Anyone play a Battle Sorcerer from UA? Feedback

Wraith-Hunter

First Post
I'm wondering if anyone has played one, and what their thoughts were on it. Was the Armor,HD,BaB worth giving up the known spells and slots for? How did it work out in actual play? All in all were you happy with it or was the price too steep.

I know how things look on paper but I am wonering about actual game play. Any insight is appreciated.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I am playing one now, but only at 3rd level so don't have a long term reaction. I am happy with it. The better BAB is great and so is the AC. Its better than playing a multiclassed Fighter/Sorcerer. I would recomend taking feats that give you more spells known, such as the Bloodline Feats from Dragon Compendium. You are going to be hitting new spell levels at the same time as a regular sorcerer, so no need to worry about that; however you are going to want to be more careful with spell selection. Given that the Battle Sorcerer can survive just fine in melee you are going to want to think about spells that help him out there. My guy is putting Shocking Grasp to great use. I plan on taking things like Enlarge Person and a buff spell or two as I go. I also invest in things like scrolls and wands to make up for some of the missing spells I would normally have taken as a pure Sorcerer.
 

I had a player use the battle sorcerer in a game years ago and it worked out fine. The extra spells were not really missed because, as a stronger combatant, she had more to do in combat than cast a spell and stay out of everyone else's way. I wanted to play a battle sorcerer myself when UA first came out, but I think my DM at the time decided the class might be too powerful. At this point, battle sorcerers are much farther down the list of powerful classes. There are now other ways to play a fighter/mage which are probably better: warmage was the better class when it came out, and duskblades are even better. Battle sorcerers still have a larger list of spells to work with, but access to spells can be granted so many ways that I wouldn't consider it a big advantage.

If someone wanted to play a battle sorcerer now, I'd try to point them toward one of the more competitive options.

Stormborn said:
I would recomend taking feats that give you more spells known, such as the Bloodline Feats from Dragon Compendium.
The battle sorcerer player had the fire bloodline feat. I don't imagine there's another feat out there that's more valuable to a battle sorcerer than the bloodline feats.
 

I would be using a bloodline feat in any case.

I like the Duskblade and Warmage but not their spell lists. Duskblade is particularly good, as a class but I want more out of a F/Mu than damaging spells. Basically they just kill stuff. I need a bit more out of the class. Same kind a goes for Warmage.

Really all I want/need is armored casting in light armor and 3/4 BaB progression with typical choices for spell lists. I tend to do well with tactics and battlefield control.

I'd take the Battle Sorc. in a heartbeat if it was d6 and didn't limit your known spells.
 

I used battle sorcs quite a lot in my previous campaign. They're pretty cool, especially in conjunction with Arcane Strike. The fact that they're fairly generic in terms of fluff is a good point in my book.
 



I am playing a battle sorceror now, and he is doing quite well. For a fighter/mage they are my favorite becasue htey get not only a good sleection of spells, butthey get a variety of them also. Warmages with evocation, and Duskblades with single-target HP spells jsut do not have the versatility that a battle sorceror enjoys. Sure the lower number of spells known hurts (the lower spell slots matters not a bit) but there are ways to incease that, and even if not, you can fall back on fighting to deal hit point damage anyway, and thus save yoruself a few spells known to jsut deal damage.

The feats like arcane strike and the Draconic chain, they can do some nasty things with those slots in combat.
 

Remove ads

Top