Hi.
We were discussing Wizard Vs. Sorcerer this weekend.
The general consensus of people who are not me is that Wizard is more powerful and clearly a better option to play and pick in (almost) all situations.
Here were the relevant points disscussed.
1) Sorcerer and Wizard (of identical levels) were somewhat equal on the levels where they can both cast the same level highest level spell. But the level where wizard gets the spell first, he effectively gets 3 spells, (one for the level, one for the bonded item, and one for intelligence) making him far superior to a Sorcerer of his level.
2) His key stat being intelligence makes him a huge skill point powerhouse at a reduced cost compared to the sorcerer. The efficacy of skills being improved in Pathfinder makes this an even bigger boost.
3) The wizard is not limited in the number of spells he can learn.
An outlier was discussed. In a campaign that did not allow a wizard to buy scrolls the sorcerer would get some additional advantage. In a campaign that forced the wizard to travel a long way between getting an opportunity to memorize his spells, the additional spells the sorcerer gets would be some advantage.
I should note that I run a 1st edition game where this is the case (wizards have to pay out the wazoo for scrolls when they can buy them at all, and generally for half the adventure they are totally out of spells) but it was generally agreed that *most* campaigns allow resting far far before spell exhaustion occurs *and* they allow wizards to purchase scrolls.
I'm convinced they wouldn't have a spell casting class that's strictly worse then another spell casting class. Assuming no "worst case comparisons" (a touch attack focused aberrant bloodline sorcerer vs. a diviner wizard for example) what other positive aspects of the sorcerer class make them equal to the wizard in power and efficacy?
Well they are not equal, just as fighter and barbarians and paladins and rangers are not equal. If they were then why have two classes?
Also I remember a month ago a person opened a similar topic but he claimed Sorcerer was far superior and there was no reason to every play a wizard :D
That says both classes are needed and wanted by the player population.
Personally in a regular campaign I find wizards a bit more powerful because of their flexibility.
Sorcerers are really useful if encounters you run into match the spells you choose at each level up. If they do not then the wizard usually overshadows the sorcerer as they will have a wider choice of spells and if they are smart leave a slot or two open to spend those 15min memorizing just the perfect spell for that situation.
This also means the wizard having access to higher level spells at a certain level which change the playing field and make the encounter easier then with the sorcerer.
Lvl 5 and lvl 7 are those levels I found the bigger difference. Having Fireball or Fly at lvl 5 and having Black Tentacles or Stoneskin or Improved Invisibility or Minor Globe of Invulnerability at lvl 7 can completely change some encounters.
Well they are not equal, just as fighter and barbarians and paladins and rangers are not equal. If they were then why have two classes?
I'm not looking for them to be equal, I'm wondering why one is strictly a better choice then the other.
Also I remember a month ago a person opened a similar topic but he claimed Sorcerer was far superior and there was no reason to every play a wizard :DThat says both classes are needed and wanted by the player population.
Personally in a regular campaign I find wizards a bit more powerful because of their flexibility.
Well, I'm reading that thread, and it's one guy going, "Hey I didn't think sorcerer's needed a boost" and fifty people explaining why wizard is without question the better choice.
I'm having trouble believing this is the case, but can't seem to come up with any reasons why.
Is wizard strictly the better choice? What am I overlooking about sorcerer?
Sorcerer has on-the-fly versatility.
Up against Fire Elementals? No problem, just toss out a few Lightning Bolts. If the Wizard prepped Fireballs, those are basically wasted slots.
If you want to play a blaster , then sorc, if ya want to make a themed caster , then sorc if ya want a jack of all trades caster then it has to be a wizard
Sorcerer has on-the-fly versatility.
Up against Fire Elementals? No problem, just toss out a few Lightning Bolts. If the Wizard prepped Fireballs, those are basically wasted slots.
Yeah, I'm not really seeing this. You're claiming 3rd level spells.
THEIR argument was that, guess what, that lightning bolt is your only third level spell, which you can cast 4 times.
