Wizard vs. Sorc


Advice

1,051 to 1,100 of 1,104 << first < prev | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Melissa Litwin wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:


Sunder Hand haversack. The books are irremediably lost.
Fail a ST with a natural 1 from a damaging spell, the sack is one of the possible item damaged and it has very few hp. Again your books are forever lost.

Having a copy is almost mandatory or your main class feature depend on dumb luck and a kind GM.

Your GM has monsters/people use actions to sunder the (very ordinary looking) backpack on the wizard? While that sucks for the wizard, that's generally going to mean a very dead monster very shortly. Most things smart enough to sunder AND target the wizard's bag know that it's a huge waste of actions when you could just kill the wizard and take the bag + books instead. If it's a targeted strike by a BBEG who scries on the party and therefore knows where the wizard keeps her books, that's one thing, but that should be pretty rare ... and pretty high level. And has issues all its own, in that scrying sensors are perceivable and allow a Will save.

The reflex save thing is true. It's a rare but not unheard of event to fail a reflex save on a 1 and lose items to damage. Most games I play in we don't use that rule, but that is a houserule and by RAW you are absolutely correct. I'm still not sure a 1 in 20 chance followed by a 1 in 4 is worth putting 10k-20k gold into, since they still won't be accessible RIGHT NOW and the difference between "new books tomorrow" and "new books in a few weeks" is rarely crucial.

I think you're just used to GMs who metagame to a ridiculous extent.

Where you get the "new books in a few weeks"?

You GM is so kind that you will find plenty of wizards willing to let you copy their spells?

About the haversack being sundered: if I am targeting a wizard and I know I will have trouble killing him now but I am pretty sure that I can sunder his backpack and escape, it is a great move.
I had only in player in 30 years of gaming losing most of his spellbooks to a failed ST, but it was a well learned experience for all the guys that followed him.
The pain of replacing all his spells from level 2 to level 4 was a good lesson for all of us.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Diego Rossi wrote:

About the haversack being sundered: if I am targeting a wizard and I know I will have trouble killing him now but I am pretty sure that I can sunder his backpack and escape, it is a great move.

I had only in player in 30 years of gaming losing most of his spellbooks to a failed ST, but it was a well learned...

Diego,

My only concern is, how do you know the books are in there? They could be in the Secret chest in his breast pocket, or in a glove of storing, or any other place. "Go for the backpack!" seems a bit meta to me. What if he's a sorcerer? Do you still go for the backpack? How can you tell the difference?


Matthew Morris wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

About the haversack being sundered: if I am targeting a wizard and I know I will have trouble killing him now but I am pretty sure that I can sunder his backpack and escape, it is a great move.

I had only in player in 30 years of gaming losing most of his spellbooks to a failed ST, but it was a well learned...

Diego,

My only concern is, how do you know the books are in there? They could be in the Secret chest in his breast pocket, or in a glove of storing, or any other place. "Go for the backpack!" seems a bit meta to me. What if he's a sorcerer? Do you still go for the backpack? How can you tell the difference?

You can tell if its a sorcerer by the fruit punch stains on the front of his robes and the fact that he has mittens taped to his hands year round. That said, A haversack is a weird place to keep your spellbooks, I prefer to keep my blessed books inside a locket.

Liberty's Edge

Alienfreak wrote:


You can always get creatures with different Feats as starting Feats.

There is only a "small" problem: You can't force an animal to take the feat you want it to take.

If you raise him from its birth you can maybe teach it a specific feat, but it should be something that he can learn as an animal ant that will work for an animal.

The Lookout teamwork feat you cited don't fall in that category.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

rat_ bastard wrote:
You can tell if its a sorcerer by the fruit punch stains on the front of his robes and the fact that he has mittens taped to his hands year round.

Damnit, stop making me laugh outloud at work!


For me i think that wizards are more verstile as they can have more spells to choise from so can be much more flexable the preping ahead of time can cause a few problems but that's where team work comes in to play if all the spellcasters get togeather ahead of time and compair spells then most bases can be covered.
And that holds true for all casters not just arcane,
sorcers are better for filling one or two types of role i.e damageing of buff as there abillity to cast the same spell several times is very useful espicaily in larger partys (i mean what fighter will say no to a bull's strengh or bears endurance or a party thats minds when fighting a high ac monster that is bombarded with a barrage of magic missles) so i think that it's very much horses for courses and both have good and bad points in my books i think that a wizard just gets the edge because of spell choise

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Morris wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

About the haversack being sundered: if I am targeting a wizard and I know I will have trouble killing him now but I am pretty sure that I can sunder his backpack and escape, it is a great move.

