Sorcerers with Spell-like abilities?

[ARandomGod]

Has anyone ever changed the sorcerer's spells into spell-like abilities? How has that worked for you? Does anyone think it is a great/awful idea? Have there been a thousand threads on this that I missed?

I've done it. I've also altered the sorc in a select few other ways*. It worked fine... I suppose it depends largely on your campaign. If the now missing components are going to be a big power boost, then it will be a big power boost. If not, all you've done was change the flavor.


*Ok, fine, you twisted my arm. The other ways were mainly HOW the sorcs got spell like abilities. They have to 'hang' the spell in a method similiar to the way a wizard memorizes spells (but longer), including all the components. However when it's 'hung' it becomes a 'spell known', and from that point on it's simply a spell like ability. There were also rules for changing the spells hung (granting more options to change spells known). It was purposefully long and complex, to maintain the lack of flexibility that is a significant power differential between the sorc and the wizard... this lack of flexibility, naturally, is controled solely by the GM (who tells you what happens while time is passing)...

 

[The Human Target]

The only other change I can note is that the wouldn't be able to counter spell, nor be counterspelled. But that hasn't gotten a ton of use in any of our games, so I don't forsee it being a huge power boost. I always make sure we keep track of components for spells (the expensive ones anyway) so it is a slight power boost. But I think all these factors help the sorcerer to become a really viable class.

 

[Storyteller01]

Sort of did...


MGP had a book on Elementalists. You converted spell slots into elemental effects. I worked it so that, instead of spending exp to gain elemental magic, you started with it. The catch: you ONly had elemental magic.


Didn't go over too well...

 

[ARandomGod]

The only other change I can note is that the wouldn't be able to counter spell, nor be counterspelled. But that hasn't gotten a ton of use in any of our games, so I don't forsee it being a huge power boost. I always make sure we keep track of components for spells (the expensive ones anyway) so it is a slight power boost. But I think all these factors help the sorcerer to become a really viable class.

That's right, uncounterable. Well, unless you've house-rules counterspelling to be an actual cost-effective option, you'll never have to worry about that. And if you do, a simple addition to that houserule makes sorcerous spell like abilities counterspellable...

Material Components, only a slight power boost. Unless you tend to take them away. (Sometimes GM's do this, if it's not done often it can be a fun quest). There's also lack of verbal and somatic components. Realize that unless you make a special exception this change would make it possible for sorcs to wear armor with no spell failure (a large power boost) and to cast in area's of silence (silence is a cheap spell anyway that I don't like to see used in that way).

Additionally, you could have spells with expensive material components still available, but have different effects depending on if they have the material available or not (I did this for all spells in my houserules, so that wizards could do it too).

 

[The Human Target]

That's right, uncounterable. Well, unless you've house-rules counterspelling to be an actual cost-effective option, you'll never have to worry about that. And if you do, a simple addition to that houserule makes sorcerous spell like abilities counterspellable...

Material Components, only a slight power boost. Unless you tend to take them away. (Sometimes GM's do this, if it's not done often it can be a fun quest). There's also lack of verbal and somatic components. Realize that unless you make a special exception this change would make it possible for sorcs to wear armor with no spell failure (a large power boost) and to cast in area's of silence (silence is a cheap spell anyway that I don't like to see used in that way).

Additionally, you could have spells with expensive material components still available, but have different effects depending on if they have the material available or not (I did this for all spells in my houserules, so that wizards could do it too).

Yeah, I was trying to think what to do with counterspell in general. As is it never gets much use at all. But if I make the option better (say being able to counterspell with any spell of the same level and school) I still might keep the sorcerer non-counterspell-able. Would the fact that they can't counterspell other spells (given that they are better at counterspelling than a wizard now) be enough of a balance point?

Like I said, I already let sorcerers have free Improved Eschew Materials, so it won't be a huge deal. And they pay for expensive ones in xp, so it balances out. But if they never had to pay any xp costs, it could become unbalanced with a spell like Wish. I do make everyone else make sure they have components and focuses. We've had whole adventures where the pcs were without their gear and the magic users had to improvise.

The armor issue is a big one, and one I've been thinking about for some time. I have already given the sorcerers in my game the ability to wear light armor with no SF, and I boosted the bards ability up so they can wear medium with no SF. (And I gave them the appropriate proficiencies.) I'm not sure if I really care to use arcane spell failure at all. Its sort of limiting.

 

[ARandomGod]

It's not to hard to rule that they still get spell failure in heavier armors ... in fact, it's not at all difficult to give sorcerous spell-like abilities special somatic components. They did that with warlocks. Note that if you make ALL of them had somatic components you seriously nerf the "get out of grapple" card that is dimension door and teleport. Something I think most arcane casters actually need...

To improve counterspell I personally suggest that you use the same basic rules, same existing feats, but change the ability to be reactive. So that instead of having to ready an action to counter a spell, you can choose to counter a spell using your next standard action as an immediate action. It doesn't change your place in the initiaive, but assuming they haven't done this already that round, they can counter and then lose their next standard action. That prevents more than one spell at a time from being countered, and it removed the necessity to be omniscient in order to effectively use counterspells, which is an unwritten prerequisite that the ability has now.

 

[The Human Target]

It's not to hard to rule that they still get spell failure in heavier armors ... in fact, it's not at all difficult to give sorcerous spell-like abilities special somatic components. They did that with warlocks. Note that if you make ALL of them had somatic components you seriously nerf the "get out of grapple" card that is dimension door and teleport. Something I think most arcane casters actually need...

To improve counterspell I personally suggest that you use the same basic rules, same existing feats, but change the ability to be reactive. So that instead of having to ready an action to counter a spell, you can choose to counter a spell using your next standard action as an immediate action. It doesn't change your place in the initiaive, but assuming they haven't done this already that round, they can counter and then lose their next standard action. That prevents more than one spell at a time from being countered, and it removed the necessity to be omniscient in order to effectively use counterspells, which is an unwritten prerequisite that the ability has now.

Really like the counterspelling option. I think thats what I'm going to end up using. But I still might add in the same spell level/school idea as well.