To actually prove your point, create sample wizard characters as per my earlier guidelines and we'll do a comparison.Weaker then the sorcerer for a majority of the time time not just weaker which I was not opposing.Can you provide an example of such sacrifices not making the wizard weaker? Nobody else has been able to provide such an example.Actually, it is more accurate to say that a Sorcerer is better than a Wizard because a Sorcerer can more easily have a Wizard cohort of nearly the same level.This is only true if the sacrifices of the wizard to gain a cohort equal to the sorcerer makes the wizard that does so worse then the sorcerer in question.
A lone wizard is stronger than a sorcerer, so a wizard who puts a miniscule amount of effort into a cohort is not losing enough to be weaker than a sorcerer. Even with a weaker cohort, which may not even happen the wizard is still on top. I think the issue here is that we define "better" differently. We might need to define "better" before we can move forward.
Why does the sorcerer need knowledge arcana? I don't see much of a reason for it and, given that sorcerers are suppossed to be untrained in magic, it is out of concept. As for spellcraft, the only significant use for it that I can see for sorcerers is in making constraining circles for summoning.
UMD is nice for giving access to spells which are not on the arcane list - using wands of cure light wounds, for example.
Stealth isn't vital. Invisibility is a suitable replacement for a non-rogue.
Bluff is better than diplomacy for non-bards. It works well with illusions, also.
Knowledge(arcana) and spellcraft are more useful to sorcerers and wizards than UMD will be on average. UMD is normally not an issue because there is usually a divine caster in the party. It is a skill that is really useful when its needed, but it does not come up a lot. I know not everyone plays with the classic four, but for the point of the discussion it is always better to assume they do. If we get into my party does this, countered by, my party does that we end up in house rule and play style territory.
Diplomacy is a flat DC is worse than bluff to me. Sometimes you just can't think of a good enough lie, but you can almost always sweet talk someone into something if you can find the right angle.
If you don't mind my asking: if it's so obvious that sorcerers are disadvantaged as compared to wizards, then why are the class features of both groups arranged the way they are?
Wizards are much better suited to artificing. There is a wizard in my party right now who has decided to manufacture pearls of power like there's no tomorrow, selling the ones she makes in order to acquire the money to make more. We're both at third level, (I'm the sorcerer), and she already has four pearls of power to carry around with her. She also knows two free second level spells, and (of course) I know none.
Given enough time and cash, I can buy scrolls, staves and wands to try to compensate for my lack of versatility - I can even, as has been actively discussed, take a cohort to do these tasks for me, (though I'm not sure my character actually wants one...) But whereas my wizard friend can easily make up for her 'weakness' (castings/day), simply by having an Intelligence modifier as high as my Charisma modifier, choosing a school, and crafting items at half-price that I am not equally well-suited to craft, I can do nothing whatsoever about my weakness - spells known. No matter how high my Charisma modifier gets, I won't get to know any more spells or gain access to spells any sooner. I can't buy anything that will augment my ability to learn spells. I can't make anything that will help me learn more spells. I can't even get a bonus from the personal choice not to dump Intelligence. (I don't like to keep my mouth shut during strategy sessions, so I insist on playing reasonably smart characters, heh). It would be kind of nice if there were an option for high Cha and high Int sorcerers to be able to learn without multi-classing.
Next level, I will get my first 2nd level spell. But by then my wizard friend will know 4 2nd level spells for free, and she will know them in time for the levels at which they will be most appropriate to cast. She'll be able to cast 2nd level spells as often or even more often than I can, because of her Pearl of Power farm. If the wizard's 'disadvantage' as compared to the sorcerer is so superficial, what is the rationale for keeping me a level behind in spell acquisition? Does anybody know? The wizard doesn't seem to need to be a level ahead in order for the two of us to be on par.
Ftr, I really like the Sorcerer class for flavor. My bloodline craziness makes me really happy, and I don't mind playing a class that has serious limitations (though the degree of those limitations seems curious, when comparisons between Sorcerers and Wizards are so inevitable). I'll probably want to play Wizards, too, though I expect daily spell prep to drive me nuts. Given the degree to which I obsess about my Sorcerer spell list, which I only have to rethink every other level, I'd rather spend my day wracking my brains for unusual spell uses than trying to guess what we're up against that day.
