Yeah -- overpowered? Not so much.
A sorcerer is a magic item with limited charges only squishier.
Seems like it on paper but in actual game play it hasn't shown to be problem.
Creative Director
|
New week, new "I didn't know that there is a Search function on this board" thread...
Why does this even bother you? I'm honestly curious. I personally don't mind it when folks ask questions like this, since to me, that's evidence that we're growing our fan base—new gamers coming to Paizo is a GOOD thing for Paizo, and seeing questions get re-asked is one of the symptoms of gaining new gamers!
As for whether it's balanced or not... I suspect it is. It LOOKS really good, but in play, having a few more spells isn't all that overwhelmingly as game-breaking as it looks. If that means that there's a lot more human sorcerers than not... I'm kinda okay with that, since "sorcerer" isn't a class that's classically been associated with any of the other races anyway (not like rogues and halfings, or wizards and elves).
I wouldn't use the word "overpowered". But I don't like the aesthetics; most favored class abilities are quite closely balanced to 1/3 or 1/4 of a feat (e.g. 1 hp is similar to 1/3 of Toughness [at best], 1 skill point is similar to 1/3 of Skill Focus, +1/2 alchemist bombs per day is similar to 1/4 of Extra Bombs, etc.), whereas the human favored class bonus is the equivalent of 1/2 of a feat (specifically, half of the feat Expanded Arcana).
I can live with it, though. If I were GMing a game, I'd probably change it to give 1/2 a bonus spell (i.e. a bonus spell every two times you take it).
Thank you really James. We're an italian community , all pathfinder fans, and we really appreciate your work. Thanks for your reply!
Don't mind Grumpy Bag over there, he's got teething problems.
I personally changed the bonus to 1/4 new spell known (i.e. you have to take it 4x in order to get one extra spell) since I thought 17 extra non-cantrip spells is too much for spontaneous casters (wizards and so on still get the extra spell).
The standard choices for favoured class are equal to one feat overall (HP is basically Toughness as you get one extra HP, and skill points is like Open Mind from Psionics Unleashed, which grants you one extra skill point per level).
This thing, however, is the equal of something like 10 feats (there is a feat that lets you have one extra spell, or two if neither is from your highest level), which is too much. 5 extra spells (or 2 1/2 feats) is much more palatable.
|
Overall, none of the favored class options give any significant boost over what the class normally does. They simply allow you to flavor your character more, beyond the stats and feats. You want to be more skill oriented, go with a skill point. Want to be tougher on the front lines or be able to take a hit, take the HP. The APG ones just added another aspect, so if you wanted to be a fire based, burn things up half-orc sorcerer, you pick the extra fire damage option.
Like they have said above, many of the over-powered/under-powered things tend to look less so once they are put an actual game. Nothing is ever going to be perfectly balanced, and shouldn't be as far as I am concerned. perfect balance tends to be quite boring.
I wouldn't use the word "overpowered". But I don't like the aesthetics; most favored class abilities are quite closely balanced to 1/3 or 1/4 of a feat (e.g. 1 hp is similar to 1/3 of Toughness [at best], 1 skill point is similar to 1/3 of Skill Focus, +1/2 alchemist bombs per day is similar to 1/4 of Extra Bombs, etc.), whereas the human favored class bonus is the equivalent of 1/2 of a feat (specifically, half of the feat Expanded Arcana).
I can live with it, though. If I were GMing a game, I'd probably change it to give 1/2 a bonus spell (i.e. a bonus spell every two times you take it).
I made it 1/2 in my game also. That seemed to work better.
Overall, none of the favored class options give any significant boost over what the class normally does. They simply allow you to flavor your character more, beyond the stats and feats. You want to be more skill oriented, go with a skill point. Want to be tougher on the front lines or be able to take a hit, take the HP. The APG ones just added another aspect, so if you wanted to be a fire based, burn things up half-orc sorcerer, you pick the extra fire damage option.
Like they have said above, many of the over-powered/under-powered things tend to look less so once they are put an actual game. Nothing is ever going to be perfectly balanced, and shouldn't be as far as I am concerned. perfect balance tends to be quite boring.
At lower levels the hp or skill points seem to be better, but at higher level the spells are almost an obvious choice. It is so much of an obvious choice that once my group learns about it I expect it to b e very popular which is why I made it 1/2.
PS:As to my earlier comment about me making it 1/2 that was for an NPC I was making to see how it looked. I made one using the 1/1, 1/2, and 1/4. The 1/4 was only appealing if I really wanted a certain spell.
So an Order of the Stick sorcerer who runs out of charges is just a stick? :)Yeah -- overpowered? Not so much.
