PDA

View Full Version : Tough Choice: Wizard vs Sorcerer <3.5>



Tokuhara
2010-11-11, 12:35 PM
I know they have the same fricken' spells (minus a few Sorcerer-Exclusives), but in an optimizer's POV, which is better?

Psyren
2010-11-11, 12:38 PM
In a very general sense, Wizards are better due to earlier spell access and unlimited spells known. (Also, Int is a better casting stat than Cha.)

But there's a lot of other factors to consider: how easily the wizard can get new spells in your DM's campaign, whether spellbook-screw is a possibility, what sources/PrCs are available etc.

Aron Times
2010-11-11, 12:39 PM
I'm an optimizer, and I prefer the sorcerer for its spontaneous casting ability. I hate having to prepare spells.

From a pure optimization standpoint, the wizard is better.

Kylarra
2010-11-11, 12:43 PM
I know they have the same fricken' spells (minus a few Sorcerer-Exclusives), but in an optimizer's POV, which is better?
Wizard is generally better, focused specialists will still know more spells than the sorcerer and cast more per/day on average, while still retaining the faster progression.

Greenish
2010-11-11, 12:44 PM
Wizard has better casting stat (int governs knowledge skills and skillpoints, cha only a few skills), easier time with metamagic, more freedom to pick situational spells, easier time qualifying for many of the best PrCs, better ACFs, faster spell level acquisition and a bunch of free feats. A focused specialist can match sorcerers in spellslots, with more higher level spells to toss around.

Sorcerer has less paperwork, and a few spells unique to them. Also, dragon shenanigans.

[Edit]: Which one is better depends on what you're trying to achieve. Wizard is stronger, though.

ericgrau
2010-11-11, 12:57 PM
Optimizers here tend to favor the wizard heavily, but I dunno. Being 1/2 a spell level behind hurts, but usually the lower level spells are also quite good unless you're playing a blaster. In theory the wizard could have any spell prepared and in theory "know" more and that's why people say they'll come out on top. But in practice the sorcerer is more versatile because he has X spells to choose from at the beginning of the day, and X spells to choose from at the end of the day (not 1 or 2). The wizard prepares about the same number give or take and ends up with less choices later. After a while he burns through his highest level spells, but even then he has many more options left. Most people playing wizards are too lazy to scry enemies and swap their spell lists frequently, so that advantage usually disappears. So, yeah, basically it comes down to how crazy are you willing to get with your planning?

Vladislav
2010-11-11, 01:01 PM
Wizards are more powerful because they have faster access to new spell levels, know more different spells, get bonus feats, get more skill points.

And a specialist wizard isn't even far behind a sorcerer in spells per day. A focused specialist might actually get more.

Wizards, however, have the added busywork of picking spells to memorize. If this bothers you, play a sorcerer.

Tvtyrant
2010-11-11, 01:05 PM
Think of Wizards as Batman; Crazy Prepared is their mantra. Most Sorcerers are entirely combat focused, while a wizard has out of combat utility spells like Knock that the Sorcerer would be wasting space getting.

Sorcerers are a ton easier to play though; you don't have to swap spells in and out, you simply cast what you need when you need it.

Tokuhara
2010-11-11, 01:20 PM
I'm asking because I want to specialize in Battlefield Control, and cannot choose between the two. Admittedly, Sorcerer-Mailman seems good, but Sorcerer's lack of class features worries me.

Wizard, while being a metamagic machine, has to prepare spells daily, thus leaving him venerable when a fight doesn't go entirely as planned. So you prepared Fly, the ceiling is only 10ft high, and that ogre looks hungry...


Books-wise, almost all books from all settings, minus Minis Handbook (which I don't think supports Wiz/Sorc Anyway), are available to my grubby fingers

kestrel404
2010-11-11, 01:22 PM
Wizard is the better class, overall.

Sorceror can be cheesed to greater extremes (Loredrake Kobold w/Greater Draconic Right of Passage means you can be a Sorceror 6 with casting as a Sorceror 9).

ericgrau
2010-11-11, 01:29 PM
I've played at least 2 battlefield control sorcerers and I love them. Picking among a dozen spells to get the best control for the job is TONS of fun. That said these boards think of wizards as being battlefield control for some reason. If you want to find new and creative ways to use the same spells (but with 15 different options all day long) I'd go sorcerer. If you want the kind of crazy-preparedness where you swap out control for new control to best fit the challenge which you scried on ahead of time, I'd go wizard. For both classes I'd grab scrolls for low level utility stuff to be prepared for any random unexpected thing imaginable.

Vladislav
2010-11-11, 01:33 PM
I'm asking because I want to specialize in Battlefield Control
A Sorcerer is okay for battlefield control, because you don't need that many different spells. In order of levels, look at things like Grease, Color Spray, Ray of Enfeeblement, Glitterdust, Web, Slow, Stinking Cloud, Black Tentacles, Wall of Force - you have pretty much something for everyone.

Tokuhara
2010-11-11, 01:35 PM
I'm also thinking of Multiclassing (I know, DON'T DO IT), but I'm thinking smart here:

Since wizard gets essentially EVERY spell in D&D 3.5 somehow, but sorcerer gets some better longevity (fewer known, but more per day), Which is better for a Spellthief-type who is BfC

Maho-Tsukai
2010-11-11, 01:36 PM
As everybody else said, Wizard is strictly better then a sorcerer though the sorcerer still can be a formidable combatant, he is, after all, a tier 2 so he's almost but not quite wizard level. It however really depends on the campaign and how generous your DM is with scrolls. If he/she's the kind to have magic marts in every town or include scrolls in most loot then the wizard is strictly better. However, if they are stingy with scrolls then you may want to play a sorcerer instead. While Wizards have far more potential power then a sorcerer a sorcerer may be better then a wizard if you will not be finding scrolls.

Simply think of both of them as stocks and the DM being the stock market. The wizard is essentially a high-risk, high-reward stock. If you know that the market is doing good aka your DM is generous with scrolls, spellbooks ect..then a wizard is definitely worth it. However if you know it's not the "right market" for a wizard aka your DM is known to be stingy with the spells or sporadic/random in how generous he/she is with spells then the sorcerer, while having less potential power then a wizard, is a "safer" choice because it's power is not highly depended on how generous or stingy the DM is.

ericgrau
2010-11-11, 01:40 PM
I'm also thinking of Multiclassing (I know, DON'T DO IT), but I'm thinking smart here:

Since wizard gets essentially EVERY spell in D&D 3.5 somehow, but sorcerer gets some better longevity (fewer known, but more per day), Which is better for a Spellthief-type who is BfC

Ya builds which tend to use the same spells tend to be better off with sorcerer. If you go wizard figure out how to take advantage of swapping or don't bother. I mean you get about as many prepared spells as a sorcerer. Actually more, but not as high level. A blaster spell-thief will benefit from having a higher level metamagic-tweaked spell on half the levels, but you say you're not doing sneak attacked blasty rays?

Kylarra
2010-11-11, 01:40 PM
Even if your DM is planning on being stingy with scrolls, collegiate wizard will give you more than enough spells to compensate and you'll still be above your sorcerer counterpart.

Tokuhara
2010-11-11, 01:43 PM
As everybody else said, Wizard is strictly better then a sorcerer though the sorcerer still can be a formidable combatant, he is, after all a Tier 2 so he's almost but not quite wizard level. It however really depends on the campaign and how generous your DM is with scrolls. If he/she's the kind to have magic marts in every town or include scrolls in most loot then the wizard is strictly better. However, if they are stingy with scrolls then you may want to play a sorcerer instead. While Wizards have far more potential power then a sorcerer a sorcerer may be better then a wizard if you will not be finding scrolls.

Simply think of both of them as stocks and the DM being the stock market. The wizard is essentially a high-risk, high-reward stock. If you know that the market is doing good aka your DM is generous with scrolls, spellbooks ect..then a wizard is definitely worth it. However if you know it's not the "right market" for a wizard aka your DM is known to be stingy with the spells or sporadic/random in how generous he/she is with spells then the sorcerer, while having less potential power then a wizard, is a "safer" choice because it's power is not highly depended on how generous or stingy the DM is.

My DM never hands out scrolls or spellbooks, but we fight wizards kinda often, usually one per dungeon. He's VERY formula-based. He claims that there's a formula to "The Perfect Dungeon," and part of it is one Wizard/Dungeon, so we don't get oodles of scrolls and spellbooks we have no clue what to do with.

Maho-Tsukai
2010-11-11, 01:50 PM
I see. In that case you may want to check out a sorcerer. However, 1 wizard per dungon may not be THAT stingy provided he stocks their spellbooks with useful spells so a wizard may still be viable depending on A) How many dungeons you frequent and B) If your DM gives the 1 wizard per dungeon a healthy amount of spells and/or spells that are actually good.

Also, I have a question for Kylarra. What the heck is a collegiate wizard? Is it an ACF? Variant class? I ask because I have played a lot of wizards and never once have I seen that term so I would really like to know what a collegiate wizard is...

Psyren
2010-11-11, 01:51 PM
Well, if it's rogue-ish casting you want, wizard is the way to go because you'll need Int anyway. (And lower spells/day won't be an issue - you can grab a crossbow, wand or reserve feat to sneak attack with.)

Your standard Wiz/Rogue/Unseen Seer/Spellwarp Sniper build is the way to go here.


