This is a good example of something I despise, so please don't take it personally I just feel like pointing this out.
Whenever someone brings up an issue with The Sorcerer class people always tell them to multiclass, and that is aggravating, like I don't want to be play a Warlock/Sorcerer or a Bard/Sorcerer I want to play a Sorcerer and I shouldn't have to ducktape a class together in order to feel like a Sorcerer.
Yeah, I have similar thoughts. I mean, I appreciate the effort, but it's a band aid. I shouldn't have to sacrifice a level, often my capstone ability, an ASI, my choice of race, my favour with the DM in order to get a magic item and my ability to hold an item in combat (because I've having to hold a magic item that I otherwise wouldn't) just to make my class work.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the effort to make it work and all...but my class should just work as well as the others by RAW without those sacrifices. With all that effort...I'd rather just play a different class that does work or adapt it so it works natively. Ideally, I'd want RAW to be fixed, but regardless, I'm not a fan of this band aids.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
This is a good example of something I despise, so please don't take it personally I just feel like pointing this out.
Whenever someone brings up an issue with The Sorcerer class people always tell them to multiclass, and that is aggravating, like I don't want to be play a Warlock/Sorcerer or a Bard/Sorcerer I want to play a Sorcerer and I shouldn't have to ducktape a class together in order to feel like a Sorcerer.
I understand your frustration. But...
YOU DO NOT WANT TO PLAY A SORCERER. You complained about the Sorcerer. Not one thing, but multiple things. That is like saying you want to own a Ferrari, but want one for less than $50,000 that can hold your six kids and groceries. You are not sacrificing things (like your capstone ability), you are trading them for better things.
You want to play something similar to a Sorcerer. Your own personal definition of a Sorcerer that dramatically differs from what WoTC created. The answer to that is a custom character class which we create by combining a bit of Bard and some feats.
The problem is that in your head you are thinking "I hate Multi-classing".
Except you do not have to call it multiclassing. Re-flavor the build I created as the Elven Sorcerer. They teach you how to do it at the Elven Sorcerer Academy. All the cool Elves take it. It's only those silly, uncultured humans that do not include a music class at their Sorcery School.
This is a good example of something I despise, so please don't take it personally I just feel like pointing this out.
Whenever someone brings up an issue with The Sorcerer class people always tell them to multiclass, and that is aggravating, like I don't want to be play a Warlock/Sorcerer or a Bard/Sorcerer I want to play a Sorcerer and I shouldn't have to ducktape a class together in order to feel like a Sorcerer.
I understand your frustration. But...
YOU DO NOT WANT TO PLAY A SORCERER. You complained about the Sorcerer. Not one thing, but multiple things. That is like saying you want to own a Ferrari, but want one for less than $50,000 that can hold your six kids and groceries. You are not sacrificing things (like your capstone ability), you are trading them for better things.
You want to play something similar to a Sorcerer. Your own personal definition of a Sorcerer that dramatically differs from what WoTC created. The answer to that is a custom character class which we create by combining a bit of Bard and some feats.
The problem is that in your head you are thinking "I hate Multi-classing".
Except you do not have to call it multiclassing. Re-flavor the build I created as the Elven Sorcerer. They teach you how to do it at the Elven Sorcerer Academy. All the cool Elves take it. It's only those silly, uncultured humans that do not include a music class at their Sorcery School.
ZadroN hasn't said a thing against the Sorceror class - at least not in this thread. Anyway, MCing should be for flavour, minmaxing and tweaking, not for gettng a class to be on a par with the other classes. If people are complaining about a given car so often, then maybe there is something wrong with the car - whether it matches the image the designers wanted for it or not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Warlocks should be the ones complaining, they litterally get almost no spells.But yes, more necromancy spells would be nice.
I haven't compared - do you mean Warlocks have a small spell list to choose from or learn few spells?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Warlocks should be the ones complaining, they litterally get almost no spells.But yes, more necromancy spells would be nice.
I haven't compared - do you mean Warlocks have a small spell list to choose from or learn few spells?
Warlock maxes out at 15 known spells too, technically, and their class spell list is smaller than other full casters. But it's complicated since you have to consider the Patron spells which are 10-spell expansions to that class list, though you don't get them as known spells automatically. Then there's also the many Eldritch Invocations (can have 8 max at high-level) that give you the ability to cast a spell once a day or at will - those spells don't appear on the Warlock Spells list either. The Warlock Spells list does include the small set of available 6th-level and higher spells, but they get one for each spell level to cast once a day as Mystic Arcanum instead of using a spell slot - I'm not sure if those count against the max 15 known spells? Oh, and if you choose Pact of the Tome and the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation, you can potentially collect ALL existing ritual spells and cast them directly from your Book of Shadows.
