Wow, I have to say, you guys did an excellent job fixing up the sorcerer. The abilities feel logical, and intuitive, easy to keep track of, and yet, filled with flavor. Not to mention it goes a long way towards making the sorcerer not suck. (I'd still prefer they got spells at the same level as wizards, but meh, no biggie)
I disagree mechanically the PF Sorcerer is not really good.
Is it that much harder to play a sorcerer who knows 3 spells when he levels and that known spells by level increases to half a dozen as he levels comparable to the Favored Soul?
It's actually easier to play a Beguiler than a PF Sorcerer right now unless you ignore your PF Sorcerer Bloodline specials in game since the PC doesn't pick his or her spells in game.
Better than the original Sorcerer? Yes.
Flavorful? Yes very.
Good? No because it doesn't meet the PRC test. For every game that focuses on the flavor and fluff there are games that also place an emphasis on the mechanics. People playing in games that place an emphasis on being effective are not playing wrong.
There is still no real mechanical or fluff reason not to delay PRCing with a PF Sorcerer in any game that requires the PCs to be effective.
Like most I can make my PC flavorful without it coming at a mechanical weakness cost in game.
I'm disappointed. I'd rather play a Beguiler or a Variant Spellcaster and PRC than pursue the PF sorcerer for 5 or 20 levels. I was hoping for something between a Variant Spellcaster and the Beguiler class with something like the Universalist Wizard class specials.
IMO a Bloodline should grant the Sorcerer Bloodline spells which differeniate him from other sorcerers. Not bat or dragon wings or claws things that physically tranform the PC into a monster.
Maybe the option of taking a Specialist school where the Sorcerer picks up 2 known spells instead of 1 or picks up a bonus specialty known spell.
Sorcerers are lesser Witches and get to pick two permanent DMG page 175 Witch class spells leveling in addition to base known spells that cannot be changed out.
To many of the Bonus feats for the PF Sorcerer are limited and weak mechanically. Would the class be so strong if half or all of those bonus feats were open instead of limited?
Has the PF sorcerer really addressed the issue of no real reason not to PRC in game? IMO No because someone familiar with the rules and various options in game can do so much better.
Good? No because it doesn't meet the PRC test. For every game that focuses on the flavor and fluff there are games that also place an emphasis on the mechanics. People playing in games that place an emphasis on being effective are not playing wrong.
There is still no real mechanical or fluff reason not to delay PRCing with a PF Sorcerer in any game that requires the PCs to be effective.
I don't know... some of the bloodlines high level abilities make me think that it might be worthwhile to skip PRC's entirely. The level 20 abilities in particular are pretty spectacular.
Like most I can make my PC flavorful without it coming at a mechanical weakness cost in game.
And many of us can find ways to make "mechanically weak" characters viable by focusing on something other than strengthening the weakness.
IMO a Bloodline should grant the Sorcerer Bloodline spells which differeniate him from other sorcerers. Not bat or dragon wings or claws things that physically tranform the PC into a monster.
Actually, I think it should be both. Meta-physical manifestations of your bloodline AND extra spells known available specific to your bloodline. Not a lot, but a handful of spells (maybe one at each spell level) that all sorcerers of a given bloodline share in common in addition to their other qualities. Such spells could (and probably should) mirror spell-like abilities common to critters of your bloodline (where applicable).
To many of the Bonus feats for the PF Sorcerer are limited and weak mechanically. Would the class be so strong if half or all of those bonus feats were open instead of limited?
Bonus feats weak? Alright, maybe there are some feats that aren't as spectacular as other feats that exist in the game... but you're getting them for free. Mechanically speaking, free bonus feats are stronger than no bonus feats.
Has the PF sorcerer really addressed the issue of no real reason not to...
As much as any other class, in my opinion.
Not intending to offend, but...I'm tired of seeing the sorcerer compared to the beguiler and the warmage. Not every body has access to them nor does every DM allow them.
Alpha 2 is about the Core Classes. Everyone who has a PHB or gets the PFPHB has access to the sorcerer.
Let's try to keep this debate in that perspective.
Again, apologies to any offended.
From what I've read I really like the new sorc. Good way to make it viable, flavorful, and entertaining.
At the end of the day those who play the game as a exersise in higher maths to acheive the holy grail of character efficiancy will always decide that some classes to not meet their expectations.
Is it really a problems?
Compairing core classes to supplimentry classes is also atleast some what problimatic. Powercreep is already an issue with PF (although from what i have seen, in an entirely good way.) Supplimental martrial is almost always more powerful than core material, which makes comparisons difficult at best.
There for, surely we should test PF sorcerer against PF wizard before looking at other classes.
All this said, i think their is a critism to be made of the class.
The bloodlines seem to similier to me.
While the 'touch/claw' thing is very cool, to may of the bloodlines seem to have this kind of ability. Perhapes replace it with something else in the case of the celestial, elemental and fae bloodlines.
It might also be cool to see more choice within a single bloodline. i get the feeling that most sorcerers of the same bloodline are going to end up looking very similier.
|
I love the new sorcerer.
