So Sorcerers. What do we do with them?

So yeah.

In 3E, the sorcerer was a natural arcanist who focused his/her instinctive magic via mental force (Charisma), had a limited array of always readied spells, a larger magical battery with a delayed but complete pregression or wizard spell.

In 4E, the sorcerer was still a natural arcanist who focused his/her instinctive magic via mental force (Charisma). The sources were more defined from dragon heritage to wild magic to cosmic alignment. They recieved their own spells and their magic was more offensive in nature. It also was more in line with wizards in progression (every class was).

So what should be done with them in Next.

My thoughts.

In 3E, the sorcerer was all about having all your spells available. You didn't need a spellbook. You didn't have to prepare anything eexcept for foci and materials. If you had a 3rd level slot, you can blast out a fireball. Need a sugestion? I got your suggestion right here. Every day of the week, baby! Every day! For Life (unless I retrain it)! Trolls beward, my Acid Splash or Acid Arrow never go away. Never Ever. I speak every language all the time.

Then it was the Charisma part. I was pretty, charming, and/or intimidating. I could get things my way more often.

And if not, Charm Person is always prepared. No spellbook. Every day. For Ever. Multiple times.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

I very much enjoy the 4e sorcerer. 3e sorcerers are awesome too but with the DDN casting system we've got it's largely inferior to what the DDN wizard offers, and the idea that the sorcerer has a specific wellspring for their power is an excellent one.
They should be folded into the Wizard and made a Tradition.  They have no business being a class.  They started out as an alternate mechanic turned into a class because there was no other way to deliver what they could do.  Now we have Traditions.  They could make a Wild Magic based Tradition, and fill in the rest with Backgrounds and Specialties.  If we aren't getting the Warlord because it seems like it is too close to the Fighter, we sure as hell should not be getting the Sorcerer or Warlock.  Both of those should be Traditions in this No-Options system.
CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!

Yes yes, people are butthurt because the warlord is under fire and they want their precious. You know what, I'm tired of hearing it. Let's not coopt every single thread that mentions a class, there are plenty of threads where you can go throw your toys out the pram in good company. Saying that if you can't have it, nobody can is childish, petulant and more than a little bit selfish.


It could be that the sorc being folded into wizard is a good idea. I could see that working. But leave the warlord rubbish out 'cause it's not helpful and undermines your statements that are actually worth the pixels they occupy.


Yes yes, people are butthurt because the warlord is under fire and they want their precious. You know what, I'm tired of hearing it. Let's not coopt every single thread that mentions a class, there are plenty of threads where you can go throw your toys out the pram in good company. Saying that if you can't have it, nobody can is childish, petulant and more than a little bit selfish.


It could be that the sorc being folded into wizard is a good idea. I could see that working. But leave the warlord rubbish out 'cause it's not helpful and undermines your statements that are actually worth the pixels they occupy.




The only reason the Warlord factors into this is because it is the current hallmark of the exclusionary design direction.  They should aim for consistency of design, otherwise they end up with an even more jumbled mess than they already have.

And as for not letting the Warlord issue infect every thread, good luck on that.  Again, it is about design consistency.
CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!

the argument for design consistency would be to make it a series of traditions that are dispersed across more broadly defined classes. "warlord" is not part of that argument.


"the warlord is going, therefore this should be taken away" is insulting, inciteful and generally unproductive. It's also not very convincing. It's like a child who explains that they took someone's bag because they stole his pen.

If the sorcerer goes away, so should the barbarian (nature fighter), paladin (holy fighter), druid (nature cleric), ranger (nature rogue) and monk (silly fighter).

In fact, why do we need anything else than Fighter, Rogue, Cleric and Mage plus traditions?

...

I'm almost serious here.
Think about it.
Traditions, preferably renamed, could cover the entire width.

