|
Amazingly enough, I don't think that the casting mechanic is going to change. No matter how much you say it. That goes for all of you that continue to complain about OVER and OVER again. Lay it to rest.
On a different note, seeing as the man wants playtest data, maybe you should all suck it up and actually playtest what you think is garbage, and see how it does in actual play. NO amount of theory will make up for real testing.
I fully support the new sorceror. They never needed a boost in mechanics, so these new things do what they should: give a bit of icing on the cake. Fluff for them, plus a bit of neatness. Second amazing point is this: Full-round metamagic is a balancing factor. Staggered spellcasting may or may not be, but damn can't you just change it for yourself if you hate it that much? That's quite possibly the easiest thing to change ever. All you have to do is remember that sorcerors get new spells when wizards do. End of problem.
And as far as I can tell, what all of you seem to want isn't the sorceror, but something entirely different. Perhaps you should design that new option instead of complaining.
Amazingly enough, I don't think that the casting mechanic is going to change. No matter how much you say it. That goes for all of you that continue to complain about OVER and OVER again. Lay it to rest.
On a different note, seeing as the man wants playtest data, maybe you should all suck it up and actually playtest what you think is garbage, and see how it does in actual play. NO amount of theory will make up for real testing.
I'd even accept the fact that the spellcasting wasn't going to change if I could just take a Wizard Specialization or a Cleric Domain instead.
As for playtesting, well.... we've playtested these kinds of options before. When he brings something new to the table, I'd be happy to playtest it.
Alright, I'm not going to regurgitate what has already been said, at this point it seems like it's a lot of back and forth between the pros and the cons. If this were a vote I'd put mine with the OP. The sorcerers still don't compare to a wizard unless a game is combat focused. Even then.
One thing that struck me about the sorcerer in 3.0 and 3.5 was the claim that because they wandered more they picked up fighting a bit better. This was used to explain their weapon proficiencies, but perhaps move it one further and advance their attack bonus. That would make those touch attack abilities worth something, maybe even permit them to use light armor or provide a feat that would lend itself to that.
Otherwise I agree with the comments on giving them cantrips and more charisma based skills (i.e. diplomacy).
Either way they need a little something more to keep up.
Lets not get off into semantics here. I am not going to be making any changes to the documents for a little bit here. If you don't want to playtest it, that is your choice. I will be looking for playtest feedback specifically to base my decisions. They will not be the only factor, but they weigh a bit more.
There are definitely some areas here that could use some improvement. I be happy to read what you think, but just telling me it is bad and that the spell level bump should be removed is not very productive. If you want to propose your own system, we have a forum for that. If you want to work with the system, post here. If you can't be civil, don't post at all.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing.
Someone said it's the problems you inherited and thats really the problem.
There was glaring problems with the sorcerer that needed fixing long before pathfinder rpg was even announced... infact it's problems that have been around since 3rd edition. For me the most glaring problem is later spell progression. So for me when I heard sorcerer revisions I'm sitting there thinking "Alright, wizard spell progression here we come!" But alas that has yet to be.
Why DO sorcerers get spells later anyways? This is what keeps me from ever playing one, I hate this glaring GLARING problem so so so so so so much.
now not counting the pathfinder I can do a little comparison of wiz/sor strengths and weaknesses.
-Wizards can learn any spell
-Wizards must prepare spells
-Wizards have fewer spells per day that sorcerer, though I am not sure if specializing changes that, because I never done it or understood it.
-Wizards have odd level spell progression
-Wizards Get meta magic feats at certain levels
-Wizards aren't gimed with meta magic like sorcs are
-Sorcs can only learn a smaller number of spells and that is IT
-Sorcs can cast any spell they know without preperation
-Sorcs casts more spells per day, again though unsure of what specialized wizards can do.
-Sorcerers have a slower spell progression than wizard
-Sorcerers do not get free meta magic feats. Instead they recieve a spell swapping thing that works for just one spell at every other level. I have always really found this very lackluster and may work a few times such as swapping out sleep for something else as soon as everything is too high in HD for it to work at all.
-Sorcerers are gimped in meta magic from my understanding. This is why sudden feats were made in other supplements, but this only matters if you have that actual book.
-Sorcs get simple weapon proficiencies... eh... besides crossbows... why are they in melee?
so you make your comparisons from that. aside from the flavor that I like more (but that is more based on opionion than anything else) I felt the sorcerer has always been either stuck in a blaster position because of their small spell selection and higher spells per day. And sorcerers were inferior to wizards due to slower spell progression.
It was more of problems that we are SURE you noticed like many other people that we hope would be fixed and don't seem to have been.
You see, sure you gave the sorcerer some gifts BUT you gave the wizard gifts too! Just for arguements sake if the wizard was a 5 in power and the sorcerer a 4 well then the wizard is better. Now you gave them gifts now the wizard is an 8 and the sorcerer is a 7... well you gave them both gifts but still haven't really addressed those big differences that the wizard really has over the sorcerer, mainly being spell progression. Wizard is still favored over the sorcerer.
I couldn't tell you how happy I would be if spell progression matched the wizards. Did nobody even talk about that when doing class revisions? o.o I don't think giving it wizard progression would be altering it to the point of no longer backwards compatible :o
Heh, as a longtime Sorcerer player, I can tell you just how sad it is when you miss a session or two and then the Fighter's cohort Wizard is casting spells as powerful as you.
I'll say it again - the sorcerer in my group outblasts the wizard and the wizard's cohort combined. And he can Enlarge most of the group. And he can put Walls of Force all over the place. And he can change the elemental aspects of his best spells to pretty much be anything. And more Magic Missiles. And Grease up the wazoo. And he can pretty much Teleport all damned day.
And he can decide what to do when he wants it without trying to guess ahead of time which spells are the most useful and which benefit from metamagic.
Versatility is SO powerful and SO very underated.
