consider substandard to the quality that I want to distribute.

Changes:

Sorcerous Boon -> Magic Manifestation. Some wording cleanup as well.
A few cantrips changed from "hit" to "damage" - Grasp of Hadar, Kiss of Mephistopheles
Some of the level requirements of Latent Sparks have been increased (I lowered them from RAW before. I didn't raise them all the way to RAW, but a bit more in the middle)
Chained Voice removed as Eldritch Sorcery covers telepathy with creatures. Gaze of Two Minds wording is cleaned up.
Kindred Spirit cleaned up to work with a familiar or eidolon

supergoji18
2017-10-21, 10:15 AM
It sounds like you want to use the old version. I generally only distribute one copy of my works to avoid old versions sitting around and confusing people with versions that I consider substandard to the quality that I want to distribute.


I mostly just want to compare the new and old level 20 features to see how I like it. I'm not really sold on the new level 20 feature and I personally think I preferred the older ones that were unique to the sorcerer's origin. It gave the sorcerer a sense of finally ascending beyond their humanoid self and fully awakening the power within them. However, as I don't recall what each old level 20 feature was, I can't do a proper comparison so I don't feel justified in making a judgement without fully understanding what I'm comparing.

Kryx
2017-10-21, 10:22 AM
If you want to see old 20th level subclass features you can see them on the Sorcerer in my houserules.

The old 20th level subclass features were quite bland. In general they gave 1 immunity and some niche addons. Some of the addons were more or less niche than others. Many of those niche cases have been moved to the 1st level features.

The Sorcerer is all about magic - the current 20th level feature reenforces that with a focus of magic from their origin.

supergoji18
2017-10-21, 05:26 PM
If you want to see old 20th level subclass features you can see them on the Sorcerer in my houserules.

That is something that I do have a copy of somewhere, so I will take a look.


The old 20th level subclass features were quite bland. In general they gave 1 immunity and some niche addons. Some of the addons were more or less niche than others. Many of those niche cases have been moved to the 1st level features.

I disagree that they were bland. On paper yes they only gained a small group of benefits. However, I feel that it's less about the power and more about what those benefits represent. In this case, it represents the culmination of the sorcerer's efforts paying off and them finally mastering their powers to the point that it physically transforms them into something more than what they once were. It might not be the most powerful feature, but it felt fitting and made each subclass that much more unique and important. And in my opinion, the Sorcerer should be defined more by their subclass than any other class, since it essentially changes the origin of their very power and thus the kind of magic they utilize.

But if we want to discuss the actual power of the features, I think being outright immune to several forms of damage is more useful than a single use of a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level spell. If I'm a 20th level Sorcerer fighting an ancient dragon with my party, and extra use of alarm probably wont help me or my companions as much as resistance or outright immunity to that dragon's breath weapon which would otherwise take out half my health every few rounds.


The Sorcerer is all about magic - the current 20th level feature reenforces that with a focus of magic from their origin.

Indeed the sorcerer is all about magic, but magic isn't all about spellcasting. Magic is a part of who a sorcerer is, as much a piece of what makes them up as their blood or their bones. Magic can manifest itself in more ways than just casting extra spells.

I feel that a feature like Ingrained Spell would be more fitting on a Wizard. It is more fitting of a character who seeks to obtain as much arcane power as possible through the use of spellcasting as possible. In fact, they do have two features that is very similar to this: Spell Mastery and Signature Spell.

The Sorcerer isn't one that focuses everything into learning new spells, but about enhancing their latent magical power. And this power manifests itself very differently from other magic users in that it begins to affect their body. Enhancing their spellcasting is more or less a side effect of this pursuit.

I recall a quote I read once about dragon's and their role in fantasy. "We men dream dreams, we work magic, we do good, we do evil. The dragons do not dream. They are dreams. They do not work magic: it is their substance, their being. They do not do; they are." - Ursula K. Le Guin, The Farthest Shore
Replace the word dragon with sorcerer and you get a very good idea of what a sorcerer is as well. They don't cast magic, they ARE magic.

Of course, this is all just an opinion and is very subjective. Someone else's interpretation could be very different from mine. But this is my two cents, for what its worth.

