D&D (2024) Sorcerer (Playtest 7)

[Neonchameleon]

Well my remark was somewhat tongue in cheek but it is remarkable that we have some on topic discussion arising from it.

I will admit to being someone that was unimpressed with the 2014 Sorcerer but it certainly seems improved. I also agree that a sorcerer gish is thematic.

Yeah, the 2014 sorcerer was both bad and bland. The dragonblood and wild sorcerer subclasses are both bland with no clear vision of the class other than "a caster who isn't a member of another casting class" (which I'll take over the aggressively bad "great great grandma made the beast with two backs with something she shouldn't" and some families are Just Better of the Pathfinder sorcerer). But it took Xanathar's to return the sorcerer from its bland 3.X "we dunno - maybe you've the blood of dragons?" to the 4e fluff of "this world is magical and some people get magic from weird things; here are some of them" and Tasha's to make subclasses that were mechanically decent.

Which is another reason I want Wild demoted from the PHB.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I think I find myself liking the Innate Sorcerery, but I do wish they leaned into it a little harder. I liked the idea of spending a HD to heal when you activate it.

Sorcerers still don't get enough spells. I haven't read through the wizard yet, but I know some of their subclasses are getting free spells prepared, and they have an ability to swap prepared spells, and they still have their special rituals, so they are easily sitting at +26 Spells available. Warlock gets ~30 spells available without counting invocations. And most sorcerers are getting 22. Yes, "half of them" don't... but that means the other half SHOULD ALSO get those spells.

The level 5 ability should just be either when you roll initiative, or when combat ends. Either way. Needing to run out of points is stupid. Also, divide by 5 round down? Why not round up and allow the points to be a little higher by 8th, 13th, and 18th? That isn't going to shatter anything.

7th level ability to use innate sorcerery more is nice, but that cost is bigger than you may think. And using two metamagics is pretty rough. Not only do you only have two metamagics, but as I discussed last playtest, most of them don't actually combine well. And since you pay the cost for both? That's a rough ask. You'll be drained in no time.

LV 20 is the next ability?! Seriously, I hate this design where you get nothing but the new spell level. I'm seriously going to go 13 levels getting nothing new except more powerful spells and more metamagics? We can do better than this. Additionally, the ability is weaker than it may seem at first. You still only have two innate sorcery uses, anything more costs points, and you are only saving points then. I could see getting this at level 12 and it being fine.

Distant spell... seriously?! The previous version was great, finally useful! Why the HECK would they change it back?!

Dragon Sorcerer -> Fine? It really isn't much to write home about the more you look at it. Level 3 is nice for armor and hp, Level 6 gets you more damage, level 14 sucks and level 18 is better, but I'm still not sure it is worth 5 points. I'm just glad that they got rid of that stupid "immune for 24 hrs" part from before.

Wild -> Actually... really good! I'm not a fan of the table, never have been. But the rest of the abilities are solid luck manipulation abilities. Add or subtract 1d4 from any d20 ability check you can see? I like it. The 14th level ability is good, I guess, but it never excites me. The 18th level is bonkers good though, but I still want it to be 1/day, not 1/1d4 days, it isn't THAT good.

Clockwork and Aberrant never excited me in the initial Tashas. The only reason they are considered so good is because they actually address the spell restrictions Sorcerers are under, and give them extra spells known. I want that to be fixed for all sorcerers, and that means these two needed a re-work, not a handwave.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I think I find myself liking the Innate Sorcerery, but I do wish they leaned into it a little harder. I liked the idea of spending a HD to heal when you activate it.

Sorcerers still don't get enough spells. I haven't read through the wizard yet, but I know some of their subclasses are getting free spells prepared, and they have an ability to swap prepared spells, and they still have their special rituals, so they are easily sitting at +26 Spells available. Warlock gets ~30 spells available without counting invocations. And most sorcerers are getting 22. Yes, "half of them" don't... but that means the other half SHOULD ALSO get those spells.

Mmmm... There's a level of diminishing returns round the number of spells known (which is why I dislike the warlock getting their patron spells for free). Four spells per spell level feels fine. But the sorcerer needs to know at least as many spells as the wizard can prepare at one time.

