Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Why No High Level Sorcerers?


Pathfinder Campaign Setting General Discussion

51 to 79 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I dont understand why a nymph would take mystic theurge. she has divine casting from being a nymph but how do those abilities increase from theurge if she dorsnt actually have class levels in a divine casting class to increase? plus shes not on the levels of a runelord nor is she level 18+ nor is she one of the normal humanoid races like the other examples i mentioned.


You think sorcerers have it bad? How about Summoners? The only specific one I have see so far is Anya Jeggare from the Rival Guide. From the APG I have seen several Oracles, Witches, and Alchemists of various levels in different products, but just ONE summoner? Hopefully, there will be more in the npc guide thats coming out.


well the npc codex is only gonna give out frameworks like the bestiaries. and they will only be from the core book classes. and even if there were summoners in there, they are in a core product and those are golarion canon.

Andoran

I think James has specifically said that classes like summoners and gunslingers are beyond rare to the point of being almost pc-only. So I wouldn't expect to see many more high level summoners, if you see any at all.

Shadow Lodge

Fnipernackle wrote:
I dont understand why a nymph would take mystic theurge. she has divine casting from being a nymph but how do those abilities increase from theurge if she dorsnt actually have class levels in a divine casting class to increase?

You answered your own question. Her innate Druid spellcasting qualifies her for MT, so her MT levels continue to advance her just as if she'd taken actual Druid levels, but advance her Sorc casting as well.


Orthos wrote:
Fnipernackle wrote:
I dont understand why a nymph would take mystic theurge. she has divine casting from being a nymph but how do those abilities increase from theurge if she dorsnt actually have class levels in a divine casting class to increase?
You answered your own question. Her innate Druid spellcasting qualifies her for MT, so her MT levels continue to advance her just as if she'd taken actual Druid levels, but advance her Sorc casting as well.

but if she doesnt actually HAVE druid levels she shouldnt be able to advance or at least thats my misunderstanding. since it says you advance a level in the spellcasting of that class, since she doesnt actually have that class she wouldnt get the advancement. like i said i may be mistaken, but i also dont play MT. my next characters are going to be a razmiran priest, winter witch, and a grey gardener.

Shadow Lodge

Yes, you misunderstand. When it says something "casts as a [class] of [level]", they have all the spellcasting capability of that class (minus class-specific things, such as Sorc bloodlines for Dragons, Domains for Dragons using Cleric casting [like Silvers], or Animal Companion/Domain for Nymphs). And as that spellcasting ability of a certain level is all MT requires - it doesn't require any specific class ability or feature, just the ability to cast Divine Spells of a certain level - then it alone is enough to qualify her for the class, along with her 6 Sorc levels for 3rd level Arcane spells.

A Nymph who takes more Druid levels has the class abilities of a Level X Druid, but has the spellcasting of her innate levels +X. Ditto for classes that advance that casting, such as MT.


Orthos wrote:

Yes, you misunderstand. When it says something "casts as a [class] of [level]", they have all the spellcasting capability of that class (minus class-specific things, such as Sorc bloodlines for Dragons, Domains for Dragons using Cleric casting [like Silvers], or Animal Companion/Domain for Nymphs). And as that spellcasting ability of a certain level is all MT requires - it doesn't require any specific class ability or feature, just the ability to cast Divine Spells of a certain level - then it alone is enough to qualify her for the class, along with her 6 Sorc levels for 3rd level Arcane spells.

A Nymph who takes more Druid levels has the class abilities of a Level X Druid, but has the spellcasting of her innate levels +X. Ditto for classes that advance that casting, such as MT.

ok thanks for clarifying. i havent read the mystic theurge class since 3.5 and the only prestige classes ive taken thus far in PF is the duelist, so i havent fully read classes that increase casting ability, but i do read everything when i play these classes. just been a long time since i have.


