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

[Undrave]

Yea, I'd agree with that. Maybe every background gives 4 skills baseline and a tool proficiency. And the special feature probably can carry a little more weight.

Assuming no multiclassing and no feats as a baseline, and therefore no variant human, maybe backgrounds could even have a feat (non-combat only) or feat-level ability baked in baseline as well.

Basically yeah. Probably a pair of feature, one more mechanical (like the Outlander's foraging skills) and one more ribbon-like (Criminal contact). I'd probably put something like 'Favored Terrain' in a background instead of directly a Ranger class.

 

[tetrasodium]

Hahaha, I don't know about that...



Well, a way to do it would be to excise culture from race? Borrowing from PF2 a little, character creation would thus be like this:

Step 1: Pick a race, you gain biological attributes and a +2 to three stats
Step 2: Pick a culture in broad stroke like "Militaristic", "Atavist", "Mercantile", "Theocratic" etc, giving you +2 to a stat, +1 to another and then some skills in the Social/Explo pillar
Step 3: Pick a background. You get another +2 and +1 and then some more skills and tools proficiency
Step 4: Pick a narrow class, giving you again +2 and +1

In the end, if you pick all the options that give a bonus to the same two stats after the Race bonus you end up with 18, 15, 12 10 10 10 if you go hyper specialized.

How's that?



You seem pretty hung up on how 3e used to do things. You should try not to focus so much on exact mechanics.

You are misinterpreting the fact that it's relevant that sorcerer and warlock design cannibalized wizard for their 5e versions, just copied nearly all of what they didn't take exclusively, and wotc filled in what remains with largely empty ribbons I was directly asked to explain "what was a solely wizard only tool in its toolbox that the sorcerer stole" and did so.

as to your not focus on exact mechanics point, I would be all for it if there were meaningful (or actual) mechanics in the wizard class that filled the wizard's empty gap to set it apart from the classes that copy virtually all of the wizard's spell list including the must have critical spells plus bring class features of their own to the table set with the top shelf spells from the wizard's spell list. There are no mechanics to focus on.. because... well.. sorcerer & warlock stole the ones not dropped from the game.

 

[TwoSix]

Basically yeah. Probably a pair of feature, one more mechanical (like the Outlander's foraging skills) and one more ribbon-like (Criminal contact). I'd probably put something like 'Favored Terrain' in a background instead of directly a Ranger class.

Agreed.

 

[Undrave]

You are misinterpreting the fact that it's relevant that sorcerer and warlock design cannibalized wizard for their 5e versions, just copied nearly all of what they didn't take exclusively, and wotc filled in what remains with largely empty ribbons I was directly asked to explain "what was a solely wizard only tool in its toolbox that the sorcerer stole" and did so.

as to your not focus on exact mechanics point, I would be all for it if there were meaningful (or actual) mechanics in the wizard class that filled the wizard's empty gap to set it apart from the classes that copy virtually all of the wizard's spell list including the must have critical spells plus bring class features of their own to the table set with the top shelf spells from the wizard's spell list. There are no mechanics to focus on.. because... well.. sorcerer & warlock stole the ones not dropped from the game.

Eh... Here you go again focusing on mechanics they had in the past rather than if the current mechanics can properly express the lore of the current Wizard (and not the lore of 2e or 3e or 4e Wizard).

You speaking of 'stolen' mechanic tells me you feel the Wizard is owed certain mechanics, certain abilities. No class is owed anything. Just because the Wizard had everything arcane casters had in the past means it should get everything arcane now.

 

[MoonSong]

You are misinterpreting the fact that it's relevant that sorcerer and warlock design cannibalized wizard for their 5e versions, just copied nearly all of what they didn't take exclusively, and wotc filled in what remains with largely empty ribbons I was directly asked to explain "what was a solely wizard only tool in its toolbox that the sorcerer stole" and did so.

as to your not focus on exact mechanics point, I would be all for it if there were meaningful (or actual) mechanics in the wizard class that filled the wizard's empty gap to set it apart from the classes that copy virtually all of the wizard's spell list including the must have critical spells plus bring class features of their own to the table set with the top shelf spells from the wizard's spell list. There are no mechanics to focus on.. because... well.. sorcerer & warlock stole the ones not dropped from the game.

