Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 General Forgotten Realms Chat
 Wizards vs Sorcerers
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

Dalor Darden
Great Reader

USA
3593 Posts

Posted - 05 Oct 2013 :  18:53:11  Show Profile Send Dalor Darden a Private Message  Reply with Quote
There was a time when memorizing spells took a wizard 15 minutes per level of the spell...THAT was their weakness.

Sure, the Arch-Mage could show up in the village and destroy the place unleashing all hell and obliterating the King's Knights...

...but when the adventurers came calling the next day, the fella wasn't going to have his spells all ready to go again! That Meteor Swarm he cast the day before takes 2.25 hours to memorize alone!

One of the reasons I always get ticked when someone says "Wizards are too powerful at higher levels!" and then the game designer goes "NERF IT!" and then actually makes wizards more powerful by making it possible for them to memorize faster!

That was my problem with the transition from earlier editions to 3.munchkinism to start with.

In 1e or 2e a Sorcerer would for sure be a better class to play if you wanted your magic back quickly...but in 3.x the wizard just gets his power back far too quickly.

AD&D for me!
Go to Top of Page

The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore

1602 Posts

Posted - 05 Oct 2013 :  20:11:54  Show Profile Send The Arcanamach a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I think the time requirement for memorization was altered because most campaigns (at least, those that I played in) house ruled or ignored the memorization times.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the Vancian/memorization rules. I prefer a spellpoint system or Con based casting (wherein a caster risks fatigue or exhaustion...but has the potential for infinite casting, albeit a difficult potential). If anyone has the Middle Earth CODA rules then you have an idea of what I'm talking about.

I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one.
Go to Top of Page

Dalor Darden
Great Reader

USA
3593 Posts

Posted - 05 Oct 2013 :  20:34:07  Show Profile Send Dalor Darden a Private Message  Reply with Quote
In 2e they had a good solid system for using spell points...it was good stuff actually.

AD&D for me!
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
6599 Posts

Posted - 05 Oct 2013 :  22:27:38  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ha, my longstanding variant houserule is a flat one hour per spell level for memorization. The flipside, however: a wizard can memorize spells over and over again all day, provided he's still "well-rested" ... he doesn't need to be fresh as the morning before breakfast and coffee (and really, who the hell ever is anyways?), he just can't be exhausted after a day filled with the exertions of combat and horseback riding and unusually difficult NPCs.

So yes, a fully-depleted archmage literally needs weeks of memorization to charge himself up to capacity. And yes, a 1st-level wizard can spend all day at practice hurling magic missiles at an unflattering doodle of his sadistic DM, casting and memorizing the same spell (or any spell) a dozen times or more in the same day.

This isn't at all canon or in the published rules. Just something which works very well at my gaming table, and which all the players have come to enjoy. A great way to help balance out the linear-fighter-quadratic-wizard inequality, and to encourage lowly magelings to cast spells rather than hoard them, and to limit rampant uber-magic overkill from the megamages. PCs play smarter when faced with competing needs, limitations, and the cost of measured force vs the cost of overwhelming overkill force.

Note that 2E offers a few magical constructs and trinkets which dramatically reduce spell memorization times (by half or more). These things can have a significant impact on the logistics of high-level adventuring.

[/Ayrik]

Edited by - Ayrik on 06 Oct 2013 00:23:35
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
31048 Posts

Posted - 05 Oct 2013 :  22:44:14  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So for a sorcerer it's a waste of a feat to be able to cast more spells than he has available, but for wizards it is expected that they'll be able to cast more spells than are available? Talk about skewing the scenario to achieve a desired result...

The Wizard doesn't have to decide if taking the Scribe Scroll feat is worth it or not - they get it for free at first level. Of course it's skewed in the Wizard's favor, for that reason alone.


No, the skew was your assumption that a wizard would be fully loaded with scrolls, and a sorcerer wouldn't have any.

quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I further maintain it is bunk to assume that wizards do nothing but blast anything and everything, all day long. Need a door opened? Fireball! Can't get up to that ledge? Screw it, bring down the mountain and walk right in! Need to have someone do something for you? They'll be plenty willing after a lightning bolt or two!

I have never made this argument, and I haven't seen it in this entire thread. Is your past personal gaming experience catching up with you here? Do you need a moment to breathe?


