At high levels I would swap out Fly for the faster and longer lasting Phantom Steed...just wait until the Phantom Steed can fly.
I'm working on a rev II and I'll include this in the second version of the spell list.
I'm thinking of writing a new guide- but which class needs one the most? Any opinions?
I'm thinking of writing a new guide- but which class needs one the most? Any opinions?
cleric
Just remember that the Phantom Steed is a lot easier to bring down. Instead of having to battle a caster level to dispel your fly spell, just hit the steed enough damage and the sorcerer becomes a plummeting rock.At high levels I would swap out Fly for the faster and longer lasting Phantom Steed...just wait until the Phantom Steed can fly.
I think anytime you are on a mount feather fall (ring/ brooch/ spell) is a requirement. Alternately, just stay below 30' and take the 3d6 damage.
how about the cleric or fighter
cleric
I figured you guys would choose the hard ones. See the fighter requires ratings on multiple builds and then feat priorities. The cleric requires ratings of all their spells. Barbarians have it so easy- they only really have one build. Ah, well- I suppose guides for fighters and clerics are more needed then.
So, any other opinions?
how about the cleric or fighterclericI figured you guys would choose the hard ones. See the fighter requires ratings on multiple builds and then feat priorities. The cleric requires ratings of all their spells. Barbarians have it so easy- they only really have one build. Ah, well- I suppose guides for fighters and clerics are more needed then.
So, any other opinions?
Cleric or Monk.
I agree with Cleric, Fighter or Monk
Cleric: I personally guarantee I won't be doing a Cleric guide. I just don't find the flavor interesting enough to get motivated. However, without Divine Metamagic Persist - I am curious to know what role the Cleric best fills in Pathfinder.
Fighter: I can also guarantee I won't be doing a fighter handbook. Not sure if we need one or not though...the various options seem to be pretty straight forward. If you can come up with some new and interesting ways to build a fighter, it would be a good guide to have though.
Monk: Definitely worthy of some in-depth look. Personally, I wonder whether the Monk got enough of a boost. Can he really contribute to combat in a way that compares with the other non-casting classes? I'm not sure if he can or not. A good look might solve the issue. Of course, if after some in-depth work you discover the numbers don't look favorable, then you've wasted your time.
Hmm, monk, cleric, fighter... I think fighter is the least needed- along with the other classes no one has mentioned so far (barbarian, paladin, rogue...) as it is rather straight forward- and stronger as a straight-melee character, making judgement of it's value is rather easy ie: damage=good. The cleric is more needed than the monk as it's more used, more dms allow them (I everyone knows at least one DM who doesn't want monk running around in their pristine medieval fantasy setting), and clerics are much better than monks. I'm done some number crunching and; taking into account accuracy; and a sword and board fighter out-damages a monk every time- the monk just isn't a damage dealer (even with improved natural attack-yes I know it's not allowed in pathfinder, but I tested it anyway; the monk just can't do it) so a monk should focus on stunning fist to keep up. ANYWAY- I think I'll start with a cleric handbook- I'll tell which races to take, describe it's class features, feats and skills- rating the domains as I rated bloodlines, rate the spells (shutter) and maybe then discuss the effectiveness of channel energy healing... Maybe then I can figure out builds...
I would love to see one on the cleric. My own experience has been to keep doing what I did with a cleric in 1e which may not be the best answer. Mostly I run the Healer and most of the parties I am in get addicted to the healing. I tried to do a Holy Champion build once but not really knowing what I was doing it was not effective. I can see a Summoner type cleric coming close to the power of a Conjurer though.
Doug
Barbarians have it so easy- they only really have one build. Ah, well- I suppose guides for fighters and clerics are more needed then.
So, any other opinions?
Actually, you can make a skirmisher type Barbarian with Spring Attack and Improved/Greater Trip, a demoralizing focused Barbarian, a grappler with Animal Fury, you could make a barbarian whoose AC exceeds the average fighter (I do not recommend it), an AoO monkey (I really liked that), the traditional Jaggernaut with DR instead of AC and hopes that the enemies run out of HP before you (I think this is the only one build you were refering), etc.
