PDA

View Full Version : Why does eveyone say sorcerers are useless?



Shinizak
2009-06-02, 09:26 PM
Sorcerers are my favorite class!

The Glyphstone
2009-06-02, 09:28 PM
No one says sorcerers are useless. They are part of the Big 5, though Wizards outrank them due to sheer versatility. I think they're in direct competition with Druid for the #2 slot.

Doc Roc
2009-06-02, 09:28 PM
Not everyone says they are useless. There's a superb guide to them in my sig.

Many very respected people in the community favor them over wizards, particularly with full cheese power engaged. That said, they can be hard to play. But I really love them. I think they're much better party mates than wizards.

Ellye
2009-06-02, 09:29 PM
Who's saying that sorcerers are useless?
Usually you'll see people saying that sorceress are not as good as Wizards - that's still far, far away from being useless.


They are part of the Big 5, though Wizards outrank them due to sheer versatilityAren't those Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer?
Sorcerers are tier 2, right behind those, anyway.

RTGoodman
2009-06-02, 09:29 PM
I've never seen ANYONE say Sorcerers are useless. It's just that, since they're limited to a certain number of spells known AND learn spells slower than their more learned companions (i.e., Wizards), they're not quite as good.

If you take a look at the base class "tiers" online that show how powerful each class is, I think you'll still find that Sorcerers, along with Wizards, Druids, Artificers, and others, are up there in Tier 1.

Doc Roc
2009-06-02, 09:30 PM
I would be happy to talk about this seriously, if you will kindly read over Solo's Guide and the CO Cabal guide. :)

Goatman_Ted
2009-06-02, 09:30 PM
I'm curious: Is there anything beside a RKV that can match their spell output?

Because no bells are ringing for me right now.

edit:

Aren't those Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer?
Sorcerers are tier 2, right behind those, anyway.
Yeah. Sometimes Spell to Power Erudites are clumped up there with them too.

Swooper
2009-06-02, 09:30 PM
As The_Glyphstone (and likely, a bunch of other ninjas before me) said, no-one says they're useless. They're one of the best classes in the game. It's just that they're so overshadowed by wizards, who fulfil the same party role (and archetype to some degree), are much more versatile and get new spell levels earlier.

Edit: God damn. That was a LOT of ninjas in the less-than-two-minutes it took me to write that :smalleek:

RangerOfFortune
2009-06-02, 09:34 PM
If you take a look at the base class "tiers" online that show how powerful each class is, I think you'll still find that Sorcerers, along with Wizards, Druids, Artificers, and others, are up there in Tier 1.

Is there somewhere I could see these "tiers"? Never heard of them, but they sound interesting.

The Glyphstone
2009-06-02, 09:34 PM
Right, my bad. They're part of the Big 3, but get bumped into Tier 2 when non-core expands it to the Big 5.

Faleldir
2009-06-02, 09:35 PM
http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=21479288d97bd2362f44db54c483bd 58&topic=1002.0

Ellye
2009-06-02, 09:37 PM
Is there somewhere I could see these "tiers"? Never heard of them, but they sound interesting.Here it is:
Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played well, can break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.

Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer.

Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potencially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Note that the Tier 2 classes are often less flexible than Tier 3 classes... it's just that their incredible potential power overwhelms their lack in flexibility.

Examples: Sorcerer, Favored Soul, Psion, Binder (with access to online vestiges)

Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time.

Examples: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Wildshape Varient Ranger, Duskblade, Factotum, Warblade, Psionic Warrior

Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competance without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter unless that encounter plays directly to the class's main strength. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribue to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 6s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well.

Examples: Rogue, Barbarian, Warlock, Warmage, Scout, Ranger, Hexblade, Adept, Spellthief, Marshal, Fighter (Dungeoncrasher Varient)

Tier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. Has trouble shining in any encounter unless the rest of the party is weak in that situation and the encounter matches their strengths. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 4 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly.

Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, Paladin

Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters.

Examples: CW Samurai, Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner

And then there's the Truenamer, which is just broken (as in, the class was improperly made and doesn't function appropriately).

Sinfire Titan
2009-06-02, 09:38 PM
Wizards are GODs, Sorcerers are machine guns. Everything the Sorcerer does, the Wizard can too (Uncanny Forethought for spontaneous casting, better familiars, bonus metamagic feats) a full two levels before the Sorcerer can. The Sorcerer is limited in spells known, meaning one wrong choice at each spell level will haunt you for a good amount of time IC and OOC. The Wizard suffers from poor spells prepared for, at most, 24 hours.

The Sorcerer also has no class features past 2nd level (spells are a 1st level class feature that advances into higher grounds in my book). Wizard has them beat in that area.

It doesn't help that Metamagic and Item Creation actually requires more of an investment for Sorcerers than it does for Wizards, or that Wizards get spells sooner. The spell book issues can be averted a number of ways (spellshards from Eberron, tattooing the book on your person/familiar/allies, putting your spells on unusual materials such as coins, clothes, or other surfaces, Spell Mastery if desperate), but spells known can bite you in the ass from 1st level, on up. You can only start swapping spells at 4th level and every even level afterwards, and only one spell at a time. Your spontaneity is hindered by your spell selection easily, as DD spells cap out very quickly and only a handful are ever worth knowing at all (Wizards get around this problem with preparation).

It takes a lot of skill to make a spell list for a Sorcerer without gimping yourself. Even with the known methods of expanding your spell list, only a handful are worth it (Recaster, Runestaves, and Fiendblooded, as Sandshaper sucks).

Also Charisma only affects 5 skills (because what Sorcerer honestly puts ranks in Perform with the intent of doing something useful with it?), only 1 of which is a class skill for you (Bluff). Int affects skill points, Spellcraft (required for learning or creating spells, or using Counterspells at all), the Knowledges (all of which can be very helpful when IDing enemies, especially if you have Knowledge Devotion), and Craft (which can be broken or very helpful at the least).

NeoVid
2009-06-02, 09:41 PM
Has anyone else thought that the OP might be talking about 4e, where sorcs are generally considered to be short on damage for strikers?

The Glyphstone
2009-06-02, 09:45 PM
Then he should have specified his edition. With lack of evidence either way, people tend to gravitate towards the subject they can speak with authority or knowledge on, which for everyone so far appears to be 3.5?

Any 4E vets with knowledge of the subject want to answer the OP from that angle in case it is what he wants?


^FoE: There is a Sorcerer base class now, in one of the new PHBs. A damage-dealer who gets random bonus effects based on die rolls, if I remember right.

RebelRogue
2009-06-02, 09:46 PM
Wow! So many posts without anyone getting the joke/reference (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112900)!

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2009-06-02, 09:46 PM
I'm curious: Is there anything short of a RKV that can match their spell output?

Because no bells are ringing for me right now.

A Focused Specialist Wizard has just as many spells/day of each level as a Sorcerer on the low and high end. Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Warmage, and Favored Soul all use the exact same spells/day progression as Sorcerers do.

The Glyphstone
2009-06-02, 09:51 PM
Wow! So many posts without anyone getting the joke/reference (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112900)!

It's possible you are right - still, it makes an interesting topic of discussion nonetheless, and it'll distract us until next week's Monk thread.

Goatman_Ted
2009-06-02, 09:51 PM
A Focused Specialist Wizard has just as many spells/day of each level as a Sorcerer on the low and high end. Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Warmage, and Favored Soul all use the exact same spells/day progression as Sorcerers do.

But their rate of output?

RebelRogue
2009-06-02, 09:52 PM
It's possible you are right - still, it makes an interesting topic of discussion nonetheless, and it'll distract us until next week's Monk thread.
I see your point: At least it will be new pointless arguments :smallbiggrin:


(:smallwink:)

RangerOfFortune
2009-06-02, 09:53 PM
Thanks, Faledir and Ellye! Makes me feel kinda bad about my Ranger/Rouge and Swashbuckler...

P.S. sorry if I'm off-topic :smalleek:

Doc Roc
2009-06-02, 09:53 PM
A Focused Specialist Wizard has just as many spells/day of each level as a Sorcerer on the low and high end. Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Warmage, and Favored Soul all use the exact same spells/day progression as Sorcerers do.

Yes, and you lose a LOT of good spells as a focused specialist, and get cut off from abjurant champion as well as incantatrix as well. Probably Iot7v as well. This is before we start using our own strong kung fu. Besides, he meant spells per round, where it's basically true that outside of serious TO builds, nothing tops sorcerers.

Doc Roc
2009-06-02, 09:55 PM
Thanks, Faledir and Ellye! Makes me feel kinda bad about my Ranger/Rouge and Swashbuckler...

P.S. sorry if I'm off-topic :smalleek:

I find rouge very hard to apply :)

with an e
2009-06-02, 09:55 PM
A Focused Specialist Wizard has just as many spells/day of each level as a Sorcerer on the low and high end.
Not quite. Rings of wizardry do not double the spell slots from specialization, focused or otherwise.

ericgrau
2009-06-02, 10:00 PM
Focused specialists have limited selection on their extra spells, and still have the wizard's limitation of only being able to cast exactly what they prepared in the quantities prepared. A sorceror has just as many different spells to choose from and can pick any of them in any combination he chooses. If the wizard prepares duplicates then the sorc has more different spells to choose from.