That is actually the argument you're making, when you insist that there is no way a wizard would possibly run out of combat spells. If they aren't running out of combat spells, it's because they have no utility spells. And if they have no utility spells, then we have the examples above.

quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Yeah, because no player ever does something like go to a tavern for a drink, or tries to charm the local nobleman's daughter into the sack... No player ever just needs supplies, or to read the new spellbook he just found, or wants to use his crafting ability, or needs the local sage to help him interpret a mysterious coded document, or needs to consult with a temple to find out about something that happened in the area 400 years ago...

The strawman argument is that all DMs, everywhere, want nothing more than to kill their players, and will not let logic or player desires get in the way of what they want.


Then would you do me a quick favor and describe the prepared spell list of an "off-duty" Wizard? Is he/she just filling up all their daily slots with nothing but Tongues and Locate Object over and over again? I find that idea vastly more ridiculous than the idea that a mage will have at least a couple of spells suited to danger prepared.



I never said that a wizard wouldn't have at least a couple of offensive spells -- I've been arguing against the idea that wizards will always, no matter the situation, be fully loaded with every possible combat spell. I've been trying to make the case that wizards not expecting combat will memorize non-combat spells, or that wizards expecting to need a variety of spells will have some utility ones memorized.

In short, I am saying that wizards do not memorize combat spells to the exclusion of all other spells, and that it is thus entirely possible that a wizard will have less combat magic available than a sorcerer of identical level.

As I've said since the beginning of this thread, it all depends on the situation.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!
Go to Top of Page

Neo2151
Learned Scribe

USA
113 Posts

Posted - 06 Oct 2013 :  01:53:18  Show Profile  Send Neo2151 an AOL message Send Neo2151 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I never said a Wizard would be fully loaded with scrolls while a Sorcerer would have none. I said it was more likely for the Wizard to have scrolls as creating them is a class ability and allows for utility spells to be stored in a way that doesn't eat up daily slots.

It's a common-sense thing, not a power-gaming thing.

I can keep my Dispel Magic, Fireball, Dimension Door, Black Tentacles, etc. spells prepared daily and keep spells like Remove Curse, Tongues, Teleport, etc. on scrolls for when I really need them. Because it's a class ability, and because it makes it much easier to avoid situations where I don't have good spells prepared.

"Come looking for me, and I will blast you to dust, and then lay waste to all your descendants, ancestors, and the realm you came from, every last tree and stone of it. Why? Well, it's what I usually do."

-Baerendra Riverhand on The Story of Spellfire

Edited by - Neo2151 on 06 Oct 2013 01:54:05
Go to Top of Page

Kiaransalyn
Senior Scribe

United Kingdom
762 Posts

Posted - 13 Aug 2016 :  08:38:53  Show Profile Send Kiaransalyn a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander

So guys what do you think? Which class is the more powerful?


D&D is often a balance between the mechanics (rules, etc) and the setting. Back in the day, when I was running a lot of games in Menzoberranzan, I had quite a decision when it came to sorcerers and Sorcere - would sorcerers be part of Sorcere?

After much thought I decided against including sorcerers in Sorcere, because the Matron Mothers rule Menzoberranzan and their individual houses, they want wizards because of their versatility. Wizards can adapt to any situation with preparation. Wizards learn new spells and certainly in a setting where being the best counts for so much what sort of future does a student of Sorcere have if she/he can't learn the spells they are being taught.

On one level, Sorcerers are living staffs/wands. They have a lot of charges and limited spells. Wizards are living books, they have less charges but a wider range. It's a nice balance.

To answer your question as to which class is more powerful, I chose Wizard, because the class has so much breadth.

Death is Life
Love is Hate
Revenge is Forgiveness


Ken: You from the States?
Jimmy: Yeah. But don't hold it against me.
Ken: I'll try not to... Just try not to say anything too loud or crass.
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
3481 Posts

Posted - 13 Aug 2016 :  18:16:41  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
After delving more into mechanics of 3.5 I believe the Wizard's abilities and slightly increased spell-level give them the edge overall. If we're going to take in ALL the Official supplements that WotC put out for 3.5 then it just gets worse. Take, for example, the feat Spell Mastery. Now on it's surface it looks sort of bad. You get to memorize X spells from your spellbook without having your spellbook present. Most campaigns the Wizard will always be with this spellbook but there are times that they might not be. But then you look at Uncanny Forethought and instantly you're taking Spell Mastery 2 or maybe even 3 times. Why? Because Uncanny Forethought allows you to keep a number of Spell Slots open equal to your Intelligence Modifier and spontaneously cast spells from Spell Mastery in there OR you can instead cast ANY spell you know there as a full-round action with only a -2 to your Caster Level.

