The Acaeum Forums  •   Collecting General
AD&D Sorcerer rules
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Author

flying_purple_monkfish
Prolific Collector

Posts: 195
Joined: Mar 31, 2006
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2009
Location: UK

Post Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 10:42 am 
 

I'm looking for anything that might have mention of the rules for Sorcerers in AD&D. I know that games like Baldur's gate included the sorc as a character class, but I can't seem to locate any official books that mention them. Anyone know where to find them?
 WWW  

User avatar
Beyondthebreach
Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1709
Joined: Feb 04, 2004
Last Visit: Aug 23, 2016
Location: Chandler, AZ

Post Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 10:45 am 
 

I believe you are thinking of Pool of Radiance and Neverwinter Nights . . .

Sorcerers are for 3E.


"Gleemonex makes it feel like it's seventy-two degrees in your head... all... the... time! "
  

guerret
Prolific Collector

Posts: 671
Joined: Dec 17, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 13, 2019
Location: Italy

Post Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 5:32 pm 
 

I'm not sure, but I believe that some of the unusual spellcasters described n Spells & Magic might suit you. Otherwise you can customize a wizard enough (with special abilities and restrictions) to make something that's quite similar to that.
 ICQ  

User avatar
Beyondthebreach
Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1709
Joined: Feb 04, 2004
Last Visit: Aug 23, 2016
Location: Chandler, AZ

Post Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 5:45 pm 
 

Just to clarify (as I didn't mention it specifically in my previous post) - try the 3.5/3.0 Player's Handbook.


"Gleemonex makes it feel like it's seventy-two degrees in your head... all... the... time! "
  

flying_purple_monkfish
Prolific Collector

Posts: 195
Joined: Mar 31, 2006
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2009
Location: UK

Post Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 6:16 pm 
 

No.. I know sorcs are in 3.5 but I also know that BG2 (which was based on ad&d 2nd ed) did have a sorc class alongside wildmages. I think they use almost identical rules to wizards but can't use scrolls... but I can't quite work out how to figure the spells per level known and to cast...
I was just wondering if there was any 2nd ed info about these spellcasters.
 WWW  

MrFilthyIke
Prolific Collector

Posts: 405
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
Last Visit: Aug 28, 2007
Location: Orlando, Fl

Post Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 9:25 pm 
 

flying_purple_monkfish wrote:No.. I know sorcs are in 3.5 but I also know that BG2 (which was based on ad&d 2nd ed) did have a sorc class alongside wildmages. I think they use almost identical rules to wizards but can't use scrolls... but I can't quite work out how to figure the spells per level known and to cast...
I was just wondering if there was any 2nd ed info about these spellcasters.


You can do it w/ some creativity.

Ditch the spellbook, they can only "Know" a few spells per level but cast them repeatedly w/o memorizing.  I would just use the d20 chart and keep the rest as 2e.

Level   Spells per Day:
       1st          2nd          3rd          4th          5th          6th          7th          8th          9th
1        3         —         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
2          4         —         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
3          5         —         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
4          6         3         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
5          6         4         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
6          6         5         3         —         —         —         —         —          —
7          6         6         4         —         —         —         —          —          —
8          6         6         5         3         —         —         —          —         —
9          6         6         6         4         —         —         —          —         —
10      6         6         6         5         3         —          —          —         —
11      6         6         6         6         4         —          —          —         —
12          6         6         6         6         5         3          —          —         —
13          6         6         6         6         6         4          —          —          —
14          6         6         6         6         6         5          3          —          —
15          6         6         6         6         6         6           4          —          —
16          6         6         6         6         6         6          5          3          —
17          6         6         6         6         6         6          6          4           —
18          6         6         6         6         6         6          6          5          3
19          6         6         6         6         6         6          6          6          4
20          6         6         6         6         6         6          6          6          6