While I agree that a little more options within the various bloodlines could be useful to further differentiate between specific ancestors (pit fiend vs ice devil in the infernal one, for example), it is also a very difficult line to thread, as the risk of unnecessary details and excessive bookkeping - not to talk of a list of things to consider just way too long - is right behind the corner.
Maybe a couple of generic options within each bloodline (again, chromatic vs metallic draconic bloodline) could be worked up for the future releases.
Regarding the very common "touch attack/claws" power at first level, it looked to me as a solution for the relatively weak ability of the class in melee (keeping nonetheless some difference from the school powers of wizards), and I don't really see any relevant problem in them.
They are subtly different from each other, and that's just fine.
Finally, the readjusted sorcerer looks fine enought to me to compete with core classes from other sources. I'm no math geek that's able to calculate the holy spot of power balance in a pinch, but if we want to consider each and every multiclass/PrC possible combination, the overall equation may become simply impossible to solve.
The new sorcerer progression seems to be more favorable for characters that stick to it without straying too distant (just as with the new wizard and its school powers), and that's a good thing in my own book.
Oooooppsss... too many typos... ;-P
|
|
I love the new sorcerer, and it saddens me to think that your opinion on wether or not the sorcerer is good, is based on its ability to work well with Prestige Classes. Prestige classes are there for if you want to do something other than the core class option, not something that should be required to make the class worth playing. Thats part of the whole idea behind 3.Pf is to make the core classes worth playing for all 20 levels.
|
Yet when one of the design goals is to allow for rough parity shouldn't these comparisons be made.Not intending to offend, but...I'm tired of seeing the sorcerer compared to the beguiler and the warmage. Not every body has access to them nor does every DM allow them.
Since they don't fall under the OGL, not really. Compare with the wizard, yeah sure, but not all of us care about those other classes.
I love the new sorcerer, and it saddens me to think that your opinion on wether or not the sorcerer is good, is based on its ability to work well with Prestige Classes. Prestige classes are there for if you want to do something other than the core class option, not something that should be required to make the class worth playing. Thats part of the whole idea behind 3.Pf is to make the core classes worth playing for all 20 levels.
To add to this comment.. by fixing the Core Classes, that leads to new and improved (Pathfinder Based) prestige classes.. which could be something for further down the process than where we are now.
If that's the case, I welcome it. I like the idea of Prestige Classes in general and in spirit, but I have bought into the Jacobs-McArtor-Bulmahn notion that you can add variety to a core class without necessarily resorting to a Prestige Class. I don't think we need a lot of them, what we need are ones of quality in fewer numbers. Part of the process is fixing the Core first and building on that foundation.
|
|
Love the new sorcerer; when the Warlock first came out, I read it and thought "this is what the sorcerer should have been". Now, the PF sorcerer fits the bill. Between feats and variants, I can't recall a campaign that had a sorcerer with a familiar (instead usually opting for a bloodline theme). Kudos!
For the post referring to having variety amongst a bloodline; aside from "DM tweaking" for specific settings, this could also open up the potential for blooline-specific feats or PRCs that could allow a focus along the bloodline (signifying the difference between "devil-bound" and "devil-blooded", for instance).
Also, would it be possible to grant sorcerers a bonus language based upon their bloodline?
|
|
If they could bring in reserve feats such as Firey Burst from CM then both Wizard and Sorcerer would be completely set.
I agree on the usefullness of reserve feats, though I don't believe they are SRD-friendly, so it may just be up to those of us with the Complete Mage to provide them to our gaming groups.
I liked the sorceror before, and I consider the bloodline stuff to be cool extras that make the class even more interesting. I do like the idea of the bonus language quite a bit, though. That would add good flavor.
|
|
I like the changes made to the sorcerer, but I still think it needs to be made a touch more powerful by removing the staggered spell progression and increased metamagic casting time. To me, these seem fundamental, simple fixes to bring the sorcerer in line with the 3.5 wizard. The added bloodlines are better to bring the sorcerer up to the 3.P wizard.
Regardless, I look forward to testing this out through some Gamemastery modules. I understand this is all a work in progress and constructive feedback (backed with playtesting) from the community is the name of the game. Thanks be to Jason Bulmahn his tireless work and for dealing with our impassioned arguments on all sides of the various debates here.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
I disagree mechanically the PF Sorcerer is not really good.
Is it that much harder to play a sorcerer who knows 3 spells when he levels and that known spells by level increases to half a dozen as he levels comparable to the Favored Soul?
It's actually easier to play a Beguiler than a PF Sorcerer right now unless you ignore your PF Sorcerer Bloodline specials in game since the PC doesn't pick his or her spells in game.
Better than the original Sorcerer? Yes.
Flavorful? Yes very.
Good? No because it doesn't meet the PRC test. For every game that focuses on the flavor and fluff there are games that also place an emphasis on the mechanics. People playing in games that place an emphasis on being effective are not playing wrong.
