PDA

View Full Version : Is the sorcerer really worth it?



Kaeso
2010-10-16, 12:50 PM
I will not touch the wizard vs sorcerer debate, yet there are other reasons I question the usefullness of a sorcerer. Like the wizard, he has an abysmal HD, AC (due to not being able to wear armor, and defensive spells cost a precious spell slot at lower levels while only being useful for a limited time), and low BAB.

A beguiler has the same spell per day progression, starts with a whole busload of spells known (as he's a "list" caster), has a d6 and can wear light armor without any spell faillure chance. On top of that beguilers also have proficiency with some martial weapons, trapfinding, two free metamagic feats and an entire truckload of skills and skill points. Sure, their spell list is limited to the enchantement/illusion theme but advanced learning allows them to learn a few other spells like shadow conjuration/evocation that allow them to do some direct damage or summoning (this becomes even more useful in conjunction with the shadowcraft mage prestige class). It can be far more useful in more diverse situations

If we take all of that in mind, what exactly redeems the sorcerer being in tier 2 while the beguiler is in tier 3? As far as I can see the sorcerer is pretty gimped until it reaches level 10 (if it can survive up to that point).

EDIT: The Beguiler is also a good class from levels 1-20, while 20 levels of sorcerer gives you nothing notable besides spells, and it doesn't have any good prestige classes.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 12:54 PM
If we take all of that in mind, what exactly redeems the sorcerer being in tier 2 while the beguiler is in tier 3?Spells.

Beguiler knows all on her list, but sorcerer can pick his from the best list in game. There are some ridiculously good ones in there, such as Wings of Cover.

Tyndmyr
2010-10-16, 12:54 PM
kobold.

wings of cover.

wings of flurry.

Kaeso
2010-10-16, 12:56 PM
Spells.

Beguiler knows all on her list, but sorcerer can pick his from the best list in game. There are some ridiculously good ones in there, such as Wings of Cover.

True, but the spells only make a sorcerer redeemable past level 10 or so. Before that he doesn't have enough winsauce spells to last beyond 3 or so encounters.

Also, taking a "counter" spell like wings of cover means you can't take a good direct damage spell known, which weakens your overall spell arsenal.

Psyren
2010-10-16, 01:00 PM
So sorcerers are useless before level 10? :smallconfused:

Don't get me wrong, I prefer psions myself, but really.



Also, taking a "counter" spell like wings of cover means you can't take a good direct damage spell known, which weakens your overall spell arsenal.

All the damage spells in the world won't matter if you are dead.

Coidzor
2010-10-16, 01:04 PM
Damage spells? Isn't that what MINIONS! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEojI5-IueI) are for?

Kaeso
2010-10-16, 01:05 PM
So sorcerers are useless before level 10? :smallconfused:

Don't get me wrong, I prefer psions myself, but really.



All the damage spells in the world won't matter if you are dead.

A sorcerer is 4th level by the time he knows "wings of cover". That leaves him with a defensive spell he can use three times a day, and three 1st level spells with 6 castings in total. That means he has 3 "can't touch this" spells and 6 pretty weak spells.

Nanoblack
2010-10-16, 01:06 PM
True, but the spells only make a sorcerer redeemable past level 10 or so. Before that he doesn't have enough winsauce spells to last beyond 3 or so encounters.

Also, taking a "counter" spell like wings of cover means you can't take a good direct damage spell known, which weakens your overall spell arsenal.

That's a very presumptuous statement... have you ever played a sorcerer to level ten? Most of the theoretical optimizing on these boards is very inaccurate when compared to what goes on in an actual game.

Quietus
2010-10-16, 01:07 PM
The tier system is, as I understand it, built not to measure raw power, but overall flexibility, along with ability to wreck a game. A few things the Beguiler does - mostly charm effects, I think, plus the rare effect garnered through Advanced Learning - can be game-breaking, yes. But the Sorcerer is able to pick from a much larger list of spells, gaining many defenses unavailable to the Beguiler, as well as attack forms - I don't believe Beguilers get Glitterdust, do they?

Basically, the Beguiler does one thing exceptionally well, in the form of the enchantment/illusion trickery. Sorcerers can be built to do basically anything they want exceptionally well, they just have to be built for that specific thing; This flexibility puts them up one tier, as they can either do just as well as a Beguiler at enchantment/illusions (with a side in other cheesetastic options), OR they could be resourceful transmutation specialists, or power-hungry necromancers. Every Beguiler will be an enchantment/illusion specialist, which is strong, but not as flexible.

By the same token, Wizards are a step up from Sorcerers because they can pull off nearly every trick the Sorcerer has, while also having the option to use all the tricks some OTHER sorcerer has the next day.

ericgrau
2010-10-16, 01:09 PM
All you need is one good versatile spell you can cast 3ish times a day. For example I was playing a level 6 or so sorcerer making highly effective use of sleet storms to make encounters a cakewalk. Large numbers of foes, small numbers of foes, heck even a house on fire, sleet storm can handle anything. Only complaint in one encounter was waiting too long for foes to come out so the party could 4v1 each one :P. Before level 6 flaming spheres were passable in damage, glitterdust wasn't so hot due to the small AoE. But he was still ok, and by comparison I shudder at the thought of putting up with a level 2 single target spell instead of an AoE spell. Darn, he saved or is mindless, well that's my action.

As for the limitation to illusion and enchantment, that's a very severe drawback. Those are fairly specialized schools. I would only play such a class in certain campaigns no matter how much you gave me. Shadow evocation and shadow conjuration are a joke. Give the enemy 2 saves instead of 1, or 1 instead of none, only partially effective, spell 1 level lower AND half of the spells that are great because they can't be dispelled or otherwise removed or can't be saved against... now can be. No thanks.

Tyndmyr
2010-10-16, 01:12 PM
True, but the spells only make a sorcerer redeemable past level 10 or so. Before that he doesn't have enough winsauce spells to last beyond 3 or so encounters.

Also, taking a "counter" spell like wings of cover means you can't take a good direct damage spell known, which weakens your overall spell arsenal.

Aright, let us consider a hypothetical sorcerer at level 8, with wings of flurry and wings of cover. Let us further assume he has boosted CL on WoF somewhat. Not a ton, just say...a reserve feat and any other +1CL booster of choice. We'll pretend he doesn't know about arcane thesis or metamagic yet.

