I think magic being monopolized by one class is weird. Same thing with stealth or dialogue or martial combat or any of the other building blocks of a fantasy adventure. Class limits (and game math being balanced around it) are the biggest reasons you can't actually create the kinds of fictional characters that inspired those classes in the first place. Those characters never suffered those limitations, because they were written organically, to resemble real people and not a bundle of mechanics
I genuinely don't care that much because I don't enjoy playing casters. In the video games based off of D&D I can't recall any I played that had sorcerers.
The concept seems fine enough and I don't begrudge its existence. I can't speak to how well it's been executed in any edition.
I think this poster is a homosexual who takes /d/ sized wieners in every hole, though.
They're a good way to represent the capabilities of an exotic race, like a Merman having the 'natural' gifts of a Sea Soul Sorcerer. I think Charisma is a bit of a wonky choice for them though, they're not beseeching an entity for their power like a Paladin or Warlock, Wisdom would have made more sense as willpower would be the driving force behind bringing inherent abilities to bear. WotC needs to stop sucking off Wizards so much and trying to keep them down with shit like the 'no using an action and bonus action both to cast levelled spells in the same turn' rule.
>I think Charisma is a bit of a wonky choice for them though, they're not beseeching an entity for their power like a Paladin or Warlock, Wisdom would have made more sense as willpower would be the driving force behind bringing inherent abilities to bear.
Sorcerers were the original Charisma casters introduced way back when 3.0 was released. The original idea was that they have such "force of personality" (represented by Cha) that they can warp reality. Paladin's spellcasting relied on Wisdom like Cleric/Druid spells. Warlock was introduced at the tail end of 3.5.
Pacts were not originally part of the 3.5 Warlock's lore. They had pretty much the same justification for their powers as Sorcerer's originally but were mechanically different. Pacts were introduced in 4e when they were turned into a Con or Cha primary (based on pact)/Int secondary class.
Depends on the game and which edition you’re playing. I’m going to assume by the OP art that you’re asking about 5e D&D, and I think it’s a total newb trap. The class’s feats and spell list steer people towards thinking it’s a pure blaster class that doesn’t have to worry about choice paralysis or prep slot syndrome, but the sad truth is that the sorcerer is a strictly inferior damage-dealer to the wizard that it wants to distance itself from. Its only claim to success that no other class could do is being able to Haste two party members with a single use of Concentration so that the real damage-dealers can do what the sorcerer wishes it could do. If you wanted to be a walking artillery piece, you just end up being a fluffer, amd that’s kind of sad.
the division between a sorcerer being able to innately perform and feel their magic vs the wizard having to study and learn theirs is great but the problem is the mechanical divide SHOULD be that the sorcerer has less options but more power while the wizard is more flexible but can't match a sorcerer in a cheesey shonen style beam fight, unfortunately metamagic just doesn't go far enough on the power aspects - twinned spell, subtle spell, extended spell are all great and really sell the fantasy of the sorcerer just oozing magical power but empowered spell is really fricking lackluster conceptually
the recent UA giving sorcerers a pseudo-rage is actually a really nice step but I wish there was more oomph in their damage output vs a wizard or even bard/cleric/druid with the same spell. spells are already underwhelming for damage dealing on single targets anyway
Exactly this. If it were up to me (and it’s not), I’d have all sorcerer spells count as being one spell slot higher than the level they’re being cast with. One more magic missile, one more die on a Fireball, as the default before any meta magic gets involved.
Was a shittier wizard in third edition because it didn't have any flexibility beyond spontaneous casting. Is reasonably on par with wizard because in exchange for losing all of its best toys (permanency, item crafting, metamagic etc) it got the prepared casting rework that basically turns it into a spontaneous caster that learns new spells every day. Meanwhile the sorcerer got a bunch of toys to help close that gap.
Either way, i'd rather be a wizard because spellbooks are cool as frick.
As a wizard chad I think they all suck and I'm never not going to be pissed WotC took away our fricking metamagic feats for them to be remotely cool as a regular ass wizard..