The wizard has, oh, as many spells as he can afford (but at a minimum 2, double the sorcerer amount). And can cast, oh snap 4 times. (2 natural, +1 Bonded Item, +1 stat bonus)
How is the sorc more versatile? The Wizard could lightning bolt 4 times *or* do something else. One of his spells he doesn't even have to prepare.
It gets even worse on the *next* level when the wizard gets 4th level spells, and the sorcerer - oh surprise - gets a second third level spell and an additional cast.
Look, I *like* the sorcerer. And I understand some of his strengths (bloodline powers + spells + bonus feat list + bonus class skill list), but the math above just doesn't make sense to me. If the sorcerer is so blasted versatile, then why is the wizard at every level have more selection and more spells per day? This vaunted flexibility doesn't get around to being a factor until high level play - early on the sorcerer player is frustrated because he's behind the wizard. When it *does* finally come into play, there's a lesson here about how third edition low level spells don't scale well to high level encounters.
one of the strengths is they can cast any spell they know any time, sure it's not alot but any time. A wizard while great really needs to plan ahead and put real thought into his daily spells, also a sorc is not chained to his spell book...if a wizard looses that he is near useless.
Both have pros and cons but they are not the same class. For me if I have a theme in mind it has to be a sorc, The bloodlines just reinforce that
now.
Sorcerer has on-the-fly versatility.
Up against Fire Elementals? No problem, just toss out a few Lightning Bolts. If the Wizard prepped Fireballs, those are basically wasted slots.
Yeah, I'm not really seeing this. You're claiming 3rd level spells.
THEIR argument was that, guess what, that lightning bolt is your only third level spell, which you can cast 4 times.
Do casters somehow never use spells below their highest caster level?
Suppose that, for the sake of argument, the Wizard prepares two of each - two fireballs, two lightning bolts.
Against electricity-immune enemies, he has two completely useless spell slots.
Compare with a Sorcerer who's chosen Lightning Bolt - instead of having useless spell slots, he can pump out four more Scorching Rays, with +1 metamagic on them if he has the required feat. No wasted spell slots.
If the sorcerer is so blasted versatile, then why is the wizard at every level have more selection and more spells per day?
Because the wizard has to pick and choose in advance. Memorize a lightning bolt, that's a spell slot that is completely wasted if you're up against elec-immune enemies.
Sorcerer up against electric-immune enemies just casts other things instead of lightning bolts.
Now if you don't actually make a wizard prep his spells like he is supposed to and just let him cast anything in his spell book, then yes the sorcerer is completely out classed. However if you make him prep his spells he's generally going to have something that doesn't work in every fight, unlike the sorcerer who can choose to do something else with that slot instead.
Adjust the level achieved of bloodline bonus spells up by 2 levels. Such that you get the 1st level bonus spell known at level 1, the second level at level 3, and so on
On my first skim through the book I thought that's what they'd done. And I thought to myself, "Oh, neat, that's a great solution to the spell level access issue without breaking flavor."
And yeah, now it's a house rule.
I have always prefered sorceror to wizard, but I have playe both extensively. I think it really depends on how you play. Like people have mentioned, if you leave open spell slots and have time during the day to prepare, a wizard can be deadly, but I have played lots of adventures where there isnt room for that. I have also played many where I really didnt know what to expect and therefore was mostly preping a similar group of spells every day with a few changes here and there. But with stuff like Allacretous cogitation you could still have that golden perfect spell moment which is always fun as a wizard.
Personally I just dont enjoy the process of picking my spells for the day every in game morning, it can often be stressful and frustrating when spells go without being used because the right situation didn't come up. With the sorceror i end up picking spells that will rarely be the perfect spell but are almost always useful. But I only have to make that choice occassionally (when I level or exchange spells known) not every in-game morning.
Adjust the level achieved of bloodline bonus spells up by 2 levels. Such that you get the 1st level bonus spell known at level 1, the second level at level 3, and so on, and give the Sorcerer one bonus spell per day at those levels.
This is more or less what I do (except I just shift spells/day up one row instead of granting one/day at odd levels). It works quite well.
