A wizard has the feats and spell versatility to easily compensate for the extra level 1-3 followers and higher level cohort a sorcerer is gaining from having a higher charisma.
Yes it's nice that a Sorcerer's prime stat compliments the Leadership feat, but the feat's synergy with the class isn't really going to make-or-break any direct comparison of power.
The Sorcerer can have a cohort one or two levels higher (remember that the maximum level of a cohort is your character level -2) and easily two or three times as many 1st - 3rd level followers. That's enough manpower to establish an adventuring guild, trading company etc
..but really, any half-respectable campaign rival is going to turn those followers and the cohort into mulch very quickly.
The wizard, while lacking the numbers of followers and suffering from a slightly lower level cohort, has the extra feats to spend on golem and magical item creation as well as the spell versatility to properly fortify any defenses/base of operations, creating a place of safety for his followers.
Golems are way overpriced. It is cheaper to get eagle's splendor cast you on right before using planar binding. I do agree that one feat is not going to help the sorcerer that much.
Golems are way overpriced. It is cheaper to get eagle's splendor cast you on right before using planar binding. I do agree that one feat is not going to help the sorcerer that much.A wizard has the feats and spell versatility to easily compensate for the extra level 1-3 followers and higher level cohort a sorcerer is gaining from having a higher charisma.
Yes it's nice that a Sorcerer's prime stat compliments the Leadership feat, but the feat's synergy with the class isn't really going to make-or-break any direct comparison of power.
The Sorcerer can have a cohort one or two levels higher (remember that the maximum level of a cohort is your character level -2) and easily two or three times as many 1st - 3rd level followers. That's enough manpower to establish an adventuring guild, trading company etc
..but really, any half-respectable campaign rival is going to turn those followers and the cohort into mulch very quickly.
The wizard, while lacking the numbers of followers and suffering from a slightly lower level cohort, has the extra feats to spend on golem and magical item creation as well as the spell versatility to properly fortify any defenses/base of operations, creating a place of safety for his followers.
Aye, I agree that golems are pricey. However, if you don't use them for combat but instead use them for carrying/digging/labour then eventually they pay their own way - not requiring you to feed them, working 24hours 7 days a week etc etc
With some Lawful-style planning and effort you can have them digging canals for the local council, offering security to rich nobles, assisting in urban/rural development projects..
For a hefty start up price you can corner the Construction/Excavation/Labour market!*
Also - SHIELD GAURDIANS! Ok, they're even pricier but you can give the amulets to anyone! Like, say, hadnful of 1st-3rd level followers the average charisma Wizard is getting from the Leadership feat.
Just had a thought: Can you craft Golem Manuals? I believe it wasn't possible in earlier editions but now?
If so, that'd take the sting out of golem prices.
*..or buy and equip an army or three**
..but you'd have to feed them! ..and pay them!
|
The wizard will need more than a +2 to their charisma because they are taking a -2 for their familiar.If they didn't decide to take a staff or ring as their Arcane Bond. Not as fun as a Familiar, but still, some people do choose the item.
i (and all of my players) almost NEVER take the familiar... too much of a liability.
Eh, they're great for delivering Touch Spells, adding a bit of flavour to the wizard, long distance scouting and even companionship at the worst of times .... but they are also a giant freaking bullseye if the DM decides to take your Wizard down a notch.
Sorcerer doesn't need a Familiar, they're nominally the most attractive/strange/commanding presence in the room. Wizards are the guys spending most of their life with their noses in a book and it shows in their Class Skills and Weapon Proficiencies.
Oh, in a game where you are given nix downtime between adventure arcs and similar, the Sorcerer will pull ahead as all she has to do is continue to gain Charisma to keep grabbing more powerful Spells. A Wizard by contrast will generally only flourish if allowed a month or so downtime between most arcs and can devise new spells or research older ones.
By contrast, the Sorcerer tends to lag in campaigns with larger breaks between the adventure arcs and smaller mini-adventures in between, since outside of Combat the Sorcerer generally has little in the way of talents unless they have taken non-combat spells, something an adventuring Sorcerer is oten loathe to do. Given time a Wizard can find a way around any obstacle, whereas the Sorcerer is more prone to trying to blast her way through it.