Also, I have a question for Kylarra. What the heck is a collegiate wizard? Is it an ACF? Variant class? I ask because I have played a lot of wizards and never once have I seen that term so I would really like to know what a collegiate wizard is...

Collegiate Wizard is described here (http://tinyurl.com/39w79po) Sorry I couldn't resist, check Complete Arcane

Kylarra
2010-11-11, 01:54 PM
Also, I have a question for Kylarra. What the heck is a collegiate wizard? Is it an ACF? Variant class? I ask because I have played a lot of wizards and never once have I seen that term so I would really like to know what a collegiate wizard is...It's a feat in CArc. Basically doubles the base spells you learn, so 6+int 1st level spells at first level and then 4/lvl thereafter.

Keld Denar
2010-11-11, 01:55 PM
When a Sorcerer blooms into 6th level spells, I personally think that sorcerers have much better spell output than Wizards do. Arcane Spellsurge + Residual Metamagic is BRUTAL for pumping out vast quanities of very effective spells in VERY short order.

Me? I like a mostly BF control Sorcerer who uses Fell Draining as his kill mechanism. You can get a lot of mileage out of Fell Draining Sonic Snap and Fell Draining Magic Missile, and some debuffs like Slow or Glitterdust and buffs like Haste are good in nearly EVERY situation.

Tokuhara
2010-11-11, 01:57 PM
I was thinking actually taking Spellthief and using Sorcerer's CHA synergy, but Wizard does have more spells...

Psyren
2010-11-11, 02:03 PM
I was thinking actually taking Spellthief and using Sorcerer's CHA synergy, but Wizard does have more spells...

Spellthief is doable but you're honestly better off with rogue. You'll have a ton of Int anyways going Wizard and you'll get huge mileage out of it with 8+Int skills (x4 at level 1.)

Spellthief has the advantage of ignoring ASF in light armor on your sorc spells (if you take Master Spellthief) but that is a minor benefit at best and represents a feat tax.

Maho-Tsukai
2010-11-11, 02:04 PM
Thanks for the info, Kylarra. I will have to look at my copy CArc again. I have so many pdfs(Including numerous 3rd party books) for 3.5e that I forget half of the content in them.

Susano-wo
2010-11-11, 02:08 PM
I have to say one thing RE sorc that wizard can't really duplicate (I know, this is going to turn into a flame war:smallwink:)
And ists ease of metamagic. Maybe its just becasue I'm a caster-noob, but I find it much easier to metamagic with sorcs. sure, you don't get to move, but you can choose whichever you need for the moment. The only drawback is no quicken.

So for a battle field control wiz/sorc, sorc will be able to maximize/extend/still (in case someone restricts your phsyical movement, or what have you whichever spell needs it). Not saying this makes sorc a clear winner, just it is an advantage that the wizard does not have

also, don't forget that you can scribe your own scrolls for those corner-case spells, like immunity to dungeon stench :smallbiggrin:
This makes it easier to know which spells to prep for the day

Talya
2010-11-11, 02:08 PM
Sorcerer's lack of class features worries me.


Think of this as a feature -- sorcerer doesn't hurt at all to PRC out of. Just make sure you swap your familiar for rapid metamagic.

Kylarra
2010-11-11, 02:11 PM
Thanks for the info, Kylarra. I will have to look at my copy CArc again. I have so many pdfs(Including numerous 3rd party books) for 3.5e that I forget half of the content in them.It's on pg 181... next to precocious apprentice, the real cheese feat.

Tokuhara
2010-11-11, 02:21 PM
Spellthief is doable but you're honestly better off with rogue. You'll have a ton of Int anyways going Wizard and you'll get huge mileage out of it with 8+Int skills (x4 at level 1.)

Spellthief has the advantage of ignoring ASF in light armor on your sorc spells (if you take Master Spellthief) but that is a minor benefit at best and represents a feat tax.

Plus, I can steal spells from Wizards/Sorcerers/Whathaveyou that my DM decides to throw at me, and if I go Daggerspell Mage, I can simply hit home with a Wings of Flurry Invoked through the Knife. With an Improved Feint/BfC spell, they are flat-footed... My assassin friend's new best buddy...

nedz
2010-11-11, 02:26 PM
It depends upon what type of spells you want: but you ought to have a look at Rogue/Beguiler. If the spell list is good for you then you will not be short of skill points.

Scout/Wizard or Scout/Sorceror are interesting options, but only if you want to play a ray focussed caster.
1 level of scout for +1d6 damage
5 levels of scout & Improved Skirmish for +4d6 damage.
The best rays are the ones which don't do damage however, still 1d3+4d6 for a cantrip is fun, and some of the reserve feats are also hilarious - how to be a warlock without being one.

Wizards are more powerful, but require more work in play.

Sorcerors require more homework - as you must plan out your spell choices several levels ahead, or get stuck with some bad choices.

Keld Denar
2010-11-11, 02:32 PM
Scout can get you into Unseen Seer as well. Unfortunately, there is no skirmish equivalent to Hunter's Eye, the spell USS's use to spike their SA damage which makes Rogue or Spellthief a much more attractive goal.

Also, Whirling Blade (CArc, reprinted in SpC) and Cloud of Knives (PHBII) are GREAT spells for either a skirmishing or SAing character. CoK is a free attack every round (which if you make after you move, gets skimish) and Whirling Blade can attack multiple targets but isn't a "volley" type attack and thus can apply skimish damage to all targets. Combine with Staggering Strike and you can kite foes around while wearing them down.

Jack_Simth
2010-11-11, 02:35 PM
I know they have the same fricken' spells (minus a few Sorcerer-Exclusives), but in an optimizer's POV, which is better?
*Most* optimizers have a few assumptions underlying their builds:

0) RAW is law
1) Wealth-by-level
2) Lots of down-time between adventures
3) No particular time pressure during adventures
4) All sources available

Under those assumptions, the Wizard is better than the Sorcerer - by a lot.

However, if we invert assumptions 1-4, things slant in favor of the Sorcerer. Why?

1) Well, if you get negligible wealth, then the Wizard has a problem: No scribing of spells, no Baccob's Blessed Book, no crafting wands and scrolls of seldom-used utility spells, and so on. Mr. Wizard is stuck with just the spells he gets at level up. There's ways to make that a very large number... but that goes back to 4, all sources available. This doesn't hurt the Sorcerer nearly as much.

2) If you don't have any down-time between adventures, you can't take time out to craft, you can't take time out to Scribe found scrolls into your spellbook, and so on. The Sorcerer, not needing to do that, is largely unaffected.

3) The Wizard, if under time pressure, has a problem: Limited spells per day (although there are ways around that, you go back to 4, 1, and 2 again), and he has to guess exactly right on his selection - he's very likely to run out of his most useful spells. The Sorcerer, having a greater number of spells per day, and a greater degree of flexibility what he uses a spell slot for, is not nearly as harmed by this.

4) Sources Available. Many of the things the Wizard does to get around issues with assumptions 1, 2, and 3 rely on having access to several key sourcebooks. If those are not available, then the inversion of Optimizers Assumptions 1, 2, and 3 cause him very large problems. The Sorcerer, being much less hindered by the inversion of Optimizer's Assumptions 1, 2, and 3, isn't nearly as harmed by a lack of source books.


Sorry, that's a rather long-winded way of saying 'campaign dependent'.

Doug Lampert
2010-11-11, 02:48 PM
I have to say one thing RE sorc that wizard can't really duplicate (I know, this is going to turn into a flame war:smallwink:)
And ists ease of metamagic. Maybe its just becasue I'm a caster-noob, but I find it much easier to metamagic with sorcs. sure, you don't get to move, but you can choose whichever you need for the moment. The only drawback is no quicken.

Choosing at the time is golden. 3.0 I came close to a TPK when the foes opened up with two level 3 clerics casting silence on the ends of the ship the PCs were on.

The sorcerer could silent spell his Dispel magic, (the check was almost automatic, and if he had missed or they had recast, Sorcerer, he can do it again and again), a wizard that hadn't prepared at least one silent spell would have been standing around looking like a commoner, and how many wizards will ACTUALLY prepare two or three silenced dispell magic's just in case the enemy has a cleric or two with silence prepared?

Similarly the sorcerer could battlefield control, and if invisible he could do it with a silenced spell while if visible he could use a lower level slot.

Broadly, Schrodinger's wizard is better at meta-magic, he's prepared EXACTLY the right spells with EXACTLY the right metamagic, in actual play, metamagic is MUCH better for a sorcerer than a wizard.

(But note that sudden metamagic and metamagic rods and the like work well for both, it's only the core feats that are better for sorcerers.)

Keld Denar
2010-11-11, 03:04 PM
Like I said...Sorcerer + Arcane Spellsurge + Residual Metamagic + ANY non-quicken Metamagic is brutal.

Arcane Spellsurge bumps the casting time of a spell up one step. Full round > Standard > Swift. Lasts rounds per level.

So, cast Arcane Spellsurge as a standard, then as a swift, cast any unmetamagiced spell A of any level.

Next round, cast Metamagic'd spell B as a standard action (reduced due to AS) and cast any normal spell C as a swift action.

Next round, cast another Metamagic'd spell D, and then cast spell B. Residual Metamagic kicks in and applies whatever MM you applied to it again.

Next round, cast another Metamagic'd spell E, and then cast spell D. Residual Metamagic kicks in and applies whatever MM you applied to it again.

Next round, etc spell F, then etc spell D, etc.

