Why choose a wizard over a sorcerer?


Advice

51 to 100 of 156 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

TriOmegaZero wrote:
CN_Minus wrote:
That said, some problems can only be solved by a sorcerer. Running from bulettes and come to a crevasse? Sorry, wizard, as weird as it sounds, didn't prepare fly 4 times. So, you're level 12 wizard wouldn't be able to help anyone but himself, but the level 7 sorcerer would.
That's because the wizard had overland flight cast that morning and didn't need such a short term buff. But he did spend a slot on dimension door, so he grabs the whole party and pops them across that mundane barrier.

He'd already used it to get away from the bulettes during the surprise round, and now can't cast any extras of the spell because he thought he would only need one! Meanwhile, a sorcerer five levels lower already had the issue covered.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
CN_Minus wrote:
He'd already used it to get away from the bulettes during the surprise round, and now can't cast any extras of the spell because he thought he would only need one! Meanwhile, a sorcerer five levels lower already had the issue covered.

He uses his arcane bond to spontaneously cast it from his spellbook. (To counter your claim that he will already have used it, he then uses Brilliant Spell Preparation to reprepare it as a standard action, draws his rod of quicken, and uses quickened dimension door.)

We can contrive answers like this all day, if you really want to keep moving the goalposts.

(And why the hell is he running from bulettes? The martials of the party should have no problem dealing with those things. Not to mention they would never have caught up if he D-Doored away from them the first time.)

Liberty's Edge

TriOmegaZero wrote:
CN_Minus wrote:
He'd already used it to get away from the bulettes during the surprise round, and now can't cast any extras of the spell because he thought he would only need one! Meanwhile, a sorcerer five levels lower already had the issue covered.

He uses his arcane bond to spontaneously cast it from his spellbook.

We can contrive answers like this all day, if you really want to keep moving the goalposts.

It's kind of laughable, though, that you'd accuse me of moving the goalposts when the entire scenario is hypothetical. The point was to illustrate a time when a wizard simply wouldn't be nearly as effective as a sorcerer.

If you're attempting to assert that the wizard is always better, then it will become nothing but a back-and-forth contrivance fest.

The truth of the matter is that sorcerers have clear outlined benefits that a wizard doesn't and vice-versa. The wizard only barely edges out the sorcerer in overall power, all things considered. Wizard fanboys who can't see the other side of the argument, accusing others of moving the goalposts when they are purposefully designing a situation where one class has a leg up on its counterpart, is silly.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
CN_Minus wrote:
If you're attempting to assert that the wizard is always better, then it will become nothing but a back-and-forth contrivance fest.

Then allow me to assure you that I believe no such thing and was only pointing out the flaw in your example.

Contrived situations like that do not make a strong argument.


CN_Minus wrote:
thejeff wrote:
CN_Minus wrote:
Wizards are more flexible as far as have spells prepared for specific situations, but what happens if something happens that you don't expect? You can't sit there and prepare a spell every time a problem comes up.

That's the weirdest argument for me. That situation where the 5 different spells the wizard has prepared are useless, but the 2 the sorcerer has happen to be the perfect choice?

Possible, I suppose, if you prepped for one specific niche situation and ran into a completely different niche case. It's far more likely though the wizard will prepare at least some of the relatively generic spells that the sorcerer is relying on to cover all her needs. So while he may not be able to make use of all his spells in any given situation, he'll have something to fall back on.

And in the niche situations, the sorcerer may also find his spells don't apply.

Again, in niche situations you have scrolls... The really exceedingly niche situations are a wizards friend, but how important is something that comes up so little a sorcerer wouldn't have a scroll for it?

When you say wizards can prepare 5 spells and sorcerers can only prepare 2 you seem to imply wizards have access to more spells on hand. That's actually the opposite of the truth. If, as everyone suggests, you prepare a niche spell or two and leave a slot open, you actually have less versatility than a sorcerer... and the point wasn't that a sorcerer would have an answer, just that the two classes would be equal in being unable to solve a problem.

Well, except that the wizard will have more scrolls at less cost than the sorcerer and will use less of them thanks to being able to leave a slot free and quickly prep in some situations.

And unless I'm expecting something specific, I wouldn't be prepping niche spells, so most of the time, there will be more options at hand. Except when I had prepped for something specific, but got blindsided.

You're right that in situations where the sorcerer has the right spell and the situation demands multiple castings he wins.

Even then, with an arcane bonded item, the wizard can easily get 2 of anything he's got. With pearls he can get more. Even if he left a slot free, he's still got more options then the sorcerer. He just can't spam them so easily.

Of course, things like pages of spell knowledge and some favored class bonuses help boost the sorcerer's options.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

People seem to assume that the theoretical ability of a Wizard to know any number of spells of each level(*) will always be fully exercisable in practice.

(*)Historical note: In AD&D 1st Edition (not sure about 2nd Edition), this WASN'T true unless you somehow got 19 Intelligence.

Yes,

{. . .} A wizard may know any number of spells. {. . .}
But if you read on just a bit in the same section (and it gets repeated in the Spellbook section),

{. . .}

Starting Spells (See Spellbooks below): A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from his opposed schools, if any; see Arcane Schools) plus three 1st-level spells of his choice. The wizard also selects a number of additional 1st-level spells equal to his Intelligence modifier to add to the spellbook. At each new wizard level, he gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that he can cast (based on his new wizard level) for his spellbook. At any time, a wizard can also add spells found in other wizards' spellbooks to his own (see Magic).