You are going to have to spell out which warlock invocations and features were stolen from wizard feats. Cause all I can see is essentially the same invocation names warlock had in complete arcane. (Its original incarnation as a class)

Now, back to sorcerer. You are assuming that sorcerer is the reason wizard lacks metamagic. In fact it is very likely the only reason metamagic is in this edition is because of the sorcerer. The reasoning is twofold. One, early playtest showed the designers had a hard time comming with workable and satisfactory metamagic mechanics. And metagic feats suddenly vanished once Neovancian was in place. Two, sorcerer was put together at the last minute, by that time wizard was nearly in its final form, so it had zero influence on how the wizard was designed. The decision to take away metamagic from wizards had nothimg to do with the sorcerer. Under this reasoning, the sorcerer didn't steal metamagic but rather salvaged it...

Edit: Ok, it wasn't exactly in this way, the last packet to have metamagic as feats was march, 2013. The next one in August 2013 removed metamagic and was the first to introduce wizard as "generic" Mage and laid the basis for the finalized wizard design.

 

[Tony Vargas]

set it apart from the classes that copy virtually all of the wizard's spell list

The wizard has more unique spells in it's PH list than any other class: 33.
The Warlock got 6 unique spells.
The Sorcerer, none.

You speaking of 'stolen' mechanic tells me you feel the Wizard is owed certain mechanics, certain abilities.

Wizard privilege?
What's next? Wizard guilt? Wizard savior syndrome?

 

[oreofox]

Wizard losing bonus feats that could be metamagic or item creation feats in 3e means nothing. Sorcerer lost the ability to have a familiar unless they burn a feat for it to learn the Find Familiar spell. The wizard can still obtain a familiar without such. WotC hasn't known what exactly to do with the sorcerer since they first made it 20 years ago. The fact that it has been 15 years since they created it when they had the chance to really do something different in 5e that wasn't "wizard but worse" seems to show that WotC doesn't care for it. Sorcerers having metamagic seems like a bandaid fix to give sorcerer some sort of class ability besides Font of Magic.

They seemed to care more about the warlock than they did the sorcerer. Warlock gets 6 things in the PHB to choose from (3 patrons, 3 pacts), while the sorcerer gets 2 (dragon and wild magic). Wizard gets 8. As stated earlier, sorcerer has 1 unique spell, while warlock and wizard have multiple. Sorcerers get 3 subclass features as they level (6, 14, 18), wizard also gets 3 (6, 10, 14).

The wizard's toolbox was sparse to begin with, other than their arcane spells. The sorcerer's toolbox was practically nonexistant. It was the wizard, but worse. That's been WotC design direction with the class, it seems, for 20 years now. I hope they can do something unique with the sorcerer (hell, even the wizard) like they did the warlock when it comes to 6th edition.

 

[tetrasodium]

@Undrave can't help but notices that wide circle you made around the point of the 5e wizard not having core mechanics that they bring to the table in meaningful fleshed out ways beyond the spell list copied by sorcerer & warlock. There have been a couple times in this thread where people have had to admit "well uhh.. tiny hut.. detect magic... some other super niche stuff like phantom steed" only after much cajoling to be specific & even then they needed to dress it up in flavorful text to obscure how empty the strawman of a mechanic they were inflating was rather than just listing the specifics.

