D&D 5E What should a Sorcerer do?

[pming]

Hiya!

The Sorcerer vs. Wizard thread brought up something I've been thinking about. I don't think the role of the Sorcerer is well-defined.

It doesn't need to be. As long as players have fun playing it, that is almost all that matters*. Not if it has some particular "role" to fill. Not if it has the same number of bonuses the other classes do. Not if it has equally powerful spells and abilities as others. None of that really matters if the class is still fun to play.

I've played in many RPG's where 'classes' (skills, professions, skill-packages, or whatever) and races were distinctly not balanced against each other, nor were they designed to fill some preconceived "role". They all...every single one of those RPG's...played just fine and were a blast!

Besides, "role" isn't what you have written on your sheet...it's how you play your character. You can play a 'defender' who is a Thief. Or a support character who is a Fighter. Or any other combination. Some classes are more suited towards one type of 'role' in the group, true enough, but IME the actual abilities and stuff are secondary to the way the player plays the character.

My suggestion is to try and not get hung up on trying to give special goodies to any class in an effort to force some pre-concieved role on those who play it. The cleric has suffered from this for decades. I've heard of players getting upset almost to the point of violence against a player who plays a cleric who doesn't focus on "healing and individual support" (ex: a cleric of knowledge who takes spells that gain information and not ones that heal/boost). Extreme example, yes, but IMHO and IME, trying to 'build' a class into a 'role' is not a good thing...unless the game has a LOT of classes. For example, look at Hackmaster 4th Edition, or even Pathfinder. Fortunately for us, 5e is FAR less about "role expectation" and more about "role-playing" expectation.

*(how it fairs over the course of a campaign in terms of enhancing or disrupting a campaign also matters; if it's balanced against other classes in case-by-case situations definitely does not).

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[CapnZapp]

I believe any Monte Cook (high level) adventure works as an example.

Bad guys inside a magically locked mountain? No problem, assuming your spellcaster whips out a highly specific trio of spells to find out where they are, lower the defenses and teleport inside.

(Sorry, this would have been better with specifics)

 

[CapnZapp]

Hiya!



It doesn't need to be. As long as players have fun playing it, that is almost all that matters*. Not if it has some particular "role" to fill. Not if it has the same number of bonuses the other classes do. Not if it has equally powerful spells and abilities as others. None of that really matters if the class is still fun to play.

I've played in many RPG's where 'classes' (skills, professions, skill-packages, or whatever) and races were distinctly not balanced against each other, nor were they designed to fill some preconceived "role". They all...every single one of those RPG's...played just fine and were a blast!

Besides, "role" isn't what you have written on your sheet...it's how you play your character. You can play a 'defender' who is a Thief. Or a support character who is a Fighter. Or any other combination. Some classes are more suited towards one type of 'role' in the group, true enough, but IME the actual abilities and stuff are secondary to the way the player plays the character.

My suggestion is to try and not get hung up on trying to give special goodies to any class in an effort to force some pre-concieved role on those who play it. The cleric has suffered from this for decades. I've heard of players getting upset almost to the point of violence against a player who plays a cleric who doesn't focus on "healing and individual support" (ex: a cleric of knowledge who takes spells that gain information and not ones that heal/boost). Extreme example, yes, but IMHO and IME, trying to 'build' a class into a 'role' is not a good thing...unless the game has a LOT of classes. For example, look at Hackmaster 4th Edition, or even Pathfinder. Fortunately for us, 5e is FAR less about "role expectation" and more about "role-playing" expectation.

*(how it fairs over the course of a campaign in terms of enhancing or disrupting a campaign also matters; if it's balanced against other classes in case-by-case situations definitely does not).

^_^

Paul L. Ming

The Cleric is the iconic example.

In a party of fighter, rogue, cleric, wizard; is it unreasonable to expect the cleric to spend actions on healing?

Of course not.

But it is equally true the cleric doesn't have to heal.

It's just that you need to expressly make this desire clear to your fellow players in a way you simply don't have to if you choose fighter.

Is this unfair? Nope. Choose a class with strong healing, and you need to tell people you chose it for other purposes.

Communication, people. Communication

 

[Quickleaf]

A sorcerer mostly blows stuff up. (citation: lots of destructive spells and meta magic geared toward combat)

Their magic is a living thing. (citation: PHB "No one chooses sorcery; the power chooses the sorcerer...Magic is a part of every sorcerer, suffusing body, mind, and spirit with a latent power that waits to be tapped." and "People with magical power seething in their veins discover that power doesn't like to stay quiet. A sorcerer's magic wants to be wielded, and it has a tendency to spill out in unpredictable ways if it isn't called on.")