I think the concept is cool. I'll never quite understand why the people who are inherently magic is somehow less flexible in their expression of magic than the blokes shackled to their books. Feels like sorcerers got a really raw deal when everyone got spontaneous casting.
But it's literally the opposite. They're able to be more flexible with the spells they perform than wizards are. Every wizard casts fireball at exactly the same range. Sorcerers can alter nearly every aspect of the effect.
The reason why sorcerers learn a smaller variety of spells is because it intuitively makes sense that bumbling around "feeling" your way through magic is going to result in niching yourself in specific choices, whereas a scholar of magic can obviously choose from the entire history of its many disciplines.
It feels like a wasted concept. They're basically peasants born with superpowers and all they do with it is act like wannabe wizards? The entire class should be scrapped and it should instead become a template for NPCs. That way you can easily turn your standard bandit lord into a fireball blasting egomaniac.
Superfluous in game that already had wizards. I suspect that in 3e's development someone had the idea for spontaneous casting but someone else wanted to keep the old way so the compromise was to make a new class for it.
Well obviously. The whole point of the sorcerer class was "magic-user minus spellbooks/memorization."
But since 3e was also the last edition to use real Vancian magic, they've been well and truly superfluous ever since 4e.
They're legacy baggage, and the fact that WotC appears to be stuck with them now is worth at least a sensible chuckle of Schadenfreude.
if we're talking DND? they suck thematically. they shouldn't have access to the wizard's spell list.
instead, they should be like Pathfinder Kineticists, fully dedicated to a single elemental theme with unique spell like abilities instead of straight up spells because they pull magic straight from the source without incantations. some could just be rip-off of spells, like a fireball for a fire sorcerer, or call lightning for a storm sorcerer.
they could either be planetouched, or draconic. the planetouched version would also unlock stuff like a (favored soul) celestial sorcerer, blasting fools with Radiant damage and healing with positive energy etc.
I really wish they were tailored to whatever magical creature they are part of instead of other guy who also uses the wizard spell list.
They would be a lot more fun if they leaned into the Pathfinder idea of picking a magical creature subtype and then you tailor your skills and spells to what that type of creature normally uses.
Thematically, it works out pretty well. Magical bloodlines are a fantasy staple, and it helps justify why the nobility in a fantasy world aren't getting screwed over by random spellcasters if the noble family has some innate bloodline-based magic of their own.
Mechanically, it doesn't work out as well, because not only do you just sort of end up as a shitty wizard, but it also doesn't blend well with other character types who could reasonably have a magical bloodline. You want to play as a dragon-blooded warrior? Hope you go for this one specific multiclass or else you'll be terrible at it.
It's something that feels like it would be better as a series of feats, but that really goes for a lot of things in D&D that basically turns it into a pointbuy system if you take it to the logical conclusion.
I enjoy the sorcerer being the one that can manipulate magic in ways that other magic users cannot.
I really don't like how the class BORN of magic, does not have access to magic that a old frick with a book does.
I do think they either need to share the spells, or give them super unique ones that only sorcerers can use that follow the elemental magics, as that is what their magical bloodlines boil down to.
Every single time I've played it I regret that I didn't just play a wizard instead.
Such great control of magic that you can't even match a fricking evo wizard who can cast fireball on the party without damaging them.
Hot and controversial take here and as I've had to clarify this before, this isn't a meme or joke. I've played a lot of 5e through various campaigns and short adventures, I've played every class except Barbarian. I've played 3 wizards, 4 sorcerers, 2 warlocks, 2 druids, 2 clerics and a bard. I've played the same human fighter battlemaster build with slight variations 3 times. I've played long games from level 1 to 18, and other campaign from level 10 up to 20th and beyond with epic attributes.
Through this expensive gameplay experience, when it comes to spellcasters I feel I have come to this conclusion.
Sorcerers in 5e are the most powerful and effective casters. The options and flexibility offered by metamagic as a feature allows for some actually insane plays and great utility and high power spikes.
