Why I Hate Sorcerors

[Petrosian]

Some miscellaneous points...

On the availability of wands... starting at second level, wand availability is beyond the "common" 3k price.

On all blasting/no utility...
not from what i have seen. Sorcerers who rely on just blasting are begging for trouble when Sr adversaries arrive. Buffing, utility, etc are mainstays of the sorcerer. What is often missed is that while he wants to be good at combat, a sorcerer just needs one useful combat spell per encounter... then he hits that again and again. Most sorcerers i have seen did not even take 1 offensive spell per level. In play, my sorcerers spells included message, mount, magic mouth, tongues, and so on.

On the planning for futurwe and not taking spells with limits...
YES!!!! This alone means the sorcerer finds different spells appealing to him than the wizard. Spells the wizard plans to use for a while and discard are aneathema for the sor. I like having different classes do different things.

On the old shield vs mage armor...
Mage armor scales wonderfully by duration as you level up, while shield remains fairly short duration, cast at the beginning of each combat if at all. Wands of shield cost 750 gold and are well within the 3000 gp common limit while bracers of armor are almost always above the 3k common available limit. Why someone would forego NA because they expect16k bracers to be provided but take shield as if .75k wands wont be available is beyond me. Take the MA spell and buy one shield wand every 2 levels. You wont be sorry and neither will your party when you give them each +4 AC vs incorporeal undead.

 

[bmcdaniel]

Re: Re: Why I Hate Sorcerors

Heighten Spell takes care of the DC problem for most of those spells.

The problem isn't so much with the DC for those spells, but with the inherant limits. For example, Sleep only affects creatures with 5 HD or less. Regardless of what the DC is, this won't do much good at high levels. Colorspray is a little better: it stuns 5+ HD creatures. Charm Person scales OK, but then again at higher levels, medium-sized or smaller humanoids get progressively rarer. None of these scale as well as Magic Missile, or even burning hands.

 

[Pax]

I like the idea of spontaneous, "natural" casters who use the force of their personality to cast spells, but I don't like how sorcerors implemented in 3e. Here's why:

1. Sorcerors have a very limited spell selection, so they have to be very careful about what spells they choose to know. On the other hand, they can cast any arcane spell (on their list) from a scroll or wand. Given the 3e baseline for availability of magic items, sorcerors can be relatively certain they can get whatever scrolls and wands they need. So, sorcerors who are supposed to be more natural, untutored magic users, end up being more reliant on scrolls and wands than most wizards!

I didn't experience this, while playing a Sorceror. Then again, I took care to find flexible-use / multi-purpose / wide-application spells; things that could be used in lots of situations, at most or all character levels, to some effect or other (for example, I love Glitterrdust; at low levels it's a decent offensive spell, and high level's it's a poor man's Invisibility Purge).

2. Second, as pointed out above, the sorceror has to select which (of a limited number) of spells to "know" versus which to rely on scrolls/wands for. Almost always, the difference between personally cast and scroll cast spells are the DC of the spell, and level-dependent benefits, most notably the duration of short-lived spells. As a result, sorcerors almost never learn utility spells. They concentrate on offensive spells that rely on high DCs and short-duration defensive spells (every sorceror I've seen knows shield; no sorceror knows mage armor).

My first sorceror knew Mage Armor, and Sleep. Two of the least scalable spells around.

Did I, at later levels, wish I'd chosen Magic Missile instead of sleep? Yep.

Did I regret my choice of Mage Armor? Nope (the Druid loved getting a Mage Armor popped on each of her companions ... the Rogue occasionally liked a non-obvious armor effect for when he went slinking about on covert recon ... etc).

In sum, the rules logic push sorcerors very far away from their supposed flavor, and turn them, nearly uniformly, into energy-blasting artillery. That's why I hate sorcerors.

*shrug*

I've crafted Sorceror-illusionists before, and probably will again. Most people who play "artillery" Sorcerors are probably more interested in the spells-per-day aspect, than the free-cast aspect.

Oh, as an aside: I allow Sorcerors to specialise; they get to KNOW one extra spell of each spell level, chosen from spells in their school. Costs for each specialisation are identical to those for wizards. And I don't let Sorcerors use Wizard scrolls, unless they have the Scribe Scroll feat ... and in the future might even require a Spellcraft check anyway. Fits in with the "their spells come form a different methodology" concept.

 

[bmcdaniel]

Re: Re: Why I Hate Sorcerors

Mage armor is far more useful, [...]

