Goblin Squad Member
|
My apologies for bringing up the subject of spellcasting again (seems there's been a couple threads), but I wanted to focus on one, specific part of spellcasting, and I am seeking an official answer from Goblinworks on this particular part.
As laid out in Pathfinder, casting most arcane spells requires a material component or a focus of some sort.
Focus (F): A focus component is a prop of some sort. Unlike a material component, a focus is not consumed when the spell is cast and can be reused. As with material components, the cost for a focus is negligible unless a price is given. Assume that focus components of negligible cost are in your spell component pouch.
In many older MMOs (e.g. Ultima Online), spellcasting required reagents. Most players found this to be rather annoying, while some thought that this should always be a requirement. Two quick points to consider:
- Goblinworks has generally stated that their goal is to take the Pathfinder ruleset and adapt them as needed to an MMO environment (taking into consideration real-time combat/events, etc.).
- Any game developer should know that there is a difficult balance between "realistic" and "fun".
Considering Pathfinder has already summarized these reagents/components into a spell component pouch, it's obvious they had play-ability and "fun" in mind when designing the tabletop experience. I would suggest that Goblinworks takes this idea and runs with it. I believe that Wizards should be required to have both a Spellbook and a Spell Component Pouch in order to cast spells. However, I do not believe that a wizard should be completely screwed if she finds herself in a "post-death situation". Either these two items should be stupidly-easy to get (available for free or close-to-free at any NPC for example), or players should be allowed to spend a Thread of Pharasma or two to keep each of these two items with them after dying. Personally, if I were playing a Wizard of any sort, I would prefer the latter. Anything otherwise, and I would not find this class "fun" to play.
Lastly, it seems that some community members feel that making spellcasting "easy" is simply overpowered. They feel that limitations of reagents is necessary to maintain balance between classes. I disagree entirely. I believe it would be simple enough to adjust other mechanics of the game, such as spell damage or weapon damage, to balance the game.
In closing, I must re-iterate the point of this thread. I am seeking a response from Goblinworks on this matter, and what their ideals are for the material components of spells, and how they plan to deal with this. If Goblinworks has already discussed this somewhere, I would ask that a member of the community would point me to this.
Thanks!
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
IMHO, as I am planning to play a Wizard, I think a *general* use spell component pouch makes sense for most spells, but once you get into the higher level spells, I think they should require specific components that are more difficult to obtain or more costly to obtain.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
IMHO, as I am planning to play a Wizard, I think a *general* use spell component pouch makes sense for most spells, but once you get into the higher level spells, I think they should require specific components that are more difficult to obtain or more costly to obtain.
That would make sense, based on Pathfinder rules. At the very least, I do not want to end up useless and unable to play my character due to a single dead-and-looted experience.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@dakcenturi i really like that idea as i will probably play a mage class perhaps have your normal tier 1-4 spells that are acquired with level and require a spell pouch but then have a tier 5 that the reagents are a moderate difficulty to find but the spells are more powerful and the have a tier 6 where the items are extremely hard to find perhaps a 1-5% drop on certain things and will allow the wizard to cast spells that do massive destruction or day long buffs etc etc also could be good to sell the spells for hex defense to people in need hmmmmm.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd prefer that with a VERY limited exception, that spell components are just assumed to be in your pouch and you simply lose the GP value of whatever spell is being cast from you bank. Exceptions would be spells that need a specific focus item, or things like Raise Dead or Wish that will need specific rare materials. Diamnonds should be mined from mountian hexes for example.
I really dont want to have to do resource mining to get the bat guano and sulfur to cast fireball.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Almost all spell components should cost nothing if you have a spell component pouch, and that pouch should either be easily obtainable or you should be able to bind it with threads of fate. The latter goes for spell books too, in my opinion.
You have to be careful though with spells that need a specific component. If a component costs too much then nobody will ever cast that spell. Since Pharasma is going to spit us all back out into the world whenever we die, resurrection type spells aren't nearly as useful and so their spell components should reflect that. They're essentially just a summon spell back to your corpse. True Seeing is a costly spell, but if invisibility and etherealness and other such effects are common then True Seeing should be much cheaper to cast. It all needs to be balanced with the game world and some spells are going to be changed more than others.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Honestly, spell components really just need to be treated like ammo, they are hard to manage in PnP because small item tracking is generally hard at a table top - however this is very EASY for a computer.
