Now, if only I could get a spear/glaive/naginata type polearm in the Finesse category (via some means other than "Hey, DM, can I used the stats for a quarterstaff but describe it as having a blade?").
That was my first reaction too, but then I realized, “bloodline” doesnt really mean “blood”. It means ancestry. So who are the ancestors? If the magic comes from Fey ancestry, then it may well be Charisma magic. If it comes from Elemental ancestry, it could be similar. Or simply from a Human family that produces a high frequency of psychics - likewise Charisma if telepathic charmers or Wisdom if second-sighted seers.
Then it probably shouldn't be called "bloodline magic" so much as "innate magic" or something of that nature.
Personally, I like the suggestion of the Warlock using Con. To me it clearly conveys the Warlock doesnt really understand the magic that they are wielding - they are “cheating” at magic. They simply unleash some eldritch force by means of some process that darker spirits have set up for them - by means of their pact.
I personally kind of hate the idea that the Warlock is "cheating" because I love the mechanical concept of an at-will caster, but strongly dislike the surrounding fluff of making dark deals to get it. Plus, if he's cheating, it should be because he tricked magic/the being he has a pact with, not because he's super tough (even if it is evocative of channeling magic through one's body). In a way, I think the Warlock concept could be expanded to cover the "Shaman" creative space by just stating that the powers come from dealing with otherworldy beings of some kind, and not cementing in stone the idea that the deal is necessarily uneven or unsavory. And when it comes to making magical deals, I just can't believe that any stat but Charisma is more appropriate.
As an aside, for me, the English meaning of the word “sorcerer” is so strong, I hope D&D doesnt misapply it. A sorcerer is someone who preforms magic by means of *spirits*. Usually black magic. Sorcerer is an appropriate name for a mage who traffics with devils, demons, and undead. But it seems the wrong name for a mage whose magic is innate. Enchanter, evoker, even psychic, even witch, are better names for innate magic.
I'm having a very hard time finding a definition of Sorcerer that brings spirits or black magic into it--in fact, barring the RPG "Sorcerer" (which I dislike anyway) every source I found simply considers it a synonym for magician. And, when there are multiple names for spellcasters in a given setting, I've generally seen the word "sorcerer" applied to the "good guys" or to some neutral parties.
To me, Bard in the sense of the magic of music, is the same thing as Enchantment (mental effects), being the magic of ones own mindforce, and in this sense Charisma. But using voice and mnemonics, or instrument as implements to focus the intended effect.
To me, it's hard to think of Bards as "musical." I always viewed them more like storytellers than musicians, probably due to my obsession with folklore/myth/legend/etc. and knowing what Bards were historically. I actually though Bards made more sense in the earlier editions when they cast Druid spells, since that at least puts them in the same culture. But then, I also prefered Rangers casting Magic User spells, so whatev, maybe I'm just stodgy.
Anyway, to me, the Bard's music had less to do with the "magic of song" and more to do with, "I do a little bit of everything, and that includes studying a little bit of magic." To that end, I feel like 2e nailed it, since they had a spellbook and cast just like wizards. In 3rd, I really liked the "Bardic Music" concept as long as it wasn't actually music, but rather generally being inspiring and stuff, but felt like the spells totally felt out of place given the shift in focus from "I'm a rogue/fighter/wizard" to "I buff people with my class features."
So, the short version:
If Bards are going to be close to their historical counterparts, give them Druid spells, and at that point, the casting stat could easily be justified to be any of the three mental stats.
If Bards are going to be jacks of all trades, then they should cast like a Wizard using intelligence, representing the fact that they studied just a little bit.
If Bardsa re going to be focused on the "magic of song," then I kind of don't think they should cast spells in any sort of traditional way, but rather have a new subsystem entirely tied much more closesly to music. Maybe assign each "key" as a stance, and have harmony abilities (you use an instrument for) that provide buffs as long as they are maintained, melody abilities that do something positive immediately, and some dissonance abilities that have aggressive effects. Or, I don't know--this isn't a "build a bard" thread.
As an aside, for me, the English meaning of the word “sorcerer” is so strong, I hope D&D doesnt misapply it. A sorcerer is someone who preforms magic by means of *spirits*. Usually black magic. Sorcerer is an appropriate name for a mage who traffics with devils, demons, and undead. But it seems the wrong name for a mage whose magic is innate. Enchanter, evoker, even psychic, even witch, are better names for innate magic.
I'm having a very hard time finding a definition of Sorcerer that brings spirits or black magic into it--in fact, barring the RPG "Sorcerer" (which I dislike anyway) every source I found simply considers it a synonym for magician. And, when there are multiple names for spellcasters in a given setting, I've generally seen the word "sorcerer" applied to the "good guys" or to some neutral parties.
Ah. You will see the definition under “sorcery”. For example,
sorcery Use of supernatural power over others through the assistance of spirits. (American Heritage Dictionary)
sorcery The art, practices, or spells of magic, esp black magic, by which it is sought to harness occult forces or evil spirits in order to produce preternatural effects in the world. (Collins English Dictionary)
In scifi, Elric the “sorcerer king”, depicts how a sorcerer engages generally evil spirits to produce magical effects. His “negotiations” do require a Charisma.
