D&D 5E What are your thoughts on the DnD Next playtest sorcerer compared to the final 5e sorcerer?

[GMforPowergamers]

Yeah, the consensus was “this is a really cool class, but I would rather it be its own thing than a sorcerer.” We were all drinking the “modular design” kool-aid and figured everything would remain on the table as an option somewhere down the line. Little did we realize the core classes would be the only classes.

yea, if you went back to the me playtesting and told me 7 years later we would have only gotten 1 new class (artificer) and almost no new feats and still had caster supremacy I would have called you a liar.

 

[Yaarel]

If you define psionic powers as being dragon-based, I suppose? But that's not even remotely present in the traditional flavor of psionics.

I define psionics as the influence that a mind manifest.

Human minds do human things.

Dragon minds do dragony things.

Aberration minds do aberrant tings.

Ghost minds do ghostly things.

Elf minds do elfin things.

Literally, whatever a psionic creature has in mind.

Also, unless the new sorcerer doesn't cast spells by default, it still won't work.

Not sure what you are saying here.



As I understand the "Bloodline" class concept:

The character has will points to manifest spells (whether arcane sorcerer, psionic sorcerer, divine sorcerer, or primal sorcerer). However, these manifestations also transform the body, mutating the body under the magical influence, and even altering the personality.

In a way, the class has the player write up two characters, one for a Jeckle and one for a Hyde, and there are gradations in between.

These mutagent influences feel psychometabolic, so that using ones will power is mentally transforming ones body.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

yea, if you went back to the me playtesting and told me 7 years later we would have only gotten 1 new class (artificer) and almost no new feats and still had caster supremacy I would have called you a liar.

If I'd been told that without further information or context, I'd have assumed that 5e had died and wasn't getting new content.

 

[Li Shenron]

Yeah early 5e seemed like it was going to be the perfect base to build on and watch it develop. Before Xanathar's everyone was saying 'just wait and be patient, you will see your favourite class soon.'

But it never got built on. All we got was random subclasses spammed out with no actual changes in gameplay or player options beyond that. And now we've had so many subclasses spammed out that it feels like we're getting into content bloat territory without actually getting any meaningful content. The worst of both worlds.

I think Xanathar was still a good idea and a well-designed book (except the frankly insulting tables with French, Spanish and English names). It doubled the number of subclasses for everyone who felt the PHB options were running short.

But 5e design broke for me just after Xanathar. Immediately the next UA articles were again about new subclasses. I think Xanathar should have closed the door to those for a few years, and designers focused on something else. Almost all the subclasses designed after Xanathar felt like scraping the bottom of the barrel of ideas for me.

Now we are at the situation when lots of gamers are waiting in anticipation to another edition reset... but we haven't even really gone very far in 5e with the promised modularity, the fantasy campaign settings, and with novelty/creative ideas like the playtest Sorcerer. Yes we do have a series of small variant rules-modules in DMG but big modules liked mass battle rules and tactical combat rules were only promised and talked about and half-tested in UA but they never really worked on those. We got some pretty nice settings from MtG, but the point is that all the focus is now shifting already to next edition, which sure they promise (again) it'll be compatible but they will be tempted to make it like 3.5 which they also claimed "compatible" but only prompted to reprint everything. So you can guess what will happen to those bold modules and creative ideas: they'll be pushed forever forward while they update and republish everything basic to the new revision. There is still an IMMENSE design space unfulfilled in 5e compared to previous editions, and WE are asking to reset the core once again.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I think Xanathar was still a good idea and a well-designed book (except the frankly insulting tables with French, Spanish and English names). It doubled the number of subclasses for everyone who felt the PHB options were running short.

But 5e design broke for me just after Xanathar. Immediately the next UA articles were again about new subclasses. I think Xanathar should have closed the door to those for a few years, and designers focused on something else. Almost all the subclasses designed after Xanathar felt like scraping the bottom of the barrel of ideas for me.

Now we are at the situation when lots of gamers are waiting in anticipation to another edition reset... but we haven't even really gone very far in 5e with the promised modularity, the fantasy campaign settings, and with novelty/creative ideas like the playtest Sorcerer. Yes we do have a series of small variant rules-modules in DMG but big modules liked mass battle rules and tactical combat rules were only promised and talked about and half-tested in UA but they never really worked on those. We got some pretty nice settings from MtG, but the point is that all the focus is now shifting already to next edition, which sure they promise (again) it'll be compatible but they will be tempted to make it like 3.5 which they also claimed "compatible" but only prompted to reprint everything. So you can guess what will happen to those bold modules and creative ideas: they'll be pushed forever forward while they update and republish everything basic to the new revision. There is still an IMMENSE design space unfulfilled in 5e compared to previous editions, and WE are asking to reset the core once again.

Yeah to me, Xanathar's was the high point for 5e where I still had hope and excitement for the game. 5e seemed so great due to being this perfect foundation to build on. And now almost 8 years later that same foundation is still bare.

At this point I'm of two minds about a new edition. On one hand I'm desperate for it, as it's clear that the 5e design content philosophy isn't something I like. On the other hand I'm terrified that a new edition would be every part I dislike about 5e doubled down on, with every part I like being removed.

I find myself hoping that some new company comes along and does what Pathfinder did. And makes a game with DnD 5e gameplay rules, but Pathfinder 2e character creation and classes.

 

[Lycurgon]

Having now read the playtest document, I think their mistake was not presenting another subclass at the same time.

