D&D.. Wizards or Sorcs?

[Saint_Proverbius]

I was wondering, since ToEE's been out for a while now, how many people play Wizards? I honestly can't see much of a point in this class any more now that there's Sorcerers. Let's look at the advantages and disadvantages here, and these are just my opinion on the matter:

Advantages for Wizard:

• Versitility: Wizards can change out their spells memorized from day to day.
• Start with Scribe Scroll feat.
• Get bonus feats every fifth level.
• Can specialize in a school of magic, but this has drawbacks to it.

Advantages for Sorcs:

• Can cast more spells per resting than Wizards, a LOT more.
• Have more hit points.
• Get spells directly every time they advance, no need to buy scrolls and learn them.

To me, the Sorc's advantage about casting more spells per day alone trumps the hell out of any of the advantages to the Wizard. The versitility of the Wizard really doesn't matter too much if the majority of the time you're just going to be casting something like Magic Missile.

Specialization in a school of magic makes a Wizard stronger in in that school, but also makes them have less access to other school's spells, if I read correctly. This seems to crimp the versitility strong point of the wizard.

To me, it just seems like the Wizard class just fails to even compare to the power of the Sorc class.

 

[Azael]

In a CRPG, where you're bound to have less spells and less uses of them than in a PnP game, the sorceror certainly seems to overpower the wizard.

 

[Zhen Dil Oloth]

I used to always take a Wizard until I decided to try a Sorcerer in IWD2.

Especially in BG2 where copying spells in your spellbook gave you a lot of good XP.

But IIWD2 made me a believer that Sorcerer is better then Wizard.

Yes the Wizard can learn more spells, but I always end up using the same few spells anyway. Tried a Wizard in ToEE and was repeating the same pattern. Only using a handfull of the spells that I knew.

So Sorcerer is what I will play from now on and until the end of the world.

Unless thay get rid of the class system in 4thE D&D as I suspect.

We shall see.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Gotta be honest, Sorceror I feel is far better than Wizard. Used to use my wiz as the guys which crafts items and rods and weapons, but no longer use either. Now I use my Cleric. Anywho, sorcerors are better.

 

[Voss]

Um, Saint...

Sorcerers don't get more hps, both get d4.

Wizards get two spells of their choice every level. Some levels they get more new spells then sorcerer.

Wizards get higher levels spells a level before sorcerers do.

And a LOT more spells isn't really true. Assuming equal INT/CHA, sorcerers get 2 extra spells (for the levels they have spells...at a lot of odd levels this gaps get closed a bit since the sorcerer doesn't have the higher level spells yet). And if the wizard is a speciallist... the sorcerer only gets one extra spell/level.

Toss in the extra feats, and more spell choices of the wizard it really isn't cut and dry.

In a CRPG though, the emphasis on pure combat spells skews the perception of relative usefulness quite a lot. In PNP the need to adapt to a wide variety of situations hurts the sorcerer a lot, particularly if they tried to focus on a type of magic. Running into undead makes enchantments and illusions effectively worthless, fire/cold/etc. can render the handful of spells known into "Uh, I cast magic missile. And again. again...."

Look at it this way, in PnP, the only thing a sorcerer gets for NOT multiclassing into a prestige class is familiar progression. Thats a bad sign.

 

[Shevek]

In PnP, maintainiing a spellbook is expensive and can prove troublesome. Also, you dont have tons of knowledge about what you are going to be facing like you would in a CRPG with tons of save/load use, so spell memorization can often lead to unused spell slots in key encounters. Hell, sorcerors are even better with PrCs than wizards are (since Wizzies lose out on bonus feats).

Sometimes, you may find need for some of the more oddball arcane spells (like tongues or dream) in a PnP campaign that a sorceror would not normally choose (the sorcerors limited number of spells known can be a hassle). By and large, though, unless you want your arcane caster to craft or something, you are much better off with a sorceror in either PnP or CRPGs IMO..

 

[atoga]

Wizards all da way in PNP. Collecting/reaserching spells is fun, interesting, and a good way to roleplay. It's a question of more options and choice, versus some powergamed, boring sorcerer. I'd say that Sorcerers are better in combat though, for obvious reasons.

 

[Walks with the Snails]

Sorcerers are mainly good at combat. Since that's what CRPG's focus on, they do quite well there. When versatility is required, wizards do much better. If you've got to sneak into the duke's mansion without being detected one session, take on a necromancer's undead army the next, infiltrate an orc camp to gather information after that, then zip over to the elemental plane of fire to take on a salamander prince and his minions with a quick stopover at Baator, a wizard's your man. When your magic options are mostly when to cast fireball, when to cast ice storm, and when to cast magic missile, a sorcerer wins out.

