PDA

View Full Version : My GM hates Wizards...



Desril
2010-07-19, 08:19 PM
My favorite (and current/usual) class is a wizard. In the 5 or so campaigns that we've played, he has never left a single spellbook or scroll anywhere. I've never found one I could buy or borrow. The only spellbook I had was when he allowed one of our players to DM a dungeon and that player had an enemy wizard as an opponent.

To quote a recent conversation we had on the subject of spellbooks,

GM: "I hate wizards with a vengence."
Me: "Why? You love Druids. They're arguably MORE powerful, so it can't be a power issue."
GM: "I just hate Wizards. They are so agrivating. Especially since WoTC seemed to decide to tip all the Arcane castingness into once side of the drum, leaving Sorcerers high and dry."
Me: "So you hate them because they outclass Sorcerers and WotC hasn't bothered buffing Sorcs?"
GM: "I hate them (because they're agrivating) and because WotC tossed all the arcaniness into the Wizard basket. I don't like that Wizards "take away" from another class by being "IT" just more so. I also wish they had done Rouges better. Sneak Attack is great but that's pretty much all they got."


So, I seek the opinion of the forums and the knowledge any of you may have that can prove that wizards don't "take away" from sorcerers for being basically the same, just "better".


Note, all of this just happened through IM and I had his permission to post this because we're both curious as to how the GitP forums feels about it.

*Edit* I'm not saying wizard's AREN'T better than sorcerers, merely trying to prove that WotC doesn't ignore sorcerers and only give fun things to wizards, and is no reason to restrict the wizard's spells known.

Prodan
2010-07-19, 08:21 PM
It sounds like he's made up his mind and no amount of evidence will convince him otherwise.

Connington
2010-07-19, 08:23 PM
What's there to talk about, really? Wizards are better than sorcerers. They probably did get more attention for WoTC, but how much was "stolen" is certainly up for debate.

Kylarra
2010-07-19, 08:25 PM
It's an infinity+1 scenario, but yes, in most cases, wizards are better than sorcs, if only because they can do the exact same thing and still have more tricks.

Snake-Aes
2010-07-19, 08:29 PM
He is overreacting by hating wizards for being better, but wizards simply are better. Arcane? Wizard.

Remmirath
2010-07-19, 08:45 PM
Wizards certainly did, by default, get the better end of the arcane power deal than sorcerers. However, having sorcerers be pretty much equal is just a house rule or two a way (removing the limited meta-magic rules on sorcerers takes care of most of the difference right there). He could just go for that.

Also, I like sorcerers, but honestly - wizards came first (okay, technically, magic-users came first - wizard was their evolution, not sorcerer). If anything's doing the taking away, it logically is the sorcerer.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-07-19, 08:47 PM
There are some Sorcerer-only spells that are the basis of a variety of dirty tricks, but in most practical settings a wizard will outperform an equally optimized sorcerer.

But don't hate the player, hate the game. If he feels Sorcerers got the short end of the stick (even if it's a very nice stick), buff the Sorcerer. Have them advance spells a level ahead, at the wizard's progression, like they should have been. Give them more spells known and unique class feature options, like in Pathfinder. Perhaps make the metamagic specialist ACF a standard class feature on top of the familiar to give them even more versatility. Eliminate the sorcerer and have your "spontaneous" caster be the Psion. There are a lot of ways to go about this without hating on the wizard.

CubeB
2010-07-19, 08:48 PM
Typically, if a DM hates a particular class that much, they should just ban it. No need to be all passive aggressive about it. Ask him if you can respec to sorcerer.

Also, if I remember correctly, the Wizard actually predates the Sorcerer. Sorcerers were created as a new flavor of Arcane Caster in 3.0. I think.

Plus sorcerers get access to tons of stuff. Sorcerer only feats, Prestige Classes that require the ability to spontaneous cast arcane spells, templates allow you to cast spells as a sorcerer. If it's related to natural magical talent and it's not an SLA or Supernatural Ability, Sorcerers are usually involved.

Mnemnosyne
2010-07-19, 08:52 PM
It could be far more logically argued that sorcerers 'took away' from wizards, considering wizard is pretty much the classic 2nd Edition Mage, while sorcerer is...a ridiculously limited class that I couldn't quite imagine actually playing (but then that's partly because I tend to have an obsession with having to be capable of learning EVERY SINGLE SPELL EVER).

Vangor
2010-07-19, 09:15 PM
Wizards are a class meant for preparation and investment, and when two classes do the same task of casting spells from the same list but one eliminates choice and preparation...the other will probably be stronger. Sorcerers are fantastic when copious fireballs can win the day, but they were made a similar time the Tarrasque was considered a terrible foe, and the concepts of engagement were simpler.