Have a sensible set of components, and various grades of each (maybe 12 categories), and then have various spells need X amount of Y component per cast.
Adjust price accordingly and done.
For extra, make some versions of components cheap, but just perform basic acts of spells, and more expensive components that enhance a spell.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just go by normal Pathfinder rules, most spells as long as you have a spell component pouch you are fine. Then there are some spells such as stoneskin and raise dead that have costs. Do it that way.
So, most spells would just have a stamina cost, and then (most likely your utilities) would have 'component' costs - This would actually work if you can adjust the availability of those components in order to allow spells to be learned by many people - but only castable by a small portion of the population to balance for how powerful they might be (raise dead for example).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Almost all spell components should cost nothing if you have a spell component pouch, and that pouch should either be easily obtainable or you should be able to bind it with threads of fate. The latter goes for spell books too, in my opinion.
You have to be careful though with spells that need a specific component. If a component costs too much then nobody will ever cast that spell. Since Pharasma is going to spit us all back out into the world whenever we die, resurrection type spells aren't nearly as useful and so their spell components should reflect that. They're essentially just a summon spell back to your corpse. True Seeing is a costly spell, but if invisibility and etherealness and other such effects are common then True Seeing should be much cheaper to cast. It all needs to be balanced with the game world and some spells are going to be changed more than others.
I agree with Uthreth. It would certainly take some balancing if some material components were required for complex/rare/powerful spells.
Honestly, spell components really just need to be treated like ammo, they are hard to manage in PnP because small item tracking is generally hard at a table top - however this is very EASY for a computer.
Have a sensible set of components, and various grades of each (maybe 12 categories), and then have various spells need X amount of Y component per cast.
Adjust price accordingly and done.
For extra, make some versions of components cheap, but just perform basic acts of spells, and more expensive components that enhance a spell.
But why make it so complicated? In this scenario, dying would suck terribly. The player would need to run to a vendor, the bank or some other cache to gather all these various components. Then they'd have to spend (from the sounds of it) at least 5 minutes figuring out or deciding which components they need to take with them. And they'll need to be sure they overcompensate on the amount to bring, because if they run out during battle, they're 100% screwed if they're relying wholly on spellcasting for "everything" (as a pure mage "always should"). And what if said cache of components is not readily available, or the player has run out, or the vendor has run out, or the player is simply too poor? Well, seems like a good time to re-roll.
Sorry to ramble-on with that above scenario, but it just seems like waaay too much of a hassle for most players. And it certainly doesn't sound "fun".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As Uthreth said, we all can come back from the dead in the game, the 'raise dead' spell would simply be a more convient solution, and having a price corresponding reflecting it accordingly.
As for the complications you mention - I mean no disrespect but I don't see those as problems per se, but rather cost/benefits of various spells.
At least for me, I've always viewed magic as a risk/reward thing - it shouldn't be just BETTER, but giving advantage at the cost of something else.
Don't know if that helps.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
No reason you can't have a spell component pouch that is crafted from combining certain numbers of spell components with a leather pouch or something. This way you still have all the market opportunities around spell components, but you take away the hassle of managing spell components (except for the expensive or rare ones needed for higher level spells).
You could even have different levels of the same spell component bag like:
Spell component pouch
Full spell component pouch
Bulging spell component pouch
etc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No reason you can't have a spell component pouch that is crafted from combining certain numbers of spell components with a leather pouch or something. This way you still have all the market opportunities around spell components, but you take away the hassle of managing spell components (except for the expensive or rare ones needed for higher level spells).
You could even have different levels of the same spell component bag like:
Spell component pouch
Full spell component pouch
Bulging spell component pouchetc.
At the very least, the spell component pouch would have to degrad - all weapons and armor, from what I understand, go into disrepair after a long enough time, limiting their effectiveness. Right?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
At the very least, the spell component pouch would have to degrad - all weapons and armor, from what I understand, go into disrepair after a long enough time, limiting their effectiveness. Right?No reason you can't have a spell component pouch that is crafted from combining certain numbers of spell components with a leather pouch or something. This way you still have all the market opportunities around spell components, but you take away the hassle of managing spell components (except for the expensive or rare ones needed for higher level spells).
You could even have different levels of the same spell component bag like:
Spell component pouch
Full spell component pouch
Bulging spell component pouchetc.
