He said that we can be a Fighter, a wizard/sorcerer(whichever), ranger, or monk.
Ranger is out for because i am already one in my friends game we are still currently playing. Monks im just not a fan of, fighters are to bland for me.
So i was thinking of rolling a spell caster, either wizard or sorcerer. Im just not sure which one to go and what to get to make them awesome.
We all will be starting at level 5 for this campaign(thats what he wanted), so i was wondering which one you think would be better out of the 2 for me to play.
I menan i like them both, just not sure what to go with.
Thanks
Sorcerer = less bookkeeping.
Since you'll be starting out at level 5, that puts you close to a prestige class if you design the character correctly. So I would recommend looking at those and picking a prestige class you like, then deciding if sorcerer or wizard is more appropriate.
A sorcerer is an easier to play wizard, but it is much less forgiving if you do make a mistake.
My advice for sorcerers is to take one direct damage spell/level and the rest utility. I also suggest the variant where you ditch your animal companion for normal metamagic casting time, and the feat "energy substituion" from complete arcane.
The 1 damage spell per level helps you keep a variety of utility spells around, while still keeping the option to simply blast things to bits.
The variant, is so you can do metamagic without spending a full round action. Helps out with your mobility.
The feat lets you swap out your fireballs for iceballs, or your orb of colds for orb of fires. Helps get around energy resistance.
For a wizard, take whatever spells you like, if you have a scroll or the option to buy a new one, scribe it to your book. Then for spell preperation, it is trial and error for every DM. If your dm seems to throw encounters requiring more X type spells, prepare mostly them. For spells that are situationaly useful, scribe one or two scrolls of it, but do not prepare it. To be on the safe side. If you decide to specialize, I would recomend against evocation, as there are plenty of other schools that can do the same thing and more.
The party's not going to get far without a healer of some sort, so if I were you I'd ask him to make a DMPC cleric to follow you around, or allow the Cleric class to be playable. Also, before he starts his campaign, your DM should get a better understanding of the rules and classes presented in the PHB so that he not only knows the rules better, but can have a broader range of NPCs for you guys.
Oh, and for your own class selection, I'd recommend Wizard, or Fighter if there are already 2 or more other arcane spellcasters.
I say since you're starting out at 5th level, take a level in each class.
Fighter 1/Ranger 1/Monk 1/Wizard 1/Sorcerer 1
This maximizes your claims on treasure as you will need them ALL.
Seriously, wizard is my favorite as you gain access to stronger spells more quickly than a sorcerer, and you gain the bonus feats. Sorcerer has its perks too, and I recommend it for the player just starting out as wizard can be intimidating as noted with the bookkeeping comments.
Sorcerers can cast more spells per day but at the cost of spell selection and what level spells, a 5th level sorcerer can cast at max 2nd level spells.
Well if you go wizard you will have access to 3rd level spells, but overall you will be able to cast less spells per day.
Sorcerers can cast more spells per day but at the cost of spell selection and what level spells, a 5th level sorcerer can cast at max 2nd level spells.
Focused Specialist actually gives a wizard equal slots to a sorcerer (actually, 1 more highest level slot over sorc). It has its drawbacks too of course and might not be available in this campaign, just worth mentioning.
Well still not sure what im going to roll i have till Tuesday to decide.
I really just want to broaden my D&D knowledge, and learn more into the spell and arcana part of the world. I usually like to play a bad ass rogue, or a deadly ranger assassin.
So basically...Sorcerer for more spells, but only can cast what you know(and theres no going back)
Wizard...Pick what you want to learn, find new ones write them in your spellbook, then you know them, cast less, but know more.
Just don't know what to do. I might do sorcerer, but i like the wizard for the bonus feats.
He said that we can be a Fighter, a wizard/sorcerer(whichever), ranger, or monk.
Only those 4? No Cleric??
So basically...Sorcerer for more spells, but only can cast what you know(and theres no going back).
Though I can not give you a direct quote there are rules about changing some of your known spells. You can only do it during a level up though.
Though I can not give you a direct quote there are rules about changing some of your known spells. You can only do it during a level up though.
Here's the relevent quote:
Upon reaching 4th level, and at every even-numbered sorcerer level after that (6th, 8th, and so on), a sorcerer can choose to learn a new spell in place of one he already knows. In effect, the sorcerer "loses" the old spell in exchange for the new one. The new spell’s level must be the same as that of the spell being exchanged, and it must be at least two levels lower than the highest-level sorcerer spell the sorcerer can cast. A sorcerer may swap only a single spell at any given level, and must choose whether or not to swap the spell at the same time that he gains new spells known for the level.