Oh yeah...don't get me started on the Monster Summoning spells he picked up.
Huge fiendish monstrous centipedes all over the place. Sheesh!
Here's my take. Understand that I am a GM and have yet to playtest the Sorcerer class in one of my games. Naturally seeing as the PDF just came out. I know I said I wouldn't regurgitate anything but I'm bored and want to put in my two bits.
Now first off. Jason sir, thank you, thank you for the hard work you've put into this RPG. My players and I have been eagerly looking forward to this second release and while some of them are fairly opinionated they're solid gamers... which from what I've seen on the boards can go hand in hand as often as not. Still, do not think myself and my group in our little corner of the world (Alaska) don't appreciate what you've done. However I know my players, both in my table top group and my online groups and with third edition (pre-PFRPG) I would never expect any of them to play a sorcerer. Numbers for numbers in 3.0 and 3.5 they just didn't compare without optional or house rule adjustments unless a game was combat oriented. Their skill selection didn't make sense, and they were described as being more melee oriented but only got simple weapon proficiencies which was a fairly lackluster advantage. It allowed the 1st levels to survive a little more because they could hang back and use a nice crossbow when they ran out of spells.
Now at first glance I honestly believe one change that should be made without even playtesting would be the cantrips and possibly a skill selection that better compliments their prime stat of charisma. Beyond that, that's where the value of speculation vs. real playtesting grows apart. Some of the feats are meh but some of the bloodlines looked rather interesting. Not sure if they'd be interesting enough for one of my players to play it but I imagine they'd think about it which is more than I could say for the 3.0 3.5 sorcerer. Some of the bloodlines don't seem worth it but others, elemental comes to mind, seems pretty neat (though I would have preferred that movement ability to come earlier but meh, mere preference). To use something similar to a previous analogy the gap between sorcerers went from the 4 points of power vs. the 5 point wizard to a 9 points in power vs. the 10 point wizard. So it's been increased, but in some respects there still seems to be a gap.
There are perks though. Whereas a wizard or a cleric might get a spell like ability that can be used only once a day the sorcerer seems to get something a little more permanent on average i.e. fly 60ft medium, not fly 10 rounds a day or fly twenty hours a week, but simply fly. It's pretty cool.
I am afraid I'll never have a full grasp of the class though. I doubt any of my players will play it (they seem fairly attached to their classes from the first release and I doubt they'd like to change :-P) so feel free to write off my comments as baseless. They're mostly speculation. Honestly I think it needs just a little tweaking before becoming perfect, or at least a class I and maybe my picky players wouldn't over look. Regardless you succeeded in one area where WotC never seemed to grasp: you made the sorcerer more interesting.
Anyway, there's my two bit rant. Keep up the good work.
I'll say it again - the sorcerer in my group outblasts the wizard and the wizard's cohort combined. And he can Enlarge most of the group. And he can put Walls of Force all over the place. And he can change the elemental aspects of his best spells to pretty much be anything. And more Magic Missiles. And Grease up the wazoo. And he can pretty much Teleport all damned day.
And he can decide what to do when he wants it without trying to guess ahead of time which spells are the most useful and which benefit from metamagic.
Versatility is SO powerful and SO very underated.
Oh yeah...don't get me started on the Monster Summoning spells he picked up.
Huge fiendish monstrous centipedes all over the place. Sheesh!
This has pretty much been my experience too. I've never really understood the people who said that the sorceror was underpowered, since every time I've played one they have been almost overpowered without even trying. Versatility is powerful and so is nearly limitless spells. I've only ever used them all up once.
I'll say it again - the sorcerer in my group outblasts the wizard and the wizard's cohort combined. And he can Enlarge most of the group. And he can put Walls of Force all over the place. And he can change the elemental aspects of his best spells to pretty much be anything. And more Magic Missiles. And Grease up the wazoo. And he can pretty much Teleport all damned day.
And he can decide what to do when he wants it without trying to guess ahead of time which spells are the most useful and which benefit from metamagic.
Versatility is SO powerful and SO very underated.
Oh yeah...don't get me started on the Monster Summoning spells he picked up.
Huge fiendish monstrous centipedes all over the place. Sheesh!
Have you ever considered that you might just have a really good player?
You know, the Wizard can do all of those things as well, and he'd have almost as many spells if he was a 3.0 or 3.5 specialist (Sorcerer at 9th level has 22 spells not counting cantrips, and a 3.x Specialist Wizard has 19 spells). He also gets spell levels faster so he actually has better spells most of the time, and better spells are always superior to more spells. With the Pathfinder Wizard getting spell-likes that are level-appropriate, I think he's even better.
Versatility is great. Thats why the Wizard is better, since he can change his entire spell list each day. One bad day, and the Sorcerer might not have nay spells that can be used in the adventure (ever see a Fire Sorcerers fighting Fire Giants?).
One bad day, and the Sorcerer might not have nay spells that can be used in the adventure (ever see a Fire Sorcerers fighting Fire Giants?).
Been there, played that. Even the most dedicated fire sorceror is going to have *a* non-fire spell. ("I can't believe I am using a third level spell slot to cast magic missile.")
Just because wizard has more versatility in spells known doesn't mean they'll have the right spell for the job prepared when they need it. I happen to think that the classes are very well balanced against each other.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
Why DO sorcerers get spells later anyways? This is what keeps me from ever playing one, I hate this glaring GLARING problem so so so so so so much.
now not counting the pathfinder I can do a little comparison of wiz/sor strengths and weaknesses.
-Wizards can learn any spell
-Wizards must prepare spells
-Wizards have fewer spells per day that sorcerer, though I am not sure if specializing changes that, because I never done it or understood it.
-Wizards have odd level spell progression
-Wizards Get meta magic feats at certain levels
-Wizards aren't gimed with meta magic like sorcs are-Sorcs can only learn a smaller number of spells and that is IT
-Sorcs can cast any spell they know without preperation
-Sorcs casts more spells per day, again though unsure of what specialized wizards can do....
