Results 211 to 240 of 1492
-
2012-08-22, 06:21 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Location
- Bristol, UK
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
That is not unreasonable, but why the hell should that class be the sorcerer or even in core? Why can't I have a dragon-blooded fighter or a dragon-blooded rogue?
Look at how 3e did it. There were two 'dragon' base classes, neither of which was sorcerer. There were also feats that let you adapt several other classes to be more draconic.
The whole draconic bloodline thing is actually a complete and utter betrayal of the original concept. It's not 'iconic' in the slightest.
-
2012-08-22, 07:33 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Honestly, I would be ok with bloodlines if they essentially acted like specializations. Undead born or whatever would be tied to necromancy, that way it could be easily refluffed if you prefer spellpoint systems over vancian as just being the new wizard. However I haven't gotten a chance to look at it yet to see how they're going about doing it.
-
2012-08-22, 07:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
-
2012-08-22, 08:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2010
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
D&D can't afford to leave out the iconic stuff. D&D itself is the iconic roleplaying game. If they decided that they're going to go in a whole new direction with the sorcerer, then everybody who likes the traditional sorcerer (which is probably most of the developers) will be upset and complain. They chose to go the route of sticking with a classic concept and having the other half of the fans complain instead.
To lesser_minion, the very fact that you have (hypothetically) chosen to play a fighter or a rogue means that you have very few, if any, magical powers. Thus, if you want your character to have draconic blood, it either has no mechanical effect and is just for the story, or you choose an appropriate background or specialty to give you some of that magic. If you want your entire character to be based on the fact that you have draconic blood, that's what the sorcerer is there for.Dubhshlaine, Elf Mage, in Eberron D&D 4e
DM for Feiticeiro's Ergodic Dungeon (Always Open!), In-Game
-
2012-08-22, 08:12 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
I'm currently all kinds of confused because I can't find a sorcerer in the playtest packet I downloaded.
Jude P.
-
2012-08-22, 08:14 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Last edited by Dienekes; 2012-08-22 at 08:15 AM.
-
2012-08-22, 08:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2010
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Dubhshlaine, Elf Mage, in Eberron D&D 4e
DM for Feiticeiro's Ergodic Dungeon (Always Open!), In-Game
-
2012-08-22, 08:20 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
- Gender
-
2012-08-22, 08:28 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Germany
-
2012-08-22, 09:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
It strikes me that in the current layout, a bloodline should obviously be a background, not a class feature. Obviously members of another class could also have a dragon in their ancestry somewhere.
Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.
"I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!
-
2012-08-22, 09:28 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
-
2012-08-22, 09:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
*********
Matters of Critical Insignificance - My Blog for all my favorite entertainment
11/4: Announcing the Vow of Honor KS! (I contributed)
-
2012-08-22, 09:34 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
I do not deny that. But two wrongs don't make a right.
Still, there is a difference between "having some dragonblood/feyblood/whatever-heritage" and "using this heritage to draw immense magical power at the expense of other abilities". The former is something I would like to see but is currently not implemented in 5e. It could be in the form of templates or feats. The later is the Sorcerer class.Last edited by Zombimode; 2012-08-22 at 09:38 AM.
-
2012-08-22, 09:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Location
- Bristol, UK
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
No, it doesn't, this is a fantasy game. This is the exact same illogic as complaining that it's a violation of the fighter's concept to use a bow.
Thus, if you want your character to have draconic blood, it either has no mechanical effect and is just for the story, or you choose an appropriate background or specialty to give you some of that magic.
If you want your entire character to be based on the fact that you have draconic blood, that's what the sorcerer is there for.
-
2012-08-22, 10:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
That's a good point now, but I'm willing to bet that (just as in 4E) they'll eventually throw in lycanthrope backgrounds, and so forth. But perhaps "specialties" are better for this.
Note that this is similar to bloodline feats that already exist in 3E and 4E; specialties are just groupings of feats, after all.Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.
"I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!
-
2012-08-22, 10:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
@Zombimode: Yes, that was my point. It should not be competing with Backgrounds or Classes. It should be competing with Races, or more specifically it should be replacing some or all of your Racial Features, which would make sense and allow for the widest variety of interesting character options, without adding any new layers of power.
*********
Matters of Critical Insignificance - My Blog for all my favorite entertainment
11/4: Announcing the Vow of Honor KS! (I contributed)
-
2012-08-22, 10:14 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
While I'm annoyed at how people assumed that the dragon rumour was correct in 3.5.... this isn't 3e or 3.5. I would be really happy if they just cleaned up and re-released the Rules Cyclopedia as the next edition, but they aren't. Also, the sorcerer isn't iconic to D&D, so it's not something that can be seriously betrayed. The Wizard, Fighter, Cleric, and Thief, they are iconic. The Paladin and Bard, and Ranger, and Druid, they are iconic. Something splashed into 3rd edition isn't and cannot be iconic. It cannot be betrayed in that sense because there's nothing to betray!
-
2012-08-22, 10:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Germany
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
What makes 2nd edition more iconic than 3rd edition?
-
2012-08-22, 10:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Location
- The Chosen Spot
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
I was hoping the sorcerer would turn out to be the spell-point based arcane spellcaster (aka an arcane spellcaster using a psion-like point system).
