| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Eladrinstar |
Posted - 16 Dec 2011 : 06:46:40
How do you handle sorcerers in your Realms games?
This is all homebrewed headcanon:
I've never liked the "lineage" origin for Sorcerers. For a few feats and prestige classes, sure, but an ancestral origin for an entire main character class is not something I like.
I much prefer the interpretation that anyone who takes the time to train (has the XP to spend) and has the proper force of personality (Charisma score) can become a sorcerer, tapping into the connection the Weave has with all forms of life (and unlife) and drawing spells from it. You see, sorcerers learn the same spells as wizards, which they draw a limited number (insert obvious sorcerer number-of-spells joke) from the Weave's memory of spells created. You see, the Weave is an entity (Mystryl/Mystra/Midnight) as well as a natural force. So it "remembers" magic known and sorcerers draw on that to "learn" those spells. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Markustay |
Posted - 28 Dec 2011 : 16:21:52
I never ran Al-Qadim, nor played in it, but it has a lot to offer. The Sha'ir aren't perfect, but with a little tweaking they can be an interesting (and playable) class.
Like I said, I had invented my own 'Sorcerer' class years before 3e, and simply called it 'Mage' (it actually had different regional names, and had regional abilities to go with it, so it was what I refer to as a 'dynamic class').
I was going to use some of that in my Kara-Tur netbook - which never saw the light of day - for a 'natural caster' class, which would lump things like Shaman, Witchdoctors, Hedge Mages & 'Wise Women', Witches & warlocks (NOT 3e warlocks), and even things like Fey and Elves (certain races, I feel, should have a little bit of 'natural talent'), into one class, with regional and racial variants. A large part of that were familiars, which could be very different from what we normally think of as familiars in D&D - spirit guides, animal companions, extra-planer minions (taking animal form), etc... even sentient artifacts.
See this HB class - I only found it yesterday, and it is very similar to what I was planning with the 'Natural Talent Mage'. Basically, the person has 'innate ability', but has no access to a spellbook, so must get spells from familiars, which could take on various forms. My hope was to eventually build the class into an umbrella class that would include things like Druids and rangers.
As another reference, the magic performed by Elric in the Stormbringer (Michael Moorcock) novels works in a similar fashion - you must make pacts with planer beings in order to use the more powerful spells and rituals.
My philosophy is/was that wizards receive some sort of formal training, weather it be a 'College of magic', a grumpy old Wizard they are apprenticed to, or just some tome they discovered in a lost crypt. Mages, on the other hand, can do simple things automatically (like cantrips), and must deal with other creatures to learn more.
In most fantasy stories, where you have the 'bright young hope' versus the 'evil old master', I feel you have this 'learned vs inborn' dichotomy going on - something I think Ed made great use of in his games (IMO). |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 28 Dec 2011 : 03:19:20
No, sha'ir are incompetents, completely unplayable past the first few levels (during which they're darn close to broken).
Ugh. I love al'Qadim, but I absolutely loathe the sha'irs. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 28 Dec 2011 : 02:52:20
Sha'ir ARE sorcerers. 
My own variant (the Mage) was base a lot upon Sha'ir (spells were received from the bound familiar). |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 25 Dec 2011 : 06:35:07
There are mechanisms other than the risky great elixir which can effectively turn any character into a wizard/sorceror. The most straightforward might be a properly worded wish.
The "Innate Talents" described in the same Volo's Guide would probably be better treated as sorcerors than wizards. Phaerimm could also be sorcerors. Elementals and Djinns and genasi (and the erudite peoples of exotic Zakhara) could practice sorcery. For that matter, even the strange magics practiced in faraway fantastic Halruaa (or Kara-Tur, or Maztica, or wherever) could be sorcery. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 25 Dec 2011 : 05:16:52
Now that we have access to the 3e sorcerer, there is one place I've added them. I think it makes a lot more sense for someone who gained the "become a wizard" power from The Great Elixir (from Volo's Guide to All Things Magical) to actually become a sorcerer. That sort of casting-innately-but-has-no-clue-how-he's-doing-it is exactly what I'd expect someone who got that lucky from the potion to be, and that's exactly what the sorcerer provides. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 24 Dec 2011 : 06:43:52
Marcus, the "cut off from magic" thing you're thinking of is Laeral's Crowning Touch, a bonus 9th level spell that Chosen (and only Chosen) can cast. It lasts a year and a day, and each time the person casts a spell, it drains as many levels as the spell has, permanently. So a 14th level wizard casting a 3rd level spell suddenly becomes an 11th level wizard. There's no saving throw, but it's only used against those who had transgressed greatly against Mystra. See page 11 of The Seven Sisters for more details. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 24 Dec 2011 : 00:55:24
quote:
Markustay
Also, we have dead magic zones, and wild magic zones. These are obviously fluctuations in the Weave (tears and 'snags' of power). This means the field of arcane energy (The Weave) is also necessary for the magic to work. Even in another Crystal Sphere, one must assume some version of this exists.
