To my mind, Sorcerers get their magic from winning friends and influencing entities. To look an alien being in the eye and bargain with it for magical power is the iconic "charisma based magic" trope. Such a thing just cries out for bluff.
Yes, but as far as we're aware you're relatively alone in that viewpoint on sorcerers.
Sorcerers are too close to wizards thematically. They relegate the wizard, who in fiction has often has an innate gift or talent, into being a guy who's good with the Dewey Decimel System. No thanks.
They're also too close mechanically. Same spells == boring.
I've read (though not seen substantiated) that the sorcerer was only added in 3E to make better use of the pagecount devoted to wizard spells. No idea if that's true, but I wouldn't be surprised.
So, we got one of the top ten dumbest ideas in 3x - that sorcerers had inherited dragon blood (or other blood).
Never mind the half-blooded everythings running around the game. Though really, if that were the way sorcerers got their magic, they should be using spell-like abilities, not spellcasting.
As for the 'get magic from entities' shtick, aren't Witches and Oracles more capably filling that role? Besides the fact that if I were bargaining with entities, I think Diplomacy (i.e. bargaining) would be more useful than Bluff (lying to your source of power = bad idea).
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.
You haven't answered the question I asked. Why does a Sorcerer need Knowledge (Arcana)? Other than for it's use in Summoning, why does a Sorcerer need spellcraft?
There are lots of reasons for UMD. I cannot count how many times the Cleric went down past zero and needed healing. The rogue doesn't typically have as high a charisma as the Sorcerer and not every party has a Bard. The Sorcerer is a prime choice to carry a wand/scroll of healing. A well-played Sorcerer will also surround himself with a small army (via charms/summoning/etc.). There are a lot of buffs on the Cleric list. Plus there's a lot of nice spells on the druid list. Did the Sorcerer just cast...
Knowledge arcana identities and monsters and their weaknesses. It also helps with other magical things such as rituals, and since the game is based on magic it seems pretty important, more important than UMD sense it should see more consistent use. Spellcraft identifies spells, deciphers scrolls which makes it a good skill to use with UMD. Do you really want to set a scroll off if you dont know what it does? It also helps with crafting. The party will find such things useful. As for charisma the cleric can handle that. He most likely has selective channel anyway, and the cha mod makes sure not too many bad guys get accidental love from him. The cleric going down is not common in most games. He is normally decently armored, a capable combatant, and the party know that if he falls they are in trouble so he is normally well protected.
You can argue the out of concept point, but this is a mechanical discussion, not a fluff one. Another point is that just because the sorcerer does not have to study magic that does not mean he will not take the time to learn more about his powers. If I woke up tomorrow with the ability to throw fireballs I would want to know more about it.edit:changed "sense" to "since"
Diplomacy == boring idea
It's far more fun to bluff your way through an encounter with a being far more powerful than you.
How is Diplomacy boring? I've had entire sessions that were basically one long negotiation (and were fun - like ending a war between two dwarven nations AND scoring a share of the disputed gold mine!). If you can lie to an entity to get power, you can also get an entity to like you and give you power.
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."
Sorcerers have strong personalities. People with strong personalities can often convince or trick others into doing things.
The feat doesn't say that the cohort needs to be adventuring to gain experience.Anyway, Calistria's ace made a good point.
Let's assume a wizard take the Leadership feat at level 7, with a Leadership score of 4. He gets a 3-rd level cohort. Let's assume a medium progression.
After the wizard gains 9 334 xp, the cohort gains a level. Then, the wizard gains 6 666 more xp, and gains a level. Now the wizard is level 8 and the cohort level 4 with 12 810 xp.
After the wizard gains 4 380 more xp, the cohort gains a level. Then after the wizard gains 12 800 more xp, the cohort gains another level. The wizard is now level 8, and the cohort level 6 - the maximum level for his cohort.
But the wizard will attain level 9 before the cohort can gain a level. The wizard attains the level 9 with 6 820 more xp, and after that, he needs to earn 10 330 xp to see his cohort gaining another level. And then, they hit respectively level 10 and 8 almost at the same time, and after 10-th level the cohort is always at maximum level.
That's an interesting observation.
I had my doubts about the Leadership table, before. Now, I'm convinced that it needs to be rewritten. PCs who don't have high CHA shouldn't have powerful cohorts or followers. Characters who do focus on CHA should maintain a clear and significant advantage as leaders.
I'm curious if it was just an accident by Paizo or if they had any rationale behind doing it this way.
If you are famous and powerful people will follow you. You might not be able to lead a dragon to gold, but people are often blinded by popularity and the chance to say I hang out with ________. I think that is the other part of the leadership feat.