Wizards do have some toolbox application as ritual monkeys, but that's about it. If you want a guy who can pull out waterwalk and leomunds tiny hut on the day to day, then sure, wizards are great at that, but when it comes to everything else Sorc's are king. This ain't 3.5 anymore, wizards aren't actually particularly good in 5e.
Using Quicken with the right spells lets Sorc's double-cast to great effect pulling double tempo on many turns, Far-Spell can come invaluable in the right situation. Twin can be expensive but make some of the best buffs in the game far-better. Subtle makes so many great utility buff spells so much better since you can just subtle-cast charm person or eagles grace in social situations. (Unless your GM is a punk b***h who lets wizards slight-of-hand-mumblecast as a houserule of course.)
In addition, utility wise we know that encounters don't all happen on the flat-white-plain, quicken can be used to pull out a clutch disengage/dash/magic-item that can be the lynchpin of a combat.
Of course it is due mentioning, the spell selection does suck, only having 1-2 spells known for each level is certainly a notable disadvantage of the class.
Adding to that, subtle spell letting you cast a spell without it being visible means that even if there's an opponent with a counterspell ready within range, they can't counterspell you.
You become the king of magic fights.
That cleric casting a spell ? Counterspell.
Enemy wizard trying to counterspell you ? Subtle spell.
It's quite consuming in terms of sorcery points and spellslots, but you can really dominate a magic fight with that.
And miss me with "abjuration wizards and bards are the best at counterspell", magical guidance allows you one reroll at the mere cost of a sorcery point, letting you retry your counterspell ability check once, which puts all sorcerers on par with the abjuration wizard at a small price.
Less diversity in spells that the wizard, but that with quickened and twinned which allow you to dish out damage like no other caster, makes sorcerer my favorite class and I am very biased when talking about it
Also charisma allows you to play a social character, with success on the rolls. Someone asked why it was charisma, it's because it's self confidence. Wizards have to study, sorcerers just have to believe in themselves which allows me to make the most unsufferable mary sues
NTA but metamagic is fricking dumb anyways. Just give sorcerers smaller, curated lists of spells, and the ability to create their own custom subclass out of their own spells using some kind of point system. Then add metamagic back not as a "you can do this sometimes feature" but instead as a "your spell is modified with this benefit" feature, such as subtle casting or maybe your shield spell blinds enemies when you cast it or some shit. Actually give them some variation of "less but better spells."
Should there be a CON class? Would that improve the game? Why would magic based on your bloodline impact your body?
>Should there be CON class?
No, not directly, but being able to sacrifice HP to recharge sorcery points or use more powerful blood spells is based.
I don't like them in 5e. I think Warlocks are thematically more interesting, and they put training wheels on the Wizard that was the original reason the Sorc existed in 3e.
Remove Warlocks as a class, it is now a subclass/Origin of Sorcerer, because there is no functional difference between "I have dragon sorcery because I snorted dragon-cum" and "I have eldrich magics because I snorted devil-cum.". Sorcerers get the Per-Short-Rest casting from Warlocks. Sorcerers and Wizards now feel incredibly distinct as arcane casters, Bards and Sorcerers feel incredibly distinct as charisma casters.
Sorcerers were just another name for magic user. Often given to either rogue magic users or extraordinary powerful users depending, and outside of D&D it remains that. Just a nebuls "Magic user" word.
>In D&D
Ah well before 3e the term Sorcerer was pretty much the same as above. Then they introduced the new class. Mechanically it was a slight variation on the wizard. Thematically it was: A MagicUser that drew it's power from a source. Either otherworldly beings, powerful beings, a special item or relic, or their own bloodline.
A lot of that may sound very familiar in later edition because it's what the Warlock's normal flavor is.
In 3.5 they drifted away from all the other themes and focused on the Magical Bloodline theme. (Althought you can still find stuff like feats, ACFs and pact stones which were still very warlocky)
With 3.5's Complete Arcane book they introduced the actual Warlock class, and to those that play 5e you'll find it's very familiar to the current rendition, except they focused on SU Abilities which mimics spells instead of just using spells.