I had only in player in 30 years of gaming losing most of his spellbooks to a failed ST, but it was a well learned...

Diego,

My only concern is, how do you know the books are in there? They could be in the Secret chest in his breast pocket, or in a glove of storing, or any other place. "Go for the backpack!" seems a bit meta to me. What if he's a sorcerer? Do you still go for the backpack? How can you tell the difference?

I am not assuming that, but apparently Melissa Litwin wizards keep the always there.

Sundering the backpack, stealing it, destroying the spell component pouch and so on are options for the antagonists of the wizard.
Saying that there is no need to spend money for a back up copy of the spells and similar gear because the risk of something happening to them is courting disaster. The GM can be lenient and let it pass, but only a very lazy wizard will be doing that.

It is like saying "Even if I have plenty of enemies I will not take any precaution when sleeping in my house. The GM will be a cheater to attack me there."

The wizard is living a dangerous life. He should take his precautions and not try to metagame and force his GM hand not taking precautions.

About the "he is a sorcerer or a wizard?" thing: generally that it is a know information about a spellcaster. For sure you can get it about a know spellcastr with a Knowledge (Arcana) or (local) roll.
Unless the caster has started spreading misinformations from first level you can generally discover if he was apprenticed to wizard X or if he was showing a natural talent for magic during his childhood.

If the spellcaster has taken the precautions to obscure those informations, more power to him. But we are back to the expenditure of resources to protect yourself.
I don't see a great advantage in hiding your class and then keeping all your spellbooks in one location where they can be easily lost.

an easy example of why you have better keeping some copy of your spellbooks: the wizard has been killed in some way that don't allow his friends to recover the corpse (throw into a pool of acid or lava, his friends had to flee and so on) but he had a clone ready or his friends have the possibility to get a True resurrection.
Very nice, but then you have a wizard without any spell beside Read magic and whatever spell he has still memorized after a fight and being resurrected. Oh joy.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Diego Rossi wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

About the haversack being sundered: if I am targeting a wizard and I know I will have trouble killing him now but I am pretty sure that I can sunder his backpack and escape, it is a great move.

I had only in player in 30 years of gaming losing most of his spellbooks to a failed ST, but it was a well learned...

Diego,

My only concern is, how do you know the books are in there? They could be in the Secret chest in his breast pocket, or in a glove of storing, or any other place. "Go for the backpack!" seems a bit meta to me. What if he's a sorcerer? Do you still go for the backpack? How can you tell the difference?

I am not assuming that, but apparently Melissa Litwin wizards keep the always there.

Ok, thanks for the clarification. :-)


Diego Rossi wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:


You can always get creatures with different Feats as starting Feats.

There is only a "small" problem: You can't force an animal to take the feat you want it to take.

If you raise him from its birth you can maybe teach it a specific feat, but it should be something that he can learn as an animal ant that will work for an animal.

The Lookout teamwork feat you cited don't fall in that category.

You attract a Familiar. Its not stated where it comes from. Just attract one which you want.

And if you attact a Nosoi its hardly an ANIMAL. Its a freaking creature which is just as intelligent as any Human. I doubt that it will be hard to find someone with that teamwork feat...
stop making an elephant out of an mouse.

Its like attracting a Animal Companion with the Feats you want. It just happens ;)

Because if you do I insist that you can't choose your Cohort. Because its stated NOWHERE that you can! its not RAW and not RAI!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:
destroying the spell component pouch and so on are options for the antagonists of the wizard.

AM HORRIBLE IDEA. COMPONENT POUCH CONTENTS AM LIKE SCHRODINGER'S POUCH. BARBARIAN ONCE SUNDER POUCH OF SQUISHY CASTY. AM MAKING NEBULOUS CONTENTS SPILL ON FLOOR. AND SPILL ON FLOOR. AND SPILL ON FLOOR. AM INFINITY CONTENTS. AM TAKING UP WAAAAY MORE ROOM THAN POUCH HAVE.

TAKE BARBARIAN LIKE THREE DAYS SUNDER ALL THAT SPELL COMPONENT STUFF AND GET INFINITY THINGS OFF SURFACE OF EARTH. ANOTHER SIX DAYS GET WORLD BACK TO NORMAL BY SMASH ALL INDIVIDUAL COMPONENTS. AM TAKING MONTH-LONG SHOWER GET SMELL OF BAT GUANO OUT OF HAIR.

IN HINDSIGHT, AM NOT BEST IDEA BARBARIAN EVER HAVE.

BARBARIAN STRONGLY RECOMMEND AGAINST SUNDER COMPONENT POUCH.