You note that it's like dealing with a one track mind. Yet so many of these have been written by so many different people. So doesn't it seem like a lot of people like the idea of bloodlines for sorcerers? There's no law against preferring this style of sorcerer. Paizo likes it. I like it. Lots of people like it. That doesn't make us awful people.
I know what Knowledge (arcana) is and what spellcraft is. You still aren't answering the question. I didn't ask why the party should have someone trained in these skills. I asked why that someone needs to be the sorcerer.
Knowledge arcana identities and monsters and their weaknesses. It also helps with other magical things such as rituals, and since the game is based on magic it seems pretty important, more important than UMD sense it should see more consistent use. Spellcraft identifies spells, deciphers scrolls which makes it a good skill to use with UMD. Do you really want to set a scroll off if you dont know what it does? It also helps with crafting. The party will find such things useful. As for charisma the cleric can handle that. He most likely has selective channel anyway, and the cha mod makes sure not too many bad guys get accidental love from him. The cleric going down is not common in most games. He is normally decently armored, a capable combatant, and the party know that if he falls they are in trouble so he is normally well protected.
You can argue the out of concept point, but this is a mechanical discussion, not a fluff one. Another point is that just because the sorcerer does not have to study magic that does not mean he will not take the time to learn more about his powers. If I woke up tomorrow with the ability to throw fireballs I would want to know more about it.
edit:changed "sense" to "since"
Because the party needs it. I thought you were asking why the skills are important in general. As for why the sorcerer should take them the reason is he is taking the wizard's place, and he is expected to do take unless somebody else does it. I know you don't like that idea, but that is how it is. Someone else already went in detail about this up the thread.
I know you don't like roles, but they are not a bad way to make sure things get done. The roles will always be there. Somebody has to do certain things.
You note that it's like dealing with a one track mind. Yet so many of these have been written by so many different people. So doesn't it seem like a lot of people like the idea of bloodlines for sorcerers? There's no law against preferring this style of sorcerer. Paizo likes it. I like it. Lots of people like it. That doesn't make us awful people.The herd mentality can have a one track mind. And having a one track mind doesn't preclude liking the thought (though it does require being narrow minded). It's as if you like chocolate cake. You might really like chocolate cake, but if you go to a land where all they eat is chocolate cake, how low will it take before you get sick and tired of chocolate cake?
It does not matter whether the powers are from an ancestor, you were born close to an opening to another plane, you were divinely gifted with the ability to use and understand(spellcraft, knowledge arcana), or some other reason. You can always refluff the bloodlines. Piazo put out an idea, and most of us accepted it. Agreeing with something does not make you mean you have a one track mind, just because others agree with it. If you can't say for yourself why you agree or like it, then that is different.
Because the party needs it. I thought you were asking why the skills are important in general. As for why the sorcerer should take them the reason is he is taking the wizard's place, and he is expected to do take unless somebody else does it. I know you don't like that idea, but that is how it is. Someone else already went in detail about this up the thread.
I know you don't like roles, but they are not a bad way to make sure things get done. The roles will always be there. Somebody has to do certain things.Once more, THE SORCERER IS NOT A VARIANT WIZARD.
The Sorcerer is not taking the Wizard's place.
In your game, you're free to use roles. Yes, they are dumb, but I don't believe in there being only one way to play. However, not everyone plays the way you do. Because everything doesn't work the way they do at your table, doesn't make them bad.
It does not matter if the sorcerer is variant wizard or not. Those are valuable skills, and most likely people will look to the sorcerer to fill them. Once again that sorcerer does not have to since no player has the right to tell another how to build their character, but that is the norm. In a game where the sorcerer replaces the wizard who do you think should take them?
When did I say anything was bad because it was not done by the way my table does something?
I am basically using generalities out there by the way, and yes some of these generalities do exist at my table.
(Personally I say Sorcs should have 4 ranks per level, but that's just me lol)
I give everyone at least 4 ranks. Two ranks is not enough.
|
You note that it's like dealing with a one track mind. Yet so many of these have been written by so many different people. So doesn't it seem like a lot of people like the idea of bloodlines for sorcerers? There's no law against preferring this style of sorcerer. Paizo likes it. I like it. Lots of people like it. That doesn't make us awful people.The herd mentality can have a one track mind. And having a one track mind doesn't preclude liking the thought (though it does require being narrow minded). It's as if you like chocolate cake. You might really like chocolate cake, but if you go to a land where all they eat is chocolate cake, how low will it take before you get sick and tired of chocolate cake?
So because there is a lot of people who disagree with you and your take, now we have a herd mentality and it can't POSSIBLY be that your views maybe off?!? Generally speaking, when people pull stuff like this, it's because they are just plain wrong and can't pull up any facts to back up their claim. You say you want us to prove you wrong...but your the one who's going against the majority in this case so it's up to you to prove that you are right. So far you have fail to convince anyone.