At any rate, Warlock and Sorcerer are very much an apples and oranges comparison. Aside from both requiring a careful consideration of choices beyond just "known spells".
The Warlock Spells list does include the small set of available 6th-level and higher spells, but they get one for each spell level to cast once a day as Mystic Arcanum instead of using a spell slot - I'm not sure if those count against the max 15 known spells?
They do not, they are in addition to the 15 spells known. That raises their Spells known to an effective 19 not counting Eldritch Invocations which can add quite a number of “at will” spells which effectively turn regular spells into cantrips for them. And there are more of those invocations than any one Warlock can learn. Warlocks are pretty darned casty.
I suppose by secondary they might be referring to Paladin? I have to admit a level 2 Paladin with CHA +3 can prepare 4 spells each day, while RAW a Sorcerer has 3 known spells at that level.
Then again, the Sorcerer has 4 cantrips, while the Paladin has zilch (or 2 if they choose the Blessed Warrior Fighting Style). And if you've been complaining about the Sorcerer spell list being limited, well...
Like Kotath said, the classes are all set up to work with different concepts for gaining & using magic
A Paladin isn't a full caster though. They are pretty well equipped to be a martial fighter, spells are a supplement to their fighting ability. Actually, their Divine Smite is supplementary to their fighting ability and their spells are supplementary to that. Sorcerors rely on spells to be their main weapon. I'm absolutely fine with Paladins having few spells because a Paladin isn't expected to use them much anyway.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
An Arcane Trickster, which is a 1 third caster as opposed to either a half caster (paladin) or a full caster (Sorcerer), will know 4 cantrips and 13 spells by 20th level. A sorcerer by 20th level will know 6 cantrips and fifteen spells. So the Sorcerer knows 2 more spells and 2 more cantrips then a 1 third caster, that is a pretty obvious problem in my opinion.
Primary caster: any class that has spellcasting that progresses all the way to 9th level spell slots.
Secondary caster: any class who's spellcasting only progresses to 5th level spell slots.
These definitions have been used pretty much as long as 5E has been around and are not vague or rare.
I do not speak for Kotath, but it may have been a misunderstanding. I always have known these by the terms 'full caster', 'half caster', and 'one-third caster'.
Primary caster: any class that has spellcasting that progresses all the way to 9th level spell slots.
Secondary caster: any class who's spellcasting only progresses to 5th level spell slots.
These definitions have been used pretty much as long as 5E has been around and are not vague or rare.
I do not speak for Kotath, but it may have been a misunderstanding. I always have known these by the terms 'full caster', 'half caster', and 'one-third caster'.
“Full caster” & “primary caster” and “secondary caster” & “half caster / ½ caster” can be used interchangeably, however “full caster” and “half caster (& “one third caster / ⅓ caster” for EK & AT, and “two thirds caster / ⅔ caster” for Artificers) are the more commonly used terms.
Primary caster: any class that has spellcasting that progresses all the way to 9th level spell slots.
Secondary caster: any class who's spellcasting only progresses to 5th level spell slots.
These definitions have been used pretty much as long as 5E has been around and are not vague or rare.
I do not speak for Kotath, but it may have been a misunderstanding. I always have known these by the terms 'full caster', 'half caster', and 'one-third caster'.
Both ways are used, and if you're familiar with one you shouldn't have any confusion the other means.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Anyway, MCing should be for flavour, minmaxing and tweaking, not for getting a class to be on a par with the other classes.
You are begging the question, assuming that what multi-classing is and that the Sorcerer is weak. It is NOT. It is a strong class that does not do what the original poster desired. Then he declares it week. The problem is he does not like what the Sorcerer does well and gets upset when we tell him how to get what he wants because he (and you) dislike multi-classing because you do not understand what it is.
I paraphrase to you what Bohr told Einstein, stop telling WotC what to do. There is no rule about what Multi-classing should be. It is a set of rules for a game you did not design, and you clearly do not understand it. Most importantly, while players know they are mult-classing, the characters do not have to even be aware of it.