Orthos wrote:

Yes, you misunderstand. When it says something "casts as a [class] of [level]", they have all the spellcasting capability of that class (minus class-specific things, such as Sorc bloodlines for Dragons, Domains for Dragons using Cleric casting [like Silvers], or Animal Companion/Domain for Nymphs). And as that spellcasting ability of a certain level is all MT requires - it doesn't require any specific class ability or feature, just the ability to cast Divine Spells of a certain level - then it alone is enough to qualify her for the class, along with her 6 Sorc levels for 3rd level Arcane spells.

A Nymph who takes more Druid levels has the class abilities of a Level X Druid, but has the spellcasting of her innate levels +X. Ditto for classes that advance that casting, such as MT.

She would only need 4 level of Sorc, so, maybe some other fluff.

Shadow Lodge

Yeah that's what I get for trying to go from memory, since I'm at work. Thought they needed 3rd level spells to get into MT, not 2nd.


Orthos wrote:
Yeah that's what I get for trying to go from memory, since I'm at work. Thought they needed 3rd level spells to get into MT, not 2nd.

You might have mistaken it with the 3 rank in Knowledge Arcana and Religion.

Shadow Lodge

I blame it on the NWN1 kludge for MT my server uses. Mechanical restrictions prevent you from requiring two specific different kind of spell lists so they were forced to reduce one side to just "need divine spellcasting" and the other to "3rd level arcane spells".

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Humans in the Inner Sea tend to be literate, and literate humans tend to communicate their knowledge via books. Even those who are likely able to develop their natural gifts of magic toward sorcery are more often than not likely to becomes wizards by trade/training in the Inner Sea. In other, less literate and more primitive human cultures, sorcerers are likely more common because information is likely conveyed in a more personal way, rather than by books.

Either way, I would expect both classes to exist in all areas to some extent, and SOME high level casters of each type, but I wouldn't expect the balance to be even everywhere... not by a long shot.


One other possibility is that it would be easier by the rules for a wizard to extend his life either by switching to unlife or by more esoteric means

Let's us compare Joe Sorcerer level 16 with Bill Wizard lvl 16

Joe has put all his stats upgrade in Charisma . Bill has of course put all his points in Int
So if both started with a 18 char ( and only Pc's do that), one would have a +2 bonus for research
Also Bill has a item + 4 int while Joe has a item + 4 charisma

Finally Bill has put a skill point at each level in knowledge arcana while I doubt Joe did so (lets say it has put 10 levels in it and that would be surprising )

So let us say Joe has 14 Int while Bill has 26 Int
So Bill' Knowledge Arcana check is d20 + 19 + 8
Joe's is d20 + 2 + 13

Joe does fail at his research much more often than Bill ...

Nuff Said

Andoran RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mengkare. Daralathyxl.

Also if Int makes you a better politician than Cha, professors would be politicians and we would elect something other than tall, good looking presidents.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Charlie Bell wrote:

Mengkare. Daralathyxl.

Also if Int makes you a better politician than Cha, professors would be politicians and we would elect something other than tall, good looking presidents.

The successful politicians are smart as well as persuasive. Ask Mayor Bloomberg sometime.


EtsuElfRanger wrote:
I think James has specifically said that classes like summoners and gunslingers are beyond rare to the point of being almost pc-only. So I wouldn't expect to see many more high level summoners, if you see any at all.

Given the variance of Sorcerer bloodlines, that makes little to no sense at all.


LazarX wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:

Mengkare. Daralathyxl.

Also if Int makes you a better politician than Cha, professors would be politicians and we would elect something other than tall, good looking presidents.

The successful politicians are smart as well as persuasive. Ask Mayor Bloomberg sometime.

Or you could ask Dubya.