Use this with a MM like Repeat Spell or Twin Spell or even something like Split Ray or Empower Spell and you'll be pumping out effectively 12-15 spell levels worth of magic per round. Its a little late game (12+ due to reliance on Arcane Spellsurge), but dang if the spells don't fly off the shelf in a hurry!

Tokuhara
2010-11-11, 03:09 PM
So, for MY build, go with sorcerer?

Vladislav
2010-11-11, 03:18 PM
3) The Wizard, if under time pressure, has a problem: Limited spells per day.
Sorry, but a Focused Specialist Wizard does not have this problem. Let's do the math.

Sorcerer level 6, Cha 16: 7 spells level 1, 6 spells level 2, 4 spells level 3
Wizard level 6, Int 16: 6 spells level 1, 6 spells level 2, 4 spells level 3
Okay, I admit, the Wizard get's one less level 1 spell, but on levels 2 and 3 it's equal.

And the wizard, at that point, has a 2-feat advantage over the sorcerer, which he can use to grab more spells or abilities. He can get, oh, I don't know, maybe a reserve feat, after which he can throw 3d6 mini-fireballs at will, and there is no more spells per day problem.

And that's a comparison on level 6. If they were level 5 or 7, the wizard is ahead by a whole spell level.

Psyren
2010-11-11, 03:22 PM
So, for MY build, go with sorcerer?

What you're not hearing from us in this thread is the resounding "it depends." We don't know what sources you have available, how readily your DM gives access to scrolls or attacks spellbooks, whether you have downtime (and if so, how much) etc.

While you certainly can decide between Wiz and Sorc without that information, you're flying at least a little blind.

Eldariel
2010-11-11, 03:29 PM
As said, ultimately Wizard is better. ˝ spell level behind is an unnecessary handicap for Sorcerer, which leads to Wizards coming out on the top. The odd levels where Wizard is a spell level ahead are just painful, and that's almost half the levels. Without that, they'd be about even. Wizard knows more spells and thus, especially when you can roughly expect what you'll be dealing with, will have more appropriate spells for the job at hands.

Empty slots also allow replenishing a spent generic after an encounter, or preparing some extremely situational spell like Knock. Wizard also doesn't need to take spells you'll only cast once per day, like Rope Trick, as Spells Known; it only costs them one slot.


That said, Wizard is much more skill intensive for the player, since you need to prepare the right spells in addition to the generics and have a broad idea of the curve of spells you'll want to cast. Wizard also benefits hugely of divination and generic ideas of the contents of the next day's adventure (Dungeon X? Well, you can probably guess roughly what types of opponents you might run into so might want to prepare for those - as an example).

Scribe Scroll in class also helps; you don't want to be caught without that See Invisibility/Knock/Wind Wall/etc. scroll when it counts. Sorcs have to pay retail or pick up the feat; Wizards need to find someone who knows the spell and cooperate, or just Scribe it if they know it themselves.

Also, one huge issue Sorcs run into is the lack of versatility on their highest level spells. On level 1, Sorc won't know Sleep, Color Spray, Grease AND Enlarge Person. He'll know one of those (let alone if he wants e.g. Mage Armor). Given the situational nature of many of said spells, it tends to be more convenient to prepare one of each and go with it. Simply lacking knowledge of a spell when you really need it hurts.

Tokuhara
2010-11-11, 03:40 PM
What you're not hearing from us in this thread is the resounding "it depends." We don't know what sources you have available, how readily your DM gives access to scrolls or attacks spellbooks, whether you have downtime (and if so, how much) etc.

While you certainly can decide between Wiz and Sorc without that information, you're flying at least a little blind.

Let's say low-none for scrolls, spellbooks, and downtime.

Psyren
2010-11-11, 03:43 PM
Let's say low-none for scrolls, spellbooks, and downtime.

Then sorcerer.

(It sounds like you already decided on it anyways :smalltongue:)

Tokuhara
2010-11-11, 03:47 PM
Then sorcerer.

(It sounds like you already decided on it anyways :smalltongue:)

Okay, so I was just seeing if more/less I had made a wise choice. I was debating on Spellthief 1/Sorcerer 5/Daggerspell Mage 10/Unseen Seer 4 as a kind of "Mage with a History of Violence"-type

ericgrau
2010-11-11, 03:50 PM
Think of this as a feature -- sorcerer doesn't hurt at all to PRC out of. Just make sure you swap your familiar for rapid metamagic.
Actually limits on feats and spell selection makes it harder to get into prcs. Basically you lose what few feats you have remaining to meet pre-reqs, and that may hurt. Being forced to know certain spells hurts even more, because it's harder to forget the spell later if you feel like it like a prepared caster. On any build do make sure to plan out the feats progression to make sure this won't be a problem.

Jack_Simth
2010-11-11, 04:05 PM
Sorry, but a Focused Specialist Wizard does not have this problem. Let's do the math.I'm curious: Did you read the sentence that came immediately after the one you quoted?

Eldariel
2010-11-11, 04:07 PM
Okay, so I was just seeing if more/less I had made a wise choice. I was debating on Spellthief 1/Sorcerer 5/Daggerspell Mage 10/Unseen Seer 4 as a kind of "Mage with a History of Violence"-type

Wouldn't you be better off going Spellthief 1/Sorcerer 4/Unseen Seer+Daggerspell ->? No reason to take the 5th level of Sorc since it literally grants no class features and Unseen Seer is perfectly enterable on 6.

Callista
2010-11-11, 04:20 PM
Depends on what you want to do with it.

Given your generic setting, a wizard is more powerful because he has access to more spells. Power isn't necessarily the ability to blast things to smithereens (though the wizard can do that, too); it's the fact that the wizard will probably have a spell for any given occasion and be able to solve a wide range of problems. The focus on Knowledge skills doesn't hurt, either; he'll be able to get access to more information than anybody else.

But for some things, you really do need a sorcerer. If your DM is prone to having more encounters per day than average, the sorcerer will last longer because he gets more spells. If your party needs a leader or a negotiator and you haven't got a rogue, bard, or paladin who can do it, the sorcerer makes a reasonable substitute for that because he's already got the charisma score. He won't have diplomacy, but he does have Bluff, and he can always cast spells like Charm Person if necessary. Unlike the wizard, he's not dependent on having a spellbook and access to an arcane library or loot from magic-using enemies to increase his repertoire. He does get access to higher-level spells more slowly, though, which delays entry into PrCs. A sorcerer is also more newbie-friendly because when a wizard has to take into account the full range of spells available to him--which can be huge even by fourth or fifth level--the sorcerer only has to know thoroughly the spells he can cast.

Vladislav
2010-11-11, 04:21 PM
I'm curious: Did you read the sentence that came immediately after the one you quoted?Read and ignored. You are just piling on assumptions in an artificial attempt to create a convoluted scenario when the sorcerer would be better.

The sorcerer is not better in the sense of power. It's a fact. Deal with it. It is playable, depending on what the player's goals are. It is, however, not more powerful than a Wizard, hardly under any set of assumptions outside the most severe anti-wizard campaign. It is, however, still more powerful than a Rogue, Fighter, Bard or Monk, and I guess that'll have to do.

However, since you made me reread, let me also comment on this.

The Sorcerer, having a greater number of spells per day, and a greater degree of flexibility what he uses a spell slot for, is not nearly as harmed by this.
Our friend, the level 6 Sorcerer, has the amazing flexibility of choosing among ONE 3rd level spell. That's it. One. If he took Fireball as his 3rd level spell, he can only cast Fireball.
For 2nd level spells, he can choose, oh, let's say between Glitterdust and Scorching Ray. Hurray for flexibility! I can cast either of TWO spells with my second level slot! I am so flexible! No, wait, I'm not.

Dr.Epic
2010-11-11, 04:24 PM
I'm an optimizer, and I prefer the sorcerer for its spontaneous casting ability. I hate having to prepare spells.

Would you rather not be able to cast the spell or have to wait and prepare the spell?

Honestly, unless I'm multiclassing and am taking a few levels in sorcerer for a PrC or just want some spells that'll help the main class, I go wizard. Let's not also forget the wizard bonus feats.

Callista
2010-11-11, 04:32 PM
Given a sorcerer with CHA 18 and a wizard with INT 18, both level 6:

The wizard can prepare and cast four 1st-level spells. He chooses from any number of spells, depending on how nice the DM is--anywhere from nine first-level spells to all of them--but he can only prepare four from that list.

The sorcerer can cast spontaneously seven 1st-level spells. He can choose these from a list of four spells that he knows. His theoretical maximum flexibility, just like the wizard's, is four different spells that day.

However, the wizard prepares his spells that morning. He may have no clue what he's getting into, or only a vague idea. If he hasn't prepared the right four spells, he'll have to rely on scrolls. Whereas, the sorcerer either knows the right four spells, or he doesn't, and there's no chance of preparing the "wrong" ones because he doesn't prepare them.

So the sorcerer wins out in a specific situation: Unpreparedness. In any given situation, without knowing what they'll be facing, the wizard and sorcerer will probably have access to the same general selection of spells. But the sorcerer will be able to cast them more often, and be able to cast a single spell seven times in a row, whereas the wizard can only cast the spell as often as he's prepared it.

But at higher levels, this situation doesn't come up. The high-level wizard, by definition, is prepared for everything.