There is still no real mechanical or fluff reason not to delay PRCing with a PF Sorcerer in any game that requires the PCs to be effective.
See Mike, you and K, and Frank Trollman are all Optimizers. There's a vast difference between the game you play and the game the average Gamer plays. It's the difference between someone who works on their car adding things like turbo chargers, better supsension, tires, etc, etc to the average joe who enjoys their car stock from the dealership.
Once you cross this line it's a very hard choice to play the baseline character. In my group of players there are optimizers/power gamers and there are your basic everyday average gamer. In many games a power gamer makes the game less fun for the average player.
I'm glad you can tear apart the headers... er, the PF sorcerer backward and frontwards at a glance, but many of us enjoy playing them straight out of the box. Having access to all the variant options and specialized classes is nice but not necessary.
I think the PF Sorcerer is made of awesome. I'm also a flavor guy. As always YMMV.
--"Vrock car driver"
I disagree mechanically the PF Sorcerer is not really good.
Is it that much harder to play a sorcerer who knows 3 spells when he levels and that known spells by level increases to half a dozen as he levels comparable to the Favored Soul?
It's actually easier to play a Beguiler than a PF Sorcerer right now unless you ignore your PF Sorcerer Bloodline specials in game since the PC doesn't pick his or her spells in game.
Better than the original Sorcerer? Yes.
Flavorful? Yes very.
Good? No because it doesn't meet the PRC test. For every game that focuses on the flavor and fluff there are games that also place an emphasis on the mechanics. People playing in games that place an emphasis on being effective are not playing wrong.
There is still no real mechanical or fluff reason not to delay PRCing with a PF Sorcerer in any game that requires the PCs to be effective.
See Mike, you and K, and Frank Trollman are all Optimizers. There's a vast difference between the game you play and the game the average Gamer plays. It's the difference between someone who works on their car adding things like turbo chargers, better supsension, tires, etc, etc to the average joe who enjoys their car stock from the dealership.
Once you cross this line it's a very hard choice to play the baseline character. In my group of players there are optimizers/power gamers and there are your basic everyday average gamer. In many games a power gamer makes the game less fun for the average player.
I'm glad you can tear apart the headers... er, the PF sorcerer backward and frontwards at a glance, but many of us enjoy playing them straight out of the box. Having access to all the variant options and specialized classes is nice but not necessary.
I think the PF Sorcerer is made of awesome. I'm also a flavor guy. As always YMMV.
--"Vrock car driver"
I love the fact that you think you gotta be an optimizer to see something thats weak as hell. And believe me optimizing and roleplaying aren't mutually exclusive.
I love the fact that you think you gotta be an optimizer to see something thats weak as hell. And believe me...I disagree mechanically the PF Sorcerer is not really good.
Is it that much harder to play a sorcerer who knows 3 spells when he levels and that known spells by level increases to half a dozen as he levels comparable to the Favored Soul?
It's actually easier to play a Beguiler than a PF Sorcerer right now unless you ignore your PF Sorcerer Bloodline specials in game since the PC doesn't pick his or her spells in game.
Better than the original Sorcerer? Yes.
Flavorful? Yes very.
Good? No because it doesn't meet the PRC test. For every game that focuses on the flavor and fluff there are games that also place an emphasis on the mechanics. People playing in games that place an emphasis on being effective are not playing wrong.
There is still no real mechanical or fluff reason not to delay PRCing with a PF Sorcerer in any game that requires the PCs to be effective.
See Mike, you and K, and Frank Trollman are all Optimizers. There's a vast difference between the game you play and the game the average Gamer plays. It's the difference between someone who works on their car adding things like turbo chargers, better supsension, tires, etc, etc to the average joe who enjoys their car stock from the dealership.
Once you cross this line it's a very hard choice to play the baseline character. In my group of players there are optimizers/power gamers and there are your basic everyday average gamer. In many games a power gamer makes the game less fun for the average player.
I'm glad you can tear apart the headers... er, the PF sorcerer backward and frontwards at a glance, but many of us enjoy playing them straight out of the box. Having access to all the variant options and specialized classes is nice but not necessary.
I think the PF Sorcerer is made of awesome. I'm also a flavor guy. As always YMMV.
--"Vrock car driver"
As optimisers are oft want to say. Unfortunately in my experience that does not hold up.
Appart from the destructive influence optimisers have on a mixted game and the tendancy towards limelighting which accompanies many Optimisers, i have yet to see an optimiser who is willing to play a concept that would, accurately built, be anything less than awesome, and when they do play such concepts, they certainly do not build to the spirit of the concept.
Ofcause this is all exclusively in my experience, but i know many people who share these opinion and experiences.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
I never said they were mutually exclusive. I said once you start optimizing it is a very difficult process to play a class right out of the box without going out of your way to tweak it to peak performance. Not everyone scours through every sourcebook or reads the build handbooks or looks for unbeatable spell/item/class ability/feat combos.
Some of us just like driving our cars.