Spells Gained at a New Level. Wizards perform a certain amount of spell research between adventures. Each time a character attains a new wizard level, he gains two spells of his choice to add to his spellbook. The two free spells must be of spell levels he can cast.

So from the above, you can see that in the absence of an external source of spells known and/or extra (costly) spell research beyond that automatically done at level-up, even though the Wizard's supply of Cantrips known is awesome and the Wizard's supply of 1st level spells known is quite good, the Wizard's supply of spells known of 2nd level and higher is actually very limited. Now in practice, most of the PbPs of APs that I have followed and most of the threads I have looked at here seem to assume the ready availability of scrolls of any spell at a local Lord WalDeMart's(*), even in some extremely hostile regions, as well as a decent number of spells in outright loot. But if you DIDN'T have access to this for long stretches, suddenly the Wizard's advantage in spells known doesn't look so great. Actually, if you have to spend a long time advanturing in a REAL DUMP, the Sorcerer might even come out ahead eventually for spells of 2nd level and higher unless the Wizard spends some time and resources doing additional spell research; the research cost isn't enormous (although in a really bad place you might not be able to find the materials you need even if you have the money), but you might not be able to afford the (down)time.

(*)And contrary to the instructions to the DM in AD&D 1st Edition (and see historical note above), Lord WalDeMart's usually seems to have scrolls of whatever spell you want in stock or at worst available with a fairly short delay. @*&&@^! Capitalism!

* * * * * * * *

Also, people mention Arcane Bonded Object for casting any spell you know spontaneously. This is nice, but never progresses beyond once per day. If you have to do this more than once per day on notice too short to prepare an unprepared spell slot, you're out of luck. A Sorcerer who needs to recast an already-cast spell can just keep trying as long as they haven't run out of spell slots of the required level or higher.


UnArcaneElection wrote:

People seem to assume that the theoretical ability of a Wizard to know any number of spells of each level(*) will always be fully exercisable in practice.

(*)Historical note: In AD&D 1st Edition (not sure about 2nd Edition), this WASN'T true unless you somehow got 19 Intelligence.

Yes,

{. . .} A wizard may know any number of spells. {. . .}
But if you read on just a bit in the same section (and it gets repeated in the Spellbook section),

{. . .}

Starting Spells (See Spellbooks below): A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from his opposed schools, if any; see Arcane Schools) plus three 1st-level spells of his choice. The wizard also selects a number of additional 1st-level spells equal to his Intelligence modifier to add to the spellbook. At each new wizard level, he gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that he can cast (based on his new wizard level) for his spellbook. At any time, a wizard can also add spells found in other wizards' spellbooks to his own (see Magic).

Spells Gained at a New Level. Wizards perform a certain amount of spell research between adventures. Each time a character attains a new wizard level, he gains two spells of his choice to add to his spellbook. The two free spells must be of spell levels he can cast.

So from the above, you can see that in the absence of an external source of spells known and/or extra (costly) spell research beyond that automatically done at level-up, even though the Wizard's supply of Cantrips known is awesome and the Wizard's supply of 1st level spells known is quite good, the Wizard's supply of spells known of 2nd level and higher is actually very limited. Now in practice, most of the PbPs of APs that I have followed...

All true, but definitely not the way the standard rules for acquiring magic items work. So a very non-standard game.

And in that case, the sorcerer is also limited by not being able to get scrolls to cover any of the utility stuff she doesn't want to waste spells known on.


Gilarius wrote:

My Oracle has just reached 10th level. I get one 5th level spell, which I can cast 3 times per day (plus bonus casting from having a high stat). Just one spell.

My party wants Breath of Life, so most of the time I'll be using my 5th level slots for more 4th level spells!

At tenth level you should have two 5th level spells: one you choose directly and one from your mystery.

Grand Lodge

You choose wizard because:

They have more skill points
They Can prepare new spells every day (more utility)
They learn higher spell levels sooner

Shadow Lodge

Plus a mass cure/inflict.


Statboy wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:


You can't always buy your way out of every problem. And you're not always one day out of a city.
I get that, but the amount of times that has come up compared to the amount of times that we don't know what to prepare for is skewed in favor no knowing what to be prepared for. Sorcerer wins not knowing what to be prepared for, because unprepared means more flexibility in your casting.

I have played both classes. A wizard may not have the perfect spell, but if he has a good variety in his default daily selection he will almost never be without the ability to do something. If he actually has good intel things get even better.

I think the wizard is more powerful becuase he is more versatile + the reasons already listed, but I normally play a sorcerer first because it is less bookkeeping.

As for the scrolls things, they cost more depending on caster level, and that can get expensive. However, just like the wizard a sorcerer can normally have a spell that will work, even if it is not the best spell for the situation. Although if someone plays a theme based sorcerer such as one who focuses on fire spells that might bite him in the ass, depending on how fire they take it.


CN_Minus wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
CN_Minus wrote:
Wizards are more flexible as far as have spells prepared for specific situations, but what happens if something happens that you don't expect? You can't sit there and prepare a spell every time a problem comes up.
You can't everytime, but then you aren't supposed to be adventuring by yourself either. Having a few surprise encounters you can't majorly participate in is better than having a single situation that your entire party can't overcome.
Anytime you run into a situation that your party wouldn't be able to overcome without a wizard you can rest assured that the person who built the encounter has no idea what he's doing.