I might be able to agree to that. This would require a new component pouch occasionally, thus addressing some of the "market" concerns. I just don't want to deal with carrying around 8-12 different silly little things in order to be competent enough to cast even the most basic spells. Further, I would want to be able to tie some threads to the component pouch so that I would not be useless after death. Similar to how a fighter might tie threads to his +5 club of goblin-smashing.
As for the different types of spell-component pouches, that might resolve the need for individual material components for these "special spells". I had not considered that. Just as a fighter upgrades her weapon, a wizard upgrades her component pouch?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think this is a good compromise. I think only one pouch should need to be in your inventory (or worn) however, so I think they should be backwards compatible. For example, if I have a Bulging spell component pouch I think that should allow me to cast spells that need components in a Full spell component pouch.
I think that arrows are a little different. If someone wants to use generic standard cheap arrows then just buying a quiver should work fine. The problem comes in when they want to have special material arrows with enchantments like Adamantine Flaming Arrows +3. Those should be special and selectable in the inventory or as part of their own quiver. The reason I say this is because there are so many different possible arrows that you can have and most of the time you'll want several different kinds of arrows. One quiver should only be able to hold one type of arrow. Either that, or each arrow must be counted and the quivers would just be a container that could hold x amount. In Core Pathfinder, quivers could hold 20 arrows, for example.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Good ideas, but why stop at quivers?
Let every consumable type, including food, feed, and water, have a single 'bag of'that the player should keep in inventory. Each bag has a magical link to the bank. The player should spend time accumulating appropriate supplies in his/her bank. Thsi could even apply to crafting consumables, such as resources and components.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This proposed spell component system sounds very similar to the system they ended up switching to in Asheron's Call (the only MMO I know of where there are spell components). You carry around a focus for each school of magic that you want to cast. This focus is bulky and limits your inventory. They never degrade, but I suppose making a component bag less bulky but degradable is a good trade off.
Adding in levels of component bags for casting higher tiers of spells, make them craftable, so that the low level ones can be bought from an NPC or a player, but the high level ones are from crafting only.
I like it! This seems perfect to me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think this is a good compromise. I think only one pouch should need to be in your inventory (or worn) however, so I think they should be backwards compatible. For example, if I have a Bulging spell component pouch I think that should allow me to cast spells that need components in a Full spell component pouch.
I think that arrows are a little different. If someone wants to use generic standard cheap arrows then just buying a quiver should work fine. The problem comes in when they want to have special material arrows with enchantments like Adamantine Flaming Arrows +3. Those should be special and selectable in the inventory or as part of their own quiver. The reason I say this is because there are so many different possible arrows that you can have and most of the time you'll want several different kinds of arrows. One quiver should only be able to hold one type of arrow. Either that, or each arrow must be counted and the quivers would just be a container that could hold x amount. In Core Pathfinder, quivers could hold 20 arrows, for example.
Ah, but those Adamantine Flaming Arrows +3 are also backwards compatible. If spell x takes components from a bag of quality y or better, how is that any different from archer action z taking arrows from a quiver of quality w of better?
Good ideas, but why stop at quivers?
Agreed, the same mechanic should be reused as often as possible, I was just mentioning that one as an easy one the envision. Although, I do not think these bags should provide access to banks, there should be real limitations and consequences involved with deciding what gear you are going to carry on any given adventure.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
While having the link back to a bank is * convenient* it would be pretty immersion breaking IMO. However, simply having crafted spell pouches of different quality eliminates the hassle for the wizards and still stimulates economy. I do agree that these should have some degradation effect on them just like you would get with armor and weapons.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While having the link back to a bank is * convenient* it would be pretty immersion breaking IMO. However, simply having crafted spell pouches of different quality elements hassle for the wizards and still stimulates economy. I do agree that these should have some degradation effect on them just like you would get with armor and weapons.
While the different quality pouches/quivers/etc might be a hassle, they not only allow crafters to meaningfully continue getting better at their trade, but also provide adventureres will real choices about weighing the pros and cons about bringing their "A" game...sometimes it might just be better to settle for less (economic) risk of bringing your hand-me-downs, even if it means you can only case big fireball instead of uber fireball. On the other hand, this keeps getting the components and skill to make A game gear, a huge part of the game; insuring crafters are always in demand.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While having the link back to a bank is * convenient* it would be pretty immersion breaking IMO. However, simply having crafted spell pouches of different quality eliminates hassle for the wizards and still stimulates economy. I do agree that these should have some degradation effect on them just like you would get with armor and weapons.
