Sorcerers lack selfcontrol?

[Mastikator]

Based on several comments made in this thread http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188566
specifically, the ones that are about how wizards are in control of their magic, and sorcerers are not, and the apparent lack of counter-posts to this, makes me wonder.
Is there any presidence for this judgment? I've seen neither any fluff nor any mechanics that support any such a conclusion, and it doesn't make sense that instincts would be less controlled than calculated tries. Just look at how the human body moves, that's instinct, try calculating the actual muscle contractions. Even with plenty of time to prepare there just isn't any comparison (maybe why sorc's start as teenagers and wiz's as adults).

If anything a sorcerer should be in more control of his spells than a wizard.

[Yuki Akuma]

Before learning enough to qualify as "level one", one can assume that a sorcerer has had to experiment with his powers a lot.

As they're innate powers that he doesn't really understand without actual study (he doesn't have ranks in Spellcraft just by virtue of being a Sorcerer), one can assume that he had a few... accidents before he got to grips with his powers.

[HunterOfJello]

As far as the magic goes, they both have to exert extraordinary influence over their arcane abilities to control and properly use their magics.


However, concerning their use of magics, Sorcerers could easily get a reputation for being temperamental. An angry Sorcerer who can cast six 3rd level spells per day is less likely to worry about the future spellcasting consequences of throwing a fireball at an annoying peasant than a Wizard who only prepared 1 fireball for that day. Wizards have to be thoughtful and conservative with their magic to be ready for future dangers, Sorcerers usually don't.

[HappyBlanket]

Sorcery favors the free, chaotic, creative spirit over the disciplined mind...
I don't bring up the bit about a Sorcerer's first spells, since I imagine talented Wizards could spawn similar uncontrolled magic, if the Wizard decided to get ahead of himself.

I haven't interpreted it in terms of magic being compared to the intricacies of the human body. I saw it as Wizard achieving arcane might through the use of discipline and hardwork, while a Sorcerer is simply given powers, skipping whatever work it would take a Wizard.

There are a few RL traditional martial arts that require it's practitioners to undergo discipline training before actually learning how to hurt somebody. Likening this to magic, a Wizard would be somebody who is taught both discipline and power, while a Sorcerer is just somebody who knows how to punch hard

[Tyndmyr]

Eh, the idea of the budding sorcerer or power crazed wizard are equally strong. Either could go awry.

I certainly don't see any justification by RAW for either being especially dangerous or lacking in self control.

[Serpentine]

It's not anything innate to D&D, but rather much wider mythology and popculture. Tamora Pierce's Circle series are probably the best demonstration of this. In that, most mages are "academic mages" - they have a natural spark of magic in them, yes, but then they hang out in universities and develop their talent, under extremely controlled circumstances, through hard study.
The main characters, on the other hand, are "ambient mages". They have a different sort of magic that is detected in a different way, and that involves a natural affinity for a particular substance or whatever. It manifests in strange ways they can't control, and unless they are found and trained they can be downright dangerous without even knowing what it is that's happening - Tris, for example, nearly fries people with lightning when she's angry.

Basically, no, there's nothing written in D&D (as far as I know) that says Sorcerers are less in control of their magic, but it is part of the wider fantasy landscape: the Sorcerer class represents the sort of natural spellcaster who, for example, manifests their power at times of stress (or at puberty), discovering masses of power that they then need to learn to control and develop. The Wizard class, on the other hand, represents the academic spellcaster who has the spark of magic within them but who largely gains power and ability through study and research, often as part of a wider community of researching spellcasters.
I think that's the thing. There isn't anything (or much) in D&D that says the Wizard is such-and-such and the Sorcerer is so-and-so, but the Wizard represents such-and-such a category of spellcaster with its associated tropes and expectations, while the Sorcerer represents so-and-so a category of spellcaster with its associated tropes and expectations.

And, moreover, this much more relates to their beginnings as spellcasters, not their ultimate power. Wizard-type spellcasters start low and build up, building control and knowledge at the same time as they build power. Sorcerer-type spellcasters start high, with raw power, and then have to learn control and knowledge.

[Tyndmyr]

Ah. I'm aware that this is a steriotype for some reason...but it seemed to me that the biggest wizard/sorc steriotypes are actually from D&D itself.

Plenty of magic systems either don't include both, or have them in other arrangements. Sword of Truth, for instance. Hell, discworld.

[Asheram]

Think of it as the public view upon when mutants first showed up in the X-men movies.

Strange mutants who are immensly powerful and can incinerate people with a thought!

[Tyndmyr]

Oh, it's a very common theme in X-men. The same theme is hardly universal, though, especially with magic, which can literally be almost anything the writer desires.

[Serpentine]

Plenty of magic systems either don't include both, or have them in other arrangements. Sword of Truth, for instance. Hell, discworld.I think maybe that's part of the problem. We can say "Sorcerers represent the spellcasters in this fantasy world", and "Wizards represent the spellcasters in that fantasy world", but I don't know of many where we can say "Sorcerers represent this spellcaster and wizards represent that spellcaster in the same world and their interactions". In fact, my Circle example's the only one that comes to my mind...