Sorcerer continued the bloodline aspect.
>Likes, dislikes, anything.
From my point of view Warlocks were what WotC always wanted Sorcerers to be in the first place. and warlocks were just hold over from the previous editions, cause it filled a mechanical niche.
>From my point of view Warlocks were what WotC always wanted Sorcerers to be in the first place. and warlocks were just hold over from the previous editions, cause it filled a mechanical niche.
hm, this makes sense
>Thematically it was: A MagicUser that drew it's power from a source.
The 3e sorcerer is explicitly tied to dragon ancestry and their use of arcane magic. Before this, sorcerers were certain various specialty wizard kits (prestige classes). During 3.x's life, sorcerers were eventually expanded with variant bloodline rules, which were made explicit rules in 4e and Pathfinder 1e, and are now considered core to the class for future editions of both systems.
The only relation warlocks have to sorcerers is sharing the bloodline origin in 3.5, being in many ways a variant sorcerer. In 4e they dropped the bloodline silliness for patron based magics, of which 5e continued.
on paper it's an interesting contrast between the learned magic of the wizard.
In practise it doesn't make that much of a difference in D&D. Learned magic and intiuitive magic are cast the same way and can do the same things.
Thematically I think metamagic would be more at home with the Wizard since he would have the theoretical understanding necessary to alter spells this way.
So at the end of the day it comes down to how you fluff your caster I guess.
>Thematically I think metamagic would be more at home with the Wizard since he would have the theoretical understanding necessary to alter spells this way.
And thats how metamagic worked for a long time, until 5e decided to frick it up. Sorcerers were in fact penalized for using metamagic by having any casting take longer due to needing to alter their inborn spells.
I think Charisma is a great stat to have, to show how charismatic people are, for determining how good you persuade and intimidate.
I think adding a sorcerers spellcasting to that stat is dumb, something they did just because their spellcasting didn't thematically require intelligence or wisdom. Any attempts at explaining the charisma modifier for sorcerers is just hamfisted nonsense.
If they're using inherent spellcasting powers, I'd avoid using a stat entirely, or create a new stat, simply called Magic or Sorcery, that people who play Sorcerers also roll.
Could possibly see Dex or Con being used instead, I can see that making a certain type of sense.
I think separating a learned man studying magic, and someone having inherent magic powers is great, since narratively they can be very different people.
on paper it's an interesting contrast between the learned magic of the wizard.
In practise it doesn't make that much of a difference in D&D. Learned magic and intiuitive magic are cast the same way and can do the same things.
Thematically I think metamagic would be more at home with the Wizard since he would have the theoretical understanding necessary to alter spells this way.
So at the end of the day it comes down to how you fluff your caster I guess.
There is no CON class and they could fill the niche. The sorcery being a part of the bloodline/soul means it should reflect the impact it has on the body, and casting is a physical effort more than a mental one. It'll never happen of course but I think it would help it stand out more
I think magic being monopolized by one class is weird. Same thing with stealth or dialogue or martial combat or any of the other building blocks of a fantasy adventure. Class limits (and game math being balanced around it) are the biggest reasons you can't actually create the kinds of fictional characters that inspired those classes in the first place. Those characters never suffered those limitations, because they were written organically, to resemble real people and not a bundle of mechanics
I genuinely don't care that much because I don't enjoy playing casters. In the video games based off of D&D I can't recall any I played that had sorcerers.
The concept seems fine enough and I don't begrudge its existence. I can't speak to how well it's been executed in any edition.
I think this poster is a homosexual who takes /d/ sized wieners in every hole, though.
Which game?
Dnd. Or any other game that has different forms of mages. Video games count too.
>Or any other game that has different forms of mages.
OP specifically said sorcerers, though, and the nature of them isn't universal.