Sorcerer tends to be a very direct and in-your-face caster-class, spurning a broad field of knowledge for a tightly focused and very niche array of spells, trading in versatility for sheer outright power.
The Wizard goes the other way, having less spells-per-day but far more freedom in choice of spells, the ability to focus his spells in a way a Sorcerer cannot match, trading outright power for versatility.
To narrow it down further, the Sorcerer is a Sword, the Wizard is a Swiss Army Knife. Looking to kill somebody quick and then do it again and again and again, go the Sorcerer, looking to go MacGuyver and have a trick for nearly every situation, go Wizard.
i (and all of my players) almost NEVER take the familiar... too much of a liability.
How is a familiar a liability? There are no negatives to losing a familiar in the rules, at most its the cost of some gold to replace it...
What is an "outside of combat" talent? Are illusions and charms an example of that? Sorcerers are great at both. Is bluff an example? How about taking all those followers he gains from leadership and building a spy network?
If you believe that a sorcerer fills a tightly focused niche, you don't know how to build a sorcerer.
True in regards to Illusions, Charms and Bluff (although a person who spends all day Bluffing everyone will eventually get a reputation for being a compulsive liar if she gets caught out a few times by some influential people), and I never said a Sorcerer couldn't succeed outside of combat, but their spell selection can tend towards singular goals due to their limited number of spells known.
Sorcerers gain a very small number of spells, and a canny Sorcerer must make sure they have a number of attack spells dealing a variety of differnet energy types to ensure they don't get caught with their pants down against specific enemies.
A Sorcerer who focuses on Illusions and Charms can be doubly effective both in and out of combat, able to put on fantastic displays for the crowds, but at the same point the Sorcerer must still spend some valuable spells-known slots for offensive, defensive and controlling spells unless they are in a party that can spare a companion to take up at least one of these burdens. That's the most glaring weakness in the Sorcerer in that if they aren't careful they can effectively build weaknesses into their spell selections, although this can be countered by swapping the spells out at later levels or using charged items such as Wands and Staves, but this will tend to eat into their gold far quicker than a Wizard taking Scrolls and scribing them into his spellbook, since once that is done, the Wizard can simply use that spell whenever he chooses to assign his spell-slots for the day, while the Sorcerer has to keep burning charges or scrolls to cast the spell. There are a number of 'must have' spells a Sorcerer will be drawn towards, and that opens up a whole new can of worms for the class.
The Wizard has an advantage in that they can gain a greater pool of magic spells, albeit it will eat into their gold doing so, unless they can find scrolls and spellbooks in their adventures, which can add some ... ecclectic spells to their spellbooks. The Sorcerer has the advantage in that they can repeatedly cast the same spells over and over, depending upon the situation, but at the same point their lack of spell variety can become a problem against enemies that have watched or otherwise studied the Sorcerer in previous battles.
Under your arguement, a 10th level Sorcerer can cast 9 different cantrips, 5 different 1st level spells, 4 different 2nd level spells, 3 3rd level spells, 2 4th level spells and 1 5th level spells, not including a high Charisma bonus. Certain spells will inevitably work their way into the Sorcerer's array, specifically Summoning spells and many of those found in Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards. To compensate for that limited spell selection, the Sorcerer must in turn select spells that will have as many potential uses as she can, and would also be stocking up on wands, scrolls and staves of utility spells to preserve those precious spells-known slots for spells useful in combat, her primary function in most combat if an aggressive type of character, or defensive/controlling, if a cunning, more team-orientated type who understands it's a team-effort that wins the day, not solo heroics. There will inevitably be cross-overs in the paths, but that lack of variety can become crippling to a Sorcerer who doesn't get the time to barter for new magical doo-dads.
