Legends & Lore: The Sorcerer class

(based on what was said) Over the years, I have had players for which this would definitely be a better option then wizard, and it seems to deal with some of the issues of the 3E sorcerer. Hence, it is good.

DEFCON 1 said:

Well no... it's not just how they cast spells is different. Mike said it himself... there are different sorcerer heritages for the power they wield. One inhabits their draconic ancestry, one has inate magic that explodes wildly out of them. There's a story to why they have power and how they wield it, which is completely different from the book-study of the wizard.

Click to expand...

I guess my question is, to cast like a sorcerer, does that mean I'll have to take the sorcerer class with all of that extra sorcerer flavor? I thought lots of different casting options were going to be included in the wizard class. And, if is isn't, then what else is going to be its own class? Sorcerer Points really have no interest for me, but I like the idea of working with a more limited spell-base for more casual games. The article, after all, talked about a very specific flavor for wizard spellcasting - vancian. Am I just behind on this, and missed where they said they were doing away with that idea? Will there be a spellcasting class for all the different types of spellcasting?

Rydac said:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20140224

Discuss!

Click to expand...

I'm sure there will be mechanical differences, but this is sounding A LOT like the sorcerer from 13th Age.

ThirdWizard said:

I guess my question is, to cast like a sorcerer, does that mean I'll have to take the sorcerer class with all of that extra sorcerer flavor? I thought lots of different casting options were going to be included in the wizard class. And, if is isn't, then what else is going to be its own class? Sorcerer Points really have no interest for me, but I like the idea of working with a more limited spell-base for more casual games. The article, after all, talked about a very specific flavor for wizard spellcasting - vancian. Am I just behind on this, and missed where they said they were doing away with that idea? Will there be a spellcasting class for all the different types of spellcasting?

Click to expand...

The concept of "present a series of neutral casting mechanics and let individual DMs assign them to spellcasting classes themselves" went away as the default game system a long time ago. So no... in the book all wizards (and all clerics and druids) have this pseudo-Vancian casting mechanic. And there won't be any spelled-out "option" in the Player's Handbook to change it for individual characters. Sorcerers (and warlocks) will probably both have casting variants assigned to them as well, but will also not have any default or "optional" way (within the Player's Handbook) for the player himself to choose a different casting mechanic.

But that being said... we do not know yet if the DMG will have rules in it to help DMs adapt or change casting mechanics across the different classes (IE use the sorcerer's mechanics for all wizards). There might be. But I'd guess that if it did... it'd probably be a DM (with player input) decision for each individual campaign... and not something the player can just opt-in for his PC on his own, no-questions-asked.

And truth be told... even if the DMG doesn't include specific rules to do so... there's also absolutely no reason why a player and their DM couldn't just decide for their individual campaign to just use one of the other casting mechanics on their own. Of course they can. They always could. So if you wanted to merge the sorcerer's casting mechanics to the wizard's "scholarly" magic story... you and the DM can work on that idea together, even if they books don't actually have anything written on the subject. It's always really up to you and your DM and the campaign.

[MENTION=7006]DEFCON 1[/MENTION]

Thanks for the info! I don't know how I missed that. I'm a bit disappointed, but I'll adopt a wait and see approach to see how its handled.

ThirdWizard said:

I guess my question is, to cast like a sorcerer, does that mean I'll have to take the sorcerer class with all of that extra sorcerer flavor?

Click to expand...

You can always re-fluff flavor.

As to the sorcery points, Rather than fiddle with them, I would think you could essentially say all points are for X (where x is more spells or metamagic or heritage transfrmation, etc) and thereby keep the decision making to a minimum.

I think the alternate magic mechanics thing is not going to be relegated to any one class.

So the basic-level spellcasting mechanic is semi-Vancian -- slots with modifications depending on your class (clerical domains, wizards with spellbooks, sorcerers with a point pool, etc.). It's Very D&D (tm).

The DMG or somesuch is likely to have a lot of different spellcasting modules, which you might apply to one class, or all classes, or several classes, as is your game's wont. At minimum, we'll probably at least have a points system (psionics!) that is adaptable for any spellcaster you might want to have it.

ThirdWizard said:

I wonder if they went back on their original plan, and wizards are just vancian.

Click to expand...

5e Wizards aren't vancian by the way

delericho said:

But, in that case, is the Vancian mechanisms are removed from the game, or the Wizard class redesigned so that some Wizards can bypass them, then the need for the Sorcerer class disappears. In which case it should just be removed - it was a mechanical artifact, so if mechanical changes make it redundant then it can go.

Click to expand...

Alternatively, they could make metamagic exclusive to Sorcerers (at least considering the base classes only). That will keep the need for the Sorcerer class.

Why do Wizards really need metamagic? They didn't have it before 3e.

Kamikaze Midget said:

The DMG or somesuch is likely to have a lot of different spellcasting modules, which you might apply to one class, or all classes, or several classes, as is your game's wont. At minimum, we'll probably at least have a points system (psionics!) that is adaptable for any spellcaster you might want to have it.

Click to expand...

That the DMG will have something like that is IMO too optimistic. But otherwise your wish totally makes sense!

In fact, one key point of this could be to design every spellcasting system with reference to the same daily slots table (what Mearls mentioned in today's article, i.e. the Sorcerer uses the same daily table as the Wizard). This is the best starting point, because it's a common ground to all spellcasters. Then Wizardry vs Sorcerer vs other subsystems can be balanced together around this table (eventually some subsystem may in fact even grant additional slots), and then be "swappable" between different classes, something that at least several people seemed to like when it was talked about in the second-last playtest package.

Li Shenron said:

In fact, one key point of this could be to design every spellcasting system with reference to the same daily slots table (what Mearls mentioned in today's article, i.e. the Sorcerer uses the same daily table as the Wizard). This is the best starting point, because it's a common ground to all spellcasters. Then Wizardry vs Sorcerer vs other subsystems can be balanced together around this table (eventually some subsystem may in fact even grant additional slots), and then be "swappable" between different classes, something that at least several people seemed to like when it was talked about in the second-last playtest package.

Click to expand...

YES. Brilliant. That standardization indeed makes it a lot easier to strip out and switch up with something that does the same thing in a different way.

I am giddy about this possibility.