I only got ToEE this week (finally went on sale for $32.90 at gogamer ), but I took a wizard and am quite happy with her so far. She's great for crafting items for one thing. I'm not sure if it's cheaper for wizards like in standard 3E rules, but the greater spell selection and extra feats help a lot anyway. I also like being able to have the ability to switch up my spell selection, since some fights require buffs and some require attack magic, and a wizard can afford to switch up his spell selection as the situation requires. Really most of the time having tons of spells is mostly redundant anyway. I think PnP wizards are almost expected to to make wands, though, which lets them maintain their versatility while still being able to cast a ton of a few spells if needed, just like a sorcerer. Wands are really quite reasonably priced for wizards to create, compared with the extra power they give you.

Something else I haven't seen implemented so far and haven't used a sorcerer in ToEE to figure out is, wizards really shine with metamagic. Since it takes a sorcerer a full round to use metamagic, it's really easy to disrupt them in combat if they plan on using it. Also, quicken spell is useless for them. And wizards get more feats to burn on metamagic. Not sure if they changed any of that in 3E, though.

Look at it this way, in PnP, the only thing a sorcerer gets for NOT multiclassing into a prestige class is familiar progression. Thats a bad sign.

Yeah, I don't agree with that. It's dumb to have the same advancement for sorcerers, wizards, clerics, and druids who take a spellcaster prestige class, when they don't all have the same amount to lose by not sticking to their base class. Of course prestige classes as a whole have quite a few problems.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Um, Saint...

Sorcerers don't get more hps, both get d4.

I thought Sorcs were 1d6 per level.

Wizards get two spells of their choice every level. Some levels they get more new spells then sorcerer.

Wizards get higher levels spells a level before sorcerers do.

And a LOT more spells isn't really true. Assuming equal INT/CHA, sorcerers get 2 extra spells (for the levels they have spells...at a lot of odd levels this gaps get closed a bit since the sorcerer doesn't have the higher level spells yet). And if the wizard is a speciallist... the sorcerer only gets one extra spell/level.

I'm talking about casting per day. At level 1, a Sorc can cast four magic missiles, while a Wizard gets to cast it once. It only goes up from there.

In a CRPG though, the emphasis on pure combat spells skews the perception of relative usefulness quite a lot. In PNP the need to adapt to a wide variety of situations hurts the sorcerer a lot, particularly if they tried to focus on a type of magic. Running into undead makes enchantments and illusions effectively worthless, fire/cold/etc. can render the handful of spells known into "Uh, I cast magic missile. And again. again...."

Very true. Ever seen a first edition CRPG with an illusionist class? How many CRPGs impliment most of the illusionist spells? Most of those spells are really only useful for PnP, so naturally from 1st Edition up through the various incarnations of this theme in modern day D&D, you won't see a heck of a lot of them in CRPGs.

 

[EEVIAC]

Does charisma effect store prices? My mage has a crapload of skills points due to her high intelligence, most of which are put to no use at all. (What does a mage need other than Concentration and Tumble?)

I've never been fond of magic users, my mage was fairly useless apart from zonking the Hill Giant and charming his bear at Emridy Meadows. Other than rooms full of Bugbears that needed a blast with Fireball, I mostly hid her in a corner playing a ranged support role for my hopeless Monk (15 consecutive misses?!?) who was thankfully put to death in the final battle. (His name was Ian by the way. :D ) On the second level of the Temple I was really wishing I'd taken a second cleric in, not only for the extra healing and mace usage, but because Trokia made sure that female characters look really good in Full Plate.

 

[HanoverF]

In ToEE? I think INT and Appraise effect store prices

 

[Voss]

I thought Sorcs were 1d6 per level.

Nope.

I'm talking about casting per day. At level 1, a Sorc can cast four magic missiles, while a Wizard gets to cast it once. It only goes up from there.

Eh. If the wizard only memorizes one magic missile, then yes, a sorcerer could cast it more times. But for 1st level wizards/sorcerers with a bonus spell from high int/cha, it works out like this (for 1st level spells, ignoring cantrips):

A sorcerer can cast any combination of the two spells he knows up to 4 times.
A wizard can cast his two (or three, if a specialist) memorized spells (which can be any of the spells he knows, which at first level is 3 + his int bonus).

So a 1st level Evoker specialist, for example, could have magic missile memorized 3 times, just one less then the sorcerer.

Jump ahead to third level, and you'll see a spot where the sorcerer is falling behind.
Our Evoker specialist (assume a 14 Int.)
Can cast 4 1st level spells, and 3 2nd level.
And assuming he hasn't found and scribed any scrolls, knows 9 spells, 2 of which will probably be second level.

