I think that this variant is very OP. The loss of the familiar is not too bad, but ignoring material components is amazing by itself (200 gp at 20th level means getting near-permanent lackeys with animate dead easily, etc.), but the inborn magic blast pushes it over the edge. 20d6 damage/will? Compare that to a warlock, who gets 10d6 damage, and little else (12 invocations, etc). Put in the bonus feats, no full-round metamagic, and the reduction in metamagic costs, and you've got one munchkined character. I would suggest lots of rehaul for this class.

I would also suggest that the author look back and correct the spelling & grammar him/herself. It's really not that hard.

First of the author is not a native-english speaker, secondly have you even bothered to read the whole balance point policy? Because this variant is supposed to be wizard-level balance point (something the original or this sorcerer fail to achieve). Comparing it to a Beguiler (another spontaneous caster, much more powerful however) this class is quite sub-par (something I should re-haul). The warlock is a fighter-level class thus shouldn't be compared to this class. --Leziad 19:20, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
It's better than the original sorcerer in that it has class features and a proper casting progression, but whether it's a 'Wizard' level class or not will depend strongly on its spell selection. I like the simplified spells known by the way.
On to actual criticism rebuttals... Ignoring up to 200gp of material components at level 20 is not OP, it is a perfectly welcome bookkeeping trick. By that point the caster has had many many infinite wealth loops to use, so it's not as if component costs in that range really matter. It's not big enough to replace some of the more obscene component requirements (generally associated with obscure components that are harder to use your infinite wealth to acquire, though why a sorcerer would take those spells is beyond me), which still leaves room to pop over to the mineral plane for cubic meter solid rubies or whatever. 1d6 per level as a standard action all day is also not OP. Even if you wanted to compare it to the warlock, they can put status effects and areas on their blasts, which this class can not. As single target damage it's not bad, but it pales in comparison to 1) battle effects from actual spellcasting or 2) single target rogue damage at that level. It's a nice backup option, one likely to see use when actual spellcasting would be overkill. I'd prefer to see it as a typed effect (fire, cold, electricity, or even acid maybe), but that's not a deal breaker for me. TarkisFlux 20:38, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.