They're a good way to represent the capabilities of an exotic race, like a Merman having the 'natural' gifts of a Sea Soul Sorcerer. I think Charisma is a bit of a wonky choice for them though, they're not beseeching an entity for their power like a Paladin or Warlock, Wisdom would have made more sense as willpower would be the driving force behind bringing inherent abilities to bear. WotC needs to stop sucking off Wizards so much and trying to keep them down with shit like the 'no using an action and bonus action both to cast levelled spells in the same turn' rule.
>I think Charisma is a bit of a wonky choice for them though, they're not beseeching an entity for their power like a Paladin or Warlock, Wisdom would have made more sense as willpower would be the driving force behind bringing inherent abilities to bear.
Sorcerers were the original Charisma casters introduced way back when 3.0 was released. The original idea was that they have such "force of personality" (represented by Cha) that they can warp reality. Paladin's spellcasting relied on Wisdom like Cleric/Druid spells. Warlock was introduced at the tail end of 3.5.
I wonder if Warlocks should have been a WIS class but then someone thought making a pact with the devil probably wasn't the wisest decision
Pacts were not originally part of the 3.5 Warlock's lore. They had pretty much the same justification for their powers as Sorcerer's originally but were mechanically different. Pacts were introduced in 4e when they were turned into a Con or Cha primary (based on pact)/Int secondary class.
Depends on the game and which edition you’re playing. I’m going to assume by the OP art that you’re asking about 5e D&D, and I think it’s a total newb trap. The class’s feats and spell list steer people towards thinking it’s a pure blaster class that doesn’t have to worry about choice paralysis or prep slot syndrome, but the sad truth is that the sorcerer is a strictly inferior damage-dealer to the wizard that it wants to distance itself from. Its only claim to success that no other class could do is being able to Haste two party members with a single use of Concentration so that the real damage-dealers can do what the sorcerer wishes it could do. If you wanted to be a walking artillery piece, you just end up being a fluffer, amd that’s kind of sad.
the division between a sorcerer being able to innately perform and feel their magic vs the wizard having to study and learn theirs is great but the problem is the mechanical divide SHOULD be that the sorcerer has less options but more power while the wizard is more flexible but can't match a sorcerer in a cheesey shonen style beam fight, unfortunately metamagic just doesn't go far enough on the power aspects - twinned spell, subtle spell, extended spell are all great and really sell the fantasy of the sorcerer just oozing magical power but empowered spell is really fricking lackluster conceptually
the recent UA giving sorcerers a pseudo-rage is actually a really nice step but I wish there was more oomph in their damage output vs a wizard or even bard/cleric/druid with the same spell. spells are already underwhelming for damage dealing on single targets anyway
Exactly this. If it were up to me (and it’s not), I’d have all sorcerer spells count as being one spell slot higher than the level they’re being cast with. One more magic missile, one more die on a Fireball, as the default before any meta magic gets involved.
>overlooking Heightened metamagic crowd control spells
Sounds like you're the one who got newb-trapped
>spend 3 sorc points to cause disadvantage on ONE target, ONE time
>crowd control
The Bard casts Vicious Mockery on you.
What game?
I generally only use sorcerer for evil characters.
Wise wizard versus evil sorcerer.
Was a shittier wizard in third edition because it didn't have any flexibility beyond spontaneous casting. Is reasonably on par with wizard because in exchange for losing all of its best toys (permanency, item crafting, metamagic etc) it got the prepared casting rework that basically turns it into a spontaneous caster that learns new spells every day. Meanwhile the sorcerer got a bunch of toys to help close that gap.
Either way, i'd rather be a wizard because spellbooks are cool as frick.
Not distinct enough to be its own class. Same with warlock. Get rid of them.
>same with warlock
No, I need to coom to my CHA-based multiclass synergies
As a wizard chad I think they all suck and I'm never not going to be pissed WotC took away our fricking metamagic feats for them to be remotely cool as a regular ass wizard..
I think the concept is cool. I'll never quite understand why the people who are inherently magic is somehow less flexible in their expression of magic than the blokes shackled to their books. Feels like sorcerers got a really raw deal when everyone got spontaneous casting.