So even a Wizard can be spontaneous AND he has a way to overcome his Spellbook requirement. Then you add in bonus feats that you can use for Item Creation, Meta-Magic (which works with Uncanny Forethought), OR the Reserve feats from Complete Mage. Imagine a Wizard with both Acidic Splatter, Fiery Burst, or Storm Bolt! At-Will elemental damage that's a supernatural ability (works even in anti-magic fields). Then there's Metamagic School Focus that reduces the cost of Meta-Magic feats for spells of your preferred school.

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."

Edited by - Diffan on 13 Aug 2016 18:18:27
Go to Top of Page

Balmar Foghaven
Seeker

Canada
69 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2018 :  15:03:10  Show Profile Send Balmar Foghaven a Private Message  Reply with Quote
It looks like nobody's posted here in a while, but I'll add my two cents: I agree with Wooly that it's highly situation - dependent on which class will shine. With that said, I played a 3.5 sorcerer with both the improved counterspell and reactive counterspell feats, (and eventually took automatic quicken spell in the epic levels) he quite literally crushed all competition from any other casters. So I hope you'll forgive me for not believing that a wizard will always defeat a sorcerer if he prepared better.

"Despair not, for in the end all things shall work out for the best - in at least one timeline."

Edited by - Balmar Foghaven on 03 May 2018 15:09:46
Go to Top of Page

LordofBones
Senior Scribe

685 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2018 :  16:09:29  Show Profile Send LordofBones a Private Message  Reply with Quote
In the long run, wizards have more versatility. Sure, a sorcerer specialized in combat can be the equal of any combat wizard, but that same sorcerer is buggered the next day when he needs to be a utility caster the next day while the wizard can just prepare his next day's spells cheerfully.

Caster damage scales horribly in epic, so unless the sorcerer is optimized for pure damage, he's in trouble. The wizard can just prepare an allotment of save-or-suck, summon bigger fish, buffs and debuffs, but that poor sorcerer is going to have problems if he's a pure damage caster and the other guy has a ring of energy immunity, or has shapeshifted into an adamantine golem.
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
31048 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2018 :  17:39:01  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones

Sure, a sorcerer specialized in combat can be the equal of any combat wizard, but that same sorcerer is buggered the next day when he needs to be a utility caster the next day while the wizard can just prepare his next day's spells cheerfully.



I'm a little confused by this... How would someone who could pick any spell he knew, at any time, be at a disadvantage when he needs a particular type of spell?

Sure, wizards can prepare more spells, and a properly-prepared wizard will always dominate a sorcerer in the same situation, the sorcerer's strength is their versatility -- the lack of a need for specific preparations.

So this theoretical "the next day" scenario only favors the wizard if he needs a larger number of utility spells. A sorcerer would not be buggered, because regardless of preparations or the prior day's events, he can still use any utility spells he knows.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!
Go to Top of Page

Balmar Foghaven
Seeker

Canada
69 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2018 :  17:51:47  Show Profile Send Balmar Foghaven a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Meh, if I needed a given utility spell that I did not use regularly (i.e. Knock, etc.) I bought a wand or scroll. And my sorcerer did not only prepare "blasting" spells, only picked the best ones for each levels, filled out the rest with crowd control or defense (Stoneskin, for example), and basically was almost as prepared for any situation as a wizard could be IMO. Fighters? Archers? Easy. Defensive spells/ crowd control. Casters? Improved + Reactive counterspelling. Don't even get me started on the Archmage PRC...

"Despair not, for in the end all things shall work out for the best - in at least one timeline."
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
31048 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2018 :  18:12:54  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
My gun mage was a sorcerer... Assuming he had time before battle, he'd cast fly and improved invisibility on himself before combat, and cat's grace and mage armor if time permitted.