Dragon mage: Sorcerer
Demon mage: Warlock

Nature cleric: Druid
Combat cleric: Paladin  
I would compare a wizard versus a fighter, and a sorcerer versus a monk in regards to how the classes approach their craft. Where a wizard or fighter take a more traditional or orhtodox approach of gaining knowledge, the monk or a sorcerer take a philosophical or natural approach to learning things. So like a monk learning an animal style, the sorcerer may observe nature and the elements to find perfection by internalizing them. With that stated you could probably have a sorcerer that has nature magic, elemental magic,  or celestial. How to represent a sorcerer mechanically will be an interesting discussion. I am not convinced that bloodlines is the right method to distinguish different types of sorcerers, as that indicates sorcerery is hereditary.
I think the Sorcerer should remain a class. It would open up another Ability score. And it could add aspects that might be too powerful to simply add to existing classes.


For example, a Sorcerer would still know spells. No preparation.
To make them still viable and different, Sorcerers can cast one additional spell per level, only gain new spells on odd levels, and cannot learn spells from scrolls. To link them to 4e, each heritage would grant bonuses to spells casted above their normal slot. Storm Sorcerers can add thunder or lightning damage to any spell or convert their damage to either. Cosmic sorcerer can extend the area or the duration of spell casted above their normal level. Wild sorcerers can make their spells go wild (or go wilder in the mild magic module is on). Etc.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

If the sorcerer goes away, so should the barbarian (nature fighter), paladin (holy fighter), druid (nature cleric), ranger (nature rogue) and monk (silly fighter).

In fact, why do we need anything else than Fighter, Rogue, Cleric and Mage plus traditions?

...

I'm almost serious here.
Think about it.
Traditions, preferably renamed, could cover the entire width.

Dragon mage: Sorcerer
Demon mage: Warlock

Nature cleric: Druid
Combat cleric: Paladin  



I really think they need to examine exactly what a class represents before they add in any other class.  They have already set the precedent that some classes are better off being subsumed by others.  Honestly, I could easily picture the Barbarian being turned into a Specialty.  Barbarians are a pretty limited concept.  The Paladin could also be torn off and turned into a Specialty representing someone that champions a cause.  The difference between a Nature Domain Cleric and a Druid is extremely narrow as well.  The Monk could be done with an Monastic Background and a Pugilist specialty.

Honestly, if they gave every character two specialties, one could easily tear down all of the non-core four classes into Specialties and still have enough customization to make differentiated characters beyond that.  It wouldn't be my ideal design, but it actually would make a lot of sense with their Basic, Standard, Advanced model.  Standard would literally be the Basic game with options attached to the characters.
CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!
The main obstacle against folding sorcerers into wizards is the Ability score.

Since its existence, Sorcerers have been Charisma based.

Are you willing to have a tradition that alters a class's main stat and. Rewrite every instance of Intelligence's link to Wizard so it works for Charisma.

That would be clunky as hell.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

I feel like looking at the sorcerer at the end of 3.5 is more inspiring than looking at the sorcerer at the beginning of 3.5. While it's true that in the PHB it's just a varient casting system with a shot at flavor stapled on, they did eventually run with that flavor a bit. I'm not saying that it couldn't just be a tradition, but there's a lot more grist to the concept later in the edition that could be used to flesh out a full class.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
The main obstacle against folding sorcerers into wizards is the Ability score. Since its existence, Sorcerers have been Charisma based. Are you willing to have a tradition that alters a class's main stat and. Rewrite every instance of Intelligence's link to Wizard so it works for Charisma. That would be clunky as hell.



Couldn't that just be part of the Tradition?  They could have a Tradition ability that changes the casting stat to Charisma.  That seems like the absolute least worriesome thing about turning the Sorcerer into a specialty.
CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!
I feel like looking at the sorcerer at the end of 3.5 is more inspiring than looking at the sorcerer at the beginning of 3.5. While it's true that in the PHB it's just a varient casting system with a shot at flavor stapled on, they did eventually run with that flavor a bit. I'm not saying that it couldn't just be a tradition, but there's a lot more grist to the concept later in the edition that could be used to flesh out a full class.