Although generally true, this is not a universal constant. There are examples of some things - certain spells, many artifacts, some mythals and mythallars - continuing to function when exposed to Weave-failure or immersed within dead-magic zones. |
| Wolfhound75 |
Posted - 23 Dec 2011 : 18:55:23
Interesting points.
This generated a question for me that is off topic so I translated it to another scroll in order to avoid hijacking the OP's discussion.
Good Hunting! |
| Markustay |
Posted - 23 Dec 2011 : 17:51:14
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
If sorcery is a thing inherited through bloodlines then it could just as likely be some sort of "magus enabler" added to human lineage as some sort of "magus inhibitor" removed from it.
In The Wheel of Time series, a group of 13 (usually) could 'snip' the connection someone has to 'The Source'. This is similar to what you suggest, except in the WoT case, they are channeling, rather then internalizing the magic.
Also, IIRC, Chosen of Mystra had the ability to 'cut off' someone from their magic, as a punishment. It was definitely a 'final warning' sort of thing, because this actually goes against Mystra's teachings. As I recall, it was temporary - a year I think.
Also, we have dead magic zones, and wild magic zones. These are obviously fluctuations in the Weave (tears and 'snags' of power). This means the field of arcane energy (The Weave) is also necessary for the magic to work. Even in another Crystal Sphere, one must assume some version of this exists.
The 'magic gene' would give a person the ability to access this energy field, in much the same way Metachlorines (I hear the SW fans throwing-up a little) enable folks to tap-into The Force. For all we know, it could be some sort of Arcane material present in the cell-structure itself - perhaps something naturally present in Fey and others. Or it could be as simple as accessing a part of your brain that most people don't have access to (since I have already made the point that nearly every human - unless extremely isolated - should have this 'magic gene' by now).
This works well within the D&D framework. The 'Arcane Patterns' that need to be imprinted in your memory in Vancian magic allows this access, as do the Dragonmarks of Eberron (Dragons/Dragonshards have this as well). In 4e, the Plaguescars serve the same function, but only in a limited capacity (which is used the same exact way in the Mystara/Red Steel setting, with Cinnabar). In this case, the scar/mark/Inheritor allows very limited access to a very specific portion of the weave - think of these as passwords on a server, but only the Admins (Sorcerers, wizards, WuJen, etc) have full access.
So nearly everyone should have the potential, but depending on how they tap into the magic determines what sort of character they become. So sorcerers may love to brag, but the truth is, they probably had the easiest route to go. |
| Wolfhound75 |
Posted - 23 Dec 2011 : 03:55:56
@MT & Ayrik
Great points by both of you. I love these 'academic' discussions. I use it as a springboard for getting the creativity gene running in overdrive. Plus it's always interesting to me to hear ideas about how other people have done things in their game.
*wistful look* Wish I could find a local game group with room for one more here. Only found one game shop so far too. I guess no one plays FR in AZ...terrain is closer to Al-Qadim I guess.
Anyway, back to the point. I have been having a lot of trouble working this class into my planning so some of the ideas here have been of great help!
Good Hunting! |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 23 Dec 2011 : 03:03:24
If sorcery is a thing inherited through bloodlines then it could just as likely be some sort of "magus enabler" added to human lineage as some sort of "magus inhibitor" removed from it. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 23 Dec 2011 : 02:49:17
@Wolfhound - I'm a 'science guy' myself, but I've also spent most of my life as a construction worker. Its quite a trick explaining string-theory in 'Brooklynese'. 
So yeah, I write the way I talk - in plain English. Big Words make Hulk's head hurt. 
