Mage vs. Sorcerer

ghettohoodie

I want to know what is better to make for BG2EE. What is a better choice of a spellcaster? A mage or a sorcerer? Please give answers and advice.

Zanian

That's a much more difficult question than you'd think. A sorcerer will have more spells per day, but of a lesser variety (at cap, they can cast 6 spells per spell-lvl, without the ability of trading in said spells for different ones).
At exp-cap, a specialist mage or wild mage (they get 1 more slot per spell-lvl) will only have one less lvl 9 spell slot than the sorcerer, but that won't happen till near the end, if at all.

If you pick your spells carefully, a sorcerer is arguably stronger than the specialist mage throughout the game, but I personally prefer the mage, because of the variety. (Plus I'm a spell-hoarder). And if you make a mistake when learning a new spell, it's not the end of the world as it is with the sorcerer.

[Deleted User]

Ask yourself how you usually go about spell preparation when you've played a mage in the past. If you're like me and tend to memorize multiple instances of a few spells, then there's a good chance you'll be better off as a Sorcerer. There's a degree of utility casting that's useful beyond what a Sorcerer can pick, though, which means a Sorcerer tends to want another Mage or a Bard in the group to fill those gaps. Which means that if your main character is going to be the only arcane spellcaster, you'll probably be better off as a (specialist) Mage.

ghettohoodie

@Kaigen @Zanian Hey, thanks guys. Now if i choose a sorcerer what spells should be a given/have to choose? And completely separate from the sorcerer. Im going to dual class a fighter into a mage, ehat level should i dual at? And should i be normal fighter or a special fighter? And what is a better armor; Elven chain or that robe or veera (something like that?)

ghettohoodie

What, not "ehat"

[Deleted User]

@ghettohoodie Check out this thread for some discussion of good sorcerer spell picks. Generally speaking there are 2 or 3 "must haves" at each spell level and then the rest is chosen to taste, so you have some wiggle room in making your picks.

For the dual class Fighter->Mage, the usual level to dual class is 9; it gets you full benefit of fighter hit points, good THAC0, and a good proficiency setup. Some people go to level 13 for the extra 1/2 attack, but it will take you a while to earn back your levels after dual-classing with that route. Kensai is a popular choice for the Fighter kit, as Kensai->Mages are still allowed to wear robes and mage spells can render your AC irrelevant in any case, while Kensai gets you extra hit and damage. As such, they usually go with robes; Elven chain is nice (and if you want to use it, Berserker makes a good kit choice as well), but after a certain point your AC isn't important compared to the protective spells you can use and your opponents' THAC0.

ghettohoodie

@Kaigen so you recommend a kensai mage? Ignore the elven chain?

[Deleted User]

It's what I usually do. Downside is there's only one Robe of Vecna, so your Sorcerer and Kensage will have to fight over it, but I would argue that you're better off with a Kensage in a Robe of the Archmagi than a different kit in elven chain.

meagloth

Sorcerer. There're just better. If your going to do the kensai->Mage thingamajig mentioned above, then the sorcerer would have to have the robes of Venca, because he would be the stronger caster.

ryuken87

- Sorcerer is generally better all round, especially if you are considering just BG2 and not the whole saga. Were you playing the whole saga many of your BG1 picks (e.g. Sleep) would become a pit poo in BG2.

- Generally speaking there aren't more than four or five *great* choices for each spell level so the sorcerer doesn't lose anything and if there are any gaps then they can be filled with a backup caster or occasionally items (Wands, Book of Infinite Spells, etc.) or a cleric (Remove / Resist Fear, True Sight / Seeing, Finger of Death, etc.)

- I like having the option of casting 6 of whatever I like rather than miromanageing my spell book.

- Sorcerers can get Spell Trigger and Wish in SoA. Spell Trigger is only a random scroll drop (so not guaranteed) and there isn't a Wish scroll.

- Wild Mages can be very powerful at high level with Nahal's and they get 6 castings per day without losing a school. They are however unpredictable. There is a case for a Conjurer since the only spell of any importance it loses is True Sight and then the gap can be filled as mentioned above. Mages also have a slight advantage in spell progression meaning they will get to the next spell level an experience level earlier (in BG1 this means no level 5 spells for sorcerers under the exp cap).

[Deleted User]

meagloth said:

Sorcerer. There're just better. If your going to do the kensai->Mage thingamajig mentioned above, then the sorcerer would have to have the robes of Venca, because he would be the stronger caster.