Well said, and I agree. Just don't forget the "threads of fate" part. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sounds like a spell component pouch will just fall in line with other equipment on your character; i.e. should have a rarity, a cost to make and sell from base materials, a time to degrade (and be repaired/replaced), and have the ability to be threaded (if it is a very powerful component pouch).
Did I miss anything
OH, and not toughing that hunger/thrist thread again....I still have players debate it's merit in actual tabletop games, let alone an MMO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The way the Pathfinder Online seems to work (correct me if I am wrong please) is that you actually have to learn spell with training. Forcing the wizard to keep his spellbook around doesn't seem to needed in that situation.
The only reason to keep the spellbook, is to have some way to destroy or steal it. Once that reason is gone (soulthreading?) isn't it just something fancy to read while the wizard prepairs his spells. Not to say that, there will be any chance of the pen and paper spell system remaining in the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
honestly im two ways about this. The first is that in a way spell componenants are pretty ingrained into the lore and history of how spell casting works in the world.
On the other hand non special components dont really add anything. Ohhh look i go to the store and buy 20 stacks on spell components, just like i did in the TT. Hey GM, I go to the magic store spend a couple gold and fill four bags with spell components. I am now going to pretty much forget about it until the next time i go to town, since it is not possible for me to cast that many spells.
So i guess my final would be this. Just leave it out. it adds meaningless tedium to the game. At least with say arrows you can possibly come up with reasons to have special arrows, which would act like special components.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If there are not spell components, what is the difference between a Wizard and a Sorcerer?
Sorcerers in the tabletop get Eschew Materials as a baseline ability. Sorcerers gain spells slowly, but innately, and they can cast them a lot. Sorcerers have bloodline abilities.
Wizards in the tabletop get an Arcane Bond as a baseline ability. Wizards gain spells quickly, but they have to keep them copied in a spell book, and they have a somewhat low limit on how many they can prepare for use that day. Wizards have school specializations.
I want these two classes to remain differentiated this way. The flavor and style of needing to carefully prepare your spell components and spells as a Wizard counts for a lot, and refers to the way they have come to learn magic - by being studious, and anticipating the challenges they will face that day.
To take away the need for preparation - of which a spell component pouch is a small and simple part - is to take away a part of what makes a Wizard a Wizard - and it cheapens the innate powers of a Sorcerer, as well.
Of course, there is no reason that a Wizard couldn't earn a Merit Badge granting him the equivalent of Eschew Materials - it could easily be within his class archetype, for that matter. But it should not be automatic - it should require study and focus, just like the rest of their magical abilities.
I hope nobody is talking about removing expensive and specific spell components - because then you are just cheapening all magic.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
I hope nobody is talking about removing expensive and specific spell components - because then you are just cheapening all magic.
That notion would be resisted: There must be a reason to go delving in the deeps and in the far places. Those components are needed therefore.
Other hand: Can you imagine GW allowing Wish?
I hope nobody is talking about removing expensive and specific spell components - because then you are just cheapening all magic.
For comparisons sake, the Devs have said that those who use weapons and armor will need maintenance kits to keep their weapons and armor in top shape. So likely spell components will be needed. I do like the idea of higher level spells requiring rare materials.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
In the TT most DM's simply over look the bag with "do you have it on you, good... forgotten". If forced it tends to only screw the wizard over everyone else.
If implemented then it needs to be across the board. So long as everyone has to deal with the same mechanic. Divine caster would need to use a degrading object the same as the wizard and fighters weapons would need to degrade at the same rate as the wizard.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A guildmate of mine (who is not on these messageboards [yet]) said:
My understanding is that people expecting something close to tabletop play are simply misinformed. The game is based on pathfinder lore and on DnD class and casting concepts, but the game will be an MMO akin to Mortal or Darkfall but hopefully with much more polish and thought put into it. Paizo has earned a lot of goodwill by keeping up the 3.5 support so I'm hopeful they'll be there directing the creation of this game.
And another said:
I've been looking through the PFO forums and am worried about one particular aspect of this game: I'm worried people are going to expect PF Tabletop gameplay but just in virtual form. I hope not too many people will be disappointed when all the lore is there but the game essence itself has changed.