To be fair, all those builds use Power Attack and any Barbarian with good strenght, decent constitution and Power would do just fine for the first 8 levels or so.
Humbly,
Yawar
I can see a Summoner type cleric coming close to the power of a Conjurer though.
Why is it that I always forget that clerics can summon as well as well as anyone else? Because, they can- aside from a few class features (added summons comes to mind...) I mean, they have the same spells at the same levels right? Actually the cleric summoner is looking better than ever as ALL of the cleric mêlée abilities got nerfed in one way or another.
One of the best things about pathfinder is the nerfs to the divine classes. I mean, as a regular divine player (no one else in the group will roll up a cleric, and they're all un-optimized enough to need one) seeing my classes take a hit is a little sad, but it's for the best. The only nerf arcanists got was to their spells, which gives me free reign to nerf stuff from the spell compendium (!)
So yeah, thanks for the tip.
Actually, you can make a skirmisher type Barbarian with Spring Attack and Improved/Greater Trip, a demoralizing focused Barbarian, a grappler with Animal Fury, you could make a barbarian whose AC exceeds the average fighter (I do not recommend it), an AoO monkey (I really liked that), the traditional Juggernaut with DR instead of AC and hopes that the enemies run out of HP before you (I think this is the only one build you were referring), etc.
To be fair, all those builds use Power Attack and any Barbarian with good strength, decent constitution and Power would do just fine for the first 8 levels or so.
You make a good point, but the fact remains that all optimized barbarians with Two Handed Fight, I mean Sword And Board and Two Weapon Fighting really aren't good options here(the former just isn't good without the latter and the latter relies too much on dexterity and good barbarians focus on their strengths; namely strength). But yes there variations to be sure.
How's this for an idea- let's keep the other mêlée classes on a shelf until a good fighter one is built. See the fighter would have to rated ALL the mêlée feats- and rate the various feat CHAINS. Once the fighter guide is done, the other mêlée classes can just tell you which feat chains work for that particular class, and re-rate if necessary (paladins and cavaliers are better mounted units than fighters for example). I know Treantmonk already wrote the ranger guide, and I love that guide more than some members of my family (hyperbole?) but I think a fighter guide would be the most helpful, it would give advice for several other classes
On a side note, is there anyone else writing guide we haven't heard about? More people should do it. It's quite rewarding all around.
I read your guide and really enjoyed. In line with the blasters are bad line of reasoning, what is the ideal role for a sorcerer? They aren't quite as versatile as a wizard, I know, but in your mind what should a sorcerer be doing each round in combat? The reason I ask is because I am making a 15 point buy character for an upcoming game and sorcerer is one of the classes I am looking into (Druid, Cavalier, Summoner, and possibly the Alchemist being the others). When ever I see the sorcerer I think of them as blasters and I want to try and avoid playing on that way, but I'm pretty sure as soon as combat started you'd see me in the back trying to turn bad guys into metaphysically indefinable matter in as short of time as possible. So if I make a sorcerer what should I be doing with my actions to avoid this one dimensional glass cannon build?
Sorcerers can work well in nearly any single caster role. They can be a battlefield controller with the right spells, a buffer, a debuffer, a summoner, an illusionist, or a blaster. What they can't really do is be all of the above the way the wizard can to a large extent. You can take a mix of different spells but then it's hard to select feats to boost your spells.
So if I make a sorcerer what should I be doing with my actions to avoid this one dimensional glass cannon build?
This isn't an easy question, because the answer is sort of a paradox. You should figure out a role and build around it. BUT avoid redundancies and make sure yu have your bases covered. I'f you summon- don't take every summon spell-take only three or four- use your other spells to cover other features of the role ie: invisablity for defense, and some buff spells for your summons are the other players. I mention summoning because it's a strong and reliable group of spells- so are buffing. On the other hand, while creating a single solid strategy is a good idea, don't go by school lines, and remember that wildly different spells can build towards a common goal.
One other thing- take spells that can do a number of things or can be used more than once a day- like summons, or dispelling (it's nerfed but it's still a great tool.)