A sorcerer is a magic item with limited charges only squishier.
Not just a stick! A stick that is going to get everyone trying to protect it killed.
But hey, at least you can get all the... well mates you want!
**************************************************
In all seriousness I've played a sorcerer recently where I was the only arcane caster in the group and I was very glad for those extra spells known -- it really made the party happy to know that I could have *both* the spells they wanted me to have for combat and the spells they wanted me to have out of combat too.
Even the extra cantrips were very nice.
Now do I feel I was more powerful than say, a gnome sorcerer, a half elf sorcerer or a halfling sorcerer? No. At least no more than I would be if I had designed my character as one of those other races.
I do feel that it is a potent ability -- but one that most parties are actually very glad the human sorcerer has available.
|
New week, new "I didn't know that there is a Search function on this board" thread...Why does this even bother you? I'm honestly curious. I personally don't mind it when folks ask questions like this, since to me, that's evidence that we're growing our fan base—new gamers coming to Paizo is a GOOD thing for Paizo, and seeing questions get re-asked is one of the symptoms of gaining new gamers!
As for whether it's balanced or not... I suspect it is. It LOOKS really good, but in play, having a few more spells isn't all that overwhelmingly as game-breaking as it looks. If that means that there's a lot more human sorcerers than not... I'm kinda okay with that, since "sorcerer" isn't a class that's classically been associated with any of the other races anyway (not like rogues and halfings, or wizards and elves).
James - I hear you, but if you were a life-long forum/mailing group/chat admin (like I unfortunately happen to be) you would develop an unearthly allergy to beating dead horses.
You would also be likely a far less amiable fellow, your avatar would be a bag of devouring and you would display a nasty habit of biting people on their ankles.
Greetings, fellow travellers.
...bag of devouring and you would display a nasty habit of biting people on their ankles
Now I am curious. How do you reach for them? By falling over? Or do you wait for them to sit on you?
On a more serious note: as a player I really like this new class option. I like the sorcerer class (finally, it encompasses all I've dreamt of since I started playing "other rpg"), because I always thought about what wonderful things I could accomplish with just one more spell known. Or two. Or three. Or...
As a DM I had my issues at first. But then, PF is heavily play-tested by thousands of players, it's been around for some time now, it has dedicated staff to support it - so, yeah, it should be balanced. If you are still bothered: just give the evil adversary the same option *shrugs* and see if it really turns the tide of battle. If so, tone it down (there are various suggestions mentioned already) - my idea was to restrict the spells thematically to the bloodline, i. e. give each bloodline two additional spells as bloodline power as the sorcerer gains new spell levels.
Ruyan.
Hi, i want to know community's opinions about Human APG favored class options for sorcerer: (instead of gaining 1 hp or 1 ability point with level up, a human sorcerer can "Add one spell known from the sorcerer spell list. This spell must be at least one level below the highest
spell level the sorcerer can cast".)
I think that power is really unbalanced, a human sorcerer can learn 20 spells more than any other race....and 20 spells (from 0 to 8 -4/2/2/2/2/2/2/2/3) are SO MUCH considering that arcane bloodlines gives as bloodline power just 3 spells, and there is a feat who add ONE spell to spells known each time is taken.
What do you think? Is that APG option really so overpowered ? Why Paizo allowed it? It's the beginning of the extinction of elves,half-elves sorcerers? :PEdit: how would you houserule it ?
It is overpowered. I have house ruled it to 1/2 a spell a level.
But the whole racial favored class this is horrible. There are simular problems with Half elf summoners.
What we did is make them class specific (and added a new general one).
Each time you level up in a favored class you can gain (choose one)
+1 hp +
+1 skill point +
1/3 a save of your choice or
A choice of two class bonuses.
The class bonuses were picked from the overall list at the beginning.
For example
A barbarian can get +1 round of rage or
+1 to his base speed (like the elf barb ability)
Now it is not tied to race so you can get back to picking whatever race you want.
For the sorcerer we chose:
+1/2 a spell learned of a spell of a lower level than the highest you can cast and
+1/2 to the use of a bloodline power.
I've played a number of human arcane sorcerers with buckets and buckets of spells. You know what I found in our games? Compared to other spellcasters (both sorcerers and non-sorcerers) it was actually kind of weak in comparison.
Action economy greatly helps keep balance with such a character. More spells makes you a little more versatile (in that there are less situations where you are sitting with your thumb up your butt), but it does NOT make you more powerful. After all, you can only ever get off one or two spells per round.
If you are still bothered: just give the evil adversary the same option *shrugs* and see if it really turns the tide of battle.