An encounter can overwhelm a party if any one party member can't do anything, especially if it is an important party member. and it is not just APL=CR.

I wouldn't just push this all on the GM though. The player could have messed up on his spell selection that day, or he could have run out of spells due to not conserving them.


Sorcerers beat wizards at three thing: Blasting (most of the time, admixture wizards can give them a run for their money), charming (high charisma helps), and giving new players a simpler spellcaster to run.

Grand Lodge

CampinCarl9127 wrote:
Sorcerers beat wizards at three thing: Blasting (most of the time, admixture wizards can give them a run for their money), charming (high charisma helps), and giving new players a simpler spellcaster to run.

I'd agree with this...Most Admixture wizards dip 1 Level of crossblooded Sorcerer anyways to get the most out of every blast spell.


This again?

A sorcerer with the human favoured class bonus ends up having a LOT of spells known at high level (more again if arcane) and has the advantages of spontaneous casting.

Metamagic is a spontaneous caster's friend (despite any increase in casting time) as they get a more 'informed' situational usage.

They can cast more spells per day and 'only' are behind on spell level for 8 of a potential 20 levels (so for 12 they are equal).

The ability to Use Magic Device can add to utility if needed (a wizard needs to invest traits if they want to utilse this skill on a par with a sorceror).

The wizard has way more skills granted and yes for 8 levels they can cast a higher level maximum spell as well as prepare an obscure spell if required however a well designed sorcerer with good metamagics (depends on your 'role' as to which) can carry a party through a wide variety of challenges.

I prefer sorcerers but if the party was to have two arcane casters I would say one wizard and one sorceror is a better balance than two of either.

Grand Lodge

strayshift wrote:

This again?

A sorcerer with the human favoured class bonus ends up having a LOT of spells known at high level (more again if arcane) and has the advantages of spontaneous casting.

Metamagic is a spontaneous caster's friend (despite any increase in casting time) as they get a more 'informed' situational usage.

They can cast more spells per day and 'only' are behind on spell level for 8 of a potential 20 levels (so for 12 they are equal).

The ability to Use Magic Device can add to utility if needed (a wizard needs to invest traits if they want to utilse this skill on a par with a sorceror).

The wizard has way more skills granted and yes for 8 levels they can cast a higher level maximum spell as well as prepare an obscure spell if required however a well designed sorcerer with good metamagics (depends on your 'role' as to which) can carry a party through a wide variety of challenges.

I prefer sorcerers but if the party was to have two arcane casters I would say one wizard and one sorceror is a better balance than two of either.

Those 8 Levels can mean the difference.

Let's say a Campaign will level you to 17 for the last bit before the end. That is the difference between 8th level spells and 9th level spells. That is the Difference between Wish, time stop, and Gate.

Lets look at PFS. typically Level 11 is the last playable level unless you do Seeker or find a higher level adventure (Like at Gen-con) So a Wizard will be casting 6th level spells versus 5th. Those 8 levels when a wizard has higher spells is very important and should not be wrote off so easily.

A wizard has potential to learn every Wizard spell in the game if so they choose and spend the money. FCB gets s!~% on there. As well as Humans get another extra spell they can write into their books. So technically that makes it a wash in the FCB department.

I forgot to mention Wizards end up with more feats.


ONE additional feat and that is at level 20. The potential versatility is dependant upon having the spell in a spell book. The Sorcerer can use scrolls for highly situational spells.

I'm not arguing the levels where the wizard has access to higher level spells are not an advantage, I'm merely saying that it is not a 100% of a casters career thing AND that spontaneous casting has it's own advantages which (in my opinion) more than compensate for that (see original post).


Humans have the most broken favored class bonus for spontaneous casters. I always ban it.

Hey Fruian, just curious, why dip sorcerer?


CampinCarl9127 wrote:

Humans have the most broken favored class bonus for spontaneous casters. I always ban it.

Hey Fruian, just curious, why dip sorcerer?

Crossblooded Orc/Draconic Bloodline for +2 damage per die.

So a 10d6 Fireball becomes 10d6+20. Elemental Spell metamagic doesnt change the descriptor either. Admixture is for on the fly energy resistance avoidance.


That's a pretty gross dip. I can't believe it's not dependent on your sorcerer levels.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just wish they'd add some errata that those are the same kind of bonus and don't stack. Right now, being a crossblooded dragon/orc is way too beneficial to a blaster build.


Yeah, the Crossblooded Sorc 1/Admixture Wizard 19 is pretty funny even before you get into Dazing Spell and the like.


strayshift wrote:

ONE additional feat and that is at level 20. The potential versatility is dependant upon having the spell in a spell book. The Sorcerer can use scrolls for highly situational spells.

I'm not arguing the levels where the wizard has access to higher level spells are not an advantage, I'm merely saying that it is not a 100% of a casters career thing AND that spontaneous casting has it's own advantages which (in my opinion) more than compensate for that (see original post).

Have you ever looked at the sorcerer feat lists? They were obviously written by someone who thought sorcerers were going to become a full BAB class.