This would make them mechanically different than the wizard in a nifty way. Also, such a mechanic would fluff well with the "you can cast spells ... just because" explanation. They could provide some fluff examples to give people some ideas on how they might want to expand the "just because" part if the players are so inclined to add such detail to their characters or campaign.Frolic and dance for joy often.
Be determined in your ventures.
-KAB
-
2012-08-22, 10:27 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2012
-
2012-08-22, 10:39 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
I agree that the sorcerer isn't iconic, but not because it wasn't in second edition.
Rather, the sorcerer isn't iconic (1) because fiction in general does not distinguish between sorcerers and wizards, so there aren't any major fictional characters that can be archetypically thought of as "sorcerer but really not wizard"; and (2) because it hasn't had a consistent role so far along D&D editions.
In 3.0, the sorcerer is the same as the wizard, only spontaneous. In 4.0, the sorcerer is a blaster wizard, except that regular wizards can also be blasters, and drawing its power from dragons, storms, chaos, or the cosmos (just like wizards, really). In 4.4, the sorcerer instead is an elementalist, except that wizards also have elemental spells, as well as a pyromancer specialty.
The bottom line is that WOTC has failed, so far, to create a meaningful and consistent difference between sorcerers and wizards. And this is why they're not iconic.Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.
"I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!
-
2012-08-22, 10:44 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Wait Dragonblood and Sorcerer were a rumor in 3rd and Dragonblood was one of the original Sorcerer builds in 4th. So technically doesn't that make a Dragon oriented Sorcerer build in 5th logical if we use the 2 edition iconic rule.
Keep in mind also people that this is 1 build for the sorcerer there will be others like how there are 2 Clerics (Sun & War), 4 Fighters (Duelist, Protector, Slayer, Sharpshooter) and 2 Rogues (Thief and Thug), Likely at least one of these Sorcerers will please, but for now they've shown us the most iconic
Personally I like the Dragonblood Sorcerer idea, I'm just worried it might be a bit OP but haven't actually tested it yetLast edited by DrBurr; 2012-08-22 at 10:45 AM.
-
2012-08-22, 10:48 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Germany
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Last edited by Yora; 2012-08-22 at 10:49 AM.
-
2012-08-22, 10:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.
"I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!
-
2012-08-22, 10:55 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
But it is. Rangers use bows. Hence the name "range-r". They're not called Rangers because they range about the wilderness.
I'm not sure whether or not I'm being sarcastic. I'll get back to you. But I do know that WotC has not done well with bow-users in general thus far.
I agree completely.
Yes yes. I don't like Vancian magic much, and the other easy option for RPG magic is mana points. Which 5e looks to be moving towards with the Sorcerer. Now there's just the question of whether they'll do it well.Jude P.
-
2012-08-22, 11:04 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2012
- Location
- NY, USA
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Uh... what?
Rangers are called rangers for the same reason Aragorn (the iconic ranger on whom D&D based the class) was called Strider. They are wardens and guardians of the wilderness, who, as you put it "range about" to defend their charges against threats out of the wilds.
With Sorcerers; Sorcerers are at least as iconic as Warlocks, if not more so. Warlocks were a minor class in 3.5 which was released fairly late, and was only a core base class in 4e. Whether that means they are or aren't iconic is up to you, but it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be represented.
At the same time, Sorcerers are fun. I love Sorcerers, I love the way they cast spells, I love the idea of bloodlines. I'm sure there are a lot of other people who agree with me. I don't see why, as long as WotC gives an option for people who don't like Bloodlines, they should be restricted for the rest of us.Last edited by Water_Bear; 2012-08-22 at 11:04 AM. Reason: Quote tags put on incorrectly.
-
2012-08-22, 11:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
You're selectively quoting. You missed the bit where I wasn't sure how sarcastic I was being. I think I was being fairly sarcastic.
But the fact that their name has "range" in it has often led people to think they're bow-users and fighters have to be melee weapon-users.Jude P.
-
2012-08-22, 11:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Germany
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Bruce Cordell created 3rd Edition psionics and after the difficulties of the 3.0 version, he revised it with the 3.5e version, which is by far the best magic system ever used in D&D. Not only does he know what works with spell points, he also knows what doesn't work and why it doesn't work, because he already did these mistakes.
And he's on the 5th Ed design team.
And the Dragon Sorcerer seems to be very close to the Psychic Warrior.Last edited by Yora; 2012-08-22 at 11:08 AM.
-
2012-08-22, 11:10 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- Enterprise, Alabama
- Gender
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Last edited by Starbuck_II; 2012-08-22 at 11:11 AM.
-
2012-08-22, 11:15 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
I could be wrong, but I don't think Aragorn had any Elven uncles. His father-in-law, and thus his wife, are both Elves, but Aragorn's Elvish ancestry goes way, way back to the first King of Numenor, Elros Tar-Minyatur, who is Elrond's brother, yes, but that means his great-great-great-great-great-great-great-throw-in-a-few-dozen-more-greats uncle is an elf, not an uncle. Elros became mortal, though, his progeny are all 100% human, regardless of what that super-great uncle Elrond is.
Last edited by Stubbazubba; 2012-08-22 at 11:16 AM.
*********
Matters of Critical Insignificance - My Blog for all my favorite entertainment
11/4: Announcing the Vow of Honor KS! (I contributed)