D&D (2024) Could the DnDNext Sorcerer be revived as its own class?

[Frozen_Heart]

I was reading through the original 5e playtest material again, and the original idea for the 5e sorcerer is one I've always found fascinating. A class which spends will points to gradually become the monster or aspect which their bloodline is linked to.

Obviously the whole idea wasn't popular for the sorcerer, and it got axed instantly, never to be seen again.

But with 5.5e seemingly being slightly more open to the idea of adding new classes (artificer release 6 months into the first year, and psion already in playtesting), I was wondering if the basic idea could be revived? From what I can tell, there is potential here for both a narrative and mechanical identity which are completely untouched in 5th edition.

If it was brought back, what should be changed about?

 

[Zardnaar]

I've thought about it mahjong the 3.5 dragon disciple prestige class into a stand alone half caster.

 

[Minigiant]

Still think the Playtest Sorcerer was a rare option of having a class whose subclasses could drift into the 4 main D&D archetypes with internal routes to tilt in any direction in the main class as well. A choose your superpowers class.

But with the Sorcerer and Warlock being a thing, you could instead tilt to the styles of the dragons.

White- Big Blizzard Brute
Black- Stealth Sulphuric Striker
Blue- Sky Shock Shooter
Green- Cold Corrupting Controller
Red- Fierce Fiery Fighter

 

[Remathilis]

When that sorcerer came out, I was not a big fan of it's design AS THE SORCERER. I felt it was too narrow. You have to start out a caster and become a melee monster as you expend resources. That means every sorcerer starts a mage and ends a fighter. If you wanted to turn into a dragon* earlier, you had to burn though your spell slots fast rather than being able to balance the two modes or switch between them. It also meant whatever monster form you had was going to be a melee brute. That limited your options for monsters you could potentially use.

The biggest issue for me was that lightswitch design where you were either a fighter or a caster but never at the same time. Which is why I was happy they didn't make that the sorcerer.

 

[Zardnaar]

When that sorcerer came out, I was not a big fan of it's design AS THE SORCERER. I felt it was too narrow. You have to start out a caster and become a melee monster as you expend resources. That means every sorcerer starts a mage and ends a fighter. If you wanted to turn into a dragon* earlier, you had to burn though your spell slots fast rather than being able to balance the two modes or switch between them. It also meant whatever monster form you had was going to be a melee brute. That limited your options for monsters you could potentially use.

The biggest issue for me was that lightswitch design where you were either a fighter or a caster but never at the same time. Which is why I was happy they didn't make that the sorcerer.

I liked the design just not as a sorcerer.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Something like the Pathfinder Bloodrager? Little or no spellcasting, magic channelled into being a combat monster.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

When that sorcerer came out, I was not a big fan of it's design AS THE SORCERER. I felt it was too narrow. You have to start out a caster and become a melee monster as you expend resources. That means every sorcerer starts a mage and ends a fighter. If you wanted to turn into a dragon* earlier, you had to burn though your spell slots fast rather than being able to balance the two modes or switch between them. It also meant whatever monster form you had was going to be a melee brute. That limited your options for monsters you could potentially use.

The biggest issue for me was that lightswitch design where you were either a fighter or a caster but never at the same time. Which is why I was happy they didn't make that the sorcerer.

Yeah I think that was the issue a lot of people had. The class didn't make a good sorcerer.

But I definitely feel that it's unique enough to be its own separate class if the sorcerer lore got ripped out.

 

[Remathilis]

Yeah I think that was the issue a lot of people had. The class didn't make a good sorcerer.

But I definitely feel that it's unique enough to be its own separate class if the sorcerer lore got ripped out.

Absolutely agree. But Im not sold it would be as good a class as it looks on paper.

There are three primary modes of class design: martial, caster, and gish. In general terms, most classes pick one mode and that is their loop. A caster or martial can become a gish (valor bard, ek) and a gish stays a gish. This class (which I will shorten to UAS) in theory starts as caster, becomes a gish, and then ends up a martial. That's very hard to balance. And it creates weird incentives.
Let's say Bobby likes the idea of being a dragon. He likes the dragon powers you get when you're low on spells. To him, burning through your spells first is an impediment to getting dragon scales and breathe weapons. So he quickly runs the first few encounters as nukes until he gets to the level of dragoness he wants, wasting a lot of his spell power just to be a sub-par dragon knight.
Susie on the other hand plays the UAS like a regular caster. She gets more draconic as the day goes, but right about the time she hits martial and is ready to rock her dragon melee skills, the other casters are tapped out and want to rest. She never gets to use her martial form because the cleric, wizard and warlock want their Union breaks.
Ultimately, the UAS ends transform ends up with someone favoring one side or the other, and since you can't do both at the same time, you end up ignoring one for the other. The idea would work if the ability to regain magic was part of the systems so that you yoyo between forms (or start at one and move to the one you need) but fact D&D only regains magic on a rest means you always start a caster and "weaken" into a martial.

Can something be done with this? I think so. But I think it would be a rather limited gimmick unless the spell system got some adjustments as well. I'd be interested in seeing someone's take on it, but for my money I think I'd prefer a gish class that has access to martial monster powers and spells equally than the UAS's system.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

. This class (which I will shorten to UAS) in theory starts as caster, becomes a gish, and then ends up a martial. That's very hard to balance. And it creates weird incentives.

We know that WotC's own feedback showed that players did not like the valour bard because it changed in nature when it gained in subclass, so it's fairly obvious why the feedback on this was negative.

However, the problem could be avoided if the class dropped the idea that it was a sorcerer. You could ditch all the caster stuff, start off as a martial, and still keep most of the mechanics.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

This class (which I will shorten to UAS) in theory starts as caster, becomes a gish, and then ends up a martial. That's very hard to balance. And it creates weird incentives.

Yeah I was thinking about that and it does create weird issues which would result in the concept not working well. Rather than starting high resources and gradually running out until it needs a rest, it's changing from one state to another, both being effective. Which kind of breaks the balance of the game.