I just wish there were some options I could be working toward that would open up new possibilities for my character, the way my wizard friend can work to overcome her weaknesses. And it would be so cool if there were a feat tree intended for sorcerers as natural magic-users - something that synergizes with my way of using magic instead of working against it. Metamagic is like the wizard's hand-me-down shoes. I'm allowed to clomp around in them, but they don't really fit me.
Here's the thing - while wizard is "better" then sorcerer, they're both so incredibly good that it frankly doesn't matter too much.
Sure, the wizard edges ahead, but at the end of the day, the sorcerer is still a full caster, with everything good that includes ;p
Here's the thing - while wizard is "better" then sorcerer, they're both so incredibly good that it frankly doesn't matter too much.
Sure, the wizard edges ahead, but at the end of the day, the sorcerer is still a full caster, with everything good that includes ;p
Aaaand that ends this debate for me....
Both rock, both are great classes and both are fun and popular.
Have Fun out there!!
~ W ~
|
Sorcerer's spontaneous casting makes them masters of combat compared to any other caster. Even at low-levels, the seem to outshine the fighters, barbarians, and rangers for damage.
I have never, at "low levels" seen a sorcerer outshine a fighter, barbarian, or ranger, or even a wizard for that matter. At low levels in our PFS group, our sorcerer regularly was reduced to uselessness (his words) while our barbarian and ranger were going to town. Even when he was "on" they were throwing out 15 point hits nearly every round while he was doing somewhere in the vicinity of 5.
I personally am a member of the "wizards blow sorcerers out of the water" school simply because I think sorcerers are over-penalized by getting their spell levels a level behind the wizard. Regularly I hear people say that sorcerers have "more spells" and are "more powerful", but when you compare a level 11 specialist wizard to a level 10 sorcerer you're talking a difference of 24 spells for the wizard vs. 28 for the sorcerer and the sorcerer is unable to cast 6th level spells. That difference in spells is not that tremendous, when you consider that "standard" day of adventuring you're likely not to blow through all of them for either class, and the wizard is using two level 6 spells (potentially three with a bonded item).
Don't get me wrong, I know this is a personal preference for a lot of people, but for me I just can't stand sorcerers for the sole reason of the lost spell level.
So in the case of the OP, I really couldn't imagine penalizing sorcerers more.
The eternal debate over which is more powerful could rage forever, as the answer is largely ... it depends. IMHO, the sorcerer is more powerful when there is little time between adventures and when the opponents/situations the group is facing are unknown. He is also more powerful in a combat-dominated game. The wizard shines when they have more down time between adventures, more foreknowledge of what's coming in an adventure or has time to prepare for an encounter. He also shines in games that offer more diverse challenges that a more diverse spell list is better suited to.
All that aside, I wanted to address 3 themes I've seen in the discussion that I think are potentially campaign-busting:
1. Unlimited down time between adventures: Given enough down time between adventures, a wizard with item creation feats and enough money can quickly unbalance a campaign by outfitting the entire party with more magic than they should have and acquiring every spell in the book. You have to give them enough down time to allow them adequate use of their class features, but unlimited time is unbalancing.
2. Unlimited availability of magic items and spells: Again, given enough money, unlimited magic item availabity can quickly grow unbalancing. I've never been a fan of Ye Ole Maqic Shoppe that has every item in the book available. Even in the biggest cities, there should be some limits on what is immediately available. Similarly, there should be some limits on what magic spells are available in any area, whether it be through reluctance to sell or guilds that require membership, high fees, etc.
3. Treating cohorts like robots/slaves with no free will: Cohorts are full-fledged NPCs with wills/desires/perferences of their own. Their leaders can tell them what they want them to do, but that is no guarantee they will. Remember, they joined their leader not just because they were awed by his charisma, but because they think they have something to gain from it, be it pay, level advancement (and no I don't think the cohort home guarding the castle/churning out magic items is earning much experience), gifts, or whatever. Some NPCs may be happy (happier even) staying at home safe and sound while thier leader is out adventuring, others may not. In either event, a personality and motivations should be created by the GM for this NPC and they should act accordingly. They are people, not just collections of stats.
