Sorcerers and Wasted Spell Slots

[Pax]

IMO -- perhaps some will call me harsh for this -- once a Sorceror or Bard selects a spell, they're stuck with it ... barrign wishes or the like.

Any sorceror worth the name will think *long* and hard about their spell choices, with an eye not only to "right now" but also to "tomorrow", WRT how useful the spellis and will remain.

For example, Glitterdust -- useful at any and all levels, as it will AT LEAST reveal invisible creatures caught in it's area, even when saving throw bonusses are high enough to eliminate the blindness effect as otehr than "pure gravy".

Sorcerors can always use scrolls, wands, and other sources to cover gaps in their spell abilities. Sorcerors with the Elemental Substitution metamagicks can keep even their low-level elemental-damage spells useful for a -long- time (Ray of Frost substituted for Fire damage on a White Dragon -- not much, but in desperation, every net 2d3 of damage helps!).

 

[Rel]

Guys pls stop hijackign the thread I am signed up for e-mail notifaction on replies. My inbox is already almost full from my PCGen mailing list subscription.


Arnix (tm)

You can unsubscribe from the thread you know.

On topic, I'll say this: If I had a newbie player who wanted a spellcaster, I'd urge them to cut their teeth on a Sorcerer because it would let them learn the basics of spellcasting with only a limited (i.e. less confusing) set of spells to choose from. If they got hooked on playing D&D and wanted to stick with the character for the long haul, I'd consider letting them swap some spells in and out of their repertoire.

For experienced players, no way. That is the price of being a Sorcerer. 3E is all about hard choices, baby.

 

[Uller]

IMO -- perhaps some will call me harsh for this -- once a Sorceror or Bard selects a spell, they're stuck with it ... barrign wishes or the like.

Any sorceror worth the name will think *long* and hard about their spell choices, with an eye not only to "right now" but also to "tomorrow", WRT how useful the spellis and will remain.

What if a player approached you and said "My sorcerer is just no fun to play. Half his spells are useless. I think I'd rather play a fighter so I'm going to retire him."

Which would you do?

A) Help him make some minor changes in order to improve the effectiveness of the character.

B) Say "Okay" and let him make a new character.

Personally, if A is an option, I'd rather try to lead the player down that path unless his character is truly a lost cause as far as the player enjoying it goes. To each his own, though...

 

[Pax]

What if a player approached you and said "My sorcerer is just no fun to play. Half his spells are useless. I think I'd rather play a fighter so I'm going to retire him."

Which would you do?

A) Help him make some minor changes in order to improve the effectiveness of the character.

B) Say "Okay" and let him make a new character.

Personally, if A is an option, I'd rather try to lead the player down that path unless his character is truly a lost cause as far as the player enjoying it goes. To each his own, though...

If hte player is an utter newbie, I'd've been aiding them in spell selection from the get-go. If not, then they should know better (see Rel's post just above yours).

So I guess my choice would be B, but not after making sure they've seen all the ramifications of their spells. Grease can be useful for a long time; so can Glitterdust. Magic Missile -never- loses it's potency (it's a FORCE effect spell and is therefor fully functional on incorporeal targets!).

As has been observed: the lack of strategic flexibility is what MAKES a sorceror different form a wizard.

Okay, anecdotal testimony time. The first 3E character I ever played, was a Sorceror, "Jalen" (Half-elf, in a party of 6 to 8 players, including a full-elven Wizard). The second Level-2 spell Jalen learned was Melf's Acid Arrow.

The very next session after levelling up, what do we discover but a dragon. A BLACK dragon. Unplanned by the GM, mind, as he was running the Forge of Fury module, but, there I am, my only -damaging- second-level spell is completely pointless; acid damage is useless against Black Dragons.

You know what I said in response to that? "Oh well, such is the cost ofplaying a sorceror ... you pays your money and you takes your chances."

Now, keep in mind, one of my other spells was Sleep. By the time we hit 6th elvel, that was largely a useless spell.

So what? It was only a FIRST LEVEL spell. Those shouldn't be the meat and bread of a spellcaster chucking 3d level spells, anyway!

