D&D 5E Is the Evocation Wizard better at being a damage Sorcerer than a Sorcerer?

Persuasively stated, I'm a convert!

Tony Vargas said:
Hey, the sorcerer may not be the greatest class design ever, but it's not 'crap.'

Still a full caster, still second-fiddle to the Wizard, but still a full caster.

Anyway, rather than trying to amp up the sorcerer, how 'bout taking Spontaneous Casting away from the Wizard?

Poster 1: I've been thinking, X?
Posters 2-6: No, not X.
Sorc Bashers: Given X, sorcerer sucks.
[Thread descends into a squabbling mess in which the sorc bashers continue to beg the question, in the technical sense.]

It happens over and over, and it gets older and older. Ovinomancer is off on his tangent about the sorcerer class being poorly realized, and Tony Vargas is grinding his axe about taking spontaneous casting away from wizards, and neither one does anything to illuminate ClaytonCross's original comparison and the questions he posed. I've seen it in I-don't-know-how-many threads by now, so, yeah, this crap is getting old.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Tony Vargas

Legend
I've seen it in I-don't-know-how-many threads by now, so, yeah, this crap is getting old.
5e leaves the DM a lot of latitude, not just in rulings & choosing modules, but in changing rules whenever he sees a problem. If DMs discussing such issues isn't your cup of tea, don't drink it.


And, yeah, taking spontaneous casting away from the prepped neo-Vancian casters, and putting Sorcerers (only? any other classes deserve it?) on the Spell Point option would better-evoke all 4 class's classic feel, and probably ameliorate the issue the OP sees.
 

Spell points don't seem like a wash, to me, because of the greater flexibility.

In fact, just giving the Sorcerer spell points wouldn't be a bad idea...
... combine that with taking spontaneous casting away from the prep casters, might not close the gap, exactly, but might help, and seems to fit..
They don't seem like a wash to me either, but the DMG statement is interesting as a perspective on design goals and what "the math" of 5E is trying to accomplish. There is not a word about it making spellcasters stronger.

Increasing a monster's mobility, or making it immune to grappling and stunning, also does not seem like a wash to me, but officially it has no impact on CR.

Ergo, despite the superficial *appearance* of an obsession with balance, 5E really doesn't care about balance in any deep way at all. So it's not surprising if sorcerers wind up feeling a bit weak in practice.

Corollary: the game will not break if you give the sorcerer more spells known and a wider spell list. As long as it doesn't get more spell slots, it's still within design parameters for 5E.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using EN World mobile app
 

yeah, taking spontaneous casting away from the prepped neo-Vancian casters, and putting Sorcerers (only? any other classes deserve it?) on the Spell Point option would better-evoke all 4 class's classic feel, and probably ameliorate the issue the OP sees.

Only wizards and maybe warlocks "deserve" to be on a Vancian system from a fictional perspective, depending on whether you view warlocks as a type of wizard or a type of priest. Clerics don't deserve to be on any spell system at all, spontaneous or otherwise--their whole shtick is the ability to negotiate with a powerful offscreen NPC: Zeus ex machina, you might say.


Sent from my Moto G (4) using EN World mobile app
 

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
Poster 1: I've been thinking, X?
Posters 2-6: No, not X.
Sorc Bashers: Given X, sorcerer sucks.
[Thread descends into a squabbling mess in which the sorc bashers continue to beg the question, in the technical sense.]

It happens over and over, and it gets older and older. Ovinomancer is off on his tangent about the sorcerer class being poorly realized, and Tony Vargas is grinding his axe about taking spontaneous casting away from wizards, and neither one does anything to illuminate ClaytonCross's original comparison and the questions he posed. I've seen it in I-don't-know-how-many threads by now, so, yeah, this crap is getting old.

And yet what did you contribute except to complain about complaints?

My criticism was directly on point as to why the wizard does outshine the sorcerer in blasting when both are trying. It's specifically because those features in the sorcerer that lead people to expect it to be the best don't actually work as the appear -- in short, the class is poorly realized for it's stated goals. Now, that said, the class does do very well if used off-axis, but this is mostly due to unanticipated interaction rather than stated design intent. The Sorc makes the absolute best buffer, and is exceptional at crowd control (even with limited spell availability). This is largely due to the interaction of twin spell and careful spell, though, and not any of the other class features. That this doesn't appear as the class design intent is why I say the class isn't well realized. Sorcerer does good stuff, but it's mostly not the stuff on the tin.
 

