Why do you define sorcery as?

[TheCountAlucard]

You're not the first one to suggest that to him; I'm still not sure why he doesn't.

[Accelerator]

I mean... I would suggest just reading the sorcery section. Most of these questions are answered there.

Ok then.


3e:

Across Creation, sorcerers are known and feared as figures of great and dangerous power, said to be capable of slaying a man with a gesture or calling up storms with a glance. The magic of sorcery is fundamentally different from Solar Charms. A Solar Charm is an expression of the Solar’s own Essence through supreme mastery of skill. Sorcery is the art of shaping the Essence of the world itself, willing it into accordance with the sorcerer’s whims. To work sorcery is to command essential forces, consort with strange spirits, and call up impossible wonders.

So... how does this help us?

I recommend you read what I wrote in the OP, instead of looking at the title. It helps a lot. And prevents you from making a fool out of yourself.

[Lioness]

I recommend you read what I wrote in the OP, instead of looking at the title. It helps a lot. And prevents you from making a fool out of yourself.

No way to talk to people and not long since my previous warning, take some time off.

[The Wizard of Oz]

Sorcery is the magic of Creation which is not springing forth from the essence of the practitioner, and is tied to ritual and capricious external forces, and which can create and destroy on deep fundamental levels. That's probably not quite right and could be better, but generally I think you are looking for things that *feel* like spells and rituals; it's a holistic approach looking at form and function, not a kind of results focused approach where you can classify sorcery or Charms based on functional results and/or costs. A sorcerer is more like a person who uses a particular style of magic, not someone who is particularly good at achieving a particular kinds of results and goals.

I think that's a pretty good explanation.