D&D 5E Designer apathy and sunk costs, The reason the sorcerer is doomed to uncanny valley one-trick-ponieness.

[Jefe Bergenstein]

x race Sorcerer 1
Scores

Str 8
Dex 15
Con 10
Int 14
Cha 13
Wis 12

Have an owl familiar
Feat Point Blank shot
Other feat: stealthy


Spells
Cantrips
Ghost sound
message
Mage hand
light
1
Instant Locksmith (Or minor illusion)
Summon monster 1

Cross class skills Hide, move silently, open lock, spot. (disable device if human)

Enough for first level challenges. Hide like crazy when combat happens and shoot your crossbow whenever you can. Or use the summons for combat. You are a magical thief, feel like one and as you gain levels you become better at it. (unseen servant, floating disk, Knock, silence and invisibility await at later levels). Other niches are less skill intensive so are even more doable. Even my gish sorcerer died because it was a senseless sacrifice -what happens when you get a wisdom penalty- not because was squishy. The "you cast combat spells or suck" was never true in 3rd edition.

I'm amused your sorcerer had a higher Cha than Int, and you complain that you hate wizards because you dont like brainy characters. Just ask your DM to play a wizard with Charisma as the casting stat, and refluff the spellbook as gold funneled into learning your innate powers. There's no balance issues, and that seems a REALLY simple fix.

If it makes you feel any better, I think they missed an opportunity by even having the sorcerer cast spells. They should have followed a similar path as the runelord PRC or the psion, and have had thematic powers that allow for magical effects, rather than cribbing directly from the wizard spell list. A sorc should basically play like a superhero. Too many classes use spells as is.

 

[Orlax]

I think blasting is a part of being an arcane caster. Sorcerers and Wizards do share design space. So I don't mind that Sorcerers have blasting in their DNA, so to speak.

But I take issue with the idea that that's their soul raison d'être. Sorcerers have access to the bulk of the wizard's spells. It's really in the area of ritual magic and specific spells (like lifestyle spells) that wizards have that Sorcerers don't.

But Sorcerers have a lot of good buff spells, Polymorph, Haste, etc. And we can Twin them for better party coverage, and CON save proficiency to keep those spells longer.

Sorcerers have access to all the good illusion and charm spells, and Subtle Spell allows them to sneak them into non-combat situations without being obvious.

Yes, it sucks that the Wizard can generally prepare close to twice the spells that the Sorcerer ever knows, but that means Sorcerers need to pick their focus. And it doesn't have to be blasting.

My wild sorc's focus is teleportation and traveling magic, shield spells, and other defensive buffs (mage armor, blur, that for of thing). My only damage really comes from cantrips (which I almost always have advantage on the attack for). I can bend luck for my allies. My d4 has been the difference between hit and miss more than once, and in both offensive and defensive applications. I have the lucky feat so I have even more defensive measures I can take. I use teleportation capabilities and shield capabilities to trigger wild surges regularly and do a ton of weird stuff.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I wish a wizard rather than a sorcerer had been the OP. Then WotC might listen.

Somewhere, on Earth 2, someone is making this exact same post telling Sorcerers of the Coast how much they screwed up the wizard class!

 

[Minigiant]

I think blasting is a part of being an arcane caster. Sorcerers and Wizards do share design space. So I don't mind that Sorcerers have blasting in their DNA, so to speak.

But I take issue with the idea that that's their soul raison d'être. Sorcerers have access to the bulk of the wizard's spells. It's really in the area of ritual magic and specific spells (like lifestyle spells) that wizards have that Sorcerers don't.

But Sorcerers have a lot of good buff spells, Polymorph, Haste, etc. And we can Twin them for better party coverage, and CON save proficiency to keep those spells longer.

Sorcerers have access to all the good illusion and charm spells, and Subtle Spell allows them to sneak them into non-combat situations without being obvious.

Yes, it sucks that the Wizard can generally prepare close to twice the spells that the Sorcerer ever knows, but that means Sorcerers need to pick their focus. And it doesn't have to be blasting.