Well, my point was that sorcerors use both shield and mage armor, but only know shield. A 1 hour duration mage armor scroll is only 25 gp. Easily affordable, even at very low levels, for everyone in the party.

Contrast this with shield, where the 1 round/level duration means the caster level is important, and sorcerors take it far more often.

BMM

 

[Pax]

Re: Re: This makes perfect sense...

2) I do agree that the way the sorcerer is presented in the PHB (e.g. flavor text) does not add up when you look at the game mechanics. Lack of charisma based skills and reliance on material components are a couple of problems.

I agree the Skill List needs to be more strongly differentiated from that ofWizards.

As for material components, use the same easy fix I do: give all sorcerors the feat "Eschew Materials" for free, perhaps limited to only function for Sorceror spells ...

 

[bmcdaniel]

Re: This makes perfect sense...

And that's the way it should be.

I, as a college-educated historian, have a much better grasp of American history than, say, my 8th-grade students. I have this much better grasp because I've spent more time studying the subject than my 8th-grade students have spent being able to tie their own shoes.

If historical trivia were spells, I could cast more without relying on reference books than any of my students, who need to constantly refer to their scrolls in order to find the answers to the questions.

I don't think the analogy quite holds, since you aren't a "natural" historian who intuitively grasps the truths of history - you were trained in history, its just that you have more training than your students. History as such doesn't really lend itself to an intuitive understanding; you pretty much have to study it.

A better example might be mathematics. There are math prodigies who rely on a natural, intuitive understanding of math to solve problems (for example, S. Ramanujan); and there are people who labor for years to train themselves to be great mathematicians.

Now, if the intuitive mathematician was to venture outside his area of expertise, he may well have to rely on other people's work to solve a math problem. That's probably realistic. But I want a game system that encourages intuitive mathematicians to rely on their wits, rather than crutches.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

It might be that I'm too used to a wizards spell selection, but I always have trouble with the small list of sorcerers known spells. honestly I'd prefer a wizards number of spells per day, but with a 25-50% increase in known spells.

Still I think the class is fun, whoose biggest limit is the terrible skill list.(the again I hope the revised edition does away with class skills, I've never liked them or even there counter parts in 2e)

 

[Xarlen]

Re: This makes perfect sense...

And that's the way it should be.

I, as a college-educated historian, have a much better grasp of American history than, say, my 8th-grade students. I have this much better grasp because I've spent more time studying the subject than my 8th-grade students have spent being able to tie their own shoes.

If historical trivia were spells, I could cast more without relying on reference books than any of my students, who need to constantly refer to their scrolls in order to find the answers to the questions.

You, Sir, are describing the Wizard.

The wizard Learns through books and classes and has to cling to those books at first, as he goes higher, using the aiding tools, until he's up there.

A Sorceror relies on WHAT HE IS BORN WITH. His magic doesn't come from Wands and Scrolls, he just has fireballs shooting out of his hands one day. And as he progresses, more spells just pop out of him. Sure, he may learn how to harness his inner workings, but this is all Inward, not Outward knowledge.

 

[Destil]

Re: Re: Re: Why I Hate Sorcerors

Well, my point was that sorcerors use both shield and mage armor, but only know shield. A 1 hour duration mage armor scroll is only 25 gp. Easily affordable, even at very low levels, for everyone in the party.

Contrast this with shield, where the 1 round/level duration means the caster level is important, and sorcerors take it far more often.

BMM

At 12th an extrnded mage armor lasts a full day. If you can get all your adventuring done in 1 hour / day then my hat's off to you.

(I'd still take MA over Shield for a sorcerer, simply because it can be cast on others)

 

[bret]

Re: Re: Re: Why I Hate Sorcerors

The problem isn't so much with the DC for those spells, but with the inherant limits. For example, Sleep only affects creatures with 5 HD or less. Regardless of what the DC is, this won't do much good at high levels. Colorspray is a little better: it stuns 5+ HD creatures. Charm Person scales OK, but then again at higher levels, medium-sized or smaller humanoids get progressively rarer. None of these scale as well as Magic Missile, or even burning hands.

I agree that Sleep and Colorspray do not scale well.

That still leaves "Charm Person, Hold Person, Hypnotism, Cause Fear, etc."

Heighten Spell helps a lot of other spells, mostly of the Save or Die variety. It can even be used well by a Sorcerer with (or against) Globe of Invulnerabilty.

From what I've seen, Sorcerers have to be played quite a bit differently than Wizards. I expect some people to prefer one over the other, there are valid ways to feel that way.

I just wanted to point out that spell DC doesn't have to be a problem for a Sorcerer that choses their spells carefully.