I have a question: What is the bloodline of Varisian sorceror and their Tattoos mark? Arcane? Destined? I don't see any that fit very well...
either of them would work well from what i know .
|
Why in the world is the Sorcerer mixing it up in melee combat with a Melee Touch attack when he doesn't wear armor and only knows 2 first level spells?
I don't think this is so much an attempt to make sorcerers a primary melee combatant as it is an attempt to make sure that at least low-level baddies think twice about closing with a sorcerer.
|
|
Sorcerers will be getting unlimited cantrips. This was an oversight on my part. As for the rest, I think I we should wait till we see some playtest feedback before we pass judgement.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Cool! Thanks, Jason. That was my main concern.
Edit: I had more I wanted to say, but let me start a thread with a less... ...incendiary title for the sorcerer class.
I was hoping not to have to make this sort of post so early on after the release, but here we are.
The tone in this and other threads has to come to an end. I would appreciate a kind and civil discourse when discussing these rules. Far too many of you seem to be making strong claims without even having remotely playtested these rules. I ask that you try them out and see where they take you. I am not saying I do not want your speculation, but please, remember that some of these are brand new, and more than likely subject to change.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
We appreciate the work it takes to make a new edition of a much-beloved game. The audience is not easy to please.
However, I must respectfully note that we've had transformational PrCs in 3e since 2001. Tome and Blood gave us the elemental savant, the acolyte of the skin, the alienist, the dragon disciple, and the pale master. The mechanic has been fully explored in the last seven years.
Of these, time has shown that people took the elemental savant and the alienist because of the full casting, they improved some area of your spellcasting, and the fact that regular levels of your base class offered little or nothing. As other full caster level PrCs have popped up that improved spellcasting in various ways, people have gravitated towards those instead.
The key problem here is that Sorcerer Bloodlines don't make you a better spellcaster, the extra feats just make it easier to PrC, and the value of the transformational aspects of any Bloodline is marginal compared to the things you are giving up by not PrCing.
That's not to say that there aren't winners. For example, the Elemental Bloodline is almost all good abilities for a specific kind of build and the Destined Bloodline is good enough for low-level play. The problem is that certain key problems that longtime Sorcerer players would like fixed have been ignored.
Add in the fact that Wizards, who no one ever complained about, have gotten class abilities that do make them better spellcasters means that the rabid minority of Sorcerer players are understandably up in arms.
My apologies for any ruffled feathers.
-K
Far too many of you seem to be making strong claims without even having remotely playtested these rules. I ask that you try them out and see where they take you. I am not saying I do not want your speculation, but please, remember that some of these are brand new, and more than likely subject to change.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Here's the thing this is valid playtest feedback. I don't want to waste my time playing the current incarnation of the PF Sorcerer.
Like other posters I don't even need to play it to know it is an inferior spontaneous caster if I don't have to play in a game that restricts player class options: The games that don't allow Beguilers, Variant Spellcasters, Wizards, Favored Souls, Psionics and No PRCs. I was looking forward to testing the PF Sorcerer before I saw it.
Some people play games that place an emphasis on the game mechanics in a suggested wealth by level game. They aren't playing wrong. Commenting on game mechanic aspects is valid feedback when most people are oohhing over fluff that does little for the class mechanically. As is there is still little reason not to PRC out of the PF Sorcerer as early as possible.
Comments like now I want to play a sorcerer because it's interesting are nice but I routinely play spellcasters. I don't want to and I won't play the PF Sorcerer unless you fix it.
The PF Sorcerer wasn't improved enough to make me want to play it with the other better spontaneous caster options in game and the sorcerer class used to be my favorite class. The PF Wizards are quite a bit better than the PF Sorcerer.
I'm making the time to post regarding it in the hopes you and the other designers will improve the class. I won't waste my time playing a new class that is obviously inferior to other spontaneous caster options in game just because it's received a new coat of paint. The occassional interesting class special isn't worth sticking around for what the PC is losing by not PRCing.