I would actually argue that the Kensai->Mage is the better candidate for the Robe of Vecna, due to casting in melee and needing to be able to fire off spells (especially defensive spells) without interruption. Unless the Sorcerer is leveraging Improved Alacrity, there isn't all that much need for super fast casting.

ryuken87

Thing is your most used defensive spells have a casting time of 1 anyway meaning they are very unlikely to be interupted. If you want to reduce them to 0 then give the K/M the AoP and give Vecna to the sorcerer, otherwise I think you are kind of wasting the massive casting reduction it bestows.

[Deleted User]

ryuken87 said:

Thing is your most used defensive spells have a casting time of 1 anyway meaning they are very unlikely to be interupted. If you want to reduce them to 0 then give the K/M the AoP and give Vecna to the sorcerer, otherwise I think you are kind of wasting the massive casting reduction it bestows.

That's a good point, I guess I was thinking more along the lines of the offensive/buff spells you might want the K/M to be able to toss out in the midst of combat, like Sunfire, (Improved) Haste, etc. I depends on whether your K/M is being run as a Fighter with really good magical defenses or if they are actually going to be spellcasting in combat to do something besides cover their butts.

Mrpenfold666

there is also the fact that a sorcerer is stuck with the few spells they choose while a mage can use scrolls and learn all the spells in the school, this allows him to change from quest to quest. meaning if a certain set of spells dont work then he can change to a set that does, not so with a sorcerer so.... playthrough as a mage learn what spells work with what then go through as a sorc for your main. i prefere mage for me and sorcerers for someone else if i were to have more than one mage in my party

OperativeNL

If you don't know the answer to this question yourself, you problably don't really know the differences between the classes, which kind of implies that you don't have a lot of "mage-experience" in Baldur's Gate. Because playing a sorcerer requires you to know beforehand which spells you want to choose, (because you can't switch them out once chosen, and you can't have them all) I would recommend you play a mage. The general playstyle will be roughly the same and you can literally cast all the spells (with a plain mage or with a wild mage), try them out, experiment with different combinations.

then maybe later once you find out which spells you like, you can play a sorcerer, and pick those spells.

Really, it's kind of useless to play a sorcerer and just pick the list of suggested spells from someone else without having a clue yourself. It's very restrictive, and not fun. Trust me I've tried it myself :P

CrevsDaak

Multi classing mages in BG1 is boss, but you'll get those pesky lvl9 spells in ToB (at chapter 9 IF YOU ARE LUCKY ENOUGH!!), but a Sorcerer solo run is a lot more easier, since at lvl 3 they can cast 5 lvl1 spells, if you add Evenmemory... You have 10 lvl1 spells at lvl3.

Blackhawk

The short answer:

Sorcerer if you don't know what you're doing.
Mage if you know what you're doing.

The long answer:

The sorcerer class is a very forgiving one, allowing a very high amount of spells per day, not to mention there's no need to prepare spells or plan ahead. This results in a caster which literally requires about five percent of your brain power, or however much it takes to click on fireball and then the enemy. In the long run however, their ultimate potential is neutered, as you can only take a few spells per level. This means you have to customize each sorcerer to, at best, do one or two things well. They just don't have a wide enough variety of spells to reach any kind of synergy for anything more.

Mages on the other hand are extremely difficult. They are undeniably weaker in lower levels, they require scrolls which are not always available, and the amount of spell slots they have are incredibly restricted. This means you are forced to not only make each and every spell count, but to anticipate with some degree of accuracy which spell you'll probably need.

Now for the good news.

You are the strongest high level character in the game.

A mage with 19-20 Intelligence (raised via tomes/Lum the Mad's machine) can learn and cast every arcane spell in the entire game. With casting time reduction items (amulet of power/robe of vecna) you can make most of your spells instant-cast, and with the spell Alacrity (level 9) can literally go full automatic with every spell in your repertoire without waiting. Time Stop, cast your combos, wait for it to run out and watch your victory unfold in an Armageddon of destruction.

You have the versatility to utterly destroy enemy spellcasters, provided you know which spells to cast in order to counter all those annoying protections. You can nuke, banish, dispel, paralyze, strip resistances, level drain, summon your own private army, and then become invisible while laughing a wicked laugh. You have the freedom to invent new combinations, as many as your devious mind can come up with, and try them out on your unfortunate foes.

