D&D General One thing I hate about the Sorcerer

[Horwath]

And in that I disagree, the study allows them to tap that inborn potential, but without it, no amount of study will help.

this is where your high Int score comes into play. it is your inborn potential.
As you can be a Wiz with 8 Int, just a very, very bad one.

 

[Horwath]

Sounds like your a proponent of the likes of Forgotten Realms “chosen”, where only a handful of individuals has that spark in the first place to be lucky enough to draw on magic. Some in FR might have extensive knowledge about magic and theories, but unless they have that spark, they’ll never be able to cast so much as a cantrips.

Somewhat also seen in Harry Potter; a “muggle” will never be able to use magic, even if they spent years studying (or like Filtch, having stunted magical ability that could never be improved - a great candidate for someone who might have the magic initiate feat, but never takes a level in Wizard.

Or, Jedi.

There was a time I agreed with this “specialness” for game reasons, but I’m not so inclined anymore. I’ll leave it at that.

Forgotten realms had in 3.5e 1st level only feat, Spellfire wielder, that would be the innate magical ability.

 

[Horwath]

Sorcerers are magical nepo babies. We don't need any other reasons to hate them.

No, 8 Int wizards are nepo babies, just because their father was a wizard.

 

[Yaarel]

One thing I hate about the sorcerer is that they stole the inborn magical talent from the wizard. Now, everyone tends to treat arcane magic as:

1. Inborn, you're a sorcerer
2. Not inborn, don't worry, studdy hard and you can be a wizard.
3. I guess you can have granted power (be a warlock)

The way I see it is that, other than the warlock who is granted it, arcane magic is an inborn talent; sorcerer and wizard are just different ways of accessing that talent. This is why in a campaign setting you still have limited amounts of wizards, you don't have a large amount of people running around with an arcane magic initiate feat because they just don't have that spark for arcane magic.

The sorcerer might learn their magic somewhat randomly, focused around their bloodline. The wizard focuses their magic around their studies. They both have that inborn spark of arcane power, they just learn to harness it differently.

One of the reasons I love cantrips is, they effectively express innate magic.

Moreover the High Elf flavors according to innate Wizard magic.

 

[Yaarel]

Sounds like your a proponent of the likes of Forgotten Realms “chosen”, where only a handful of individuals has that spark in the first place to be lucky enough to draw on magic. Some in FR might have extensive knowledge about magic and theories, but unless they have that spark, they’ll never be able to cast so much as a cantrips.

Somewhat also seen in Harry Potter; a “muggle” will never be able to use magic, even if they spent years studying (or like Filtch, having stunted magical ability that could never be improved - a great candidate for someone who might have the magic initiate feat, but never takes a level in Wizard.

Or, Jedi.

There was a time I agreed with this “specialness” for game reasons, but I’m not so inclined anymore. I’ll leave it at that.

Humans are magical beings. In D&D the soul is magical, and the universe that the material body is made out of is also magical.

Unlike some other species, Humans need to work to hone their magical skills, similar to how an athlete must their physical skills.

There are different methods to hone this magical potential.

Notice too, even Elves need to work at developing their magical potential, even if they have a headstart.

 

[AK81]

The "Innate Gift" the Wizard has is having a good Int score and having the interest and patience to pursue magical study.

As well as the outward gifts of money and privilege to be able to devote their life to study. And access to a tutor or a school.

I don't think the regular commoner of a fantasy world would often have access to all that.

 

[Minigiant]

Wizardry was always pure education.

Since OD&D, any human could multiclass into wizard without naming where they got their spark.

A sorcerer, since 3e, always had an arcane spark.

The issue was that only 4e fully embraced the idea the difference between the 2

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Wizards is like the scholar who studies, the warlock is like the trader or trafficker who works for a patron, artificier is the artisant crafting and testing their works, and the sorcerer is the artist with an innate talent. With training you can do it better, but someones can do it better than others.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The way I see it is that, other than the warlock who is granted it, arcane magic is an inborn talent; sorcerer and wizard are just different ways of accessing that talent.

The trouble is, you need to complain all the way back in 3E, and complaining about this in 5E, is complaining after the horse not only bolted, but lived a long life in California, had kids, and died quietly in its sleep surrounded by family.

As soon as 3E let you just take a level in Wizard if you felt like it, any notion of "inborn talent" was gone. Period. I'm sure some people did complain but they would have needed to have kicked up a real stink. Either way - "inborn talent" is just not compatible with the 3E/5E approach to multiclassing.

Arguably, you could say dual-classing in 1E/2E already eliminated the idea of "inborn talent" for Arcane magic. Because in 1E, if you'd rolled well stats-wise, and you were bored of being a Cleric or w/e, you could say "I'm a Magic User now!".

 

[Mind of tempest]

I hate the sorcerer for trying to eat the psion and not even doing it well.
why should inborn magic be a thing?