His caster stat WILL be high enough for a bonus spell, so he has four wings of flurry per day, doing 10d6 damage to all hostiles within 30 feet. Force. Saves? What? Oh, there is a save against the debuff, but it should generally matter, as 35 damage to all enemies in a single round at level 8 means you've done your share for the party.

WoC means his low hp really isn't likely to matter. He has a LOT of slots open for it.

So, he can literally cast one spell per combat, then chill in the back and cast magic missile or something. In encounters against a number of lower level opponents, his single spell probably IS the encounter. This has significant leftover firepower in the form of unused lower spell slots and spells known.

Psyren
2010-10-16, 01:23 PM
A sorcerer is 4th level by the time he knows "wings of cover".

4 is still less than 10.


That leaves him with a defensive spell he can use three times a day, and three 1st level spells with 6 castings in total. That means he has 3 "can't touch this" spells and 6 pretty weak spells.

Why are you assuming level 1 spells are weak? Grease is pretty badass (so many people neglect balance), then throw in Magic Missile as the standard fallback and Expeditious Retreat for when your party bites off more than it you can chew - there's your 3.

Outside core you can start picking up lesser orbs and throw in a True Strike.

Kaeso
2010-10-16, 01:27 PM
4 is still less than 10.



Why are you assuming level 1 spells are weak? Grease is pretty badass (so many people neglect balance), then throw in Magic Missile as the standard fallback and Expeditious Retreat for when your party bites off more than it you can chew - there's your 3.

Outside core you can start picking up lesser orbs and throw in a True Strike.

which still leaves him with 2 level 1 spells per encounter. Even a spell like grease can incapacitate 1 or 2 enemies. Beyond that the sorcerer hardly has anything to contribute to the party. Your level 2 spells are purely defensive on account of your single level 2 spell known being devoted to wings of cover.

Eldariel
2010-10-16, 01:30 PM
which still leaves him with 2 level 1 spells per encounter. Even a spell like grease can incapacitate 1 or 2 enemies. Beyond that the sorcerer hardly has anything to contribute to the party. Your level 2 spells are purely defensive on account of your single level 2 spell known being devoted to wings of cover.

Color Spray is fine, Sleep has its uses (though not after level 4 or so) and Daze is a cantrip that does something (locks down a single humanoid enemy). Both Color Spray and Sleep are multitargeting, as is Grease. They can contribute, alright.

Nanoblack
2010-10-16, 01:31 PM
which still leaves him with 2 level 1 spells per encounter. Even a spell like grease can incapacitate 1 or 2 enemies. Beyond that the sorcerer hardly has anything to contribute to the party. Your level 2 spells are purely defensive on account of your single level 2 spell known being devoted to wings of cover.

Well that early in the game you're likely to be using a crossbow to supplement your damage and to conserve your spells, but that doesn't mean he cant contribute.

Psyren
2010-10-16, 01:31 PM
which still leaves him with 2 level 1 spells per encounter. Even a spell like grease can incapacitate 1 or 2 enemies. Beyond that the sorcerer hardly has anything to contribute to the party. Your level 2 spells are purely defensive on account of your single level 2 spell known being devoted to wings of cover.

You don't have to grab WoC right away. At level 5 (still less than 10) you get another level 2 spell; feel free to make it offensive or a buff if you wish. Or even postpone WoC until later.

I would grab Alter Self at 4 personally.

Volthawk
2010-10-16, 01:36 PM
A beguiler has the same spell per day progression, starts with a whole busload of spells known (as he's a "list" caster), has a d6 and can wear light armor without any spell faillure chance. On top of that beguilers also have proficiency with some martial weapons, trapfinding, two free metamagic feats and an entire truckload of skills and skill points. Sure, their spell list is limited to the enchantement/illusion theme but advanced learning allows them to learn a few other spells like shadow conjuration/evocation that allow them to do some direct damage or summoning (this becomes even more useful in conjunction with the shadowcraft mage prestige class). It can be far more useful in more diverse situations

Can the Beguiler cast Animate Dead? How about Scrying? Or the Polymorph line?

Gnaeus
2010-10-16, 01:52 PM
I will not touch the wizard vs sorcerer debate, yet there are other reasons I question the usefullness of a sorcerer.

A beguiler has the same spell per day progression,

If we take all of that in mind, what exactly redeems the sorcerer being in tier 2 while the beguiler is in tier 3? As far as I can see the sorcerer is pretty gimped until it reaches level 10 (if it can survive up to that point).

EDIT: The Beguiler is also a good class from levels 1-20, while 20 levels of sorcerer gives you nothing notable besides spells, and it doesn't have any good prestige classes.


Sorcerer is in tier 2 and Beguiler is in tier 3 because.....JaronK says so.

As you have noted, a beguiler's spells are generally as strong as common sorcerer spells, on top of a better base with actual class features.

Where the unresolveable argument comes in is what qualifies as fair at different levels of optimization.

Clearly, at really low optimization, Beguiler, with his list of solid spells, higher hp, skills, and AC, beats a sorcerer who chose bad spells. Even JaronK will admit that tier 2's are disproportionally vulnerable to poor choices in chargen/leveling, whereas tier 3's are hard to mess up.

So we are really only talking about mid to high op levels here.
Sorcerer:A moderately optimized sorcerer will have a good range of spells from different schools.
Beguiler: But so will a beguiler, using spell list expanding tricks like Arcane Disciple, or UMD'd runestaves.
Sorcerer: But a sorcerer gets game breaking spells in PHB, and has awesome draconic sorcerer only spells
Beguiler: I can break the game much better with Races of Stone, since Shadowcraft Mage makes my spell list huge.
Sorcerer:But at that level of optimization I have greater draconic rite of ascention for +2 levels of casting.
B: But that is way cheasier. S: No it isn't. B: Is. S: Isn't.

Ultimately, a 1 tier difference is very difficult to prove in most cases, including this one. JaronK makes a lot of campaign assumptions (like convenience of items to buy for UMD) that may or may not be true in your game. Beguiler and Dread Necro are pretty clearly the top of tier 3. Op level, Campaign (what you are fighting? are there magic marts?), sources allowed, play style, etc can all tip the balance one way or the other.


Can the Beguiler cast Animate Dead? How about Scrying? Or the Polymorph line?

