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

1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Ok so whats the deal here?

We have the Runlords, all 7 of em, Xin, Jatambe, Aroden, Arazni, Nex, Geb, Tar-Baphon, Alicavniss Vonnarc, Razmir (which from here on out in my games is a sorcerer cause this is bull s&%*), etc. All Wizards. All level 18+.

You even have Baba Yaga and her daughter and current ruler of Irrisen both level 20+.

You even have Artokus Kirran as a level 20+ alchemist.

So where oh where are the 18-20+ level sorcerers at? I mean yes theres some, SOME, sorcerers, but none at that level that have had a major impact in canon, and most of them are multiclassed. I mean does Paizo hate sorcerers so much and think that they are so sub par to wizards that we get no 18-20+ level sorcerers?

Ill put it like this. I love everything Paizo puts out. I buy every book they produce save a very small list of them, and i mean small, like two to three items. I buy many PF miniatures, game mastery map packs, flip mats, flying tiles, etc. Ive always had a disdain for anything from outer space in my fantasy games, but i love the flavor Paizo gave to Numeria and put into the Distant Worlds book, which is one of my favorites. I also have never been big on oriental themed areas nor their versions of dragons, yet Paizo again made me a believer as i love both the Dragon Empires Gazetteer, as well as the Primal dragons or whatever you call em.

But this, THIS is just getting ridiculous. I love sorcerers and the flavor they bring, yet its like they get no love. Ill bring up the fact that most sorcerer options we get are bloodlines, where as other classes, especially wizards get so much more that they can take after character creation. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but this is just too much. I really think theres something much bigger going on here.

Let me know your thoughts.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Fnipernackle wrote:

Ok so whats the deal here?

We have the Runlords, all 7 of em, Xin, Jatambe, Aroden, Arazni, Nex, Geb, Tar-Baphon, Alicavniss Vonnarc, Razmir (which from here on out in my games is a sorcerer cause this is bull s&%*), etc. All Wizards. All level 18+.

You even have Baba Yaga and her daughter and current ruler of Irrisen both level 20+.

You even have Artokus Kirran as a level 20+ alchemist.

So where oh where are the 18-20+ level sorcerers at? I mean yes theres some, SOME, sorcerers, but none at that level that have had a major impact in canon, and most of them are multiclassed. I mean does Paizo hate sorcerers so much and think that they are so sub par to wizards that we get no 18-20+ level sorcerers?

Sorcerers are one trick ponies in comparison. While they an be awesome as singular figures, when you're playing rival runelord level, they're essentially stuck at a single schtick, and since the runelords are solo figures they'll eventually be maneuvered around. Wizards on the other hand, are changeable flexible, which is something that can make a key difference when you're operating at near-Amber levels.

Personally I think it makes sense even though I'm a major sorcerer fan myself. Wizards and Alchemists are inherently more creative, and don't forget, MORE INTELLIGENT. Sorcerers on the other hand simply aren't as suited for the big time mass political game, as opposed to one on one encounters.

You'll also notice a dearth of ruling Magues to, because of their more narrow focus, they've got blind sides of their own which handicap them in the meaglomanical ruler profession.


Much easier to revise a prepared caster to suit the party, too.


Think of it like this - pretty much everything with a supernatural or spell-like ability is a sorcerer. From that perspective, they are everywhere...

Shadow Lodge

Wizards are the default mindset for "powerful arcanist". I personally am with you and revise many to be Sorcs, Witches, Psionicists, or other.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Story Archer wrote:
Think of it like this - pretty much everything with a supernatural or spell-like ability is a sorcerer. From that perspective, they are everywhere...

Uh, no definitely not. That's like saying anything with a Strength score and a natural weapon is a fighter. Only sorcerers are sorcerers, and there does seem to be a dearth of them in Golarion. I thought for sure Razmir would be a sorcerer, but no - another wizard.

There is mention of a super powerful sorcerer called the Ruby Phoenix in the Ruby Phoenix Tournament module, but she was from Tian Xia.


LazarX wrote:
Fnipernackle wrote:

Ok so whats the deal here?

We have the Runlords, all 7 of em, Xin, Jatambe, Aroden, Arazni, Nex, Geb, Tar-Baphon, Alicavniss Vonnarc, Razmir (which from here on out in my games is a sorcerer cause this is bull s&%*), etc. All Wizards. All level 18+.