A subsequent sorceror (a (very) young human lad by the name of Ethen) is planned out to take a lot of elemental-damage type spells, with a few utilities thrown in here and there.

And all five Elemental Substitution metamagicks.

As he's just reached 3d level, he knows very few spells; Grease, Know Protections, and Ice Dagger (the latter from Magic of Faerun) constitute his first-level repertoire of spells -- selected by the player for long-term viability.

With true newbies, people on their first character (or at least, first spellcaster), even their second ... flexibility in all ways increases.

But once IMO a player has the proverbial "clue" on his internal equipmentlist ... is s/he doesn't look ahead in each spell's case, well ... them's the breaks. Tough luck, kiddo, pay closer attention to long-term viability later on, eh?

IF someone wants to be able to change their selection of spells radically at a later date, they shoudl play a Wizard. Otherwse they need to choose their spells with *great* care.

It's just that simple; it's the difference between wizards and sorcerors.

IC and OOC, Jalen and his wizard companion both agreed; Jalen had the edge in tactical flexibility and tactical endurance.

The Wizard had a huge edge in strategic flexibility. His spellcasting strategy today didn't have to bear evena passing resemblance to his spellcasting strategy YESTERDAY. Jalen's did.

 

[KarinsDad]

What if a player approached you and said "My sorcerer is just no fun to play. Half his spells are useless. I think I'd rather play a fighter so I'm going to retire him."

Which would you do?

A) Help him make some minor changes in order to improve the effectiveness of the character.

B) Say "Okay" and let him make a new character.

Personally, if A is an option, I'd rather try to lead the player down that path unless his character is truly a lost cause as far as the player enjoying it goes. To each his own, though...

I'd also let him have:

c) New Improved Sorcerer, lower level of course.
d) New Other Class, lower level of course.

Yes, it's a game and we are suppose to have fun.

But, it's also a game with rules. If you give in to your players every time they see some rule they do not like, your life will one day be a nightmare and the game will collapse on its own anyway.

Personally, I oversee all level changes of all my players PCs, so I would step in for a Sorcerer character right away and say:

"Hey, are you aware that this spell will have a lot less utility in 4 levels?"

even if the player is really experienced. I do not tell them what to do, but if I see a potential problem, I at least inform them of it.

But, if you do not do that with your players, I can see where the problem you suggest might creep up easier in your campaign.

 

[Duncan Haldane]

I like the suggestion of being able to change a spell when you get a higher level version of a spell - eg, "forget" Invisibility when you get Improved Invisibility.

When one attains a level to get Invisibility it may literally be a life-saver. But once one gets Imp. Invis, it would hardly be worth using.

The other rule I've thought about is if a spell is unused for a COMPLETE level. Eg, he wants to drop sleep, well, if he hasn't used it since level four, and is now level six, I might consider it.

Duncan

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I like the suggestion of being able to change a spell when you get a higher level version of a spell - eg, "forget" Invisibility when you get Improved Invisibility.

I like like that idea, too.

I think the DM should encourage characters to develop themes for their characters. A sorceror who sticks to a theme is likely to be screwed unless he metagames carefully.

 

[Pax]

Generally level cap comes into play, easy saves make offensive spells useless, higher level spells that achieve the same effect better or magic items mimic the spell's effect.

A few examples:
Sleep - it can be useful as a "stealth" spell in a campaign where sneaking past low level guards is often useful. Not much use in a hack 'n slay campaign beyond 8th level or so.

Mage Armor - at high level, bracers of armor render this spell unnecessary

Invisibility - Once you have improved Invis, you rarely need invis.

So...I would not give a NPC sorcerer +3 Bracers of Armor and a mage armor spell. So if one of my players picks up bracers of armor and ends up no longer ever casting mage armor, I'd eventually let him switch that spell for another at some point (probably not right away).

Sleep is still slightly useful even in a hack-and-slay campaign, even past 10th level. As others have observed: maximise, Empower, single-target.

The mage armor -- tough on the sorceror; besides which, my own sorceror cast the spell on OTHER PC's more often than on himself. specially when incorporeal, or touch-attack-wielding, foes enter the scene, suddenly that fighter LIKES havign a mage armor dropped on him. Or at night, when asleep, if some critters attack you -- the spell is a quick action, that can get your fighter(s) into the front line (and thusbetween you and the enemy's weapons/teeth/etc) sooner. It's also, IIRC, a prerequisite for making certain magic items.

