| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Nicolai Withander
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1093 Posts |
 Posted - 01 Oct 2013 : 11:33:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by _Jarlaxle_
PS: I never played a Pen&Paper session myself so this are only some assumptions by an "outsider"
Dude, you have got to get yourself at a table... its huge fun!  |
 |
|
|
_Jarlaxle_
Senior Scribe
Germany
584 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2013 : 12:45:30
|
| Unfortunatly its not very common here and I guess I would be a though player, expecting the DM to know the Realms in and out. |
|
|
|
Saxmilian
Learned Scribe
USA
157 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2013 : 13:16:58
|
I keep hearing people say that the IZARD will do research into the Sorcerer's abilities and the sorcerer will instantly die, this keeps assuming that the wizard has every spell in the game. I love my wizard, I really do, but he dosent have access to EVERY spell. Indeed, in second-ed, a few failed rolls and there were spells he couldn't learn.
3.5 I think it still boils down to who goes first in battle. Wizards can be more powerful in their usefulness. A few open slots and they can fill whatever magic-roll is needed (once again assuming they have access to lots of spellbooks). Sorcerers in battle win hands down. I mean who even plays a sorcerer and dosent plan to survive? Always Mage Armor, Shield, Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Magic Missile and at those truly deadly levels Disintegrate, Iron Body and Time Stop. Then again, every wizard takes the SAME combat spells.
Sadly, it boils down to who casts first, who fails a save, thugh, in battle those extra spells and dispel magic are gonna let the sorcerer win out, every time. |
|
|
|
Saxmilian
Learned Scribe
USA
157 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2013 : 13:20:39
|
| Also, since I just realized I forgot to mention, overall, as the topic suggested, powerful, I cant deny that if the Wizard knows a butt-load of spells, then my wizard carries a butt-load of scrolls (at least 1 for EVERY spell they know)the right bag of holding, bandolier or scroll case, quick-draw and game over, wizard rocks. |
|
|
|
KacyCrawford
Acolyte
USA
41 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2013 : 14:26:23
|
| The Wizard is unquestionably the more powerful of the two (unless you are very skilled at using some very specific Sorcerer tricks, like Arcane Fusion and Kobold Greater Rite of Passage). That said, I think Sorcerer is a lot more fun to play in general, and therefore consider it a "better" class. |
|
|
|
Entromancer
Senior Scribe
USA
388 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2013 : 17:36:50
|
| All a sorcerer need do is fashion an antimagic orb (like the one Morik used against Rai'gy Bondalek)into a bullet that, upon penetrating the wizard, releases a neurotoxin containing the orb's antimagic properties. Effectively, this disrupts the neurons' signaling and considerably slows down the wizard's ability to cast spells. |
"...the will is everything. The will to act."--Ra's Al Ghul
"Suffering builds character."--Talia Al Ghul |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1879 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2013 : 19:58:11
|
| Are there any insane wizard builds similar to the Mailman? |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4459 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2013 : 21:06:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
Are there any insane wizard builds similar to the Mailman?
I'm not really sure the Wizard (or really, any Tier 1 full-spellcaster for that matter) needs ridiculous builds to be crazy at high levels.
But I've always favored Wizard 5/ War Weaver (Hereos of Battle) 5/ Wizard 10 or PrC____ 10) a pretty awesome combination. Yes, lets turn evryone into hastened, invisible, bull's strength polymorphed Dragon on turn 1.
Another overpowered (dare I say "broken") combination is that the Wizard or Sorcerer can craft Rune-Bombs. If your not sure what a Rune Bomb is then I'll explain it.
A Rune Bomb is someone who casts Explosive Runes on a piece of paper multiple times. Since the RAW is that there is no limit to how many times the explosive runes can be applied, it's believed that the spells can be added and thus stack with one another. You then use another spell as the trigger and *boom*, 5d6 force damage per casting with no saving throw for any target within the immediate vacinity. With the bomb on hand, you can use a simple cantrip called "Launch Object" to throw the "bomb" at an opponent's feet (AC 10) and then detonate it with a quickened Amanuensis (cantrip, 4th level spell). These detonate ALL the runes since there is no rule stating that each explosive rune needs more than one trigger.
