Wizard vs Sorcerer

[Kasa]

Let's start with this, I've almost always played wizards first and formost. I love the idea that ANYONE can be a wizard with some time and effort. As oppose to the chosen one Sorcerer's feel like. That aside in th game are wizards actually worth it?

All knowledge checks are easily covered by a inqusitor, Sorcerer's can have charisma as a primary casting stat that works well on those occasional times your called for a check. There are too few spells to actually scribe into you spell book as a wizard so you more or less have the same number of known spells as a Sorcerer.

Wizards are suppose to be more versitile then a Sorcerer but that dosn't really seem true especailly in the game where you are on a time limit. You can't always sit down and rest just to relearn you spells for a specific encounter. As oppose to a Sorcerer you can take some generic spells and can easily cast them all day long and also have those really niche spells on the side for just in case senarios.

Am I missing somthing in general with wizards? I mean I really love the class but what it does and what people say it does doesn't seem to match up.

[DodgeyB]

Wizards are indeed more versatile, however in my play time in the game I find the lack of spells available makes that advantage less pronounced when stacked against the number of casts the Sorcerers get.

Also wizards are missing one thing that really gives them that edge over sorcerers in table top, Scribing Scrolls. Sure your sorcerers can do it too, but your sorcerer doesnt have eleventy billion different spells at their disposal to really let that wizard with some ink and time get the edge on the battlefield.

With bloodline abilities, plus the smaller spell pools (again to my experience as far as what I have discovered for scrolls) Sorcerers definately get the edge as each level there are really a handful of staple spells that they can more than cover.

Hopefully that helps

[Kasa]

It does, thanks! Though that still makes me think back to D&D in general and the "versatility" of wizards. If it was based on the fact they can use scribe scroll for their niche spells that would be burning money and time to make a consumable item while everyone else is using their money to get more perminate upgrades. It's even worse in D&D 3.5 where scribe scroll also costs exp literally weakening you character for a 1 use item.

[la_nague]

unless they fixed it recently, spell traits dont work for most sorcerer bloodlines. Might as well play wizard.

[Kasa]

I'll probably jump into a more martial class, or cleric. If wizards are gimped atm and traits are not working for sorcerers. I mean atm buffing seems to win out over debuffs do to how short fights are.

[DodgeyB]

Patherinder, magic item creation just became about the cash monies and time. It's a lot more friendly to the crafters.

I did some editing to my game, and my wizards and sorcs are running on spell points as "traditional" memorization mechanics dont flow as well in these style of games, and you need to rest every 20 steps because of how rapidly encounters come across vs the time etc in pen and paper between battles

[Nozshand]

Traits work for sorcerer now, but many spells are missing in this game to justify picking wizard. Sorcerer is actually the better option in this game.

[Entropy]

Originally posted by Nozshand:

Traits work for sorcerer now, but many spells are missing in this game to justify picking wizard. Sorcerer is actually the better option in this game.

I heard for arcane Sorc, spell focus and possibly other spell feats don't work. Have not personally verified yet tho

[Larus]

Originally posted by Nozshand:

Traits work for sorcerer now, but many spells are missing in this game to justify picking wizard. Sorcerer is actually the better option in this game.

Can agree to that. In this game there is little reason to play a wizard over a sorcerer. That might change if they ever expand their content though.

[Kasa]

That's a neat edit Jotunblut, howed did you manage that?

From what I can tell atm:

1: some spells overrite themselves unconditionally (I'm looking at you light..)
2: Class features mostly overrite themselves no matter who used it. (Don't bother making 2 monster tacticians they won't let you use 2 summons at once)

[DodgeyB]

With the limited spell pool, at higher levels sorcs are definately the way to go.

[DodgeyB]

Originally posted by Kasa:

That's a neat edit Jotunblut, howed did you manage that?

From what I can tell atm:

1: some spells overrite themselves unconditionally (I'm looking at you light..)
2: Class features mostly overrite themselves no matter who used it. (Don't bother making 2 monster tacticians they won't let you use 2 summons at once)

Very loosely based off old Mystara rules and just adjusting the spells per day to reflect the numbers. Its very rough, but it gets by

[Kyutaru]

Wizards are better for the versatility normally and all the metamagic potential. They can handcraft the perfect spell list for whatever encounters you may be facing, even knowing what those will be through divination. In Kingmaker they can safely use Color Spray and Sleep without screwing your late game build. But they're lacking some of their PNP potential so if you're going with a spell spamming nuker then Sorcerer is better at the job. But since nukers are bad and you should feel bad playing one, the wizard's added DC bonuses are the way to go.

Honestly most of the value of a wizard comes from crafting since they have access to every spell ever made but that's not a thing here. Meh.

[Slap Happy Pappy]

Red dragon bloodline, greater invisibility and scorching ray. Metamagic it up to level 3, 4, 5. Pewpewpew.

12d6 + 12

[s.g.michelsen]

Maybe, but there are still more spells in the game than a sorcerer can select them all.

[Kyutaru]

Originally posted by Slap Happy Pappy:

Red dragon bloodline, greater invisibility and scorching ray. Metamagic it up to level 3, 4, 5. Pewpewpew.

12d6 + 12

The rogue can do that without spending a spell slot. Casters are for buffs people! Damage is for stick swingers.