While I think the sorcerer class works in combat, I feel like it could use another iteration or two to hone in on what distinguishes it from, say, a warlock or wizard.

That flavor text from the PHB (which I don't feel the class mechanics do justice) would be a great place to start.

Some food for thought...

• You're a sorcerer. You're innately magical. So why do you need material components or arcane foci at all?
• Youre a sorcer. Your magic is supposed to burst out if not used, almost as if it has a will of it's own. Yet only the Wild Mage gets something like this.
• You're a sorcerer. Your magic shouldn't feel academic, so it makes sense illusory script (for example) isn't on your spell list. But why not grease, protection from evil and good, or Tasha's hideous laughter? How do we make sense out of the sorcerer's spell list? Should there even by one unified spell list for all sorcerers?
• You're a sorcerer. You're in tune with a living breathing magical force. Yet you need to cast detect magic like any other class to sense if something is magical or not. Same for dispel magic.

These are just a quick brainstorm of ideas. It is not that the sorcerer is broken, it just could use a little help defining itself thematically.

 

[Herobizkit]

To put a modern spin on it, a Sorcerer is a "Mutant". She has a select few powers, most of them combat-related, many of them straight-up Blaster/AoE damage abilities that she can also enhance via metamagic to varying effects.

She doesn't HAVE to be built so, but most people who want "book smarts" with lots of Divination/utility spells usually play Wizards (for flexibility) or Bards (for even more* flexibility).

* More in the case of the Loremaster Bard, who can collect spells from ANY class.

Steal any trope from X-Men and that's your character. :3

 

[Psikerlord#]

Sorcerors are specialised wizards with metamagic tricks. You dont play a sorceror if there is already a wizard in your party, and vice versa. They overlap too much.

I see dragon sorceror as specialist blaster. Wild mage as well, wild magic weirdness. Favoured soul as classic fighter/mage.

 

[Mephista]

A sorcerer mostly blows stuff up. (citation: lots of destructive spells and meta magic geared toward combat)

Only the Dragon and Wild Sorcerers, though. Favored Soul seems to be leaning towards less destructive and more gishy or support magic. Twin Cast Healing Word, anyone? It seems that, while the initial spell list is very much like the 3e Sorcerer incarnation, they're moving away from that with various subclasses. Though, lets be honest, metamagic rarely was used out of combat, so by nature, we're generally looking at war magic.

Their magic is a living thing. (citation: PHB "No one chooses sorcery; the power chooses the sorcerer...Magic is a part of every sorcerer, suffusing body, mind, and spirit with a latent power that waits to be tapped." and "People with magical power seething in their veins discover that power doesn't like to stay quiet. A sorcerer's magic wants to be wielded, and it has a tendency to spill out in unpredictable ways if it isn't called on.")

While I think the sorcerer class works in combat, I feel like it could use another iteration or two to hone in on what distinguishes it from, say, a warlock or wizard.

Emphasis mine. How psionic of them! Seriously, the big problem is the Sorcerer spell list being mainly Evoker style stuff, which lends itself to the Dragon class; adding more spell variety is the best way to separate them, followed by unique spellcaster subclasses like the Spirit Shaman, Psion, and Ice Sorcerer that does more than just damage.

Update the spell list in some new directions, add some more kinds of metamagic options, add some more unique subclasses, and we are good.

"Elemental magic" seems to be a theme in the Sorcerer. Which means evoker spells, which means wizard similarities. Branch out to include things outside elementalist magic, heck, even different styles of elemental magic, and we'll see a perception shift.

That flavor text from the PHB (which I don't feel the class mechanics do justice) would be a great place to start.

The stuff about magic spilling out is effectively just having an appropriate themed cantrip that occasionally activates without character's conscious control. Which still should be entirely under the player's control, though, so I'd say that's more of a suggestion than a rule. If we get a Complete Caster book, and articles on "suggestions to playing a Sorcerer" this would be cool to jot down as ideas. As a hard mechanic? No, I don't think so.

I think the Wild Mage is currently suffering from non-thematic spells for the subclass, so an update of general "chaotic" spells for the general sorcerer would be cool.

I'd also like to point out that the Stormsoul benefits (the flying and gusts of wind) are actually side effects of using too much power in "wind elemental" spells. That's "magic spilling out" right there. So, really, that's two subclasses.

Some food for thought...

• You're a sorcerer. You're innately magical. So why do you need material components or arcane foci at all?
• Youre a sorcer. Your magic is supposed to burst out if not used, almost as if it has a will of it's own. Yet only the Wild Mage gets something like this.
• You're a sorcerer. Your magic shouldn't feel academic, so it makes sense illusory script (for example) isn't on your spell list. But why not grease, protection from evil and good, or Tasha's hideous laughter? How do we make sense out of the sorcerer's spell list? Should there even by one unified spell list for all sorcerers?
• You're a sorcerer. You're in tune with a living breathing magical force. Yet you need to cast detect magic like any other class to sense if something is magical or not. Same for dispel magic.