Do casters somehow never use spells below their highest caster level?
Of course they do, but (speaking from experience) what you usually end up with is their top two to three levels of spells devoted to combat effects, and their lower level spell slots used for buffs and utility spells, since the save DCs make using those spells against level appropriate opponents difficult.
Most adventures have 3-5 encounters per day, and most fights (that I've seen) run just a few rounds (2-3 usually). So you're looking at 6-15 rounds of combat a day, averaging out somewhere around 10. The bonded item bonus, bonus spells from int, specialization, and your base spells per day mean you can cast a spell every single round of every combat, and still just have a few slots left over in those top level spells. (1 bonded + 3 bonus + 3 specialist + 6 base, for a total of 13 spell slots in your top 3 levels at odd levels, and 15 spell slots at even levels).
Suppose that, for the sake of argument, the Wizard prepares two of each - two fireballs, two lightning bolts.
Against electricity-immune enemies, he has two completely useless spell slots.
Compare with a Sorcerer who's chosen Lightning Bolt - instead of having useless spell slots, he can pump out four more Scorching Rays, with +1 metamagic on them if he has the required feat. No wasted spell slots.
If you're playing them as blasters, yeah, elemental immunities might be a decent argument for flexibility, but evocation is sadly just not all that super effective compared to save or die/suck spells. Change those lightning bolts and fireballs out for Slow and you're more effective no matter what you're fighting.
If the sorcerer is so blasted versatile, then why is the wizard at every level have more selection and more spells per day?Because the wizard has to pick and choose in advance. Memorize a lightning bolt, that's a spell slot that is completely wasted if you're up against elec-immune enemies.
Sorcerer up against electric-immune enemies just casts other things instead of lightning bolts.
Leaving aside the elemental immune enemies (which I addressed above) there just aren't that many really great combat spells at each level. Most levels have one or two spells that are almost always going to be better than the rest in most combat situations (Sleep, Glitterdust, Slow, Wall of Force, etc.) and a long list of utility spells that can either be A> written to a scroll and kept on hand for emergencies, B> cast using your bonded item if absolutely necessary, or C> are out of combat utility and can just wait until you have a chance to re-memorize.
Sorcerer flexibility is great, in theory, but the spell list for Sorc/Wiz is lopsided enough that it doesn't end being a huge bonus in practice.
Now if you start including all sorts of splat books, then it gets a little more competitive.
|
I think the main difference between sorcerers and wizards is that a sorcerer is defined by his or her spells, and a wizard is defined by his or her style. This isn't to say that sorcerers don't have style, only that their style will be defined by their spells and bloodline.
A generalist wizard, however, can pretty much make up whatever style he needs to as far as his spell selection goes. (I'm currently playing a generalist who focuses on spells of subtlety.)
The sorcerer, however is going to be remembered for his or her ability to cast a spell several times in succession or to cast a particular spell all the time. mage armor an entire party, always have friends through charm person, or whatever spell fits the sorcerer concept.
As a wizard, when you flip through the spell section, you're going to be thinking about how to combine spell effects, using different spells in rapid succession intelligently, or how different spells will affect different party members.
As a sorcerer, when you flip through the spell section, you're pretty much looking at abilities that will define your character for the rest of his or her life.
My first answer is: Sorcerers are fun to play and are plenty powerful enough where your party won't be smacking him around for being ineffective (assuming a reasonably decent spell selection). IMO this is enough. Personally, I enjoy both classes and pick which one I take based on what sort of character I want to play (Class choice follows role play choice rather than the other way around).
My Second answer is: Not all campaigns allow casters to pick up tons of spells. I'm not just talking about homegrown campaigns but several of the super modules and adventure paths I've read are written in such a way that wizards aren't going to be able to pick up tons of scrolls and new spells. Also, in the three groups I'm currently playing in the GMs all limit accessibility to spells in one way or another.
Finally: Sorcerers are also much easier to play and if a GM has a new player he can hand that player a decently built sorcerer character and he will be able to do Ok. Less so with the wizard. I'm not suggesting it's a beginners only class, just that it is good for beginning players (assuming you help with spells).