The main advantage of a wizard is earlier access to high level spells. Most other advantages are disadvantages disguised as advantages.

Dark_Scary
2009-06-02, 10:02 PM
Not quite. Rings of wizardry do not double the spell slots from specialization, focused or otherwise.

No, but buying 6 pearls of power is cheaper then buying a ring of Wizardry for any level.

So. Still more.

Flickerdart
2009-06-02, 10:02 PM
Yes, and you lose a LOT of good spells as a focused specialist, and get cut off from abjurant champion as well as incantatrix as well. Probably Iot7v as well. This is before we start using our own strong kung fu. Besides, he meant spells per round, where it's basically true that outside of serious TO builds, nothing tops sorcerers.
If you don't ban Abjuration, it doesn't cut you off from those. And when you consider that the Sorcerer can only learn so many spells, they're really a lot more limited than even Focused/Master Specialists.

And then there's the Elf Generalist substitution levels. Ouch.

Sorcerers do get their own neat stuff though, such as Wings of Flurry, or Loredrake shenanigans. A Kobold sorcerer that does the Loredrake ritual effectively gains a new level, so he's caught up to the Wizard, and then his power becomes that much more apparent. Let the Wizard use his few spell slots! The Sorcerer has those spells too, with more slots! Who cares if he has only one spell of that level, he can use it to solve every problem.

The Glyphstone
2009-06-02, 10:03 PM
The main advantage of a wizard is earlier access to high level spells. Most other advantages are disadvantages disguised as advantages.

You're forgetting the flexibility of the wizard, which is why they hold the #1 spot. A Sorcerer can cast more than them, and if he picks his spells right, can have something that's effective in almost any situation. A wizard who plans right can have something that's the perfect answer for any specific situation - and if he doesn't, theres a number of ways for him to get it (leaving spell slots open, Spell Engine, Mage of the Arcane Order - though MotAO is sheer gold for Sorcerers if they jump through the hoops to qualify).

ericgrau
2009-06-02, 10:04 PM
... Given 8+ hours notice. That's not really much flexibility, and I explained why the sorcerer otherwise has much more flexibility. That advantage is really a disadvantage in that he's forced to cast exactly what he prepared and cannot combo as he chooses. Which is exactly what I covered in my last post, almost as if no, I did not forget the most common thing ever claimed about wizards and addressed precisely that point.

The Glyphstone
2009-06-02, 10:08 PM
If you do it right, he only needs....15 minutes preparation, I believe? Wizards are explicitly allowed to leave prepared slots empty and fill them later. If he's got access to Spell Engine from Spell Compendium, he can even replace spell slots he's already filled (but not cast).

The downside, of course, is that your wizard is deliberately lobotomizing himself for a portion of the adventuring day, but them's the breaks.

Flickerdart
2009-06-02, 10:09 PM
Yeah, but a Wizard can change his entire strategy overnight. Up against Undead? After a day, the Wizard now slings illusions instead of Enchantments. The Sorcerer is stuck with what he has: it will suffice if he chose spells right but it won't be perfect.

deuxhero
2009-06-02, 10:15 PM
There is absolutely no reason to stay in the class as soon as you can Prc out, the sorcerer has 19 dead levels (if you give up your familer like everyone does)

Dark_Scary
2009-06-02, 10:18 PM
The main advantage of a wizard is earlier access to high level spells. Most other advantages are disadvantages disguised as advantages.

A Sorcerer's "versatility" is a disadvantage disguised as an advantage.

Generally speaking having four choices for your lower level spells is not superior to the Wizard who has prepared one of each spell and can reuse additionals if he needs.

The only thing that really makes much difference is high level slots.

So compare two levels:

Level 11:
Wizard has 4 level 4 spells free in book, and 4 non bonus spell slots.
Has 4 level 5 spells free in book, and 3 non bonus slots.
Has 2 level 6 spells free in book, and 2 non bonus slots.

Wizard can prepare 9 different spells (or more with bonus) and/or can reuse spells in slots. 9 total slots (but more access to bonus slots then Sorcerer).

Sorcerer has 3 level 4 spells known, and 6 slots.
Has 2 level 5 spells known, and 4 slots.

Sorcerer can cast five different spells. But can cast multiples. 10 Slots, but lower level, and really only as many as the Wizard anyway from the bonus spell he can't access.

level 12:
Wizard has 4 level 4 spells free in book, and 5 non bonus spell slots.
Has 4 level 5 spells free in book, and 4 non bonus slots.
Has 4 level 6 spells free in book, and 3 non bonus slots.

Wizard can prepare and cast 12 different spells or more. Or double up. Has 12 slots total.

Sorcerer has 3 level 4 spells known, and 6 slots.
Has 2 level 5 spells known, and 5 slots.
Has 1 level 6 spell known, and 3 slots.

Sorcerer can cast 6 different spells. But can cast multiples. 14 total spells.

Now the question is, as a Sorcerer, how often have you faced a day where having one orb of force and one orb of fire would have been better then having just orb of force? As a Wizard, how often do you say, "damn, I really wish I had prepared nothing but Orb of Force because Orb of Fire was useless today."

If your DM literally throws encounters with the same traits against you for every encounter each day, and you can predict what you will be facing a level in advance, Sorcerer is better.

If you can't predict it in advance, a Wizard can prepare the same thing a Sorcerer can, only better, because he can prepare buffs ect.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-06-02, 11:52 PM
Focused specialists have limited selection on their extra spells, and still have the wizard's limitation of only being able to cast exactly what they prepared in the quantities prepared. A sorceror has just as many different spells to choose from and can pick any of them in any combination he chooses. If the wizard prepares duplicates then the sorc has more different spells to choose from.

The main advantage of a wizard is earlier access to high level spells. Most other advantages are disadvantages disguised as advantages.On even levels(so ignoring levels where the Sorc is a spell level weaker)The Wizard picks between all of his highest level spells each morning. The Sorc picks one spell for his highest level at level up. Which is more flexible?

And for those who say the Wizard has fewer slots, no. Again, on even levels when he doesn't have access to an extra full level of spells, and ignoring the Sorcerer's slightly increased MAD, the Specialist(or Elven Generalist) Wizard has the same number of spells of his highest level as a Sorcerer. Lower levels, the Sorcerer is slightly ahead(one slot of each level, which isn't much), but since low-level spells are generally less useful, it doesn't matter much.

And of course, all of that again was on levels where the Sorc isn't specifically nerfed. And it ignores what I view as the main advantages for a Wizard(bonus feats, Int instead of Cha, specialization ACFs[Abrupt Jaunt, Rapid Summoning, etc], and metamagic usage to name a few).

John Campbell
2009-06-03, 05:25 PM
It's worth noting that, while you get attribute bonuses to spells per day, you don't get them to spells known. This means that a Wizard with a good Int can prepare a greater variety of spells than the Sorcerer knows at most levels.

It's also cheaper and easier for the Wizard to overcome the limitations of spell preparation than it is for the Sorcerer to overcome his sharply limited spells-known. Wizards get Scribe Scroll for free at 1st level, and get bonus feats that they can use for Craft Wand or the like. And crafting magic items requires being able to cast the spell (or have someone else do it for you). That means that the Wizard, in his downtime, can scribe himself a library of half-price scrolls with all those utility spells that he's got buried in the back of his spellbook that you need when you need 'em, but that aren't really worth preparing every day.

The Sorcerer doesn't get the free feat, and, unlike the Wizard, who can scribe spells he knows but doesn't usually prepare, the Sorcerer can't scribe the spells that aren't among his spells-known anyway. So he's either got to buy those scrolls full-price, or burn one of his precious general feats on a crafting feat and go begging to the Wizard to handle the casting end of it.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-06-03, 06:28 PM
Wizards have greater Strategic flexibility, Sorcerers have greater Tactical flexibility.

Wizards, given eight hours, can completely change their line-up to deal with literally ANY situation, assuming access to spellbook with sufficient spells written in them.

Sorcerers, on the other hand, choose spells which are flexible, or have a number of uses, or are expected to be used a number of times per day. Then they choose metamagic feats which augment them, as necessary.

So, if something needs to Get Dead Now, a Sorcerer can decide "Hmm... that's a Caster, so here, play with a Reach Spell Touch of Idiocy". Or, "Charging Barbarian? Fine, let's see how you like a Ray of Exhaustion + Quickened Slow. Even if you make your save, you are still Fatigued and cannot charge, so no Ubercharging for YOU. Oh, and only a single attack per round now.

Now, a Wizard, with foreknowledge, can specifically prepare spells ahead of time.

"So, we're going into the Orcish Tunnels, so there's probably going to be a LOT of charging barbarians in there. Let's go with two Slow spells, a Sleet Storm if they have a Frenzied Berzerker, Dispel Magic in case they get a buffer, and... hmm... let's go with a Haste for the first round of the boss encounter. Those will be my 3rd level spells for the day."

