Café de Nuit

ScS of the Fraternity wrote:Eye lyke to tok wit tung n cheak, ow!

Shame ea.... ouch, damn fangs

As for the specialisation, allowing 2 extra spells per spell level and restricting them to only 4 schools might work?

If knowledge (all skills) doesn't work, try restricting them to a couple of knowledge skills like arcane, geography and local.

I don't think specialization is broken. It adds as much power as having a higher Int but with limits to the schools and what spells can be memorised. Altering that is a bad idea.

I still say giving a sorc a couple extra feats would balance things out.

I think specialization is pretty good as is, though I don't see why it couldn't also be applied to a sorcerer, perhaps as a responce to the unique origins of their powers.

Jason of the Fraternity wrote:

Troile wrote:Specialization as wizard is so broken. I think you'd have to tailor something specific to the sorcerer. I think 1 extra spell slot per level might be a bit much...but then who knows

What about using something along the lines of the bloodline feats from the Arcane Ancestry (Dragon #311) and Arcane Ancestry 2 (Dragon #325) articles? These feats allow a sorcerer to gain an extra known spell per spell level, but the sorcerer is then restricted from choosing certain types of other spells.

For example, the anarchic bloodline provides color spray (1st-level), Tasha's hideous laughter (2nd-level), rage (3rd-level), etc. as bonus spells. However, the sorcerer with this background can learn or cast spells with the lawful descriptor. I realize that it isn't the same as specialization, but you could use this method to help compensate between the two.

Since one extra spell known per spell-level doesn't completely work the same, I would also recommend that the sorcerer possibly get two or three other bonus bloodline feats at higher levels (10th perhaps?). Again, the articles provide other benefits that can be gained after a particular bloodline is chosen. Perhaps at 5th-level, the sorcerer gains a another insight to his/her inherent magical heritage...

Again, I don't think that this completely recreates the specialization idea for the sorcerer class. I do think that it brings it a bit closer while keeping within the idea of the sorcerer's style of magic, though. Anyway, some food for thought.

I just skimmed over it, but it seems a lot like Cleric's domain spells, no? That seems a good idea.

As for specialization, I tried to use it in 2ndEd. I repented soon enough. Not being able to cast from a certain school is a very very big drawback.
In 3E, when it came out, Specialization seemed even weaker than it was. If I remember, all it did was grant you an extra spell from a specific school, but the regular wizard gains that extra spell too, and from any school. So, it's not an advantage (in 2nd Ed, the specialist really gained an extra spell more than the regular wizard). Then, it grants a +1 bonus to spellcraft checks. So what? It's easier to learn? Bah. IIRC, it doesn't even increase the DC for spells cast, so I really can't see any big advantage in specialization.
It may be that I've forgotten the rules too much, so please, Troile, tell me what you find so interesting in the specialist.

Ail

Specialization is a great role-playing tool. It makes your wizard stand out from the crowd and gives his spells a theme. It's also powerful game-wise for giveing you the extra spell per level per day.

I think it fits even better to sorcerors than wizards. If your spells are inborn, it seems only natural that they will fit your personality, and that you might have a mental block that will just never let you cast certain types of spells. I could be born with the power to cloud men's minds (enchanter, with some illusion spells) but my powers don't raise the dead. How could they?

Whereas it always seemed a little odd that wizards learn their spells by reading books, yet can't learn a spell they're barred from even with the book in front of them and a tutor.

You could just do a direct mapping:
The sorcerer gets an additional spell per day of the specialized school. He just doesn't have to choose it ahead of time like the wizard. It can be any spell of the appropriate level and school. The spellcraft bonus to learn spells is meaningless to the sorc, of course. Maybe give him a spell focus in the school to replace it.

OR you could address the sorc's weaknesses the way specialization does for wizards. Wizards are good at spells known/limited at spells per day. Sorcerers are good at spells per day/limited at spells known. So maybe instead of increasing their spells per day, give the specialist sorcerer an extra spell known per level as long as it's in the specialist's school.

gonzoron wrote:I think it fits even better to sorcerors than wizards. If your spells are inborn, it seems only natural that they will fit your personality, and that you might have a mental block that will just never let you cast certain types of spells. I could be born with the power to cloud men's minds (enchanter, with some illusion spells) but my powers don't raise the dead. How could they?

I agree with specialisation fitting Sorcerers well, but I still think that using it as it is makes the sorcerer a tad to powerful. Though this is compensated by what you say here:

So maybe instead of increasing their spells per day, give the specialist sorcerer an extra spell known per level as long as it's in the specialist's school.

Now that would work very well, the major factor in the Sorcerer's arsenal is that they only have access to so many spells, so an increase in spells known would denefit them better than increasing the number of spells they can cast each day.

If I remember, all it did was grant you an extra spell from a specific school, but the regular wizard gains that extra spell too, and from any school.

I don't understand this statement.

