D&D 5E Is the major thing that's disappointing about Sorcerers is the lack of sorcery point options?

[FormerlyHemlock]

I would be good with a change element metamagic/subclass ability as long as it contained the following phrase: if the target had resistance or immunity to the original damage type of the spell, it has the same resistance or immunity to the damage type of the spell changed by this metamagic. You guys must think WotC and DM's are slow--like no one noticed that every fifth monster has some kind of fire protection, but almost none have acid protection.

I view that phrase as unnecessary and conceptually harmful. "It's acid, but poison immunity still protects you against it?" Just, no.

According to the DMG spell construction rules and the DMG monster math, resistance type is not factored into evaluating the power of a spell or the power of a monster. (E.g. Red dragons don't have a higher CR than normal just because of their fire immunity.) I therefore have no problem saying that a player's ability to bypass said resistance in one dimension (e.g. anything -> acid) doesn't significantly affect game balance.

So, Red Dragon Sorcerer: gets bonus damage against lots of things, has problems with fire-resistant things (mostly demons and devils).
Black Dragon Sorcerer: almost never gets bonus damage, but almost never has problems with elemental immunity.

Seems like a fair trade to me.

 

[MoonSong]

I know that the 2nd least satisfying class after the Ranger, has been the Sorcerer.

I feel it's lack of satisfaction may have to do with sorcery points not having many neat options. As I feel they should be able to do more with them, though metamagic is a good start.

But it might just be the wild mage that's causing a lot of dissatisfaction with the class.

Personally, it is not only the metamagic dissatisfaction. Well in a way, but not really. Basically Sorcerers have to give up a lot for metamagic, and then the ability itself is underwhelming, repetitive and not as much of a game changer.

Basically I miss a lot of things in the class. As much of an empty skeleton as the class was in 3.x, it was very flexible an open to character concepts. Wanted to be a summoner? you could, go gish, be a charmer, go full utility... The class is missing many key utility spells, familiars, summons, and thematically is very restricted. In a way feels like you are weaker yet more monstruous -while the class used to be more flavor neutral- and even more one trick-pony than ever.

Metamagic was a lousy fit for Sorcerers. Everything about metamagics scream "analytical mind", which is exactly what sorcerers aren't. If there was one class to give metamagics to, it is Wizards. (Or, perhaps even better, Psions)

But generally I wish metamagic was kept as a standalone subsystem, not tied to any one class.

Well, to me it was less "analytic" more "a way you show how reactive and adaptive you are", as in your magic isn't a static formula, but an extension of yourself that you can bend and adapt like you can do with your fingers or your mouth.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by single Stat character. Surely, the sorcerer will still need a reasonable Dex and if there are no other arcane casters in the group, a reasonable Int too (for Arcana checks).

I don't wholly disagree with you, I just feel Charisma is over represented as a spell casting stat. There is no 'mana' or 'arcana' stat in D&D so it feels like they shoe-horned the Sorcerer into Cha for lack of anything better. I wouldn't be heart-broken if the Sorcerer disappeared altogether.

But the sorcerer is the original Charisma caster, why take even more things out of the class? (bards flipfloped from wisdom to int, to cha, paladins switched in 4th, warlocks appeared later) As much as you might love wizards, there are so many character concepts that just don't fit under it -and sorcerer covers many of them-.

Speaking as a fan of the 3.5 Sorcerer, the major disappointment isn't the Sorcerer, itself, which is, if anything, more evocative of a 'natural' or instinctive magic-wielder than ever.

It's that everyone else made off with its Spontaneous Casting.

I was happier with the blank-slate that it was before, all officially sanctioned flavors are quite too monstruous for me -favored soul notwithstanding-. A limited spells known pool means you ought to fill a single niche, but all the utility spells are made explicitly to not fill niches -other than blaster-, case in proof Friends, should be called Enemies, and Charm Person gives you away even if you used Subtle Spell, and the only good utility spells were ripped from the class and given exclusively to the wizard, that doesn't even need to commit to them.

But apparently I'm too much of a munchkin for daring to want those utility spells...

 

[Tony Vargas]

Basically I miss a lot of things in the class. As much of an empty skeleton as the class was in 3.x, it was very flexible an open to character concepts. Wanted to be a summoner? you could, go gish, be a charmer, go full utility... The class is missing many key utility spells, familiars, summons, and thematically is very restricted.

OK, there is that, too. I looked at Sorcerer and wasn't interested, and have only had one player play one (once, in one session), so I keep forgetting it also has a smaller spell list than the wizard, and no spells unique to that list.

More than the Bard, it might make sense for the Sorcerer to be able to poach spells from other classes, so long as they're in keeping with his theme...