I've played spontaneous caster & prep-caster (Bard & Mystic Theurge - Talk about extremes!), and I think the biggest difference between Sorcerer and Wizard is a meta game thing. Much like someone with Einstein's Wardrobe, Sorcerers know what they are going to "wear" every morning, they just erase their "used spell marks." Wizards have to take two or three minutes to fill out their spell sheets.
|
Wizards are much better suited to artificing. There is a wizard in my party right now who has decided to manufacture pearls of power like there's no tomorrow, selling the ones she makes in order to acquire the money to make more. We're both at third level, (I'm the sorcerer), and she already has four pearls of power to carry around with her. She also knows two free second level spells, and (of course) I know none.
You can't do that. By RAW, you spend half market value to make the pearl and get half the market value when you sell the pearl. If the DM is allowing you to sell at anything above half market value, the craft feats WILL cause problems. At best, the only thing that should be allowed is for a profession shopkeep roll to augment the sell price after the time needed for a profesion roll has passed for you to find a buyer. This would be the problem going the OTHER way from LT's premise...in this case, houserules are making the wizard much stronger.
You can't do that. By RAW, you spend half market value to make the pearl and get half the market value when you sell the pearl. If the DM is allowing you to sell at anything above half market value, the craft feats WILL cause problems. At best, the only thing that should be allowed is for a profession shopkeep roll to augment the sell price after the time needed for a profesion roll has passed for you to find a buyer. This would be the problem going the OTHER way from LT's premise...in this case, houserules are making the wizard much stronger.
Wizards are much better suited to artificing. There is a wizard in my party right now who has decided to manufacture pearls of power like there's no tomorrow, selling the ones she makes in order to acquire the money to make more. We're both at third level, (I'm the sorcerer), and she already has four pearls of power to carry around with her. She also knows two free second level spells, and (of course) I know none.
Darn. Ninja'd.
By RAW, you spend half market value to make the pearl and get half the market value when you sell the pearl.
Take the Hedge Magician trait! 5% discount on all Crafting!
That's 50 gp a day, or 100 gp if you take the -5 on the DC for fast Crafting.
You can't do that. By RAW, you spend half market value to make the pearl and get half the market value when you sell the pearl. If the DM is allowing you to sell at anything above half market value, the craft feats WILL cause problems. At best, the only thing that should be allowed is for a profession shopkeep roll to augment the sell price after the time needed for a profesion roll has passed for you to find a buyer. This would be the problem going the OTHER way from LT's premise...in this case, houserules are making the wizard much stronger.
Wizards are much better suited to artificing. There is a wizard in my party right now who has decided to manufacture pearls of power like there's no tomorrow, selling the ones she makes in order to acquire the money to make more. We're both at third level, (I'm the sorcerer), and she already has four pearls of power to carry around with her. She also knows two free second level spells, and (of course) I know none.
+1
Crafting and selling for full price immediately throws the item balance off. Not to mention that there must be buyers for the items, they ain't cheap and the amoung of wealthy wizards is limited. And if crafting is this profitable, then why doesn't every wizard have the feat?
2. Unlimited availability of magic items and spells: Again, given enough money, unlimited magic item availabity can quickly grow unbalancing. I've never been a fan of Ye Ole Maqic Shoppe that has every item in the book available. Even in the biggest cities, there should be some limits on what is immediately available. Similarly, there should be some limits on what magic spells are available in any area, whether it be through reluctance to sell or guilds that require membership, high fees, etc.