This is how I test a lot of stuff for power level. As a GM it can really be eye opening how quickly something that looked overpowered at first suddenly doesn't after it is used against the players.
I've played a number of human arcane sorcerers with buckets and buckets of spells. You know what I found in our games? Compared to other spellcasters (both sorcerers and non-sorcerers) it was actually kind of weak in comparison.
Action economy greatly helps keep balance with such a character. More spells makes you a little more versatile (in that there are less situations where you are sitting with your thumb up your butt), but it does NOT make you more powerful. After all, you can only ever get off one or two spells per round.
If you can only do X, and I can do X+Y how am I not more powerful?
I'm just starting to play a sorcerer with this option here on the PbP boards, and the reason I took it was that in my previous Pathfinder tabletop games, the GM ruled that it is difficult to buy scrolls and such. The Sorcerer is limited to a number of spells, and if your party does not have a Wizard or any other arcane casters, then you are limited in what spells you are going to have by 15th-20th level. The only option previously was to have the arcane caster also be a crafter, and spend a ton of gold pieces on wands, weapons, and rings. The APG option gives you more spells to round out your blaster/utility Sorcerer without resulting to crafting.
Now, if you have a Sorcerer that doesn't buff the other players, doesn't care about anything but Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Magic Missile, etc, then yes, adding 18-20 more spells is just candy to the munchkin.
We actually have a Wizard in addition to my Sorcerer on our Rise of the Runelords team, and we're still working out who does what in this early stage. But yes, losing that "Favored Class" skill point does hurt with my secondary goal, multiple Knowledge and skills.
If you can only do X, and I can do X+Y how am I not more powerful?I've played a number of human arcane sorcerers with buckets and buckets of spells. You know what I found in our games? Compared to other spellcasters (both sorcerers and non-sorcerers) it was actually kind of weak in comparison.
Action economy greatly helps keep balance with such a character. More spells makes you a little more versatile (in that there are less situations where you are sitting with your thumb up your butt), but it does NOT make you more powerful. After all, you can only ever get off one or two spells per round.
Because we both can only do a combination of x or x+y the same number of times per day. In addition to your only having X you also either have another skill maxed, or more HP than me.
If you can only do X, and I can do X+Y how am I not more powerful?I've played a number of human arcane sorcerers with buckets and buckets of spells. You know what I found in our games? Compared to other spellcasters (both sorcerers and non-sorcerers) it was actually kind of weak in comparison.
Action economy greatly helps keep balance with such a character. More spells makes you a little more versatile (in that there are less situations where you are sitting with your thumb up your butt), but it does NOT make you more powerful. After all, you can only ever get off one or two spells per round.
Because a person with the extra spells can't do X+Y, they can only do X or Y.
Because we both can only do a combination of x or x+y the same number of times per day. In addition to your only having X you also either have another skill maxed, or more HP than me.
Yep. Those extra skill ranks and hit points may not seem like much on paper, but they make a BIG difference in play and are easily equal to having extra spells. It's not something you can easily see unless you've actually played it out.
/Agree with RavingDork's points.
I think it is a powerful option, and pretty clearly the best FC option for Sorcerers... But, I still don't find it to be broken powerful.
The thing I really like about it is that it validates the choice of sorcerer as the only arcane caster in a group. It may not be quite as strong as a wizard still, but the group isn't taking the massive hit it would previously. I like the extra options for party composition.
|
Any time someone doesn't take the extra Hit Point option in my home group it's kinda' considered 'tempting fate'... next time you die for going one Hit Point over your limit you'll be cursing that extra cantrip you just had to have... ;)
I'm not sure why Sorcerers are being singled out here - all the human caster classes who have a limited number of spells known have the same option. Witches even get to keep the bonus spells if their familiar dies, which seems a particularly good option for them.
I wouldn't consider it overpowered in any case: of the other races which have Sorcerer-specific favoured class options elves get extra uses of bloodline powers, and half-orcs get extra fire damage. So we have humans getting a larger variety of options, but elves and half-orcs getting more raw power. This seems consistent with the 'humans are jacks-of-all-trades' sort of theme they have going on (like the extra skill point each level and the extra feat at level 1).
While the option seems very good compared with the Expanded Arcana feat, it's only really 'half a feat' if you only ever plan to take Expanded Arcana for the two lower level spell options - the one extra spell known of your highest level is still tempting, especially for low-level Sorcerers looking to cover all their bases. I'd suggest that the lack of an option to use the favoured class bonus for spells of your highest level drops it from 'half a feat' to something a little less... which is basically in-line with other favoured class options.
