[3.5] a quick question about sorcs

[slaydemons]

I have been thinking if sorcs draw their powers from within themselves, shouldn't they be able to cast without spell components and I often think they use stilled and silent spells, since they probably don't need to say anything to activate something deep within them. Am I just a crazy and should go away quietly or am I onto something with this.

[Sitzkrieg]

My group always gives out free Eschew Materials to all the arcane casters. I think it still makes sense for them to use gestures and incantations though, as a way to channel their energy. Maybe you could take a look at the Warlock class, which uses a slightly different casting system where they use Spell-like Abilities, and so have all of those benefits I believe.

[nedz]

Eschew Materials is the feat you need. Free for PF Sorcerors IIRC.
Shame about the spells with Foci though, I don't think it works for those.

[boomwolf]

It does as far I recall.

Anyway, sorcerers need components because they draw the POWER from within, but they still require a way to convert that power into the effect, unlike wizards that draw power from the words, gestures and items sorcerers just use them to convert the power to the desired effect.

[Yuki Akuma]

Sorcerers are creatures capable of casting spells innately, without tutelage, very quickly.

Normally, casting a spell requries at least fifteen minutes of incantation and mental flexing, but Sorcerers can boil a set number of spells down to their most basic components.

These components still require material components, gestures and words of power, just like the triggering gestures and phrases that Wizards use.

Sorcerers do not draw magical power from within. The power for their spells comes from the same place it does for Wizards.

[graymachine]

Perhaps you could use this particular aspect to fix the Sorcerer class. I've held the option that sorcerers got nerfed pretty hard in the transition from 3.0 to 3.5, although I generally prefer 3.5. The only significant difference between wizards and sorcerers is the increased spells-per-day for sorcerers, but that comes at the crippling cost of spells-known. Honestly, a player with passing familiarity can correct a wizard for the gap in spells-per-day, which is the end leaves no reason to play a sorcerer from a mechanical aspect. Obviously, there is a flavor issue, which I support, but I think, at least in D&D, that mechanics back up flavor.

Adding Eschew Materials as a bonus feat would help to correct this issue, but that is only true if you are meticulous about tracking spell components. In my experience, most groups allow spellcasters to purchase "component kits" to cover most spells, not really caring as long they occasionally repurchase the kit. Obviously this doesn't apply to expensive components, such as the diamonds for a raise dead spell.

I'd honestly recommend revamping the Sorcerer class for balance and flavor against the Wizard class. To be safe, I would have any players that are wizards approve the changes, since they would be the most critical.

[Yuki Akuma]

I honestly don't think the Sorcerer needs to be any stronger. They're still more powerful than the broad majority of classes. Comparing classes to one of the Big Five is just silly.

Besides, spontaneous casting does have advantages over prepared casting. The fact that it's, you know, spontaneous. If a Wizard who knows knock only prepared it once but needs it twice in a day... he's screwed. A Sorcerer who knows knock can cast it any number of times he likes.

Also, RAW, you don't ever need to replace your spell component pouch (unless it gets sundered, in which case everything is completely lost).

[Narren]

My group always gives out free Eschew Materials to all the arcane casters. I think it still makes sense for them to use gestures and incantations though, as a way to channel their energy. Maybe you could take a look at the Warlock class, which uses a slightly different casting system where they use Spell-like Abilities, and so have all of those benefits I believe.

I always gave it to sorcerers only. It was just a little something to help them compare to the wizard. I'm also one of the only DM's I know that pays attention to spell components. I don't make the party list every one of them, but I'll put them in situations that they may have reacquire them, just to make them think outside the box.

I've also allowed them to search for rare components that will strengthen a spell when used. Makes for a quick hook when my ideas have run dry.

[slaydemons]

I now have a want to play a sorc who can cast dimension spells.... something like this always happens when I come to this forum dammit...

[graymachine]

I honestly don't think the Sorcerer needs to be any stronger. They're still more powerful than the broad majority of classes. Comparing classes to one of the Big Five is just silly.

Besides, spontaneous casting does have advantages over prepared casting. The fact that it's, you know, spontaneous. If a Wizard who knows knock only prepared it once but needs it twice in a day... he's screwed. A Sorcerer who knows knock can cast it any number of times he likes.

Also, RAW, you don't ever need to replace your spell component pouch (unless it gets sundered, in which case everything is completely lost).

I'll agree that the sorcerer is strong, insomuch as it is a caster. As to the point of spontaneous casting, yes, a powerful sorcerer can spontaneously cast one of the seven spells he knows, while a moderately clever wizard player doesn't really consider prepared spells an obstacle.