Wizard's advantage: many, many more spells known
Sorcerer's advantage: you're almost never stuck with spells you can't use (unless you made poor choices when choosing spells known)
Seems to me you are trying to dredge up an argument which is gone round and round many times. It also seems like you have read those arguments so really what's the point of dredging it up again? Just read those threads because there is really nothing new going to be revealed suddenly here.
Look, I *like* the sorcerer. And I understand some of his strengths (bloodline powers + spells + bonus feat list + bonus class skill list), but the math above just doesn't make sense to me. If the sorcerer is so blasted versatile, then why is the wizard at every level have more selection and more spells per day?
This isn't the case. While the gap isn't very big and the wizard generally has the edge on higher level spells the sorcerer has more spells/ day at most levels than the wizard.
Ultimately, the biggest "problem" with the Sorcerer it's printed right next to the Wizard. The Wizard is known to be among the most overpowered classes in the entire game, what with the whole "learn everything" mechanic. The Sorcerer's power level is perfectly appropriate, they just get compared to a complete monster.
Though the bloodlines do give them some minor abilities that make them legitimately different, grant some much-needed spells known, and a few perks that can give 'em a legitimate edge. They're still no better than Wizard in the vast majority of cases, but that's not a fair comparison anyways, and the Sorcerer a powerhouse class in its own right... just not compared to the Wizard.
Because the wizard has to pick and choose in advance. Memorize a lightning bolt, that's a spell slot that is completely wasted if you're up against elec-immune enemies.
Sorcerer up against electric-immune enemies just casts other things instead of lightning bolts.
Except even at high levels, Sorcerers still don't get many spells known, and it's still very hard to squeeze that versatility they're supposed to have, particularly compared to the Wizard who, on top of everything else, can cast any single spell she knows once per day, giving her all the benefits of a Sorcerer that one time, along with the vast spell selection of a Wizard, to pretty much solve anything that one time.
And a canny mage can prepare an extremely versatile list that can serve her well in pretty much all cases, to the point where spontaneous casting is not a huge deal. Yes, it's very nice, and it is a legitimate benefit, but it's overrated and Sorcerers pay far too much for the privilege if you're using Wizard as the baseline, especially since low spells known hinder their ability to really take advantage of it. And the ability to know pretty much every spell that matters at minimal cost? Yeah, that's just not something you can compete with.
My Second answer is: Not all campaigns allow casters to pick up tons of spells. I'm not just talking about homegrown campaigns but several of the super modules and adventure paths I've read are written in such a way that wizards aren't going to be able to pick up tons of scrolls and new spells. Also, in the three groups I'm currently playing in the GMs all limit accessibility to spells in one way or another.
Except, by the rules, Wizards have access if there's any chance to buy. A campaign that's far from civilization is one thing, but to restrict Wizards' access when there is a chance to buy and sell stuff is not within the confines of the rules, either as written or intended, and is pretty much the DM cheating the Wizard because the rules give them far too much power. At which point, I'd suggest getting an actual fix rather than manually controlling spell access and making balance the whim of the DM like that.
Finally: Sorcerers are also much easier to play and if a GM has a new player he can hand that player a decently built sorcerer character and he will be able to do Ok. Less so with the wizard. I'm not suggesting it's a beginners only class, just that it is good for beginning players (assuming you help with spells).
Eh, if you build the Sorcerer for them, sure, but it's easy to mess up spell selection. I'd sooner have a new player go Druid or Cleric if they went with a caster since you pretty much can't mess them up, so long as you have a decent wisdom score.
This isn't the case. While the gap isn't very big and the wizard generally has the edge on higher level spells the sorcerer has more spells/ day at most levels than the wizard.
The problem being, those extra spells aren't generally enough to matter. Specialize, and it's down to a one spell/day advantage, and the Wizard has an extra spell slot of pure win via the bonded item.
While the gap isn't very big and the wizard generally has the edge on higher level spells the sorcerer has more spells/ day at most levels than the wizard.
