There are people who are simply born with a powerful force of personality. Powerful enough to command magic without the intellect to master it the way a Wizard does.Really? So, just being charming and charismatic is enough to grant magical power?
A cleric is granted spells by a god; a druid is granted spells by nature; a wizard is granted spells by an intense and nigh-perfect knowledge of exactly what to do to evoke their spells; a sorceror forces the world to change to meet his will. Remember, Charisma just isn't how charming you are-- it's also a measure of how you stand out compared to other objects, and how you tell yourself apart from the world around you It's literally your will, in a kind of nietzsche way.. With enough der will zer macht you can push reality, and subsequently, other people, into doing what you want. Charisma for sorcerers is part of them forcing their will upon the universe-- literally using force of personality to command reality to do their bidding.
So, why doesn't everybody with a high CHA have magical powers?
Because of the bloodline. Your relation to supernatural forces allows you to tap into their world-altering mysteries.Without that first magical spark created by their ancestor's genes, they can't access the power necessary to control magic. It's what sets them apart from normal people with high charisma.
Could it be, and mind you I'm just tossing a possibility out there, that having a charming and charismatic personality isn't enough? That you need something else?
You need to be descended from supernatural forces, thus, we return to the concept of the bloodline.
Perhaps my post was not clear or maybe just too long to read.
Not too long per se. It's just that your writing style is very boring. I actually fell asleep while reading. Good thing I had something in the microwave or I'd be asleep still.
When I thought of the idea it was more like, Well, Sorcerers were fine in 3E, what if someone wanted to run a 3E Sorcerer, without the flavor of a particular Bloodline? And I wondered what would be fair to give such a Player.
The arcane bloodline, being the non-bloodline.
Force of personality isn't just the ability to make a Ding! every time you smile.
Sorcerers have magic in their blood. Maybe it's from the creature granted bloodlines. Maybe it's the Arcane bloodline, and it just infused them. Maybe it's the Destiny bloodline, which means it just sorta happened. But the big difference between sorcerers and wizards is that, for the sorcerer, the magic is already there. They don't need the rituals and formula and psuedo-science that wizards need.
So how does this pertain to charisma?
Intelligence is mental dexterity. Wisdom is mental constitution. And charisma? Charisma is mental strength. Sorcerers use charisma to grab physics by the throat and say "This here? This is changing." Charisma is pure force of self, grabbing that magic in your blood and throwing it into the world.
What sucks and doesn't make sense is the bloodline concept.
It just screams goth. "Look, I'm an X-man!" It's, frankly, profoundly retarded and it was meant, originally, as a joke. Some kobald sorcerers spread the rumor that they were born from dragons so as to make them look more special.
If you hear it screaming goth, you might need to get your head looked at by shrink, because you're hearing voices :P
Just because Vampire (admittedly a game catering to the goth stereotype) uses bloodlines doesn't mean that it's the only way it can work.
Creatures with supernatural ancestries have long been a fantasy stock, and more often than not, those otherworldly touched were said to have eldritch powers, or did have those powers. It's even grounded in real-world myth. Doesn't have to be "goth or x-man".
The game needs more than just one source of inspiration. It's one of the things that makes Pathfinder so strong.
What does charisma have to do with it? Beats me. If magic was due to your genetics, it'd be based on your con.
Yeah, because we all know that the only thing dictated by your genes is your stamina and hardiness. Cheetahs are just so fast because they are doping.
And every creature can be as intelligent as a human - intelligence doesn't have anything to do with genetics.
I think this beats you because you don't know anything about genetics. So just don't bring them into this. It's still all magic, and doesn't have make sense in the light of our scientific knowledge.
So, what does make sense? Well, it's based on CHA. What does CHA represent? As per RAW, "Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance". What? Not who your great grandfather was? No.
Inherent supernatural power has always been tied to charisma because your power level is tied to your "inner strength", which is tied to charisma.
Charisma isn't tied to "personality", it's tied to confidence, to ego. A person can be quite an a!&&$~$ (bad personality) but still have buckets of charisma, manifesting in the utter conviction that the universe revolves around him.