Aberrant: Combat Casting, Improved Disarm, Improved Grapple, Improved Initiative, Improved Unarmed Strike, Iron Will, Silent Spell, Skill Focus (Knowledge [dungeoneering])
That's one limited boost to concentration that shouldn't be needed, one good feat, one iffy metamagic, two combat maneuvers you'd have to be suicidal to try, a boost to your already strong save, a weapon proficiency worse than a club, and skill focus in a knowledge skill. Compared to all metamagic and item creation feats and wizard discoveries. Only one of these options is something a wizard would actually bother with.

Abyssal: Augment Summoning, Cleave, Empower Spell, Great Fortitude, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Sunder, Power Attack, Skill Focus (Knowledge [planes])
That's slightly better. There are three not horrible options, though the sorcerer is paying prerequisites so augment summoning isn't available solely with bonus feats. Still, most wizards and sorcerers wouldn't have picked Great Fortitude, and few want both Augment Summoning and Empower Spell.

Arcane: Combat Casting, Improved Counterspell, Improved Initiative, Scribe Scroll, Skill Focus (Knowledge [arcana]), Spell Focus, Still Spell
Finally, a bloodline feat list that isn't for fighters. Of course Combat Casting is iffy, Improved Counterspell trash, Scribe Scroll horribly limited for spontaneous casters, still spell not a commonly used metamagic, and iron will again redundant with your strong save. Still, spell focus is acceptable and improved initiative is always nice. But this is the high point. The rest of the lists are more like Aberrant and Abyssal than Arcane.


One of the reasons I'd pick wizard is the Primalist archetype. I wish there was an official sorcerer version, as it feels very appropriate. Easy enough to house rule it to work as it, but still..


Atarlost wrote:
strayshift wrote:

ONE additional feat and that is at level 20. The potential versatility is dependant upon having the spell in a spell book. The Sorcerer can use scrolls for highly situational spells.

I'm not arguing the levels where the wizard has access to higher level spells are not an advantage, I'm merely saying that it is not a 100% of a casters career thing AND that spontaneous casting has it's own advantages which (in my opinion) more than compensate for that (see original post).

Have you ever looked at the sorcerer feat lists? They were obviously written by someone who thought sorcerers were going to become a full BAB class.

Aberrant: Combat Casting, Improved Disarm, Improved Grapple, Improved Initiative, Improved Unarmed Strike, Iron Will, Silent Spell, Skill Focus (Knowledge [dungeoneering])
That's one limited boost to concentration that shouldn't be needed, one good feat, one iffy metamagic, two combat maneuvers you'd have to be suicidal to try, a boost to your already strong save, a weapon proficiency worse than a club, and skill focus in a knowledge skill. Compared to all metamagic and item creation feats and wizard discoveries. Only one of these options is something a wizard would actually bother with.

Abyssal: Augment Summoning, Cleave, Empower Spell, Great Fortitude, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Sunder, Power Attack, Skill Focus (Knowledge [planes])
That's slightly better. There are three not horrible options, though the sorcerer is paying prerequisites so augment summoning isn't available solely with bonus feats. Still, most wizards and sorcerers wouldn't have picked Great Fortitude, and few want both Augment Summoning and Empower Spell.

Arcane: Combat Casting, Improved Counterspell, Improved Initiative, Scribe Scroll, Skill Focus (Knowledge [arcana]), Spell Focus, Still Spell
That's slightly better. There are three not horrible options, though the sorcerer is paying prerequisites so augment summoning isn't available solely with bonus feats. Still, most wizards and sorcerers wouldn't have picked Great Fortitude, and few want both Augment Summoning and Empower Spell..

I pick Great Fortitude every time I make a weak Fort save caster. Other than that I agree those bolded bonus feats are a terrible idea.


Arcanist, Sorcerer, and Wizard should probably be considered Alternate Classes of each other -- no more Crossblooded Sorcerer Dip shenanigans.


wraithstrike wrote:
I pick Great Fortitude every time I make a weak Fort save caster. Other than that I agree those bolded bonus feats are a terrible idea.

I didn't bold Great Fortitude. I don't see it on a lot of posted builds the way iron will is everywhere on anyone with a poor will save that isn't a superstitious barbarian, but it's certainly a feat useful to casters.


CampinCarl9127 wrote:
Sorcerers beat wizards at three thing: Blasting (most of the time, admixture wizards can give them a run for their money), charming (high charisma helps), and giving new players a simpler spellcaster to run.

This, plus being able to cast the same spell repeatedly. Eg resist or protection spells.

Strayshift wrote:
I prefer sorcerers but if the party was to have two arcane casters I would say one wizard and one sorceror is a better balance than two of either.

Which I also agree with (although I prefer wizards).

Overall, I don't see why so many people seem to want to convince the other posters which class is 'better'. The thread started off with someone asking about the differences, which have now been explained. Personal play style will generally determine which class an individual player prefers, and there is sufficient evidence for the OP to choose.

Aside on my Oracle:

Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
Gilarius wrote:

My Oracle has just reached 10th level. I get one 5th level spell, which I can cast 3 times per day (plus bonus casting from having a high stat). Just one spell.

My party wants Breath of Life, so most of the time I'll be using my 5th level slots for more 4th level spells!

At tenth level you should have two 5th level spells: one you choose directly and one from your mystery.

Lore mystery: Contact Other Plane. Not an every-fight-sort-of-spell.

