Spontaneous vs. Prepared Casting?

[Eurus]

Alright, I'm curious for homebrewing purposes. The sorcerer is widely considered strictly inferior to the wizard, for many good reasons (the big one being that it gets spell levels one level earlier, but the bonus feats help too). That's not what I'm asking about. What I'm wondering is - all else being equal - how does spontaneous compare to prepared?

Would a sorcerer with the same number of slots, but who uses a spellbook like a wizard to prepare spells rather than a list of spells known, be better or worse than a traditional one? (The spontaneous version would still suffer from the metamagic restrictions of a normal sorc, since those are intrinsic to all spontaneous casting, but can always use one of the many workarounds already in existence).

If the options seem significantly imbalanced still (in either direction), how would you adjust the number of spells known by the spontaneous version to make them more equal?

[PId6]

Even without the stupid lost spell level and the slower metamagic time*, prepared casters are still better. The ability to learn all the spells you'll ever need and to prepare from that list in only 9 hours (or 15 minutes if you've left a slot open) is something that spontaneous casters can never have (beyond examples like Rainbow Warsnake or Shadowcraft Mage, that is).

* And the metamagic slowdown is pretty pointless as well. Why should it cost a feat for spontaneous casters to do what prepared casters can do all along? Not to mention you can't even take Rapid Metamagic until 9th level, and every other "workaround" is just bad.

To make it equal? You can't. Ultimately, the versatility of prepared casting and of knowing an unbounded number of spells trumps spontaneous casting. You can add more spells known to bridge the gap, but you'll never close it completely without, again, something ridiculous like Rainbow Warsnake. However, with the sheer power of Tier 1 casters, that's not really a bad thing.

[Kantolin]

In the overarching sense, a wizard can do everything, while a sorceror has to select what he can do. All else equal, that gives the wizard an advantage in that style of play.

In a more typical kick in the door style of play, however, the gap narrows considerably. You might need to scry once through the entire campaign, and the party cleric can do it. You want teleport so the sorceror may snag that, but you don't really need to care about planar binding, and if you really need a specific utility spell the sorceror may not have, a scroll will suffice.

So all things equal, in that style of play, they both have their advantage. The wizard can start shuffling his spells to fit the style of play you're aiming for (stop memorizing haste when everyone gets a something of speed), but also may not have guesstimated exactly how many hastes he needed today.

The sorceror will still have haste for awhile after everyone gets their thing of speed, and may not have teleport immediately as they'd only have one fifth level spell at the time and really wanted magic jar, but his ability to select 'on the fly' helps considerably.

So it's a bit campaign dependant. If you have no way of knowing the type of campaign you're getting into, though, wizard's a safer bet. The lower your optimization, the better sorcerors become compared to wizards.

But long and short, I do think that giving sorcerors bonus feats and no level hiccup helps narrow the gap considerably. It's easier to get more spells per day, though, than it is for a sorceror to get more spells known (I mean, wizards have scribe scroll for free), so they probably still have an edge.

Although lack of Quicken without shenanigans sucks. >_>

[Wonton]

Even without the stupid lost spell level and the slower metamagic time*, prepared casters are still better. The ability to learn all the spells you'll ever need and to prepare from that list in only 9 hours (or 15 minutes if you've left a slot open) is something that spontaneous casters can never have (beyond examples like Rainbow Warsnake or Shadowcraft Mage, that is).

This brings up a very interesting point I've been thinking about for a while: Is it necessary to play Batman to play a spontaneous prepared caster?

To clarify... does being a prepared caster means you HAVE to have some accurate information about an upcoming mission/task/encounter? Is a wizard gimped if he's not able to use Divinations to plan his spells for the day? Or is preparing a general list, and only modifying it slightly when you know you're gonna need a different type of spell good enough?

Edit: D'oh! Mixed up spontaneous and prepared. It's late.

[PId6]

This brings up a very interesting point I've been thinking about for a while: Is it necessary to play Batman to play a spontaneous caster?

To clarify... does being a prepared caster means you HAVE to have some accurate information about an upcoming mission/task/encounter? Is a wizard gimped if he's not able to use Divinations to plan his spells for the day? Or is preparing a general list, and only modifying it slightly when you know you're gonna need a different type of spell good enough?

No, you do not need to divination everything, and I'd say most wizards probably just prepare a "usual" list and mix things up when needed. But it's the ability to mix things up that holds the bulk of their power. If you need a certain spell, you always have the power to switch to it if you already have it or copy a scroll of it and have access to it permanently. Sorcerers have far more trouble doing any such thing.

[Wonton]

No, you do not need to divination everything, and I'd say most wizards probably just prepare a "usual" list and mix things up when needed. But it's the ability to mix things up that holds the bulk of their power. If you need a certain spell, you always have the power to switch to it if you already have it or copy a scroll of it and have access to it permanently. Sorcerers have far more trouble doing any such thing.

Though, extrapolating from what Kantolin said, in many groups, a selection of 10 spells will get you through 95% of gaming sessions. The people I play with often complain when my Wizard doesn't cast damage spells. Sigh.

[aje8]

No, you do not need to divination everything, and I'd say most wizards probably just prepare a "usual" list and mix things up when needed. But it's the ability to mix things up that holds the bulk of their power. If you need a certain spell, you always have the power to switch to it if you already have it or copy a scroll of it and have access to it permanently. Sorcerers have far more trouble doing any such thing.

Agreed.
That Wizards need to know what their facing is a very common misconception. It's more like, Wizard have a list of pure awesome spells they usually cast and then they can be like, Oh we need a Teleport? Got it. Oh we need a Stone Shape? On it, and change a couple of slots for the next day. My Wizards usually prepare the same list of spells for like 9/10 of in-game days. However, I usually purchase and place in my spellbook some utility spells just in case.

Although, "bulk of their power" is probably going a bit far. More like, it's the bulk of their advantage compared to Spontaneous casters. The bulk of their power is that their fullcasters and fullcasters own everything in 3.5.

[Keld Denar]

If you are REALLY careful in selecting your spells with a Sorcerer, you can compete just as hard as a Wizard can. The only thing that really holds you back is the 1/2 a spell level you lag behind a Wizard, simply because spell power in general is quadradic or exponential rather than linear. In the end, a well prepared Sorcerer can be just as nasty. Residual Metamagic + Arcane Spellsurge go a LONG way on a well equipped Sorcerer.