Besides, to not include scrolls flatly is idiotic. He can limit spell selection all he desires while giving a resource to make rogues less weak with UMD. His notion of sneak attack being all rogues have going for them and his idea Wizards took anything from the simplified version of the arcane caster who has a plethora of class or class ability (spontaneous arcane spellcasting) content suggests he probably gets flustered with real bookkeeping and therefore thinks anything involved is stupid.

Rasman
2010-07-19, 09:49 PM
so applying Meta Magic Feats just because you want to makes Sorcerers weak...I see...

Sorcerers are much better than your DM thinks they are, probably the best way to show that is just to try playing one yourself, they require more planning than a Wizard, but being able to hurl Maximized Fireballs because someone made you angry is nice...frankly, a well planned out Sorcerer has the potential to be better than a Wizard because of the limitations, Not to mention that "blow for blow" you're probably going to outlast the Wizard and once he's down to Acid Splash, he's done

I'd also say that you're probably right about the druid thing as well, Wall of Thorns shouldn't be able to kill Giants like that...

Leon
2010-07-20, 11:32 PM
So take a break and play something different. Let him hate wizards and move on.

I hate gnomes, you can play one in my games but your gonna get the short end of the stick for it (that and samurai).

Greenish
2010-07-21, 12:31 AM
frankly, a well planned out Sorcerer has the potential to be better than a Wizard because of the limitations, Not to mention that "blow for blow" you're probably going to outlast the Wizard and once he's down to Acid Splash, he's doneFocused specialist can match a sorcerer spell for spell, while being a spell level ahead. Then obviously you can get some spontaneous casting for wizard too, for flexibility, while still enjoying the ability to have more situational spells. (For example, you most likely won't be casting Mage Armor or Teleport again and again every day.)

Tshern
2010-07-21, 01:44 AM
So take a break and play something different. Let him hate wizards and move on.

I hate gnomes, you can play one in my games but your gonna get the short end of the stick for it (that and samurai).
Your games sound like a riot. Whenever I enter a game I look forward to being discriminated simply because the DM doesn't like a race, but allows it anyway.

Rixx
2010-07-21, 01:45 AM
Wizards are very hatable.

Skeppio
2010-07-21, 01:50 AM
I'd say just play a sorceror. They're like the wizard, just without making everyone else in the party obsolete, unless you're all tier 1 classes.

Kurald Galain
2010-07-21, 02:26 AM
Well, there's a reason why the design company isn't called "Sorcerers of the Coast"...

Hawriel
2010-07-21, 02:37 AM
The wizard class has never stolen any thing from the sorcerer class. It has been around sence the begining of D&D. The sorc is the new kid.

Wizards do not shar spell books. Knowledge is power. You do not share your power with others. It weekens you and makes them stronger.

Why had D&D devalved into somthing whare children are aguring what class is better? Its like fighting over wich mortal combat character is most powerful.

Greenish
2010-07-21, 02:47 AM
Why had D&D devalved into somthing whare children are aguring what class is better? Its like fighting over wich mortal combat character is most powerful.Metagame (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Metagame) is serious business.

mint
2010-07-21, 04:12 AM
Have you showed your DM knowstones from Dragon Magazine?
Your DM should be reigning in your spells known as a wizard though, if only to tune your power-level to the rest of the party.

HunterOfJello
2010-07-21, 04:16 AM
If a DM has a particular hatred of a game feature, just go ahead and avoid it. The DM should have just outright banned the class and told everyone involved of that before the group even met for the first planning session, if that's how they feel.

~

DMs can develop all sorts of weird likes and dislikes of the game, and since they can create the rules, they have the option of removing or changing those features.

I have lots of custom rules in my games like removing the Use Rope skill.

Also, I hate Paladins and Monks, so I told all my players before the first session of our current campaign that Paladins and Monks were banned. One wanted to play a Monk, and I showed him several alternatives that he might enjoy based on the same character type. Since he had plenty of warning in advance, everything turned out smoothly.

FelixG
2010-07-21, 04:31 AM
Show your GM the nuclear sorcerer to prove that Sorcs can hold their own ~.^

Uec
2010-07-21, 04:42 AM
So let me get this right?

Your GM hates wizards with a passion - a fiery flaming passion from the nether regions of hell. And this is well known to all of his players.

Yet you choose to play a wizard for the fifth campaign in a row? I really don't see what you have to complain about, you knew what was in store for you if you made a certain choice, then went ahead and made that choice, and now you're complaining about the consequences.