• You know, I always thought that making innate casters of any ilk use material components was odd. That said, Psions, another innate caster, make extensive use of crystals as foci. So, there is kind of a precedent for this kind of thing, but it should be different than a wizard's though. Consumable or expensive material is very much not thematic for innate casters, though.
• There should be a unified spell list, yes, but there should also be differences by Origin, like Patrons, Domains, Oaths, and Land types do. Protection from Good/Evil is a good Favored Soul spell, but does it make sense for (mainly fiery) Dragons or Stormsouls? That said, the spell list is mainly focused on the blasty-dragon-sorcerer style at the moment, so that should be altered in new directions. Tasha's Hideous Laughter could be generic sorcerer, or a psion-specific type subclass. The Sorcerer needs expanded spell options.
• You have magic burning in your mind, body, and soul. Why should that make you supernaturally sensitive to magic? Its no different than the paladin having to activate Divine Sense instead of it being entirely instinctive.

Seriously, though, I keep going back to just "access to new spells and subclasses." I'd also like to see some metamagic options, like Elemental Additive.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Some food for thought...

• You're a sorcerer. You're innately magical. So why do you need material components or arcane foci at all?
• Youre a sorcer. Your magic is supposed to burst out if not used, almost as if it has a will of it's own. Yet only the Wild Mage gets something like this.
• You're a sorcerer. Your magic shouldn't feel academic, so it makes sense illusory script (for example) isn't on your spell list. But why not grease, protection from evil and good, or Tasha's hideous laughter? How do we make sense out of the sorcerer's spell list? Should there even by one unified spell list for all sorcerers?
• You're a sorcerer. You're in tune with a living breathing magical force. Yet you need to cast detect magic like any other class to sense if something is magical or not. Same for dispel magic.

These are just a quick brainstorm of ideas. It is not that the sorcerer is broken, it just could use a little help defining itself thematically.

I think the first and the last are great examples of where more metamagic options could come in handy. The third and the second is where things like the bonus spells and features for storm and favored soul sorcerers see much of its expression - though ostensibly...

- you don't get grease because conjuring grease is a more controlled expression of power - it doesn't fizzle or pop or roar, it just *splorts*.
- you don't get tasha's because named spells are specifically a wizard thing - invented by other wizards and shared by other wizards. It's not a general magical principle, it's a specific magical expression.
- you don't get protection from good & evil because that's a divine thing - the difference between mortals and the immortals is in the soul. Your blood-magic is arcane.

...though, you know, you could probably think of exceptions for all of those (which might make them good subclass features!).

 

[Ashrym]

I believe any Monte Cook (high level) adventure works as an example.

Bad guys inside a magically locked mountain? No problem, assuming your spellcaster whips out a highly specific trio of spells to find out where they are, lower the defenses and teleport inside.

This strategy is highly ineffective in 5e. Divination spells became more restrictive and teleporting anywhere but a teleportation circle has too much of an accuracy issue even on a very familiar location. Spending an extremely limited resource (high level slot) to miss the mark simply doesn't cut it like older editions did.

* More in the case of the Loremaster Bard, who can collect spells from ANY class.

All bards have magical secrets. Lore bards only have 2 additional magical secrets of 3rd-level spells or less. Valor bards get the other 6 secrets just like lore bards.

 

[houser2112]

I think the first and the last are great examples of where more metamagic options could come in handy.

I agree with Quickleaf, about the components and focus. Why should the sorcerer waste his precious metamagic options on getting something that should be innate anyway, according to the class fluff?

- you don't get grease because conjuring grease is a more controlled expression of power - it doesn't fizzle or pop or roar, it just *splorts*.

No more or less controlled than any other AoE spell.

- you don't get tasha's because named spells are specifically a wizard thing - invented by other wizards and shared by other wizards. It's not a general magical principle, it's a specific magical expression.

This always bothered me. If I'm a wizard, and I find this spell, I'm saying to myself "Tasha? Who in the nine hells is Tasha? Well, this is a neat spell, it's going into my spellbook, but I'm certainly not giving this Tasha hack credit for it.". I also fail to see how incapacitating someone with laughter is inherently more wizardly as opposed to sorcerous.

- you don't get protection from good & evil because that's a divine thing - the difference between mortals and the immortals is in the soul. Your blood-magic is arcane.

I'm AFB, but wizards do get this spell, do they not?