And I believe 'human adaptability' comes directly from the 3e Player's Guide, if I am not mistaken. Its not a case of 'great minds thinking alike', but rather, people who have read so many rule books they don't know where half the stuff in their head comes from.
Now getting back to the subject: I think that most humans in a setting like FR have the 'magic gene', thanks to thousands of years of intermingling, with other humans and other species (isn't fantasy grand?) Many people have the capability of 'doing magic', but just never bother to learn or try. i think with Sorcerers, there is a trigger, which could be as simple as someone casting a spell in their presence, or touching (and setting-off) a magical device by accident, or even getting too close to Faerzress. It doesn't matter - once the catalyst is brought into proximity, it triggers the latent ability (like puberty in Marvel mutants).
So while Sorcerers may brag about their 'dragon heritage', some local farmer may be the grandson of a fiend, and the local blacksmith the great, great grand-nephew of a demigod, and the miller's daughter may not know her 'lost' mother was actually a doppleganger. Sorcerers are flashy by nature - they tell these tales - be they true or not - to impress. only problem is, in the Realms, this sort of thing happens all the time.
After 35K+ years, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any FR human that doesn't have some non-human blood in them. Sorcerers have merely learned to tap into it.
At least, that is how I have worked things out (once again, HB from my own Realms games). |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 22 Dec 2011 : 20:06:23
3E sorcerors sucked, so I never wanted one as an NPC unless I was going to multi-class it with something else. However, if a player wanted one, I was going to pretty much let them write their own "origin". Maybe they had dragon blood. Maybe their great grandmother mated with a genie. Maybe they were caught in some blast or fell in some magical wishing well and it "irradiated" them with magic. That all being said, I only had one player that ever wanted one, and he only played a few games before having to move. |
| Wolfhound75 |
Posted - 21 Dec 2011 : 18:34:39
And that is exactly why I find myself coming down straddling the line between both theories. Both of them are plausible.
I completely concur with your homebrew territory interpretation that humans do not have natural magical ability and find it curious that the extra starting and leveling skill points that humans get, I nicknamed 'Human Adaptability' in my notes. That goes hand-in-hand with your ultimate gift, the ability to adapt, idea.
I should have differentiated better when using the word ability. I apologize for any confusion this caused. I used ability to mean the supernatural/extrodinary type - what you could consider as instinct or genetics to apply RL science.
And yes, you always have the possibility of dominant and recessive alleles, mutations and mutation rate, etc. Which is why I mentioned the difference between genotype (what alleles the genes are capable of supplying) and phenotype (what traits the individual actually manifests) and that meshes up with your "presto, the two dormant bloodlines meet and something unusual is the result."
I've been a science guy since I was little and I think we're saying the same things in two different ways. You're speaking common and I'm speaking a sub-dialect known as geek-speak.
Good Hunting! |
| Markustay |
Posted - 20 Dec 2011 : 15:34:04
I did not rule-out Bloodlines, I simply added to the list of reasons their powers manifested -
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Going along with what Erik and Hoondatha said - Sorcerers just have 'natural talent', which could be attributed to any number of phenomena (environment, magical accident or encounter, divine intervention, etc).
The way I see it (which means we are entering homebrew territory here), humans do NOT have natural magical ability - it is derived from external sources. Some beg for spells (priests), others imprints arcane patterns in their minds to be released at the right moment (Vancian/Arcane magic), while yet others (mostly giants & dwarves, but Orientals use a form of it as well) imprint these patterns on physical objects to release the power (Rune magic).
Other races have many 'gifts' bestowed upon them - abilities humans do not have (this is canon). However, humans have the ultimate gift - the ability to adapt. If they see others using magic, they figure-out a way of doing it themselves, even though they are not naturally prone to it.
Wizardry - as the word is used in D&D - is the purposeful undertaking of an individual to bestow themselves with 'magical ability', and requires a LOT of work. 'Sorcery' - as the word is used in D&D - is a natural affinity toward magic, which could be derived from any number of external sources, including - but not limited to - Bloodlines.
As to your question about genetics - there are such things as 'throwbacks', and sometimes a gene from long-ago 'pops-up' from time to time. There are also dominant and recessive genes, and I would hazard to guess that paranormal creatures (including things like fiends, angels, deities, Fey, etc) would have a more 'primal' DNA code, and therefor be dominant (just a shot in the dark there - I am no geneticist, but we are talking about fantasy genetics now).