I have other questions so I made a new thread so I didn't hijack this one thanks for all your help thus far.
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/general/sorcererBuildHelp
quick question re: Undead bloodline arcana. You mention casting 'enlarge person' on undead servants, but does that really work? I'm reading the entry and it seems to only apply to [mind-affecting] spells. It still does some things that are interesting, but is a much less versatile and useful ability the way I'm reading it, so I hope I'm wrong, here.
I'm honestly a little sad about the undead bloodline. Grasp is good (as noted both in the thread and the guide), but there's not a lot else to speak of. Oh, well. Know: Religion as a class skill (and skill focus in it as a bonus feat) makes qualifying for Pale Master easier, if the DM's converting 3.5 material, which might be worth mentioning for players looking for a necromancy themed sorcerer.
|
Seeing as sorcerer's aren't as versatile as wizards, you could argue that one of the primary benefits of being able to cast a spell multiple times would be lots of good ol' blast damage. it seems as though this guide rates the spells and bloodlines in similar terms to the Wizard guide. However, if you wanted to build a blaster sorcerer to draw on the major advantage of a sorcerer over a wizard, the bloodlines and spell weights reverse, and the Elemental bloodline is at the top of this in terms of blast ability. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.
However, if you wanted to build a blaster sorcerer to draw on the major advantage of a sorcerer over a wizard, the bloodlines and spell weights reverse, and the Elemental bloodline is at the top of this in terms of blast ability. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.
If you want to build a blaster sorcerer, obviously you need to give greater weight to the blasting spells. That said, if you want to play a fighter who specializes in the club, then the club is the best weapon choice for that character concept. That doesn't mean Fighter optimization guides should recommend clubs as great weapon choices.
Battlefield control, save or lose, and area buff or debuff spells generally have a bigger impact on combat then generic blasting for HP. This is why they're favored as Wizard combat options, and this is why they're favored as sorcerer combat options. Getting to cast spells a few more times generally doesn't stop these spells from being more effective then blasting. While a sorcerer does get more spells per day, it's not enough more that they can spam spells haphazardly, anyway. Spellcasting per day is still a limited resource for them, so getting the most bang for your buck is still important.
Even more so, the sorcerer suffers from a painfully limited number of spells known. Sorcerers benefit significantly from taking the most versatile spells possible, and need to minimize overlap among their spells known. Most damage spells are some variation on 'Blast group for Xd6 damage, ref half' or 'blast single monster for Xd6 damage, ranged touch'. That doesn't make them bad, per se, but it can make having multiples of these spells redundant.
Should a sorcerer take some blasting spells? Yes. Some dedicated utility spells are worth it too. But Sorcerers are generally the most effective when the bulk of their spells are spent getting the most bang for the buck (ie, serious encounter altering battlefield control, buff, debuff, or Save or lose spells), or the widest range of applications (summon spells, shadow spells, any spell that can do different things as situations dictate), which is why you see these spells, and those bloodlines that grant them as bonus spells, rated higher in optimization guides.
Seeing as sorcerer's aren't as versatile as wizards, you could argue that one of the primary benefits of being able to cast a spell multiple times would be lots of good ol' blast damage. it seems as though this guide rates the spells and bloodlines in similar terms to the Wizard guide. However, if you wanted to build a blaster sorcerer to draw on the major advantage of a sorcerer over a wizard, the bloodlines and spell weights reverse, and the Elemental bloodline is at the top of this in terms of blast ability. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.
So make a guide "How to build a better blaster". This guide isn't about that.
Seeing as sorcerer's aren't as versatile as wizards, you could argue that one of the primary benefits of being able to cast a spell multiple times would be lots of good ol' blast damage. ....
If only I had a Dikembe Mutumbo icon to wave a finger at this idea.
Let's see, start with a Warmage and mix in.... naw, we probably don't need a better-blaster guide, just improve your dice-rolling skills!
I'm not arguing against the point of this thread. I was merely asking that if one wanted to build a blaster, then would the bloodline weights reverse and put the elemental bloodline on top. I'm not saying this needs to be included in the optimization, I was asking a question.