This has always bugged me, personally. Imagine you're a magic item shop owner and even assuming you're a mid to high level Wizard, realistically you will not have even close to every magic item in your shop. Odds are you'll have a few "display items" around your shop, but honestly it's really not worth it for a Wizard shopkeeper NPC to spend his whole life doing nothing but crafting these extraordinarily high priced (for most of the world) items on the off chance that they'll sell. You walk into a shop in my games and want a Ring of Protection +4? The NPC will tell you "certainly... but this will be an item to order, so it will take some time, and I'll require half the money up front". This in my opinion should be standard. I used to do things with unlimited magic items and my players quickly ran amok and became way too powerful way too quickly. Sure there's a chance he might happen to have your item in stock, but it's very unlikely. I take the 100,000 minus the gp value of the item and for every 10,000 remaining (round up) I give it a 1% chance that the item just happens to be for sale in that shop already. Items 100,000 gp or more will be custom order only.
|
I don't agree with magic item shop bashing. While I don't think the more expensive items would be available at most shops, minor magic items make perfect sense. The shop only needs as much security as it takes to make the risk/benefit analyses come up with too much risk. Anyone selling magic items should be able to afford a few good body gaurds and some magical protections. They could even offer the local mercenary's guild a discount in exchange for protection.
In regards to the major magic items, how many people do you think want to piss off a 16th lvl caster? I don't know about you, but I can't think of too many. Sometimes it isn't a matter of whether you can rob a place, it's a question of whether you should. Wizards/sorcerers have means of tracking down there possessions and can call on extra-planar beings to help them get them back. That doesn't include the spells at their disposal to provide security for their work.
while I don't think magic shops would be prevalent, i don't think they'd be as hopeless as you seem to think. In the real world we have jewelry stores that store millions of dollars worth of product on the premesis. Why aren't all the thieves in the world robbing the place blind every day?
Magic item shops are among the top ten dumbest cliches in the game.
Well, silliest anyway.
The only thing most NPC class folks would be able to use are Wondrous Items. A low level cleric could take care of most of that with far less bother and expense.
But I think we are wandering OT.
You can't do that. By RAW, you spend half market value to make the pearl and get half the market value when you sell the pearl. If the DM is allowing you to sell at anything above half market value, the craft feats WILL cause problems. At best, the only thing that should be allowed is for a profession shopkeep roll to augment the sell price after the time needed for a profesion roll has passed for you to find a buyer. This would be the problem going the OTHER way from LT's premise...in this case, houserules are making the wizard much stronger.
Wizards are much better suited to artificing. There is a wizard in my party right now who has decided to manufacture pearls of power like there's no tomorrow, selling the ones she makes in order to acquire the money to make more. We're both at third level, (I'm the sorcerer), and she already has four pearls of power to carry around with her. She also knows two free second level spells, and (of course) I know none.
Hmm... I didn't realize it was a house rule, but the GM is the wizard's husband, so it's not likely to change. (And I don't want to rain on my friend's parade, either, even if it does make me feel behind the curve. She's having a lot of fun). He says if she makes and sells too many of any one thing, he'll make her cut back, on account of flooding the market. But I don't think he knows she's only supposed to be selling her items half-price, not retail...
|
|
Hmm... I didn't realize it was a house rule, but the GM is the wizard's husband, so it's not likely to change. (And I don't want to rain on my friend's parade, either, even if it does make me feel behind the curve. She's having a lot of fun). He says if she makes and sells too many of any one thing, he'll make her cut back, on account of flooding the market. But I don't think he knows she's only supposed to be selling her items half-price, not retail...
Well nothing wrong with a houserule as long as you guys are having fun...you just have to realize what is and is not a houserule.
I don't agree with magic item shop bashing.I do! Adventurers shouldn't be buying magic trinkets like some law-abiding commoner, they should be stripping them off of the dude they just murdered in his own home. :)
Exactly! What are kids coming to these days thinking they can just buy something when everyone knows you are supposed to pry it from the cold, dead hands of the nearest monster/evil NPC? Pretty soon, they'll be thinking they should be allowed to buy second level rather than braining poor hapless kobolds for it.
Exactly! What are kids coming to these days thinking they can just buy something when everyone knows you are supposed to pry it from the cold, dead hands of the nearest monster/evil NPC? Pretty soon, they'll be thinking they should be allowed to buy second level rather than braining poor hapless kobolds for it.I don't agree with magic item shop bashing.I do! Adventurers shouldn't be buying magic trinkets like some law-abiding commoner, they should be stripping them off of the dude they just murdered in his own home. :)
Or worse, they will think they can just *GASP* roleplay their way to their next level....