However, if he gets something unexpected, his lineup may be somewhat suffering

"Crap! I didn't know there were going to be oozes in here, and I didn't prepare any fire damage, the only elemental damage I have is the Acid from the Acid Fog and the ice damage from Sleet Storm. I didn't bother with Scorching Ray because I figured the beatstick can handle damage output."

Wheras the Sorcerer grins and says "Okay, I got Scorching Ray as my 2nd level damage output spell. Let's fry those suckers!". or even better "Okay, I grabbed Acid Arrow instead of Scorching Ray, but I *DO* have Energy Substitution: Lightning, which it is also vulnerable to. So, Energy Sub: Lighting Acid Arrow!"

A well-prepared Wizard, with sufficent divination ability, is almost never taken unawares (unless he starts playing with the Joker Bard seen in my sig), so most people tend to say he is more powerful than the Sorcerer.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-06-03, 10:51 PM
Wizards have greater Strategic flexibility, Sorcerers have greater Tactical flexibility.

Wizards, given eight hours, can completely change their line-up to deal with literally ANY situation, assuming access to spellbook with sufficient spells written in them. The problem is the Sorcerer's 1 spell known of his highest level. That sharply limits how flexible he can be. He's either forced to rely on full-round casting from metamagic in order to be anything resembling flexible, or...well, what other option does he have? The Wizard is far more likely to know what he's facing 8 hours in advance(as well as able to leave slots open for 15 minute warning) than the Sorc is to know what he's facing a level in advance.

Also, that ignores the other advantages the Wizard has. A full level of advantage in getting new spell levels, the free feats at 1 and 5, the ability to take ACFs for the Familiar that do more than eliminate a needless nerf(metamagic), and the fact that Int>Cha. Start fixing those, then we can talk about spont or prepared being better.

Lycanthromancer
2009-06-03, 10:59 PM
Psions make MUCH better spontaneous 'casters' than sorcerers, mostly because they're A.) using a system specifically designed around spontaneity (rather than geared toward the way wizards handle things), and B.) have a class framework similar to the wizard (Int as a casting stat, a -potentially- great skill list, and bonus feats to prevent an entire class progression of dead-levels).

And even though they share the 'limited spell list' trait of a sorcerer, they're not nearly as bad (2 highest-level powers, through almost 75% of their class levels - the exceptions are at level 1, when they get 3, and the odd-numbered levels after 10, when they get 1), and their lower level powers augment to act similarly to higher level abilities (though at a cost).

If you want a 'sorcerer,' take a psion, rename and reflavor, and voila.

Saph
2009-06-03, 11:04 PM
The problem is the Sorcerer's 1 spell known of his highest level. That sharply limits how flexible he can be.

The best solution to this, IMO, is to pick lower-level spells that work at higher levels too. Scorching Ray is solid damage even at levels 7-9. Glitterdust is dangerous even to mid-level enemies. Ray of Enfeeblement, despite being a level 1 spell, is actually nastier at higher levels than low. Haste and Slow are still great even when the party are level 10. Etc. Once you get to level 7/8/9, you should have quite a few reliable spells.

- Saph

Trizap
2009-06-03, 11:24 PM
sorcerers are not useless, they just work differently.

me, I prefer sorcerers because well really someone else has already said it: a wizard caught unprepared won't really do as much good if what happens isn't what they prepared for.

meanwhile, a sorcerer can adapt to the situation and improvise better than a wizard.

and what someone else said was wrong: if a DM is unpredictable, its better to be a sorcerer than a wizard because said unpredictable DM will come up with challenges a wizard can't prepare against, while if a DM is predictable, a wizard is better because you can easily select the spells needed to prepare for any encounters thrown at you.

in short, the wizard is someone who uses the Xanatos Gambit (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/XanatosGambit), the sorcerer is someone who plays Xanatos Speed Chess (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/XanatosSpeedChess).

up against a DM, I'd rather pick the speedy chess player.......who knows what they can come up with......

Curmudgeon
2009-06-03, 11:47 PM
I'm curious: Is there anything beside a RKV that can match their spell output? Favored Soul, of course.

Mark Hall
2009-06-04, 12:05 AM
IMO, Wizards did not really understand the game they made with WD&D. The many changes made between AD&D and WD&D1 did a lot of damage to the power of melee classes, and to the projected value of the sorcerer. A few points on what did it:

1) Scrolls. Don't get me wrong; I love WD&D1 on scrolls, and intend to incorporate that into my AD&D games. However, it severely messed with the balance of sorcerers to give wizards access to their entire spellbook at any given time. In AD&D, it was common for wizards to say "I have the perfect spell for that... but I didn't memorize it today." With the ability to create scrolls, wizards in WD&D1 didn't have that problem... while they could go with reams of combat spells, there was always the utility of just having Knock or Wall of Fog on tap, if you needed it.

2) Study time. WD&D cut study time, for all wizards, to one hour a day, and Sorcerers to 15 minutes. In AD&D, it took wizards 10 minutes per spell level to memorize spells, meaning a WD&D wizard was ahead of the game about 4th level (when it would take a AD&D wizard 70 minutes to prepare his spells, and a WD&D wizard 60 minutes... and that only assumes base slots, not bonus slots from intelligence, which AD&D wizards didn't get). In an AD&D study time format, the advantage to sorcerers would be HUGE... they may not know as many spells, but they can be up and adventuring the next day, whereas the wizard has to spend days, even a week, preparing all his new spells.

3) Bonus slots. The inclusion of bonus slots benefits wizards and sorcerers equally except for 2 things. The first is that, by increasing the number of slots both have, it lessens a sorcerer's advantage in slots... they have a proportionally smaller lead on wizards, who can supplement things with now-readily-available scrolls. The second is that a Wizard's bonus-slot granting ability, Intelligence, is much more useful than a sorcerer's... a Wizard with a 20 Intelligence is doing better than a Sorcerer with a 20 Charisma, because 9 skills (including Language, but not including the many variants of Knowledge) are based on Intelligence, compared to 8 for Charisma. While Charisma includes the most versatile skill in the game (Use Magic Device), the sorcerer won't really have the skill points to put into a variety of skills. The wizard will, and can even afford the luxury of cross-class skills like UMD.

4) Class abilities. Wizards have them, even if it is a grand total of 5 feats over the course of 20 levels. Sorcerers do not. There is no good reason for this.

IMO, if you want to play what the sorcerer should have been, look at a Warlock. The blastiness, the sense of "magic is a part of this character", the ability to spam a relatively limited number of abilities... the Warlock is, in many respects, what they seem to have been shooting for with the sorcerer. If they'd de-emo them, and give a good rubric for converting spells into invocations ("a lesser invocation should be from levels X through Y as a spell magic"; can probably be reverse engineered pretty easily, though DM oversight would be needed), you'd have a great character to fill the sorcerer niche.

Waspinator
2009-06-04, 12:32 AM
Out of curiosity, has anyone tried to rewrite the sorceror class to even things a little? Giving it bonus feats, cutting metamagic time, etc?

Also, for both wizards and sorcerors, I'd be tempted to make familiar abilities dependent on total character levels. Makes familiars a little better after you start prestige-classing.

quick_comment
2009-06-04, 12:38 AM
I would give the sorc an extra spell known per spell level, and a crapload of heritage feats. Also, rapid metamagic feat for free at level 1, and bump up the casting progression so they arent a spell level behind the wizard.

holywhippet
2009-06-04, 12:38 AM
Which class is better also depends on your playstyle and type of campaign. If you aren't aiming to powergame and are just going for a class that can blast enemies with spells then the sorcerer is a good pick.

Sorcerers can be handy if you run into something that's a bit stronger than the party should be able to handle (like the campaign I played where the level 4 party picked a fight with a level 8 fighter backed by a few goblins and an imp). Being able to pump out more spells and just keep doing damage can ensure you win such a fight.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-06-04, 12:43 AM
Out of curiosity, has anyone tried to rewrite the sorceror class to even things a little? Giving it bonus feats, cutting metamagic time, etc?My fix is that Sorcerers get Eschew Materials at level 1, a bonus feat from the same list as the Wizard at 5th and every 5th after, the ability to specialize(same school rules as a Wizard) for an extra spell known at each level, metamagic has no casting time increase, and the ability to take any of the Wizard ACFs or PrCs that require specialization or sacrificing a bonus feat.

This leaves Cha being inferior to Int(which is too thematic IMHO to change, but some people swap Sorcs to Con-based casting, making them more SAD than anyone but a Druid), the spell level delay(which is too complicated to fix), and still some issues with the total number of spells known. Fairly balanced, IMHO, with the average Wizard, though still inferior to the epitome of Schroedinger.
Also, for both wizards and sorcerors, I'd be tempted to make familiar abilities dependent on total character levels. Makes familiars a little better after you start prestige-classing.they already are. Most of the Familiar abilities(HD, skill ranks, HP) are based on character level. Assuming you PrC out after 5 like a good little optimizer, you lose the boosts to Nat Armor(which will never be high enough anyways), Int(which doesn't really matter), SR(again, if your familiar is targetted it's dead anyways), and a couple special abilities. Making it based on your character level rather than Wizard levels helps a bit, but most of the time just isn't worth the trouble, and eliminates the only reason people have to not take a PrC at the first oportunity.

