D&D (2024) Can we have the sorcerer fixed now? (Plz, I beg you n_n°)

[MoonSong]

Alternative fix.

Throw them out. Make a sorcerer subtype for the wizard. Give them the metamagic as their class ability, with the type of metamagic they have access to based on bloodline. Allow them to use charisma instead of intelligence if they wish. Allow them to ignore the need for the book.

This is not acceptable. Any solution to the sorcerer problems that involves killing them and giving wixards their toys isn't a solution at all. Besides, it isn't just the spellbook that makes wizards a poor replacement for sorcerers, it is basically EVERYTHING that isn't just casting spells that gets in the way.

 

[This Effin’ GM]

This is not acceptable. Any solution to the sorcerer problems that involves killing them and giving wixards their toys isn't a solution at all.

Sorcerer is my favorite class conceptually. I agree this would not be a solution I would prefer. But better than constantly mishandlin’ it.

 

[SkidAce]

I also like sorcerers.

We enforce a theme (fire, charm, whatever) and give extra spells known per level for free from the theme.

Had a sorcerer we called an Adept that was functionally a mystic prophet healer.

 

[Haplo781]

Move metamagic back to feats and bring back the Next sorcerer.

 

[Haplo781]

Sorcerer need some exclusive spells. D&D needs to man up, go back to 4e, and convert some Sorcerer powers into spells.

And if the Sorcerer is THE innate caster, it's time for..

Magic Eye Lasers
Magic Hand Blasts
Magic Mouth Beam

The Sorcerer should be the only caster that can literally vomit and sneeze magic aggressively at you.

UNLIMITED POOOOWAAAAH!

Ah yes the holy trinity of Cyclops punch beams, Star Wars force lightning, and shoop da whoop.

 

[MoonSong]

Sorcerer is my favorite class conceptually. I agree this would not be a solution I would prefer. But better than constantly mishandlin’ it.

As I expressed in a thread a couple of years back, it is impossible to merge sorcerer and wizard without losing either. Merging sorcerer "back"* into wizard would mean effectively killing the concept. A combined class -or worse turning sorcerer into just a subclass- would be 99% pure wizard (or so be broad that wizard would be limited to a very specific build which is a no no as the wizard itself is a sacred cow) Besides, If sorcerer is being poorly managed as its own class, what makes you think that it being watered down into a subclass wouldn't encourage even more mishandling?

Your argument basically boils down to "I don't want to eff it up in the future, so in order to avoid it, I will eff it up now even harder." Or "I don't want this puppy to be mistreated anymore, so I'm going to put it to sleep and append its name to that other puppy across the street that is always getting a lot of love."

* Because people keep telling the sorcerer was just split from the wizard at some point, but that is a lie. The Wizard/Mage/MU has never covered anything even vaguely resembling a sorcerer. "Splitting" the sorcerer from the wizard didn't result in any narrowing of the class, instead it expanded the character concepts that were possible since none of them could be made before. Placing it under wizard would mean going back to the previous status quo where we trade a class that can cover thousands of concepts and archetypes to one that can't cover even one of them.

 

[Haplo781]

Sorcerer didn't exist before 3e, and it was literally just "spontaneous casting wizard that uses charisma instead of intelligence." Notably, metamagic was a set of feats (and wizards got bonus metamagic feats; sorcerers didn't). Then 4e made it a Striker (pure damage class) as opposed to the wizard's Controller (crowd control).

5e's "90% identical spell list to the wizard but fewer spell slots, also spell points and metamagic and different subclasses" thing is honestly just kind of a mess. Not different enough to truly justify being its own thing; not similar enough to truly justify folding it in.

I'd really like to see the class get more of its own identity.

 

[MoonSong]

Sorcerer didn't exist before 3e, and it was literally just "spontaneous casting wizard that uses charisma instead of intelligence." Notably, metamagic was a set of feats (and wizards got bonus metamagic feats; sorcerers didn't). Then 4e made it a Striker (pure damage class) as opposed to the wizard's Controller (crowd control).

Sorcerer didn't exist before 3e, but the class neatly filled a thematic void left behind by wizards since day 1 of 0th edition. It simply enabled a lot of character concepts that weren't possible before.

 

[Mecheon]

Yeah, it may not have existed prior to 3E, but its stayed around for a reason. The wizard fails at the narrative idea of the spellcaster with natural magic who doesn't get it through study, or the warlock's pact, but instead through their bloodline. Seventh son of a seventh son type of situation.

Frankly my fix for the sorcerer remains "You're the spell points or custom spell making class". Wizards and warlocks have their inscribed spells with specific rules, you on the other hand just grab magic and get it to do a thing through very different means. Probably not as vesitile as a wizard, but that raw magic-grabbing gives a lot more specific flavours. However as much as I like that being its thing, maybe a bit late in the edition to change things up that much

 

[Leatherhead]

To be perfectly honest, if you swap the lore, Warlock mechanics make for better Sorcerers than Sorcerers do.