Now, it probably would have been better if he had just banned the class.

742
2010-07-21, 05:23 AM
Wizards certainly did, by default, get the better end of the arcane power deal than sorcerers. However, having sorcerers be pretty much equal is just a house rule or two a way (removing the limited meta-magic rules on sorcerers takes care of most of the difference right there). He could just go for that.

Also, I like sorcerers, but honestly - wizards came first (okay, technically, magic-users came first - wizard was their evolution, not sorcerer). If anything's doing the taking away, it logically is the sorcerer.

i think there was an alternate class feature where you forfeit your familiar to remove metamagic casting time penalty, and i think a feat that gives you a familiar.

also, rangers take away from fighters. only two fewer potential hit points but more than three times the skills, spellcasting, an animal companion, favored enemy, better saves, and a few bonus feats too on top of all that? thats just rubbing it in
dont even get me started on the non-core classes that "take away from" fighters, or how every class "takes away from" monk.

not everything was well designed or well thought out, often they realized their mistakes after the fact, and of course fan favorites got more attention. the magical super-nerds who carry around big books and make people die by knowing things being popular in D&D!? who could seen that coming, other than a wizard i mean?

Murdim
2010-07-21, 05:28 AM
A possible compromise is to limit the number of spells a wizard can know. Let's say a wizard can only "master" a limited number of pages in his spellbook, that increases with his level and Intelligence. In order to prepare a spell, the wizard needs to both have mastery of the spell, and have it in his spellbook. He automatically masters the two spells he gets at each new level, but needs to study for several days for each additional spell he wants to master.

Another one is to make the (specialist) wizard a sorcerer-based variant : lose some versatility in your choice of spells, gain one more spell known of your specialty and a more interesting casting stat.



Wizards do not shar spell books. Knowledge is power. You do not share your power with others. It weekens you and makes them stronger.
What about Good-aligned wizards ? Or heck, even Neutral wizards who are devoted to the spread of knowledge ? The stereotypical wizard may be a selfish, asocial, cowardly, power-hungry caricature of a nerd, but player characters tend to subvert stereotypes.

Wings of Peace
2010-07-21, 05:28 AM
Why get caught up in the commotion of Wizard versus Sorcerer? Re-spec to Generic Spellcaster today! :smallsmile:

Oslecamo
2010-07-21, 05:29 AM
If a DM has a particular hatred of a game feature, just go ahead and avoid it. The DM should have just outright banned the class and told everyone involved of that before the group even met for the first planning session, if that's how they feel.


However, do notice that he's only preventing the wizard from learning extra spells. Even with "just" 2/spells per level a wizard is still quite powerfull and more than capable of doing his job. You still have your extra feats and are still learning higher level spells earlier than the sorceror. You just won't be able to know every trick on the book.

Really, it's not as much hating but more like reigning down.

After all, if you played a cleric, DMM was banned and undeads never showed up you would still be a freaking fullcaster even if you had nothing to do with your turn undead atempts.

Frog Dragon
2010-07-21, 06:05 AM
I agree with the point that if it has been established that he hates wizards so during 5 campaigns, then you shouldn't play one.
However, facts are that the spell list is the "Sor/Wis" list. There are no seperate sorcerer and wizard lists, with a few minor exceptions. These exceptions are essentially slanted in favor of the Sorcerer (Wings of Cover anyone?)
Both classes get essentially the same tricks, but the wizard gets more of those tricks, though they have less on the spot access to their list.
Your DM's reasons for this hate are flawed though since the classes wizard and sorcerer fill the same niche anyway! The wizard may do it slightly better, but it doesn't matter that much. The sorcerer has his own recourses.
Suggestion for the DM. How about allowing the sorcerer's to cast metamagic in the same time wizards do? This makes them the kings at metamagic, because they can apply it spontaneously.
On topic of classes not sorc or wiz. It is a well known fact that at around level 6 and above, the caster classes start to overtake the other classes. This is not a problem with the wizard class. This is a problem with caster classes in general.
If you wish to make the rogue and the fighter better, show them ToB and Dungeonscape. The first contains Warblade, Crusader and Swordsage and the latter contains the Factotum. Warblade is essentially Fighter-fix, Crusader is Paladin-fix and Swordsage is something else, mainly monk-fix. The factotum can do anything basically, in limited amounts. He gains access to 1 or two spells per day and draws on Int score for everything. All skills as class skills too. Great class.
In addition, I feel the DM is underestimating the rogue. I'm running a game where I have a rogue player (who also has two levels of factotum variant with warlock invocations instead of spells but anyway). This character looks quite weak on paper, but in the hands of a canny player, like the one playing that particular rogue, the character shines both in power and in rp. You wouldn't believe how useful at will spiderwalk is! And the skill uses too. The skill points those classes get is not to be underestimated, nor is the class skill list. It is great. Far more valuable than BAB, that's for sure. There's a reason rogue is tier 4 and not 5. Well played, it can be brought to tier three. No opti-fu needed.
Fighter doesn't really have hidden power like this, since the fighter's problem is lack of options instead of the power of those options. However, we have an easy fix for the fighter. Play a warblade. If you don't want to play a warblade, play one of those fighter fixes floating around here. I have a thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=159429) for this. I like the bears with lasers fix myself.
Just my (very long and wall of texty) 2 cp.

