Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6174151" data-attributes="member: 37579">But we can change it for the warlock and sorcerer?Shouldn't we be focusing equally on making it possible to play non-standard wizards?That's one interpretation. Really, it's a justification of the weapon proficiencies. The other is that the wizard had to work to learn their magic while the sorcerer is born with it. The sorcerer doesn't need to learn how to fight as they have the inborn power to blast their foes with magic. Reread the opening paragraph to the mage. Other than the last sentence it's pretty generic.Please keep in mind that almost all of the "scholarly wizard" lore and flavour is in the wizardry class feature and not in the mage class. But sorcerers have traditionally had fewer skills than a wizard. They're not really a skill-based class. And improved combat ability really seems geared towards the gish sorcerer. And while the melee sorcerer works to differentiate the 5e sorcerer from the wizard, it doesn't work well for updating everyone's sorcerers from earlier editions. Which is one of the catches. The sorcerer needs to be recognisable for updating.They start with a ranged power that hits enemies 60 ft. away as their primary class feature. Sounds like a ranged attacker by default to me.</blockquote>