Welly well wellington, my fedora friend, sorcs and spontaneous casters suck to begin with compared to stategic and classical vancian casters like wizards and now witches as well.
In PnP they do. But in video-games, in which there are only ever a small handful of actually useful spells-per-level + the fact you can Save and Load game at will? I honestly don't understand the point of playing a Wizard (unless, of course, for specific LARP purposes). Even in both Baldur's Gate SCS, Sorcerers reign supreme over Wizards because in video-game format, there really are only small handful of spells per level that are actually useful.
In general, casters just suck for like 10 levels, through some of the most difficult parts of the game, because difficulty does jack shit against enemy spell resistance and immunities, and demons have ton of it. And then, they begin to just throw all this immune to everything (bosses are even immune to level drain, what is this, sawyerism? i demand bg back!) and high hp resurrecting demons. I swear, it is a game totally skewed against casters, and made for Haplos and their improved improved criticals doing 30000 damage per crit.
Oh, Christ.
I'll do a Haplo-style build in 1 out 3-4 of my playthroughs of a game, but if a fucking D&D-based game won't let me be a god-among-men magic blaster, I really don't think I want to bother.
Kingmaker wasn't 100% caster-friendly to begin with, with all the HP bloat and sky-high Saves, but what you're describing sounds even worse. A D&D party in which the focused Arcane caster isn't the most powerful member just feels.... wrong.