I'm not seeing the math on this. The wizard gets as many or more casts of his highest levels spells in call cases.
Also: how does him having *more* spells per day of his highest level, make up for me having an additional 2 lower level spells?
Except, by the rules, Wizards have access if there's any chance to buy. A campaign that's far from civilization is one thing, but to restrict Wizards' access when there is a chance to buy and sell stuff is not within the confines of the rules, either as written or intended, and is pretty much the DM cheating the Wizard because the rules give them far too much power. At which point, I'd suggest getting an actual fix rather than manually controlling spell access and making balance the whim of the DM like that.
I do not believe that is the case anymore. In the Purchasing Magic Items section of the book, it lists that when you can purchase magic items the available items are random based upon the size of the town.
This has several effects that I like.
First it makes magic much more rare and exotic. Not everyone in the party will all have "The Best" stuff possible or "All the Best" spells. There will be much more variety of equipment and spells in the group and a little less Min/Max building.
Second it gives the crafters an advantage for actually taking a feat to make their own things.
Third it allows the DM a little more control over his game then if a player can say "I want to buy it because the rules say I can." (Note that comment is not intended to be snarky.)
When you have a wizard that has every spell in the book possible they will have more of an advantage. If the game is more holistic in its evolution where spells in the wizards book are selected at level up, those gained as treasure, and the few that he hunts for at every town market then that changes things. He will still have a lot of variety and options, but then not every wizard will be a clone of the others and the value of selecting spells at level up becomes more important.
While the gap isn't very big and the wizard generally has the edge on higher level spells the sorcerer has more spells/ day at most levels than the wizard.I'm not seeing the math on this. The wizard gets as many or more casts of his highest levels spells in call cases.
Also: how does him having *more* spells per day of his highest level, make up for me having an additional 2 lower level spells?
A Wizard caps each level at four spells. A specialist caps at five per level. The sorcerer caps at six per level. Granted the wizard and specialist do get one Bonus spell IF they take a bonded item... but so can a sorcerer if they choose the Arcane Bloodline. Over nine levels of spells that give the sorcerer more spells per day at every level.
That being said I think the balance between the two (or three) classes is fine. It all depends on the game and how you like to RP your character.
While the gap isn't very big and the wizard generally has the edge on higher level spells the sorcerer has more spells/ day at most levels than the wizard.
A sorcerer does end up with slightly more spells per day, but it's nearly as much of a gap as it seems like.
All but the top three levels of spells are completely consistent, 6 per day for the sorcerer, and 5 (4 + 1 specialist) per day for the wizard, and for those, yes, the sorcerer is gaining 1 extra slot over the wizard per 2 caster levels.
For the top three levels of spells, it matters what level the two casters are at. At odd levels, the sorcerer has 10 total (6/4/-) and the wizard has 10 total (3/2/1 +3 specialist, +1 bonded item, +1 bonus spell the sorcerer doesn't get) and at even levels, the sorcerer has 14 (6/5/3) and the wizard has 13 (4/3/2 +3 specialist, +1 bonded item). The wizard being 1 spell down at even levels is also somewhat offset by the fact they could have 4 of their top level of spells base vs. 3 for the sorcerer.
In the end the sorcerer is really only gaining one low level (max-3 or lower) spell slot over the wizard every two levels.
Except, by the rules, Wizards have access if there's any chance to buy. A campaign that's far from civilization is one thing, but to restrict Wizards' access when there is a chance to buy and sell stuff is not within the confines of the rules, either as written or intended, and is pretty much the DM cheating the Wizard because the rules give them far too much power. At which point, I'd suggest getting an actual fix rather than manually controllng spell access and making balance the whim of the DM like that.
First, open access to whatever spell you like is NOT in the rules under PfRPG. There are some general guidelines for THE GM on magic item availability but nowhere is there something that says Wizards get to open book access to spells.
Also you completely ignored the fact that the very first words I said were "NOT ALL campaigns...".
You also ignore the fact that I was talking about (high profile) published adventures some of which limit access for quite a few character levels.