Flavor should not be the biggest deciding factor when making a class.  What makes sense mechanically should be, and flavor should be added in afterward.  If something makes sense in flavor, but not mechanically, then it doesn't need to be made.
CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!
First: The 3.x Sorcerer was a means to a mechanism - a different way of delivering the same old spells designed to give the players more flexibility with the wizard.
Second:  The 4E Sorcerer was a means to a different mechanism - a way of fitting an arcane caster into the (original) 4E approach of one class-one role.  They needed an arcane striker and thus the sorcerer was it.


Neither of those is necessary in 5E (the wizard already has the flexibility of the 3.x sorcerer and we don't have the narrowly defined relationship between class and role of early 4E).


That said - in the process an archetype emerged that can fit the sorcerer - but it is an archetype that the game system has never well represented (although it has touched upon it).


That is the character whose magic is raw talent, perhaps uncontrolled, often unpredictable rather than the result of study and/or discipline.  Sure -the game has always put that into the fluff of the sorcerer - and then (at least in the pre-4E game) had the sorcerer use the exact same spells as the wizard.


Even the 5E attempt made that mistake.  They just cast the same magic as the wizard - or rather, they cast a subset of the wizard's spells.


I'd rather see something more spontaneous.  The sorcerer's magic might be very limited in scope - lets start with an elemental (or dragon) sorcerer.  I'll use a fire sorcerer/ red dragon sorcerer as an example:  You can do one thing - and you do it well.  You exude fire.  When you get upset, things burn.  Give the character the ability to spontaneously create fires around them - the more 'points' (however that mechanic ends up being expressed) the more flame.  You can focus the fire in a small area for a lot of damage or you can spread it out over a wide area for less damage.   Perhaps you can even (eventually) immolate yourself doing damage to anyone standing near you (be careful of your allies!).


The idea is that you are not casting spells.  You are embodying an element.


Carl                      
I feel like looking at the sorcerer at the end of 3.5 is more inspiring than looking at the sorcerer at the beginning of 3.5. While it's true that in the PHB it's just a varient casting system with a shot at flavor stapled on, they did eventually run with that flavor a bit. I'm not saying that it couldn't just be a tradition, but there's a lot more grist to the concept later in the edition that could be used to flesh out a full class.


Flavor should not be the biggest deciding factor when making a class.  What makes sense mechanically should be, and flavor should be added in afterward.  If something makes sense in flavor, but not mechanically, then it doesn't need to be made.

I actually totally agree, I'm just trying to be as nice as possible to the sorcerer.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.

I think the Sorcerer should remain a class. It would open up another Ability score. And it could add aspects that might be too powerful to simply add to existing classes. For example, a Sorcerer would still know spells. No preparation. To make them still viable and different, Sorcerers can cast one additional spell per level, only gain new spells on odd levels, and cannot learn spells from scrolls. To link them to 4e, each heritage would grant bonuses to spells casted above their normal slot. Storm Sorcerers can add thunder or lightning damage to any spell or convert their damage to either. Cosmic sorcerer can extend the area or the duration of spell casted above their normal level. Wild sorcerers can make their spells go wild (or go wilder in the mild magic module is on). Etc.

I see no reason why traditions couldn't open up ability scores, but class is a nice umbrella when talking about stat weights.

I like using the 4e options 'cause they're really good ones. I wouldn't mind seeing more.

Sorcerer as tradition could just easily be folded into wizard:

tradition: sorcery!

instead of learning from a spellbook, you learn a number of spells per level.
You use charisma as your relevant magic stat instead of int
you always have all your spells ready (more than the traditional wizard, but you can´t chose different ones in the morning)

so with this tradition, you have a very easy to play wizard. Give it some more benefits, like chosing an element to get bonuses and you are good to go. No spell preperation, you can just cast any spell you have.
I think we won't be seeing the scorcer back untill the final product.

They put it in a packet to get certain awnsers, they got the awnsers they waned and made up their mind about the class, so no longer a need to include it in the playtest 
I think we won't be seeing the scorcer back untill the final product.

They put it in a packet to get certain awnsers, they got the awnsers they waned and made up their mind about the class, so no longer a need to include it in the playtest 



Not true.  It will still need playtesting.


