Sorcerer looks like weak wizard and self penalty

[Dorok]

The sorcerer not played but created and level up to 10 looks quit like a crap wizard no matter the 3 specialization.

It's clearly no old Sorcerer with a wide choice of spell, some mor spells to learn along level up, and significantly more spells slots. So it seems now the only point of Sorcerer are a lot of nerf in exchange of sorcerer points, but frankly it's hard figure how they can justify the nerfs.

[Dorok]

Originally posted by rumpelstiltskin:

Originally posted by Blackdragon:

When has Sorcerer ever dominated the Wizard? In 3/3.5 the Wizard was leaps and bounds ahead in terms of power. In 5e despite Wizards being severely gimped the Sorcerer still only gains advantage through multiclassing (Sorlock), but a multiclassed Wizard is also very powerful (Storm Cleric + Loremaster Wizard = big bang).

i mean at least in CRPGs, with their reliance on combat gauntlets. sorcs can spam spells and utilize spell slots more effectively due to spontaneous casting.

I confirm that wizard is no match with Sorcerer in BG2, a sorcerer having a tuned selection of spells fitting perfectly the full campaign.

[Frostfeather]

Twinned Haste, Greater Invisibility, Banishment, etc is strong enough. Adding in Heightened Entangle makes them overpowered.

Draconic isn't going fill the same niche as Shock Arcanist even when everything is working properly. The point is more to be a tankier Arcane caster.

Some people constantly whining about Sorcerers are still going to whine about them after they're fixed, I guarantee it. Partly because they're using them wrong and/or have different expectations about Sorcerers from other games.

[Dorok]

What's so tanky with Draconic? It's not that mage armor isn't easy to have for wiz. For higher protection against one element, that's one element.

If 5e Sorcerer are so low in lists there's certainly a reason.

But the point of this thread isn't to whine, it is to ask for explanations of their strength because they seem weak. I don't whine yet but will certainly if I don't get good answers making sense

For already whining about people whining about sorcerers but clearly nobody want play them, you are just at the other side, not better positioned as you probably think.

Anyway it seems I got some valid answers already for Sorc plus, so I don't whine, so you are plain wrong to whine I'm whining because I don't whine as I got answers that seem valid, and the worse is it's you that whine here, and you complain about whiners... Common, you are complaining about yourself, rather pointless don't you think?

[Frostfeather]

Originally posted by Dorok:

What's so tanky with Draconic? It's not that mage armor isn't easy to have for wiz. For higher protection against one element, that's one element.

If 5e Sorcerer are so low in lists there's certainly a reason.

But the point of this thread isn't to whine, it is to ask for explanations of their strength because they seem weak. I don't whine yet but will certainly if I don't get good answers making sense

For already whining about people whining about sorcerers but clearly nobody want play them, you are just at the other side, not better positioned as you probably think.

Anyway it seems I got some valid answers already for Sorc plus, so I don't whine, so you are plain wrong to whine I'm whining because I don't whine as I got answers that seem valid, and the worse is it's you that whine here, and you complain about whiners... Common, you are complaining about yourself, rather pointless don't you think?

Your poorly written answers are a riot to read, as always. The most amusing part is that I literally just told you how to make good use of a Sorcerer and you ignored it.

And I wasn't really referring to you as the "whiner". You haven't been ranting almost daily about Sorcerers as if TA killed your dog, lol.

As for Draconic's tankiness: having Mage Armor memorized and using it is a large cost in the early game especially (doubly especially in Solasta, where we have one of the more possibly challenging fights at level 2). When travelling, you'll always have higher AC even when surprised vs casting Mage Armor. Having Shield as your level 1 origin spell makes you considerably tanky. And I'm not understanding your logic about having resistance against an element. If you're fire, which you probably would want to be, you have resistance against a common type of damage.

Further, Misty Step helps you get out of danger or out of melee so you can use a ranged attack/spell. Counterspell can prevent enemy spells. And Greater Invisibility makes you untargetable even by bosses. Everything they get makes them tankier, prevents damage, and/or lets them survive better/longer.

It's kind of like people talking about Dragon Disciple vs Sorcerer in BG2 and saying "fewer spells makes DD terrible". DD is one of the best tanks in the game - I'd probably argue literally the best tank and I usually use one in my LoB playthroughs because they're that strong. DD/Draconic isn't for people who just want to do damage and nothing else with their arcane caster. They can cover all tanking needs *and* do impressive damage on top of that.

[Dorok]

If you hadn't whine pointlessly I wouldn't have tried put you in a box, and for me I succeed, and if you can't understand it, it's even more funny.

Don't complain about others if you can't bear their reactions, facepalm. I found fun the pointless exchange, and you made it unfun, gee, you are good to break mood I bet.