In combat, he'd cast a spell and/or shoot his pistol, then fly over to a new spot, and repeat the process.

He went from routinely getting stomped on during combat (at lower levels) to going several levels without getting hit at all.

Those spells gave my guy a huge advantage in combat.

And as I've said before, there is something delightful about putting a vampiric touch spell into a bullet and then shooting someone with it. I didn't do that oft, once he stopped getting hit in combat, but I loved it every time I had a reason to do it.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!
Go to Top of Page

TBeholder
Master of Realmslore

1621 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2018 :  18:30:46  Show Profile Send TBeholder a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach

Ok so this debate has me wondering how to make the sorcerer more viable? Has anyone created a 'new' sorcerer class? I mean, rather than come up with a good build within the rules, has anyone actually retooled the class to make it stronger so as to compete with the wizard class?

Or build the free casting class after Channeller from AD&D 2+ (PO:S&M).
It's Con & Wis based (which makes more sense than "cuteness is magic" thing).
Spells consume spell-points (which recover fairly easily) and inflict fatigue (which stacks with itself and normal fatigue/encumbrance). Can learn and cast spells above "major caster" level limit, but this costs more fatigue: +1 level Severe fatigue (has problems with walking straight), +2 levels Mortal fatigue (collapses and save-or-die), on the upside 1-2 levels below common maximum is moderate/light fatigue, with minimal penalties and recovered in a few rounds. Fatigue is removed with rest and saving throws, but they come less often if heavily fatigued, thus tbis allows more spells, but not as often.

Also, there was another approach to free casting in d20 Thieves' World (Green Ronin version).
Magic use is split to "spell casting" (fast, but more limited and prone to failure in low mana conditions) and ritual casting (slow, but potentially much more powerful, just not for combat). Different classes have different skills at either: primary casters are Priest (leans more toward ritual), Mage (more toward spellcasting) and Witch (in between); secondary are Godsworn (ritual only, priest spells) and Initiate (spellcasting only, mage and witch spells). Weirder traditions are done via prestige classes.

People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch
Go to Top of Page

Balmar Foghaven
Seeker

Canada
69 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2018 :  18:56:29  Show Profile Send Balmar Foghaven a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I wonder how people here at Candlekeep feel about warlocks (from Complete Arcane, if I'm not mistaken). I understand general consensus regarding the class is a large resounding "meh" on most forums, as people tend to not enjoy playing one-trick ponies, especially when their one trick - Eldritch Blast - doesn't scale quite well.

I'm of course talking about 3.5 warlocks, as the 5e warlock actually has surprisingly good damage output with Eldritch Blasts.

Edit: I'm sure there are threads about this somewhere already, but I'm typing this at work and feeling a bit lazy ATM.

"Despair not, for in the end all things shall work out for the best - in at least one timeline."

Edited by - Balmar Foghaven on 03 May 2018 18:58:00
Go to Top of Page

Bladewind
Master of Realmslore

Netherlands
1243 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2018 :  18:58:22  Show Profile Send Bladewind a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Being able to recast a debuff or damage spell that didn't have much effect due to succesfull saves is one thing I love about sorcerers in D&D combat. A wizards selected spells need to stick, and usually debuffs have only one chance to work. Fail and the wizard needs to reasses his strategy. Fail and the sorcerer casts the threat anew.

On a battlefield a war-sorcerer has a tactical advantage over a war wizard (i.e. he has the means to defeat his foes in the moment), but a good war wizard has the strategic edge (i.e. more easily discovers the way how to the defeat the foe).

Edit: To answer Balmar:
Never seen a warlock in play, but seen some theory crafted glaivelocks (Melee debuffing warlock with quickened Eldritch Glaive invocation) I might have wanted to give a try.

I loved Erik de Bie's depiction of a deviously powerful hellfire warlock in Depths of Madness, who loved to tease the wizard that his very strong hellfire would outlast his attempts at arcane blasting. Hellfire for daaaaaaayyyyyyyyss.

My campaign sketches

Druidic Groves

Creature Feature: Giant Spiders

Edited by - Bladewind on 03 May 2018 19:17:11
Go to Top of Page

Balmar Foghaven
Seeker

Canada
69 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2018 :  19:02:33  Show Profile Send Balmar Foghaven a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I mentioned the Archmage PrC earlier, and though it does indeed also apply to wizards - probably more often, in fact - there is just something about having the ability to change the elemental damage type of your 6 fireballs/day on the fly...