It may be a low priority for awhile (it was designed to solve a problem and they determined that wasn't the right way to solve that problem so it got scrapped).   But a) they will eventually bring back something similar to what was called 'the sorcerer' (but with a different name because they decided that build really didn't fit 'the sorcerer' and b) we will eventually likely get something different called 'the sorcerer' (which may be a wizard tradition).


But either way it will eventually show up in the playtest if it will be in the game at release.  That's what we are here for.


Carl      
I'd rather see something more spontaneous.  The sorcerer's magic might be very limited in scope - lets start with an elemental (or dragon) sorcerer.  I'll use a fire sorcerer/ red dragon sorcerer as an example:  You can do one thing - and you do it well.  You exude fire.  When you get upset, things burn.  Give the character the ability to spontaneously create fires around them - the more 'points' (however that mechanic ends up being expressed) the more flame.  You can focus the fire in a small area for a lot of damage or you can spread it out over a wide area for less damage.   Perhaps you can even (eventually) immolate yourself doing damage to anyone standing near you (be careful of your allies!).


The idea is that you are not casting spells.  You are embodying an element.


Carl                      

Remember that old FR book, Spellfire? That'd be a great concept for a sorcerer.

I personally don't see how you can convert the sorcerer into a tradition without either:

1. Weaken the sorcerer flavor into a some INT wizard with less spells.
2. Weaken the wizard flavor by implying the Wizard uses Charisma as well as Intelligence and rewriting every wizard spell, feat, item, or mod that references it.

It probably could be done, but I doubt anyone would like the results.

I think sorcerers would need the own class.

Key Ability: Charisma
Fluff: Naturally gifted arcanist
Crunch: Metamage who can alter spells on the fly and doesn't need to prepare spells.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Would it be too much to have a tradition feature shift all the casting numbers to cha? I don't see why it would.


I'd prefer to see a class but I could see how it'd work as a tradition. I could see how a tradition could also be applied more generally, like how the favoured soul is basically a cleric-sorcerer. We could totally do that with traditions.

I really think they need to examine exactly what a class represents before they add in any other class.  They have already set the precedent that some classes are better off being subsumed by others.  Honestly, I could easily picture the Barbarian being turned into a Specialty.  Barbarians are a pretty limited concept.  The Paladin could also be torn off and turned into a Specialty representing someone that champions a cause.  The difference between a Nature Domain Cleric and a Druid is extremely narrow as well.  The Monk could be done with an Monastic Background and a Pugilist specialty.

Honestly, if they gave every character two specialties, one could easily tear down all of the non-core four classes into Specialties and still have enough customization to make differentiated characters beyond that.  It wouldn't be my ideal design, but it actually would make a lot of sense with their Basic, Standard, Advanced model.  Standard would literally be the Basic game with options attached to the characters.

Many martial classes can be presented as Fighting Styles. I think the same could be done with a Mage class, with Tradition (though I'd call it something else in this case) carrying the heavy lifting of casting method (Vancian, spell point, AEDU) and type of mage (book-studying Wizard, spontaneous Sorcerer, pact-making Warlock). Let the Tradition and Fighting Style do more for the specific class variants.

In memory of wrecan and his Unearthed Wrecana.


Would it be too much to have a tradition feature shift all the casting numbers to cha? I don't see why it would.


I'd prefer to see a class but I could see how it'd work as a tradition. I could see how a tradition could also be applied more generally, like how the favoured soul is basically a cleric-sorcerer. We could totally do that with traditions.




I don't think it would be too much.  I'm just not sure that, by itself, is interesting enough to be worth a tradition.  It wouldn't be enough.


In fact - I think that would also just work as a feat.  Except I'm not even sure it's interesting enough to qualify as a feat.


The concept needs more something.  


And I'd rather see that something be so different that it is obvious that you are playing something that is not a wizard.  Just changing the stat or the number of spells doesn't really fit the identified criteria (by Mearls) that it should be obvious what class you are playing by the mechanics you use.


Carl      

Would it be too much to have a tradition feature shift all the casting numbers to cha? I don't see why it would.


