D&D 5E Merging the Sorcerer and Warlock

[Salthorae]

Then we could bring back the playtest sorcerer.

It's been so long... what did you like about the playtest version so much?

 

[Kurotowa]

It's been so long... what did you like about the playtest version so much?

The early playtest Sorcerer not only used a Spell Point mechanic, but had Heritage abilities that could either be activated by spending points or activated automatically after you had spent a certain number of points that day. It was more complex and unusual, but certainly give the Sorcerer a much more distinct identity in relation to the Wizard.

I didn't participate in the playtest but I have looked over some of the materials after the fact. A lot of classes got pulled back to less complex or more traditional formats from the early wild experimentation. In some cases that was definitely the right call; restricting Superiority Dice to an optional mechanic for Fighters is for the best, and the first Warlock mechanics were kind of wacky. But having tried a Sorcerer in a recent campaign and finding it deeply unsatisfying, I can totally understand some people feeling like that class in particular shouldn't have been designed so conservatively.

 

[Salthorae]

I didn't participate in the playtest

I did, I just don't remember what it had back then! I have the files around somewhere though...

 

[generic]

If Oberon banged your mom, your a feyblooded sorcerer. If you learned the secret magic techniques of the Seelie Courts, because Oberon got into a drunken stupor, during one hell of a Fey Banger, and you overheard him, your a warlock.

I see em as two whole separate branches. Reflavoring Bloodline Origins as Patron Options (a Dragon for Dragon-Blooded, a Storm Lord for Giant Bloodline, a Ithillid for Abbarant Mind, etc, etc.) Seems legit.

That's um... One way to describe the base themes.

 

[Aldarc]

I honestly would have preferred if classes and spell lists were on a mix-and-match system. So you would have your power sources (spell list) and your power method (class chassis). So as a brainstorming hypothetical...

Power Methods: Learned, Pact, Innate
Power Sources: Arcane, Divine, Primal

Arcane:

• Learned Arcane = Wizard
• Pact Arcane = Warlock
• Innate Arcane = Sorcerer

Divine:

• Learned Divine = Cloistered Priest / White Mage
• Pact Divine = Cleric / War Priest
• Innate Divine = Favored Soul / Oracle

Primal:

• Learned Primal= Druid
• Pact Primal = Shaman
• Innate Primal = Shifter

 

[jgsugden]

D&D is an RPG - a role playing game. Characters play roles in stories.

The Warlock and Sorcerer are separate classes because they are designed to be separate types of stories. The mechanics support those stories. If they shared mechanics, they would not feel distinct from each other if both were in the same party.

The sorcerer is the 'Jack of Few Trades, Master of those'. He knows few spells but can do more with them than any other class due to metamagic. His power comes from using the same few tools better than anyone else could use them. A 7th level sorcerer could trade in all of his lower level slots to get 26 sorcerery points for 4 more 4th level spells (leaving 2 sorcerery points for metamagic), but those 5 4th level slots would be all he gets for the adventuring day as they do not have invocations to fall back upon.

The warlock comes to the table with only top shelf magics. Assuming 2 SR per LR, you get 6 high level spells per LR (or 7 with a Rod of the Pact Keeper). They supplement these high level spells with invocations rather than low level spells. Those invocations are themed to the concepts that support the warlock rather than those that support the sorcerer.

The design of these classes supports the concept. It is best that they remain separate, although I do wish they'd put a bit more flare into a sorcerer.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

It's been so long... what did you like about the playtest version so much?

Mainly the fact that it was trying something different. Core sorcerer is just a wizard in other colors. Even to make it distinct in the PHB they had to steal classic wizard tools, like wild magic and metamagic.

The playtest version used spell points and manifested stronger traits of the bloodline as their use of magic and sorcerous powers increased. It was really cool that your character would get more dragon-like as the sorcery of its blood manifested through the use of magic and sorcerous powers.

We may never know how much design space there really was on it. It only went to the 5th level and didn't have a lot of sorcerous powers described, but I think what they're doing was an improvement. It may have some bias on my part, though. Definitely not a fan of the traditional sorcerer.

 

[DND_Reborn]

In reading all this I don't find fault so much in the classes as in the spell lists. Although the spell lists are exclusive in that each class has one, there is way too much overlap IMO between the different classes.

From the sources I have (I know this isn't exhaustive, but good enough I suppose, and I included subclass augmented spells), here is the breakdown of % overlap spells:

Notice the classic casters, Cleric, Druid, and Wizard have some of the lowest amount of overlap. Only Ranger is among their ranks for being "low" in overlap. The newer classes, Bard, Sorcerer, and Warlock all have the worst amount of overlap. This hardly helps make them feel unique.

So, for myself, what should differentiate spell casters isn't so much how they cast spells or where they get their power from, but what their spells should be able to do.

Maybe it is just me, but that's my two cents.

 

[oreofox]

Mainly the fact that it was trying something different. Core sorcerer is just a wizard in other colors. Even to make it distinct in the PHB they had to steal classic wizard tools, like wild magic and metamagic.

The playtest version used spell points and manifested stronger traits of the bloodline as their use of magic and sorcerous powers increased. It was really cool that your character would get more dragon-like as the sorcery of its blood manifested through the use of magic and sorcerous powers.

We may never know how much design space there really was on it. It only went to the 5th level and didn't have a lot of sorcerous powers described, but I think what they're doing was an improvement. It may have some bias on my part, though. Definitely not a fan of the traditional sorcerer.

Their hit dice also changed depending on their subclass, or at least that's what it seemed like in the write up. The sorcerer's hit dice was listed in the sorcerous origin section, and not the actual class section like the other couple classes that were in the 1st or 2nd playtest packet (whichever one contained the sorcerer). They just had the dragon (because for some reason WotC always seems to think innate spellcasting is the result of dragons), and it gave the sorcerer a d8 for HD, and seemed to be a melee subclass. Gained proficiency with all armor, shields, and martial weapons. Suggested equipment included chainmail and a greatsword. Would have been nice if they kept going with it, instead of giving us what we got. They had to spend willpower (early version of spell points) to cast a spell, and even though it only went up to 2nd level spells, it looked like they were going to be a 1-1 basis (1 willpower per level of spell).

As for the topic at hand: I basically did exactly what the OP was talking about. I merged the warlock into the sorcerer, giving it all the warlock spells. I've got the idea of changing the warlock patrons into sorcerer subclasses, but I haven't done much as no one has really wanted to be a sorcerer. It's the class that seems to get the least amount of play in all the games I have participated.

 

[Salthorae]

The newer classes, Bard, Sorcerer, and Warlock all have the worst amount of overlap. This hardly helps make them feel unique.

So, for myself, what should differentiate spell casters isn't so much how they cast spells or where they get their power from, but what their spells should be able to do.

Well, for one thing, Bard isn't a new class. It's been around since 1e.

It has always been billed as a dabbler in spells (like everything else) though still full powered caster (i.e. CL) and that it was in actuality casting either Druid or Wizard spells depending on the edition, so overlap is expected there.

For me, it's the complete opposite. I could care less about the spell list overlap. For me, it's about the fluff of the classes and the source of their powers and their mechanical differentiation that matters.

While it's nice to have a few spells here and there that are different, it's probably the least important aspect.