Sorcerer or Wizard?

[Caliban]

The Sorceror Says: "I can cast Fireball 5 times per day or Slow 5 times per day! Or any combination of the two!"

The Wizard Replies: "I made five Fireball scrolls, and five Slow scrolls last level before you even had them. Who'se your Arcane Daddy?"

=)

and in fairness

The Sorceror Retaliates: "Well, at least I didn't have to pay 3170 gold and 250 xp for them!"

Also: They aren't at the minimum save DC when I cast them, as opposed to those expensive scrolls of yours.

Most wizards choose to put utilility spells or spells without saving throws (magic missile, ice storm, etc.) on scrolls.

Personally, I prefer a wizard to a sorceror. The risk of possibly being caught with your pants down ("Darn, didn't memorize Knock!") is balanced by the ability to always have a scroll handy, and the only limitations are character wealth and time really. That in mind, if your campaign is gold-light or time-constrained.. go sorceror. If the world's going boom in 3 weeks, and you need 15 levels by then, there's no time to prepare!

Overall, I prefer wizard as well. They are especially powerful in a cash rich setting.

But I've started a new sorcerer, and I've been enjoying him a lot.

One of his 1st level spells is grease, and I've found that a well lubricated battlefield can drive a DM to distraction.

 

[Buttercup]

I think it's important to mention Monte Cook's alt.sorcerer from Book of Eldritch Might 2. I really like it better than the PHB sorcerer because it just makes more sense to me. The D6 for hit dice instead of D4 and the different skill set that takes advantage of the sorcerer's necessarily high charisma turns the class into one that is useful in more ways. And that, my friend, makes it more fun to play.

If you're going withe the PHB sorcerer, then I recommend throwing in a level or two of something else, even though it will slow down your acquisition of spells even more. For example, I once played a cleric/sorcerer who was pretty darn amazing. I also really like the idea of starting the character as a barbarian and switching to sorcerer at second or third level. It's easy to create a character concept that works with this, and it makes a really well rounded character, IMHO.

 

[Hygric]

remember that it only takes 153 xp to scribe a 9th level spell on scroll.

If you are a specialist, you will only be 1 behind a sorc for spells per day, and every odd level (from 3rd to 17 at least), you will atually tend to have just as many as the sorc.

 

[Sanackranib]

sorc vs. wizard

it all depends on your style of play. sorc's tend to be mobile fireing platforms because they won't know more then 5 spells per level with the standard progression.

A wiz on the other hand (if he's smart) will prepair ulitarian spells on scrolls ahead of time so he doesn't need to prepair stuff like knock on a daily basis. once you get over 3rd level then spell preperation sucks, but this is IMO offset by the versitility and xtra feats.

 

[William Ronald]

Personally, I prefer wizards. Maybe part of this is due to the fact that I have been playing D&D since 1980. Back then the arcane casters were limited to magic-user and illusionist.

In general, I like the versatility of wizards. I tend to play generalist wizards who can vary their spells against different opponents.

In the case of a specialist wizard, some spells work less well than others against certain opponents. (Necromancers have a hard time fighting constructs.) The problem increases for sorcerors, who may have a BIG problem if an enemy learns what spells a sorceror can cast each day. (I offer this as a general tip to evil DMs every where.)

Also, to my mind, wizards are more democratic than sorcerors. Rather than being gifted with a particular bloodline, any person with adequate resources, will, and training can become a wizard.

 

[Olive]

Aside from crunchiness, have you thought about the PC itself? I've always perfered Sorcerers over Wizards because of style.

It's funny isn't it, because i've always liked wiards over sorcerors for exactly the same reason. It hink sorcerors have no style worth commenting on. Wizards on the other hand, make something from nothing.

 

[ergeheilalt]

Sorcerers are a vertiable tank. Load them up with attack spells and give them a ring of protection and bracers of armor, then place them in the back with the rogue as a guard and then let the fireballs fall where they may. Sorcerers get full proficency with all simple weapons and can cast at will. The spell selection for a sorcerer is limited, resulting in picking an "archtype" and sticking to it (at 4th level in 3.5 they can switch out one spell everytime they gain a level).

Wizards have a wide selection of spells to choose from. They can write limitless numbers of spells into spellbooks and can be very specialized in many different spell types; however, they do not recieve as many uses per day. Wizards also get a free feat (scribe scroll), a cheap way of casting spells that cannot/are not memorized on any given day. Wizards are trained in the use of a very select few weapons and suffer a tad more when forced into combat.

I prefer the wizard's versitility - and the ability to focus in on one school. Wizards tend to be the most useful for an adventuring party, however if you expect trouble, a sorcerer is not a bad choice.