It's cheesy but works the first time until the DM just says "no", lol. |
Edited by - Diffan on 01 Oct 2013 21:11:25 |
|
|
|
GRYPHON
Senior Scribe
USA
527 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2013 : 15:46:47
|
| Wizards... |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2013 : 23:11:18
|
quote:
Wooly Hamster
There's nothing you need to do to make [wizards] more viable. If you want more spells, play a wizard -- just be aware you have to plan what you're going to do at the start of each day, and that you could make one mistake and render yourself useless.
Partially true.
A low-level wizard usually has a limited spell selection and can easily prepare poorly. But this limit also applies to his sorcerer counterpart. Not that matters all that much when you can only cast a few spells per day anyhow; both classes can benefit from a crossbow more than a spell library at the lowest levels.
But at middling and high levels, a wizard would have to make not just one bad choice but a large number of bad choices to find himself utterly unprepared for whatever the day may bring. A high level wizard, certainly an epic level wizard, would likely be fully prepared against a large array of possible threats and challenges. While I‘m firmly opposed to allowing PC (and NPC) wizards have access to every spell published in the sourcebooks, I‘m also often dismayed by how (player) wizards tend to lazily overlook the immense value and versatility of creating/researching their own (or even another wizard‘s) spells.
My opinion is that any wizard worth his levels will ensure that he is equipped with spells sufficient for any likely contingency, and will have addressed any glaring weaknesses in his spell arsenal by the time he achieves a decent level. Even if only half of his spells should happen to prove useful in an encounter vs some randome sorceror, he would still manage to have enough magical advantage to prevail. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2013 : 23:32:24
|
I append another observation to my above post:
Specialist wizards have an overwhelming advantage over sorcerers at low experience levels. They‘re superbly good at what they do and almost guaranteed to have access to a handful of spells within their specialization which are immediately useful. Their inability to access forbidden schools of magic isn‘t much bother when most of their spellbook pages are blank anyhow. Sorcerors do not have access to such advantages.
Incidentally, I‘ve played in plenty of short-term or one-shot games ... a specialist is the way to go when you want more good spells now and don‘t care much about long-term potential. For the record, rules exist which allow specialists to generalize later if they should choose. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36871 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 04:56:53
|
| A wizard who is prepared for every possible contingency is going to have a wide variety of spells memorized -- and most of them will only be useful in particular contingencies. What does he do when he has cast all the relevant spells for a particular contingency, and none of his remaining ones are relevant? |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 13:44:53
|
| The wizard cracks out the wands, scrolls, rings and amulets...? |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36871 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 14:10:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
The wizard cracks out the wands, scrolls, rings and amulets...?
Which again assumes he has them, and that they are right for the situation.
Here's what it comes down to: wizards are best strategically, sorcerers are best tactically. A properly-prepared wizard will outperform a sorcerer in the same situation, but if the wizard is not prepared, the sorcerer will do better. It's all situational, and which is better depends entirely on whether or not the wizard was able to prepare all the right spells.
That's why I like sorcerers. A sorcerer never has to get up in the morning and ponder whether to prepare another fireball, or dispel magic, or fly. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Neo2151
Learned Scribe
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 16:00:53
|
I'll answer this as if the question assumes Pathfinder rules, because who straight-leveled in 3.5 anyway?
So a Sorcerer with the Arcane bloodline and enough gold to create a Staff of Wish is the most powerful. But who's gonna allow that, right?
Really though, if we're talking about a duel, it all comes down to who wins initiative. The first spell to land is going to be the deciding factor, and you can argue 'til you're blue in the face about poorly prepared spells vs spells knows, etc, and this will still be true.
If we're not talking about a duel, but just class ability overall: The Wizard is more powerful, but the Sorcerer has the more enjoyable playstyle at the tabletop, IMO.