Is a Sorcerer fun to play? Yes particularly as a starter spellcaster or Blaster with a Reserve feat or for a one shot game for a lot less record keeping than comparable spellcasters. An NPC Commoner can be fun to play that doesn't mean that is what I choose to play normally. Druids are powerful but I never play them in game.
IMO as much fun as it is to play a Sorcerer it is quite a bit more fun to play a Beguiler below L10 in a leveling up game because I can know and cast quite a few more spells, have better HD, No ASF in light armor, better weapons, better skill choices (Both Diplomacy and UMD (Nice UMD was included in the PF Sorcerer) as class skills) along with more base skill points with Intelligence based casting for more skill points and don't have to mess around with all the record keeping although going Ultimate Magus minimizes the record keeping due to the Beguiler spellcasting options.
Why should I test drive and have less fun with the PF Sorcerer that I already know I'll never play if Paizo doesn't fix the class?
I really dislike how to many of the blood lines transform the PC into a monster since that really limits player options in game and is a fluff/crunch reason not to play one in game. I want to play a spontaneous spellcaster not a monster. Other posters have commented they think that is cool.
Hmm... I'll agree, K, that Sorcerers are still weak, but you're being a little bit pessimistic
First off, UMD is helpful.
Second, Most of the bloodlines have at least one and often 2 really good feats that you want. Several of the features are really useful when you get them.
The biggest problem I'm seeing is that each bloodline is useful only at certain levels. The low-level powers don't scale, and the high-level powers are only good if you haven't yet taken a spell that does the same thing. Still, if you're playing a game only in a certain level rang,e most bloodlines have one or two good powers.
The good ones:
Celestial is a *powerhouse* that easily makes you as good as a wizard at levels 1-2. That healing touch is *awesome* until it becomes useless. Wings aren't bad either, but not enough to make this good at levels 3 or more.
My favorite would have to be Abyssal
At levels 15+ the extra summoning would be fun; get Augment Summoning and Empower Spell free
Arcane: The Arcane Bond doesn't help much, since the spontaneous casting ability is wasted. Still, Improved Initiative, Spell Focus, 3 free spells and School Power: this is worth as much as a wizard's bonus feats; at this point it's just your inferior casting mechanic holding you back.
Fey: Imp. Init, Quicken (assuming this actually works), Fleeting glance -- this is worth 2 or 3 feats.
Celestial is a *powerhouse* that easily makes you as good as a wizard at levels 1-2.
There's a lot of classes that are better than the wizard at level 2. A level 2 sorcerer is probably better than a level 2 wizard in 3.5. "Great at second level" is not a ringing endorsement
Barring serious retooling of natural attacks or unarmed strikes, having the sorcerer's claw attacks work like armed weapon attacks is a recipe for player confusion. Natural attacks are confusing on their own merits. The interaction of natural attacks and monk unarmed strikes is worse. We don't need an additional layer of complication with natural attacks that don't count as natural attacks.
So long as the sorcerer gains new spells a level behind the wizard, he can never prevail without changing his basic role. So why not change it? Give the sorcerer a 3/4 BAB and a d8 hit die; finish what you've started with claw and touch attacks, and make the sorcerer a proper gish. That, or give him 2nd level spells at third level. Fun tricks do not a spellcaster make; spells do. Either give him spells like the real spellcasters, or don't make him out to be a real spellcaster.
Far too many of you seem to be making strong claims without even having remotely playtested these rules. I ask that you try them out and see where they take you. I am not saying I do not want your speculation, but please, remember that some of these are brand new, and more than likely subject to change.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo PublishingHere's the thing this is valid playtest feedback. I don't want to waste my time playing the current incarnation of the PF Sorcerer.
Like other posters I don't even need to play it to know it is an inferior spontaneous caster if I don't have to play in a game that restricts player class options: The games that don't allow Beguilers, Variant Spellcasters, Wizards, Favored Souls, Psionics and No PRCs.