You even have Baba Yaga and her daughter and current ruler of Irrisen both level 20+.

You even have Artokus Kirran as a level 20+ alchemist.

So where oh where are the 18-20+ level sorcerers at? I mean yes theres some, SOME, sorcerers, but none at that level that have had a major impact in canon, and most of them are multiclassed. I mean does Paizo hate sorcerers so much and think that they are so sub par to wizards that we get no 18-20+ level sorcerers?

Sorcerers are one trick ponies in comparison. While they an be awesome as singular figures, when you're playing rival runelord level, they're essentially stuck at a single schtick, and since the runelords are solo figures they'll eventually be maneuvered around. Wizards on the other hand, are changeable flexible, which is something that can make a key difference when you're operating at near-Amber levels.

Personally I think it makes sense even though I'm a major sorcerer fan myself. Wizards and Alchemists are inherently more creative, and don't forget, MORE INTELLIGENT. Sorcerers on the other hand simply aren't as suited for the big time mass political game, as opposed to one on one encounters.

You'll also notice a dearth of ruling Magues to, because of their more narrow focus, they've got blind sides of their own which handicap them in the meaglomanical ruler profession.

more intelligent doesnt always mean more creative, and any good sorcerer worth his weight will be able to be effective against any enemy.

furthermore, they dont just have to be involved in politics to make a global presence or have a global impact. jatembe could have easily been a sorcerer rather than a wizard.

and as far as versatile for a party, that doesnt mean there cant be high level npcs for sorcerers.

and as far a versatile goes, thats if you KNOW whats coming up and what to prepare, and as for that argument, knowing whats gonna happen the next day is a very rare case indeed. in all my years of gaming ive seen one time when the party knew exactly what we were about to face, so the argument of more versatile doesnt hold up for me. no offense, just saying what ive learned from my personal gaming experience. (and no, ive never seen anybody even take the divination spells youd need to help you prepare spells, let alone even cast them, especially for that reason).


Generic Villain wrote:
Story Archer wrote:
Think of it like this - pretty much everything with a supernatural or spell-like ability is a sorcerer. From that perspective, they are everywhere...

Uh, no definitely not. That's like saying anything with a Strength score and a natural weapon is a fighter. Only sorcerers are sorcerers, and there does seem to be a dearth of them in Golarion. I thought for sure Razmir would be a sorcerer, but no - another wizard.

There is mention of a super powerful sorcerer called the Ruby Phoenix in the Ruby Phoenix Tournament module, but she was from Tian Xia.

are her stats listed anywhere other than the module? or at least an idea of her stats?

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Fnipernackle wrote:

more intelligent doesnt always mean more creative, and any good sorcerer worth his weight will be able to be effective against any enemy.

furthermore, they dont just have to be involved in politics to make a global presence or have a global impact. prepare spells, let alone even cast them, especially for that reason).

If you're not involved in politics, then everything relies on your own strength. However if you succeed in the political game you have the weight of cities, nations, and empires at your beck and call. That's what makes the fearsome magical figures of Conan that much more powerful, the cults and follwers they lead. Greater intelligence generally brings about greater flexibility.

Paizo has said nothing about there being a total lack of 18-20th level sorcerers, they're just not really suited to world domination as well as their learned counterparts.

Osirion

LazarX wrote:
You'll also notice a dearth of ruling Magues

?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Fnipernackle wrote:

more intelligent doesnt always mean more creative, and any good sorcerer worth his weight will be able to be effective against any enemy.

furthermore, they dont just have to be involved in politics to make a global presence or have a global impact. prepare spells, let alone even cast them, especially for that reason).

If you're not involved in politics, then everything relies on your own strength. However if you succeed in the political game you have the weight of cities, nations, and empires at your beck and call. That's what makes the fearsome magical figures of Conan that much more powerful, the cults and follwers they lead. Greater intelligence generally brings about greater flexibility.

Paizo has said nothing about there being a total lack of 18-20th level sorcerers, they're just not really suited to world domination as well as their learned counterparts.

OTOH, sorcerers are known for Charisma, which can be very helpful in the political game.

