Encouraging a player NOT to play a sorceror...

Ok, we had a reasonbly good discussion about things to watch out for if you want to play a sorceror. Now let's turn that on its ear and offer some advice on how to discourage a player from playing a sorceror. This is mostly because I don't want to deal with a PC sorceror at the start of our campaign, and the player in question plays nothing BUT magicusers in D&D.

So, short of saying "no sorcerors" (I hate being so hardnosed), how can I encourage her NOT to be a sorceror? Note, I don't mind if she is a scholar, I just don't want to see her try to be a D&D style magicuser.
 
But could she even be? I mean, it's not as if the Scholar class can be used to do things the 'wizard's way' here. No magic missile, mage armor, grease or other spells.

If the problem is that the player is used to taking the wizard class and plans to do the same kind of stuff here, she is in for a nasty surprise!

No spellbook full of spell. No defensive spells (at least at low level). Corruption lurking around the corner. PP gained mainly through sacrifices or drugs. Etc...

I would explain to her that she can be a spell-casting Scholar but that she can't expect things to work the same way as in D&D. Underscore the alien nature of wizardry, the fact that it slowly corrupts the soul and that most people will either run in fright from her or (try to) kill her where she stands.

If she still insists on playing one, let her but stick to the rules (especially the rule of obsession) and, remember, YOU [the DM] get to choose which spell(s) she gains access to. No browsing through the rule book and picking what she likes best. Based on her scholar's background, you are the sole judge of what kind of magic (and spells) she was able to study.

I would also - in her presence - tell the other players how their own PC view sorcery. Unless they come from Kithai or Stygia, chances are they don't much care for it. Then, insist that they role-play correctly.

When the entire world (companions included) doesn't like you, you tend to get the message rather rapidly...
 
I had the same concerns in my campaign, so I stressed to my party of mostly Aquilonians and Hyboreans the anti sorcery stance of Mitra, and my PCs expressed that they would take care of any would be sorcerers themselves. That was sufficient to discourage the one player who thought about playing a sorcerer.
 
strategoi_nikolai: If you want to discourage your player from playing a sorcerer you could mention social stigma, although I'm unsure of how strong this is in Hyboria. Another thing that is less attractive about Hyborian sorcerers is their enormous frailty. There are few D&D-style defensive spells. A decent warrior can relatively easily down a sorcerer with one hit. This means that the sorcerer will often have to choose between a preemptive attack to wipe out his enemies, or running away. One thing I personally wouldn't recommend is "tricking" her into making a non-sorcerous scholar. Such a PC will probably be in for a very rough time if this is a combat-heavy campaign.

Mortepierre: I don't want to be argumentative, but I disagree with you on a few points. I think you may be overstating the role of Corruption. Unless the sorcerer takes feats and spells like Spawn of Dagoth Hill, Child of Jhebbal Sag, Salome, Demonic Pact, Greater Demonic Pact, and Form Demon, she is IMO roughly no more or less susceptible to Corruption than the other classes. Granted, she alone can accumulate Corruption in a War of Souls with a demon, but this is probably offset by the fact that she usually has the best Will save in the party.

Also IMO, PPs are mainly gained through rest (including Greater Meditation and Debaucher), Energy Drain, and Opportunistic Sacrifice. I consider lotus, Power Rituals, and Tortured Sacrifice inefficient most of the time. Ritual Sacrifice is sometimes worth the trouble, but not with low-level commoners.

I disagree with your statement that the DM is "the sole judge of what kind of magic (and spells) she was able to study." According to the background rules, the DM chooses which of the four backgrounds he allows in his campaign. If he allows independent, the PC is allowed her choice of spells as long as she has Knowledge (arcana) +10. Considering that all the other backgrounds use the independent rules for "dabbling", this background should probably be open. If he allows pact, the PC may choose to conduct research as an independent or choose freely among the spells the demon knows (usually all spells from 2-5 styles + some summoning spells). If he allows lay priest, the PC may have to go without spells several levels, but is after taking the Priest feat allowed to choose from the spells available to her religion. And there are many religions teaching all, or all but a few, styles. Once again independent studies are mentioned as an option. Only the acolyte has a strict curriculum (most of the time), but even she is allowed to choose her spells at later levels. Lastly, since there may be several masters or groups to choose between for the acolyte, she will still have some input as to which spells she learns.
 
Turim said:
Mortepierre: I don't want to be argumentative, but I disagree with you on a few points. I think you may be overstating the role of Corruption. Unless the sorcerer takes feats and spells like Spawn of Dagoth Hill, Child of Jhebbal Sag, Salome, Demonic Pact, Greater Demonic Pact, and Form Demon, she is IMO roughly no more or less susceptible to Corruption than the other classes. Granted, she alone can accumulate Corruption in a War of Souls with a demon, but this is probably offset by the fact that she usually has the best Will save in the party.

Disagreement is good. It means the subject is an interesting one :wink:

You raise a few good points. It’s true that - apparently - Scholars aren’t more susceptible to Corruption than other characters (unless they go look for it), especially given their Will save. However, you discount several factors.