And that's all well and good. Make suggestions, explain the reasoning behind it, and all that jazz... but there's a lot of negativity behind some of the comments in this thread right up front, and we still have a year to go. Telling someone "this sucks compared to" or "this is lame because" isn't really constructive criticism. Its borderline browbeating, telling them to fix what you don't like or you'll ignore it. Adding legitimate criticism and suggestions to improve what you percieve as broken to that kind of negativity doesn't diminish the negativity, either.
I'm not saying I'd advocate this kind of behavior, but if I was a developer working on the new Pathfinder rules and reading this kind of negativity, I'd set my preferences to ignore posters who respond like that which could have me missing out on useful feedback on other matters.
Telling someone "this sucks compared to" or "this is lame because" isn't really constructive criticism.
Nonsense. It's aggressively undiplomatic constructive criticism, but constructive nonetheless; insulting or no, you are saying that such-and-such doesn't work and here's why.
Director of Games
|
Lets not get off into semantics here. I am not going to be making any changes to the documents for a little bit here. If you don't want to playtest it, that is your choice. I will be looking for playtest feedback specifically to base my decisions. They will not be the only factor, but they weigh a bit more.
There are definitely some areas here that could use some improvement. I be happy to read what you think, but just telling me it is bad and that the spell level bump should be removed is not very productive. If you want to propose your own system, we have a forum for that. If you want to work with the system, post here. If you can't be civil, don't post at all.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing.
Oh! I forgot. Metamagic Adept is a crummy solution to a problem that shouldn't exist. The fix to beat here is the PHB2 alternate feature that replaces the sorcerer's familiar ability with a complete removal of the full-round limitation for spontaneous metamagic, which is a doubly sensible fix when you remember how terrible familiars are in 3.5. Fortunately, you have a much stronger position here; you can simply strike that silly full-round metamagic rule from the rulebooks entirely. A limited fix that isn't as good as previous fixes is an imperfect solution. Wholesale elimination of the problem is dramatically more elegant.
See? Undiplomatic, because I don't know how to be nice on the internet, but still constructive.
|
|
The tone in this and other threads has to come to an end. I would appreciate a kind and civil discourse when discussing these rules. Far too many of you seem to be making strong claims without even having remotely playtested these rules. I ask that you try them out and see where they take you. I am not saying I do not want your speculation, but please, remember that some of these are brand new, and more than likely subject to change.
You tell 'em, Bull Man. I love the new sorcerer, and don't let anyone try to turn your head about it. ^_^
Jeremy Puckett
-Sorcerer Tax: Sorcerer still get spells a level late for no reason. It wouldn't even be hard to make it backwards compatible in old adventures since you'd take a Sorcerer and just drop his level by one. Just remove the 2nd level from the game. Getting spells at the same rate as a Wizard or Cleric is not unreasonable, considering the power of both.
-Still No Reason to Stop PrCing Out: The abilities are very flavorful, they they don't actually make you win encounters and there are still problems that are only addressed in PrCing like:
-Need a bonus known spell when you gain a spell level. Its a cruel joke to let a spontaneous caster get his choice of one spell to cast with his new level of slots.
-Need some ability to use metamagic. Sorcerers still have no reason to take metmagic.
-Bloodline abilities are not equivalent to spells gained at that level (which is the standard that Wizards and Clerics use in (Pathfinder), or even increase your spellcasting ability in any way (we don't count an extra check vs. SR once a day). The Arcane Bloodline almost does this, but its laughable that they get normal metamagic use at 20th level. The Universalist Wizard still mocks him. A lot.
God's honest truth.
Bonus Feats a joke: Diehard...Endurance...Iron Will. These are the feats that make people laugh when they see it on a character sheet. I think that each Bloodline has maybe two feats that would work with a specific build. In short, free junk is still junk.