Charismatic madmen and con artists are great for leading cults or world domination.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Fnipernackle wrote:


are her stats listed anywhere other than the module? or at least an idea of her stats?

No and no, she's just a plot element. Her name was Hao Jin and she earned her Ruby Phoenix sobriquet because she died many times, only to return to life thanks to contingencies she set in place. She was centuries old and thought to be immortal, but dissappeared and hasn't been seen since. Her fate is unknown but most think she is truly dead. Also, while she is referred to as a sorceress, there's no guarantee that was actually her class. But I figure calling her a sorceress is more specific then just "mage" or "arcanist," so that's what I'm guessing she was.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
minoritarian wrote:
LazarX wrote:
You'll also notice a dearth of ruling Magues
?

I think LazarX was referring to a dearth of ruling Magoos.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Generic Villain wrote:


There is mention of a super powerful sorcerer called the Ruby Phoenix in the Ruby Phoenix Tournament module, but she was from Tian Xia.

Keep in mind that outside of game mechanics, any powerful spellcaster in literature is usually refered to as a "sorcerer". Even though in execution they tend to operate like wizards.

Qadira RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor

LazarX wrote:
Generic Villain wrote:


There is mention of a super powerful sorcerer called the Ruby Phoenix in the Ruby Phoenix Tournament module, but she was from Tian Xia.

Keep in mind that outside of game mechanics, any powerful spellcaster in literature is usually refered to as a "sorcerer". Even though in execution they tend to operate like wizards.

I disagree strongly here. Very very few sorcerers/wizards in fiction sit down and 'prepare' spells. If you want to dig into fiction, most spellcasting is far closer to a sorcerer using the optional words of power system than anything else.


Is the beef with a lack of high level sorcerers, or with a lack of High level sorcerers in control of important things?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion Subscriber

I guess that somebody at Paizo understands that Sorcerers are poor man's Wizards. So they always get to be Alpha Flight next to X-Men.

Shadow Lodge

Dennis Baker wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Generic Villain wrote:


There is mention of a super powerful sorcerer called the Ruby Phoenix in the Ruby Phoenix Tournament module, but she was from Tian Xia.

Keep in mind that outside of game mechanics, any powerful spellcaster in literature is usually refered to as a "sorcerer". Even though in execution they tend to operate like wizards.
I disagree strongly here. Very very few sorcerers/wizards in fiction sit down and 'prepare' spells. If you want to dig into fiction, most spellcasting is far closer to a sorcerer using the optional words of power system than anything else.

Yeah, you venture outside of D&D/Pathfinder-licensed fiction, the only place you're going to see a spellcaster that operates like a wizard is in the writings of Jack Vance.


I'm guessing it's the out-of-story reason that a high-level sorcerer NPC can't be as diverse and interesting mechanically as a high-level wizard NPC.

A sorcerer blasting out the same level 9 spell every round would probably be either boring or annoying.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's not even the lack of high-level-sorceres that bugs me - it's the fact that the vast majority of Golarion's high-level NPCs seem to be wizards and clerics. I'd like to see a few renowned martial characters play a greater role in the world, but haven't seen too much outside of the Land of the Linnorm Kings. What about legendary thieves? Masters of the wilderness?

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Uninvited Ghost wrote:

I'm guessing it's the out-of-story reason that a high-level sorcerer NPC can't be as diverse and interesting mechanically as a high-level wizard NPC.

A sorcerer blasting out the same level 9 spell every round would probably be either boring or annoying.

Xykon is boring?


Abrogail Thrine II has 16th levels of Sorcerer, according to Inner Sea magic. That's a sorcerer in charge of one of the greater powers of the Inner Sea.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There's no sinister secret or plot here.

There are high level sorcerers on Golarion... but we haven't really done much with them (aka invented many of them) yet.

When I was compiling the list of famous spellcasters for pages 5–7 of Inner Sea Magic... that was really the first time we'd ever really nailed down actual levels for a LOT of the famous spellcasting NPCs we'd mentioned up to that point in Golarion products.

It was tricky.

Because I really REALLY wanted to include at least one example of each and every spellcasting class on that list. And when I went through what we'd written about these spellcasters in print to date at the time... the vast majority of them were wizards.

