DMs and the Sorcerer class

[daoloth]

I DM most of the time and for me it's ease. If I need to throw in an arcane caster on the fly, then I can create a Sorcerer faster. With a wizard I have to figure out which spells he picked on level up, and which spells he came across/bought. Then I have to figure out exactly which ones he memorized that day. And this is partially because I want a more realistic villian, but also because the players are going to likely get whatever spells he has. Now, if I've prepared ahead of time then I choose whatever fits. Although right after 3.0 came out I probably picked sorcerer a bit more often because they were new.

 

[bill2825]

First, I am answering this from a DM standpoint.....

I use both wizards and sorcerers, as the story requires. Over the past 5000 years in the world I run, magic has gone through some interesting changes. Early on in that timeframe, Magic was dominated by the "Learned Arcanist", or wizards who studied their magic. These wizards became very powerful, approaching arcane magic from an almost scientific method and increasing their power. Sorcerers in this timeframe were not as powerful, as they were limited by inborn ability.

Then magic went through a purge, and “All” the arcane users were driven out. Book burnings, destruction of towers and items, and all that jazz. Sorcerers were able to hide their nature and keep their magic, so they came to prominence. Over time, the anti-arcane fervor scaled back and Sorcerers began to document their methods in books and scrolls. These were studied and a new breed of Wizard emerged, but they have not yet been able to achieve the heights of the “Lost Arts”.

Because of this, in the time period my campaign runs, there is a healthy mix of Sorcerers and Wizards. Wizards have tended to congregate in certain cities and parts of the world where society has been groomed to be more tolerant. Sorcerers are still prevalent through the world. And then there is the rare wizard who discovers a cache of scrolls or books or ruins where they discover some of the “Lost Arts”. These wizards are very powerful, but also very rare.

In answer to which I use more, it depends on the plot requirements and the area of the world where the characters are. I try to maintain continuity in my campaign as it is plot centric as opposed to a collection of random adventures and encounters.

Not sure if that sparks any interest or provides further answer to your question, but there it is.

Bill

 

[Faerl'Elghinn]

I tend to prefer wizards, but that's partially because of my old-school nostalgia. Additionally, I feel that the additional level gain required to gain access to spell levels is a highly critical disadvantage at lower levels. Once higher levels are attained, this disadvantage can be greatly offset by the ability to spontaneously apply metamagic feats, greatly increasing the repertoire of the sorcerer. Personally, though, I find their spellcasting abilities to be a bit too narrow in addition to this drawback, thereby rendering them just below playable in my opinion. Granted, their large number of spells per day is quite nice, but they are so limited in versatility by the few spells known that it is basically a necessity to min-max all spell choices to the utmost degree. I find it rather boring to simply cast Fireball every round for ten rounds in a row. The sorcerer doesn't leave much alternative.

When a situation changes such that the narrow scope of spells chosen by a sorcerer become less useful, the usefulness of the sorcerer him or herself varies directly, thereby often rendering the single-classed sorcerer highly inneffectual.

Basically, my decision between sorcerer and wizard is highly contingent upon the level at which the character is initially created. If the character or NPC is starting at 18th-level or above (Possibly 14th or so), it seems to me that the sorcerer is the obvious choice. At lower levels, however, I find the class negatively unbalanced due to its lack of access to each spell level at every odd level. In campaigns I've played, a level gain is generally a large ordeal, not one to be denied to offset fairly minimal advantages. It seems as if the class has been strangled in an attempt to offset its spontaneous casting and high spells per day, to the point that I find it at a somewhat lower power level than the rest of the classes. I feel that some house rules should be applied to the statistics given for this class, such that it might be slightly more effective in combat or something, just to make it a little more unique.

Just my 2 bucks (Inflation)...

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Personally, while the entire "permenant" spell list of a Sorcerer works for me, I dislike the entire spontaneous sprouting of spells out of one's arse. So, I do use Sorcerers, but they have to learn their spells as a Wizard does; they just retain them forever.

 

[Ao the Overkitty]

Our current DM favors wizards if we encounter an arcane spellcaster. I'm not sure if we have ever run into a sorcerer, but we don't run into that many spellcasters.

Now, for me as a DM, I show the same preferences as i have as a player for spontaneous casters. I'm not good at making up lists every day, figuring out what will be best for the coming situations (known and unknown). I'm much better at coming up with a small list of spells that will always be useful. So, most of the time my players encountered sorcerers, but when the story called for it, there were wizards.

As a side note, I probably would have favored favored souls above clerics if I had had access to them as well. Mostly just personal preference, though.

 

[Davelozzi]

I use mostly wizards. I don't really think sorcerors are a good addition to the game, except maybe as an easier to manage arcance caster for newbies.

 

[Sejs]

Depends on where. In more civilized lands, wizards are the norm. Or people from a civilized area, out and about - wizards.

In places where there's not going to be alot of book-learning available, steppes barbarians and the like.. or really, uh, pretty much any barbarians - I use sorcerers.

 

[Silveras]

I run a game where versatility can be more important than sheer number of spells. Sorcerers come out weak in that comparison.

I am currently preparing a campaign in which I will be using the "All Divine Casters are Spontaneous" option from Unearthed Arcana. I am emphasizing a difference between Arcane and Divine magic. I think spontaneous casting better suits the agents of divinity.

I will also be using the Battle Sorcerer variant from Unearted Arcana. Elves and Gnomes are innately magical races in my world, and may be Sorcerers. As a consequence, since magic comes so easily to them, they are culturally inclined not to be Wizards. Humans and Dwarves, on the other hand, must study to master arcane arts; they are not Sorcerers by nature. Either set of races may select a feat to allow them to be "the other type of caster", but must also write a background justifying it.

That being said, I think the Sorcerer was introduced precisely to have a class that was :

• easy for the new players to manage as a PC
• easy for the DM to manage as a foe

The Sorcerer has practically no abilities to modify, hence the lack of Sorcerer-friendly Prestige Classes.

On the other hand, remember that the design mantra for 3rd Edition was "Back to the Dungeon". In a basic dungeon-crawl environment, the Sorcerer can easily match or overshadow the Wizard. A Wizard/Sorcerer team would be interesting to watch over time. The Sorcerer does the power-blasting, and the Wizard makes items to improve the Sorcerer's versatility. A Wizard Cohort would be a most interesting choice for a Sorcerer, and a Sorcerer Cohort for a Wizard.

 

[Mr. Kaze]

As a DM, I prefer my players to be taking sorcerors on the road simply because I've never seen or heard anybody who could come up with a great reason for a wizard to be going out and actively risking life and limb with Fluffy the Familiar and their library of spellbooks on one of my campaigns.

Logic goes like this --
Wizards hunger for knowledge.
Players hunger for adventure.
Wizards with any sense of self-preservation know to stay the heck away from my adventures.
Players just build new characters as necessary.

But then again, I'm not really a fan of the de facto arcane casting "system" anyway.

::Kaze (uses wizards as NPCs when they think that they're fairly well settled and think that they're relatively secure in their lair. Otherwise, sorcerors are better since they've got more spells per day and aren't likely to survive the PCs onslaught anyway.)

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I use a mix. Sorcerers are easier to DM -- cast on the fly, no need to pre-select spells. Plus with mid- and higher level opponents, you don't give away a fortune in treasure with each spellbook. But using only sorcerers is cheating players a bit. So my wizards tend to do what I think a real wizard would do: take great pains to secure their spellbooks.

As a result, my group probably thinks I use all sorcerers ...