Yes. It is generally easier for the beguiler to add spells known (UMD, Arcane disciple, PRCs) than for the sorcerer.

Coidzor
2010-10-16, 02:04 PM
Except you're forgetting that the tiers are not about how they are in actual play, hence why it would be misleading to say "X is playing his Class Y as a Tier Z." Rather, the tier system represents the raw potential inherent in the class.

Kaeso
2010-10-16, 02:15 PM
Except you're forgetting that the tiers are not about how they are in actual play, hence why it would be misleading to say "X is playing his Class Y as a Tier Z." Rather, the tier system represents the raw potential inherent in the class.

Yes, it's about potential versatility. But the average beguiler has a higher versatility than the average sorcerer due to high skill points and knowing every spell on her list.

EDIT: And UMD

Greenish
2010-10-16, 02:29 PM
Yes, it's about potential versatility. But the average beguiler has a higher versatility than the average sorcerer due to high skill points and knowing every spell on her list.Well, I'm not quite certain what an "average sorcerer" or an "average beguiler" looks like, but beguilers draw their spells mostly from two schools, and from two books (as far as I can remember). Sorcerer is a PHB base class, which means he has more options with each splatbook, and draws his spells from the largest and most versatile spell list in the game.

UMD? Again, sorcerers have most everything you could want from UMD on their list already.


Don't get me wrong. Beguilers have a much narrower focus than make-your-own-houdini sorcerers, but IMO that makes them a much better designed class. I'd much rather play a beguiler than an illusion/enchantment focused sorcerer.

Radar
2010-10-16, 02:51 PM
Yes, it's about potential versatility. But the average beguiler has a higher versatility than the average sorcerer due to high skill points and knowing every spell on her list.

EDIT: And UMD
Not just versatility, but raw power as well. As it was said in the original thread, Tier 3 classes are more versatile then Tier 2, but don't have access to game-breaking powers/spells. Sorcerer has a much higher potential power, because he has access to the whole wizard/sorcerer spell list and some notable sorcerer-only spells. Beguiler has a preset spell list, so out of the box he doesn't have such a game-breaking potential (Planar Binding, Gate, Arcane Fusion abuse etc.). And to be powerhouse, sorcerer doesn't need that many spells - two direct damage spell (single/multiple opponents), one SoL for each save (backed up by some No Save Just Suck spells later) and the rest goes for defences and general utility. Heighten Spell and stat-boosters keep all your low-level SoL spells relevant at higher levels.

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-16, 03:09 PM
Yes, sorcerers are worth it, without a question or doubt. The only difference between a sorcerer and wizard is not power, but rather versatility.

mootoall
2010-10-16, 03:25 PM
Okay, so I'm not certain if this has been mentioned before, buuuuuuuuuut ....

A) Direct damage is not the strong point of a good sorcerer. At all. The biggest strengths of casters are to screw your opponents and let the meat shields hit them with sticks.

B) Glitterdust. Grease. Sleep. Three low level save of suck/battlefield control spells. Not sure if the beguiler can cast these, but saying the sorcerer has nothing going for it at low levels is BS when you consider these.

C) The Orb spells. A Lesser Orb of Electricity does 2d8 damage at third level. That's considerable damage at that point. Not to mention spells like Lesser Orb of Sound, which is only 5d6 damage maximum, remains useful for a blaster caster up until high levels when most creatures have fire/acid/cold/electricity immunities/resistances, while at what approximate level do monsters stop being immune to mind-effecting spells? Also, the orbs rock because they're ranged touch spells. A decent dex, you're set. Sure, it turns them from SAD to slightly MAD if you rely heavily on them, but with magic items and only having to hit touch AC, you'll hit as often as not.

D) If you're going to argue the Beguiler is as good as the sorcerer, then why not the Dread Necro? You want damage dealing? Bam, it has that, Charnel Touch. You want meat shields? Just wait a round! It's got that armor proficiency/lack of spell failure you wanted. Fear aura? You got it! A single feat and you're set for healing for life- without a cleric! But still, it's not nearly as versatile as a Sorcerer.

E) Also, while it costs a feat to get proficiency, the Twilight enchantment reduces spell failure by 10%. Say hello to enchanted padded leather armor! This is a minor one, but addresses one of your points. Also, mage armor (does the beguiler get that?) raises the AC even more!

Edit: Also, bloodline feats. I like breath weapons on my casters sometimes.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 03:35 PM
E) Also, while it costs a feat to get proficiency, the Twilight enchantment reduces spell failure by 10%. Say hello to enchanted padded leather armor!A feat for padded leather?

A mithral Twilight chain shirt is 0 ACP (so you can wear it without proficiency without any adverse effects) and 0% ASF.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-10-16, 03:42 PM
Alter Self. That's when the Sorcerer starts to outpace the Beguiler. Polymorph seals the deal. Before fourth level, though, the OP is right, but that's because Beguiler is one of the best low level classes in the game. The only comparable class is the Druid.

Tvtyrant
2010-10-16, 03:43 PM
A feat for padded leather?

A mithral Twilight chain shirt is 0 ACP (so you can wear it without proficiency without any adverse effects) and 0% ASF.

if you can use leather armor you can wear a mithral breastplate.

The final touch on sorcerers is that once you get archmage they become as unto GODS! Spontaneous alter elements and shapes? Actually be able to use the dispelling bonus? :D

Greenish
2010-10-16, 03:49 PM
if you can use leather armor you can wear a mithral breastplate.That's a feat, +3000gp and +5% ASF for +1 AC.

The point was that the chain shirt needs neither proficiency nor armoured casting.

[Edit]: +1 Mithral Breastplate (without ASF reduction) is more expensive than a +1 Twilight Mithral Chain Shirt, too. :smalltongue:

mootoall
2010-10-16, 03:56 PM
A feat for padded leather?

Aha, forgot that leather has no Armor Check penalty.

Gnaeus
2010-10-16, 05:04 PM
if you can use leather armor you can wear a mithral breastplate.

The final touch on sorcerers is that once you get archmage they become as unto GODS! Spontaneous alter elements and shapes? Actually be able to use the dispelling bonus? :D

Thats exactly the kind of "what optimization is more optimized" splat that becomes impossible to argue. Sorcerer + archmage gets compared with shadowcraft gnome beguilers spamming shadow miracle.