A 10th level Wizard can know all cantrips, minimum of 4 1st level spells, minimum of 4 2nd level spells, minimum of 4 3rd level spells, minimum of 4 4th level spells and a minimum of 4 5th level spells. Furthermore, the Wizard can have spent a few thousand gold worth of treasure in scrolls and possibly a rival Wizard's spellbook to add even more spells to the mix. If there is a specific spell he is after, at the cost of 1,000 gold pieces per spell level he can research it and add it to his spell list. The Wizard will likely spend a sizeable amount of his gold on spell research, and possibly just as much again crafting items, but in doing so can create new spells, but as RAW on page 220, a Sorcerer or Bard doesn't seem to be written up to create their own spells, which stinks to me of epic bull-hockery and I'd probably ignore that for my players.
But to throw some more fuel on this fire, a Sorcerer could craft an illusion that could entertain people for several minutes and draw massive crowds. A Wizard using Meta-Magic feats can do the same thing for longer or a larger spell-radius and can still have feats left to burn on more 'vital' feats that a Sorcerer could have to do without to gain access to her desired meta-magic feat (I am also unable to find the information on wether or not Metamagic still screws with the Spontaneous Casters like it did in 3.5 in the Core Rulebook, will have to have a closer and more in-depth read later tonight). Wizards are also a 'slow burn' class in that, unlike the Sorcerer, they take a long time to get up to their full power-level, wherein the Sorcerer, even though she gains access to spell as a slower rate and has a much reduced pool to use, isn't tied to a vulnerable spell-book and as such even if she is captured and stripped of all her equipment, a canny Sorcerer would keep a 'faux' spellbook on her person to throw people off the trail and think her defenceless without her spellbook.
Your math is a little off. A wizard can potentially learn every spell in the game for a measly 12,500gp (2 blessed books crafted via Craft Wondrous Item and then find all the scrolls/enemy spellbooks for free while adventuring--I call this "the hard way").
Alternatively, for the more studious wizard, find a few powerful wizards and/or an arcane library and copy all the game's spells into your blessed book from them (paying only for the privilege to view the spells). That will run you a little less than 64,905gp (12,500gp for making 2 of your own blessed books and another 52,405gp for the viewing privilege of every wizard spell in the core rulebook; don't forget to subtract the viewing cost of spells you get for free for your class levels).
I've done all the math and have a big table.
I'm of the opinion that in a standard to high-fantasy campaign world, a high level wizard (18th or higher) has no excuse for not knowing every spell in the core rulebook. Heck, an 11th-level wizard could put every core wizard spell into his two blessed books according to the wealth by level guidelines if he didn't mind being under-equipped.
Making copies is easy too. For every 12,500gp you are willing to spend, you can make a single backup of all your spells. That means for 25,000gp, you can have EVERY core spell in a traveling/adventuring pair of spellbooks and a backup of said books resting safely at home in your vault next to your phylactery. :P
I prefer to err on the side of caution, assigning too much money rather than too little, as you never know what the political situation of the region will be, how protective other Wizards are of their 'signature' spells or wether or not the DM will pull Shenanigans and have non-Guilded Wizards treated as pariah, and Guilded Wizards under the control of a powerful and potentialy evil Archmage Lich.
@kenmckinney: I was trying to not engage lilth on that as she (assuming it's a she based on the name) tends to become increasingly combative in her arguments when called out on from previous threads I've seen her post in. This thread is an interesting meeting of the minds so long as we can keep our egos out of the way, and trust me on this, I'm fighting that urge severely as I am a feverent supporter of the Wizard! Sorcerer tends to be the better choice in games with little downtime as she's the damn energiser bunny of the Arcane World, while Wizard is the opposite.
Also rating a class based on Leadership is a bit ... depressing. Yes you get a wonderful kick-ass cohort but you also have to deal with the annoyance of a small legion of fans who are pretty much a village-sized target to your enemies, and every one of those that dies, wether by your direct action or by random chance can be attributed to your leadership score and end up costing you renown.
Your math is a little off. A wizard can potentially learn every spell in the game for a measly 12,500gp (2 blessed books craft via Craft Wondrous Item and then find all the scrolls/enemy spellbooks for free while adventuring).