Alienfreak wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:


You can always get creatures with different Feats as starting Feats.

There is only a "small" problem: You can't force an animal to take the feat you want it to take.

If you raise him from its birth you can maybe teach it a specific feat, but it should be something that he can learn as an animal ant that will work for an animal.

The Lookout teamwork feat you cited don't fall in that category.

You attract a Familiar. Its not stated where it comes from. Just attract one which you want.

And if you attact a Nosoi its hardly an ANIMAL. Its a freaking creature which is just as intelligent as any Human. I doubt that it will be hard to find someone with that teamwork feat...
stop making an elephant out of an mouse.

Its like attracting a Animal Companion with the Feats you want. It just happens ;)

Because if you do I insist that you can't choose your Cohort. Because its stated NOWHERE that you can! its not RAW and not RAI!

You know I'll just end this conversation now.

pfsrd wrote:
A familiar is an animal chosen by a spellcaster to aid him in his study of magic. It retains the appearance, Hit Dice, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, skills, and feats of the normal animal it once was, but is now a magical beast for the purpose of effects that depend on its type. Only a normal, unmodified animal may become a familiar. An animal companion cannot also function as a familiar.

It would appear that you cannot actually modify the animal in any way. Changing out its feats would be a modification, would it not?

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Just because it amuses me...

GM guide, page 66 wrote:

Cohorts: The Leadership feat gives a character the option to attract subordinates drawn to his personality

and legend. Just because that character might be a wizard doesn’t mean he has to attract spellcasting associates; attracting other cohorts gives him a perfect opportunity to balance his own limitations with a whole other set of abilities. In this situation, work with your players to create NPCs that are both valuable to the group and interesting and plausible within the ongoing story.

(Emphasis mine)

Now if you can find a similar phrase about customizing familiars...


Trinam wrote:


It would appear that you cannot actually modify the animal in any way. Changing out its feats would be a modification, would it not?

Unmodified means that you can't give it any templates or cast awaken on it or such...

A animal with different skills wouldn't be modified... it just has different skills...


Alienfreak wrote:
Trinam wrote:


It would appear that you cannot actually modify the animal in any way. Changing out its feats would be a modification, would it not?

Unmodified means that you can't give it any templates or cast awaken on it or such...

A animal with different skills wouldn't be modified... it just has different skills...

I submit that anything that involves changing the monster as it appears in the bestiary is a modification, no matter how small. After all, to modify is to change.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Alienfreak wrote:

Unmodified means that you can't give it any templates or cast awaken on it or such...

A animal with different skills wouldn't be modified... it just has different skills...

"You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means."

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

(Keep in mind, the following is my campaign only.)

In my mind what makes magic effective is it can solve *anything* with enough research. (It's SCIENCE!)

Spoiler:
For example, at my table, a wizard could research a spell to drop AM BARBARIAN like a stone, gutting his spell parry, spell breaker, etc, and coming down to a saving throw. Now would it be easy? Oh hell no.

You're talking about a spell that's going to need his true name as a component, and likely a piece of him as well. It's going to be hit dice or HP based, and likely scale with the barbarian's level (3rd level Barb = 2nd level spell, 6th level = 3rd etc.) It's also going to be a 'PC only' in that most NPCs aren't likely to devote such time to killing one person. (or adventure wise, the PCs are going to get wind of it and start hunting the BBEG down before he can complete the 'Kill that one PC spell') Remember, my rule is everyone has some level of fun at the table. "We need X to kill Y!" leads to adventures and fun. "We need to stop X from getting Y to kill me!" leads to adventures and fun. "X shows up and casts Y, it bypasses all your defences so just give me a straight will save" is 'rocks fall everyone dies' and fun for no one.


Now the advantage for the wizard* here is simple... Is a sorcerer going to burn one of his highest level spells known for 'kill fred'? A spell that will work on one target? You're going to cast it once, maybe twice, in your entire lifetime. Also since you're researching a unique spell, there's no 'go to magic mart and pick of the scroll of Kill Fred' option. So it's fill up one precious spell known, or a page in a spell book.

Now the sorcerer can 'nova' better than the wizard. It's a 'trap class/skilled class' in that you need to plan ahead to get a diverse enough set of spells to handle general situations. It can be powerful, even with 'just' the CRB, but it takes talent.