Gnaeus
2010-10-16, 05:15 PM
Not just versatility, but raw power as well. As it was said in the original thread, Tier 3 classes are more versatile then Tier 2, but don't have access to game-breaking powers/spells. Sorcerer has a much higher potential power, because he has access to the whole wizard/sorcerer spell list and some notable sorcerer-only spells. Beguiler has a preset spell list, so out of the box he doesn't have such a game-breaking potential (Planar Binding, Gate, Arcane Fusion abuse etc.). And to be powerhouse, sorcerer doesn't need that many spells - two direct damage spell (single/multiple opponents), one SoL for each save (backed up by some No Save Just Suck spells later) and the rest goes for defences and general utility. Heighten Spell and stat-boosters keep all your low-level SoL spells relevant at higher levels.

Beguilers spells are just as powerful as sorcerers spells. Whether it is level 1 (Charm Person, Sleep, Color Spray), 2 (Glitterdust, Mirror Image, Invisibility), 3 (Dispel Magic, Haste, Slow) 4 (Confusion, Greater Invisibility, Solid Fog) all the way up to 9 (Time Stop).

One or two good domains with Arcane disciple, or a UMD'ed staff or runestaff, or any of a number of spell list expanding PRCs (ranging from decent, like Fiend Blooded or Sandshaper, all the way up to psycho powerhouses like Rainbow Servant or Shadowcraft Mage), will easily cover the Fort SoD and the blasting.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 05:19 PM
I should point out that sorcerers are objectively way more cool than beguilers.

HunterOfJello
2010-10-16, 05:29 PM
Sorcerer vs. Beguiler debate? Sorcerer wins. No contest.

d6 is only 1 hit point better per level, on average, than d4. Light armor can be replaced by a single casting of Mage Armor or a single Mage Armor potion.

~

Lets look just the first level spells that Sorcerers get and Beguilers don't:

Magic Missle
Grease (check the Errata, beguilers don't get this awesome spell)
Benign Transposition
Hail of Stone
Arrow Mind
Identify
Enlarge
Ray of Enfeeblement
True Strike
Protection from Evil

and the list goes on for just 1st level spells!

~

Also, yes, beguilers do get some nice class features, but that also limits their opportunity cost of going into prestige classes. Once a sorcerer grabs onto a good prestige class, he'll be able to get plenty of nice class features.

Unfortunately for the Beguiler, a slightly larger, but fixed spells known list of only cannot compare to a smaller, unfixed spell list of all of the Wizard/Sorcerer spells.

Gnaeus
2010-10-16, 05:46 PM
Lets look just the first level spells that Sorcerers get and Beguilers don't:

Magic Missle
Grease (check the Errata, beguilers don't get this awesome spell)
Benign Transposition
Hail of Stone
Arrow Mind
Identify
Enlarge
Ray of Enfeeblement
True Strike
Protection from Evil

Sorry, that argument doesn't really work. A first level sorcerer only knows 2 of those spells. Even a 20th level Sorcerer only knows 5. A beguiler knows more than 5 useful 1st level spells at level 1, and that is before he picks up power word pain from advanced learning and whatever outside spell he gets from arcane disciple at level 3. You can't compare the beguiler against some super-sorcerer who knows all spells on the Sor-Wiz list.

Imagine that the level 1 sorcerer spells are Mage Armor, Charm Person, Color Spray or Sleep, Comprehend Languages or expeditious retreat, and Power Word Pain. None of those are stupid spells to pick. That sorcerer's list is strictly worse than the beguilers.

~


Also, yes, beguilers do get some nice class features, but that also limits their opportunity cost of going into prestige classes. Once a sorcerer grabs onto a good prestige class, he'll be able to get plenty of nice class features.
.

Class A is better than class b because class A has no class features? Keep working on that one, it isn't ready yet.

Beguilers have lots of great PRCs. The fact that they know all spells on their list makes a lot of spell list enhancing PRCs much better for Beguiler than Sorcerer.

Gerbah
2010-10-16, 05:48 PM
Beguilers are sweet, but they fill a different role. Sorcerers are innately pretty powerful, even without optimization.

As an example, I started playing a campaign with a Kobold Sorcerer. Now this was one of my earlier campaigns I had played, and as such I did not do any of the crazy Kobold nonsense shown here. I didn't want anything to do with metamagic, and focused on Draconic feats because the more you had, the better you got right? Anyways: The character was incredibly powerful, using mainly Scorching Ray and other damaging spells. Most fights were the other characters keeping the monsters attention and doing their best to kill 'em, while I just floated about, using Draconic Flight, and obliterated the poor critters. Many times the end of the battle saw most of the others unconscious or wounded, where as I was almost always at full health or near it.

I realize it's just my experience, but no one in the group was optimizing at all until much later, at which point I would have switched into grabbing metamagics and a million other Sorcerer tricks.

Tvtyrant
2010-10-16, 05:51 PM
Thats exactly the kind of "what optimization is more optimized" splat that becomes impossible to argue. Sorcerer + archmage gets compared with shadowcraft gnome beguilers spamming shadow miracle.

...There isn't even any splat in that optimization!

Gnaeus
2010-10-16, 05:53 PM
...There isn't even any splat in that optimization!

Sorry. You are right, that is core. Point remains tho. Sorcerer + good PRC has to be compared with Beguiler + good PRC.

Crow
2010-10-16, 05:55 PM
I'm playing a Battle Sorcerer at lvl 21. Yes a Battle Sorcerer...which is even weaker than the regular sorcerer, and have done so from level 1. She passed the beguiler in usefulness long before level 10.

The beguiler faces some of the same problems as the rogue. Certain enemies just aren't all that effected by it's abilities.

Valameer
2010-10-16, 06:01 PM
They are what, one tier apart?

Don't worry about it too much, it won't be an issue for your average game. Play whatever works better for you.

I think sorcerers are pretty cool, but beguiler is definitely a better designed class. The main thing that sends sorCees up a tier is just that there are enough terrible spell options for them to pick (wings of...) that make an optimized sorcerer more game-breaking than an optimized beguiler (who is stuck with his certain spells, no matter how many poorly thought out spells he wishes were on that list.)

Plus... THEORETICALLY the sorcerer has more options, so any one sorcerer could be custom built to break one campaign. Do people actually do this? Probably not, but the potential is there.

