D&D 5E Designer apathy and sunk costs, The reason the sorcerer is doomed to uncanny valley one-trick-ponieness.

[discosoc]

The fact remains that, outside of fire and possibly ice, there are few options for the sorcerer to use his bonus damage ability. When making a selection for dragon bloodlines, there is an overwhelmingly best choice (fire), a decent choice (ice), a poor choice (lightening) and two trap choices (acid, poison). Even adding a supplement doesn't change this arithmetic. While I'll be the first to say that 5e isn't much about balance, I at least expect there to not be trap choices lurking in the sorcerer class.

And my second point is that this is easily corrected by the addition of a relatively small selection of spells -- ones targeted to address this lack. Or the inclusion of a special metamagic, specific to the bloodline, that allows for the substitution of energies to the favored energy of the bloodline only. Done. Fixed. No issues, no major power gained.

There is a cantrip for each type that scales with level, and will always be available for them. When it comes to actual spells beyond cantrips, fire does indeed dominate, but unless you think sorcs are supposed to be locked out of other elements or something, it shouldn't matter. The bulk of your cha mod to damage will be coming from your cantrips.

Anyway, I wouldn't consider either acid or poison to be "trap" choices. Acid Splash and Poison Spray are both pretty good spells under common circumstances. Both bypass armor, relying instead on saving throws, which is often kind of useful. Acid Splash is more geared as a mini-aoe, and Poison Spray is single target, but otherwise both are good. The only real argument I can see being made against either is that poison resistance and immunity is fairly common with certain types of creatures, so if you're campaign is going to be dealing with a something like an undead theme the whole way through, then perhaps it's not so great. Even then, it's not like the sorc won't have steady access to other spells and cantrips to deal with that when it comes up (fire is common, as you point out).

Unless you're just trying to min/max everything and coming to the conclusion that anything that's not the best isn't worth taking, then I'm just not really concerned.

 

[MoonSong]

I disagree. A wizard isn't just as good because the wizard doesn't get to add bonuses to damage of the element type, nor do they get resistance to that damage type. The other is purely subjective. You don't think there are enough spells, and I do.

The Evoker wants a word with you. In fact the evoker is better at adding bonuses with blasting because it applies to all evocations, not only one single element. But my major complaint is not inside combat, outside combat is the point. Why being restricted to just inside combat?

I want versatility of concept, to be able to create any character I want with sorcerers not just blasters. For me Blasting gets old pretty fast and is something I could get from a videogame -not that I play a lot of them-, Want to go all utility? the wizard does it better and can also contribute to combat by just ritual casting and having more preppared spells than you know, he can even help the party to get a rest (rope trick, tiny hut) or increase the party's looting ability (tenser's disk) or help them get to places they usually wouldn't (passwall), and they can change hats as often as they want. Why can't I even scratch that exploration potential not even if I want to dedicate it for keeps?

And come on, the sorcerer is the only "arcane" class that doesn't have a native way to get a familiar, even bards with magical secrets can.

 

[Orlax]

Yeah you keep using the term trap, I do not think that word means what you think it means. Mainly because those options don't leave the sorc non functional. Moreover all of those builds have spells that compliment them. There are poison spells and there are acid spells. Just because there are more fire spells and ice spells doesn't make those options any more effective. In fact it just means that anyone rocking an acid based sorc had more spells known realestate to pack with more utility. Besides that the flat spells themselves are non trapish in their own right (spells of a similar spell level perform on a similar damage and effect level), and are designed to work as viable contributive options with no extra enhancement. The extra damage from the dragon sorc feature is gravy. Not getting the bonus damage on the regular isn't a trap because the extra damage was never required by the system. It's absence doesn't make you contribute on a noticeably lesser scale. On top of that you still have meta magic and quite a few other benefits. Again an acid based dragon sorc isn't a trap because choosing that path doesn't leave you on a lesser operating level as compared to those around you.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Why can't I even scratch that exploration potential not even if I want to dedicate it for keeps?

Because that's the way WotC designed the 5E sorcerer.

If you want to do all the things you mentioned, then design your own 5E sorcerer.

 

[Andor]

I want versatility of concept, to be able to create any character I want with sorcerers not just blasters. For me Blasting gets old pretty fast and is something I could get from a videogame -not that I play a lot of them-, Want to go all utility? the wizard does it better and can also contribute to combat by just ritual casting and having more preppared spells than you know, he can even help the party to get a rest (rope trick, tiny hut) or increase the party's looting ability (tenser's disk) or help them get to places they usually wouldn't (passwall), and they can change hats as often as they want. Why can't I even scratch that exploration potential not even if I want to dedicate it for keeps?

So play a Lore Bare, ditch the collegiate fluff and claim the power of your voice comes from your Siren grandmother.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The Evoker wants a word with you. In fact the evoker is better at adding bonuses with blasting because it applies to all evocations, not only one single element. But my major complaint is not inside combat, outside combat is the point. Why being restricted to just inside combat?

