Wizard vs. Sorc


Advice

151 to 200 of 1,104 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Treantmonk wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:

Can't do it. Bestow Curse is a touch spell. Even with spectral hand, he'd have to cross the circle to affect his target. I know of no Pathfinder way to overcome that.

You know of no way to reach through an inward focused magic circle against evil when you are a non-evil non-planar bound arcane caster?

Really?

It can't get out, but that's not a two-way street. The game is rigged.

And if you're not keen on doing that, there's spectral hand.


Treantmonk wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:

Can't do it. Bestow Curse is a touch spell. Even with spectral hand, he'd have to cross the circle to affect his target. I know of no Pathfinder way to overcome that.

You know of no way to reach through an inward focused magic circle against evil when you are a non-evil non-planar bound arcane caster?

Really?

It can't get out, but that's not a two-way street. The game is rigged.

Breaking the circle is bad. Reaching into the circle with your hand (or with spectral hand) breaks the circle.


I checked and don't see any mention that reaching into the circle breaks it. So long as you don't disturb the diagram on the floor, you're fine.

Also, reach spell metamagic is another alternative.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Treantmonk wrote:

Of course a Wizard should curse them to give them a -6 on CHA. After all, we don't want a fair CHA battle do we? Just leave the CHA gimped. All it's affecting is targeted SLA DC's, which aren't the SLA's we love anyways.

Isn't throwing an offensive spell at your summon going to sour the negotiation process a bit?


LilithsThrall wrote:
Treantmonk wrote:


Of course a Wizard should curse them to give them a -4 on CHA checks.
Can't do it. Bestow Curse is a touch spell. Even with spectral hand, he'd have to cross the circle to affect his target. I know of no Pathfinder way to overcome that.

Reach spell


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Wizard vs. Sorcerer very much depends on what you are trying to do. Certain things a wizard is going to be better at than a sorcerer and vice versa. Taking Leadership for a pocket wizard to make the sorcerer stand on equal ground does not make the two equal. If you have to take Leadership to get equal, then the wizard wins because he can take leadership as well. Better to show where the sorcerer shines.

Wizards shine in certain areas. I'll list a few examples.

A general spellcaster wanting an enormously versatile spell selection is going to want to play a wizard. The versatility advantage of the wizard is unmatched.

If you're playing a caster that wants to be the fastest caster there is, nothing beats the divination specialized wizard.

Now some areas where the sorcerer shines.

Charm specialist. If you go fey-infernal or fey-arcane cross-blooded sorcerer and focus on domination/charm spells, you'll be able to reach DCs the wizard can't match. Your charm spells will also be far more effective because opposed charisma checks will almost always be in your favor.

Making a shapechanger is also very much in the sorcerer's favor. If you go cross-blooded aberration-abyssal, aberration-orc, or aberration-infernal (pit-touched) and toss in the Eldritch Heritage bloodline for the stat you don't get (much easier to do as a sorcerer), you can reach stat bonuses the wizard can't touch as well as get immunity to crits, spell resistance, 60 foot blindsight, and DR 5/- without casting a spell. And with Eschew Materials, you can basically become an uber shape-shifting monster that can hammer with spells and have more hit points, better stats, and be much harder to physically bring down than any wizard could hope to be.

Sorcerers are also the best blasters for the most part. They may occasionally be limited by energy resistance,but overall they can do greater blast damage than any wizard can hope to reach on his own.

I play both sorcerers and wizards. Both have advantages and disadvantages. The human bonus has definitely made sorcerers much, much better than they used to be. Sadly the human bonus is so much better than any other bonus that playing a sorcerer other than human isn't really an option any more for an optimizer. The human bonus at the end of the day gives an extra 2 spells a level and 3 8th level spells. That's a bonus you can't pass up. I wish Paizo had given the human bonus to every race to balance out the race options for sorcerer. But that's a debate for another thread.

One thing that is nice about sorcerers: they're much easier on DMs. Give a wizard a few days he can ruin almost every encounter with divination magics. Since sorcerers don't usually waste spells on divination magic like scrying, you can keep your campaign story arcs a lot more dynamic and have less of the scry and fry element in the campaign.