A sorcerer does end up with slightly more spells per day, but it's nearly as much of a gap as it seems like.
Did you read what I said and the context? Because you are essentially repeating what I said. My reply was in response to Nexus' comment that wizard's actually get more spells which isn't true.
Edit: Here, I'll put it back in context so maybe that will help.
If the sorcerer is so blasted versatile, then why is the wizard at every level have more selection and more spells per day?While the gap isn't very big and the wizard generally has the edge on higher level spells the sorcerer has more spells/ day at most levels than the wizard.
I do not believe that is the case anymore. In the Purchasing Magic Items section of the book, it lists that when you can purchase magic items the available items are random based upon the size of the town.
I'd double check the spell-learning section, 'cause in 3.5, there was also spell research, which only cost twice what it would cost to get an NPC to cast it, takes a day, and may still be doable pretty much anywhere reasonably developed. (As opposed to outright inventing a spell, which takes considerably more time and resources.) I'd need to check. Still, find enough cities, and again, it becomes the whim of market access and DM fiat, which is not good game design.
Also you completely ignored the fact that the very first words I said were "NOT ALL campaigns...".
I'm not ignoring it. However, I'm also against the, "Iff no shopping, then not God," path that Wizards have, as it's not true balance. If they only don't explode in a specific subset of adventure types, then they're not a good class for any notion of balance.
Just out of curiosity, how does a Wiz cast super flexible spells when he's a specialist? Compared to the Generalist, which is commonly pointed to, the Sor gets many more spells. Since specialists are limited by prohibited schools and such, Sor gain some spell choice flexibility in exchange for spell selection.
Not all schools are created equal. If you have access to transmutation, conjuration, and illusion, you're tremendously flexible. The rest can be lost without too much pain.
And, you assume a bonded item vs a familiar. Excellent arguments for the familiar have been made so that choice is not as cut-and-dry as it seems.
A spell per day from your entire spells known is one of the most powerful effects a Wizard can ask for, bar none. Unless you can use your familiar to squeeze out more spells and get an edge in the action economy (a comparably tremendous benefit), the familiar really has trouble competing. After all, the Wizard's greatest strength is the power to hit easy buttons. Pulling out any easy button on a whim is tremendous.
Did you read what I said and the context? Because you are essentially repeating what I said. My reply was in response to Nexus' comment that wizard's actually get more spells which isn't true.
Sorry, I did misread your post, I think what Nexus was saying was that at odd levels the wizard will get more spells of their top two levels than the sorcerer gets of their highest. Most 5th level sorcerers for instance get five 2nd level spells (4 base +1 bonus from cha), while most 5th level wizards will get 8 spells of 2nd level or higher (2/1 base, +2 for specialist, +2 for bonus from Int, +1 from their bonded item).
Just out of curiosity, how does a Wiz cast super flexible spells when he's a specialist? Compared to the Generalist, which is commonly pointed to, the Sor gets many more spells. Since specialists are limited by prohibited schools and such, Sor gain some spell choice flexibility in exchange for spell selection.
Considering the mechanic they chose for prohibited schools (2x the spell slots when memorizing, but no penalty whatsoever to learning prohibited spells) there's no reason for a specialist wizard not to keep such spells on a scroll, or purchase a wand. It's cheezy, and personally I think the specialization penalties should be harsher, but at present there's really not a huge reason not to specialize unless you just want metamagic mastery.
And, you assume a bonded item vs a familiar. Excellent arguments for the familiar have been made so that choice is not as cut-and-dry as it seems.
This is just personal preference I suppose, to me a free Pearl of Power that is always set to whatever level you want it seems like the better bonus, but that is up to the individual player.
Yes, that's why the familiar casts from a scroll or wand. Very important in most combat's.
Sorry, since when can familiars use wands and scrolls? A wizard of a sufficient level can deliver touch spells through the familiar, but the wizard still must cast the spell in question.
And I have seen very few encounters where there WAS an easy button. Unless it comes up all the time, then it's marginal effect is quite small.
