Sorc and Wiz

[TheBlueFox]

Alright, Ive set up the bullet proof shielding, Covered myself in fire retardant insulation, and hidden myself in a concrete bunker...

Can someone please explain to this caster-noob why Wizards are better than sorcs, or vice versa?

From what I can tell, Sorcs get faster casting, more spell points, and Double spell points from items
Wizards get more spells(but how many of them are all that useful), can learn spells from scrolls, faster spell progression, the ability to swap spells on rest, and more skill points due to INT.

Both can UMD a rez, though its easier for sorcs because CHA is their main stat.
Both can UMD healing

Tossing up both, I see a benefit for sorcs...someone please tell me why people say wizards are better?

I dont mean this in any bad way, Im just a caster-noob.

[Angelus_dead]

Tossing up both, I see a benefit for sorcs...someone please tell me why people say wizards are better?

People don't really say that. The typical opinion is that sorcerers are superior (and there's an expectation that the devs will buff Wizards in the future).

Some additional factors you didn't mention:
1. Warforged have a penalty to the sorcerer casting stat, so for a sorcerer to get the self-repair ability costs him 1 spell DC from a similar wizard.

2. Wizards have more skillpoints. That's particularly helpful if you'd like to be a rogue MC, or just like to have a lot of skills (such as for Hide MS).

3. Wizards can take Insightful Reflexes, which protects against a more dangerous category of attacks than Force of Personality does.

4. If you're a new player, then Wizards are harder to screw up, because you're not stuck with bad spell choices for long.

[hydra_ex]

Generally agree with A_D.

(Beware of unreliable figures below)
I would say that about 65% of people think that they are reasonably balanced, and about 35% say that sorcs are better (although from experience, sorc players tend to be more outgoing than wizard players, although that might just be my prejudice)

[Pyromaniac]

I'd argue that wizards are better off than sorcs as you get closer to the current end game. Especially with DC based spells being stronger on wizards, and damage spells (that sorcs are pigeonholed into) being somewhat irrelevant at end game.

[Angelus_dead]

Especially with DC based spells being stronger on wizards

They're not stronger.

Wizards can have a slightly higher DC, but that's not enough to catch up to casting +40% more spells at +100% the speed.

[xanvar]

I think that it boils down to preferance. Many people that have been playing the game for a long time will prefer to play sorc because they know the spells they use. They have gear already set up, and they have plenty of gold to swap spells as they become more or less usefull. I would recommend starting with a wizard because it gives you a chance to play with the spells and see what works and what doesn't. Wizards get more feats and can swap spells easily. For some very specific quests a wizard can be more prepared than a sorc. All in all in my opinion they are pretty well balanced.

[seldarin]

I'd argue that wizards are better off than sorcs as you get closer to the current end game. Especially with DC based spells being stronger on wizards, and damage spells (that sorcs are pigeonholed into) being somewhat irrelevant at end game.

Whats this pigeonholing you talk about? My sorc has more than just damage spells, things like mass suggestion and suchlike. Reading your post you are suggesting that sorcs are a one trick ponies, which is pretty far from the truth. Keeping that in mind i grouped with a sorc the other day, on my sorc and watched as he didnt do that much, when i asked him about spell selections, his response was "im a nuker". I said to him, what do you do when your "nuking" spells arent effective? The response was so deafening even the crickets left.

Sorcs arent just damage spellcasters and anyone that pigeonholes them into that category does so at their own peril. There are many more facets to spellcasters than that. Granted they have less spell casting options available than wizards, but that is when a bit of commonsense comes in. You dont need all the blasting spells available, a mix of spells is a far better option, but make sure the selection is optomized for what you will be running most. For example, my sorc doesnt carry GH, however i do carry 200 or so GH scrolls. 11 mins v 32 mins, not really a big deal in my mind. If i have to cast it twice on someone, so be it. Granted cooldown times on scrolls is a negative compared to casting, but it makes room for disintegrate etc.

[shores11]

Alright, Ive set up the bullet proof shielding, Covered myself in fire retardant insulation, and hidden myself in a concrete bunker...

Can someone please explain to this caster-noob why Wizards are better than sorcs, or vice versa?

From what I can tell, Sorcs get faster casting, more spell points, and Double spell points from items
Wizards get more spells(but how many of them are all that useful), can learn spells from scrolls, faster spell progression, the ability to swap spells on rest, and more skill points due to INT.