This goes back to the 'what role do they serve in the party' In my experience, if you have a wizard, you have someone who is likely to be MORE specialized per day** and can, given time, adapt on the fly. With a sorcerer, you're going to have someone who has a broad base of powers, but if he specializes, he can't switch specialties.***

*

Spoiler:
Or Witch or Magus. I allow any class to research, but they all have no cap (except wealth) on spells known

**
Spoiler:
again, personal experience. We played in a game where killing by magic was illegal inside Greyhawk city limits. Our wizard then focused on charms, holds, grease, etc. We ended up rushed into the wilderness with little or no time to prepare at one point. He suffered until we could rest while my psychic warrior (with a much more limited powerset) was fine.

***
Spoiler:
Not counting external methods of course. A good specialist has back up spells handy, but if you're a summon/buffing specialist, how many blasting spells can you afford to take?


There are things magic cannot do, just like there are things science cannot do (things that science, no matter how far developed, cannot do). By the rules of the game, for example, in no version of the game have you ever been allowed to simply wish someone dead.

A sorcerer specializes himself for an adventure through charms, binding, and UMD.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:

There are things magic cannot do, just like there are things science cannot do (things that science, no matter how far developed, cannot do). By the rules of the game, for example, in no version of the game have you ever been allowed to simply wish someone dead.

A sorcerer specializes himself for an adventure through charms, binding, and UMD.

Two things.

1) I did say IMC. :P

2) Um yes you can wish someone dead. Wish can emulate finger of death, slay living, destruction, and, Blasphemy/dictum/holy word/unholy word/word of chaos to name just a few death effects. If you cast it, a blue Robin Williams will not appear to tell your character it's against the rules.

Edit: So a bard can specialize himself as a sorcerer better than a sorcerer since he has more charms, better skills to let him have the knowlege to bind the right critter, and as good a UMD. :P (And of course the Wizard can do the same, then change his spells to compliment his critter)


Alienfreak wrote:


A animal with different skills wouldn't be modified... it just has different skills...

`it just has different skills` is just another way of saying its been modified.


Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:

There are things magic cannot do, just like there are things science cannot do (things that science, no matter how far developed, cannot do). By the rules of the game, for example, in no version of the game have you ever been allowed to simply wish someone dead.

A sorcerer specializes himself for an adventure through charms, binding, and UMD.

Two things.

1) I did say IMC. :P

2) Um yes you can wish someone dead. Wish can emulate finger of death, slay living, destruction, and, Blasphemy/dictum/holy word/unholy word/word of chaos to name just a few death effects. If you cast it, a blue Robin Williams will not appear to tell your character it's against the rules.

All of those spells have saving throws. I didn`t clarify that I meant `without a save`.


Matthew Morris wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:

There are things magic cannot do, just like there are things science cannot do (things that science, no matter how far developed, cannot do). By the rules of the game, for example, in no version of the game have you ever been allowed to simply wish someone dead.

A sorcerer specializes himself for an adventure through charms, binding, and UMD.

Two things.

1) I did say IMC. :P

2) Um yes you can wish someone dead. Wish can emulate finger of death, slay living, destruction, and, Blasphemy/dictum/holy word/unholy word/word of chaos to name just a few death effects. If you cast it, a blue Robin Williams will not appear to tell your character it's against the rules.

Edit: So a bard can specialize himself as a sorcerer better than a sorcerer since he has more charms, better skills to let him have the knowlege to bind the right critter, and as good a UMD. :P (And of course the Wizard can do the same, then change his spells to compliment his critter)

Bards can cast Planar Binding, Magic Circle, and Dimensional Anchor? Wizards can keep up with Sorcerers in UMD without spending gold, traits, or feats?


Darkwing Duck wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:


A animal with different skills wouldn't be modified... it just has different skills...

`it just has different skills` is just another way of saying its been modified.

Not according to the rules.

Or tell me where it is stated per RAW that a monster with different skills is considered "modified"

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Darkwing Duck wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:

There are things magic cannot do, just like there are things science cannot do (things that science, no matter how far developed, cannot do). By the rules of the game, for example, in no version of the game have you ever been allowed to simply wish someone dead.

A sorcerer specializes himself for an adventure through charms, binding, and UMD.

Two things.

1) I did say IMC. :P

2) Um yes you can wish someone dead. Wish can emulate finger of death, slay living, destruction, and, Blasphemy/dictum/holy word/unholy word/word of chaos to name just a few death effects. If you cast it, a blue Robin Williams will not appear to tell your character it's against the rules.

Edit: So a bard can specialize himself as a sorcerer better than a sorcerer since he has more charms, better skills to let him have the knowlege to bind the right critter, and as good a UMD. :P (And of course the Wizard can do the same, then change his spells to compliment his critter)
Bards can cast Planar Binding? Wizards can keep up with Sorcerers in UMD without spending gold or feats?

Bards just use UMD. Wizards don't have to 'keep up' with sorcerers, they just have to 'keep up' with their items.

