D&D 5E 5e Sorcerer versus Wizard, which is better?

[Esker]

I didn't read it whole (just first 20 and last 10 posts) What about 3 lvl sorc (CHA only 13 for taking MC) for metamagic and Wizard X (with max INT)? MC spell slots remain same, so in 20 lvl you have access to 9th spellslots and spells too. And "at will" transfering spellslots need more higher slots? sacrifice lower and vice versa.

I kind of decided sometime after the first 20 posts to focus on Wizard to cast spells not available to the Sorcerer and to get them earlier I decided not to multiclass, but that is not a bad idea, thanks for the input.

I dunno, your SP are based on sorcerer level, so you're pretty limited in what you can do with just 3 per day, and the price is really high: 3 levels behind in getting the next spell level, 3 levels behind in ASIs, and you have to sacrifice your DEX and CON to get your CHA up high enough to qualify. Maybe there are some very specific builds where it could make sense (though I'm struggling to think of any) but for a typical wizard it sounds like a terrible idea.

Even if you're taking the sorcerer levels after 17th so your spell progression isn't delayed, is 3 sp/day worth of metamagic at 20th worth giving up Signature Spells for 3 levels?

Fighter 1 is probably a better way to get CON saves without a feat, since you also get a ton of AC out of it and want DEX anyway.

 

[Ashrym]

Getting to third level in warlock grants basically the same benefit. Two - second level slots you can turn into 4 sorcery points every short rest. Plus some nice stuff like two invocations, more spells known, and a magical weapon, a pet or rituals

It does but it also costs in high level spell slots, the 18th level subclass ability, and slows down progression.

 

[FrogReaver]

I find both your arguing amusing, but I side with Mistwell on this...plus, this doesn't say it is a list of all players in the game. It lists who takes feats, and I assume that is who takes feats versus stat increases out of those that take or play with feats. Otherwise, the numbers would be the same for each category.

If that chart was showing “of the characters that use feats these are the levels they have a feat by”, then you would see level 20 showing 100%. It’s no where near that.

 

[MoonSong]

It does but it also costs in high level spell slots, the 18th level subclass ability, and slows down progression.

On the slow down, granted. But the meaningful spell progression stops at 17th, and most of the subclasses 18th level ability isn't that great -except for storm-. And it comes to whether one considers the sorcerer capstone worth it. If it is, then how having it 13 levels early is not worth it?

 

[Ashrym]

On the slow down, granted. But the meaningful spell progression stops at 17th, and most of the subclasses 18th level ability isn't that great -except for storm-. And it comes to whether one considers the sorcerer capstone worth it. If it is, then how having it 13 levels early is not worth it?

It's a 5th, 6th, and 7th level slot. And no 9th level slots until 20th level. The slow down hurts and I don't think draconic presence is bad.

3 warlock levels isn't a bad way to go but it is still a trade-off.

 

[FrogReaver]

Cantrips: Firebolt, Mage Hand, Sword Burst, Minor Illusion, Infestation

1st level: Shield, Sleep
2nd level: Alter Self, Suggestion
3rd level: Fireball, Haste

Meta-magic: twinned spell, quickened spell

Sorc points: 6

BTW, you are level 5 and so you only have 5 Sorc Points.

Cantrips: Firebolt, Mage Hand, Minor Illusion, Light

1st level: Shield, Sleep, Magic Missile
2nd level: Alter Self, Suggestion, Levitate, Misty Step
3rd level: Hypnotic Pattern, Haste

Arcane Recovery: Up to 3 levels worth of spells

Some reasoning behind the choices:

1. The spells that I left the same as your sorcerer choices I couldn't find a good justification for changing. There just wasn't another spell that could produce similar results in many situations.

2. I think hypnotic pattern is better than fireball in most aoe situations, especially on a wizard. On a sorcerer fireball is a little more general purpose and so makes sense IMO. So I'm not faulting your choice, I'm just pointing out the added spells allowed me to configure them such that I still had decent direct damage when needed and also a slightly better aoe spell IMO.

(The new additions)
3. Magic Missile. This is the only additional pure combat spell out of the bunch. I literally took it so that I wouldn't be so far behind in damage when you twinned haste. I can use magic missiles to make up some of the difference. I still don't reach the same single target damage potential, but I get much closer with this.

4. Levitate. Good control spell for single target enemies without ranged attacks, single save. Also helps in exploration phase as it allows party to easily bypass some obstacles. For example, it can allow a rogue to get over the castles wall to do a scouting mission.

5. Misty Step. Teleportation is always nice in exploration phases. The ability to teleport in combat as a bonus action is great too. You can put some serious distance between yourself and the enemy with this spell and a dash action when needed.

My conclusion: Your sorcerer is good. He reigns supreme when it comes to single target damage for a caster. However, he lacks defensive abilities to get away from enemies when needed. He lacks the extra control of levitate. The out of combat utility of levitate and misty step. It's hard for him to justify taking one of the best control spells in the game, hypnotic pattern as the choice would leave him with no direct damage spells.

In summary it comes down to what you value more. More utility or more damage.

Not included in the above analysis: The wizard also has 2 additional things going for him that the sorcerer doesn't

1. The wizard knows a total of 14 spells. I've only chosen 9. The rest can easily be rituals. Rituals also add a lot of utility, which is why you've suggested the sorcerer take ritual caster. The downside to ritual caster is that it means you only have 2 rituals known vs the wizards 5. That's a lot more rituals. That's a lot more utility. IMO

2. The good wizard subclasses are generally better than the good sorcerer subclasses, at least through most of the game. IMO

 

[FrogReaver]

It's a 5th, 6th, and 7th level slot. And no 9th level slots until 20th level. The slow down hurts and I don't think draconic presence is bad.

