sorcerers

[nittanytbone]

Sorcerer benefits:

More spells per day
Cast on the fly
Easy to use metamagic feats -- you may only know one 5th level spell, but you know a bunch of 3rd level spells and could empower that fireball and STILL have 5th level spell slots left over
Easier to maintain with less bookkeeping -- you don't have to keep track of a tome of spells
Access to superior weaponry
Access to the best social skill available, bluff (look at the synergies across the board with this skill) and a prime req that supports social characters
Can still use spell-trigger and completion magic items to get versatility in spells, especially spell levels 1-4

Wizard Benefits:
Gets higher spell levels sooner, which makes for an optimal eldritch knight or other dual-class type character
Gets one extra feat per five levels
Wider spell selection

Honestly, I think they're both pretty balanced. If you carefully pick a metamagic feat or two with your sorcerer those higher level spell slots will never be wasted.

Alternatively, sorcerers can make ideal battlemages by focusing on spells without somatic components (true strike, hold portal, flare, etc) or with longer durations (endure elements) and using still spell to allow casting in heavier armors. A wizard in a similar build would have similar limitations for spell choice and get fewer spells per day to boot.

 

[irdeggman]

Again it all depends on the style of game play as to whether a wozard is better than a sorcerer.

One thing I don't like about the sorcerer class is that is so bland. What I mean is that they don't get any real level dependent benefits. Sure they get more spells and theri familiar gets better but they don't get bonus feats or any specific abilities that can make them unique. At least IMO.

Clerics also have that problem with nothing really happening as they gain levels except for spells - even though they do get to chose 2 domains at first level to help tailor them some.

Regardless a sorcerer is a very versatile class and can be extremely usefull in the right kind of game.

 

[Merlion]

Sorcerers are underpowered when compared to other casters. They are also ill concieved in many ways.

The power of a spellcaster lies largely (thats largely, not totally) in versatility, and sorcerers are by far the least versatile of spellcasters due to their absurdly tiny number of spells known.


Yea, they can cast more spells than the wizard but generally, especially once you get out of low levels, that doesnt help much. Especially in the context of combat. A Sorcerer and a Wizard each get exactly the same number of actions per round.

Wizards have access to more spells, but they really need to spend cash or find spellbooks to capitalize on this diversity. Otherwise, they get two spells per level. At higher levels, sorcerers get three or four new spells per level, which actually means that they may outpace wizards

Not really. a 20th level Sorcerer knows 34 spells, not counting Cantrips. a 20th level Wizard, starting out with a 15 or 16 Int and never spending any money on spells at all (which would never actually happen realistically) will know 43 or 44 spells. not counting cantrips.

And the big thing about it is, the Wizard will always have access to way more of his highest level spells, much faster. Not only are Sorcerers delayed a level in spell aqquasition, even once they gain a new spell level, they only know a single spell of that level. Wizards gain access to a spell level a level early, and can automatically learn 2 spells of that level, and two more the next level.

And lets not even get into comparing the Sorcerer with the Divine casters and their automatic spell access.


Sorcerers arent unplayable. They are not as underpowered as the Cleric is overpowered. And for some they are great...a person who wants to play a caster who is mainly artilary for instance, or someone who wants some arcane magic with no bookeeping or complicated spells. But I find most people who want to play a caster want it for the versatility, which the sorcerer doesnt have. Sure he can cast on the fly. But sadly, he has very little to cast.


Also, the Wizard and the Sorcerer are mostly redundant. They have different flavour text, and cast differently, but have exactly the same spell list and are otherwise mostly identical...spellcasters with nothing else.

 

[Thanee]

With the addition of metamagic rods and sudden metamagic, even the sorcerors forté of spontaneous metamagic is eroded.

Metamagic rods are not spontaneous (unless you cast spontaneously), wizards have to prepare their use ahead of time, as normal.

Although I personally have no great love for Quicken Spell, a lot of people like it but Wizards made the stupid decision that a sorceror can NEVER cast a quickened spell, not even with a metamagic rod.

This is simply wrong. Sorcerers need an extra feat (Arcane Preparation), but then they can use Quicken Spell just fine, same as the rods.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Felix]

Yea, they can cast more spells than the wizard but generally, especially once you get out of low levels, that doesnt help much. Especially in the context of combat. A Sorcerer and a Wizard each get exactly the same number of actions per round.

