|
I actually think that certain prestige classes should be harder for Sorcerers to get into instead of Wizards especially those like Loremaster which are about the Study and mastery of magic.
The feat requirements kinda handle that, 'though, as you need three metamagic or item creation feats (which wizards gain as bonus feats, and sorcerers do not).
Although I do agree with that point. A Wizard should (and does, spell progression or no) have an easier time getting into that PrC.
On the other hand, an Archivist or Cloistered Cleric or Bard should also have an easier time getting into that PrC than, say, a Druid or standard Cleric, and this is not the case, so even the Feat requirement isn't an ideal solution, as it pretty much *only* proves advantageous to the Wizard, and not other lore-based classes.
I'm not a huge fan of PrCs anyway, as they seem kind of ill-conceived, but I think they'd work much better if the Prereqs were more modular and open-ended. CL X *or* X feats *or* X ranks in skill this-n-that. The PrCs that have Paladin-specific or Ranger-specific or Monk-specific requirements bug me, since the game has 11 core classes, and 30 or so other base classes scattered through the PHB2, CArc, CW, CD, CAdv, HoH, EPH, CPsi, ToI, ToB, ToM, MH, DMG, etc. A PrC that is only open to one class (or, worse, one specific set of multi-classes), ever, feels a bit too restrictive to be worth the page count, to me.
An alternative that we have considered....is allowing Sorcerers to cast bloodline spells at the same equivalent level as Wizards, but leaving the rest as is.
I like this option. I may have to steal it for my campaigns :)
As an aside: The main reason I don't like Sorcerers getting spells one level later is the fact that they also have to wait an additional level to qualify for those prestige classes that require "ability to cast X level spells". That's a bigger problem than getting spells later, imo. Well, at least it was back in 3.5, when Sorcerers had absolutely no reason to stay as full 20th-level Sorcerers..
I have changed the prereqs for a lot of the prestege classes to be based on ranks in skills instead of being able to cast specific levels of spells to work around this.
For example, my prereqs for the mystic theurge are Knowledge(Arcana) 6 ranks, Knowledge(Religion) 6 ranks, can cast level 1 arcane and divine spells.
This lets you be a lot more flexible about how you qualify for the class without letting you get into the class early.
|
I actually think that certain prestige classes should be harder for Sorcerers to get into instead of Wizards especially those like Loremaster which are about the Study and mastery of magic.The feat requirements kinda handle that, 'though, as you need three metamagic or item creation feats (which wizards gain as bonus feats, and sorcerers do not).
Although I do agree with that point. A Wizard should (and does, spell progression or no) have an easier time getting into that PrC.
I agree with Loremaster for example, should be easier for wizards and I think it is as Set has pointed out. On the other hand there are also prestige classes like Arcane Trickster which have the caster spontanously manifesting abilities in very spontanous, un-academic fashion that flavor wise seems to favor the Sorcerer flavor wise.
However, there is are no rules which favor the Sorcerer in entering such classes. On the contrary, they are still penalized a level. That should end.
With a few notable exceptions (monster summoning, planar binding, etc.), the ability to cast more spells per day makes up for getting spells one level later.
What sorcerers -need- is more skill points.
I could agree with this but I'd do two things.
4+skills/levelAdd 1 (or 2?) skills of the player's choice. For example, a Sorcerer with a lot of divination spells might take perception. A Sorcerer who empathized enchantment might take diplomacy. One who had Elemental Bloodline:Air might take Acrobatics, empathizing that they were light on their feet.
It is also the sort of idiosyncratic thing a Sorcerer would do as they were mastering their magic, often with little guidance.
All the best,
Kerney
|
I Totally disagree, you are overlook the blood line abilities, more spells a day definitely counts, 4-6 spells vs 2 at 1st level is definitely a plus, skill points the wizard gets 2+IQ mod, same as
sorceror, free feat eschew material-sorceror, wizards get 2 spells
per level for free,...
You should read the entirety of the thread before commenting. The number of spells per day for a sorcerer is virtually the same as spells per day for a specialist wizard with an arcane focus. The skill points may be the same, but INT is the primary stat for wizards, so they will have many more skills without hurting their magic.
Xykon sure proved that a Sorcerer can kick the snot out of a Wizard by spamming Energy Drain over and over again... do Sorcs really need even more of an advantage? Both have strengths and weaknesses. Removing one of the main weaknesses of the Sorcerer while leaving all their strengths intact would (imo) unbalance the class.
Xykon sure proved that a Sorcerer can kick the snot out of a Wizard by spamming Energy Drain over and over again... do Sorcs really need even more of an advantage? Both have strengths and weaknesses. Removing one of the main weaknesses of the Sorcerer while leaving all their strengths intact would (imo) unbalance the class.
Seriously? Your argument is OOTS, a plot driven story?
Again, I've seen this in play and seen no issues with the sorcerer trumping everything. The class is still very limited by the limited spells know. The truth is, they only get one more spell per day per level than a specialist wizard. In highest level spells they have the same number of spells per day when you average in arcane bond.
