D&D 5E What about warlocks and sorcerers?

[Jester David]

But, Mages are soaked in D&D flavor that becomes part of any campaign, so I don't see any difference. However, my point is not about "its pact, therefore not different", but rather the structure is different; warlocks were at will casters of raw magic/hate before atwill casting existed for PCs (though reserve feats were around). That's the difference, the "mechanic", not the flavor.

That's the only saving grace for fighters vs barbarians vs monks, the distinct mechanical differences. If we don't have that, no point .. IMHO

True, but now that all spellcasters have at-wills the warlock is a little less special. It was neat for that one edition but that doesn't mean WotC is obligated to include it in every future edition. Otherwise any class with a unique mechanic would be fair game.

I'm not in love with the idea of barbarians as a seperate class. Or paladins as more than multiclassed Fighter McClerics. But the barbarian has been around since AD&D and the pally since OD&D so they get grandfathered in.

 

[Jester David]

So the big rhetorical question: should everything that's ever been a class continue to be a class in 5th Edition?
The answer has to be a "no". Or we'd have the:
cleric, fighting man, magic-user, thief, paladin, bard, druid, monk, assassin, illusionist, dwarf, elf, halfling, mystic, dervish, elf wizard, treekeeper, dwarf-cleric, Wise Woman , Master , Merchant-Prince, Kobold (GAZ10), Goblin, Orc, Hobgoblin, Gnoll, Bugbear, Ogre, Troll, Merchant), Shaman, Shadow Elf, Shadow Elf Shaman, Shamani, jester, ninja, psionicist, avenger, gypsy, arcanist, archivist, beguiler, binder, crusader, dragon shama, dragonfire adept, dread necromancer, duskblade, factorum, favoured soul, healer, hexblade, incarnate, knight, marshal, samurai, scout, shadowcaster, shugenja, sohei, soulborn, spellthief, spirit shaman, swashbuckler, swordsage, totemist, truenamer, warblade, warlock, warmage, wu jen, adept, divine mind, erudit, lurk, psion, psychic rogue, psychic warrior, soulknife, wilder, artificer, 4veger, invoker, runepriest, seeker, sorcerer, swordmage, warden, vampire, and blackguard.

So we cannot have every possible class, so we need to cut it down to the essentials. Of course, everyone has their favourites. There are warlord champions, warlock fans, sorcerer supporters, and artificer aficionados. But, really, every single class has its supporters. I really liked the 3e archivist.

So that leaves the big names. Things that have been in every edition are a must. Anything that's been in four or more (of the six versions of D&D) should likely also make the cut unless there's a really, really good reason not to. Anything that's been in three editions should probably make the cut but should have to justify itself, and should have both unique flavour and distinct mechanics that have been consistent through the editions. Things that have only been in two editon had better be really special to be included. Anything that's been in only one edition... thanks for playing.

 

[variant]

In a world where all magic is the result of bargins with otherworldly beings, what is the difference between a warlock and a mage?
Warlocks, like the inherited magic of sorcerers, are an origin story for how a character received their power.

What? Not all magic is from pacts with otherworldly beings. Wizardry is the study of of magic as if it was a science. Worshiping a god isn't the same thing as making a pact and sorcerers get their magic because it flows in their veins.

 

[MoonSong]

True, and that should be a reflection of the character's Background not their class.

The mage/Mu/wizard can posibly fit with many mechanical backgrounds, but it already comes hardcoded with the academic baggage. You just cannot escape that.

That's up to world lore. I can imagine worlds were magic is both inborn and taught, ala Harry Potter where not everyone can learn magic. This should be independant of class and dependent on the campaign.

I don't intend to take away the DM's ability to hardcode this at world level, but I don't want the option to have it on an individual level taken away from players either. The sorcerer class is pretty world agnostic on this regard, a pseudogeneric mage class tailored to catter to the academic mage is a poor fit for this one anyway.

