D&D 5E Is the major thing that's disappointing about Sorcerers is the lack of sorcery point options?

[Yunru]

I wasn't refering to Moon's personality, merely the sentiment? Statement? I know not the word.

That said, by including skin tone in a deogratory way the statement is most definitely racist, regardless of the person making its alignment? Nature? Again, I know not the word.

 

[MoonSong]

Please help? (No, really. )

Look I have very personal reasons to like what I like. There is a reason being inhuman/looking less human/looking not normal is not really escapist to me. Magic as something beautiful, constructive, personal, instinctive, easy, and not dangerous is specially appealing as a fantasy to me. All I want is a way to play that fantasy and stuff in all three "Official" sorcerer subclasses get in the way. Making a mockery of it won't make me feel good -nor welcome- or see things your way. I long ago decided I would not press the issue, and the only reason I posted in this thread was because I found receptive people who thought in similar ways. But right now it isn't healthy for me to keep going with this discussion, so please don't quote me anymore in this thread if it isn't to be really constructive.

Thanks.

 

[UnadvisedGoose445]

Please help? (No, really. )

Look I have very personal reasons to like what I like. There is a reason being inhuman/looking less human/looking not normal is not really escapist to me. Magic as something beautiful, constructive, personal, instinctive, easy, and not dangerous is specially appealing as a fantasy to me. All I want is a way to play that fantasy and stuff in all three "Official" sorcerer subclasses get in the way. Making a mockery of it won't make me feel good -nor welcome- or see things your way. I long ago decided I would not press the issue, and the only reason I posted in this thread was because I found receptive people who thought in similar ways. But right now it isn't healthy for me to keep going with this discussion, so please don't quote me anymore in this thread if it isn't to be really constructive.

Thanks.

If this line of questioning is going to be upsetting, I am genuinely and directly asking that you feel free to ignore it, but I am curious. What exactly about the Storm sorcerer feels monstrous and unappealing to you? I can understand not caring for the other two options as is, that's absolutely your prerogative. And I'm also with you in that I really wish there was another more "generic" sorcerous origin to choose from, like Cosmic or something along those lines. But what about Storm is off-putting to you?

Again, I know you asked not to quote, but I certainly don't think I'm going to be degrading and critical of your personal preferences.

 

[zicar]

I've never been a fan of the sorcerer as a separate class. To me it occupies the same design space as the warlock but the warlock does a much better job of fulfilling it.

 

[Prakriti]

I've never been a fan of the sorcerer as a separate class. To me it occupies the same design space as the warlock but the warlock does a much better job of fulfilling it.

The Sorcerer basically came into being as a non-Vancian alternative to the Wizard. In that sense, it didn't just occupy the Wizard's design-space, it trampled over it. For that reason, I never liked the Sorcerer, especially not its early incarnations in 2E. There was just something inherently Gary Stu-ish about a class that didn't have to work hard for its abilities and was charming to boot, like someone who's born with wealth, good looks, AND natural talent. There was no down-side.

Luckily, 5E gave us a balanced class, and I find myself liking the Sorcerer now. It's not just a bigger-and-better version of the Wizard. It has its own flavor, its own lore, and, yes, its own drawbacks -- just like any other class. Thank goodness for that.

 

[MoonSong]

If this line of questioning is going to be upsetting, I am genuinely and directly asking that you feel free to ignore it, but I am curious. What exactly about the Storm sorcerer feels monstrous and unappealing to you? I can understand not caring for the other two options as is, that's absolutely your prerogative. And I'm also with you in that I really wish there was another more "generic" sorcerous origin to choose from, like Cosmic or something along those lines. But what about Storm is off-putting to you?

Again, I know you asked not to quote, but I certainly don't think I'm going to be degrading and critical of your personal preferences.

Ok, you were nice enough. Controlling weather sounds fun, but basically the storm sorcerer was my to go option during 4e's run (other than hybrids), and has already gotten old for me, more so the subclass still focuses in combat and is still not fully standard, while easier to get accepted it still means a lot of effort for what is still a poor substitute of what I'm looking for (on top of there not being enough thunder and lightning spells as it is).

Basically it goes like this. Convince the DM to let you join the group when he/she has lots of people wanting to play, then convince them to give you a spot that would normally go to a wizard, then on top to use a subclass that is not core, then to let you use it in a different way from intended.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I mean, Rule 34, at least. But the point of that quote was "a touch of the exotic that hints at an unusual heritage."

Seems like a jump from that to scales that give you a 13 AC.

And, y'know, 3e did quite explicitly give you the option of describing your character how you wished (the second really prominent example of re-fluffing in D&D history, IMHO - the first being the 2e Sense Shifting spell) , so if you wanted a relatively human-looking sorcerer, you had one.

This is an interesting thread. When I read through the PHB the first time, I wanted to be a non-magical class.

Condolences.

Think of the people complaining about the current sorcerer, they are from 3e and wanting to make a PC in a similar fashion to their 3e sorcerers with all spell options available to them that are available to the wizard. A newbie isn't going to be carrying around earlier edition baggage.

Can't argue against that.

And, while 3e fans have a ready, lavishly-supported alternative in PF, they /are/ still D&D fans and 5e is meant to include them (and, frankly, the 'simple stuff for the newbs' is the basic pdf, which doesn't even have sorcerers, so how the sorcerer works is a non-issue from that perspective). The feat and MCing optional rules in the PH are very clearly there for 3e fans, for instance. There'd be nothing destructive about a Sorcerer sub-class that was closer to the original in some ways.

Obviously (as I keep coming back to), taking Spontaneous Casting away from other classes would be a much more extreme solution, but one that's growing on me...

