Why choose a wizard over a sorcerer?


Advice

151 to 156 of 156 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

pjackson wrote:
Derek Dalton wrote:


My Sorcerer saw more melee combat then almost anyone else. Things happened where the monsters often got the jump on us and zeroed in on the weakest looking character, me.

Surely you mean the most powerful looking character. Intelligent foes should target casters because they are often the biggest threat. That is what PCs usually do. Of course less intelligent ones might go for one that looks most vulenerable.

That is why my casters often try to look like another class: wear a monk's outfit; a rapier at your waist and a lyre on your back; or a leather jacket and several daggers.

It's fun to reverse that, too. One of my characters has familiar, wears robes, and holds a staff. Enemies typically assume he is a wizard, witch, or sorcerer when in fact he is a Hexcrafter/Staff Magus wearing glamoured armor.

The Exchange

Just a Mort wrote:

Also, usually the fighter, if not the rogue, is the one who trips the traps, so it shouldn't be you having to take the pit. The fighter has the hp for it, the rogue will probably make his reflex save and not fall in. The use of featherfall to prevent bombard is also not allowed.

[snip]

Since alchemist fires and the lot have like a 10 feet range increment, it's definitely not going to be falling that "quite a distance" and so the spell will have no effect.

The bombard trick specifies the creature can only drop items from directly overhead, and can't throw them. Dropped items have a range increment of 20ft (as per the core book p.443) and we don't care, in this situation, what the thrown range increment is, 'cos it 'ain't being thrown. Any dropped/falling item allows a Reflex save to take half damage - so anyone with Evasion can already dodge the thing completely. If you've got time to dodge it, and it's falling, then I'd suggest that you can Feather Fall the sucker as an immediate action, despite the nebulous nature of the undefined 'quite a distance' criteria you mention. If we were to try to define 'quite a distance' then I guess it may be 30ft plus, as that's the point where falling objects cease to inflict half damage, but it's a GM call either way... but YMMV, of course.


pjackson wrote:
strayshift wrote:
I've played both for over 35 years and all types of level, it ultimately comes down to play-style, party balance, the DM and the adventure you are doing. In other words: they are just different, one is not better than the other.

Since sorcerers were only introduced in 2000 with 3.0 you haven't been playing them that long. Wizards maybe - I have. :)

Sorcerers were less flexible in 3.5 and were rated tier 2 for only being able to break the game in a few ways depending on build, where wizards were tier 1 for being able to break the game in lots of ways.

Pathfinder seems to have mad sorcerers closer to wizards, so I think now I agree it is down to playstyle. Wizards work best when they know what they will be doing and can prepare for it. So if your group does reconnaissance first a wizard should be stronger. If they just charge into the unknown a sorcerer probably is. In my experience the latter is more common.

Obviously the timeline for the two classes isn't the same. And I agree the Sorcerer has developed and PF has blurred the lines between the two classes. The Sorcerer is an equal to the Wizard/Magic User in P.F.

Regarding recon, I find that that tends to rely on party balance at low-mid levels. Rogues not being as popular as they once were, and in the early versions of D&D Fighter/Thieves and M.U./Thieves being less viable.

The Exchange

Its too close to saying I ready an action to sunder an arrow/bullets as it flies at me. Sure, in movies it works, and technically you can sunder arrows. Try to see if you can get a GM to buy that, however.


I'd let my PCs do that XD


Mage of the Wyrmkin wrote:
Sorcs and Wizards are very different despite sharing the same spell list. I would say that Wizards are easier to play at low levels (1-5) but after that point Sorcs really begin to shine. At higher levels the ability to cast spontaneously is a huge benefit in both preserving and making the most of your spell slots. Wizards and Sorcs also complement each other amazingly well and a high level party will find that there is not much that their Wizard-Sorc or Sorc-Wizard duo cannot accomplish.

In Wrath of the Righteous we later had a Rogue and Sorcerer join us and the Sorcerer and my Wizard were the blasters.

1 to 50 of 156 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Why choose a wizard over a sorcerer? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.