D_Lord
2009-06-04, 12:52 AM
I noticed something that gives much power to wizards. Misused Worth. Spell books and spells cost a bit, but most DM's just give them the spells for free and that lets them use that money for more spells. And smart DM's don't let Batmans exist, because the world should have a history. You think you're the smartest wizard. Well there is wizards before you, and if you are batman then they are and would have killed you before you get to 6 level spells. Batmans never really work in anything but really high powered magic camounbs. DM is much more powerful then Batman wizards, and most of them should stop them before hand because they don't fit in most canbanes worlds.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-06-04, 12:58 AM
My fix for Sorcerer was simple. Remove full-round casting for metamagic, and gains spells on the same level a Wizard does. Then add a Bloodline, which adds a spell per level, pre-defined based on Bloodline (similar to Domain), and gives nifty abilities roughly equal in power to a metamagic feat at 1st, 5th, and every 5 levels thereafter.


The problem is the Sorcerer's 1 spell known of his highest level. That sharply limits how flexible he can be. He's either forced to rely on full-round casting from metamagic in order to be anything resembling flexible, or...well, what other option does he have? The Wizard is far more likely to know what he's facing 8 hours in advance(as well as able to leave slots open for 15 minute warning) than the Sorc is to know what he's facing a level in advance

With Rapid Metamagic feat, there is no full-round casting from metamagic anymore. So yea, you can get a LOT of use out of those higher level spell slots. Trading in familiar for the PhB II variant isn't so hot anymore. Imbue Familiar beats it pretty hard, although it's still not Abrupt Jaunt. What the hell was WoTC thinking to give the strongest specialty the strongest trade-in-familiar ability?

The point you are missing is that the Sorcerer doesn't need to know what he is facing a level in advance. He chooses spells not on foreknowledge that this spell will definitely be needed at x time. He chooses spells based on 'how useful is this, in general, and how much use can I get out of it on a daily basis'. Thus while Wizards, with preparation ahead of time, can know they need Bat-Shark-Repellant, a Sorcerer always carries around a Taser Stick because while it is useful against sharks, it is also handy against random thugs in back alleys, and useful for frying circuitry.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-06-04, 01:00 AM
I noticed something that gives much power to wizards. Misused Worth. Spell books and spells cost a bit, but most DM's just give them the spells for free and that lets them use that money for more spellsOr charge them the 50 GP/spell level recommended in the PHB. Heck, it is perfectly possible to make a Wizard with no spells beyond those gained by leveling and do most of the things listed in the Batman guide, especially if you take the right spells(GSE) and Collegiate Wizard.
And smart DM's don't let Batmans exist, because the world should have a history. You think you're the smartest wizard. Well there is wizards before you, and if you are batman then they are and would have killed you before you get to 6 level spells. Batmans never really work in anything but really high powered magic camounbs. DM is much more powerful then Batman wizards, and most of them should stop them before hand because they don't fit in most canbanes worlds.WILL PEOPLE PLEASE STOP CONFUSING 'BATMAN' AND 'TIPPY'?!? A Batman Wizard takes spells that are useful in a variety of situations, tailored to what situations he epects for the day, mixing Battlefield Control, Debuff, Buff, and Save-or-X, and uses those spells to the best of their capabilities. He's not an immortal campaign-wrecker, he doesn't make the party useless(he turns an impossible fight into a cakewalk that the rest of the party then 'wins'), he's just the vehicle for delivering the right spell to the right location at the right time.

And will people please use a spell checker? I don't normally worry too much over the occasional error, but 'camounb'? Seriously?

Edit:
He chooses spells based on 'how useful is this, in general, and how much use can I get out of it on a daily basis'.And the Wizard doesn't? He just gets to pick his set of versatile tools on a daily basis instead of a level-by-level one.

Viv
2009-06-04, 01:02 AM
Mark,

To be fair, let's remember that in AD&D (1st and 2nd Ed), any mage could make any (non-clerical) magical item, and it didn't cost him/her any experience to do so, just time, gold and material availability. This means that a mage could easily store up a goodly chunk of magical might in advance. Doubly so, since the Staff of the Magi was just a magical item back then and not a minor artifact, and was hence considerably easier to obtain (theoretically, any mage could make one).

Also, with respect to guidelines for creating invocations, I remember seeing a thread -- I think over on the Wizards forums -- where one of the creators of the class mentioned their criteria. It essentially boiled down to, "Select a spell. Select the level at which a sorcerer can cast it as many times per day as they might reasonably want to. Look at the Warlock, and figure out the highest grade of invocation a warlock could cast at that level, and that's the type of invocation said spell would be."

Take the spell "fly" for example -- third level spell. A sorcerer can cast it three times per day straight up at level 6, and with the charisma you'd expect to see, four times. I think the DMG suggests 4 encounters per day? Okay, so you can cast fly as many times as you would reasonably want to in a day at level 6.

Fell Flight is a lesser invocation, which, lo and behold, becomes available at level 6.

Obviously, you have to be careful, but that's the basic process as I understand it.

BobVosh
2009-06-04, 01:06 AM
sorcerers are not useless, they just work differently.

me, I prefer sorcerers because well really someone else has already said it: a wizard caught unprepared won't really do as much good if what happens isn't what they prepared for.

meanwhile, a sorcerer can adapt to the situation and improvise better than a wizard.

and what someone else said was wrong: if a DM is unpredictable, its better to be a sorcerer than a wizard because said unpredictable DM will come up with challenges a wizard can't prepare against, while if a DM is predictable, a wizard is better because you can easily select the spells needed to prepare for any encounters thrown at you.

in short, the wizard is someone who uses the Xanatos Gambit (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/XanatosGambit), the sorcerer is someone who plays Xanatos Speed Chess (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/XanatosSpeedChess).

up against a DM, I'd rather pick the speedy chess player.......who knows what they can come up with......

I disagree. With scrolls the wizard should never have an issue. Also that is one of the "class features" that wizards have that sorcerers don't.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-06-04, 01:14 AM
I'd come up with a warlock variant which has 1/2 BAB, but gains one invocation per level, and expanded the invocation list a bit. Basic fire/ice/lightning was either a least invocation each, or a lesser for any of the three. Acid was Greater, as was Force. Burst was Lesser, so was Line. Cone was Greater.

Also threw in some handy utility stuff (One being Secure Shelter + Morinkain's Private Sanctum + Endure Elements, as a 'campsite' spell that isn't in an extra-dimensional space. MMM and Rope Trick not allowed) and some classics (rounds/level Force Wall or, as a Greatest, rounds/level Forcecage).

Didn't get any DR, although gained various elemental resistances by virtue of working with them so frequently. Also got an elemental companion rather than a familiar.

sonofzeal
2009-06-04, 01:24 AM
I'd come up with a warlock variant which has 1/2 BAB, but gains one invocation per level, and expanded the invocation list a bit. Basic fire/ice/lightning was either a least invocation each, or a lesser for any of the three. Acid was Greater, as was Force. Burst was Lesser, so was Line. Cone was Greater.

Also threw in some handy utility stuff (One being Secure Shelter + Morinkain's Private Sanctum + Endure Elements, as a 'campsite' spell that isn't in an extra-dimensional space. MMM and Rope Trick not allowed) and some classics (rounds/level Force Wall or, as a Greatest, rounds/level Forcecage).

Didn't get any DR, although gained various elemental resistances by virtue of working with them so frequently. Also got an elemental companion rather than a familiar.
Sounds pretty much like a Dragonfire Adept, doesn't it?

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-06-04, 01:32 AM
Sounds pretty much like a Dragonfire Adept, doesn't it?

Haven't seen much of the Dragonfire Adept's invocation list to give you an answer to that, however the class is far more "raw arcane forces" based than "Draconic Bloodline" based. I also wasn't aware a Dragonfire Adept got an elemental companion...

sonofzeal
2009-06-04, 01:34 AM
Haven't seen much of the Dragonfire Adept's invocation list to give you an answer to that, however the class is far more "raw arcane forces" based than "Draconic Bloodline" based. I also wasn't aware a Dragonfire Adept got an elemental companion...
Well.... DFA have 1/2 bab, elemental damage theme that they can upgrade and diversify on as they level, Endure Elements, and no DR (but they do get +NA instead). Similarities are striking, really.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-06-04, 01:46 AM
Well.... DFA have 1/2 bab, elemental damage theme that they can upgrade and diversify on as they level, Endure Elements, and no DR (but they do get +NA instead). Similarities are striking, really.

Not really

1/2 bab yea, they have in common. Elemental damage theme isn't common, because it's a variety of flavors of blasting, rather than one specific type based on your bloodline. Endure Elements is a part of the invocation Secure Shelter, to protect parties from bad weather while camping, not a general always-on ability. No natural armor, either. And elemental resistances are across the board rather than for your specific type.

Basically, the Arcanist can toss around something that looks a LOT like a Fireball, an unlimited number of times per day. It's a 10' ball of fire (or whatever other flavor he has the invocations to turn it into), with Reflex save for half damage. That requires the Burst invocation, which is a Lesser, and can be obtained at 6th level. Or he could do Lightning, or Cold, or Force, or Acid... depending on which invocations he has. Or he could do a cone, or a line. This class can be, if done properly, the ultimate in versatility in blasting.

