Going to quote you out of order
In the end, what I am really trying to say is that one sorcery point coming directly from the sorcery pool is cheaper than one sorcery point coming from a first level spell slot. It is self-evident, as the spell slots only return sorcery points on a one-by-one ratio, but to create slots from the sorcery points the cost is higher, isn't it?
Yes, a sorcery point coming from the pool is cheaper than the point coming from a slot. I will agree to that. But, I don’t see why it should cost so much to make slots. As it is, I’ve never seen and frankly can’t think if I’ve heard of people changing points into slots. Not because metamagic is so good, but because the cost is too high. You don’t get enough value making slots to make it worthwhile, which cuts into what they can do per day.
I see people claiming that sorcerers and wizards have the same daily resources, but when you peel back that first level, it is frankly not true.
If you were playing a wizard and, instead of being given arcane recovery you were given an arcane pool the same size as the sorcerer, that you can only use to create spell slots, would you feel it was a nerf or an upgrade to the wizard? Now, if you add to this pool the possibility to do something else, such as to enable metamagic, would it again be a nerf, because now you will need to share this resource between different functionalities? If you could use your arcane recovery to do something else, anything else that you could find useful, would that be worse for you because now you may be compromising your ability to recover spell slots?
If I only replaced the Wizard’s arcane recovery with a pool of points, it would clearly be an upgrade.
If that pool, which only replaced arcane recovery, could also be used to alter spells, it would be an even better upgrade.
Would you want that pool of points at the cost of your spellbook, 3/4 of all your spells ever known, ritual casting, and nerfing half your subclass features? IS that pool of points worth all that?
That’s the kicker, that’s the comparison. Yes, Font of Magic in isolation is slightly better than Arcane recovery. It had better be, because the sorcerer is gimped at every turn by the access to metamagic that this represents. They get fewer spells, fewer ways to cast spells, fewer ways to learn spells, and fewer abilities outside those spells, than almost any other full caster. Because they have metamagic.
And the Lore wizard gets better metamagic than they do at level 6. Hell, they get really good metamagic at level 2, before the Sorcerer even starts getting any metamagic. Without sacrificing any of those base class features.
Yes, spending those spell slots is a cost. It may even be slightly more expensive than the sorcerers, but they are flat out better. Sorcerer takes empower and Heighten as their two metamagics
A sorcerer uses empower on a fireball. They can reroll 4-5 dice of damage, hopefully getting a higher result. This costs 1 point.
Wizard spends a 1st level slot, and their fireball does an automatic 2d10 extra force damage to every target in the fireball.
Sorcerer heightens the Fireball, giving one creature within it disadvantage.
Wizard spends an additional 3rd level slot, increasing the DC by 2 for every single creature in the spell. Equivalent to giving them all a -2 on their save.
Wizard can also change the element
Wizard can also make the fireball target Intelligence or Charisma
Wizard can also cast the fireball from a mile away.
Now yes, my sorcerer probably chose Quicken and Twin instead, and these abilities can’t do that, but does that excuse the wizard, who was already superior to the sorcerer, getting better metamagic when we look at the equivalent abilities?
Yes, it may be slightly more expensive for them, but since Arcane Recovery is roughly equivalent to the Sorcerers entire pool of points, they are awfully close to having the system. And the Wizard has the better version, and all the options and utility that make them a wizard in the first place.
As to sorcery point abilities being the minority. Dragon sorcerer is 2/5ths if you count the ribbon of speaking draconic and expertise with talking with dragons. Otherwise it is 50%. Wild is 1/5, but 3/5 of their stuff is tied up with the wild surge mechanic, which is 5% chance even with a lenient DM.
And that is if we decouple metamagic from spellcasting, which is difficult to do, since metamagic does nothing without the spell casting, and base sorcerer is Spellcasting, Metamagic, and ability score improvements.
Look, I am not really comparing the whole of the both classes, but I am trying to gauge the price of the lore master "metamagic" with the sorcerer's. This is what I was originally aiming at, and it seemed that, as spell slots and sorcery pool are the resources that enable both features, and both sorcery pool and arcane recovery impact spell slots, they should be part of the comparison. How should I proceed? I definitely do not agree that 1 lvl 1 spell = 1 sorcery spell point. The way spell slots are created from sorcery points seem to back me up. If you think they are, I would be very pleased if you could share your thoughts about it.