Level          Spells Known
0         1st          2nd    3rd          4th          5th         6th          7th          8th          9th
1st         2         —         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
2nd         2         —         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
3rd         3         —         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
4th         3         1         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
5th         4         2         —         —         —         —         —         —         —
6th         4         2         1         —         —         —         —         —         —
7th         5         3         2         —         —         —         —         —         —
8th         5         3         2         1         —         —         —         —         —
9th         5         4         3         2         —         —         —         —         —
10th         5         4         3         2         1         —         —         —         —
11th         5         5         4         3         2         —         —         —         —
12th         5         5         4         3         2         1         —         —         —
13th         5         5         4         4         3         2         —         —         —
14th         5         5         4         4         3         2         1         —         —
15th         5         5         4         4         4         3         2         —         —
16th         5         5         4         4         4         3         2         1         —
17th         5         5         4         4         4         3         3         2         —
18th         5         5         4         4         4         3         3         2         1
19th         5         5         4         4         4         3         3         3         2
20th         5         5         4         4         4         3         3         3         3

courtesy of http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorce ... m#sorcerer


There are no bad editions of D&D, just Boring Players and Unimaginative DMs.
  

User avatar
mordrin
Prolific Collector

Posts: 399
Joined: Jan 30, 2004
Last Visit: May 18, 2022
Location: Chicagoish

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 12:12 am 
 

I did a quick search and found conflicting info on whether BGII used 3E or 2E rules.  Based on what little I read, it seemed as if they were sort of a hybrid, which would make sense, given when it was released.

I've never heard of 'sorceror' class prior to 3E.
  

User avatar
bbarsh
Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3863
Joined: Feb 21, 2004
Last Visit: Mar 27, 2022
Location: Milford, Michigan

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 8:30 am 
 

My first recollection of this type of character is actually from a TSR novel - or paperback from the mid-late 80s. I did not read it, but one of my gaming buddies read most AD&D fiction told us all about it :roll: . Some chic had super wizard powers but was not a true magic user. Used magic energy?? to create spell effects or something like that. Being the purist that I am, I thought the idea sucked. This was AD&D, not some munchkin game system.

Saying that, it would not shock me to think there was some kind of write up in The Dragon. This would have been second edition era, and well before third. Had to be, because my group played little if any AD&D after around 1988 +/-.


And I could've bought these damn modules off the 1$ rack!!!

New modules for your Old School game http://pacesettergames.com/

Everything Pacesetter at http://pacesettergames.blog.com/
 WWW  

flying_purple_monkfish
Prolific Collector

Posts: 195
Joined: Mar 31, 2006
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2009
Location: UK

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 8:37 am 
 

hmm. I have no idea... it's a shame really... cuz I prefer the sorc to the wizard... makes more sense in my mind you see.
 WWW  

User avatar
killjoy32
Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 8241
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Last Visit: Mar 05, 2022
Location: Wallasey, Merseyside, UK

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 9:34 am 
 

flying_purple_monkfish wrote:hmm. I have no idea... it's a shame really... cuz I prefer the sorc to the wizard... makes more sense in my mind you see.


bah.

what the hell is wrong with a magic-user and thats that :D

Al


Are we nearly there yet?
  

User avatar
Kingofpain89
Long-Winded Collector

Posts: 4752
Joined: Oct 31, 2004
Last Visit: May 11, 2022
Location: Garland, TX

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 9:48 am 
 

bbarsh wrote:My first recollection of this type of character is actually from a TSR novel - or paperback from the mid-late 80s. I did not read it, but one of my gaming buddies read most AD&D fiction told us all about it :roll: . Some chic had super wizard powers but was not a true magic user. Used magic energy?? to create spell effects or something like that.


That would be from the book Spellfire by Ed Greenwood.  I think it was the first book Ed wrote for TSR for the Forgotten Realms.  It wasnt that good of a book IMO.

bah.

what the hell is wrong with a magic-user and thats that  


I actually like the idea of different classes of spellcaster.  I didnt like the way 2nd edition tried to break down the magic-user class but I always thought the whole idea of being a Necromancer and only casting death related spells was kind of interesting.  :twisted:  I got thinking about doing that when I read The Arcanum that Bard Games put out.
  

User avatar
Mars
Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 6113
Joined: May 03, 2003
Last Visit: May 01, 2022
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 11:37 am 
 

How could it not be good?  TSR named a cardgame after it! :)
 WWW  

User avatar
Beyondthebreach
Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1709
Joined: Feb 04, 2004
Last Visit: Aug 23, 2016
Location: Chandler, AZ

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 11:57 am 
 

mordrin wrote:I did a quick search and found conflicting info on whether BGII used 3E or 2E rules.  Based on what little I read, it seemed as if they were sort of a hybrid, which would make sense, given when it was released.

