D&D 5E On whether sorcerers and wizards should be merged or not, (they shouldn't)

[tetrasodium]

Sure. With the full understanding that the wizards list of rules, tricks and formulas represent less than 1% of what magic is capable of. In short, his studious doesn't guarantee him a privleged place when it comes to knowing any particular magical ability.

I was specific. I even gave you a numbered list of the specifics.

To answer this specific question of "what clearly sets the wizard apart". In terms of theme it's his studiousness toward magic.

so I'll again ask you what in those vague strawmen are you referring to

@MoonSong I'd rather wizard and sorcerer have different must take spells that were unique rather than a selection of must haves plus a meaningless assortment of spells that range from trap to niche or pointless. You and frog reaver keep bringing up the handful of wizard specific spells as if they are largely meaningful options & when pressed to justify it resort or character assassinations changing of the subject or simply pound the table as if the mere presence of any number of spells on the wizard but not sorcerer list is an argument in itself.

 

[Todd Roybark]

You believe that study is more likely to yield greater power and ability than will come from raw uncultivated talent alone.

No, because a Sorcerer and D&D as a system does not assume ‘uncultivated’ talent.
A Sorcerer is not casting 9th level spells right after character creation, it takes time to develop one’s power, in any class.

D&D believes in the 10,000 hour theory of mastery.

I think I have been very clear, that while I like the 5e Sorcerer in play, I dislike aesthetically the fact the class is riven from the Wizard, and as has been expressed amply, in this 13 page thread, many people come at the classes with the Paradigm: The Wizard is the boring guy with the book and the Sorcerer is Magic.

This is a paradigm shift from before, and this narrow scope, in my opinion hurts both classes.

but hey, if you want to narrow down my statements to thinking I want the Wizard to be the ubermensch, and you won...go for it. I hope it makes you feel better.

Seriously I do. (Truly Irony free).

 

[FrogReaver]

so I'll again ask you what in those vague strawmen are you referring to

No vagueness, no strawman. I told you the wizard's theme is what set it apart. I told you how his class features supported that theme.

...the mere presence of any number of spells on the wizard but not sorcerer list is an argument in itself.

I think you finally stated the argument. Next step - stop your outright dismissal of it.

 

[MoonSong]

I can agree with that. The problem with that from a 5e perspective is that metamagic is really the only feature that sorcerers get in their base class that supports their class theme.

Exactly. I could be down with something different, but really the wizard is already too flexible already. (And some school abilities are better than metamagic!)

 

[FrogReaver]

Exactly. I could be down with something different, but really the wizard is already too flexible already. (And some school abilities are better than metamagic!)

Yep,

If the question is whether the sorcerer could have been designed differently. Absolutely.
If the question is does the sorcerer as currently designed serve a purpose in 5e then I also answer, Absolutely.

 

[cbwjm]

If one believes that wizards should be able to learn essentially all magic and learn to modify all magic (at least arcane magic), then that beliefs conclusion is that those who study magic should be able to do everything that the other arcane casters can do and more. I believe that view cannot exist in a class based RPG with multiple full casters.

Consider this - Not arguing power - just theme.

Wizards already have many magical abilities that relate back to their studying magic.
1. Access to largest spell list.
2. Most known spells.
3. Ability to gain spells by finding them and copying them.
4. Ability to prepare different spells day after day.

All of these things hearken back to the concept of a learned spell caster.

Whereas everything the sorcerer gets (or doesn't get) hearkens to a caster that hasn't learned many spells but has the power to shape them in ways the learned spell casters cannot. In other words, there's still many unknowns about magic - such that wizards only have limited but broad control over it.

I dont come to the same conclusions as you as to the wizard being able to do everything and I still think metamagic would fit well as something that a wizard could learn. To me, it seems to fit the theme of the learned spellcaster to learn loopholes or alternate casting methods to alter their spells.

 

[tetrasodium]

No vagueness, no strawman. I told you the wizard's theme is what set it apart. I told you how his class features supported that theme.



I think you finally stated the argument. Next step - stop your outright dismissal of it.

I'm not dismissing it, I'm asking you to justify why it is relevant to the fact that you & @MoonSong have argued that sorcerer should be everything wizard but with social skills minus spellbook & extra stuff that is mechanically meaningful in play or capable of justifying the raiding & copying of everything in the wizard's. so again I ask you to justify the relevance rather than continuing to admit you were parroting an empty strawman of a point that can not be inflated with anything meaningful to support your desire.

 

[FrogReaver]

I'm not dismissing it, I'm asking you to justify why it is relevant to the fact that you & @MoonSong have argued that sorcerer should be everything wizard but with social skills minus spellbook & extra stuff that is mechanically meaningful in play

Let me clear this up right here. In terms of mechanics:
The sorcerer shouldn't know as many spells as the wizard.
The sorcerer shouldn't be able to interchange spells from day to day like the wizard.
The sorcerer shouldn't have as large of a spell list as the wizard.
The sorcerer shouldn't be able to cast rituals.
The sorcerer shouldn't have an arcane traditon.

You really seem to be under the impression that sharing many of the same spells with a wizard and having metamagic is leaving the wizard with nothing. That's not the case.

And you are dismissing it - the wizards larger spell list is both a mechanical benefit and something that supports the wizard theme.

 

[FrogReaver]

I dont come to the same conclusions as you as to the wizard being able to do everything and I still think metamagic would fit well as something that a wizard could learn. To me, it seems to fit the theme of the learned spellcaster to learn loopholes or alternate casting methods to alter their spells.

I mean I can understand how it could be explained for a wizard. I just think it work much much better as the mechanic for how raw-untapped magical power can be altered by the caster of such magic.

 

[Todd Roybark]

Is it Metamagic or Font of Magic that defines a Sorcerer?

For me it is Font of Magic, which is a woefully underutilized design space, though with promise on the horizon based off recent U/A entries.

So while I think Metamagic is fair game to add to the Wizard thru a subclass (Arcane Theurge anyone...easy to design subclasses in 5e).....Font of Magic is a red line for me.

Font of Magic should be Sorcerer only.