And, as Serum added, Cure Light Wounds, Mass. Also not useful most of the time.

I am playing a Spirit Guide Oracle, so I have the grab-a-mix-of-spells-from-the-wizard-list ability, with house rules. These have been pretty essential for my enjoyment of the character.


Atarlost wrote:
strayshift wrote:

ONE additional feat and that is at level 20. The potential versatility is dependant upon having the spell in a spell book. The Sorcerer can use scrolls for highly situational spells.

I'm not arguing the levels where the wizard has access to higher level spells are not an advantage, I'm merely saying that it is not a 100% of a casters career thing AND that spontaneous casting has it's own advantages which (in my opinion) more than compensate for that (see original post).

Have you ever looked at the sorcerer feat lists? They were obviously written by someone who thought sorcerers were going to become a full BAB class.

Aberrant: Combat Casting, Improved Disarm, Improved Grapple, Improved Initiative, Improved Unarmed Strike, Iron Will, Silent Spell, Skill Focus (Knowledge [dungeoneering])
That's one limited boost to concentration that shouldn't be needed, one good feat, one iffy metamagic, two combat maneuvers you'd have to be suicidal to try, a boost to your already strong save, a weapon proficiency worse than a club, and skill focus in a knowledge skill. Compared to all metamagic and item creation feats and wizard discoveries. Only one of these options is something a wizard would actually bother with.

Abyssal: Augment Summoning, Cleave, Empower Spell, Great Fortitude, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Sunder, Power Attack, Skill Focus (Knowledge [planes])
That's slightly better. There are three not horrible options, though the sorcerer is paying prerequisites so augment summoning isn't available solely with bonus feats. Still, most wizards and sorcerers wouldn't have picked Great Fortitude, and few want both Augment Summoning and Empower Spell.

Arcane: Combat Casting, Improved Counterspell, Improved Initiative, Scribe Scroll, Skill Focus (Knowledge [arcana]), Spell Focus, Still Spell
Finally, a bloodline feat list that isn't for fighters. Of course Combat Casting is iffy, Improved...

Have I ever looked at the list? I've only played sorcerers in all iterations of D&D that they have been in existance for, as well as wizards - and that is for over 30 years. Obviously some of those bloodlines tend to attract GISH type players, draconic for example is clearly designed for that purpose despite being a 1/2 bab class but toughness, improved initiative & quicken spell would be useful and likely feats for many 'pure' casters.

Fey is not quite so 'optimised' but still contains Inproved Initiative, Quicken Spell and Dodge/Lightning Reflexes. Two of those feats would be on most casters list of feats to take and another boosts a weak save or a.c.

Looking at the bloodlines yes, your choices are more limited however that simply means that you pick a bloodline that best matches what you want to do. It's called character building I believe...

I'm not trying to argue that one class or other is better merely that I have played bith wizards and sorcerers many, many times at all levels and I prefer spontaneous casters and that in my experience and with my playstyle I find spontaneous casting and good choices of metamagics more than compensates for the downsides against the wizard (which was the o.p.'s question).


Arcane Addict wrote:
I cannot believe I forgot this one! Metamagic! Wizards don't take as long as sorcerers do when casting metamagic'ed up spells!

You should have left this one forgotten. If you're trying to prove Sorcerers aren't as good as Wizards, this is the worst possible argument you could make. Being able to apply any metamagic feat you know to any spell you cast at any time you want is ridiculous. To say that giving up your move action isn't worth this ability, when you are a class that can hit something 150 feet or more away is beyond ludicrous.

To answer the original post, there is very little reason to play a Wizard over Sorcerer. Most people play Sorcerers and have a "grass is always greener" attitude. The reality is that Sorcerers are far more versatile despite claims to the contrary. Most people who defend sorcerers usually play sorcerers instead of wizards (as if that isn't telling enough). There is really only a few reasons they'll throw up repeatedly, but if you look at them, they really don't bridge the gap at all.

The first one you'll hear repeatedly is: INT is a better stat. Let's analyze that statement. Sure INT is skill points, and Knowledge skills, but the most important/most used skills in the game are Perception, WIS based and interaction skills (Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate), add in Favored Class bonus, and how much of a loss is this? But okay, let's pretend that we all agree that INT is the absolute most important stat in the game. Well, then all you have to do is play a Sorcerer that use INT as its casting stat. Rather have perception? Well, play a Sorcerer that uses WIS as its casting stat. There are bloodlines that allow for both.

The second one you'll hear is that it takes a move action to apply metamagic. If you honestly believe this is some sort of limitation, slap yourself, and read my first paragraph again.

The third one is really the only actual limitation. You get supreme versatility, but get higher level spells, 1 level later. Then again when you can spontaneously add Heighten Spell to all your spells, does it really matter?

You're right when you say if you know what's coming a Sorcerer can just buy scrolls. Sure Sorc-Supporters will say that you can't buy your way out all the time, while in the same breath say that a Wizard can add any spell to their spell book (which costs money). So I guess what they're saying is that Sorcerers can't buy their way out, but Wizards can,because if sorcerers could that would invalidate their argument and that just wouldn't be fair.

Sure you can leave open slots, but by the time your high enough level to afford to leave open slots, you (and the sorcerers) would have enough scrolls for those seldom used spells that can come in handy every now and then.

