Sorceror in current edition worse than wizard?

[LuYangShih]

The point being, what's said AFTER the fact does not always eflect what was intended BEFORE hand. Sometimes it's simply easier to shrug and say "meant to do that" ... even when it's not true.

I prefer to trust the designers on what the intent of what they wrote was, instead of leaving it up to interpetation. YMMV.

That, or noone ever bothered to playtest BBB, because with absolutely free scribing costs, it IS stupid NOT to take it.

Anytime not doing something is considered "stupid" or "suicide" ... there's something wrong.

I personally have no problems with Boccobs Blessed Book. But, I also think the scribing costs for Wizards are ridiculous without the existence of an item to negate the problem. If it is really as imbalanced as you seem to think, I'm sure they'll fix it in 3.5E.

Very very very very VERY rarely will the Sorceror not know an applicable spell for a given, general situation, when the wizard would likely have prepared an apropriate spell ahead of time.

You know what, I've played both wizards and Sorcerors; I don't think you've ever PLAYED a sorceror.

Knows too few spells? BAH! If the player is careful in his selection of spells, and knows how and when and where and WHY to apply each one, well, there're plenty of options open to him or her, in almost any situation.

Almost any situation, perhaps, but not all situations. Not all encounters require the same limited pool of spells to deal with best, but the Sorcerer always has to draw from that limited pool of spells to get the job done, as ineffecient as that may be.

The Wizard will eitehr have fewer spells prepared (overall) than the Sorceror knows, each day -- or the Wizard will be a "one-hit wonder" in terms of any given spell.

I disagree, and that has not been my experience. If anything, it's the Sorcerer who is a "one hit wonder", as they often know only ONE spell of a given level, and two or three of another.

Even just in terms of scroll cost, the Wizard still doesn't get those spells for free.

Assuming you are playing with the core rules, the cost is hardly prohibitive and will not set the Wizard back significantly. Even if you house rule Boccobs Blessed Book, the amount of GP the Wizard will likely spend on scribing spells into his spellbook is hardly crippling.

As has been pointed out to you -- since nothing official says otherwise, it's not a houserule, it's a difference of interpretation..

You can "interpret" quite a few of the rules in the book in a different way than you were meant to. That doesn't make it official, or any less of a house rule. The designers have stated what the intention of Boccobs Blessed Book is, which makes disallowing Boccobs Blessed Book a house rule.

High or low magic isn't the issue. It's DM effort to maintain a balanced game that is.

Of course high and low magic is an issue. If the Wizard is in a magic rich world where he can stroll down to the magic shop, and pick and choose whatever spells he wants, as well as have more money to do so, it gives him an advantage over the Sorcerer.

Likewise, if the Sorcerer is in a world where few if any magic shops exist, and magic is scarce and rare, he will have an advantage over the Wizard, because his magic is almost purely inherent.

Or two levels of Blackguard. *shrug* And it's an option NOT open to a wizard (or at the least, not as effective for a wizard as for a sorceror).

I still don't think pointing out varying multiclass rules really adds anything to a discussion of whether or not Wizards and Sorcerers are balanced against each other. A Wizard could just as easily take levels of PrCs that give benefits based on the Intelligence score, but that doesn't make the class any more or less balanced against the Sorcerer.

Okay, we'll lop off the Ghoul's charisma bonus ... so the saves all drop by ... *gasp* all of 4 points each.

The point I was making is, given the discussion is based on whether or not the Wizard is balanced against the Sorcerer, why add other, mostly irrelevant extra information into the mix?

I never said most do. Most wizards don't play in games where the DM hands out new spells (either on scrolls, or in spellbooks) like they were candy, either.

In most middle to high magic worlds, it is farily easy for Wizards to acquire new spells from magic shops.

Oh, but you DO.

Seriously -- hwo many third-level attacks pells do you NEED? Give me a couple Elemental Substitution feats, and my sorceror can have an applicable spell for just about any opponent -- with no second-guessing during spell prep, either.

Who said I'm talking purely combat? That's the entire point. A Wizard can handle almost any task, from spying, to scouting, to investigation, to travel and exploration, to combat, and so on, with the vast array of spells at his disposal. Meanwhile, the Sorcerer can handle a few of those areas, but he can't handle them all, and if he tries, he ends up far less effective than a Wizard will be.

You keep assuming a Sorceror will run into a situation in which his spells (eventually 34 of them, 43 including cantrips!) will all be useless.

Yet you assume the same will never happen to the Wizard.