•First- The idea that a Wizard will have too much utility prepared to be offensive is kinda bunk. The class gets Scribe Scroll for free, and can potentially "know" as many spells as the DM allows. So all your utility spells can be safely tucked away in your scroll case while your prepared spells are more typical daily choices.
The Sorcerer, on the other hand, does not have this option for utility spells and any utility spells they want are going to eat away at the rather small list of Spells Known that they have to deal with, or they must find someone selling scrolls of the specific spells they want. Otherwise, they'll just have to live without.
And because Wizards can know any spell they can afford to scribe into their book, they are much more likely to take item creation feats, which means they are more likely to have the right wand/staff/etc for the job.
•Second- Unless we're discussing two casters who have both achieved 9th level power, the Wizard has a HUGE advantage here. A 5th level Wizard has access to 3rd level spells. A 5th level Sorcerer doesn't yet. They're a level behind for every spell level, all the way up to 18th level when they finally learn 9th level casting.
•Third- If we're talking about 3.X D&D, then Wizards have School Specialization giving them extra options, while Sorcerers have nothing of the sort.
If we're talking Pathfinder, Sorcerers actually pull ahead here as Bloodlines are typically better than Specializations, though not by a lot.
•Finally- Intelligence is a much more useful stat than Charisma, especially when you only have "2+Int" for school skills. The Wizard is way more likely to know information about a variety of things than the Sorcerer, and we all know "knowledge is power." (Elminster has a reputation for being one of the most powerful people in the Realms because of what he knows rather than what he can cast.) |
"Come looking for me, and I will blast you to dust, and then lay waste to all your descendants, ancestors, and the realm you came from, every last tree and stone of it. Why? Well, it's what I usually do."
-Baerendra Riverhand on The Story of Spellfire |
Edited by - Neo2151 on 05 Oct 2013 16:04:48 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36871 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 16:43:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
I'll answer this as if the question assumes Pathfinder rules, because who straight-leveled in 3.5 anyway?
So a Sorcerer with the Arcane bloodline and enough gold to create a Staff of Wish is the most powerful. But who's gonna allow that, right?
Really though, if we're talking about a duel, it all comes down to who wins initiative. The first spell to land is going to be the deciding factor, and you can argue 'til you're blue in the face about poorly prepared spells vs spells knows, etc, and this will still be true.
If we're not talking about a duel, but just class ability overall: The Wizard is more powerful, but the Sorcerer has the more enjoyable playstyle at the tabletop, IMO.
•First- The idea that a Wizard will have too much utility prepared to be offensive is kinda bunk. The class gets Scribe Scroll for free, and can potentially "know" as many spells as the DM allows. So all your utility spells can be safely tucked away in your scroll case while your prepared spells are more typical daily choices.
The Sorcerer, on the other hand, does not have this option for utility spells and any utility spells they want are going to eat away at the rather small list of Spells Known that they have to deal with, or they must find someone selling scrolls of the specific spells they want. Otherwise, they'll just have to live without.
And because Wizards can know any spell they can afford to scribe into their book, they are much more likely to take item creation feats, which means they are more likely to have the right wand/staff/etc for the job.
Where does it say sorcerers can't prepare scrolls?
The idea of a wizard not prepared for combat is not bunk. Do you really think that a wizard expecting a quiet day of reading is going to be loading up on fireballs? Do you really think a wizard who is in a large city to relax, buy some supplies, and take in a couple of shows is still going to make sure he's got every single scroll he can carry on him when he steps out to go to the tavern, and that he'll make a point of preparing meteor swarm in case he has an argument with someone at the bar? Heck, is your wizard, who is preparing to study all the runes and old paraphernalia he and his companions just found in a tower he now knows to be empty, still going to have fireballs ready instead of dispel magic?
Look at it this way: is your fighter going to prepare for a day at the beach by strapping on his heaviest plate armor and grabbing a few swords and polearms? Is your cleric going to prepare for a date by grabbing his +8 mace of holy smashing?
No. People relax. People let down their guard when they have no reason to expect an attack. People expecting to do research, or to relax, or to spend their time creating magical items do not load up on nothing but offensive spells.