That said, there are a few tricks I use to make a Wizard more versatile. The first one is make an elf/half-elf and use the Spellbinder Archetype. This let's you pick one spell of each level to spontaneously cast. I use the Spellbinder spells to for blasting/attack spells and memorize all the utility/buff spells. There are some feats that will make you more sorcerer like, there's one that allows you to change a higher level spell slot into two lower level ones (yeah a feat to allow you to do what sorcerers say is a limitation).


Jodokai wrote:
Arcane Addict wrote:
I cannot believe I forgot this one! Metamagic! Wizards don't take as long as sorcerers do when casting metamagic'ed up spells!

You should have left this one forgotten. If you're trying to prove Sorcerers aren't as good as Wizards, this is the worst possible argument you could make. Being able to apply any metamagic feat you know to any spell you cast at any time you want is ridiculous. To say that giving up your move action isn't worth this ability, when you are a class that can hit something 150 feet or more away is beyond ludicrous.

To answer the original post, there is very little reason to play a Wizard over Sorcerer. Most people play Sorcerers and have a "grass is always greener" attitude. The reality is that Sorcerers are far more versatile despite claims to the contrary. Most people who defend sorcerers usually play sorcerers instead of wizards (as if that isn't telling enough). There is really only a few reasons they'll throw up repeatedly, but if you look at them, they really don't bridge the gap at all.

The first one you'll hear repeatedly is: INT is a better stat. Let's analyze that statement. Sure INT is skill points, and Knowledge skills, but the most important/most used skills in the game are Perception, WIS based and interaction skills (Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate), add in Favored Class bonus, and how much of a loss is this? But okay, let's pretend that we all agree that INT is the absolute most important stat in the game. Well, then all you have to do is play a Sorcerer that use INT as its casting stat. Rather have perception? Well, play a Sorcerer that uses WIS as its casting stat. There are bloodlines that allow for both.

The second one you'll hear is that it takes a move action to apply metamagic. If you honestly believe this is some sort of limitation, slap yourself, and read my first paragraph again.

The third one is really the only actual limitation. You get supreme versatility, but get higher level spells, 1 level later. Then again when you...

This. Plus Use Magic Device as aclass skill and with charisma being a key stat.


Gain higher spells a level later is enough to make this a difficult decision for me. Nothing in the sorcerer suite of abilities really makes up for this for me.


Some of the Bloodline feat lists are pretty bad -- even considering that they are for gish builds, they still out to be at least functional for a single-classed Sorcerer at reasonable levels, but some of them are not.

Also, some of the Sorcerer archetypes that are supposed to support gish builds replace the Bloodline Powers that you need for gishing (Eldritch Scrapper, I'm looking at you). And the Bloodline Powers themselves are REALLY uneven in quality.

Sorcerer is far from being a bad class, but we need a Sorcerer Unchained.


Arcane Addict wrote:
I cannot believe I forgot this one! Metamagic! Wizards don't take as long as sorcerers do when casting metamagic'ed up spells!

On the flip side though, wizards have to prepare metamagic in advance, committing higher level spell slots.


Both wizards and sorcerers have to plan what they will do with metamagic when they level up and select feats.

Unless you're suggesting that sorcerers should just pick their feats with a dartboard rather than with an expectation of how they will be used.


Obviously both wizards and sorcerers need to pick metamagic feats carefully.
Wizards though, need to prepare their spells with metamagic when they prepare spells each day. Sorcerers can apply any metamagic they have on the fly whenever they cast.
It's another example of the kind of flexibility sorcerers have as opposed to the kind wizards have.

I'd guess in practice it lets sorcerers use more situational metamagic, while wizards might concentrate on more generally useful metamagic.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

GM style is also a factor, if you are playing with a GM who likes to pull the rug out from under the party (the dinner party gets attacked by demons for example)the sorcerer gains usefulness because you didn't spend slots prepping social skills. alternatively when you can plan out your combats ahead of time (we scouted the enemy camp and it looks like they only have one spell caster, but they have a pet troll) the wizard has better utility because you pick spells to specifically overcome this situation, while the sorcerer is stuck with the spells he already knows.


UnArcaneElection wrote:

Some of the Bloodline feat lists are pretty bad -- even considering that they are for gish builds, they still out to be at least functional for a single-classed Sorcerer at reasonable levels, but some of them are not.

Also, some of the Sorcerer archetypes that are supposed to support gish builds replace the Bloodline Powers that you need for gishing (Eldritch Scrapper, I'm looking at you). And the Bloodline Powers themselves are REALLY uneven in quality.

Sorcerer is far from being a bad class, but we need a Sorcerer Unchained.

The bloodlines are kinda meh, but remember its a full caster. Like domain powers/arcane schools the extra power is on top of the power/utility of being a full caster so they aren't meant to be super powerful.

That said we basically got all of options we wanted via the crossblooded bloodline, you lose spells and take a penalty on will saves to get double bloodline arcana and the ability to mix/match bloodline powers as we want. Considering Draconic+Orc can equal a 10d6 fireball becoming 10d6+20 damage (more if you're half-orc and got the FCB).

Honestly the class could have more options via bloodlines to be better at different schools, but right now the class as a whole makes for the best blaster option at least.

Any non-blaster options kind-of fall to arcanist for save DCs, and wizard/summoner for conjuration (maybe even arcanist).

