D&D 5E Sorcerer/Warlord - Is 5E SRD The Solution or AL The Problem?

[Tony Vargas]

And I'd bet that WotC will 'get it wrong' for a big chunk of the target group because of expectations.

Yep. The longer they wait, the more it has to make up for, the higher the expectations, and the more disappointing it's going to be.

Actually, the OGL/DMsG is a perfect example of doing it right. We had to wait a long while for an OGL, but it 'made up for the wait.' If we'd gotten something like the GSL, it'd be rioting in the streets. If we'd waited 5 years for it instead of 17month, it'd've been infuriating.

 

[Jester David]

The warlord isn't going to happen.
There's already a good dozen or more warlords out there. The OGL changes nothing. The problem is that the warlord has become this symbol of 4e and only official support will be accepted, and even then it's unlikely to satisfy as there's too much division in what people want and no one wants to compromise.

The sorcerer is a message board problem. A few vocal people here. A few new builds might help. But the ranger is much less popular.

 

[Tony Vargas]

for a Warlord branch of this thread

some recognition this is an actual issue and not just an excuse to munchkinise

I have to admit that, by the numbers, there's no denying the Sorcerer has come up short relative to the gains of other casters. If you want to exploit imbalances in the game, you want to see trap options as much as broken combos. If the Sorcerer really is all that bad, pointing it out would be the last thing 'munchkins' would want to do.

But, at least there /is/ a Sorcerer.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Sorcerer was low on satisfaction on he periodic polls from Wizards.

"Periodic polls"? Which ones?

And define "low". What is the metric?

Only a little better than Ranger. I was probably the first to point it out, but not the only one. I haven't started a single sorcerer thread since I posted one on October, but we have them. They are there.

You should probably not assume I was speaking directly of you. But okay. Your point still does not invalidate mine.

All the rest of your post was completely irrelevant. Comparing any class from different editions will result in glaring changes.

And I completely disagree that sorcerers have no room for utility. Many utility spells offer great flexibility (such as enhance ability, just for one example) and make awesome choices for a class with limited spell options like sorcerers.

But the biggest thing you are failing to acknowledge is that previous editions allowed other spellcasters access to metamagic. Now that is solely a sorcerer thing. That's huge. Avoiding weighing that is a glaring hole in your entire argument.

 

[Jester David]

There's already a warlord:
http://www.dmsguild.com/product/170957/Warlord--Martial-Archetype

Sorcerer was low on satisfaction on he periodic polls from Wizards. Only a little better than Ranger. I was probably the first to point it out, but not the only one. I haven't started a single sorcerer thread since I posted one on October, but we have them. They are there.

You're misremembering:

Overall, the barbarian, bard, monk, paladin, sorcerer, and warlock all graded very well. The areas of concern were limited to specific areas of the classes.

For instance, we’ve heard consistent feedback that the sorcerer doesn’t offer enough options within the class. Not everyone is excited about the wild mage, thus leaving some players with only the dragon sorcerer as an option. It’s no coincidence that we showed off a favored soul option for the sorcerer in Unearthed Arcana. Plus, we have another sorcerer option on tap for that article series.
​

From:
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/news/march-survey-results

People are happy with the sorcerer as a whole but unhappy with the limited number of subclasses. Now with storm in SCAG and the favoured soul and shadow from UA there's decent support.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

[sarcasm?]
So all I have to do now is write up my own tweaked Sorcerer class that fits my power-gaming fantasy (specifically geared towards my own character, of course), slip in in through DMGuild on AL Approval...and I'm golden! I'll be able to win AL D&D every weekend! Yay!!!!11!!oneone!!

[/sarcasm?]



Seriously though, I don't play AL (thinking about giving it a shot just for S's & G's though). But IMHO, no. Not just no, but 'ELL NO! There is no way that AL stuff should be left to ANYONE other than the 'owners' of AL (re: WotC). Period. To do so otherwise would open a can of worms of cataclysmic proportion.

Oh, btw, Warlord = Why? I've never understood the draw... ...and... Sorcerer = Just fine the way it is.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Sunseeker]

No, I meant what if they do fail? Obviously they disappoint a small segment of the fanbase, but then what? What happens after that?

6TH EDITION, HOOOOOOOO!!!!! Obviously.

 

[MoonSong]

You should probably not assume I was speaking directly of you. But okay. Your point still does not invalidate mine.

All the rest of your post was completely irrelevant. Comparing any class from different editions will result in glaring changes.

And I completely disagree that sorcerers have no room for utility. Many utility spells offer great flexibility (such as enhance ability, just for one example) and make awesome choices for a class with limited spell options like sorcerers.

But the biggest thing you are failing to acknowledge is that previous editions allowed other spellcasters access to metamagic. Now that is solely a sorcerer thing. That's huge. Avoiding weighing that is a glaring hole in your entire argument.

Metamagic flexibility is overrated. It does create more power, but not more flexibility. No amount of metamagic will turn enhance ability into a familiar, or another dimension, or a safe refuge, or a summoned mount. No metamagic will turn mage hand into an unseen servant or floating disk. No metamagic can compensate the ill effects of friends, charm person or knock. Metamagic can't even turn a fireball into an Iceball. Oh and this power doesn't come free, because it comes at the expense of casting less times per day. 5e's metamagic is not the shadow of 3Es metamagic. And it doesn't really compensate for the limited spells known or the lack of variety in utility.

 

[Eltab]

My group has a Merfolk Sorcerer (based on SCAG half-elf options) who can pick from plenty of Fire spells but has to fluff-up any Water spells. It's not crippling - I introduced her to IRL steam locomotive NKP 765 to describe what she might shoot across the room - but it is kind of silly that she can't just pour drum-fulls of water into a room.

 

[MoonSong]

[sarcasm?]
So all I have to do now is write up my own tweaked Sorcerer class that fits my power-gaming fantasy (specifically geared towards my own character, of course), slip in in through DMGuild on AL Approval...and I'm golden! I'll be able to win AL D&D every weekend! Yay!!!!11!!oneone!!

[/sarcasm?]

You see [MENTION=5590]jodyjohnson[/MENTION], this is what I'm talking about. No empathy and munchkin stigma.