Why dont people seem to like sorcerers

[Stryke]

I've been onthis forum for a while now and while a lot of classes are mentioned freqently, sorcerer doesn't seem to be one of them. Is there a reason for this or am i just reading the wrong theads

Edit
for the purposes of this thread only consider info from the core books PHB 1 DMG1 MM1

[Yora]

There's nothing wrong with sorcerers. But wizards can cast the same spells and are much more powerful when optimized.
And most threads about characters in this forum are about high level optimization.

[Stryke]

There's nothing wrong with sorcerers. But wizards can cast the same spells and are much more powerful when optimized.
And most threads about characters in this forum are about high level optimization.

Now see, i've always wondered about that. Sure wizards can cast a bigger variety of spells but their limited to four fixed spells/level/day meaning a sorcerer can out cast any wizard of equal level and for the sake of one feat is basically the same class with more spells per day. yes a wizard of infinitly more flexable but only if he has eight hours to prepare were as a sorcerer can have the same spells and more prepared meaning on an encounter to encounter basis he is far more flexable

[Boci]

Couple of reasons I can think of:
1. Delayed spell progression
2. Do not get a chance to try out situationally useful spells
3. Int gives more skill points, Cha gives better modifiers to social interaction. Most people feel arcane casters do not need to be the parties face anyway, so int is generally considered better.

Now see, i've always wondered about that. Sure wizards can cast a bigger variety of spells but their limited to four fixed spells/level/day meaning a sorcerer can out cast any wizard of equal level and for the sake of one feat is basically the same class with more spells per day. yes a wizard of infinitly more flexable but only if he has eight hours to prepare were as a sorcerer can have the same spells and more prepared meaning on an encounter to encounter basis he is far more flexable

Wizards will typically specialize, meaning the sorceror only has 1 more spell. Focused specialist? Yes, sorcerors are more flexible, and thus they do not require as much planning, which could another reason why thay aren't spoken about as much.
On a side note, not sure if you were trying to say otherwsie, but sorcerors also need 8 hours of preperation.

[Kurald Galain]

Even aside from optimization concerns, it is plain from reading the class description that (1) the sorcerer gets every spell level a level later, (2) the wizard gets better skills and bonus feats, and (3) the wizard gets many more spells known than the sorc does. So at a first glance, the wizard is simply a better version of the sorc. I'm not saying this is always the case, of course, but it easily seems so.

[KillianHawkeye]

There are exactly 2 things wrong with the Sorcerer. First, they're one level behind most other spellcasters when it comes to getting new spell levels. If you not in a game where you gain levels like crazy, this can really hurt. Second, they don't get to learn that many spells compared to other full spellcasters. That means they have to be really careful about which spells they learn and can't choose many with situational usefulness.

And their only major advantage is they can cast any spell they know spontaneously (assuming they have the spell slots). That and they get a couple extra spells per day compared to a Wizard. Unfortunately, a properly prepared Wizard doesn't really need to cast spells spontaneously, since they get Scribe Scroll for free and get another bonus feat they could use for Craft Wand or something which a Sorcerer needs to spend a normal feat to get.

In the end, being a spontaneous caster just isn't as good as being able to learn every Sor/Wiz spell and stick it in a book to use whenever you want, and getting a couple extra spells per day doesn't make up for being a level behind. Not to mention the fact that Sorcs aren't as good at using metamagic, and you can see how the Sorcerer just doesn't stack up against Wizards, Clerics and Druids.

[Runestar]

Splatbooks have a variety of abilities which make the sorcerer's abilities less unique. For example, focused specialist variant gives a wizard even more spell slots than a sorc. There are feats/features such as uncanny foresight or spontaneous divination which allow wizards to spontaneously cast spells. Wizards even get a spell which lets them rearrange their spell slots.

Simply put, yes, a sorc's spontaneous spellcasting is a very neat ability, but wotc made them pay through the nose for this benefit (no bonus feats, cannot quicken spells without external help, limited spells known, slightly slower spell acquisition).

Nevertheless, spellcasting is king in dnd, so sorcs are still a force to be reckoned with, even if they are inferior to wizards.

[KillianHawkeye]

On the plus side, as a DM I prefer using Sorcerer villains because they're easier to run and the extra spell slots can help them stay in the fight a little longer, and I can just make them whatever level I need so the late spell levels isn't really a problem anymore.