I do not assume anything. I'm merely pointing out that the Wizard will have access to a much wider variety of spells, and thus can handle many more tasks than a Sorcere can, because of his limited focus.

Actually, by "wimp" I don't mean only number of encounters per day. I've seen some encounters where the casters were "dry" only 3/4 of the way through (sufficient numbers of targets will DO that).

I don't really see why just one big encounter would do much, considering the party will likely take time to rest afterwards, thus allowing the Wizard to regain his full powers before the next big encounter happens. The only way I've ever seen for a well prepared Wizard to really run out of spells is either A) Truly massive encounters, in which case he can fall back on his wands and scrolls, or B) a number of smaller encounters, dispersed before or after the big encounter. YMMV, of course.

Make an ECL 25 wizard, and we'll see how well you do against Thraven the Unclean.

Go to www.rpol.net, and check out the game "The Exodus", under the Arena category. Use the characetr generation rules there (that's the game Thraven's made for, though he's not gotten the final green light for use there, just yet).

Heck, join Exodus; once your wizard is up and running, and Thraven is also ... we'll see who outdoes who. If you think Wizards are more powerful ... make a wizard powerful enough to kick Thraven's unliving teeth in.

IOW, "put up or shut up", because I'm getting tired of your assumptions and presumptions (90% or more of which aren't even near to being in SPITTING range of the truth).

I don't consider Arena Games, or Games Of Death, a proper way to test the balance of a character, or class. The true balance of a character comes in actual play, when adventuring as part of a group. And, to me at least, the Wizard is more effective in the standard adventuring party than a Sorcerer.

 

[Pax]

I personally have no problems with Boccobs Blessed Book. But, I also think the scribing costs for Wizards are ridiculous without the existence of an item to negate the problem.

You WOULD, given your stated preferecne for Wizards.

Almost any situation, perhaps, but not all situations. Not all encounters require the same limited pool of spells to deal with best, but the Sorcerer always has to draw from that limited pool of spells to get the job done, as ineffecient as that may be.

Again, the Sorceror will know a number of spells comparable to how many a Wizard PREPARES each day.

I disagree, and that has not been my experience. If anything, it's the Sorcerer who is a "one hit wonder", as they often know only ONE spell of a given level, and two or three of another.

Saying that proves you haven't even read the PHB entry for Sorcerors. ONE spell, TWO or THREE spells? Hah! At high levels -- 20th, is what we've been debating back and forth, so far -- sorcerors know 3 to 5 spells of EVERY level from 1 to 9.

Assuming you are playing with the core rules, the cost is hardly prohibitive and will not set the Wizard back significantly. Even if you house rule Boccobs Blessed Book, the amount of GP the Wizard will likely spend on scribing spells into his spellbook is hardly crippling.

Last time, lackwit -- it's an interpretive difference, until and unless the fAQ and/or errata say otherwise.

And I dunno about you, I call 50-80 thousand gp spent scribing fairly significant.

You can "interpret" quite a few of the rules in the book in a different way than you were meant to.

You're living proof of THAT.

That doesn't make it official, or any less of a house rule. The designers have stated what the intention of Boccobs Blessed Book is, which makes disallowing Boccobs Blessed Book a house rule.

They have stated what their intent is NOW, but that does not mean they intended that when teh WROTE it.

BEsides which, apocryphal statements by people after the fact, regardles of what book(s) their name shows up in, are really worth no moe than what *I* say ... or what *you* say, even!

Of course high and low magic is an issue. If the Wizard is in a magic rich world where he can stroll down to the magic shop, and pick and choose whatever spells he wants, as well as have more money to do so, it gives him an advantage over the Sorcerer.

And the Sorceror can stroll in right alongside the Wizard, and invest the scrol-and-scribe money into a wand or two, to cover the rare spell he "needs" but doens't know.

I still don't think pointing out varying multiclass rules really adds anything to a discussion of whether or not Wizards and Sorcerers are balanced against each other. A Wizard could just as easily take levels of PrCs that give benefits based on the Intelligence score, but that doesn't make the class any more or less balanced against the Sorcerer.

Benefits based on INT score?

Name me any two froma WOTC source -- which don't base the benefit(s) on whatever attribute the character uses for spellcasting.

The point I was making is, given the discussion is based on whether or not the Wizard is balanced against the Sorcerer, why add other, mostly irrelevant extra information into the mix?

But it's not irrelevant. The sorceror's high charisma can be turned into an advantage. You could go Cleric/Sorceror/Geomancer, for example. Clerics benefit more than a tiny bit form a decent charisma.