The HD, the Armour and weapons can all be different with different subclasses. So if they presented a Wild Magic Subclass alongside the Draconic Heritage, with a D6 HD and no armour with non-martial boosting power-ups as they spent willpower points people could have seen the more traditional Spellcaster focused Sorcerer at the same time, I think the feed back would have been way more positive.
The hybrid oriented Draconic Sorcerer might have Survival as an option if people saw the tradition style Sorcerer as an option too. Instead they presented just the Sorcerer with a very different play style/space in the game than seen in the past which put people off.

There is still room in the game for a more martial Sorcerer. They have given us the Bladesinger, the Hexblade and the Sword Bard so other classes can play as hybrids, but nothing good for the single classed Sorcerer to do so. It is a shame.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I define psionics as the influence that a mind manifest.

Human minds do human things.

Dragon minds do dragony things.

Aberration minds do aberrant tings.

Ghost minds do ghostly things.

Elf minds do elfin things.

Literally, whatever a psionic creature has in mind.

Psionics in DnD already has a distinct flavor, one with new-age, pseudoscientific, and space fantasy tropes. It's never been race specific.

Not sure what you are saying here.

That what you're proposing doesn't track with prior DnD psionics flavor.

As I understand the "Bloodline" class concept:

The character has will points to manifest spells (whether arcane sorcerer, psionic sorcerer, divine sorcerer, or primal sorcerer). However, these manifestations also transform the body, mutating the body under the magical influence, and even altering the personality.

In a way, the class has the player write up two characters, one for a Jeckle and one for a Hyde, and there are gradations in between.

These mutagent influences feel psychometabolic, so that using ones will power is mentally transforming ones body.

Which isn't a bad concept, but doesn't track with prior versions of the DnD psion, ay more than it tracks with prior versions of the DnD wizard.

 

[oreofox]

Having now read the playtest document, I think their mistake was not presenting another subclass at the same time.

The HD, the Armour and weapons can all be different with different subclasses. So if they presented a Wild Magic Subclass alongside the Draconic Heritage, with a D6 HD and no armour with non-martial boosting power-ups as they spent willpower points people could have seen the more traditional Spellcaster focused Sorcerer at the same time, I think the feed back would have been way more positive.
The hybrid oriented Draconic Sorcerer might have Survival as an option if people saw the tradition style Sorcerer as an option too. Instead they presented just the Sorcerer with a very different play style/space in the game than seen in the past which put people off.

There is still room in the game for a more martial Sorcerer. They have given us the Bladesinger, the Hexblade and the Sword Bard so other classes can play as hybrids, but nothing good for the single classed Sorcerer to do so. It is a shame.

If WotC would have been more open to spontaneous innate spellcasting coming from something other than dragons at the time (just about every sorcerer origin pre-5e was from a dragon getting freaky with a humanoid sometime in the distant past), they might have thought of something other than a draconic sorcerer to put into the playtest. And then they go and make dragons in the MM elemental breathing bags of meat, with a pathetic side-bar saying "you can add spellcasting to them by doing this but they can never do anything magical above what a 7th level character can do!"

I enjoyed the concept of the playtest sorcerer. Their HD, proficiencies, etc being different depending on their bloodline/origin was something interesting. But they were too stuck on innate magic = dragon ancestor they opened with a more martial-leaning sorcerer, which people apparently didn't want to play.

That was one thing that drew me to Pathfinder (other than my dislike of 4e, despite a few attempts at it). Sorcerers had numerous origins for their innate magical powers, instead of just a dragon did it with great-great-great granddad. Also, it was a nice breath of fresh air when we got the wild magic sorcerer, though that air came from a sweaty unwashed bottom when I tried to play a wild magic sorcerer and no matter how much magic I cast, a surge never happened.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

If WotC would have been more open to spontaneous innate spellcasting coming from something other than dragons at the time (just about every sorcerer origin pre-5e was from a dragon getting freaky with a humanoid sometime in the distant past), they might have thought of something other than a draconic sorcerer to put into the playtest. And then they go and make dragons in the MM elemental breathing bags of meat, with a pathetic side-bar saying "you can add spellcasting to them by doing this but they can never do anything magical above what a 7th level character can do!"

I enjoyed the concept of the playtest sorcerer. Their HD, proficiencies, etc being different depending on their bloodline/origin was something interesting. But they were too stuck on innate magic = dragon ancestor they opened with a more martial-leaning sorcerer, which people apparently didn't want to play.

That was one thing that drew me to Pathfinder (other than my dislike of 4e, despite a few attempts at it). Sorcerers had numerous origins for their innate magical powers, instead of just a dragon did it with great-great-great granddad. Also, it was a nice breath of fresh air when we got the wild magic sorcerer, though that air came from a sweaty unwashed bottom when I tried to play a wild magic sorcerer and no matter how much magic I cast, a surge never happened.

Evidently they still seem to be struggling to come up with origins for sorcerers, considering that it has the join least subclasses apart from artificer (which was added very late to the game).

I'm still sore about the elemental bloodline sorcerers getting axed in UA. Elemental themes seem very neglected in 5e (also cold/winter themes. We don't have a single cold/winter themed subclass for any class).

 

[dave2008]

Yeah to me, Xanathar's was the high point for 5e where I still had hope and excitement for the game. 5e seemed so great due to being this perfect foundation to build on. And now almost 8 years later that same foundation is still bare.

I wish the foundation as bit more bare honestly. I would prefer that WotC just make the foundation and leave the tinkering to everyone else (which is pretty much what they have done). I mean there is so much great ideas around 5e that is amazing - they are just not coming from WotC. And I am absolutely fine with that. If they just made the core 3 and published adventures - I would be completely fine with that.