Vladislav
2010-11-11, 04:37 PM
Given a sorcerer with CHA 18 and a wizard with INT 18, both level 6:

The wizard can prepare and cast four 1st-level spells. He chooses from any number of spells, depending on how nice the DM is--anywhere from nine first-level spells to all of them--but he can only prepare four from that list.
It seems you have given the Sorcerer his Charisma bonus spells, but didn't give the Wizard same for Int. Nor have you given him bonus spells for being a specialist. Or a focused specialist.

Callista
2010-11-11, 04:39 PM
I'm assuming he's not a specialist because that reduces his spell selection and brings him closer to the sorcerer in both versatility and spells per day.

Wizard at 6th level gets three 1st level spells plus one for 18 INT.

Vladislav
2010-11-11, 04:42 PM
I'm assuming he's not a specialist because that reduces his spell selection and brings him closer to the sorcerer in both versatility and spells per day.Nah, banning two schools, or even three, merely means you're down from potential ~30 spells of each level in your spellbook to ~20. Still way above the Sorcerer.

Callista
2010-11-11, 04:46 PM
Of course. The wizard will always have more spells to choose from than the sorcerer, even if he never finds a single scroll or spellbook in his entire career. But he has to choose from them when he prepares them, rather than when he casts them; so in the event that both are unprepared, the sorcerer has the advantage.

Look, I'm not saying the sorcerer's more powerful; I'm just saying that there does exist at least one situation where the sorcerer has the advantage.

Susano-wo
2010-11-11, 04:49 PM
or the time when you need, say 4 or spell X, and sorc knows it. Wiz probably didn't prep 4 of spell X, so the sorc will be more useful in that situation.

[also not arguing that sorceror is more powerful than wizard]

Kylarra
2010-11-11, 04:52 PM
It's worth pointing out that unless you need a certain spell /right now/, the wizard can just leave a spell slot open and prepare it for the right situation, as is the most case for non-time critical utility spell uses.

Though I concede that there does exist at least one situation where a given sorcerer will be more effective than a given wizard. :smalltongue: [/continuing the silly logic]

Susano-wo
2010-11-11, 04:54 PM
It's worth pointing out that unless you need a certain spell /right now/, the wizard can just leave a spell slot open and prepare it for the right situation, as is the most case for non-time critical utility spell uses.

Though I concede that there does exist at least one situation where a given sorcerer will be more effective than a given wizard. :smalltongue: [/continuing the silly logic]

I'm just saying, there have been times where I was glad I could spam transposition, that's all:smallbiggrin:

Psyren
2010-11-11, 04:55 PM
What's more important than effectiveness is playstyle. Wizards are amazing if you don't mind the bookkeeping. If flying by the seat of your pants is more your thing (nothing wrong with that at all) then be a Sorcerer.

Or you can get the best of both worlds and be an Erudite :smallbiggrin:

vrellum
2010-11-11, 05:49 PM
Since wizards are so heavily favored, I suppose they are stronger. But a well-made sorcerer has a lot of versatility and a lot of pop. One key is to not pick more than one damage dealing spell per level. For example, which would you rather have grease or magic missle. I know I'd rather have grease. Then use the fact that you can cast any spell you know many, many times and you don't have to sit around and study your spell book in order to do it.

Throw in energy sub and empower and the number of direct damage spells you need goes way down, even you like to blast.

A focused specialist has a lot of spells per day, but their breadth is reduced because of all the banned schools. So in someways they are more limited than a sorcerer.

A wizard could be like a hunter who has a 22 for squirrels, a shotgun with #4 shot for ducks, #6 for rabbits, and #8 for doves, a 22-250 for coyotes, a 30-30 for shooting deer in cover, a 7 mm remington mag for deer at long range, and a 338 winchester mag for elk. But he can't carry all of them at any given time and he has limited ammo because he must prepare each in advance.

A sorcerer is a hunter with a 22, 12 guage with #6 shot, and a 30-06. This guy doesn't have as many guns, but he can carry more ammo for each gun. Sometimes he won't have the best gun, but #6 shot works pretty darn good for ducks and doves... and a 30-06 kills coyotes, deer, and elk quite well.

Kylarra
2010-11-11, 05:59 PM
I'm not even wholly convinced that the focused specialist's lack of breadth is really an issue so long as they still have conjuration and transmutation. Of course, that's really just commentary on how the schools of magic aren't equally balanced and thus you can get away with banning several without significantly diminishing your versatility, but that's neither here nor there.

Psyren
2010-11-11, 06:03 PM
One key is to not pick more than one damage dealing spell per level. For example, which would you rather have grease or magic missle. I know I'd rather have grease.

You also have to be careful about analyzing these things in a vacuum. :smalltongue:

In certain campaigns (e.g. a ghost hunt, aquatic etc.) MM is probably going to be more useful than Grease. It just depends.

Jack_Simth
2010-11-11, 06:45 PM
Read and ignored.
Ah... so, you ignore the bit where I said "Yes, there's ways to negate this" (paraphrasing, there), and then went on to explain exactly how wrong I am, by using the sort of thing I was talking about? That's... interesting.

You are just piling on assumptions in an artificial attempt to create a convoluted scenario when the sorcerer would be better.Err... no, I'm saying "It depends", and listing a few things it depends on.

But just for laughs, I think I'm going to continue with this...

The sorcerer is not better in the sense of power. It's a fact.No, it's circumstantial. There's more, and more common, circumstances under which the wizard will be more effective in play than will the Sorcerer - totally true, and nowhere did I deny this. So overall, yes, the Wizard's going to be better. There are, however, circumstances under which you're better served with a Sorcerer.

Deal with it. It is playable, depending on what the player's goals are. It is, however, not more powerful than a Wizard, hardly under any set of assumptions outside the most severe anti-wizard campaign. It is, however, still more powerful than a Rogue, Fighter, Bard or Monk, and I guess that'll have to do.
Low-wealth is a flavor, as is 'rush'. It's not specifically anti-wizard. Likewise, sources available has more to do with the actual money of the players in most cases. Not that it matters.
Our friend, the level 6 Sorcerer, has the amazing flexibility of choosing among ONE 3rd level spell. That's it. One. If he took Fireball as his 3rd level spell, he can only cast Fireball.
For 2nd level spells, he can choose, oh, let's say between Glitterdust and Scorching Ray. Hurray for flexibility! I can cast either of TWO spells with my second level slot! I am so flexible! No, wait, I'm not.As you seem fond of multiple sources, I might point out that, outside of Core, there's quite a few different ways to get extra spells known, as a Sorcerer... oh yes, and they can be combined. The Bloodline feats from Dragon Compendium, the Mother Cyst feat from Libris Mortis, the Mage of the Arcane Order PrC, just as three examples. But of course, that goes back to sources permitted....

Even in Core, though, the Sorcerer loves metamagic. Sure, he's got Fireball (or likely something more useful, such as Slow or Stinking Cloud). But he's also got the option of a metamagic'd 1st or 2nd level spell. An Extended Glitterdust, maybe. And unlike the Wizard, the Sorcerer's options don't go down until he's out of his top tier of spell slots (and there's ways to keep them up, even past that - Versatile Spellcaster, namely). For the Wizard, every option used is one less option the next round, or the next fight. If you're doing the DMG-recommended four encounters per day, the Sorcerer is much more flexible on the 3rd and 4th encounter than is the Wizard.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-11-11, 07:20 PM
I'm playing a low level wizard in a rushed, low-downtime campaign with random illiquid wealth endowments that so far don't benefit casters. He's still far more powerful than if I played a sorcerer thanks to #4, various sources allowed. Collegiate Wizard + Focused Specialist really helps. I think you just need one of those four assumptions for wizards to start creeping ahead of sorcerers. At the very least the whole 'half spell level ahead' thing is huge at odd levels.

Of course, once the sorcerer starts breaking the action economy with Arcane Spellsurge he immediately catches up, but that's a seventh level spell. I personally don't play many 14th level campaigns, fewer that wouldn't frown on Arcane Spellsurge, but YMMV.

Optimator
2010-11-11, 07:42 PM
Wizard kicks the crap out of sorcerer. More versatility, same power, Int based for mad skillz.

jumpet
2010-11-11, 11:25 PM
Wizard kicks the crap out of sorcerer. More versatility, same power, Int based for mad skillz.

woah thats a pretty big statement. I understand all the reasons why wizard is considered better than a sorcerer, but its no such a big difference as you are implying.

Thurbane
2010-11-11, 11:43 PM
*Most* optimizers have a few assumptions underlying their builds:

0) RAW is law
1) Wealth-by-level
2) Lots of down-time between adventures
3) No particular time pressure during adventures
4) All sources available

Under those assumptions, the Wizard is better than the Sorcerer - by a lot.



Read and ignored. You are just piling on assumptions in an artificial attempt to create a convoluted scenario when the sorcerer would be better.
I would hardly call those variables "a convoluted scenario"...especially the time contraints. Almost every game I have played has some sort of time contraint or other. The perfect example is Red Hand of Doom - the clock is ticking against an invading army. You really don't have the luxury of sitting down to craft items. Depending on the pacing, you will barely have time to scribe spells into your book.

I firmly echo Jack's sentiment, that a lot of optimization choices can be heavily affected by campaign specifics. That's not to say that general op advice assuming a "generic" game isn't most often applicable, just that campaign specific variables are something to bear in mind.