A level 40 mage VS a level 40 sorcerer would be so laughably one sided, you might wonder why anyone would pick the latter class at all. The sorcerer would not have the spells he'd need to bring down the mage's protections, or even begin to be able to defend himself from the twelve different types of hurt the mage would be laying on him.

Would he have more spells to cast than the mage? Yes. Fat load of good that does him when he's dead in fifteen seconds.

Nonnahswriter

Blackhawk said:

The short answer:

Sorcerer if you don't know what you're doing.
Mage if you know what you're doing.

Um.

No.

It's because a sorcerer has such a limited spell pool that you want to pick him if you know what you're doing. Sorcerer spell picks can be very unforgiving if you don't know what the spells do or what to prepare for in later battles. There are tons of duplicate spells--Reflected Image and Mirror Image come to mind--and plenty of spells that do not grow stronger with you as you level up. I cannot tell you how many times I've wasted spell slots due to ignorance. ("Aw, Mirror Image!? I knew I shouldn't have picked Reflected Image at first level." "Improved Mantle!? But I don't have the spell disable for that one!!" "What. Do you MEAN. Fireball has a DAMAGE CAP!?")

Pure mages, on the other hand, get every spell in the game, so long as you can find and scribe it. This allows you a TON of possibilities to play around with. You can find out what spells do what, which ones work in which situations, and ultimately, teaches you best how magic works. Yes, you have to prepare them beforehand, but it's really not such a big deal. Especially with magic items like Metaspell of Influence and Ring of Wizardry that increase the amount of spell slots you have (i.e.: more room to experiment).

And let's face it, after a certain point in the game, you'll have so much money that you can buy whatever scrolls you're missing, along with every other scroll in the game.

That's right.

All of them.

meagloth

Blackhawk said:

The short answer:

Sorcerer if you don't know what you're doing.
Mage if you know what you're doing.

The long answer:

The sorcerer class is a very forgiving one, allowing a very high amount of spells per day, not to mention there's no need to prepare spells or plan ahead. This results in a caster which literally requires about five percent of your brain power, or however much it takes to click on fireball and then the enemy. In the long run however, their ultimate potential is neutered, as you can only take a few spells per level. This means you have to customize each sorcerer to, at best, do one or two things well. They just don't have a wide enough variety of spells to reach any kind of synergy for anything more.

Mages on the other hand are extremely difficult. They are undeniably weaker in lower levels, they require scrolls which are not always available, and the amount of spell slots they have are incredibly restricted. This means you are forced to not only make each and every spell count, but to anticipate with some degree of accuracy which spell you'll probably need.

Now for the good news.

You are the strongest high level character in the game.

A mage with 19-20 Intelligence (raised via tomes/Lum the Mad's machine) can learn and cast every arcane spell in the entire game. With casting time reduction items (amulet of power/robe of vecna) you can make most of your spells instant-cast, and with the spell Alacrity (level 9) can literally go full automatic with every spell in your repertoire without waiting. Time Stop, cast your combos, wait for it to run out and watch your victory unfold in an Armageddon of destruction.

You have the versatility to utterly destroy enemy spellcasters, provided you know which spells to cast in order to counter all those annoying protections. You can nuke, banish, dispel, paralyze, strip resistances, level drain, summon your own private army, and then become invisible while laughing a wicked laugh. You have the freedom to invent new combinations, as many as your devious mind can come up with, and try them out on your unfortunate foes.

A level 40 mage VS a level 40 sorcerer would be so laughably one sided, you might wonder why anyone would pick the latter class at all. The sorcerer would not have the spells he'd need to bring down the mage's protections, or even begin to be able to defend himself from the twelve different types of hurt the mage would be laying on him.

Would he have more spells to cast than the mage? Yes. Fat load of good that does him when he's dead in fifteen seconds.

Lol

Archaos

@Blackhawk You might be confusing the Sorcerer with the Cleric or Druid.
It's quite the other way around, actually. If you don't know what you're doing, you pick Mage, unspecialized.

It gives you versatility and you can experiment and see what spells work and suits you and what doesn't.
Is that spell useless? Change your spell selection and rest.

You go Sorcerer after you have mastered the arcane spells.
You need to know exactly what to pick, because if you pick a crappy spell, you're screwed and it's dead weight until the end.

Wild Mage is the compromise. When you want both versatility, the extra slot and the challenge of messing with Wild Magic that can screw you up as well as save you.