Non-optimized sorcerers are around the same level as non-op'd beguilers, though. Maybe even a touch worse. Sorc is one of those classes that slides around in power a lot depending on who's playing it.

tl;dr: Ah... fahgettaboudit!

Gnaeus
2010-10-16, 06:04 PM
I'm playing a Battle Sorcerer at lvl 21. Yes a Battle Sorcerer...which is even weaker than the regular sorcerer, and have done so from level 1. She passed the beguiler in usefulness long before level 10.

Possible. Depends on the Opti-fu of the players involved. A well built sorc vs a beguiler who isn't making the most of his class could be clearly better.


The beguiler faces some of the same problems as the rogue. Certain enemies just aren't all that effected by it's abilities.

Only if the beguiler doesn't know what he is doing. Beguilers are actually quite effective against many of the enemies that people think are immune to them. Mindless things, for example, are pretty easily beaten by illusions. They have a number of good buff and battlefield control spells. Shadow Conjurations have hundreds of uses, and that is before the Arcane Disciple or UMD.

Teron
2010-10-16, 07:19 PM
As I recall, tier 2 is defined primarily by the ability to break the game, rather than "practical" power or versatility. The sorcerer has polymorph and planar binding spells for raw power and accessing monster abilities that were never meant for PCs, divination and teleportation spells for scry-and-die and general plot wrecking, and so on; the beguiler, as far as I know, doesn't unless you use a non-built-in trick to access another class's spell list, which is the kind of thing the tier list can't really take into account. If you assume every character is built around accessing the best features of other classes instead of relying on his own (through wealth and UMD, if nothing else), the rankings are reduced to tier 1 casters and those doing a second rate impersonation of tier 1 casters.

That's my understanding of it, anyway.

Gnaeus
2010-10-16, 07:30 PM
AIf you assume every character is built around accessing the best features of other classes instead of relying on his own (through wealth and UMD, if nothing else), the rankings are reduced to tier 1 casters and those doing a second rate impersonation of tier 1 casters.

That's my understanding of it, anyway.


What you don't understand is that accessing the best features of other classes IS the best feature of the Beguiler and Dread Necro. They are built with lists where they know every single spell available. That is the core feature of their classes. Of course they want to expand their lists. Why wouldn't they? The sorcerer expands his list with metamagic feats, turning level 2-3 spells into level 5-6 slots. The Beguiler and DN expand their lists with Arcane Disciple + PRCs. A beguiler who doesn't expand his class list is as badly built as a sorcerer who learns only electrical blasting spells. Personally, I think that the reason that JaronK didn't understand that was that he admitted that he never played with a Beguiler who didn't go into Shadowcraft Gnome and therefore into tier 1.

Leon
2010-10-17, 12:24 AM
If we take all of that in mind, what exactly redeems the sorcerer being in tier 2 while the beguiler is in tier 3? As far as I can see the sorcerer is pretty gimped until it reaches level 10 (if it can survive up to that point).

EDIT: The Beguiler is also a good class from levels 1-20, while 20 levels of sorcerer gives you nothing notable besides spells, and it doesn't have any good prestige classes.

The Tier system is not a way you should be chosing a PC anyway - you should be choosing a Class that you like and fits with what you want to play.
Its a list that someone thought up and decided to rank the classes in what they thought was a best to worst line up. You can and should think differently.

What makes the Sorcerer good without other class features is Spells (and lots of them), after that having other class features is just icing on the cake.
PrCs are not a requirement to have for any class - they add a element to it but all classes can be played to 20 without them.

The Beguiler/Dred Necro/Warmage are all very good in the area of thier specialty so if your wanting to play within that sphere of effect its proably a better choice than a Sorcerer - however the Sorcerer has the flexibility to choose just about any arcane spell from anywhere, it does require a bit more thought to make a spell list to suit your needs but its not that hard if you have a idea of what you want.

JKTrickster
2010-10-17, 01:13 AM
Personally, I think that the reason that JaronK didn't understand that was that he admitted that he never played with a Beguiler who didn't go into Shadowcraft Gnome and therefore into tier 1.

wait.....I thought the list assumed full base class 20 levels without PrCs? So wouldn't that not fit into the list anyway?

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-10-17, 01:28 AM
The Beguiler and DN expand their lists with Arcane Disciple + PRCs. A beguiler who doesn't expand his class list is as badly built as a sorcerer who learns only electrical blasting spells.IMO a beguiler without spell list expansion could be anywhere from low to medium optimization, whereas an electric-only sorcerer is intentionally gimping himself. Arcane Disciple contends with Polymorph/Planar Bind abuse, and Shadowcraft Mage contends with Incantatrix.

That said, back at those middle-to-lower optimization levels (woefully ignored by the tier list anyway), the Beguiler is better than or equal to the sorcerer until the higher levels.

T.G. Oskar
2010-10-17, 02:00 AM
Yes, sorcerers are worth it, without a question or doubt. The only difference between a sorcerer and wizard is not power, but rather versatility.

Well...that depends on what you mean about versatility. I'm sure that the meaning behind that statement is that wizards are more versatile than sorcerers in their spellcasting.

I think I saw this before over these parts, and I wholeheartedly agree with it; the power of Sorcerers is utility. A player that plays a Sorcerer smart will choose spells that can do multiple functions, particularly those that work inside and outside of battle.

Grease is a good example of the quintessential Sorcerer spell. First, it's a debuff; and a very good debuff at that. But it doesn't stop there. A clever use of Grease may imply a bonus on Open Lock (rust? Grease!), or disarming a creature (touch the weapon instead of the character; voila, the creature's damage potential reduces to non-lethal damage in seconds!), or even as a circumstance bonus to Escape Artist/Grapple checks (and a big one; +10 means you can escape a grapple before Freedom of Movement!). Granted, the idea of using Grease as a bonus to Open Lock/Disable Device is questionable, but certainly not outside of the line of thought. But the other three? Part of the spell description (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/grease.htm). And that's a 1st level spell.

Prestidigitation is another. A very useful utility spell out of battle; again, the more uses you can find for the spell, the better.