I don't think that's quite fair. Free junk is still junk, yes... but there's a lot of feats that have been junk because of junk prerequisites, and if you have those prerequisites, that "junk-by-association" gets a lot better. The Knight bonus feats are a good example of this; Iron Will would be a lousy bonus feat for a knight (or anybody else) on its own merits, but it's pretty awesome when you consider that it's a prerequisite for Indomitable Soul, from the same book, which is an awesome feat when it doesn't have two junk prereqs.
See? Undiplomatic, because I don't know how to be nice on the internet, but still constructive.If you cannot be "nice", please take some time to cool off until you can be.
Oh, I wish. It's not a matter of "cooling off", it's a matter of "I'm a terrible writer and people constantly misinterpret my intentions as a result of it."
There are definitely some areas here that could use some improvement. I be happy to read what you think, but just telling me it is bad and that the spell level bump should be removed is not very productive. If you want to propose your own system, we have a forum for that. If you want to work with the system, post here. If you can't be civil, don't post at all.Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing.
I'm sorry but people here are being civil, they are bringing up good points. Some things don't need to be play tested for a person to know there garbage up front, which sad to say the Sorcerer is. I was really looking foroword to it but so much of it is just sad and utterly weak. The only Bloodlines that are close to being worth it are the elemental and Destined ones, all the others just really aren't worth it.
Oh! I forgot. Metamagic Adept is a crummy solution to a problem that shouldn't exist. The fix to beat here is the PHB2 alternate feature that replaces the sorcerer's familiar ability with a complete removal of the full-round limitation for spontaneous metamagic, which is a doubly sensible fix when you remember how terrible familiars are in 3.5. Fortunately, you have a much stronger position here; you can simply strike that silly full-round metamagic rule from the rulebooks entirely. A limited fix that isn't as good as previous fixes is an imperfect solution. Wholesale elimination of the problem is dramatically more elegant.
See? Undiplomatic, because I don't know how to be nice on the internet, but still constructive.
And you can all ways just pick one up with a feat anyway and it will be just as strong.
|
I can't wait to playtest this new Sorcerer. Some of the abilities seem a little off but after a playtest or two, I will know how they truly stack up. Thank you Jason, this is exactly what I was looking at doing House Rules wise for my games. I don't know about these other guys, but I'm truly excited about playtesting one of these bad boys.
I can't wait to playtest this new Sorcerer. Some of the abilities seem a little off but after a playtest or two, I will know how they truly stack up. Thank you Jason, this is exactly what I was looking at doing House Rules wise for my games. I don't know about these other guys, but I'm truly excited about playtesting one of these bad boys.
im with ya here the changes look great
Thank you for what you've done Jason.
I really like the new Sorcerer class. While I was upset that they didn't have unlimited cantrips (a mistake already corrected), I really enjoyed the fluff and mechanics of the bloodlines. I have always like the idea of being a caster whose power was a result of his past/genetic makeup. The description of the Sorcerer in the 3.5 PHB even points out that that is most Sorcerers' claim to fame. While I would like to see the class get a little more power in order to be on more even terms with the Wizard, I am happy with just getting the basics of bloodlines into the game.
As someone earlier pointed out, Sorcerers can often be called "Howitzers on legs." This is true and the new bloodlines allows the Sorcerer to do some damage up close where the cleric can more easily reach them. As was brought up in another thread on Sorcerers/Wizards, with the right spells, a Sorcerer/Wizard can have quite a high AC (Mage Armor anyone?). Combine that with a good DEX score (allowing you to more easily go first in the order) and the Sorcerer can get in, do some damage, survive, and get out of the close range when he runs out of his highly-damaging spells.
As for the tone of the criticisms, insulting criticism is almost never taken as seriously as criticism that is backed up with proof and worded nicely. I know that I personally would just get annoyed with people who can't bother to be civil about their comments, so I can't imagine how Jason and the others do it all the time. When you think about it, they are letting us all help design their system. They're paying for it and we get to put in our thoughts and ideas and play it for free for over a year. That's quite a bit more than WoTC is doing, so why don't we just count ourselves lucky that Paizo is run/staffed by such understanding, hardworking people.
