Wizard vs. Sorcerer

[Ashrym]

True. but when a debuff works, it typically hurts an enemy much more than a buff helps your allys. The real downside of debuffing is legendary resistance but that comes up fairly rarely and it really doesn't turn up until higher levels.

Keep in mind there are plenty of group debuffs like slow or hypnotic pattern and many debuffs scale up in number of targets so you can usually target all the enemies or at least all the important enemies with a debuff. Buffing only typically affects 1 ally or 2 at most with twin spell.

Spells that only affect 1 target tend to be powerful while scaling to multiple targets requires waiting 2 more levels and spending a higher level slot.

Keep in mind that slow and hypnotic pattern are also sorc options. The difference is that quicken (or another meta) can be applied for more effectiveness in the same turn.

I stand by my comment, however. DC's are still low enough when those spells come online to carry risk even against weak saves. Bonuses, immunities, possible advantage, etc increase that risk.

Take some of both. Any caster can do that.

 

[FrogReaver]

Spells that only affect 1 target tend to be powerful while scaling to multiple targets requires waiting 2 more levels and spending a higher level slot.

Keep in mind that slow and hypnotic pattern are also sorc options. The difference is that quicken (or another meta) can be applied for more effectiveness in the same turn.

I stand by my comment, however. DC's are still low enough when those spells come online to carry risk even against weak saves. Bonuses, immunities, possible advantage, etc increase that risk.

Take some of both. Any caster can do that.

The downside to a sorc debuffing is it's very difficult to take all the important debuffs to actually use them to target the specific situation. Sure when the situation for slow comes up the sorc can cast it just as well, but when situations that call for tasha's hideous laughter or phantasmal force or hypnotic pattern or hold person come up the wizard can be prepared with all those spells while the sorcerer would have to sacrifice nearly every other kind of spell to try that.

The low level wizard and sorcerer buffs are virtually non-existent. Low level debuffs for them are fairly plentiful. Generally 1 of even the level 1 or 2 debuffs that hits will have a greater impact on combat than a buff spell can. The only thing that possibly could compare is something like twin haste. However depending on the situation there's some debuff that can easily out perform that and a wizard is much better off at having the full variety needed to accomplish that task.

 

[Ashrym]

The downside to a sorc debuffing is it's very difficult to take all the important debuffs to actually use them to target the specific situation. Sure when the situation for slow comes up the sorc can cast it just as well, but when situations that call for tasha's hideous laughter or phantasmal force or hypnotic pattern or hold person come up the wizard can be prepared with all those spells while the sorcerer would have to sacrifice nearly every other kind of spell to try that.

The low level wizard and sorcerer buffs are virtually non-existent. Low level debuffs for them are fairly plentiful. Generally 1 of even the level 1 or 2 debuffs that hits will have a greater impact on combat than a buff spell can. The only thing that possibly could compare is something like twin haste. However depending on the situation there's some debuff that can easily out perform that and a wizard is much better off at having the full variety needed to accomplish that task.

How are you defining low level here? A 5th level wizard preps 9 spells and you just gave nearly half of them of them up already in your list. Plus mage armor, typically. That cuts into offensive, defensive, and buffs.

Don't forget that a wizard only averages 1 additional spell prepped over spells known for a sorc. Sure, it adds up but that's higher levels instead of lower levels. A sorc cpuld drop Tasha's and phantasmal force while having almost the same list left.

Considering Tasha's gives a save with advantage every time damage is taken and low INT grants immunity it can be over-rated.

I would say twin invisibility, levitate, enhance ability, fly, or haste twinned can be very impactful. 1st level buffs are self but there is mage armor.

 

[Retreater]

My opinion is that the main reason for playing a sorcerer in 3rd edition was spontaneous casting. Both 4e and 5e have changed wizards to be able to cast spontaneously. Both editions also have warlocks as a core class to fill the role of arcane blaster. The biggest reasons to play a sorcerer have been supplanted by other classes and rules changes. They haven't been relevant in over a decade in my games.

 

[MoonSong]

How are you defining low level here? A 5th level wizard preps 9 spells and you just gave nearly half of them of them up already in your list. Plus mage armor, typically. That cuts into offensive, defensive, and buffs.

Don't forget that a wizard only averages 1 additional spell prepped over spells known for a sorc. Sure, it adds up but that's higher levels instead of lower levels. A sorc cpuld drop Tasha's and phantasmal force while having almost the same list left.

Considering Tasha's gives a save with advantage every time damage is taken and low INT grants immunity it can be over-rated.

I would say twin invisibility, levitate, enhance ability, fly, or haste twinned can be very impactful. 1st level buffs are self but there is mage armor.

Line by line.
1)I'd say low level truly means low level (1-3), but a wizard doesn't need to prepare all of them at the same time, just at the right time.
2)The difference is two spells prepared more than spells known, at first. In general the average difference is about 5 more spells prepared than spells known
3) Tasha's -like all name spells in core- is not in the sorcerer list.
4) I wouldn't know, the spell is out of bounds for sorcerer's.
5) In general if you want to be a buffing sorcerer, divine soul is the way to go.

 

[MoonSong]

My opinion is that the main reason for playing a sorcerer in 3rd edition was spontaneous casting. Both 4e and 5e have changed wizards to be able to cast spontaneously. Both editions also have warlocks as a core class to fill the role of arcane blaster. The biggest reasons to play a sorcerer have been supplanted by other classes and rules changes. They haven't been relevant in over a decade in my games.

There was another reason, but many people just didn't care or notice. Themes and backgrounds. Maybe your players characterized their sorcerers like wizards unless noted, but the sorcerer class isn't bound by the wizard's thematic limits. All wizards are brainy/scholarly by default and by necessity. That is the thematic core of the class, regardless of their backstory they all have to have space (and resources) to procure an education and magical training, along with the intelligence needed for it all somewhere in their background. The sorcerer isn't bound by that, they can afford to be destitute and ignorant idiots(lovable/cute idiots). Their background has next to zero trappings and as such they can be anybody, come from anywhere and take their magic for granted or even see it as a curse, not even "daddy was a dragon" is required, "I don't know why, I just can do it" or "I don't care, to me it's a curse" work as well. They can care as much or as little as they want about the origin of their magic and that makes it a very versatile class. They still are, while the wizard is every bit as scholarly as ever.