I've often toyed with the idea of allowing only sorcerers. It fits better with much of the fantasy literature I've read. Most casters in fantasy know what they know and usually specialize in different types of magic whether it be a seer or a transmuter or a shapechanger. Rarely do you see wizards in stories that can do everything. The closest you would get to a generalist would be the arcane bloodline sorcerer.

It would be pretty cool for storytelling as well. You must kill Udrig the Cloud Wizard. He lives up in the mountains. Make him a stormborn sorcerer specializing in fogs, flight, and lightning. I think that would make for interesting storytelling making arcane casters limited to a theme rather than being able to dial up any spell they need given a day or two. I think it would eliminate a great deal of the caster-martial disparity as well without damaging the robust magic system.


LilithsThrall wrote:
LazarX wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:


Clerics don't get planar binding.

They don't need it. Instead of having to coerce an outsider, they can call one up aligned to their faith.

Yep, we're talking Planar Ally.

Which isn't quite as powerful as Planer Binding since it drastically reduces the diversity of entities which are obtainable.

Except that Clerics CAN get Planar Binding...

It's as official as Dervish Dancer.


KaptainKrunch wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
LazarX wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:


Clerics don't get planar binding.

They don't need it. Instead of having to coerce an outsider, they can call one up aligned to their faith.

Yep, we're talking Planar Ally.

Which isn't quite as powerful as Planer Binding since it drastically reduces the diversity of entities which are obtainable.

Except that Clerics CAN get Planar Binding...

It's as official as Dervish Dancer.

Yes, I saw that. But my comment above was strictly saying that Planar Ally isn't as powerful as Planar Binding. That statement is still true. Just like its true that Clerics can, through the Void domain, get Planar Binding.


Maddigan wrote:

Wizard vs. Sorcerer very much depends on what you are trying to do. Certain things a wizard is going to be better at than a sorcerer and vice versa. Taking Leadership for a pocket wizard to make the sorcerer stand on equal ground does not make the two equal. If you have to take Leadership to get equal, then the wizard wins because he can take leadership as well. Better to show where the sorcerer shines.

Wizards shine in certain areas. I'll list a few examples.

A general spellcaster wanting an enormously versatile spell selection is going to want to play a wizard. The versatility advantage of the wizard is unmatched.

If you're playing a caster that wants to be the fastest caster there is, nothing beats the divination specialized wizard.

Now some areas where the sorcerer shines.

Charm specialist. If you go fey-infernal or fey-arcane cross-blooded sorcerer and focus on domination/charm spells, you'll be able to reach DCs the wizard can't match. Your charm spells will also be far more effective because opposed charisma checks will almost always be in your favor.

Making a shapechanger is also very much in the sorcerer's favor. If you go cross-blooded aberration-abyssal, aberration-orc, or aberration-infernal (pit-touched) and toss in the Eldritch Heritage bloodline for the stat you don't get (much easier to do as a sorcerer), you can reach stat bonuses the wizard can't touch as well as get immunity to crits, spell resistance, 60 foot blindsight, and DR 5/- without casting a spell. And with Eschew Materials, you can basically become an uber shape-shifting monster that can hammer with spells and have more hit points, better stats, and be much harder to physically bring down than any wizard could hope to be.

Sorcerers are also the best blasters for the most part. They may occasionally be limited by energy resistance,but overall they can do greater blast damage than any wizard can hope to reach on his own.

I play both sorcerers and wizards. Both have advantages and disadvantages. The human bonus...

Thanks to the alternate race feature and the possibility of avoiding CHA as you base stat, the big difference between Wizards and Sorcerers is this:

Sorcerers have the advantage of the spontaneously cast toolbelt, and requiring no effort to gain power.

Wizards have the advantage of taking effort to obtain power, and because of this they have no limit to the number of spells the can know.

Simplified even further:

Sorcerers: Versatility in the Moment
Wizards: Versatility in the Preparation

In speaking of Planar Binding, I think that is a spell that definitely fits best into the latter category.


LilithsThrall wrote:
Treantmonk wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:

Can't do it. Bestow Curse is a touch spell. Even with spectral hand, he'd have to cross the circle to affect his target. I know of no Pathfinder way to overcome that.