What is there to not understand? They don't control their magic, it's just something they happened to be born with.
But it's literally the opposite. They're able to be more flexible with the spells they perform than wizards are. Every wizard casts fireball at exactly the same range. Sorcerers can alter nearly every aspect of the effect.
The reason why sorcerers learn a smaller variety of spells is because it intuitively makes sense that bumbling around "feeling" your way through magic is going to result in niching yourself in specific choices, whereas a scholar of magic can obviously choose from the entire history of its many disciplines.
It feels like a wasted concept. They're basically peasants born with superpowers and all they do with it is act like wannabe wizards? The entire class should be scrapped and it should instead become a template for NPCs. That way you can easily turn your standard bandit lord into a fireball blasting egomaniac.
... in what game?
Superfluous in game that already had wizards. I suspect that in 3e's development someone had the idea for spontaneous casting but someone else wanted to keep the old way so the compromise was to make a new class for it.
Well obviously. The whole point of the sorcerer class was "magic-user minus spellbooks/memorization."
But since 3e was also the last edition to use real Vancian magic, they've been well and truly superfluous ever since 4e.
They're legacy baggage, and the fact that WotC appears to be stuck with them now is worth at least a sensible chuckle of Schadenfreude.
if we're talking DND? they suck thematically. they shouldn't have access to the wizard's spell list.
instead, they should be like Pathfinder Kineticists, fully dedicated to a single elemental theme with unique spell like abilities instead of straight up spells because they pull magic straight from the source without incantations. some could just be rip-off of spells, like a fireball for a fire sorcerer, or call lightning for a storm sorcerer.
they could either be planetouched, or draconic. the planetouched version would also unlock stuff like a (favored soul) celestial sorcerer, blasting fools with Radiant damage and healing with positive energy etc.
I really wish they were tailored to whatever magical creature they are part of instead of other guy who also uses the wizard spell list.
They would be a lot more fun if they leaned into the Pathfinder idea of picking a magical creature subtype and then you tailor your skills and spells to what that type of creature normally uses.
Effectively fluff wizards. Nothing else about them really matters. They cast fast I guess.
Thematically, it works out pretty well. Magical bloodlines are a fantasy staple, and it helps justify why the nobility in a fantasy world aren't getting screwed over by random spellcasters if the noble family has some innate bloodline-based magic of their own.
Mechanically, it doesn't work out as well, because not only do you just sort of end up as a shitty wizard, but it also doesn't blend well with other character types who could reasonably have a magical bloodline. You want to play as a dragon-blooded warrior? Hope you go for this one specific multiclass or else you'll be terrible at it.
It's something that feels like it would be better as a series of feats, but that really goes for a lot of things in D&D that basically turns it into a pointbuy system if you take it to the logical conclusion.
I enjoy the sorcerer being the one that can manipulate magic in ways that other magic users cannot.
I really don't like how the class BORN of magic, does not have access to magic that a old frick with a book does.
I do think they either need to share the spells, or give them super unique ones that only sorcerers can use that follow the elemental magics, as that is what their magical bloodlines boil down to.
Every single time I've played it I regret that I didn't just play a wizard instead.
Such great control of magic that you can't even match a fricking evo wizard who can cast fireball on the party without damaging them.
Hot and controversial take here and as I've had to clarify this before, this isn't a meme or joke. I've played a lot of 5e through various campaigns and short adventures, I've played every class except Barbarian. I've played 3 wizards, 4 sorcerers, 2 warlocks, 2 druids, 2 clerics and a bard. I've played the same human fighter battlemaster build with slight variations 3 times. I've played long games from level 1 to 18, and other campaign from level 10 up to 20th and beyond with epic attributes.
Through this expensive gameplay experience, when it comes to spellcasters I feel I have come to this conclusion.
Sorcerers in 5e are the most powerful and effective casters. The options and flexibility offered by metamagic as a feature allows for some actually insane plays and great utility and high power spikes.