Thanks again Jason and all those at Paizo who are making such a great addition to the game we all know and love!
I was going to be a bit harsher in my comments to the Original Poster, but taking the spirit of Jason's suggestion, I'll simply say that my jaw was dropping at the *overpowered* abilities the bloodlines were giving, and was just looking for a forum to post something along the lines of the potential for the releases to cause rapid power-creep as one class one-ups the last.
The "points" being brought up here are over mega power-gaming issues, using every possible splatbook put out. That's not what Core Rules should deal with.
Thank you very much Jason, for *not* making the Sorcerer even more of a one-trick Gargantuan pony.
For those of you who want to PrC out still - do so - isn't it nice to have a class that sets you up well for that?
*overpowered* abilities the bloodlines were giving
Examples, please.
The "points" being brought up here are over mega power-gaming issues
...I'm not responding to that.
using every possible splatbook put out.
"Every possible splatbook" here meaning "Major WOTC supplements like Complete Mage and Player's Handbook II".
That's not what Core Rules should deal with.
Balance of core classes and backwards compatibility are some of the biggest things the core rules should deal with.
For those of you who want to PrC out still - do so - isn't it nice to have a class that sets you up well for that?
Yes, the wizard is good for that.
I like the Sorcerer, I really do. I love the blood line feats. But... the thing is that, when it's built on a skeleton that has been tried over the period 3.5, somewhere in the last few years; there are going to be large nitpicks and expectations that have been fermenting with fans and players over that time. I'm pretty sure a lot of people were really looking forward to seeing something change in the inherent skeleton of the sorcerer, something that obviously points out rightful parity with the wizard. I'm not saying it's not on par, or it is on par; but I'm sure a lot of people who looked at it, saw that they didn't see that obvious thing that made it seem on par.
I'll simply say that my jaw was dropping at the *overpowered* abilities the bloodlines were giving.
Give me an example and I can show you something the wizard can do thats 10x worse.
I have a question: What is the bloodline of Varisian sorceror and their Tattoos mark? Arcane? Destined? I don't see any that fit very well...
More bloodlines could be coming. The ones presented don't necessarily have to be the be all and end all of the bloodlines feature.
I just don't see the sorcerer as crippled...now or ever. In my campaign I've got both a sorcerer and a wizard with a wizard cohort (both conjurers).
The sorcerer outcasts both of the wizards combined. Seriously. Summoned monsters are great and some of the wizards' teleport tricks are cool but in the meantime the sorcerer is napalming the whole freaking battlefield. I can pretty much count on any group of 3 or more mooks being obliterated.
I don't see full round casting times for metamagic to be bad because the sorcerer can choose them on the fly and apply multiple metamagics as needed. Full round casting time is a small price to pay for not having to gamble ahead of time which spells to buff up (and with the various Energy Substitution feats he can pretty much kill anything).
In my group, any night the player of the sorcerer can't make it is a cause for real concern for my group.
To Jason: huzzah! So much to look at and drool over. No sleep tonight!
|
Hm, there's a lot of posts here, of which I will ignore all but Jason's (because others are just saying the same thing over and over again.)
I'm gonna make a wild jump here. Instead of telling what's wrong and yadda yadda, I'll make suggestions.
We all know Warmage and Beguiler from other books and they are undoubtly more powerful than the basic D&D 3.5 sorcerer. They have the same BAB, same spell progression yet a larger repository of spells (yet with limited area of expertise), and are allowed to wear armor. Armor, you say? Well, I would consider it alright to allow a sorcerer to wear light armor despite the fact a sorcerer could easily just cast mage armor all the time.
Furthermore, considering that a sorcerer hasn't spent time with books and such, one might be more proficient. A moderate BAB (3/4) would give the sorcerer a slightly better chance with ranged weapons and weapon-like spells.
Metamagic is also an important issue. Reducing the needed casting time to the normal would indeed make metamagic more luring to a sorcerer, although I don't see the full-round casting as all that bad of a thing.