Tony Vargas

Legend
This is largely due to the interaction of twin spell and careful spell, though, and not any of the other class features. That this doesn't appear as the class design intent is why I say the class isn't well realized. Sorcerer does good stuff, but it's mostly not the stuff on the tin.
That's fair. In 4e, the Sorcerer was a Striker, and in post-Essentials included a 'simple caster' Elemantal blasting sub-class. It also may have had a rep in 3.x as being blasty, because it did have so many slots, so you could spam blasting spells, contributing to the race to 0 hps as well as anyone.

But, arguably, the best 3.x Sorcerer builds weren't blasting, either, but were, though not for the same reason, builds that used a wider variety of spells, including spamming buff spells, which maps a bit to the twin spell usage. So, maybe the Sorcerer is a failed blaster, but maybe it's the best take they could manage on the 3.x sorcerer, with Spontaneous casting being universal.
 
Last edited:

Just to be sure I know what you're talking about: in what way do sorcerers call themselves out as good at blasting? I don't remember any explicit claims to that effect in the PHB. Is it just because they have a narrow spell list with lots of blasting spells like Meteor Swarm/Chain Lightning/etc. on it?
They got the reputation in 3.X, and then 4E explicitly called them out as Strikers. So they got that role, and did a very solid job of being blasters. And even in 5E they get bonuses to dealing elemental damage in their Draconic and Storm archetypes, so 5E hasn't made any real effort to discourage the impression that Sorcerers are about blasting.

And shaking that impression is going to take a while.
 

ClaytonCross

Kinder reader Inflection wanted
So in answer to my question:
"So did I miss something big that makes Sorcerers more powerful DPR or are Sorcerers relegated to buffer/rpg roles using subtle spell etc? How do you use Sorcerers? (I do understand that Sorcerers DPR is not bad, just that I question there role when compared to Evocation Wizards.)"

I seems like it boils down to 3 things.

1. Evocation Wizards are not as powerful as I thought because I miss read some things. Worsened by the fact they get a lot of there power later when casting a level 5 cold of cone at max damage is over shadowed by the ability to cast level 7 Fire Storm for example.
It is illegal to Overchannel a spell over 5th level. Meteor Swarm is not eligible for Overchannel.
Just a quick correction I believe:
It is the Necrotic damage backlash that the caster takes that ignores resistance and immunities, not the damage of the overchannelled spell.
Its nice as a one-off ability, but dangerous to try to use regularly.

While a lot of damaging spells are evocation, there are enough effective spells of other schools to make the sorcerer's metamagics like careful spell still effective in comparison.

2. While Sorcerers CAN DPR they seem to be better suited for a roles of crowd control and buffing. Thought it could be (had has been here) argued that this is more of a happy accident then an intended design and as such makes it less apparent to many players. This "accidental" design vs the implied design (Which is how I took it, hints this whole discussion) can lead to players accidently taking "trap" chooses.
Careful Spell is kind of awesome when combined with crowd control spells like Web and Stinking Cloud, or Evard's Black Tentacles if you somehow manage to get it. It's worth noting that it guarantees successful saves against that spell--for as long as it lasts, not just one round. That essentially turns the spell's AoE into extremely hostile terrain for your enemies: while they are stumbling through the difficult terrain of your Web spell, getting stuck in the webs frequently and having to waste actions to break free, your melee bruisers get to freely attack every turn, even the fighters with a Dex save of -4, while your ranged sharpshooters can just hang back behind them and plug the enemy full of arrows, again without penalty.

Quicken is obviously the best and most versatile metamagic, with Twin and Careful all tying for second place in my mind. (Extended excels in one niche application: doubling the healing a Paladin/Sorcerer gets from Aura of Vitality. It's worth taking for that alone, if you think you'll ever have access to that spell.)
And elemental based subclasses, and class abilities that, at first look, seem to favor blasting (empower, quicken, careful, twin). However, the entire class functions best when not used at face value: careful works best with crowd control, twin works best with buffing, you should almost never create spell slots with sorcery points and instead burn low level slots to power metamagic on your higher slots, etc. For a class that has a narrow list and abilities that seem custom made to empower blasting, the sorcerer doesn't really deliver over the other casting classes.