Is the PF Sorcerer as good a blaster as the Warmage... not likely. But at least they can cast utility spells if they want. Is a PF Sorcerer as sly and coniving as the Beguiler, probably not but they can blow the hell out of something. Warmages, Beguilers, and the Dread Necro are all specialists. They are a niche character that falls short in places, just like a regular Sorcerer can fall short in places.
How is the PF sorcerer "weak as hell" and compared to what? Show me a valid comparison that doesn't rely on a specific build. Show me how no matter HOW I build the PF sorcerer it is too weak a class to compare with the PF Wizard.
|
|
My personal experience is that most players have found the wizard wanting, and go to the sorcerer in preference. With all the adjustments done to both classes, I think the wizards have been brought up to the sorcerer's level, putting them on equal footing.
I was a big wizard-player in 2ed, but the transition to 3ed and 3.5 seemed to have reduced the 'fun' factor. I've played more bards than I have wizards in the past decade, and judging by many people's impressions of bards I guess that kinda makes a point. Wizards and sorcerers overlapped too much in abilities, and what differences there were seemed to favour the sorcerer. What Pathfinder has done is made each of them more distinct classes, equally powerful but in different directions.
After reviewing both the wizard and sorcerer for some time, making a few builds and such (I have yet to playtest unfortunately) it seems that the sorcerer is still behind the wizard. My suggestion is to increase the number of bloodline powers to equal the number of specialist powers, shift the entire spell casting progression down a level (so on par with wizards), and give them a tad more spells per day.
Alternately, I could see the sorcerer as a battle mage-type class and some of the bloodlines cater a bit to that. If this direction is preferable, I would say boost BAB to average and the hit die to d8 and give them light armor (and bypass like 20% of the spell failure of light armor) and keep everything else as is.
Love the changes, the bloodlines rock and give a new twist to expanding the class and making it your own.
I agree. A minor point on book organization. The Sorcerer class section is very long now with the inclusion of the bloodlines. May I suggest moving the bloodline powers to the back of the book, into the magic section, next to the Wizard schools and Cleric domains?
After reviewing both the wizard and sorcerer for some time, making a few builds and such (I have yet to playtest unfortunately) it seems that the sorcerer is still behind the wizard. My suggestion is to increase the number of bloodline powers to equal the number of specialist powers, shift the entire spell casting progression down a level (so on par with wizards), and give them a tad more spells per day.
See, I'm confused on this. If you gave the sorcerer more bloodline abilities, lowered the level where they get 2nd level spells, and gave them more spells per day, what would be the point in playing a wizard at all? Especially when the sorcerer's bloodline abilites are based off CON, which improves the Fort saves and HP when you increase it (as opposed to the Wizard's CHR-based abilities). With the current rules, I could see myself playing either.
If they made the changes you mention, I don't see what reason there would be to play a wizard at all? You get less spells, you have to prepare them, you have a second "spellcasting" stat that doesn't provide anything else (since wizards don't have any CHR-based class skills). The only benefit is being able to know any number of spells, but wizards have now lost the bonus spell per spell level for specializing. I guess the wizard has the ability to create more scrolls, since he would know more spells, but of course the sorcerer could purchase those scrolls. The wizard also gets bonus feats...wait, so does the sorcerer??
I admit to never playing a sorcerer, because I prefer the "learned spellcaster" idea, but I've noticed in the last couple campaigns everytime someone plays a wizard (at least at low-to-mid level) they are always teased for not playing a sorcerer who would have more spells per day.
I like what I see. Being a wizard who is in love with memorization of his spells, I always disliked the sorcerer for its lack of versatility.
The 3.5 Sorcerer was extremely limited and I refused to play them (I still wont play a sorcerer, but this class looks so much better that its almost tempting! It's not that I think the sorcerer is weak, its just not my style, I would play a wizard with 1/2 the spells to cast per day over the <yawn> sorcerer).
Balance wise, the flavor is nice and so are the abilities, good job in picking out the drab boring taste of the "nuker" and giving it some life and even a nice option for roleplaying flavor.
I really like the alternative choices of the bloodlines.... way to go!
The Sorcerer class is good, but as the Cleric and Wizard classes can cast an unlimited number of orisons/cantrips each day, I would also allow that for the Sorcerer. With the limitation that, unlike the Cleric and Wizard, the Sorcerer couldn't change their prepared cantrips.
The Sorcerer class is good, but as the Cleric and Wizard classes can cast an unlimited number of orisons/cantrips each day, I would also allow that for the Sorcerer. With the limitation that, unlike the Cleric and Wizard, the Sorcerer couldn't change their prepared cantrips.
It has already been mentioned that the lack of unlimited cantrips for the sorcerer was an oversight and will be fixed. No need to worry that the wizards will be throwing Rays of Frost all day while the sorcerer can't.
|
I really like the sorcerer and choice of bloodlines, but find the aspect of most bloodlines needing a melee touch attack to work not a good thing. Since the class is not a melee class, how about adding light armor proficiency to the class and the light armor not having an arcane spell failure. Or there can be a special class feature of reducing ASF by 15 or 20%.