Ok the philosophy behind the Sorcerer is dirt simple, behind all spontaneous casters really. You get a few spells, but you can cast ANY one of them more times per day than a wizard. You also can spontaneously add a metamagic feat to your spells whenever you need them. The balancing factor for these two advantages are you access a new spell level one level later than wizard and adding metamagic to your spells takes a wee bit long to cast, or a full-round action.
Being able to choose any spell in your arsenal at any time is powerful. Being able to tweak said spell with metamagic on the fly is powerful.
Wizards have the ability to learn many spells, but are limited to only a few choices from that wide array. They really have to know what they might face in order to select the right spell. On any given day this is unlikely to happen (random encounters can be a pain this way). Given enough time to prep a wizard is a beast, but the the spur of the moment, when circumstances go against his prepared spell set he's on the defensive. A specialist used to gain a single extra spell per level because of his speciality. In no way did that ever give a Wiz more spells than a Sor.
Was ditching the familiar for the sorcerer a conscious decision, or was it a simple oversight like the cantrips? If it was conscious, I can deal with that, I just want to be sure.
Also, while I haven't playtested, some of the bloodline abilities make me hesitant to even attempt them. The Aberrant really sticks out - good for a eldritch knight sort of character, but strange for a pure sorcerer. Personally, I'd like to see more aberrant abilities along the lines of unusual anatomy (though long limbs makes me twitch) allowing the sorcerer to manipulate his body somewhat into bizarre forms, perhaps climaxing at 20th level with the ability to alter self or its equivalent at will. BTW, I'd like to suggest Acidic Touch be Acidic Spit as a ranged touch so the sorcerer doesn't have to try to go toe-to-toe with an opponent at 1st level.
I would like to suggest contemplating "stealing" bloodline powers from some of the PrC's, if this wasn't already an inspiration - for example, borrowing from Dragon Disciple for a Draconic heritage, and Acolyte of the Skin for Abyssmal/Demonic and Alienist for the Aberrant blood line.
Also, looking over the bonus feats, I'd like to see more metamagic feats in the bonus feats and less melee combat feats. It really feels like the sorcerer is trying to encroach on the fighter's area of expertise, despite being woefully bad at it. I can't imagine any player in my group willing to use the melee attacks of the sorcerous bloodlines unless really desperate, brave and/or suicidal. And while the abilities might be somewhat useful at low level, by about 5th-6th level the HP & attack bonus of the sorcerer falls so far behind the melee specialists that the claws and melee attacks I can see as being worthless for anything but purely defensive, desperation attacks.
I will say I like both the ideas behind the Arcane and Destined bloodlines. Both are very flavorful, and I can't wait for one of my players to give it a whirl to see how it plays out.
Finally, I'd also like to put in a plea for more spells known for the sorcerer. Even one extra spell known per level past first would be a great help to getting the sorcerer out of the rut of the one-spell pony.
|
|
I agree on most parts. Well, some most parts, or something.
I was discussing the sorcerer's problems with my bro, who exclaimed the reason to be that a sorcerer is too "narrow". The lack of skill points and an inferior list of spells makes a sorcerer easily a one-trick-pony. One extra known spell for each spell level might do the appropriate change quite likely.
Next Saturday I'll test the sorcerer. And also by granting it cleric's BAB (3/4) and light armor proficiency, and see how it goes. Might make it too temptating though. We'll see.
test it with wizard spell progression.
Amazingly enough, I don't think that the casting mechanic is going to change. No matter how much you say it. That goes for all of you that continue to complain about OVER and OVER again. Lay it to rest.
Kobold Sorcerers can undergo a ritual that gives them standard spellcasting in game.
Why doesn't Paizo develop a similar ritual for PF Bloodline Sorcerers with a mechanical cost similar to the Kobold ritual mechanic since many players who don't wish to be limited to playing Kobolds obviously desire it?
Sudden thought:
What if bloodlines grant bonus known spells, sort of like how domain spells worked in 3.5. This adds flavor while simultaneously adding a nice mechanical advantage to up the sorcerer's repertoire without significantly increasing firepower.
Director of Games
|
Sudden thought:
What if bloodlines grant bonus known spells, sort of like how domain spells worked in 3.5. This adds flavor while simultaneously adding a nice mechanical advantage to up the sorcerer's repertoire without significantly increasing firepower.
I did not want to come out and say it quite yet, but this is a change I am seriously considering right now. Each bloodline would have a list of spells, and you would get to choose one every time you gain a new level of spells (4th, 6th, 8th, etc). I like that, but to give them a bit of a bit more balance, I might drop all those levels by one (that is they can choose a bonus 1st lv spell at 3rd, 2nd lv at 5th, etc).
I realize that some folks would really like to see their progression change. Right now, I am not willing to make that change. The sorcerers benefit has always been more spells, just at a slightly slower progression. You may disagree, but right now, I am sticking with this concept.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
A Sorcerer is very much like a Wizard, except that you have to prepare your spells when you level up instead of when the day begins. Both a Sorcerer and a Wizard can be caught in a position where their spell selection leaves them underperforming or even completely useless. For Sorcerers, this state will continue until they gain a level and are allowed to select new spells. For a Wizard, this state will continue until they can spend nine hours (possibly in a rope trick or plane with fast time) resting and preparing new spells.
9 hours is less than completing the chapter in the campaign, so Wizards are more versatile. Period.
-Frank
I'll say it again - the sorcerer in my group outblasts the wizard and the wizard's cohort combined. And he can Enlarge most of the group. And he can put Walls of Force all over the place. And he can change the elemental aspects of his best spells to pretty much be anything. And more Magic Missiles. And Grease up the wazoo. And he can pretty much Teleport all damned day.