Who said I'm talking purely combat? That's the entire point. A Wizard can handle almost any task, from spying, to scouting, to investigation, to travel and exploration, to combat, and so on, with the vast array of spells at his disposal. Meanwhile, the Sorcerer can handle a few of those areas, but he can't handle them all, and if he tries, he ends up far less effective than a Wizard will be.

If the Wizard is prepared for "any situation", then he's a one-hit-wonder; he'll have one, maybe two iterations of any given spell ... because he's spreading himself so thin.

Y'see, that's the one thing you're overlooking: you have to prepare Wizard spells hours beforehand.

I do not assume anything. I'm merely pointing out that the Wizard will have access to a much wider variety of spells, and thus can handle many more tasks than a Sorcere can, because of his limited focus.

Strategically, yes -- IOW, if the wizard knwos BEFOREHAND, what to prepare with, he has an edge. The Wizard can also afford to lern a couple spells intending them SOLELY to satisfy Item Creation prerequisites.

However, you can only have so many spells prepared each day.

I don't really see why just one big encounter would do much, considering the party will likely take time to rest afterwards, thus allowing the Wizard to regain his full powers before the next big encounter happens. The only way I've ever seen for a well prepared Wizard to really run out of spells is either A) Truly massive encounters, in which case he can fall back on his wands and scrolls, or B) a number of smaller encounters, dispersed before or after the big encounter. YMMV, of course.

OH, the wizard has WANDS?

Well, so does the Sorceror; only the sorceror buys wands for utility, instead of raw firepower or ammunition.

I don't consider Arena Games, or Games Of Death, a proper way to test the balance of a character, or class. The true balance of a character comes in actual play, when adventuring as part of a group. And, to me at least, the Wizard is more effective in the standard adventuring party than a Sorcerer.

You're the one who keeps saying Wizards are more powerful than sorcerors. Not more useful, not better team players, but more powerful.

Put your money where your mouth is, troll.

 

[Zhure]

Now, now, name calling serves no end.

Personally, I feel Sorcerers have the slight edge. In any game I've played a Sorcerer in, no one will play a Wizard to disprove me. I keep hoping.

I refuse to play a Wizard, I feel they're so disabled. I also realize that's my opinion vs a fact. I'm sure one could build a competent Wizard if one could predict with certainty more than one or two spells per day that would be useful.

I have seen many Clerics who have to prepare like a Wizard. Usually they can at least burn their prepared junk spells for some curative spells, so at least the slots don't go wasted.

The only Wizard worth a hoot, IMO, is an Illusionist or a Transmuter, since their spells are either flexible or buff (in that order). In my experience, the only time a Wizard is superior is if the character somehow knows in advance exactly what spells he will need.

While the Wizard can supplement his castings with Wands, the Sorcerer can do the same. Also true for scrolls, etc. My 5th level Sorcerer has a small cache of Sleep scrolls left over from low levels... gotta sell them now that I'm getting closer to 8th. We don't want for a Wizard in that party of eight.

Greg

 

[Plane Sailing]

In my experience Sorcerers are better than wizards at 1st level, trail behind them until about 8th level and then come into their own.

To recap a point that others have already made: A wizard has supreme strategic flexibility. A sorcerer has supreme tactical flexibility.

A sorcerer can be the king of metamagic, far more so than the wizard. Most wizards who are able would keep a silent dispel magic or silent dimension door to escape from a silence spell... but if it doesn't work, or he gets hit by another, what can he do? A sorcerer in the same situation can decide to cast *any* of his spells bar the top level ones silently whenever he wants to. My current sorcerer doesn't intend to learn Empower until 9th level (since it is only at 10th level it becomes really significant, with empowered fireballs in her case. No 1st/2nd spells I want to empower). Her first three feats were still spell, silent spell and enlarge spell - all of which are only +1 spell level, and give lots of opportunity for mixing and matching even though she's currently only 4th level.

The ability of high level sorcerers to burn high level slots to power additional low level spells can be useful in some circumstances, but it is the ability to metamagic what you want, when you want that gives a mid-to-high level sorcerer his staying power.

Cheers

 

[Kae'Yoss]

(and isn't there an ECL for Fey-ri so you'd be 21st or 22nd level)

Fey'ri have a level adjustment of +2 - or +3 if you choose dimension door or enervation as spell-like ability. So you already lose spell power compared to a gold elf caster (or human, or whatever standard race). Add a couple of other class levels to it and the character will have a serious power deficiency. I really don't think that the power or the versatility you get from that will make up for that.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

we simply write up our ultimate goal we wish to acheive (btw, i took DR so most normal weapons can't kill me with my measly 6 hp. We however use a broken down system, which means when they do reach level 20, i will only be 17, but when they reach level 3, i'll be level 2...level 5/level 3, level 6/level 3, and after that it goes on normally...it's to let the outsider not die 100%, because wish and miracle spells are hard to come by...)