True. but:

A sorcerer has access to all the spells the does know, while the wizard only knows those spells he has prepared, as far as any single combat is concerned.

So, the more time your DM allows to prep for combat, the more the DM favors wizards. The more combat comes on the party unawares, the more the DM favors the sorcerer.

And you say a wiz and a sorc have the same number of rounds to act in a combat, but the sorcerer is ready for combat more times per day than a wiz because of his increased spells per day.

If your DM only throws one combat per day at your party, then he will favor the wizard. The more combats, the more he favors the sorcerer.

Not really. a 20th level Sorcerer knows 34 spells, not counting Cantrips. a 20th level Wizard, starting out with a 15 or 16 Int and never spending any money on spells at all (which would never actually happen realistically) will know 43 or 44 spells. not counting cantrips.

True, but:

If you're going to have the wizard stocked up with scrolls to scribe into his spellbook, then you must give the sorcerer all those same scrolls (to equalize the wealth). At this point, both classes can cast all those spells, but the sorc will only be able to cast the spell once before having to buy it again, and the wizard will have to spend a part of his day memorizing the thing.

So, the sorcerer will have access to, and be able to cast, just as many different spells as the wizard, he just won't be able to cast them over and over. The wizard will be able to cast these spells repeatedly, as long as he had the foresight to memorize the spell.

And don't dismiss the fact that you can't remove a sorcerer's spells from him... you can only prevent him from casting them. A wizard, well his spellbook is his achilles' heel. It makes him vulnerable to attack, and it also makes him a target for other wizards who don't want to spend the money to buy all those spells. A sorcerer has neither the heel, nor the reward for other casters that do away with him out of hand.

And the big thing about it is, the Wizard will always have access to way more of his highest level spells, much faster. Not only are Sorcerers delayed a level in spell aqquasition, even once they gain a new spell level, they only know a single spell of that level. Wizards gain access to a spell level a level early, and can automatically learn 2 spells of that level, and two more the next level.

And this is to balance the wizard and the sorcerer, along with the lack of sorcerer bonus feats. Were the sorc to have the same spell level progression and feat aquisition as the wizard, the sorc would be undoubtedly more powerful. Ergo, on other levels not including spell progression and feat aquisition, the sorc should be stronger. And he is.

And for some they are great...a person who wants to play a caster who is mainly artilary for instance,

Good use for sorcerers.

or someone who wants some arcane magic with no bookeeping

Also true, much less to keep track of.

or complicated spells.

I must disagree. Because the sorcerer knows fewer spells, the best spells for the sorcerer to pick are the complicated spells that can be applied in many situations, and have many uses. Complicated spells are the sorcerer's bread and butter.

But I find most people who want to play a caster want it for the versatility, which the sorcerer doesnt have.

Not in the number of spells, but a surviving sorcerer must find versatility in the uses of his spells.

Sure he can cast on the fly. But sadly, he has very little to cast.

Happily, he can create a wide variety of effects with those spells on the fly.

Also, the Wizard and the Sorcerer are mostly redundant.

Only in the spells they can choose from. The way these two classes can react to any situation is completely different. The sorcerer is an improvisationalist, the wizard a prepare-o-phile.

And two clerics of different gods have mostly the same spells to choose from, but I would never say that they have to be redundant. If they are played as two different kinds of clerics, then they will not be redundant. If they decide to be opposite sides of the same coin, well, look out undead.

Any classes can be redundant. It is up to the players to make their characters individuals.

 

[Thanee]

Not really. a 20th level Sorcerer knows 34 spells, not counting Cantrips. a 20th level Wizard, starting out with a 15 or 16 Int and never spending any money on spells at all (which would never actually happen realistically) will know 43 or 44 spells. not counting cantrips.

Right, and the sorcerer has all these spells available, all the time (plus *all* 6th level and lower via Limited Wish), while the wizard always has to pick, which of the spells to learn and how often. There are many, many ways to expand the sorcerers spells known via magic items (Heighten Spell, wands, scrolls, ring of theurgy, etc) to keep up with the wizard's versatility, but the wizard has a very hard time to keep up with the flexibility of the sorcerer - especially in combat situations, where you need to be able to access your resources immediately. And in a campaign, where your magical reserves (slots) are under a high amount of stress, the extra high level slots also make a big difference. The biggest advantage of the wizard here is the higher number of different high level spells, of course.

