I played a sorcerer and it was fun. Still, they are a little underbalanced IMO. I couldn't see a way to beef up their spellcasting without tipping the scales the other way... so IMC I've added +1 skill point per level, Use Magic Device and Sense Motive. It gives a little more wiggle room to make themselves into something other than "gatling wizards."
sorcerers
- Thread starter vince33
- Start date
Lonely Tylenol
First Post
Felix said:The draconic bloodlines for sorcerers you mention is a flavor element. Wizardly spellbooks are not. They are a game mechanic. Like KarinsDad says (we're finally seeing eye to eye KarinsDad!) it smacks of common sense to attack a wizard's spellbook. When you fight a wizard, you fight his spells. To reduce his ability to cast those spells, you can strike his spellbook. Wizards should have to spend resources to protect their books, because an unprotected spellbook is the beginning of the end for a wizard.
So who goes into combat with a wizard intending to destroy the spellbook and leave the wizard standing, so that later on when you fight the wizard again he doesn't have any spells? If you can defeat the wizard badly enough to get at his spellbook (assuming he doesn't carry it around in his hand all the time so it can be sundered, disintegrated, or stolen), you've already got him beat, and you don't need to destroy his spellbook. Not that you'd want to destroy it if you can avoid doing so, since it's quite valuable treasure.
I suppose there's something to be said for stealing the spellbook. But what kind of crazy adventurers leave their equipment--each piece of which is worth several years (if not lifetimes) of labour by a commoner--lying around unguarded to be stolen? If your livelihood and survival depended on one specific item that could not be replaced and was made of a fragile, flammable material, could you imagine ever letting that item out of your sight? I figure most wizards are necessarily paranoid, to the point that nobody ever bothers to steal their spellbooks because they know they'll have to kill the wizard to get near the book.
Another good spell for Sorcerers combined with Empowered Spell is Scorching Ray.
I like fire blasting those pesky Rogues with their Evasion and Improved Evasion and it doesn't work for them.
At level 4, it is only 4D6 (course, 4D6 will seriously wound most 4th level opponents).
At level 7, it is 8D6.
At level 8, it is 12D6 (i.e. 8D6 Empowered using up a 4th level slot).
At level 11, it is 18D6 (i.e. 12D6 Empowered using up a 4th level slot).
Very few 11th level opponents can take 18D6 points of damage and not feel it. This is an automatic Massive Damage rule, even with most Fire Resistances.
At higher level, you will probably have to Maximize and Empower it with a 7th level slot to get major damage (average 93 points).
Again, it has the problems of ranged touch attack and spell resistance, but for pounding specific opponents (such as doing a ready action to disrupt an enemy spellcasters spell), it is pretty sweet.
I like fire blasting those pesky Rogues with their Evasion and Improved Evasion and it doesn't work for them.
At level 4, it is only 4D6 (course, 4D6 will seriously wound most 4th level opponents).
At level 7, it is 8D6.
At level 8, it is 12D6 (i.e. 8D6 Empowered using up a 4th level slot).
At level 11, it is 18D6 (i.e. 12D6 Empowered using up a 4th level slot).
Very few 11th level opponents can take 18D6 points of damage and not feel it. This is an automatic Massive Damage rule, even with most Fire Resistances.
At higher level, you will probably have to Maximize and Empower it with a 7th level slot to get major damage (average 93 points).
Again, it has the problems of ranged touch attack and spell resistance, but for pounding specific opponents (such as doing a ready action to disrupt an enemy spellcasters spell), it is pretty sweet.
Dr. Awkward said:
Even Wizards have to take a break.
Hide in Plain Sight can make stealing the backpack (or whatever) where spellbooks are kept pretty simple.
Or, Greater Mage Hand followed by Teleport.
Sometimes, your enemy just wants to frustrate or humiliate you as opposed to just killing you outright.
As a DM, I think players should be challenged. That does not mean attacking a Wizard's spellbooks every single time, but it does mean doing so when it is reasonable and logical for the enemies to do so.
Ditto for the "favored weapon" of the party Fighter or Cleric.
Or, the armor of the Paladin.