AFAIK, fey'ri are native outsiders, and can be raised and resurrected just like humans or elves.

 

[Darklone]

No 1st/2nd spells I want to empower). Her first three feats were still spell, silent spell and enlarge spell - all of which are only +1 spell level, and give lots of opportunity for mixing and matching even though she's currently only 4th level.

No empowered bulls strength, cat's grace and endurance for the whole party ?

 

[bret]

Out of Curiosity...what WOULD the best combination of Rogue/Fighter/Wizard be? and PLZ don't say 'oh drop this class completely, and infact jsut start wizard'...

[ snip ]

My original idea as you know was Rogue3/Fighter2/Wiz15...

R3/F2/W15
BAB 2 + 2 + 7 = 11/6/1
Fort 1+3+5=9
Reflex 3 +0+5 = 8
Will 1 +0+9 = 10

Caster level 15.

Assuming you start as a Rogue:
Avg HP 6 + 3.5*2 + 5.5*2 + 2.5*15 = 61.5
For comparison, Cleric HP = 93.5

You aren't going to be able to compete in Melee without a tremendous Con.

Trying a different solution:
R4/Wiz6/Arcane Trickster10
BAB 3 + 3 + 5 = 11/6/1
Fort 1 + 2 + 3 = 6
Reflect 4 + 2 + 7 = 13
Will 1 + 5 + 7 = 13

Caster level 16.

Assuming you start as a Rogue:
Avg HP 6 + 3.5*3 + 2.5 * 6 + 2.5 * 10 = 56.5

You will not have as many weapons you are proficient with, but you will have better Reflex and Will saves and some nice special abilities.

You could take the Toughness feat and Great Fortitude to partially make up for the difference. You still will not be able to stand up to anything in a melee fight.


Going a little bit more melee (and giving up a lot in spell power):

Rogue 3 / Fighter 3 / Wizard 4 / Spellsword 10

BAB 2 + 3 + 2 + 7 = 14 / 9 / 4
Fort 1 + 3 + 1 + 7 = 12
Reflex 3 + 1 + 1 + 3 = 8
Will 1 + 1 + 4 + 7 = 13

Caster Level 8 (Big hit, I know)

Avg HP:
6 + 2 * 3.5 + 3 * 5.5 + 4 * 2.5 + 10 * 4.5 = 84.5

Can cast spells in Breastplate + Small Shield. Can do better if you go for Mithril Armor.

Now you might be able to take on a little melee without getting totally wiped out.

There are a lot of variations of this build, you need to decide how important combat vs. Magic is to your character concept.


It is *really* tough to combine arcane magic and fighting prowess in a character.

 

[Zhure]

It is *really* tough to combine arcane magic and fighting prowess in a character.

Indirectly I disagree. In those cases a Cleric with the Magic and Strength domains or Magic and War are competetive in the typical Wizard role and Fighter role. BAB of 15 and able to use arcane spell trigger and arcane spell completion items.

Greg

 

[Fenes 2]

From my experience, spontaneous casting beats a wide selection of spells to prepare any day, at least in my campaigns. My sorceress-14 has failed a dispel check more than once and had to cast another dispel or greater dispel or two to succeed. Same goes when our party needed knock - a single casting often did not suffice. Dimension Door? Same pattern again. Many situations needed more than a single casting.

People keep toting the wizards horn, and forget that the sorcerer can cast whatever spell he knows as often as he has slots of that level or higher free. It may not be the ideal spell for the situation, but the number of times you can cast it will make up for it. And when you are in a situation where, f.e., 3 wall of fires will be better than one a sorcerer really shines. Need to give some covering fire? Keep casting that fireball for a minute or two on any enemy that shows up. Going up against an enemy that only force effects will hurt? No problem, keep casting magic missile. It may not be the strongest spell, but you can contribute all day long, and with empower spell used twice or even thrice on it it packs quite a punch.

And, last but not least, as a sorcerer you will never be in the situation that the perfect spell for the situation you are in is the spell you could but did not prepare this morning... nothing is as frustrating as this.

I played a spellcaster in 2E, and all my vaunted arsenal of spells boiled down to the "general menu" of the usual mix of damage and utility spells - in effect, I had less flexibility than a sorcerer in 3E.