What can a Wizard do that a Sorcerer can't?Who the f!@* cares?
I love you and your posts. Even the ones that make fun of me.
Another difference is how to make them.
Wizards are inteligence basesd. Which means that the average person can be taught to be magical to some degree or another.
Sorcerers are supposedly created from the bloodline of an ancestor.
So, the world on average it would be easier to make a wizard as compared to a sorc.
Actually, it would be harder. Int based skills tend to take time and effort and instruction and long, slow, hard progress over time that is carefully preserved and passed down from master to apprentice.
Sorcery is Charisma based. Everyone is their own teacher. All you need is a strong personality and willpower and you can be a powerful sorcerer. They can spring up ANYWHERE...you don't need books, tomes, acadamies, instructors, blah blah blah. You just ARE.
Sorcs are likely MUCH more common then wizards for this very reason...literally anyone can become one, not just those lucky enough to have access to education in magic.
==Aelryinth
Sorcs can be the product of a deity or other magical event as well. Don't marry "bloodline" and ancestors too tightly in your mind.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love you and your posts. Even the ones that make fun of me.What can a Wizard do that a Sorcerer can't?Who the f!@* cares?
I try to be an equal opportunity gadfly.
What can a Wizard do that a Sorcerer can't?Who the f&%~ cares?
Well for one...
I do.I would like a non-biased side by side comparison of the two. (I have yet to ever see that).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's been tons of side by side comparisons, Damian. It ain't the comparisons, its that each person reading them values the importance of different abilities differently.
Sorc lovers love the fact they can spam the most useful spell they have at the time they need it, without using a spellbook.
Wizards love the fact they can learn any spell and theoretically prepare perfectly for any scenario.
Sorcs love the fact they get tons of spell slots per day.
Wizards love the fact they get a higher tier of spells a level earlier, and conveniently ignore the fact the Sorc will probably still know more spells at one time then they will after the lowest levels.
Sorcs love the fact that Cha means they are the sexy casters.
Wizards love the fact that Int also means they get tons of skill points.
Sorcs love the extra powers from their bloodlines. They ooze flavor.
Wizards love the extra powers of their schools, ESPECIALLY the extra spell for specialists. They ooze powah!
Sorcs love the huge spell list because it means they can pick the best spells to know.
Wizards love the huge spell list because they can eventually learn them all, mwah ha ha ha ha ha!
Etc etc.
==Aelryinth
|
The Charisma thing is a current ruleset piece that I detest. Anything Spontanious casting (Cept for, I believe, the Inquisiter) can use magic because they are pretty. Makes no sense to me, I don't even consider CHA a mental stat at all except that it is not a physical one.
The whole thing with the differences between the two classes, from the Wizard having early access to higher level spells to the Sorcerer having the "freedom" of choosing spells as they are cast instead of second guessing the night before, is not class driven in of itself, but driven to be balanced between two mechanics that don't really go with and play nice with one another. To balance the Sorcerer, they are hampered with later access, no (class driven) way to learn spells beyond the Known Spells limits and basing their casting on the CHA stat.
CHA should only be used for the Bard and possibly the Cleric/Paladin secondary. It should have never been a "caster stat."
Now, now, Cha doesn't mean pretty. Red Dragons and Pit Fiends aren't pretty, but have impressive Charisma.
They are IMPRESSIVE. Imposing. Magnetic. Intense. Compelling. Eye-catching. Dominating.
But, yes, if they are attractive, it rather does tie in nicely, doesn't it?
The stereotype for unattractive 18 Charisma is Adolf Hitler. The man was completely average in appearance. But he took over a nation by force of personality alone. It certainly wasn't because of his brains!
For women, plenty of examples of older women who aren't 'beautiful' anymore, with devastating charisma. The magazine owner in 'The Devil wore Pravda' is a good example. So are many older actresses still in the game. The Comedienne Roseanna isn't beautiful by any stretch of the imagination, but she's still a compelling personality.
==Aelryinth
The Charisma thing is a current ruleset piece that I detest. Anything Spontanious casting (Cept for, I believe, the Inquisiter) can use magic because they are pretty. Makes no sense to me, I don't even consider CHA a mental stat at all except that it is not a physical one.
Charisma and appearance have nothing to do with each other. The woman with the striking looks, to whom no one pays any amount of notice or respect for is a low Charisma example. Then again there was a certain German demagogue, while fairly homely in appearance, moved a nation to war with the power of his oration.
Charisma is force of personality, and in that aspect, makes tremendous sense for the basis of a spontaneous caster.
true enough. But willpower (wis) would also make for a good basis as would high intellect.
Meh, Charisma is representative of dramatis, flair, power, personality, individualism, chaos...the things SOrcs are supposed to represent.
Wis is representative of age and experience, somberness, thoughtfulness, attentiveness...not personality traits associated with Sorcs.
And Int is already in use by those overly educated, disciplined, rational and schmot guys.
But, you know them sorcs, breaking all the rules...there are wis based and int based sorcs around, too!
==Aelryinth
Meh, Charisma is representative of dramatis, flair, power, personality, individualism, chaos...the things SOrcs are supposed to represent.