DFA, on the other hand, are monochrome based on bloodline. So yea, not really all that similar.

tyckspoon
2009-06-04, 01:49 AM
Mark,

To be fair, let's remember that in AD&D (1st and 2nd Ed), any mage could make any (non-clerical) magical item, and it didn't cost him/her any experience to do so, just time, gold and material availability. This means that a mage could easily store up a goodly chunk of magical might in advance. Doubly so, since the Staff of the Magi was just a magical item back then and not a minor artifact, and was hence considerably easier to obtain (theoretically, any mage could make one).


Sure, no xp.. just lots and *lots* of time. The whole process would take weeks and possibly months to complete, by the default rules. Casting Enchant An Item over and over.. and then sealing the whole thing with a Permanency, which burns Con. And after all that, if you managed not to blow up your workspace during the work process, you get to throw percentile to find out if you actually made what you thought you were making. If you're just unlucky enough, you simply fail to make anything useful. If you're really unlucky, you accidentally made a cursed item which will probably kill the first person that tries to use it. You'd have to be insane to want to make permanent magic items under those rules (potions and scrolls were also obnoxious, but generally much easier to create.)

'course, AD&D being what it was, there were probably some variant rules somewhere that were more sane about item-creation. Especially in 2nd edition's assorted options splats.

sonofzeal
2009-06-04, 02:22 AM
Not really

1/2 bab yea, they have in common. Elemental damage theme isn't common, because it's a variety of flavors of blasting, rather than one specific type based on your bloodline. Endure Elements is a part of the invocation Secure Shelter, to protect parties from bad weather while camping, not a general always-on ability. No natural armor, either. And elemental resistances are across the board rather than for your specific type.

Basically, the Arcanist can toss around something that looks a LOT like a Fireball, an unlimited number of times per day. It's a 10' ball of fire (or whatever other flavor he has the invocations to turn it into), with Reflex save for half damage. That requires the Burst invocation, which is a Lesser, and can be obtained at 6th level. Or he could do Lightning, or Cold, or Force, or Acid... depending on which invocations he has. Or he could do a cone, or a line. This class can be, if done properly, the ultimate in versatility in blasting.

DFA, on the other hand, are monochrome based on bloodline. So yea, not really all that similar.
Actually, DFA are not constrained by bloodline at all. As far as I'm aware they don't even have to choose which bloodline they get at any point. If I remember correctly, all DFA start off dealing fire damage with their breath, then can upgrade it to add different elements as they level up, using the equivalent of "Eldritch Essence" invocations. They're very certainly not "monochrome".

Gorbash
2009-06-04, 03:43 AM
Wheras the Sorcerer grins and says "Okay, I got Scorching Ray as my 2nd level damage output spell. Let's fry those suckers!". or even better "Okay, I grabbed Acid Arrow instead of Scorching Ray, but I *DO* have Energy Substitution: Lightning, which it is also vulnerable to. So, Energy Sub: Lighting Acid Arrow!"

And he's going to know the weaknesses of an ooze just how...? :smalltongue:

Player knowledge vs. character knowledge, Shneekey.

Telonius
2009-06-04, 05:17 AM
Well, in terms of things the Sorcerer can do that the Wizard can't, there is the Loredrake/Greater Draconic Rite trick that makes you a Mystic Theurge with full Sorc20 casting. But that's taken directly from the Plane of Cheese and requires several feats.

Waspinator
2009-06-04, 07:43 AM
About magic item creation: the problem is that the whole XP thing just makes wealth by level even more distorted. You lose XP and make an item for less money than it would take to buy it, so you delay leveling up and increase your wealth. Honestly, you should either be getting a small amount of XP from the process (due to practicing your magic during the creation of the item) or at least not losing any. In many campaigns, the lost time should be enough of a penalty.

Curmudgeon
2009-06-04, 08:10 AM
About magic item creation: ... Honestly, you should either be getting a small amount of XP from the process (due to practicing your magic during the creation of the item) or at least not losing any. In many campaigns, the lost time should be enough of a penalty.
This only makes some sense in the bare context of magic users. But what about the rest of the party in this time? Rogues can be using their skills for some extra income, so they're covered. But what about martial types like Fighters? If Sorcerers are turning time into magic gear, thereby increasing their preparedness for later adventures, what's the Fighter going to get from that lost time?

I don't see how this can work without having the XP cost to make up for the increased survivability at the current level. Anything else just screws over the non-casting classes even worse.

Mark Hall
2009-06-04, 09:14 AM
To be fair, let's remember that in AD&D (1st and 2nd Ed), any mage could make any (non-clerical) magical item, and it didn't cost him/her any experience to do so, just time, gold and material availability. This means that a mage could easily store up a goodly chunk of magical might in advance. Doubly so, since the Staff of the Magi was just a magical item back then and not a minor artifact, and was hence considerably easier to obtain (theoretically, any mage could make one).

Compare requirements. To make a permanent magic item in WD&D, you need to be about 3rd level, and it will take you a few days... 1 day per 1000gp in base price, so to have an arsenal of basic stuff will take you a couple weeks, assuming you have the cash. It will also hit you for XP, but if you spend just under one moon cycle making magic items (25 days), you're talking only 1000xp. You can scribe scrolls for the same cost in time and XP at 1st level.

In AD&D, you need to be, IIRC, 7th level to scribe scrolls or brew potions, and 9th level to make permanent magic items... or higher, as I recall the process required permanency which, as a 7th level spell, wasn't available until 14th level. DMs were encouraged to make creating them a quest, requiring unique material and long periods of time to complete (I'm away from my books right now, but a month for a minor magic item wasn't unreasonable). Want to make a staff of the Magi? Well, you need wood from a particular tree. In order to get wood from that tree, you need a particular type of flower, bathed in a particular magical pool at a particular time. In order to get the flower, you need to defeat a particular monster, or even just spend days trekking through the jungle.

Yes, you got XP for making magic items in AD&D... but they are a massive time investment, and not available until higher level, and the XP value of magic items was fairly negligible in the face of level-increasing costs. Having custom magic items available at low level... even scrolls, potions, and wands... is a massive power boost to a wizard, who frequently doesn't have much else to spend money on (aside from their spellbooks).

derfenrirwolv
2009-06-04, 09:23 AM
Its not that their useless, its just that the wizard is better. I used to have an essay on this, can't find it, but here's the run down

1) Sorcerers lag behind wizards in spell progression

Wizards get the best spells sooner. They do more damage, screw the enemy more, and have a higher spell DC than a sorcerer can cast. It also gets boring playing for 4 levels so you can get your first second level spell.


2) Wizards can cast almost as many useful spells as the sorcerer

Because wizards get an extra level spell slot, they get their intelligence bonus and possibly specialization spells to go along with it.

3) The wizard gets bonus feats. The sorcerer gets.. NO class abilities after the familiar.

4) Prestige classes

These are just NOT made with the sorcerer in mind. Because the wizard can cast higher level spells faster he qualifies for prestige classes sooner (most prestige classes require that you be able to cast x level spell)

Prestige classes often require knowledge skills and other skills its hard for a sorcerer to get. They may also require feats, which the wizard has more of.

This is probably the biggest one on the list. Prestige classes are, lets face it, a power boost. Its one wizards can take more advantage of and sooner.


5) Intelligence, the better stat

Charisma is the penultimate example of a dump stat. Intelligence decides your skill points, giving more skill points per level. That lets you use know ledges to determine monster weaknesses, and fulfills the wizards secondary role as a librarian.

I also do not like to play dumb casters. I'm not inclined not to role play my sorcerers 8 intelligence if that's what i get stuck with.

6) The sorcerers skill list does not match their prime attribute

The only cha skill on a sorcerers spell list is Bluff. ONE skill matches the attribute they should have. They can't serve as the parties face because they don't have diplomacy (Bluff diplomacy and sense motive are the usually requirements for that role) The rogue, even with a low charismia, will be better at this than the sorcerer.

7) Grapple: Bad for wizards, death for sorcerers

Half the monster manual and their cousin has snatch, improved grab improved grapple. The stop motion nature of the game makes it hard for the meat shields to protect you unless its a narrow cooridoor.

A wizard against a DM who likes to use grapple monsters can take still spell. That doesn't work for a sorcerer. Using a metamagic feat like still spell increases the casting time to a full round action. Spells cast in a grapple can only be standard actions or less.

For example, when V had Xykon in the bigsby's grasping hand, Xykon shouldn't have been able to use still meteor swarm. The author kind of cheated, which blows a hole in Xykons "sorcerers are just as good as wizards" theme he's been going on about with Xykon....

.. sorry, completely irrational pet peeve. I think i'm done now.

8) Spell versitility

A wizard can be save or die, battlefield control, blasty, sneaky, melee monster or any combination thereof on any given day. A sorcerer is stuck with what they have. If he's blasty and the mission calls for subtly, he's out of luck. A wizard can also take a spell like sunburst, control undead, or banishment specifically to get rid of undead and oozes or other specific type of monster without sacrificing any of his power.