I still feel that sorcerer (while coming a long way from 3.5) still need that little extra oomph. This (along with the extra language) should make up for the slower casting progression.
Wow, I have to say, you guys did an excellent job fixing up the sorcerer. The abilities feel logical, and intuitive, easy to keep track of, and yet, filled with flavor. Not to mention it goes a long way towards making the sorcerer not suck. (I'd still prefer they got spells at the same level as wizards, but meh, no biggie)
I agree- very flavorful, I like the bloodlines and it makes the sorcerer a good "replacement" for the warlock. I always thought the 3e wizard/sorcerer distinction wasn't enough and then when the warlock was in the mix too it was just too many cooks in the kitchen. Now the sorcerer is a cross between sorcerer and warlock, and I like it!
See Mike, you and K, and Frank Trollman are all Optimizers. There's a vast difference between the game you play and the game the average Gamer plays. It's the difference between someone who works on their car adding things like turbo chargers, better supsension, tires, etc, etc to the average joe who enjoys their car stock from the dealership.
I'm not an optimizer...I'm a gamer. I understand that flavor is something I can come up with on my own. I can write a compelling and intriguing backstory to make any class flavorful and fun. Once you do that, most DMs will shower you with things to make your character better because you've actually taken a role in the storytelling of the game.
Thats being said, as a gamer I also appreciate game theory. Since I can't do anything about that, I need game mechanics to be clear, simple, and playable. I need them to be balanced so that when a DM sets a challenge for the party, my investment of backstory and flavor doesn't end up in a owlbear's gullet.
The new Sorcerer is flavorful. I'll even give it an 8 our of 10 on that scale. On the Mechanics scale, it gets a 3.
|
I really like the changes made to the sorcerer. Unfortunately, it'll be at least another week before I can get a play test going so these are just my initial impressions.
Here's a couple of things about the sorcerer class that I just never understood and would like to see addressed.
1) Get rid of the slow meta-magic for sorcerers. There's just no good reason for it. I can't think of a game that actually used it, especially after PHB II let you lose the familiar in favor of being able to cast meta-magic feats normally. (I never saw the point for a familiar either but I really like Arcane Bond.)
2) Would it break the game or cause a weird rift in the space/time continuum to give sorcerers extra spells per level according to their CHR bonus? I don't understand how another half a dozen or so spells of each spell level compared to a wizard's unlimited spells known would be a problem. Maybe require the chosen spells come from a list determined by the sorcerer's bloodline? Food for the new rules board?
The bloodlines as they are now are a good starting point for making the sorcerer class a 20 level keeper but they seem to be a bit uneven in power and usefulness. Until I actually try to play them I'll withhold judgment but there are a couple of things I'd like to bring up now.
1) I'm not sure I understand the reasoning for giving sorcerers a bunch of limited unarmed attacks. Sorcerers are supposed to be blasting suckers out of existence, not playing touchy feely with cold, clammy hands. I think it would fit their flavor better to give them a ranged touch attack that has an effect similar to what you have now. The warlock's eldritch blast is close in theory and FR's spellfire is even closer in practice but even those aren't 100% right. I'll save these ideas for the variant systems board but I'm curious about the 'why' more than anything.
2) It seems like there's a lot of open space around 6th, 12th and 18th level. Was this intentional? Would it be better to have a progression that builds the bloodline's theme over levels 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 & 20? I must say the finale at 20th is worth waiting for.
3) Shouldn't the 1/day powers be 3/day or 3 + Charisma bonus? 3 + charisma might be a bit much but 1/day just sucks.
Those are the only three things that I see right off the bat that may need to be addressed. Some of the themes need some work but this is an excellent start! Hopefully I'll be able to get a group together here soon and put this stuff to the test.
One last thing....
Jason, thank you for making me want to play and DM DnD again.
SM
It's actually pretty playable -- provided you're brutally efficient with your spell choices, you cna easily pull your weight compared to cleric, rogue, etc. It's just that a Sorcerer isn't and never has been as good as a wizard.
As for the issue of spells, the assertion that Sorcerers have more spells than wizards is, by and large, a *myth*
Assuming a starting casting stat of 17 (easy with Pathfinder races) and using 3.5 specialization for simplicity, the number of first-level spells per day looks like this:
S v W by Level
4v3 (the sorcerer has a solid edge at level one)
5v4 (at levl 2, Scribe Scroll probably makes up for the difference)
6v7 (at level 3, the wizard casts more and higher level spells)
11v9 (okay, the sorcerer is ahead again)
12v12 (a tie, with the wizard having better spells)
17v14
19v18 (Basically, the sorcerer has more spells on even levels, similar number on odd levels, when the wizard has more)
Yes, in total number of spells per day, the sorcerer eventually puls ahead. but look at total number of *powerful* spells. Assuming 1 bonus spells from casting stat, the highest 2 levels of spells (the ones which significantly effect combat) always looks like either
Sorcerer: 0 and 5; Wizard: 3 and 4
or
Sorcerer 4 and 6; Wizard 4 and 5 (Note that the Sorcerer is "spontneously casting" the same spell four times)
So yeah, the wizard will *always* have more and better access to the most powerful spells currently in play; the sorcerer can *never* throw around the raw power the wizard can. "Spontaneous casting" as an ability doesn't even apply to level N spells until the wizard has level N+1
This isn't to say that the sorcerer's not good for anything. The flexibility of spontaneous casting means he effectively has *many times* the number fo low-level spells. If you need to *magic missile* something 10 times or lob a dispel magic *every round* the sorc is your man. And while a sorcerer can't learn as many utility and buff spells, many fo them are far more useful in his hands; he, unlike a wizard, can easily decide to polymorph, fly, or stoneskin an entire party without sacrificing much power or versatility. Plus, metamagic ought to make him more flexible with high-level spell slots.
