Children of the Gods

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Tue May 08, 2007 2:57 pm

Rob summed it up best a while back...

"Sorcerors are the idiot savants of the arcane."

There is good reason why Wizards use INT as their primary stat instead of CHA.

Post by **Vahene** » Tue May 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Wyvern wrote:Rob summed it up best a while back...

"Sorcerors are the idiot savants of the arcane."

There is good reason why Wizards use INT as their primary stat instead of CHA.

There's no reason you can't have a decent INT and be a Sorcerer, or any other profession for that matter.

Excuses, excuses, all I hear are excuses.. as to why people hate sorcerers.

Pssh!

K

sirius · Post by **sirius** » Tue May 08, 2007 9:51 pm

Peregrinus, I agree if you mean how most people play their sorcerors (which is nothing like the archetypal to which I made reference, thankfully), but the archetypal sorceror seems to be pretty arrogant and self-righteous, and it's totally inexplicable in my opinion.

I mean, they didn't work for their powers therefore they can't understand it to any meaningful degree, it's like giving a young kid a gun really, they don't know how to use it (but they can find out) and they may not even know what it is.

Post by **Peregrinus** » Wed May 09, 2007 4:32 am

SnorriHT wrote:Hehe...this is so true. I used to think Sorceror's were the poor man's wizard until saw a Sorceror save our high level party from total annihilation once by literally letting rip with everything he had. Using the military term it was "Fire Mission all available"! The aftermath was just atomised enemies and the occaisional bit of charred meat

On Dasaria 1, I rarely played my sorcerer in full bore (what I called ruthless) mode. The main reason was if I did, I would have to rest ever two to three fights and it would take the fun out of it for everyone else. But yeah, when a sorcerer decides its time to raze something, well, there's not much left standing, and if there is, he has another fireball just for it.

sirius wrote:Peregrinus, I agree if you mean how most people play their sorcerors (which is nothing like the archetypal to which I made reference, thankfully), but the archetypal sorceror seems to be pretty arrogant and self-righteous, and it's totally inexplicable in my opinion.

I mean, they didn't work for their powers therefore they can't understand it to any meaningful degree, it's like giving a young kid a gun really, they don't know how to use it (but they can find out) and they may not even know what it is.

sirius, a first level sorcerer, you're right about, they just inherently have those powers, they're lucky enough to be born with them for some reason. However, going beyond first level is a trial, training. Think of it not like a kid who has been handed a gun, but a kid who has been given a sword. A wizard is a kid who's been given lessons while a sorcerer is self taught. A person who's had lessons will be better at some things and will be more adaptable because they have more to fall back on, but a self taught swordsman can be just as deadly and will have a few tricks they depend on and are probably very good at. As to not understanding them, on a technical sense that is probably true, but a technical sense is not needed for them, they have an instinctive sense about it. Saying one or the other is better is simply foolish, that is like saying a self-taught musician who plays by ear is worse than a classical trained musician who plays by reading notes off a page.

Actually, the musician thing is a perfect connection to magic.

As to the "archetype," part of the problem is that the entire sorcerer/wizard divide is only about ten years old in DnD, all the stuff from before then only has wizards. In fact, I'm not sure where the archetype comes from, but I'd argue that arrogance is not a sorcerer trait, rather that its a generic mage trait. For a prime example of arrogant wizard, I need only reference the one, the only, the magnificent, the incredible, blah, blah, blah, Trace! As to self-righteousness, I've never seen a case where that springs from character class... wait, no, I have but those instances its a class feature called "stick-up-their-posterior," its an ability at level 1 for Paladins.

Stormknife · Post by **Stormknife** » Wed May 09, 2007 5:36 am

For a prime example of arrogant wizard, I need only reference the one, the only, the magnificent, the incredible, blah, blah, blah, Trace!

You're only arrogant if you don't live up to the hype. Which I do.

SnorriHT · Post by **SnorriHT** » Wed May 09, 2007 8:20 am

Agreed Pere...what makes a high level sorceror so scary is their potential to wtfbbqpwn at any time.

sirius · Post by **sirius** » Wed May 09, 2007 10:58 am

I'd disagree on a few points Peregrinus, but your crack at paladins has done it for me

I am happy to agree to disagree with sorceror supporters. Besides, as I said previously, I play both. But I just prefer wizards immensely.

kikkelipoika · Post by **kikkelipoika** » Wed May 09, 2007 1:01 pm

wtfbbqpwn

theres something very beautiful in there that i can't really put my hands on. Maybe it's the bbq part

SnorriHT · Post by **SnorriHT** » Wed May 09, 2007 1:26 pm

kikkelipoika wrote:
wtfbbqpwn
theres something very beautiful in there that i can't really put my hands on. Maybe it's the bbq part

Barbecuing is what Sorceror's are good at. Wizard's are the A'la Carte menu

Post by **Peregrinus** » Wed May 09, 2007 2:50 pm

To use the food analogy:

Wizards are the French chefs, exceptionally good at crafting a meal for a person to their exact taste.

Sorcerers are the Southern mothers, they might not make as good food and what you get your stuck with, but they can make a lot of it at the drop of a hat.

Who's better? Well that totally depends if you prefer French Cuisine or home style southern cooking...

Minuvas · Post by **Minuvas** » Wed May 09, 2007 2:57 pm

I think this thread has run its course, especially for an IC post.

Lets move it to general, or close it down.

This "debate" seems to be cyclical in nature and going no where

.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Wed May 09, 2007 3:28 pm

Barbecue is clearly divine, not arcane.

kikkelipoika · Post by **kikkelipoika** » Wed May 09, 2007 8:47 pm

SnorriHT wrote:Barbecuing is what Sorceror's are good at. Wizard's are the A'la Carte menu

mmmm..... barbeque...... that must be the reason i prefer sorcs to wizzies

.

Rob wrote:Barbecue is clearly divine, not arcane.

perhaps it's both? whatever it is, it's the best thing in existance. mmmmm...... barbeque...... beer........ sauna....... more barbeque......... more beer....... more *slap* "SHUT UP!".. .. "...

sry...".

Goeumzz · Post by **Goeumzz** » Thu May 10, 2007 2:56 am

Wizards are more adaptable/flexible which probably makes them group-friendlier, but if i knew i was going to be flying solo most of the time.. (such as i rolled a Tiefling or Drow) i'd probably choose a sorcerer or warlock instead since they probably won't have to rest as often alone.

Post by **Peregrinus** » Thu May 10, 2007 5:12 am

Goeumzz wrote:Wizards are more adaptable/flexible which probably makes them group-friendlier, but if i knew i was going to be flying solo most of the time.. (such as i rolled a Tiefling or Drow) i'd probably choose a sorcerer or warlock instead since they probably won't have to rest as often alone.

The answer is both yes, and no. For a small group, a wixard can get exact buffs to help each party member. However, as the groups get larger, custom buffing becomes much more difficult as it really starts to eat into the wizard's spells per day. A sorcerer will have the general buffs, and has enough to share with a lot of people and it won't cut their effectiveness down to the same degree.

In short, being a good buffer involves both having the spells known and having enough spells per day to use them.

As to soloing, neither is very good at it, something about a D4 hit die...