No one, not even an adventurer, is prepped for combat 24/7. And if your wizard only prepares battle magic and nothing else, then his skills are being poorly used. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 16:56:02
|
To back up Wooly's post, there was a WARwizard of Cormyr in the Cormyr series (co-written by Ed Greenwood, in fact) who got hit in the head with a rock by a child... and then got beat-up by a crowd of angry bystanders.
Guess he wasn't prepared that day....
Only guys like Elminster, Szass Tam, The Blackstaff, Larloch, etc, are ready for a fight, 24/7. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Neo2151
Learned Scribe
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 17:15:21
|
Sure a Sorcerer can take Scribe Scroll and make his own scrolls. But most of the time it ends up being a waste of a feat, since he can only scribe what he knows, and he can cast everything he knows as long as he has spell slots. (For what it's worth, I've never seen a Spont. caster take the feat. Ever.)
And I maintain it is bunk. No Wizard worth their salt is going to "load up" on offensive spells, but they're not going to go out into the dangerous D&D world (city or not) without some sort of offense, defense, and/or escape magic readily available.
The "day at the beach" is a straw-man argument. No player is ever going to let their guard down unless they want their DM to kill them. So "people" might get to relax, but "players" hardly ever do. And even when my fighter goes to the beach, he doesn't go without at least one weapon. Again - dangerous D&D world is dangerous.
As for that War Wizard... Novels and gameplay mechanics are two entirely different beasts. According to Ed, any mage will lose a fight against a well-thrown rock.
Edit- Larloch, since you mention him Markustay, is actually a great example of what I'm talking about. This guy is someone that no one messes with, has tons of Netherese liches under his control to deal with any potential situation, and rarely leaves home because he's too busy tinkering with personal projects to mess with the outside world. And yet, I bet if you had PCs face him, he'd be "prepared" for them. |
"Come looking for me, and I will blast you to dust, and then lay waste to all your descendants, ancestors, and the realm you came from, every last tree and stone of it. Why? Well, it's what I usually do."
-Baerendra Riverhand on The Story of Spellfire |
Edited by - Neo2151 on 05 Oct 2013 17:22:09 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36871 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 17:41:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
Sure a Sorcerer can take Scribe Scroll and make his own scrolls. But most of the time it ends up being a waste of a feat, since he can only scribe what he knows, and he can cast everything he knows as long as he has spell slots. (For what it's worth, I've never seen a Spont. caster take the feat. Ever.)
So for a sorcerer it's a waste of a feat to be able to cast more spells than he has available, but for wizards it is expected that they'll be able to cast more spells than are available? Talk about skewing the scenario to achieve a desired result...
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
And I maintain it is bunk. No Wizard worth their salt is going to "load up" on offensive spells, but they're not going to go out into the dangerous D&D world (city or not) without some sort of offense, defense, and/or escape magic readily available.
I maintain it is bunk to assume that one can never, ever let their guard down. I maintain it is bunk to assume anyone combat-capable is going to be combat-ready 24/7. I maintain it is bunk to ignore human nature and a desire to relax and unwind. I maintain it is bunk to assume that there is never, ever a reason to not expect to be attacked.
I further maintain it is bunk to assume that wizards do nothing but blast anything and everything, all day long. Need a door opened? Fireball! Can't get up to that ledge? Screw it, bring down the mountain and walk right in! Need to have someone do something for you? They'll be plenty willing after a lightning bolt or two! 
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
The "day at the beach" is a straw-man argument. No player is ever going to let their guard down unless they want their DM to kill them. So "people" might get to relax, but "players" hardly ever do. And even when my fighter goes to the beach, he doesn't go without at least one weapon. Again - dangerous D&D world is dangerous.
Yeah, because no player ever does something like go to a tavern for a drink, or tries to charm the local nobleman's daughter into the sack... No player ever just needs supplies, or to read the new spellbook he just found, or wants to use his crafting ability, or needs the local sage to help him interpret a mysterious coded document, or needs to consult with a temple to find out about something that happened in the area 400 years ago...