I've never heard of 'sorceror' class prior to 3E.


Okay . . . it's all coming back to me now . . .  :D   When BG2 was released, 3.0 had just come out (or was just about to come out.)  Of course, BG2 had been in production for years and was already designed to use 2E rules.  They made a few additions of 3E rules and the Sorcerer was one of them.

When Pool of Radiance came out, they specifically advertised that they were the first game to use only 3E rules.


So, for the purposes of your question about Sorcerers and BG2 . . . the answer is still the 3E Player's Handbook.


"Gleemonex makes it feel like it's seventy-two degrees in your head... all... the... time! "
  

flying_purple_monkfish
Prolific Collector

Posts: 195
Joined: Mar 31, 2006
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2009
Location: UK

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 11:59 am 
 

Alright.. thank you. I'll have a look at my 3rd ed stuff... see if I can backwards engineer it.
 WWW  

Xaxaxe
Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 5:26 pm 
 

flying_purple_monkfish wrote:hmm. I have no idea... it's a shame really... cuz I prefer the sorc to the wizard... makes more sense in my mind you see.

You're not alone, brother. AD&D 1e's "fire-and-forget" magic system never made an ounce of sense to me. Me and my buddies just house-ruled it to death rather than deal with its innate stupidity.

Say what you will about 3e (and I'm generally not a big fan of the system), but the Sorcerer class handles the concept of wielding magic much more elegantly. Plus, the wizard class is still an option, if desired.
 WWW  

flying_purple_monkfish
Prolific Collector

Posts: 195
Joined: Mar 31, 2006
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2009
Location: UK

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 5:47 pm 
 

I was playing a wizard at the student nationals.. after being used to my usual sorc.... i found it sooo clunky... going "oh why do I have this spell memorised? if only I had one more magic missile" etc...

Sorcs are a lot more elegant and make for more firepower imo. Some people hate em... I love em. but they don't work too well single classed... in any setting. My own house rules pretty much demand any sorc must be multi or dual classed... simply because the late onset of the powers suggest the character would have picked up another career path in a lot of cases. If I was really feeling mean, i'd npc class people... mwahahahaha
 WWW  

User avatar
FormCritic
Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 02, 2021

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 6:18 pm 
 

flying_purple_monkfish wrote:No.. I know sorcs are in 3.5 but I also know that BG2 (which was based on ad&d 2nd ed) did have a sorc class alongside wildmages. I think they use almost identical rules to wizards but can't use scrolls... but I can't quite work out how to figure the spells per level known and to cast...
I was just wondering if there was any 2nd ed info about these spellcasters.


   I don't know if anyone has pointed this out yet.

   I believe the book you are looking for was a hardback called Tome of Magic.

    This was one of those rules additions that TSR was prone to....a can full of worms for your campaign, packaged to sell.

    That book was the one that introduced "wild magic" and I believe it is the first instance in AD&D of the concept of a "sorcerer" as distinct from a "wizard."

    (Although, this distinction was also a part of the seminal fantasy computer game, Bard's Tale.)

    FWIW

Mark   8)


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."
  

guerret
Prolific Collector

Posts: 671
Joined: Dec 17, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 13, 2019
Location: Italy

Post Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 6:51 pm 
 

Xaxaxe wrote:
flying_purple_monkfish wrote:hmm. I have no idea... it's a shame really... cuz I prefer the sorc to the wizard... makes more sense in my mind you see.

You're not alone, brother. AD&D 1e's "fire-and-forget" magic system never made an ounce of sense to me. Me and my buddies just house-ruled it to death rather than deal with its innate stupidity.

Say what you will about 3e (and I'm generally not a big fan of the system), but the Sorcerer class handles the concept of wielding magic much more elegantly. Plus, the wizard class is still an option, if desired.


The spell point system in Spells & Magic, in fact, was the solution we never gave up since we adopted it a lot of years ago. It solved very well the rigidity of the spell progression table and introduced a very practical and fast free magick system.

(Nothing compared to a Flambeau battle mage expert in Creo Ignem or a Tremere Rego Mentem master expert in controlling other people, but then, no magic system could ever be compared to Ars Magica.)
 ICQ  
Next
Post new topic Reply to topic The Acaeum Forums  •   Collecting General Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3