Battle soc vs Wiz. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Battle soc vs Wiz. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Valoy_Muniz
07-22-05, 11:40 AM I was thinking about this when I was reading the other thread. What is better a battle soc (from ua) or a wiz? For these that do not know a battle soc cast and knows one less spell per spell level (min of 1) but get cleric attack bounes and hp and can cast and profisent in light armor.

I personaly think it is balanced but I want to know what you think.
Lord Schpungus
07-22-05, 01:41 PM It really depends on your style of casting. I myself prefer the battle sorcerer to any other spellcasting class, because spontaneous casting is a necesity for me. Others prefer the absolute dominance of the wizard, who can have all the spells he can scribe ready to memorize in just fifteen minutes.
Board_Rider
07-22-05, 02:13 PM I would say Wizard just because of Utility Spells. Granted, the Battle Sorcerer would have the upper hand in melee but what Wizard would go there?
TheDarkestOfAngels
07-22-05, 02:21 PM I was thinking about this when I was reading the other thread. What is better a battle soc (from ua) or a wiz? For these that do not know a battle soc cast and knows one less spell per spell level (min of 1) but get cleric attack bounes and hp and can cast and profisent in light armor.

I personaly think it is balanced but I want to know what you think.

Uh, considering that the battle sorcerer is a full-blown gish class with up to ninth level spells, I don't think that they're quite that comparable. The ten fewer spells known really is a hard hit on the battle sorcerer's effectiveness as a primary spellcaster. (Meaning that the most effective way to use a battle sorcerer is to build up a lot of synergy between the melee & magic abilities as opposed to focus on one or the other because it is not as effective at either, singly.)
Though I suppose anything's possible.
Kurama Youko
07-22-05, 02:22 PM Neither because each has its own function and serves its own purpose.

A Battle Sorcerer is a Arcane Spellcaster with fighting prowess to back up his Spellcasting when it proves ineffective.

A Wizard is a Arcane Spellcaster who prefers finding the best spell for the task at hand as well as playing the guessing game as to what spells he might need for a day.

Neither is superior to the other because each can do things the other cannot or one is better at doing something than the other.

Infact the two are so different in contrast that they wouldnt even begin to challenge either other because both sides know they value two different things.

(I thought I'd just chime in again with a tid bit of something, recently well not really recently but if your DM allows Dragon Magazine at the table then the battle sorcerer doesnt lose as much anymore because of issues 311 and 325's Bloodline feats which provide spontaneous arcane spellcasters with 9 additional spells based on possible bloodlines.)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Valoy_Muniz 07-22-05, 11:40 AM	I was thinking about this when I was reading the other thread. What is better a battle soc (from ua) or a wiz? For these that do not know a battle soc cast and knows one less spell per spell level (min of 1) but get cleric attack bounes and hp and can cast and profisent in light armor. I personaly think it is balanced but I want to know what you think.
Lord Schpungus 07-22-05, 01:41 PM	It really depends on your style of casting. I myself prefer the battle sorcerer to any other spellcasting class, because spontaneous casting is a necesity for me. Others prefer the absolute dominance of the wizard, who can have all the spells he can scribe ready to memorize in just fifteen minutes.
Board_Rider 07-22-05, 02:13 PM	I would say Wizard just because of Utility Spells. Granted, the Battle Sorcerer would have the upper hand in melee but what Wizard would go there?
TheDarkestOfAngels 07-22-05, 02:21 PM	I was thinking about this when I was reading the other thread. What is better a battle soc (from ua) or a wiz? For these that do not know a battle soc cast and knows one less spell per spell level (min of 1) but get cleric attack bounes and hp and can cast and profisent in light armor. I personaly think it is balanced but I want to know what you think. Uh, considering that the battle sorcerer is a full-blown gish class with up to ninth level spells, I don't think that they're quite that comparable. The ten fewer spells known really is a hard hit on the battle sorcerer's effectiveness as a primary spellcaster. (Meaning that the most effective way to use a battle sorcerer is to build up a lot of synergy between the melee & magic abilities as opposed to focus on one or the other because it is not as effective at either, singly.) Though I suppose anything's possible.
Kurama Youko 07-22-05, 02:22 PM	Neither because each has its own function and serves its own purpose. A Battle Sorcerer is a Arcane Spellcaster with fighting prowess to back up his Spellcasting when it proves ineffective. A Wizard is a Arcane Spellcaster who prefers finding the best spell for the task at hand as well as playing the guessing game as to what spells he might need for a day. Neither is superior to the other because each can do things the other cannot or one is better at doing something than the other. Infact the two are so different in contrast that they wouldnt even begin to challenge either other because both sides know they value two different things. (I thought I'd just chime in again with a tid bit of something, recently well not really recently but if your DM allows Dragon Magazine at the table then the battle sorcerer doesnt lose as much anymore because of issues 311 and 325's Bloodline feats which provide spontaneous arcane spellcasters with 9 additional spells based on possible bloodlines.)