D&D (2024) Sorcerer (Playtest 7)

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Sorcerer is still just the sexy Wizard (who was too busy partying to learn all of the spells). It still seems like a weird thing to be its own class, rather than a Wizard subclass...

 

[Horwath]

Sorcerer is still just the sexy Wizard. Who was too busy partying to learn all of the spells.

As it exists, it still seems like a weird thing to be its own class, rather than a Wizard subclass.

the more similar classes are becoming, more I am convinced that we need just one caster class,

Mage,
d6 HD,
full caster,
no armor
proficiency in int, wis and cha saves

casting stat is highest of int, wis or cha

access to all spells.

spells prepared and known as now current UA wizard

feats at levels 1(x2),2,3(x2),4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,19,20. Total of 15 feats.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Now that Warlocks no longer have the requirement of "pact" abilities....I once again ask the question, "isn't the warlock just a better sorceror?"

And I have to ask "isn't the sorcerer just a better wizard?" But the sorcerer and wizard are far closer mechanically and in terms of playstyle; spell slots are very different from pact magic.

I mean if you added in a warlock subclass that was "inner magic" (aka your power comes from yourself rather than a patron), and basically gave them a few sorc things (and removing the requirement of focuses to cast spells, because your magic is innate damn it!)....honestly that seems like a pretty solid sorc to me.

And taking a sorcerer and giving them a few wizard things like the ability to change their spells from a book and scribe new spells in that book seems like a very solid wizard to me.

You have at-will magics, you can replenish magic faster than that snooty wizard.....its a clear distinctive theme that stands on its own.

Unlike the wizard.

Ever time I see a sorc I just go "doesn't the warlock do this motiff better?", and with this new version I still feel that way.

And every time I see a non-generalist wizard subclass I think it could be better focused as a sorcerer one.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

to me it was closest to 3.5e psion/wilder attempt at psionics.

1st level bonus feat(as most tables play it); Telekinetic
4th level, Bonus metamagic feat
8th level +2 CHA(for 20)

take mostly psychic damage spells, and fireball OFC.
Got option to use psychic damage from elemental metamagic from DM so that was cool.

I was referring to the options in 5e only. I know when the character was created it was inspired by the Psion class, but Aberrant Sorcerer is as close as we get to that. Plus he is very tight with the Mindflayer community and has battled Slaads.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Sorcerer is still just the sexy Wizard (who was too busy partying to learn all of the spells). It still seems like a weird thing to be its own class, rather than a Wizard subclass...

Nah. Wizard is just a nerdy sorcerer who learned all their spells by being a bookworm rather than through imbuement, magical accident, bloodlines, the School of Hard Knocks, or whatever. The sorcerer is the general case and it's weird that the bookworm adventurer gets its own class.

 

[Weiley31]

Nah. Wizard is just a nerdy sorcerer who learned all their spells by being a bookworm rather than through imbuement, magical accident, bloodlines, the School of Hard Knocks, or whatever. The sorcerer is the general case and it's weird that the bookworm adventurer gets its own class.

Meanwhile the Warlock just straight up purchases the DLC and calls it a day.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Nah. Wizard is just a nerdy sorcerer who learned all their spells by being a bookworm rather than through imbuement, magical accident, bloodlines, the School of Hard Knocks, or whatever. The sorcerer is the general case and it's weird that the bookworm adventurer gets its own class.

See, I'd love to think this, but then every Sorcerer still slavishly follows every single rule that wizards ever printed into their spellbooks.

 

[Neonchameleon]

See, I'd love to think this, but then every Sorcerer still slavishly follows every single rule that wizards ever printed into their spellbooks.

Well yours may. Mine use metamagic to at least bend the rules or even make the spells outright psionic, and I've never seen a sorcerer bother with components.

 

[Stalker0]

And I have to ask "isn't the sorcerer just a better wizard?" But the sorcerer and wizard are far closer mechanically and in terms of playstyle; spell slots are very different from pact magic.

And taking a sorcerer and giving them a few wizard things like the ability to change their spells from a book and scribe new spells in that book seems like a very solid wizard to me.

Unlike the wizard.

And every time I see a non-generalist wizard subclass I think it could be better focused as a sorcerer one.

Ultimately you could easily combine a lot of classes together if you really wanted to.

The reason I made my point about the warlock is....it seems to do the innate theme of the sorceror "a creature with innate inborn magic" better than the sorc does. The wizard has the schtick of being the bookish learned caster, and it has several mechanics that support this theme. (ritual casting from anything in your book, being able to learn new spells from scrolls or spellbooks, etc).

The warlocks "at-will power" seems a lot more in theme with the idea of a creature with innate in-born power than any mechanic the sorc has. Its not that the mechanics of the sorc isn;t "useful", but it just doesn't capture the theme like the warlock imo.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Ultimately you could easily combine a lot of classes together if you really wanted to.

The reason I made my point about the warlock is....it seems to do the innate theme of the sorceror "a creature with innate inborn magic" better than the sorc does. The wizard has the schtick of being the bookish learned caster, and it has several mechanics that support this theme. (ritual casting from anything in your book, being able to learn new spells from scrolls or spellbooks, etc).

And the reason I made mine is that there are strong mechanical differences as well as thematic ones between sorcerer and warlock. Some people prefer full casting, some pact magic.

Meanwhile the wizard and sorcerer are mechanically remixes of each other and while it is true that the wizard "has several mechanics which support this theme" - but every subclass has several mechanics that support their theme with various degrees of success. And wizard subclasses are generally both bland and push them away from generalist book learners.

The warlocks "at-will power" seems a lot more in theme with the idea of a creature with innate in-born power than any mechanic the sorc has. Its not that the mechanics of the sorc isn;t "useful", but it just doesn't capture the theme like the warlock imo.

Meanwhile the warlock's pact magic and lack of mid level spells cuts hard against the magical innate specialist and in favour of someone who got power levelled rather than really mastered their area.

But the fundamental reason that there is a point to the sorcerer being a class and not one to the wizard being one is subclasses. There is a 100% need for the Aberrant Mind/Psion to have subclass mechanics that are very different from the Storm Sorcerer. The wizard went through the entire period from 1985 to 2008 with subclasses whose only significant difference boiled down to "it's easier to learn spells in your school and you are locked out of another".

Due to its focus on spell breadth and learning anything the wizard doesn't really support subclasses as a concept because part of the point is grabbing from the other lists; it therefore is a subclass. Meanwhile concept of any actual sorcerer anyone plays is built around the subclass - and that's why pretending you can stuff it all into the warlock box eviscerates the class.