Which Is The Stronger Character Class - Sorcerer or Wizard?

[Li Shenron]

The worst sorcerer justification I've seen is that because they get nothing past level 1 its easier for them to prestige.

It might be more convenient for them to prestige, since all they lose is Familiar advancement.

But given the fact that almost all PrCls for arcane casters require a certain spell level to qualify, a Sorcerer always qualifies 1 level later.

 

[Shadeydm]

Ahh the power of cheese.

 

[Nifft]

Wizards are strategically strong. If you know what you'll be facing during the next day's encounters, you can probably destroy them. If ambushed or otherwise surprised, you may be unprepared, or forced to expend a lot of non-free resources.

Sorcerers are tactically strong. Your spell selection is strategically fixed, but your tactical selection (among spells you know) is far more flexible. You also have more raw power.

- - -

But really, it's more an issue of play style. Some people love picking spells, some people hate it. For those who love picking spells, Wizard is fun! For those who hate it, Sorcerer is pretty darn good. I've had both IMC and was surprised at how effective the Sorcerer was, because I too thought they were weak.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Psion]

In 3.0 they were balanced against each other. Slightly better the Sorcerer at level 1-2, slightly better the Wizard at levels 3-5, then basically equal.

In 3.5 the Wizard is better, especially once you start using supplements.

Along the same lines, sorcerers were really brutalized by the "divvying out" of multipurpose spells that happened in 3.5.

 

[Fishbone]

Why does this question always get asked? Shouldn't anyone with access to an online SRD, 5 minutes of time, and even the most tenuous grasp of Dungeons and Dragons fundamentals realize that the sorcerer is getting supremely shafted compared to Clerics, Druids, and Wizards?

 

[rgard]

There are really 3 classes to compare:

Generalist Wizard
Specialist Wizard
Sorcerer

I think they're all balanced. Sorcerer is generally better in combat, Wizard generally better in problem-solving.

Cheers!

We could add Beguiler, Warmage and Battle Sorcerer to the list as well.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[rgard]

Well, which one do you think is stronger? And why?

Personally I had always though that the Wizard was the stronger class. However, last night in our session the Sorcerer cast 3 Fireball spells in the space of 2 combats. That in itself is not that impressive. What was though was that he could still had another 2 to spare if he needed them.

A Wizard of the same level would have been all out of 3rd level spells at that point. Even if he hadn't been, chances are that he wouldn't have just prepared Fireball for all his 3rd level spell slots.

This made me realise that a Sorcerer could do that with any spell, not just Fireball. Any spell that is useful to cast multiple times is extremely useful to a Sorcerer. Of course a Sorcerer doesn't have the utility of a Wizard, which is one disadvantage. However one of my players strongly believes that there aren't that many useful spells available each level anyway. He thinks that there are a few spells that are "better" than the others in most situations so the Sorcerer isn't disadvantaged by a narrow spell selection at all.

Personally I'm undecided now.

Olaf the Stout

Much of the of the discussion on which is stronger hinges on the type of campaign you play in. If I'm playing an arcane caster in a combat oriented campaign, I'll go with the Sorcerer or Battle Sorcerer. If I'm playing in a campaign where there is problem solving and opportunities that can be solved/worked with a greater range of spells, I'll stick with the Wizard.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

If Sorcerers got the bonus feats I think they would be balanced (or at least a lot better balanced).

They wouldn't need to be the same set of feat choices to allow more of a difference flavor wise between the two classes (Heritage Feats or something similar instead of Item Creation Feats for example) but Wizards get faster metamagic casting, wider variety of spells to cast(spellbook vs Spells Known), more skill points (because of INT) along with the additional feats.

That is worth more than spontanious casting in my book.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Sorc = Wizard Lite.

And while I certainly think it's valuable to have a class suited to learning the game, I don't think that necessarily justifies a power discrepancy.

Me, I like the Complete Book of Eldritch Might Sorcerer. d6 HD, more skill points, an amped up version of eschew material components, and a slightly different spell list that focuses more on immediate, flashy, and powerful magic. This version will definitely make an appearance in the next game I run.

In addition, I'd give one bonus feat at first level, chosen from the Heritage feat list. Then at 15th level I was thinking of giving sorcerers access to a "domain" based on their heritage, essentially increasing their spell list across the board and granting them an interesting, unique power, much like the cleric.

I worry because the last little bit could put sorcerer over the top, but if I offer the domain ability late enough, it will discourage multiclassing and cherry-picking.

 

[iwatt]

Me, I like the Complete Book of Eldritch Might Sorcerer. d6 HD, more skill points, an amped up version of eschew material components, and a slightly different spell list that focuses more on immediate, flashy, and powerful magic.

The d6 upgrade I used in one campaign, as well as Eschew materials. It makes for tough sorcerors. A wizard with his paltry d4 can be shut down with a good hit, but the d6 and a decent con made the sorceror pretty tough (throw in some magical defenses and he was very hard to kill)