Fair enough. I'd say the elemental bloodline is practically inconsequential for a blasting comparison. The elemental ray does laughable damage and has a range of only 30 ft. The elemental burst does feature energy vulnerability (on a failed save) but that only lasts 1 round with a range of 60 ft (for a 20 ft burst, be careful), useable only 1/day at 9th level. One of the greatest benefits of the bloodlines are the bonus spells known, and while the burning hands and scorching ray spell types will undoubtedly be of use to a blaster, the elemental body I - IV spells gained are redundant for a sorcerer (a spellcaster that thrives on versatility to be most effective). Given that a blaster revels in doing damage, the elemental bloodline doesn't provide enough extra damage to justify its selection as an appreciably better blaster than the other bloodlines.
I'm not arguing against the point of this thread. I was merely asking that if one wanted to build a blaster, then would the bloodline weights reverse and put the elemental bloodline on top. I'm not saying this needs to be included in the optimization, I was asking a question.
Sorry, didn't mean to jump on you.
Maybe not a complete reversal. I think draconic and elemental bloodlines are both quite good for blasting. Draconic is a little less versatile because it lacks the energy substitution, but it has a better spell list (IMO) and it's doing essentially 25% more damage on average due to the bloodline arcana. I also like the other draconic bloodline powers a bit better as well. If you took a draconic bloodline that dealt acid damage you could avoid many of the energy resistance problems.
FWIW, I've seriously considered doing a blaster based guide.
I'm not arguing against the point of this thread. I was merely asking that if one wanted to build a blaster, then would the bloodline weights reverse and put the elemental bloodline on top. I'm not saying this needs to be included in the optimization, I was asking a question.Fair enough. I'd say the elemental bloodline is practically inconsequential for a blasting comparison. The elemental ray does laughable damage and has a range of only 30 ft. The elemental burst does feature energy vulnerability (on a failed save) but that only lasts 1 round with a range of 60 ft (for a 20 ft burst, be careful), useable only 1/day at 9th level. One of the greatest benefits of the bloodlines are the bonus spells known, and while the burning hands and scorching ray spell types will undoubtedly be of use to a blaster, the elemental body I - IV spells gained are redundant for a sorcerer (a spellcaster that thrives on versatility to be most effective). Given that a blaster revels in doing damage, the elemental bloodline doesn't provide enough extra damage to justify its selection as an appreciably better blaster than the other bloodlines.
I do agree that the elemental bonus spells are weak, more so because they don't compliment the bloodline ability. The biggest (maybe the only) advantage of the elemental bloodlines is the energy substitution ability which lets them bypass a lot of energy resistance. It is a pretty nice ability.
Lissen to da Ogre. Energy substitution is a HUGE benefit for a sorcerer (and especially the elemental bloodline)! And one of my favorite 3.5 metamagic feats.
Lissen to da Ogre. Energy substitution is a HUGE benefit for a sorcerer (and especially the elemental bloodline)! And one of my favorite 3.5 metamagic feats.
Heh... the funny thing about the elemental bloodline is that if you do it right most of your spells do other types of elemental damage. If you are an earth bloodline sorcerer you want to take primarily non-acid spells and convert them to acid on the fly. So you take fireball then you have 2 options for energy damage.
The thing that's kind of irritating is the spells in your bonus list are auto-converted so if you want scorching ray to do fire damage you have to take it a second time :(
I would point out that silent spell is usually better than still spell, if just because of the interaction with Invisibility, and the fact that DimDoor is verbal only, so you almost always have a nice way out anyway.
I would point out that silent spell is usually better than still spell, if just because of the interaction with Invisibility, and the fact that DimDoor is verbal only, so you almost always have a nice way out anyway.
I agree, Silent Spell is the better of the two.
Other than those occasions when you find yourself silenced, what help is a silent dimension door?
I think the sorcerer is harder to build than a Wizard because you have to really think about your spell selection. You always want to have options so you need to have a good mix of spells available. Obviously at low levels this is tough because you have few spells, but once you hit mid levels you should have a versatile mix. Personally I've found sorcerers great for utility spells and never got why people saw them as master blasters. PF Sorcerer is so much better with the bloodlines and UMD.