Both can UMD a rez, though its easier for sorcs because CHA is their main stat.
Both can UMD healing

Tossing up both, I see a benefit for sorcs...someone please tell me why people say wizards are better?

I dont mean this in any bad way, Im just a caster-noob.

Whether a wizard or sorcerer are better than the other is really a matter of opinion. Me personally I prefer playing a wizard over a sorcerer. I have played both and ended up deleting my sorcerer just because I think they are more arcade and simple to play. Load up your spell points and faster caster and sit back and blast. Where as a wizard has many more spells he/she can use (and I personally use them all a lot) so it makes the questing more complex and strategic which is what I enjoy.

Spell points, yes a sorcerer has many more but my wizard will exceed 2,000 spell points at level 18 which is already way more than I normally ever use. If I want to crowd control I can or if I want to be damage dealer I can also if I choose to be a instant killer I can. Specced out in illusion as I am my phantasmal killer is still a viable spell at end game so I also have more instant killing spells to toggle with.

With quicken a wizard casts just as fast or faster than a sorcerer. Wizard is the way to go for me. The only argument I really do not agree with is that wizard is the learning caster class for you to graduate to sorcerer, I could not disagree more with that statement.

[Harbinder]

I agree with all the comments above^

edit--> and most of the ones below ☻

[seldarin]

I think that it boils down to preferance. Many people that have been playing the game for a long time will prefer to play sorc because they know the spells they use. They have gear already set up, and they have plenty of gold to swap spells as they become more or less usefull. I would recommend starting with a wizard because it gives you a chance to play with the spells and see what works and what doesn't. Wizards get more feats and can swap spells easily. For some very specific quests a wizard can be more prepared than a sorc. All in all in my opinion they are pretty well balanced.

I agree Xan. I played three wizards, Elf, WF and Human before rerolling as a Sorc. Wizards get more feats because of the extra meta at every 5th level. When i built my sorc i had a set plan in mind as to what i wanted and when. Extend, Empower, Maximize, Heighten, Spell Pen, Greater Spell Pen, Toughness and something else at 18th when i get there. My sorc is human, extra feat at lvl 1, and with all the spell points they get, i really didnt see that Mental Toughness and improved Mental toughness was necessary.

Whatever spells im lacking, i cover with scrolls, as long as its not an issue for DCs. I agree though that they are well balanced for what it is they both bring to the table and its personal choice.

[Duratan99]

I started with a wizard. At some point around level 9 or 10, I decided that I wanted to have more SP to play a larger role in the party. I then re-rolled Sorc, I like the Sorc better. They each have their places. I will list the positive and negatives for each class below.

Sorc Positives:

Faster Spell Casting
More Spell Points(This one has a few sub bonuses that comes with it)
1. Ability to Buff the entire party, and still have 85% of their mana.
2. Can leave 1-2 meta magic feats on perma
Can achieve high UMD easily
Very good at Nuking

Sorc Negatives:

Very few CHA runes
Can only swap 1 spell every 3 days
Slower spell progression
No bonus feats
Takes a -2 max cha hit when rolling WF(IMO WF = Best caster)
Not so great at Nuking

Wizard Positives

No Penalty for being WF
There are many INT runes in the game
Ability to swap spells
Bonus feats at 1, 5, 10, 15, 20(These feats can only be used for Meta Magic feats)
Faster Spell progression, and can learn more spells for most spell levels.
Can splash 1 lvl of rogue, and be a trap monkey with relative ease.
Very good at CC, and buffing

Wizard Negatives

Less SP
Can't keep meta magics on at all times
Slower casting speed
Not very good a nuking



It would seem the Wizard is more Versatile, and is most defiently the better choice for your first caster. I prefer a Sorc over Wizard, though it could have been because my wizard was not WF. So I didn't feel quite as indestructable.

[Pyromaniac]

They're not stronger. Wizards can have a slightly higher DC, but that's not enough to catch up to casting +40% more spells at +100% the speed.

The higher DC was what I was refering to. And given the absurdly high DCs at end game, and the way Turbine is making DC caster = wizards I suspect they will give even more benefits to DC wizards over DC sorcs in the future. I would also suggest that wizards get more magic feats for free which helps them more easily fit in all the DC type benefits.

