Charles's comment to my review of "Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves" prompted me to do a deep dive on the distinction between and among wizards, warlocks, and sorcerers in D&D. I immediately found this page.
It doesn't help when some classes are easily confused. The easiest to mix up are the main spellcasting classes: wizard, warlock, and sorcerer. To a player not familiar with D&D, these may sound like the same thing. "Warlock" is often used as the male equivalent of a witch, while other sources use "wizard" and "sorcerer" interchangeably. In D&D though, while all three have access to a wide range of spells, they have one key distinction — the source of their magic.
Later in the article, we learn that
• A Wizard has to learn and study magic before [he] can use it.
• A Sorcerer is naturally magical. [Her] power can come from a variety of sources, but no matter what, magic has been a part of [her] as long as [she] can remember.
• A Warlock is granted [his] magic by a higher power, referred to as [his] "patron." Usually, this occurs in the form of a pact, where the Warlock [receives] powers in exchange for some sort of service to [his] patron.
This reference even explains what wild magic means in the D&D context.
• Wild Magic ([Player's] Handbook): This magic comes from the forces of Chaos. It often has no apparent [origin and] can be unpredictable in nature.
All of this is new—and news—to me. I don't recall that, in our D&D sessions, we ever got into the minutiae of these distinctions—distinctions that hold only within the context of the game. Further exploration of the above-linked website also shows that these magical classes have evolved over time, so it could be that, back in the Stone Age when I played D&D, these distinctions weren't nearly as clear. Alas, my old D&D manuals (which probably date back to the '70s*) are either in storage in Virginia or sold off via eBay; I no longer remember what happened to them. Upshot: I have no old references to consult unless such references exist online. Besides, I probably wouldn't want to read through the manuals today: I'd be too tempted to proofread them to death. Geeks and nerds are often good with ideas and strangely good with the exact language of computer programming, but they generally suck at spelling, and the D&D books were written by geeks and nerds.
Thanks, Charles, for focusing on a single word in my review, thereby prompting me to go down this rabbit hole.
__________
*I played D&D in the '80s, but the manuals most likely dated back to the '70s.
"Thanks, Charles, for focusing on a single word in my review, thereby prompting me to go down this rabbit hole."
ReplyDeleteThat's what I'm here for, man!
But you can be forgiven for not knowing the distinction between wizard and sorceror, as the latter was only introduced in third edition (2000). And "magic user" was indeed used as a catch-all in earlier editions.
Most of the D&D I played was second edition, but I did play some after the introduction of sorcerers--thus my familiarity. However, I myself have never played a sorcerer. In fact, the only time I ever played a magic user was the one time I played a cleric. I was never really into magic users. Too fiddly.
Out of curiosity, what classes did you favor when you played? I think ranger was probably my favorite class. Monks were fun, too. But I guess I almost always played fighter-type classes (with the exception of that one dalliance with holy magic, which I do have to admit was fun).
Oh, and I aos was wondering if you got the "Simon the Sorcerer" reference. This was the title of an old point-and-click game from the early 90s--so I can guess you can add that to your list of references the film makes.
ReplyDeleteI played a magic user named Simon back in the day, but no, I didn't get the intended reference. I thought you were talking about alliteration, to which I considered countering with, "So... Sofina the Red Wizard, then? Ed the Bard? Holga the Barbarian?" Good thing I didn't write that reply!
ReplyDeleteI was a magic user the entire time I campaigned with Mike as DM. After all my studies of monasticism, though, I might go back and play a monk were I ever to play D&D again.
ReplyDelete