Andoran RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

thread derail:
I would contend that successful politicians a) have a vision and the ability to communicate it well, b) are smart enough to surround themselves with smart worker bees who can get it done, c) have the charisma/salesmanship/whatever to make most everybody else believe in it. Say whatever else you will about Dubya, he had a vision ("we're going to get those terrorists"), surrounded himself with smart people of the caliber of Condi Rice, and got the majority of Americans to buy into it. FDR was the same with the New Deal. Whether you or I actually agree with a politician's goals has no bearing on how successful they are at implementing them.


Charlie Bell wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

And speaking as one whose known many a shrewd Texan, never mistake a thick accent or a more folksy verbosity for a lack of intellect.


Charlie Bell wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

So the argument that successful politicians are smart is proven because they're successful so they must be smart.


thejeff wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

So the argument that successful politicians are smart is proven because they're successful so they must be smart.

Maybe some of them are smart enough to realize they aren't that smart and that they should ask someone else for ideas, there is also the "Areas of Expertize" that some have, and if they are moderately smart, should find people with skills, knowledge and AoE they don't have themselve.

Andoran RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can get away with not being brilliant if you are at least canny enough to get the brilliant people behind you, as in The Dilbert Principle.


Charlie Bell wrote:
You can get away with not being brilliant if you are at least canny enough to get the brilliant people behind you, as in The Dilbert Principle.

Or you can wind up with clever people running you from behind the scenes. Making all the real decisions while you remain the charming face.

Remember, Bush had Cheney head up his vice-presidential search committee, which came to the conclusion that Cheney would be the best candidate. Who's really picking the people and making the choices?
How common is that sort of thing?

Of course, in a world where people have much greater personal power, it's easier to ignore advisers and chart your own course. I suspect in a PF world, a lot of puppets would cut their own strings or use their charm to manipulate the brilliant people trying to tell them what to do.

Andoran RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Merlin and King Arthur, as the legend commonly goes, are the classic example. Arthur is a knucklehead whose whole kingship was orchestrated by Merlin's scheming.

Darth Vader and Palpatine are kind of a reverse scenario: Palpatine is the evil genius mastermind who's actually in charge, but Vader's definitely the "face" of the Empire. And he's also a simpleton by comparison, very straightforward and unsubtle.

Godwin alert: Hitler is another great example of a tremendously charismatic visionary who was not personally brilliant but surrounded himself by some real evil masterminds. And by visionary I don't mean I agree with his vision, but he definitely had the ability to get people on board with his plans for Germany.

Then you have that one in billions like Napoleon who possesses genius, drive, and personal magnetism.

Cheliax

I'm actually working on statting out Queen Frilogarma of the Court of ether for our home game. I'm making her a variant nymph that has sorcerer spells instead of druid so that her 11 levels of sorcerer are more intimidating to match her 'history'.

Sylvan sorcerer is a really fun match for her.


I notice almost all of the arcane NPCs in the PFS modules are sorcerers as well.

Osirion

Finlanderboy wrote:
I notice almost all of the arcane NPCs in the PFS modules are sorcerers as well.

As someone who played magic-users almost exclusively in 1st and 2nd edition, I also noticed that you will pretty much *never* find a spellbook as treasure since the invention of the sorcerer.

My 1e and 2e magic-user/mage characters used to have stacks of them. (Usually having a small selection of low level duplicate spells, since the average NPC magic-user foe used pretty much the same spells...)

Now? Rarer than succubi with good intentions.

I'm sure, with organized play, it's quite deliberate, as any spellbook introduced as treasure potentially adds to the spell list of any wizard PC that goes through that mod.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Set wrote:
As someone who played magic-users almost exclusively in 1st and 2nd edition, I also noticed that you will pretty much *never* find a spellbook as treasure since the invention of the sorcerer.

I don't know, Rise of the Runelords has at least a dozen spellbooks that you encounter, one of which is an artifact itself. I think it's just PFS where they are rare to encounter (although I wouldn't know, having never been a part of PFS)

51 to 79 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Campaign Setting / General Discussion / Why No High Level Sorcerers? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.