D&D 5E Sorcerer class improvement house rule

[5ekyu]

I agree with the statement of the problem... I agree that while one can build an effective blaster or such using very limited expectations, most others dont have enough spells.

As a patch to the sorc, these options seem fine though I am a bit off on the division of sorc points then giving out free meta uses etc. This all seems like the dividing of those mechanics complicates the issues.

This is not the approach I would take.

My big change would be yo fix both sorcerer and warlock by swapping invocations and meta-magic, but thsts another isdue.

My patch to sorc would be simpler - give each origin say two to three schools of magic that are affiliated with them. The sorcerer chooses one. Spells from the wizard spell list of thst school are added to the sorcerer list of available (not known. ).

At every odd level the sorc can pick a bonus known spell of thst school.

So, by 5th level, you have added 3 known spells, by 11th 6, etc all of a school affiliate with your origin,.

That allows sorcerer builds to expand out and gain a few spells in a given theme tied to his origin.

That's where to me the sorcerer fallsxshort. Thsts all we need in a patch.

Imo.

 

[Dausuul]

I don't know why you're throwing out the red dragon or divine soul sorcerers. Those are the two subclasses that work like a sorcerer is supposed to work. Why wouldn't you use them as the template for making the rest of the class perform?

Where dragon sorcs are concerned, the problem is simply lack of spells. A blaster-caster needs two crucial things:

• A high-damage at-will attack with no situational limitations*.
• A high-damage AoE blast at 3rd level - and I cannot lay enough stress on the "3rd-level" part. If your AoE blast comes at 4th level, you have to wait two extra levels for it to come online, and at the point where it does come online, you get three fewer casts per day. 5th is right out.

The red dragon sorc knocks both requirements out of the park. Fire bolt is the go-to attack cantrip, with good range and high damage, and fireball is notorious for being the best blasting spell in the game. Now compare the other elements:

Cold: Ray of frost is a good at-will attack. 3rd level AoE damage spell does not exist.
Lightning: Shocking grasp is a panic button, not a bread-and-butter attack cantrip. Lightning bolt is solid, if not quite up to the fireball standard.
Acid: Acid splash is so-so. 3rd level AoE damage spell does not exist.
Poison: Poison spray is crap. 3rd-level AoE damage spell does not exist. Hell, 4th-level AoE damage spell does not exist, and the 5th-level AoE damage spell is garbage. And while I don't normally worry too much about immunities and resistances, I make an exception when entire categories of monsters have immunity. Poison sorcs are just screwed.

The quick fix is to allow dragon sorcs to change the element of blasting spells, so everyone is just using a reskinned fireball. A slightly more involved solution is to create 5 new spells: New attack cantrips for lightning and poison, and 3rd-level AoE blasts for cold, acid, and poison. (And the poison spells should be extra buffed given the prevalence of poison immunity.)

For the other sorcerer types, I'd look at each one to see why it does or does not work, and address that individually.

*Aside from elemental resistances/immunities.

 

[Blue]

I'm fairly sure I see the issue, and I bolded it.

After considering arguments for and against sorcerer balance, I was of the opinion that it was fine. Then I tried to make a sorcerer character concept that was completely reasonable. A (black) draconic origin with a black dragon theme. I wanted to be able to do the sorts of magical effects that traditional black dragons can do, and have a very basic "party arcanist" suite of spells. I'm not going to be nearly as flexible as a wizard (and shouldn't be!) but I should be able to cover the bases of a primary spellcaster for the party. To keep it brief--it didn't work. I was rather surprised to find out that I actually couldn't make the character I wanted. I couldn't focus on acid damage, I couldn't cover enough bases, etc. And if I couldn't do it with that basic concept, then I can't do it with a lot of other basic concepts either. So I changed my opinion, analyzed the class design, and determined that sorcerer doesn't work right.

That's not a reasonable character for a sorcerer. If I said I couldn't make the same concept with a paladin nor a trickster cleric no one would be surprised. But the fluff for the sorcerer and the wizard often gets people thinking that they can be interchanged regardless of concept.

I read through that paragraph and I see requirements that fit the wizard's strengths, such as a "party arcanist" suite of spells, but I see nothing that focuses on what makes the sorcerer a sorcerer. There's a bit about the acid focus that says at least there's some toward the subclass, but everything about the general class is describing a wizard class, not a sorcerer class. It's no surprise it was a poor fit.

The sorcerer has it's own identity separate from the wizard. If you play to that identity instead of trying to mimic another class I think you'd be a lot more happy with the sorcerer.

 

[Harzel]

The quick fix is to allow dragon sorcs to change the element of blasting spells, so everyone is just using a reskinned fireball.

I realize you suggested this as a matter of expediency, but it just makes me shudder - nails on a chalkboard, etc. Things that are supposed to be different things should be ... different. It's like adding food coloring to vanilla ice cream and claiming you've created a new flavor. And I freely admit this is a highly subjective reaction.

 

[Harzel]

I'm fairly sure I see the issue, and I bolded it.



That's not a reasonable character for a sorcerer. If I said I couldn't make the same concept with a paladin nor a trickster cleric no one would be surprised. But the fluff for the sorcerer and the wizard often gets people thinking that they can be interchanged regardless of concept.

I read through that paragraph and I see requirements that fit the wizard's strengths, such as a "party arcanist" suite of spells, but I see nothing that focuses on what makes the sorcerer a sorcerer. There's a bit about the acid focus that says at least there's some toward the subclass, but everything about the general class is describing a wizard class, not a sorcerer class. It's no surprise it was a poor fit.