Leon
2010-07-21, 06:18 AM
Your games sound like a riot. Whenever I enter a game I look forward to being discriminated simply because the DM doesn't like a race, but allows it anyway.

Well Ive not actually had anyone play a gnome thus far. The samurai however... had a short miserable life after being warned about them and ended its own life in Sepaku after its katana was sundered.


Moot point now anyway as the setting i like to play in has neither race or class

valadil
2010-07-21, 10:25 AM
Even if your GM is right and wizards do trump sorcerers, so what? Unless you have a sorcerer in the group whose niche is taken away by the wizard, it really doesn't matter that wizards outclass sorcs.

Volomon
2010-07-21, 11:11 AM
Well, you should see the one DM I played with he hated the mere notion of Enlarge/Shield. Mere level one sorcerer. I still haven't wrapped my mind around it because I'm using PHB spells god forbid I use anything else. Wait till he sees Alter Self combined with those two.

Provengreil
2010-07-21, 12:07 PM
perhaps the DM doesn't like the ridiculous amount of power wizards can get to? or maybe he can't handle your level of optimization? maybe he just doesnt like your reasons for making certain decisions?

2 things:

1. I'm running campaign in which my wizard died, and he asked if he could have fighter bring back his old spellbook. I said no, because if i had said yes he would have chosen only spells his previous character didn't know, and basically doubled up his spells known. I wasn't going to reward him for dying, but your DM might just not want you to learn every spell ever.

2. I recently had a heated debate with a friend over why, in his games at least, every NPC arcane caster has 1 level in mindbender. all the reasons he gave me were based entirely on optimised stats, and general metagame. there was no credence given to the fact that different people would have different thoughts, goals, and style. near the end he claimed the most "generic" wizard was Wiz 3/Master Specialist 10/Archmage 5, with a 2 levels to put toward anythingmindbender. maybe your DM wants to see some variety.

Tyndmyr
2010-07-21, 01:35 PM
perhaps the DM doesn't like the ridiculous amount of power wizards can get to? or maybe he can't handle your level of optimization? maybe he just doesnt like your reasons for making certain decisions?

See, this is why you read the post before responding. Then you don't look dumb for asking questions that are clearly not relevant.

The man hates wizards because he likes sorcs, and sees wizards as stealing the glory that should rightfully belong to the sorcerer. Now, this viewpoint may not be the least bit sane or justified, but it's apparently what he thinks.

Kylarra
2010-07-21, 02:13 PM
Although I guess to be honest, he should hate sorcs because they can be IT better for the lower tier characters outside of super-specialized niches.

Kish
2010-07-21, 02:18 PM
Tell him that cosmetics can't sneak attack anyone.

Beyond that, if he dislikes the balance of the classes, he should fix it, not pick on one player for playing a class he doesn't like. On the other hand...


I'm not saying wizard's AREN'T better than sorcerers, merely trying to prove that [...] no reason to restrict the wizard's spells known.

If he had said calmly and rationally, "I'm restricting your wizard's spells known because I want the wizard class to be balanced with the sorcerer class, which I don't believe it is in by-the-book D&D," I'd be entirely on his side. And then you could argue about how druids should also be nerfed or how it would be more fun for you if he buffed sorcerers instead of nerfing wizards, but simply protesting, "But that's no reason to restrict the wizard's spells known" would fall very flat.

2xMachina
2010-07-21, 02:21 PM
*shrugs*

Depends on how limiting is limiting.

If it's spells learned from lvling only (no spell book learning), that's a freaking pain. That makes wizards more like nerfed Sorcs.

Kylarra
2010-07-21, 02:27 PM
Hardly, it's easy enough to compensate for the only getting levelup spells if you're aware that's what you're getting into.

