Which Is The Stronger Character Class - Sorcerer or Wizard?

[EyeontheMountain]

? what is that supposed to mean? genuinely confused.

Nothing there to understnad, don't feel bad.

 

[Victim]

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.

Sure, if by "slightly different spell list that focuses more on immediate, flashy, and powerful magic," you really mean more restrictive, and weaker. Many bread and butter spells have been bumped up in level. The focus on flashy magic comes from removing some of the non flashy stuff, not by any advantages.

The class pays for its skill and HD advantages with its weaker spell list. I dunno about you, but if I'm playing a wizard or sorcerer, it's all about spells. Fringe bennies at the expense of good spells is not a good trade.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Wizards get scribe scroll for free. That means they can basically make scrolls at half price although it costs them XP. However, a sorcerer can just buy scrolls at full price. Since the sorcerer doesn't need to expend gold to expand his spellbook (a wizard with only his 2 free spells per level is like a sorcerer who needs to prepare), he'll probably have enough money to make up the difference.

As a sorcerer, it sucks that you know so few spells, especially for the first few levels.

As a wizard, it sucks when dead spells eat away at both your staying power and flexibility.

I generally prefer to play wizard characters, but I can definitely see the advantages fo being a sorcerer.

 

[Slife]

I personally like the homebrew Blue Mage class more than the sorcerer.

I guess the sorcerer is just too vanilla for me. It feels more like a trial run for spontaneous casting than a full class.

 

[Tuzenbach]

I personally like the homebrew Blue Mage class more than the sorcerer.

I guess the sorcerer is just too vanilla for me. It feels more like a trial run for spontaneous casting than a full class.

Learning spells through experiencing them? I was under the impression that I came up with this. Looks as if I'm wrong!

IIRC, there was much chatter on the House Rules board about "building a better Sorcerer" circa January 2004. The above concept was but one of my contributions. Now I see that I was three months too late!

 

[Li Shenron]

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

I think there were several 3.5 changes which seemed to be targeted at "reducing the effectiveness of casting the same spell over and over".

- splitting multipurpose spells
- halving spell focus bonus
- not stacking the same metamagic

and then changes to selected spells which were "too good".

But I have no idea why no one at WotC realized that there was an entire class in the core rules which is based on casting the same few spells over and over. I seriously doubt that WotC believed there was a need to tone down the Sorcerer because it was too powerful.

 

[Li Shenron]

Remind me to tell you about the time when we ran across a hydra and our only source of acid or fire was my pile of Lesser Acid Orb scrolls.

Of course you never really know what spells you're going to need, if you always knew perhaps playing the game wouldn't be as fun

Still IMHO it's not a particularly good tactic to prepare 5 Magic Missile and also scribe a scroll of Magic Missile "in case there are 6 zombies instead of 5", because then what are you going to say if there are 7? If you constantly run out of combat spells, perhaps a more structural change is needed to your character.

I do think that Scribe Scroll is a great feat for every preparation caster, just not for offensive spells.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Sure, if by "slightly different spell list that focuses more on immediate, flashy, and powerful magic," you really mean more restrictive, and weaker.

I didn't see it that way. I'd call it more "playing to the class's strengths," which basically boils down to "blowing stuff up." Obviously I'm oversimplifying, but judging from a lot of the posts in this thread, I think most people would agree with the sentiment

Many bread and butter spells have been bumped up in level. The focus on flashy magic comes from removing some of the non flashy stuff, not by any advantages.

Didn't realize some spells got a level bump. I'll have to take another look at that. Even so, it's easy enough to house rule.

Fringe bennies at the expense of good spells is not a good trade.

I'm not sure what you mean by "fringe bennies." Are you talking about skill points?. How about extra hit points? Do you consider that a fringe benefit? The ability to eschew expensive material components by paying experience? I can see why some wouldn't like that, but the cost is relatively small, and you end saving a lot more for equipment (read: flexibility).

Plus, if you really don't like the spell list, house-ruling old spells back in is easy to do. Heck, if you wanted to ditch the CBoEM list and repalce it with the Core Sorc/Wizard list, I doubt it'd break the class.

What you see as "fringe bennies" I see as a big step in the right direction. If sorcerers need a power bump I think a few minor tweaks can go a long way.

 

[Larcen]

My take is that wizards are more powerful but sorcerers are more fun and relaxing to play.

I usually go with sorcerers because I dont want the headaches of all that spell planning. With a sorcerer I don't worry if I have prepared the proper spells for the day ahead. What I have is what I have. Plus travelling light without a big musty spellbook to lug around everywhere, and still blasting people with fireballs on a daily basis, is not just practical... it's cool.

So to all you wizards out there I say: Sure properly played you are more powerful. But you will NEVER be as cool as us. And our high CHA gets us all the wenches.

 

[Tuzenbach]

A thought I had two-ish years ago regarding the Sorcerer involved his hit dice.

AIUI, the whole concept is that the Sorcerer is supposedly "born magical", owing to some sort of demonic/draconic/outer-planar lineage, or whatever.

That said, does it not make a bit of sense that the Socerer is a tad tougher than the Wizard?

Then I started thinking of dice & power & percentages & rolling & identity & etc., etc., etc......

I reasoned that a d6 for the Sorcerer's hit dice, while probably a better fit in terms of relative comparison with the Wizard, would just be too powerful & draw unnecessary parallels with the rogue class. That is, too many people would say "a Rogue's hit dice and ALMOST the Wizard's full spell compliment? Who'd WOULD'NT play a Sorcerer?!" Clearly, then, a d6 for a Sorcerer is out of bounds.

Then I happened across the (now defunct) Gamescience.net website & learned that a d5 existed.

At that point I realized that this d5 die might be a rather advantageous way of not just granting the Sorcerer his or her own unique characterization & identity, but of balancing the Sorcerer relative to the Wizard.

It is with the following queries that I resurrect this thread before it actually has the chance to die:

1) If the Sorcerer used a d5 for its hit points, would the Sorcerer then be better balanced relative to the Wizard?

2) Is using a d5 for the Sorcerer's hit die a good idea?

3) Do you own a d5?

 

[Harm]

A flip side to this is if you can just buy any scroll you want at a local scroll shop the sorceror gets MUCH better. But most DMs in my exerience don't play this way.

I did some arena playing on the WotC boards a couple years ago with a sorceror, and the ability to purchase scrolls of any core spell you wanted was a HUGE power boost. But that is not indicitive of a typical game.

It's how the game was intended however. Scrolls are a low-priced magic item and magic item availability is primarly based on price. Scrolls should be commonly available. All those low level wizards with free scribe scroll feat would be more than eager to make some gold with it to pay off their tuition. Besides if scrolls weren't available, how are wizards getting their spells aside from the somewhat cheesy gift ones the get each level? It's pretty hard to make the arguement that wizards are more flexible than sorcerers when there are no scrolls out there to scribe... without scrolls, wizards would be pretty similar to sorcerers for spells known.

Hence I don't really consider scribe scroll to be a huge advantage. Why spend XP when you can spend extra gold? Heward's Handy Haversack + a couple dozen scrolls and a sorcerer has most of the flexibility of a wizard but with more spell slots. Lower skill points and the level after spell tiers however are a big bite for the sorcerer.

3) Do you own a d5?

It's called a d10 + math.