Is the Sorceror as bad as I think?

[rasputinradio]

I like some of the things done with the sorc, but overall it just seems to pale in comparison to a wizard. Am I missing something in the rules? I like the spell versitility, but access to spells seems so limited. Please, somebody set me straight.

 

[Christian]

'Bad' how? Underpowered? Not IME. I found it a bit dull, though, casting most of the same spells over and over. (And over and over-the main reason it's not underpowered isn't the spontaneous casting but the increased spells per day.) They make really good combat mages. If you like blasting lots of baddies with your arcane power, you'll probably like the sorc.

 

[rasputinradio]

Dull as in the limited spell options. I'm sure there are people who could defend every class in the book. I was just looking for someone to defend sorc. I'm just surprised that the only real difference between the sorc and the wizard is how they handle spells.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

It depends on what level sorceror you're looking at. Before level 4, they're pretty pathetic. By level 6, they start to be good and by level 10, they're potentially more powerful than a wizard of the same level.

The sorceror has several advantages over the wizard at high level:

1. More low level spells/day. At the highest castable level, wizards usually have just as many spells, if not more. At all other levels, however, the sorceror usually has 50% more spells.

2. More flexibility in any given situation. A sorceror will usually know three or four or more spells at most levels other than his highest castable level. While a wizard may have put more spells in his spellbook, it is rare that he will have prepared four different spells of any given level. And if he uses an open slot, it takes several minutes to fill it with the spell he chooses. Consequently, a high level sorceror will usually have more spells available to him in any given situation.

3. More flexibility with metamagic/lower opportunity cost. At high levels, sorcerors can use extend spell, empower spell, energy substitution, and persistent spell to great effect. A wizard who wants to cast extended buffs before going to sleep needs to prepare empty slots in order to do so. This limits the amount of firepower he has available for any given encounter and also limits the amount of slots he has available for buffing. My fighter/wizard spellsword (2/7/2) makes good use of this tactic, leaving three second level, two third level, and two fourth level slots open for extended Endure Elements, Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace, extended versions of those spells, and extended Greater Magic Weapons. As a sorceror, I would have more slots to do that with and if I hadn't needed Improved Invisibility by the end of the day, I could use that slot for a double extended False Life or another Greater Magic Weapon. Were the character a pure sorceror, he would be able to use his five 5th level slots for an extended empowered bull's strengths for the entire party before going to bed.

Then there's also the option to toss empowered fireballs if you end up facing creatures that aren't effected by the Dominate Person you chose as your 5th level spell too.

To summarize: at low levels, sorcerors are second class spellcasters; at high levels, they have more tactical flexibility than wizards (who have more strategic flexibility) and more lower level spells than wizards (who have as many spells of their highest castable level--or more at odd levels).

 

[Olive]

Dull as in the limited spell options. I'm sure there are people who could defend every class in the book. I was just looking for someone to defend sorc. I'm just surprised that the only real difference between the sorc and the wizard is how they handle spells.

which is why i use monte's varient. more HP, different skills. quite a different character than the wizard.

i still reckon it would be a boring class to play... and the player does seem a bit bored always casting magic missle and lightning bolt...

 

[Cloudgatherer]

Sorcerers are definitely easier to play. The tough choices are up front: What spells to take? While the wizard can decide each day what spells to fill his slots, the sorcerer does not vary the spells he has available.

I agree that the sorcerer needs some work. I'm playing in an epic game where I swapped a couple skills (arcana for planar knowledge, alchemy for intimidate) and ditched my familiar for a pair of feats, but these are admittedly house rules.

 

[rasputinradio]

I don't mean to badmouth the sorceror, but when I first heard about the class when 3e was first coming out I envisioned something a little different, I guess. Although, I have a similar problem with the ranger so I guess I just have to deal.

 

[Zhure]

Nobody mentioned "spellbooks," the wizard's potentially crippling weakness. Those things are bulky and expensive. I vastly prefer Sorcerers, but I admit it's a stylistic choice, not a power-choice. If you want earlier access to higher level spells and a few bonus feats, then take Wizard. If you want less dependency on outside sources, then take Sorcerer.

Greg

 

[Spatzimaus]

These others have covered all the main points, so I'll give the gratuitous anecdote.

In my first 3E campaign, I played a Sorcerer, and another guy in the group played a Wizard. Basically, we worked great together. He blasted, I did the utility stuff and nondamage spells. (Yes, that's backwards from how you'd expect it to work.)

Now, speaking from that, I can say that playing a Sorcerer can get boring if you're not careful. You have to pick useful non-combat spells, the sort of thing where you need to cast several of the same spell but don't know if you'll need them. For example, I took Comprehend Languages, Clairvoyance, Fabricate, and Teleport. Each of these is something a Wizard isn't likely to waste a slot on (well, except Teleport) but that can be really useful on a moment's notice often enough that you can't just make up for it with scrolls and wands.

That being said, when we got the Psionics Handbook I retroactively switched him to a Shaper Psion. It fit more with the character concept, and it was nice to have at least a FEW spells the other classes couldn't cast. The Psion class has its own flaws (although adding the Mind's Eye and/or ITCK solves a lot of these)

And that's the basic problem. Between Clerics (with all their domains) and Wizards there's already a lack of a niche for them, and if you add Psion to the mix there's really too much overlap. People who want Fireballs go Wizard, those that want spontaneous casting go Psion, and the munchkins go Cleric.

At that point, the only distinguishing feature of the Sorcerer is its spells/day, and that isn't quite as useful as you'd think. After all, the group will stop to rest when the Cleric, Druid, and Wizard run low on spells, even if the Sorcerer has a bunch left. What it does is let the Sorcerer cast spells without worry.

So, IMC, we eventually combined the Wizard and Sorcerer into one class. But, YMMV.

 

[Zentermi]

I would sacrifice flexibility for a Specialist mage vs. Sorceror any day. Higher level spell access, at the cost of only two spells per day, and spontanous casting(who needs the enchantment school anyway?).

I think that having one of each in a party is probably a great boon though.

It may be a pride of planning thing. With a sorceror, you miss out on the kudos of party-mates saying "Wow man... sure was cool you memmed that spell when you did.". It's a nic e feeling every so often.