D&D 5E Thread: Your thoughts on the 5th. Edition Player's Handbook classes?

[MoonSong]

I hate to break it to you, but the D&D sorcerer is whatever they say it is in the D&D books. Telling someone they have "contempt" for the sorcerer because they don't share the same opinion as you is not only hyperbolic, but pretty ridiculous. Who made you the authority on what a sorcerer should be like? You have your opinion of what the class is, but clearly it doesn't jive with how D&D is viewing it. Get over it and move on.

If you really want to start talking about what a sorcerer should be, then I'd have to point you to Howard's and Leiber's versions as the "true" version of what a sorcerer is. And D&D is not, and has never been, the best system to represent those mechanically.

Also, "underpowered" and "undersupported" are entirely your subjective opinion. Judging by how you used "versatile" earlier, I'm not sure you really know what these words actually mean, but just sling out hyperbolic words from your own contempt. That would be some irony. Sort of like your statement about not paying attention to the details, details, details.

Undersupported, having too few options. Not a new happening just compare 4e compendium, there are over 400 wizard powers and barely 250 sorcerer powers. A 4e wizard can strike for way more punch than any sorcerer could-basically outperforming them in their job-. A 3.5 wizard with all splat involved can basically cast spontaneously from a spellbook, but don't dare to give sorcerers even a few more spells known because it would break the game...

And versatile is not the same as flexible, yes sorcerers in 5e are more flexible to a certain extent, but have been denied all the world-changing magic that wizards still wield and it is harder to build any kind of non-blaster. And it is a lie that a sorcerer can cast more spells than a wizard. First because wizards have ritual casting, and a thing called arcane recovery oh and once they hit 18th level they can cast some low level spells at-will and their capstone is an extra third level slot. Couple this with more spells available at any point and a way wider spell selection, a wizard is indeed more versatile and more powerful overall.

 

[Consonant Dude]

Undersupported, having too few options. Not a new happening just compare 4e compendium, there are over 400 wizard powers and barely 250 sorcerer powers. A 4e wizard can strike for way more punch than any sorcerer could-basically outperforming them in their job-. A 3.5 wizard with all splat involved can basically cast spontaneously from a spellbook, but don't dare to give sorcerers even a few more spells known because it would break the game...

And versatile is not the same as flexible, yes sorcerers in 5e are more flexible to a certain extent, but have been denied all the world-changing magic that wizards still wield and it is harder to build any kind of non-blaster. And it is a lie that a sorcerer can cast more spells than a wizard. First because wizards have ritual casting, and a thing called arcane recovery oh and once they hit 18th level they can cast some low level spells at-will and their capstone is an extra third level slot. Couple this with more spells available at any point and a way wider spell selection, a wizard is indeed more versatile and more powerful overall.

So, do you plan on tweaking the sorcerer? If so, how are you going to proceed?

I understand that it's always preferable when the published material fits our needs as is but one of the things I am really appreciating about this edition is how intuitive it is for me to tweak stuff.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Undersupported, having too few options. Not a new happening just compare 4e compendium, there are over 400 wizard powers and barely 250 sorcerer powers. A 4e wizard can strike for way more punch than any sorcerer could-basically outperforming them in their job-. A 3.5 wizard with all splat involved can basically cast spontaneously from a spellbook, but don't dare to give sorcerers even a few more spells known because it would break the game...

Undersupported again is just your personal opinion. Not having as many spells does not mean "less versatile", especially if there are other options available to the sorcerer that the wizard does not have. Which they do.

And versatile is not the same as flexible, yes sorcerers in 5e are more flexible to a certain extent, but have been denied all the world-changing magic that wizards still wield and it is harder to build any kind of non-blaster. And it is a lie that a sorcerer can cast more spells than a wizard. First because wizards have ritual casting, and a thing called arcane recovery oh and once they hit 18th level they can cast some low level spells at-will and their capstone is an extra third level slot. Couple this with more spells available at any point and a way wider spell selection, a wizard is indeed more versatile and more powerful overall.

This is what versatile means. Sorry, you can't change the definition of a word to fit your preconceived biases. The sorcerer does a lot of things more versatile than the wizard; in fact, the ad hoc spell swapping is the very definition of versatility. Some things no, but others yes. It is definitely not a lot less versatile than the wizard.

 

[keterys]

Undersupported, having too few options. Not a new happening just compare 4e compendium, there are over 400 wizard powers and barely 250 sorcerer powers.

This isn't a very good comparison. The wizard was an older class than the sorcerer and benefitted from receiving spells from the later essentials products (necromancer, nethermancer, witch, etc).

A 4e wizard can strike for way more punch than any sorcerer could-basically outperforming them in their job-.

This is incorrect. It is quite possible to build combat effective versions of both, and it is certainly possible to build a very good AE blasting wizard, or enchanting monster blender, but the sorcerer is a better striker if well built for damage. It is true that the ways of doing so were sometimes too subtle; flame spiral, explosive pyre, etc. If you wanted to stand back and just shoot someone from afar, the elementalist might also have better served. It's certainly _far_ better at striking in heroic tier to anything the wizard can bring to the table.