Wis is representative of age and experience, somberness, thoughtfulness, attentiveness...not personality traits associated with Sorcs.
And Int is already in use by those overly educated, disciplined, rational and schmot guys.
But, you know them sorcs, breaking all the rules...there are wis based and int based sorcs around, too!
==Aelryinth
interestingly enough given the time and inclination I think I can come up with a decent argument for a CON based spontaneous caster. Or a regular one for that matter.
I thought of a CON based sorcerer that could even do expensive components for free with incurable fatigue and exhaustion conditions. You could even go unconscious and have to succeed at a concentration check to have your spell succeed if your level to gp math didn't work out right. It was fun but felt very foreign to Pathfinder.
Wisdom is supposed to represent intuitive thought processes and force of will. Charisma is supposed to represent... also that. What if Wisdom and Charisma were combined into a single stat?
I thought of a CON based sorcerer that could even do expensive components for free with incurable fatigue and exhaustion conditions. You could even go unconscious and have to succeed at a concentration check to have your spell succeed if your level to gp math didn't work out right. It was fun but felt very foreign to Pathfinder.
There is a CON-based full caster: the Scarred Witch Doctor. It's a witch archtype that was made to allow Orcs to be witch's without having to use their gimped INT stat. With the recent ruling that Half-breeds (and humans with a feat) can use racial archtypes of their ancestors, Half-orcs can now take it a racial bonus to their CON making it really strong. It's probably the most powerful Witch archtype and one of the best casters in the game. I probably would ban it as a DM due to strength making it, as you said, "fun but...very foreign to Pathfinder," which is usually better about balance (than, say, 3.5.) Your Sorc at least some factors to weaken it in exchange for a lot more hit points.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And vice versa, for that matter?
For me, the big difference between Wizards and Sorcerers have been theoretical versatility vs. practical versatility.
Wizards are theoretically versatile due to the fact that IF you know all of the challenges you might face (as well as the frequency and detail of such challenges) and IF you have access to all of the spells that you might need then you can adequately prepare... in my experience, about 99% of the time, this isn't the case.
Sorcerers are practical in their versatility - sure, they have a limited number of spells at their disposal, but not inhibitively so, and there are a host of ways to increase them. But once the adventuring day begins, within that framework, you can do whatever you need to do - you need to cast 10 fireballs that day? No problem, you have all that you can use. Turn out you don't need or can't cast Fireball that day? No problem, you have 0 wasted slots. And of course, meta-magic feats you know can be applied on the fly to best fit whatever circumstances you might find yourself in. One day eight Alarm spells might suit your needs perfectly - another day eight Silent Images might come in most useful. No Wizard is likely to have memorized those options, certainly in those numbers... but a Sorcerer could do it easily without any special planning from one day to the next.
The best Sorcerers tend to be Human due to their FCB, and a Human Arcane Sorcerer who makes liberal use of meta-magic feats is probably the most versatile caster in the game. Personally I prefer to choose another Bloodline and add in Arcane via Eldritch Heritage feats.
These observations are independent of Paragon Surge which our group doesn't allow due to its generally agreed upon cheesiness when abused.
Also, powers and abilities granted through your bloodline are generally better than those offered by Wizard specialization schools.
Lastly - and this is just personal preference - spontaneous casting has always felt like 'the' way magic would be done. I've never been able to get behind the 'the words and gestures disappear from your mind, requiring you to study the same spell all over again in order to cast it' thing. It never made sense to me. I feel like that was something that worked in the original game and has been grandfathered in edition after edition, decade after decade simply because that's the way its always been.
I prefer wizards because:
The primary casting stat (intelligence) is also what determines the number of bonus ranks. Wizards are knowledge monkeys compared to Sorcerers and knowledge is power.
I can memorize a variety of spells.
With specialization I am only one spell slot per spell level down compared to a sorcerer. That can be made up for via a Pearl of Power (the sorcerer equivalent is double the price so I can get ahead of the sorcerer if desired).
After level 5, I can memorize any spell in my spellbook with a minute of concentration via the Arcane Discovery: Fast Study. I typically keep one slot open of each level except the highest level. I use this slot for toolbox spells or spell replacements.
With proper (read: varied) memorization and the open slot I am typically prepared for all challenges. Example: I will memorize Fort, Reflex, and Will spells to cover my bases.
With a Bonded Object I also have one casting of any spell in my book.
Can a sorcerer mimic much of this?
Yes, with Pages of Spell Knowledge a Sorcerer could have as many spells known as a Wizard. However, the cost is prohibitive.
Yes, the Sorcerer wouldn't need to sit down for 15minutes (or 1 minute after level 5) to memorize in an open slot.
Yes, with Mnemonic Vestment they can mimic the Bonded Object effect but the price tag is much higher (5k for the Mnemonic Vestments plus scroll cost of SL*CL*25 vs learning and writing a spell into spellbook cost of SL*SL*15).
|
|
And vice versa, for that matter?For me, the big difference between Wizards and Sorcerers have been theoretical versatility vs. practical versatility.