First of all, I wasn’t talking only in terms of rules. Role-play is half the equation here. Look at what the (Atlantean) edition says of Scholars in the first two paragraphs of p.182. Sound risk-proof to you? Not exactly, eh?

Second, a sorcerer will – in all likelihood – be his team’s first (and last) line of defense against demonic entities of any kind. Hence, higher chances of gaining corruption. Let’s not forget, while we’re discussing this, that whenever not running in fright or attacking, he’ll risk corruption just for delving too deeply into arcane secrets best left alone. And, let’s be honest here, what Scholar worth his salt wouldn’t risk limb and soul to gain more power?

Third, a Scholar/sorcerer will often be the one dealing with weird artifacts and magical items, if only because his pals will have enough good sense not to touch them with a ten ft. pole. Some of these can increase his Corruption score.

Fourth, a Scholar is perhaps the class less likely to have a code of honor. A serious disadvantage when dealing with Corruption (even if their innate Will save lessens the risk somewhat).

Last but not least, starting as a ‘clean’ sorcerer is easy. Climbing the ladder of power without risking Corruption isn’t. Spells don’t come cheap in this world (at least, they shouldn’t). To gain more, the sorcerer will have to go looking for them where they are, whether it is a ghost-haunted ruin, a demon-infested temple, or the abode of an evil sorcerer of the Black Ring.

I could add that collecting spellbooks written on human flesh isn’t exactly healthy…

Turim said:
Also IMO, PPs are mainly gained through rest (including Greater Meditation and Debaucher), Energy Drain, and Opportunistic Sacrifice. I consider lotus, Power Rituals, and Tortured Sacrifice inefficient most of the time. Ritual Sacrifice is sometimes worth the trouble, but not with low-level commoners.

True, again, but a sorcerer doesn’t always have the luxury to rest for days in-between two events demanding his attention (and powers).

In a big battle, a long fight, or a climatic scene against the demon invoked by his adversary, the sorcerer will need more power and he’ll need it quickly. Hence, he’ll have to resort to alchemical means of regaining PP rapidly or go for the drain/sacrifice option.

Now, maybe your players are comfy when it comes to watching their sorcerer pal butcher or drain his servants (or, even, one of them) in order to boost his PP total but the vast majority – if role-played correctly – should freak out.. and rightfully so!

Turim said:
I disagree with your statement that the DM is "the sole judge of what kind of magic (and spells) she was able to study." According to the background rules, the DM chooses which of the four backgrounds he allows in his campaign. If he allows independent, the PC is allowed her choice of spells as long as she has Knowledge (arcana) +10. Considering that all the other backgrounds use the independent rules for "dabbling", this background should probably be open. If he allows pact, the PC may choose to conduct research as an independent or choose freely among the spells the demon knows (usually all spells from 2-5 styles + some summoning spells). If he allows lay priest, the PC may have to go without spells several levels, but is after taking the Priest feat allowed to choose from the spells available to her religion. And there are many religions teaching all, or all but a few, styles. Once again independent studies are mentioned as an option. Only the acolyte has a strict curriculum (most of the time), but even she is allowed to choose her spells at later levels. Lastly, since there may be several masters or groups to choose between for the acolyte, she will still have some input as to which spells she learns.

Just because one of your players would like to play a sorcerer doesn’t mean that you have to kowtow to him. Magic, in the Howard’s universe, is evil. Not good. Not neutral. Not ‘in shades of grey’. It’s black, unnatural, and evil, period.

Let’s examine our fledgling sorcerer’s options one by one:

- Acolyte: The text says that the player “.. must select a specific group to join, or a master to whom he may apprentice himself ..”. Does it say that the player can flesh out said group or master himself, or that he has full access to all the prospective candidates out there? Of course not! The DM is in control here. HE is the one giving ‘options’ to the player, and if the options are choosing between the Black Ring and the Seers of Yimsha, well.. too bad for the player.

- Independent: Perhaps the best option if the player isn’t keen on gaining Corruption but it has the disadvantage that, until his Knowledge (arcana) bonus is high enough, only sheer luck will prevent the DM from telling him exactly what he could learn. Spells gained that way are usually found on musty old scrolls or on crumbling walls in ruins of bygone era. Who is to say how corrupted those who wrote them were? Not to mention that few of these come with the mention “WARNING! Using this spell could corrupt you!”

- Pact: Already dealing with a demon? Welcome to Corruption-heaven!

- Lay Priest: A seemingly ‘nice’ option too.. until one realizes that the number of not-downright-evil gods out there aren’t exactly legion. Asura, Bori, Ibis, or Mitra are reasonable choices, I’ll grant you that. That said, being a ‘priest’ isn’t the same as being a sorcerer. When you’re part of cult, you have obligations (not to mention often a ton of political/religious enemies). Don’t fulfil them and you’re out (of luck, at the very least)

No, I disagree here. A DM can always remain in control of what magic the player learns and he doesn’t even have to act as a tyrant to do it. A spell-casting Scholar is the class that has the most potential to (re)shape the world. Thus, the DM is perfectly entitled to exert a certain amount of control over who gets to play it or even how they do it.
 