Of course, a little bit of this is due to the fact that we set up the seven runelords as single-classed wizards... but most of the other key spellcasters ended up being wizards as well—Arazni, Aroden, Jatembe, Nex, Razmir, etc...

Why is that? I'm not sure, frankly, but if I had to guess, it's because the primary architects of Golarion and the Inner Sea and their NPCs (such as myself and Erik) have pretty old school sensibilities. When we think back to OUR favorite campaigns from our early days, those memories are of 1st edition—a setting that didn't have sorcerers. Those settings still had powerful spellcasters... but those spellcasters tended to be wizards. Elminster. Mordenkainen. The Circle of Eight. Raistlin. And so on.

And so, when we were building Golarion, there was a strong element of nostalgia fueling our creativity. I suspect that the fact that we put so many wizards into the world and not many sorcerers is a subconsious reflection of that.

As a result... when it came to me listing the 50-some powerful spellcasters, there was no shortage of wizards. But finding other spellcasters started getting tricky.

Now, that said... there ARE some powerful sorcerers out there in the Inner Sea region. Just looking at the list in Inner Sea Magic reveals the Mother of Flies (she's "only" a 14th level sorcerer... but that's on top of her green hag powers so she's a bit tougher than a human sorcerer of that level!), Kholas (also only 14th level, but he's a vampire!), Kortash Khain (who's a ghoul mystic theurge10 sorcerer 5/cleric 5 who also happens to be a mythic character... so that's pretty bad-ass in and of itself), Eando Kline (super multiclassed and hardly a badass sorcerer, but he's pretty famous nonetheless), and of course Abrogail Thrune II (the leader of Cheliax and a 16th level sorcerer/2nd level aristocrat).

That's a fair amount of sorcerer representation, including one mythic sorcerer, on a list of 50 spellcasters that had to represent over a dozen spellcasting classes.

FURTHERMORE... if and when we get around to using those NPCs in adventures... their actual levels when the PCs encounter them are often higher. Remember, the levels listed there are "snapshots" at the start of the campaign. After a six part adventure path... just as the PCs gained, say, 15 levels, it's not unlikely to expect, say, Abrogail Thrune would gain 2 sorcerer levels.

Of course, once you start looking at our various adventures and Adventure Paths, you'll see sorcerers showing up rather often.

Which is a way of saying there are more sorcerers out there than we've talked about yet!


I know of 2 sorcerers that hold big positions in Golarion, both from Tian Xia, curiously enough:

The Tien Sorcerers Kamraten Khemkhaeng (human sorcerer 11) and Shethagri (royal naga sorcerer 9, i.e. the equivalent of an 18th level sorcerer, technically). Those two rule the Tien countries of Dtang Ma and Nagajor respectively.

In fact Dtang Ma as a country hugely favours sorcerers, being ruled by a council of 4 of them with traditions heavily rooted in a history of rule beneath 4 specific bloodlines of sorcery (Fey, Maestro, Starsoul, and Stormborn).


+1 on having more high level Sorceror NPC representation...
and more Dragon Disciple style PrCs (but with different BL focuses) would be great, too...


Its not canon, but in my homebrew campaign I have an orc from Belkzen who is a high level (18) sorcerer. The class seemed to fit infinitely more than wizard did.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:


Yeah, you venture outside of D&D/Pathfinder-licensed fiction, the only place you're going to see a spellcaster that operates like a wizard is in the writings of Jack Vance.

Again, you're confusing game mechanics with story. (And remmember Jack Vance preceded the game by decades.) If you extrapolate from game mechanics, the big bad magicians as well as the good ones are always creating new spells and rites... that's a wizard trick. Whereas sorcerers are bound by their inner talents, they don't research new spells, spells just come to them. Stephen Strange is called the "Sorcerer Supreme" but he's clearly a wizard in theme in that he has a literal library of spellbooks to draw from.

The sorcerer as directly drawn from the class game mechanic construct has litle to no background in fantasy literature. about the closest would be Shandril and her spellfire. What you're thinking of as a sorcerer is a Wizard unbound by Vancian restrictions, only those of plot.