Wizards do have some toolbox application as ritual monkeys, but that's about it. If you want a guy who can pull out waterwalk and leomunds tiny hut on the day to day, then sure, wizards are great at that, but when it comes to everything else Sorc's are king. This ain't 3.5 anymore, wizards aren't actually particularly good in 5e.
Using Quicken with the right spells lets Sorc's double-cast to great effect pulling double tempo on many turns, Far-Spell can come invaluable in the right situation. Twin can be expensive but make some of the best buffs in the game far-better. Subtle makes so many great utility buff spells so much better since you can just subtle-cast charm person or eagles grace in social situations. (Unless your GM is a punk b***h who lets wizards slight-of-hand-mumblecast as a houserule of course.)
In addition, utility wise we know that encounters don't all happen on the flat-white-plain, quicken can be used to pull out a clutch disengage/dash/magic-item that can be the lynchpin of a combat.
Of course it is due mentioning, the spell selection does suck, only having 1-2 spells known for each level is certainly a notable disadvantage of the class.
Adding to that, subtle spell letting you cast a spell without it being visible means that even if there's an opponent with a counterspell ready within range, they can't counterspell you.
You become the king of magic fights.
That cleric casting a spell ? Counterspell.
Enemy wizard trying to counterspell you ? Subtle spell.
It's quite consuming in terms of sorcery points and spellslots, but you can really dominate a magic fight with that.
And miss me with "abjuration wizards and bards are the best at counterspell", magical guidance allows you one reroll at the mere cost of a sorcery point, letting you retry your counterspell ability check once, which puts all sorcerers on par with the abjuration wizard at a small price.
Less diversity in spells that the wizard, but that with quickened and twinned which allow you to dish out damage like no other caster, makes sorcerer my favorite class and I am very biased when talking about it
Also charisma allows you to play a social character, with success on the rolls. Someone asked why it was charisma, it's because it's self confidence. Wizards have to study, sorcerers just have to believe in themselves which allows me to make the most unsufferable mary sues
How do you feel about sorcs being limited to only 2 metamagic options until they hit higher levels?
NTA but metamagic is fricking dumb anyways. Just give sorcerers smaller, curated lists of spells, and the ability to create their own custom subclass out of their own spells using some kind of point system. Then add metamagic back not as a "you can do this sometimes feature" but instead as a "your spell is modified with this benefit" feature, such as subtle casting or maybe your shield spell blinds enemies when you cast it or some shit. Actually give them some variation of "less but better spells."
>Should there be CON class?
No, not directly, but being able to sacrifice HP to recharge sorcery points or use more powerful blood spells is based.
I don't like them in 5e. I think Warlocks are thematically more interesting, and they put training wheels on the Wizard that was the original reason the Sorc existed in 3e.
My biggest hot-take for Sorcerers.
Remove Warlocks as a class, it is now a subclass/Origin of Sorcerer, because there is no functional difference between "I have dragon sorcery because I snorted dragon-cum" and "I have eldrich magics because I snorted devil-cum.". Sorcerers get the Per-Short-Rest casting from Warlocks. Sorcerers and Wizards now feel incredibly distinct as arcane casters, Bards and Sorcerers feel incredibly distinct as charisma casters.
i dont think, i only consume
They feel like a wizard subclass
Sorcerers were just another name for magic user. Often given to either rogue magic users or extraordinary powerful users depending, and outside of D&D it remains that. Just a nebuls "Magic user" word.
>In D&D
Ah well before 3e the term Sorcerer was pretty much the same as above. Then they introduced the new class. Mechanically it was a slight variation on the wizard. Thematically it was: A MagicUser that drew it's power from a source. Either otherworldly beings, powerful beings, a special item or relic, or their own bloodline.
A lot of that may sound very familiar in later edition because it's what the Warlock's normal flavor is.
In 3.5 they drifted away from all the other themes and focused on the Magical Bloodline theme. (Althought you can still find stuff like feats, ACFs and pact stones which were still very warlocky)
With 3.5's Complete Arcane book they introduced the actual Warlock class, and to those that play 5e you'll find it's very familiar to the current rendition, except they focused on SU Abilities which mimics spells instead of just using spells.