You know of no way to reach through an inward focused magic circle against evil when you are a non-evil non-planar bound arcane caster?

Really?

It can't get out, but that's not a two-way street. The game is rigged.

Breaking the circle is bad. Reaching into the circle with your hand (or with spectral hand) breaks the circle.

No it's not

No it doesn't

Read the spell again


LazarX wrote:
Treantmonk wrote:

Of course a Wizard should curse them to give them a -6 on CHA. After all, we don't want a fair CHA battle do we? Just leave the CHA gimped. All it's affecting is targeted SLA DC's, which aren't the SLA's we love anyways.

Isn't throwing an offensive spell at your summon going to sour the negotiation process a bit?

Not at all. This is NOT a friendly negotiation.

Establishes the mood, and who's boss.

Friendly negotiations are for Sorcerers.


Treantmonk wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Treantmonk wrote:

Of course a Wizard should curse them to give them a -6 on CHA. After all, we don't want a fair CHA battle do we? Just leave the CHA gimped. All it's affecting is targeted SLA DC's, which aren't the SLA's we love anyways.

Isn't throwing an offensive spell at your summon going to sour the negotiation process a bit?

Not at all. This is NOT a friendly negotiation.

Establishes the mood, and who's boss.

Friendly negotiations are for Sorcerers.

In speaking of which, what do you think of the Agonize spell in Ultimate Magic?

It's the same level as bestow curse, but targets Fortitude instead of Will with a similar desired effect.

How would you get around the "Resentment" that DMs would take full advantage of?


Treantmonk wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:

Can't do it. Bestow Curse is a touch spell. Even with spectral hand, he'd have to cross the circle to affect his target. I know of no Pathfinder way to overcome that.

You know of no way to reach through an inward focused magic circle against evil when you are a non-evil non-planar bound arcane caster?

Really?

It can't get out, but that's not a two-way street. The game is rigged.

The circle stops the creature from escaping, but if you reach through the circle, what's to stop the creature from grabbing you and pulling you in?


Maddigan wrote:
If you have to take Leadership to get equal, then the wizard wins because he can take leadership as well.

While this may be true, it ignores the fact that a PC is likely to see his cohort die a couple of times - particularly in the early period right after getting a cohort if the character has a low charisma. That penalty stacks up. Sorcerers can soak that penalty.

Maddigan wrote:
A general spellcaster wanting an enormously versatile spell selection is going to want to play a wizard. The versatility advantage of the wizard is unmatched.

The wizard is paying for that out of his WBL. He has a problem dealing with spells which need to be cast an unspecified number of times. He doesn't have the versatility of going off the arcane spell list. In other words, the two classes are pretty equal in versatility.

Maddigan wrote:


Sorcerers are also the best blasters for the most part. They may occasionally be limited by energy resistance,but overall they can do greater blast damage than any wizard can hope to reach on his own.

Blasters aren't optimal builds for Sorcerers.

Maddigan wrote:
One thing that is nice about sorcerers: they're much easier on DMs.

Wizards go from really, really, good to really, really bad. They are very swingy. The fact that they might memorize the wrong spells for the day or don't have enough slots for a given spell can drastically nerf them. OTOH, in a best case scenario, the wizard can be quite powerful. And, yes, the fact that a DM can't always correctly predict whether a wizard is going to be powerful or a mensch makes encounter design hard on the DM.


Blasters may not be optimal builds for Sorcerers, but Sorcerers are an Optimal Class for Blasters...


Treantmonk wrote:


No it's not

No it doesn't

Read the spell again

Even a straw will break it. And that's nowhere near as big as an arm.


KaptainKrunch wrote:

Sorcerers: Versatility in the Moment

Wizards: Versatility in the Preparation

In speaking of Planar Binding, I think that is a spell that definitely fits best into the latter category.

You're taking a guideline and trying to turn it into a rule. That's an error.

Its not even a good guideline. When a Sorcerer selects his scrolls from any spell list (relying on UMD to cast it) versatility in the moment or in the preparation? Given that purchasing these scrolls is part of preparation?


Major curse is already close range instead of touch...
: )
Edit: course that's a 6 th level spell

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:

Sorcerers: Versatility in the Moment

Wizards: Versatility in the Preparation

In speaking of Planar Binding, I think that is a spell that definitely fits best into the latter category.