You don't need two mechanically identical classes whose only distinction is spellcasting stat and lore. We don't need both a rogue and a ninja, or a fighter and a cavalier, and we don't really need a sorcerer and a wizard. You can just have a mage as a mega class that works as a wizard, and warlock, and sorcerer, and artificer. With subclasses modifying the class to fit, just like you can have a fighter that's a fencer, two-weapon user, archer, or great weapon wielder.

yes we don't need wo identical classes, but I'm not asking for sorcerers to be identical to wizards, rather the opossite, I wouldn't be asking for them to be a class if I wanted them to be identical to each other. You see two classes that are identical except for casting stat and lore, I see two classes that have nothing to do with each other except that they can cast more or less the same spells, but the way they do it doens't have to be the same.

It is in an edition explicitly designed to be a "Best Of" edition. Barbarians and Druids being classes is D&D.


There are sorcerer type spellcaster and wizardly type spellcaster but not both in the same fiction (excluding D&D). It's be fair for the DM to only have sorcerers or only have wizards.

Well I've never had problems with DMs who think certain classes don't fit on their worlds, but that is a table issue. However they cannot chose if there is no sorcerer to begin with.

It's easy enough to just swap spellcasting ability score from Int to Cha and flavour and the mage as a sorcerer and you have a sorcerer.
That handles most of the difference. Anything else would just be tacked on.

It's easy to make new mechanics, seperate classes with unique crunch. You can make endless new classes that way. But they might all be redundant.

List of things with the current mage that don't fit with the general flavor of a sorcerer
-Int stat
-Arcane Lore
-The spellbook
-Prepparing spells
-Ritual Casting
-Write scrolls
-Perppare potions (but this is borderline)
-Limited weapons available
-Sublcasses built around schools

Things that woulda sorcerer class would probably feature
-Cast with cha
-Option to pick any lore of choosing, not just scholarly ones
-Probably a Charisma skill dice (this would be nice)
-Perhaps choice of up to four cantrips
-Obviously access to all simple weapons
-slightly improved combat capability (nothing on the rogue's level of curse)
-Could live with a slower spell progression, as long as the designers take measures to balance them on the grounds of lacking ritual casting, probalby an improved version of spell mastery at lower levels
-Subclasses built around Bloodlines, including one open ended and "generic" and a more academic one (this one could indeed dedicate time to brew potions)

Though a toned down draconic sorcerer from last year would still do (notice you cannot go more far away from a wizard than this while remainig on the same realm), yes I'm saying exactly that, one class mold that makes it impossible to translate many types of sorcerer is more sorcerer than any wizard inspired class could ever be.

The warlock has two big differences: the pact flavour and the alternate spellcasting.
The pact flavour is awkward and makes assumptions regarding the world: there are patrons, people can make deals with them, and there are other ways of accessing magic apart from pacts.

The same could be said of cleric deities, and guess what? they work just fine. We don't need hyper especiffic pacts for the warlock to work, 4e had enough flavors for the warlock to be satisfactory, and nobody complained about them being awkward, they work just fine.

In a world where all magic is the result of bargins with otherworldly beings, what is the difference between a warlock and a mage?
Warlocks, like the inherited magic of sorcerers, are an origin story for how a character received their power.

This is your opinion, and I respect it, however not everyone plays on such restricted worlds, I've been on campaigns of differing magic levels where warlocks, sorcerers and wizards coexist just fine. Just because you want to play on worlds were the flavor of magic is restricted to be very speciffic with little to no deviation doesn't mean the rest of us have to.

Moreover you are so stuck on pacts and bloodlines being the "origin story" that you fail to consider their effects don't end there, they really shape up the way a character develops and is played, to what extent they are affected is up to the player; the right balance between the mechanics that support and get out of the way when needed is key because of this. And it is easier when you only have to decide how much you want your pact/blodline affects you when you don't have to worry the unwanted wizardy baggae will get in the way.

 

[Jester David]

What? Not all magic is from pacts with otherworldly beings. Wizardry is the study of of magic as if it was a science. Worshiping a god isn't the same thing as making a pact and sorcerers get their magic because it flows in their veins.

That's the default yes, and it works fine if I play the Forgotten Realms.