A generalist, as a side note, can cast 3 1st level, and 2 2nd level at this point.

Our sorcerer, on the other hand (assuming a 14 Cha)
Can cast 6 1st level spells.
And only has 3 spells to choose from.

Of course, there are levels that the sorcerer pulls back ahead of the specialist, but up until 18th level, he'll be behind in terms of higher level spells, and even in raw numbers will only be at most 9 spells/day ahead of a specialist (and this is only at 19th/20th level, usually its closer to 4- 6 spells/day ahead, at most.


And of course, having scribe scrolls (and possibly craft wands later) pushes the wizards advantages way over the sorcerers. Buff spells, rare situations that might come up? Put them on scrolls. Attack spells- put them in wands. Then make your memorized slots the critical and versalite stuff.

I agree about illusionist though- they always get screwed. As do diviners, which I'm personally rather fond of.
Though I feel slightly sorry for Evokers in ToEE at 3rd and 4th level. Gust of Wind. Hurrah! Scorching Ray would have been nice.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Great analysis, Voss. The only thing that's worth adding to summarize this discussion is that the final choice depends on a game: setting, lvl cap, spells available in a game, intensity and nature of magic battles. BG2 required higher degree of versatility to be able to bring magical defenses down, IWD2 favoured buffs and summoning, while the role of a mage in ToEE is supplying additional firepower using low level spells and that makes sorc a better choice for this particular game.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

while the role of a mage in ToEE is supplying additional firepower using low level spells and that makes sorc a better choice for this particular game.

Tried an enchantment focused arcane character? Charm Person, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Sleep, etc. all do wonders for turning the tide of combat.

 

[Rabby]

I'm surprised crafting hasn't been brought up more in this thread in regards to the advantages of being a wizard. Is it because people have been using clerics and druids, who get all their spells without much hassle, for crafting armors/weapons and wondrous items? While a sorceror could toss out more fireballs, I feel that being able to enchant your own items really puts them at a disadvantage for the smaller spell arsenal, especially if your party consists of adventurers with different Achille's Ankles. I've been avoiding crafting up until a more recent game in ToEE because the experience toll just felt too much, but I think it adds another layer to customization of your characters to be able to essentially make any item you need for them.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Tried an enchantment focused arcane character? Charm Person, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Sleep, etc. all do wonders for turning the tide of combat.

Sure did. I guess I should have said support instead of firepower. What I meant is that while spellcasters help a lot in ToEE their role is not critical. You can dismiss Iuz for fun and different ending, but if you don't St Cuthbert will take care of him. So if the role is not critical a mage can pick any spells he likes vs spells he must have for different situations.

 

[Voss]

Item creation is useful for wizards, though clerics (and druids to some extent) do have an easier time of it, since all spells are given.
I find it amusing that a druid is a monks best friend. Very strange... Though a monk needs the non-standard item slots to get the most out of his abilities... I have to admit, though, I don't really like the idea of stat boosting items... sure they cap out at 6, but it just seems wrong, in the same sense that steroids are considered wrong.

What I find wizards really get out of item creation is scrolls and wands... for the buffing and special situation spells that they can take time to cast.

Sorcerers can take them and take the one trick pony stance to an absurd extreme...but for other types of item creation they're effectively crippled by the spells known.

 

[Orlon]

In DnD, 3E at least, the wizard has the upper hand. The flexability of a LIVE DM/GM allows creative wizards to do some very special things with item creations.
Ex 1
collect a bag full of stones or mrables about the size of golfballs
cast everburing flame on them
hire a potter to cover each one in clay so it doesnt produce any light

now you can breeak one of these open and toss it down a hole to see how deep it is, place a few wround camp to light the area, toss some out near the entrance of a cave so if anything steps on one it breaks open and warns you with the light

Ex 2
Cazst everburning flame on your paladins wimpy sword and it could give him a situational bonus to intimiddate/gather info. If the guy the paladin is trying to get info thinks its a flambrand not a regular sword then he might talk out of fear.

Thats just 2 examples of one spell, dont even get me started on the immovable rod. :D

But I concede the sorc has the upper hand when he is playing the spellslinger role

 

[asshatnewguy]

I think wands for blaster and utility spells really closes the contest in favor of the wizard.

Like rangers with their old favored foes, the sorcerer really depends on the DM to play his/her spell selection into effect

 

[Mad_Dog]

The DM for the PnP group I play in decided to give sorcerers and bards an extra spell each level, so they aren't as much of a one-trick-pony. He also made Bluff and Intimidate class skills for fighters and sorcerers (sorcs get diplomacy too I think), so fighters have somewhere useful to put their points and sorcs can use their charisma.