Callista
2010-11-12, 12:03 AM
The sorcerer is a great deal more newbie-friendly, in any case. My first character was a sorcerer; and while I certainly didn't optimize her, she wasn't useless either. If she'd been a wizard, I imagine my inexperience would have shown through a great deal more; the sorcerer just has fewer ways to mess up.

Kylarra
2010-11-12, 12:07 AM
I would say that Jack is oversimplifying the cases though, since, while we are assuming things that aren't "particularly bad" for the sorcerer, other than #3, they don't significantly reduce the innate advantage the wizard has over the sorcerer anyway.

That is to say, even campaign dependent, the wizard is still the stronger of the two classes in general.

Scribing scrolls takes a negligible amount of time, you can scribe up to 4th level generally in a day, and the wizard still gets 2 spells known of his highest spell level before the sorc and knows 4 by the time the sorc gets their first one, as well as having int for more skills.

---------------
@Callista- I would respectfully disagree, with the caveat that if an experienced player is helping you choose your spell list, then I agree.

Deth Muncher
2010-11-12, 12:42 AM
I'm just gonna go ahead and leave this (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2180.0) here for you. Take it as you will.

Psyren
2010-11-12, 12:45 AM
The sorcerer is a great deal more newbie-friendly, in any case. My first character was a sorcerer; and while I certainly didn't optimize her, she wasn't useless either. If she'd been a wizard, I imagine my inexperience would have shown through a great deal more; the sorcerer just has fewer ways to mess up.

It's actually easier to mess up a sorcerer than a wizard. If a wizard learns the wrong spells the worst he has to contend with is a trip to the magic shop, and maybe a spellbook he has to shove to the back of his shelf or the bottom of his haversack. The sorcerer who screws up is stuck, barring the handful of spells they can switch out every 4 levels.

Psions have it easiest (past level 7 anyway.)

Endarire
2010-11-12, 02:03 AM
Wizard, unless you're doing some spiffy stuff with Sorcerer-only material. Consider how many spells a Sorcerer knows. Consider how many spells a Wizard can know, and can swap them between days.

DementedFellow
2010-11-12, 02:30 AM
Sorry, but a Focused Specialist Wizard does not have this problem. Let's do the math.

Sorcerer level 6, Cha 16: 7 spells level 1, 6 spells level 2, 4 spells level 3
Wizard level 6, Int 16: 6 spells level 1, 6 spells level 2, 4 spells level 3
Okay, I admit, the Wizard get's one less level 1 spell, but on levels 2 and 3 it's equal.


I may mistaken but isn't Focused Specialist Wizard existing outside of core? Complete Mage right?

If this is the case, then why bring it up as a point which somehow invalidates Jack Smith's message when books are restricted?

Captainocaptain
2010-11-12, 02:30 AM
Almost everyone seems to sing the praise of a wizard.
In the usual campaign settings (ie: heroes going after something evil) a sorcerer is almost always better. Yes, if you want to go insane with planning you can be a wizard, but honestly, who does that?
Let me craft a scenario for you:
A wizard and a sorcerer are adventuring in different dungeons, they are both aware that they may face arcane casters in the dungeon. It is midday and both have used about 1/2 of their spells per day of each level.
Now, these two are of opposing alignment, they meet in the dungeon and mediately begin fighting. Who wins?
The answer: about 90% of the time, the sorcerer. With more spells per day overall (usually), and the ability to cast ANY spell he knows with a spellslot, the wizard is at a clear disadvantage.

EDIT: I would also like to point out that, for the most part, you will be unable to scry, divine, or whatever any information about your enemies in a campaign. The wizard usually has to prepare spells with the idea that he could be fighting a variety of different things.
Wizards tend to die a lot faster than Sorcerers. Yes you CAN be more versatile and do everything... but you wont. you cant. And that one spell that would have saved you right now, you did not prepare.

Skaven
2010-11-12, 02:32 AM
Wizard = Batman, tier 1, has access to everything.

Sorcerer = Robin, gets what he is given / chooses from Batman. Tier 2.

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0

Captainocaptain
2010-11-12, 02:52 AM
Wizard = Batman, tier 1, has access to everything.

Sorcerer = Robin, gets what he is given / chooses from Batman. Tier 2.

There is one major flaw in that assessment, Batman has ACCESS to everything, but can only bring a handful of it with him. Robin has access to the same stuff as batman, but gets to take two handfuls. The only restriction is, Batman can go back to the batcave and change what he picked once per day, Robin has to stick with his choices. BUT- while batman choses a grappling hook, and he has to pick how many he brings and that cuts into the other stuff he can bring, Robin has access to hammer-space and can pull grappling hooks or fishing lines out of his utility belt and is not limited to deciding how many to bring, because its interchangeable.

In conclusion:
Wizard- You have a list of spells 100 pages long. You have to choose, from that list spells to fill your spell slots. You have 20 spell slots, each must be assigned a spell. You do not get to change your mind for 24 hours.
Sorcerer- You have a list of spells like 20 pages long. You never have to chose which ones to fill your spell slots. You have maybe 22 spell slots (a little more than wizard), but those 22 spell slots can be used for ANY spell you know.

Wizards are great, but not omnipresent. A high Intelligence and access to a lot of magic does not mean you know what you will be facing or make the proper judgement of what to use.

[Sorry for the rant, it just really ticks me off that so many people think wizards are the alpha and the omega of arcane magic. Hell, I bet that a bard could beat a wizard, if neither knew the fight was coming]

EDIT: sorry to add on, but, to paraphrase Xykon: Having a lot of spells does not equal power.

Souhiro
2010-11-12, 03:17 AM
When you optimize, you must think WHAT your character will do.

A Wizard is superb when you want to make potions or wondrous items, since they know all the spells they need. Plus they got spells one level early. And even they have a feat every few levels.

But the Sorcerer is a kind of machine-gun of the very few spells he know.

Optimizing, I would encourage you to do a Sorcerer - Arcane trickster or a Sorcerer-Incantatrix or Better Sorcered:Guild Mage(Try to bargain with you GM about the "XP Tribute" clause) The sorcerer don't get anything but spells when he gains a new level, so every level above which isn't PrC is a waste.

The Trickster part goes because as you're a Sorcerer, you will have a very high CHA, and trickstering grants you access to Use Magic Item Skill: Whoa. Now you can a way bypass the weakness of your class!

The Guild Mage goes about the Spell Vault: You can ask for the spell you want żNeed a Remove Curse, but you choose Enervation? No problem. And since the Sorcerers get a lot of spells per Lvl, you can be in peace with the guild an have a positive ballance in your spell accounting.


The Incantatrix is just a good class, but if you play good your cards and reach high levels of Incantatrix, you can have the dreadful Maximiced Quickened Dissintegrate (Plus another Dissintegrate), that even the Tarrasque fears.

DementedFellow
2010-11-12, 03:30 AM
A lot of people say that the wizard is totally awesome and crazy prepared because they use divination spells to know what is coming up that day and can prepare.

Let's look at the divination spells in Core:

0- Level
Detect Poison: Yep, it's poisoned.
Detect Magic: Yep, it's magical. Also you can tell what school of magic and if areas you enter are magical in nature. Whoop di doo. Most DMs will hint at that if it will feature later on anyway.

1- Level

Comprehend Languages: Only useful if there is a sign which says, "This way there be Dragons" in some obscure language.
Detect Secret Doors: Yep, there is a secret door here. What's behind the door? No idea.
Detect Undead: Slightly more useful in spell selection. But look at the range. By that time, you can just look at the shambling zombie coming your way and figure out that it's a zombie looming closer to you.
Identify: Useful, but not in spell selection for that day's encounters.
True Strike: Useful again, but if you plan on damaging something, chances are you're preparing this spell anyway.

2- Level
Detect Thoughts: Yep, it's thinking... about food.
Locate Object: I don't know how this would help you prepare unless you know exactly what a lich's phylactery looks like.
See Invisibility: Okay, moderately useful. But if you're at the point where you are so paranoid about ghosts shanking you, then chances are you'd prepare spells that would damage them anyway, like magic missile.

3- Level
Arcane Sight: Useless in preparation. Yep, it's magical.
Clairaudience/Clairvoyance: Alright here we go. Only you need to be intimately familiar with the area. So that dungeon you're delving into, or the BBEG's bedroom typically won't be available to be seen. Oh yeah, darkness and a door can nullify any effect you're trying to achieve in regards to peeking at what's around the corner in the dungeon.
Tongues: I imagine inventive players could find a use to make this work on any sort of animal that is nearby or something. I'm on the fence because it says any intelligent creature. This is the first one what MAY be helpful and it's entirely up to the DM as to whether or not you'll encounter something that will be helpful to you.


4- Level
Arcane Eye: Alright! Finally usefulness. Only it can be blocked by a door. And it has a 10 minute casting time. Some adventurers like to break camp before noon.
Detect Scrying: Oh no, someone is scrying me! Slightly effective and beneficial. You get to see them, but most BBEG either don't see you as a threat or pretty much know what you're doing anyway.
Locate Creature: Unless you know some pretty specific things, worthless.
Scrying: Horrible spell, with a casting time of 1 hour.


5- Level
Contact Other Plane: This is the alleged win button as far as optimizers go. One poster even said a dedicated wizard would learn about nuclear physics with enough application of this spell. But they seem to forget the beings don't like being contacted and bothered and can lie or be completely ignorant of your situation.
Prying Eyes: Awesome spell for dungeon diving, unless there is darkness, illusions or, you know, doors. Which as we all know are never in dungeons.
Telepathic Bond: Not a bad spell, but not awesome for foreknowledge of your day to come.