Whats this pigeonholing you talk about?

I'm referring to the fact that Turbine is making sorcs = damage dealers and wizards = DC/CC casters. DC/CC is the key 'offense' that arcanes can currently do at end game imo. Buffing can be done by either, but wizard versatility in buff spell swapping > sorc buffing speed/more mana. To me arcane damage spells are not that relevant in the new mod.

[FluffyCalico]

Well I think we can all agree if you are going to make a 18/2 caster rogue its better to use a wiz than a sorc

[Aerendil]

Sorc Positives:
Can leave 1-2 meta magic feats on perma
Very good at Nuking

Sorc Negatives:
Not so great at Nuking

Wizard Positives:
Very good at CC, and buffing

Wizard Negatives:
Can't keep meta magics on at all times
Not very good a nuking

I have quoted only the parts that I *slightly* disagree with. Everything else was spot on. So my thoughts/questions/opinions are as follows:

1 - you label Sorcs as "very good at nuking" and "not so great at nuking". I'm confused. Was the last one a typo?
2 - on the same train of thought, you place Wizards as good at CC/buffing, yet bad at nuking. If a Sorc can have metamagics on permanently and have the greater SP pool, and can buff a party and still have 85% of their SP pool, wouldn't they be the better buffers? Why does everyone always look to the Wizard for this job? I'm confused. Sure, the Wizard is more likely to have the lion's share of various spells/buffs, whereas the Sorc specs for damage, but there's no reason the Sorc can't blur/haste the party - they should have those spells!

And what makes the Wizard not very good at nuking? Aside from a lower SP pool, they should have the same spell DC / spell penetration as an equally-specced Sorceror, making them just as efficient at nuking. It's just that the Sorc can nuke faster, and for longer periods. But if that's not a huge concern (i.e. short quest, or using firewalls / insta-death spells), there's little difference between the two.
3 - theoretically speaking, the Wizard *should* be the one with metamagics on all the time, not the Sorceror. The Wizard gets 90% of meta's free anyways, and can use APs to further reduce them. So in theory they should be far cheaper for the Wizard than for the Sorc, and the Wizard may have meta's working most if not all of the time too (they just have to be a bit more careful / smart about using them so as not to drain their SP pool too quickly).

Otherwise, as mentioned, the rest of the pros/cons were fairly accurate.

[Angelus_dead]

I'm referring to the fact that Turbine is making sorcs = damage dealers and wizards = DC/CC casters.

As already explained, that is untrue.

Sorcs are better at DC spells than Wizards, because they have superior spellpoints, casting times, and cooldowns. The +2 intelligence from the Wizard capstone isn't enough to catch them up: Yeah, the wizard can have over 5% more success rate, but the sorc can simply cast the spell twice.

[Angelus_dead]

So in theory they should be far cheaper for the Wizard than for the Sorc

Not at all.

Metamagics are only cheaper for a Wizard in terms of feat slots; once you've learned the feats, they're not any better off in terms of having them on or off. Both get the same enhancements to reduce costs; just the sorc with more mana can better afford a little extra expenditure.

[Aspenor]

I'd argue that wizards are better off than sorcs as you get closer to the current end game. Especially with DC based spells being stronger on wizards, and damage spells (that sorcs are pigeonholed into) being somewhat irrelevant at end game.

False. Both caster classes have been relegated to buff bots and CC. The best CC available is the type that has no save like fogs, level drain, and Irresistable dance, or targetted save spells which are aimed to take advantage of the lowest saves on the target. Wizards only excel at one of these, which is also the least important.

[Talon_Moonshadow]

IMO Sorcs are indeed more powerful than Wizards.

But Wizards are more versitile and can be more fun to people who appreciate that.
Plus the Wiz capstone gives tham the potential for a higher save DC on their spells.
Which in the new content is very, very important IMO.

Also because of the WF cha penalty, IMO a WF makes a better W1zard than a Sorc.
And the extra spell slots give them more room for repair spells.

Another issure is that the extra spell slots give wixards more buffs. Which in my experiance makes a wizard less squishy.
My 190(approx)HP Wizard watches 300+ HP sorcs die around me all the time.
Part of it is not being a nuker/drawing as much agro etc. Part of it is playstyle and having the right equipment to keep me alive.
But part of it is also having more buffs active.