But what does a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance have to do with magic? Well, pick up just about any book on mythology/comparative religion/or, hell, just about any fantasy book that's ever been written and you'll find the concept of a person who consorts with supernatural beings. Shamans persuade nature spirits to do stuff. Mediums talk to the spirits of the dead and get them to reveal their secrets. Witches (as per the Malleus Mallifecarium) dance in the moonlight with devils. Does this sound more based on "personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance"? Why, yes it does.
Funny that you mention that: A lot of the people who were accused of being witches, of consorting with dark powers, and all that crap, were just confident persons. Often women who did not play the submissive rule, the powers that were felt threatened and came up with the devil worshipper angle to have an excuse to kill them.
And in Pathfinder, it is simple truth that sorcerers often (maybe most of the time) inherit their powers from a supernatural source. Not always (even though it's called bloodline, it doesn't have to be a family matter), but not never, either.
|
It's really not an issue... people love to play spellcasters because it allows you to do amazing things that you can't accomplish without magic, whether it's healing wounds, flying through the air, or blasting fire n' lightning from your fingertips. But no matter who they are, what spellcasting class they select, they can only do it so many times a day before they run dry -- like a lighter that periodically runs out of fluid. But a Fighter can put his feats to work, and swing his sword and do mighty damage in combat every single round. Without fail. One of the campaigns we're running right now has two players, a sorcerer and a fighter, both 11th level. The sorcerer loves to cast lightning bolts and cones of cold, and can do about 30-50 damage to a number of foes several times a day before she is out of juice and has to sit back for a while or call for an 8-hour rest break. The Fighter doesn't really have that issue... if he can reach the foes in combat, he can consistently dish out about 70-110 damage per round to anyone within his...
There's also the fact that if the bad guys have spellcasters too, much of the spellcaster's potential on both sides is spent negating the potential of the other side to one-shot-kill them. While insta-win spells and counterspells are being thrown around by the casters, the warrior-types do the actual work of winning the battle.
I would likely respond to a request to play a sorcerer without a bloodline in the same way that I would to someone asking to play a cleric without any domains.
Why?
But if they really wanted to do it, I would let them. They just wouldn't get the bonuses from bloodlines. While the bloodline abilities are helpful and nice, losing them will not break the class. If they don't want those abilities, I don't think it is necessary to try and give them an equal bonus to the ability they gave up.
If they really want abilities I would point them other arcane classes that don't have bloodlines or suggest that the choose the arcane bloodline (those magical bloodlines have to start somewhere).
If you really want to give bonuses to a character without a bloodline, I think that letting them choose a bonus known spell at 3rd level and every odd level after that should be fine.
|
Here we go right back to my original point. The bloodline is a stupid, stupid concept.
I'm willing to buy into your whole Nietzche argument, but you go spinning off the rails when you have to ultimately go back to saying "it's because of the bloodline".
Having a high CHA and shaping the world to your liking is an argument which could apply just as well to using CHA as it is defined in the book (ie. "Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance") by forcing devils and fey and ancient shades and whatever to your will to have them share their magic secrets with you.
|
|
I think a PC who gets their power from dancing with devils in the moonlight or one whose imaginary friend never went away (and is actually a powerful, ancient fey in disguise), or who speaks with the dead, or has the unwanted attention of a malevolent spirit who is trying to corrupt them (or is trying to use the PC as a plaything) isn't so bland.
Agreed. It's the difference between having power because you were born with it and having power because you went out and said 'I bend thee to my will, for thou art but a stone, and I am Man'.
|
|
That's a very good point *nod*. Inherent in the bloodline concept is the idea that the PC was given magic, not that he/she took it.I think a PC who gets their power from dancing with devils in the moonlight or one whose imaginary friend never went away (and is actually a powerful, ancient fey in disguise), or who speaks with the dead, or has the unwanted attention of a malevolent spirit who is trying to corrupt them (or is trying to use the PC as a plaything) isn't so bland.Agreed. It's the difference between having power because you were born with it and having power because you went out and said 'I bend thee to my will, for thou art but a stone, and I am Man'.
