Is the Sorceror as bad as I think?

[TheAuldGrump]

And of course in 3e the lack of spell choice each day can be countered very easily with scrolls. (Though my wizards and sorcerers tend to rustle when they walk anyway...) Meanwhile the wizards lack of frequent use spells can be balanced with a wand or two. Though I will admit, I do prefer Monte Cook's variant sorcerer to the one in the PHB, it has a bit of a different flavor from the wizard, in particular not requiring spell components.

The Auld Grump

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I agree that it is really a style thing.

IMO, the real power of spontaneous casting comes from the buff spells and metamagic.

In particular I would like to point out that a 6th level sorceror can make an entire four PC party Invisible AND Flying on the spur of the moment. IME, the majority of tough combats become complete cakewalks against an Invisible Flying ambush. Yes, a wizard might be able to do the same if he knows exactly what he is up against for the coming day. 9 times out of 10, only a sorceror can pull it off when the opportunity arises.

At the end of the day, those leftover spell slots can easily be converted into Extended Endure Elements, Extended Empowered Empowered Endurance, or Extended GMW.

 

[The Blue Elf]

I like some of the things done with the sorc, but overall it just seems to pale in comparison to a wizard. Am I missing something in the rules? I like the spell versitility, but access to spells seems so limited. Please, somebody set me straight.

Well the only diffrents is Sorceor can cast a spell without a use of a spell book to remember them they don't have to study it but to know a new spell they have to also Study,Wizards use a spell books to cast spells they have to study to remember the spells.

 

[Grog]

At the end of the day, those leftover spell slots can easily be converted into Extended Endure Elements, Extended Empowered Empowered Endurance, or Extended GMW.

Just hope you don't get ambushed in the middle of the night...

 

[Darklone]

In particular I would like to point out that a 6th level sorceror can make an entire four PC party Invisible AND Flying on the spur of the moment.

Here we have my main problem with a sorcerer. We had such a guy in our group. We could have as well played some demons who just fly around invisibly. It was BORING.

 

[fba827]

Based on my own experiences...

Sorcerers are more fun for short-term games

Wizards are more fun over long-term games.

Why? Sorcerers turn into such repretative one-trick ponies after a while.. just boring (for me). Where as a Wizard really does shine when they can show their versitility via access to more spells... true, there is some preparation needed, but I (personally) find that needed prep time insignificant compared to the advantage of versitility).

just my two cents. YMMV

 

[Darklone]

I agree.

The sorcerer we had did always the same (fly and invis on his fighter buddy tank who always hid during fights then...). The group hated it.

Then ... finally... some enemies popped up who had see invis and fly too...

And the sorcerer whined and cried because his tactic was screwed by the "cruel" DM.

 

[Thresher]

Sorcs do very well in games where there isnt a lot of time to prepare and they have to do things at a rushed pace, wizards only really do ok when they have a little time to research.

As for spell selection, I play a high level generalist wiz and have done for about the last 10 years, about the only things I change regually in her mem are a couple of tactical low level spells and occassionally if we're going into a specific hostile environment I'll change the offensive loadout to affect creatures I think we might meet.
Apart from that, its basically the same, most of the spells that make bodies hit the floor are just another version with a higher DC and you can do that with metamagic.
As for sorcs and metamagic, they do fine, just make sure you position yourself carefully when you let rip and its easy enough.
You will miss out on having a lot of skills which is where I hear the only complaints really from the party sorc.

Divination, the clerics are better than me in 80% of cases
Firepower, even with a 'howitzer' build I can never even touch the sorc's damage output.
"Buff" type spells, Clerics are better for the most part and I dont have the spell slots to do everyone.
So where do I fit in?

Dunno

Guess its the 'de-buff', 'no-save' and 'insta-kill' type of spells that I seem to support the party best with, I think that you could probably do the same with a Sorc as well if not better. Room full of evil dudes, I open up with a chained-enervation or chained energy drain, (rivers of tears follow ), heighted & chained Ray of Enfeeblement or Disjunction and you have room full of drooling newbs that get whupped to pieces by the rest of the crew. For making it personal theres always the heightened Disintergrates and Temporal stasis spells which rip the badies a new hole.
Problem is, I cant do it real often which is what you need in a protracted fight.
Ive lost count of the fights where Ive run out of spells halfway through and the sorc is barely scratching his nuking repatoire.

For your sorc, you'd be a flexible party member with an armload of scrolls, and a few choice charged items to fill in the areas they dont have in their standard loadout.
Lets face it they only really spend their money on things to make them prettier, tougher and hair gel otherwise.

(Well, we pimp our sorc out to "Gather Info" once in awile... to 'pump information' from lonely little sages and loremasters)

 

[Pickaxe]

I've heard arguments for both sides. A lot of it has to do with the type of campaign you run. In a campaign with easy access to magic items, it tends to favor the sorcerer over the wizard, because the sorc can buy scrolls and magic items to overcome those spells he can't cast. Also, there's little need for item creation feats, which is a major strength of the wizard. In a low magic item game, a wizard's item creation feats are more important.

Independent of campaign, some players just like the flexibility of the sorcerer's casting ability, while others like the greater spell choice of the wizard and just use scrolls to overcome the fewer spell slots. Sorc proponents also point out that every specialist is giving up significant spells in order to get that much closer to a sorc in casting slots.

Overall, I like wizards, but I can see why some players like playing sorcs, which is why I think they are just fine as is.

 

[Skinwalker]

I'd say this issue simply boils down to a matter of style and preference.

Personally, I prefer playing wizards. I am a planner, and I'd take the vast selection of spells over number I can cast any day. I'd never even dream of playing a sorcerer, because the limited spell selection would cripple my playing style.

By the same token, one of my fellow players likes sorcerers and bards. He has a more reactive style of play and hates to labor over building spell lists. He'd never even dream of playing a wizard, and revels in the extra number of castings each day.

Both of us are useful to the party and our opposing styles are well-represented by our respective classes. Overall, neither of us feels we have a signifigant advantage over the other.

What that says to me is that both classes are well-balanced against each other.