But core meta-magic is kind of shaky in value, and the sorc gets randomly shafted for using it. Meanwhile, the Wizard can use wands etc., to steal a lot of hte sorcerer's thunder. Ultimately, the wizard always has more and better high-end spells, which means over the course of a campaign, they bring more to the team than a sorcerer ever will.
Not intending to offend, but...I'm tired of seeing the sorcerer compared to the beguiler and the warmage. Not every body has access to them nor does every DM allow them.
Alpha 2 is about the Core Classes. Everyone who has a PHB or gets the PFPHB has access to the sorcerer.
Let's try to keep this debate in that perspective.
I disagree PFRPG is supposed to be backwards compatible. The PHBII references the Beguiler, Favored Soul, Sorcerer, Warlock and Warmage. The D20 SRD references the Psion and the Variant Generic Spellcaster (The first real sorcerer class fix in game IMO).
Those classes keep getting brought up for a reason. I think people sometimes forget that All the spontaneous full casters after the sorcerer class have been improved or tweaked mechanically in some form by WOTC in comparison to the base sorcerer class and quite a few other classes have options of picking up the powerful spontaneous casting in some form or another in game if desired. Playing a sorcerer can be fun but at low levels playing a Beguiler can be a little more enjoyable since they have more spell casting versatility unless you prefer blasting and a few feats can provide the PC with some blasting if desired.
I prefer low level games myself L1- L6 and topping out around L 8-10 before things get crazy in game because of the magic options. The sorcerer class can be fun to play at low to mid levels (L1 to L6) with some limited spellcasting versatility although it pales in comparison to the Beguiler class spellcasting versatility IMO due to the limited known spells of the sorcerer class.
IMO the current sweet spot for what determines Sorcerer class spellcasting versatility is very subjective to each Player and DM.
IMO it is somewhere around the L8 to L11+ range when some good feat and known spell choices really begin to give the PC a lot of spellcasting options in game not tied to utilizing temporary one shot magic items like scrolls and potions or needing to rely on other magical equipment, when the sorcerer can cast one of his known spells to deal with most obstacles in game. It can be acquired earlier depending on the campaign availablity of minor magic items.
IMO mechanically a Psion - 20 and a Variant Spellcaster - 20 are both superior to a core Sorcerer - 20 without PRCing because they get more feats and skill choices in game. This is less clearly defined against a PFRPG Bloodline Sorcerer -20. Regardless all the classes are powerful and playable in their own right at this level because they have lots of known powers or spells along with 760,000 gp in wealth.
The Psion and the Variant Spellcaster pick up a bonus feat at L5 and 3 additional feats at 10, 15 and 20 if not PRCed out of in comparison to the standard sorcerer.
Spontaneous caster options for a PC using the Core/SRD and PFRPG rules including the Spell domain and the PHBII Sorcerer class Meta magic variant:
Not PRC and just go straight class Core Sorcerer - 20, PF Bloodline Sorcerer - 20, Psion - 20, Variant Spellcaster - 20.
Play one of the PFRPG Bloodline Sorcerer fares which better than a Core Sorcerer with a +2 to Charisma, D6 for hit points and +20 hit points for remaining in class along with all the PF class specials.
Limited to the Core rules and PRCs with access to the PHBII Metamagic variant and the Spell domain (Since the PFRPG isn't Core I'll take a single domain and the spells on the domain) instead of playing a PFRPG Bloodline Sorcerer?
I don't know if people would find the option of playing either of these two PCs more enjoyable than taking 20 levels in PF Bloodline Sorcerer but this is an option in game:
Non Lawful, Intelligence based Human Variant Spellcaster because I get to choose 4 skills as class skills and the generic bonus feats are good. Highest attribute is Intelligence instead of Charisma.
Var SC - 6, Arcane Trickster - (9 or 10), Arch Mage - (5 or 4) L20 spellcasting (Arcane Miracle as a known spell and 2 No Experience Miracles a day as SLA via High Arcana for spell duplication as an option) plus full AT specials +7D6 Sneak Attack, Impromtu Sneak Attack and Ranged Legerdemain. Cherry pick spells from all lists.