Anyway, thats most of why i think the wizard is better. Its not that their more useless than the fighter or the monk, its that their role is better served by something very similar to them.

Optimystik
2009-06-04, 09:56 AM
For example, when V had Xykon in the bigsby's grasping hand, Xykon shouldn't have been able to use still meteor swarm. The author kind of cheated, which blows a hole in Xykons "sorcerers are just as good as wizards" theme he's been going on about with Xykon....

.. sorry, completely irrational pet peeve. I think i'm done now.

Xykon, like any epic caster worth his salt, likely has an item that grants constant Freedom of Movement by now. Of course that means that he didn't have to blow up the hand to escape it, but can you imagine Xykon using a screwdriver when a sledgehammer would do?



5) Intelligence, the better stat

Charisma is the penultimate example of a dump stat. Intelligence decides your skill points, giving more skill points per level. That lets you use know ledges to determine monster weaknesses, and fulfills the wizards secondary role as a librarian.

I also do not like to play dumb casters. I'm not inclined not to role play my sorcerers 8 intelligence if that's what i get stuck with.

I agree with you (I hate playing dumb casters too, it's counterintuitive); you sound awfully like Master Fyron is SoD though.

Fyron: "They aren't very bright, but are strangely adept at magic."
Xykon: "Did... did you just compare me to the Rain Man??"

:smallbiggrin:

The Glyphstone
2009-06-04, 10:01 AM
Xykon, like any epic caster worth his salt, likely has an item that grants constant Freedom of Movement by now. Of course that means that he didn't have to blow up the hand to escape it, but can you imagine Xykon using a screwdriver when a sledgehammer would do?


Or, as an epic caster, he could have spent one of his feat slots on the absolutely indispensible Rapid Metamagic (min 12th level by skill requirements).

Optimystik
2009-06-04, 10:07 AM
Or, as an epic caster, he could have spent one of his feat slots on the absolutely indispensible Rapid Metamagic (min 12th level by skill requirements).

Didn't he quicken a spell at one point? That would mean he has it I think.

Waspinator
2009-06-04, 10:24 AM
This only makes some sense in the bare context of magic users. But what about the rest of the party in this time? Rogues can be using their skills for some extra income, so they're covered. But what about martial types like Fighters? If Sorcerers are turning time into magic gear, thereby increasing their preparedness for later adventures, what's the Fighter going to get from that lost time?

I don't see how this can work without having the XP cost to make up for the increased survivability at the current level. Anything else just screws over the non-casting classes even worse.

Easy. Guard duty. A high level fighter could probably easily get a job in whatever town or whatnot they're doing the item crafting in and wherever the rogue is doing his thing.

And I still question how the XP lost is a real penalty. Since you gain more XP than your party members if you are a level behind them, you tend to catch up. And the wizard/sorceror/artificer/whatever can make gear for everyone in the party, so everyone is benefiting. Especially if you use that one spell (I think it's from the Wizards site) that lets you transfer XP from one person to another for item crafting. Then everyone's on the same level with the same extra gear if you just sit back and let the caster do his thing.

Dagren
2009-06-04, 10:32 AM
2) Study time. WD&D cut study time, for all wizards, to one hour a day, and Sorcerers to 15 minutes. In AD&D, it took wizards 10 minutes per spell level to memorize spells, meaning a WD&D wizard was ahead of the game about 4th level (when it would take a AD&D wizard 70 minutes to prepare his spells, and a WD&D wizard 60 minutes... and that only assumes base slots, not bonus slots from intelligence, which AD&D wizards didn't get). In an AD&D study time format, the advantage to sorcerers would be HUGE... they may not know as many spells, but they can be up and adventuring the next day, whereas the wizard has to spend days, even a week, preparing all his new spells.Except that Sorcerers get more slots, so if you take 10 minutes per level per slot, they're even further behind than the wizard. How exactly you'd justify basing the time on spells known when wizards get it based off slots filled, I don't know. It's slots that get expended after all, not known spells.

valadil
2009-06-04, 10:45 AM
A wizard against a DM who likes to use grapple monsters can take still spell. That doesn't work for a sorcerer. Using a metamagic feat like still spell increases the casting time to a full round action. Spells cast in a grapple can only be standard actions or less.



I'm of the opinion that all real sorcerers have fast metamagic, either from the feat or from the PHB2 variant. With fast metamagic, they're happily playable. But I wouldn't even try without it.

Epinephrine
2009-06-04, 10:51 AM
Its not that their useless, its just that the wizard is better. I used to have an essay on this, can't find it, but here's the run down

I'm going to respond to some of your points.

1) Sorcerers lag behind wizards in spell progression
Abolutely. Wizards beat sorcerors here, hands down.

2) Wizards can cast almost as many useful spells as the sorcerer
Somewhat. Wizards have to pick their slots ahead of time, which can limit the use of "useful spells"

3) The wizard gets bonus feats. The sorcerer gets.. NO class abilities after the familiar.
Abolutely. I like the Pathfinder sorceror bloodlines for this, but in 3.5 they do suffer. On the plus side, there's no reason not to PrC.

4) Prestige classes
Yes, but this is a bit of overlap with point 1), and every sorceror will PrC, so they're still just a level behind.

5) Intelligence, the better stat
Yes, but charisma can be helpful. And bluffing can be useful with certain skill tricks/feats, Disguise Spell and so on come to mind.

6) The sorcerers skill list does not match their prime attribute
True.

7) Grapple: Bad for wizards, death for sorcerers
Disagree here, every sorceror worth his salt will have a way of not taking extra time on metamagic. Metamagic is (in games I've played in or run) what makes a sorceror powerful - the ability to apply it on the fly, rather than having to choose ahead of time which spell to still, to silence, to heighten...
The feat Rapid Metamagic is one way to do this, another is to take the Metamagic Specialist variant sorceror, sacrificing your familar. Of course, then you just obtain familiar with a feat if you want one.

8) Spell versitility
Sure, a wizard can be any combination of things on a given day, but he has to decide beforehand. A sorceror can as well - a good sorceror picks his spells to be useful at multiple levels, then uses Heighten Spell for example to keep it functional. Picking spells is tough as a sorceror, you don't want to overlap the same function over and over, you would rather expand what you can accomplish. By higher levels you should have a flexible spell list, filling many different roles - and you can decide on the fly which role to fill. Realise that the whole party NEEDS to be invisible? No problem, use your slots that way. Need a strong will save spell? You have a will save spell around, heighten it to the appropriate level.

This is where I have the biggest beef - I've played prepared casters, and it's awesome when you are in control. If you are deciding what you'll face, if you know what to prepare against, the world is your oyster. If you get caught with the wrong stuff prepared though, you can be in big trouble - and a sorceror that has been careful picking his spells and metamagic should never find himself in that situation.

I find it amusing to carry around a spellbook when playing a sorceror, and I like the Eschew Materials feat if I can afford it - nothing like having your spell component pouch (that you never use) and your spellbook taken from you, and still having access to anything you want.

derfenrirwolv
2009-06-04, 11:21 AM
First, since everyone is bringing up this point...

Fast metamagic isn't core. I don't know if it came from the PHB II or some other sourcebook that was comming in just as the big cookie cutter 4e was looming, but not everyone has it.


Somewhat. Wizards have to pick their slots ahead of time, which can limit the use of "useful spells"

What i mean by useful is the spell slots high enough to make any real difference in a fight, roughly the highest three levels of spell a caster can cast.



Yes, but this is a bit of overlap with point 1), and every sorceror will PrC, so they're still just a level behind.

Actually, its a train wreck of points 1, 3,5, and 6. They all conspire to keep the sorcerer from getting into the good prestige class



Yes, but charisma can be helpful. And bluffing can be useful with certain skill tricks/feats, Disguise Spell and so on come to mind.

Charisma is almost never used alone. its used in conjunction with bluff or diplomacy. At first level that +4 is nice. at 10th level the rogue with the 8 cha and 13 ranks of diplomacy blows you out of the water.


Sure, a wizard can be any combination of things on a given day, but he has to decide beforehand.

Which isn't that hard. You pick 3/4s of your spells for what you think you'll be facing and then 1/4's worth of general utility for when you get the curve ball. A wizard can have a greater variety of spells MEMMORIZED than a sorcerer knows.

You can also put old spells to different uses.

My wizard once had an interlude session where he had to go into combat with the spells he'd prepared to build his house. Walls of stone surrounded enemies, and were immediately doubled in hardness and hit points by a spell from the stronghold builders guidebook. Summon monster spells that were going to be used to summon heavy lifting and burrowing monsters instead summoned fighting monsters. Grease for the ropes and pullies tripped people up. Extended enlarge person mason went on the fighter, as did polymorph other (3.0 game) Illusion spells came in handy too ( I want you to build something that looks like THIS )

derfenrirwolv
2009-06-04, 12:03 PM
Oh, and let me add 9) quicken spell

At high levels this little gem is a beauty. Its an extra magic missle for free, or an extra mirror image when you need to attack and your opponent is throwing around rays.