Xykon sure proved that a Sorcerer can kick the snot out of a Wizard by spamming Energy Drain over and over again... do Sorcs really need even more of an advantage? Both have strengths and weaknesses. Removing one of the main weaknesses of the Sorcerer while leaving all their strengths intact would (imo) unbalance the class.Seriously? Your argument is OOTS, a plot driven story?
Eh, only half-heartedly.
I could totally see it happening, though.
My PC Wizards tend to plan for that particular tactic though and have magic items made that effectively bestow a permanent Death Ward.
|
|
Xykon sure proved that a Sorcerer can kick the snot out of a Wizard by spamming Energy Drain over and over again... do Sorcs really need even more of an advantage? Both have strengths and weaknesses. Removing one of the main weaknesses of the Sorcerer while leaving all their strengths intact would (imo) unbalance the class.
XyKon has shown a Sorcerer can be a superior blaster. He has not shown who is more likely to unlock a door, who is more likely to have a spell like Jump in their spellbook or on a scroll to cross an obstacle, or have the knowledge needed to address a situation.
In all cases, it is the wizard.
All the best,
Kerney
The argument that a wizard has as many spells per day as a sorcerer or close enough not to matter is based on the assumption that a wizard chose arcane bond and not a familiar. Also your assuming they chose to specialize.
|
In my games, I would not give sorcerers the same spell progression, be it new spell level, spells per day, or spells known.
Sorcerers and Wizards were created in this way not for flavor, but for balance. Sorcerers can be incredibly stronger than wizards, who make up for it by (with awesome planning skills) their versatility and knowning higher level spells.
I've played both sorcerers and wizards. My wizard almost always runs out of her spells that are useful for the encounter, while with sorcerers I have very rarely ran out of spells.
**The only reason I would give a sorcerer the wizard spell progression is if the other pcs were incredibly strong and powerful. This would give the sorcerer a boost - and make it easier for the DM to boost the encounter levels to keep them challenging without risking killing one or two (relatively) underpowered characters.**
I like the idea mentioned earlier of giving the sorcerer (and bard) a 0/day at the level the wizard gets access to a new level. It gives them a slight boost at lower levels, but doesn't really effect any 6th or higher level spells (except in extreme conditions where they are allowed to build up their charisma to levels that are likely to leave them them with equally extreme weaknesses). This also cancels out a lot of the problems with prestige class prereqs. Personally,I've never understood the idea that spontaneaous casting is more powerful than having to memorize spells. The fact is that while you can use the few spells you know more often, you are very much a one trick pony, even with wands or scrolls (which don't really count, being available to all casters). It is much easier to come up with counters to a known sorcerer/bard than it is for a known wizard/cleric/druid. A bump in skill points wouldn't hurt the sorcerer either, since there are still a lot of mundane situations that the sorcerer will have to resort to mundane solutions that the wizard can just ignore.
|
|
I actually take the opposite view the Arcane Trickster can also be thought as Batman, crazy prepared with the right spell for the right occasion. I've run the rouge/sorcerer AT flavor in 3.5 and while under pathfinder the sorcerer road is rougher it's still easier in the new system
I agree with Loremaster for example, should be easier for wizards and I think it is as Set has pointed out. On the other hand there are also prestige classes like Arcane Trickster which have the caster spontanously manifesting abilities in very spontanous, un-academic fashion that flavor wise seems to favor the Sorcerer flavor wise.
It's easier, but I think my image is just as valid as yours (and I find it interesting how differently we concieve these classes). I genuine feel that the ease should be the same.
Here is what I picture a Sorcerer/Loremaster might be like interacting with a party cleric.
All the Best,
Kerney
|
|
Here is what I picture a Sorcerer/Loremaster might be like interacting with a party cleric.
LOL! That was awesome. Though, it sounds like something that a wizard/loremaster would say. Too intelligent for a sorcerer. Not that sorcerers can't be intelligent, but wizards generally are more intelligent than sorcerers, who rely on their force of personality.
I think this is an interesting discussion so I'm going to perform shameless thread necromancy.
The argument that a wizard has as many spells per day as a sorcerer or close enough not to matter is based on the assumption that a wizard chose arcane bond and not a familiar. Also your assuming they chose to specialize.
Well, of course. When you're making a balance argument between two classes you assume the characters of both classes are making smart choices.
I think I'd ban arcane bond from any PF game that I ran -- it's not fun for a player with it if his bonded object is being stolen or sundered nearly every adventure, and it's just too too good otherwise.
Playing wizard in 3.0/3.5 (and I'd have never touched the god-awful 3.X sorcerer while wizard was an option -- PF's bloodlines at least make sorcerer interesting even if I'm still pretty sure it's not as good or fun for me to play), probably a good quarter of my prepared spells past the low levels would be the kind of utility spells that usually don't come up but are huge if you have the right one at the right time. Low level ones you can mostly cover by scribing scrolls, but for higher level spells that gets expensive quick.
With arcane bond in play, I think I'd just scrap those kinds of spells from my prep list entirely and trust arcane bond to cover them -- it's very rare I unexpectedly needed one of those "odd case" spells in a day. Even if AB just gave you an extra prep slot of your highest level, it would still be a tremendously good ability, but for the way the best wizard players I've seen play, it effectively adds up to many extra spells per day.