So swapping out spells is an options, but since you can do so only so rarely, it's best avoiding needing to use this mechanic if at all possible.
As for which of the two to choose, while my personal preference is sorcerer, you really have to know your spell options; not just to avoid bum learning spells, but also for knowing how to get the most synergy out of your limited spell choices (which is necessary for a truely successful sorcerer).
Also, the sorcerer's not only has the problem of knowing fewer spells than the wizard, but he also learns spells much more slowly. Not only is he a level behind (sorcerers learn Xth level spells one level later than wizards), but he only learns a scant one or two spells at a time. The wizard, otoh, can jot down as many spells as his pockets can afford as soon as he is capable of casting them.
For your first time with an arcane caster, wizard is probably your safest choice since it's a much more forgiving class. Playing a wizard will give you a chance to experiment with lots of different spells in actual play without having to make a commitment to them. Likewise, Int-based casting gives you more leeway with experimenting with skills, and the bonus feats will help with experimenting with metamagic combinations.
Wow, your DM has chopped out half the fun of playing the game: choosing from the variety of classes out there and playing what you want!
Not at all. We all had fun playing D&D for 20 years with only a few more choices than listed above (Fighter, Magic User, Thief, Paladin, Assassin, Cleric, Monk, Druid, and Illusionist). Massive Choice is pretty new and NOT a necessary fun-factor of the game. Plentiful choices of classes are both a plus and a (HUGE) minus (not ALL the game balance threads). Also, playing what you want isn't always going to happen. If you WANT to play a Thrall of Orcus and the existing party consists of a Paladin, a Cleric of St Cuthbert and a Chaotic Good elven rogue...guess what your DM is going to say...unless he's not a good DM?
Your party is in for a LONG haul.
No healers. Ow. Suggest to him to allow at least a cleric or a druid...or at very least, a paladin. The entire game is balanced with the implication that the players can heal. A monster of a CR equal to your party will be too powerful. He's trying to keep it simple. I understand that...but this will bite him...and you.
If he says no...that will be his first LARGE mistake as a DM. Therefore, if I were you, I'd pick a Ranger (which you don't want) or a Monk. Insist at everyone in your party have a high Heal Skill (or try to have everyone in your party equipped with Healing Belts from Magic Item Compendium). You're gonna need it!
If you and your group want to make things easy for him...have at most ONE caster (wizard or sorcerer). The multitude of spells equates to a mulitude of rules that he must understand and frequently adapt.
Otherwise you are definatly in for lots of resting, and down time. Might be fun as is with him, but it might also suck a lot.
Not at all. We all had fun playing D&D for 20 years with only a few more choices than listed above (Fighter, Magic User, Thief, Paladin, Assassin, Cleric, Monk, Druid, and Illusionist).
There are 10 classes in the PHB, 11 if you don't lump Sorceror and Wizard into a single Magic-User section. You just listed 9 available classes for an older edition.
Ok, if you do decide to play a Sorcerer, invest in wands and staffs ASAP. If you have access to Runestaffs from the MIC, even better. Those are the items that will give you the spell variety that you need. Since you're probably stuck with Core material only (since you have a new DM), one level in Archmage will be your best friend ever, since you can pick up the ability to substitute any energy type, and the sacrificed spell slot means basically nothing to you.
However, I do honestly think that wizard is a more viable choice, and if you're brave, Conjurer (Conjuration specialist). You can probably afford to drop Evocation and Necromancy or Illusion/Enchantment. Why this route? You have no healing (probably a poor decision, but the DM is new, so let him live and learn). Thus, your magic selection needs to be focused less on dealing damage, and more on preventing damage (to your party) to the greatest degree possible.
Conjuration allows you to summon meat shields to place between you and your foes. Necromancy also does this well, but if your DM restricts alignment, then ditch it as your other banned school. Depending on your play style, Enchantment makes enemies your allies (and prevents encounters), while Illusion can misdirect your foes endlessly. While all of these school are useful in preventing damage to you and your allies, Transmutation and Abjuration are just too important to ditch. Thus, drop Evocation and one of the three listed above.
I wish you the best of luck. Wizard is hands-down my favorite class, and I hope you enjoy playing one.
Focused Specialist actually gives a wizard equal slots to a sorcerer (actually, 1 more highest level slot over sorc). It has its drawbacks too of course and might not be available in this campaign, just worth mentioning.
Yes, and thier are feats for Sorcerers to be able to cast more spells per day as well.
When I see someone take a specialist wizard I always tell them the same thing, Great you made a versital class worthless.