Otherwise yeah I quoted your explanations as those that did others before. For Sorc tanky, well I would have more to argue but you aren't in the mood to argue, so ok.

[PXR5]

Originally posted by night4:

Originally posted by Dorok:

What's so tanky with Draconic? It's not that mage armor isn't easy to have for wiz. For higher protection against one element, that's one element.

If 5e Sorcerer are so low in lists there's certainly a reason.

But the point of this thread isn't to whine, it is to ask for explanations of their strength because they seem weak. I don't whine yet but will certainly if I don't get good answers making sense

For already whining about people whining about sorcerers but clearly nobody want play them, you are just at the other side, not better positioned as you probably think.

Anyway it seems I got some valid answers already for Sorc plus, so I don't whine, so you are plain wrong to whine I'm whining because I don't whine as I got answers that seem valid, and the worse is it's you that whine here, and you complain about whiners... Common, you are complaining about yourself, rather pointless don't you think?

Your poorly written answers are a riot to read, as always. The most amusing part is that I literally just told you how to make good use of a Sorcerer and you ignored it.

And I wasn't really referring to you as the "whiner". You haven't been ranting almost daily about Sorcerers as if TA killed your dog, lol.

As for Draconic's tankiness: having Mage Armor memorized and using it is a large cost in the early game especially (doubly especially in Solasta, where we have one of the more possibly challenging fights at level 2). When travelling, you'll always have higher AC even when surprised vs casting Mage Armor. Having Shield as your level 1 origin spell makes you considerably tanky. And I'm not understanding your logic about having resistance against an element. If you're fire, which you probably would want to be, you have resistance against a common type of damage.

Further, Misty Step helps you get out of danger or out of melee so you can use a ranged attack/spell. Counterspell can prevent enemy spells. And Greater Invisibility makes you untargetable even by bosses. Everything they get makes them tankier, prevents damage, and/or lets them survive better/longer.

It's kind of like people talking about Dragon Disciple vs Sorcerer in BG2 and saying "fewer spells makes DD terrible". DD is one of the best tanks in the game (I'd probably argue literally the best tank) and I usually use one in my LoB playthroughs because they're that strong. DD/Draconic isn't for people who just want to do damage and nothing else with their arcane caster. They can cover all tanking needs *and* do impressive damage on top of that.

At the end of the day a mediocre Wizard will still beat the ♥♥♥♥ out of a good Sorcerer. That's how it is in 5th. The choice to bring out a sorc and not another char will always be strange to me. Warlock or Barbarian would have been a much more fun choice than the bargain bin Wizard.

[Frostfeather]

Originally posted by Bak Bon Dzshow:

At the end of the day a mediocre Wizard will still beat the ♥♥♥♥ out of a good Sorcerer. That's how it is in 5th.

Simply untrue, but it depends on how you use them.

Further, comparing Wizard to Sorcerer isn't the point here. You can have both and you probably want to have both in Solasta.

We're talking about the strengths of Sorcerers and how to make use of them. In this particular case, we're talking about what natural strengths Draconic has, so I'm not sure where you're getting "Wizard vs Sorcerer" in general.

[Frostfeather]

Originally posted by Dorok:

Never argue with an idiot because you'll always lost. :-)

...

[Blackdragon]

Originally posted by Dorok:

Originally posted by Blackdragon:

The cost is "free" since you get Sorcery Points as part of the class abilities. So by using Metamagic you're not strictly losing anything compared to other classes.

That's a reasoning I don't agree with.

First point of view, forget other classes, stick to Sorcerer point of view, use a sorc point is like use a spell point, there's a cost and only long rest can restore it.

The Sorcery Points are a feature of the Sorcerer class. No other class gets them. If you're saying the cost of metamagic Empower Spell is "too high" compared to the other benefits of using Sorcery Points, it only reflects on the relative value of Empower vs. converting SPs to spell slots, not the value of the Sorcerer vs. the Wizard (which does not get Sorcery Points at all).

In other words, using Sorcery Points to get more spell slots is another benefit of the Sorcerer that the Wizard doesn't have. So saying it's better than Empower has no bearing on the Sorcerer vs. Wizard argument.

Originally posted by Dorok:

In this case you use it in case of 10% chance of failing damages roll. That's a weird bet, 10 points spend and you didn't even get a sum of 100% chance of to get an extra cast for 10 spells cast. That's a negative bargain.

Apart from what was previously said, your math is very weird. Empower Spell is not used in "10% chance of failing damage rolls". On a d6, for instance, a "failed" roll is anything below average (3.5), so 1, 2 and 3. That's 50% of the rolls. Empower in Solasta (if it were not bugged) would reroll 1 and 2, so the worst 33% of the rolls. This would translate in a difficult to quantify, but noticeable boost to damage - on top of the Draconic Sorcerer's permanent +5 (CHA bonus) to damage for spells of his element.