Sorcerer continued the bloodline aspect.
>Likes, dislikes, anything.
From my point of view Warlocks were what WotC always wanted Sorcerers to be in the first place. and warlocks were just hold over from the previous editions, cause it filled a mechanical niche.
>corrections
>***and SORCERS were just hold over from the previous editions, cause it filled a mechanical niche.
>From my point of view Warlocks were what WotC always wanted Sorcerers to be in the first place. and warlocks were just hold over from the previous editions, cause it filled a mechanical niche.
hm, this makes sense
>Thematically it was: A MagicUser that drew it's power from a source.
The 3e sorcerer is explicitly tied to dragon ancestry and their use of arcane magic. Before this, sorcerers were certain various specialty wizard kits (prestige classes). During 3.x's life, sorcerers were eventually expanded with variant bloodline rules, which were made explicit rules in 4e and Pathfinder 1e, and are now considered core to the class for future editions of both systems.
The only relation warlocks have to sorcerers is sharing the bloodline origin in 3.5, being in many ways a variant sorcerer. In 4e they dropped the bloodline silliness for patron based magics, of which 5e continued.
>Thematically I think metamagic would be more at home with the Wizard since he would have the theoretical understanding necessary to alter spells this way.
And thats how metamagic worked for a long time, until 5e decided to frick it up. Sorcerers were in fact penalized for using metamagic by having any casting take longer due to needing to alter their inborn spells.
Sorcerers are the ones who invoke the logic granted to them by ZZabur, all rune magic users are not human and will be purged on sight
I think Charisma is a great stat to have, to show how charismatic people are, for determining how good you persuade and intimidate.
I think adding a sorcerers spellcasting to that stat is dumb, something they did just because their spellcasting didn't thematically require intelligence or wisdom. Any attempts at explaining the charisma modifier for sorcerers is just hamfisted nonsense.
If they're using inherent spellcasting powers, I'd avoid using a stat entirely, or create a new stat, simply called Magic or Sorcery, that people who play Sorcerers also roll.
Could possibly see Dex or Con being used instead, I can see that making a certain type of sense.
I think separating a learned man studying magic, and someone having inherent magic powers is great, since narratively they can be very different people.
My three year old calls them "sorcies"
should be canon for 6th ed imo
Best when they are adorable e-girls
Lightning bolt yourself. Children are only used to have the players dumb enough to get attached to them suffer when I horribly kill them
That's kind of harsh man
which part is ?
imagine being into moronic children when fat milkers exist. what a sorry excuse of a human. you're not a real man.
Luv me sum titty
on paper it's an interesting contrast between the learned magic of the wizard.
In practise it doesn't make that much of a difference in D&D. Learned magic and intiuitive magic are cast the same way and can do the same things.
Thematically I think metamagic would be more at home with the Wizard since he would have the theoretical understanding necessary to alter spells this way.
So at the end of the day it comes down to how you fluff your caster I guess.
Well the high CHA make sorcerers a far more viable face than a wizard is
At least sorcerer are giant fricking nerds like wizards
aren't*
PS: They ooze sex appeal which is far more useful in real life than actual intelligence
nah all sorcerers are ugly microdick manlets, charisma is a cope
They are cool chads
nah
There isn't actually much art of male sorcs
Why?
>Using Quicken with the right spells lets Sorc's double-cast to great effect pulling double tempo on many turns
Someone didn't READ THE FRICKING RULES
who are you quoting?
They should cast from CON and be reworked to make that balanced. Casting with health as a pool, exhaustion threat, etc.
Why?
There is no CON class and they could fill the niche. The sorcery being a part of the bloodline/soul means it should reflect the impact it has on the body, and casting is a physical effort more than a mental one. It'll never happen of course but I think it would help it stand out more
Should there be a CON class? Would that improve the game? Why would magic based on your bloodline impact your body?