Also, there's a lot of trap choices in the sorcerer class -- both in spell selection, metamagic selection, and subclass selection. Picking black as your dragonblood color, for instance, is bad. Picking subtle is very limited except in certain game styles. Knowing that you should probably skip picking up a blasting spell of your color (provided your red or white) every level and instead up-cast lower level spell and pick up some variety is another.

Can you have a successful sorcerer? Absolutely. But it's a lot easier to not have one with the class setup than to have one. You have to really grok the weirdness of the class to have a solid sorcerer. This is shown out by most people's examples of great sorcerers focusing on buffing or CC and not straight up blasting, which is what the 3.x iteration excelled at and is, at first blush, what the 5e version appears to excel at.

So don't let your "Draconic origin" control your spell selection.
Crowd control with Careful Spell:
- Sleep (reduce the number of enemies effected to make it more effective against stronger opponents and more useful at higher levels)
- Web, Stinking Cloud, Reverse Gravity, Cloudkill to lock down some bad guys so you can beat on them... Though I should point out Evocation Wizards can do this too.
Duel Buff with twinned: Jump, Enhance Ability, Enlarge/Reduce, Invisibility, Levitate, spider climb, Fly, Gaseous Form, Haste, Protection from Energy
Duel Debuff with twinned: Frostbite, True Strike, Blindness/Deafness, Enlarge/Reduce, Eyebite, True seeing
Duel Damage with twinned: Firebolt, Witchbolt, Ice Knife (maybe, ask your GM), Ray of Sickness, Phantasmal Force, Blight, Disintegrate, Finger of Death, Power Word Stun, Power Word Kill
Duel Crowd Control with twinned: Hold Person, Hold person, Dominate Person, Telekinesis, Dominate Monster

Though I am sure I missed a few.

3. Sorcerers maybe limited in spells but make better use of them through things like action manipulation (quickenned spell) and the fact that Carefull spell and empowered spell meta magic's work at spell levels higher than 5 and on a larger variety of spells.

The sorcerer may not deal as much damage using a single spell as a wizard, but he honestly doesn't need to. Quickened Metamagic is just that good.

In one session a few weeks ago, my group came under attack by a team of Derro assassins.
My position on the grid was not advantageous, so I took the disengage action to avoid provoking an attack of opportunity from three Derro moved over 10 feet and unleashed quickened Cone of Cold, hitting and killing 12 derro instead of just 5 if I had remained where I was.
If I had been a Wizard, I would have had to take 3 attacks of opportunity to pull off this same tactic.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
The Sorcerer class is poorly realized: it doesn't sufficiently meet any of it's presented design goals. You can have fun playing it, but that's not because the class it well designed.

That's the gist of it.

The Sorcerer class ...
...could have been full of cool abilities to support all kinds of "sorcerous" archetypes, but isn't...
...about the only real foundation for varied archetypes is the spells, but there is zero compensation if you choose anything but the "best" spells at each level (irrespective of what those spells are, Fireball or not)
...and the class stole metamagic

On topic, yes, even if the Sorcerer were winning the blaster war, it would still lose, since it so obviously lacks almost all the Wizard's flexibility.

It is undercooked, restrained, AND as a desperate measure to gain a modicum of uniqueness it denied metamagic to everybody else 😞

Again you can have fun with a Sorcerer, but unless you're playing a Fire Draconic one, you're pretty much doing so *despite* the class design, not thanks to it.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
 

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
That's the gist of it.

The Sorcerer class ...
...could have been full of cool abilities to support all kinds of "sorcerous" archetypes, but isn't...
...about the only real foundation for varied archetypes is the spells, but there is zero compensation if you choose anything but the "best" spells at each level (irrespective of what those spells are, Fireball or not)
...and the class stole metamagic

On topic, yes, even if the Sorcerer were winning the blaster war, it would still lose, since it so obviously lacks almost all the Wizard's flexibility.

It is undercooked, restrained, AND as a desperate measure to gain a modicum of uniqueness it denied metamagic to everybody else

Again you can have fun with a Sorcerer, but unless you're playing a Fire Draconic one, you're pretty much doing so *despite* the class design, not thanks to it.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
Wild specs, with the right DM, are pretty cool.

'Course, those italics are a bummer.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top