Known spell requirements for PRCs: Mage Hand and 5 fifth level or greater spells of different schools.
Var SC - 6, Arcane Trickster - 3, Thaum - 5, Loremaster - 2, Archmage -4 with L20 spellcasting. Lots of useful abilities Bardic Lore, Enhanced Summoning, Planar Cohort, +3D6 Sneak Attack, Impromtu Sneak Attack. High Arcana to personal taste. Arcane Miracle as a known spell and 2 No Experience Miracles a day as SLA via High Arcana for spell duplication are an option.
Known spell requirements for PRCs: Mage Hand, Lesser Planar Ally and with the L6 Anyspell Greater the PC only needs to know 4 other fifth level or greater spells of different schools. Keep a spell book with some low level divination spells and other utility spells to meet PRC spell requirements if not already meeting the 7 known Divination spells for the Loremaster PRC.
The L6 Anyspell Greater will meet all divination school spell requirements if taken from L12+ for Loremaster if known Divination spells do not meet the PRC requirements.
Entry into Arcane Trickster via choosing Decipher Script, Disable Device, Escape Artist as class skills and cross classing Hide and Move Silently to have 4 ranks at L5 to take the +2D6 generic bonus feat Sneak Attack +2D6 with Mage Hand as a known spell. At L6 you can cast at least one level 3 arcane spell. AT L7 you can enter Arcane Trickster.
Compairing core classes to supplimentry classes is also atleast some what problimatic. Powercreep is already an issue with PF (although from what i have seen, in an entirely good way.) Supplimental martrial is almost always more powerful than core material, which makes comparisons difficult at best.
The samurai, hexblade, warlock, shugenja, spell-thief, true-namer, shadow caster and binder would like to have a word with you.
Meanwhile the druid with natural spell will laugh at them all.
Compairing core classes to supplimentry classes is also atleast some what problimatic. Powercreep is already an issue with PF (although from what i have seen, in an entirely good way.) Supplimental martrial is almost always more powerful than core material, which makes comparisons difficult at best.The samurai, hexblade, warlock, shugenja, spell-thief, true-namer, shadow caster and binder would like to have a word with you.
Meanwhile the druid with natural spell will laugh at them all.
I take it that they want to have this word with me because they haven't visited the old Sorcerers of the shore optimisation board yet ;)
|
Not intending to offend, but...I'm tired of seeing the sorcerer compared to the beguiler and the warmage. Not every body has access to them nor does every DM allow them.
Alpha 2 is about the Core Classes. Everyone who has a PHB or gets the PFPHB has access to the sorcerer.
Let's try to keep this debate in that perspective.
I disagree PFRPG is supposed to be backwards compatible. The PHBII references the Beguiler, Favored Soul, Sorcerer, Warlock and Warmage. The D20 SRD references the Psion and the Variant Generic Spellcaster (The first real sorcerer class fix in game IMO).
CM, I think you are laboring under a misconception. I am a HUGE proponent of maintaining backwards compatibility. But i don't believe that the phrase means what you think it does. Backwards compatibility means that the material from 3.5 would remain usable. But it does not even remotely suggest that PFRPG will try to balance itself against every WOTC crapbook er I mean splatbook that has been released.
PFRPG has to be balanced against the existing OGL since that is all they can publish with. It would be foolish for Paizo to be concerned about how beguilers or warmages would balance against a sorcerer when they will never be used in any PFRPG product - because they can't be.
Ultimately, Paizo needs to make sure that the mechanics remains similar enough that people who want to use any particular splat book can, but that each DM is repsonsible for game balance at their table. While I'm generally please with the new sorcerer, it needs to be compared against the other OGL materials that Paizo can work with. On that basis, I think wizard/cleric/druid is our true class comparisons for sorcerer.
The 'Ling
|
|
Actually the Wizard trumps the sorcerer in one way by having unlimited use of the zero level spells he's prepared. From what I read, Sorcerers are stuck with a fixed use of a zero level set that's even more limited than it was in 3.5 ( a maximum of 6 spells as opposed to 9 ) At the very least, sorcerers should have unlimited use of prestidgitation or a similar type ability.It's actually pretty playable -- provided you're brutally efficient with your spell choices, you cna easily pull your weight compared to cleric, rogue, etc. It's just that a Sorcerer isn't and never has been as good as a wizard.
As for the issue of spells, the assertion that Sorcerers have more spells than wizards is, by and large, a *myth*
Assuming a starting casting stat of 17 (easy with Pathfinder races) and using 3.5 specialization for simplicity, the number of first-level spells per day looks like this:
S v W by Level
4v3 (the sorcerer has a solid edge at level one)
Jason has already indicated in another thread that this was an oversight. Sorcerers were always intended to have unlimited cantrip use just like the other casters.
Not intending to offend, but...I'm tired of seeing the sorcerer compared to the beguiler and the warmage. Not every body has access to them nor does every DM allow them.
Alpha 2 is about the Core Classes. Everyone who has a PHB or gets the PFPHB has access to the sorcerer.
