D&D 5E Why do Sorcerers have so few spells compared to other full Casters

[Ristamar]

These topics always seem to assume that a wizard quickly acquires an extensive number of spells via scrolls or spellbooks while ignoring the convenience and reliability of a sorcerer's innate spell knowledge. Perhaps I'm a stingy DM, but the wizards in my campaigns typically don't find all the spells they want or need, and adventuring does not allow for an abundance of quiet research. Building a library of arcana is a often a lifetime of work.

 

[Li Shenron]

These topics always seem to assume that a wizard quickly acquires an extensive number of spells via scrolls or spellbooks while ignoring the convenience and reliability of a sorcerer's innate spell knowledge.

What exactly is this convenience and reliability?

 

[Ristamar]

What exactly is this convenience and reliability?

Wow, my mistake, I completely forgot about the two automatic spells a wizard learns each time he gains a level. I need to stop posting when I'm half asleep.

The only part of my argument that remains is that a wizard may often not have access to the wide variety of spells that is presumed in these discussions. Admittedly, it's a far weaker rebuttal than my original post, but it is something I feel is taken for granted.

 

[Li Shenron]

Wow, my mistake, I completely forgot about the two automatic spells a wizard learns each time he gains a level. I need to stop posting when I'm half asleep.

Yes they do make a lot of difference

I can't really say much about how other DMs make scrolls available to Wizards for copying. It can be anything from "none" to "every spell in the book" and I just can't provide any statistics.

But as a matter of fact even if you consider the worst case for the Wizard, i.e. having only the spells known when levelling up, the Wizard still has more known spells than the Sorcerer (except one cantrip).

But that's not even the true comparison... that's merely a formal comparison of the variable we call "known spells".

A better substantial comparison takes into account the fact that even the number of prepared spells by the Wizard is bigger than the known spells by the Sorcerer. These are really what matter on an adventuring day.

With these in mind, you can see that the Wizard is someone who (even in the worst case) has each day available for casting more spells than a Sorcerer, can change the list every day, and has even more available as rituals (the Sorcerer cannot even cast Rituals!).

And the difference between Arcane Recovery and extra slots by Spell Points is numerically very small. Just do the math! The Sorcerer's advantage here is rather in the fact that Arcane Recovery is very "stiffy" (you can only do it once a day, needs a short rest, and can only recover slots you've actually already spent).

This is just to say that the 2 most common praises on Sorcerers are blatantly wrong:

- "Sorcerers cast much more spells than Wizards"
- "Sorcerers have an advantage in not needing to prepare spells beforehand"

They were true in 3e, but plain false in 5e, apparently because people haven't yet seen many groups with a Wizard and a Sorcerer simultaneouly.

 

[Li Shenron]

This is just to say that the 2 most common praises on Sorcerers are blatantly wrong:

- "Sorcerers cast much more spells than Wizards"
- "Sorcerers have an advantage in not needing to prepare spells beforehand"

They were true in 3e, but plain false in 5e, apparently because people haven't yet seen many groups with a Wizard and a Sorcerer simultaneouly.

And I forgot another one...

- "Sorcerers are an easier class to play than Wizards"

No they are not. You have to plan more carefully which spells you know exactly because they are few, and you have an additional tactical complication with spell points (more slots or more metamagic?). You should also not forget the option of dropping older spells for new ones (otherwise you'd be seriously low on high-level spells!).

 

[CapnZapp]

Yeah, I'm calling bull on Sorcs being under powered because a lack of spells known.

1. Dragon Sorcs get significantly higher (relative to Wizards) HP and Con saves. That alone is worth its weight in gold. They also effectively get +1 spells known because they don't need to prepare Mage Armor (everyone seems to forget that).

2. People apparently have zero idea how to use Metamagic. Everyone loves Quickened and Twinned. Screw that, Quickened + Heightened. Do you have any idea how many BBEG fights I've ended on my wild magic sorc because of Bend Luck + Heightened Banishment/Hold Person/etc.? A Divination Wizard can *maybe* do that once or twice a long rest because of their Portent rolls, but that's far from the nigh guarantee of the Wild Magic Sorc.

Even Draconic Sorcs get their +cha damage boost at level 6, well before Evocation Wizards pick it up at level 10 (rarely seen in most campaigns). That means significantly higher damage on their Fireballs/etc, especially if you disregard the idiotic Sage Advice about it only applying to 1 ray of a Scorching Ray.