I invite anyone listening in here to read the Belgariad and see how the sorcerers perform there. Its not that they were special, only that they learned to force their Will on the world, without the study and knowledge wizards require. I believe that bloodlines should be acceptable explanations, but not requirements.
As an aside, it's quite odd to be agreeing with you so much LT. 8)
Nowhere in the description on what charisma is do the words "Inherent supernatural power" appear.
And the description of wisdom doesn't contain anything about divine power. And the constitution description never refers to anything like the potency of physical stuff like poison.
Your point?
Would 'Power Path' be a better term?
Only if you get hung up with terminology. The rules already provide for sorcerers whose power stems from something other than ancestry. The bloodlines have descriptions of people gaining the power from unusual circumstances.
Just like you can rename everything about your own character, you can rename your "bloodline".
You don't have to call it bloodline any more than you have to call your character with the fighter class a "fighter", or a cleric a "cleric".
This sort of freedom is inherent in the whole concept of RPGs.
So you want to get rid of divine spellcasters altogether and turn sorcerers into the blandness that they were in 3E. Maybe we should get rid of fighters or rogues as well? And maybe eliminate the martial arts flavor from the monk?I think bloodlines are bland.
I think a PC who gets their power from dancing with devils in the moonlight or one whose imaginary friend never went away (and is actually a powerful, ancient fey in disguise), or who speaks with the dead, or has the unwanted attention of a malevolent spirit who is trying to corrupt them (or is trying to use the PC as a plaything) isn't so bland.
Sure, those aren't done to death and way beyond....*getting dizzy from all the eye rolling*
Yawn. Another witch. Dancing around on hilltops skyclad. A warlock with a Faustian pact. Their most dreadful power? Boring me to death with clichés.
You're complaining about cliches while playing DnD?You're kidding, right?
The fact that DnD uses cliches is one of the reasons it works as well as it does for newbies.
Yeah, clichés are an integral part of Pathfinder. It's a class-based system, after all.
But since you started ranting about one cliché (power in the blood), I thought I'd rant about the clichés you mentioned and tried to sell off as less cliché than the rest.
They're all clichés: The sorcerer who gains his power from his ancestry, the sorcerer who gains power from unusual circumstances, and the sorcerer who gains power from a pact.
That's the whole point! They're *all* done to death. I can find examples for bad implementations for all three of them. So bloodlines are "x-men goth" for some reason? I've seen the pact thing a killion times, too, and a lot of it was godawful. And the unusual circumstances is so Super Hero - and we all know there are more than enough really, really crappy super heroes in super hero comics.
We could all, of course, accept those bad examples, remember Sturgeon's Law, and focus on the good ideas.
Would 'Power Path' be a better term?
Only if you get hung up with terminology. The rules already provide for sorcerers whose power stems from something other than ancestry. The bloodlines have descriptions of people gaining the power from unusual circumstances.
Just like you can rename everything about your own character, you can rename your "bloodline".
You don't have to call it bloodline any more than you have to call your character with the fighter class a "fighter", or a cleric a "cleric".
This sort of freedom is inherent in the whole concept of RPGs.
If that were really so obvious to the majority of people, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Calling it a "bloodline" sends a confusing message and hurts clarity.
Not a bloodline problem. The message just has to be hammered home. I'll get my earthbreaker, you round up people.
Still, if a player wants to play a Sorcerer but none of the Bloodlines fit -- but the Sun Domain does because the Player likes Pelor -- do you think What a Cleric gets with the Sun Domain is relatively equal to one of the Sorcerer Bloodlines?As far as I'm concerned, a bloodline, two domains, and a school are all more or less interchangeable. If you want a sorcerer blessed by a deity or a cleric who worships the god of a particular bloodline, I say go for it.