6- Level
Analyze Dweomer: I've never seen this spell on anyone's spell list ever. As such I can only assume it is either not used, of an inappropriate level, or just something my groups have utilized. Doesn't look particularly useful to predicting what spells to prepare today.
Legend Lore: Bards do it better. And faster. Casting times range from at best 10 minutes, to at worst, 12 weeks.
True Seeing: Pretty awesome. But still cannot see through those pesky doors.


7- Level
Arcane Sight, Greater: Just about as worthless as Arcane Sight.
Scrying, Greater: Allows you to reliably use other Detect spells and the like while Scrying, but you have to cast them as well to gain that benefit.
Vision: Bards do it better. At best you gain a vision. And you still lose 100 XP.


8- Level
Discern Location: Let's hope you know what Kobold's #3's name is. And if you did, chances are the spell would tell you what you already know, as it only reveals the location, not the layout of the place.
Moment of Prescience: Not helpful in prognostication of today's events.
Prying Eyes, Greater: Alright now we are talking! Still, doors can be an issue.


9- Level
Foresight: Not being flatfooted is awesome. But still, it doesn't help you predict what you'll face that day.


Keep in mind when I say a spell is worthless or useless I simply mean in spell selection to know what you'll face that day. Certainly even the most ingenious of players can come up with wonderful uses of these spells, but they don't grab me. More often than not, a DOOR is all it takes to block Divination.

Souhiro
2010-11-12, 05:48 AM
As I Said, everyone has pros and cons.

Wizard: Pros: You can prepare for the day. If you are going to stay in the big city for a while, you will prepare most divinations (The vizir only says lies! He kidnapped the princess!) and when you're going for the big bad guy, you''ll get a ton of evocations.
Also, The "Crafter" is better a Wizard or a Cleric, since they surely will know the spell needed for making ANY item. I.E. A Sorcerer had to choose between Mage Armor and Shield, so he only can make "Broochs of Shielding" or "Bracers of Armor". The Wizard can get both of them and make everything is needed.
They need INT, which is great for your Skill Points. Also, they get more Skill Classes, and most of them, based on INT.
Every 5 levels, a feat. At least, is something!

Cons: Less spells per day. Sure, they can go happily to especialice and get a free spell of their school, but they are losing their versatility, which is their great strengh.
Also, they can give headaches to the GM. "Darn... I was counting with the wizard preparing THIS spell! / Darn, this is an anticlimatic end for the campaing, just because he used the X spell!".



Sorc:
Pros: Many spells per day
They can have a happier GM.
They have a class who just screams "PrC Me!"


Noobs:
They get their spells a level later than the wizard.
They won't even get the wizard's feat every 5 levels.
Since their powers comes from their CHA, they have the WORST amount of skills points. They will suffer a lot when going epic since that.
They only have a Skill bassed on CHA (Bluff)
They are given proficiency with simple weapons, what is just an insult, since they won't have BAB to hit anything, nor HP to resist the sneeze of a kobold.


Our Sorcerer (in 3P), with Cha-20, Racist modifiers to Bluff being half-Elf, Skill Focus: Bluff, skill points to the very same skill, and the very same player being a very convincing person, was able to talk out from many situations! "Yes, I'm one of the messengers of the King. My clothes? I'm here in an undercover mission, since at least ONE has to reach the King. The others are just my cover. Give me a room, since you will be giving a room to the King". (Rolls Dice: eleven, plus twelve, and plus three for RP with the bartender = Even his friends started to believe that story)

Psyren
2010-11-12, 09:14 AM
A lot of people say that the wizard is totally awesome and crazy prepared because they use divination spells to know what is coming up that day and can prepare.

There's also, you know, spells that are just a good idea to have prepared no matter what you're up against. You can ALWAYS find a use for Alter Self.


Contact Other Plane: This is the alleged win button as far as optimizers go. One poster even said a dedicated wizard would learn about nuclear physics with enough application of this spell. But they seem to forget the beings don't like being contacted and bothered and can lie or be completely ignorant of your situation.

That's correct - spells don't work if the DM keeps them from working. Congratulations, you have unraveled D&D's complex tapestry :smalltongue:

Lans
2010-11-12, 09:38 AM
It really comes down to power vs versatility.
Kobold Loredrake vs That feat that lets the wizard spontaneously cast from his spell book INT times per day.

Tharck
2010-11-12, 09:51 AM
I'd have to agree, Wizard is a good pick if you know the spells well. Sorc is more newbie friendly.

FMArthur
2010-11-12, 10:55 AM
The variety available in your highest-level slots is the biggest example of the power disparity. It's an enormously big deal that a wizard can prepare 2-4 different spells of the most powerful spells currently available a level earlier than a Sorceror acquires his ability to cast one of those 3 times. At levels where Sorcerors get to cast a new level of spells, they only get as many uses as a core specialist wizard has at that level anyway. Having different spells provides better coverage for unexpected circumstances, and in cases where you need to whip out the big guns and cast multiple highest-level spells in an encounter, casting a variety of spells is usually going to be more helpful than the same one repeatedly. This difference in versatility only widens when bonus spells from ability scores are considered.

The gap widens further when you consider the number of wizard-centric options outside of core that Sorcerors struggle to acquire or simply don't get at all; many good "arcane caster" prestige classes consider only Wizard entry or favour it heavily, by asking for skills the Sorceror doesn't have, requiring spell levels they get late, or just making things a little more difficult by requiring Spell Focus (school) or a school specialization. Focused Specialist wizards get more high-level spell uses than Sorcerors (CM). They can give up their familiars for Immediate Magic (PHII) and specialist wizard variants (UA). Sorcerors can worsen their spellcasting disadvantage to get more HP and attack with weapons poorly (CM), cripple it brutally to cast in armor and attack with weapons decently (UA), and give up their familiars to shore up their metamagic disadvantage (PHII).

Sorcerors are great. They are overpowered, they are cool, they are harder to plan but require less ongoing work, and they have far more options and "I win" buttons than any mundane classes. But Wizards do make them look weak by comparison, make no mistake.

Kylarra
2010-11-12, 10:59 AM
It really comes down to power vs versatility.
Kobold Loredrake vs That feat that lets the wizard spontaneously cast from his spell book INT times per day.I... don't think Uncanny Forethought is on the same level of cheese (it doesn't even ping my cheesedar) as a Kobold Loredrake, but YMMV? :smallconfused:

FMArthur
2010-11-12, 11:08 AM
It really comes down to power vs versatility.
Kobold Loredrake vs That feat that lets the wizard spontaneously cast from his spell book INT times per day.

Kobold Loredrake is incredible cheese, and the process through which you acquire it is, while RAW allowed, a tenuous and obviously abusive connection. You'd only be able to play it if your DM didn't ask you to explain it. :smalltongue:

Under real and normal gameplay circumstances from low-op to high-op, the difference between a Wizard and Sorceror isn't power vs versatility; Wizards have both. Sorcerors are just less work and less paperwork, and that's all. Sometimes that's all you wanted anyway.

BeholderSlayer
2010-11-12, 11:17 AM
I agree that Loredrake is cheesy, but I don't really care so much if a player wants to go venerable dragonwrought with dragonspawn and Greater Draconic Rite of Passage. Getting two free levels of sorcerer is powerful, but not absurd. Four free levels is pretty absurd.

Of course, when I'm a player I want the DM to allow Loredrake :smallbiggrin:

grimbold
2010-11-12, 11:20 AM
sorcerer=more fun slightly less OP
wizard=OP
thats it IMO

DementedFellow
2010-11-12, 11:35 AM
There's also, you know, spells that are just a good idea to have prepared no matter what you're up against. You can ALWAYS find a use for Alter Self.



That's correct - spells don't work if the DM keeps them from working. Congratulations, you have unraveled D&D's complex tapestry :smalltongue:

I guess my point is that there is really no such thing as a crazy prepared wizard when it's just Core involved. If there are great all-purpose spells that the Wizard can choose from, what prevents the Sorcerer from also learning these great all-purpose spells? Granted there is a limit to spells known for a Sorcerer, but certain spells provide a duplication of services.

And about Contact Other Plane not working, it's kinda short-sighted to suppose from a CharOp standpoint that all answers you receive will be helpful instead of harmful. I wouldn't bank on it, but that's just me.

BeholderSlayer
2010-11-12, 11:41 AM
And about Contact Other Plane not working, it's kinda short-sighted to suppose from a CharOp standpoint that all answers you receive will be helpful instead of harmful. I wouldn't bank on it, but that's just me.

TO methods involve asking the same question multiple times, statistically reducing the chance for wrong information to near zero.

FMArthur
2010-11-12, 11:51 AM
Let's say no planning-related divinations exist at all; I never bother with that anyway and I doubt a whole lot of people do it either. So both Wizards and Sorcerors are preparing for general utility. A Sorceror is going to be less prepared than a wizard for exceptional circumstances, because a wizard is able to have between 3 and 5 different spells in his highest level slots as opposed to 4 of the same spell. A Sorceror just has to make his preparations much further back (ie: the time he gained new spells known), making planning actually more difficult than for a Wizard, even if he has to do it less often.

Daily preparation is more busywork than playing a spontaneous caster but on the whole it's easier than having to pick your small number of spells known at level-up, and not as disastrous if you pick the wrong ones.