And anything the Mage can do, the Sorcerer can do better:

"Congratulations, Mage, you have dispelled all my protections" *Casts Time Stop again and recasts all protections*
...Now, where were we? What, you had only one copy of each dispelling spell? That's too bad."

The Sorcerer is the spell spammer. He can keep casting Time Stop every round until everything is dead and barely had time to breathe.

Plus he can have minimum everything and still kick ass.

Blackhawk

Sorcerers are for players who don't understand and/or appreciate how the more complex spells interact with each other or work. I did anticipate to piss off a lot of fan-boys who cling to their irrelevant and baseless bias, and that's fine.

If you have fun playing a sorcerer, play a sorcerer.

Mages are superior. Sorry.

jacobtan

If the true PnP mage spell progression is restored in BG2, mages will crush sorcerers. At L30, mages get memorization 7/7/7/7/7/7/7/6/6, before the specialist mage bonus. The current progression is a pitiful 5/5/5/5/5/5/5/5/4 max - mages have been badly shortchanged, possibly to make the sorcerer more appealing since sorcerers cannot dual or multi-class.

With the PnP spell progression, anything the sorcerer can do, the mage can do better. It doesn't matter that the sorcerer has flexibility in casting any spell from his repertoire, because mages can simply carry the same spells (Improved Alacrity, Time Stop, Wish) that sorcerers use to spam damage in combat.

Gotural

@jacobtan‌ But Sorcerers have more spells than mages for every level, it's the design of the class itself.

In Baldur's Gate, they have a spell progression of 6 spells per level because the mage has a progression of 5 spells per level. If you restored the mage PnP progression of 7/7/7/7/7/7/7/6/6, then you must increase the Sorcerer progression to at least 8/8/8/8/8/8/8/7/7.

Remember the Sorcerer isn't a 2E class, it's a 3E one. The number of spells of a Sorcerer is always superior to the number of spells of a Mage, it's a class feature. In 3E, Mages have a spell progression of 4 spells per level while the Sorcerer is at 6 spells per level.

@Blackhawk‌ I can't understand you. A Sorcerer would eat alive a mage of the same level.

When you play a mage, you can experiment with the magic system, you have room for errors because nothing is set in stone, you can scribe every scrolls of the game. A Sorcerer doesn't have this luxury, but fortunately, there is only between 4 and 6 powerful spells at each level.
Which means a good Sorcerer has access to every good spells of the game when he wants, because he doesn't have to prepare them beforehand.

You really think a Sorcerer, able to adapt to cast 6 times per day Shadow Door or Spell Immunity or Spell Shield for level 5 spells or able to cast 8 times per day Khelben Warding Whip or Spell Turning for level 7 spells could lose to a mere Mage who needs to make a choice before the fight ?

If you know every spells tactics of the game, a Sorcerer can cast 5 spells per round while Time Stopping for an unlimited amount of time with an infinite amount of spells.

The only thing that can come close is a Wild Mage, because NRD doesn't count on the one spell per round limit and thus, acts like a mini Improved Alacrity, allowing you to cast multiple spells per round easely and to duplicate effects of high level spells. It's better on some aspects (Higher total number of high level spells) but worse on some others (isn't as flexible overall)

jacobtan

@Gotural‌

Your explanation is precisely why I detest mixing and matching rule sets. Either it's 2E, or it's 3E. No mix-and-match. It's plainly absurd for PCs, NPCs and monsters to have 2E stats, but to have a 3E class transposed onto 2E and make mages the pansies that they are in BG2.

If BG2EE is a modder's wet dream come true, modders have BG2 to thank - cherry-picking rules from two rules sets laid the groundwork for the hotchpotch situation of BG today where modded versions are unique and are fundamentally different games from one another.

Gotural

I don't know why Mages, but also Bards, Clerics and Druids, got a nerfed spell progression in BG2/ToB compared to PnP but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have anything to do with the Sorcerer's introduction, I could be wrong though maybe they had the legal rights to do a Sorcerer class but only if they respected the 6 spell per level progression of the class in 3E, thus they had to downgrade the others classes to balance it.

It's possible honestly, but I don't think it's the reason.