Yeah definitely agree on taking advantage of your high CHA and that you have Bluff and UMD as class skills. UMD really opens up your options once you've got some gold to take advantage of it.
I must admit that Illusions and charms haven't got the greatest track record in the group/s I've gamed. Our DM, who rolls out in front the screen, tends to roll high which beats the saves. With most damage spells if they pass saves they at least take some damage unless they have evasion or similiar abilities. With the enchantments and a lot of illusions you get nothing. I still think a good sorcerer has to have some spells of these schools, but I wouldn't be loading up on them and not take spells from the other schools.
For damage spells you have to pay attention to saves and energy types. You want to have spells that attack the different save types. With creatures having different resistances and vulnerabilities you want to ensure you've always got options. Taking burning hands, scorching ray and fireball is a bad idea.
Feat selection is big too. Back in 3.5 I always took Sculpt Spell because it made me AoE spells more flexible. Still and Silent spell are popular feats because they enable you to hide when you're casting and help you out if grappled and hit by silence effects. Quicken Spell is popular too and being able to use it on the fly is awesome.
You don't take a lot of damage spells, but you should take some. And those that you do take you need to mix up on damage types and Aoe versus targeting. I'm going off memory here, but I'm pretty sure the last sorcerer I played had a damage spell at the odd spell levels. You don't want to load up on damage spells, but you do want a few so you can smack stuff with a big knockout punch.
Summoning spells are good, no doubt. Particularly when you get to the higher levels and can summon creatures with handy abilities. I do like the versatility of the Shadow Evocation and Shadow Conjuration spells.
Illusions need to be interacted with to get the Will save to see whether the effected believes or not. Make the save and you're unaffected by all but a few. The way my current DM is ruling illusions is that if it creates a visual effect and they can see it, they are considered to interact with it.
Personally I like different sorts of spells so that I always have options. Plus the game doesn't become routine when you're doing different things.
Only the sorcerers with the Arcane Bond option meet the prerequiste and that means only the Arcane Bloodline.
I don't see how they can't take a familiar. They meet all the requirements.
I know that. I misread the other poster. I thought he was saying no sorcerer can take it regardless.
|
I don't recommend damage spells for sorcerers. Mainly because they are too single purpose. Summoning works well for damage and offers other uses as well.Also, illusion spells only enable a save if someone attempts to disbelieve. Make illusions which seem believable. I once had a GM who had us encounter an elven archer. The guy was an uncanny shot - not like Robin Hood men in tights, but still really good. It took us awhile to realize that the archer was actually an elven wizard and the arrows were phantasmal force.
This is quite an interesting discussion.
I'd really love if any of you guys could present a few "example builds" of sorcerers (e.g. at level 10 or level 16, whatever you wish), just to see more tangibly what kind of sorcerer character you have in mind -- the discussion is a bit on the abstract side at the moment.
Oh, just to be clear: I am certainly not asking you to present an extremely detailed description of an excruciantly optimized sorcerer: a spell list, feat list, choice of bloodline options (e.g. new arcana for the Arcane Bloodline) and major magical items will do!
EDIT: actually, I think that inserting a few examples like this (evolving a sample sorcerer through level, e.g. at level 5, 10, 15, 20) would be beneficial to the guide. These do not need to be the "perfect sorcerer" or the "paragon sorcerer" or anything like that, but just a way to visualize on the field what the guide suggestions amount to.
I usually use a google search- since I'm not selling my guides, public domain isn't really an issue.
I'm working on my own guide, though it won't be finished for awhile. I do plan on adding a couple of sample characters.
Can anyone tell me where these guides get all those great graphics?
I'm eagerly anticipating this, LT.
One thing for all to consider when it comes to spell choice for a Sorcerer: you have to view your spellcasting as a whole - including previously chosen spells (and future desired spells) as well as feat choices, magic item availability, and bloodline features. That's quite a lot going on for each spell choice you make. The guide builder's burden will be far greater for a Sorcerer guide than a Wizard guide, due to the many obfuscating factors involved and the impact of not being able to freely substitute spell choice.