Yes, its pretty powerful.. to the point that you probably won't see many non human sorcerers. Sorcerers don't have any class skills all that worth investing in besides diplomacy, and without any stats except cha and con many sorcerers will have enough hit points anyway.
|
|
As for whether it's balanced or not... I suspect it is. It LOOKS really good, but in play, having a few more spells isn't all that overwhelmingly as game-breaking as it looks. If that means that there's a lot more human sorcerers than not... I'm kinda okay with that, since "sorcerer" isn't a class that's classically been associated with any of the other races anyway (not like rogues and halfings, or wizards and elves).
From my point of view he is.
The only advantage a wizard has against a sorcerer is that he get higher level spells 1 level ahead of the sorcerer and that he has a wider selection of spells in his spellbook.
The sorcerer has all his spell available as long has he has available slots, the bloodline powers are more numerous and generally better than the powers of specialist wizards and he has a higher number of spells.
Lessening even further one of the two drawback of the class make him even more powerful.
In the typical PA arc you have little free time so the wizard advantage in versatility is further reduced as he has little time to add spells to his spellbook, while the sorcerer get them automatically, so again increasing the number of spells know to a sorcerer make the class even more potent.
If you are still bothered: just give the evil adversary the same option *shrugs* and see if it really turns the tide of battle. If so, tone it down (there are various suggestions mentioned already) - my idea was to restrict the spells thematically to the bloodline, i. e. give each bloodline two additional spells as bloodline power as the sorcerer gains new spell levels.
Ruyan.
It don't really work that way. Giving the extra spell or spells to a NPC that will be met one or 2 times in an adventure don't change the balance between the arcane spellcasters players.
Giving more spells to a class whose main drawback was exactly the limited number of spells accessible change the balance between the arcane spellcaster players.
Action economy greatly helps keep balance with such a character. More spells makes you a little more versatile (in that there are less situations where you are sitting with your thumb up your butt), but it does NOT make you more powerful. After all, you can only ever get off one or two spells per round.
Plus, it doesn't help you cast any more per day, either. It's entirely a versatility booster, and versatility does not correlate to power level. Between the same per-round limit and the same daily limit, it's good, but nowhere near overpowered.
From my point of view he is.
The
onlyadvantage a wizard has against a sorcerer is that he get higher level spells 1 level ahead of the sorcerer and that he has a wider selection of spells in his spellbook.The sorcerer has all his spell available as long has he has available slots, the bloodline powers are more numerous and generally better than the powers of specialist wizards and he has a higher number of spells.
Lessening even further one of the two drawback of the class make him even more powerful.
Ok some points:
1. On every odd level the specialist wizard has more spells than the sorcerer.
2. The wizard gains two first level powers (arcane bond and his school power) plus scribe scroll (infinity more useful than eschew materials), and his school arcana power (such as extra damage for the evoker)
3. The wizard still has more spells known than the sorcerer can hope for if he applies himself in getting them, and he does so without losing his favored class choice (and can take them as part of that choice too).
4. The wizard's school powers are just as useful as the sorcerers -- in many cases more so -- which would you rather have? Immunity to surprise with a growing bonus to initiative... or claws that you can use a few times a day?
5. Wizards also benefit from more items (pearls of power for example) and have more bonus feats in addition to their school powers.
6. The wizard's casting stat is more useful mechanically speaking than the sorcerer's casting stat.
7. The sorcerer still receives his spells later than the wizard.
All this adds up to put and keep the wizard ahead of the sorcerer even with the sorcerer taking this favored class option.
|
|
Lessening even further one of the two drawback of the class make him even more powerful.In the typical PA arc you have little free time so the wizard advantage in versatility is further reduced as he has little time to add spells to his spellbook, while the sorcerer get them automatically, so again increasing the number of spells know to a sorcerer make the class even more potent.
I think your stating your opinions as fact here, which I disagree with. Consider that you automatically gain 2 hours a day for crafting, 8 hours a day is almost guaranteed by the rules (unless your adventuring 16+ hours a day).
What are you saying here?
The wizard is powerful, he cant incant stuff while adventuring?Or you mean that the wizard has 2 full hours every day to add spells to his spelbook? (I don't know where you get the 8 hours when adventuring. Your wizard has nothing to do when the group is moving around or at a camp-site? He can write while walking/riding and get no guard duty?)
The wizard need a source to learn a spell and then the time and resources to put it in his spellbook. So unless your gaming group find plenty of scrolls the wizard, in a typical Pathfinder story arc has little time to add the spell to his repertoire beside the 2 he automatically learn every time he gain a level.