TL;DR: I think you should leave extra spellcasting features to wizards, while sorcerers should get unique benefits based on the magic they use.

Kryx
2017-10-21, 06:17 PM
You are mistaken about what the old 20th level features did. No 20th level feature involved any physical transformation at all. I believe you are thinking of other features at different levels. I just reviewed them all the 20th level features before the change - they were nearly all immunity to one damage type and niche benefits that were better suited to early levels than 20th level.

I'll respond to the rest of your message tomorrow.

Kryx
2017-10-22, 06:31 AM
But if we want to discuss the actual power of the features, I think being outright immune to several forms of damage is more useful than a single use of a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level spell. If I'm a 20th level Sorcerer fighting an ancient dragon with my party, and extra use of alarm probably wont help me or my companions as much as resistance or outright immunity to that dragon's breath weapon which would otherwise take out half my health every few rounds.
This is a rather strawman argument. Alarm is a terrible spell to use as an example - it's a niche utility spell. Origin spells are ideally meant to be a mix of offense and utility spells. Utility spells likely aren't always the best candidates. You're also assuming that you are actually fighting the damage type that you are immune to. That would be a very rare occurance. In most cases you would have no benefit at all out of that immunity.



But lets take a comparison of the features:


Power of Wyrms
At 20th level, your draconic heritage becomes manifest. You cannot be paralyzed or put to sleep and are immune to the damage of your energy type. In addition you gain blindsight 60 feet.
The old 20th level feature is honestly lazy design. It is a damage immunity plus immunity to 2 conditions: paralyzed and sleep. It also gives blindsight 60 feet.
Immune to one damage is ok, but certainly not super flavorful.
Why are dragons immune to paralyze and sleep? None of the actual dragons are.
Blindsight is the most flavorful option here. It's a decent benefit.

Overall the old 20th level subclass features were did not emphasize what the class or subclass was about. They tried, but fell rather flat.


Ingrained Spells
When you reach 20th level, you gain mastery over certain origin spells and can cast them with little effort. You can cast a 1st-level, a 2nd-level, and a 3rd-level spell from your Origin Spells list once at their lowest level without expending spell points. When you do so, you canít do so again until you finish a short or long rest.
If you want to cast any of these spells at a higher level, you must expend spell points as normal.
This 20th level feature brings emphasis to the Sorcerer's core of magic:

Magic is a part of every sorcerer, suffusing body, mind, and spirit with a latent power that waits to be tapped.
This feature focuses on that aspect, much like the RAW Sorcerer and Warlock features do:

Sorcerous Restoration
At 20th level, you regain 4 expended sorcery points whenever you finish a short rest.

Eldritch Master
At 20th level, you can draw on your inner reserve of mystical power while entreating your patron to regain expended spell slots. You can spend 1 minute entreating your patron for aid to regain all your expended spell slots from your Pact Magic feature. Once you regain spell slots with this feature, you must finish a long rest before you can do so again.
Both of the RAW features focus on increasing the amount of spells cast. My feature does exactly that as well, giving an effective extra 10 spell points of lower level spells for each short rest.

This feature is backed up by the flavor: After manifesting the power within themselves the Sorcerer is able to channel spells based on their origin with less effort.


TL;DR: The old 20th level feature was incredibly niche and did not actually transform the Sorcerer as claimed. It was very niche benefits that in actualality likely didn't add up to much in most cases. Whereas the new feature is much more in line with the RAW vision of the 2 classes and allows the Sorcerer to focus its magic energies based on its origin.

Kryx
2017-10-22, 07:07 AM
On that same line of thought I believe a more open ended solution is better.

Changes:

20th level feature changes: Sorcerous Restoration. At 20th level, you can draw on your inner reserve of power to regain expended spell points. You can spend 1 minute to regain all your expended spell points from your Sorcerous Magic feature. Once you regain spell points with this feature, you must finish a long rest before you can do so again.

This is the same mechanics as the Warlock's 20th level feature. With this, the Sorcerer is more open ended in how it spends its extra spell points and is more in line with where I expect for its expected spell points per day (see Caster Comparison (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wJAnGX7qgsPqpXv3h76QGGn5vmPgjU1bCzU-7kgBjvw/edit#gid=2077828504))

supergoji18
2017-10-22, 10:49 AM
You are mistaken about what the old 20th level features did. No 20th level feature involved any physical transformation at all. I believe you are thinking of other features at different levels. I just reviewed them all the 20th level features before the change - they were nearly all immunity to one damage type and niche benefits that were better suited to early levels than 20th level.