I'd prefer to see a class but I could see how it'd work as a tradition. I could see how a tradition could also be applied more generally, like how the favoured soul is basically a cleric-sorcerer. We could totally do that with traditions.




I don't think it would be too much.  I'm just not sure that, by itself, is interesting enough to be worth a tradition.  It wouldn't be enough.


In fact - I think that would also just work as a feat.  Except I'm not even sure it's interesting enough to qualify as a feat.


The concept needs more something.  


And I'd rather see that something be so different that it is obvious that you are playing something that is not a wizard.  Just changing the stat or the number of spells doesn't really fit the identified criteria (by Mearls) that it should be obvious what class you are playing by the mechanics you use.


Carl      



Well obviously it wouldn't be the only part of the tradition, it would just be one part of it.  Thing like casting more spells for less spells known, some ability to burn additional spells to cast more powerful versions of others.

Even the fluff lends itself to a Tradition.  You are a Wizard that learned to cast spells without a spellbook to learn them from.  
CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!
The sorcerer could be done as a tradition but it would most likely be:

A weak and flavorless tradition
A complicated and clunky but flavorful tradition
Or
A tradition so limited in effect that it would be better as a feat.

I would love to see someone prove me wrong. But I just don't see it. I can't see a fully written up sorcerer tradition that doesn't suck.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

I think the issue with making it a tradition is the traditions as we have them now don't modify the wizard anywhere near enough to make sorcery feel massively different.


As with many things, I could see a sorcery tradition that existed alongside the class as a sort of hybrid option. Maybe the wizard would get fewer spells but one or two more at-wills and more flexibility with their at-will spells, but the sorcerer class doesn't use spells at all and shape energy into things they want, depending on how they do with an ability check.

anywhere near enough to make sorcery feel massively different. 

Arguably it shouldnt for the 3e fans.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 


I think the issue with making it a tradition is the traditions as we have them now don't modify the wizard anywhere near enough to make sorcery feel massively different.


As with many things, I could see a sorcery tradition that existed alongside the class as a sort of hybrid option. Maybe the wizard would get fewer spells but one or two more at-wills and more flexibility with their at-will spells, but the sorcerer class doesn't use spells at all and shape energy into things they want, depending on how they do with an ability check.




Exactly.


You could do it easily enough.  In fact - if you add the line (to each tradition):  Primary Ability Score:  Charisma (or Int for the current traditions) you pretty much already have a 3.5 sorcerer.  Add a couple of appropriate perks and you have a perfectly valid sorcerer tradition.. 

This can be done (and I suspect that this is what they will do).



But the class can be so much more.  The class could approach magic from a different perspective rather than just changing what stat you use (trivial) or the exact mechanics for memorizing essentially the exact same spells as the wizard (boring and not worthy of a separate class).


Bottom Line:  If the sorcerer is just going to cast spell like a wizard, it might as well be a wizard.  I want a new approach to magic for the sorcerer. 

Carl

    
The key is the bloodline. Most of gamers will want a draconic socerer, and I suposse sublines for each metalic, gem, chromatic, lung, linnords and planar will be necesary. Other players will wish no-draconic bloodline (celestial, fiendish, far realm, faerie, genies, netrotouched..). A good bloodline should be like a monster mini-template (half-faerie, half-dragon..). For example a half-giant socerer with blooline firbolg

Other option is bloodline (feat) could allow "buy" special shapeshipter powers link with the bloodline..(for example wings or natural weapons).



"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 

The 3ed edition sorcerer was very good with extensive use of metamagic feats with the most flexible spells available, far better than any wizards when time was limited, always when spamming a spell was an advantage, like spamming divination exploring spells, or transportation spells.

Without metamagic feats, the vancian sorcerer is severly lacking and needs another way to adjust is limited spell list to the situations on the fly. It will worse with the current trend toward less flexible spells.

If the sorcerer is a spellcaster, his effectiveness shouldn't be diluted by default with non spellcasting options, like growing scales, claws and spitting fire at short range. This kind of thing should be limited to backgrounds and feats (like in 3rd ed.).