Or worse, they will think they can just *GASP* roleplay their way to their next level....Exactly! What are kids coming to these days thinking they can just buy something when everyone knows you are supposed to pry it from the cold, dead hands of the nearest monster/evil NPC? Pretty soon, they'll be thinking they should be allowed to buy second level rather than braining poor hapless kobolds for it.I don't agree with magic item shop bashing.I do! Adventurers shouldn't be buying magic trinkets like some law-abiding commoner, they should be stripping them off of the dude they just murdered in his own home. :)
The problem with that is D&D games have never -by the book- rewarded RP. It's pretty much all about leveling by killing monsters. Perhaps I missed a section for Pathfinder where it addresses this? (I hope)
Sorcerers need Knowledge Arcana and Spellcraft as much as a wizard does, because presumably they are fulling the party role of "arcanist" and need to do all the things that character is expected to do. This includes using Knowledge Arcana (in conjunction with detect magic) to see that next room is filled with a strong magical haze of necromancy. Or spellcraft to, ya know, CRAFT ITEMS, or identify items, or to tell what the enemy spellcaster is casting so you can warn your colleagues or counterspell it. There, that's why. Those are pretty routine uses that I've used as a sorcerer and as a wizard.
LT you are only asserting in this debate as well. None of your arguments hold any water. Leadership is only nominally better at most levels for a Sorcerer than a Wizard. As a wiz I always have at least 13 or 14 Cha (my current wizard has a 17, but only because we rolled for stats so I won't use that as part of my argument) so will have a leadership score of 9 when they can take it. Leadership score of 9 still nets me a level 6 cohort (which is turned into max lvl 5). Heck even if I have a familiar my leadership score is high enough to get a 5th level cohort, who will outpace me in leveling and basically always be max level.
As a wizard, with a bajillion skill points comparatively, I can totally invest some in UMD. If all you're worried about is healing and you only have one character in your party capable of either healing or UMDing then I suppose its a clincher. As has been stated, too many rannks net you nothing. A sorcerer at level 10 with a Cha of 24 auto succeeds on using all wands in the game. So I guess my wizard will have to have a sorcerer cohort ONOEZ!
A wizard can still craft while on the move, it just takes a while. In big campaigns large swaths of time are often used travelling (at least before the advent of a Teleport big enough to get the whole party).
The problem with that is D&D games have never -by the book- rewarded RP. It's pretty much all about leveling by killing monsters. Perhaps I missed a section for Pathfinder where it addresses this? (I hope)Or worse, they will think they can just *GASP* roleplay their way to their next level....Exactly! What are kids coming to these days thinking they can just buy something when everyone knows you are supposed to pry it from the cold, dead hands of the nearest monster/evil NPC? Pretty soon, they'll be thinking they should be allowed to buy second level rather than braining poor hapless kobolds for it.I don't agree with magic item shop bashing.I do! Adventurers shouldn't be buying magic trinkets like some law-abiding commoner, they should be stripping them off of the dude they just murdered in his own home. :)
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game characters advance in level by defeating monsters, overcoming challenges, and completing adventures—in so doing, they earn experience points (XP for short). Although you can award experience points as soon as a challenge is overcome, this can quickly disrupt the flow of game play. It's easier to simply award experience points at the end of a game session—that way, if a character earns enough XP to gain a level, he won't disrupt the game while he levels up his character. He can instead take the time between game sessions to do that.
Keep a list of the CRs of all the monsters, traps, obstacles, and roleplaying encounters the PCs overcome. At the end of each session, award XP to each PC that participated. Each monster, trap, and obstacle awards a set amount of XP, as determined by its CR, regardless of the level of the party in relation to the challenge, although you should never bother awarding XP for challenges that have a CR of 10 or more lower than the APL. Pure roleplaying encounters generally have a CR equal to the average level of the party (although particularly easy or difficult roleplaying encounters might be one higher or lower). There are two methods for awarding XP. While one is more exact, it requires a calculator for ease of use. The other is slightly more abstract.
