Does anyone else think it is ridiculous that Sorcerers use components and such?
- Thread starter rootbeergnome
- Start date
Tetsubo
First Post
I think sorcerers should use a fetish rather than spell components. The fetish would have a certain amount of XP invested in it for each spell level known. If lost the sorcerer couldn't cast until a new fetish was "invested".
I like the suggestion that Spellcraft be a cross-class skill. Reflecting the intuative nature of the spellcasting used by sorcerers.
I like the suggestion that Spellcraft be a cross-class skill. Reflecting the intuative nature of the spellcasting used by sorcerers.
Psion
Adventurer
Buttercup said:
I really don't agree. Sorcerer know magic by understanding it intuitively. Even if you aren't a scientist with the ability to calculate trajectory, wind resistance, and the forces of gravity on a frisbee, if you have been tossing frisbees all your life, you have a pretty good idea how a frisbee toss is going to work out.
Humanophile
First Post
Personally, I'd guess sorcerers were limited that way to prevent players from asking "If I don't need a rose petal/pinch of sand/live spider/bat dung, why would I need an expensive pearl/diamond dust/big honkin' gemstone", and since several spells are balanced in large part by their costs, I could see a sorcerer with, say, Stoneskin freely available as being quite overpowered. (On a similar note, I think Eschew Materials dropped the ball in a similar way, and as such would've been better if it raised the spell's level more for more expensive components. But I digress.)
If you think that your sorcerer, or your wizard even, would be better served by alternate components, I say more power to you. If you think your Sleep spells are better served by poppy seeds and chemical mixtures for your Identifys, do what feels best for your game's mood. But spells from any source would be complicated and prone to abuse if they just listed the component gold value, and as such, the current system is as good for generic flavor as any. I could see a blurb to this effect in place for D&D 3.2, but until then, it's a fair agreement for everyone.
If you think that your sorcerer, or your wizard even, would be better served by alternate components, I say more power to you. If you think your Sleep spells are better served by poppy seeds and chemical mixtures for your Identifys, do what feels best for your game's mood. But spells from any source would be complicated and prone to abuse if they just listed the component gold value, and as such, the current system is as good for generic flavor as any. I could see a blurb to this effect in place for D&D 3.2, but until then, it's a fair agreement for everyone.
ConcreteBuddha
First Post
We houseruled that sorcs use an "arcane focus" in place of all of their material components. Rules:
1) The arcane focus must cost 100x the price of their most expensive spell component. This is in addition to any other properties the item might have.
2) The arcane focus takes up a "slot" on the body. Be it a ring, staff, amulet, or some other slot. (Even boots, which is kinda weird. But hey, they're sorcs!)
3) Sorcs cannot use normal, wizard material components.
4) The arcane focus also takes the place of any other specific arcane focus (such as the gem for Magic Jar), as long as its value is more than the arcane focus superceded.
Example arcane focus: A sorcerer casting stoneskin with an arcane focus quarterstaff +1/+1 would have paid 29,600 gp. (25,000 + 4,600)
Works pretty well for us, and it further separates the two classes, which, IMHO, is a good thing. Our first impression was that spells like stoneskin would be too powerful, but we have not encountered this problem (especially because of item breakage and disarm).
1) The arcane focus must cost 100x the price of their most expensive spell component. This is in addition to any other properties the item might have.
2) The arcane focus takes up a "slot" on the body. Be it a ring, staff, amulet, or some other slot. (Even boots, which is kinda weird. But hey, they're sorcs!)
3) Sorcs cannot use normal, wizard material components.
4) The arcane focus also takes the place of any other specific arcane focus (such as the gem for Magic Jar), as long as its value is more than the arcane focus superceded.
Example arcane focus: A sorcerer casting stoneskin with an arcane focus quarterstaff +1/+1 would have paid 29,600 gp. (25,000 + 4,600)
Works pretty well for us, and it further separates the two classes, which, IMHO, is a good thing. Our first impression was that spells like stoneskin would be too powerful, but we have not encountered this problem (especially because of item breakage and disarm).
Last edited:
Sorcerers come in many shapes and sizes. Keep in mind that most monsters that use spell-like abilities cast them "as sorcerers." I dont expect a dragon, a demon, a devil, etc. to need material components so why should a sorcerer
The idea that all magic is accessed in the same way is just wrong.
Sorcerers are either born with the power to channel magic or acquire it from a powerful entity. A player in our Greyhawk campaign has a Baklunish sorcerer that gains his magic from genies (just like the shi'ars from Al'Qadim) and the idea of him using material components is just ridiculous.
The new sorcerer from Monte Cook is perfect. The new sorcerer spell list takes spells with long casting times and expensive components into account and it just works better.
The idea that all magic is accessed in the same way is just wrong.
Sorcerers are either born with the power to channel magic or acquire it from a powerful entity. A player in our Greyhawk campaign has a Baklunish sorcerer that gains his magic from genies (just like the shi'ars from Al'Qadim) and the idea of him using material components is just ridiculous.
The new sorcerer from Monte Cook is perfect. The new sorcerer spell list takes spells with long casting times and expensive components into account and it just works better.
Does anyone have a link to Monte's sorcerer by the way?
Count me in as a non-believer in material components for sorcerers. The analogy to dragons, demons and such using magic is perfect. I seriously doubt a pit fiend is going to pull out a bag of bat guano prior to hitting you with a 1000d6 fireball.
I prefer my wizards mechanical and my sorcerers mystical.
This gets complicated when dealing with gp-value'd components. I'm actually in the process of trying to create a system that uses temporary constitution drain as a substitue for expensive components, substituting the body of the sorcerer for the normal material that would be required.
Balacing it however is a real chore. I'm not a fan of universal xp drain from any expensive spell, since casting a spell should never make a person less experienced. It works in terms of creating items since the caster actually gives a part of himself to the item and since you're dealing with permanency.
Count me in as a non-believer in material components for sorcerers. The analogy to dragons, demons and such using magic is perfect. I seriously doubt a pit fiend is going to pull out a bag of bat guano prior to hitting you with a 1000d6 fireball.
I prefer my wizards mechanical and my sorcerers mystical.This gets complicated when dealing with gp-value'd components. I'm actually in the process of trying to create a system that uses temporary constitution drain as a substitue for expensive components, substituting the body of the sorcerer for the normal material that would be required.
Balacing it however is a real chore. I'm not a fan of universal xp drain from any expensive spell, since casting a spell should never make a person less experienced. It works in terms of creating items since the caster actually gives a part of himself to the item and since you're dealing with permanency.
Similar Threads