3 warlock levels isn't a bad way to go but it is still a trade-off.

Yep, slowing spell progression is bad generally bad. A single level dip can be argued for. 2 levels almost never can be argued for.

Personally if I'm a high level sorcerer and don't like my capstone, I'm looking to dip 2 levels of fighter for action surge. Casting twin haste and then shooting out a high damage fireball on turn 1 is a pretty awesome way to start any combat.

Alternatively it gives me 2 chances on turn 1 to get hold monster to work (both of which can be heightened is you take that metamagic)

 

[FrogReaver]

I think the whole discussion of feats is a moot point. Because IF you use feats, the Wizard would get that same feat as well (Warcaster, Alert, Lucky, etc.). If you're needing to spend a feat just to get your class equal to the Wizard, then you're by definition still behind the Wizard, because they also got a Feat/ASI.

In addition, I don't even think it's common for Sorcerer players to choose the Ritual Caster feat, particularly not at first level as a human, but I don't have hard data to support that. It just doesn't seem like something I've heard anyone doing, either around here, at the WOTC boards before they closed, on Reddit boards, YouTube, etc.. Where is this idea even coming from that Sorcerer's typically choose variant human and select Ritual Caster as their one feat at that level?

I actually find wizards to be worse than sorcerers without feats. Missing out on good concentration saves is rough. Feats allow that to be fixed. Missing out on rituals sucks too, but generally not knowing rituals ain't goina get you killed.

*a few wizard subclasses boost concentration saves

 

[FrogReaver]

I dunno, your SP are based on sorcerer level, so you're pretty limited in what you can do with just 3 per day, and the price is really high: 3 levels behind in getting the next spell level, 3 levels behind in ASIs, and you have to sacrifice your DEX and CON to get your CHA up high enough to qualify. Maybe there are some very specific builds where it could make sense (though I'm struggling to think of any) but for a typical wizard it sounds like a terrible idea.

Even if you're taking the sorcerer levels after 17th so your spell progression isn't delayed, is 3 sp/day worth of metamagic at 20th worth giving up Signature Spells for 3 levels?

Fighter 1 is probably a better way to get CON saves without a feat, since you also get a ton of AC out of it and want DEX anyway.

Actually, I'm rather liking the 3 level dip of sorcerer late game for a wizard. Heightened spell would be amazing. You have arcane recovery to get spells back. You could burn most all your level 3 slots for sorcery points for heightened and then get them back with arcane recovery.

I think it makes an excellent late game disadvantage to a save plan.

You could always start sorcerer 1 to get the con saves and whatever subclass benefit early. Then you can go wizard 18 and finish up with sorcerer levels.

 

[DM-Rocco]

The CHR bonus to spells known or continuing the spells known progression. I haven't seen both and the spells known formula is more common because other spells known casters want stat bonus to known as well. Most of the time I've seen the DM specifically wants the sorc to learn more known. The basic progression is sorc level +1 until it's halved for the high tier and eliminated for epic tier. It doesn't break the class to simply continue with a spell for 21 spells known eventually.

To answer your question, magic initiate already exists and isn't a bad way to pick up another 1st level spell, more cantrips, and a free casting. In play test it was part of a chain where additional feats added a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th level spell. I am not sure why it was dropped. Probably because it's expensive in feats costs to the point no one would ever spend 4 ASI's just for more spells known.

Magic initiate allow a spellcaster to use the spell learned using slots in addition to the free casting as long as it's from one of the classes to which the spellcaster accesses spells. So a sorc who takes magic initiate sorcerer gains a 1st level spell known, 1 freebie use of that spell, and 2 extra cantrips. The alternative would be taking a spell with a long duration from another list (like mage armor) and just using the freebie cast.

You would need to talk to your DM if all you want is more spells known. I wouldn't hesitate to allow a feat to grant a first level spell from any class to be known and use a choice of caster stat as in line with other feats and not stepping on the toes of magical secrets or other feats too much.

It's easier just to take even a single level of pretty much any class with spells, however; sorcs are pretty MC friendly. I like abusing the sorc capstone when I get into an epic game so I tend not to MC. The sorc capstone is a pretty good prep device. It's better than the wizard capstone, but the 18th level wizard ability is actually better than either, imo, so a definite consideration if you play to that tier. Spell mastery is a definite on the wizard list of pros.



Organized gameplay allows feats. It seems to be the default until the DM decides otherwise, and makes sense as to why it's included in the SRD and PHB instead of a section of the DMG. The statistics we were given demonstrated higher levels use feats (presumably because ASI's take priority) starting around 12th level but most players aren't that high so the majority of players were not shown to be using feats. Feats not being allowed as the reason is just an assumption that's disproven by the feats appearing at higher levels.

It's all speculation, however. ;-)

I'll clarify that. I have yet to see anyone play without feats. What I meant was that I side with Mistwell because the other guy's argument is absurd. It can't say "Optional Rule" and then be the norm, or it wouldn't be listed as an optional rule. I think he meant to say something like it is widely accepted as part of the rules, but his whole argument basically sounded like he didn't know what the meaning of the word "Optional" was.