IMO, natural spellcasting would favor specialization and abilities more like flexible class features than spells, more maneuvers than spells. Maybe some themed superspells with built-in at-will/attack/utility options.

If the sorcerer has to stay a vancian variation, then it's possible to base their recuperation on any rests, and not just long rests like the wizard.
If they are going to bury the Warlord, bury the Sorcerer and Warlock. Let players waste their few paltry choices just to approximate an old class. That's what they are doing to the Warlord, so it only seems to make sense for all of these other classes. By tenth level, you can have something that looks kind of like a Sorcerer, if you squint. It also saves the developers from having to come up with any other unique class features, as they appear stumped anyway.
We need to break Magic User up into a few pieces, the same way Fighter was broken up.  It's just too broad and vauge of a catagory.  And putting everything under one umbrella class just for the sake of putting it under one class only restricts class design and complicates things.

Sorcerer can easily be one of those pieces.  Warlock can be another.  Both have good fluff to back them up.


IMO, sorcerer's should be an elemental "striker" like 4e.  Good damage, small area, short-ish range, little special effects.  To keep the 3.0 feel, we'll just give a short list of wizard damage spells, gain slower, but gained at-will.   Add a good, single target scaling cantrip as well.

For intance, at level 3, you can pick up burning hands (3d6) or thunderwave, Melf's acid arrow (4d8) at level 6, fireball (6d6) at level 9, ice storm (6d8) at level 12...



And similarly, a warlock could get less damage, but more utility spells.  Such as cause fear, disguse self, phantasmal forces, hold person, web, dominate.  Along with his special at-will cantrip.



Leaving the wizard as the "jack of all spells".  Able to use anything, but not as often.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I personally don't see how you can convert the sorcerer into a tradition without either: 1. Weaken the sorcerer flavor into a some INT wizard with less spells. 2. Weaken the wizard flavor by implying the Wizard uses Charisma as well as Intelligence and rewriting every wizard spell, feat, item, or mod that references it. It probably could be done, but I doubt anyone would like the results. I think sorcerers would need the own class. Key Ability: Charisma Fluff: Naturally gifted arcanist Crunch: Metamage who can alter spells on the fly and doesn't need to prepare spells.



None of the spells refer to Intelligence in the playtest packet.

Three feats have a intelligence requirement and all three are a stretch to be call intrinsic to sorcerer.

Intelligence is only mentioned in the wizard class so having a charisma exception in the class is no big deal.

Rogue already demonstrates that that one scheme can have a bonus feat while another does not. In addition,  there already exist a feat that lets you change damage type of spells. Taking cool things from martial classes and giving it to everyone else also has been commonly deminstrated. The crunch and president has already been demonstrated across different elements of the playtest to meet these requirements. 

Big Model: Creative Agenda
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? join the Old Guard of 4th Edition
Reality Refracted: Social Contracts

My blog of random stuff 

Dreaming the Impossible Dream
Imagine a world where the first-time D&D player rolls stats, picks a race, picks a class, picks an alignment, and buys gear to create a character. Imagine if an experienced player, maybe the person helping our theoretical player learn the ropes, could also make a character by rolling ability scores and picking a race, class, feat, skills, class features, spells or powers, and so on. Those two players used different paths to build characters, but the system design allows them to play at the same table. -Mearl

"It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the publick to be the most anxious for its welfare." - Edmund Burke
To me wizards are magical scientists and sorcerers are magical artists (and warlocks are magical con-men for what it's worth).

I think one of the concepts that should have been included in 3.5 and wasn't is that a Sorcerer has natural access to a thematically appropriate set of spells based on the origin of their magic. A sorcerer could be designed to have access to threads of thematically related spells.  A sorcerer who's powers result from a fae blessing might choose enchantment and illusion themes.  Dragon blooded might choose fire and draconic themes. The scion of a family cursed by Geryon might result in an infernal sorcerer might access fire and infernal themes. 

For more advanced players, themes could be custom built in collaboration with the DM.  It could even be built as the character levels and discovers more of his true nature.