[Amnestic]

Think of it as the public view upon when mutants first showed up in the X-men movies.

Strange mutants who is immensly powerful and can incinerate people with a thought!

That always bugged me. Why do people hate mutants but love Spiderman who may as well be a mutant despite different origin of powers. :smallannoyed:

[Serpentine]

Hypothesis: Mutants can be anyone, anywhere, and they're growing in number. Your own family could be mutants. Spiderman, on the other hand, is (presumably) a one-off freak occurance.
Thoughts?

[Tyndmyr]

That always bugged me. Why do people hate mutants but love Spiderman who may as well be a mutant despite different origin of powers. :smallannoyed:

Depending on the book you read, Spiderman can range from despised/hated to loved by all.

There is an inconsistency in some renditions, though. Mostly the ones focusing on mutants.

[Pentachoron]

That always bugged me. Why do people hate mutants but love Spiderman who may as well be a mutant despite different origin of powers. :smallannoyed:

Because various writers (Stan Lee to a large extent, of course) wanted the two comics to cover radically different subjects, presumably. It does stand to point out, though, that per canon Spider-Man is not loved by all by a long shot, nor were the X-Men/Mutants initially pariahs.

Edit: Swordsaged

[Gullintanni]

Based on several comments made in this thread http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188566
specifically, the ones that are about how wizards are in control of their magic, and sorcerers are not, and the apparent lack of counter-posts to this, makes me wonder.
Is there any presidence for this judgment? I've seen neither any fluff nor any mechanics that support any such a conclusion, and it doesn't make sense that instincts would be less controlled than calculated tries. Just look at how the human body moves, that's instinct, try calculating the actual muscle contractions. Even with plenty of time to prepare there just isn't any comparison (maybe why sorc's start as teenagers and wiz's as adults).

If anything a sorcerer should be in more control of his spells than a wizard.

A Sorcerer who's had his power for a few years is just as in control of his power as any Wizard is. On the other hand, Sorcerers powers develop with the onset of puberty. Assuming the Sorcerer in question has no mentor, then it'll be a very confusing experience. He won't necessarily know what triggers his power or how to limit it at first.

If I had to compare the Sorcerer to anyone, if you've seen Heroes, then you know the kind of chaos sudden onset power can cause. Imagine turning on that power in middle school. By the time a Sorcerer becomes a PC, they've manifested and experimented enough with their power that the lack of control described in the PHB is no longer an issue.

Every Sorcerer will have been caught off guard by their own abilities, and realistically, there will be a range of Sorcerers from good, who will try to maintain strict control of their power, to evil who will try to exploit it, but initially, as has been mentioned above, and well before the Sorcerer becomes a character, there are going to be accidents.

[TheStranger]

Agreed that there is no inherent reason that sorcerers would have less self-control. You could easily make up some fluff suggesting that sorcerers have much greater self-control than wizards. Think of it this way: a sorcerer, through sheer willpower (force of personality, skimpy clothing, whatever), bends the raw forces of magic to his will. A wizard, to control those same forces, has to first organize the magical energy into mechanistic patterns, because he lacks the mental discipline and strength to do it on the fly the way the sorcerer does. If he tried, the magical energy would either fizzle or burn him to a crisp.

Almost anything can be refluffed, and there's no particular reason to adhere to the WotC fluff or fantasy stereotypes.

Actually, there is one reason - the other people at your table. Ideally, you'd like to be playing in the same fantasy world as everybody else in your game.

[Goonthegoof]

Actually discworld does have both and both are very close to the d&d incarnations- wizards are spellcasters who study for long periods and memorise spells, sourcerers are people born with an innate connection to magic and know what to do automatically.

That said they aren't similar in power like in d&d, sourcerers are far more powerful.

[Serpentine]

Didn't that only turn up in one book? And... was that specifically the 8th son of the 8th son of a wizard?

[Tyndmyr]

That's true, but the similarity ends there. Wizards learn to magic by studying, sure, but they are remarkably dangerous to...everyone. Especially unintentionally.

Sorcerers, on the other hand, are a rare result of wizard children, and are like unto gods. They have perfect control and immense power that they wield with ease.

If anything, it's the opposite of the Circle-styled representation.

[FMArthur]

The mechanics actually don't support the 'natural mage' going or starting out wild too well because despite their natural magic, Sorcerers still need to use the same special material, somatic and verbal components to cast their spells. Perhaps their age and comparatively smaller amount of study makes them, on average, less responsible with magic than Wizards. But they don't actually lose control and it would be nearly impossible to cast spells by accident.

Warlocks fit that fluff much better. You might houserule free Eschew Materials onto Sorcerers - I would if anyone would play them in my group - but that's not in the text.

[Gnoman]

If you're looking for examples of wizards and sorcerers in non-DND media, the Wheel of Time is a fair example. Users of the One Power are always feared to some degree, even full Aes Sedai, but the male channelers and the few women who spontaneously start to channel but escape the notice of the Aes Sedai (or the sea folk, or the Aiel Wise ones, or the Knitting Circle) cause an incredible amount of fear even if they have gained some measure of control.