Specialists get one more spell per spell level per day than wizards do. The stipulation of course is that one of their spells per level has to be of that specialty.

Personally I'm not going to learn or have a chance to learn one spell from each spell school...not having necromancy and illusion say and having one extra spell per spell level is such a better advantage. Yes illusion is good...but when you choose to learn an illusion spell you're giving up other good spells too. All the schools are good...but trying to get spells from all the schools but not having enough spells slots isn't good either.

If anything specialization gives you MORE schools to choose from b/c you have more spell slots to devote to more schools.

There's an idea, Troile. Let sorcerers specialize in a school. That way, they'd become spell machines. (Though they already are.)

I don't think that specialization is all that, either. It's fairly balanced. As a wizard, I want the widest arrangement of spells I can get. And nixing two school hurts. Bad. I remember in the last campaign, my wizardess ran around with no Dispel Magic. That hurt on a number of occasions in which we really needed it. Also, your extra spell has to be from your specialty school. Often, you find yourself in situations where your whole school isn't necessary. A evoker's extra spell isn't that useful when you're at high court. And an enchanter is going to suck vs. undead or constructs.

Not to say that specialization isn't worth it, it's just like anything else. It has drawbacks and advantages both.

To respond to everyone on this post:
If you want to change something in Ravenloft or any campaign, go ahead.
It doesn't matter if it's exactly cannon or not. What's important is that you and your players have fun. And nobody is going to punish you for not playing by the book( exept mabey for some members of the fraternity...
just kidding! )

canon...


It is nice to get feedback though...is it really too weak? is it just the playing? are the changes good? etc.

I just don't see how specialization is balanced out with its advantages and drawbacks...but maybe its just me. There are some schools that you really shouldn't nix...abjuration being one of them but I digress.

Specialization with the sorcerer isn't the key I don't think...I don't think we need to make the sorcerer a better magic user than the wizard...in fact the wizard by the feel of the classes really should be more powerful. But the sorcerer should have a bit of ability in non-magic related areas.

By the way you were saying that the sorcerer class was weak and that the wizard out strips it in spellcasting, I was thinking that you wanted the sorcerer to have greater spellcasting abilities

Specialisation is balanced by the fact that you do get a bonus spell from a preferred school and +2 to her spellcraft checks to learn spells frm that school while losing the ability to learn spells from 2 other schools. The bonus is balanced by this restriction on spells she/he has access to.

Like Ivana I like to have the widest range of schools and spells possible, my wizards are the spellcasting Jack of all Trades. They experiment and mix everything together so they have a chance to be prepared for any given situation. Yes you still get it wrong at times, but by having access to all the schools, you have a chance of getting it right where a specialist couldn't, as he/she has no access to the spells helpful to that situation.

Well I don't consider sorcerers absolutely weaker than wizards spellcasting wise...but in the end wizards are stronger. In the world in general wizards are always going to be more dominant.

I think being slightly weaker in the magic dept. gives sorcerers an excuse to benefit from "not having to train or study" for their magic.

It makes sense IMO both on the game balance perspective and the rp perspective.

I think the problem might be that I don't want grand changes but I'm arguing for something just a little more than 4+ for skills since that won't really help to flesh them out anyway.

I agree that the class could do with a few more class skills, the question is which ones, though more Cha-based skills would be a benefit to the class. As would possibly raising the HD to d6.

I think I would agree that raising the skills to 4+, giving it more cha based skills...and just more generic peasant-esq skills as well as raising the hit die to d6 would definately define the sorcerer better.

I think that Sorcerers would have d6 for hit points and access to feats that give them more spells known.
This type of feats make the character deeper. For example a player playing a man that found he is able to use magic because he was gifted somehow from the fey, or one in his family was consorting with the fey, could take a feat that allows illusions or charms to show that his characters affinity with such things is inherent.

Since the sorcerer doesn't have bonus feats, the number of known spells he will gain that way is limited.

For example:
Glammer spells (generic):
Prerequisites:Cha 13+, int 13+, ability to cast arcane spells without preparation.
Bonus: Add the following spells to your known spell list.
ghost sound, silent image, minor image, major image, hallucinatory terrain, mirage arcana, veil.
You must be able to cast spells of the appropriate spell level before you can cast these spells. When you become of sufficient level to cast the spell, you take it as a free known spell.
For example a 1st level sorcerer with that takes this feat adds to his known spells the ghost sound spell and the silent image spell. When this sorcerer becomes 4th level, he adds minor image to his known spells for free.

Feats that give more powerful spells, also give less spells. For example:
Spells of fire (generic):
Prerequisites: Cha 15+, int 13+, ability to cast arcane spells with out preparation.
Bonus: Add the following spells to your known spell list:
Burning hands, fireball, wall of fire.

PS. Even with these rules, my players believe the sorcerer is underpowered and play wizards instead. I haven't test that system, although I use it for NPCs for almost a year.