Protection from X is yet another good use. You get a decent buff in the line of +2 deflection bonus to AC and +2 resistance bonus to saves against the creature indicated on the spell. But it also prevents mental control (about half of the spells on the enchantment spell list, meaning it is an INCREDIBLE anti-Enchantment spell) and also great against possession. Oh, and protection against summoned creatures, So that's...four uses in one, and at least two outside of battle. Again; a perfect Sorcerer spell, because you'll be using it for several things.

Also, Pyrotechnics; a 2nd level spell, but it's surprisingly good as either a huge range blinding spell (120 ft.; again, the spell description says so (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/pyrotechnics.htm)), or a fog that causes debuffing upon a small area. At the same time you'd get Glitterdust or Web. And it only requires a fire source (say...torch?). Fastidiously effective debuff spell.

Or, say, Detect Magic (0-level spell, but it's unrivaled in what it can do once creatures start to use magic items and emit magic auras). Or the classic debuffs Color Spray, Sleep, Glitterdust and Web. Or being a counter-spellcaster with Dispel Magic done several times.

Now, this doesn't compare to the many tricks a Wizard has under its sleeve (namely, the ability to prepare spells with only a moment's notice, and have a bigger selection of spells, or [Rary's] Mnemonic Enhancer and [Mordenkainen's]/Mage's Lucubration, amongst any other tricks they can pull off. Or the fact that prepared spellcasters earn their spells one level earlier, or that they can use Quicken Spell. But it makes Sorcerers hauntingly effective, to a bigger extent than a Beguiler who has a larger selection of spells than a Sorcerer but on a much more reduced focus (Enchantment, Illusion, and assorted spells which include a lot of Transmutation, Abjuration and Conjuration). But, indeed, Sorcerers are worthwhile classes, if only because while not being quite versatile in their spell selection, they can use more of the many utility spells of the game without breaking a sweat. They prize a smart player, of course (oh, the irony! Though smart-played Wizards are a force to be reckoned, ere their reputed Intelligence) with a smaller but slightly more constant selection of spells.

Also, don't forget that you still have access to one of the best list of spells around. Beguilers need UMD to beat that, but Sorcerers have that access by default. That's another plus.

Now, this isn't a bash to Beguilers; they are a fun class to play, and they deliver a good deal of useful spells that the Warmage would only dream of having (aside from several variants of blasting). But against a Sorcerer...the latter has to make several bad choices of spells for the Beguiler to have an edge, and the Sorcerer can simply dabble into the Beguiler's zone by choosing the best utility spells of the Beguiler (Silent Image goes a long way, Shadow Conjuration/Evocation is something you'd expect from a Sorcerer anyways) and still have other spells that the Beguiler would only dream of.

So yeah, Sorcerer's aren't that much of a red-headed stepchild. Now Monks, on the other hand...

ranagrande
2010-10-17, 02:20 AM
Sorcerer is a fine class and the reasons for its placement in Tier 2 have been well documented.

However, as long as Complete Divine is allowed, the Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, and Warmage can all blow the Sorcerer away and jump to the very top of Tier 1.

JaronK
2010-10-17, 02:21 AM
What you don't understand is that accessing the best features of other classes IS the best feature of the Beguiler and Dread Necro. They are built with lists where they know every single spell available. That is the core feature of their classes. Of course they want to expand their lists. Why wouldn't they? The sorcerer expands his list with metamagic feats, turning level 2-3 spells into level 5-6 slots. The Beguiler and DN expand their lists with Arcane Disciple + PRCs. A beguiler who doesn't expand his class list is as badly built as a sorcerer who learns only electrical blasting spells.

A Sorcerer who wants to expand his list takes Mage of the Arcane Order, and then has far more than a Dread Necromancer or Beguiler ever would. Nice and easy.


Personally, I think that the reason that JaronK didn't understand that was that he admitted that he never played with a Beguiler who didn't go into Shadowcraft Gnome and therefore into tier 1.

What? No I didn't say that. The last Beguiler I played with was a Drow Beguiler 6/Mindbender 1.

JaronK

ranagrande
2010-10-17, 02:28 AM
A Sorcerer who wants to expand his list takes Mage of the Arcane Order, and then has far more than a Dread Necromancer or Beguiler ever would. Nice and easy.

I must disagree. A Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, or Warmage who wants to expand his list takes Rainbow Servant, and then can spontaneously cast any spell from his class list as well as any spell on the Cleric list. No Sorcerer could ever come close to that.

JaronK
2010-10-17, 02:49 AM
I must disagree. A Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, or Warmage who wants to expand his list takes Rainbow Servant, and then can spontaneously cast any spell from his class list as well as any spell on the Cleric list. No Sorcerer could ever come close to that.

That requires a dubious ruling (various translations of that book have alternated between 6/10 and 10/10), you don't get it until level 13+ (most games are below level 10), and it requires the DM to put in a special monster for you to meet so you can enter the PrC. It's not that great of a solution. A better way would probably be Dragonwrought Kobold with the sovereign Archtype that just gives you Druid or Cleric casting at level 1 in the same manner.

And if we're going to that level of optimization, we can start talking about Loredrake Kobolds with MotAO, which doesn't spontaenously cast as much but easily has as much overall versitility while remaining one spell level ahead. That's easily better due to the whole extra level of spells.

JaronK

ranagrande
2010-10-17, 03:34 AM
That requires a dubious ruling (various translations of that book have alternated between 6/10 and 10/10), you don't get it until level 13+ (most games are below level 10), and it requires the DM to put in a special monster for you to meet so you can enter the PrC. It's not that great of a solution. A better way would probably be Dragonwrought Kobold with the sovereign Archtype that just gives you Druid or Cleric casting at level 1 in the same manner.

And if we're going to that level of optimization, we can start talking about Loredrake Kobolds with MotAO, which doesn't spontaenously cast as much but easily has as much overall versitility while remaining one spell level ahead. That's easily better due to the whole extra level of spells.

JaronK

I don't know about other translations of Complete Divine. In mine, the table indicates that the Rainbow Servant does not advance spellcasting at levels 1, 4, 7, and 10. However, the text for it under "Spells per Day/Spells Known" says that it increases at every level. The DMG says that when there is a discrepancy between the two, text trumps table.

It also doesn't require any new monsters to take the class. The special requirement is to find a location.

I would say that Sovereign Archetype Kobolds require a far more dubious ruling. Part of the description of Sovereign Archetypes begins "All true dragons..." and that theme is present throughout. Loredrake Kobolds may be open for interpretation RAW, but they are clearly not RAI.