Let's try to keep this debate in that perspective.
I disagree PFRPG is supposed to be backwards compatible. The PHBII references the Beguiler, Favored Soul, Sorcerer, Warlock and Warmage. The D20 SRD references the Psion and the Variant Generic Spellcaster (The first real sorcerer class fix in game IMO).
CM, I think you are laboring under a misconception. I am a HUGE proponent of maintaining backwards compatibility. But i don't believe that the phrase means what you think it does. Backwards compatibility means that the material from 3.5 would remain usable. But it does not even remotely suggest that PFRPG will try to balance itself against every WOTC crapbook er I mean splatbook that has been released.
PFRPG has to be balanced against the existing OGL since that is all they can publish with. It would be foolish for Paizo to be concerned about how beguilers or warmages would balance against a sorcerer when they will never be used in any PFRPG product - because they can't be.
Ultimately, Paizo needs to make sure that the mechanics remains similar enough that people who want to use any particular splat book can, but that each DM is repsonsible for game balance at their table. While I'm generally please with the new sorcerer, it needs to be compared against the other OGL materials that Paizo can work with. On that basis, I think wizard/cleric/druid is our true class comparisons for sorcerer.
The 'Ling
Well said.
|
|
CM, I think you are laboring under a misconception. I am a HUGE proponent of maintaining backwards compatibility. But i don't believe that the phrase means what you think it does. Backwards compatibility means that the material from 3.5 would remain usable. But it does not even remotely suggest that PFRPG will try to balance itself against every WOTC crapbook er I mean splatbook that has been released.
PFRPG has to be balanced against the existing OGL since that is all they can publish with. It would be foolish for Paizo to be concerned about how beguilers or warmages would balance against a sorcerer when they will never be used in any PFRPG product - because they can't be.
Ultimately, Paizo needs to make sure that the mechanics remains similar enough that people who want to use any particular splat book can, but that each DM is repsonsible for game balance at their table. While I'm generally please with the new sorcerer, it needs to be compared against the other OGL materials that Paizo can work with. On that basis, I think wizard/cleric/druid is our true class comparisons for sorcerer.
The 'Ling
Very very true. I would wager that the amount of time spent at Paizo worrying about splatbook support approaches nil. Splatbook features of any type will not appear in Pathfinder and Jason and crew have more than enough to do to make the needed rules improvements. The entire debate concerning PRPG Core vs Splatbook X can be summed up this way: if your DM wants to try and balance all of this out, let him, just as he did in the past with 3.5 Core and Splatbook X. Meanwhile, we have a game to improve.
If people think the sorcerer class is weak compared to a Beguiler, go play a Beguiler (if your DM allows them in your Pathfinder game). It doesn't do the conversation as a whole much good to talk about splatbook comparisons when such comparisons are likely not even being considered during design and have never been a goal of the design. And lest I be accused of supposing too much concerning design intent, I offer the new Sorcerer as a demonstration that the intent is not to make the class "comparable to the splatbooks"; clearly it is not and I would wager Jason and his team know this as well.
And just a word on PrC options instead of straight sorcerer, though it applies to all classes really. It is the design intent to make the sorcerer a class worth taking for 20 levels instead of going with a PrC. When some people read this, they think of already published (and therefore offlimits - save the ones in the SRD) PrCs. Perhaps the sorcerer seen here will be a viable alternative to the Pathfinder PRCs due out eventually. These as yet undefined PRC's are the only ones that matter on a go-forward basis since only these PRCs will be able to be published.
Comparing the sorcerer to other SRD and PRPG classes is fair, but comparisons against non-SDR classes are not germane to the discussion. Discussing the sorcerer's need to PRC is moot at this time since no PRPG PRCs exist to determine if the sorcerer is underpowered without taking a PRC. Individual DMs may want to incorporate the non-core, optional splatbhooks with PRPG, but they do so under their own risk and with their own effort toward game balance. Personally, I feel these latter two issues will go the farthest in making a PRPG game great; the splatbooks were horrible for the most part and in my opinion their demise cannot come soon enough.
|
i'm not sure that many of the "Sorcerer's Are Weak..." argument-wielding folks have played one.
In at least 2 games, I have played a sorcerer from Lvl 1 on. One made it to 9th lvl, the other is now 10th.
I've also played several one-off characters of higher levels.
Beyond the lack of class features (except the familiar, of course), i have never really felt the "lack" of doable things in a given course of action.
in fact, the 1-10th lvl character (playing in a living-campaign game where he is even MORE limited, and has no familiar) has more than once been the MVP of the adventure, getting people to where they have to go, delivering the knockout punch, and generally being the one guy to have the tricks needed to save the day.
and i don't think i've EVER run out of spells in a given day. it's not like i'm hordeing them, either, just always seem to end the day with at least a couple spells left on board.
so, the sorc may not be able to solo every threat, and without good spell selection/feat selection they are going to be lacking things they'll want, they are a viable class, even with 3.5 rules.
under PFRPG rules, I can't wait to see em in action.
-the hamster