To buy a scroll or a spell you need a city and money, same thing to buy the inks, same thing to buy a blank spellbook. Then you need the time to copy those spells.
A wizard is relatively easy to "de-fang". Remove his spellbook and his components and he is reduced to a couple of spells. If he want to protect against that risk he has to spend 2 feats (eschew components and spell mastery).
I am really perplexed by the "pooor sorcerer" position I seen a lot of people taking.
They need the bloodline powers, or they are worthless compared to a wizard with good spell selection. Consider they have (as a specialist wizard) 80% of more of the # of spells, if they only gain a 50% gain in there spells efficiency due to being able to select from such a wide variety they are at least 130% as good as a sorcerer. By giving the Sorcerer 20 extra spells (at 1 level lower than there highest) there might make up 10% of that gap at most.
So your wizard get 2 level 5 spells at level 9 (with specialization), at the same level the sorcerer get 1*lvl 1, 1*lvl 2, 2*lvl 3, 1*lvl 4 extra spells against the wizard.
Who is the guy with more flexibility and a better chance to have the right spell?
Look all this isn't anything new -- if you check the archives for the beta playtest for the pathfinder rules you'll find several threads about how many spells each class gets, when they get them and how that compares to the other class.
Something you forget about the wizard -- he doesn't need to scribe the scrolls in -- he's just got to find a spellbook to use.
Also the "has to have time" argument really doesn't hold up -- I've played in every AP up through Kingmaker which I am waiting to GM -- there has always been plenty of time for me (playing the wizard usually) to scribe scrolls (or out of other people's spellbooks) over as I want to.
Yes you can "just take the wizard's spellbook and component pouch away" but honestly -- good luck with that. You'll have my spellbook after you get it out of my haversack... and the shrink item one in my pocket... and the one I keep in my hat... and the one in my boot as well (and don't think I don't have a few more spares in hiding, because I do). Same with my spell component pouch(es).
It's akin to saying "well the fighter is a chump because you can take his armor, shield and weapon away!"
It just doesn't wash.
|
|
1. On every odd level the specialist wizard has more spells than the sorcerer.
When? I don't see any level where a specialist wizard has more total spells than a sorcerer.
Care to make an example
2. The wizard gains two first level powers (arcane bond and his school power) plus scribe scroll (infinity more useful than eschew materials), and his school arcana power (such as extra damage for the evoker)
It disputable if scribe scroll is more useful than eschew material, depend on the campaign. I have never seen a player rendered incapable of casting spells because he could not scribe a scroll on the fly, while I have seen player barred for casting spels because they have lost the components.
Scribe scroll is more useful in a campaign with ample downtime, eschew material when you are adventuring.
3. The wizard still has more spells known than the sorcerer can hope for if he applies himself in getting them, and he does so without losing his favored class choice (and can take them as part of that choice too).
Applying require time. Not always available.
And being capable to chose between 100+ spells against 43 at level 20 is a thing, against 60 it is another.
4. The wizard's school powers are just as useful as the sorcerers -- in many cases more so -- which would you rather have? Immunity to surprise with a growing bonus to initiative... or claws that you can use a few times a day?
Unlimited fly time at level 15 against ... oh wait, no specialization bonus at level 15?
A free reroll or 25% immunity to critical at level 9 against an elemental wall or becoming a small elemental at level 8?
As a sum of what you gain the bloodline powers are better.
5. Wizards also benefit from more items (pearls of power for example) and have more bonus feats in addition to their school powers.
A few items, and what, 1 more feat (sure the sorcerer is limited to bloodline feats for his 3 feats, but they aren't bad at all).
6. The wizard's casting stat is more useful mechanically speaking than the sorcerer's casting stat.
Yes, a bit.
7. The sorcerer still receives his spells later than the wizard.
1 level later. While he get more lower level spells. And istant choice of what spell he want to cast.
All this adds up to put and keep the wizard ahead of the sorcerer even with the sorcerer taking this favored class option.
I really disagree. The wizard main advantage is that he has the choice of what he want to memorize against the fixed know spells of the sorcerer.
Every time you increase the number of spells that the sorcerer know you are making that advantage less and less significant.
Unless the whole adventure plot revolve around someone casting the "resolve plot" spell at the right moment and all will fail if that isn't done, a sorcerer with a well rounded choice of spells is very powerful.
A limited number of spell know force him to leave some hole in his power, holes that he should patch selecting the right feats and magic items.
When you give the possibility to patch the holes simply renouncing to 1 hit point you are making the class more powerful at a low cost.