If you don't like the parallels to past editions, perhaps you'd like to expound on the wizard's core class mechanics that really set it's duplicated spell list access apart from classes like warlock & sorcerer who effectively have all the meaningful portions of the wizard spell list and core class mechanics that shine. Be specific, don't just say "ritual magic, bigger spell list"... This thread has gone over those & nobody has been willing or able to admit what meaningful contribution those play at the table other than the occasional niche edge case

@Tony Vargas the sorcerer has a few wizard does not have, I made a list earlier. Enhance ability, daylight, dominate beast, & insect plague. I don't know if your none also includes cleric/warlock/bard/etc. Critically important to your "more unique spells" point is the fact that few if any (depending on your criteria for weighing them) are not the critical must have top shelf spells. If you click on that link there that says earlier you can see the last time someone tried to build an argument around those spells & they couldn't even do it without obfuscating the sprells behind descriptive text, maybe you are itching to do better?

@oreofox on those "wizards get eight" point, they took a core class mechanic & made it an archtype. Sorcerer's draconic bloodline is a bunch of feats & wild magic was a PrC that I sourced earlier. The wizard arcane toolbox was indeed "practically nonexistant" because the toolbox was those bonus feats and differences to how the int mod applied to various things. In short it was extensive. they took a portion of the core class that applied at level 1 rather than a feat grouping or PrC & made it into the vast majority of wizard archtypes then cut the rest including some of that core class stuff from the game

 

[Tony Vargas]

the sorcerer has a few wizard does not have, I made a list earlier.

I saw it. Good list. Illustrates the blatant favoritism shown the wizard. ;P

The Sorcerer has no spells uniquely it's own, though. It shares a lot with wizard, some with cleric or druid, etc.

The wizard, OTOH, 33 spells all it's own, but for the odd poach-anything options.

Spoiler

Find Familiar
Grease
Tenser's Floating Disk
Arcane Lock
Melf's Acid Arrow
Nystul's Magic Aura
Rope Trick
Phantom Steed
Arcane Eye
Evard's Black Tentacles
Fabricate
Fire Shield
Leomund's Secret Chest
Mordenkainen's Faithful Hound
Mordenkainen's Private Sanctum
Otiluke's Resilient Sphere
Phantasmal Killer
Bigby's Hand
Passwall
Rary's Telepathic Bond
Wall of Force
Contingency
Drawmij's Instant Summons
Magic Jar
Otiluke's Freezing Sphere
Wall of Ice
Sequester
Simulacrum
Clone
Maze
Telepathy
Prismatic Wall
Weird

Critically important to your "more unique spells" point is the fact that few if any (depending on your criteria for weighing them) are not the critical must have top shelf spells.

If you can compile a definitive list of critical, must-have spells, that eat up most casters' known spells, the game has much bigger problems.

 

[Undrave]

@Undrave can't help but notices that wide circle you made around the point of the 5e wizard not having core mechanics that they bring to the table in meaningful fleshed out ways beyond the spell list copied by sorcerer & warlock. There have been a couple times in this thread where people have had to admit "well uhh.. tiny hut.. detect magic... some other super niche stuff like phantom steed" only after much cajoling to be specific & even then they needed to dress it up in flavorful text to obscure how empty the strawman of a mechanic they were inflating was rather than just listing the specifics.

If you don't like the parallels to past editions, perhaps you'd like to expound on the wizard's core class mechanics that really set it's duplicated spell list access apart from classes like warlock & sorcerer who effectively have all the meaningful portions of the wizard spell list and core class mechanics that shine. Be specific, don't just say "ritual magic, bigger spell list"... This thread has gone over those & nobody has been willing or able to admit what meaningful contribution those play at the table other than the occasional niche edge case

Hey mostly because I agree the Wizard has a bland identity and uninspiring class features (aside, again, for the Diviner and Abjurer's single speciality), but I just don't agree in blaming the Sorcerer for it basically. Plus, the Wizard is still strong, it's just bland.

Personally though, I think Ritual Magic is pretty cool and there just should have been more rituals and the Wizard should have had features to make them better at it than anybody else. It's a fun concept that doesn't feel fully realized.