While the basic concept behind schools, bloodlines, and domains is the same, they aren't always mechanically interchangeable. For example, how do the channel-based powers granted by the sun domain translate to classes without the ability to channel energy? Or the healing domain? Do sorcerers with these powers also get to cast healing spells?
|
|
[/Threadjack]
So, . . . .
Going back to my OP,
Let's say that "Lilith's Thrall" is a Player in my game, a Player who, for whatever reason, just doesn't like the Bloodlines. That's his(?) prerogative.
As his DM, it's part of my job to try to let the Player play what he wants to play. "Try" to let the Player....
So, what would be a good boon, equal to a set of Bloodline abilities?
Most gamers have said giving a +1 to Spells Known is too powerful though one said it shouldn't be.
If that isn't an equitable choice, what is?
Would a Familiar equal a set of Bloodline abilities if a Player wanted one? (It seems too weak -- an animal companion is too overpowered)
What about free Metamagic Feats just like a Wizard gets -- 1 at 1st, 5th, 10th, etc.?
|
|
[Threadjack]
You think Bloodlines are stupid, Lilith's Thrall?!!!
I think it's the best concept change in the new edition.
You know what I think is the stupidest part of the game -- the sacred cow that really needs to get torn to shreds? -- Ability Score descriptions.
STR, CON, DEX, INT, WIS, CHA.
The absolute worst part of D&D!
They're not equal.
INT, WIS & CHA are so badly defined it's pathetic.
A Wizard only needs one good Ability. A Paladin needs 3. A Monk needs 2 or 3. Meanwhile, Clerics & Druids, Rogues & Bards can, depending on the build, juggle between 1 or 2.
Back in the day CHA was ONLY a PC's beauty. No game mechanic whatsoever. (Unless you were into henchmen -- no one actually had a RAW Paladin)
The reason Monte Cook and Skip Williams created the Sorcerer Class was because so much of the PHB was devoted to spells it seemed wrong to just have one arcane-casting Class. And they finally found an actual use for CHA.
|
|
So the answer (which many posters have asserted) is... make the Player choose a Bloodline.
Ugh.
I just don't like it. A Player should be able to trade that "package" for another "package."
Of course, that ultimately makes the OP irrelevant. If a Player wants to trade the crunch of Bloodline for something else it usually falls to the Player to come up with a possible replacement package.
|
|
So the answer (which many posters have asserted) is... make the Player choose a Bloodline.
People have pointed out that both the Arcane and Destined bloodlines diverge from the typical and are suited for a "non-bloodline" sorcerer. It's also been suggested to just flat out remove the bloodline abilities, yes this nerfs the character, but the player is asking for the nerfing. Finally, there have been a few suggestions for alternate abilities to replace the bloodline features.
|
|
Yes... save that what goes on in Belgeriad isn't AD+D style sorcerery, it's the Magic of Mary Sue, as they don't even cast spells, just think what they want and release that will with a word. (and apparantly any word will do) Also noteworthy is that even the Belgeriad sorcerers do seem to come from uncommon backgrounds, Polgara and her sister had a "wolf" bloodline, there were two identical twins that pratically thought with one mind and a hideously deformed dwarf. Hardly any one of these sorcerers came from a mundane background.
Actually given that everyone and everything in the Belgeriad world seems to be shaped AND BRED FOR MILLENNIA by one Prophecy or the other, all sorcerers of that world could be justified in having the "Destined" bloodline.
And it could be justified that they were normal people who realized they could shape the world with their Will. Hell, the characters discuss the sporadicalness of the talent emerging when they find a sorcerer they never knew about in a university. They posited that the reason they don't find so many of them is that they accidentally destroy themselves with their own Will. Which kind of throws out the uncommon background thing.
What is AD&D style sorcery? Because I think it fits 3.5 sorcery just fine. Force your will on the world without preparation, but only so many times before you have to rest. We just rarely see them run out of spell slots since this is an Eddings book and the good guys always win.
So the answer (which many posters have asserted) is... make the Player choose a Bloodline.
Ugh.
