wizards vs. sorcerers

[maddman75]

Sadly, my group has yet to see a 3e wizard. The power of the sorcerer is too tempting.

Personally, I could never run a sorc - too limited. Give me spells, scrolls, extra feats! I liken the difference to that between a fighter and a barbarian. The babarian has the big hit dice and huge rage, but the fighter has all his extra tricks - he's not as powerful at a charge, but is more useful in a lot more situations.

Likewise, if a thousand orcs were charging me, I'd love to have a sorcerer at my side. Pretty much any other time, give me the wizard.

 

[Fenes 2]

You know, back when we played 2E with prepared spells, my bard had less flexibility (despite knowing a ton more spell than my current sorcerer) since the old "just in case" spells were always prepared in sufficient numbers. Dispel Magic 2 or more times, Fireball 2 times, 2 or 3 Magic Missiles just in case we had a battle later the day. Cantrip for the cool effects during a performance, detect magic to check for magic. A couple invisibility. A few more higher level combat spells. 2 teleports. Oops, I am out of spell slots with just the basic load to survive an attack by a foe or two.

All in all, the same spells were prepared each day, just because they were much more likely to be needed than the oddballs or speciality spells. Less variety than a sorcerer - since spells known but not prepared are of no use when you need them now.

 

[the Jester]

Hey, bloodymage. My browser, MSIE, seems to be doing something odd, and I think it's because of your sig. Whenever I click on this thread, a login window for Microsoft.net Passport pops up asking me to login.

I'm thinking it's coming from your sig because 1) this didn't happen earlier in the thread, and 2) your sig picture is not showing up.

It's not a big deal, but it is a bit annoying. Is this happening to other people?

Yep... me too!

On topic, I like the fact that you can play either one- choices are great, and the choice between wizard and sorcerer is a hard one if you're gonna play an arcane caster. I like the spontaneous style of the sorcerer and the "scientist" flavor of the wizard.

 

[Clefton Twain]

IMO, a sorcerer=really great multiclass option if you take a couple of levels. Heck, just take sorcerer to get spells like shield, mage armor, haste, invisibility, whatever. Obviously you won't be dealing much harm to enemies but if you're happy with just taking sorcerer to amp yourself up, a couple of levels work really well. You'll have a few handy spells and can cast them all day.

Wizard doesn't work as well for this since you're limited in castings and you have to memorize.

--CT

 

[The Sigil]

My 2 coppers...

I find that sorcerers make an excellent one-level multiclass option if you feel like your rogue or fighter could use a little magical "oomph" from time to time or to qualify for a nifty prestige class, sorcerer is the way to go.

If you're looking to pick up just enough magical "power" to enchant items, though, I have to favor wizards. Multiclass three levels and get access to the Craft Wondrous Item Feat - with 2nd level spells to choose from in creating stuff. Multiclass for five levels and you get fireball, lightning bolt, and a bonus feat (which, if you're smart, you probably use for Craft Wand).

If you want to play a counterspeller, you gotta love the sorcerer - (especially with the Heightened Spell Feat if you rule that a sorcerer can't use a 4th level slot on a 3rd level spell) - while no wizard is going to memorize a ton of dispel magic spells, the counterspelling sorcerer can burn a ton of slots on dispels. And in my experience, a counterspeller is particularly potent at high levels of play.

But properly played, a wizard is every bit as dangerous as a sorcerer - do not overlook those bonus Feats! After his first adventure, any self-respecting Wizard ought to be going straight home and burning as much gold and/or XP as he can to Scribe Scrolls. Any fifth level wizard worth his salt immediately uses his Bonus Feat to pick up Craft Wand and proceeds to craft a wand or five of Fireball, a wand or five of Lightning Bolt, and then memorizes his "non-combat" spells when adventuring. Wizards should be using their bonus feats on item creation feats (IMO) and use the items to give them the "on-demand" combat ability. And any Wizard who isn't Crafting Staffs as soon as he hits 12th level is just stupid. Staffs (and to a lesser degree, Wands) are referred to by my wizard characters as "sorcerer-on-a-stick."