I have to agree with the common theme here in their posts. While the creators of PFO would like to keep true to the tabletop game as close as possible, I'm thinking that some people might have too high of expectations in regards to how close to the tabletop it will be.
That being said, if Goblinworks decided to make sorcerers and wizards cast nearly the same in regards to "physical components" (reagents, spellbook, etc., or the complete lack thereof) in the interest of keeping the game fun to play, then I'm thinking there's going to be some disappointed people. However, making the game tedious and unplayable is going to disappoint and frustrate people even more.
Unplayable? Check the spoiler below for this tangent...
Scenario:
Imagine a modern-day player logging into PFO for the first time, saying "Oh neat, I've always wanted to be a wizard!" She rolls a wizard, and is probably granted some reagents and a basic spellbook. She ventures out and kills a few dire-monkeys and all is well. Suddenly, a band of goblins attacks her, kills her, and her corpse is looted. She loses her spellbook, or at least all of her reagents. She has no skills to even pick up a stick and beat things, so she's pretty much S.O.L. Depending on the type of person she is, she might rage-quit there on the spot.
So what I'm really trying to say is that we really should be prepared to accept change, especially in regards to how PFO archetypes are likely to drastically differ from those in the books.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, as to that scenario: Spell component pouches are fairly cheap, threaded gear, and it's a social game - go get a little help.
Honestly I'm totally willing to accept change, but I'd sooner have sorcerers and wizards combined than reduced to too-similar shadows of one another.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, as to that scenario: Spell component pouches are fairly cheap, threaded gear, and it's a social game - go get a little help.
I certainly hope that's all it would take, which is one of the points I really would like to make. It shouldn't take exorbitant amounts of time to get back into playing the game.
Honestly I'm totally willing to accept change, but I'd sooner have sorcerers and wizards combined than reduced to too-similar shadows of one another.
I could see this combination as being a possible solution. Some people may not like that, but I could see that being a better option than the latter.
Sounds like a spell component pouch will just fall in line with other equipment on your character; i.e. should have a rarity, a cost to make and sell from base materials, a time to degrade (and be repaired/replaced), and have the ability to be threaded (if it is a very powerful component pouch).
This, pretty much--but not quite, I think.
What I am hearing reminds me a lot of the specialty bags from WoW, but a little different to work with the PfO mechanics. Spell component pouch could be a threaded bag that allows all the items inside to also be threaded, however it only holds spell components. It could hold, perhaps, 4 (spell component pouch, thread cost:1), 8 (full spell component pouch, thread cost:2), or 12 (bulging spell component pouch, thread cost:3) different component stacks at a time, but needs to be refilled occasionally. Perhaps some high level, rare bags have some kind of special ability, like a percentage chance to cast the spell without expending the component, or some kind of metamagic, or something...?
I think it makes sense that spell components are kept in the game as a way of balancing consumption, as in, melee combatants need to pay to repair/replace equipment periodically, ranged combatants need to purchase ammo, spellcasters need to purchase spell components. Also, for me, at least, it lends to immersion. And, I agree that it is a cornerstone of the difference between sorcerers and wizards. Side note: perhaps instead of Eschew Materials, sorcerers would gain an ability that allows one component pouch to be threaded to them for free (at no thread cost).
certainly hope that's all it would take, which is one of the points I really would like to make. It shouldn't take exorbitant amounts of time to get back into playing the game.
Well if I were running a caster that depended on reagents to cast spells, I would keep a backup spell component pouch, and components, banked for just such emergencies.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hmm, an update on the subject of Sorcerers vs Wizards (and whether there will be a distinction if there are no individual reagents, etc.):
From Ryan's post here...
... We have a very good idea of what kinds of things need to be put on the priority list at the outset:
* All the races in the core rulebook
* All the roles from the core rulebook...
It seems they will be focusing on the roles in the core rulebook, and that might imply that these two archetypes will be combined somehow. Obviously, we won't know for some time, but speculation is fun.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hmm, an update on the subject of Sorcerers vs Wizards (and whether there will be a distinction if there are no individual reagents, etc.):
From Ryan's post here...