Ultimately, the Party will need somebody to handle certain situations. Clever Roleplay can help with these situations, but the correct Skills can enable the Party to tip the balance of power to their own favour or outright overcome an Encounter.
Knowledge (Arcane) explains how much the Sorcerer understands about their power. A 10th level Sorcerer without any ranks in this Knowledge skill speaks of a character who is using their power recklessly, without knowing the nature of the spells they are flinging around and as a DM I would probably be dictating their Spells to them since they haven't put any real effort into understanding their own abilities.
Now, a Sorcerer with Knowledge (Arcane) might have picked up a 'Magic for Dummies' book sometime over their adventures, or spent a few weeks pushing themselves to the limit to understand just what their spells can do, ye olde 'training under the waterfall' method, to grasp just what they can do and who they are. They are self-trained and justifiably proud of their own grasp of Magic, and most importantly have spent time and effort understanding just what sort of powers they are flinging around the battlefield or the back-alleys of their village. A Sorcerer with this skill understands their 'Gift' to the level they could potentially devise their own rituals for greater power or instinctively know what form of magic an enemy is using on them and counter it.
As has been said before, Bluff is a great skill for Lying. Eventually this can come back to bite the PCs on the arse if they use Bluff for every conversation, as they will get the reputation for being two-faced wind-bags and the NPCs around you will begin to pick up on this, meaning the Sorcerer (or any other Bluffing character, for that matter) could start dealing with -10 to their attempts. Chicken Little is a good fable for why Bluff should not be used all the time.
.......as a DM I would probably be dictating their Spells to them since they haven't put any real effort into understanding their own abilities.
This I disagree with. The minute a DM dictates to me how to build a character, or he gets to control it, is the minute I hand him the character sheet and make another character. While I do agree that a sorcerer should take spellcraft and/or knowledge(arcana) if nobody else has taken it I won't force a player into a build because I think that is the best one RP-wise or mechanically.
|
|
Agreed wraith. We don't force the Fighter to take Knowledge: Warfare to understand how to fight. We don't force the Paladin to take Knowledge: Religion to understand how his smite functions. I'm definitely not going to force the Sorcerer to spend points on Knowledge: Arcane if he doesn't want to.
If I want a every member of a class to automatically have a skill trained, I'm going to give it to him for free like this.
I've read (though not seen substantiated) that the sorcerer was only added in 3E to make better use of the pagecount devoted to wizard spells. No idea if that's true, but I wouldn't be surprised.
I think it was because people who liked magic users were sick and tired of Vancian spellcasting and were moving to more favorable game systems in droves.
To my mind, Sorcerers get their magic from winning friends and influencing entities. To look an alien being in the eye and bargain with it for magical power is the iconic "charisma based magic" trope. Such a thing just cries out for bluff.
I'm not sure I'd want power from an entity that can't make a DC 20 with Sense Motive.
The fact that some people will look to the sorcerer to have these skills isn't relevant. They could just as easily look to the Bard or Druid. Hell, I've even had Monks who have taken Knowledge (Arcana).
It does not matter if the sorcerer is variant wizard or not. Those are valuable skills, and most likely people will look to the sorcerer to fill them. Once again that sorcerer does not have to since no player has the right to tell another how to build their character, but that is the norm. In a game where the sorcerer replaces the wizard who do you think should take them?When did I say anything was bad because it was not done by the way my table does something?
I am basically using generalities out there by the way, and yes some of these generalities do exist at my table.
You did not tell me who should take them, if not the sorcerer. Any class can take any skill, but not having that +3 because it is a class skill does matter. I try to give those to all my casters, but depending on which classes are on the table some are expected more than others to take it.
The fighter can take knowledge(religion), but if he is in a group with a pally or cleric those two will be getting looked at when the situation arises.It is not relevant to you because you can build around your players, so if the monk takes it and might not make a check you can lower it, but not everyone has time to make a lot of alternations to a campaign. This means players normally have to make sure the best man/woman for the job is doing the job. You can give the fighter with a low perception the job of finding traps, but its not a good idea.
So wait, is our conclusion:
The wizard wins because he has a whole group with him because he took the skills and spells the primary arcanist needs, whereas the sorcerer is selfish and therefore has no group. :3
A sorcerer is exactly and nothing else but a varient wizard period.
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.
the meta varients listed above are designed to allow for variety in class selection and nothing more.
So FAR be it from aney one to tell somebody else what to play or how to play it, however whineing, crying, and stamping your feat will not change the fact that a wizard is a wizard by aney other name and will whether you or aneone else likes it or not fulfill its role and part of that role is knowing maghic thus the Knowledge (Arcana)skill.
