D&D 5E It's the Sorcerer!

[steeldragons]

I can't wait to find out what Font of Magic means (probably relates to sorcery points) ... and the flavor text of the sorcerer growing wings...is this a spell or a bloodline feature? I'm leaning toward the latter.

My best guess is that it will be some kin of mechanic to gain/use spell points and/or replenish used spell points or slots..."after a short rest, rada rada rada."

Extrapolating from the flavor text, it seems we can be assured of, at minimum: a Dragon bloodline Sorcerer, an Elemental bloodline [or "infused"? Someone who is...I dunno...plane-touched, perhaps?] Sorcerer and the "Wild Mage/Magic" Sorcerer [which already we knew about]. Sounds like a good enough (and pleasingly flavorful) spread for beginning "sub-classes" to me.

Annnd, metamagic as a built-in class feature...Great. Almost exactly what I was doing [for a "sorcerer" tacked-on feature for mages] in my own homebrew game system. *sigh.*

 

[Li Shenron]

Those of us who don't like vancian casting (which I believe was a majority in their playtest polls) can wait until the DMG comes out in November to see if they give us a paragraph blurb about spell points as an optional rule many DMs won't kinks about or want to hassle with.

Third column = sorcery points. This is maybe not the same as spell points (which the 3e Sorcerer didn't have, and maybe the 4e neither).

You also have to take regular slots, and that was a design choice dictated by wanting multiclassing between spellcasters to be easy and effective (unlike the known problem in 3e).

But I would bet that all your known spells are automatically prepared. So the 5e Sorcerer is quite like the 3e Sorcerer plus sorcery points. As a matter of fact, all 5e spellcasters are more similar to a 3e Sorcerer than a 3e vancian spellcaster.

 

[TarionzCousin]

... however unlike Hennet this guy doesn't have an obsession with belts.

Not necessarily--the "Sorcerous Origin" feature could be "Clothier," and every level you could gain the ability to wear one more (magical or non-magical) belt!

 

[MoonSong]

That's one of those named features. It may do what it did in 3e (though, neo-Vancian casters /also/ get the benefits of a few 3e metamagic feats more or less for free - since their save DCs go up with level (Heighten), and they can cast lower-level spells in higher level slots for more damage (Empower, with more granularity), Eschew Materials via an implement, and don't need Still Spell to cast in armor), or it may do something more interesting. If it's like 3e metamagic feats, it might also just /be/ metamagic feats (or /a/ feat given how 'big' feats are now) that other casters could take.

There is no single mention of a metamagic feat in the list provided in Monday's L&L, and from what I get Metamagic is the sorcerer's schtick in this edition, in part to compensate them for the wizard taking their stuff. I doubt such a feat would ever exist and if that was the case it would be a measly "once per day" thing. If the wizard wants metamagic he rather invest in charisma and take four levels of sorcerer. (Actually a wizard/sorcerer looks very viable).

 

[MoonSong]

So they took a class whose whole raison d'être in 3e was different caster mechanics, and made it mechanically identical to the 5e wizard. Biggest disappointment in 5e. Those of us who don't like vancian casting (which I believe was a majority in their playtest polls) can wait until the DMG comes out in November to see if they give us a paragraph blurb about spell points as an optional rule many DMs won't kinks about or want to hassle with.

Well, at least the art is cool.

But the sorcerer is a spell point class in disguise! You don't even need your DM to give you permission, just make your own chart with the equivalent spell points you have at each level, at first level you have two slots= two spell points and a limit to spend one at the time, at second level you have five and a limit to spend one at the time, at third level you have eleven and a limit to spend two + metamagic and so on. (the numbers are guesses but you get the point)

On the converse you could also treat all of your points to the maximum slots possible for a powerhouse that scales all slots like a warlock!

 

[Tony Vargas]

I doubt such a feat would ever exist and if that was the case it would be a measly "once per day" thing. If the wizard wants metamagic he rather invest in charisma and take four levels of sorcerer. (Actually a wizard/sorcerer looks very viable).

We have seen playtest feats that lift features from other classes. And, yes one thing they improved on over 3.5 MCing is that Caster/Caster MCs aren't hopeless anymore.

 

[Bacon Bits]

If you can envision a new player asking you "What's the difference between a sorcerer and a wizard" and you have to think about that for more than three seconds then it isn't distinct enough to be its own class.

What's the difference between a ranger and a druid? A ranger and a barbarian? A fighter and a warlord? A paladin and a cleric?

Many classes share themes, archetypes and even class features. That doesn't mean they're not different enough to both be presented.