Alternatively, for the more studious wizard, find a few powerful wizards and/or an arcane library and copy all the game's spells into your blessed book from them (paying only for the privilege to view the spells). That will run you a little less than 64,905gp (12,500gp for making 2 of your own blessed books and another 52,405gp for every wizard spell in the core rulebook - the viewing cost of spells you get for free for your class levels).
I've done all the math and have a big table.
I'm of the opinion that in a standard to high-fantasy campaign world, a high level wizard (18th or higher) has no excuse for not knowing every spell in the core rulebook. Heck, an 11th-level wizard could pull it off according to the wealth by level guidelines if he didn't mind being under-equipped.
Ah! But one of the stipulations was that "no item" crafting.
I am looking at two bigger problem.
Ah! But one of the stipulations was that "no item" crafting.I am looking at two bigger problem.
Low Level magic items (such as scrolls of 4th Level or lower) can be made in a day. As, a wizard starts with "Scribe Scroll" as a bonus feat, saying that there would be no downtime what so ever, is already biasing the outcome.
A bigger problem is define "power." A sorcerer has more power immediately and reliably, but a wizard with little time to prepare can overcome any obstical.
I agree with your last two points but the first 'no item crafting' isn't in the OP's post. That said, a Sorcerer with access to Item Creation feats can be quite effective in that role, able to create a small pile of valuable scrolls to supplement her already formidable spells-per-day, enabling the Sorcerer to potentially spend a whole 20 round doing nothing but blowing s!+~ up (damnably effective if she's flying and is just tossing big old AoE spells down on an army of Undead or Humanoids!) or creating a maze of overlapping Illusion spells that can tie up enemies for several minutes at the least while the PCs can smuggle themselves or vulnerable NPCs out of combat.
One observation I made when playing the ToEE computer game was that there was no good reason to play a Wizard when you could play a Sorcerer. I always thought Wizards seemed better than Sorcerers in my games because of the versatility. However, in the computer game, playing a Sorcerer was much more effective than playing a Wizard. You could get all the good spells you needed, and use them more, if you played a Sorcerer.
My take-away from that observation was that which class is better will depend upon your style of play. I still think Wizards are better in my game because I spend a lot of time with planning, building power bases, and researching before setting off to take care of the BBEG.
|
|
One observation I made when playing the ToEE computer game was that there was no good reason to play a Wizard when you could play a Sorcerer. I always thought Wizards seemed better than Sorcerers in my games because of the versatility. However, in the computer game, playing a Sorcerer was much more effective than playing a Wizard. You could get all the good spells you needed, and use them more, if you played a Sorcerer.
My take-away from that observation was that which class is better will depend upon your style of play. I still think Wizards are better in my game because I spend a lot of time with planning, building power bases, and researching before setting off to take care of the BBEG.
I found the opposite to be true in Neverwinter Nights (1 and 2). I found that the majority of random loot where scrolls. Use Magic Device ranks did allow you to make use of that, but if you were a wizard, you quickly gained access to several spells that you could toy with. I found sorcerers in NWN to be almost unplayable. Though NWN 1 is 3.0 and NWN 2 is 3.5 and both of those editions I found sorcerers to be unplayable. Pathfinders has at least made Sorcerers a viable choice again WITHOUT the NEED to multiclass.
Again...thanks Paizo staff.
|
i (and all of my players) almost NEVER take the familiar... too much of a liability.The wizard will need more than a +2 to their charisma because they are taking a -2 for their familiar.If they didn't decide to take a staff or ring as their Arcane Bond. Not as fun as a Familiar, but still, some people do choose the item.
Umm the item choice is WAY more of a liability. Lose the item and you need to make DC 20+spell level concentration checks AND pay gold to replace it. Lose a familiar and you can just not have a familiar...or pay gold to replace it.
|
|
Okay, let's make this a bit more fun
Create a Wizard at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th levels.
Use only the rules in the SRD. Make the character straight-classed. You'll use a standard fantasy point buy.
Pay for your spells (other than those two you gain for free each level and the ones you gain at first level for free). This comes out of your gold for magic items each level.
This character will be adventuring regularly, so no downtime to create magic items.
