Which Is The Stronger Character Class - Sorcerer or Wizard?

[Lonely Tylenol]

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.

I give one of the Dragon Compendium lineage feats for free at 1st level. These provide what is essentially a domain to the spells-known along a certain theme, while restricting access to another themed group of spells, generally those with a particular descriptor.

I also allow sorcerers to gain a new spell level at odd-numbered levels, but they only have the spells known granted by their lineage feat, and only have the spells per day granted by their bonus spells due to a high Charisma. So a 5th level sorcerer knows one 3rd level spell, and can probably cast it once per day.

Also, they get a bonus feat which must be chosen from a list (generally metamagic, lineage, heritage, or reserve) at 6th, 12th, and 18th level. I don't give Eschew Materials for free, but I did rewrite the feat so that it essentially does what the BoEMII sorcerer's ability does: trade XP for costly components.

This has worked out okay for me.

 

[DragonLancer]

It depends what you do with them.

The wizards is powerful when you consider the sheer versatility available to the class. If you have the time, you can have a spell memorised to do almost anything.

If you take the Sorcerer as a combat mage then it wins hands down in the power stakes.

 

[CrimsonWineGlass]

With level 18+ I will always, invariably, pick a sorcerer. There, the disadvantage of a sorcerer is rendered null.

Usually, i go with a sorc at level 10-12+ though. Other than that, I go for wizard. The next level of spells is pretty valuable there.

 

[pallandrome]

I'll throw in my hat on this debate.

If it is a game with plenty of downtime, and the pace is generally determined by the players, then the wizard is MUCH more powerful. He'll usually be able to have his more rarely used utility spells scribed onto scrolls, and he'll almost certainly have his combat spells in wand form (usually as a sonic varient, for the more convenient bypassing of damage reduction). He'll also probably make himself a metamagic rod or two in the higher levels. He'll even (if he's smart) stash copies of his spellbooks stashed in hidey holes that only he knows about, JUST IN CASE one gets taken away from him. And he gets all the feats to make this possible.

BUT

In a run-and-gun game with little to no downtime, where the players have limited access to the materials and time a Wizard needs to TRULY prepare for adventuring, the Sorcerer will beat him out. Not by much, mind you, but still.

 

[drothgery]

If you take the Sorcerer as a combat mage then it wins hands down in the power stakes.

I hate to keep banging this drum but ...

As a combat caster ...

Sorcerer beats the generalist wizard.
But it's at best a wash with the specialist wizard.
And the cleric, druid, battle sorcerer, warmage and psion are just plain better.

 

[green slime]

? what is that supposed to mean? genuinely confused.

This discussion has been haunting this bored (points finger at self, yes, guilty as charged) ever since the release of 3.0. Seven years later, we have still reached no generally agreed verdict.

It comes down to a matter of taste, personal preference, and what you want for your dessert.

What flavour icecream would you like with your peach?

I apologise, I shouldn't let my boredom spill over and spoil the fun of others. I'll blame it on work... and the mistress. And the children. And a bad hair day.... The entire universe is against me, I say! .....
*calms down*
*writes note:"remember medication"*

And now, for something completely different:

IMO, (and it really is only my opinion), it's the wizard

But that is because I enjoy and value flexibility very much. When I play wizards, they invest large sums of moola/dosh/rials/clamshells trying to scrap together every possible known and unknown spell. Most of them would probably sell their own spouses, as well as the entire adventuring party, in order to get a new spell of apropriate level.

 

[Sigurd]

Is the battle in 10 minutes or 10 days?

 

[green slime]

Is the battle in 10 minutes or 10 days?

Makes no difference for a well-prepared character.

 

[Fishbone]

This discussion has been haunting this bored (points finger at self, yes, guilty as charged) ever since the release of 3.0. Seven years later, we have still reached no generally agreed verdict.

He, at least its not as bad as all the fighter weakness threads. Who hasn't bitched in them?
My position? Fighters suck, pretty much anything that doesn't full cast is sucky but the Fighter class is a double dose of triple suck. The new feats have made them slightly less sucky, but Paladins and Barbarians and Rangers are still superior.
Back on topic: I seriously don't know why this is such a frequent and heated topic of discussion. Wizards dominate sorcerers.

 

[airwalkrr]

Also I want to point out that "easier to play" is NOT a balacing factor!

Of course not, but it is a good reason to leave the class in the core rules. It is great for newbies and some players simply do not wish to keep track of a detailed spell list like a wizard's.