Christmas Gameing Blog # 3

While many feel the film DRAGONSLAYER is one of the best depictions of what a D&D universe might actually be like (I prefer Hawk the Slayer) the ending does not make a lot of sens, unless you have read the novelization of the film. Then when the main character says “I only wish we had a Horse” and the Horse appears, then it makes sens.

Because if you reed the book you discover tha

• As an infant, Galen was handed to Ulrich by his parents due to their fear of his magical abilities. Ulrich took him as an apprentice, but was concerned with the lad's lack of focus, which usually resulted in the unintentional creation of bizarre, dream-inspired creatures.

So he had the inborn ability to be a Wizard(Sorcerer) but required training (wizard) to realize his full potential.

The same theme is seen in Harry potter, Potter was Born to be a wizard and displayed uses of his power (the snake) long before Hogwarts, it was Hogwarts and his experience that trained him to be a Wizard.

We could also include Luke Skywalker in this analogy, he had the blood but needed the training. Even some of the X-men could also fit this idea of Blood vs training or Improvisational magic vs Trained Magic,

A sorcerer is the Artist of magic while a Wizard is the Scientist of magic as one GM once said.

In OG D&D there was the Magic User Class and the Cleric Class and that was it, all the other permutation did not show up till much latter. The wizard was the old guy in the floppy hat and robes and modeled after Gandalph and Merlin. A person had to spend Years studying ancient texts to master magic, as if magic was the D&D equivalent of a Masters Degree. Any Jo could pick up a sword or pick a lock but Wizardry required years of Study which is why they only had a D4 Hit Points, because all those years made them week and frail

Except, both Merlin and Gandalph were known to lay the smack down on more then one occasion, and neither were students of magic, Gandalph was a 2000 year old Angel in Human form when we first meet him in the Hobbit and Merlin was to son of Supernatural beings.

So.

What's the BIG difference between saying that all Wizards are born with the blood line to use Magic(Sorcerers) but they must be trained by a Sensi to use there magic properly as a Wizard Other wise they just go mad with power? Or cause a lot of damage with there uncontrolled magic(Harry with the snake at the Zoo?)

Or that Wizards and Sorcerers are not the same at all (though isn’t a Sorcery with the Arcane Blood Line a Wizard?).

On Paper the difference between a Sorcerer and a Wizard are as follows

A: Blood Line vs Specialization

B: No Familiar vs Familiar/Arcane Bond

C: Spontaneously cast spells vs studying specific spells each night.

D: Lesser spells known/memorized and longer time to reach top tier spells vs more Spells known and reach top tier spells sooner

The spontaneous ability to pull spells out of thin air gives the Sorcery a slight advantage but they know less spells from which to Improvise. A Wizard has to memorize his spell and with out feats can not change them till his next rest, he has more spells in his arsenal but he has no way of knowing what the next few encounters might require so he may have 8 Spells memorized to fight Frothgar the Frost demon but -Oops look its his ½ brother the Flame Demon .

On versatility the Sorcerer takes the lead and personally I like the Blood Lines more then School Specialization

On utility and pure raw power a wizard will trump a Sorcerer-if he is prepared.

The question again is, are all Wizards like Galen? Having the raw power to do magic but requiring training to be a true wizard

I like that idea

In the end though it's the choice of each player and GM as to how magic works in their world.

At the end of the day both the Wizard and the Sorcerer are going to cast magic Missile.....At the Darkness

Till next time

Be excellent