Exact XP: Once the game session is over, take your list of defeated CR numbers and look up the value of each CR on Table: Experience Point Awards under the “Total XP” column. Add up the XP values for each CR and then divide this total by the number of characters—each character earns an amount of XP equal to this number.
Abstract XP: Simply add up the individual XP awards listed for a group of the appropriate size. In this case, the division is done for you—you need only total up all the awards to determine how many XP to award to each PC.
Story Awards: Feel free to award Story Awards when players conclude a major storyline or make an important accomplishment. These awards should be worth double the amount of experience points for a CR equal to the APL. Particularly long or difficult story arcs might award even more, at your discretion as GM.
If you roleplay talking your way past a guard instead of braining him like a good adventurer should, you still get XP for the encounter. The horror!
That doesn't even make sense.Your argument, such as it is, is that sorcerers will be required to analyze magical auras and craft magic items.
Wny? Why are they required to analyze magical auras and craft magic items? Sorcerers are -not- Wizards. Your argument makes as much sense as claiming that Druids need to be able to turn undead because they cast divine magic.
Yes, a wizard can invest skill points in UMD. And they are going to suck at that skill until they get enough skill ranks to compensate for their mundane charisma and the cross-class penalty.
His argument is that sorcerers are an arcane caster, and as such they will be required to fill the same role as any other arcane caster. If you have a bard or wizard handy, then the sorcerer doesn't need to take those skills.
But...
If the sorcerer is the only arcane caster in the party, then there will be an expectation they they fill roughly the same role as a wizard. That includes IDing magic items, analyzing any magic auras that the party comes across, etc. If the sorcerer can't do these things, then that is even more slack for the rest of the party to pick up.
That doesn't even make sense.Your argument, such as it is, is that sorcerers will be required to analyze magical auras and craft magic items.
Wny? Why are they required to analyze magical auras and craft magic items? Sorcerers are -not- Wizards. Your argument makes as much sense as claiming that Druids need to be able to turn undead because they cast divine magic.
Yes, a wizard can invest skill points in UMD. And they are going to suck at that skill until they get enough skill ranks to compensate for their mundane charisma and the cross-class penalty.
His argument is that sorcerers are an arcane caster, and as such they will be required to fill the same role as any other arcane caster. If you have a bard or wizard handy, then the sorcerer doesn't need to take those skills.
But...
If the sorcerer is the only arcane caster in the party, then there will be an expectation they they fill roughly the same role as a wizard. That includes IDing magic items, analyzing any magic auras that the party comes across, etc. If the sorcerer can't do these things, then that is even more slack for the rest of the party to pick up.
This is my argument. LT you are being willfully ignorant to protect your pet class and it is childish.
If you have a bard in your party willing to do those things then even a wizard doesn't need knowledge arcana and spellcraft. Or a cleric who actually takes spellcraft. But someone has got to do it, it is often a vital part of an adventure. My argument is more akin to, with the absence of someone else to heal, the druid would be expected to fill that role BECAUSE HE CAN. If something needs doing, and it is within your class's abilities to do but you refuse to do it, your fellow players will hate you. That's like a fighter that won't hit things or a rogue that won't disarm traps.
Sorcerers are spellcasters and, as such, are expected to be good at casting and deciphering magical things. I'm not telling you what you HAVE to do, I'm informing you that those are class skills and others will expect you to do those things. Next you will be telling me you don't have to cast spells, and want to swing a sword.
What exactly IS a sorcerer good at, in your opinion? What spells would you pick and how would you conduct yourself that would make yourself de facto better than the wizard?
Why does the sorcerer need knowledge arcana? I don't see much of a reason for it and, given that sorcerers are suppossed to be untrained in magic, it is out of concept. As for spellcraft, the only significant use for it that I can see for sorcerers is in making constraining circles for summoning.
Given the 'nuclear' party (divine/arcane/rogue/fighter), a Sorcerer is best suited to have these skills - just as the divine caster is suited to Knowledge: Religion or Nature. As for utility, Knowledge Arcana lets you identify auras with Detect Magic, identify in-place spells, identify spells that have targeted YOU, as well as tell you about ancient mysteries, magic traditions, arcane symbols, constructs, dragons and magical beasts. Don't see how that can not be useful to a sorcerer. Spellcraft is also used to identify spells (cast at anyone), decipher a scroll so you can use it without UMD, and most importantly, identify magic items with Detect Magic. Unless there is a Wizard in the party, the Sorcerer is probably the best suited to doing these things.