Mattarias, King.
2009-06-04, 12:09 PM
You're forgetting one thing- In 4e, sorcerers can not only bend steel with their huge strength, but also reality itself.

Wizards can NOT top that manliness in any edition. :smallcool:

ZeroNumerous
2009-06-04, 12:28 PM
Fast metamagic isn't core. I don't know if it came from the PHB II or some other sourcebook that was comming in just as the big cookie cutter 4e was looming, but not everyone has it.

Everyone who brought up fast metamagic also stipulated that any sorcerer 'worth his salt' had it. And I'm inclined to agree that a good sorcerer has fast metamagic someway.

Mark Hall
2009-06-04, 12:31 PM
Except that Sorcerers get more slots, so if you take 10 minutes per level per slot, they're even further behind than the wizard. How exactly you'd justify basing the time on spells known when wizards get it based off slots filled, I don't know. It's slots that get expended after all, not known spells.

The time is not based off spells known... it's based off of slots filled. Sorcerers, by their concept, don't have to memorize/prepare spells, so their 15 minutes of preparation is negligible. In WD&D, you compare this to one hour... not that big of a difference. In AD&D, you compare this to 10min/spell level... which quickly adds up, especially for those who talk about spellcasters as 'port and dump and 'port, refilling the next day.

Epinephrine
2009-06-04, 12:31 PM
First, since everyone is bringing up this point...

Fast metamagic isn't core. I don't know if it came from the PHB II or some other sourcebook that was comming in just as the big cookie cutter 4e was looming, but not everyone has it.

Complete Mage and PH2. Yes, not core, but I can't imagine making a sorceror without them. Without fast metamagic sorcerors are WAY behind wizards, not even worth comparing them.


Charisma is almost never used alone. its used in conjunction with bluff or diplomacy. At first level that +4 is nice. at 10th level the rogue with the 8 cha and 13 ranks of diplomacy blows you out of the water.

So you stick to bluffing, using feats like disguise spellcasting. And you assist with diplomacy. It's a party-based game.


Which isn't that hard. You pick 3/4s of your spells for what you think you'll be facing and then 1/4's worth of general utility for when you get the curve ball. A wizard can have a greater variety of spells MEMMORIZED than a sorcerer knows.

Yes, I get that. So the wizard takes a few spells that might be great against a foe that can be affected by X, and some for foes that are affected by Y, and a few different elements or something for damage (if desired), and a few dispel magic*. Yes, they can be very powerful.

Sorcerors are a different kind of powerful. A sorceror can throw a dispel magic with every slot from 3rd and up, for example. The wizard probably had a couple of dispel magics, but if he used them too soon, or if you really needed more of them, he's stuck. The sorceror can just keep throwing them out there - use a 5th level slot for it, whatever - that's a heightened one. Sometimes it's more important to be able to cast a staple spell right then, than to have a bunch of other neat options that don't fit the bill.

A wizard might have some fly spells - if they are dispelled, he could be in trouble. Not so for a sorceror, if you can just use other slots for it. Sorcerors are different, and play differently. They have a different flexibility - a ton of flexibility on any given day as to how to spend their arcane power, but fewer specific spells to choose from.

If you don't get a ton of curveballs, the sorceror will be underpowered. If you never know what's next, if one day you might need 12 dispel magics to get through the day? That's where a sorceror can be handy - he can actually do that.

* Repeated mention of dispel magic purely for illustrative purposes; in a game in which enemies were frequently buffed like crazy, and we had a player tossing dispels nearly constantly.

Dagren
2009-06-04, 01:05 PM
The time is not based off spells known... it's based off of slots filled. Sorcerers, by their concept, don't have to memorize/prepare spells, so their 15 minutes of preparation is negligible. In WD&D, you compare this to one hour... not that big of a difference. In AD&D, you compare this to 10min/spell level... which quickly adds up, especially for those who talk about spellcasters as 'port and dump and 'port, refilling the next day.Well, if you want to screw wizards over without doing the same to sorcerers, of course wizards are going to come out of it worse. I'm just saying that if you apply the same rules to both, it's irrelevant, or in the wizard's favour. And if you don't? Well then the sorcerer is getting more slots for a fraction of the time. There's no way that makes sense.

Waspinator
2009-06-04, 01:27 PM
I find it amusing to carry around a spellbook when playing a sorceror, and I like the Eschew Materials feat if I can afford it - nothing like having your spell component pouch (that you never use) and your spellbook taken from you, and still having access to anything you want.

An idea I've wanted to do for awhile now is a Psion who carries around a bunch of frog legs, bat guano, and a book full of pig latin. Wave my hands around and mumble when manifesting a power and I could really confuse people.

derfenrirwolv
2009-06-04, 02:44 PM
Complete Mage and PH2. Yes, not core, but I can't imagine making a sorceror without them. Without fast metamagic sorcerors are WAY behind wizards, not even worth comparing them.

So you can't Imagine making a core sorcerer. The wizards rule sorcerers drool feeling probably comes from that :)



So you stick to bluffing, using feats like disguise spellcasting. And you assist with diplomacy. It's a party-based game.

I think the party would rather know what will kill the undead/ooze/abomination and how to get rid of the green stuff the undead/ooze/abomination left growing in the fighters abdomen.




Sorcerors are a different kind of powerful. A sorceror can throw a dispel magic with every slot from 3rd and up, for example. The wizard probably had a couple of dispel magics, but if he used them too soon, or if you really needed more of them, he's stuck.


Nope. Scribe scroll. You scribe scrolls of two things: Spells you almost never use (so you don't need to waste the slot) and spells you use ALOT. Dispel magic comes under the second catagory. Get some RP xp if you need to scribe :)




A wizard might have some fly spells - if they are dispelled, he could be in trouble. Not so for a sorceror, if you can just use other slots for it. Sorcerors are different, and play differently. They have a different flexibility - a ton of flexibility on any given day as to how to spend their arcane power, but fewer specific spells to choose from.

And if NONE of their spells are very handy they're screwed today and screwed tomorrow and the next day.

The main strength of the sorcerer is to cast the same spell over and over over a lot of encounters. But most groups i've played with have 1-2 encounters before resting or calling it for the night, because combat takes an hour if not two and we like to get some dungeoncrawling/investigating in.



* Repeated mention of dispel magic purely for illustrative purposes; in a game in which enemies were frequently buffed like crazy, and we had a player tossing dispels nearly constantly.

If you need 12 dispells.. oh look, my wand..

lsfreak
2009-06-04, 02:48 PM
Wands and scrolls are horrible for dispel magic. You've got a +5 to the dispel check instead of +10 (prepared) or more (greater dispel + obligatory CL increases that you have by the time you get it). You also don't scroll things you use a lot of, if anything you get it in a runestave or eternal wand so that you're not buying a few thousand gold in replacements every week.

TheOverlord
2009-06-04, 04:20 PM
I thought I would throw out an interesting idea.

I don't think that sorcerers are as underpowered as they say. The real problem is less in-game balance and more in how we cheat.

If spell lists and memorization is monitored and enforced you will see a huge drop in the utility of wizards in certain situations...because they have not prepared the right spells.

The problem is that we (almost everyone that plays 3.5) constantly cheats. Whether it be a little or a lot those "memorized" spells are fudged all the time. (That is not to say there are some hard-core DMs out there we audit this but I would say they are in minority by far)

The more we allow fudging of spell lists the more we hurt the sorcerer whose utility never changes based on preparation. The wizard is supposed to be a veritable force of arcane power when they have had time and the knowledge to plan ahead but when they are caught out of their element or what they planned for turns out to be different there power drops off sometimes a lot. Sure they will have a few back-up spells they always have "just in case" but pounding spell after spell...perhaps not so much. Now, I will say that a wizard who is full blaster will tend to not have much of a dip whenever combat hits...because that is what they are prepped for...but when utility is needed they won't have it...but that is a conscious sacrifice for being a one-trick pony.

Audit the prepared spells for the day of wizards and clerics and watch how your game changes. Try it out...just a few sessions. You may like it you may not...but you will be able to tell the difference...and perhaps you will find that the sorcerer can tell the difference as well.

The Overlord
D&D 3.5 Monster Advancer - Monster, NPC and Random Encounter generation, customization and advancement (http://www.monsteradvancer.com)

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-06-04, 04:28 PM
The problem is that we (almost everyone that plays 3.5) constantly cheats. Whether it be a little or a lot those "memorized" spells are fudged all the time. (That is not to say there are some hard-core DMs out there we audit this but I would say they are in minority by far)

The more we allow fudging of spell lists the more we hurt the sorcerer whose utility never changes based on preparation. The wizard is supposed to be a veritable force of arcane power when they have had time and the knowledge to plan ahead but when they are caught out of their element or what they planned for turns out to be different there power drops off sometimes a lot. Sure they will have a few back-up spells they always have "just in case" but pounding spell after spell...perhaps not so much. Now, I will say that a wizard who is full blaster will tend to not have much of a dip whenever combat hits...because that is what they are prepped for...but when utility is needed they won't have it...but that is a conscious sacrifice for being a one-trick pony.