[Grumman]

Yes, sorcerors are more flexible, and thus they do not require as much planning, which could another reason why thay aren't spoken about as much.

Actually they require more planning. A wizard has to pick how many slots to allocate to each spell, it's true, but a sorcerer has to pick what spells to learn. A wizard who makes a mistake can fix the error the next time he prepares his spells, or scribe a new spell into his spellbook if he made a more significant error (assuming he survives, of course). A sorcerer who learns a useless spell is stuck with it until he levels up a few times.

[molten_dragon]

I actually prefer playing sorcerers to wizards myself. They're simpler and there's less bookkeeping to worry about. And although they're somewhat less powerful than wizards, a sorcerer is still a force to be reckoned with.

As a DM though, I give sorcerers some perks to help make up the gap between them and wizards.

[Ecalsneerg]

While I think this has been said, it's worth repeating. Sorcerers are worse than most spellcasters. They're still not by any stretch of the imagination bad.

[Andry]

I always give either bonus metamagic/or bloodline feats every five levels. To help even the playing field a little.

[Roc Ness]

I actually prefer playing sorcerers to wizards myself. They're simpler and there's less bookkeeping to worry about. And although they're somewhat less powerful than wizards, a sorcerer is still a force to be reckoned with.

Seconded. Just put a bit of effort into choosing a couple of good, universally helpful sorcerer spells, and then never worry about them again. Much better than having to worry about using up the only fly spell you prepared and whatnot, or having to change your preparations every day for the most optimised use of less spell slots, or preparing low-level spells "just in case" that you probably won't use...


Besides, sorcerers get Arcane Fusion

[DragonOfLies]

If you want to play a slight better Sorcerer, there's always the Pathfinder version. Eschew Materials as a bonus beat, and bloodlines grant spells, bonus feats, and other bonuses

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/basic-classes/sorcerer

[AstralFire]

While I think this has been said, it's worth repeating. Sorcerers are worse than most spellcasters. They're still not by any stretch of the imagination bad.

Slight nitpick: Sorcerers are worse than the other three core 9-level casters. They are better than most other spellcasters.

[molten_dragon]

If you want to play a slight better Sorcerer, there's always the Pathfinder version. Eschew Materials as a bonus beat, and bloodlines grant spells, bonus feats, and other bonuses

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/basic-classes/sorcerer

I tend to use what I call "MD's 5 minute sorcerer fix", which consists of:

Increase skill points from 2 to 4
Add knowledge (arcana), diplomacy, sense motive, intimidate, spot, and listen to list of class skills
Add eschew materials as a bonus feat at 1st level
Add a bonus feat at 5th level and every 5 levels after that, same list as wizard
Remove familiar and replace with the ability to use metamagic without increasing casting time
Bonus spells from a high CHA apply to spells known as well as spells per day

I kind of like the pathfinder version though, so maybe I'll try using that in the future.

I also have plans to someday do a much more flavorful reboot of the sorcerer, involving pacts made with powerful outsiders, and familiars who are agents of those same outsiders. This may or may not actually get done, depending on how busy I stay.

[Runestar]

If you want to play a slight better Sorcerer, there's always the Pathfinder version. Eschew Materials as a bonus beat, and bloodlines grant spells, bonus feats, and other bonuses

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/basic-classes/sorcerer

I am actually against the idea of mandatory bloodlines, because I don't like the concept of sorcs necessarily being tied to a certain heritage. Wotc kinda overdid it with their "All sorcs are descended from dragons" and the load of draconic feats in races of dragon, followed by an assortment of fey/celestial/fiendish feats.

[Boci]

Actually they require more planning. A wizard has to pick how many slots to allocate to each spell, it's true, but a sorcerer has to pick what spells to learn. A wizard who makes a mistake can fix the error the next time he prepares his spells, or scribe a new spell into his spellbook if he made a more significant error (assuming he survives, of course). A sorcerer who learns a useless spell is stuck with it until he levels up a few times.

Yes but that's not really planning you can discuss on the internet, since it depends a lot on the campaign setting.

[Snake-Aes]

I am actually against the idea of mandatory bloodlines, because I don't like the concept of sorcs necessarily being tied to a certain heritage. Wotc kinda overdid it with their "All sorcs are descended from dragons" and the load of draconic feats in races of dragon, followed by an assortment of fey/celestial/fiendish feats.

Pick arcane and reflavor that you are a rebel wizard.