The wizard has the *potential* to have the right spell for every situation, but that's just hypothetical and completely irrelevant, unless there is a 15 minute break to prepare. The big equalizer is what spells the wizard has prepared *actually*, and that can very often result in a suboptimal configuration, especially, if some spells are needed more than just once.

Still, because of the other stuff (feats, skill points, slower spell level advancement and such) the wizard is *slightly* 'better' than the sorcerer on average, but not much. They are almost even.

People who play the sorcerer as a mobile artillery platform just waste a huge amount of their potential. Small wonder, that they appear underpowered then. The warmage is a much better choice for that.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

A bit off-topic, but I started a topic a while back on sorcerers asking the question "has anyone found any spells that aren't what you'd call "normal" spells for a sorcerer (not magic missile, not fireball, etc.) that they have discovered to be really great, even surprisingly good, for sorcerers?" Nobody posted any. So while I've got all these sorcerer supporters here, I thought I'd ask again. As an example, someone over at the WotC boards talks up Swift Fly, from Complete Adventurer. He says that for a sorcerer, it's superior to Fly.

 

[Denaes]

A bit off-topic, but I started a topic a while back on sorcerers asking the question "has anyone found any spells that aren't what you'd call "normal" spells for a sorcerer (not magic missile, not fireball, etc.) that they have discovered to be really great, even surprisingly good, for sorcerers?"

Why would Magic Missile & Fireball be "normal" Sorcerer Spells? They happen to be the most popular combat spells in the game for any spellcaster. There are clerics who work the system to get those spells.

D&D is still a combat game, so the way I see it, with the limit to the number of spells you can learn, you want one attack spell per level - preferrably not related to an element.

Each level has great spells for a Sorcerer and while in most normal D&D games I wouldn't go without a damage spell, I say MM & FB are only so good due to lack of better choices.

Cantrips:
* Arcane Mark
* Message
* Detect Magic

Level One:
* Sleep
* Silent Image
* Enlarge Person
* Reduce Person
* Magic Missile

Level Two:
* Arcane Lock
* Detect Thoughts
* Mirror Image
* Minor Image
* Alter Self
* Knock
* Scortching Ray

Level Three:
* Tongues
* Knock
* Suggestion
* Major Image
* Fireball

MM, SR & FB aside, these are all spells that are either indispensible in most games or have a good solid combat/out of combat use. Pretty much spells that a Wizard couldn't count on memorizing "just in case I needed to Lock a door" or make a simple illusion.

A Sorcerer need not worry about that sort of thing.

Obviously combat spells aside, use will vary campaign by campaign. Some GMs arn't very open to utility spells or spells used in creative ways. Some players don't like playing games or magic users like that. Honestly I think it works better for fewer players. When you have like 4+ players, everyone is going to want to try their solution to a problem and people arn't going to want to let the sorcerer solve all the problems, but they're very veratile with a good selection of dual use (combat/non combat) spells.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Why would Magic Missile & Fireball be "normal" Sorcerer Spells? They happen to be the most popular combat spells in the game for any spellcaster.

I think your second sentence answers the question posed in the first sentence.

 

[Denaes]

I think your second sentence answers the question posed in the first sentence.

MM & FB are "normal" Sorcerer spells because they're the most popular combat spells for all casters?

No that doesn't answer that question at all. There is no reason to say that they're more popular for Sorcerers than they are for Wizards or Clerics who have access to them as well. They're just the most popular lower level combat spells, period. Nothing to do with the class.

There arn't any "normal" spells for a Sorcerer. To say say so would be to insinuate that there is a specific build that is right for a Sorcerer, which isn't true.

There is a build common to all Arcane casters, which is to have combat spells as this is a particularily combat oriented game. I wouldn't say that all Arcane casters go out of their way for combat effectiveness (just basically having spells to cast in combat), but I think it's far more common to see combat spells than Arcane casters without combat spells.

This has absolutely nothing to do with Sorcerers in specific, which is what the questioner had asked. It has to do with Arcane casters, the spell lists granted and the type/frequency of combats compared to an Arcane casters other abilities... ie, given so much expected combat and no natural predisposition for melee combat (unlike a cleric), it's a nobrainer that Combat spells will be chosen.