Sorcerers get the short end of the stick?

[billd91]

I can see the argument that it's OK for sorcerers to take a little longer to enter a PrC than wizards because they give up less (the wizard generally giving up a bonus feat... though I don't think I'd call that a huge loss either since it occurs only every 5 levels anyway and is usually made up for by the perks inherent in the PrC).

I also agree that as far as raw adventuring goes, the sorcerer's ample spells and flexibility balance them well with wizards.

It's the other form of balance I think sorcerer's lack... screen time balance. The sorcerer has fewer non-combat strengths than most other classes. They have the same skill points as a wizard, but the wizard has to invest in intelligence and so makes up for lower skill points quite easily. Those skill points can go a long way to helping define the character in out-of-combat ways that can help get the character screen time in non-combat situations.

Personally, I think it would be a nice balance to give the sorcerer 4 skill points per level and broaden the list of available skills. If the idea behind the sorcerer is that they can come from any walk of life as a natural caster rather than being channeled into a narrow profession by training as a wizard is, then why not treat their skills like the NPC Expert class? Have the player pick any 10 class skills and come up with a justification for the background. That way, the sorcerer can have the skills necessary for any possible walk of life as their background.

That would enable the sorcerer to leverage more use our of the stats and background ideas he has and not be tied into a wizard-style way of life when he doesn't necessarily have the same educational background. It would also help the character be a significant contributor, mechanically, in non-combat situations.

 

[Patman21967]

Sorcerer

I've had the oportunity to play 2 sorcerers to high level. The first one, through alot of " roleplaying " became a half-fiend SpellSword. The half fiend was not my idea, but something that happened by accident, but I started the character with reaching spellsword in mind. In our group we usually work backward, find what PrC you want to end up at, then move your character in that direction. Spellsword was a good one, IMO.

The 2nd one was in a large scale campaign, with lots of combats between large parties, and a Sorcerer is a great " mobile artillery platform " I took all detruction spells, most of the area effect..ie...fireball, CoC, chain lightning, delayed blast, Icestorm, Horrid Wilting, ...you can do loads of damage, especially with empower or enlarge spell...

It's mostly a campaign thing, and roleplaying. If you are Dungeon delving, then a wizard is better, but a sorcerer can be a kick ass utility to a well mixed group...

Just writing this I got the thought that a Sorcerer, in a party with a Wizard, could be a huge support advantage...multiple hastes, bulls str, bears, a great buff character.

I like the class myself

 

[ARandomGod]

So, then, I ask you this:

1) Am I correct in my points, or have I overlooked some information which shows me to be in the wrong? Have your gaming experiences suggested that I am wrong, and sorcerers are not ill-treated in this regard?

2) If I am correct, can anyone suggest a reason why this might be?

3) If I am correct, does anyone have any ideas as to how this imbalance could be redressed?

Many thanks for your input!

Cheers,
Synchronicity.

1) You are correct.

2) Because the authors did a thoroughly half assed job on the class. If they even used half. Having stated that opinion, I feel I should add that I think it's still a pretty good class, all told.

3) Rewrite the class. Then, for various PrC's rewrite THEM to better accomodate, or create others specifically for the sorc. You could, for instance, rule "Ability to cast level three spells, or five levels of sorc."

 

[med stud]

Personally I think they should have done with the sorcerer what 1st edition did with the illusionist: give it a spell list of it's own. Arcane magic is obviously so powerful that wizards and sorcerers only have the magic going for them (d4 HD, crappy BAB, low number of skill points to compensate for arcane magic). Since they are using the same spell list they become very much alike and when two concepts are very much alike it is extremely hard to make them balanced against each other, both in flavour and power.

If the sorcerer and the wizard had different spell lists they would be much more unique and fill different niches. It's not a realistic wish (since spells already take up lots of space in the PHB) but I think it would solve the problems with the sorcerer's blandness and percieved weakness (I dont agree with the sorcerer being weak, I just think it's bland).

 

[Zappo]

It's a combination problem.

First of all, the Sorcerer simply has nothing that can be taken away. Bad saves, d4 hit dice, 2 skill points, crappy skill selection, no BAB, he has nothing except his spell progression and familiar. If you make a PrC with full spellcasting progression, the only thing a Sorcerer needs to worry about are the prerequisites.

At the same time, many PrCs are objectively more powerful than a simple caster. Too many PrCs give full spellcasting and special abilities. Of course a Sorcerer is better off taking a PrC.

The same problem exists with the Wizard as well, only a little less. So the only thing the designers can use to make an arcane PrC balanced is tweak the requirements. Put a useless skill or feat in there, so that taking the PrC stings a bit. But there's only so much you can do this way. It would have been better if the Sorcerer had some special ability that a PrC can take away. As things stand now, I can't see why anyone would make a 20th level Sorcerer.

 

[Thanee]

Yep, wizards definitely have the better choice of PrC, altho some are extremely good for the sorcerer (and probably better than for the wizard, altho most are the other way around for sure).

Incantatrix is very good for sorcerers, altho instant metamagic benefits wizards more, everything else benefits the sorcerer more (bonus metamagic feats, improved metamagic, etc).

Eldritch Knight is better for sorcerers, since it's basically the same, but they lose less (wizard bonus feats), same for Arcane Trickster.

Dragon Disciple is not available to wizards, altho it's technically a fighter PrC, anyways.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

3) They get spells a level later than wizards, making it harder for them to qualify for classes with '3rd level arcane casting' or the like required by at least one level.

But at least they will get all the nifty benefits of reaching 6th level (+1 to all saves, +1 BAB ).

BTW, I find it funny, that you assume sorcerers and wizards to be balanced, but then go on and list all the arguments for why they are not, but say, that you don't want to talk about sorcerer-wizard balance.

Sorcerers get spontaneous casting... it doesn't help when getting a PrC, obviously, but it is why they don't get all that stuff you listed up there. Since you assume, that sorcerers and wizards are balanced, all that stuff is taken care of already (balanced with spontaneous casting) and thus your whole argument is moot.



Bye
Thanee

 

[Moleculo]

In addition to the short spear, they also get the crossbow.

just a point on accuracy, the wizard gets this as well, right?.