3. For Draconic Sorcs, show me any level 14 Wizard ability that even comes close to matching zero concentration at-will perma flying?

Also, the Wild Magic table speaks for itself. By level 14 you should be encouraging your DM to let you roll after every spell and using Tides of Chaos every chance you get.

4. Sorcs have TREMENDOUSLY better multiclass options. Should this be a consideration? Probably not, but it's still true. Because they pick up con save proficiency already, they don't need to burn a feat on Res (con) or take their first level in a non-caster class. The synchronicity between Sorc x/Warlock 3 is ridiculously overpowered for a Sorc. Short rest rechargable Heightened Suggestion Spells is completely broken and requires the DM to break the rules around your character.

Are Wizards powerful? Absolutely. Terrifyingly so at higher levels. But the VAST majority of games that take place at lower levels where a Wizard is instagibbed by an enemy even looking sideways at them and fail their concentration saves all the time? Sorcs are significantly better.

The problem never was "it's weak".

The problem is "it isn't very fun"

People want themed sorcerers, but the mainstream blaster caster is the only archetype supported, because there is so few spells.

Once you've taken the essentials, there isn't enough spell choices left to support your theme. The result is that you're forced to choose between "good" and "fun".

.

 

[MoonSong]

Why penalise wizards at the same time as you buff (or fix, depending on how you see them) the sorcerer? Do you just not like wizards? It looks like you would be stealth banning them by giving them some terrible penalties so that players wouldn't want to play one.

But the designers did the same to sorcerers while buffing wizards. Nothing in the original sorcerer write up ever mentioned the class being for people who want monstruous characters, yet all 5e sorcerers -but favored souls- are more circus freaks than charming enchantresses. Out of the four arcane casters, sorcerers are the only ones that traditionally are part of the world, part of society, yet they here are reduced to feral child monsters that would be shot on sight and can only destroy things.

 

[MoonSong]

They were true in 3e, but plain false in 5e, apparently because people haven't yet seen many groups with a Wizard and a Sorcerer simultaneouly.

A lot of DMs in RPOL assume that if you have a wizard you don't need a sorcerer. And also there is a lot of self-consciousness, when there is a wizard in the party I rather play a cleric or bard so I don't get overshadowed.

The problem never was "it's weak".

The problem is "it isn't very fun"

People want themed sorcerers, but the mainstream blaster caster is the only archetype supported, because there is so few spells.

Once you've taken the essentials, there isn't enough spell choices left to support your theme. The result is that you're forced to choose between "good" and "fun".

.

Well, there is an incentive to try to prove sorcerers are weak, it is the munchkin stigma. It is way easier to get your DM to make changes that let you have more fun if he doesn't think Sorcerers are broken as it is.

 

[Huntsman57]

That's if you want to play a Sorcerer as a blaster. But what of people who want to play the class differently. Why is it for other classes you can chooses the type of character you want to be but a Sorcerer must be a blaster and nothing else? The player chooses who the character is and the style of play, not the other way around

Well, a Sorc isn't just a blaster. He's also a highly effective buffer.

In any event, I think there's an RP answer and a mechanics answer to your question.

On the RP end of things I believe even non wild magic sorcs are considered beings who are conduits for controlling powerful energies that do not easily bow to the whims of that conduit. Creating more subtle effects is simply not possible. So, if the Wizard is a rapier, then the Sorc is the warhammer.

On the mechanics side of things, I think there are several spells that based on the mechanics of 5E, the developers may believe (not that I share the belief) would be OP if they could benefit from the effect of Sorc metamagic abilities like twin spell.

For myself, while there are a few non-damage based save or suck spells and utility spells that I do see value in, overwhelmingly I prefer effects that have guaranteed results over those that a single saving throw could cancel out, particularly in 5E when most of these effects allow renewed saves every round. As an example, Confusion was among my favorite spells in 2E. The level hasn't changed but its effectiveness has gone into the toilet. I'll take a guaranteed buff, or guaranteed damage over a 5E save or suck any say of the week. I may miss the versatility from a few utility spells, or those rare non damage based spells that aren't save for no effect, but overwhelmingly the Sorc does offer 90% of the spells I value along with the metamagic ability to make them all the more potent.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Same problem as rangers. A themed list. Maybe themed rituals too and the class is good.