Originally posted by Dorok:

Second point of view, compare with wizard, the 10 sorc point cost at level 10 is a huge weakness in amount of usable spells. There' a cost and it is very high.

Most of those spells are utility, and you shouldn't have only 1 Arcane caster in a party. When your Wizard(s) take care of utilites/rituals, and your Cleric(s) of defensive spells, the Sorcerer is free to use his spell slots purely for blasting. And Sorcery Points allow him to increase damage of his spells or increase the number of spell slots compared to the Wizard.

In other words, rather than having more spells known that I would never use anyway, I'd rather have a bigger bonus to the damage of the attack spells I will always use.

Originally posted by Dorok:

Originally posted by Blackdragon:

+5, since you've obviously maxed your casting stat. And that +5 turns to +25 when you cast Scorching Ray as a 4th level spell, or when your Fireball hits 5 targets.

Well 5 turns is long, for fireball, ok.

No, that's +5 (extra damage from 20 Charisma) turns into (becomes) +25 (extra damage when an AOE or multiple ray spell hits 5 targets). 25 = 5*5. Six targets would mean +30 damage, and so on. In other words, the Charisma bonus is applied not once per round, but every time your spell hits a target. More hits = more extra damage per round.

Originally posted by Dorok:

Originally posted by Blackdragon:

Wizards don't specialise in elements in Solasta..

Mmm that's cleric? Fire, and so on? I can't check now, but I doubt.

Wizard Arcane Traditions in Solasta are Shock Arcanist, Loremaster and Green Mage. Only Shock Arcanist focuses on damage, and his bonuses apply to any Evocation spell, not just particular elements. There are also no feats in Solasta that give bonuses for elemental spellcasting, so Wizards can't specialise in an element.

Clerics have Elemental Domains, but they are actually worse for damage than the Battle Domain.

[Ommamar]

One thing that is turning me off from sorcerers in Solasta is how they play, so much clicking just to do a simple thing like cast a cantrip which I just select and fire on the Wizard.

I think both have a place in the game, sorcerers are still a caster who is good at one type of situation, although they lost some of the power that made them good in 3.5E with the 5E rule set. Wizards are still your utility knife that can be adapted to different situations with a wide range of spells you can slot.

[PXR5]

Originally posted by Ommamar:

One thing that is turning me off from sorcerers in Solasta is how they play, so much clicking just to do a simple thing like cast a cantrip which I just select and fire on the Wizard.

I think both have a place in the game, sorcerers are still a caster who is good at one type of situation, although they lost some of the power that made them good in 3.5E with the 5E rule set. Wizards are still your utility knife that can be adapted to different situations with a wide range of spells you can slot.

Some of the power? Outside of a computer game a Wizard has the Sorcerer beat every day of the year. Only in very specific circumstances is a Sorc better. In a duel I would put my money on a Abjuration Wizard over all forms of Sorcs in this ruleset.

[The Crimson]

i'm sincerely speechless seeing how many think the wizard is better

sorcerers have the same spellslots, just less flexibility (also can use sorcery points to increase his spells to compensate for arcane recovery)

mana painter recovers half points on short rest and every short rest can get a free point

draconic is broken op atm, cha on dmg should work only one time on multi-hit spells like scorching ray (and working on every aoe's target is legit albeit strong)

child of the rift is even more broken than draconic after getting the hp to sorcery point skill (as long as you have potions you have infinite sorcery points and spellslots thx to greater restoration)

the fact that an OP subclass like shock arcanist does more damage than 2 out of 3 sorcerer subclasses (if you ignore metamagic) only shows that shock arcanist was a mistake

[Dorok]

It's a common believing for tabletop, example:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/tips-tactics/59394-strongest-and-weakest-classes-poll
Top 3 strongest classes: Wizard, Paladin, Cleric.
Top 3 Weakest classes: Ranger, Monk, Sorcerer.

https://mythcreants.com/blog/dd-5e-classes-ranked-from-worst-to-best/
A blog but still:
Wizard: 1
Sorcerer: 6

You can go on and you won't find any list putting Sorcerer close to Wizard.

[The Crimson]

ofc in tabletop wizards are better due to out of combat versatility

but it changes drastically in videogames tho, both here and in BG3 the ranger is the best melee class after paladin (and paladin is slightly better just cause of burst)

sorcerer is the best mage in solasta if you have identify covered

an even stronger mage than sorcerer would be warlock, even if all he does is spamming eldritch blast and short rest spells, people are overrating spell versatility in a combat-only game

[Sloul Des Tucs]

I actually started playing the game recently (i am now lvl 3, close to 4), and I have a sorcerer of Draconic origin in my party. Can someone tell me what are the non fonctional abilities? thanks