D&D General One thing I hate about the Sorcerer

[Crimson Longinus]

Because you can't get invocations without making a pact.
Well you're not suppose to.

But the mechanic makes perfect sense for innately magical being like sorcerer. Always-on magical effects it something such person should have.

 

[Minigiant]

Clerics get their powers from the plane, not from the gods. Also, Clerics can contemplate a cosmic principle.

If I recall correctly, a Warlock can make a pact with a community of Pixies, or something like that.

Appeal to a hierarchy is untenable.

That essentially is why you see no different.

You watered down the flavor.

Allowing for players to be clerics with no deity is a nice gesture for those morally opposed, those with different comfort levels, and those with unique concepts.
Warlocks with no actual patron is cool for the scholar who knows not what he's done
Wizards who didn't study hard is nice for people who want to run young prodigies or genius who found a spellbook.

But using special cases as the rule and not the rare or setting exception kills the flavor.

 

[Minigiant]

But the mechanic makes perfect sense for innately magical being like sorcerer. Always-on magical effects it something such person should have.

so make another one. Called power or sorceries.

In D&D, invocations are traps nondivine immortals sucker you into their service with.

 

[Yaarel]

That essentially is why you see no different.

You watered down the flavor.

Allowing for players to be clerics with no deity is a nice gesture for those morally opposed, those with different comfort levels, and those with unique concepts.
Warlocks with no actual patron is cool for the scholar who knows not what he's done
Wizards who didn't study hard is nice for people who want to run young prodigies or genius who found a spellbook.

But using special cases as the rule and not the rare or setting exception kills the flavor.

I dont consider hierarchy and master-slave relationships to be "flavor".

There are many kinds of flavor.

Paladin distinguishes from Bard, even both swing swords and heal. They do these things in the context of doing different other things.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

so make another one. Called power or sorceries.

We don't need to as we already have this mechanic, and I don't want classes that duplicate each other's niches. Mistake was just making sorcerer a separate class instead of combining its strong fluff with the superior warlock mechanics.

In D&D, invocations are traps nondivine immortals sucker you into their service with.

Aren't the spells that too? This doesn't need specific mechanic, it is any magic such a pact grants.

And I repeat, warlock doesn't make sense metaphysically. If the pact imbues the character with power, such a person now possesses innate magical power and that's sorcerer's fluff. But if the power is constantly channelled instead, then that's a cleric. Warlock doesn't have metaphysics that separates it from other classes, thus shouldn't exist as separate class. Its mechanics are good though, and perfectly suit the sorcerer which has pointless mechanics. So rather than having two flawed classes, I'd rather combine them into one coherent and strong one.

 

[Yaarel]

I like the Eldritch Blast cantrip. I like the flavor of force magic.

But in the context of the Warlock, the Eldritch Blast becomes problematic. The Warlock is spilling over in flavor and ways to mechanically express it. But because it is what it does, it is instead always Eldritch Blast over and over and over again. During gameplay there is no flavor except Eldritch Blast − and for the Warlocks rich potential that is a crime.

At least let each pact flavorfully modify the Eldritch Blast. So during gameplay it would be untrue that every Warlock is an indistinguishable copy.

 

[Minigiant]

I dont consider hierarchy and master-slave relationships to be "flavor".

There are many kinds of flavor.

Paladin distinguishes from Bard, even both swing swords and heal. They do these things in the context of doing different other things.

Because WOTC gave them both strong mechanical aspects to match the flavor.

This thread only exist because WOTC didn't give sorcerer strong mechanical and flavor aspects becaause a percentage of fans demanded it to justify more wizard spells.

Hell the Arcane, Divine, and Primal spell lists, an aspect with strong flavor and mechanics, was also killed by wizard players.

Damn Wizard fanboys!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I like the Eldritch Blast cantrip. I like the flavor of force magic.

But in the context of the Warlock, the Eldritch Blast becomes problematic. The Warlock is spilling over in flavor and ways to mechanically express it. But because it is what it does, it is instead always Eldritch Blast over and over and over again. During gameplay there is no flavor except Eldritch Blast − and for the Warlocks rich potential that is a crime.

At least let each pact flavorfully modify the Eldritch Blast. So during gameplay it would be untrue that every Warlock is an indistinguishable copy.

Yes, absolutely. The first thing I did on my warlock houserules was to allow agonising blast bonus to apply to any cantrip, but unfortunately eldritch blast is still obviously the best choice most of the time. It is just too good, there is no real choice and that's boring.

 

[Minigiant]

Aren't the spells that too? This doesn't need specific mechanic, it is any magic such a pact grants.

And I repeat, warlock doesn't make sense metaphysically. If the pact imbues the character with power, such a person now possesses innate magical power and that's sorcerer's fluff. But if the power is constantly channelled instead, then that's a cleric. Warlock doesn't have metaphysics that separates it from other classes, thus shouldn't exist as separate class. Its mechanics are good though, and perfectly suit the sorcerer which has pointless mechanics. So rather than having two flawed classes, I'd rather combine them into one coherent and strong one.

Oh I get what you are missing.
Originally, in 3e and 4e, a patron pact didn't give you spells.
WOTC reverted it all back into spells in 5e.
It was
Innate arcane magic that granted spells= Sorcerer
Innate arcane magic that graneed invocations= Warlock

In 5e, WOTC just made them all cast the same spells then gave them barely any unique spells.

Because Wizards of the Coast.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Oh I get what you are missing.
Originally, in 3e and 4e, a patron pact didn't give you spells.
WOTC reverted it all back into spells in 5e.

I mean I really don't care about how it was. I don't care how some old edition did it or even what classes existed in them.

It was
Innate arcane magic that granted spells= Sorcerer
Innate arcane magic that graneed invocations= Warlock

Which is weird. Because it is same fluff, innate arcane magic, so it should have the same rules. So the distinction was nonsensical even back then.