Off the top of my head? How about Glitterdust and Slow, as long as you work to keep your save DC up, Glitterdust and Slow alone can wreck every single fight from level 3 on up (petering out a bit at the high end). Even if it's something weird and specific (like the specific golem weaknesses) you can always just pop the one spell you need, since the bond allows you cast any spell in your spellbook.
And barred schools still limit versatility. Even barring evocation, I can't tell how many times I wished I had that Fireball or Polay Ray. Instead, I cast an illusion and hoped for the best.
Or you can just craft a wand of fireball, or keep it on a scroll, or use your bonded item to whip it out on the fly, all at no penalty despite specialization.
Sorry, since when can familiars use wands and scrolls?
Skills: For each skill in which either the master or the familiar has ranks, use either the normal skill ranks for an animal of that type or the master’s skill ranks, whichever is better. In either case, the familiar uses its own ability modifiers.
Thus, familiars can use the master's Use Magic Device ranks.
Skills: For each skill in which either the master or the familiar has ranks, use either the normal skill ranks for an animal of that type or the master’s skill ranks, whichever is better. In either case, the familiar uses its own ability modifiers.
Thus, familiars can use the master's Use Magic Device ranks.
Ok, interesting point, I'll give you that one. Definitely a tactic I had not considered. Of course, that's still sort of a point in the wizard's favor, not the sorc's.. so it may not be that relevant to the discussion at hand.
To be fair, it does go on to say that "some skills may be beyond the familiar's ability to use", but it doesn't say which skills those may be. Given that familiars can get up to 15 intelligence and can speak in at least a limited sense, it's at least fuzzy whether UMD is one of those skills.
Really?? My fights don't have closely packed opponents, and they tend to save almost half the time anyway.
Most encounters have 2-5 opponents because more than that slows down the game too much. If even two of them are standing close enough to one another for Slow to effect them both, you likely just shut down half your foes.
Most encounters aren't run in an open plain either (though it does come up from time to time). Choke points of any sort, hallways, doors, rough terrain, whatever, will let you funnel an entire group into a save or die/suck. Start adding in the various walls and you can create your own choke points, regardless of the environment.
As for your opponents saving half the time, I'm calling flat BS on that. Even a mid level wizard is likely to have spell focus, greater spell focus, a significant bump from their casting stat, and the base spell level (+1 every 2 levels) vs their foe's base save bonus (+1 every 3 levels) and what is likely a very low tertiary stat. Now if you're casting fort saves against the fighter types, sure you might fail half the time, but why wouldn't you be using your will save spells in that situation? (A 9th level fighter type for instance only has +3 base will save, and is very likely to have a wisdom of 10-12 at best, giving them a total of +4 to the save. Even with a cloak of resistance they'll only be getting +6 or so by that point vs. your Slow DC of 22+)
Or you can just craft a wand of fireball, or keep it on a scroll, or use your bonded item to whip it out on the fly, all at no penalty despite specialization.Granted, they really changed specialization. But having tons of contingency items is going to cost a bunch, and you need to FIND those items first.
I never said tons, just a few scrolls or a wand, to cover the 2 or 3 spells you'd like to have access to from a prohibited school. And forget finding them, nothing at all prevents you from just making them.
|
I have played both and a Sorceror has to choose thier spells wisely all the time or they have serious issues later on down the road. Energy Substitution is also a Sorceror's best friend.
In some encounters you will hear a mage go damn I really should have memorized X spell instead of Y. While the Sorceror can really just look over thier list of chosen spells and use the most effective ones.
Wizards have to slot up thier metamagic feat spells in advance.
A Sorc can go bamn Quickened Disintigrate without even sweating it.
(This is especially handy when you need to cast a large number of the same spell like oh say Dispel Magic to eliminate buffs)
I should also note to people who don't seem to read the Sorc Class
"Her base spell allotment is given on table 3-14. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Charisma score (see table 1-3)." Page 71 second paragraph.
So really its 6 + Bonus spells as opposed to 4+ bonus spells or 5 + bonus spells.