The strawman argument is that all DMs, everywhere, want nothing more than to kill their players, and will not let logic or player desires get in the way of what they want. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Neo2151
Learned Scribe
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 18:07:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So for a sorcerer it's a waste of a feat to be able to cast more spells than he has available, but for wizards it is expected that they'll be able to cast more spells than are available? Talk about skewing the scenario to achieve a desired result...
The Wizard doesn't have to decide if taking the Scribe Scroll feat is worth it or not - they get it for free at first level. Of course it's skewed in the Wizard's favor, for that reason alone.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I further maintain it is bunk to assume that wizards do nothing but blast anything and everything, all day long. Need a door opened? Fireball! Can't get up to that ledge? Screw it, bring down the mountain and walk right in! Need to have someone do something for you? They'll be plenty willing after a lightning bolt or two!
I have never made this argument, and I haven't seen it in this entire thread. Is your past personal gaming experience catching up with you here? Do you need a moment to breathe? 
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Yeah, because no player ever does something like go to a tavern for a drink, or tries to charm the local nobleman's daughter into the sack... No player ever just needs supplies, or to read the new spellbook he just found, or wants to use his crafting ability, or needs the local sage to help him interpret a mysterious coded document, or needs to consult with a temple to find out about something that happened in the area 400 years ago...
The strawman argument is that all DMs, everywhere, want nothing more than to kill their players, and will not let logic or player desires get in the way of what they want.
Then would you do me a quick favor and describe the prepared spell list of an "off-duty" Wizard? Is he/she just filling up all their daily slots with nothing but Tongues and Locate Object over and over again? I find that idea vastly more ridiculous than the idea that a mage will have at least a couple of spells suited to danger prepared. |
"Come looking for me, and I will blast you to dust, and then lay waste to all your descendants, ancestors, and the realm you came from, every last tree and stone of it. Why? Well, it's what I usually do."
-Baerendra Riverhand on The Story of Spellfire |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 18:53:11
|
There was a time when memorizing spells took a wizard 15 minutes per level of the spell...THAT was their weakness.
Sure, the Arch-Mage could show up in the village and destroy the place unleashing all hell and obliterating the King's Knights...
...but when the adventurers came calling the next day, the fella wasn't going to have his spells all ready to go again! That Meteor Swarm he cast the day before takes 2.25 hours to memorize alone!
One of the reasons I always get ticked when someone says "Wizards are too powerful at higher levels!" and then the game designer goes "NERF IT!" and then actually makes wizards more powerful by making it possible for them to memorize faster! 
That was my problem with the transition from earlier editions to 3.munchkinism to start with.
In 1e or 2e a Sorcerer would for sure be a better class to play if you wanted your magic back quickly...but in 3.x the wizard just gets his power back far too quickly. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1879 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 20:11:54
|
I think the time requirement for memorization was altered because most campaigns (at least, those that I played in) house ruled or ignored the memorization times.
Personally, I'm not a fan of the Vancian/memorization rules. I prefer a spellpoint system or Con based casting (wherein a caster risks fatigue or exhaustion...but has the potential for infinite casting, albeit a difficult potential). If anyone has the Middle Earth CODA rules then you have an idea of what I'm talking about. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 20:34:07
|
| In 2e they had a good solid system for using spell points...it was good stuff actually. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 22:27:38
|
Ha, my longstanding variant houserule is a flat one hour per spell level for memorization. The flipside, however: a wizard can memorize spells over and over again all day, provided he's still "well-rested" ... he doesn't need to be fresh as the morning before breakfast and coffee (and really, who the hell ever is anyways?), he just can't be exhausted after a day filled with the exertions of combat and horseback riding and unusually difficult NPCs.
So yes, a fully-depleted archmage literally needs weeks of memorization to charge himself up to capacity. And yes, a 1st-level wizard can spend all day at practice hurling magic missiles at an unflattering doodle of his sadistic DM, casting and memorizing the same spell (or any spell) a dozen times or more in the same day.