If I was playing a sorcerer and was given the option of joining all my sorcery points and my spell levels into one big pool, just by adding the totality of both, and then I could choose to use this pool (the same number) as either a pool of spell levels that I can convert to sorcery points via sorcerer rules or a pool of sorcery points that I can convert to spell levels also using the sorcerer rules, I am pretty sure to which side I would be on. This is also why, if ever, somebody would just add the sorcery points to the total spell points in the DMG, this would have a significant impact on how much a sorcerer can (ab)use metamagics. It also makes self-evident that draining this same pool of one "sorcery point" definitely does not equal draining this pool of one level one spell.
Moreover, the lore master will not benefit of any other wizard tradition, right?
EDIT - Just to make myself more clear, I am not arguing whether this new tradition is fully balanced. I don't even know if I like wizards doing metamagic-like stuff in this edition. Moreover I have already expressed that I am displeased by options such as elemental substitution. I did not comment on the save-changer feature before, but for me this is the lowest spot of the whole package, as it distorts in very acrobatic ways the in-game fiction. All I wanted was to point out that the way some features were being compared (namely the prices between the metamagic-like features, given by alchemical casting, and the sorcerer metamagic) seemed inappropriate, or unfair.
And I see this after typing all that. This is what I get for not being as active.
I’ve heard rolling Spell Points and Sorcerery Points into a big pot is a good fix for Sorcerer, but I’ve never seen it in practice.
Maybe comparing a 1st level spell to 1 sorcerery point is a little unfair. I’ll admit that I am not rational about this right now. I’ve advocated for improving the sorcerer a lot, and been shot down a lot, and seeing this Lore Wizard has put me a little over the edge.
However, the cost of the point depends on the direction. If a single 1st level slot is worth more than 1 sorcery point, then why is that all I get when I burn my precious slot? If the slot is worth less, then why does it cost me 2 precious points to make one, and also the Wizard is getting a tremendous deal in their metamagic, getting a lower price for a better usage. They set up this asymmetrical system, and depending on which resource you value, colors how you see it. Either answer seems bad, which is a problem.
I should have said sorcery points, not metamagic. You get more slots than base casters based on sorcery points. Full stop. The sorcer can use these extra slots for metamagic. The wizard has base slots, he must use those to get some metamagic. X(base caster) + Y (sorcery points) > X(base caster) - Z(lore sacrificing slots). So on that score, sorcerer wins (more slots, more metamagic options)
This is only true if you completely ignore Arcane Recovery and Ritual Casting.
Yes, I’m aware my sorcerer could take a feat and get a weaker version (because it is fewer spells and costs money to get more) of Ritual Caster.
However, let’s assume I don’t do that. The wizard can ritual cast anything he needs for utility, meaning he doesn’t spend those slots, and Arcane Recovery (as we’ve been discussing) is nearly equivalent to the extra slots sorcerery points can create.
X (base Caster) + Y (Q(sorcery points for slots) -M ( actually using metamagic)) ≤ X(base Caster)+ V(ritual casting) + C (Arcane Recovery) – Z(lore sacrificing slots)
Lore can swap energy type. That is powerful, I agree, but I think in practice its not as great as it might seem. *IF* you (as a caster) only have one energy type prepared, and *IF* you encounter a creature(s) resistant/immune to that type, then it matters.
1/rest switching a stat for saves? Again, pretty awesome. 1 per rest. But realistically, if I am targeting a good stat (say con for brute) I swap to a dump stat for a brute (dex, eg). What is that? +5 vs -2 at the most extreme? In a way its like 1/rest Disadvantage to a save. Not huge by any means.
So… if you have a damage that doesn’t work, or you know a damage that is more powerful, you can use it. How is that not as powerful as it seems? Sure, there will be times when it is pure flavor to use any damage type, but it costs you nothing, and can allow you to hit Vulnerable damage types.
As for the save, if -7 to a roll for all creatures within it isn’t huge, then first of all, I want you to talk to the poor bard who can only begin reaching those numbers with cutting words by 5th level is he’s lucky against a single creature, by 15th I think he can hit those penalties regularly.