Several good points have been raised in this discussion. Unfortunately, I'm at work now so am hampered in my response w/o access to the rules, but...
  • Sorcerers have auras that others can see (sorcerers, demons & outsiders). Any enemy sorcerer or beastie will see the sorcerer and see her as it's first target. That might dissuade your player. If a powerful creature, a fantastical beastie or sorcerer is throwing it's weight against the sorcerer, she shouldn't complain "why me" if you emphasize this point before or during character creation (her character would have learned as much early on).
  • Social stigma - well discussed here. She won't be trusted, probably not liked by anyone, including the other players' characters?
  • Low magic setting - not like high fantasy games, no wands, spellbooks, boots or rings of wishes lying around dungeons. Add to this the Rule of Impermanence in trying to create her own items if she survives the low levels.
  • Lastly, just because the group are adventurers, doesn't mean every town mayor, lord and king will invite them to tea and ask them to solve the mystery of the monsters in the caves, just because they're a haphazard group of adventurers. This game emphasizes role-playing, which by implication means you play your background. So if you're a sorcerer (see social stigma, above), no lord will want to be around you, much less offer you tons of silver and glory to wander around ruins. Unless she makes a pact with a demon or serves an order, already discussed and restricting player's spell choice, she'll have to live by her wits, unless she starts as a noble first level and then goes up as scholar, which I also wouldn't recommend as she'd be ostracised by her society.
Hope these help. 8)
 
After a long discussion and letting her read more about scholars (sorcerors), she has decided what she is really after in her characetr concept is a thief/scholar. She wants to be a lay priest of Bel, more interested in perfecting her knowledge of things worth stealing and her trickery in order to be a top notch thief.

I can deal with that.

Of course, it's a mercenary campaign so I don't know how I'm gonna work her in! :D

Thanks to everyone for their advice and suggestions.
 
strategoi_nikolai said:
After a long discussion and letting her read more about scholars (sorcerors), she has decided what she is really after in her characetr concept is a thief/scholar. She wants to be a lay priest of Bel, more interested in perfecting her knowledge of things worth stealing and her trickery in order to be a top notch thief.

I can deal with that.

Of course, it's a mercenary campaign so I don't know how I'm gonna work her in! :D

Thanks to everyone for their advice and suggestions.
Well, that's an interesting idea, hope it works for you and for her. As I just said on the other thread, good luck with your first run tomorrow, and have :twisted: fun!
 
strategoi_nikolai said:
After a long discussion and letting her read more about scholars (sorcerors), she has decided what she is really after in her characetr concept is a thief/scholar. She wants to be a lay priest of Bel, more interested in perfecting her knowledge of things worth stealing and her trickery in order to be a top notch thief.

I can deal with that.

Of course, it's a mercenary campaign so I don't know how I'm gonna work her in! :D

Thanks to everyone for their advice and suggestions.

That's what happened with our adventure. Once the player becomes familar with the class and the game rules, multiclassing seems the best option and a great part of the Conan RPG.
 
Strom said:
Once the player becomes familar with the class and the game rules, multiclassing seems the best option and a great part of the Conan RPG.
Yeah, I agree. My players got so turned off because of bad experiences w/ OGL mutliclassing that they avoid it wholly in the Conan game, but this is the best game system for multiclassing AND it's kinda encouraged in the system. I guess if any character class favors NOT multiclassing, it'd be Scholar, but it's in the general feel of the setting to adapt, so if she feels comfortable trying, multiclassing should benefit her character concept.
 
Bregales said:
Strom said:
Once the player becomes familar with the class and the game rules, multiclassing seems the best option and a great part of the Conan RPG.
Yeah, I agree. My players got so turned off because of bad experiences w/ OGL mutliclassing that they avoid it wholly in the Conan game, but this is the best game system for multiclassing AND it's kinda encouraged in the system. I guess if any character class favors NOT multiclassing, it'd be Scholar, but it's in the general feel of the setting to adapt, so if she feels comfortable trying, multiclassing should benefit her character concept.

That's right I was only thinking of the early levels to get started. The player in our adventure started as a noble only to multiclass into a scholar - and that was very beneficial to his character. He wanted to play a scholar and just took a indirect route which I feel the game rewards.
 
Strom said:
That's right I was only thinking of the early levels to get started. The player in our adventure started as a noble only to multiclass into a scholar - and that was very beneficial to his character. He wanted to play a scholar and just took a indirect route which I feel the game rewards.
Yeah, I agree it does reward. Sounds like a good start.
 
I'd be firm, but fair.
Taking the 'soft' approach is not only a recipe for disaster, it's rather indecisive.

If a GM has qualms about something in their games, they should speak up.
For example, I don't allow Cimmerians in my own games - Conan was a one-of-kind character, the Cimmerians are not seen in Howard's stories bar he. So I reciprocate.

Personally, I'm comfortable with sorcerers in the group - but usually no more than one per group, unless they share backstory.

But if you, as GM, are not comfortable with PC sorcerers, just say so.
Your players should understand, and nothing is to be gained by underhandedness except distrust between player and GM.
 
OR...

you could have your group do some sample combats (1st-3rd level chars) 1-on-1, Scholar vs. some other class. That should get the point across, hehe.
 
Back
Top