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

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).
Heh. Might want to go Paladin for S&B...
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.
Nod. IN 3e, the Sorcerer would have stuck to the theme better, because the wizard would be off memorizing non-theme spells situationally, and the sorcerer would generally be able to cast the best thematic spell at the moment, often repeatedly (and more often, because more slots). Not so much, anymore. The wizard can cast about as much as the Sorcerer, and if he preps thematic spells consistently, is as likely to bring the most thematic spell to bear every round, too.



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.
Seems in keeping with 5e 'rulings not rules' philosophy, in general. It's the same way inspiration works, and deciding success/failure/roll on actions, for that matter. Great swaths of the play experience depend on case-by-case DM judgement.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad




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!

Some of us use classes only as the basis for our theme. I can create a monk or a sorcerer without using those classes, for instance. We choose the class(es) that helps us achieve our concept without adding too much baggage. I found it is pretty hard to break a character(make them non viable) in 5E. YMMV. Wild Mage does not have a lot of lock down.
 




Umm, for the record and because this sounds a lot like deja vu... [MENTION=6855130]Jago[/MENTION] is not related to me in any way nor is a sockpuppet of mine.

Promise... really really pinkie swear...
 


Remove ads

Top