And he can decide what to do when he wants it without trying to guess ahead of time which spells are the most useful and which benefit from metamagic.
Versatility is SO powerful and SO very underated.
Oh yeah...don't get me started on the Monster Summoning spells he picked up.
Huge fiendish monstrous centipedes all over the place. Sheesh!
Nuff Said!
Have you ever considered that you might just have a really good player?
In my experience, a good player is more needed playing a wizard than a sorcerer. Sorcerers should carefully select his spells known, but a wizard has the daily duty of selecting the best spells for the situation at hand, and this leads to more chances for mistake. Selecting the spells known for the whole career, if done right, can make you versatile enough and with more spells per day to boot.
Versatility is great. Thats why the Wizard is better, since he can change his entire spell list each day. One bad day, and the Sorcerer might not have nay spells that can be used in the adventure (ever see a Fire Sorcerers fighting Fire Giants?).
This bad day turns out to happen a lot more often to wizards than to sorcerers, by the way. A Fire Sorcerer who don't take some kind of non-fire spell or energy substitution, well, let's say he will be having such "bad days" time after time. Is the class to be blamed, or the player?
|
@David Jackson 60: The breath weapon limit is easily taken care of with a feat from one of the dragon books (cannot remember which one) which strengthened the breathe uses from 1/day to having a 1d4-1 round delay between uses.
@K: quit looking at the other classes, look to just this and think this: "Hoe can I maximize the potential of this class from going just being a 20 sorcerer"
My opinion is that this class got a significant power boost over the regular one since it got more class abilities than just 'I have spells!' Considering the bard, ranger, paladin, cleric, druid, and wizard have things to do now that make them unique for each character made. (I HATE cookie cutter characters!)
To everyone use your brain to get your dm to tell you to stop doing that.
~Kalebon
'The golden rule of any game is the DM/GM/storyteller has last say!'
This bad day turns out to happen a lot more often to wizards than to sorcerers, by the way. A Fire Sorcerer who don't take some kind of non-fire spell or energy substitution, well, let's say he will be having such "bad days" time after time. Is the class to be blamed, or the player?
The Class.
Consider: at 5th level a Sorcerer knows two 2nd level spells and can cast 5 of them in a day (4 for base class and 1 bonus from attributes). The specialist Wizard knows at least four 2nd level spells and two 3rd level spells; and he can cast 5 of them per day (2+1 2nd level spells, 1+1 3rd level spells), and he has an extra 2nd level he can use once per day as a spell-like ability.
And yeah, the Sorcerer has 7 or 8 first level spells per day at this level, to the Wizard's 4 or 5, but the Wizard has 2 bonus 1st level spells as Spell-likes. And the Wizard's Arcane Bond to his ring allows him to cast an extra spell of any level selected from anything in his whole spell book.
At 5th level the Wizard:
- Casts more total spells in a day.
- Knows more spells.
- Has more daily versatility (a choice of two 3rd level spells to cast spontaneously instead of a choice of two 2nd level spells).
- Has more powerful spells (3rd level instead of 2nd).
- Has the ability to learn even more spells indefinitely by glaring at another Wizard's spellbook and casting secret page.
This isn't really up for debate or anything. The Wizard is better than the Sorcerer. Any anecdote you have of a Sorcerer outperforming a Wizard in any specific instance is by definition an unusual anecdote. It's not representative of the power and versatility disparity of the class.
-Frank
Ok, i have just run a couple of duels between a first level wizard [envoker] and a first level sorcerer(arcane).
Both where built along the lines i would build a PC, so i would imagain far form optimium.
Here are my observations
-The sorcerer tended to go first due to a +5 init from dex and improved init.
-Sorcerer cast sheild, negating the envokers magic missiles.
- When the init was lost, the sorcerer had the hp's to easily soak up a spell from the wizard. Thanks to toughness and con
-at which point the sorcerer was able to blast away to his hearts content.
-the envoker was able to win, but it seemed to be as a result of goodluck, getting the init and clever use of their bond item
Its hardly a conclusive study, but it has left me with the impression, that at low levels, if you want a combat mage, sorcerer seems to be the don.
The Class.
Consider: at 5th level a Sorcerer knows two 2nd level spells and can cast 5 of them in a day (4 for base class and 1 bonus from attributes). The specialist Wizard knows at least four 2nd level spells and two 3rd level spells; and he can cast 5 of them per day (2+1 2nd level spells, 1+1 3rd level spells), and he has an extra 2nd level he can use once per day as a spell-like ability.
And yeah, the Sorcerer has 7 or 8 first level spells per day at this level, to the Wizard's 4 or 5, but the Wizard has 2 bonus 1st level spells as Spell-likes. And the Wizard's Arcane Bond to his ring allows him to cast an extra spell of any level selected from anything in his whole spell book.
At 5th level the Wizard:
- Casts more total spells in a day.
- Knows more spells.
- Has more daily versatility (a choice of two 3rd level spells to cast spontaneously instead of a choice of two 2nd level spells).
- Has more powerful spells (3rd level instead of 2nd).
- Has the ability to learn even more spells indefinitely by glaring at another Wizard's spellbook and casting secret page.
This isn't really up for debate or anything. The Wizard is better than the Sorcerer. Any anecdote you have of a Sorcerer outperforming a Wizard in any specific instance is by definition an unusual anecdote. It's not representative of the power and versatility disparity of the class.
-Frank
I'm not trying to demonstrate that sorcerers are better than wizards. Not the contrary, either. Those classes are different, and they ought to be. They feel different, they play different. Anything one can say about one class being better, despite all "evidence" that support it, at the end will always boil down to personal preferences. Some players have it easier playing sorcerers than wizards, or vice versa.
What I'm saying is that we should not try to make sorcerers more wizardly. Sorcerers are NOT a weak class, as any DM or player that has seen one in action during 20 levels knows. It has its strengths, and it has its weakness, and that's fine. Every class has weaknesses.