[Eldan]

I think its also about the age thing.

A 16 year old human sorcerer knows a handful of spells, and can perfectly control them. I'd assume that they started training a few years earlier.

Now think of the average 14 year old. Give him the ability to:
a) Charm people
b) Shoot fire from his hands
c) Make people fall over
d) Any other spell

Even if he's an especially stable teenager, this won't end well in most cases.

[Serpentine]

The mechanics actually don't support the 'natural mage' going or starting out wild too well because despite their natural magic, Sorcerers still need to use the same special material, somatic and verbal components to cast their spells. Perhaps their age and comparatively smaller amount of study makes them, on average, less responsible with magic than Wizards. But they don't actually lose control and it would be nearly impossible to cast spells by accident.The way I - and, I'd guess, a fair few others - handle it is that the starting out is a one-off (or sort of) uncontrolled "explosion"* of magic. It's explicitly not like normal spellcasting. The spell components would be part of the later learning how to do it controlled and deliberately.
Compare Tris from Tamora Pierce's early uncontrolled (i.e. without material, somatic or verbal components) manipulation of magic, and her later use of her own hair to contain winds.


*May not accurately describe what actually happens.

[FMArthur]

Is there any way for people actually looking for it to find budding Sorcerers as they begin their journey towards being a spellcaster? I think bloodline-tracking is mostly impossible due to the possibility of fey heritage and fey being... well, fey.

I sort of want to make this a thing in my campaign worlds if it's possible, since it really seems likely that existing casters would want to know and shape the next generation. Older Sorcerers or even Wizards seek out and teach young Sorcerers. Clerics monitor them for their community or to offer spiritual guidance. And of course, some evil people seek to control or eradicate them.

[Tyndmyr]

Now think of the average 14 year old. Give him the ability to:
a) Charm people
b) Shoot fire from his hands
c) Make people fall over
d) Any other spell

This is completely legit. Wizard, sorc, whatever, you give spellcasting to teenagers, and some poor decisions are going to be made at some point.

[Fhaolan]

I think this is a case of non-cannon fluff being added to a class because the playerbase wants more differentation between the two classes. As it stands they're too similar and yet they're just different enough that it feels odd.

Personally, I find psionics make a better 'sorcerer' due to the more extreme differences in the mechanics.

But then, I'm also a (reserved) fan of the old SJG-published book 'Authentic Thaumaturgy' (not the GURPS 4ed Thaumaturgy book, it's a bit different.) that posits a completely different magical system where some people can have massive natural power with little to no skill in controlling it (Sorcerer equivalents), and you can have highly trained skills to have excelent control and focus power from other sources (Wizard equivalents). The interesting bit is that in this system the Wizard has to have *some* Sorcerer-like ability (but not much) to provide the initial oomph to allow the character to draw power from another source (be it planar, spirits, other people's life force, etc.)

I say a reserved fan because the game system in the book itself is a bit awkward. However, it's an interesting concept that 'feels' to me a lot more like how people have viewed magic in RL.

EDIT: Actually, I just got out my copy of the book, and my memory of it is a lot better than the reality of it. The system is more than just 'a bit awkward', and it's pretty obvious the author is a mystic-type and not an actual game designer. However the *concepts* are interesting and just beg for a real game designer to take a shot at making them workable.

[Serpentine]

Is there any way for people actually looking for it to find budding Sorcerers as they begin their journey towards being a spellcaster? I think bloodline-tracking is mostly impossible due to the possibility of fey heritage and fey being... well, fey.

I sort of want to make this a thing in my campaign worlds if it's possible, since it really seems likely that existing casters would want to know and shape the next generation. Older Sorcerers or even Wizards seek out and teach young Sorcerers. Clerics monitor them for their community or to offer spiritual guidance. And of course, some evil people seek to control or eradicate them.Sure, there's plenty of ways it could be identified. Strange - but generally benign - occurances around the person, a test, someone with a special ability to "see" their magic, that sort of thing.
To take Tamora Pierce's example, again, the usual way to identify young mages (i.e. Wizards) is a series of tests involving making objects move and the like. However, this doesn't work on ambient mages (i.e. Sorcerers) (although you could easily say it does), but because they're so rare there isn't really any standard test. Instead, in the books, they tend to be accidentally found usually by someone with similar talents, or sought out by an exceptional individual with the specific ability to find them.
So, there's two possibilities: an organised test, and a sort of wandering talent scout. There's plenty of others, though.

[Redshirt traine]

For some reason this topic reminds me of some part for the book Jurasic Park.

At one point they discuss two majoir methods of gaining knowledge. Learning though study and learning thought practice.

My idea is that spellcaters that learn spells though practice also learn what the big concequinces of after they do so. spelcaster who learn though study only know what they are given meaning they may learn how to cast it, but not how to control it.(Even if the instuctions are in the spell discrption they may be throw off the frist time thay cast it. I don't care how good your cheatsheets are, you are not able to use one where flying that 747.)

[Fhaolan]

Learning though study and learning thought practice.

Huh. I can see that way of looking at it. Interesting.