This isn't at all canon or in the published rules. Just something which works very well at my gaming table, and which all the players have come to enjoy. A great way to help balance out the linear-fighter-quadratic-wizard inequality, and to encourage lowly magelings to cast spells rather than hoard them, and to limit rampant uber-magic overkill from the megamages. PCs play smarter when faced with competing needs, limitations, and the cost of measured force vs the cost of overwhelming overkill force.
Note that 2E offers a few magical constructs and trinkets which dramatically reduce spell memorization times (by half or more). These things can have a significant impact on the logistics of high-level adventuring. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 06 Oct 2013 00:23:35 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36871 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2013 : 22:44:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So for a sorcerer it's a waste of a feat to be able to cast more spells than he has available, but for wizards it is expected that they'll be able to cast more spells than are available? Talk about skewing the scenario to achieve a desired result...
The Wizard doesn't have to decide if taking the Scribe Scroll feat is worth it or not - they get it for free at first level. Of course it's skewed in the Wizard's favor, for that reason alone.
No, the skew was your assumption that a wizard would be fully loaded with scrolls, and a sorcerer wouldn't have any.
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I further maintain it is bunk to assume that wizards do nothing but blast anything and everything, all day long. Need a door opened? Fireball! Can't get up to that ledge? Screw it, bring down the mountain and walk right in! Need to have someone do something for you? They'll be plenty willing after a lightning bolt or two!
I have never made this argument, and I haven't seen it in this entire thread. Is your past personal gaming experience catching up with you here? Do you need a moment to breathe?
That is actually the argument you're making, when you insist that there is no way a wizard would possibly run out of combat spells. If they aren't running out of combat spells, it's because they have no utility spells. And if they have no utility spells, then we have the examples above.
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Yeah, because no player ever does something like go to a tavern for a drink, or tries to charm the local nobleman's daughter into the sack... No player ever just needs supplies, or to read the new spellbook he just found, or wants to use his crafting ability, or needs the local sage to help him interpret a mysterious coded document, or needs to consult with a temple to find out about something that happened in the area 400 years ago...
The strawman argument is that all DMs, everywhere, want nothing more than to kill their players, and will not let logic or player desires get in the way of what they want.
Then would you do me a quick favor and describe the prepared spell list of an "off-duty" Wizard? Is he/she just filling up all their daily slots with nothing but Tongues and Locate Object over and over again? I find that idea vastly more ridiculous than the idea that a mage will have at least a couple of spells suited to danger prepared.
I never said that a wizard wouldn't have at least a couple of offensive spells -- I've been arguing against the idea that wizards will always, no matter the situation, be fully loaded with every possible combat spell. I've been trying to make the case that wizards not expecting combat will memorize non-combat spells, or that wizards expecting to need a variety of spells will have some utility ones memorized.
In short, I am saying that wizards do not memorize combat spells to the exclusion of all other spells, and that it is thus entirely possible that a wizard will have less combat magic available than a sorcerer of identical level.
As I've said since the beginning of this thread, it all depends on the situation. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Neo2151
Learned Scribe
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 06 Oct 2013 : 01:53:18
|
I never said a Wizard would be fully loaded with scrolls while a Sorcerer would have none. I said it was more likely for the Wizard to have scrolls as creating them is a class ability and allows for utility spells to be stored in a way that doesn't eat up daily slots.
It's a common-sense thing, not a power-gaming thing.
I can keep my Dispel Magic, Fireball, Dimension Door, Black Tentacles, etc. spells prepared daily and keep spells like Remove Curse, Tongues, Teleport, etc. on scrolls for when I really need them. Because it's a class ability, and because it makes it much easier to avoid situations where I don't have good spells prepared. |
"Come looking for me, and I will blast you to dust, and then lay waste to all your descendants, ancestors, and the realm you came from, every last tree and stone of it. Why? Well, it's what I usually do."
-Baerendra Riverhand on The Story of Spellfire |
Edited by - Neo2151 on 06 Oct 2013 01:54:05 |
|
|
|
Kiaransalyn
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
762 Posts |
Posted - 13 Aug 2016 : 08:38:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
So guys what do you think? Which class is the more powerful?