So basically I'm assuming the party has either a Wizard or a Sorcerer, not both. If your party has a Wizard, it's going to free up the meager few skill points a Sorcerer has.
UMD is nice for giving access to spells which are not on the arcane list - using wands of cure light wounds, for example.
This is what potions are for. Chancing a failure on a UMD check when your party cleric is down and dying when a potion is a guaranteed success isn't a wise course of action. I know people harp that potions are overpriced, but they have their use. And there are FIVE character classes that can use wands of CLW (Bard/Cleric/Druid/Paladin/Ranger) without resorting to UMD. If you're lacking the 1 in 5 of those, and lacking a Rogue/Bard...okay, then the Sorcerer needs UMD. :-)
Stealth isn't vital. Invisibility is a suitable replacement for a non-rogue.
I'll agree that it's not vital, but that's one more spell the Sorcerer has to keep slotted (when he should be packing Greater Invisibility). Also, often you'll run into circumstances where spellcasting gives away your position - so be sure to take Silent Spell as well. Sorcerers tend to have decent DEX and a Cloak of Elvenkind is cheap, even when stacked with Resistance bonuses. But anyways, by that argument Bluff is pretty useless, as Charm/Dominate Person/Monster renders Bluff obsolete. In both cases the requisite skills (Stealth/Bluff) makes the use of the spells better.
Bluff is better than diplomacy for non-bards. It works well with illusions, also.
I can see how Bluff can assist with Illusions (or at least some of them), but how is Bluff better than Diplomacy for everyone but Bards?
That doesn't even make sense.Your argument, such as it is, is that sorcerers will be required to analyze...
It seems as valid as your arguments for sorcerers, in fact it seems decidedly akin to your own arguments.
-James
Now, I think you're deliberately not making sense.
The claim is that Sorcerers don't have enough skill points because they must max out Knowledge (arcana) and Spellcraft and they must max those skills out because, while they get little benefit from either of those skills, they are arcane casters and another arcane caster, the Wizard, tends to max out those skills.
My claim is that a Sorcerer can have a higher UMD because they have a higher CHA and having a higher UMD gives them more versatility.
In what way are those two claims possibly related?
Because maybe the wizard has enough skill points to put have a higher UMD than the sorcerer and still keep Knowledge:Arcana and Spell craft at max ranks?
At higher levels, I have seen wizards who outskill bards. Wizard with 24 int gets 9 skill points per level, while a bard with a 12 int gets 7. Level 10 bard using knowledge skill = 10 ranks + 3(class skill) +5(bardic knowledge) + 1(12 int) vs Level 10 wizard 10 ranks + 3(class skill) +7(24 int).
Level 10 sorcerer UMD is 10ranks + 3(class skill) + 7(24 cha) = +20. A level 10 wizard is 10ranks + nothing = +10. The difference is that the sorcerer with an int of 12 just spent a third of their skill points while the level 10 wizard can put 10 ranks in UMD, and still have 80 skill points left to spend.
Sorcerers have about as much in common with Wizards as Druids have in common with Clerics. We don't criticize Druids for not being as good at healing as Clerics are. Likewise, it makes no sense to judge a character (who explicitly gets their spell casting without studying) by how much book knowledge they have of magical theory.
Knowledge and Spellcraft don't have to represent 'book knowledge' - they can also represent practical knowledge, innate understanding and intuition. Someone who pulls magic literally out of their being might well understand a lot about how other creatures pull magic out of their own very beings as well.
It's a scientist (wizard) vs engineers (sorcerer) debate. Scientists will know why stuff works better than engineers, while engineers will put it to practical use better than scientists will. But engineers still know a LOT of science and scientists pick up a bit of engineering.