You are giving examples that, in my opinion, does not demonstrate anything. Present your "evidences" one level higher for both classes, and they don't stand. Theory is theory, but the world at the gaming table is very, very different.
You know, it's kind of funny that you say "this is not up for debate" on an internet forum.
|
¡Hi!
I usually had a sorcerer as PC (a Fire or Electricity Sorcerer) and I like the Paizo's version.
A sorcerer, as the druid, was good in potency. Now is similar to wizard and each one shines on its abilities:
A wizard have a big repertory to spells (utility spells) and between its bonded item and its capability to study his spellbook on the fly can do anything that it not relationed by combat. In combat his memorized spells & new spellike abilities are good but they are not better than the potency AND versatity of a combat sorcerer.
A Bloodline let a sorcercer to be unique and it it good.
PD: If you are a Fire Sorcerer and must confront *alone* a fire resistent creature always are another option: ¡Run!
You are giving examples that, in my opinion, does not demonstrate anything. Present your "evidences" one level higher for both classes, and they don't stand.
Actually, it still does. You go up one level and the Sorcerer learns one 3rd level spell and picks up a 2nd level spell slot and 4 3rd level spell slots. The Wizard learns 2 additional 3rd level spells for free and gains a 2nd level and a 3rd level spell slot. And he picks up a 1st level and a 3rd level Spell like ability.
The Wizard still has more magic per day, and he still has more power and versatility at the high end than the Sorcerer does. Out of the box, the Wizard can cast one of five (or more) different 3rd level spells, the Sorcerer has his choice of one.
-Frank
|
|
This bad day turns out to happen a lot more often to wizards than to sorcerers, by the way. A Fire Sorcerer who don't take some kind of non-fire spell or energy substitution, well, let's say he will be having such "bad days" time after time. Is the class to be blamed, or the player?The Class.
Consider: at 5th level a Sorcerer knows two 2nd level spells and can cast 5 of them in a day (4 for base class and 1 bonus from attributes). The specialist Wizard knows at least four 2nd level spells and two 3rd level spells; and he can cast 5 of them per day (2+1 2nd level spells, 1+1 3rd level spells), and he has an extra 2nd level he can use once per day as a spell-like ability.
And yeah, the Sorcerer has 7 or 8 first level spells per day at this level, to the Wizard's 4 or 5, but the Wizard has 2 bonus 1st level spells as Spell-likes. And the Wizard's Arcane Bond to his ring allows him to cast an extra spell of any level selected from anything in his whole spell book.
At 5th level the Wizard:
- Casts more total spells in a day.
- Knows more spells.
- Has more daily versatility (a choice of two 3rd level spells to cast spontaneously instead of a choice of two 2nd level spells).
- Has more powerful spells (3rd level instead of 2nd).
- Has the ability to learn even more spells indefinitely by glaring at another Wizard's spellbook and casting secret page.
This isn't really up for debate or anything. The Wizard is better than the Sorcerer. Any anecdote you have of a Sorcerer outperforming a Wizard in any specific instance is by definition an unusual anecdote. It's not representative of the power and versatility disparity of the class.
-Frank
I wrote out a long reply about the sorcerer, but the board ate it! Aargh.
Anyway, to sum up what I said before, here is 1 simple fix that would at once simplify the Sorcerer and increase his power and versatility: Spell points instead of spell slots. The Psion from the 3.5 Expanded Psionic Handbook is what the Sorcerer should be. A more limited number of spells than the Wizard, but incredible flexibility in using those spells.
Simply say that a spell uses up a number of points equal to its spell level each time it is cast. A Sorcerer has a number of spell points, such as the following chart (which increases the number of spell points by the Sorcerer's level), for example:
1: 1
2: 3
3: 6
4: 10
5: 15
6: 21
7: 28
8: 36
9: 45
10: 55
11: 66
12: 78
13: 91
14: 105
15: 120
16: 136
17: 153
18: 171
19: 190
20: 210
Add to this amount your Charisma Bonus. The Psion's Attribute bonus increases as he goes up in level. It isn't necessary to do this, but you could say the Cha bonus points are doubled at 6th level, tripled at 12th level, and quadrupled at 18th level.
You may be wondering about 0 level spells, if casting a spell uses its level in points... simple. Like a Cleric's Orisons, the natural blood magic of a Sorcerer lets him cast cantrips at will.
So, taking a look at the 5th level Sorcerer under this idea, he'd have about 19 spell points and casts cantrips for free. He could thus cast up to 9 2nd level spells in a day. At 10th level, when he gains his first 5th level spell, he'll have 63 spell points, and be able to cast that 5th level spell 12 times, if that's how he wants to use up his spell points for the day! By comparison, a 5th level Wizard can only cast 3 2nd level and 2 3rd level spells in a day, and at 10th level can only cast 2 5th level spells (plus a bunch of lower level spells).
I know there are potential problems with this system, especially at higher levels, when he can cast large numbers of high level spells. But I think the Psion was a better Sorcerer-type than the real Sorcerer, and the idea should be considered.
|
|
Actually, it still does. You go up one level and the Sorcerer learns one 3rd level spell and picks up a 2nd level spell slot and 4 3rd level spell slots. The Wizard learns 2 additional 3rd level spells for free and gains a 2nd level and a 3rd level spell slot. And he picks up a 1st level and a 3rd level Spell like ability.
The Wizard still has more magic per day, and he still has more power and versatility at the high end than the Sorcerer does. Out of the box, the Wizard can cast one of five (or more) different 3rd level spells, the Sorcerer has his choice of one.
-Frank
Just to make sure I understand ... would, in your opinion, an additional spell known per spell level make a sorcerer much more playable? I doubt it's the only thing, but it most likely would make it a whole lot better.
|
See? Undiplomatic, because I don't know how to be nice on the internet, but still constructive.