Then I’ll direct you to the Ancient White, where changing their save from Con (+14) to Int (+0) is a difference of -14 to the roll. Or perhaps Feeblemind a Lich, but make it a strength save, making go from +12 with advantage to +0 with advantage. Is -12 big enough to make this 1/day ability a huge deal?
Sure, over the normal course of low level adventuring, it is “only” a -7 to whatever save you’d like the enemy to make, but it gets better, not worse, as time goes on.
I think the "Lore master OP" argument is really a "Sorcerer kinda sucks" argument. Let's face it, with the way spell slots/spells known/spells prepared works now, it took away a lot of what made the sorcerer: spontaneous casting. To compensate they took metamagic from all casters and gave it to the sorcerer. Now people are upset because there is a wizard who can sort of do metamgic (among other things).
The truth is, the "problem" is the sorcerer. Has been since day 1 of 5E. They know it. It's why we have half a dozen or so variants...I don't see Lore wizard OP to any class, and all the "But sorcerer..." arguments is a sorcerer problem.
And yet, try and argue that the sorcerer needs fixing, and you are told how powerful they are and what an immense benefit the ability to alter your spells are.
Don’t try to play them as damage dealers, they are buffers and debuffers. Don’t worry about limited damage types, you only need 3 damage spells at all times anyways, and if those don’t work…. Well, you’re a member of a party aren’t you, you can’t think you can do it all.
Then, we get this wizard. It’s kind of a “straw that broke the camel’s patience” sort of story
You can only switch saving throws once per long rest. Without meta gaming, you have to know what the enemy is resistant to and then switch. Beyond that, it's not a big deal.
How much metagaming is needed to know that the enemy cleric, who looks sickly and weak, has a lower Con score than Wisdom score?
A lot of the basic spread of enemy stats is self-evident, no metagame required. Also, kind of hard to prevent anyways, unless you plan on trying to shame the player for choosing the monsters weak stat.
As much as I hate to say it, the one-handed Hexblade is actually pretty bad. It's not weak, but rather bad in terms of design.
A one-handed hexblade will *always* do more damage with eldritch blast, unless it spends invocations to get a +1 pact weapon. Even then, it will fall behind until level 9. The Hound feature at level six is far more useful for Eldritch Blast than melee. The Hex feature you get at level 1 works with Eldritch blast.
I'm not against a charisma based melee build, but in its current form one-handed Hexblade is better as a dip for a bard or paladin, and bad as a solo option.
I think the best way to handle this would be to make a separate invocation available at level 2, which allows the Hexblade to make Charisma attacks with its pact weapon, but only if its one-handed. Add an additional rider to it so it can "smite" like the other blade pact invocations, or give it some additional effect so that it won't be perpetually inferior to Eldritch Blast.
Make it so the level 6 feature also makes charisma-based weapon attacks attacks deal an additional 2 damage to the target(like the Duelist fighting style).
On that note, the Hexblade spell list is just awful. It should focus less on weapon buffs(which almost never stack and work poorly with existing features), and focus far more on debuffs and control effects, that make it feel like a master of curses. I'd like to see it gain Bestow Curse, Blindness/Deafness, Heat Metal, and a few other choice gems that make it good at screwing with its enemies.
Wouldn’t an easier fix to the Hexblade be making the Curse only work with Melee attacks?
This way, the Eldritch Blast Warlock has no incentive to go for Hexblade, and the Hexblade can focus on creating the melee build they want. If they want a 1d10+cha attack, then can just forgo the shield and use versatile weapons. IF they want the Ac from the shield, they drop down to 1d8. Then as they get higher level, especially as a bladelock, they can begin adding enough mods to the damage to overtake Eldritch blast.
For me, the key is that Eldritch Blast is a poor choice for melee, disadvantage, and I just want the bladelock/ Hexbladelock to be closer to Rangers or rogues in melee. Not to neccesarily beat out Eldritch blast, which is frankly the best ranged damage option for an at-will character in the entire game. Nothing beats it outside of full spells. It really is just an immensely powerful cantrip, and I’d worry about trying to rebalance a melee character to match it, when you just aren’t going to be able to without making a melee character better than the current options.