Multi-classing can be whatever people want it to be. It is clear from your complaints that you do not like how many people are using multi-classing. I know this because you specifically mentioned how other people have told you the same thing I did.We tell you to use it not to improve a class, but instead to get what you desire. That keeps happening to you and you hate it because you do not realize that it ALSO is how people create their own custom class. This is not a forbidden thing that multi-classing is not supposed to do, it is an INTENDED use for multi-classing that you are complaining about.
If you do not like the standard Sorcerer, then design your own by adding a few levels of another class without house ruling. The Sorlock I have is not a weird min-maxing of two classes to him. He is simply a magical being that inherited some stuff from his ancestors including both the ability to do spells and a connection to an extraplanar being that has granted him so martial prowess. He is not a mult-classer, he is a single class know as the Sorlock.
The fact that you dislike the game's existing rules for making their own custom class is not a fault with the game or with those of us that keep explaining how to do it. It will continue to happen as long as you find things you wish were different and helpful people tell you how to get what you want.
If people are complaining about a given car so often, then maybe there is something wrong with the car - whether it matches the image the designers wanted for it or not
That would be true IF most people were complaining about Sorcerer. That does not happen. Sorcerer is a STRONG class. They are good at DPR, Stealth, Social, and control/debuffs. Their metamagics are incredibly valuable and lets them use the fewer spells they have to incredible effect. This is one of the few threads complaining about them. By far, the most complained about class is Monk. They are not tanks, not DPR, not Utility. So they mostly get taken for flavor/role playing reasons.
Warlocks and Druids get complained about next (mainly because people do not know how to play them). Then Clerics because people hate it when others think of them as the healer monkey.
Except you do not have to call it multiclassing. Re-flavor the build I created as the Elven Sorcerer. They teach you how to do it at the Elven Sorcerer Academy. All the cool Elves take it. It's only those silly, uncultured humans that do not include a music class at their Sorcery School.
You are begging the question, assuming that what multi-classing is and that the Sorcerer is weak. It is NOT. It is a strong class that does not do what the original poster desired. Then he declares it week. The problem is he does not like what the Sorcerer does well and gets upset when we tell him how to get what he wants because he (and you) dislike multi-classing because you do not understand what it is.
Your use of pronouns makes it sound like l (The person who started the thread) said the Sorcerer is weak, and that l got upset about the comments. I have done none of these. I have nothing against multiclassing, and I'm well aware that the Sorcerer isn't weak. My only complaint was that it lacked some necromancy spells l wanted for a character l planned on making, specifically ones that could reanimate corpses, and that if l wanted them, l had to use a spesific subclass, instead of the one l wanted for the character.
Honestly, l agree with your point about multiclassing being a cool tool to add to the character. Heck, two of my fav characters I've made are multiclass, one is even a Sorlock!
If people are complaining about a given car so often, then maybe there is something wrong with the car - whether it matches the image the designers wanted for it or not
That would be true IF most people were complaining about Sorcerer. That does not happen. Sorcerer is a STRONG class. They are good at DPR, Stealth, Social, and control/debuffs. Their metamagics are incredibly valuable and lets them use the fewer spells they have to incredible effect.
Far more people complain about the sorcerer being weak than say it's strong. I don't know where you're getting them being good at DPR from, there's only a couple of bloodlines that get damage boosts. They don't get any stealth skills, and they're playing second fiddle to bards and wizards when it comes to control and buffs/debuffs, the latter of whom also beats them on social. Metamagic is nice but it's also extremely limited both in how often you can use it per day and how many options you can pick. If you can afford to bust it out all the time, your GM is being rather lenient in how many encounters you're facing between long rests.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Sorcerers are fine where they are at for known spells. They get the limit due to meta-magic being given to them as a class ability and its flexibility. If you want more spells learned without metamagic, then play a wizard. That being written, you can always homebrew a Sorcerer to be whatever you want and as powerful as you want. Charisma is the primary stat for paladins, bards, warlocks and sorcerers - you have a wide variety of classes to multi-class with as well. Wizards can multi-class with artificers or a rare subclass in another class. With flexibility you get a limit to your known spells, bards have the same thing again for them due to their abilities and equipment they can wear. If you want to increase the slots for sorcerers just remove wizards from the game because they will become less useful compared to sorcerers.
Primary caster: any class that has spellcasting that progresses all the way to 9th level spell slots.