The Evoker can have a word, and then I'd tell him to sit back down at his desk and open up his book again. Even an evoker wizard cannot be as good as, let alone better (as was claimed) than a blood sorcerer in reliable damage from spells. Between damage bonuses from being dragonblood, and metamagic enhancements, the sorcerer is the best magic damage dealer. The sorcerer also has sorcery points to cast those spells at higher slots than a wizard, resulting in more damage. The evoker can max damage his spells, but only once or they take damage themselves. Not nearly as consistent as the sorcerer. And that ability isn't even granted until they hit 14th level.

I want versatility of concept, to be able to create any character I want with sorcerers not just blasters..

Have you even read the sorcerer class description? I suggest you do, because the basic core of what makes a sorcerer a sorcerer is not what you want. It would be like me complaining that I want a cleric to cast spells that aren't divinely related at all.

Also, I'm still curious to see your data you used when you said some people were happy, but more were upset with the published version of the sorcerer over the playtest version.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm deeply disappointed with the designers handling of the sorcerer.

Everything started so well in the playtest, the sorcerer in there was a sorcerer's fan wet dream, hard to do conversions with, but very very cool and showing all of the strengths sorcerers traditionally had. The designers answer to this conversion bit? Jettison the sorcerer! get rid of it by wrapping it under wizard! Then it came all the negative feedback to it, but by then it was too late to include the sorcerer in the open playtest. But instead of just asking lots of questions about the soul of the sorcerer in the two last polls, they just decided to keep the sorcerer under wraps and avoid all mention to it, so it was one of the few classes that was designed with zero input from fans.

It wasn't the only cool thing to never make it out of the playtest, but at least it saw the light of day, however briefly.

the missinformed feedback of one year ago is law, or at least a pretext to not do anything meaningful with sorcerers, because allegations of avoiding power creep go down the drain when in the same book we have a wizard subclass that is outright overpowered. Or is it a double standard?

A double standard? In D&D? Shocking!

And I have completely lost faith on being able to convert previous edition PCs, let alone have a sorcerer that doesn't make your party wish you had brought a wizard instead. Sorcerer used to be a second among equals with the wizard, now it is outright inferior to even bards. I really miss the familiars and other long term magic effects, and don't tell me familiars are a wizard thing, the original sorcerer had familiars as a class feature.

Are you thinking 3.x Sorcerers? Because they weren't second-among-equals, just second. Solidly Tier 2. In a game where full casters were wildly over-powered, being a second-rate full caster actually pointed to having a superior design, though., FWLTW. ;P Or were you thinking the 4e Sorcerer, nice small-area/close blasting strikers, but nothing like the Wizard as a controller, and the Mage sub-class with it's greater flexibility and largest spell list in the game?

It doesn't seem like the Sorcerer really has all that much to live up to. Second-fiddle to the wizard, then and now.

Yep. We know. You've brought this up many times before. But right now the question is What are you going to do about it?

I mean, if you just want to keep bemoaning the sorcerer for bemoaning's sake, that's fine. Go right ahead. You're free to do so as often as you want. But I do wonder if perhaps there might be a more constructive use of your time?

If the edition war was any guide, 4-5 years of acrimonious whining will get you what you want.

But you're not getting what you want from WotC ever. They made their design choice.

So much for 5e being for everyone who ever loved D&D...

...or not - it could just be you, not anyone at WotC, thinking that way. They might get closer to their goal over time, by not sticking exclusively to their initial design choices. They've already wandered all over the map (npi!) with the Ranger, and will probably re-design it again.

 

[Azzy]

Does the OP even know what the term "uncanny valley" refers to, or is the thread title just thrown together words and terms that mean nothing?

 

[Minigiant]

The sorcerer is plenty versatile.
Remember that about half the wizard subclasses rely on using 20-40% of your spells in their chosen schools of be outclassed by the bard. Maybe 3/4 of the wizard subclasses.

The sorcerer can blast in element or use metamagic and have a better primary ability score.

 

[Vael]

Honestly, Poison isn't a trap option because of the lack of Poison damage spells, it's a trap because of how many creatures have either resistance or immunity to it.

Also, given the limitations on Spells known, even as a Fire or Cold Sorcerer, I wouldn't take more than 3 or 4 spells in my chosen element, total. I'm planning on playing a Fire Dragon Sorcerer, and I'm only going to get three fire spells total, Fireball, Firebolt and Scorching Ray. Maybe Create Bonfire, because it combos so well with Pyrotechnics, but since I don't want to be the one-trick pony, I have to limit my Fire magics.

I expect more spells will be added to the Sorcerer, as each new expansion has, so while we might not reach elemental parity, flexibility will increase. To be honest, if there's a spot I'd redo, I think Sorcerers should have more Metamagic options, and gain additional Metamagics as they level. That is something I'm less certain will happen.