Wizards are theoretically versatile due to the fact that IF you know all of the challenges you might face (as well as the frequency and detail of such challenges) and IF you have access to all of the spells that you might need then you can adequately prepare... in my experience, about 99% of the time, this isn't the case.
Sorcerers are practical in their versatility - sure, they have a limited number of spells at their disposal, but not inhibitively so, and there are a host of ways to increase them. But once the adventuring day begins, within that framework, you can do whatever you need to do - you need to cast 10 fireballs that day? No problem, you have all that you can use. Turn out you don't need or can't cast Fireball that day? No problem, you have 0 wasted slots. And of course, meta-magic feats you know can be applied on the fly to best fit whatever circumstances you might find yourself in. One day eight Alarm spells might suit your needs perfectly - another day eight Silent Images might come in most useful. No Wizard is likely to have memorized those options, certainly in those numbers... but a Sorcerer could do it easily without any special planning from one day to the next.
The best Sorcerers tend to be Human due to their FCB, and a Human Arcane Sorcerer who makes liberal use of meta-magic feats is probably the most versatile caster in the game. Personally I prefer to choose another Bloodline and add in Arcane via Eldritch Heritage feats.
These observations are independent of Paragon Surge which our group doesn't allow due to its generally agreed upon cheesiness when abused.
Also, powers and abilities granted through your bloodline are generally better than those offered by Wizard specialization schools.
Lastly - and this is just personal preference - spontaneous casting has always felt like 'the'...
Ditto....
|
I rarely find that my casters need the same spell over and over. With my spontaneous casters I end up casting the same spells over and over because I have nothing better to do. And in most events I end the adventure with spell slots still unexpended from not needing them all, prepared or spontaneously.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards try fill Pokédex.
Sorcerers try prove caster not need full Pokédex.
Wisdom is supposed to represent intuitive thought processes and force of will. Charisma is supposed to represent... also that. What if Wisdom and Charisma were combined into a single stat?
Wisdom represents force of will internally, in that you have the willpower to keep going in the face of adversity or to push yourself to overcome obstacles.
Charisma has force of personality. This is more involving the ability to impose your will upon OTHERS, rather then upon yourself. It is perfect in that the wise person is master of themselves, and the charismatic person is the master of others. The charismatic person makes magic dance to their tune because he demands it do so, not because he understands it.
Perfect sorc stat.
And yeah, I'm just waiting for them to come out with str and dex based sorcs. They actually said at one point they shied away from Con based casters, despite the whole appropriate flavor issue, because as a single stat caster it would blow all the others away for sheer synergy.
I was actually pretty surprised to see that witch doctor archetype.
==Aelryinth
Weeeelllll the ring only works on spells up to level 4 if you get the full upgrade, so there is that. It's just that all the common, utility and versatility spells you want can basically be found at those levels.
The robe lets you get any spell on the list up to one level below what you can cast, and cast it in a higher spell slot...so grab a 7th level spell with an 8th slot. Which again, is utility and versatility on demand.
The feat allows you to invest a lot of time doing the same thing as the robe, but basically allows a Sorc to grab any arcane spell below his highest level...which means he can pretty much always satisfy any reqs for magic item construction. In short, he memorizes the spell in a higher slot, makes a Page of Spell Knowledge for half price if it's a really cool spell, then starts over.
Feat, ring and robe combined, and we won't even go into unlimited Paragon Surge, and yeah, Sorcs can do it all.
One level later.
==Aelyinth
I rarely find that my casters need the same spell over and over. With my spontaneous casters I end up casting the same spells over and over because I have nothing better to do. And in most events I end the adventure with spell slots still unexpended from not needing them all, prepared or spontaneously.
Sometimes it's needed. My dervishing summoner uses dimension door like your drug of choice.
Because he has an eidolon that enjoys full-attacking, I presume?
Nah, he rarely has his eidolon out and rarely summons. He just enjoys going nightcrawler on his enemies.
Yup, pretty sure. This is a templated summoner though. Natural lycanthrope. His shenanigans are ridiculous.
A lot of it depends on what type of versatility you value and how proactive the party is. The Wizard excels when you can plan out what your doing or when the campaign takes dramatic changes in scope or direction. If it turns out that the Campaign is going to take place on the Elemental Plane of Fire starting tomorrow, the Wizard is good with it. When a demon shows up in with a horde of undead? The Sorc is probably in a better position. A lot also depends what sources are open.
|
|
The Charisma thing is a current ruleset piece that I detest. Anything Spontanious casting (Cept for, I believe, the Inquisiter) can use magic because they are pretty. Makes no sense to me, I don't even consider CHA a mental stat at all except that it is not a physical one.
Charisma and appearance have nothing to do with each other. The woman with the striking looks, to whom no one pays any amount of notice or respect for is a low Charisma example. Then again there was a certain German demagogue, while fairly homely in appearance, moved a nation to war with the power of his oration.
Charisma is force of personality, and in that aspect, makes tremendous sense for the basis of a spontaneous caster.
Charisma does take one looks into account, though. This is why, in 2nd edition, the UA split the stat into CHA and COM. Some of the silliness with the COM Dazzle/stun stuff was over the top, but I am still a bit disappointed the Seventh Stat never made it into 3.0.