There's a 40% chance that any magic item gained through adventuring will be removed from your list of magic gear. This will simulate the fact that you aren't under control of the magic items you'll gain through adventuring. This also applies to magic items you buy - since "magic emporiums unlimited" don't exist in most campaign worlds. If such a magic item is removed, you can select a replacement (which will also be subject to that 40% chance). This rule applies equally to spell books and scrolls from which you learn your spells. We'll have a third party roll the percentage chance for us.
Once you create these characters, I'll create a Sorcerer of the same level and we'll see which character is more powerful.
So...a bunch of houserules to allow your sorcerer to come out on top then? This would prove nothing other then by DM fiat, you can make any class shine over another. I can make a bunch of houserules and selected encounters to make a monk shine over any other class too...doesn't mean the monk is a better class then the wizard.
Isn't Leadership Score maxed at 25? Along with the other modifiers, the Sorcerer's Charisma bonus means less and less the higher level the characters are. By 20th level the Wizard can have almost no Charisma bonus and still get to the cap via those modifiers. Level is more important to Leadership than Charisma and honestly, Leadership isn't all that impressive anyway. The cohort is nice, but unnecessary and just serves to make combat take longer in games.
Isn't Leadership Score maxed at 25? Along with the other modifiers, the Sorcerer's Charisma bonus means less and less the higher level the characters are. By 20th level the Wizard can have almost no Charisma bonus and still get to the cap via those modifiers. Level is more important to Leadership than Charisma and honestly, Leadership isn't all that impressive anyway. The cohort is nice, but unnecessary and just serves to make combat take longer in games.
Well, the maximum effect gained from a Leadership score is 25, but the table says '25 or more', so a score can actually go higher than 25.
And since we have to take into account the various penalties to a Leadership score, higher is always better. Imagine a CN character who tries to take as a cohort a NG character (-1 score), has already a Familiar (-2 score), has lost 2 previous cohorts due to accidents in adventuring (-4 score) and is a bit aloof (-1 score); as a 20th level Sorcerer with +10 Cha his Leadership score would be 22 (and so, 15th level cohort at best - quite acceptable), as a 20th level Wizard with +4 Cha his score would be only 16 (11th level cohort - at 20th level - is not useful at all...).
Just my 2c.
At level 5 and 15, the wizard is better. I don't even need to stat it out. The wizard is better. At level 15 the wizard as Greater Planar Binding and the sorcerer doesn't; wizard is better.
How about levels 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 17? ;p
Note how I don't say "wins?" Because it's two arcane classes vs each other. It's rocket tag. The winner isn't dependent on who's more powerful; they're both strong enough for that to not matter. The winner is whoever wins in initiative.
Also, sorcerers are better in computer games most of the time because cRPGs have a significantly smaller number of spells at each level, and of those spells only, like, 3 are good, since you rarely if ever need non-combat spells. cRPGs are built entirely to a sorcerer's strengths.
I've generally found sorcerers to be much weaker than wizards, but then I've mostly played in games where you get all the downtime you could ever want.
In my local game (which has as much downtime as the players want, but that doesn't mean the villains are sitting on their hands), I let sorcerers get their bloodline spells two levels early, if they have a high enough charisma to gain a bonus spell for that level. I give oracles the same deal with their mystery spells.
Wizards need to find downtime to craft. Sorcerers can easily get a cohort to craft for them. Advantage Sorcerer.
Huh? The cohort needs downtime to craft for them as well. If the cohort stays home to do this, he's not helping on the adventure...so what was the point of Leadership? Also, this is like saying "Sorcerers are better than Wizards at item creation because a Sorcerer can have a Wizard cohort." <boggle>
Wizards learn spells from scrolls and spell books. So, their spell choice is random and counts against their max magic item gold piece limit. Sorcerers don't have to deal with that. Advantage sorcerer.
Wizards get 2 FREE spells per level of their choice. So over the course of their career, they get 38+3+starting INT bonus spells (not counting cantrips). Sorcerers get 5+5+4+4+4+3+3+3+3 = 34 spells known at 20th level. So even in the worst case, Wizards will know more spells than a sorcerer.