Value of a "sorcerer-on-a-stick" (Staff) with the same number and level of spells "known" as a 12th-level sorcerer (and with a caster level of 12) - 153,000 gp. (If all spells draw two charges, it drops to 76,500 gp). Remember, though, that it costs only half that much gold to "do it yourself" with the Craft Staff Feat.

Value of a "sorcerer-on-a-stick" (Staff) with the same number and level of spells "known" as a 10th-level sorcerer (and with a caster level of 10, the damage cap for fireballs and lightning bolts) - 87,187 gp. (If all spells draw two charges, it drops to 43,593.5 gp). Remember, though, that it costs only half that much gold to "do it yourself" with the Craft Staff Feat.

The 10th-level sorcerer-on-a-stick costs a wizard 3487.5 XP and the 12th-level SoaS costs a wizard 6,120 XP. (Halved if the wizard creates a SoaS that has all effects draw two charges). Yes, these are significant outlays... the 6,120 XP, for instance is about half of what the wizard needs to advance to 13th level. But IMO, it's a sacrifice that is definitely worth it - you now have all the strategic flexibility of being a wizard with the tactical flexibility of being a sorcerer - and now you know why fantasy wizards are always carrying staffs!

Does this make wizards a little more reliant upon their "stuff?" Absolutely. But that's a factor in every class nowadays, so it's not that bad.

--The Sigil

 

[drakhe]

I prefer the sorcerer. The idea of somebody advancing in magic prowess through study is fine by me, it's not the reason why I prefer the sorcerer. basicly there are two reasons why I prefer the sorcerer:

a) I like the idea of "wilders" who might be the strongest magic users around, but don't realise it. Also the idea that there are a select few out there who don't need to study but have this magical sense and power all of their own. I might even go as far as suggesting the limiting of sorcerers to races that are closely related to magic (that would offcourse mean elves ;-) ) and perhaps half-breeds with part being of those races. The simple fact they have these powers but don't know what they are or how to harness them seems to me an obvious reason to go adventuring.

b) I NEVER liked the idea of spellslots and memorizing spells. How come that people who have spent years (and decenia and more) of study in perfectin and understanding and learning these spells forget them and have to re-memorise them once cast?? That casting spells expends energy and that this energy must be recharged every once in a while, I totaly agree, but memorising a spell over and over again, I definetly don't like that concept.

 

[Mortaneus]

I've got two comments to make on this:

1. IMC, I give sorcerers an extra spell known from each level, of a specific school chosen at character creation.

2. Pick up Elements of Magic from Nat20. It rules.

 

[drakhe]

Oh, and I forgot to add (after reading another post) I definetly like the sorcerer because it makes counterspelling a viable choice. I mean: even a wizard as impressive as Elminster can from time to time find himself in a tight spot because he hasn't memorised the right spell. (mind you, the expierience this kind of spell-caster has accumulated offcourse gives ample alternatives in most circumstances, I agree)

[EDIT:typo]

 

[Elf Witch]

I have played both since 3ed came out. I prefer the sorcerer for a lot of the reasons already stated. You don't have to worry about losing your spellbook. And some spells like Magic Missle only require a geasture so even if you lose everything you can still cast that.

The sorcerer I designed was more of a party support mage (we had a wizard) so I took a lot of spells to support the others. Improved Invisiability cast on the rogues, Mage armour cast on the fighters when we has lost all our equipment. I took Phantom Steed which was great because I could make enough for all of us to ride we usually had five or six in the party. I would like to see a wizard to that. The only real offensive spell I had was MM. In bad situations I would cast alter self and grow wings and rain MM down on the fighters if they had ranged weapons then I would also cast Improved Invisiabilty. Web and slow were great for taking on large parties of unfriendlys.

The only drawback that bothered me was the fact that the sorcerer did not have one class skill based on their primary atribute my PC had +1 bonus for intellegence so only getting three points a level to put in skills was a little frustrating at times.

 

[Olive]

personally i love wizards.

the odd person obsessed with magic, sitting in their tower researching seems so true to me. and so i wouldn't play anythign else...

i'm glad they intorduced sorcorers cos i know lots fo people like to play them, and feel that the 'feel' is better.

if you want to see how vancian style wizards have a fantastic fanstasy feel then read sepulchure's story hour... from the begining... his wizards are amazing.