A middle to high level arcane spellcaster that depend on his HP to survive has some serious problem.
|
|
When? I don't see any level where a specialist wizard has more total spells than a sorcerer.Care to make an example
Well, at 5th they've got more with Arcane Bond (7/5 for Sorcerer, 5/4/3+1 of any level for the Wizard) at 9th it's only one less and considering comparative levels of the Spells...(8/7/7/5 for Sorcerer 7/6/5/4/3 +1 of any level for the Wizard). If we're talking spell levels, as opposed to individual spells it's definitely true every odd numbered level.
At 17th, to give a higher level example, Sorcerers are definitely ahead (by 5 total spells), but again, only by a few, and the quality makes a big difference (9/8/8/8/8/7/5 for the Sorcerer, 8/7/7/7/7/5/4/3 +1 of any level for the Wizard).
EDIT: Got numbers wrong considering stats. 9th level assumes casting stat 20, 17th level casting stat 28.
|
|
When? I don't see any level where a specialist wizard has more total spells than a sorcerer.Care to make an example
Well, at 5th they've got more with Arcane Bond (7/5 for Sorcerer, 5/4/3+1 of any level for the Wizard) at 9th it's only one less and considering comparative levels of the Spells...(7/7/7/5 for Sorcerer 6/6/5/4/3 +1 of any level for the Wizard). If we're talking spell levels, as opposed to individual spells it's definitely true every odd numbered level.
At 17th, to give a higher level example, Sorcerers are definitely ahead (by 5 total spells), but again, only by a few, and the quality makes a big difference (7/7/7/7/7/7/5 for the Sorcerer, 6/6/6/6/6/5/4/3 +1 of any level for the Wizard).
It depends on DM style.
If you DM has short days, the fact you have a spell you might want to use more than once only memorized once isn't as big a problem.
If your DM doesn't take advantage of the weaknesses of Arcane Bonded items, it isn't as big a problem.
|
|
Look all this isn't anything new -- if you check the archives for the beta playtest for the pathfinder rules you'll find several threads about how many spells each class gets, when they get them and how that compares to the other class.
Something you forget about the wizard -- he doesn't need to scribe the scrolls in -- he's just got to find a spellbook to use.
Also the "has to have time" argument really doesn't hold up -- I've played in every AP up through Kingmaker which I am waiting to GM -- there has always been plenty of time for me (playing the wizard usually) to scribe scrolls (or out of other people's spellbooks) over as I want to.
Yes you can "just take the wizard's spellbook and component pouch away" but honestly -- good luck with that. You'll have my spellbook after you get it out of my haversack... and the shrink item one in my pocket... and the one I keep in my hat... and the one in my boot as well (and don't think I don't have a few more spares in hiding, because I do). Same with my spell component pouch(es).
It's akin to saying "well the fighter is a chump because you can take his armor, shield and weapon away!"
It just doesn't wash.
"beta playtest" Sorry, we aren't playing beta. As far as I can see at best, with the the Arcane bond, a specialist wizard get the same number of spells at some of the early levels if the sorcerer don't get the arcane bloodline and the arcane bond.
So you have copied your 300 spells level 4 time over? (approximate value for a mid level wizard)
Let's say the first one is free. 56 days at 8 hours day to make the other copies. About 7.500 gp, so 2 low power magic items or a medium one.
Not a low cost option.
The "de-fang" part work very well if you are playing a political game.
When you are a guest that is a hostage too, it is easy to remove the capacity to replace spells from the wizard, way harder from the sorcerer.
Same thing if you are taken prisoner, if you are shipwrecked and so on.
Something you forget about the wizard -- he doesn't need to scribe the scrolls in -- he's just got to find a spellbook to use.
He need to copy the spell in his spell book or risk to fail memorizing them (very low risk, but it exist).
Yes, its pretty powerful.. to the point that you probably won't see many non human sorcerers. Sorcerers don't have any class skills all that worth investing in besides diplomacy, and without any stats except cha and con many sorcerers will have enough hit points anyway.
In all the threads on this subject I have read, that is by far the best argument I have seen for the opposition.
However, I would argue that Dexterity, Constitution, AND Charisma are all important to a sorcerer, rather than just the latter two.
It disputable if scribe scroll is more useful than eschew material, depend on the campaign. I have never seen a player rendered incapable of casting spells because he could not scribe a scroll on the fly, while I have seen player barred for casting spels because they have lost the components.
Scribe scroll is more useful in a campaign with ample downtime, eschew material when you are adventuring.