Navigator
2010-07-21, 02:39 PM
In the 5 or so campaigns that we've played, he has never left a single spellbook or scroll anywhere. I've never found one I could buy or borrow. The only spellbook I had was when he allowed one of our players to DM a dungeon and that player had an enemy wizard as an opponent.
To be fair to your DM, very few wizards should actually be carrying their spellbook, unless you're in the very low levels. Almost every person I know that plays a wizard has a "traveling" spellbook, and an "at-home" spellbook. Not only that, if you used a wizard NPC's wealth on his spellbook, that's pretty much all he'd have.

Honestly, if I had a choice, I would choose to run a game without wizards running around, because they do get out of hand late game. However, I deal with it because I love playing wizard hybrids, and if I outright banned wizards, I would experience an extremely sudden decline in my player base.

Off-topic
For this reason, while it may or may not have been intended this way, regularly finding scrolls is probably just as good as finding an "at-home" book every now and then.

Another possibly unintended consequence of this is that it makes sense of searching for lost magic; Mr. Joe Wizard hides his book somewhere underground, gets curb-stomped by uh... another wizard I guess, and no one knows where his book is.

Frog Dragon
2010-07-21, 02:53 PM
*shrugs*

Depends on how limiting is limiting.

If it's spells learned from lvling only (no spell book learning), that's a freaking pain. That makes wizards more like nerfed Sorcs.
Debatable. Wizards would still get more spells known. And when you add the tricks to get moar free spells. Well, yeah.

Jayabalard
2010-07-21, 03:09 PM
So let me get this right?

Your GM hates wizards with a passion - a fiery flaming passion from the nether regions of hell. And this is well known to all of his players.

Yet you choose to play a wizard for the fifth campaign in a row? I really don't see what you have to complain about, you knew what was in store for you if you made a certain choice, then went ahead and made that choice, and now you're complaining about the consequences.That's pretty much exactly how I feel about it.

Wizards are incredibly powerful, and I don't personally see anything wrong with allowing people to play them, while still making them ultra rare in game, meaning that spellbooks/scrolls/etc will be extremely rare if they are found at all.

If this was your first game with the DM, and this was a surprise, I might feel like you had a valid complaint, but it's your 5th, and this isn't something new, so I don't.

Roderick_BR
2010-07-21, 04:21 PM
It could be far more logically argued that sorcerers 'took away' from wizards, considering wizard is pretty much the classic 2nd Edition Mage, while sorcerer is...a ridiculously limited class that I couldn't quite imagine actually playing (but then that's partly because I tend to have an obsession with having to be capable of learning EVERY SINGLE SPELL EVER).
And ironically, sorcerers got the only limitation AD&D wizards had: Limited spells known.
AD&D wizards had a limit of how many spells of each level he could learn, based on his inteligence. 3.x wizards threw away that rule, and sorcerers got an even more nerfed version, by not even be able to improve how many spells he can learn with an high stat.

Lycar
2010-07-21, 04:27 PM
Wizards are very hatable.

I dunno, aren't they stuck with a pointy one? :smalltongue:

Lycar

the humanity
2010-07-21, 04:44 PM
your DM needs more battle sorcerer. totally makes the sorcerers have a niche. I'm not sure why dragon blood would make you easy to kill anyways.

and play something new. if played nothing but wizards I'd start wanting to hit things and kamikaze something so I could roll up a barbarian.

Desril
2010-07-21, 04:52 PM
I'm not complaining that I don't have enough spells, I was trying to have someone point out special things Sorcs get proving that Wizards don't get all the fun things, leaving sorcerers with nothing so that my GM would be willing to have scrolls or spellbooks at certain points. Although he's recently admitted that while he does hate wizards, the only reason he hasn't had any scrolls or spellbooks is because he's been to lazy to make them...

the humanity
2010-07-21, 05:00 PM
well, with the battle sorcerer variant, touch spells, antimagic, wings of flurry, and other things that really fly well up close become really viable options, it's not nearly as scary for you.

without it, they are still good options- but not nearly as good as a wizard.

W3bDragon
2010-07-21, 06:32 PM
To really understand why wizards and sorcerers are the way they are, you have to examine their evolution.

Back during the AD&D days, most players that played wizards would have been in the following situation at some point:

"Isn't it stupid that I have a spell in my spellbook, and here's a perfect opportunity to cast it, but I can't because I didn't memorize it that day? I mean, what if its raining and we want to setup camp. Its a perfect time for Lemund's Tiny Hut, but who the hell would memorize that in the morning?" OR... "I memorized three invisibility spells today because we were gonna infiltrate the ogre camp, but we just got jumped by a troll. So although I know both Melf's Acid Arrows AND Flaming Sphere, I can cast neither!"