[Tengu_temp]

The problem is not that sorcerers are too weak. The problem is that wizards, clerics and druids are too strong.

[2xMachina]

Kobold Sorc is pretty ok.

No cheese, no sorc though. Foc. Spec is much better.

[Vizzerdrix]

I like Sorc. A lot less book keeping.

[valadil]

The other factor that hoses them that I haven't seen mentioned yet is that sorcerer metamagic sucks. You either need to burn a feat or sacrifice your familiar to make it usable.

[DragonOfLies]

Pick arcane and reflavor that you are a rebel wizard.

+1
In my campaign, almost all NPC Sorcerers have the Arcane bloodline. I've re-fluffed it a little so that any 2nd generation child of arcane magic users is guaranteed to (potentially) be a Sorcerer.
I even drew up a little table to show how likely it was for various people to have Arcane blood

[Vizzerdrix]

Loosing the familiar is a blessing. The fact that you can get to use meta magic better is just icing on the cake.

If you'd like a familiar, take Obtain Familiar. You won't hurt it by taking a PrC this way.

[Aasimar]

I'm currently playing a lvl.1 Drow Sorceress in 4e, I'm not completely sure where it's going, but I'm having fun so far.

I went for storm sorcery and Implement Expertise: Staffs, but she's effectively the party rogue, since I used a background to get access to thievery and stealth, and trained those as well as bluff. Somewhere down the line, I may grab Warrior of the Wilds to get hunter's quarry 1/encounter and training in Acrobatics.

All in all, I'm looking forward to continuing the game.

Back in 3.0, I played a Sorcerer from level 1 to level 19. I had tons of fun with that. I realize that wizards could de facto be way more powerful, but I enjoyed the charisma emphasis and the freedom of not having to prepare spells.

Also, this was back when Haste gave you an extra action, so at higher levels, I was pulling stuff like, Haste, flight, improved invisibility and then two disintegrates per turn (which was a save or die at the time). Against tougher opponents I'd cast limited wish (-7 on his next saving throw) and then disintegrate.

Not completely powergamey though, my last couple of levels were in dragon disciple (which were basically wasted, since DD doesn't get caster progression, and the strength + Natural armor are pretty wasted on such a person)

Anyway, my experience with sorcerers has been a long and happy one.

[Lin Bayaseda]

Let's look at a Level 6 Sorcerer with decent charisma:
Casts per day: 7 1st-level, 6 2nd-level, 4 3rd-level.
Knows: 4 1st-level, 2 2nd-level, 1 3rd-level

Among his highest level of spells known, the sorcerer enjoys the amazing flexibility of the ONE spell he knows. Among level 2 spells, he has the wide range of spontaneous choices between TWO spells.

For comparison, Level 6 focused specialist Wizard with decent intelligence:
Casts per day: 6 1st-level, 6 2nd-level, 4 3rd-level.
Has in spellbook: ~10 1st-level, 4 2nd-level, 4 3rd-level (plus can learn additional spells from scrolls)

Counting spells per day, he's only one 1st-level spell down compared to the sorcerer. Counting spells known, he's light years ahead. And the sorcerer's alleged flexibility isn't much of an asset, when, for his most powerful spells, he can only choose between two spells at the most.

The wizard also gets, at this point in his career, 2 additional feats over the sorcerer, and probably a lot more skill points (INT vs. CHA as the main attribute).

Note that I was generous and compared them at an even level. At the next level, the Wizards gets 4th level spells, while the sorcerer doesn't, which further widens the gap.

And that's why people don't like sorcerers. Because they're like Wizards, but worse.

[Rothen]

For comparison, Level 6 focused specialist Wizard with decent intelligence:

Ah! But you'd have to give up the excellent schools of evocation and...

Eh, who am I kidding. If you don't mind the bookkeeping, just play a wizard.

The Sorcerer is a great class if you like to keep things simple and still want to have more options than a fighter, though.

[Stryke]

OK these are all fair points but unless your optimizing they're not all big problems. yes the lack of bonus feats is a big blow i wont dispute that, however if a wizard specializes he becomes even less flexible meaning his choice of "situational spells" becomes small enough to make the point moot unless you start digging out suppliments and loads of crazy races and bloodlines.
And just so you know i meant using only core books sorry i should have mentioned that earlier

[elonin]

without a feat metamagic takes a full round action.