I'll respond to the rest of your message tomorrow.
It caused a change in the sense that they now gained a whole bunch of different features such as enhanced eyesight, immunity to poison, and/or immunity to some other damage type. That's what I meant.


This is a rather strawman argument. Alarm is a terrible spell to use as an example - it's a niche utility spell. Origin spells are ideally meant to be a mix of offense and utility spells. Utility spells likely aren't always the best candidates. You're also assuming that you are actually fighting the damage type that you are immune to. That would be a very rare occurance. In most cases you would have no benefit at all out of that immunity.

I chose alarm because I was using the Dragon Sorcerer as the example (forgot to mention that), which had Alarm as one of the 3rd level spells it could use as part of the feature. The other spell that could be used from this feature would have been even more useless if you were fighting against a dragon of the same element as yourself, where the immunity would be much more beneficial.



But lets take a comparison of the features:


The old 20th level feature is honestly lazy design. It is a damage immunity plus immunity to 2 conditions: paralyzed and sleep. It also gives blindsight 60 feet.
Immune to one damage is ok, but certainly not super flavorful.
Why are dragons immune to paralyze and sleep? None of the actual dragons are.
Blindsight is the most flavorful option here. It's a decent benefit.

Overall the old 20th level subclass features were did not emphasize what the class or subclass was about. They tried, but fell rather flat.


This 20th level feature brings emphasis to the Sorcerer's core of magic:

This feature focuses on that aspect, much like the RAW Sorcerer and Warlock features do:


Both of the RAW features focus on increasing the amount of spells cast. My feature does exactly that as well, giving an effective extra 10 spell points of lower level spells for each short rest.

This feature is backed up by the flavor: After manifesting the power within themselves the Sorcerer is able to channel spells based on their origin with less effort.

This is a good point you bring up. The old ones didn't offer too much for a level 20 feature. But I think the way to fix it would not be to remove these features. Yes they may not be as flavorful or as powerful as I thought initially, but with a tiny bit of changes and additions they could be. One example I can think of (though this should not be the only thing as it is kind of minor) is to have the character's creature type become whatever their origin is. Dragon Sorcerer becomes a dragon type creature, Boreal becomes an elemental, Eldritch becomes an aberration, etc. The second thing would be to grant them additional passive benefits or useful powers. Or maybe a the ability to transform into a creature of their type with unique features, but only temporarily.

EDIT: off topic, but I always houserule the dragons having the old immunity to sleep and paralysis because I felt they should have it. So I may have forgotten about that while looking at the feature. Oops.

On that same line of thought I believe a more open ended solution is better.

Changes:

20th level feature changes: Sorcerous Restoration. At 20th level, you can draw on your inner reserve of power to regain expended spell points. You can spend 1 minute to regain all your expended spell points from your Sorcerous Magic feature. Once you regain spell points with this feature, you must finish a long rest before you can do so again.

This is the same mechanics as the Warlock's 20th level feature. With this, the Sorcerer is more open ended in how it spends its extra spell points and is more in line with where I expect for its expected spell points per day (see Caster Comparison (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wJAnGX7qgsPqpXv3h76QGGn5vmPgjU1bCzU-7kgBjvw/edit#gid=2077828504))
This is really good. I like it a lot. Kind of like a second wind for sorcerers, which keeps them distinct from the Wizard's abilities while still improving their power substantially, essentially doubling their longevity. Nice work.

reticent.rouge
2017-10-25, 12:29 PM
I don't really have much, if any, feedback. I just wanted to say thank you for all your hard work. One of my coping skills when I get depressed is to try to fit my old 3.0 character with classes and powers that better suit how I played him and what things he actually used. Here, in one class, you've given me nearly everything I needed! (The rest would require working with a DM if I ever okayed this guy again... If I can get back to gaming).

So thank you. At times your a real life saver! (Preferably a strawberry or cherry one BC they're red and yummy!)