And since those days, many variants/house rules attempted to give wizards a way to cast any spell they had in their book without preparation. There were some spell pool point systems introduced, among other stuff, but all with the intention of getting over what was the wizard's biggest weakness at the time, being forced to pick what he will cast ahead of time and living with the consequences. It took (and still does take) foresight and planning to pick a wizard's spells for the day. In AD&D, if wizards were given spontaneous casting, it would have increased their power significantly.

In 3.x, WotC decided to finally cater to people with different arcane casting needs and put in the Sorcerer class. This class was given what all wizards from the earliest days always wanted, being able to use any spell they know whenever they want. Not only that, they were able to cast MANY MORE spells per day than an average wizard. To add to that, metamagic feats can be applied by a sorcerer ON THE SPOT at the cost of a measly move action. That gives sorcerers much more mileage out of most metamagic feats than wizards.

In exchange for all that versatility, they lose a few bonus feats, and they play a seesaw with wizards, on odd numbered levels, wizards have the advantage in knowing higher level spells, and on even numbered levels sorcerers can match wizards and cast MORE higher level spells than they can.

The biggest place where they decided the tradeoff would be was in spells known. Wizards with just the 2 spells/level get roughly double the spells that sorcerers get, and can get many more, if available.

Was that too much of a trade off? Too little? That's up to each DM to decide. But its very obvious that the wizard class never "took" anything from sorcerer. If anything, its the other way around.

It must be noted that as more and more spells and feats were released with different supplements, its only natural that a class that can conceivably learn every spell in the game, and gets a few bonus feats, will have a clear advantage. That is not a failing of the wizard class...

Yahzi
2010-07-21, 09:12 PM
In the 5 or so campaigns that we've played, he has never left a single spellbook or scroll anywhere.
Does it matter?

If you're playing at 9+ level, I'm guessing you're dominating the game based just on the 2 spells per level you get for free.

Maybe it's your DM's way of limiting wizards. Since wizards break the game, that seems pretty fair.

But if it sill bugs you, play a Druid and fluff it like a wizard. Call your "animal companion" a "demonic servant." Invent stupid material components for your spells - maybe give them all new names ("Rhialto the Great's Barkskin"). Live out in the woods in an isolated tower. Study lots of nature magic. And in all ways act like a wizard. Just use Druid spells.

Then break his game in half. Eventually he might decide wizards aren't so bad.

Cookiemobsta
2010-07-21, 10:44 PM
Let him play a wizard.
He'll fall in love.

/end argument

ericgrau
2010-07-21, 10:52 PM
Blame the internet forums he's been reading, which exaggerate any differences as far as the English language will allow.

And do you like to change your spell list a lot? No? Then play a sorcerer with a similar list. They can prepare slightly more unique spells, even. It won't be the end of the world like your DM thinks.

Zeful
2010-07-21, 11:25 PM
My favorite (and current/usual) class is a wizard. In the 5 or so campaigns that we've played, he has never left a single spellbook or scroll anywhere. I've never found one I could buy or borrow. The only spellbook I had was when he allowed one of our players to DM a dungeon and that player had an enemy wizard as an opponent.Similar to my games, though that's because I track populations of classes, and Wizards have the lowest population in all my games. Though I also ban several things like BBB and similar things that let the wizard completely ignore the limitations of their class (and most of the overpowered 7-9th level spells). Though you can find other Wizards to copy off of, but they will not go out of their way to help you (you have to earn their trust, because all the Naive wizards are all dead), or even let you look through all of their spells, or buy any from you.


*Edit* I'm not saying wizard's AREN'T better than sorcerers, merely trying to prove that WotC doesn't ignore sorcerers and only give fun things to wizards, and is no reason to restrict the wizard's spells known.Actually they pretty much did, most options for sorcerers are linked to heritage or as I put it "My Great-Grandmother liked/was raped by monsters". Which doesn't count it as support.


Plus sorcerers get access to tons of stuff. Sorcerer only feats, Prestige Classes that require the ability to spontaneous cast arcane spells, templates allow you to cast spells as a sorcerer. If it's related to natural magical talent and it's not an SLA or Supernatural Ability, Sorcerers are usually involved.Most of them are crap, or allow them to do stuff they could in 3.0 and are generally inferior across the board to Wizard options.


your DM needs more battle sorcerer. totally makes the sorcerers have a niche. I'm not sure why dragon blood would make you easy to kill anyways. Battle Sorcerer sucks. Also: Sorcerers are not automatically related to dragons, that myth has been the single reason I will not use any of the Dragon books in any of my games, ever.