You're taking a guideline and trying to turn it into a rule. That's an error.

Its not even a good guideline. When a Sorcerer selects his scrolls from any spell list (relying on UMD to cast it) versatility in the moment or in the preparation? Given that purchasing these scrolls is part of preparation?

LT, you realize that you're taking something that any class can do (read: casting any spell list scrolls via UMD) and turning that into a strong point for Sorcerer?


LilithsThrall wrote:
Treantmonk wrote:


No it's not

No it doesn't

Read the spell again

Even a straw will break it. And that's nowhere near as big as an arm.

The summoning circle is on floor. Unless you're rubbing your arm on the floor you won't break the circle.


Gorbacz wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:

Sorcerers: Versatility in the Moment

Wizards: Versatility in the Preparation

In speaking of Planar Binding, I think that is a spell that definitely fits best into the latter category.

You're taking a guideline and trying to turn it into a rule. That's an error.

Its not even a good guideline. When a Sorcerer selects his scrolls from any spell list (relying on UMD to cast it) versatility in the moment or in the preparation? Given that purchasing these scrolls is part of preparation?

LT, you realize that you're taking something that any class can do (read: casting any spell list scrolls via UMD) and turning that into a strong point for Sorcerer?

My thoughts exactly.

Bard > Sorcerer, because they can turn Charisma into something useful with Versatile Performance (Sense motive with CHA baby!) AND they can tote around the 100 scrolls that Treantmonk was talking about.


Gorbacz wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:

Sorcerers: Versatility in the Moment

Wizards: Versatility in the Preparation

In speaking of Planar Binding, I think that is a spell that definitely fits best into the latter category.

You're taking a guideline and trying to turn it into a rule. That's an error.

Its not even a good guideline. When a Sorcerer selects his scrolls from any spell list (relying on UMD to cast it) versatility in the moment or in the preparation? Given that purchasing these scrolls is part of preparation?

LT, you realize that you're taking something that any class can do (read: casting any spell list scrolls via UMD) and turning that into a strong point for Sorcerer?

Its a strong point for any class that uses charisma as a prime req - only one of which is on topic in this thread.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:

Sorcerers: Versatility in the Moment

Wizards: Versatility in the Preparation

In speaking of Planar Binding, I think that is a spell that definitely fits best into the latter category.

You're taking a guideline and trying to turn it into a rule. That's an error.

Its not even a good guideline. When a Sorcerer selects his scrolls from any spell list (relying on UMD to cast it) versatility in the moment or in the preparation? Given that purchasing these scrolls is part of preparation?

LT, you realize that you're taking something that any class can do (read: casting any spell list scrolls via UMD) and turning that into a strong point for Sorcerer?
Its a strong point for any class that uses charisma as a prime req - only one of which is on topic in this thread.

A Wizard that kicks off with Int 18 Cha 14 and Dangerously Curious will be only 2 points of UMD behind a Sorcerer.


KaptainKrunch wrote:


My thoughts exactly.

Bard > Sorcerer, because they can turn Charisma into something useful with Versatile Performance (Sense motive with CHA baby!) AND they can tote around the 100 scrolls that Treantmonk was talking about.

Bards can't do binding. Bards are a good class, but not > Sorcerer.


Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
The summoning circle is on floor. Unless you're rubbing your arm on the floor you won't break the circle.

You're assuming that breaking the circle means to rub part of it out. There's no particular reason to believe that.

Hermetically speaking, breaking the circle means to cross the circle's line. And, hermetically speaking, such a crossing doesn't have to make contact with it.

We can argue over whether we should use hermetic definitions, but there's no indication that any other available definition is more appropriate.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote:
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
The summoning circle is on floor. Unless you're rubbing your arm on the floor you won't break the circle.

You're assuming that breaking the circle means to rub part of it out. There's no particular reason to believe that.

Hermetically speaking, breaking the circle means to cross the circle's line. And, hermetically speaking, such a crossing doesn't have to make contact with it.

We can argue over whether we should use hermetic definitions, but there's no indication that any other available definition is more appropriate.