"Despair not, for in the end all things shall work out for the best - in at least one timeline."
Go to Top of Page

LordofBones
Senior Scribe

685 Posts

Posted - 05 May 2018 :  04:30:55  Show Profile Send LordofBones a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones

Sure, a sorcerer specialized in combat can be the equal of any combat wizard, but that same sorcerer is buggered the next day when he needs to be a utility caster the next day while the wizard can just prepare his next day's spells cheerfully.



I'm a little confused by this... How would someone who could pick any spell he knew, at any time, be at a disadvantage when he needs a particular type of spell?

Sure, wizards can prepare more spells, and a properly-prepared wizard will always dominate a sorcerer in the same situation, the sorcerer's strength is their versatility -- the lack of a need for specific preparations.

So this theoretical "the next day" scenario only favors the wizard if he needs a larger number of utility spells. A sorcerer would not be buggered, because regardless of preparations or the prior day's events, he can still use any utility spells he knows.



Assuming he knows any. Charisma affects his spells per day, not his spells known. A sorcerer with 50 Cha is still going to have the same three 9th level spells, a wizard with 50 Int can cast 7 different 9th level spells, 8 if specialized, 10 if Focused Specialist.

Yes, a sorcerer can cast more often, but he can't tailor his spell selection. If the party's going to raid the Elemental Plane of Fire, the wizard can just prepare orb of ice, wall of ice, cone of cold, shivering touch and so on. If the party's going to raid an archmage's laboratory, the wizard can stock up on assay SR, mord's disjunction, reaving dispel, greater dispel magic, no-save-no-SR spells and so on.

Feats like Uncanny Forethought also muddy the waters. Not to mention runestaves.
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
31048 Posts

Posted - 05 May 2018 :  11:17:18  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
That's setting up the scenario to favor the wizard, again, though: he knows exactly what to prepare for.

That's been my argument. If he knows what to prepare for, the wizard is better. If he's not properly prepared, though, it goes to the sorcerer. It remains purely situational.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!
Go to Top of Page

LordofBones
Senior Scribe

685 Posts

Posted - 05 May 2018 :  12:30:35  Show Profile Send LordofBones a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

That's setting up the scenario to favor the wizard, again, though: he knows exactly what to prepare for.

That's been my argument. If he knows what to prepare for, the wizard is better. If he's not properly prepared, though, it goes to the sorcerer. It remains purely situational.



Not...really? I mean, the sorcerer's spells known are fixed. If there's a spontaneous attack of enraged fire elementals, or if a red dragon shows up, the sorcerer with fireball, scorching ray and meteor swarm is going to have problems unless he has a rod of searing spell.

EDIT: Uncanny Forethought also makes things worse for the poor sorcerer.

Edited by - LordofBones on 05 May 2018 14:36:52
Go to Top of Page

Gyor
Master of Realmslore

1288 Posts

Posted - 06 May 2018 :  02:57:58  Show Profile Send Gyor a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Honestly I find Sorcerers more fun to play then Wizards, smoother experience.

Also edition plays a huge deal in this.

In 3x Sorcerer's advantage over Wizard was spontanious casting, and the Wizard's advantage over Sorcerers was getting free metamagic feats as they level.

In 5e it's the Sorcerer who gets metamagic and the Wizard has a spontaneous form of Vancian magic.

But the Sorcerer also has spell points, yet the Wizard has Ritual Casting (but the Sorcerer can get that with a feat and apply metamagic to those spells).

Also Sorcerer don't really feel like the same class as each other, a Conjurer, a Bladesinger, Evoker, Abjurer, Necromancer, Diviner, Warmage, Illusionist, Enchanter,Transmuted, all feel like Wizards, but with a twist and a focus.

But 5e Sorcerers doesn't even feel like the same species as each other, they don't feel connected to each other like Wizards do as a Discipline. Wizard is an occupation and discipline and a body of knowledge.

Sorcerers on the other hand are almost a change in species, instead of a job.

You have Shadow Sorcerers who feel like a mix of 3e inhuman Shadowcasters (Class) and 4e Shades (species).