Leon
2010-07-22, 12:37 AM
Battle Sorcerer sucks.

Matter of opinion, I think they are great - then again I'm not afraid to play classes that lose multiple caster levels or have high LAs.

The limit of spells makes for a greater challenge to work around and finding new uses for the small selection you have.

Frog Dragon
2010-07-22, 04:14 AM
The "secret" to a good sorc spell list is not doubling up. You will want one spell for one function. Energy Substitution is your friend. It saves you spells because you don't have to use those spells known to compensate for immunities. Enervation is great on sorcerers. Spam, spam, glorious spam. :smallbiggrin:
Essentially, you'll want a way to target any one save with a potent effect, something to punch to SR, and maybe a good buff spell or two. Damage is always a good secondary. Something that has no save is great.
Anyway, the point is that that a good sorcerer list has no redundancies. You cover as much ground as you can without covering any ground twice. That is the basic tenet of optimizing a sorcerer spell list. :smallbiggrin:
Edit: Mechanically, Battle Sorcerer is a downgrade.

Bladesinger
2010-07-22, 04:26 AM
Be a Sorcerer. Take the Draconic Heritage feat. Then take the Dragonheart Mage PrC and just run around breathing on people. Maybe then your DM will let you do a Wizard. My DM got so ticked off at me for doing that that she made my character hold his breath whenever the party entered a wooden building. You can bet I was glad my Fort. save was high.

But seriously, just try talking to your DM. My DM hated psionics, and would kill anyone who even mentioned them, but I managed to convince her to let me play a Psion. How? A little something called healthy communication. Figure out exactly why your DM hates Wizards, and do what you can to alleviate those fears. A little discussion goes a long way, I've found.

Ranos
2010-07-22, 04:52 AM
Battle Sorcerer sucks. Also: Sorcerers are not automatically related to dragons, that myth has been the single reason I will not use any of the Dragon books in any of my games, ever.

Battle sorcerer + Stalwart sorcerer makes for a very good melee combattant. d8 hd, +2hp/level, proficiency with light armor which you can cast in, proficiency with a martial weapon and weapon focus in it, 3/4 BAB.


There are many spells that boost close combat abilities, like wraithstrike, or wings of cover. And then you can get arcane strike. Don't think of it as a wizard, instead, compare it with a tob class. Battle sorcerer does not suck.

2xMachina
2010-07-22, 06:30 AM
Eh, Sorc has their own cheese.

Venerable Loredrake White Dragonspawn Dragonborn Dragonwrought Kobold, with the Greater Ritual and buyoff.
Cast as Sorc of +4 lvl.

Take Arcane Prep and join Mage of the Arcane Order and dip Sandshaper.

Zeful
2010-07-22, 03:32 PM
Eh, Sorc has their own cheese.

Venerable Loredrake White Dragonspawn Dragonborn Dragonwrought Kobold, with the Greater Ritual and buyoff.
Cast as Sorc of +4 lvl.

Take Arcane Prep and join Mage of the Arcane Order and dip Sandshaper.

That's Kobold Cheese, not Sorcerer Cheese.

2xMachina
2010-07-23, 04:35 AM
lol.

But then it doesn't work with Wizard, so...

taltamir
2010-07-23, 08:31 AM
My favorite (and current/usual) class is a wizard. In the 5 or so campaigns that we've played, he has never left a single spellbook or scroll anywhere. I've never found one I could buy or borrow. The only spellbook I had was when he allowed one of our players to DM a dungeon and that player had an enemy wizard as an opponent.

To quote a recent conversation we had on the subject of spellbooks,

GM: "I hate wizards with a vengence."
Me: "Why? You love Druids. They're arguably MORE powerful, so it can't be a power issue."
GM: "I just hate Wizards. They are so agrivating. Especially since WoTC seemed to decide to tip all the Arcane castingness into once side of the drum, leaving Sorcerers high and dry."
Me: "So you hate them because they outclass Sorcerers and WotC hasn't bothered buffing Sorcs?"
GM: "I hate them (because they're agrivating) and because WotC tossed all the arcaniness into the Wizard basket. I don't like that Wizards "take away" from another class by being "IT" just more so. I also wish they had done Rouges better. Sneak Attack is great but that's pretty much all they got."


So, I seek the opinion of the forums and the knowledge any of you may have that can prove that wizards don't "take away" from sorcerers for being basically the same, just "better".


Note, all of this just happened through IM and I had his permission to post this because we're both curious as to how the GitP forums feels about it.