The spell selections of beguilers and dread necromancers and warmages from 3.5 speak to me about how a sorcerer's spell list ought ot be built. 

The player doesn't even need to know the source at first, discovery can be some of the story of the character.

That said, restricting a character's spell selection to a theme in addition to not allowing daily changes presents some balance issues compared to the wizard.  I see two potential fixes and like a combination of both. 

The first is improvisation.  The sorcerer can utilize magic with a d20 check to attempt effects related to their theme that aren't a specific spell or even a spell that exists, but one that isn't known.  Advantage and disadvantage would apply based on how close or far astray the caster fares from his or her theme.  The DM would adjudicate using a page 42 style reference when the caster doesn't simply duplicate an unknown spell.

The second is flexiblity.  A sorcerer can modify the spells he does know quite readily.  Things like meta-magic from 3.5 are just small tweaks a sorcerer adds to his spells as they are cast.

Done correctly a sorcerer is a different type of magician than a wizard.  Not simply a different way to access the same resources.

The 3ed edition sorcerer was very good with extensive use of metamagic feats with the most flexible spells available


Metamagician is a Speciality, and that seems appropriate.

As others mentioned, the 3e sorcerer was a means to allow more flexible spellcasting, which the Next wizard already possesses.  I do think sorcerer could easily be designed as a Tradition that switches your primary stat to Charisma and exchanges a spellbook for inherently known spells.

As for "embodying" an element, "Elementalist" (Shugenja?) would also be a great tradtion to have, either as a variant sorcerer or wizard.  Alternately, it can be accomplished simply through spell selection.

I'm also thinking that the warlock could be better expressed through Backgrounds and Specialties that represent a pact to get specific power.  The initial impetus behind the 3e warlock was to allow for a blaster that never ran out of spells.  That's also already been incorporated into the wizard.  So a wizard with an evoker tradition is pretty close to a 3e warlock concept as is.

All that remains is an option for people who want to have made a pact for power.  And Backgrounds and Specialties seem the appropriate way to accomplish that.
The 3ed edition sorcerer was very good with extensive use of metamagic feats with the most flexible spells available, far better than any wizards when time was limited, always when spamming a spell was an advantage, like spamming divination exploring spells, or transportation spells.

Without metamagic feats, the vancian sorcerer is severly lacking and needs another way to adjust is limited spell list to the situations on the fly. It will worse with the current trend toward less flexible spells.

If the sorcerer is a spellcaster, his effectiveness shouldn't be diluted by default with non spellcasting options, like growing scales, claws and spitting fire at short range. This kind of thing should be limited to backgrounds and feats (like in 3rd ed.).

IMO, natural spellcasting would favor specialization and abilities more like flexible class features than spells, more maneuvers than spells. Maybe some themed superspells with built-in at-will/attack/utility options.

If the sorcerer has to stay a vancian variation, then it's possible to base their recuperation on any rests, and not just long rests like the wizard.



I would very much like to see meta-magic... why just for a sorceror... I mean shouldnt understanding be core to being able to manipulate it. The normal vancian caster doesnt feel like they understand what they are doing they just blurt out what they were given rote memory stuff... AND the sorceror flavor doesnt imply more understanding isnt that the point of talent.

Shrug I do want some form of meta magic (though I heard it has had issues with how it was implemented in the past) I dont know if I think it needs to be class bound.

Skill  based magic where forming the magic is a skill roll seems an interesting idea.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

They both use magic, so by Mearls reasoning, they are Wizards. Just make people eat up their choices to get the flavor right, and voila. Class "design" made easy.
Also note thet with the last packet the wizards method of casting got closer to the 3rd edition scorcerer.
instead of traditional vancian casting for the wizard.

Memorising 1+level spells and only deciding what spell slot you are going to use when you actualy cast the pell.
If you want to use all your spell slots just to cast magic missiles ( they get damage bonus based on spell slot used) 
Don't want to dwell too much on the warlock but invocations are a neat approach to magic that should be in there somewhere. Maybe the warlock isn't a class but some kind of magic class that uses invocations would be fun.