Divine Souls feel almost more like clerics then Sorcerers and poach the best Sorcerer and Cleric Spells and who then laugh at 3e Mystic Theurges as amuetuers, they also get spectral wings at will. They will like Demigods.

Then you have the 10 flavours of Dragon Sorcerer, who grow scales, wings, speaks Draconic and can eventually use something akin to Dragon Awe.

Then there are Storm Sorcerers kings of weather magic, thunder/lightning spells, and wingless flying.

And last not least Wild Magic Sorcerers who use a whole page for a wild magic table alone.

So I have to give it to Sorcerers in 5e, but it's close. In some ways to harder to compair them in 5e then in 3e.



Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
31048 Posts

Posted - 06 May 2018 :  21:32:43  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

That's setting up the scenario to favor the wizard, again, though: he knows exactly what to prepare for.

That's been my argument. If he knows what to prepare for, the wizard is better. If he's not properly prepared, though, it goes to the sorcerer. It remains purely situational.



Not...really? I mean, the sorcerer's spells known are fixed. If there's a spontaneous attack of enraged fire elementals, or if a red dragon shows up, the sorcerer with fireball, scorching ray and meteor swarm is going to have problems unless he has a rod of searing spell.




And the wizard who didn't prep anything to protect against fire isn't going to be any better off.

You keep arguing that the wizard is better overall, solely because he's properly prepared. That's tilting the scenario into the wizard's favor.

A wizard who isn't prepared is not going to do any better than a sorcerer. It all comes down to the situation. It's X vs. Y, all over again.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!
Go to Top of Page

TBeholder
Master of Realmslore

1621 Posts

Posted - 18 May 2018 :  09:04:40  Show Profile Send TBeholder a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Also, there's middle ground - memorizing casters without spellbook.
At least, Maztican artisans:
quote:
[...] Maztican magic-workers gain the use of
spells. These are awarded magically
and automatically. When cast, they
can be remastered through
meditation and contemplation. The
time to relearn a spell is one hour
per level of the spell, plus the
casting time (which, in many cases,
is significant).
- Maztica (TSR#1066)

Also, the dragons are another point in the middle: they can use the usual wizard magic without spellbook and with V component only.
quote:
Originally posted by Balmar Foghaven

I wonder how people here at Candlekeep feel about warlocks (from Complete Arcane, if I'm not mistaken).


quote:
I understand general consensus regarding the class is a large resounding "meh" on most forums, as people tend to not enjoy playing one-trick ponies, especially when their one trick - Eldritch Blast - doesn't scale quite well.


quote:
I'm of course talking about 3.5 warlocks, as the 5e warlock actually has surprisingly good damage output with Eldritch Blasts.

So the only problem is that it's not twinky enough?
It was not used anywhere because it was obviously made for MUD style H&S, and the pretense it had something to do with RPG was tied to a very strange niche, so it just doesn't fit almost anywhere without stretched and obvious shoehorning.
So the real problem is "it's useless for anything except boring munchkinism, and it's not good for boring munchkinism".
The only thing that was going for it in the first place is that for some reason a few True Grognards start breathing heavily at seeing the word "eldritchshffft", and the opportunistic newbies seem to think using it makes them sound "smart" and "Tru" and "grognard-like" (remember 3.0 unpatching trying to rebuild from pre-AD&D2 materials?..)
If it wasn't made specifically for projectile vomiting damage points in the first place, it could be made into something that actually can be given to a character. At very least with elemental variants, etc.
Granted, versatility makes things easier to screw up, but one-trick "magic missile hurler" classes are downright stupid and deserve ridicule, and the classes like warlock are next door from them.

quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden

In 2e they had a good solid system for using spell points...it was good stuff actually.

Well... there was a spell point system in Netheril, there was one in Player’s Option: Spells & Magic (again, compatible with channellers), and several (including hybrids) in Great Wizard Netbook.
But which one was "good solid"?

People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch

Edited by - TBeholder on 18 May 2018 09:08:04
Go to Top of Page

LordofBones
Senior Scribe

685 Posts

Posted - 18 May 2018 :  12:28:24  Show Profile Send LordofBones a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'm fairly sure that Unearthed Arcana had a spell point system. It's in the online SRD.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2018 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000