Bottom line, a Sorcerer deals with arcane magic, so is probably expected to 'know stuff' about magic.
|
|
The problem with that is D&D games have never -by the book- rewarded RP. It's pretty much all about leveling by killing monsters. Perhaps I missed a section for Pathfinder where it addresses this? (I hope)
Sadly, the current group I'm in doesn't get full XP for RPing an encounter. For example, an Ettin Monk 5 was blocking the entrance to a tunnel we needed to get in, instead of fighting him, the party Bard made the Ettin believe he was our friend. We were granted access to the cave entrance, and only received half XP for the encounter.
Luckily, the DM is starting to come around, as he is actually enjoying the RP encounters now. He typically used to run games that were almost all combat. Now that he's flexing his RP muscle, he's having much more fun. =)
Also, it was last session that he started giving full XP ;)
|
|
The problem with that is D&D games have never -by the book- rewarded RP. It's pretty much all about leveling by killing monsters. Perhaps I missed a section for Pathfinder where it addresses this? (I hope)
Sadly, the current group I'm in doesn't get full XP for RPing an encounter. For example, an Ettin Monk 5 was blocking the entrance to a tunnel we needed to get in, instead of fighting him, the party Bard made the Ettin believe he was our friend. We were granted access to the cave entrance, and only received half XP for the encounter.
Luckily, the DM is starting to come around, as he is actually enjoying the RP encounters now. He typically used to run games that were almost all combat. Now that he's flexing his RP muscle, he's having much more fun. =)
Also, it was last session that he started giving full XP ;)
You know, not only do I give full xp for finding non-violent solutions, I give BONUS XP for it.
You know, not only do I give full xp for finding non-violent solutions, I give BONUS XP for it.The problem with that is D&D games have never -by the book- rewarded RP. It's pretty much all about leveling by killing monsters. Perhaps I missed a section for Pathfinder where it addresses this? (I hope)
Sadly, the current group I'm in doesn't get full XP for RPing an encounter. For example, an Ettin Monk 5 was blocking the entrance to a tunnel we needed to get in, instead of fighting him, the party Bard made the Ettin believe he was our friend. We were granted access to the cave entrance, and only received half XP for the encounter.
Luckily, the DM is starting to come around, as he is actually enjoying the RP encounters now. He typically used to run games that were almost all combat. Now that he's flexing his RP muscle, he's having much more fun. =)
Also, it was last session that he started giving full XP ;)
Sadly, many DMs read "Give XP for overcoming the challenge" as "Give XP for overcoming the challenge the way I think it should be overcome"
My apologies LilithsThrall but i hate to be the one to tell you that a sorcerer is exactly a varient wizard just the same as barbarian's, palidin's, ranger's, and monk's are varient fighters bard's are varient rogue's and druid's are varient clerics.
Sorry.
:) <--- to take the sting out.
The problem with that is D&D games have never -by the book- rewarded RP. It's pretty much all about leveling by killing monsters. Perhaps I missed a section for Pathfinder where it addresses this? (I hope)Or worse, they will think they can just *GASP* roleplay their way to their next level....Exactly! What are kids coming to these days thinking they can just buy something when everyone knows you are supposed to pry it from the cold, dead hands of the nearest monster/evil NPC? Pretty soon, they'll be thinking they should be allowed to buy second level rather than braining poor hapless kobolds for it.I don't agree with magic item shop bashing.I do! Adventurers shouldn't be buying magic trinkets like some law-abiding commoner, they should be stripping them off of the dude they just murdered in his own home. :)** spoiler omitted **...
If you roleplay talking your way past a guard instead of braining him like a good adventurer should, you still get XP for the encounter. The horror!
That's awesome. Pathfinder actually included RP in their xp rules. :-)
However, I'll bet there's still a huge number of DMs that don't reward RP or have the RP xp be minuscule compared to combat xp.
I'm kind of curious about why Sorcerers were given Bluff on their skill list.
Is it so they can act like a shaman? If so, why do they not have Diplomacy or Intimidate?
The only reason I can think of why a Sorcerer would have it and a Wizard would not have it is so that, in lands that forbid Arcane magic, they can convincingly say, "Lightning bolt? I saw it too! Weird weather we're having. 'scuse me, I think I left the kettle on."