Actually, it really isn't disputable at all. Having your spell components taken from you is a fairly rare occurrence in most games (and if the whole party is getting captured, it's usually deus ex machina in action anyways). ANY campaign that lets you rest and prepare spells, by default, also gives you enough time to scribe one scroll each day.
|
|
When? I don't see any level where a specialist wizard has more total spells than a sorcerer.Care to make an example
Well, at 5th they've got more with Arcane Bond (7/5 for Sorcerer, 5/4/3+1 of any level for the Wizard) at 9th it's only one less and considering comparative levels of the Spells...(7/7/7/5 for Sorcerer 6/6/5/4/3 +1 of any level for the Wizard). If we're talking spell levels, as opposed to individual spells it's definitely true every odd numbered level.
At 17th, to give a higher level example, Sorcerers are definitely ahead (by 5 total spells), but again, only by a few, and the quality makes a big difference (7/7/7/7/7/7/5 for the Sorcerer, 6/6/6/6/6/5/4/3 +1 of any level for the Wizard).
TY. I see you are considering stat bonus. Reasonable at the lower levels, less reasonable at higher levels.
In your campaigns it is routine to have 28 in the primary stat?
It disputable if scribe scroll is more useful than eschew material, depend on the campaign. I have never seen a player rendered incapable of casting spells because he could not scribe a scroll on the fly, while I have seen player barred for casting spels because they have lost the components.
Scribe scroll is more useful in a campaign with ample downtime, eschew material when you are adventuring.
Actually, it really isn't disputable at all. Having your spell components taken from you is a fairly rare occurrence in most games (and if the whole party is getting captured, it's usually deus ex machina in action anyways). ANY campaign that lets you rest and prepare spells, by default, also gives you enough time to scribe one scroll each day.
I suppose you "mass purchase" the needed components before leaving a city if you think you will be away for a time.
All good and nice if you always play in or near civilization. Less good if you will be away for a long time.
Gnome Sorcerer is still superior. ^.^
Small Size +AC/+toHit, Cha bonus AND con bonus, plus low-light vision. Dancing Lights, Ghost Sound, Prestidigitation, and Speak With Animals once per day each. +1 to save DCs of those sorcerous illusions you have available, AND a +2 racial save against illusions and keen senses to boot. Plus three starting languages, one of which is incredibly useful for dealing with otherwise hostile chaotic creatures! (Fey)
Advantage: Gnome.
Why does this even bother you? I'm honestly curious. I personally don't mind it when folks ask questions like this, since to me, that's evidence that we're growing our fan base—new gamers coming to Paizo is a GOOD thing for Paizo, and seeing questions get re-asked is one of the symptoms of gaining new gamers!
As for whether it's balanced or not... I suspect it is. It LOOKS really good, but in play, having a few more spells isn't all that overwhelmingly as game-breaking as it looks. If that means that there's a lot more human sorcerers than not... I'm kinda okay with that, since "sorcerer" isn't a class that's classically been associated with any of the other races anyway (not like rogues and halfings, or wizards and elves).
The main balancing factor that keeps the sorcerer from overshadowing the wizard is their limit of spells known. Normally, a sorcerer at 20th level knows a grand total of 43 spells, 9 of which are humble cantrips. A human sorcerer can now add 20 spells to that total, an almost 50% increase (only 3 of which are humble cantrips)! That's incredible. Simply incredible.
It's also flat out better than the alternatives. +1 HP per level is, in its entiretey, selected 20 times, the equivalent of one feat - Toughness. 20 spells known, on the other hand, is the equivalent of ten Expanded Arcana feats, TEN! Tell me how this is balanced. Either Toughness is grossly underpowered as a feat (and I suspect it isn't, considering how almost every character optimization thing I've ever seen strongly suggests taking it), the Expanded Arcana feat is grossly underpowered (I don't think it is, as it is better than the equivalent feat in 3.0 and 3.5), or the human sorcerer option to know an extra spell each level is extremely overpowered. I believe it is the latter, but whatever you believe, you must acknowledge that something's not right here!
stuffs
first off the beta led into the way things are now -- if you want to understand where it has ended perhaps it would be good knowing where it came from hm? Also included is the fact that everything we are discussing here (about spells known, spells per day and the class powers) was covered extensively during the playtest I speak of -- again -- if you had looked up the archives I suggested you would have known that.
********************************************
On to new territory -- Yes as a matter of fact I did keep six copies of my basic spell book -- a wise wizard should (and I had a wisdom of 14 by the way -- making me very wise for a wizard), and I took spell mastery -- and eschew materials, AND still spell as well as silent spell, plus defensive combat training.
It's good to be paranoid.
And then I also had my familiar -- or as I liked to refer to him -- my second set of actions for the round.