Grand Lodge

thejeff wrote:

Obviously both wizards and sorcerers need to pick metamagic feats carefully.

Wizards though, need to prepare their spells with metamagic when they prepare spells each day. Sorcerers can apply any metamagic they have on the fly whenever they cast.
It's another example of the kind of flexibility sorcerers have as opposed to the kind wizards have.

I'd guess in practice it lets sorcerers use more situational metamagic, while wizards might concentrate on more generally useful metamagic.

Yet if your good at preparing spells and planning then everything your saying that is a drawback becomes an asset.

Utility is KING and wizard has it in spades. Being able to design a spell list to defeat every challenge is amazing power.


Fruian Thistlefoot wrote:

Yet if your good at preparing spells and planning then everything your saying that is a drawback becomes an asset.

Utility is KING and wizard has it in spades. Being able to design a spell list to defeat every challenge is amazing power.

You're right, utility is king, and in almost every instance the sorcerer has more of it. IF you think about, if you know exactly what's coming, the sorcerer can just go out and buy scrolls. In that case he's still better than the wizard, because not only will he have the spells he needs for this particular battle, but he still has his regular abilities too.

If you want to talk about the cost of that, both the Wizard and the Sorcerer need the exact same items, a Wizard then has to spend more buying scrolls and copying them into a spellbook that the sorcerer doesn't have to do. So if we assume they both spend the same amount on gear, and they both earn the same amount, what does the sorcerer do with the money he saves on not having a spell book? He buys the scrolls he needs for those particular battles.

Really no matter how you look at it, you're better off with a sorcerer. The only real drawback is having to wait a level for next higher spell level.


Jodokai wrote:
Fruian Thistlefoot wrote:

Yet if your good at preparing spells and planning then everything your saying that is a drawback becomes an asset.

Utility is KING and wizard has it in spades. Being able to design a spell list to defeat every challenge is amazing power.

You're right, utility is king, and in almost every instance the sorcerer has more of it. IF you think about, if you know exactly what's coming, the sorcerer can just go out and buy scrolls. In that case he's still better than the wizard, because not only will he have the spells he needs for this particular battle, but he still has his regular abilities too.

If you want to talk about the cost of that, both the Wizard and the Sorcerer need the exact same items, a Wizard then has to spend more buying scrolls and copying them into a spellbook that the sorcerer doesn't have to do. So if we assume they both spend the same amount on gear, and they both earn the same amount, what does the sorcerer do with the money he saves on not having a spell book? He buys the scrolls he needs for those particular battles.

Really no matter how you look at it, you're better off with a sorcerer. The only real drawback is having to wait a level for next higher spell level.

Well except pearls of power cost 1/2 as much as a runestone of power so in theory if they have the same money, copying spells costs money but not a huge amount. So in theory a wizard can have more spells/day than a sorcerer given there's no real limit on runestone/pearl ownership.

Also in theory then a sorcerer may end up spending more money on scrolls just because they're buying tons of them for 1 time use (or even a page of spell knowledge if they want to not keep eating money for common utility spells).

Honestly it all comes down to also how much utility you need. A wizard can prepare based on city/field/dungeon/travel situations and fill many roles. Sorcerers are limited by funds/town visits in that regard.

I like sorcerers more than wizard but i don't feel its a clear cut where one class is incredibly better than the other.

That said I do feel the arcanist makes the wizard a bit obsolete because they did somewhat sprinkle in the upsides of being a sorcerer onto the spell flexibility of a wizard with that one while sorcerer still can hold onto what makes them good wizard kind of got buried on that one.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
CN_Minus wrote:
He'd already used it to get away from the bulettes during the surprise round, and now can't cast any extras of the spell because he thought he would only need one! Meanwhile, a sorcerer five levels lower already had the issue covered.

He uses his arcane bond to spontaneously cast it from his spellbook. (To counter your claim that he will already have used it, he then uses Brilliant Spell Preparation to reprepare it as a standard action, draws his rod of quicken, and uses quickened dimension door.)

We can contrive answers like this all day, if you really want to keep moving the goalposts.

(And why the hell is he running from bulettes? The martials of the party should have no problem dealing with those things. Not to mention they would never have caught up if he D-Doored away from them the first time.)

What is this Brilliant Spell Preparation? GoogleFu is failing me and I didn't see it at a glance of Arcane Anthologies (sounded like it may have come from there).

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Ultimate Intrigue. :)


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Ultimate Intrigue. :)

Time to comb the product thread again. Thanks for the tease =P

I've got the gist at least.


Jodokai wrote:
Arcane Addict wrote:
I cannot believe I forgot this one! Metamagic! Wizards don't take as long as sorcerers do when casting metamagic'ed up spells!
You should have left this one forgotten. If you're trying to prove Sorcerers aren't as good as Wizards, this is the worst possible argument you could make.

Not at all. Speaking as someone who play a lot of wizard and some sorcerer, I find the greater action economy to be better than the sorcerer's on-the-fly metamagic.

INT is a great stat - better than CHA, definitely, and I would argue better than WIS unless you're on high-enough point buy to afford decent INT or are human and can afford to spend your FCB on points.

One thing people forget about wizard is schools. Conjuration (Teleportation) is king. I can say, with a fairly high degree of confidence, that that or Divination (Foresight) in the hands of a skilled player is the most effective class on average.

