D&D (2024) The sorcerer shouldn't exist

[Neonchameleon]

To me at least, the difference between "I made a deal with an entity from Beyond." [Warlock] and "My ancestor made a deal with an entity from Beyond, and now it runs in the family." [Sorcerer] is the conceptual difference between two sub-classes, not the conceptual difference between two different classes. Sorcerer and Warlock should be combined. Leave Wizard as it is.

Meanwhile to me the difference between "I have a wellspring of power that I can draw on to cast spells" (sorcerer) and "I have a wellspring of power I can draw on to cast spells that comes from book learning" (wizard) is that wizard is clearly a subclass of sorcerer.

Meanwhile "my ancestor made a deal with an entity from beyond" doesn't particularly sum up the sorcerer. "I'm a seventh son of a seventh son" is also a sorcerer as is "I spent seven years in the shadowfell and it seeped into my bones so I manipulate shadow" and "I was struck by lightning by the century storm and a part of it is now part of me" and far far more that involves neither bloodlines nor deals. Sorcerer is more than fine as is in D&D - please stop trying to dismember it in order to get it to fit into a small box.

 

[Mecheon]

did we. really need this one necromanced while there was an active discussion going on with the same discussion

To me at least, the difference between "I made a deal with an entity from Beyond." [Warlock] and "My ancestor made a deal with an entity from Beyond, and now it runs in the family." [Sorcerer] is the conceptual difference between two sub-classes, not the conceptual difference between two different classes. Sorcerer and Warlock should be combined. Leave Wizard as it is.

Sorcerer isn't just "My ancestor made a deal with an entity" though. Its also "The blood of dragons runs through me" or "My bloodline received a divine gift in ages long past that has re-awoken in me". They're two different classes by design. The warlock is the dark mirror of the cleric, another side of the same coin, with a much more limited toolset due to the difference in what they deal with. The sorcerer on the other hand is the one with raw magic, unfettered by learning or the whims of another. Its the class that should be adjusting magic on a whim because that is the sorcerer's birthright, and the other classes are trying to immitate this as best they can.

If you combine them into a single class you're eroding away both of them and the flavour that makes them unique. They shouldn't be acting the same at all. Warlock just gets a grab-bag of spells, but sorcerer, per the name, should be doing far more because it is that thing. Dragon Disciple was the intended go-to cool sorcerer prestige class back in 3E for a reason and, yeah, it was about as effective as any early 3E prestige class, but that evocative image of "You're so immersed in your dragon heritage you get a massive pair of wings" is the type of thing that drives that idea.

 

[Vaalingrade]

did we. really need this one necromanced while there was an active discussion going on with the same discussion

To be fair, that thread is now about making sure martials can't have nice things instead of making sure sorcerers can't have nice things.

 

[DEFCON 1]

To be fair, that thread is now about making sure martials can't have nice things instead of making sure sorcerers can't have nice things.

Is it actually about martials not having nice things, or currently about whether or not the nice things martials have should be written as supernatural or not.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Is it actually about martials not having nice things, or currently about whether or not the nice things martials have should be written as supernatural or not.

This.

When I want to play someone like aragorn, hawkeye, jon snow, black widow, felix jaeger, or any number of mundane but extraordinary people in DnD, I don't want to be told 'nope not allowed'.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Is it actually about martials not having nice things, or currently about whether or not the nice things martials have should be written as supernatural or not.

¿Por qué no los dos?

 

[Minigiant]

It's funny.

D&D fans can understand 3, 6 or 100 types of elf.

But 2 types of "innate magic user who doesn't use a spellbooks"?

Inconceivable!

We get the Wonder Woman and Aquaman are alternate forms of humanity or different races. But you don't see people claiming Amazon's are the same as Atlantians.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Frankly, my own feeling is that the sorcerer has outlived its usefulness as a base class

Also the Fighter, but y'all ain't ready for that realness.

Look, every class is optional. You only need as many classes as you want to need.

IMO, the sorcerer is fine as the "inborn magic" character (vs. the wizard as a more "studied magic" character). I like the vibe of "I got my magic from a particular source," and having that shape the spells you cast and how you cast them.

I would like to see the magic source define a sorcerer a bit more. Not, like, transforming them, but defining them in other ways.

Can the sorc and wizard be very mechanically similar? Yeah. Is that a problem? Well, depends on who you ask and what they care about. Not always. Maybe not even usually. Maybe not enough to change it at all. And that's fine. We're not pursuing some platonic ideal of a class list, here, we're just grouping mechanics and telling stories.

 

[James Gasik]

As long as people want to play a class, it's existence is justified. At least until they learn that you can play a better class and just write "Sorcerer" or "Fighter" on you character sheet.

 

[Vaalingrade]

It's funny.

D&D fans can understand 3, 6 or 100 types of elf.

But 2 types of "innate magic user who doesn't use a spellbooks"?

Inconceivable!

We get the Wonder Woman and Aquaman are alternate forms of humanity or different races. But you don't see people claiming Amazon's are the same as Atlantians.

That's step 1 in 'why aren't all arcanists wizards?'

Then we get to 'why can't clerics be religious wizards?' And druids are really just shapeshifting wizards.'.