Dragon Sorcerer -> Fine? It really isn't much to write home about the more you look at it.

And I'm fine with there being at least one subclass like this.

Wild -> Actually... really good! I'm not a fan of the table, never have been. But the rest of the abilities are solid luck manipulation abilities. Add or subtract 1d4 from any d20 ability check you can see? I like it. The 14th level ability is good, I guess, but it never excites me. The 18th level is bonkers good though, but I still want it to be 1/day, not 1/1d4 days, it isn't THAT good.

A "wild magic table" that's boring and faffy is something the D&D designers have been trying to foist on us since at least the 90s. I like chaos in my magic (as in post-1e WFRP) - but not this "one size fits all table to slow the game down just for random nonsense" approach. The rest is fine but the table is the core of the subclass.

Clockwork and Aberrant never excited me in the initial Tashas. The only reason they are considered so good is because they actually address the spell restrictions Sorcerers are under, and give them extra spells known. I want that to be fixed for all sorcerers, and that means these two needed a re-work, not a handwave.

I've never liked Clockwork thematically but Aberrant Psion is great. But this gives an opportunity to give feedback on the extra spells known mechanic.

 

[NaturalZero]

I know there is zero chance of this for One D&D as a result of the enormous traction of "tradition," but I wish that WotC would take a step back and critically reexamine what archetypes are mechanically or thematically needed for D&D for much the same reason as you mention here. I don't think that the whole "where you get magic from" is really strong enough of a thematic difference if there is only marginal mechanical difference: e.g., spells known vs. spells prepared. IMHO, there are more robust thematic archetypes that D&D could use for its classes.

If we were to get serious about this rabbit hole, there are a few huge pillars of fantasy that don't really have good representation in DnD. The necromancer in DnD is just like any other generalist wizard but with some extra HP on their zombies. Same Sleep, Fireball, Shield, et al spells, because everything in the game has to go back to that same well over and over. Things like the summoner and the elementalist are also things that would be amazing as their own classes, but the devs need every wizard and sorc to pretty much use the same old spells but with different theme labels slapped onto subclasses.

If I were designing a new edition and wasn't as fanatically obsessed with tradition as WotC is, i'd deconstruct the wizard, sorc, and bard, and parse out the spells and class features so that strong archetypes got unique features. Wizard, Sorcerer, and Bard would lose a chunk of their spells list but gain stronger and more plentiful class features, some of those spells, like necromancy and conjuration could go to dedicated classes, supported by their own non-spell slot features.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

If I were designing a new edition and wasn't as fanatically obsessed with tradition as WotC is, i'd deconstruct the wizard, sorc, and bard, and parse out the spells and class features so that strong archetypes got unique features. Wizard, Sorcerer, and Bard would lose a chunk of their spells list but gain stronger and more plentiful class features, some of those spells, like necromancy and conjuration could go to dedicated classes, supported by their own non-spell slot features.

I'd probably keep the Bard's theme and spell list as close to the 5e one, but make them a half caster to emphasise the 'jack of all trades' nature. But then really beef up their class features to compensate.

But wizard and sorcerer would get melted down completely and blended into a 'mage' class, with different types of magic being the subclasses. 'dark magic, rune magic, war magic, etc'. Warlock then ends up not having to share its subclass ideas with sorcerer, which then allows stuff like dragon patron warlock.

 

[NaturalZero]

I'd probably keep the Bard's theme and spell list as close to the 5e one, but make them a half caster to emphasise the 'jack of all trades' nature. But then really beef up their class features to compensate.

I remember when illusionist was it's own class and could see the Bard as the main receptacle for the illusion and enchantment spells. Those slots, on top of skill-based, performance, and combat features and subclass focuses would give it a clear identity. The part that would be anathema to the current development team would be stripping those schools out of the wizard and sorcerer classes in order to give them their own more focused identities.