 

[I'm A Banana]

I don't miss the utility spells. I've got the fundamentals (invisibility, flight, charms, illusions), and that's enough. It's fine that a Wizard does utility better (ritual caster), because the Wizard uses a book - I've just got the magic from my origin, so I need to be creative with how I use it. The limited spell list is actually a virtue in my book, because it lets me be thematic without strictly locking me down.

The playstyle I'm looking for in a sorcerer is "I am a thematic spellcaster. I can do everything in my theme, and do it over and over again."

The playstyle I'm looking for in a wizard is "I have prepared precisely the right spell from my library for just such an occasion!"

I'm quite content with how 5e has made this distinction clearer!

 

[MoonSong]

I don't miss the utility spells. I've got the fundamentals (invisibility, flight, charms, illusions), and that's enough. It's fine that a Wizard does utility better (ritual caster), because the Wizard uses a book - I've just got the magic from my origin, so I need to be creative with how I use it. The limited spell list is actually a virtue in my book, because it lets me be thematic without strictly locking me down.

The playstyle I'm looking for in a sorcerer is "I am a thematic spellcaster. I can do everything in my theme, and do it over and over again."

The playstyle I'm looking for in a wizard is "I have prepared precisely the right spell from my library for just such an occasion!"

I'm quite content with how 5e has made this distinction clearer!

I do like the restriction to a theme, the problem is that 99% of the time my theme is not "a magical murderer". A sorcerer was never the one that had the right spell at the right time, but a magical specialist. If I want to be a magical thief -as a sorcerer- I would want stuff like unseen servant, TFD, and a knock spell that didn't alerted every single guard within earshot. If I wanted to be a dimension witch, I would need stuff to actually summon dimensional critters, pocket dimensions -rope trick?- and even someday at some point create magical demiplanes. Yes the basics are kind of enough utility for a blaster, but are just not enough if you want to be something other than a blaster.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I do like the restriction to a theme, the problem is that 99% of the time my theme is not "a magical murderer".

Oh, that's everybody's theme if they want an effective character. ;P

The limited spell list is actually a virtue in my book, because it lets me be thematic without strictly locking me down.

Agreed. That was one of the most appealing things about the 3.x Sorcerer relative to the Wizard and other prepped casters. You only had to stay committed to your theme at chargen and level up, you weren't tempted to 'break character' every morning.

I don't miss the utility spells. . It's fine that a Wizard does utility better (ritual caster), because the Wizard uses a book - I've just got the magic from my origin, so I need to be creative with how I use it.

The playstyle I'm looking for in a sorcerer is "I am a thematic spellcaster.

What if your theme calls for utility spells or others not on the sorcerer's list?

I can do everything in my theme, and do it over and over again."

The playstyle I'm looking for in a wizard is "I have prepared precisely the right spell from my library for just such an occasion!"

I'm quite content with how 5e has made this distinction clearer!

That the Wizard now casts Spontaneously and has as many slots as the Sorcerer seems to hurt the distinction. The Wizard is far more flexible across days, when able to re-memorizeprepare spells, but just as flexible in a narrower time-frame, when, in 3e, the Sorcerer had an edge.

 

[MoonSong]

What if your theme calls for utility spells or others not on the sorcerer's list? That the Wizard now casts Spontaneously and has as many slots as the Sorcerer seems to hurt the distinction. The Wizard is far more flexible across days, when able to re-memorizeprepare spells, but just as flexible in a narrower time-frame, when, in 3e, the Sorcerer had an edge.

Actually the wizard isn't just as flexible, that is just the best case, the wizard is definitely more flexible during the day, they keep more prepared spells than the sorcerer knows, and can spring a ritual at any time.

Oh and thanks for the XP, I'm finally back to Enchanter.

 

[CapnZapp]

Isn't that abundantly clear across the board, though?

Well, I was responding to the poster relating bad experiences, where it seems clear the badness comes from the DM not understanding where the player thought the character was weak came from.

And to be honest, I have seen other similar threads before, on the "how generous should I be" theme: this tells me that particular poster DM hasn't realized the only answer is "ALL THE GENEROSITY ALL THE TIME".

So no, I guess not.


TL;DR: The write-up of the optionalness of the Wild Mage is not working right. Not saying it shouldn't still empower the DM to allow or deny the class, but it needs to make the DM give a verdict of it as a complete package. Not by granting the power to individually vet each and every instance of the core power feature of the subclass.

 

[Xeviat]

Metamagic was a lousy fit for Sorcerers. Everything about metamagics scream "analytical mind", which is exactly what sorcerers aren't. If there was one class to give metamagics to, it is Wizards. (Or, perhaps even better, Psions)

But generally I wish metamagic was kept as a standalone subsystem, not tied to any one class.