Remember, a lot of spells make you want to use your move actions to direct them, and action economy is everything - that's why summoner is so good.

Also remember that the must-have blessed book mitigates much of the cost of expanding spells known.


@ranmyaku262: I didn't mean to indicate that the Bloodlines are generally mediocre -- far from it, some of them (for instance, Arcane) are awesome. But they are really uneven in quality, and taken individually, the Bloodline Powers (and Arcana) are also really uneven in quality. In other words, they are imbalanced among themselves. For instance, compare the various Elemental Bloodline 1st level Bloodline Powers (really puny blasts that are inferior to the all-day Acid Splash Cantrip) to the Ghoul Bloodline (awesome 1st level Bloodline Power). And you can find a host of other problems like that . . . Yeah, this needs to be cleaned up.

Liberty's Edge

Jodokai wrote:

You're right, utility is king, and in almost every instance the sorcerer has more of it. IF you think about, if you know exactly what's coming, the sorcerer can just go out and buy scrolls. In that case he's still better than the wizard, because not only will he have the spells he needs for this particular battle, but he still has his regular abilities too.

If you want to talk about the cost of that, both the Wizard and the Sorcerer need the exact same items, a Wizard then has to spend more buying scrolls and copying them into a spellbook that the sorcerer doesn't have to do. So if we assume they both spend the same amount on gear, and they both earn the same amount, what does the sorcerer do with the money he saves on not having a spell book? He buys the scrolls he needs for those particular battles.

Really no matter how you look at it, you're better off with a sorcerer. The only real drawback is having to wait a level for next higher spell level.

I think you're missing a couple key points of the wizard being able to prepare spells instead of casting them off of scrolls. Whenever a wizard prepares a spell it's cast at his caster level, using his casting stat modifier. When casting from a scroll you're likely to be casting at a minimum casting stat and the lowest caster level possible, unless you feel like paying extra. Also, writing spells into a spellbook is cheaper than buying a scroll. Even paying for access to spells is cheaper than buying a scroll. A wizard who knows a spell can then cast it any number of times for no further cost, unless he feels like scribing a scroll to have an extra casting on hand. Meanwhile a sorcerer has to purchase every casting he wants of any spell he doesn't know.

And aside from that, the real versatility is in being able to choose a completely new focus everyday. A sorcerer is locked in to their spells, so a sorcerer focused on fire magic and enchantment going up against a necromancer who uses burning skeletons is nearly completely hosed. A wizard who specializes in fire magic and enchantment will just prepare something else that day.


To be honest I feel this thread has run its course a while ago. At first we actually did follow the threads premise: "why play a wizard over a sorceror?" but somewhere it turned adversarial. So why am I back posting again? Because words are being put into my mouth and, like most folk, I don't enjoy that!

Jodokai wrote:
You should have left this one forgotten. If you're trying to prove Sorcerers aren't as good as Wizards, this is the worst possible argument you could make. Being able to apply any metamagic feat you know to any spell you cast at any time you want is ridiculous. To say that giving up your move action isn't worth this ability, when you are a class that can hit something 150 feet or more away is beyond ludicrous.

And there it is (and btw, I'm not singling you out, Jodokai, you're just the closest to quote...). I wasn't trying to prove the wizard is better (though I do believe it is). I was merely pointing out advantages the wizard has over the sorcerer, because thats something someone wants to know if they're looking for reasons to play a wizard over a sorcerer. I realize full well that the sorcerer isn't without its own advantages (I've already mentioned in an earlier post that its still a great class!). I think we all know this. That just isn't the point of the thread! I mean, the OP already gets sorcerers so why does he need to be convinced of their value exactly?

I'm pretty sure most everything on the topic has been said. I am done.


UnArcaneElection wrote:

@ranmyaku262: I didn't mean to indicate that the Bloodlines are generally mediocre -- far from it, some of them (for instance, Arcane) are awesome. But they are really uneven in quality, and taken individually, the Bloodline Powers (and Arcana) are also really uneven in quality. In other words, they are imbalanced among themselves. For instance, compare the various Elemental Bloodline 1st level Bloodline Powers (really puny blasts that are inferior to the all-day Acid Splash Cantrip) to the Ghoul Bloodline (awesome 1st level Bloodline Power). And you can find a host of other problems like that . . . Yeah, this needs to be cleaned up.

I agree, the quality ranges fairly hard between bloodlines, which lends itself to people leaning on a select few bloodlines.

Wildblooded did somewhat address this, but it somewhat has two issues.
1. Its mostly just replacing arcana/1st level powers (some replaced higher like the Brutal replaces the abyssal strength with wings, which is nice, but the arcana is pretty weak considering +2 on 1 target compared to orc which does +1 PER DICE with no target limit.).
2. Because of the range of quality there's little reason to not be crossblooded, but its been ruled wildblooded doesn't stack with crossblooded. Which honestly the best wildblooded options are the arcane/emphyerial options allowing Int/Wis to be used for casting.

Bloodrager isn't as bad as sorcerer but it also has an issue of a select few bloodlines being head and shoulders over the rest.

I'd rather just see new bloodlines or new wildblooded options be added than uncahined, we could end up easily seeing the good bloodlines just be brought down to bring them in line with the bad ones.


Shoutout to the Mongrel Mage Sorcerer.

Swapping your bloodline day to day is soo cool.

51 to 100 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.