*Edit* I'm not saying wizard's AREN'T better than sorcerers, merely trying to prove that WotC doesn't ignore sorcerers and only give fun things to wizards, and is no reason to restrict the wizard's spells known.

Option 1: play with another DM
Option 2: don't play a wizard.

It is really that simple...
I recommend you play a druid or a cleric with the spell domain.

Psyx
2010-07-23, 08:39 AM
Or...after FIVE campaigns... play something else entirely?

liquid150
2010-07-23, 09:18 AM
He didn't necessarily specify that he was the wizard in all 5 campaigns (or if he did, I forgot) but I bet it's a safe assumption he did.

Honestly, it doesn't sound like your DM is going to change his mind. I doubt anything you can say will change his mind, mostly because he has spent too much time reading about how wizards are OMGWTFBBQ better than everything. If he had spent that time figuring out ways to put a wizard into situations they didn't have every tool for it probably would have come out better.

Stompy
2010-07-23, 09:37 AM
Eh, Sorc has their own cheese.

Venerable Loredrake White Dragonspawn Dragonborn Dragonwrought Kobold, with the Greater Ritual and buyoff.
Cast as Sorc of +4 lvl.

Did someone order the Triple Dragonburger with cheese? :smallbiggrin:

On-Topic: You're probably not going to convince them otherwise. Also, you my want to go sorc if the wizard thing pisses off the DM too much. Hell, you might be able to get more arcane stuffs because of DM pity for the class. The first thing I would bargain for is an elimination of the metamagic time increase for spont casters. (or as I like to call it, why does eschew materials make the sorc suck more?)

taltamir
2010-07-23, 09:40 AM
On-Topic: You're probably not going to convince them otherwise. Also, you my want to go sorc if the wizard thing pisses off the DM too much. Hell, you might be able to get more arcane stuffs because of DM pity for the class. The first thing I would bargain for is an elimination of the metamagic time increase for spont casters. (or as I like to call it, why does eschew materials make the sorc suck more?)

good idea, the DM flat out says that the wizard is "robbing" the poor sorc... play a sorc and he goes from a hostile DM to a generous DM.

U-233
2010-07-23, 11:50 PM
Does he just hate the classes named "wizard", or does he hate classes that act like wizards? He apparently likes sorcerers, but those are a bit stifling in my view. But there are a bunch of int-based primary casters who are functionally similar to wizards:

Archivist (HH) and Erudite (Complete Psionic, out of order at the very end of the book) are probably the closest to wizard in theme and function. Each is int-based, each learns new spells/powers in wizard-like ways and ends up able to use half the spells/powers in the universe like a wizard. Because they learn spells/powers in ways similar to wizards, your DM would probably screw you in the same way, but it's an option to consider.

The next step further from wizard would I guess be Beguiler (PHB2) and Psion (EPH). Each is an int-based primary caster/manifester with different methods of acquiring spells/powers than wizards, and can behave in broadly wizard-like ways. Because they have different ways of acquiring spells/powers your DM shouldn't be able to use his current method of screwing your character, though he could always switch to another method.

If you can change your character to one of those you can probably keep most of the thematic details and power / versatility while exiting the class that your DM hates.

Psyx
2010-07-24, 11:11 AM
He didn't necessarily specify that he was the wizard in all 5 campaigns (or if he did, I forgot) but I bet it's a safe assumption he did.


I have to say, that if someone tried playing the party wizard for five games straight, I'd give them a straight 'no'. As much to let someone else take a turn as to make them play something a bit different.

Stompy
2010-07-24, 02:27 PM
*Edit* I'm not saying wizard's AREN'T better than sorcerers, merely trying to prove that WotC doesn't ignore sorcerers and only give fun things to wizards, and is no reason to restrict the wizard's spells known.

Might be off-topic, but does anyone else think that Sorcerer is a bad Alternate Class Feature of the Wizard?

Gamblerjoe
2010-07-24, 03:49 PM
Show your GM the nuclear sorcerer to prove that Sorcs can hold their own ~.^

i loved my blaster. gr. dimension door, haste, fly, gr. invis, stoneskin, displacement, lots of damage, tons of fun. the best was when i teleported into a large group of enemies (as a move action), dropped an empowered flameburst, then cast a quickened benign transposition to swap places with a fighter who was up next. a wizard could have done it too, but with that character i could throw away 5th level spell slots at will. the problem for sorcs is that this advantage is diminished by pearls of power. the standard procedure for wizards is to get as many as you can, then dont double up on spells when you prepare them. let your pearls of power handle the sudden need to spam a spell, and prepare away with the magic mouth or sepia snake sigil or whatever.