Aaaaaand this folks is why you don't argue with LilithsThrall. :)


Golden-Esque wrote:

I've only skimmed this discussion, but as a sorcerer player, I was extremely surprised to see that no one mentioned the major advantage that a sorcerer has over a Wizard; flexibility in normally inflexible situations.

Here me out on this one. Yes, normally you can leave a few spell slots unprepared as a wizard and prepare what you need as you need it. But what about situations where you don't have the time to prepare those spells? Namely, in combat. A sorcerer, in my opinion, is infinitely better than the wizard in combat situations. A sorcerer never has to worry about exhausting their supply of debuffing spells or attacking spells. They never have to fall back to cantrips or crossbows. They cast what they want, when they want to, as long as they have enough spell slots.

As a wizard, you basically have to guess the GM's game, and at the same time know exactly when it's appropriate to use your magic. As a wizard, you play chess with the GM. As a sorcerer, you go balls-to-the-wall every encounter like in a good-old fashioned game of wall ball.

While generally accurate, a Wizard can avoid this issue now, if they're willing to only prepare a limited number of spells, and have the fast study feat.

At which point, prepare yourself a nifty little way of stepping outside the combat (rope trick, mansion, or even turtling under a wall of ice), and then take the time to prepare the spell you need, before coming back out.

Notably, this works best in an all wizard group. If you've got a standard 'balanced' party there, by the time you have finished studying for a minute, they'll have ended the encounter.


To be clear, while Sorcerers and Wizards are equal, Sorcerers are slipping behind. This is because the game designers are biassed towards Wizards. A lot of stuff is coming out which either a.) steals the Sorcerer's advantages (such as Eldritch Heritage and Truename feat) or b.) removes the Wizard's disadvantages (such as the fast study feat).

To be honest, I don't know why the game designers are biased towards wizards. But, its pretty much indisputable that they are.

So, while the two classes are equal, that they will continue to be into the future seems unlikely.


LilithsThrall wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:


My thoughts exactly.

Bard > Sorcerer, because they can turn Charisma into something useful with Versatile Performance (Sense motive with CHA baby!) AND they can tote around the 100 scrolls that Treantmonk was talking about.

Bards can't do binding. Bards are a good class, but not > Sorcerer.

With scrolls you can do ANYTHING!


OberonViking wrote:


I disagree on this point though. By Level 20 the Wizard should have so many scrolls in her Handy Haversack that she needn't ever worry about not having the right spell.

If you calculate the amount of money a caster would spend on scrolls and wands to cover all those contingencies, it doesn't really work until mid-level. There's also the matter of time - the easy scrolls are not a problem to put out one or two a day, but after 3rd level it gets prohibitively time consuming and costly. You can only scribe one scroll per day in any case - which is fine if you are traveling or otherwise not concerned with time, but if you have to be ready in 4 days, having a double dozen scrolls such as you describe as every wizard must have is a very difficult endeavor. By level twenty anything that is a 4th level spell or lower and is a common use items will be in a wand, and sorcerers use those just fine. A sorcerer may not be able to make them easily, but he can still make them - a minus 5 to the spellcraft check isn't crippling.


KaptainKrunch wrote:
With scrolls you can do ANYTHING!

Do you think it's cost effective (from a WBL pov) for a character to keep a pile of high level scrolls on hand to cast every couple of days?

At the very top levels, he could have a Wizard cohort help him out with this.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LilithsThrall wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:
With scrolls you can do ANYTHING!

Do you think it's cost effective (from a WBL pov) for a character to keep a pile of high level scrolls on hand to cast every couple of days?

At the very top levels, he could have a Wizard cohort help him out with this.

He could! It's awesome that it doesn't cost money for the Wizard Cohort to do it either!


KaptainKrunch wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:
With scrolls you can do ANYTHING!

Do you think it's cost effective (from a WBL pov) for a character to keep a pile of high level scrolls on hand to cast every couple of days?

At the very top levels, he could have a Wizard cohort help him out with this.

He could! It's awesome that it doesn't cost money for the Wizard Cohort to do it either!

I love you!

Liberty's Edge

Mnemaxa wrote:
By level twenty anything that is a 4th level spell or lower and is a common use items will be in a wand, and sorcerers use those just fine. A sorcerer may not be able to make them easily, but he can still make them - a minus 5 to the spellcraft check isn't crippling.

Sorry, but a Sorcerer can't take a -5 to make a wand of a spell that he doesn't know, since wands are spell trigger magic items.

He could, weirdly, use a scroll with a single casting of the spell (or a buddy who can cast the spell, of course) to meet the spell prerequisite, and thereby make a wand with 50 charges.

CRB p.549 wrote:
You cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.
CRB p.549 as well wrote:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the items creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).

So, they can make a wand if the have access to the prerequisite spell, and since they have the prerequisite it isn't necessary to take -5.

Basically, if you're a Sorcerer with Craft Wand, you can make any wand you want, regardless of whether you know the spell. You just need to buy a scroll of it first. Advice guides that peg Craft Wand as a poor Item Creation feat for Sorcerers don't seem to take this into account.


KaptainKrunch wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:
With scrolls you can do ANYTHING!

Do you think it's cost effective (from a WBL pov) for a character to keep a pile of high level scrolls on hand to cast every couple of days?

At the very top levels, he could have a Wizard cohort help him out with this.

He could! It's awesome that it doesn't cost money for the Wizard Cohort to do it either!

Clearly, it does cost money to have the cohort do it. Just less money than purchasing a scroll on the open market every time would cost.


LilithsThrall wrote:
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
The summoning circle is on floor. Unless you're rubbing your arm on the floor you won't break the circle.

You're assuming that breaking the circle means to rub part of it out. There's no particular reason to believe that.

Hermetically speaking, breaking the circle means to cross the circle's line. And, hermetically speaking, such a crossing doesn't have to make contact with it.

We can argue over whether we should use hermetic definitions, but there's no indication that any other available definition is more appropriate.

I was basing it on the word "circle" which is by definition two dimensional. But if you want to make stuff up feel free to do so in your game.


LilithsThrall wrote:
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
The summoning circle is on floor. Unless you're rubbing your arm on the floor you won't break the circle.

You're assuming that breaking the circle means to rub part of it out. There's no particular reason to believe that.

Hermetically speaking, breaking the circle means to cross the circle's line. And, hermetically speaking, such a crossing doesn't have to make contact with it.

We can argue over whether we should use hermetic definitions, but there's no indication that any other available definition is more appropriate.

I was basing it on the word "circle" which is by definition two dimensional. But if you want to make stuff up feel free to do so in your game.
I'm flattered that you think that Hermetic definitions ( that were created centuries ago and that the binding spell was clearly inspired by) were created by me. For my next trick, claim that I once shared a meal with John Dee.


Gorbacz wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
The summoning circle is on floor. Unless you're rubbing your arm on the floor you won't break the circle.

You're assuming that breaking the circle means to rub part of it out. There's no particular reason to believe that.

Hermetically speaking, breaking the circle means to cross the circle's line. And, hermetically speaking, such a crossing doesn't have to make contact with it.

We can argue over whether we should use hermetic definitions, but there's no indication that any other available definition is more appropriate.

Aaaaaand this folks is why you don't argue with LilithsThrall. :)

I really should know better, and yet here we are. I'm done here, so I'm going to go have naked horizontal happy dance time with my partner. Enjoy spinning your wheels.


LilithsThrall wrote:
Dire Mongoose wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I'm surprised this thread got to 20 posts before it became "LT vs. The World".

+1.

It would be easier to sort out peace in the Middle East than to convince LT that sorcerer isn't the strongest class.

Sorcerer isn't the strongest class. Wizard isn't either.

One of the reasons I like the Sorcerer is because optimizing it is a real art and a lot of its powers are overlooked by theorycrafters.

Incorrect. You just play the game differently from everyone else. As an example you don't believe in assigning roles/jobs to characters. Due to your difference in play style things that work in your game will not work in other people's games. What you call a decent reason to go after the spellbook is considered "not a good reason" in someone else's game also.


Golden-Esque wrote:

I've only skimmed this discussion, but as a sorcerer player, I was extremely surprised to see that no one mentioned the major advantage that a sorcerer has over a Wizard; flexibility in normally inflexible situations.

Here me out on this one. Yes, normally you can leave a few spell slots unprepared as a wizard and prepare what you need as you need it. But what about situations where you don't have the time to prepare those spells? Namely, in combat. A sorcerer, in my opinion, is infinitely better than the wizard in combat situations. A sorcerer never has to worry about exhausting their supply of debuffing spells or attacking spells. They never have to fall back to cantrips or crossbows. They cast what they want, when they want to, as long as they have enough spell slots.

As a wizard, you basically have to guess the GM's game, and at the same time know exactly when it's appropriate to use your magic. As a wizard, you play chess with the GM. As a sorcerer, you go balls-to-the-wall every encounter like in a good-old fashioned game of wall ball.

.........

I have never seen a good player not have a useful spell ready. On top of that calling something theorycraft because you don't agree with it is silly. You can call it theorycraft if you want, but I can bet someone has used it at a table, and therefore it is not theorycraft.


Andy Ferguson wrote:
Treantmonk wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:

Can't do it. Bestow Curse is a touch spell. Even with spectral hand, he'd have to cross the circle to affect his target. I know of no Pathfinder way to overcome that.

You know of no way to reach through an inward focused magic circle against evil when you are a non-evil non-planar bound arcane caster?

Really?

It can't get out, but that's not a two-way street. The game is rigged.

The circle stops the creature from escaping, but if you reach through the circle, what's to stop the creature from grabbing you and pulling you in?

It would need a specific combat maneuver to do so, and weaponized touch attacks don't provoke so it never gets an AoO to use the combat maneuver


KaptainKrunch wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:


My thoughts exactly.

Bard > Sorcerer, because they can turn Charisma into something useful with Versatile Performance (Sense motive with CHA baby!) AND they can tote around the 100 scrolls that Treantmonk was talking about.

Bards can't do binding. Bards are a good class, but not > Sorcerer.
With scrolls you can do ANYTHING!

No you can't, and buying scrolls does not make you equal. You will never have enough scrolls to be a good pseudo-sorcerer. On top of that pulling them out eats into your action economy. The bard is not a sorcerer nor can he scroll himself into being one anymore than he can scroll himself into being a wizard.


wraithstrike wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
Dire Mongoose wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I'm surprised this thread got to 20 posts before it became "LT vs. The World".

+1.

It would be easier to sort out peace in the Middle East than to convince LT that sorcerer isn't the strongest class.

Sorcerer isn't the strongest class. Wizard isn't either.

One of the reasons I like the Sorcerer is because optimizing it is a real art and a lot of its powers are overlooked by theorycrafters.

Incorrect. You just play the game differently from everyone else. As an example you don't believe in assigning roles/jobs to characters. Due to your difference in play style things that work in your game will not work in other people's games. What you call a decent reason to go after the spellbook is considered "not a good reason" in someone else's game also.

While I acknowledge that there are people out there who use roles, I'd love to see how you reached the conclusion that everyone else but me uses roles. The same thing with regards to going after or not going after spellbooks.

You're just talking out of your ass.


LilithsThrall wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
Dire Mongoose wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I'm surprised this thread got to 20 posts before it became "LT vs. The World".

+1.

It would be easier to sort out peace in the Middle East than to convince LT that sorcerer isn't the strongest class.

Sorcerer isn't the strongest class. Wizard isn't either.

One of the reasons I like the Sorcerer is because optimizing it is a real art and a lot of its powers are overlooked by theorycrafters.

Incorrect. You just play the game differently from everyone else. As an example you don't believe in assigning roles/jobs to characters. Due to your difference in play style things that work in your game will not work in other people's games. What you call a decent reason to go after the spellbook is considered "not a good reason" in someone else's game also.

While I acknowledge that there are people out there who use roles, I'd love to see how you reached the conclusion that everyone else but me uses roles. The same thing with regards to going after or not going after spellbooks.

You're just talking out of your ass.

I never said "everyone", but most people do. I never said you were the only one going after spellbooks either.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Please keep in mind that a wizard gets exactly 2 spells per level for free. That's it. At 20th level, that's starting spells +38 spells.

If he wants more, he has to acquire them somehow. Either they come as loot or he buys them, but either way, that's a function of WBL.

The sorceror spends that same amount of money on scrolls, wands and maybe staves, broadening their own spell selection as they do so.

The wizard can certainly grab more estoeric spells then a sorceror is likely to know...it's an advantage of the class. The wizard has more capability to prepare ahead of time...again a strength of his class.

The sorc has all of his gifts and magic available RIGHT NOW. And in a fight, that can easily mean the difference.

==Aelryinth


Lilith, do you ever notice how you often seem to have a lot of people all disagreeing with you? Not that the majority is the best way to judge sanity, but it is a good measure of when to reevaluate one's conclusions. Perhaps not everyone else is wrong. Just a thought.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wizard > All

Liberty's Edge

Heymitch wrote:
Mnemaxa wrote:
By level twenty anything that is a 4th level spell or lower and is a common use items will be in a wand, and sorcerers use those just fine. A sorcerer may not be able to make them easily, but he can still make them - a minus 5 to the spellcraft check isn't crippling.

Sorry, but a Sorcerer can't take a -5 to make a wand of a spell that he doesn't know, since wands are spell trigger magic items.

He could, weirdly, use a scroll with a single casting of the spell (or a buddy who can cast the spell, of course) to meet the spell prerequisite, and thereby make a wand with 50 charges.

CRB p.549 wrote:
You cannot create spell-trigger and spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.
CRB p.549 as well wrote:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the items creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).

So, they can make a wand if the have access to the prerequisite spell, and since they have the prerequisite it isn't necessary to take -5.

Basically, if you're a Sorcerer with Craft Wand, you can make any wand you want, regardless of whether you know the spell. You just need to buy a scroll of it first. Advice guides that peg Craft Wand as a poor Item Creation feat for Sorcerers don't seem to take this into account.

You need 1 scroll for each day spent enchanting the wand as you need to have the spell available every day and the scroll is consumed.

So, unless you are taking a +5 to the DC to enchant at double speed you will use 1 scroll for a wand with a first level spell, 5 for a second level , 12 for a third level and 21 for a fourth level wand if you are enchanting them as a wizard.

As a sorcerer it require even more scrolls:
1 for a wand with a level 1 spell, 6 for a wand with a level 2 spell, 14 for a wand with a level 3 spell and 24 fora wand with a level 4 spell.

If you have a wand with the spell you want to pot in the new wand you can use that to provide the spell you need.
A good reason to keep the partially expended wands.

Remember that the expense of the scroll or wand is in addition to the regular expense for enchanting the item so your item has a higher production cost.
The only thing I feel should be corrected is that while enchanting the spellcaster should still use up the appropriate spell slot, even if the spell was provided by a magic item.


KaptainKrunch wrote:

How would you get around the "Resentment" that DMs would take full advantage of?

Evil demon that is called to our plane and accidentally dies on the last day of service doesn't get revenge.

Liberty's Edge

DreamAtelier wrote:


While generally accurate, a Wizard can avoid this issue now, if they're willing to only prepare a limited number of spells, and have the fast study feat.

At which point, prepare yourself a nifty little way of stepping outside the combat (rope trick, mansion, or even turtling under a wall of ice), and then take the time to prepare the spell you need, before coming back out.

Notably, this works best in an all wizard group. If you've got a standard 'balanced' party there, by the time you have finished studying for a minute, they'll have ended the encounter.

PRD wrote:
Preparation Environment: To prepare any spell, a wizard must have enough peace, quiet, and comfort to allow for proper concentration. The wizard's surroundings need not be luxurious, but they must be free from distractions. Exposure to inclement weather prevents the necessary concentration, as does any injury or failed saving throw the character might experience while studying. Wizards also must have access to their spellbooks to study from and sufficient light to read them. There is one major exception: a wizard can prepare a read magic spell even without a spellbook.

Of the three solution you cite only the mansion work. The other don't fulfil the requirements for memorizing spells.

Having someone bashing on your ice wall is distracting.
Having someone climb the rope of your rope trick and entering the extradimensional space is distracting.
PRD wrote:
The rope cannot be removed or hidden.

Then there is the little problem that extradimensional spaces don't work within other extradimensional spaces. So your wizard can't access his spellbooks if he keep them in a Handy Haversack or a Bag of holding.

151 to 200 of 1,104 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Wizard vs. Sorc All Messageboards