DementedFellow
2010-11-12, 11:56 AM
TO methods involve asking the same question multiple times, statistically reducing the chance for wrong information to near zero.

If one wastes several spells in preparation, then doesn't that defeat the point of "HAHA! I have more spells than a sorcerer!"? Heaven help you if the thing you are contacting doesn't know and just makes stuff up. Aside from that, unless you have meta-knowledge that the spell works correctly X% of the time, then how can you say in-character that asking the same question 3 times will enable you to know what the right answer is?

And keep in mind that the casting time is 10 minutes. There are plenty of times when characters get rudely awakened in all sorts of manners.

When talking about TO, people seem to think that everything is peaches and cream and the DM spoonfeeds the players/characters. They get however many weeks it takes to create their special items, every town has a magic mart and XP is given based on level, instead of standard XP across the board. So to say that something will work in the best case scenario does little to sway my opinion that it's not a helpful spell.

DementedFellow
2010-11-12, 12:06 PM
Let's say no planning-related divinations exist at all; I never bother with that anyway and I doubt a whole lot of people do it either. So both Wizards and Sorcerors are preparing for general utility. A Sorceror is going to be less prepared than a wizard for exceptional circumstances, because a wizard is able to have between 3 and 5 different spells in his highest level slots as opposed to 4 of the same spell. A Sorceror just has to make his preparations much further back (ie: the time he gained new spells known), making planning actually more difficult than for a Wizard, even if he has to do it less often.

Daily preparation is more busywork than playing a spontaneous caster but on the whole it's easier than having to pick your small number of spells known at level-up, and not as disastrous if you pick the wrong ones.

But both are preparing for general utility, as you said. With this supposition would they not have some overlap in spells known for both? Certain spells lend themselves to versatility more than others. Alter Self can give you wings or water-breathing or even a good hide skill modifier if need be.

Wizards are a better class overall. But my original point was that when sources are restricted, the gap narrows especially in regard to the "My Batman Wizard knows specifically what is going down today and therefore has prepared spells that are specifically tailored to an easy win."

BeholderSlayer
2010-11-12, 12:24 PM
If one wastes several spells in preparation, then doesn't that defeat the point of "HAHA! I have more spells than a sorcerer!"? Heaven help you if the thing you are contacting doesn't know and just makes stuff up. Aside from that, unless you have meta-knowledge that the spell works correctly X% of the time, then how can you say in-character that asking the same question 3 times will enable you to know what the right answer is?
I think it would be a little silly if a wizard didn't know how their spells worked. That's not meta-knowledge, that's character knowledge.

Also, speaking from a TO perspective, the wizard is casting COP on down days when they have little else to do, they aren't casting it out in the field while adventuring.


And keep in mind that the casting time is 10 minutes. There are plenty of times when characters get rudely awakened in all sorts of manners.
Again, only speaking from a TO perspective, the wizard is casting COP either in a safe, secluded place or he is casting it from his personal demiplane where nobody else can get to him.


When talking about TO, people seem to think that everything is peaches and cream and the DM spoonfeeds the players/characters. They get however many weeks it takes to create their special items, every town has a magic mart and XP is given based on level, instead of standard XP across the board. So to say that something will work in the best case scenario does little to sway my opinion that it's not a helpful spell.
Disregarding the whole bit about TO (yes, I know it's not practical, that's why it's called theoretical optimization), COP can still be a useful spell. As stated earlier in the thread, you can find out things like "who stole the artifact?" and "where is the artifact that was stolen?" Not all uses of the spell need to be "What is the first name of the next person that will try to kill me?"

Is there a chance that you might get wrong or no information? Yes. There's nothing stopping you from contacting other deity to double-check your answers.

COP, when used as it should be, isn't that big of a deal. A DM ought to be able to deal with it, and by the time the PC's get the spell a DM should know that they are high enough level that they shouldn't be doing mundane things like manually gathering information. A DM shouldn't design a campaign that assumes players will do dumb things like walking (instead of flying or teleporting) or gathering information manually (instead of just divining it) at level 9.

FMArthur
2010-11-12, 01:24 PM
But both are preparing for general utility, as you said. With this supposition would they not have some overlap in spells known for both? Certain spells lend themselves to versatility more than others. Alter Self can give you wings or water-breathing or even a good hide skill modifier if need be.

Wizards are a better class overall. But my original point was that when sources are restricted, the gap narrows especially in regard to the "My Batman Wizard knows specifically what is going down today and therefore has prepared spells that are specifically tailored to an easy win."

And I agree with you with regard to Contact Other Plane theory. Divinations like that require more DM work, waste more time, and generally hover pretty close to the metagaming line despite not quite going over it. It's not anywhere near typical circumstances and is pretty much outside of the scope of this thread's discussion, which is on whether Wizards are more powerful than Sorcerors in actual play.

But I disagree that the gap is smaller for the lack of this. The Wizard/Sorceror power disparity really is quite large and noticable with just core, despite getting much worse outside of it. That was really the point I was making. Half of the time, the wizard just plain has bigger guns available than the Sorceror even has access to, and significantly so due to the way spell levels seem to scale power-wise.

In a party with a Wizard and Sorceror, this scenario recurs with incremental severity over the course of a campaign:

At third level a Wizard casts Web and effectively ends an encounter. The next encounter is just as suitable for Web, but the Wizard says he doesn't have another... so the party looks to the Sorceror, who can only shrug in response. They both cast Grease instead. The Wizard also casts Invisibility that day on someone to sneak around better than the Rogue can, and completely cripples some creatures in another combat with Glitterdust, while also contributing 1st level spells alongside the Sorceror the rest of the time, which have less powerful effects. The Sorceror's sole advantage is having 6 1st level spells to a Wizard's 4.

At fourth level, the Sorceror is actually able to cast spells on the same tier as the Wizard. But he only gets to cast his one second-level spell 4 times, while Wiz prepares 4 different ones. Sorc picks up Glitterdust and nullifies a few threats in one day. They both throw around the weaker 1st level spells, which Sorc gets two more of. Wiz casts Web, Glitterdust, Protection From Arrows, and uses a cheap Lesser Metamagic Rod of Extend that day to make the party safe for the night with a Rope Trick. The Wizard is able to help his party more.

This 2-level cycle repeats and the power gap becomes more and more apparent as their maximum level spells get even stronger relative to the previous level. Half of the time the Wizard has game-changing abilities that the Sorceror simply doesn't and can't replicate. The other half of the time, the Wizard is able to solve a much wider variety of problems in addition to combat encounters, and has the option of emulating the Sorceror with his highest-level spells by preparing 4x one spell if he feels like it, and he can because the Sorceror does not even get more highest-level spell slots than the Wizard except at levels 1, 2, and 20.

BeholderSlayer
2010-11-12, 02:30 PM
As DM, I let sorcerers know one more spell per sorcerer level, PrC's count. The highest level spell they can select is the highest level available to them when they take a new level. It helps a lot. I'm not going to say it equalizes the playing field, but it helps.

Kylarra
2010-11-12, 02:39 PM
As DM, I let sorcerers know one more spell per sorcerer level, PrC's count. The highest level spell they can select is the highest level available to them when they take a new level. It helps a lot. I'm not going to say it equalizes the playing field, but it helps.I don't think that you'll get any disagreement that a houserule that gives sorcs 20 more spells known is going to increase their power. :smalltongue:

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-11-12, 04:27 PM
Almost everyone seems to sing the praise of a wizard.
In the usual campaign settings (ie: heroes going after something evil) a sorcerer is almost always better. Yes, if you want to go insane with planning you can be a wizard, but honestly, who does that?
Let me craft a scenario for you:
A wizard and a sorcerer are adventuring in different dungeons, they are both aware that they may face arcane casters in the dungeon. It is midday and both have used about 1/2 of their spells per day of each level.
Now, these two are of opposing alignment, they meet in the dungeon and mediately begin fighting. Who wins?
The answer: about 90% of the time, the sorcerer. With more spells per day overall (usually), and the ability to cast ANY spell he knows with a spellslot, the wizard is at a clear disadvantage.

EDIT: I would also like to point out that, for the most part, you will be unable to scry, divine, or whatever any information about your enemies in a campaign. The wizard usually has to prepare spells with the idea that he could be fighting a variety of different things.
Wizards tend to die a lot faster than Sorcerers. Yes you CAN be more versatile and do everything... but you wont. you cant. And that one spell that would have saved you right now, you did not prepare.At odd levels the wizard wins your scenario much more often due to higher level spell access. At even levels the wizard still likely has saved most of his "big guns" for the bigger fight ahead (casters, egads!), and on an even (both are surprised) encounter footing that point it's mostly down to lucky rolls, but it's worth pointing out that the wizard will *still* have better highest-spell-level options if he has just two of those slots left.

In the even more contrived, sorcerer-favoring scenario of no WBL, core only, no allowance for preparedness, no spellbook adds, and 1/2 spells missing, the wizard is still a half spell level ahead. That by itself is a boon to optimizers and non-optimizers alike. Let's take the case of a core specialist wizard and a core sorcerer with 18s in their respective casting stats and all the above restrictions, at level 7 to emphasize the difference in half-spell-level disparity.

The wizard has six level 1 slots, five level 2 slots, four level 3 slots, and three level 4 slots to start the day. Some of these slots have to be filled with the same spells known, since our poor wizard only has four level 2 spells known and two level 4 spells known. The sorcerer has seven level 1 slots, seven level 2 slots, and five level three slots to start the day. That's *one* more spell slot in total, most of that being gains in second level spell slots.