But if I want to use D&D to play, say a game in the Harry Potter universe but during the Dark Ages then magic users are both sorcerers (as magic is apparently genetic) and wizards (as you need to study how to use it for half a decade). And the D&D distinction between "sorcerer" and "wizard" is redundant.
Or if I want to play in a homebrew where gaining arcane magic involves making a pact with an elemental spirit that inhabits the body of the mage then wizards overlap with warlocks and the distinction there is redundant.

Having a wizard, and sorcerer, and warlock makes assumptions that there are different ways to gain arcane power. Having just a mage suggests there might be one or there might be many, but leaves the specifics up to the DM and the setting.

 

[variant]

That's the default yes, and it works fine if I play the Forgotten Realms.

But if I want to use D&D to play, say a game in the Harry Potter universe but during the Dark Ages then magic users are both sorcerers (as magic is apparently genetic) and wizards (as you need to study how to use it for half a decade). And the D&D distinction between "sorcerer" and "wizard" is redundant.
Or if I want to play in a homebrew where gaining arcane magic involves making a pact with an elemental spirit that inhabits the body of the mage then wizards overlap with warlocks and the distinction there is redundant.

Having a wizard, and sorcerer, and warlock makes assumptions that there are different ways to gain arcane power. Having just a mage suggests there might be one or there might be many, but leaves the specifics up to the DM and the setting.

The only thing that matters is if the content is in the core rules to play in a typical D&D world. Anything else can be put in the respective campaign setting. If you want to use D&D for your own setting that isn't similar to a typical D&D setting, it is your responsibility to come up with any rule and fluff changes that fit it.

 

[Jester David]

The only thing that matters is if the content is in the core rules to play in a typical D&D world. Anything else can be put in the respective campaign setting. If you want to use D&D for your own setting that isn't similar to a typical D&D setting, it is your responsibility to come up with any rule and fluff changes that fit it.

Well, the "typically" D&D world doesn't include sorcerers or warlocks, unless they were one of the few updated to 3-4e and one or both of those classes were forced in there.

 

[Jester David]

The mage/Mu/wizard can posibly fit with many mechanical backgrounds, but it already comes hardcoded with the academic baggage. You just cannot escape that.
...
List of things with the current mage that don't fit with the general flavor of a sorcerer
-Int stat
-Arcane Lore
-The spellbook
-Prepparing spells
-Ritual Casting
-Write scrolls
-Perppare potions (but this is borderline)
-Limited weapons available
-Sublcasses built around schools

Arcane Lore is really a filler power, likely replaced with Skills. But Arcane Lore works just as well with sorcerers.
Weapons are largely redundant to the sorcerer's niche. You likely won't be relying on them and gaining proficiency isn't hard. But it's easy to add this via tradition.

Please notice that the spellbook, casting using Int, ritual casting, spells per day, and arcane recovery are all part of the "Wizardry" class feature. It'd be easy to replace that with "Sorcery" altering all those features. Pair this with a couple subclasses based around bloodline and you're good.

 

[variant]

Well, the "typically" D&D world doesn't include sorcerers or warlocks, unless they were one of the few updated to 3-4e and one or both of those classes were forced in there.

Magic through bloodlines and characters making pacts with otherworldly beings have been in D&D for as along as I can remember. The Warlock and Sorcerer are simply class representations so players can have characters that make pacts and that get magic from their bloodline. When those were added in 3e, they became apart of the typical D&D world.

 

[Jester David]

Magic through bloodlines and people making pacts with otherworldly beings have been in D&D for as along as I can remember.

And they somehow managed to do that without distinct classes for twenty years.

The Warlock and Sorcerer are simply class representations so players can make pacts and have characters that get magic from their bloodline.

It was always possible for someone to say "I just naturally know magic" or "I made a deal in exchange for magical talent". There just wasn't a class for it and it was a flavourful background.
We don't need a separate class for barbarian raised by a tribe and a barbarian raised by wolves.

When those were added in 3e, they became apart of the typical D&D world.

Just because something was added does not mean it always has to be added from now on. There have been many, many additions to worlds that have been forgotten or handwaved away.