Important thing to remember that even in D%D, prior to 3.0 Wizard/Magic-User and Sorcerer were interchangeable terms. Sorcerer in fact was one of the level titles for the Magic-User in AD&D. In 3.X, the sorcerer was really nothing more than a cut down Wizard for the player who couldn't be bothered to memorize spells. It's really only in Pathfinder that the Sorcerer begins to have a distinct identity of her own.


LazarX wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:


Yeah, you venture outside of D&D/Pathfinder-licensed fiction, the only place you're going to see a spellcaster that operates like a wizard is in the writings of Jack Vance.

Again, you're confusing game mechanics with story. (And remmember Jack Vance preceded the game by decades.) If you extrapolate from game mechanics, the big bad magicians as well as the good ones are always creating new spells and rites... that's a wizard trick. Whereas sorcerers are bound by their inner talents, they don't research new spells, spells just come to them. Stephen Strange is called the "Sorcerer Supreme" but he's clearly a wizard in theme in that he has a literal library of spellbooks to draw from.

The sorcerer as directly drawn from the class game mechanic construct has litle to no background in fantasy literature. about the closest would be Shandril and her spellfire. What you're thinking of as a sorcerer is a Wizard unbound by Vancian restrictions, only those of plot.

Or the distinction between wizards and sorcerers is a game mechanics thing that isn't really reflected in most fantasy literature.

Some are strictly book learning, anyone smart enough can do it. For some it's innate power or power bargained from some other being. Some have magic neatly bound up in spells. Some improvise. Some do both. Some need the proper genetics, but also have to learn specific spells.
Strictly defining sorcerers as "sorcerers are bound by their inner talents, they don't research new spells, spells just come to them" while wizards are everyone else, makes no more sense than defining wizards as "strictly Vancian memorizing from spellbooks" and everyone else is a sorcerer. And no less.

Nor of course, is it impossible for sorcerers to create new spells, even in Pathfinder.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Actually I remember only one really powerfull sorcerer from all my 3.0/3.5/Pathfinder sources, Dyrr the Lichdrow (Stats were in Dragon at one time). Nasty piece of work that one ^^.

Of course with UC and the new items to add more spells to a sorcerers list certain limitations would no longer apply.

Andoran

Nyrissa, nymph sorcerer 6/mystic theurge 10
Yndri Ysalaa, The White Mage, NE female efreeti sorcerer 16, noble 3


LazarX wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:


Yeah, you venture outside of D&D/Pathfinder-licensed fiction, the only place you're going to see a spellcaster that operates like a wizard is in the writings of Jack Vance.

Again, you're confusing game mechanics with story. (And remmember Jack Vance preceded the game by decades.) If you extrapolate from game mechanics, the big bad magicians as well as the good ones are always creating new spells and rites... that's a wizard trick. Whereas sorcerers are bound by their inner talents, they don't research new spells, spells just come to them. Stephen Strange is called the "Sorcerer Supreme" but he's clearly a wizard in theme in that he has a literal library of spellbooks to draw from.

The sorcerer as directly drawn from the class game mechanic construct has litle to no background in fantasy literature. about the closest would be Shandril and her spellfire. What you're thinking of as a sorcerer is a Wizard unbound by Vancian restrictions, only those of plot.

Important thing to remember that even in D%D, prior to 3.0 Wizard/Magic-User and Sorcerer were interchangeable terms. Sorcerer in fact was one of the level titles for the Magic-User in AD&D. In 3.X, the sorcerer was really nothing more than a cut down Wizard for the player who couldn't be bothered to memorize spells. It's really only in Pathfinder that the Sorcerer begins to have a distinct identity of her own.

Technically, fictional mages draw from both; they have inate talents that they learn to develop, and can memorize spells for a long time, they rarely have to prepare spells unless said spell require time and/or special components.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:

Nor of course, is it impossible for sorcerers to create new spells, even in Pathfinder.

Actually it is, unless the DM allows the player to do so as part of level advancement and an opening of a new spell known slot or retraining an old one. A sorcerer can't add to summ of his spell knowledge only change it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Nor of course, is it impossible for sorcerers to create new spells, even in Pathfinder.

Actually it is, unless the DM allows the player to do so as part of level advancement and an opening of a new spell known slot or retraining an old one. A sorcerer can't add to summ of his spell knowledge only change it.
pfsrd wrote:

Creating a Spell

Successfully researching a new spell requires time and expensive research. An optional system for researching new spells is outlined below.