-----------------------
No offense, but is your friend new to D&D altogether? Now, he might have some special campaign setting or something (I don't know the details of course), but from taking a look at the classes he's letting you use, it appears as if he's hedged out all the Player's Handbook classes that he either doesn't like or doesn't understand. A DM is either incredibly new or hard-core conservative if he outlaws PHB classes.
If I were to limit players to 6-ish classes, most PHB classes wouldn't make the cut. Personally, I allow pretty much anything, but I hold no illusions about the core classes being essential. Healing is the biggest issue, but there are non-divine classes that can fill the slot. This doesn't help the OP though - none of the allowed classes make very good healers.
Edit: Here are some links
Wizard:
[thread=165134]Wizard's Handbook I[/thread] - (by Yekoj) Somewhat outdated
[thread=649782]Best Wizard Race Handbook[/thread] - (by AZNsupermarket)
The Logic Ninja's Guide to Wizards: Being Batman - (by LogicNinja)
[thread=881457]The Wizard's Handbook[/thread] - (by Dictum Mortuum)
[thread=956548]Treantmonk's guide to Wizards: Being a God[/thread] - (by Treantmonklvl20)
Sorcerer:
[thread=239207]The 3.5 Sorcerer-Thread[/thread] - (by Funny Slaughter)
[thread=616344]Ways for a Sorcerer to gain additional spells known[/thread] - (by The_WhiteRabbit)
[thread=765195]Good Spells for Sorcerers[/thread] - a few very good posts on the principles behind spell selection for a sorceror (or any class that has fixed spells known)
[thread=772393]Sorcerer Prestige Classes with Full Caster Progression[/thread] - (by AZNsupermarket)
[thread=1005059]Sorcerer Handbook[/thread] - (by Alastar) newest one
Here you go: [THREAD=900334]A Player's Guide to Healing (And, why you will be Just Fine without a Cleric to heal[/THREAD]
You don't need a healer. There are thansands of options for healing with no healer. Healing belt, magic bedroll, Rapid meta feat (EPH), potions, weapon crystals, armor magic enhancements, etc....
Here you go: [THREAD=900334]A Player's Guide to Healing (And, why you will be Just Fine without a Cleric to heal[/THREAD]
Completely refuted. Repeatedly.
Healing is a very nessesary in-combat role. First of all, the OP blithely tosses of statements like "healing often does not outpace damage" - in fact he likes it so much he says it twice, like that will make it more true. Not so at all. Any decent healer should be able to outpace the damage done in any fair fight- at least when it is needed.
And that is the crux here, and where the OP's argument falls flat. Sure, you can get healing after combat with wands. And a cleric can deal out damage during combat. But let us say the Foe does do a big solid hit (or series of) for 50 points to a PC, who has 80 hp, and now cries "Medic!". The cleric chooses to not heal, and tries to kill instead. Well, now if 50 pts does not kill our party member in one hit, why should it kill the foe? Even so, the foe gets a save or SR or the cleric may miss (depending on the attack). So the foe does another 50 pts, and Bob the Fighter is dead. So, in order to "fix" Bob, the party needs to spend at least $5000, and really should spend $25,000, the cost of a True Res. And frankly the party can NOT be throwing that kind of money around.
It is not taking more damage that that in-combat healing is there for, it is for PREVENTING PC DEATH. In combat healing prevents PC death.
Well, sure, so does running. The cleric could step in, and let Bob the fighter run. But now we have lost Bob's damage for the entire combat, while healing him allows Bob to keep on hittin'.
Most clerics can not do more damage than they can heal. Let us take level 5 where a cleric can cast CSW. With Augment Healing (not the Healing Domain as there are better Domains), that's 3d8+11, or 26 points. And that is 26 points with no miss chance, no chance of failing to bypass SR and no chance the other guy will make his save.
Higher levels you say? Mass Heal will do 1000 points to an average party, with again, no miss chance, no chance of failing to bypass SR and no chance the other guy will make his save.
Yes, after combat is a good time to patch up those lesser wounds, and a wand is not a terrible way to do it. But those wands (in a healer-free party) will turn out to be a constant hemmorrage of cash from the party's coffers. I have seen healer-less parties go thru a wand per game day. 3 such wands, and you no longer have a +1 weapon. 4 such wands, and a spellcaster can not afford a lesser Rod."
I usually say someone devoted to healing is recomended, but they do not need to be a cleric. So long as someone can handle that role in the party. A paladin, druid, or rogue with enough umd can handle it, but they had better be prepared to devote at least 50% of their time to it.
Mostly the author ignores the huge benefits of spells like the heal spell, its variants, and the ability to remove curses, diseases, and poisons. Which i find to be some of the biggest things that need healing during a combat. His main point of "do not buy potions" is valid though.