If you cannot be "nice", please take some time to cool off until you can be.
Oh, I wish. It's not a matter of "cooling off", it's a matter of "I'm a terrible writer and people constantly misinterpret my intentions as a result of it."
Actually, there is nothing wrong with your powers of expression - you are being rude deliberately, mainly because you are copying Frank and (to a lesser extent) K, who have snide and patronising writing styles coupled with an absolute belief that the only way is their way. You, on the other hand, get cut a bit more slack, since you are only a kid.
(Patronising, moi?)
More generally, it is a shame that a lot of the detailed knowledge and pertinent observation is disguised in aggressive and hostile barracking. What did Jason do - steal your girlfriends and shoot your dogs? If you think that this sort of thing is acceptable, it isn't. Do you want to put Jason off this project? Do you really want to look like a bunch of ignorant, mannerless a*#!+#$#s?
If you don't like it, make your case. If you still cannot convince anyone, weigh up whether this will put you off Pathfinder or not and decide then whether you want to continue (me, I really don't like a lot of the extra spell-like abilities the wizards now have, but I've got over it).
There are different ways to approach the goals, and different opinions about what is necessary to fix the perceived problems (for example, do you power up, or power down?). A lot of the "problems" aired here strike me as exaggerated. Are sorcerers less versatile - er, yeah, isn't that the point? As for the "I know it all already and don't have to play test it" view, well, people's games vary - what holds true in your game is not necessarily universal.
So show a little class and appreciation for what Jason is doing. If it isn't exactly what you wanted, well, was 3.5 any different?
I'll say it again - the sorcerer in my group outblasts the wizard and the wizard's cohort combined. And he can Enlarge most of the group. And he can put Walls of Force all over the place. And he can change the elemental aspects of his best spells to pretty much be anything. And more Magic Missiles. And Grease up the wazoo. And he can pretty much Teleport all damned day.
And he can decide what to do when he wants it without trying to guess ahead of time which spells are the most useful and which benefit from metamagic.
Versatility is SO powerful and SO very underated.
Oh yeah...don't get me started on the Monster Summoning spells he picked up.
Huge fiendish monstrous centipedes all over the place. Sheesh!
I agree this sorcerer example has finally reached the sweet spot for spell versatility with a sorcerer at L11 with 2 known 5th level spells from a total of 19 known first to fifth level spells and in anything but but a really uber game the PC should do well with good feat and spell choices. In a leveling up game he has finally come up through the known spell drought and it's only going to get better. Supposedly half the games are L10 and below.
It's at lower levels where it is not as much fun to play a low level sorcerer spontaneous spellcaster because your PC lacks that same spell versatility when a Sorc - 1 knows 2 first level spells in comparison to a Beguiler -1 with 14. Given the choice between having more fun or less fun for the same opportunity cost I usually choose the more fun option.
When a Sorc - 4 with 4 known first and second level spells in comparison to a Beguiler with 33 known first and second level spells.
The Beguiler - 6 knows 53 first to third level spells in comparison to the Sorcerer - 6 with 7 known spells.
When the Sorcerer - 8 knows 11 first to fourth level spells and is getting some of that versatility the Beguiler - 8 knows 64.
In low level games given a choice it is usually more fun to play a Beguiler. In an open game where the PC can take a few feats.
Three good one are the Nexus Method for some spontaneous monster summoning, Arcane Disciple for a domain of personal choice (Spell or Travel are nice), and one of the Heritage Bloodline feats which plugs the few holes in the Beguiler spellcasting.
Lot of fun playing without much record keeping. Decent hit points, light armor, lots of skill points and useful skills.
There are different ways to approach the goals, and different opinions about what is necessary to fix the perceived problems (for example, do you power up, or power down?). A lot of the "problems" aired here strike me as exaggerated. Are sorcerers less versatile - er, yeah, isn't that the point? As for the "I know it all already and don't have to play test it" view, well, people's games vary - what holds true in your game is not necessarily universal.
So show a little class and appreciation for what Jason is...
I completely agree.
The Wizard still has more magic per day, and he still has more power and versatility at the high end than the Sorcerer does. Out of the box, the Wizard can cast one of five (or more) different 3rd level spells, the Sorcerer has his choice of one.
I agree in that the Wizard is receiving spell-like abilities, but what you forget to say is the Sorcerer now is receiving some bonus feats and bloodlines powers too. Are they worse than wizard's school powers? That's very debatable. The sorcerer's bonus feats are worse? Don't think so, the fact that many of them can be selected at first level don't diminish their usefulness. The Arcane Bloodline (assumed to be the default by the rules) has some pretty useful selections for a sorcerer.
Again, things on paper, folks... I don't want to offend anyone. I don't pretend to have the absolute truth about this or anything else. But some people on these boards are harshly criticising and bashing some things that work perfectly fine on an actual game... These armchair critics and coach game designers really have to start playing and seeing how things work in an actual dungeon-crawling adventure, instead of theorizing on things they "already know without playing it, because I'm so smart". Try it, build a sorcerer, build a wizard... run them in the same party, without bias or prejudice... And then post your experiences. You could very well be surprised by the results.
Ok so lets look under the hood of spell casting for a momment.
The only class features i am taking into account is pure spell casting and i am specificially looking at damage potential.
Both casters have an intelligence or charisma of 17(human, with elite attribute and their bonus placed in their primary casting stat.)
Both have effectively the same combat spell arrey.
Both are sixth level and stripped of all class features save spell casting.
1st magic missile
2nd scorching ray(we are assuming that these all hit)
3rd lightning bolt
By the time the sorcerer and the wizard have both used up their spells on our imagainary stationary and indistructable target.
The sorcerer has dealt an average of 207 damage with an upward potential of 393 and a minimium of 90
The wizard on the other hand has an average of 136, a maximum of 276 and a minium 58
The sorcerer also pulls out the damage faster at the start, thanks to his larger number of higher level spells.