 

[Neonchameleon]

If we were to get serious about this rabbit hole, there are a few huge pillars of fantasy that don't really have good representation in DnD. The necromancer in DnD is just like any other generalist wizard but with some extra HP on their zombies. Same Sleep, Fireball, Shield, et al spells, because everything in the game has to go back to that same well over and over. Things like the summoner and the elementalist are also things that would be amazing as their own classes, but the devs need every wizard and sorc to pretty much use the same old spells but with different theme labels slapped onto subclasses.

If I were designing a new edition and wasn't as fanatically obsessed with tradition as WotC is, i'd deconstruct the wizard, sorc, and bard, and parse out the spells and class features so that strong archetypes got unique features. Wizard, Sorcerer, and Bard would lose a chunk of their spells list but gain stronger and more plentiful class features, some of those spells, like necromancy and conjuration could go to dedicated classes, supported by their own non-spell slot features.

The thing is that, as the Aberrant Mind and others show, the Sorcerer is a weak enough core class that you can put a lot of power into the subclasses. You don't need a Necromancer class when you can give a sorcerer the Necromancy school, some general necromancy bonuses, and some necromancy-specific metamagic. And yes when I say the necromancy school I do include revivify.

 

[Remathilis]

If we were to get serious about this rabbit hole, there are a few huge pillars of fantasy that don't really have good representation in DnD. The necromancer in DnD is just like any other generalist wizard but with some extra HP on their zombies. Same Sleep, Fireball, Shield, et al spells, because everything in the game has to go back to that same well over and over. Things like the summoner and the elementalist are also things that would be amazing as their own classes, but the devs need every wizard and sorc to pretty much use the same old spells but with different theme labels slapped onto subclasses.

If I were designing a new edition and wasn't as fanatically obsessed with tradition as WotC is, i'd deconstruct the wizard, sorc, and bard, and parse out the spells and class features so that strong archetypes got unique features. Wizard, Sorcerer, and Bard would lose a chunk of their spells list but gain stronger and more plentiful class features, some of those spells, like necromancy and conjuration could go to dedicated classes, supported by their own non-spell slot features.

Part of that is also a result of poor spell balancing (where iconic spells are far better than others of their level) and the lack of sufficient thematic support. The Necromancer list is paltry and a lot of it is worse than the normal wizard spells of the stand level. Elementalists have few choices unless it's fire, summoning and conjuring is an afterthought. We lack a Spell Compendium style book to flesh out those niches with sufficient support so that not every caster is using fireball, shield, sleep and counterspell alongside one theme spell.

 

[NaturalZero]

The Necromancer list is paltry and a lot of it is worse than the normal wizard spells of the stand level. Elementalists have few choices unless it's fire, summoning and conjuring is an afterthought.

One of the very first characters I played when 5e came out was a necromancer and, boy, the utter lack of necromancy spells completely killed the concept. My spell list was practically the same as the other wizard at the table.

For me, the way 5e hands up spells is problematic for 2 reasons. On one hand, you have situations like the necromancer where you just don't get enough of the right flavor to fill out the concept and distinguish yourself from everyone else in the class. Second, there are so many people going to the same well of spells in the PHB that your concept might be a fire elemental wizard, and the cleric, warlock, and sorcerer characters all show with your signature Fireball spell, if they're the right subclass. Filling out niches and protecting niches is something 5e has been pretty bad at.

 

[Pauln6]

One of the very first characters I played when 5e came out was a necromancer and, boy, the utter lack of necromancy spells completely killed the concept. My spell list was practically the same as the other wizard at the table.

For me, the way 5e hands up spells is problematic for 2 reasons. On one hand, you have situations like the necromancer where you just don't get enough of the right flavor to fill out the concept and distinguish yourself from everyone else in the class. Second, there are so many people going to the same well of spells in the PHB that your concept might be a fire elemental wizard, and the cleric, warlock, and sorcerer characters all show with your signature Fireball spell, if they're the right subclass. Filling out niches and protecting niches is something 5e has been pretty bad at.

Same with shadow sorcerer. I did build a necromancer as a multiclass death cleric and shadow mage as multiclass warlock but class features letting you re-flavour existing spells in theme-appropriate ways might work for these subclasses.