The research should cost at least 1,000 gp per spell level (or even more for particularly exotic spells) and require both the Spellcraft skill and a Knowledge skill appropriate to the researcher’s class. Wizards and bards use Knowledge (arcana), sorcerers use a Knowledge skill appropriate to their heritage (usually arcana, nature, or planes)

No, the sorcerer can't learn more spells by creating them, but that doesn't stop him from creating them. Most likely it would be done as you said, as part of (or prior to) level advancement.

It's an optional system, but so is creating new spells for Wizards. There is no difference suggested, other than the skills involved.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
LazarX wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Nor of course, is it impossible for sorcerers to create new spells, even in Pathfinder.

Actually it is, unless the DM allows the player to do so as part of level advancement and an opening of a new spell known slot or retraining an old one. A sorcerer can't add to summ of his spell knowledge only change it.
pfsrd wrote:

Creating a Spell

Successfully researching a new spell requires time and expensive research. An optional system for researching new spells is outlined below.

The research should cost at least 1,000 gp per spell level (or even more for particularly exotic spells) and require both the Spellcraft skill and a Knowledge skill appropriate to the researcher’s class. Wizards and bards use Knowledge (arcana), sorcerers use a Knowledge skill appropriate to their heritage (usually arcana, nature, or planes)

No, the sorcerer can't learn more spells by creating them, but that doesn't stop him from creating them. Most likely it would be done as you said, as part of (or prior to) level advancement.

It's an optional system, but so is creating new spells for Wizards. There is no difference suggested, other than the skills involved.

That and the fact that the sorcerer can't exceed the total number of spells known as provided by level,feats, traits and/or favored class bonuses.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

As far as fiction's concerned, it's often a lot easier to cover your plot needs with wizards, just because they have access to so many different spells. Sorcerers make great spell cannons, but how often do you need a spell cannon to play a starring role in a story vs. a PC-driven campaign?

This is especially true when we're talking about high-level characters, whose role is generally to be a historical figure, worldbuilding explanation, and/or late-stage antagonist.

That's my feeling, at least, which is why I tend to reach for the high-level "Wizard" bin before the "Sorcerer" one. I've used sorcerers in Pathfinder fiction (Jelani and Ascaros, most notably), but they're more midlevel sorts.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Liane Merciel wrote:
As far as fiction's concerned, it's often a lot easier to cover your plot needs with wizards, just because they have access to so many different spells.

Outside of the rather narrow market of D&D/Pathfinder licensed fiction + Jack Vance, the words wizard, sorcerer, warlock, witch, mage, etc are most often used completely interchangably.


Kthulhu wrote:
Liane Merciel wrote:
As far as fiction's concerned, it's often a lot easier to cover your plot needs with wizards, just because they have access to so many different spells.
Outside of the rather narrow market of D&D/Pathfinder licensed fiction + Jack Vance, the words wizard, sorcerer, warlock, witch, mage, etc are most often used completely interchangably.

And if you were going to model them for a RPG, the most common would probably use something like a Sorcerer's inborn potential, study scrolls and books to learn magic like a Wizard and use some kind of spell point system, probably with a mechanic for creating spells on the fly.

Classing them all as "wizards" because of the use of spellbooks makes no sense. Anymore than classifying them all as "Sorcerers" because they don't prepare spells for the day.

Contributor

Kthulhu wrote:
Liane Merciel wrote:
As far as fiction's concerned, it's often a lot easier to cover your plot needs with wizards, just because they have access to so many different spells.
Outside of the rather narrow market of D&D/Pathfinder licensed fiction + Jack Vance, the words wizard, sorcerer, warlock, witch, mage, etc are most often used completely interchangably.

Oh, yeah, sorry if that wasn't clear. In my post above, I was talking exclusively about RPG-licensed fiction, specifically D&D and Pathfinder. Since the original question seemed to be focused on why you don't see more high-level sorcerers in Golarion canon sources, that was my answer for why I haven't used any (and don't have any planned for the next book either).

For non-tie-in fiction, none of that matters.