Edit: After looking at it more closely, it's a fairly simple logic exercise to show that Loredrake (or any other Sovereign Archetype) Kobolds are not, in fact, RAW legal. I don't know if I'm allowed to actually post the whole description, what with copyright concerns and so on, but I will quote what I see as the key terms.

The third paragraph under "Sovereign Archetypes" wherein it actually describes the feature begins:

'"All true dragons" can do arcane stuff. "Most" can also do clericky stuff. "This variant rule instead provides a dragon" other stuff.'

So, can a Dragonwrought Kobold employ this rule? Let's work backwards. It says it provides a "dragon" with certain features. A Dragonwrought Kobold is a dragon. So far, so good. The word "instead" denotes a replacement, so what does it replace? That other clericky stuff. And who has that other clericky stuff? "Most." Most what? "true dragons." Is a Dragonwrought Kobold a true dragon? No.

Ergo, Loredrake and all of the other Sovereign Archetypes are not legally available to Kobolds.

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-17, 09:38 AM
From what I have heard one of the European translations of the Complete Divine change the table to be 10/10, Portugese I think but I'm not sure.

I have never heard of any other translation besides English being 6/10. I'm pretty sure the English table is a misprint.

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-17, 09:42 AM
Ergo, Loredrake and all of the other Sovereign Archetypes are not legally available to Kobolds.

This is false. In fact there is no limitation that Sovereign Archetypes may only be used by True Dragons, as the text repeatedly says "Dragons" and has only one reference to true dragons, stating something to the nature of "all true dragons have the ability to use arcane magic." Henceforth the text only says "dragons."

Additionally, the text does not make giving up clerical access a requirement. In fact it explicitly states that dragons without access to clerical magic may take Archetypes. So, in actuality, any creature with the dragon type may take an archetype.

Furthermore, Dragonwrought Kobolds are true dragons anyway, and by the rules of Sovereign Archetypes need not give up domain access to gain an archetype. By the only consistent definition across any source, all that is required to be a True Dragon is to have the draconic 12 age categories. One could argue that they need to get more powerful as they age, but Dragonwrought Kobolds do that too.

ranagrande
2010-10-17, 11:32 AM
This is false.
I disagree with almost everything you say here.


In fact there is no limitation that Sovereign Archetypes may only be used by True Dragons, as the text repeatedly says "Dragons" and has only one reference to true dragons, stating something to the nature of "all true dragons have the ability to use arcane magic." Henceforth the text only says "dragons."
This is true; it does only say "true dragons" once, the first time it mentions them in the paragraph describing the mechanics of the variant rule. I think it's pretty clear that it is referring back to that throughout the rest of the description, but it could be open to interpretation.


Additionally, the text does not make giving up clerical access a requirement. In fact it explicitly states that dragons without access to clerical magic may take Archetypes. So, in actuality, any creature with the dragon type may take an archetype.
It does indeed state that dragons without clerical spells can be Sovereign Archetypes. It also lists exactly what dragons that applies to: Black, Green, and White dragons. Kobolds are not on the list.


Furthermore, Dragonwrought Kobolds are true dragons anyway, and by the rules of Sovereign Archetypes need not give up domain access to gain an archetype. By the only consistent definition across any source, all that is required to be a True Dragon is to have the draconic 12 age categories. One could argue that they need to get more powerful as they age, but Dragonwrought Kobolds do that too.
There is no consistent definition in any source. The "draconic 12 age categories" are not actually given as a requirement in any source that I know of. According to the definition given in the the book that should be the authority on the subject, the Draconomicon, humans are true dragons. This is obviously false. Stipulating that true dragons must be of the Dragon type, which is implied but not actually stated (as is the case with true dragons and Sovereign Archetypes), the dragonnel is a true dragon according to the definition given in the Draconomicon. However, that same book specifically lists the dragonnel as a "Lesser Dragon."

The definition in the Monster Manual is no better. It just says that "All true dragons gain more abilities and power as they age." Again, this is true of many creatures that are explicitly declared in the Draconomicon as not being true dragons.

With the total lack of cohesion that the definitions for a true dragon has, even within the individual sources where those definitions are given, it is impossible by RAW to declare anything to be a true dragon.

The only reason we can accept true dragons at all is because the primary sources, the original monster entries and the updates in the Draconomicon, specifically name certain creatures as being one.

The Dragonwrought Kobold is not specifically listed anywhere as being a true dragon, and we were never given a functional method for determining what constitutes a true dragon, so a Dragonwrought Kobold is not a true dragon.

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-17, 01:46 PM
The Dragonwrought Kobold is not specifically listed anywhere as being a true dragon, and we were never given a functional method for determining what constitutes a true dragon, so a Dragonwrought Kobold is not a true dragon.

Actually, we have been given a functional method. Page 4 sidebar, Draconomicon. True Dragons are dragons that have the 12 draconic age categories and gain power as they grow older.

This definition applies to all True Dragons ever printed, thus serves as a proper definition of what is a True Dragon. Numerous other references to True Dragons simply state something to the nature of "dragons that have 12 age categories."

Gnaeus
2010-10-17, 02:40 PM
Sorcerer: But a sorcerer gets game breaking spells in PHB, and has awesome draconic sorcerer only spells
Beguiler: I can break the game much better with Races of Stone, since Shadowcraft Mage makes my spell list huge.
Sorcerer:But at that level of optimization I have greater draconic rite of ascention for +2 levels of casting.
B: But that is way cheasier. S: No it isn't. B: Is. S: Isn't.

And now we are there.

Here's an idea. You talk with your DM about ALL the assumptions, rules calls, books and character types allowed, common enemies, existence or absence of magic marts and WBL in your game, and then we can meaningfully tell you whether sorcerer or Beguiler is more powerful.

Other than that it is just opinion as to what is fair on different levels of optimization. It is my opinion that loredrake kobolds are illegal and 10/10 rainbow servant is legal. But the key word there is opinion.