Yes, sorcerer can do things other than blasting. And I argue to many that the sorcerer has a lot of versatility.
But offensive spells, defensive spells, and general multi-purpose buffs/charm/illusions is it's strength in 3e and this continued in 5e.
You skip hold portal and ventriloquism and opt for spells that are most likely to be needed charm person and color spray

You could make a barbarians archer or paladin sneak but you ignore lots of the classes' strength that way.

 

[Sunseeker]

Personally, I think utility is the biggest bane of 5e.

I like focused classes. I like a focused sorcerer. I don't think it's properly focused, but I whole-heartedly favor classes that are REALLY GOOD at a couple things as opposed to kinda-okay at a lot of things. And certainly it's a huge problem when classes are REALLY GOOD at everything.

 

[Mistwell]

I get the sense that a lot of people who want a different sorcerer are kinda talking about a psionic-type class (perhaps with the serial number scratched off).

 

[Fishing_Minigame]

When I still had a wild magic sorcerer in my group, this is what I cobbled together to play with:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DGRejk-T_hUxtf4MEWA6ti3KnchOSbZ-pGoTvDFbHfU/edit
(The bonus spells and the metamagic adjustment were from someone else's proposal, I can try and track it down again if anyone is curious).

It definitely did increase the frequency of wild magic surges, as I was frequently forgetting to have her roll before. This was mostly me being irritated with the class though -- she was perfectly happy as long as I threw in groups of weak critters to be fireball'd.

Most of my caster players just get annoyed at the number of spell slots per day they have to play with, and we might be able to blame those dang MMOs for that.

 

[Minigiant]

Personally, I think utility is the biggest bane of 5e.

I like focused classes. I like a focused sorcerer. I don't think it's properly focused, but I whole-heartedly favor classes that are REALLY GOOD at a couple things as opposed to kinda-okay at a lot of things. And certainly it's a huge problem when classes are REALLY GOOD at everything.

That's the bane of any multiplayer game with magic. That's why when novels with casters convert into games, casters get so many restrictions.

I call it the Harry Potter Effect. Move Harry and friends out of a book and into a game and he forgets 95% of his spells.

 

[MoonSong]

And it's weak. It's Charisma is too low to get into offensive spells ever. Crossbows will get underpowered fast and you'll have to help the party in a fight eventually. Even sneaky rogue could drop a nasty sneak attack.

It's a niche build. If your party can pick up your slack. Fine. If you campaign is low combat. Fine. If your DM hands you a chest of wands of fireballs, magic missile, and lightning bolt. Fine.

But Niche build should not be in the same place as a common one.

This was an example with a magical thief, but it could have been almost anything. Maybe it is because I play sorcerers with a cleric's mentality, you have to be good at your main job -whatever it is-and just avoid to die in combat, let the fighter shine in combat with enough weapon attacks to support the frontliners, it is fine to go a full combat without casting a single spell. At low levels a low bab isn't that low, and at higher levels you have one or two spare spells known for a true strike, it wasn't perfect, but was doable and a lot of fun. The 5e sorcerer doesn't even come close, it is outright made for blasting, has even less spells known than ever, and lacks access to meaningful utility.

I'm amused your sorcerer had a higher Cha than Int, and you complain that you hate wizards because you dont like brainy characters. Just ask your DM to play a wizard with Charisma as the casting stat, and refluff the spellbook as gold funneled into learning your innate powers. There's no balance issues, and that seems a REALLY simple fix.

If it makes you feel any better, I think they missed an opportunity by even having the sorcerer cast spells. They should have followed a similar path as the runelord PRC or the psion, and have had thematic powers that allow for magical effects, rather than cribbing directly from the wizard spell list. A sorc should basically play like a superhero. Too many classes use spells as is.

If you go all utility, then casting stat doesn't matter. If your only purpose is to be a magical thief, you don't care about casting fireball or whatever, and since you don't have the room for it anyway it doesn't matter. A wizard will always have the temptation to wear another hat tomorrow, and has less credibility on going on a niche. This was skill intensive and needs int, but other niches don't -maybe int 13 for combat expertise for the gish-. That is why I love 3e sorcerers, they let you build your niche and be good at it.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I get the sense that a lot of people who want a different sorcerer are kinda talking about a psionic-type class (perhaps with the serial number scratched off).

Or just a Wizard that uses CHA as their caster stat and their "spellbook" is in their head.