 

[MoonSong]

I liked the playtest sorcerer better. That one at least had a theme to it "Cool dragon guy". This is just a poor wizard with some extra bits stapled to it. If you can envision a new player asking you "What's the difference between a sorcerer and a wizard" and you have to think about that for more than three seconds then it isn't distinct enough to be its own class.

This just looks as dull and tacked on as the 3e sorcerer.

Please leave out your apathy out of my sorcerer , as I was telling beyond the lack of full simple weapon proficiencies this sorcerer has a lot going on. The difference is pretty easy: the wizard is the loser who has to study rigid recipes to do magic, the sorcerer is magic incarnate!.

If you want to get mechanical, one carries a spellbook being limited to what these spells can do and is always a nerd , the other one just does spells and is very adaptable and adept at improvising with them, and sometimes is crazy.

 

[variant]

This is the first bit of art I actually haven't liked. WTF is up with that pose? He seems to proportioned all sorts of weirdly too - neck like a linebacker, but spindly little arms. He looks like the girl from Frozen, just with fire. He's about to break into a show tune about YOLO fire magic.

OTOH, now that I saw it mentioned elsewhere, it looks like every class has an icon. I wonder how widespread that will get used. Instead of Class:X, will we just see an Icon (7) somewhere?

[video=youtube;qC0ZR9CFAQQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC0ZR9CFAQQ[/video]

 

[Tony Vargas]

What's the difference between a ranger and a druid? A ranger and a barbarian? A fighter and a warlord? A paladin and a cleric?

I /know/ it's rhetorical, but I just can't help trying to answer:

[sblock="gratuitous comparisons"]Let's look as Sorc v Wiz. What's the difference:

AD&D: 9th level magic-user vs 11th level magic-user

3e: How they cast spells. Spontaneous vs Vancian.

4e: Role. Striker vs Controller; Class features. 'Soul' (different features for each build) vs Implement Mastery/Cantrips/Spellbook; Spell lists: Hundreds of spells for each class, none shared.

5e: Class features. Spellbook vs known spells; metamagic vs schools; &c.
Also: not in Basic vs in Basic.


OK, lets do the rest of them:

Ranger vs Druid

AD&D: Woodsy fighter who tracks and casts a few magic-user spells vs Woodsy priest who Shapechanges and has lots of spells over 3rd level but caps at level 14. Totally different exp tables. Different attack & save matrixes

3e: Class features: Full BAB vs 3/4; half-caster vs Full Caster; Favored Enemy vs Shapechange; Spell lists with some overlap.

4e: Source: Martial vs Primal; Role. Striker vs Controller; Class Features: Hunter's Quary, Prime Shot, Fighting Style vs Balance of Nature, Primal Aspect, Wildshape. Completely different lists of hundreds of exploits vs hundreds of invocations.

5e: Class Features: half-caster vs full caster; wildshape vs TWFing & tracking - honestly the playtest ranger didn't make much of an impression...

ranger vs barbarian

3e: class features: half-caster vs Rage, bonus feats vs uncanny dodge..

4e: Source: Martial vs Primal; Class Features: Hunter's Quary, Prime Shot, Fighting Style vs Agility, Feral Might, Rage Strike, Rampage. Completely different lists of hundreds of exploits vs hundreds of invocations.

5e: Class Features: half-caster vs Rage


fighter vs warlord

AD&D: existed vs didn't exist.

3e: existed vs didn't exist.
(Or, if you take the Marshal as Walord, class features: full BAB vs 3/4, bonus feats vs auras)

4e: Role: Defender vs Leader; Class Features: Fighting Style, Combat Superiority, Combat Challenge vs Combat Leader, Inspiring Word, Commanding Presence; Different lists of hundreds of exploits unique to each class.

5e: exists vs doesn't exist.
(Or, if you take the Battlemaster as both 'complex' fighter and Warlord: 14 maneuvers vs 2.)


paladin vs cleric

AD&D: half-caster vs full caster; lay on hands vs full-power turn undead; different attack & save matrices, different weapons permitted.

3e: Class features: Full BAB vs 3/4, half-caster vs full caster, save bonus & lay on hands vs domains

4e: Role: Defender vs Leader; Class Features: Divine Challenge, Lay on Hands vs Healing Word, Healer's Lore, Ritual Casting. Different lists of hundreds of prayers each.

5e: Class Featuers: half caster vs full caster, Pally/Warden/Blackguard vs Deity/Domain[/sblock]



The harder questions are: What's the difference between a Ranger and a Fighter/Druid or a Barbarian and Fighter with a 'barbaric' background or a Paladin and a Fighter/Cleric.