Skill points are based off the Wizard's prime characteristic. But the sorcerer gets some of the most powerful skills in the game (bluff and UMD), whereas the Wizard primarily gets knowledge skill, and they work off the sorcerer's prime char. Advantage, wizard by a hair.
Sorcerers basically get +6 skill ranks thanks to having UMD and bluff as class skills. Wizards will get +level skill ranks every time they raise INT by 2 points (typically 8th and 16th level). I think the 40 extra skill ranks at 20th level is more than 'a hair of an advantage'. Sorcerers can be good (great even) at 3-4 skills. A wizard can be great at 7-8 skills, or even good at 3-4 and competent at another 7-8 skills. Even more, the wizard can afford to get good in very useful non class skills (like Perception or Stealth), where the Sorcerer cannot.
About the “no down time”, let me throw a pair of Rule logs on the fire.
PF Core book, page 547, there is a sentence that breaks from the first column to the second column: “If the caster is out adventuring, he can devote 4 hours each day to item creation, although he nets only 2 hours worth of work.”
Also, the last sentence of the paragraph before that. “This process can be accelerated to 4 hours of work per 1,000 gp in the item’s base price (or fraction thereof) by increasing the DC to create the item by +5.” (Normally the Crafting process takes 8 hours per 1,000 gp.)
So the Wizard can pack up some “item creation material” (which don't seem to have any encumberance) and knock out a few 1st level scrolls. Use ‘em or cash ‘em in for more mats. If you have a high Int you shouldn’t need to take the Skill Focus (Spellcraft) & Magical Aptitude feats.
Also, while the second rule I mentioned doesn’t say that you can take an extra +5 to the DC to Craft even faster, it doesn't say you can’t. Up to your DM, I suppose.
Sorcerers basically get +6 skill ranks thanks to having UMD and bluff as class skills. Wizards will get +level skill ranks every time they raise INT by 2 points (typically 8th and 16th level). I think the 40 extra skill ranks at 20th level is more than 'a hair of an advantage'. Sorcerers can be good (great even) at 3-4 skills. A wizard can be great at 7-8 skills, or even good at 3-4 and competent at another 7-8 skills. Even more, the wizard can afford to get good in very useful non class skills (like Perception or Stealth), where the Sorcerer cannot.You don't get 40 extra skill points at 20th level. The extra skill points are gained as your INT increases (and doesn't apply to magic item increases - the increase must be a permanent increase). So, if you gain a +1 int modifer at 16th level, this will only give you 5 more skill points, not 20.
Actually, that isn't the case. Ability score increases apply retroactively.
You don't get 40 extra skill points at 20th level. The extra skill points are gained as your INT increases (and doesn't apply to magic item increases - the increase must be a permanent increase). So, if you gain a +1 int modifer at 16th level, this will only give you 5 more skill points, not 20.
The skill gains are retroactive; so if at 8th level you get +1 INT modifier, you immediately get +8 skill points to spend (not just +1). So if you gained +2 INT modifier over your whole career, you would have gained 20x2=40 skill points because of it (over what you would have gained if you had not raised INT at all from 1st level).
And the wizard will be maxing out things like knowledge skills whereas the sorcerer will be maxing out two of the most important skills in the game (bluff and UMD
Wizards need ONE knowledge skill (arcana); everything else is completely optional - Clerics will probably be packing Knowledge: Religion. How much else do you need? Maybe Dungeoneering might be useful. Knowledge: Planes doesn't come up that often. Only Bards should try to be knowledge-guy; there are too many of them for anyone else to be truly effective.
HOWEVER, UMD is NOT as important skill for either the Wizard or Sorcerer* as it is for a most other classes, thanks to their (awesome) spell list. It's way more important for Rogues and Bards. Even then, once you can reliably get to a 20 people will stop putting points into it; in this regard, the Sorcerer caps out earlier. UMD is one of those weird skills where a little is worthless and a whole lot is too much. Even a Sorcerer isn't much good with UMD until he has more than a few ranks of it (lower targets generally being in the 20 range). While a Rogue or Bard has the skill points to burn for this kind of future investment, the Sorcerer...not so much.