After half of a long day of adventuring, both of our brave arcanists have expended nine spell slots - 4 from first level, 3 from second level, and 2 from third level. This is reasonable for the wizard because he would likely save his big guns for the later fights. This still leaves the sorcerer with ten spells known, but eight of those spells are first and second level. The wizard, after casting nine spells, still has eight spells known, two of which are fourth level. I'll just note that Black Tentacles has a grapple modifier of +15 at this level. Our sorcerer and wizard both have 3 BaB, and strength is a common caster dump stat.

BeholderSlayer
2010-11-12, 05:51 PM
I don't think that you'll get any disagreement that a houserule that gives sorcs 20 more spells known is going to increase their power. :smalltongue:

I would hope not. I didn't expect to be disagreed with, just threw out my take on it.

Captainocaptain
2010-11-14, 11:41 PM
I have one argument against wizards that no one seems to have considered.

Wizard: I have prepared for this encounter all day! I have every spell I could possibly need.
*Enemy turns invisible*
Party: Good thing you prepared for this right!
Wizard: errr...
Party: So what do you have See Invisibility? Glitterdust?
Wizard: Actually, I did not prepare those spells today...
Party: We thought you had found out everything about this person!
Wizard: I did not expect him to drink a potion of Invisibility!
*enemy kills wizard while back is turned*

Same Scenario with a Sorcerer.
Sorcerer: I have only 2 uses of my 2nd level spells.
Party: What did you pick?
Sorcerer: Glitterdust, it blinds enemies and outlines invisible enemies, its the best choice there.
*enemy turns invisible*
Sorcerer:Glitterdust!
*enemy can now be seen*
*Party kills enemy*

EDIT: Forgot a conclusion: Wizards are great, but Sorcerers are not nearly as underrated as everyone makes them out to be. They are not the Wizards less attractive little brother, they are, by and far, the wizards equal when it comes to adventuring. Both can screw up, and both have their shining moments, but wizards tend to have more opportunity to screw it up, and,outside of character creation, a wizard's mistakes are more likely to get him killed (usually from not preparing the right spells, or running out too soon.)
I love playing both wizards and sorcerers, but really guys. WIZARDS ARE NOT AS GREAT AS YOU THINK!!!

Jarian
2010-11-14, 11:46 PM
So, in this scenario, the Wizard conveniently forgets to pack a single spell slot with a means of detecting invisible creatures, but the Sorcerer thought ahead enough to burn a known spell on one?

Something's fishy.

Captainocaptain
2010-11-14, 11:48 PM
You are told you are fighting one person, who can not use magic. Do you really think he is going to become invisible?!

As for the sorcerer: Can you honestly tell me that a sorcerer would not know glitterdust? really? Its arguably the most useful 2nd level spell out there for combat!

EDIT: Also, the scenario I presented is, I think, fairly straightforward. I do not think it is slanted towards either character really.
(No: just because you think that the sorcerer or wizard is doing something that they would not do in a reasonable situation does not mean you are right.)
Also, if the highest level spells you have access to are 2nd level, and you have a whole 2 spell slots for 2nd level spells, are YOU going to waste one of them detecting invisibility?

Kylarra
2010-11-14, 11:56 PM
You generally have scrolls for utility spells. No one is saying that sorcerer can't contribute, simply that in general, the wizard is the stronger of the two classes. A single scenario does not change this.

Jarian
2010-11-15, 12:00 AM
As for the sorcerer: Can you honestly tell me that a sorcerer would not know glitterdust? really? Its arguably the most useful 2nd level spell out there for combat!

That's not what I was trying to say at all. I just find it odd that you arbitrarily remove it from the Wizard's prepared spells (despite being a multiuse Save-or-Suck), yet the Sorcerer in this situation happens to know it.

I haven't run into many Sorcerers in my day who didn't know it, but I've run into even fewer Wizards that didn't prep at least one copy a day.

Edit:


Also, if the highest level spells you have access to are 2nd level, and you have a whole 2 spell slots for 2nd level spells, are YOU going to waste one of them detecting invisibility?

No, I'm going to use one of them for blinding a group of foes and making everything all shiny and pretty so my allies can see them.

Also, your hypothetical sorcerer at this level only has one level 2 spell known.

And it happens to be a means of detecting invisibility.

I smell bias.

Edit2: Also x2, said Wizard probably shouldn't be a Wizard if he doesn't have at least one bonus 2nd level slot. Just saying.

And that's not even getting into the issue of specializing/focused specialists.

jumpet
2010-11-15, 12:25 AM
Why do so many people keep saying sorcerer's are for noobs?

I say its the opposite. It takes a veteran player to carefully select the sorcerer's precious spells known spots to maximum effect.

wizards are for noobs, sorcerer's for the skilled player.

Souhiro
2010-11-15, 09:38 AM
Well, I find the Sorceror can overcome his weakness (Lack of Versatility) With the "Mage of the Arcane Order" PrC. It REALLY was created with mages in mind (They get A SPELL FOR THE SPELLBOOK as a class benefict?) But when the SpellVault comes to play, He can ask for whatever spell he needs.

A "Sorcerer of the Arcane Order" has the "I Win" moves of a wizard, but can do it even more times!

(for the "Write a Spell" feature, for the Sorcerers I would Homebrew something like giving "Eschew Materials", "Spell Focus", "Magical Aptitude", or a single spell to their sorcerer repertoire.)

Eldariel
2010-11-15, 09:49 AM
You are told you are fighting one person, who can not use magic. Do you really think he is going to become invisible?!

I'd say it's pretty obvious that every character in the world can become invisible. But even if not, Glitterdust is a superb offensive spell anyways especially against those with poor Will-saves so yeah, you'd have it prepared alright.

It's a bit bothersome when someone outright comes and says the people who are of opinion X just clearly haven't thought about things enough. There's a...reason pretty much the whole of Char Ops considers Wizards ultimately superior to Sorcerers (hint: that ˝ level is rather huge). Trust me, we've spent quite a few years figuring these things out.


And yes, Sorcerers are for "newbies" in the sense that you only need to craft one good generic list while Wizard needs to craft a generic skeleton with specific exceptions daily. In other words, Sorcerers are easier. Doesn't make them easy, but they are comparatively easier. Yes, Sorc selection is really important and it takes know-how not to screw it up; and you need to know what trades you're making each level. But a Wizard does the same process every day.

And yes, Wizard's screw-ups don't carry nearly as lasting damage as Sorc screw ups since Wizards get to redo their selection every day, but that's more or less eclipsed by the fact that having to redo their selection daily makes constant screw-ups and subtle mistakes very likely.

Mastikator
2010-11-15, 10:06 AM
Wizards get a scribe scroll and 4 bonus feats and advance spell levels faster.

For example, at level 6 with 18 base stat, this is what they'll have:
sorc: spells/day: 6/7/6/4, known: 7/4/2/1, 3 feats total + familiar, 18 skill points (assuming 10 int & no racial bonus), the sorcerer only gets one skill based on charisma (bluff). The sorcerer can spontaneously add metamagic, which is pretty sweet, the spell cast time is increased to full round, but it's worth it imo
wiz: spells/day: 4/4/4/3, known: all/9/4/4 (plus any that the wizard has scribed), 3 feats + familiar + 1 wizard feat + scribe scroll, 54 skill points (assuming 18 int & no racial bonus), all magic / knowledge related skills are int based (except use magic device), the wizard gets them all (not umd). the wizard has to apply metamagic when preparing spells.

In conclusion, the sorcerer gets more spells per day, and can apply metamagic willynilly, but doesn't get many options really.
The wizard can choose spells freely, moreso than the sorcerer despite spontaneous spellcasting, and has more skills (and more relevant skills with a more relevant base ability) and more feats.

The sorcerer is a blaster, the wizard is a utility caster/controller.

zimmerwald1915
2010-11-15, 10:19 AM
The sorcerer is a blaster, the wizard is a utility caster/controller.
It's true that a Sorcerer generally isn't the greatest utility caster, given that he needs usually to spend his spells known on other things. Except in a small number of situations, you wouldn't give a sorcerer, say, Knock. But you might give him Teleport. And you could easily give him the Summon Monster line and have him work off his summons' SLAs for utility. Even with all that, however, the Wizard is still better at utility, given that he can pick the situational, specialized spells that he's sure will come up that day, and doesn't have to worry about that spell the next, when it will be useless. PLUS he can do everything utility-wise that a Sorcerer can do.

However, utility and control are not the same thing, and the Sorcerer can be a great controller. There are a few really strong, versitile control spells that practically make up the bulk of the discipline: the Clouds, the Walls, Summon Monster, Grease, Web, Black Tentacles, and the like. The Sorcerer, despite his weaknesses compared to the Wizard, is not necessarily a blaster, and that's certainly not how he can be most effective.

Souhiro
2010-11-15, 12:36 PM
Well, to Mastikator. I won't quote your post. You only need to see what Pathfinder did to the Sorcerers.

In 3.5, the Sorcerer was the class you wanted to go out and prestige ASAP. They only get magic, and many PrC gives you access to Full Magic Advance
In 3P, the Sorcerer is the class where you NEVER want to multiclass!


But still, I don't know why the sorcerer has to get his spells one level later the wizard? He has been nauhty and santa is punishing him?