D&D 5E Sorcerers Should Be Constitution-Based Casters, Not Charisma

[Aldarc]

In future editions of the game, they could even implement features that let you use your Hit Dice and Hit Points with your magic, possibly sacrificing them to deal more damage or regain sorcery points. How cool would it be to literally drain yourself physically in order to cast more powerful spells?

Sounds like a nice template for a blood mage.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

You gotta stop posting. That's such an evocative idea for my Warlock variant. Heck that's a WoW warlock feature, Life Tap.

Yeah, I just don't see it as a Warlock power. Warlocks barter for their magic, which seems like Charisma. Some do research in dark magic in order to summon/contact an otherworldly patron, which could require Intelligence, but I still feel like Charisma works best for Warlocks. Constitution just feels like a Sorcerous spellcasting ability to me. Your magic is something you were born with/were granted through a magical experience. It just feels better for Sorcerers to use CON than Warlocks.

I don't know much about WoW or how their Warlocks work, but I'm certain it's different from 5e's Warlocks.

 

[Scribe]

Yeah, I just don't see it as a Warlock power. Warlocks barter for their magic, which seems like Charisma. Some do research in dark magic in order to summon/contact an otherworldly patron, which could require Intelligence, but I still feel like Charisma works best for Warlocks. Constitution just feels like a Sorcerous spellcasting ability to me. Your magic is something you were born with/were granted through a magical experience. It just feels better for Sorcerers to use CON than Warlocks.

I don't know much about WoW or how their Warlocks work, but I'm certain it's different from 5e's Warlocks.

Oh its very different, my son is talking about WoW right now, so its on the top of my mind.

I can see how both can be argued any number of ways, so its all good. It may just be how I look at Warlocks specifically (I dont really like the bargain aspect, but lean into more a binding aspect.) and Charisma as a abstraction of 'self confidence, presence, willpower' etc.

 

[Minigiant]

I certainly think Cha is stacked up for casters now, but I dont like moving Sorcerer out of that bracket, because of how I look at Charisma. While I can see the body/flesh angle, I see it more as a matter of that power is something other, its tied to ones 'presence' or personal intensity.

The archetype of the caster just doesnt work for me as stacking Constitution, but I for sure see issue with all the Charisma casters now.

It's Warlocks who should move from Cha. Each pact should be based on a different ability score as the patron night grant power in different ways.

If Sorcerer's cast like wizards, then the magic is mental. They might get more sorcery points or something with high Constitution but the magic goes from the "blood" to the "mind".

 

[SirMoogle]

I believe Bards should be CON-based because, well, you know...

But on a more serious note, I think there's an argument to be made for warlocks to be CON-based. Like @Minigiant said, patrons grant powers in different ways, and in the PHB, under the Great Old One,

The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it.

so there's a possibility that patrons might not even know their power is somehow being siphoned, or they decide to bestow some of their power against their beneficiary's better interests.With a little headcanoning from me, I think that possessing magic powers (particularly arcane ones) comes with a burden. For example, wizards use their intellect to safely handle their magic, bards seduce persuade the Weave to do things they want, and sorcerers force the Weave to do their bidding through their innate magic. (Pure) Warlocks come across the power "illegitimately" without the proper training and/or innate nature, and their meat-sack bodies have to be strong enough to withstand the power coming from this foreign agent. The sturdier they are, the more control they have over it.

Mechanically speaking it also gives Warlocks more versatility in being a frontline fighter, and could cut down on short rest spam.

 

[Scribe]

I believe Bards should be CON-based because, well, you know...

But on a more serious note, I think there's an argument to be made for warlocks to be CON-based. Like @Minigiant said, patrons grant powers in different ways, and in the PHB, under the Great Old One,

The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it.

so there's a possibility that patrons might not even know their power is somehow being siphoned, or they decide to bestow some of their power against their beneficiary's better interests.With a little headcanoning from me, I think that possessing magic powers (particularly arcane ones) comes with a burden. For example, wizards use their intellect to safely handle their magic, bards seduce persuade the Weave to do things they want, and sorcerers force the Weave to do their bidding through their innate magic. (Pure) Warlocks come across the power "illegitimately" without the proper training and/or innate nature, and their meat-sack bodies have to be strong enough to withstand the power coming from this foreign agent. The sturdier they are, the more control they have over it.

Mechanically speaking it also gives Warlocks more versatility in being a frontline fighter, and could cut down on short rest spam.

Exactly.

I was looking at all the Arcane casters a few days ago, and while I love the concept of Warlocks, I don't like the lore behind the mechanics at all.

Pulling them into Con instead is absolutely how I'll change them.

 

[Shadow Over Mystara]

Great thread. I've grown to like the Charisma-based sorcerer who proudly claims dragon lineage, but I agree that Constitution makes more sense.

Warlock: I was thinking on this the other day. Pact's are not Charisma. You are making a deal. You are binding, or bound, and you get something out of it. Actually now that I think of it, this could be the Constitution based Arcane, as the magic is bound to your flesh? They also do not have the historical baggage around casting with armour, they have for more 'go ahead and swing instead of cast' logic.

I also like this one. Yes, a deal is being made, which suggests Charisma, but then again a Warlock's body is what they're offering up. Plus, I have to admit to being a fan of the WARlock as a capable combatant.

Either way would be fine by me, but I would like to see one of the two moved away from Charisma.

 

[Gadget]

Personally, I would rather move Warlocks to INT. It is an underused stat as is (only Wizards really care about it), and it would cut out a lot of the multi-classing synergy that gets thrown around (coffe-lock, palid-locks, etc.). Of course, Wiz-locks would become much more common, with some added exploits, but I'm more okay with that thematically.

 

[SirMoogle]

Personally, I would rather move Warlocks to INT. It is an underused stat as is (only Wizards really care about it) [...]

I understand they might be half-casters (and technically not a class offered by the PHB), but Artificer features use INT as well.

 

[Minigiant]

I believe Bards should be CON-based because, well, you know...

But on a more serious note, I think there's an argument to be made for warlocks to be CON-based. Like @Minigiant said, patrons grant powers in different ways, and in the PHB, under the Great Old One,

The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it.

so there's a possibility that patrons might not even know their power is somehow being siphoned, or they decide to bestow some of their power against their beneficiary's better interests.With a little headcanoning from me, I think that possessing magic powers (particularly arcane ones) comes with a burden. For example, wizards use their intellect to safely handle their magic, bards seduce persuade the Weave to do things they want, and sorcerers force the Weave to do their bidding through their innate magic. (Pure) Warlocks come across the power "illegitimately" without the proper training and/or innate nature, and their meat-sack bodies have to be strong enough to withstand the power coming from this foreign agent. The sturdier they are, the more control they have over it.

Mechanically speaking it also gives Warlocks more versatility in being a frontline fighter, and could cut down on short rest spam.

5e lost some great ideas when it ran from 4e.

Warlocks had 2 primary ability scores. Infernalock used CON and barely held their energies insides their bodies. Feylocks used CHA and blasted foes with psychic assaults. And GOOlocks used Both CON and CHA with INT because they were freaking nuts.

Similarly each sorcerer bloodline had secondary ability scores. STR and DEX were odd choices but it could have been changed. At least adding the modifier to their sorcery points or spells known.

• Aberrant: INT
• Clockwork: DEX
• Divine: WIS
• Draconic: CON
• Shadow: CON
• Storm: WIS
• Wild: Roll 4 it.