The sorcerer also keeps trucking longer, meaning that he can devide up the damage against more targets over all.
Edit: i am fairly comfident in these numbers, but I am disnumerate, so feel free to crunch the numbers for your self.
I'd like to be the voice of "Remember that this is supposed to be backwards compatible." If you change the skeleton of the sorcerer too much, you make more work for DMs or invalidate their archive of published adventures. I think a test the designers after they've designed this class should be to go back to a Dungeon adventure and use an egg timer to time their conversion of a high level example of the class. That will be an incentive for simplicity.
Frankly, I'd again suggest that sorcerer get Diplomacy added to their skill list. Along with UMD, it's one of the more powerful skills in the game. It's a subtle way to rebalance the class. It also makes sense for the celestial bloodline sorcerer to have it, amongst others. In addition, the gamist reason is that the sorcerer should be able to operate as a face for the party, as the PhB fluff makes clear. You can't do that effectively without Diplomacy.
Please remember that the barbarian and the sorcerer are supposed to be starter classes for new players. The less complex you make them, the better they work.
And since classes like the beguiler are so popular, perhaps you might make the sorcerer similarly narrowly focused... based on bloodline, not school. That allows you to give choice to new players while retaining simplicity of use for them.
Finally, put me down for suggesting a reserve power spell as one of these bloodline powers.
I like the changes, I never felt sorcerers were under powered compared to wizards before the Alpha 2 anyway, so I didn't see a reason to up their power.
If I was surprised at anything it was that most of the "free" 1st level abilities being touch spells. This has also been the comment from the sorcerer player in our group, who feels he will have to stick to his crossbow when his spells run out. Where as the Wizard gets the ability to carry on doing touch range attacks if he chooses one of those options. That all said, he has waded into combat with a wand of shocking grasp on several occasions now, so maybe his touch attacks will see him doing that more often?
We convert him this week and play him Thursday, so the play test feed back can start then.
I have also now done the maths for a level seven character as well. I have made the same assumptions, save that the wizard has shout and the target has failed his save.
The sorcerer has an average damage of 357
The wizard has an average of 237
And again the sorcerer pulls out the damage faster and does more in the long run.
Add to this the fact that, the wizard would only be able to be able to cast the affore mentioned spells on that day. While the sorcerer would be able, if conditions where to change suddenly, use a selection other spells.
Sorcerers are more versitile within an adventure day, while wizards are more versitile within a campaign.
|
Frankly, I'd again suggest that sorcerer get Diplomacy added to their skill list. Along with UMD, it's one of the more powerful skills in the game. It's a subtle way to rebalance the class. It also makes sense for the celestial bloodline sorcerer to have it, amongst others. In addition, the gamist reason is that the sorcerer should be able to operate as a face for the party, as the PhB fluff makes clear. You can't do that effectively without Diplomacy.
This, please. Not in the sense that "Sorcerers rely on charisma, it only makes sense they get charisma-based skills, so give it to us yesterday", but more like, "Sorcerers are charismatic, and charisma-based skills are a way of carrying that concept through and allowing them to express it in a more versatile, non spell-slinging way".
By consulting my trusty, well-worn (not well-worn) PDF of PRPG Alpha 2, I see that the charisma-based skills are bluff, diplomacy, disguise, handle animal, intimidate, perform, and use magic device.
Sorcerers have already been given bluff, intimidate, and use magic device. I understand why they've been given intimidate (because magic is crazy! and people who spontaneously start magic missile-ing are scary), but to me, intimidation or diplomacy is simply a personal choice of method that leads to similar results.
With skills now working as they are with the +3 bonus for class skills, I interpret that as, "You're naturally good at this", besides the training and practice. A sorcerer can be scary... but is there any less chance that they can also be oddly compelling?
If using intimidation or diplomacy is a personal choice, it can also be a situational one. That's why I think having both as a class skill makes sense. A funny example would be Ben from Lost- he can be a frightening, unquestionable leader or a soft-spoken captive getting himself freed.
I also wouldn't mind them getting bumped to 4 skill points per level. Why? Because I feel it fleshes out the idea of their versatility.
Sorcerers were originally given proficiency with simple weapons because they theoretically have more time to hang out and maybe pick up a dagger, instead of studying all the time. Do sorcerers use daggers? Usually not. But they might also have spent time hanging out and picking up things they would use, like skills.
Here's another idea: although XP costs have been removed, sorcerers can choose to completely forego that, and in a pinch, not only not spend the money, but spend only XP instead. Better minds then mine could hammer the details out (is it limited per day? per encounter? by charisma modifier? etc.), but it basically expands on the concept that a sorcerer's power is innate and requires only his own will (will that can be substituted for gold and bat guano most of the time).
Ultimately, the merit of my feedback and suggestions comes down to how the PRPG decides to re-envision the class. I personally see them as the instinctive, "rules are meant to be ignored or broken", rogue of a caster. They don't have a focused grasp on magic, so yes, they master it at a slower rate, but they do have the ability to roll with the punches and pull one more (cinematic, possibly day-saving) trick out of their sleeve. So the question is, what is the flavor of a sorcerer (and the nature of a man)? How versatile, and self-sufficient, are they really?
A fix that I would suggest for the sorcerer is giving them a domain that grants an at-will power, bonus spells known, and a special ability. For instance:
Special: All fire spells you cast get a bonus on damage rolls equal to 1 + your Charisma bonus. This bonus to damage improves by +1 for every five levels you have. This bonus only applies once per spell, not once per ray, missile, etc.
At-will: As a standard action, you can shoot a ray of fire. This has a range of 30', and it does 1d6 points of damage, +1 damage for every two levels that you have. Your special ability applies to this so that it has a modicum of use at high levels.
1: Burning hands.
2: Scorching ray.
3: Fireball.
4: Wall of fire.
5: Cone of fire (works like cone of cold).
6: Fire seeds.
7: Delayed blast fireball, firestorm.
8: Incendiary cloud.
9: Meteor swarm, elemental swarm.
This would allow the sorcerer to have a number of thematic spells while freeing him to take some utility spells as well, greatly increasing his efficacy.
|
|
I have three (planned) sorcerers in my group, and none of them are particularly happy with the relative appearance of the class as compared to that of the wizard.
The big issue is that, unlike the wizards, the "15 minute adventuring day" hasn't really been helped by the changes - no one's terribly excited about getting into melee if they can help it, so a bunch of touch attack options don't really appeal. They're still all too likely to switch to their crossbows when they run out of spells. The lack of a 1st level, 1/2 class levels SLA (such as the evoker's magic missile, for instance) only makes the situation worse. One of my players, who was playing a warmage but had agreed to convert to a PF base class for playtest purposes, is seriously considering becoming an evoker instead, simply because it works so much better for what he was doing.
|
It's at lower levels where it is not as much fun to play a low level sorcerer spontaneous spellcaster because your PC lacks that same spell versatility when a Sorc - 1 knows 2 first level spells in comparison to a Beguiler -1 with 14. Given the choice between having more fun or less fun for the same opportunity cost I usually choose the more fun option.
When a Sorc - 4 with 4 known first and second level spells in comparison to a Beguiler with 33 known first and second level spells.
The Beguiler - 6 knows 53 first to third level spells in comparison to the Sorcerer - 6 with 7 known spells.
When the Sorcerer - 8 knows 11 first to fourth level spells and is getting some of that versatility the Beguiler - 8 knows 64.
In low level games given a choice it is usually more fun to play a Beguiler. In an...
I posted this in the Sorcerer Good thread. Sorry for the cross-post but the two threads are on the same topic.
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-SRD 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.
High again, after a little more number crunching i have returned.
And to the, Sorcerers are bad brigade i submit to you another snatch of infomation.
I gave the 7th level wizard his school class features, thinking, surely now he will deal more average damage than the sorcerer of the same level with no class features...
Well i sat down and worked out the average damages for the school spells and added them to the pool.
Guess what i found, a sorcerer with only his spell casting ability does an average of ....7 points of damage more than an envoker with with his class features and a familier.
For a wizard to actually be a better direct damage mage at his level, he has to take a bond item.
Which, ofcause a sorcerer with an arcane blood line can also take.
A wizard with one is better of, due to his wider selection of spells but hey.
All in all, i think this once and for all makes it clear that sorcery is far from weak.
So we shouldn't compare it to class that were built well just because they weren't in splats? Seems real counter intuitive to me.
I have three (planned) sorcerers in my group, and none of them are particularly happy with the relative appearance of the class as compared to that of the wizard.
The big issue is that, unlike the wizards, the "15 minute adventuring day" hasn't really been helped by the changes - no one's terribly excited about getting into melee if they can help it, so a bunch of touch attack options don't really appeal. They're still all too likely to switch to their crossbows when they run out of spells. The lack of a 1st level, 1/2 class levels SLA (such as the evoker's magic missile, for instance) only makes the situation worse. One of my players, who was playing a warmage but had agreed to convert to a PF base class for playtest purposes, is seriously considering becoming an evoker instead, simply because it works so much better for what he was doing.
At the end of the day, what is wrong with falling back on the crossbow?(or scrolls or alchemicials or wands.)
So we shouldn't compare it to class that were built well just because they weren't in splats? Seems real counter intuitive to me.
A lot of splat based classes are not built well, they are power gamers wet dreams.
|
|
So we shouldn't compare it to class that were built well just because they weren't in splats? Seems real counter intuitive to me.
Right. As far as counter-intuitiveness, I suppose it depends on what your intuition is telling you to start with. It isn't counterintuitive to me because it has seemed clear to me from the outset that PRPG has enough to do just improving the Core rules and therefore every class/PRC that appeared in the various splatbooks is offlimits from a design/balance standpoint.
Trying to publish a revised/improved rulesset is a daunting task. Trying to balance those rules and make them "better/powerful" versus the worst of WotC's efforts (represented by the ridiculous power levels in the splatbooks) is a nearly futile task, one that no business would want to take on, especially when their goal is to "continue to tell the kinds of stories they wanted to tell in the Pathfinder Universe". Have you seen any Beguilers in the Pathfinder products, even when they were allowed? How about 99% of the other PRC/feats/ new core classes? No? Neither have I. Is it any wonder then, that you are not seeing the new sorcerer being as powerful as the Beguiler? To me it isn't a surprise at all. They are trying to "tell the kinds of stories they want to tell". Thus far, their stories haven't included much splatbook-sourced material and I don't think they are going to change that approach now. But hey, it's just my intuition.
High again, after a little more number crunching i have returned.
And to the, Sorcerers are bad brigade i submit to you another snatch of infomation.
I gave the 7th level wizard his school class features, thinking, surely now he will deal more average damage than the sorcerer of the same level with no class features...
Well i sat down and worked out the average damages for the school spells and added them to the pool.
Guess what i found, a sorcerer with only his spell casting ability does an average of ....7 points of damage more than an envoker with with his class features and a familier.
For a wizard to actually be a better direct damage mage at his level, he has to take a bond item.
Which, ofcause a sorcerer with an arcane blood line can also take.
A wizard with one is better of, due to his wider selection of spells but hey.
All in all, i think this once and for all makes it clear that sorcery is far from weak.
And what, good sir, should one do if one does NOT wish to play a blaster sorcerer? Furthermore, I challenge you to try such an activity once the blaster wizard can quicken his spells...you will be sorely disappointed.
Lich-loved: Can i steal your intuition and keep it as a pet? It seems to have its head screwed on right. That is always a good sign in a potential pet intuition.