Again, it's not a matter of keeping up. How does the sorcerer 'keep up' his skills with the wizard or bard? So far, to be a practical primary caster, our sorcerer has 4 skill points/level allocated. Knowlege(planes) Knowlege(Arcana) Spellcraft, Use Magic Device.


Alienfreak wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:


A animal with different skills wouldn't be modified... it just has different skills...

`it just has different skills` is just another way of saying its been modified.

Not according to the rules.

Or tell me where it is stated per RAW that a monster with different skills is considered "modified"

Is English not your native language? I ask because that`s what the word means in English.


Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:

There are things magic cannot do, just like there are things science cannot do (things that science, no matter how far developed, cannot do). By the rules of the game, for example, in no version of the game have you ever been allowed to simply wish someone dead.

A sorcerer specializes himself for an adventure through charms, binding, and UMD.

Two things.

1) I did say IMC. :P

2) Um yes you can wish someone dead. Wish can emulate finger of death, slay living, destruction, and, Blasphemy/dictum/holy word/unholy word/word of chaos to name just a few death effects. If you cast it, a blue Robin Williams will not appear to tell your character it's against the rules.

Edit: So a bard can specialize himself as a sorcerer better than a sorcerer since he has more charms, better skills to let him have the knowlege to bind the right critter, and as good a UMD. :P (And of course the Wizard can do the same, then change his spells to compliment his critter)
Bards can cast Planar Binding? Wizards can keep up with Sorcerers in UMD without spending gold or feats?

Bards just use UMD. Wizards don't have to 'keep up' with sorcerers, they just have to 'keep up' with their items.

Again, it's not a matter of keeping up. How does the sorcerer 'keep up' his skills with the wizard or bard? So far, to be a practical primary caster, our sorcerer has 4 skill points/level allocated. Knowlege(planes) Knowlege(Arcana) Spellcraft, Use Magic Device.

The Sorcerer can do the Binding regularly. If Bards try to do it regularly with UMD, its gonna get expensive.

As was pointed out earlier, a Wizard, without gold or feat or trait, can`t cast a scroll of his highest spell level from a different spell list reliably.

A sorcerer doesn`t need spellcraft and has almost no use for knowledge arcana. Its pretty easy for the sorcerer to have 6 skill points. 1.) knowledge planes 2.) diplomacy 3.) bluff 4.) UMD 5.)fly 6.) sense motive


Darkwing Duck wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:


A animal with different skills wouldn't be modified... it just has different skills...

`it just has different skills` is just another way of saying its been modified.

Not according to the rules.

Or tell me where it is stated per RAW that a monster with different skills is considered "modified"

Is English not your native language? I ask because that`s what the word means in English.

What something means in a language and per rules is not the same.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Darkwing Duck wrote:

A sorcerer doesn`t need spellcraft and has almost no use for knowledge arcana. Its pretty easy for the sorcerer to have 6 skill points. 1.) knowledge planes 2.) diplomacy 3.) bluff 4.) UMD 5.)fly 6.) sense motive

Which lasts exactly long enough for a bard to cast glibness. "I just cast a spell that blocks all your arcane powers." The low level sorcerer is even worse. No knowlege arcana to recognize runes, no spell craft to identify what spell was cast, etc.

Sorcerer fails hideous bluff check. "Well crap, I guess I lose."

And easy? For a human you can do it with a 14 (base 2, +2 class +1 human, +1 favored). For any other race it's a 16.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Darkwing Duck wrote:
Is English not your native language? I ask because that`s what the word means in English.

Now on this we can agree. I'm still waiting for him to cite RAW where the player can help design his familiar. He dropped that one when I pointed to where the Cohort info was. :-)


Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:

A sorcerer doesn`t need spellcraft and has almost no use for knowledge arcana. Its pretty easy for the sorcerer to have 6 skill points. 1.) knowledge planes 2.) diplomacy 3.) bluff 4.) UMD 5.)fly 6.) sense motive

Which lasts exactly long enough for a bard to cast glibness. "I just cast a spell that blocks all your arcane powers." The low level sorcerer is even worse. No knowlege arcana to recognize runes, no spell craft to identify what spell was cast, etc.

Sorcerer fails hideous bluff check. "Well crap, I guess I lose."

And easy? For a human you can do it with a 14 (base 2, +2 class +1 human, +1 favored). For any other race it's a 16.

How does glibness block all the sorcerer`s powers? All it blocks is sense motive and it`s not like all the beings the sorcerer is ever going to meet will be bards.


Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Is English not your native language? I ask because that`s what the word means in English.
Now on this we can agree. I'm still waiting for him to cite RAW where the player can help design his familiar. He dropped that one when I pointed to where the Cohort info was. :-)

1. DM's Gudie is not Core but ok for rules.

2. Working together doesn't mean the Player can decide what to take, no?
Otherwise there would stand "The Player can design it but the DM has to agree to the concept".
Like it is with the Characters. There is no "work together" part, no?

Yet still everyone in here treats Leadership as the super Feat where you get exactly the cohort you need and want.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Alienfreak wrote:


1. DM's Gudie is not Core but ok for rules.

Oh I was waiting for this one! :D

The GM Guide has NPCs with potion of shield. Can my PC have one?


Gorbacz wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:


1. DM's Gudie is not Core but ok for rules.

Oh I was waiting for this one! :D

The GM Guide has NPCs with potion of shield. Can my PC have one?

What exactly are you thinking what kind of argument you just made?

Shadow Lodge

Alienfreak wrote:


What exactly are you thinking what kind of argument you just made?

Shield is a personal range spell and cannot be made into a potion. The GM Guide contradicts the Core Rules.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

TOZ wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:


What exactly are you thinking what kind of argument you just made?
Shield is a personal range spell and cannot be made into a potion. The GM Guide contradicts the Core Rules.

I thought there was errata to say they were 'wondrous items' instead?

(Really think it's a silly rule anyway.)

Edit, I see where the potions were correct for NPCs, no Potion of shield mentioned. (aside, shield was my favourite aberrant dragonmark.)


TOZ wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:


What exactly are you thinking what kind of argument you just made?
Shield is a personal range spell and cannot be made into a potion. The GM Guide contradicts the Core Rules.

Maybe because its an editing error and it means "shield of faith"?

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Darkwing Duck wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:

A sorcerer doesn`t need spellcraft and has almost no use for knowledge arcana. Its pretty easy for the sorcerer to have 6 skill points. 1.) knowledge planes 2.) diplomacy 3.) bluff 4.) UMD 5.)fly 6.) sense motive

Which lasts exactly long enough for a bard to cast glibness. "I just cast a spell that blocks all your arcane powers." The low level sorcerer is even worse. No knowlege arcana to recognize runes, no spell craft to identify what spell was cast, etc.

Sorcerer fails hideous bluff check. "Well crap, I guess I lose."

And easy? For a human you can do it with a 14 (base 2, +2 class +1 human, +1 favored). For any other race it's a 16.

How does glibness block all the sorcerer`s powers? All it blocks is sense motive and it`s not like all the beings the sorcerer is ever going to meet will be bards.

His inability to identify the bard cast glibness changes it from an impossible bluff "Nuh uh! I know what spell you cast." to a possible one "Well gee, you did look like you were casting, and I have no idea what a spell looks like... So I guess I'm screwed."

The other thing to remember... characters don't exist in a vaccum. When a party needs to play CSI, who do they turn to for mystical lore? Who's filling that hole?

Still want to hear how you get 6 sp/level a) in a 15 point buy and b) w/o the sage bloodline. That's something I noticed LT backed away from.

There's a difference between "One is better than the other" and "They fill different functions. I'm in the second camp. But so far all we've seen is the bard is better at your kind of sorcerer than your sorcerer is.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Alienfreak wrote:

2. Working together doesn't mean the Player can decide what to take, no?

Like it is with the Characters. There is no "work together" part, no?

Yet still everyone in here treats Leadership as the super Feat where you get exactly the cohort you need and want.

Ok, so now you've conceeded the player has input on the cohort (though most DMs are IME pretty leinent.

So where RAW does it say you can use anything but the unmodified statblock for the familiar?

I really begin to think English is not your first language. Work with = work together.


Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:

A sorcerer doesn`t need spellcraft and has almost no use for knowledge arcana. Its pretty easy for the sorcerer to have 6 skill points. 1.) knowledge planes 2.) diplomacy 3.) bluff 4.) UMD 5.)fly 6.) sense motive

Which lasts exactly long enough for a bard to cast glibness. "I just cast a spell that blocks all your arcane powers." The low level sorcerer is even worse. No knowlege arcana to recognize runes, no spell craft to identify what spell was cast, etc.

Sorcerer fails hideous bluff check. "Well crap, I guess I lose."

And easy? For a human you can do it with a 14 (base 2, +2 class +1 human, +1 favored). For any other race it's a 16.

How does glibness block all the sorcerer`s powers? All it blocks is sense motive and it`s not like all the beings the sorcerer is ever going to meet will be bards.

