Sorceror Mechanics

[Yora]

All I really want is a non-vancian wizard and a non-vancian druid.

 

[Tallifer]

I fully support a sub-class of Wizard which has variant casting mechanics: whether Vancian, Pathfinder sorcerer or Fourth Edition Wizard.

But I really want to see a return of the Fourth Edition sorcerer with his distinctive spells and sources of power. More variety of spells is always good. The Fourth Edition sorcerer was the blaster wizard par excellence, since he could dish out decent damage at will.

 

[Yora]

Though I would really hate if that's the only alternative we get to a vancian arcane caster.

 

[Invisible Stalker]

As I said in another thread, I'd like an old fashioned Vancian wizard and three other arcane classes that use the other three mechanics.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I think the whole point of the sorcerer was the idea that you were getting at the same source of power in a different way.

Also, I'm not keen on any class being relegated to a role. A 3e sorcerer (or wizard, or any character really) was defined by the choices the player made. That's important.

FWIW, the PF sorcerer is fantastic. It casts the same as the 3e version, but the flavorful bloodline powers really filled a need.

 

[Dausuul]

You missed out 'and got vastly more use out of metamagic feats'.

Although the full round casting rule denied them quicken, I've played sorcerers and the ability to use any of your metamagic feats on the fly was astonishingly useful (Oh, I'll just make my Suggestion spell into a Silent Suggestion on this occasion. I'll empower this false life since I think we're getting into a particularly dangerous part of the dungeon).

Oh, absolutely. My sorcerors were the same way. Even Heighten Spell becomes useful in a sorc's hands (glitterdust is worth Heightening as much as 3-4 levels). But that was an emergent property of the sorceror spell mechanic combined with metamagic feats; it wasn't part of the sorceror rules per se.

 

[variant]

I think the Sorcerer should loot the Warlock.

 

[the Jester]

I do not see the need for another edition with bajillions of separate powers that do the same thing, just with slightly different damage dice/ranges/names.

3e style.

 

[Grydan]

I don't see the need for calling it a separate class when it's Wizard Lite.

If people want a non-Vancian spell-caster that has access to the exact same abilities the wizard does, I don't see why that's not just "Wizard (Non-Vancian)", and obtained through class feature choice, or feats, or what have you.

I quite like the flavour of 4E's Sorcerer class. The idea that magic that is inherent to you, and not acquired through study (wizard) or bargain (warlock) is distinct unto itself, rather than just being the same set of abilities accessed in a different way appeals to me in a way that "Alternate Access to the Same List" does not.

 

[Dragonhelm]

The problem with the sorcerer in 3e was that there was little to differentiate it from the wizard. Oh, sure, he had a limited number of spells known and was able to cast spontaneously (which I love), but what was his identity? When the magister appeared in Arcana Unearthed/Evolved, it became apparent that the sorcerer was no longer necessary.

The idea of bloodlines, as seen in Dragon and later Pathfinder, is a great way to provide some of that identity. If wizards focus on schools and sorcerers on bloodlines, you have a winning combo.

The 4e sorcerer had a lot of good things going for it, and I particularly like the chaos sorcerer build. However, I felt it didn't hold its own compared with strong archetypes like the wizard and warlock. Perhaps I'm being a bit down on it.

I don't know what the sorcerer will be in 5e, but I do know that I don't want it to be a variant wizard. I would rather see some focus on elemental or wild magic, or bloodlines. Give the sorcerer identity so that it can stand on its own.