Sorcerer variant balanced? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Sorcerer variant balanced? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
DragonBringerX
06-09-05, 05:08 AM everyone knows that the wizard gains both a familiar and bonus feats ( 1 every 5th lv), and the sorc only gains a familiar but no bonus feats. What would someone say on the balance of a sorc who doesn't have a familiar but has the bonus feat progression of a wiz instead? :confused: My DM thinks it's fair, but as much as would want to play that, im not sure cause i dont want to play an over powerd character compared to everyone else! :mage:
Drizzt Clone
06-09-05, 12:52 PM Balanced compared to the normal sorcerer? No. Familiars suck. They just sit around in your pocket or bag of holding or whatever and drain your XP when they die. Bonus feats (especially 5 of them) are indesputably good.

Balanced compared to the balanced classes of the game? I think so. I've always viewed sorcerers as a bit underpowered.
steenan
06-10-05, 03:29 AM In our campaign sorcerers don't have familiars. They get Eschew materials at first level, and bonus feats at 5, 10, 15, 20. They have different list to chose bonus feats from than wizards: no item creation feats, only a few metamagic feats (ex. no Chain, Persistent, Maximize), but they can get (greater) Spell focus and (greater) Spell penetration as bonus feats instead.
And it seems to be balanced - at least there haven't been any problems with it yet.
Hvitar-Hrafnar
06-10-05, 03:35 PM Balanced compared to the normal sorcerer? No. Familiars suck. They just sit around in your pocket or bag of holding or whatever and drain your XP when they die. Bonus feats (especially 5 of them) are indesputably good.

Balanced compared to the balanced classes of the game? I think so. I've always viewed sorcerers as a bit underpowered.

I very strongly agree. When I have used familiars for NPC's, they've done almost nothing useful other than deliver touch attacks and seem to be more for looks. Familiars, although intelligent, don't do much. Animal companions at higher levels, on the other hand, are EXTREMELY useful. Combat, meatshields, physical power, tasks, steeds, and tricks.

I'm seriously considering revamping the sorcerer for the campaign I DM, and possibly giving it the bonus feats that a Wizard gets. Sorcerer is one of my favorite classes, but because of how weak it is, I don't use it.

In the campaign I DM, one of the NPC's is an 8th level Half-Dragon sorcerer with a very high AC due to magic items, as well as bonus spells due to his high CHA score. The problem is, even though hes very powerful for a sorcerer, and has physical strength as a backup, he still falls very fast and usually is forced to flee from battle when he reaches one HP. The ironic thing is that hes not the tank of the group and he hardly engages in 1on1 combat with a melee unit, and is very good at defending from spells. His problem is that he hardly knows any spells, and once he quickly runs out, hes left to either casting GREASE on the ground or taking out his sword and hoping one of the healers will help him.

Unearthed Arcana introduced a mana/spellpoint system, and I agree with it's rules in that Sorcerers need the most mana. In my opinion, a sorcerer is a powerful and charismatic caster with although a small spell list can cast spells quickly and more rapidly than any of the other casters, and has a slyness to the class. With the current rules, Sorcerer's are dangeously underpowered, and terribly weak mini-wizards with a familiar, a ridiculously small spell selection.

The answer to your question? A sorcerer with the bonus feats, at the VERY least, would be more balanced than the current class. Playing one wouldn't offset the game in the least -- Don't even get me started in Clerics.
DragonBringerX
06-10-05, 04:06 PM The answer to your question? A sorcerer with the bonus feats, at the VERY least, would be more balanced than the current class. Playing one wouldn't offset the game in the least -- Don't even get me started in Clerics.
Thanx a million, :P ,Now i have no doubts about playing the variant on the sorc, and if dont like the cleric, you should check out my variant on the cleric called The Priest.
The Priest... (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=444415)
Braids
06-10-05, 08:17 PM Woops, so sorry...hit the wrong button.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
DragonBringerX 06-09-05, 05:08 AM	everyone knows that the wizard gains both a familiar and bonus feats ( 1 every 5th lv), and the sorc only gains a familiar but no bonus feats. What would someone say on the balance of a sorc who doesn't have a familiar but has the bonus feat progression of a wiz instead? :confused: My DM thinks it's fair, but as much as would want to play that, im not sure cause i dont want to play an over powerd character compared to everyone else! :mage:
Drizzt Clone 06-09-05, 12:52 PM	Balanced compared to the normal sorcerer? No. Familiars suck. They just sit around in your pocket or bag of holding or whatever and drain your XP when they die. Bonus feats (especially 5 of them) are indesputably good. Balanced compared to the balanced classes of the game? I think so. I've always viewed sorcerers as a bit underpowered.
steenan 06-10-05, 03:29 AM	In our campaign sorcerers don't have familiars. They get Eschew materials at first level, and bonus feats at 5, 10, 15, 20. They have different list to chose bonus feats from than wizards: no item creation feats, only a few metamagic feats (ex. no Chain, Persistent, Maximize), but they can get (greater) Spell focus and (greater) Spell penetration as bonus feats instead. And it seems to be balanced - at least there haven't been any problems with it yet.
Hvitar-Hrafnar 06-10-05, 03:35 PM	Balanced compared to the normal sorcerer? No. Familiars suck. They just sit around in your pocket or bag of holding or whatever and drain your XP when they die. Bonus feats (especially 5 of them) are indesputably good. Balanced compared to the balanced classes of the game? I think so. I've always viewed sorcerers as a bit underpowered. I very strongly agree. When I have used familiars for NPC's, they've done almost nothing useful other than deliver touch attacks and seem to be more for looks. Familiars, although intelligent, don't do much. Animal companions at higher levels, on the other hand, are EXTREMELY useful. Combat, meatshields, physical power, tasks, steeds, and tricks. I'm seriously considering revamping the sorcerer for the campaign I DM, and possibly giving it the bonus feats that a Wizard gets. Sorcerer is one of my favorite classes, but because of how weak it is, I don't use it. In the campaign I DM, one of the NPC's is an 8th level Half-Dragon sorcerer with a very high AC due to magic items, as well as bonus spells due to his high CHA score. The problem is, even though hes very powerful for a sorcerer, and has physical strength as a backup, he still falls very fast and usually is forced to flee from battle when he reaches one HP. The ironic thing is that hes not the tank of the group and he hardly engages in 1on1 combat with a melee unit, and is very good at defending from spells. His problem is that he hardly knows any spells, and once he quickly runs out, hes left to either casting GREASE on the ground or taking out his sword and hoping one of the healers will help him. Unearthed Arcana introduced a mana/spellpoint system, and I agree with it's rules in that Sorcerers need the most mana. In my opinion, a sorcerer is a powerful and charismatic caster with although a small spell list can cast spells quickly and more rapidly than any of the other casters, and has a slyness to the class. With the current rules, Sorcerer's are dangeously underpowered, and terribly weak mini-wizards with a familiar, a ridiculously small spell selection. The answer to your question? A sorcerer with the bonus feats, at the VERY least, would be more balanced than the current class. Playing one wouldn't offset the game in the least -- Don't even get me started in Clerics.
DragonBringerX 06-10-05, 04:06 PM	The answer to your question? A sorcerer with the bonus feats, at the VERY least, would be more balanced than the current class. Playing one wouldn't offset the game in the least -- Don't even get me started in Clerics. Thanx a million, :P ,Now i have no doubts about playing the variant on the sorc, and if dont like the cleric, you should check out my variant on the cleric called The Priest. The Priest... (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=444415)
Braids 06-10-05, 08:17 PM	Woops, so sorry...hit the wrong button.