Also, you have the situation where a person with a long-ago 'magical' ancestor (probably a great many people in a world like FR), meets and breeds with a person with a similar background. presto, the two dormant bloodlines meet and something unusual is the result. This is why two very ordinary parents can have an Archmage for a child (as Elminster's parents were... as far as we know). Or why a such a child may have horns... or wings... or whatever. I site MANY RW cases where persons of color have 'white' children, and 'white' parents give birth to children of color (there was even a movie about one such case - a famous one - in South Africa).
Genetics is a crapshoot; throw in magic and divine intervention, and anything is possible. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 19 Dec 2011 : 22:09:38
quote:
Originally posted by Kris the Grey
Pathfinder...cough...cough...bloodlines...cough...cough. Seems an ideal approach!
The Pathfinder sorcerer bloodlines are one of my favorite things about that spin on 3.5.
I do think it's somewhat limited conceptually, so I expand the flavor in my own games to include power derived from some magical source (i.e., take the demon bloodline but instead of being descended from a demon, you just had a run-in with a demon, and it tainted you with its power, etc).
In fact, spellscars work kinda like this, in my mind.
Cheers |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Dec 2011 : 21:57:17
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
I never liked the concept of sorcerers, and haven't implemented them, because they really were meant as a "fix" or alternative to the wizard. In many ways, I felt they served to dilute the wizard. Suddenly, you have arcane casters who didn't have to spend years of study to learn their magic; and not only that, they were more versatile in terms of spells. No longer was intelligence an issue, or wisdom... rather, charisma?
Who, honestly, is going to choose to play a class that is perceived as being "gimped" (my spell is one-shot, then I have to rely on a crossbow(?!) for combat) when you have the sorcerer and its benefits? In one stroke, arcane magic is turned into pew-pew with no ties to the original "study and be intelligent/wise" concept.
No thanks. It's a major reason I switched systems to Rolemaster back in the day, rather than get deep into 2E. Since I hated the entire set of changes that came along with the Time of Troubles (switching Myrkul, Bane and Bhaal for that chump Cyric? And also losing Mystra for Midnight?! COME ON!) and wanted to skip that junk, the decision was easy.
With Rolemaster and its arcane spell lists, I got to keep the wizard concept as one of study and clever smarts, and the idea of Essaence as "the Weave" also matched nicely. It even served the Realms' approach to divine magic and psionics quite well.
I'm no fan of Vancian spellcasting, but sorcerers don't fix the "problem" of Vancian-style wizards at all.
I've never considered sorcerers to be a fix for wizards. Sorcerers have the advantage of not having to plan ahead, but the flipside of this is fewer spells. I think that's a fair exchange.
I personally prefer sorcerers, but I don't see them as a replacement for wizards, and I'd favor a wizard in some situations. |
| Wolfhound75 |
Posted - 19 Dec 2011 : 20:09:26
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I don't think dilution is as much of a concern, though. Dilution is only a concern if there's only one outsider who only gets into the family tree, one time. With the plethora of outsiders that have come to the Realms, with the availability of portals leading to where the outsiders come from, and with the immortal nature of outsiders, it's quite likely that there are large numbers of people with at least a trace of outsider blood. It's possible, in fact, for an outsider to mate with several generations of one family.
Agreed! Which is why I said "...making it necessary (and apparently fun) for the gods/demons/devils/celestials to renew or start new bloodlines."
(OOC: Cripes, I've totally become a Scribe - and a long-winded one at that! Hmm...note to self...Outsider is a lot shorter to type and gets the point across just as well as all the slash-work. Thanks Wooly!)
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And plenty of outsiders work arcane magic, so that angle isn't a concern for me, either.
Ah, yes. But being able to work arcane magic, either through study or supernatural/extrodinary ability, doesn't mean that you can pass that on through breeding. Admittedly, if it's an ability it's more likely to be passed on. It's like knowledge or an injury IMO. If I lose my arm in combat, it doesn't mean my children will be born without an arm. Or, if I learn a skill (IRL - Fly a helicopter) it doesn't mean my kids will learn the same skills. I view wizardry the same way, as a learned skill. Though I admit if we applied RL genetics to it, they may be genetically predisposed to excel at wizardry....
A very interesting discussion at any rate and hopefully we can all generate some ideas on how to handle Sorcerers in our Realms like the OP asked. Ideas we can all draw on to help handle the sudden influx of this class.