I do not believe that is the case anymore. In the Purchasing Magic Items section of the book, it lists that when you can purchase magic items the available items are random based upon the size of the town.I'd double check the spell-learning section, 'cause in 3.5, there was also spell research, which only cost twice what it would cost to get an NPC to cast it, takes a day, and may still be doable pretty much anywhere reasonably developed. (As opposed to outright inventing a spell, which takes considerably more time and resources.) I'd need to check. Still, find enough cities, and again, it becomes the whim of market access and DM fiat, which is not good game design.
God forbid they write a book that assumes the GM has a brain!!
Your head is stuck in 3.5 and you should read the relevant rules before shouting people down.
I'm not ignoring it. However, I'm also against the, "Iff no shopping, then not God," path that Wizards have, as it's not true balance. If they only don't explode in a specific subset of adventure types, then they're not a good class for any notion of balance.
Simmer down, quit misquoting rules (and people), and quit cramming your play style down other folks throats.
Edit: I reread and you are again putting words in my mouth, please stop doing that.
Yes, that's why the familiar casts from a scroll or wand. Very important in most combat's.Sorry, since when can familiars use wands and scrolls? A wizard of a sufficient level can deliver touch spells through the familiar, but the wizard still must cast the spell in question.
With a friendly GM and enough ranks in "Cheese Rules" anything is possible.
I should also note to people who don't seem to read the Sorc Class "Her base spell allotment is given on table 3-14. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Charisma score (see table 1-3)." Page 71 second paragraph.
So really its 6 + Bonus spells as opposed to 4+ bonus spells or 5 + bonus spells.
I assume this is directed at me? I was indeed aware, if you'll notice I didn't include the bonus spells from Int on the wizard side either, except when the wizard was getting an additional bonus spell over the sorcerer due to gaining their next spell level early.
I left out the bonus spells from casting stat because the two characters are very likely to have exactly the same total, but it's very hard to be entirely certain what that total will be at any given level.
I should point out Scrolls and wands are not cheap.
Even worse wands are not as good as if you were casting it and only go up to 4th level...They are only kinda sort of a solution to the I don't have that spell memorized. Unless your playing in a monty haul campaign.
The wealth by level tables assume approximately 25% of your total wealth at any particular level is in the form of single use or limited use items. Considering crafting your own scrolls and wands also produces double the total value in goods of the components you put in, it's not hard at all to find enough cash to support a very generous supply of scrolls, potions and wands (provided you're crafting your own, buying them on the other hand, not so great an idea).
|
|
I should also point out those wands are at the caster level required to cast the spell.
So that 375gp 50 shot wand of magic missiles gives you 1 missile.
Want a decent wand of Magic Missiles and it will cost you 3375 gold...
A wand of Dispel Magic would cost you 5625 for a lvl 5 caster wand.
You want a decent 10th level wand it will cost you 11250 gold
scrolls
Are cheaper, but mass producing them eats up similar costs.
Then there are the encumberance for all of it.
Staves are really what you want for your casting purposes, but they are extremely expensive...
I should also point out those wands are at the caster level required to cast the spell.
Only if you make them so. You can create a wand of any caster level in the range [minimum required to cast the spell ~ current caster level for that spell].
|
|
Only if you make them so. You can create a wand of any caster level in the range [minimum required to cast the spell ~ current caster level for that spell].
I should also point out those wands are at the caster level required to cast the spell.
You want a 20th level Wand of Fireballs cost ya 22500 gold.
Keep in mind regardless the DC when cast is as set at the amount needed to cast the spell so a Wand of Fireballs will have a dc of 11...Only staves use the full stats and feats of the user when determining the DC... Paizo's built in counter to this issue...
a Wand of Fireballs will have a dc of 11...
You mean 14. 10 (base) + 3 (spell level) + 1 (minimum 13 casting stat required to cast a 3rd level spell, which is a +1).
There's also no reason to make a 20th CL wand of fireball unless you REALLY need to extend the range from 800 feet to 1,200 feet. CL 10 will get you maximum dice and more range than you should ever need.