Secondary caster: any class who's spellcasting only progresses to 5th level spell slots.
These definitions have been used pretty much as long as 5E has been around and are not vague or rare.
I do not speak for Kotath, but it may have been a misunderstanding. I always have known these by the terms 'full caster', 'half caster', and 'onen-third caster'.
Both ways are used, and if you're familiar with one you shouldn't have any confusion the other means.
Not really. If you said to me "Wizards are primary casters", my assumption (until now) would have have been that you meant that they primarily used casting as their method of attack or doing things. If you said that "Paladins are secondary casters" I'd have taken that to mean that they primarily use martial and physical methods, but use magic to supplement those methods. Indeed, that's what we going through my head originally. While granted there is a correlation, that's not what you intended with those terms. As an aside, I've been on these boards for 9 months and this is the first time that I've noticed that terminology - I've always seen full, half or, rarely, third caster.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Okay, first of all sod off I know what I want and I know what I said. Second of all you have hit the nail on the head there in a crass sort of way. It's my opinion that if the DND Next's Sorcerer had been kept and turned into a full class it would be far more interesting and with stronger mechanical flavor, though it would likely not match the typical view of a sorcerer. Third of all I love multiclassing, especially when it adds up to something unique and flavor rather then being a Band-Aid for a classes meh mechanics. Fourth of all stop putting words in other peoples mouth's. Fifth of all no idea who Bohrs or Einstein are but as a consumer and avid fan of DND I will continue to give as much of my opinion as a please. Sixth of all Multi-Classing is a way to get abilities from more then one of thirteen classes currently available in dnd 5e, nothing more nothing less. How you choose to use and view it is entirely up to you, just as it is up to me to disagree with that perception. Seventh of all you are technically right, Sorcerer is a strong class. But that is not because it is a Sorcerer, it's because it has access to fireball. The best parts of the sorcerer is that it has whittled down version of the Wizard spell list, that's it. Eighth of all Monks are actually pretty good controllers with stunning strike, they also excel in mobility and their class features will often let them survive a wide array of situations even if they don't excel in them, and most importantly the things that make the monk good are unique to the monk. Ninth of all I want you to know that unlike in my first comment I mean full offense and disrespect with this comment. As you have, from my point of view, been a generally unpleasant person.
Edit: Just in cast it wasn't clear this is directed at Mog Darov.
Yeah, I have similar thoughts. I mean, I appreciate the effort, but it's a band aid. I shouldn't have to sacrifice a level, often my capstone ability, an ASI, my choice of race, my favour with the DM in order to get a magic item and my ability to hold an item in combat (because I've having to hold a magic item that I otherwise wouldn't) just to make my class work.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the effort to make it work and all...but my class should just work as well as the others by RAW without those sacrifices. With all that effort...I'd rather just play a different class that does work or adapt it so it works natively. Ideally, I'd want RAW to be fixed, but regardless, I'm not a fan of this band aids.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I understand your frustration. But...
YOU DO NOT WANT TO PLAY A SORCERER. You complained about the Sorcerer. Not one thing, but multiple things. That is like saying you want to own a Ferrari, but want one for less than $50,000 that can hold your six kids and groceries. You are not sacrificing things (like your capstone ability), you are trading them for better things.
You want to play something similar to a Sorcerer. Your own personal definition of a Sorcerer that dramatically differs from what WoTC created. The answer to that is a custom character class which we create by combining a bit of Bard and some feats.
The problem is that in your head you are thinking "I hate Multi-classing".
Except you do not have to call it multiclassing. Re-flavor the build I created as the Elven Sorcerer. They teach you how to do it at the Elven Sorcerer Academy. All the cool Elves take it. It's only those silly, uncultured humans that do not include a music class at their Sorcery School.
ZadroN hasn't said a thing against the Sorceror class - at least not in this thread. Anyway, MCing should be for flavour, minmaxing and tweaking, not for gettng a class to be on a par with the other classes. If people are complaining about a given car so often, then maybe there is something wrong with the car - whether it matches the image the designers wanted for it or not.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Warlocks should be the ones complaining, they litterally get almost no spells.
But yes, more necromancy spells would be nice.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.I haven't compared - do you mean Warlocks have a small spell list to choose from or learn few spells?