Good Hunting! |
| Therise |
Posted - 19 Dec 2011 : 20:07:52
I never liked the concept of sorcerers, and haven't implemented them, because they really were meant as a "fix" or alternative to the wizard. In many ways, I felt they served to dilute the wizard. Suddenly, you have arcane casters who didn't have to spend years of study to learn their magic; and not only that, they were more versatile in terms of spells. No longer was intelligence an issue, or wisdom... rather, charisma?
Who, honestly, is going to choose to play a class that is perceived as being "gimped" (my spell is one-shot, then I have to rely on a crossbow(?!) for combat) when you have the sorcerer and its benefits? In one stroke, arcane magic is turned into pew-pew with no ties to the original "study and be intelligent/wise" concept.
No thanks. It's a major reason I switched systems to Rolemaster back in the day, rather than get deep into 2E. Since I hated the entire set of changes that came along with the Time of Troubles (switching Myrkul, Bane and Bhaal for that chump Cyric? And also losing Mystra for Midnight?! COME ON!) and wanted to skip that junk, the decision was easy.
With Rolemaster and its arcane spell lists, I got to keep the wizard concept as one of study and clever smarts, and the idea of Essaence as "the Weave" also matched nicely. It even served the Realms' approach to divine magic and psionics quite well.
I'm no fan of Vancian spellcasting, but sorcerers don't fix the "problem" of Vancian-style wizards at all.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Dec 2011 : 19:11:40
I, personally, think that the Return of the Archwizards, spun a different way, could have explained why we suddenly have sorcerers when we didn't before. Ditto for the Time of Troubles (with a delayed effect, obviously).
I don't think dilution is as much of a concern, though. Dilution is only a concern if there's only one outsider who only gets into the family tree, one time. With the plethora of outsiders that have come to the Realms, with the availability of portals leading to where the outsiders come from, and with the immortal nature of outsiders, it's quite likely that there are large numbers of people with at least a trace of outsider blood. It's possible, in fact, for an outsider to mate with several generations of one family.
It's also possible that outsider genes don't breed out all the way, but only get to a certain level and then remain. Yeah, that's not the way real-world genetics work, but real-world genetics wouldn't work the way it works in canon for the elven races, either.
And plenty of outsiders work arcane magic, so that angle isn't a concern for me, either. |
| Wolfhound75 |
Posted - 19 Dec 2011 : 17:23:09
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
With tying a sorcerer's power to their bloodline, it's not unreasonable to have smaller numbers of sorcerers than wizards.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Going along with what Erik and Hoondatha said - Sorcerers just have 'natural talent', which could be attributed to any number of phenomena (environment, magical accident or encounter, divine intervention, etc).
Perhaps I am over-thinking this but, after ruminating on this subject while working on my 'honey-do' list this weekend, I find myself coming down straddling the fence, so to speak.
I absolutely believe that certain sorcerers can tie the manifestation of their powers to bloodline but, I am having trouble rectifying a couple of points in my mind. The first of which I will call describe as Dilution and the second as Disconnected.
Using the Bloodline theory, I see an inherant flaw in the premise - Dilution. One of my side businesses involves breeding horses and, if you have an animal with a highly desired trait (we'll call that sorcery for this discussion) which could be passed on (a prerequisite of the Bloodline theory), subsequent generations would receive less and less of that heritage. This eventually makes it very unlikely that a great-x-grandson/daughter would manifest that trait in its phenotype, even though it might theoretically be present in genotype. So over time, it seems to me, that a specific sorcerer's bloodline would eventually die out making it necessary (and apparently fun) for the gods/demons/devils/celestials to renew or start new bloodlines.
The second ambiguity that I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around is that the backstory appears disconnected. If sorcerers, using the Bloodline theory, have some sort of divine/celestial/devilish/demonic heritage, and looking at the various writeups in the MM/MC books, it occurs that while some can cast arcane spells as a class or supernatural/extrodinary ability, that sorcerers would be more likely to inherit the ability to tap divine energies - more akin to the Favored Soul class.
Conversely, using the Natural Talent premise, there is some credible canon to support it. Bards cast arcane magic through the use of Charisma - force of personality - and their voice. Charisma is also the ability for Use Magic Device. So clearly, it's possible that the right combination in an individual may open the door of possibility. However, the magic combination required to do this would likely be very rare so I have trouble rectifying how sorcerers are suddenly so much more prevalent in the realms.