Meta magic could have been a special way to use higher level slots, like in 3E, I agree. I would have liked it. I think sorcery points being a short rest resource would have been better, though a smaller number.

I get metamagic on the sorcerer. They could dynamically use it in 3rd. Going RAAA and firing off an extra powerful fireball is sorcererish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jago]

I don't miss the utility spells. I've got the fundamentals (invisibility, flight, charms, illusions), and that's enough. It's fine that a Wizard does utility better (ritual caster), because the Wizard uses a book - I've just got the magic from my origin, so I need to be creative with how I use it. The limited spell list is actually a virtue in my book, because it lets me be thematic without strictly locking me down.

The playstyle I'm looking for in a sorcerer is "I am a thematic spellcaster. I can do everything in my theme, and do it over and over again."

The playstyle I'm looking for in a wizard is "I have prepared precisely the right spell from my library for just such an occasion!"

I'm quite content with how 5e has made this distinction clearer!

The problem is that it really hasn't.

The limited Spells Known compounded with the limited spell list really hampers expanding on certain concepts. I want to be an Enchantment Sorcerer whose power comes from some Fey Ancestry, but no Tasha's Hideous Laughter or Faerie Fire? A Warlock suits this concept with the Archfey Patron better, and that shouldn't be so.

If my powers come from the Plane of Water ... Uhm ... Well, there's Ray of Frost, Fog Cloud ... Chromatic Orb, I guess ... I suppose Thunderwave might be thematic, to represent like a storm ... Uhm ... Misty ... Step?


Sorcerers cannot have Familiars. Why? Why is this a Wizard thing exclusively? Sorcerers used to be able to have Familiars too.

If I wanted a Celestial Bloodline, well, Favored Soul, but what if my GM disallows that?
Well, that's completely out of the picture.

An Infernal Bloodline is basically all the Fire spells and Darkness and such, but ... again, Warlock does that better with their Patron.

I'm not really going above 2nd level spells here, and if I cannot solidify my theme by the time I get 2nd level spells, I've got an issue. I only know 4 spells at 3rd level, and between 4 spells, I'm severely hampering myself to get a theme going. I get 1 more Cantrip than the Wizard, but the Wizard probably has like 15+ spells in their book by this point.

I know 4. If I take the Fey Sorcerer, let's say, then my Cantrips are probably:
Dancing Lights: Handy
Friends: Not so handy, better off using my Charisma skills but we're doing a theme here.
Minor Illusion, thematic and handy enough
And then more than likely Firebolt or Ray of Frost, because let's be honest, I need some means of doing damage that is not a Crossbow.

My 4 spells known are:
Disguise Self: Decent, thematic
Fog Cloud: Can sorta be thematic, and it's a handy spell
Sleep: Also decent at lower levels and thematic

And then either Crown of Madness, Invisibility, Mirror Image, Misty Step, or ... Uhm ... Possibly Silent Image or Suggestion.

And that's my allotment, and I'm already having a difficult time deciding what to take with only 4 spells known because I still need an effective spell. Every Spell choice is crucial. I could have chosen things like Charm Person, which are more thematic, but Charm Person sucks and I already have a High Charisma, so I don't really want to waste a spell slot on that.



If I was a Wizard, we still take the same first 3 Cantrips, sure, but our Spells (6 for 1st level and let's say 3rd level, so we know 4 more):
Color Spray
Disguise Self
Find Familiar
Fog Cloud
Grease
Silent Image
Sleep
Tasha's Hideous Laughter

Phantasmal Force
Suggestion


And this was after a brief look through the book, not really putting a lot of thought into it.
Already, the Wizard at 3rd level is much more thematically appropriate to the idea of a Fey-based Caster (without just defaulting to Warlock) than the Sorcerer is, when the Sorcerer could realistically have Archfey blood in them and therefore be tied to this theme much more strongly than some nerd with a book.


The Sorcerer should be able to evoke lots of different backgrounds and themes, but because of limited spell choice and availability, more often than not we're going to get the Gold/Red Dragons with Fire Spells because that mechanically works better than others. It sucks that if I wanted to go with a Sorcerer other than "I blow stuff up", I am actively hampering myself than if I had just gone Wizard and took the appropriate spells, of which I have many, many more.

No class should force me to choose weaker options just to pick a theme. I can be a Sword and Board fighter just as much as I can be a Longbow Fighter and neither is truly superior to the other (yes, yes, Archery, I know, but bare with me). The fact that the Sorcerer and Wizard are truly the 2 Arcane spellcasters in the most direct competition and I can be a more variously themed Wizard than I can a Sorcerer is a shame.