Osirion

thejeff wrote:

No, the sorcerer can't learn more spells by creating them, but that doesn't stop him from creating them. Most likely it would be done as you said, as part of (or prior to) level advancement.

It's an optional system, but so is creating new spells for Wizards. There is no difference suggested, other than the skills involved.

[tangent]

When 3.0 came out with the Sorcerer, we almost immediately house-ruled that if a Sorcerer researched a new spell, they could choose to immediately replace one of their previous spells known with the newly researched spell.

Later, given the cost and time involved, and the utter lack of anyone willing to play a Sorcerer instead of a Wizard anyway, we house-ruled that if a Sorcerer researched a new spell, they could add it to their spells known *without* replacing a previous known spell, effectively increasing their number of spells known for that level by one.

Still, no one wanted to play one, so the house rules were moot.
[/tangent]


Thats unfortunate. i always play a sorcerer for arcane casters and that rule is awesome. I think sorcerers just have better flavor and if you pick your spells correctly they can be very good. not every sorcerer is a blaster, but you should have at least a few damaging spells.

Shadow Lodge

What Fnip said. I've always preferred spont-casters to Vancian.

Heck, I've houseruled in my games that they get their spell advancement at the same levels. So 2nd level spells at 3rd, 3rd at 5th, etc.


Fnipernackle wrote:

Ok so whats the deal here?

We have the Runlords, all 7 of em, Xin, Jatambe, Aroden, Arazni, Nex, Geb, Tar-Baphon, Alicavniss Vonnarc, Razmir (which from here on out in my games is a sorcerer cause this is bull s&%*),

Aroden, Arazni, Nex, and Geb were definitely not runelords.

Here is the runelord list.

Alaznist, Runelord of Wrath
Domain: Bakrakhan
Weapon of Rule: Ranseur of charred adamantine

Belimarius, Runelord of Envy
Domain: Edasseril
Weapon of Rule: Halberd

Karzoug, Runelord of Greed <----In an AP
Domain: Shalast
Weapon of Rule: Burning glaive studded with meteoric gemstones

Krune, Runelord of Sloth
Domain: Haruka
Weapon of Rule: Dragon-tooth longspear

Sorshen, Runelord of Lust
Domain: Eurythnia
Weapon of Rule: Double-headed guisarme

Xanderghul, Runelord of Pride
Domain: Cyrusian
Weapon of Rule: Lucerne hammer

Zutha, Runelord of Gluttony
Domain: Gastash
Weapon of Rule: Scythe

With that aside some high level sorcerers would be nice.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Heh, I don't know. You say there's a lack of high level sorcerers, I say "Challenge accepted!" Perhaps the first high level sorcerer that makes a splash in Golarion...is your own PC! ;)


wraithstrike wrote:
Fnipernackle wrote:

Ok so whats the deal here?

We have the Runlords, all 7 of em, Xin, Jatambe, Aroden, Arazni, Nex, Geb, Tar-Baphon, Alicavniss Vonnarc, Razmir (which from here on out in my games is a sorcerer cause this is bull s&%*),

Aroden, Arazni, Nex, and Geb were definitely not runelords.

Here is the runelord list.

Alaznist, Runelord of Wrath
Domain: Bakrakhan
Weapon of Rule: Ranseur of charred adamantine

Belimarius, Runelord of Envy
Domain: Edasseril
Weapon of Rule: Halberd

Karzoug, Runelord of Greed <----In an AP
Domain: Shalast
Weapon of Rule: Burning glaive studded with meteoric gemstones

Krune, Runelord of Sloth
Domain: Haruka
Weapon of Rule: Dragon-tooth longspear

Sorshen, Runelord of Lust
Domain: Eurythnia
Weapon of Rule: Double-headed guisarme

Xanderghul, Runelord of Pride
Domain: Cyrusian
Weapon of Rule: Lucerne hammer

Zutha, Runelord of Gluttony
Domain: Gastash
Weapon of Rule: Scythe

With that aside some high level sorcerers would be nice.

you definitely miss read my post.

i didnt want to take the time to list the runelords individually. had i wanted to name the runelords geb, nex, aroden, etc, the post would have read like this;

"We have the Runlords, all 7 of em (Xin, Jatambe, Aroden, Arazni, Nex, Geb, Tar-Baphon, Alicavniss Vonnarc)"

thats not what a wrote. i wrote "We have the Runlords, all 7 of em, Xin, Jatambe, Aroden, Arazni, Nex, Geb, Tar-Baphon, Alicavniss Vonnarc, Razmir..." so the runelords are listed just not by name AND THEN i list other wizards outside of the runelords.

you read it as those were the runelords when instead of just 7 wizards listed there theres 15 i list.

and i meant to say the baba yaga and her daughter were witches. i didnt get that in the post.


Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Heh, I don't know. You say there's a lack of high level sorcerers, I say "Challenge accepted!" Perhaps the first high level sorcerer that makes a splash in Golarion...is your own PC! ;)

wrong again sir. my sorcerer died at level 10 due to interparty conflict and a power gamed player character. and this is why i hate power gaming.

and i was more referring to having something canon, and no, they cant appease me by just making one 18+ sorcerer. there needs to be like 12.


all im saying is that there needs to be more sorcerers level 18+ in cannon.

and for those who mentioned that blasty characters arent all that appealing, not only will i disagree with you about them not being interesting, not all sorcerers are blasters. they can take spells outside of evocation. granted their spells are limited by how many the know, but that doesnt mean they cant learn good illusion, enchantment, conjuration, etc spells.

and really you would get something similar with wizards since they can only prepare so many spells per day and they have to prepared multiple if they are in need of them. so technically their spell list is set too until the next day.

plus, there are these things in the game called wands, rod, staves, and scrolls that im sure the sorcerer can use for the spells he doesnt have. i bet he can even get them at a discounted price with his high charisma ;)

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've always thought that the limit on the number of spells known alone was a good limiting factor to keep sorcerers balanced with wizards. The delayed spell progression just seems like it's WotC saying "So you don't want Vancian casting? Well FU!"

Osirion

Kthulhu wrote:
I've always thought that the limit on the number of spells known alone was a good limiting factor to keep sorcerers balanced with wizards. The delayed spell progression just seems like it's WotC saying "So you don't want Vancian casting? Well FU!"

That and the 'no Quicken Spell' thing, back in the day, yeah.

With no familiarity with the concept of non-Vancian casting, I felt at the time that the design team that made the Sorcerer and hampered it with delayed progression seriously overestimated how powerful that option would be and feared that nobody would play Wizards.

Many years later, after a bajillion posts about 'god Wizards' and 'Batman Wizards' and Wizards (along with Clerics and Druids) being the 'top tier' classes, and the Sorcerer an ugly stepchild by comparison, I think their initial fears about making the Sorcerer 'too good' have been pretty much proven groundless.

The developers / designers notions about play balance did sometimes seem to fly in the face of internet assumptions, 'though. By the time Unearthed Arcana came out, there were tons of options to add this and subtract that from various classes, and then there was the Domain Wizard (which just flat out added more power to the Wizard class) and a sidebar about adding a free Domain to Druids, both options that gave free boosts to two of the classes that the WotC forum regulars generally regarded as the *last* two that needed a boost.


Pathfinder 36: Sound of a Thousand Scream has Nyrissa (Nymph Sorcerer 6/Mystic Theurge 10) (as Sorcerer stacks with Ny,ph casting she casts as a 17th level Sorcerer)

Pathfinder 6: Spires of Xin-Shalast has another Nymph sorcerer. The PF fan conversion is here: Svevenka (Icy Nymph Druid 8)(effective sorc CL 15).

Also all Dragons cast as sorcerers iirc.


Gah, Nymph of course stacks with druid casting, so ignore Svevenka...

Gluttony wrote:

I know of 2 sorcerers that hold big positions in Golarion, both from Tian Xia, curiously enough:

The Tien Sorcerers Kamraten Khemkhaeng (human sorcerer 11) and Shethagri (royal naga sorcerer 9, i.e. the equivalent of an 18th level sorcerer, technically). Those two rule the Tien countries of Dtang Ma and Nagajor respectively.

In fact Dtang Ma as a country hugely favours sorcerers, being ruled by a council of 4 of them with traditions heavily rooted in a history of rule beneath 4 specific bloodlines of sorcery (Fey, Maestro, Starsoul, and Stormborn).

Iiiinteresting.

1 to 50 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.