Why limit your combats to simple hack and slash when you can do "memorable maneuvers" that players remember for a long time, especially when "it is reasonable and logical for the enemies to do so"?
As a player of a PC Wizard, which would you rather do? Go on the third quest this month to rescue the Princess or slay a dragon or enter a dungeon, or go find the SOB who stole your spellbooks?
Dr. Awkward said:
It's not a disadvantage to wizardds at all. It's just the way wizards cast spells. An advantage of the Sorcerer is that they don't have to worry about that. Sorcerers are by far more flexible casters.
Thats not to be confused with spell selection. Wizards have the potential (it's not a right and not guaranteed) to have a more flexible selection of spells.
Now we can contrive hundreds of specific scenarios specially tailored to have the Sorcerers come out smelling like roses like they're superior and making Wizards looking like doofs and hundreds more specific circumstances where the Sorcerers are left holding their wands and Wizards are shown to be truely superior.
That doesn't matter. What matters is that one is more flexible in casting and the other is (potentially) more flexible in selection. In the grand scheme of things, levels 1 to 20, All styles of play from kicking down dungeon doors to courtly intrique to intercity guild wars to running through the woods, they pretty much balance out.
Thats not to say that someone who prefers wizards doesn't prefer having a potentially endless list of spells and having to make educated guesses about using them or that someone who loves spontanious versatility at a moments notice won't prefer their Sorcerers.
Some people prefer not to use magic at all, does that mean that their backstabber or their carving warrior are any better than magic? They have their uses and compared to magic they also have advantage and disadvantages.
With having like 4 spell slots and maybe 6 spells between cantrip to 3rd level, i've spontaniously out magicked Wizards in the party with over a dozen spells each and who knows how many prepared. Overall throughout the game that went on to like 10th level, we all had our moments and my Sorcerer wasn't shut out with two Wizards in the party in the least. It was pretty equal overall, on the average.
I prefer magic I can work with on the fly. I can adjust to a situation and roll with it. I have plenty of spell slots to not worry about running out of spells or having to worry about having my spells prepared. I enjoyed that quite a bit more than when I played the Wizard and there were so many times my spell selection didn't fit the situation. We got by and got the job done, but it frustrated me.
This is why I feel that overall it's pretty equal. I'm not saying that the Wizard is disadvantaged next to the Sorcerer or visa versa. I'm saying that differen't players enjoy and prefer a different aspect of their magic.
StreamOfTheSky
Adventurer
A few things.
1) Do my eyes deceive me, or in this entire "what if the wizard loses his spell books" argument, has no one even mentioned the greatest wizard feat ever, Spell Mastery? Perhaps they took it out in 3.5? For the price of a bonus feat or 2, you can prepare from sheer memory a dozen or so of your most versatile spells. Sure, a spare spellbook is still better, but the feats don't cost money.
2) I used to think sorcerors were better than wizards because they didn't have to spend all their money on new spells, but after having played one, they do seem slightly underpowered. I know it's more house rules, but there are a few possibilities to make sorcerors a little better / different. a) give them higher skill points and UMD. they'll still probably end up with less skills than the wizard, and for the ultimate "spontaneous caster" class, I'm shocked and apalled they don't already have UMD. b) Make certain spells like detect magic, read magic, identify, etc... automatically known to all sorcerors because they're such common, fundamental spells. Alternatively, just say sorcerors learn all universal-school spells, such as limited wish, for free. Or, let them add their bonus from charisma to spells known. With all the new spells introduced in the supplements, is it really that broken to give sorcs a few more spells known? c) Lose the familiar ability, as I never understood why sorcerors would have one, and instead give them bonus feats at certain levels (preferably odd numbered ones). At first level, they'd get draconic heritage feat from CA, and at these other bonus feat levels, they pick other draconic feats of their choice. Perhaps 3 bonus feats on top of heritage spread out over the 20 levels?
3) For Dr. Awkward's list, I'd like to also say that ray of enfeeblement is a great and versatile spell. Even a wizard can be hurt by it. Have a str 10 wizard get zapped for 6 str damage? "That spellbook suddenly got pretty heavy, didn't it? Better drop it if you want to have any chance of running away." (not to mention the loss of dex to AC). I'd like to add Suggestion, though. If the enemy fails the save, the only real limit on what you can do is your creativity. Very fitting sorceror spell. Finally, Prestigitation is just cool. Take it! Take it now!