Volos
2010-10-17, 02:48 PM
In all honesty a question such as Is the sorcerer really worth it? is itself not worth it. The question assumes that everyone is a power gamer who is trying to break the game and/or win the game. It's D&D, you cannot win. If you have a half decent DM, he will make challenges that fits the party. A certian percentage of those challenges will kick your ass, and a certian percentage will just be challenging. (very few should be easy)

The sorcerer is as just a good choice for an arcane caster as the wizard, depnding on what you want to do. If you know how to optimize your use of low level spells and/or have a good collection of scrolls and other magic items to back you up, you should be a great arcane caster. Yes, your spell list is limited... but as we've established, there are some spells that are just so awesome that you really don't need to know every spell under the sun to survive. And with the ability to choose which spells you are casting on the fly, you are never prepared for the wrong situation. Sorcerers can be very effective if used correctly.

Soranar
2010-10-17, 03:23 PM
why is sorcerer tier 2 vs beguiler tier 3

sorcerers have more ACF, substitution levels and better spell choices (at any level)

which in turn gives you more options (they're not all superior but many are)

so yeah, if both are unoptimized (meaning if sorcerer picks bad spells while you don't, since you can't) than a beguiler might be better (unless he's facing creatures to mind affecting spells, which are legion)

ranagrande
2010-10-17, 04:16 PM
Actually, we have been given a functional method. Page 4 sidebar, Draconomicon. True Dragons are dragons that have the 12 draconic age categories and gain power as they grow older.

This definition applies to all True Dragons ever printed, thus serves as a proper definition of what is a True Dragon. Numerous other references to True Dragons simply state something to the nature of "dragons that have 12 age categories."

Is there errata for the Draconomicon? Because that is not what the sidebar on page 4 of my copy says. It says "True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older." So by strict RAW, anything that gains a level could be a true dragon.

It states an exception for dragon-typed creatures that "do not advance through age categories" to be lesser dragons instead, but there is no mention of there needing to be 12 of them. Note that while this requires dragon-typed characters to advance through age categories to be classified as true dragons, there is no such requirement for creatures of other types, and it does not say that something has to be a dragon in order to be a true dragon.

If we grant that that should be implied, a half-dragon human has at least 5 age categories. Is it a true dragon? A dragonnel has 2 age categories, and the Draconomicon specifically says that a dragonnel is a lesser dragon. The book proves its own definition a paradox.

Having true dragon status require dragon-typed creatures who advance through the 12 age categories as all of the other listed true dragons do might be a reasonable house rule, but it's not RAW.

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-17, 04:35 PM
read a little further, it states in the same place that "other creatures of the dragon type that do not advance through age categories are referred to as lesser dragons."

ranagrande
2010-10-17, 04:49 PM
Reread my post. I mentioned that.

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-17, 04:55 PM
Reread my post. I mentioned that.

The term "Age Categories" is unique to dragons. I just use "12" to be specific. Non-dragons do not have age categories.

ranagrande
2010-10-17, 05:08 PM
The term "Age Categories" is unique to dragons. I just use "12" to be specific. Non-dragons do not have age categories.

Huh. I guess you're right. I had thought that the starting ages and such were too, but they're just listed as Aging Effects.

However, that does not change the fact that it only requires dragon-type creatures to have age categories and that it does not require true dragons to be dragons.

JaronK
2010-10-18, 12:18 AM
I don't know about other translations of Complete Divine. In mine, the table indicates that the Rainbow Servant does not advance spellcasting at levels 1, 4, 7, and 10. However, the text for it under "Spells per Day/Spells Known" says that it increases at every level. The DMG says that when there is a discrepancy between the two, text trumps table.

It also doesn't require any new monsters to take the class. The special requirement is to find a location.

Sorry, I forgot it was a location. Either way, are you sure that location is available to you within the campaign? Most campaigns I've been in don't just let you run off to another part of the world, especially at very low levels. It's going to be a LONG time before you get the full Cleric casting.


I would say that Sovereign Archetype Kobolds require a far more dubious ruling. Part of the description of Sovereign Archetypes begins "All true dragons..." and that theme is present throughout. Loredrake Kobolds may be open for interpretation RAW, but they are clearly not RAI.

I think once we start talking about Rainbow Servants giving full casting, RAI is rather out the window.


So, can a Dragonwrought Kobold employ this rule? Let's work backwards. It says it provides a "dragon" with certain features. A Dragonwrought Kobold is a dragon. So far, so good. The word "instead" denotes a replacement, so what does it replace? That other clericky stuff. And who has that other clericky stuff? "Most." Most what? "true dragons." Is a Dragonwrought Kobold a true dragon? No.

You might want to check the definition of True Dragon. It's found in Dragon Magic and Dragons of Kyrnn... a Dragon with 12 Age Categories. Draconomicon backs this up in the sidebar on page 4 (with the added bit about getting more powerful as they get older, which Dragonwrought Kobolds do due to getting bonuses to mental stats for being older without penalities to physical stats that other races get). Now look in Races of the Dragon, in the beginning of the Kobold section. See those age categories? Yup, they're True Dragons, and it seems to be RAI as well (why else would they put those age categories in there, and then talk about all Kobolds being either Chromatic or Metallic?). Note that I'm quite sure the writer of Dragons of Eberron didn't realize that Kobolds were True Dragons (they only got that ability in Races of the Dragon, which was just being finished while Dragons of Eberron was still being written by a different team of designers), so while it's clearly RAI that Kobolds be such, it's not RAI that they use Sovereign Archtypes. It's RAW though.

And yes, it's overpowered as heck and totally not intended, but so is giving the entire Cleric list to spontaneous arcane casters. Don't pull this in game without express permission from your DM first!

JaronK

Gnaeus
2010-10-18, 05:41 AM
Sorry, I forgot it was a location. Either way, are you sure that location is available to you within the campaign? Most campaigns I've been in don't just let you run off to another part of the world, especially at very low levels. It's going to be a LONG time before you get the full Cleric casting.

Most campaigns I've been in don't let you play kobolds, either as DM fiat because monster races don't fit with their campaign, or with the warning that you will be killed on sight the first time you walk into a town after the guards detect that you are using magic to hide your race. (Shadowcraft gnomes don't usually have that problem)




And yes, it's overpowered as heck and totally not intended, but so is giving the entire Cleric list to spontaneous arcane casters. Don't pull this in game without express permission from your DM first!

JaronK

It is also from 2 late printed sourcebooks, one of which is world specific, while Complete Divine was one of the 1st books in 3.5. This sub-argument is pointless and stupid. Every single thing in it comes down to ask your DM.