Wrapping up, both of these prevailing theories can explain the presence of sorcerers in the Realms. What they cannot explain, taking each theory individually, is the sudden abundance that we are seeing spread throughout the Realms in a relatively short time span. That is why I find myself straddling the fence between both theories. If both are in play, coupled with the catastrophic canon events throughout Faerun (ToT, Spellplague, etc.) it might explain the how and the how many.
As always, more thoughts and discussion welcome.
Good Hunting!
Edit: Added quote from Markustay |
| Markustay |
Posted - 18 Dec 2011 : 22:50:10
Going along with what Erik and Hoondatha said - Sorcerers just have 'natural talent', which could be attributed to any number of phenomena (environment, magical accident or encounter, divine intervention, etc).
I also had Sorcerers long before 3e did - my system was similar, but simpler. I used the term 'mage' (short for hedge-mage) for my version; I used 'sorcerer' for elementalists. My Sorcerers (Mages) were more along the lines of wiccans (and I am still annoyed at what D&D did to the word 'Warlock'), complete with familiars that are actually summoned creatures forced to take a material form. |
| Therise |
Posted - 18 Dec 2011 : 18:02:41
My personal homebrew Realms has been on a shelf for a while gathering dust (we've been playing some other things, lately). But I never had "sorcerers" in it, partly because I diverged from D&D rules a long, long time ago. When AD&D ended and 2E came out, we switched to Rolemaster, which (to us) seemed to fit the magic of the Realms a lot better. In addition, there were lots of things that we never incorporated into my homebrew Realms... no Time of Troubles, no "wild magic" as D&D described it, just a lot of things that we never brought in.
|
| Kris the Grey |
Posted - 18 Dec 2011 : 08:32:38
Pathfinder...cough...cough...bloodlines...cough...cough. Seems an ideal approach!
|
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 17 Dec 2011 : 21:23:14
I tend to use Sorcery as a sort of substitute for trained wizardry and suggest that everyone who is a sorcery can be trained as an Arcane Mage.
It's just those who don't potentially can develop their powers on their own.
It's just a storytelling preference. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 16 Dec 2011 : 23:48:52
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Personally, though, I would have expected the advent of sorcerers in the Realms to have been explained better. The class didn't exist, and then we found out that characters previously described as wizards had always been sorcerers...
Which is kind of why I'm following Ed's trend on sorcery in the Realms, as I explained above. It makes it clear that the talent has mostly always existed, but was poorly understood at the time.
Deemed "wild talent-like," it was only with the dragonblood experimentations of Cordorlar, that the very notion of sorcerers became somewhat more defined, and, possibly, categorised as an alternate arcane science. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 16 Dec 2011 : 17:47:10
With tying a sorcerer's power to their bloodline, it's not unreasonable to have smaller numbers of sorcerers than wizards. Not so rare as just a few dozen in the entire setting, but making them as rare as pre-4E genasi is reasonable, to me.
Personally, though, I would have expected the advent of sorcerers in the Realms to have been explained better. The class didn't exist, and then we found out that characters previously described as wizards had always been sorcerers... Going into the series, I honestly expected that the Return of Shade would have been the mechanism to explain this new method of spellcasting, but that's obviously not the direction WotC chose. |
| Eladrinstar |
Posted - 16 Dec 2011 : 17:32:07
I just assume sorcerers are as prevalent as they are said to be in the 3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide rules for drawing up random populations in cities, towns and villages. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 16 Dec 2011 : 16:34:37
My games have the same assumption as Hoondatha, though sorcerers are somewhat more prevalent. Sorcery can come from one's heritage, contact with powerful magic, or even a particular item/relic the character carries around.
Cheers |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 16 Dec 2011 : 15:20:30
I don't have any problem with sorcerers in very small numbers, so there are a few scattered throughout my Realms. They need some sort of trigger to do what they do, but in addition to the bloodline stuff WotC so loved, I've added prolonged (as in generational) contact with abnormally high levels of magic. This allows you to have perfectly normal people from Raven's Bluff, Thay, Halruaa, or Silverymoon manifest in a pinch.
It's still really rare, though. Only a few dozen probably in all Faerun. |
|
|