His inability to identify the bard cast glibness changes it from an impossible bluff "Nuh uh! I know what spell you cast." to a possible one "Well gee, you did look like you were casting, and I have no idea what a spell looks like... So I guess I'm screwed."

The other thing to remember... characters don't exist in a vaccum. When a party needs to play CSI, who do they turn to for mystical lore? Who's filling that hole?

Still want to hear how you get 6 sp/level a) in a 15 point buy and b) w/o the sage bloodline. That's something I noticed LT backed away from.

There's a difference between "One is better than the other" and "They fill different functions. I'm in the second camp. But so far all we've seen is the bard is better at your kind of sorcerer than your sorcerer is.

Wait, are you saying that you think the sorcerer`s only power is the ability to sense motive and that everyone is a bard?

As for the party needing to play CSI, tell me where in RAW the knowledge person must be the arcanist.


Alienfreak wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Is English not your native language? I ask because that`s what the word means in English.
Now on this we can agree. I'm still waiting for him to cite RAW where the player can help design his familiar. He dropped that one when I pointed to where the Cohort info was. :-)

1. DM's Gudie is not Core but ok for rules.

2. Working together doesn't mean the Player can decide what to take, no?
Otherwise there would stand "The Player can design it but the DM has to agree to the concept".
Like it is with the Characters. There is no "work together" part, no?

Yet still everyone in here treats Leadership as the super Feat where you get exactly the cohort you need and want.

You keep saying this, but ignoring the fact that noone has said that the cohort should be designed by the player down to the last skill point.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Arrgh. i'm getting confrontational when I don't mean to.

*deep breath*

OK. Most all the arguments I see for the Sorcerer being 'better' than the Wizard boil down to two things.

1) Leadership

2) Use Magic Device.

I don't see how these make the Sorcerer better or are a 'win' button for the sorcerer.

By bringing up the bard (semi-snarkily, I'll admit) I'm just pointing out that the bard covers these two fields as well as the sorcerer, if not better. His knowlege skills are going to be equal/better, and he's more likely to be able to spread his skill points around.

I do think the sorcerer has strengths, unique strengths. I don't think UMD (or neglecting spellcraft* or knowlege arcana) are part of them.

As to "Where's that in the RAW" argument, that's right in the definition of party that they work together. IF the party's resident arcanist doesn't know jack about arcane matters he's left a hole that someone has to step in to fill. So now the hypothetical sorcerer is forcing someone else to spend resources in a sub-par (not even sub-optimal) fashion. In a five man band this isn't as bad (your fifth man is likely to be a bard or a magus, but might be a monk or fighter)

(Aside on UMD, you have to be able to decipher the scroll before you can use it. That's 25+ spell level. a little more difficult even if you min/max the roll Guess you'll want read magic as a cantrip.)

*

Spoiler:
Actually spellcraft can be useful for the sorcerer vs wizard. With more spell slots (on average) in a party v party scenario you can try to counterspell effectively if you recognize the spell. I had success with my battle sorcerer readying actions while my little armoured dragon was flying around raising havok. Sure in my case my 'counterspell' was an orb of force to the face most of the time but the point stands.


Matthew Morris wrote:

Arrgh. i'm getting confrontational when I don't mean to.

*deep breath*

OK. Most all the arguments I see for the Sorcerer being 'better' than the Wizard boil down to two things.

1) Leadership

2) Use Magic Device.

I don't see how these make the Sorcerer better or are a 'win' button for the sorcerer.

By bringing up the bard (semi-snarkily, I'll admit) I'm just pointing out that the bard covers these two fields as well as the sorcerer, if not better. His knowlege skills are going to be equal/better, and he's more likely to be able to spread his skill points around.

I do think the sorcerer has strengths, unique strengths. I don't think UMD (or neglecting spellcraft* or knowlege arcana) are part of them.

As to "Where's that in the RAW" argument, that's right in the definition of party that they work together. IF the party's resident arcanist doesn't know jack about arcane matters he's left a hole that someone has to step in to fill. So now the hypothetical sorcerer is forcing someone else to spend resources in a sub-par (not even sub-optimal) fashion. In a five man band this isn't as bad (your fifth man is likely to be a bard or a magus, but might be a monk or fighter)

(Aside on UMD, you have to be able to decipher the scroll before you can use it. That's 25+ spell level. a little more difficult even if you min/max the roll Guess you'll want read magic as a cantrip.)

*** spoiler omitted **

Noone in thtis thread has claimed that sorcerers are better than wizards.

Your argument that the arcanist should be the knowledge guy doesn`t make sense. Why is
the sorcerer under any greater obligation to be the knowledge guy than the bard or cleric?