To say "I can defang the wizard this easily" still doesn't fly -- sure you could -- but in those situations the sorcerer is going to be just as boned -- since they are likely gagged and bound as well (which wasn't a problem for my wizard by the way -- which I got due to all those extra bonus feats).
And I still had more HP than a sorcerer would have with the extra spells favored class option since I sank my favored class into HP (a worthy investment) -- meaning I won't drop as easily -- after all I didn't need those extra skill points since I'm getting so many from my intelligence (unlike the sorcerer).
*****************************
Now for spells per day at level 9 -- I'm glad this is the level since as an odd level it favors the wizard:
Wizard Base:
4/4/3/2/1
+ specialist:
+1/+1/+1/+1/+1
+ Int (26):
+2/+2/+2/+2/+1
Total:
7/7/6/5/3
+1 arcane bond
Total spells per day: 29
Sorcerer:
6/6/6/4
+ Cha (26):
+2/+2/+2/+2
Total:
8/8/8/6
Total spells per day: 30
Now that headband costs either/both of them 16,000.
Assuming... 10k for "stuff" for defense or what not.
leaves us 20k.
For the wizard that could be 5k for scrolls and 15k for pearls of power:
2x2nd level, 2x1st level, 1x3rd level (4k+1k+9k=15k)
Putting the wizard above the sorcerer by 4 spells per day, and a higher spell level.
With that 5k of scrolls the wizard is even more ahead since he can simply scribe them himself and keep a steady supply of "useful but not needed from me" spells.
Something the sorcerer can't do.
The wizard can also change his spells memorized -- which the sorcerer can't do daily, and if the wizard prepares mnemonic enhancer he can instead have 2 spells for each fourth level slot he gives up -- something the sorcerer (again) cannot do.
*************************************************************
Now I'm not saying that the sorcerer is the red-headed step child of the classes -- but compare it any other full caster and I will say it is typically a step behind.
Of those 20 spells, the first 3 are cantrips, and ninth level spells never come to the table. The Elven bonus to spell penetration is not one to be dismissed lightly.
That's why you wait until level 4 and get the HP or skill point for the first 3 levels
|
|
TY. I see you are considering stat bonus. Reasonable at the lower levels, less reasonable at higher levels.In your campaigns it is routine to have 28 in the primary stat?
By 17th level? Yeah, probably. 18 base +4 levels +6 Item (which does apply). That's not even considering Tomes and such, or them starting with a 20. Is it gonna be universal? Not quite. But it's the way to bet.
Oh, and I did it wrong, they should both have one more 1st level spell at 9th and 2/1/1/1/1 more spells at 17th. I'll edit that in, actually. It doesn't matter for comparison purposes anyway, since it applies to both equally.
EDIT: And fixed.
Yep, you can't beat gnomes when it comes to sorcerers. Their bonus to illusion spells means their color spray will knock you flat!
|
New week, new "I didn't know that there is a Search function on this board" thread...Why does this even bother you? I'm honestly curious. I personally don't mind it when folks ask questions like this, since to me, that's evidence that we're growing our fan base—new gamers coming to Paizo is a GOOD thing for Paizo, and seeing questions get re-asked is one of the symptoms of gaining new gamers!
+1
As for whether it's balanced or not... I suspect it is. It LOOKS really good, but in play, having a few more spells isn't all that overwhelmingly as game-breaking as it looks. If that means that there's a lot more human sorcerers than not... I'm kinda okay with that, since "sorcerer" isn't a class that's classically been associated with any of the other races anyway (not like rogues and halfings, or wizards and elves).
I'd worry more if it was +1 slot than known. Known only adds versatility, slots add power.
Because we both can only do a combination of x or x+y the same number of times per day. In addition to your only having X you also either have another skill maxed, or more HP than me.If you can only do X, and I can do X+Y how am I not more powerful?I've played a number of human arcane sorcerers with buckets and buckets of spells. You know what I found in our games? Compared to other spellcasters (both sorcerers and non-sorcerers) it was actually kind of weak in comparison.
Action economy greatly helps keep balance with such a character. More spells makes you a little more versatile (in that there are less situations where you are sitting with your thumb up your butt), but it does NOT make you more powerful. After all, you can only ever get off one or two spells per round.
My X includes A, B and my Y includes C and D. You X only has A and B.
The number of times you can perform an action is less efficient than someone who do more things with that same action. 1 hp is generally not as useful as one more spell, and I would say the same for skill points.That is not to say skills don't matter. Of course I guess it depends on what level you start to drop one for the other. I only think it is good at higher levels. At lower levels I will take the hp or skill points.