It all comes to the point where we ask ourselves what do we see in an iconic sorcerer? A powerful mage with an innate ability to shape the arcane forces, sure! Thus should a sorcerer receive a slight bonus to his/her caster level? For example, if one would get +1 CL on 3rd level, and increase that bonus for every 4 levels beyond 3rd, certain spells would likely increase in power. Would it be broken or just too powerful in comparison? I doubt it. Considering all the feedback, people are unbelievably disappointed with the class, for my amazement.
As for bloodlines, they could hold a certain affinity with the group of creature mentioned. Similar to the undead bloodline's (undeads have blood?) One of Us, a sorcerer could receive a mild +2 bonus when dealing with the creatures of his/her bloodline.
Balancing the abilities is a tough job, and it seems many people forget that. This is still in early alpha stage (it's been only a bit over month since the initial release, people!) and as Jason implied, things are subject to change, just as the skill system did. If my suggestions would be put to the table for consideration, the loudly pled modification of the sorcerer's spell progression to "2nd level spells at 3rd level" would possibly make it too powerful in comparison to the wizard.
I'll let the designer team make the appropriate changes. I'm merely here to watch, wait, and help.
Seconded on fixing the metamagic issue.
Jason -- I understand your desire to see playtestin results, but you msut realize that you're hardly showing us an entirely new system. Some of us *have* played the sorcerer -- the PHB sorcerer or countless variants on it for years now, and we have some stored up feedback to give.
It's been evident for some time, for instance, that slow metamagic for sorcerers... doesn't do anything good for the game. There's absolutely no need to playtest the Pathfinder sorcerer before reiterating this, because your revisions haven't touched those rules.
We truly, truly appreciate your undertaking this project -- and part of that appreciation is because you, unlike Wizards, seem to be *reading* our complaints. So when we're bitterly ciriticizing something, please remember that we're generally criticizing a problem you've inherited, not one you've created.
I don't like the fey bloodline. Make a plant and a fey bloodline please. The powers are to "plantish" and not enough fey-like.
The tone in this and other threads has to come to an end. I would appreciate a kind and civil discourse when discussing these rules. Far too many of you seem to be making strong claims without even having remotely playtested these rules. I ask that you try them out and see where they take you. I am not saying I do not want your speculation, but please, remember that some of these are brand new, and more than likely subject to change.
The thing is that most of these new class features aren't new. We've been playing with a lot of them for literally years. We've had the abilities to put claws on Sorcerers since Complete Arcane came out, we've been able to give them extending limbs since Lords of Madness. We know that these abilities aren't good because we've already tried to use them.
The Pathfinder Wizards already get the ability to hand out small amounts of damage with a touch attack at first level. I've put that ability through its paces, and it sucks. I don't have to run new playtests with the Sorcerer to say definitively that her new Acidic Touch, Claws, or Heavenly Fire Fist are all crap because those aren't really different from the Gravetouch, the Draconic Claws, or whatever that arcane spellcasters already have been able to use.
If you give us an ability, and it sucks, and then you change the flavor without changing the mechanics then I can absolutely guaranty you that the ability still sucks. Natural weapons which are less effective than Morningstars seriously may as well not even exist.
Almost nothing that the Sorcerer picked up in the under 10 bracket is meaningful in the slightest. We seriously don't need to run a full playtest to give you that answer because these abilities are not different from other abilities which we have already tested. You should be ashamed of yourself for even being surprised by people having a negative reaction to the new Sorcerer packages, considering how little new material there is in them.
I mean seriously: 4d8 breath weapon at ninth level (18 damage)? That's not even a 3rd level spell cast by a sixth level character (21 damage). What made you think that was a good idea? Why is it even worthy of discussion that the vast majority of people can see that it is not?
-Frank
Some things don't need to be play tested for a person to know there garbage up front, which sad to say the Sorcerer is. I was really looking foroword to it but so much of it is just sad and utterly weak. The only Bloodlines that are close to being worth it are the elemental and Destined ones, all the others just really aren't worth it.