The sorcerer has it's own identity separate from the wizard. If you play to that identity instead of trying to mimic another class I think you'd be a lot more happy with the sorcerer.

Well, your basic point seems quite sound, but OTOH, it does not seem unreasonable to want to build a character on the basis of
a) my magic comes from something innate within me; AND
b) I want to be able to do a basic variety of magical tasks.
Although when I look at that the first thing that comes to mind is Sorc X / Wizard Y, perhaps with some tweaks to make the combo more appealing.

 

[Blue]

Well, your basic point seems quite sound, but OTOH, it does not seem unreasonable to want to build a character on the basis of
a) my magic comes from something innate within me; AND
b) I want to be able to do a basic variety of magical tasks.
Although when I look at that the first thing that comes to mind is Sorc X / Wizard Y, perhaps with some tweaks to make the combo more appealing.

It's not unreasonable to have a concept, but it may not be one that the classes can cover.

With how 5e handles arcane magic, those that do it through knowledge (INT) are given a wider scope of spells and more flexibility. That's a bonus given to another class. Granting a feature of one class and wanting it along with everything else a different class already gives you isn't reasonable.

As a side note, beware because multiclassing is easy to shoot yourself in the foot. A Sorc / Wizard will have a large number of known spells, but they will lag well behind in higher level spells known. Plus they will have two different casting scores to advance.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I don't know why you're throwing out the red dragon or divine soul sorcerers. Those are the two subclasses that work like a sorcerer is supposed to work. Why wouldn't you use them as the template for making the rest of the class perform?

When I said "throw them out" I didn't mean I don't use those subclasses. What I was doing was forestalling people arguing that sorcerer is perfectly balanced (and therefore this thread is meaningless) because a fire draconic sorcerer is a damage powerhouse, or a divine soul is incredibly flexible. That's usually what happens on these threads, and it completely misses the issue that a class is more than its best subclass. It seems to have worked, since no one is making that argument.

That's not a reasonable character for a sorcerer. If I said I couldn't make the same concept with a paladin nor a trickster cleric no one would be surprised. But the fluff for the sorcerer and the wizard often gets people thinking that they can be interchanged regardless of concept.

I read through that paragraph and I see requirements that fit the wizard's strengths, such as a "party arcanist" suite of spells, but I see nothing that focuses on what makes the sorcerer a sorcerer. There's a bit about the acid focus that says at least there's some toward the subclass, but everything about the general class is describing a wizard class, not a sorcerer class. It's no surprise it was a poor fit.

The sorcerer has it's own identity separate from the wizard. If you play to that identity instead of trying to mimic another class I think you'd be a lot more happy with the sorcerer.

The sorcerer's identity is pretty close to that of a wizard. They are an innate, less scholarly caster with a theme, compared to a trained, scholarly caster with a theme. They should be an alternative way of filling the role that a wizard could fill. Just like you can have a barbarian, or paladin, or ranger fill the same role as a fighter, but fill it a little differently, you should be able to do the same with sorcerer and wizard. You might argue that that isn't the intended case, but I would argue that if it were not the intended case, then they should have given the sorcerer some unique features that clearly allow it to fill a role that the wizard cannot, and not make it look like it can fill a role similar to the wizard. As it is that is the obvious intent, and there is no good evidence that I'm aware of for a contrary "correct usage" for the sorcerer.

 

[FrogReaver]

Maybe we are missing one of the simplest solutions. Empower the DM to Empower the Player. Allow a metamagic ability that allows sorcery points to be spent to produce a spell or spell like effect that would be consistent with something a creature from their bloodline would perform.

 

[Blue]

The sorcerer's identity is pretty close to that of a wizard.

No, they are not. This is the problem I bolded in my first statement. They have very different identities.

The wizard is a master of wide spell selection, changing their spells every long rest, and having the best ritual casting of any class in the book because they don't have to have a spell known/prepared. The get almost no base class (vs. subclass) features as they level up because their casting is so good. They start with a wide spell selection, add to it faster than other arcane casters, and have mechanisms to grow it through play. They also get a very wide spell list with more choices on it to enable their specialty of wide spell scope.

A sorcerer is a master of just a few spells, but being able to do a lot with them. They get metamagic that allows them to manipulate that magic in ways that others can not, from twinning single target spells (amazing with buff spells), to casting unnoticed in social situations / uncounterable in combat situation, to a bunch of other ways to get more from a limited spell selection. They gain sorcery points to fuel this but could also do things like break down slots and construct slots. Not only is their spells known small, it comes from a narrower list.

You might argue that that isn't the intended case, but I would argue that if it were not the intended case, then they should have given the sorcerer some unique features that clearly allow it to fill a role that the wizard cannot, and not make it look like it can fill a role similar to the wizard. As it is that is the obvious intent, and there is no good evidence that I'm aware of for a contrary "correct usage" for the sorcerer.

They gave then exactly what you said - unique features. The part that you are also missing is that they also gave the wizard unique features. You are asking for a sorcerer with the wizard unique features, and ignoring the sorcerer unique features. That's not a problem with the game design.

 

[Laurefindel]

I agree with the OP’s premise: sorcerer is supposed to have a narrow focus, but that focus doesn’t need to be that narrow. A few things I considered, not necessarily all at the same time.

1) one or two bonus thematic spells per spell level 1-5, like domain extra spells.

2) 50% sorcery points recharge on short rest. A bit under, but not far off arcane recovery.

3) all metamagic options from level 2. Or start with 4, then 2 per extra metamagic features. Mirrors battlemaster