Anyway, Mages, even if inferior to Sorcerers and nerfed compared to PnP, can still dualclass / multiclass and wield the power of the arcane magic, making them half-gods compared to Fighters, Thieves, Clerics, etc.

jacobtan

Gotural said:

I don't know why Mages, but also Bards, Clerics and Druids, got a nerfed spell progression in BG2/ToB compared to PnP but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have anything to do with the Sorcerer's introduction, I could be wrong though maybe they had the legal rights to do a Sorcerer class but only if they respected the 6 spell per level progression of the class in 3E, thus they had to downgrade the others classes to balance it.

It's possible honestly, but I don't think it's the reason.

Anyway, Mages, even if inferior to Sorcerers and nerfed compared to PnP, can still dualclass / multiclass and wield the power of the arcane magic, making them half-gods compared to Fighters, Thieves, Clerics, etc.

The original designers of BG2 wrecked 2E rules although there wasn't a need to - on hindsight, it looks like something they just wanted to put in as a "new feature". It didn't really matter how much they wrecked. It set a precedence for further customizations and corrections such as the restoration of bard PnP spell progression. The overall effect of all the rules-modding over the years just turned BG into a "vaguely DnD" game where players choose whatever rules they fancy - IRL, it would probably be called anarchy.

As for your comment about "respecting the 6-spell per level progression of sorcerers", you should be aware that modifying a small set of rules can have a major impact on the entire gameplay. Nerfing 2 spells per level for mages is critical, because with their full PnP progression they will be nearly as good as sorcerers. The real power of sorcerers is the Timestop-Alacrity-Wish infinite spell loop, easily used and abused. Without this infinite spell loop, sorcerers pretty much suck. More slots will allow mages to abuse this loop too.

DnD was not balanced to begin with, but I advocate a "don't aggravate things" approach - leave things as they are unless you are using a new rules set altogether. I'd have preferred the original BG2 to be like BG1 or IWD2, instead of the Frankenstein of rules that they cobbled together.

As an aside, I think the sorcerer is a ridiculous class from a RP perspective. Warriors need to practice their melee skills. Priests need to commune with their deities and perform priestly duties. Thieves need to practice their thievery skills. Bards need to practice their musical skills. Mages need to study arcane texts and perform extensive research. What do sorcerers do, since their spell acquisition is intuitive? Chant moo backwards and try to commune with themselves to gain insight? Duh.

Archaos

Blackhawk said:

This results in a caster which literally requires about five percent of your brain power, or however much it takes to click on fireball and then the enemy.

Sorcerers are for players who don't understand and/or appreciate how the more complex spells interact with each other or work. I did anticipate to piss off a lot of fan-boys who cling to their irrelevant and baseless bias, and that's fine.

You assume that the only way to play a Sorcerer is to use Fireball all the time again and again and again and never use any other spell.
No. Like I said, if a Mage can pick the complex spells, so can a Sorcerer.

If a Mage can dispel, use complex spell tactics, use a bunch of protections etc, so can a Sorcerer and can do it again and again.

They pick from the exact same freaking spell list. It's not fanboyism, it's a fact. If a Mage can use a tactic, so can a Sorcerer.

The Mage also has a huge advantage over the Sorcerer that doesn't have to do with spells.
Dual/Multiclassing. Fighter/Mages, Thief/Mages, Cleric/Mages. Kensai/Mages etc etc.

meagloth

Gotural said:

I don't know why Mages, but also Bards, Clerics and Druids, got a nerfed spell progression in BG2/ToB compared to PnP but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have anything to do with the Sorcerer's introduction, I could be wrong though maybe they had the legal rights to do a Sorcerer class but only if they respected the 6 spell per level progression of the class in 3E, thus they had to downgrade the others classes to balance it.

It's possible honestly, but I don't think it's the reason.

Anyway, Mages, even if inferior to Sorcerers and nerfed compared to PnP, can still dualclass / multiclass and wield the power of the arcane magic, making them half-gods compared to Fighters, Thieves, Clerics, etc.

Well, any arcane caster is hella OP anyway, so I can see why they'd try to balance it. Regardless, it make sense that sorcerers are more powerful than mages because they're supposed to be an ultra-rare superman Mage dude that can cast whatever he feels like without a spellbook. And I mean ultra-rare. Isn't charname the only sorcerer in bg2, and the only sorcerer in vanillia bg1(if he could have been one then)? Compare that to wild mages, who are supposed to be really rare.

jacobtan

meagloth said:

Well, any arcane caster is hella OP anyway, so I can see why they'd try to balance it. Regardless, it make sense that sorcerers are more powerful than mages because they're supposed to be an ultra-rare superman Mage dude that can cast whatever he feels like without a spellbook. And I mean ultra-rare. Isn't charname the only sorcerer in bg2, and the only sorcerer in vanillia bg1(if he could have been one then)? Compare that to wild mages, who are supposed to be really rare.