As for the invisibility/Improved Invisibility issue: a SMART sorceror won't pick up BOTH.

See, here's how I play a sorceror: when I create the character, I pick what spells s/he will have at 20th level (along with feats in order of selection, target skills, prestige class-levels if any, and so on). Thus, I know from level ONE, which spells I want to have at level TWENTY. Ech time I gain a new spell, I don't pick from the PHB, etc, lists; I pick form my personal spell planner.

This is something Sorcerors really need to do; if the player fails, and isn't a rank newbie ... then, frankly, theplayer needs to go pay for a wish/miracle/etc, IOW, find an in-game means of bending the rules. In a stock PHB game, a quest on behalf of one of the Deities to claim Magic as part of their portfolio could suffice (Boccob, Wee Jas, Vecna). In an FR campaign, Azuth or Mystra/Mystara would work -- or Shar, if the Sorceror plans to go to Shadow Weave magicks (or perhaps already has).

As for an NPC -- I'd pick their spells, THEN give them items. If they had mage armor, you're right, I wouldn't give them Bracers of Armor (+3); the character would have rcognised the inferiority of that item, when they obtained it, and wouldhave exchanged it for something else more useful to them.

As would a Player Character.

I *might* however give the NPC Sorceror BRacers of Armor +6 or so, evenif Mage Armor was among the choices of spells. The NPC might have friends, or minions,or an apprentice, who could benefit form the Mage Armor spell, after all.

Or those bracers might be SELF MADE -- which IIRC requires Mage Armor as a prerequisite.

 

[tburdett]

Yes, it's a game and we are suppose to have fun.

But, it's also a game with rules. If you give in to your players every time they see some rule they do not like, your life will one day be a nightmare and the game will collapse on its own anyway.

But, in this instance, we are not talking about rules. We are talking about choices.

There is no rule that forces a player to continue with a character that they are not happy with.

There is no rule regarding the starting level of a character.

These are CHOICES that YOU are making to punish a player because he wants to make a change.

Why?

 

[Pax]

But, in this instance, we are not talking about rules. We are talking about choices.

There is no rule that forces a player to continue with a character that they are not happy with.

There is no rule regarding the starting level of a character.

These are CHOICES that YOU are making to punish a player because he wants to make a change.

Why?

Since I was the original hard-line poster, I'll answer this.

In fact, I;ll answer it with a question: why do you presume the player's new PC will come in at a lower level than the player's old PC? I never said that. Even if a level is lost, it's a small price to pay IMO, for changing out yoru charater mid-campaign.

Now, actually, there ARE rules regardin the starting level of the character: whatever the DM says.

By default, in the absence of any other ruling, all characters -begin- at 1st level.

DMG pages 42-43 is where you find the rules for creating characters above 1st level, andit does specify, the DM sets the starting level (usually in terms of an XP/GP total, in keeping with table 2-24 on DMG page 43).

If we're talking about a 10th or 12th level sorceror being replaced, as a DM, I don't WANT a 1stlevel fighter coming in as the replacement. 8th level at least, please!

As for disallowing the change of spell slots, or a slight loss of character level in the process of retirement and replacement; the Player doesn't have to choose to retire and replace. The player HAD plenty of choices of spells his character could have learned.

Losing one or two levels is a deterrent measure, to prevent everyone from constantly retiring their characters (especially upon character death, to avoid the cost of Raises or Resurrects!). It also makes sure theplayer really WANTS to replace their old character.

It's not a punishment. The player CHOSE to play a sorceror, knowng full well -- once a spell is learned, barring a wish or a miracle, it stays chosen. Period.

Them's the rules, them's the breaks. I won't allow a sorceror to change their spell selection willy-nilly, justa s I wouldn't allow a Cleric to change their choice of Domains on a whim.

The players should plan their characters out better. If they are unsure, they can sit down and discuss with me; I -might- even approve a "trial run" in such cases.

But that talking should be at the point of choice, not four or eight levels later.