I just don't like it. A Player should be able to trade that "package" for another "package."
On the same note -- suppose a player doesn't like the Universal School wizard and wants to play a 3.5 non-specialised wizard. What do you think would be a good trade-off?
On the same note -- suppose a player doesn't like the Universal School wizard and wants to play a 3.5 non-specialised wizard. What do you think would be a good trade-off?So the answer (which many posters have asserted) is... make the Player choose a Bloodline.
Ugh.
I just don't like it. A Player should be able to trade that "package" for another "package."
A 3.5 game instead of Pathfinder.
It's like saying, "Well, I want a brand new corvette, but I don't want one with the modern engine or electronics, I want one that has the same features as the 1992 model."
That's a very good point *nod*. Inherent in the bloodline concept is the idea that the PC was given magic, not that he/she took it.I think a PC who gets their power from dancing with devils in the moonlight or one whose imaginary friend never went away (and is actually a powerful, ancient fey in disguise), or who speaks with the dead, or has the unwanted attention of a malevolent spirit who is trying to corrupt them (or is trying to use the PC as a plaything) isn't so bland.Agreed. It's the difference between having power because you were born with it and having power because you went out and said 'I bend thee to my will, for thou art but a stone, and I am Man'.I invite anyone listening in here to read the Belgariad and see how the sorcerers perform there. Its not that they were special, only that they learned to force their Will on the world, without the study and knowledge wizards require. I believe that bloodlines should be acceptable explanations, but not requirements.
As an aside, it's quite odd to be agreeing with you so much LT. 8)
Interesting that you should recommend reading the Belgariad... because I recently did just that (well I re-read the Belgariad and the Mallorean). Some really great stuff.
Oh... and I like the Bloodlines. I honestly feel that they add something to the Sorcerer class.
Dean; The_Minstrel_Wyrm
On the same note -- suppose a player doesn't like the Universal School wizard and wants to play a 3.5 non-specialised wizard. What do you think would be a good trade-off?So the answer (which many posters have asserted) is... make the Player choose a Bloodline.
Ugh.
I just don't like it. A Player should be able to trade that "package" for another "package."
A 3.5 game instead of Pathfinder.
It's like saying, "Well, I want a brand new corvette, but I don't want one with the modern engine or electronics, I want one that has the same features as the 1992 model."
This.
If you hear it screaming goth, you might need to get your head looked at by shrink, because you're hearing voices :PJust because Vampire (admittedly a game catering to the goth stereotype) uses bloodlines doesn't mean that it's the only way it can work.
Oh THANK YOU! For the life of me, I could not figure out the "goth screaming" statement. It just didn't click. Thanks for clearing that up.
greg
In my case, I, as the player, would say (for example) "My character was playing with a group of other kids on the lake next to his village when he was 12 years old. He fell through the ice and got trapped. The villagers rushed out with axes and picks and tried to free him, but he died.
Only, the next spring, he came back to the village, alive. They chased him out thinking he was some sort of revenant. He had an odd pallor about him and always seemed cold to the touch.
He joined a wandering band of merchants and learned their craft, but he always had the sense that -something- was chasing him.
Shortly before he joined the party of adventurers, his old merchant group were slaughtered. He doesn't know how or why, but he has a sense that whatever has been chasing him all these years is getting closer. For protection, he joined the group of PCs, but he keeps the secret of the hunter to himself. I can use either the elemental (water/ice) or undead bloodlines - though the bloodline is just a game mechanic, my character doesn't have any ancestral crap. If you've got a preference as a GM for which of the two bloodlines to use, please tell me."
If my player came up with that, they would get a customized bloodline. I would still call it a bloodline, though, because in my game sorcerers have "bloodline" powers even if no rational character in the game would refer to it as bloodline. The knee-jerk negative reaction to a hypothetical player coming up with a sorcerer concept that doesn't rely upon bloodline strikes me as odd, particularly when coupled with the assertion that such a player would be punished by not getting anything in place of the bloodline power as long as they stand by their backstory that they do not, in fact, have a bloodline that grants their powers. Why? DM can call the suite of powers "bloodline" powers, just like I do, but not gimp a character just because the player decides to reject the bloodline concept.