It seems they will be focusing on the roles in the core rulebook, and that might imply that these two archetypes will be combined somehow. Obviously, we won't know for some time, but speculation is fun.... We have a very good idea of what kinds of things need to be put on the priority list at the outset:
* All the races in the core rulebook
* All the roles from the core rulebook...
I'm not sure the Devs could combine Wizards and Sorcerers totally and still have all the roles included as stated. A wizard has the potential of knowing every spell available, but due to a Sorcerer gaining his/her magic via a bloodline, they are limited in the number of spells they can know. They can be very powerful, especially if they train the proper skills and get all the proper merit badges for being a Sorcerer, but a Wizard who has access to inscribing scrolls and spells from captured/looted spell books will be the more powerful of the two as he/she can choose from among many spells every time they rest. The Sorcerer has a limited spell list available to them as they only gain a set number. While many overlaps may occur, like both can train Knowledge: Arcana, and Spellcrafting, any skills that allow the use of a spell book will make a 100% wizard have an edge over a similarly skilled (Level) Sorcerer. Of course you can, in a skill-based Sandbox MMO have hybrid characters, and I think we will see those, so I am just comparing characters that stick to those skills needed to be pure Sorcerers and pure Wizards. And I do agree, speculating is fun ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If a component costs too much then nobody will ever cast that spell. Since Pharasma is going to spit us all back out into the world whenever we die, resurrection type spells aren't nearly as useful and so their spell components should reflect that. They're essentially just a summon spell back to your corpse.
It depends on how you look at it. In a situation where your body can be looted when you die, every second counts when it comes to getting back to your body. A Resurrection spell would instantly get you back up so your gear would no longer be threatened for loss.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not to worried about spell components even though I wanna play a wizard. It even says that most spell components have almost no cost and are common materials like the fire ball spell just requires a pinch of guano and sufur to cast i believe. Where chain lightning requires silver keys for each target effected. And spell books being looted would suck but think on in the pnp version how much a spell book full of spells can be worth.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure the Devs could combine Wizards and Sorcerers totally and still have all the roles included as stated. A wizard has the potential of knowing every spell available, but due to a Sorcerer gaining his/her magic via a bloodline, they are limited in the number of spells they can know. They can be very powerful, especially if they train the proper skills and get all the proper merit badges for being a Sorcerer, but a Wizard who has access to inscribing scrolls and spells from captured/looted spell books will be the more powerful of the two as he/she can choose from among many spells every time they rest. The Sorcerer has a limited spell list available to them as they only gain a set number. While many overlaps may occur, like both can train Knowledge: Arcana, and Spellcrafting, any skills that allow the use of a spell book will make a 100% wizard have an edge over a similarly skilled (Level) Sorcerer. Of course you can, in a skill-based Sandbox MMO have hybrid characters, and I think we will see those, so I am just comparing characters that stick to those skills needed to be pure Sorcerers and pure Wizards. And I do agree, speculating is fun ;)Hmm, an update on the subject of Sorcerers vs Wizards (and whether there will be a distinction if there are no individual reagents, etc.):
From Ryan's post here...
It seems they will be focusing on the roles in the core rulebook, and that might imply that these two archetypes will be combined somehow. Obviously, we won't know for some time, but speculation is fun.... We have a very good idea of what kinds of things need to be put on the priority list at the outset:
* All the races in the core rulebook
* All the roles from the core rulebook...
Sorcs have the advantage of being able to cast every spell they know. The Wizard has to with limited exceptions actually prepared the spell ahead of time. Sadly I think the Sorceror class still needs a few more spells known to completely even out the balance, but they are completely different in terms of how thier abilities work. Especially when you combine a Sorceror with Metamagic feats you can some pretty extreme numbers of a spell out of them.
From what they have said spell books are going to have a limited selection of spells in them and you will be able to only equip one at a time. Sorcs of course don't need a spellbook and thus have a significant advantage over Wizards in that regard.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If a component costs too much then nobody will ever cast that spell. Since Pharasma is going to spit us all back out into the world whenever we die, resurrection type spells aren't nearly as useful and so their spell components should reflect that. They're essentially just a summon spell back to your corpse.It depends on how you look at it. In a situation where your body can be looted when you die, every second counts when it comes to getting back to your body. A Resurrection spell would instantly get you back up so your gear would no longer be threatened for loss.
Further, being able to restore life to your fallen party member midway through a dungeon should not be an overlooked utility.