Sorry, it does not make sense.

Sorcerers have innate spellcasting abilities, but having innate spellcasting abilities does not mean that sorcerers should have so many spell slots, or the ability to choose what spells they want. Even PnP dragons do not have so many spell slots - a great wyrm gold dragon only has spell progression 2/2/2/2/2/2/2/2. The description for gold dragons actually states that gold dragons often take up formal magical training despite their innate magic - presumably, if they have been trained as mages, they will cast spells as mages, with the aforementioned innate spells as extra.

It would have been more realistic for sorcerers to be a sub-class superimposed on the basic character classes - innate spellcasting ability should be available to characters of any class since it is innate and does not require prior magical training, and the number of slots should be highly limited as with dragons. In practice, it would be much like the Bhaalpowers that the protagonist acquires in BG1. A limited number of castings of spells per day, but which does not affect the function of his basic class.

meagloth

jacobtan said:

meagloth said:

Well, any arcane caster is hella OP anyway, so I can see why they'd try to balance it. Regardless, it make sense that sorcerers are more powerful than mages because they're supposed to be an ultra-rare superman Mage dude that can cast whatever he feels like without a spellbook. And I mean ultra-rare. Isn't charname the only sorcerer in bg2, and the only sorcerer in vanillia bg1(if he could have been one then)? Compare that to wild mages, who are supposed to be really rare.

Sorry, it does not make sense.

Sorcerers have innate spellcasting abilities, but having innate spellcasting abilities does not mean that sorcerers should have so many spell slots, or the ability to choose what spells they want. Even PnP dragons do not have so many spell slots - a great wyrm gold dragon only has spell progression 2/2/2/2/2/2/2/2. The description for gold dragons actually states that gold dragons often take up formal magical training despite their innate magic - presumably, if they have been trained as mages, they will cast spells as mages, with the aforementioned innate spells as extra.

It would have been more realistic for sorcerers to be a sub-class superimposed on the basic character classes - innate spellcasting ability should be available to characters of any class since it is innate and does not require prior magical training, and the number of slots should be highly limited as with dragons. In practice, it would be much like the Bhaalpowers that the protagonist acquires in BG1. A limited number of castings of spells per day, but which does not affect the function of his basic class.

Mm. I like my way better.

Gotural

jacobtan said:

As for your comment about "respecting the 6-spell per level progression of sorcerers", you should be aware that modifying a small set of rules can have a major impact on the entire gameplay. Nerfing 2 spells per level for mages is critical, because with their full PnP progression they will be nearly as good as sorcerers. The real power of sorcerers is the Timestop-Alacrity-Wish infinite spell loop, easily used and abused. Without this infinite spell loop, sorcerers pretty much suck. More slots will allow mages to abuse this loop too.

As an aside, I think the sorcerer is a ridiculous class from a RP perspective. Warriors need to practice their melee skills. Priests need to commune with their deities and perform priestly duties. Thieves need to practice their thievery skills. Bards need to practice their musical skills. Mages need to study arcane texts and perform extensive research. What do sorcerers do, since their spell acquisition is intuitive? Chant moo backwards and try to commune with themselves to gain insight? Duh.

I don't write the lore of D&D, but I don't think Mages make more sence than Sorcerers. Why could you "learn" magic ? Okay you could learn some incantations, but why would it produce anything ? In real life, if I learn some kind of incantation and speak it, it won't produce anything. So why a mage should be able to cast by practicing ? I find the method of a Sorcerer more intuitive and logical, but that's just me. They often have the blood of Dragons or Fiends in their veins which give them innate magical abilities.

Considering the balance issue, I really think the Wish strategy is completely overrated and sucks. It isn't the real power of Sorcerer, Timestop + Alacrity isn't either. You can cast 4-5 spells per round without Improved Alacrity as a Sorcerer, and Wish only has about 10-15% chance of giving you the rest option with 18 Wisdom which is terribly bad (About 20-25% chance with 25 Wisdom).
Sorcerers are awesomely stronger than Mages because of their flexibility, If I want to regain my spells mid fight, I know some other, 100% reliable way, to do so without Wish, and I could do so with only 3-4 spell per level.