A 3.5 wizard with all splat involved can basically cast spontaneously from a spellbook, but don't dare to give sorcerers even a few more spells known because it would break the game...

I'll concede that a 3e sorcerer was specifically nerfed to make it worse than the wizard, for no good reason; it was the experiment at the time and they erred on the side of traditional casting. I'd have rather they didn't, personally.

And versatile is not the same as flexible

Well, technically, depending on usage they're nearly identical words. It's certainly true that wizards have access to a better breadth of spellcasting, and easier ritualing. The sorcerer might, with care, be a more versatile combat caster, but I suspect it would take some work. Personally, I think the sorcerer in 5e has too few known spells, and should emulate the bard's known spells at a minimum baseline.

I do miss the sorcerer from playtest, as something truly different. The spell point system is interesting, at least, but I'm a little more dubious on how it'll work out in actual play. I'll need to see one in play side by side before I commit strongly to an opinion there.

 

[MoonSong]

This isn't a very good comparison. The wizard was an older class than the sorcerer and benefitted from receiving spells from the later essentials products (necromancer, nethermancer, witch, etc).

But also received help from tons of class acts articles up to the point of redundancy.

This is incorrect. It is quite possible to build combat effective versions of both, and it is certainly possible to build a very good AE blasting wizard, or enchanting monster blender, but the sorcerer is a better striker if well built for damage. It is true that the ways of doing so were sometimes too subtle; flame spiral, explosive pyre, etc. If you wanted to stand back and just shoot someone from afar, the elementalist might also have better served. It's certainly _far_ better at striking in heroic tier to anything the wizard can bring to the table.

Three words Genasi evoker wizard

I'll concede that a 3e sorcerer was specifically nerfed to make it worse than the wizard, for no good reason; it was the experiment at the time and they erred on the side of traditional casting. I'd have rather they didn't, personally.

Yes, it was bad, and incredible how much they could get away with buffing the wizard while no DM would ever allow knowstones.

Well, technically, depending on usage they're nearly identical words. It's certainly true that wizards have access to a better breadth of spellcasting, and easier ritualing. The sorcerer might, with care, be a more versatile combat caster, but I suspect it would take some work. Personally, I think the sorcerer in 5e has too few known spells, and should emulate the bard's known spells at a minimum baseline.

This, more spells known at least up to bard levels. But as I was telling that is only half the story. Yes the sorcerer can do a very good combat caster, but only that, somehow the designers arbitralily decided that blasting was the only way to roll for a sorcerer. And that is my biggest grip, I've always made sorcerers that have fun with magic, like a sorceress who through creative combination of spells could remain afloat all day without her feet ever touching the ground. Or a sorcerer whose magic was entirely focussed on stealth, stealing and trickery. You can hardly do that kind of things anymore.

So, do you plan on tweaking the sorcerer? If so, how are you going to proceed?

I understand that it's always preferable when the published material fits our needs as is but one of the things I am really appreciating about this edition is how intuitive it is for me to tweak stuff.

Well I cannot tweak and play in the same game, the quickest solution I can think is to get three levels on a combination of warlock/bard to pad out the deficiencies in the spell list and spells known. Just giving sorcerers things like silence and subsitutes for Tenser's floating disk, unseen servant and Find familiar could go a long way. And I still hope the simple weapons thing was a mistake.

 

[keterys]

But also received help from tons of class acts articles up to the point of redundancy.

Yep, the wizard has a ton of powers.

The sorcerer in 4e was actually in a pretty solid spot though. As good or better as any of the later classes, and a far cry from the actually more painful disparities like runepriest or seeker.

Three words Genasi evoker wizard

That was my assumption for what you were thinking, yes, and why I said "it is certainly possible to build a very good AE blasting wizard". That does not change what I said in any way, though. The genasi blaster was merely quite strong, as opposed to a flame (or lightning) spiraling sorcerer who was so broken it had to be nerfed multiple ways and still remained lethal, or the absolutely degenerate dragon sorcerer breath build.

This, more spells known at least up to bard levels. But as I was telling that is only half the story. Yes the sorcerer can do a very good combat caster, but only that, somehow the designers arbitralily decided that blasting was the only way to roll for a sorcerer. And that is my biggest grip, I've always made sorcerers that have fun with magic, like a sorceress who through creative combination of spells could remain afloat all day without her feet ever touching the ground. Or a sorcerer whose magic was entirely focussed on stealth, stealing and trickery. You can hardly do that kind of things anymore.

The 5E sorcerer is closer to the 3e warmage or 4e sorcerer in concept, yes. I'm not sure that's a bad plan, even if it invalidates your previous character choices. After all, the only real conceit of sorcerers in 3e is had by just about anyone casting spells now.

Thankfully, you can just play a bard, warlock, or wizard and get the previous casting freedom of sorcerers along with a number of interesting other benefits.

 

[Sadrik]

I think my sorcerer change will be to remove their spell list and allow them to have any spell from any list and they can swap any spell at any level up. As the raw magic inborn talent guys I don't know why that makes them only blasty. Basically the bard talent but for every spell they know. It will greatly enhance their playability and power potential.