That was my first reaction too, but then I realized, “bloodline” doesnt really mean “blood”. It means ancestry. So who are the ancestors? If the magic comes from Fey ancestry, then it may well be Charisma magic. If it comes from Elemental ancestry, it could be similar. Or simply from a Human family that produces a high frequency of psychics - likewise Charisma if telepathic charmers or Wisdom if second-sighted seers.
Then it probably shouldn't be called "bloodline magic" so much as "innate magic" or something of that nature.
“Innate Magic” sounds better to me. Its seems better also because it includes a person who acquires innate magic later in life, via some kind of transformation.
Personally, I like the suggestion of the Warlock using Con. To me it clearly conveys the Warlock doesnt really understand the magic that they are wielding - they are “cheating” at magic. They simply unleash some eldritch force by means of some process that darker spirits have set up for them - by means of their pact.
I personally kind of hate the idea that the Warlock is "cheating" because I love the mechanical concept of an at-will caster, but strongly dislike the surrounding fluff of making dark deals to get it.
I certainly dont want the Warlock to be the only atwill caster. Im hoping to see an elemental “Evoker” who is an atwill caster.
I also dislike the flavor of dark pacts, but other players seem to enjoy it. It suits the word “warlock”, which itself has sinister baggage. In fact, the class is so soaked with the flavor, Id rather cut it loose to let those who like it have it. Hopefully, some other atwill class becomes available that appeals more to me, like an Evoker.
Plus, if he's cheating, it should be because he tricked magic/the being he has a pact with, not because he's super tough (even if it is evocative of channeling magic through one's body). In a way, I think the Warlock concept could be expanded to cover the "Shaman" creative space by just stating that the powers come from dealing with otherworldy beings of some kind, and not cementing in stone the idea that the deal is necessarily uneven or unsavory. And when it comes to making magical deals, I just can't believe that any stat but Charisma is more appropriate.
For me, the word shaman has strongly positive connotations. But you are right, all three styles of magic involve spirits.
The Shaman involves nature spirits, including ancestors and cosmic features, lke the skydome and the landdisk. However, the Norse tradition concerning the shamans of the Finn (Saame) explicitly describe shamanic magic as manifestations of ones own mindforce. In other words, innate magic.
But the words warlock and sorcerer involve negative spirits, like demons, devils, and undead.
Personally, I like the suggestion of the Warlock using Con. To me it clearly conveys the Warlock doesnt really understand the magic that they are wielding - they are “cheating” at magic. They simply unleash some eldritch force by means of some process that darker spirits have set up for them - by means of their pact.
I personally kind of hate the idea that the Warlock is "cheating" because I love the mechanical concept of an at-will caster, but strongly dislike the surrounding fluff of making dark deals to get it. Plus, if he's cheating, it should be because he tricked magic/the being he has a pact with, not because he's super tough (even if it is evocative of channeling magic through one's body). In a way, I think the Warlock concept could be expanded to cover the "Shaman" creative space by just stating that the powers come from dealing with otherworldy beings of some kind, and not cementing in stone the idea that the deal is necessarily uneven or unsavory. And when it comes to making magical deals, I just can't believe that any stat but Charisma is more appropriate.
Here part of the background for my 4E warlock
"The half elf warlock gained his powers after counting the stars on his birthday. One that night, he was contacted by 3 beings of arcane power. They came to him as small blinking orbs and spoke to him telepathically right into the deepest part of his mind. He made a pact with them to gain his powers, each granting him skills via his various abilities.
The first to speak was the Biting One. The Biting One would painfully possess him for a moment to cast spells through his body. The longer he could resist the pain (via his Constitution), the more time the Biting One had to fire off magic. His fingers burned black and his arms twisted as the Biting One used him as a conduit for rivers of energy. Dire Radiance was renamed Radiant Tooth. Hunger of Hadar became Hunger of The Biting One until he learned who the Biting One was an aspect of.
The second was the Licking One. Its tongues was the energy behind some of his power. The warlock had to mentally wrangle the Licking One into aiming straight at targets with his Charisma whenever his hands were too burned from the Biting One's possession and energy. When he was closes to an enemy, he could go a little easier on the least and let the Licking One unleash more power for greater accuracy (Prime Shot). The flailing tongue also granted concealment as he walked.
And the final one was the Mouthing One, who invoked his curse. It barely spoke to the half-elf himself. The Mouthing one would whisper the Secret of Pain and Death when commanded into the nearest enemy's ear for the Warlock's Curse. The secret was that it was casting a contingent divination ritual powered by the enemy's fading life force to give the warlock information and boon and the orbs souls for a future ploy."
So the warlock used CON and CHA to use his spirit based magic. One possessed him and he needed CON to survive. Another acted on its own and he had to convince it to work wit CHA. And the the last practically ignored him. The spirits could have been good, evil, or neutral.
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