A sorcerer is exactly and nothing else but a varient wizard period.
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.
the meta varients listed above are designed to allow for variety in class selection and nothing more.
So FAR be it from aney one to tell somebody else what to play or how to play it, however whineing, crying, and stamping your feat will not change the fact that a wizard is a wizard by aney other name and will whether you or aneone else likes it or not fulfill its role and part of that role is knowing maghic thus the Knowledge (Arcana)skill.
+1
LT, no matter how much of a tantrum you throw your pet class is still the Wizard's idiot savant brother.
I picked up a way an old GM of mine used Knowledge (Arcana) to make it worth taking for all arcane casters: It always comes up where your casters want to 'surgically' place AoE spells to get the bad guys and not the good guys. He would make you roll a Knowledge (Arcane) roll to drop that puppy right where you wanted it.
Now, the Mage being classically trained had no worries and could blast a stirge off a rogues back with out blinking...the Sorcerer on the other hand often blasted the poor rogue as well as the stirge.
Is that gimping the poor Sorcerer? Maybe, but it kinda made sense to us all at the time and I use it to this day. Has the right feel for my group and me.
Now I know someone is gonna ask what about Divine Casters doing that. In our games, we use the same DC for a Will Save to simulate the roll. Although a Bard would have the Knowledge (Arcana) more than likely. A Druid, might not worry too much about hitting you, buggers. A Ranger should be shooting arrows.
It's all a matter of personal preferences it seems. If LT doesn't think a Sor should take the skill, that's her right to choose. It's just seems most of us can't see her point of view. Doesn't make her wrong. Doesn't make us wrong for thinking they should take the skill if it will help their group and makes sense to most of us.
Have Fun out there!!
~ W~
The actual roll to make is an opposed roll vs. the PC's bluff.To my mind, Sorcerers get their magic from winning friends and influencing entities. To look an alien being in the eye and bargain with it for magical power is the iconic "charisma based magic" trope. Such a thing just cries out for bluff.I'm not sure I'd want power from an entity that can't make a DC 20 with Sense Motive.
This is the entity who granted you your first level in Sorcerer? You had no levels in anything? Just raw Charisma? Fine, DC 24. Unless you're a gnome or a halfling. Then it'll be DC 25.
Yeah, I know, that's not what you wanted. Notice I that chose to use the word "attempt." ;)
To be fair, Sorcerers and their Bloodlines can be the source of some epic Roleplaying, wherein most Wizards end up "I sat on my ass and read books for 10 years" or variations thereof.
I recall a player in my group was having problems writing up a backstory for her Fey-Blooded Sorcerer. I sat her down and helped her write out a backstory for her character, as a child, used to escape the bullies that picked on her for having darker skin than they did and slightly pointed ears, and used to take shelter in the nearby forest.
She met, and was befriended, by a quiet, gentle woman living in the woods, and was taught how to find edible berries, how to befriend small animals like squirrles and rabbits and was told stories about the Fey Courts and the ancient Heroes of ages past. She had one memorable encounter in which she found a patch of wild strawberries and brought them to her friend, and they spent the better part of a lazy summer day eating the strawberries with some of the rabbits the little girl had tamed.
Sometime into her teenage years, the girl found her friend was aging rapidly, and eventually the truth was revealed, that 'Granny' was actually a very old Dryad, and her tree was nearing the end of it's life. Passing to the young girl a wooden dagger she pulled out of her tree, made from it's very heart-wood and as sharp and sturdy as steel, the Dryad held the crying girl to her for a long moment before whispering "You've made me very, very proud, grand-daughter." before smiling softly one last time and gently kissing the girl on the forehead. "All that I have left, I pass to you. May the Seelie Court watch over and bless you, for my time has come."
Fading into mist, the Dryad slipped out of the girls arms and faded into her tree, just as the last leaves fell off the branches. The little girl realised why it was her mother had run away into the forest all those years ago, and why her father never spoke of her afterwards. When she returned home, she found the spark of magic within her and found that 'Granny' had been teaching her how to harness the magic all along. When the Party walked into the village a few months later, she was ready to be a part of her own legend.
The Sorcerer burst into tears every time she saw strawberries and when the party had to go into the forest to chase after a pair of rabid Dire-Wolves, they encountered the Dryad's tree and she explained to the party Barbarian, holding the knife to his throat, that no he could not cut down the dead tree for firewood. After that the party found large boulders (after they slew the wolves), got the party Wizard to use magic to carve the runes for 'grave' and 'sacred grove' into the stones and placed them around the tree to prevent anyone else disturbing the Dryad's tree.
I say we combine the two into a new class called the Sorzard and call it a day.
I say we combine the two into a new class called the Sorzard and call it a day.
I prefer Wizerer :P