They kept delaying it and now it is taken off the calender. I am annoyed....the sorcerer has gotten no support except for Arcane Power. I was excited they were getting an Essentials article and now it is gone!
Instead we get endless articles dealing with the Raven Queen month after month.......I really can't stand her anymore. Next she will be invading the Realms.
Maybe the writer didn't finish it hence why it kept being delayed week after week
Very disappointed it won't appear....the Divine Power article sounded cool too....that has also been removed from the calender.
It is still listed on the current Dragon issue Table of Contents but they might have forgot to remove it from there.
Maybe the writer didn't finish it hence why it kept being delayed week after week
Very disappointed it won't appear....the Divine Power article sounded cool too....that has also been removed from the calender.
The Divine Power one was never on the calendar.
The Divine Power one was never on the calendar.
Correction: it was on the Dragon Table of Contents and still is like the sorcerer article but not on the calendar.
I also think it would be a softer blow if there was someplace we could look to get updates about why a particular article got delayed or canceled. I came to the forums to sniff around, and found this thread, but I'd be surprised if the authors popped in to explain where it went (hopefully they're busy trying to get it out sooner rather than later).
I was looking forward to the sorcerer article too, even though my current PC is only a MC sorcerer. I have no idea what they were going to put in this article, but I had my fingers crossed that there might be a few feats that *didn't* hinge on having sorcerer at-wills.
Hopefully it is still coming out next month.
Dang it, I've been looking forward to this all month.
Please bring it back in early December! *puppy eyes*
www.wizards.com/dnd/downloads/dragon/381...
no feats though....which is sad....cause the sorcerer feats so far have been crap....why take all those feats that give you a situational +1 when you can just take Focused Expertise or Implement Expertise??
Well, that was nearly useless.
Pretty cool for Chaos Sorcerers, but not realy worth it for anyone else...
And where are those Sorcerer EDs I was praying for? :/
class (the druid)"
LOL
*anticlimatic sigh*
Well, that was nearly useless.
Pretty cool for Chaos Sorcerers, but not realy worth it for anyone else...
And where are those Sorcerer EDs I was praying for? :/
Yeah article was kinda a let down and I play a Choas sorcerer.....the daggers aren't impressive - VERY disappointed no feats - only thing I liked was the new At-will and some of the other spells
Still hoping for a Class Acts for sorcerers next month
Anyone else notice the side bar that appears to be a reply to certain complaints on the forums?
Well, I guess they're watching our complaints, at least. I also like the fact that it justifies itself as what it's supposed to be, rather than the perfect builds.
I'm happy with that.
Does anybody else find it strange that all the builds suggested putting an 18 in Charisma BEFORE racial modifiers? I would do that ONLY if you're race doesn't give a +2 to Charisma. Starting 20 in attacking ability is nice, but it seems to me a waste of ability points in the initial point buy.
no feats though....which is sad....cause the sorcerer feats so far have been crap....why take all those feats that give you a situational +1 when you can just take Focused Expertise or Implement Expertise??
Um ... because most of those situational feats can stack with expertise.
no feats though....which is sad....cause the sorcerer feats so far have been crap....why take all those feats that give you a situational +1 when you can just take Focused Expertise or Implement Expertise??
Um ... because most of those situational feats can stack with expertise.
But worth TWO feats.....not worth it to me. I would rather take one of the Lotus feats that alter at-wills.
"As an implement used by at least one other striker
class (the druid)"
LOL
This. Everyone makes mistakes, but this is the type that seems to show little knowledge of a reasonably major portion of the game... by someone who should know better no less.
Yeah.