* Arcane Bloodline Sorcerers with Improved Familiar excepted. Ditto Wizards with Improved Familiar feat - note that the class skill bonus doesn't carry over, so ranks are of equal value here (and it uses the Familiar's CHA bonus).
As for Bluff, it isn't nearly as important as Diplomacy; as a Sorcerer I'd take Diplomacy every time over Bluff. YMMV.
Regardless of how useful these two skills (Bluff/UMD) are, how is the Sorcerer getting them? At best Sorcerers will have 3-4 skill points a level (many will have 2-3). Spellcraft probably eats one of those. Knowledge: Arcana probably eats another - and you need max ranks in those for a while b/c you lack the INT bonus to make them really good. So you've got 1-2 skill points to spread around. You could spend all of them them on Bluff/UMD, but you're also neglecting things like Diplomacy and Perception (equally important), never mind Stealth. Not class skills for the Wiz/Sor, but still very important skills indeed.
So maybe the Sorcerer's class skill list is better than the Wizard's. That doesn't compensate for the fact that the Wizard will have 2-3 times as many skill ranks as the Sorcerer.
Wizards need to find downtime to craft. Sorcerers can easily get a cohort to craft for them. Advantage Sorcerer.
Reread the Leadership feat.
If you lock the poor guy in a sweatshop he will not advance in levels. Or were you planning on swapping out your Cohort every level?
No matter how bad your Leadership score is, no matter how weak the follower you initially attract, they use experience points to advance in levels, not the Leadership score. They can, and if given sufficient time they will, advance all the way up to the cap of Player's Level-2. The poor guy living in the sweatshop gets nothing because he is not adventuring.
Guys paladins are the best class because they have high charisma, and then they can take Leadership and get a sorcerer, who then takes leadership and gets a wizard.
Guys <ANY CLASS EVER> is the best class because they can take Leadership.
¯\(°_o)/¯
Lilith you've been wrong about game mechanics like four times now. You aren't making your argument any better by showcasing that you very literally do not know what you're talking about.
The other thing to consider with the Sorcerer is that their low-skill points means that a Sorcerer will be likely be unable to max out her Spellcraft, Knowledge (Arcane) and Fly skills if she focuses on her Bluff and UMD skills. A Wizard, on the other hand, will often be able to take at least two other Knowledge skills of his choice, a Craft or Profession skill and likely the Appraise skill as well.
On the other hand, the Sorcerer that uses the Leadership Skill doesn't need high-skill ranks, they can have their legions of minions do that for them. Unfortunately, this means that most Sorcerers will need to take either a Wizard along to be their second banana in the magical arts or a Bard to be their walking library when they hit something that can't be blasted down.
For arguement's sake, let's say a Sorcerer 10 with a Charisma score of 17 could have a 8th level Cohort and 10 1st level Followers and 1 2nd level Followers. The Sorcerer could easily have those 11 Followers running her home, crafting to keep the place in the black and put a little bit of extra gold in her pocket for buying new magical items, or she could very well drag them out into the world with her as flunkies or hired hands, having them set up her tent, cook her food, dig the latrine pit and stand watch during the night.
(Incidentally the 'Olde Magic Shoppe' does exist in most D&D/Pathfinder campaigns, just it generally revolves around the PCs knowing a guy who knows a guy, and in large towns and most cities there would be the customer volume and cash-flow to warrant a goodly number of such shops. Not EVERYTHING the PCs find while trudging through Dungeons will help their character concepts and there are times when you just have to bite the bullet and say "Okay, make us this, please.")
A Wizard of the same with an Int Score of 17 and a neutral Charisma Score would only have a 7th level Cohort and 5 followers. In this situation, the Wizard is more likely to bring the followers along to be the hired help than leave them behind to man the Mage's Tower, but again this may vary to your mileage. Most PCs I've seen who take Leadership often assign most of their Followers to 'manning the fort' and assign their highest level Followers, plus some hired mercenaries of higher levels, to maintain effective control of their home, protect it from rivals and enemies and hopefully ensure they don't come home to a pile of ashes and dead bodies.