You don`t need to identify a spell before you counterspell it if you use dispel magic. Spamming dispel magic is something the sorcerer is better at.


Darkwing Duck wrote:

Noone in thtis thread has claimed that sorcerers are better than wizards.

Your argument that the arcanist should be the knowledge guy doesn`t make sense. Why is the sorcerer under any greater obligation to be the knowledge guy than the bard or cleric?

Correction: You haven't made that claim, to my knowledge.

It was made. It was made by people whose system mastery I will gladly question, mind you. But the claim was made, and the evidence to back it up was lacking.


Trinam wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:

Noone in thtis thread has claimed that sorcerers are better than wizards.

Your argument that the arcanist should be the knowledge guy doesn`t make sense. Why is the sorcerer under any greater obligation to be the knowledge guy than the bard or cleric?

Correction: You haven't made that claim, to my knowledge.

It was made. It was made by people whose system mastery I will gladly question, mind you. But the claim was made, and the evidence to back it up was lacking.

I know that LT didn`t make that claim.

Who did?

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Darkwing Duck wrote:
Your argument that the arcanist should be the knowledge guy doesn`t make sense. Why is the sorcerer under any greater obligation to be the knowledge guy than the bard or cleric?

Ok, no one sane may have claimed that, I'll give you that.

As to why not the cleric? Well the cleric is already likely putting his knowlege to use with knowlege (religion) As I said above if you have a bard in the party, then it's not as bad (but is the high cha diplomacy/sense motive sorcerer stepping on his toes?). If you're leaving the hole in a standard 4 man band, most likely the cleric/druid won't have it as a class skill (and the cleric is more skill point starved than the sorcerer*) nor will the Barbarian/Fighter/Ranger/Paladin** nor will the rogue/ninja.*** So you're either dealing with a pretty big hole, or you're filling the hole substandardly. It goes back to that 'ultra specialized thing' if you ask others to fill 'non-standard' roles, so yours can be optimized, I don't feel it's fair to the other players.

*

Spoiler:
not that this is a bad thing, the cleric needs to suffer somewhere.

**
Spoiler:
I don't include magus because he's not a frontline fighter the same way the 'big four' are.

***
Spoiler:
again, the bard can fit here, filling your holes, but likely opening others


Darkwing Duck wrote:
Alienfreak wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Is English not your native language? I ask because that`s what the word means in English.
Now on this we can agree. I'm still waiting for him to cite RAW where the player can help design his familiar. He dropped that one when I pointed to where the Cohort info was. :-)

1. DM's Gudie is not Core but ok for rules.

2. Working together doesn't mean the Player can decide what to take, no?
Otherwise there would stand "The Player can design it but the DM has to agree to the concept".
Like it is with the Characters. There is no "work together" part, no?

Yet still everyone in here treats Leadership as the super Feat where you get exactly the cohort you need and want.

You keep saying this, but ignoring the fact that noone has said that the cohort should be designed by the player down to the last skill point.

Well it looks alot like it.


Matthew Morris wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Your argument that the arcanist should be the knowledge guy doesn`t make sense. Why is the sorcerer under any greater obligation to be the knowledge guy than the bard or cleric?

Ok, no one sane may have claimed that, I'll give you that.

As to why not the cleric? Well the cleric is already likely putting his knowlege to use with knowlege (religion) As I said above if you have a bard in the party, then it's not as bad (but is the high cha diplomacy/sense motive sorcerer stepping on his toes?). If you're leaving the hole in a standard 4 man band, most likely the cleric/druid won't have it as a class skill (and the cleric is more skill point starved than the sorcerer*) nor will the Barbarian/Fighter/Ranger/Paladin** nor will the rogue/ninja.*** So you're either dealing with a pretty big hole, or you're filling the hole substandardly. It goes back to that 'ultra specialized thing' if you ask others to fill 'non-standard' roles, so yours can be optimized, I don't feel it's fair to the other players.

*** spoiler omitted **
**** spoiler omitted **
***** spoiler omitted **

Your argument is that the sorcerer should take it because the other classes can`t. But the giant hole in your argument is that it can be turned around. It could just as easily be said that the rogue or ranger or cleric should take it because the sorcerer can`t.

If the Sorcerer is suppossed to be the knowledge guy in a 4 party group, then who is suppossed to be the face?


Darkwing Duck wrote:

I know that LT didn`t make that claim.

Who did?

This guy.

Like I said. It was made. Badly.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

I removed some posts that indulged in name-calling.

Also, I think this thread has gone in angry circles enough times. It's locked.

1,051 to 1,100 of 1,104 << first < prev | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Wizard vs. Sorc All Messageboards