D&D 5E Sorcerer Changes

[jsaving]

First, what is wrong with Sorcerers as written? They are already a popular choice at many tables.

This is not at all correct, at least among the general D&D gaming community. Data from character-gen sites routinely ranks sorcerer among 5e's least popular classes, with the latest Beyond figures putting sorcerer second-to-last in popularity. By comparison wizard is the third most popular despite having a similar spell list, which tells you it is very likely the design of the sorcerer class that is causing its unpopularity.

I'd argue their main problem is not that they are weak but that they have no clearly defined role in an edition where wizards can spontaneously cast spells. Basically the wizard killed the sorcerer and took his stuff, and the 5e team failed to come up with a compelling new take for the class.

 

[Weiley31]

I really enjoy them, but design wise they are a hot mess

Could always "reflavor/reshuffle" the Bladesinger via the Bard. Just swap the CHA spell casting with INT.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Oh gee, I can hardly wait to be edified.



Subjective nonsense. Sure, it would make sense for a Storm Sorcerer to be able to cast call lightning, but that's a flavor issue, not a power one.

Twinned Spell alone is remarkably powerful (not just for Haste) and more than compensates for the Wizard's strengths. It effectively gives a Sorcerer his full level in free spell slots, it doesn't require a short rest, it's equivalent to casting two spells in one turn, and it's the only thing in the game that allows double concentration.

Sorcerers are a little boring, but they're not weak.

I'm not really seeing much disagreement here about the facts of the class. What you are calling a little boring seems like what I'm calling failing to be able to represent a wide variety of innate magic themes. I didn't actually say the class was underpowered (I may have in the past at some point. Probably a better term is underperforming.)

I mean, sure, technically how important that is to someone is subjective, but I think most people would agree that there is at least a design fail when the class marketing describes it as the class with inborn arcane magic that could come from a variety of sources, but actual implementation ends up only providing quality mechanical realization for a limited number of those options.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Subjective nonsense.

Clarify please.

Sure, it would make sense for a Storm Sorcerer to be able to cast call lightning, but that's a flavor issue, not a power one.

There are rather less Lightning spells available to sorcerors than fire spells. Likewise acid.
There are very, very few Poison spells, and as a damage type, it is ineffective against a very wide variety of common D&D foes.

If you aren't picking a specific subset of a subclass of sorceror, you can't apply your subclass feature effectively.
That's a power issue, not a flavour one.

Twinned Spell alone is remarkably powerful (not just for Haste) and more than compensates for the Wizard's strengths. It effectively gives a Sorcerer his full level in free spell slots, it doesn't require a short rest, it's equivalent to casting two spells in one turn, and it's the only thing in the game that allows double concentration.

Twinned Haste is a common example. What higher-end spells are also good for twinning for a generic sorceror?

 

[Redwizard007]

Twinned Haste is a common example. What higher-end spells are also good for twinning for a generic sorceror?

Dominate ______, Power Word ______, Disintegrate, Hold _____, Polymorph, Greater Invisibility, Banishment... thats just off the top of my head.

The only semi-legitimate complaint is that sorcerors should probably get a few bonus spells based on bloodline or that its hard to play a ______ bender. Both of those are easily addressed by DMs with a little reflavoring.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Dominate ______, Power Word ______, Disintegrate, Hold _____, Polymorph, Greater Invisibility, Banishment... thats just off the top of my head.

One of my favorites isn't even high-level, it's suggestion. "Hey, your buddy here is plotting to kill you. You should kill him first."

/popcorn

Or any single-target blasting spell, either upcast or not. Ice-knife is fun at two targets next to each other; each takes 1d10 + 4d6. Not bad for a first level spell (plus any other targets close by).

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Honestly, this has not been my experience. Bards have few spells known at low level, so their access to Ritual Magic does not magnify the versatility gap in the way a Wizard’s Ritual Magic feature does.

Warlocks....is your argument warlocks outperform Sorcerers?

All of those classes outperform Sorcerers. They're bottom-of-the-barrel full-caster-wise.

Suggesting otherwise seems bizarre to me.

So with 1d6 HD at +5 Con, they'll add 9 HP per level as a primary caster, while a warrior class with 1d10 HD at +2 Con will be adding 8 HP per level. Most would consider this counter intuitive.

That's weasel words ("most people") and literally not an argument, and also I suspect, not correct. I don't see any meaningful balance issue here either.

 

[Redwizard007]

All of those classes outperform Sorcerers. They're bottom-of-the-barrel full-caster-wise.

Suggesting otherwise seems bizarre to me.



That's weasel words ("most people") and literally not an argument, and also I suspect, not correct. I don't see any meaningful balance issue here either.

All of those classes outperform Sorcerers. They're bottom-of-the-barrel full-caster-wise.

Suggesting otherwise seems bizarre to me.



That's weasel words ("most people") and literally not an argument, and also I suspect, not correct. I don't see any meaningful balance issue here either.

I feel obligated to direct you to another forum involving giants and playgrounds where they swear up and down about how incredibly OP sorcerers are, and how anyone playing a wizard has some sort of mental handicap. I think they are just as judgement-impaired as the folks over here saying the opposite. Its a pretty well balanced class as is.

THEN you go on to claim that reasonable people feel that the sorceror should have as many HP as a standard melee class... thats... well, its just not accurate.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I feel obligated to direct you to another forum involving giants and playgrounds where they swear up and down about how incredibly OP sorcerers are, and how anyone playing a wizard has some sort of mental handicap.

Do they? At a quick search of GitP I could find nothing of the sort. Got some links?

THEN you go on to claim that reasonable people feel that the sorceror should have as many HP as a standard melee class... thats... well, its just not accurate.

Wow.

You both put words in my mouth that I didn't say, very disingenuous ones too, and used weasel words ("reasonable people") when I already pointed out that that was problematic, and calls into question your claim re: GitP.

I'm confused as to why anyone would have difficulty with the idea that 4 (Sorcerer base HP/level) + 5 (20 CON mod) is higher than 6 (Fighter base HP/level) +2. Fighters don't really have many more HP than Sorcerers in 5E. I feel like people see 1d10 and think it should be "much higher" than 1d6, but it never has been, mathematically.

 

[bedir than]

I'm confused as to why anyone would have difficulty with the idea that 4 (Sorcerer base HP/level) + 5 (20 CON mod) is higher than 6 (Fighter base HP/level) +2. Fighters don't really have many more HP than Sorcerers in 5E. I feel like people see 1d10 and think it should be "much higher" than 1d6, but it never has been, mathematically.

Probably because you decided that a fighter would intentionally ignore their likely secondary attribute.