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Warlock maxes out at 15 known spells too, technically, and their class spell list is smaller than other full casters. But it's complicated since you have to consider the Patron spells which are 10-spell expansions to that class list, though you don't get them as known spells automatically. Then there's also the many Eldritch Invocations (can have 8 max at high-level) that give you the ability to cast a spell once a day or at will - those spells don't appear on the Warlock Spells list either. The Warlock Spells list does include the small set of available 6th-level and higher spells, but they get one for each spell level to cast once a day as Mystic Arcanum instead of using a spell slot - I'm not sure if those count against the max 15 known spells? Oh, and if you choose Pact of the Tome and the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation, you can potentially collect ALL existing ritual spells and cast them directly from your Book of Shadows.
At any rate, Warlock and Sorcerer are very much an apples and oranges comparison. Aside from both requiring a careful consideration of choices beyond just "known spells".
They do not, they are in addition to the 15 spells known. That raises their Spells known to an effective 19 not counting Eldritch Invocations which can add quite a number of “at will” spells which effectively turn regular spells into cantrips for them. And there are more of those invocations than any one Warlock can learn. Warlocks are pretty darned casty.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I suppose by secondary they might be referring to Paladin? I have to admit a level 2 Paladin with CHA +3 can prepare 4 spells each day, while RAW a Sorcerer has 3 known spells at that level.
Then again, the Sorcerer has 4 cantrips, while the Paladin has zilch (or 2 if they choose the Blessed Warrior Fighting Style). And if you've been complaining about the Sorcerer spell list being limited, well...
Like Kotath said, the classes are all set up to work with different concepts for gaining & using magic
A Paladin isn't a full caster though. They are pretty well equipped to be a martial fighter, spells are a supplement to their fighting ability. Actually, their Divine Smite is supplementary to their fighting ability and their spells are supplementary to that. Sorcerors rely on spells to be their main weapon. I'm absolutely fine with Paladins having few spells because a Paladin isn't expected to use them much anyway.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Primary caster: any class that has spellcasting that progresses all the way to 9th level spell slots.
Secondary caster: any class who's spellcasting only progresses to 5th level spell slots.
These definitions have been used pretty much as long as 5E has been around and are not vague or rare.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
An Arcane Trickster, which is a 1 third caster as opposed to either a half caster (paladin) or a full caster (Sorcerer), will know 4 cantrips and 13 spells by 20th level. A sorcerer by 20th level will know 6 cantrips and fifteen spells. So the Sorcerer knows 2 more spells and 2 more cantrips then a 1 third caster, that is a pretty obvious problem in my opinion.
I do not speak for Kotath, but it may have been a misunderstanding. I always have known these by the terms 'full caster', 'half caster', and 'one-third caster'.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
“Full caster” & “primary caster” and “secondary caster” & “half caster / ½ caster” can be used interchangeably, however “full caster” and “half caster (& “one third caster / ⅓ caster” for EK & AT, and “two thirds caster / ⅔ caster” for Artificers) are the more commonly used terms.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Both ways are used, and if you're familiar with one you shouldn't have any confusion the other means.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
You are begging the question, assuming that what multi-classing is and that the Sorcerer is weak. It is NOT. It is a strong class that does not do what the original poster desired. Then he declares it week. The problem is he does not like what the Sorcerer does well and gets upset when we tell him how to get what he wants because he (and you) dislike multi-classing because you do not understand what it is.
I paraphrase to you what Bohr told Einstein, stop telling WotC what to do. There is no rule about what Multi-classing should be. It is a set of rules for a game you did not design, and you clearly do not understand it. Most importantly, while players know they are mult-classing, the characters do not have to even be aware of it.
Multi-classing can be whatever people want it to be. It is clear from your complaints that you do not like how many people are using multi-classing. I know this because you specifically mentioned how other people have told you the same thing I did. We tell you to use it not to improve a class, but instead to get what you desire. That keeps happening to you and you hate it because you do not realize that it ALSO is how people create their own custom class. This is not a forbidden thing that multi-classing is not supposed to do, it is an INTENDED use for multi-classing that you are complaining about.
If you do not like the standard Sorcerer, then design your own by adding a few levels of another class without house ruling. The Sorlock I have is not a weird min-maxing of two classes to him. He is simply a magical being that inherited some stuff from his ancestors including both the ability to do spells and a connection to an extraplanar being that has granted him so martial prowess. He is not a mult-classer, he is a single class know as the Sorlock.