1) Do my eyes deceive me, or in this entire "what if the wizard loses his spell books" argument, has no one even mentioned the greatest wizard feat ever, Spell Mastery? Perhaps they took it out in 3.5? For the price of a bonus feat or 2, you can prepare from sheer memory a dozen or so of your most versatile spells. Sure, a spare spellbook is still better, but the feats don't cost money.
2) I used to think sorcerors were better than wizards because they didn't have to spend all their money on new spells, but after having played one, they do seem slightly underpowered. I know it's more house rules, but there are a few possibilities to make sorcerors a little better / different. a) give them higher skill points and UMD. they'll still probably end up with less skills than the wizard, and for the ultimate "spontaneous caster" class, I'm shocked and apalled they don't already have UMD. b) Make certain spells like detect magic, read magic, identify, etc... automatically known to all sorcerors because they're such common, fundamental spells. Alternatively, just say sorcerors learn all universal-school spells, such as limited wish, for free. Or, let them add their bonus from charisma to spells known. With all the new spells introduced in the supplements, is it really that broken to give sorcs a few more spells known? c) Lose the familiar ability, as I never understood why sorcerors would have one, and instead give them bonus feats at certain levels (preferably odd numbered ones). At first level, they'd get draconic heritage feat from CA, and at these other bonus feat levels, they pick other draconic feats of their choice. Perhaps 3 bonus feats on top of heritage spread out over the 20 levels?
3) For Dr. Awkward's list, I'd like to also say that ray of enfeeblement is a great and versatile spell. Even a wizard can be hurt by it. Have a str 10 wizard get zapped for 6 str damage? "That spellbook suddenly got pretty heavy, didn't it? Better drop it if you want to have any chance of running away." (not to mention the loss of dex to AC). I'd like to add Suggestion, though. If the enemy fails the save, the only real limit on what you can do is your creativity. Very fitting sorceror spell. Finally, Prestigitation is just cool. Take it! Take it now!
StreamOfTheSky said:
Seems very close to what I'd do.
I'd make a player choose what their bloodline is, wether draconic, demonic, etc. What sort of demon/dragon/angel/whatever. Depending on which they chose, they would gain generic liniage feats/abilities as they went up in level that would give them spelllike abilities or extra spells or bonuses or whatever, inline with their liniage.
To make it interesting I'd give two options in each feat/ability. A lesser bonus and a greater bonus that comes with a drawback.
Like one ability might be "Bloodline: Resistance" which grants +x to a Good Save of their Bloodline and a bonus to save vs an element/magic that their bloodline is resistant to. A greater version would grant a larger set of bonuses, but also a penalty of the bloodline.
So if you're descended from a Fire Dragon and chose Bloodline: Resistance, you would gain some bonuses against fire damage and maybe even some resistances to Fire Damage while gaining a weakness against cold and a slight physical trait.
So they would act like normal feats/abilities in line with their heritage, but the player could opt for a version more powerful, but also becoming more inhuman and gaining more power from their Bloodline and also more weaknesses.
another option might be a special attack, gaining extra spells in line with their Bloodline and some that might just be in general with their parental liniage like dragons, demons, etc.
Lonely Tylenol
First Post
Denaes said:
emphasis mine
On what basis do you make this assertion? Sorcerers are more fecund casters, certainly. But more flexible? They have access to the same spells wizards do, but fewer. How does that make them more flexible?
Dr. Awkward said:
Fecund? Does this mean more of their infant spells live past their first year?
I think the "flexible" argument refers to the fact that sorcerers can cast multiples of a useful spell without having to have prepared them beforehand. A wizard and a sorcerer may each have fireball, dispel magic, and fly, but the wizard will likely prepare one or two of each, whereas the sorcerer could use all of his third level slots to cast X number of fly spells (and he could also use all of his higher-level slots to cast that many more). A sorcerer can respond spontaneously to a situation if he knows the necessary spell. A wizard may know the spell and still be unable to respond appropriately, because he has not prepared enough of the needed spell.
--Axe