Audit the prepared spells for the day of wizards and clerics and watch how your game changes. Try it out...just a few sessions. You may like it you may not...but you will be able to tell the difference...and perhaps you will find that the sorcerer can tell the difference as well.I have never cheated on that, or on any die roll. All of the arguments made so far have been based on people not cheating.


The Overlord
D&D 3.5 Monster Advancer - Monster, NPC and Random Encounter generation, customization and advancement (http://www.monsteradvancercom)USE A REAL SIG!

lsfreak
2009-06-04, 04:34 PM
Uh... yea, I'd say that the vast majority don't cheat. It's not hard past about level 5 to have a spell prepared for essentially every situation (though perhaps not every situation twice, that's why we have solid fog).

Mark Hall
2009-06-04, 04:49 PM
Well, if you want to screw wizards over without doing the same to sorcerers, of course wizards are going to come out of it worse. I'm just saying that if you apply the same rules to both, it's irrelevant, or in the wizard's favour. And if you don't? Well then the sorcerer is getting more slots for a fraction of the time. There's no way that makes sense.

It's not an arbitrary screw-job, however. The concept of sorcerers is "We don't have to memorize spells." That's why, instead of taking an hour to prepare spells, they've got 15 minutes in WD&D... a difference, but not a significant one.

And, leaving aside that issue, if you're not willing to accept it as a rationale, you've got the rest of it. Scrolls (and magic item creation in general), which vastly favor wizards, with their larger pile of spells known. Bonus slots lessening the impact of additional slots for being a sorcerer. Wizards have bonus feats that sorcerers do not. A better prime stat. As others mentioned, wizards are better prepared for most mage-oriented prestige classes. One I neglected to mention was the decrease in effectiveness of blasting spells... not especially a hard hit for the sorcerer, but it does reduce the effectiveness of spamming a single spell, vs. having a suite of spells which can be used in combination.

Talya
2009-06-04, 07:17 PM
While nobody debates the power of a prepared wizard is better than anything, in real play it never works that way, unless your DM is a pushover. Nobody is always prepared. No matter how much you think you are, you are not "The God Damn Batman (TM)." You can cast divinations all day and a good DM will still surprise you, without screwing over your divinations in the slightest. Most days, you end up choosing your spells much like a sorcerer does when they level...by guessing what's going to be most useful for the greatest number of situations. And you know what? Usually its enough, because spells are just that good. But you never know when you're going to be entirely mislead because that divination pitted you up against a red dragon. You didn't know it's an advanced red dragon with class levels, special gear, and non-standard ability scores.

Sure, if your DM only puts you up against 2 encounters every day that you expect, or he lets you work out your encounters so that YOU are choosing them, and not the DM, then you'll dominate. And no sorcerer is ever beating a wizard prepared to fight him in a caster's duel, at least not if he's remotely familiar with the sorcerer's spell list, it's just not happening. A prepared wizard is virtually unbeatable. They're just not as hard to catch unprepared as people seem to insinuate. And things are not perfect, even when you get the plans right. Not all spells with saving throws or that allow SR go as planned. All it takes is one natural 1 on an CL check--even with assay spell resistance active that fails (yes, there's a feat somewhere that lets you take 10 on CL checks, but most casters don't have it, and if you do, you gave up something else for it anyway), or natural 20 on an enemy's saving throw, to throw the best laid plans out the window. Yes, you can stack the odds in your favor. And yes, a wizard tends to have more power, at least at higher levels, than just about any other class, but it's by no means absolute. Much of this game is "paper/scissors/stone," prepping for one thing precludes having prepped for something else.

And, there are so many ways for a sorcerer to gain access to more spells than the norm, and even swap them out in the morning (runestaves are a great thing), they have a certain amount of flexibility that way too. Not nearly as much as a wizard, and overall on the powerscale, nobody would sanely rank a well-played sorcerer at the same level as a well-played wizard. There is no question about that, but it's not as absolute as most wizard-fans would have you believe, nor is the flexibility of the sorcerer useless, by any means. There are even a few days when the wizard can't even come close to the usefulness of a sorcerer, rare as they are. It's the impulsive person who leaps in and plans on the fly that generally wins a race, not the one that sits back and plans his route. Recklessness kills wizards, but sorcerers thrive on it.

holywhippet
2009-06-04, 07:24 PM
5) Intelligence, the better stat

Charisma is the penultimate example of a dump stat. Intelligence decides your skill points, giving more skill points per level. That lets you use know ledges to determine monster weaknesses, and fulfills the wizards secondary role as a librarian.

I also do not like to play dumb casters. I'm not inclined not to role play my sorcerers 8 intelligence if that's what i get stuck with.


You can sort of work around this but the cost might not be worth it. Take your first level in rogue and shove the skill points into whatever areas you want. Then you can spend your skill points as a sorcerer to top off whatever skill(s) you like most.

Of course that means losing a level of advancement in a class that's already 1 level slower than the wizard when it comes to spell levels. The 1d6 sneak attack damage can come in handy from time to time though.

Curmudgeon
2009-06-04, 07:32 PM
Charisma is the penultimate example of a dump stat. ... and the ultimate example is?

The Glyphstone
2009-06-04, 07:43 PM
... and the ultimate example is?

Appearance, of course. :smallbiggrin:

valadil
2009-06-04, 09:02 PM
The problem is that we (almost everyone that plays 3.5) constantly cheats. Whether it be a little or a lot those "memorized" spells are fudged all the time. (That is not to say there are some hard-core DMs out there we audit this but I would say they are in minority by far)


So you're saying wizard is better because it's easier to cheat with prepared spells than with a sorcerers set in stone list? Remind me to never game with you.

That said, I'm not interested in debating how often cheating actually happens in games. I'm sure it varies from group to group and there's no way to be totally sure what percentage of gamers cheat. How do you feel about wizards and sorcerers as written, with no spell list fudging?

Mike_G
2009-06-04, 09:31 PM
The Sorcerer doesn't need to, and should never, IMO, dump INT. It's too good a stat.

Now, yes, CHA is more important, but those extra skill points, and the bonus to Knowledge and Spellcraft skills make it worth putting a decent score in INT.

I always dump WIS, and take Force of Personality which lets you use CHA instead of WIS for your Will save. It's in either Complete Scoundrel or Complete Adventurer.

So, the whole "I don't want to play a caster with an 8 INT," isn't really an issue, since you don't have to. What does a Sorcerer need STR for? Or WIS if you take the feat? INT should rate up with CON and DEX as good secondary stats.

Eldariel
2009-06-04, 09:45 PM
The Sorcerer doesn't need to, and should never, IMO, dump INT. It's too good a stat.

Now, yes, CHA is more important, but those extra skill points, and the bonus to Knowledge and Spellcraft skills make it worth putting a decent score in INT.

I always dump WIS, and take Force of Personality which lets you use CHA instead of WIS for your Will save. It's in either Complete Scoundrel or Complete Adventurer.

So, the whole "I don't want to play a caster with an 8 INT," isn't really an issue, since you don't have to. What does a Sorcerer need STR for? Or WIS if you take the feat? INT should rate up with CON and DEX as good secondary stats.

Wis still opens up Arcane Disciple, one of the better ways to add spells to your list. And if you're the face, Sense Motive is handy. Otherwise, dump away.

Saph
2009-06-04, 10:23 PM
I always dump WIS, and take Force of Personality which lets you use CHA instead of WIS for your Will save. It's in either Complete Scoundrel or Complete Adventurer.

Partly right. It's from Complete Adventurer, and lets you sub Cha for Wis for Will saves against mind-affecting spells and abilities. A lot of Will saves are mind-affecting, so it's still a good feat - but it makes dumping Wis a gamble. If someone slaps you with a Glitterdust, you're in trouble.

I've taken to bringing this up whenever someone shows me a character sheet with Force of Personality written on it, since I've noticed that a lot of people, for whatever reason, seem to forget about the 'vs mind-affecting' disclaimer.

- Saph

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-06-04, 10:27 PM
Dump Wis, take Ruin Delver's Fortune

Mike_G
2009-06-04, 10:31 PM
Partly right. It's from Complete Adventurer, and lets you sub Cha for Wis for Will saves against mind-affecting spells and abilities. A lot of Will saves are mind-affecting, so it's still a good feat - but it makes dumping Wis a gamble. If someone slaps you with a Glitterdust, you're in trouble.

I've taken to bringing this up whenever someone shows me a character sheet with Force of Personality written on it, since I've noticed that a lot of people, for whatever reason, seem to forget about the 'vs mind-affecting' disclaimer.

- Saph


Ah.

Didn't realize that. I still think it's a good feat choice when you probably maxed out your CHA, and get little other benefit from WIS.

I still say dumping WIS is better than dumping INT, and no Sorcerer should have a higher STR than INT, so I'm not sure where the concept of the Rain Man Sorcerer is coming from.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-06-04, 10:34 PM
Well some people roll stats and maybe Str, Int, and Wis all came out poorly.

Shinizak
2009-06-07, 04:05 PM
Wow! So many posts without anyone getting the joke/reference (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112900)!

Actually there was no joke, that was just an incredible coincidence...

:smalleek: