Sorcerer boost or destroying it altogether

[Dissinger]

Utgardloki wrote:

But at 1st level, a sorcerer only knows 2 1st level spells. My experience is that Mage Armor is a must have. That means that, after starting a combat and casting Mage Armor so she doesn't get knocked out right away, a 1st level sorcerer can choose between casting one spell. That's not a choice.

Even still, they're casting that one spell, far more times than the party wizard. It's not a lot, but it does make a difference in the short and long run. You could also bank on NOT being that close to the action, and prepare two evocations, then save up and buy a wand of Mage armor that'll last longer in the long run.

[tejón]

I honestly can't remember the last time I saw anyone cast mage armor. I mean, they talk about it sometimes, but always go with something useful instead.

[Dissinger]

tejón wrote:

I honestly can't remember the last time I saw anyone cast mage armor. I mean, they talk about it sometimes, but always go with something useful instead.

I used to cast it all the time, early in the morning after a certain point, simply because it lasted long enough.

[stormraven]

Dissinger wrote:

stormraven wrote:

Dissinger wrote:

Then again my Sorcerer was kicked in the nuts by the party dwarf cleric.

So Potatoe Potatoh.

Giving the kicking... I think those are MASHED taters. :) Sorry, couldn't resist it.

Wait...

Lives in Seattle...

Made a comment on the kicking...

Is that you Ruel?

Sadly, no. ;(

[Dissinger]

Curses foiled again...

[LazarX]

Utgardloki wrote:

But at 1st level, a sorcerer only knows 2 1st level spells. My experience is that Mage Armor is a must have. That means that, after starting a combat and casting Mage Armor so she doesn't get knocked out right away, a 1st level sorcerer can choose between casting one spell. That's not a choice.

Many campaigns I've played in usually started out the characters with the option of picking from a very small set of legacy items to start out with. For wizards and sorcerers this usually meant Bracers of Armor +2, which basically gave them the equivalent of leather armor without spell failure. Also at first level the offensive cantrip options are not something to sneeze at especially since under Pathfinder you can cast them as often as you wanted to. Also at those low levels if I played elven arcanists, I never lost sight of the fact that they have bow proficiencies from the start. Mage Armor was typically something I'd pick up later, not at the start.

The other thing was smart placement and the cooperation of my heavily armed adventuring buddies.

The other thing you forget is wizards never get above 4 cantrip casting slots, starting out with 3. Sorcerers get 6 or more fairly quickly.

[Galeros]

I like the Pathfinder Sorcerer a lot better than the 3.5 one. I do think that changing their spell progression to the same as the Wizard's would not harm game balance at all.

[LazarX]

Galeros wrote:

I like the Pathfinder Sorcerer a lot better than the 3.5 one. I do think that changing their spell progression to the same as the Wizard's would not harm game balance at all.

And there are those of us who don't think so. and so we've come to the same end that all such threads though, However WOTC spoke for 3.x, Paizo has spoken for 3.5 and various other d20 clone designers whose profession is game design seem to have placed themselves on this side of the argument.

Any time you boost a character's ability versus another, you make a game balance change by definition. You've yet to make a convincing argument that sorcerers under the present system don't pull thier weight which would be the only justification to make this change, not the fact that you want to play a wizard who doesn't have to prepare spells.

[Dennis da Ogre]

Utgardloki wrote:

But at 1st level, a sorcerer only knows 2 1st level spells. My experience is that Mage Armor is a must have. That means that, after starting a combat and casting Mage Armor so she doesn't get knocked out right away, a 1st level sorcerer can choose between casting one spell. That's not a choice.

Sure it is, don't take mage armor and stay out of melee. For all the reasons you suggest. When you get a little higher level (2nd/ 3rd) buy a wand of mage armor if you feel the need to have armor. For that matter if you don't expect to play past 9th level take arcane armor training and wear a light chain shirt. You burn a swift action/ round but until somewhere around 8th-10th level you don't really use swift actions much. I have a 7th level sorcerer who uses it and almost never bumps into arcane spell failure.

Utgardloki wrote:

In a way, Pathfinder made it worse by making cantrips more powerful. My 3.5 sorceress knew 4 cantrips, but her advantage over a wizard was that she could choose which cantrip to cast when she cast it, rather than preparing a number of castings of Light and a number of castings of Daze, etc. But in Pathfinder, cantrips are not used up, so my sorceress with 4 cantrips that she can cast as much as she wants is the same as a wizard with 4 cantrips that she can cast as much as she wants.

Cantrips aren't much more powerful than crossbow bolts. Less damage better chance of hitting. Depending on your dex it's likely a wash at low levels. Daze is kind of the exception, it is decent but only once per creature and has a 4hd limit.

[Kevin Mack]

LazarX wrote:

Any time you boost a character's ability versus another, you make a game balance change by definition.

Actually I am glad someone brought this up since I don't think I have seen it mentioned anywhere. All this talk about changing Sorceror spell progression and I do not think anyone has brought up the knock on affect it has on monsters such as Dragons and the like many of which use sorcerer spell progression to determine spells.

[kyrt-ryder]

Kevin Mack wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Any time you boost a character's ability versus another, you make a game balance change by definition.

Actually I am glad someone brought this up since I don't think I have seen it mentioned anywhere. All this talk about changing Sorceror spell progression and I do not think anyone has brought up the knock on affect it has on monsters such as Dragons and the like many of which use sorcerer spell progression to determine spells.

For what it's worth, I personally consider that a good thing.

[NOM NOM NOM]

LazarX wrote:

Galeros wrote:

I like the Pathfinder Sorcerer a lot better than the 3.5 one. I do think that changing their spell progression to the same as the Wizard's would not harm game balance at all.

And there are those of us who don't think so. and so we've come to the same end that all such threads though, However WOTC spoke for 3.x, Paizo has spoken for 3.5 and various other d20 clone designers whose profession is game design seem to have placed themselves on this side of the argument.

Any time you boost a character's ability versus another, you make a game balance change by definition. You've yet to make a convincing argument that sorcerers under the present system don't pull thier weight which would be the only justification to make this change, not the fact that you want to play a wizard who doesn't have to prepare spells.

Well technically, it's only a buff half the time.

It just really sucks when you compare an odd-leveled wizard to an odd-leveled sorcerer. Technically, magic items fix everything, but then you water down both classes.

Unless the sorcerer has access to a wand of fireball at 5th level, a wand of finger of death at 13th level, etc... How is he supposed to feel equal?

Sorcerers are magic incarnate. They are 100% Magic.
Wizards are dudes with pointy hats and sticks. They are 0% magic. they just point fingers and say bang, and magic comes to the rescue.

So why should the 100% magic class be 50% inferior to the 0% magic class? BECAUSE IT'S MAGIC. lol.

Actually, the whole argument is hilarious because psionics is superior. Oh btw, *MIND BLAST*

Time for Step Four!
/eat brains

[LazarX]

NOM NOM NOM wrote:

Well technically, it's only a buff half the time.

It just really sucks when you compare an odd-leveled wizard to an odd-leveled sorcerer. Technically, magic items fix everything, but then you water down both classes.

Unless the sorcerer has access to a wand of fireball at 5th level, a wand of finger of death at 13th level, etc... How is he supposed to feel equal?

Sorcerers are magic incarnate. They are 100% Magic.
Wizards are dudes with pointy hats and sticks. They are 0% magic. they just point fingers and say bang, and magic comes to the rescue.

So why should the 100% magic class be 50% inferior to the 0% magic class? BECAUSE IT'S MAGIC. lol.

Actually, the whole argument is hilarious because psionics is superior. Oh btw, *MIND BLAST*

Time for Step Four!
/eat brains

Enough with this Equal BS. He's not supposed to feel like a wizard, or cast like one. He makes up for what he does not have in upper level spells by his dependability and greater overall quantity of magic., his liberation from spellbooks.

Wizards are not 50 percent vs 100 percent, which is a ludicrous comparison by the way. What they are are the Masters of Magic as opposed to talented idiot savants that sorcerers who are essentially the Rainmans of magic.

If your sorcerers "suck" when next to wizards of equal level, it's probably because you "suck" at playing them. Having had characters on both sides of the aisle, they're pretty much at equal strength especially with the Pathfinder reformation. The key to a sorcerer is not to ape a wizard; it's to work with the classes particular strengths while coping with the weaknesses.... just like what you have to do with a wizard or any other class.