If my player came up with that, they would get a customized bloodline. I would still call it a bloodline, though, because in my game sorcerers have "bloodline" powers even if no rational character in the game would refer to it as bloodline. The knee-jerk negative reaction to a hypothetical player coming up with a sorcerer concept that doesn't rely upon bloodline strikes me as odd, particularly when coupled with the assertion that such a player would be punished by not getting anything in place of the bloodline power as long as they stand by their backstory that they do not, in fact, have a bloodline that grants their powers. Why? DM can call the suite of powers "bloodline" powers, just like I do, but not gimp a character just because the player decides to reject the bloodline concept.
In my case, I, as the player, would say (for example) "My character was playing with a group of other kids on the lake next to his village when he was 12 years old. He fell through the ice and got trapped. The villagers rushed out with axes and picks and tried to free him, but he died.
Only, the next spring, he came back to the village, alive. They chased him out thinking he was some sort of revenant. He had an odd pallor about him and always seemed cold to the touch.
He joined a wandering band of merchants and learned their craft, but he always had the sense that -something- was chasing him.
Shortly before he joined the party of adventurers, his old merchant group were slaughtered. He doesn't know how or why, but he has a sense that whatever has been chasing him all these years is getting closer. For protection, he joined the group of PCs, but he keeps the secret of the hunter to himself. I can use either the elemental (water/ice) or undead bloodlines - though the bloodline is just a game mechanic, my character doesn't have any ancestral crap. If you've got a preference as a GM for which of the two bloodlines to use, please tell me."
It's also worth noting that most bloodlines have to start somewhere. LilithsThrall's example might not sound like "all my ancesters bequeathed this weird blodline on me" but it could easily be "I am the progenitor of a new bloodline, even if I don't know it yet."
Making it still a bloodline, even in name.
Or, of course, we could just rename it to watever the player likes.
I think the X-man sorcerer can have a place, but the non X-man sorcerer can too
We are in perfect agreement on this.
Sorcerers have magic in their blood.
You knew that when a devil gives you infernal power in exchange for your soul and perverse sexual acts, he puts the power into you blood, didn't you? ;-)
"Magic in the blood" can be a different way to say "inherent magical powers". All sorcerers have inherent powers rather than something they are being granted piecemeal by a higher entity or harness using knowledge garnered from their studies. Some inherit it, some are born under auspicious circumstances and get it from there, others obtain it later through said circumstances or by making pacts.
I do agree: it shouldn't all be "my mommy was an angel" - but sorcerers are magic rather than use magic.
And claims that removing bloodlines from Sorcerers will make them bland, like thisSo you want to .. turn sorcerers into the blandness that they were in 3E.
Well, removing the mechanic makes them bland. So you keep the mechanic. If someone doesn't want an aberrant's special flavour, they will go arcane vanilla. Call it awesome vanilla. But going NASA styrofoam pills on the class to get an extra helping shouldn't be the way.
I just don't like it. A Player should be able to trade that "package" for another "package."
Then this isn't the game for you. You either need to find a new one or put work and effort into this.
This game is all about those packages. The game is class-based. Although it is a pretty liberal class-based system because of multiclassing, lots of subsets of abilities (like bloodlines for sorcerers, monks' lists of bonus feats, domains...) in each class, and the skills and feats concepts, it still puts limitations on the possible combinations of packages.
Going off the beaten paths and mixing the packages is not built into the system. Once you want to do that, you're on your own, and without a map.
I don't think it is as easy as "lose the bloodline, gain X". You need to decide on a case-by-case basis to find a satisfactory solution.
The "screaming goth" thing referred to being a freak with magical powers both of which (freakishness and magical powers) come as a result of something outside one's control.
We're not talking about goths here, right? Sure, they're freakish, but their only power is putting on make-up and they do it all to themselves ;-P