Well, Playtest is called PLAYtest for a reason... You cannot playtest something without actually, you know, PLAY IT. Things tend to be much different in actual play, at the game table, than they look on paper.
I wonder how many people in the "sorcerers are crippled" camp have actually played a sorcerer... much less across all 20 levels.
I, for one, don't even remotely think sorcerers are crippled. I have played one (to great effect, I must add), my players have played them as often as wizards, clerics and druids, and I have seen what they can do. Sorcerers are a powerful class, and have been since their debut in 3.0. Did they need some adjustments? Yes, of course. I think Jason has done a great job creating some mechanics that are not only good rules-wise and backward compatible, but full of flavor too. Sorcerers have a niche in the game, there are a lot of players who prefer them over wizards (even with the perceived disadvantage), and I think Pathfinder and Jason are heading in the right direction, adding options for them, adding flavor and spice, but not changing what they are and what they do.
Most of the complaints about the sorcerers I do not share. They get new spells levels one level later than wizards? Sure, it stings, but common, it's not a tragedy. Metamagic costs a full round? It's a balancing factor, and compensate the ability to throw around empowered enervations one after another if needed. From both a mechanical and a flavor point of view, I love the new Sorcerer and the host of options that come with him.
Thanks Jason for your good work and your nice words here!
Jason, this is a golden opportunity for you to rise above it all and see feedback in a different light. Feedback isn't positive or negative. Feedback is simply information. You have the choice on how to feel about it. You can choose to see it as neutral. You can choose to see it as valuable. You can take it into consideration, you can not.
I'm not perfect and do not always practice this myself. The way to go about things to get the most results is BEING FOR whatever it is that you WANT. So if you want playtest feedback, then focus on that. ANY energy spent on BEING AGAINST what you DO NOT WANT will draw attention to what it is that you do not want.
Instead of railing against preconceived notions... You could instead facilitate the playtest process (why not pregen characters? and a short playtest scenario?) and simply inspire playtesting. REALLY be inspirational about playtesting instead of merely requesting it. You could go about it any way you want. People see your work, but not really your passion. Where's the crazy passion energy?
It's not up to the fans whether or not positive energy is brought to PRPG, it's up to you and Paizo. You can't control what the fans are going to do.
Common, we roleplayers are supposed to be creative people... If we know how to play, we know how to playtest... Basically it's the same thing.
Go ahead, make some characters, advance them a few levels to see how they evolve, and above all, play, play and play! Note down what you like and what you feel it could be changed/fixed/whatever.
We are in the enviable position of having fun while helping those brave Paizo folks! They had the courage and guts of laying their job naked before us, so we could speak, criticise, and give our opinion. Nobody else has done this, and I think we owe them and the game they're creating for all of us some respect, gratitude and nicely worded and civil comments here in the forums.
I wish to thank all who have posted on this thread. I will consider what you have said while I build my first Pathfinder sorcerer character. Jason, I wish to especially thank you as this is the first sorcerer I have built, as the previous version didn't interest me.
After Igor Proudfoot, halfling sorcerer of an undead bloodline, is completed, I will comment again. No offense to those who can gauge the class without trial, but I will get a better feel for the class by using it, rather than preusing it.
Well, I guess the issue I take with some of the discussions is that the Sorcerer is seen as weak, and I guess I never saw that in comparison to the other classes... I always thought the sorcerer was fairly decent.
Let's take the Dragon-blooded sorcerer, which given the original history seems to be the most common theme.
At 11th level the addtions are:
+2 natural AC & 10 resistance to an element as a constant effect, a breath weapon 1/day that does 5d8 points of damage, a natural weapon that does 1d8+str+1d6(energy) damage, and two more feats (of which I would take quicken spell and improved initiative).
The weapons don't really impress me even though I do like the claw concept just for flavor. I think the breath weapon should be at-will. I think I would rather have the claw attack be a touch attack, unless I was making a multiclass.