More buffs, more utility spells, a spell feat for every occasion, the ability to swao spells quickly for every occasion. Potentially higher spell DC.
And those extra feats leave room for using feats for another purpose if desired.
Higher Int give more skill points.
My Wizard is also stealthy enough to pin "kick me" signs on Orthon's butts.

[Thrudh]

From what I can tell, Sorcs get faster casting, more spell points, and Double spell points from items
Wizards get more spells(but how many of them are all that useful), can learn spells from scrolls, faster spell progression, the ability to swap spells on rest, and more skill points due to INT.

Both can UMD a rez, though its easier for sorcs because CHA is their main stat.
Both can UMD healing

Tossing up both, I see a benefit for sorcs...someone please tell me why people say wizards are better?

I dont mean this in any bad way, Im just a caster-noob.

Wizards also get five extra feats... which is pretty huge...

Most people don't think wizards are better... I agree with the poster that says 35% of people think sorcs are better, and 65% of people think they're balanced...

I fall in the balanced category.. Both have their strengths..

I personally enjoy my wizard more, because I like being able to pull out the exact right spell for a situation... There are very few places where Ooze Puppet is useful... Yet I'll have it when doing those quests, and most sorcs won't (and rightly so - it would be a waste of a slot in 98% of the quests they do).

If debuffing is called for, I can swap in 4 or 5 debuffing spells... It's fun...

I like having the extra feats... I have enlarge, which I rarely use, but when I do (beholders) it makes a huge difference...

In most quests though, it doesn't matter which you bring along... Both will be a big boost to a party... Sorcs have a lot more spell points though, and in a quest with scarce shrines, they'll get a definite advantage from that...

I definitely recommend new players should start with wizard though (maybe that's where you heard that wizards are better)... Wizards let you try ALL the spells and see which ones work where... Then when you roll up a sorc, you know exactly what spells you want...

[Vienemen]

I keep seeing this wizard master of the DCs BS...capstone is +2 stacking int which would put only a drow wiz over a drow sorc by one DC these days right? So drow sorc and human wiz=same DC. As is with every other race. Correct me if I am wrong, I have been gone a while.

Sorc Positives:

Faster Spell Casting -Big perk IMO
More Spell Points(This one has a few sub bonuses that comes with it) -Big perk IMO
1. Ability to Buff the entire party, and still have 85% of their mana.
2. Can leave 1-2 meta magic feats on perma
Can achieve high UMD easily
Very good at Nuking (Someone already pointed out other than more and faster this isnt true)

Sorc Negatives:

Very few CHA runes -not sure why this is a big deal at all?
Can only swap 1 spell every 3 days -I cant believe this isnt swap one per patch per lvl...way too frequent
Slower spell progression -doesnt matter 18+
No bonus feats -this one is a tough draw back
Takes a -2 max cha hit when rolling WF(IMO WF = Best caster)
Not so great at Nuking

Wizard Positives

No Penalty for being WF -in my mind this is mostly flavor details
There are many INT runes in the game -not big perk from my experience
Ability to swap spells -highly overrated, covered by others here already. Once you know the spells you know which are bread and butter and which are not
Bonus feats at 1, 5, 10, 15, 20(These feats can only be used for Meta Magic feats)-Big perk IMO
Faster Spell progression, and can learn more spells for most spell levels. -18+ doesnt matter
Can splash 1 lvl of rogue, and be a trap monkey with relative ease. -good point but at the loss of the capstone enhancement I belive.
Very good at CC, and buffing -as good as the next arcane I suppose

Wizard Negatives

Less SP -ouch
Can't keep meta magics on at all times -ya pain in the ass, but can live without
Slower casting speed -this is another tough one
Not very good a nuking

I agree that for most powergamers wiz is the spring board into a successful sorcerer for most people.

So why do I play a wiz, cause I like them more in PnP and had a delusion we would double and triple the number of spells available that are worth while to use. Well 20 is within reach now and they kept the number of spells on a decreasing scale per spell level. I mean we dont even have 2 from each type in 9th (CC, Nuke, Utility, and Buffs). I continue to play my wiz cause I am rocking my first char no reroll 28 pt build and playing with the big boys and holding my own. Wiz are for those who love to succeed despite the requirement to be a resource management nazi.