My GM hates Wizards...

[Desril]

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]

It sounds like he's made up his mind and no amount of evidence will convince him otherwise.

[Connington]

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]

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]

He is overreacting by hating wizards for being better, but wizards simply are better. Arcane? Wizard.

[Remmirath]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

Focused 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]

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]

Wizards are very hatable.

[Skeppio]

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]

Well, there's a reason why the design company isn't called "Sorcerers of the Coast"...

[Hawriel]

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]

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 is serious business.

[mint]

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]

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]

Show your GM the nuclear sorcerer to prove that Sorcs can hold their own ~.^

[Uec]

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]

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]

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]

Why get caught up in the commotion of Wizard versus Sorcerer? Re-spec to Generic Spellcaster today!

[Oslecamo]

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]

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 for this. I like the bears with lasers fix myself.
Just my (very long and wall of texty) 2 cp.

[Leon]

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]

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.