The Natural armor...resistance...well I really can't see how those are bad things. They certainly don't make the character weaker and I'm not sure the character needs to be that much stronger.
The two feats are nice too, and if it's not some sort of typo I'm assuming the sorcerer can now use quicken spell (that or it was meant to be something else and was a typo) which would certainly be a boost given the number of spell slots a sorc has to burn.
Either way, in comparison to the 3.5 sorc which I don't think was that weak I see a similar character with 2 more AC, 10 energy resist, two more feats (one of them possibly being a massively useful one he didn't have access to), a higher HP total, and of course the slightly stronger build that the system naturally has.
Like I said, maybe the damages should be changed for the new abilities to put it on par, or another ability added, but I guess I don't see the need for angst over input.
I suppose it may be a good thing, for now I feel the want to playtest it and see what it's like, but other than that I don't see a massive amount of use to this.
Sorcerers will be getting unlimited cantrips. This was an oversight on my part. As for the rest, I think I we should wait till we see some playtest feedback before we pass judgement.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
This was one of my main concerns for the sorcerers thanks
I like the changes to the sorcerer, but I can honestly say I've never played one. However, I'm tempted to now :)
One of the things I noticed that was a little disturbing was that the bloodline abilies are modified by CON?? How is this balanced against the wizard specialist abilities being based off CHR? If a sorcerer wants to increase the effectiveness of their bloodline abilities, they bump their CON which also gives them more HP and better Fortitude saves. If a wizard wants to increase their specialist abilities, they have to bump their CHR which also affects.... NOTHING????
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Jason,
I've not had a chance to read the Playtest, stuck at work, but I do want to point out that Claws of the Beast (Psychic Warrior 1) does allow both claws at full BAB, but you do not get secondary attacks. Ex: thrid level psychic warrior goes +2/+2 but an 8th level goes +6/+6, not +6/+6/+1. Since the Sorcerer's crazy or desperate enough to get ito melee with his poor BAB, please let him have the two attacks.
Brett,
I think it balances in that Intelligence doesn't make sense "I'm smarter, so my raw magical power is more efficient?" Con works as a kludge, but if it was Charisma it would be a double benefit.
I am a wizard and therefor more intellegent enabling me to conceptualize spells in a more efficient way and store said information in my cavernous mind. This thereby increases the effectiveness of various theorems of arcane esotera, empowers me toward more substantial and potent arcana and allows the breaking of the very laws of the universe!
Wizards have less magical oomph than sorcerers, but they use it better.
[Int rules, Cha is for posers! Nya!]
Only because the sorcerer keeps getting arbitrarily shafted by rule mechanics and are now given things that don't help them be better sorcerers. Claws and touch attacks might be nice for a dedicated shapeshifter or 'magical fighter' class, but for a dedicated low BAB and HP spellcaster, they cry out 'I have a death wish'
Honestly, I think a bloodline is about as good as a wizar'ds class features -- especially in a core-only game.
The problem is just that the sorcerer's casting mechanic is still worse.
The bloodlines could be cleaned up a little to be consistently useful across levels, but are already workable across some limited level-ranges.
Honestly, I think a bloodline is about as good as a wizar'ds class features -- especially in a core-only game.
A quick comparison between any bloodline and any school tells me that isn't the case. The schools at least help the wizard actually be a better wizard.
The casting mechanic is still worse as well.
Honestly, I think a bloodline is about as good as a wizar'ds class features -- especially in a core-only game.
How?
Wizards are getting level appropriate spells as spell-likes at the levels they get them, as well as abilities that improve spellcasting.
Sorcerers are getting feats that you can get at 1st level and not care about and monster powers that can be duplicated by 1st to 3rd spells (with a few high level powers being almost 5th level powers).
They are no gate, sir. I'd be tempted to ask my DM to let me take a school specialization or a domain.
So far, the only thing I truly approve of is the flavor option where you don't necessarily have to be the product of ancestral xenophilia.