Erge

 

[Staffan]

(at 4th level in 3.5 they can switch out one spell everytime they gain a level).

As I understand it, that's not precisely the case. They can switch out one spell each time they gain a new *spell* level, and that spell must be two levels lower than their highest spell level. In other words:
<table>
<tr bgcolor="white" valign="center"><td>Class<br>Level</td><td>Highest<br>spell<br>level</td><td>Swappable<br>spell<br>level</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="white" valign="center"><td>4</td><td>2nd</td><td>0th</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="white" valign="center"><td>6</td><td>3rd</td><td>1st</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="white" valign="center"><td>8</td><td>4th</td><td>2nd</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="white" valign="center"><td>10</td><td>5th</td><td>3rd</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="white" valign="center"><td>12</td><td>6th</td><td>4th</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="white" valign="center"><td>14</td><td>7th</td><td>5th</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="white" valign="center"><td>16</td><td>8th</td><td>6th</td></tr>
<tr bgcolor="white" valign="center"><td>18</td><td>9th</td><td>7th</td></tr></table>
I'm not sure if they get to swap out an 8th or 7th level spell at 20th level, or maybe none at all.

 

[Grog]

Wizard pros:

Can technically learn any number of spells per level

Free metamagic/item creation/spell mastery feats

Can use metamagic feats without spending a full round action, and can use the quicken spell feat

Their primary attribute is more useful than the sorceror's (Intelligence vs. Charisma)

Wizard cons:

Although they can technically learn any number of spells per level, the cost and the time it takes to scribe spells into their spellbooks will drastically limit the number of spells they can learn, in most cases.

Can cast fewer spells per day than a sorceror

They have to carry around spellbooks, and they're screwed if the books are lost or stolen (though spell mastery can get around this to a certain extent)


Sorceror pros:

Can cast lots of spells per day

Doesn't have to memorize spells, so can choose the right spell for the situation

No spellbooks, so they don't have to worry about losing them

Can apply metamagic feats on the fly, using them as needed

Proficient with all simple weapons (I hesitate to even list this as a pro, but it can make a difference at low levels)

Sorceror cons:

Limited number of castable spells, so may not know the right spell for the situation

Has to use a full-round action to apply a metamagic feat, and can't use quicken spell

Not as good at item creation as a wizard (due to smaller selection of spells)


Both classes have their good and bad points. And both classes can get around their weaknesses to some extent by using items. Wizards can use wands and staves to compensate for fewer spells per day, and sorcerers can use scrolls to compensate for their limited number of known spells.

In general, I tend to prefer sorcerors. But that's just my personal taste.

Oh, and if you're going to be playing 3.5, I'd wait until the books come out before deciding. It looks like sorcerors really got the shaft in the revision, maybe more so than any other class.

 

[Fedifensor]

A specialist wizard and a sorcerer are roughly equal, until you factor in the wizard's bonus feats. The wizard has to prememorize, but most wizards pick a good general set of spells that will see them through most situations - and even a specialist wizard has a much larger selection than a sorcerer.

The sorcerer can cast more spells...but a specialist wizard only has one less spell per spell level. Furthermore, on the odd levels (3, 5, 7, etc), the wizard has higher level spells - a BIG advantage.

On the even levels (4, 6, 8, etc), the sorcerer has only ONE choice for their highest level spell. Sure, the 6th level sorcerer can throw four fireballs, but an Evocation specialist wizard at the same level can have Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Slow, and Haste memorized (assuming Transmutation isn't a prohibited school). Which means they should have at least one high-level spell that can work against almost any opponent they run across ("EEK! Fire Elemental!"). For that matter, the specialist wizard could also have four Fireballs. Wizards are also harder to counterspell - once an enemy mage learns a sorcerer's spell selection, the sorcerer is going to have a tough time.

So, to sum up the previous two paragraphs, a specialist wizard will always be equal to or better than a sorcerer when it comes to their highest level spells (at least from 3rd to 18th level).

In any situation where you have preparation time, the wizard outshines the sorcerer, because he can choose the right spell for the situation.

The wizard is the better caster for low-level utility spells, since 1st and 2nd level spells are cheap to scribe on a scroll.

I have to agree with many of the other posters on this list - if your world is cash-strapped or lacking downtime, the sorcerer may be a better choice. However, the standard D&D campaign offers enough time and money for wizards to shine.

By the way, one poster touted the sorcerer's ability to use all simple weapons as an advantage. That's just silly. A light crossbow is probably the best weapon a sorcerer will use (since melee is suicide), and wizards get that as a proficiency. Furthermore, if you really want better weapons, just choose Elf as your race.

So, unless your game world has special factors designed to limit a wizard's usefulness (no money or no time to scribe spells), play a wizard.