D&D is often a balance between the mechanics (rules, etc) and the setting. Back in the day, when I was running a lot of games in Menzoberranzan, I had quite a decision when it came to sorcerers and Sorcere - would sorcerers be part of Sorcere?
After much thought I decided against including sorcerers in Sorcere, because the Matron Mothers rule Menzoberranzan and their individual houses, they want wizards because of their versatility. Wizards can adapt to any situation with preparation. Wizards learn new spells and certainly in a setting where being the best counts for so much what sort of future does a student of Sorcere have if she/he can't learn the spells they are being taught.
On one level, Sorcerers are living staffs/wands. They have a lot of charges and limited spells. Wizards are living books, they have less charges but a wider range. It's a nice balance.
To answer your question as to which class is more powerful, I chose Wizard, because the class has so much breadth. |
Death is Life
Love is Hate
Revenge is Forgiveness
Ken: You from the States?
Jimmy: Yeah. But don't hold it against me.
Ken: I'll try not to... Just try not to say anything too loud or crass. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4459 Posts |
Posted - 13 Aug 2016 : 18:16:41
|
After delving more into mechanics of 3.5 I believe the Wizard's abilities and slightly increased spell-level give them the edge overall. If we're going to take in ALL the Official supplements that WotC put out for 3.5 then it just gets worse. Take, for example, the feat Spell Mastery. Now on it's surface it looks sort of bad. You get to memorize X spells from your spellbook without having your spellbook present. Most campaigns the Wizard will always be with this spellbook but there are times that they might not be. But then you look at Uncanny Forethought and instantly you're taking Spell Mastery 2 or maybe even 3 times. Why? Because Uncanny Forethought allows you to keep a number of Spell Slots open equal to your Intelligence Modifier and spontaneously cast spells from Spell Mastery in there OR you can instead cast ANY spell you know there as a full-round action with only a -2 to your Caster Level.
So even a Wizard can be spontaneous AND he has a way to overcome his Spellbook requirement. Then you add in bonus feats that you can use for Item Creation, Meta-Magic (which works with Uncanny Forethought), OR the Reserve feats from Complete Mage. Imagine a Wizard with both Acidic Splatter, Fiery Burst, or Storm Bolt! At-Will elemental damage that's a supernatural ability (works even in anti-magic fields). Then there's Metamagic School Focus that reduces the cost of Meta-Magic feats for spells of your preferred school. |
Edited by - Diffan on 13 Aug 2016 18:18:27 |
|
|
|
Balmar Foghaven
Learned Scribe
Canada
124 Posts |
Posted - 03 May 2018 : 15:03:10
|
| It looks like nobody's posted here in a while, but I'll add my two cents: I agree with Wooly that it's highly situation - dependent on which class will shine. With that said, I played a 3.5 sorcerer with both the improved counterspell and reactive counterspell feats, (and eventually took automatic quicken spell in the epic levels) he quite literally crushed all competition from any other casters. So I hope you'll forgive me for not believing that a wizard will always defeat a sorcerer if he prepared better. |
"Despair not, for in the end all things shall work out for the best - in at least one timeline." |
Edited by - Balmar Foghaven on 03 May 2018 15:09:46 |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1566 Posts |
Posted - 03 May 2018 : 16:09:29
|
In the long run, wizards have more versatility. Sure, a sorcerer specialized in combat can be the equal of any combat wizard, but that same sorcerer is buggered the next day when he needs to be a utility caster the next day while the wizard can just prepare his next day's spells cheerfully.
Caster damage scales horribly in epic, so unless the sorcerer is optimized for pure damage, he's in trouble. The wizard can just prepare an allotment of save-or-suck, summon bigger fish, buffs and debuffs, but that poor sorcerer is going to have problems if he's a pure damage caster and the other guy has a ring of energy immunity, or has shapeshifted into an adamantine golem. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Wizards vs Sorcerers