/ARROGANT HYPERBOLE :smalltongue:

My major point is that the sorcerer class needs some overhauling for flavor reasons. I tend to view the 3.0 sorcerer as a far better version, simply because it didn't feel like a weird version of wizard with slightly more spells-per-day. He had more hitpoints! He could actually use weapons! And wear a bit or two of armor! Nowadays, if I'm looking to play something that feels like what a sorcerer should be I play a warlock. But I'm confusing the issue; I think that it serves a game better to make enough changes to the sorcerer class that it can be cool in its own right, without drawing (at least immediate) comparisons to the wizard.

Two of the coolest changes to the I've seen in a game to the sorcerer class were: 1. Any class granted feats are can be exchanged for the alternates found in Unearthed Arcana, or other sources for that matter, and wizards cannot do that. 2. Sorcerers gain the Thematic Magic feat for free at first level. Any power gamer is going to tell you these changes aren't that significant, but in game they made a world of difference.

[Narren]

2. Sorcerers gain the Thematic Magic feat for free at first level.


This has just been stolen :smallbiggrin:

[graymachine]

This has just been stolen :smallbiggrin:

It's simultaneously the most awesome feat for a caster and the worst. The worst because the only thing it does mechanically is increase the DC to identify the spell you are casting by 5. The best is that you cast magic fundamentally different from how everyone cultured understands magic. One of my most enjoyed characters had the feat. He was a 20 level character, wizard base but a whole mess of PrCs and such for maximum power. His Thematic Casting? He cast spells like Akiro from Conan the Barbarian; he had the Eschew Materials feat so he just made hand symbolize and went, "HUmmmm-Ahhmmmm!"

[Narren]

It's simultaneously the most awesome feat for a caster and the worst. The worst because the only thing it does mechanically is increase the DC to identify the spell you are casting by 5. The best is that you cast magic fundamentally different from how everyone cultured understands magic. One of my most enjoyed characters had the feat. He was a 20 level character, wizard base but a whole mess of PrCs and such for maximum power. His Thematic Casting? He cast spells like Akiro from Conan the Barbarian; he had the Eschew Materials feat so he just made hand symbolize and went, "HUmmmm-Ahhmmmm!"

I've got no problem gimping a character for something I think is cool.

[Yuki Akuma]

Taking a feat that only has positives is not 'gimping'.

Gimping would be taking a feat with downsides, whose upsides aren't good enough to make up for it.

It may not be the most mechanically efficient choice but who plays mechanically perfect characters?

[graymachine]

I've got no problem gimping a character for something I think is cool.

Well, if you're giving it for free to sorcerers at first level there is not gimping. Mechanically, the sorcerer is simply getting a +5 bonus against people trying to determine what they are casting. Which seems completely reasonable, given that sorcery is not, by its nature, part of a formal magic education. It's only gimping if someone has to pay a feat for it.

[Narren]

Agreed on both counts. Gimping was the wrong word for this situation, though I'll rarely play a character that's optimized. That's partly because my group is horribly unoptimized (they don't really know any better, and could care less to learn), and partly because I find no real joy in it.

[graymachine]

Taking a feat that only has positives is not 'gimping'.

Gimping would be taking a feat with downsides, whose upsides aren't good enough to make up for it.

It may not be the most mechanically efficient choice but who plays mechanically perfect characters?

There were other feats I could have taken that would have increased my damage output by ~15%, but what is RPing without whimsy? :smalltongue:

[graymachine]

Agreed on both counts. Gimping was the wrong word for this situation, though I'll rarely play a character that's optimized. That's partly because my group is horribly unoptimized (they don't really know any better, and could care less to learn), and partly because I find no real joy in it.

Huh. I'm different, at least with D&D. I'm a roleplayer first, probably from being weened on White Wolf, but with D&D I find a certain pleasure in a well-made character playing with other well-made characters fighting complex and well-made challenges.

[Yuki Akuma]

You're a Sorcerer. Why would you care about a 15% damage increase? :smalltongue:

[graymachine]

You're a Sorcerer. Why would you care about a 15% damage increase? :smalltongue:

Heh. Because I'm growing tired of the Wizard handling the situation and the rest of the party constantly asking what I actually do.

[Narren]

Huh. I'm different, at least with D&D. I'm a roleplayer first, probably from being weened on White Wolf, but with D&D I find a certain pleasure in a well-made character playing with other well-made characters fighting complex and well-made challenges.

Well, 3.5 lends itself well to that. My group started with 2nd edition, and then went to White Wolf, so we never really got too into that aspect of it. If I told most of them that blasters and heal bots were not the way to go, and that fighters and monks are awful, they wouldn't believe me.

And not one of them has ever even thought of playing a druid.

[graymachine]

Well, 3.5 lends itself well to that. My group started with 2nd edition, and then went to White Wolf, so we never really got too into that aspect of it. If I told most of them that blasters and heal bots were not the way to go, and that fighters and monks are awful, they wouldn't believe me.

And not one of them has ever even thought of playing a druid.

Hell, you can make an impressive fighter or monk. The issue is simply knowledge of the system.