Ok, you were nice enough. Controlling weather sounds fun, but basically the storm sorcerer was my to go option during 4e's run, and has already gotten old for me

OK, I can certainly empathize. 5e's evoking of past editions is wonderful on some levels, but when you're sufficiently experienced, it doesn't present a lot of exciting ('new') options.

Basically it goes like this. Convince the DM to let you join the group when he/she has lots of people wanting to play, then convince them to give you a spot that would normally go to a wizard, then on top to use a subclass that is not core, then to let you use it in a different way from intended.

Likewise. Though only a few things from past PH1s were excluded from 5e's PH, a lot of other stuff unavoidably was, and all of it's going to be in the option ghetto, at least until 6e (unless there's a very thick 5.5e PH someday).

Magic as something beautiful, constructive, personal, instinctive, easy, and not dangerous is specially appealing as a fantasy to me. All I want is a way to play that fantasy and stuff in all three "Official" sorcerer subclasses get in the way.

D&D is mostly pretty accommodating of that attitude toward magic. Correllon is a god of exactly that kind of magic, elves practically embody it. (Frankly, I find it a little bowdlerized and tired, since I've been sick of elves like that for some decades now, and am reasonably happy with the darker takes on magic like the Warlock - not happy enough to play one, but it's nice they're available - but that's just the old no accounting for taste.)

The Sorcerer does seem like a prime place to put dangerous magic though, like the madwand concept (danger to himself and others!), which is also something that's appealing to a sub-set of D&Ders out there ('the Joker demographic,' Heinsoo called it in 13TW), in fact, there's vanishingly little genuinely perilous-to-the-caster magic in D&D. Anyway, we have that, which is nice.

The hard-coding of the Draconic heritage into the other sub-class is maybe less necessary, it could have been left more open, someone wanting a very dragony sorcerer could simply have played a dragonborn, for that matter.

And there's no reason we can't have yet another Sorcerer sub-class, ideally a more generic, 3.x-feel one, but, maybe a fey heritage one, that'd naturally get a lot closer to what you just articulated.

 

[MoonSong]

The Sorcerer basically came into being as a non-Vancian alternative to the Wizard. In that sense, it didn't just occupy the Wizard's design-space, it trampled over it. For that reason, I never liked the Sorcerer, especially not its early incarnations in 2E. There was just something inherently Gary Stu-ish about a class that didn't have to work hard for its abilities and was charming to boot, like someone who's born with wealth, good looks, AND natural talent. There was no down-side.

I hadn't seen it like that. To me the sorcerer was a peasant class, a form of power money can't buy and that isn't fed by cold rigid "logic" -I'm at heart an anti-intellectual luddite-. Something based on emotion, feelings. A happenstance more than the result of greed/desire for power. It is a different journey from the wizard that always felt like a blind quest for more and more power for power's sake. Are you in for the ride? reluctant? looking for a way to get rid of the gift? seeking control? a place to belong? And then there's other reasons -more personal reasons that have no place on a public forum- that made this class resonate with me.

 

[UnadvisedGoose445]

Ok, you were nice enough. Controlling weather sounds fun, but basically the storm sorcerer was my to go option during 4e's run (other than hybrids), and has already gotten old for me, more so the subclass still focuses in combat and is still not fully standard, while easier to get accepted it still means a lot of effort for what is still a poor substitute of what I'm looking for (on top of there not being enough thunder and lightning spells as it is).

Gotcha. That makes total sense. As I mentioned before, I really wanted to see something more "generic"/just born with inherent magic as pure magic, not "wild" (though I think it's an excellent and fun subclass in the right settings with the right people). I think Cosmic could possibly be a niche to have this, but something even more "pure magic" would be fun and could offer a lot of interesting things. I'm happy Storm made it and I'm excited for when Shadow gets published eventually too. With Sorcerer's I would've loved to have seen about 4 subclasses printed in the original PHB. There's a lot of room there.

Basically it goes like this. Convince the DM to let you join the group when he/she has lots of people wanting to play, then convince them to give you a spot that would normally go to a wizard, then on top to use a subclass that is not core, then to let you use it in a different way from intended.

Huh. I can't say I can understand this one, personally. I've never once had to convince a DM to let me play something because "that spot in the group usually goes to another class". That's not cool, to me. I'm sorry if you've run into that. But perhaps I'm misunderstanding.

Also, what would you mean by "using it in a different way than intended"? How does one use a class/subclass different than intended?

 

[Leatherhead]

The Sorcerer basically came into being as a non-Vancian alternative to the Wizard. In that sense, it didn't just occupy the Wizard's design-space, it trampled over it. For that reason, I never liked the Sorcerer, especially not its early incarnations in 2E. There was just something inherently Gary Stu-ish about a class that didn't have to work hard for its abilities and was charming to boot, like someone who's born with wealth, good looks, AND natural talent. There was no down-side.

Yeah, that bugged me about past renditions about the Sorcerer too. Maybe it was because Wizards were always (and still are) maligned up and down for everything: Their players, their mechanics, their flavor. And the Sorcerer was not only their alternative but "looked cool/sexy" while doing it, as if to rub salt in the wound. The Bard seemed like a better fit for that character type anyway, mostly because it did a bit of everything competently, but not to the point where it was obvious that it was intended to replace anything (except maybe the Rogue, but Rogues have that edgy or sassy lithe-warrioresque character feel that nobody will ever get rid of.) Right now I think Sorcerers are slotted up for a much better design space as living flesh-and-blood magic.

However, the Warlock is bugging me right now. It mechanically limits the Sorcerer, and thematically limits the Cleric. I really would have liked to see it as a Sorcerer subclass from the get-go. Because any kind of planetouched-blooded or fey-kissed subclass for the Sorcerer is going to be decried as too similar, despite being logical extensions of the Sorcerer theme.