The fact that you dislike the game's existing rules for making their own custom class is not a fault with the game or with those of us that keep explaining how to do it. It will continue to happen as long as you find things you wish were different and helpful people tell you how to get what you want.
That would be true IF most people were complaining about Sorcerer. That does not happen. Sorcerer is a STRONG class. They are good at DPR, Stealth, Social, and control/debuffs. Their metamagics are incredibly valuable and lets them use the fewer spells they have to incredible effect. This is one of the few threads complaining about them. By far, the most complained about class is Monk. They are not tanks, not DPR, not Utility. So they mostly get taken for flavor/role playing reasons.
Warlocks and Druids get complained about next (mainly because people do not know how to play them). Then Clerics because people hate it when others think of them as the healer monkey.
What am I, a Wizard?! (lol)
Your use of pronouns makes it sound like l (The person who started the thread) said the Sorcerer is weak, and that l got upset about the comments. I have done none of these. I have nothing against multiclassing, and I'm well aware that the Sorcerer isn't weak. My only complaint was that it lacked some necromancy spells l wanted for a character l planned on making, specifically ones that could reanimate corpses, and that if l wanted them, l had to use a spesific subclass, instead of the one l wanted for the character.
Honestly, l agree with your point about multiclassing being a cool tool to add to the character. Heck, two of my fav characters I've made are multiclass, one is even a Sorlock!
Far more people complain about the sorcerer being weak than say it's strong. I don't know where you're getting them being good at DPR from, there's only a couple of bloodlines that get damage boosts. They don't get any stealth skills, and they're playing second fiddle to bards and wizards when it comes to control and buffs/debuffs, the latter of whom also beats them on social. Metamagic is nice but it's also extremely limited both in how often you can use it per day and how many options you can pick. If you can afford to bust it out all the time, your GM is being rather lenient in how many encounters you're facing between long rests.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Sorcerers are fine where they are at for known spells. They get the limit due to meta-magic being given to them as a class ability and its flexibility. If you want more spells learned without metamagic, then play a wizard. That being written, you can always homebrew a Sorcerer to be whatever you want and as powerful as you want. Charisma is the primary stat for paladins, bards, warlocks and sorcerers - you have a wide variety of classes to multi-class with as well. Wizards can multi-class with artificers or a rare subclass in another class. With flexibility you get a limit to your known spells, bards have the same thing again for them due to their abilities and equipment they can wear. If you want to increase the slots for sorcerers just remove wizards from the game because they will become less useful compared to sorcerers.
Not really. If you said to me "Wizards are primary casters", my assumption (until now) would have have been that you meant that they primarily used casting as their method of attack or doing things. If you said that "Paladins are secondary casters" I'd have taken that to mean that they primarily use martial and physical methods, but use magic to supplement those methods. Indeed, that's what we going through my head originally. While granted there is a correlation, that's not what you intended with those terms. As an aside, I've been on these boards for 9 months and this is the first time that I've noticed that terminology - I've always seen full, half or, rarely, third caster.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Okay, first of all sod off I know what I want and I know what I said.
Second of all you have hit the nail on the head there in a crass sort of way. It's my opinion that if the DND Next's Sorcerer had been kept and turned into a full class it would be far more interesting and with stronger mechanical flavor, though it would likely not match the typical view of a sorcerer.
Third of all I love multiclassing, especially when it adds up to something unique and flavor rather then being a Band-Aid for a classes meh mechanics.
Fourth of all stop putting words in other peoples mouth's.
Fifth of all no idea who Bohrs or Einstein are but as a consumer and avid fan of DND I will continue to give as much of my opinion as a please.
Sixth of all Multi-Classing is a way to get abilities from more then one of thirteen classes currently available in dnd 5e, nothing more nothing less. How you choose to use and view it is entirely up to you, just as it is up to me to disagree with that perception.
Seventh of all you are technically right, Sorcerer is a strong class. But that is not because it is a Sorcerer, it's because it has access to fireball. The best parts of the sorcerer is that it has whittled down version of the Wizard spell list, that's it.
Eighth of all Monks are actually pretty good controllers with stunning strike, they also excel in mobility and their class features will often let them survive a wide array of situations even if they don't excel in them, and most importantly the things that make the monk good are unique to the monk.
Ninth of all I want you to know that unlike in my first comment I mean full offense and disrespect with this comment. As you have, from my point of view, been a generally unpleasant person.
Edit: Just in cast it wasn't clear this is directed at Mog Darov.