Sorc or Lock, Which Burns More?

[NeoSeraphi]

I don't want to multiclass. Which class should I take, red dragon sorcerer or fiend warlock, to deal lots of fire damage?

[Ohnoeszz]

Sorcerer easily. You could also consider an evocation wizard. The Warlock doesn't have the spell slots to compete in throwing fire.

[Madfellow]

My gut tells me Red Dragon Sorcerer; elemental affinity + Metamagic means you can really focus on what you want to do: burning stuff. :smallamused:

[NeoSeraphi]

I just get frustrated with the sorcerer's general lack of interesting class features. It's just kind of an empty class.

[Madfellow]

I just get frustrated with the sorcerer's general lack of interesting class features. It's just kind of an empty class.

I prefer to think of it as being focused. If that bugs you, though, you're probably better off with the warlock.

[NeoSeraphi]

Dragon sorcerer works then.

[andhaira]

Evocation Wizards. Not only can you bring down the fiery pain, you have access to a bunch of other things should there be need. Damage wise you are actually superior to the Sorcerer, if I am not mistaken.

Warlock (Fiend Pact): Fiend Pact grants fire spells. The level 14 ability is what makes this really worth it, you send your enemy to hell where it burns like nothing has burnt before!

[Dalebert]

I just get frustrated with the sorcerer's general lack of interesting class features. It's just kind of an empty class.

Tend to feel the same way. Wizards seem to have them beat hands down in overall ability. Metamagics are nice but they don't seem to make up for all you give up.


Evocation Wizards. Not only can you bring down the fiery pain, you have access to a bunch of other things should there be need. Damage wise you are actually superior to the Sorcerer, if I am not mistaken.

Haven't done any math on this but wouldn't be surprised.


Warlock (Fiend Pact): Fiend Pact grants fire spells. The level 14 ability is what makes this really worth it, you send your enemy to hell where it burns like nothing has burnt before!

Except they don't actually burn. They just think they are. Still awesome, but not a fire effect if you want to get really technical. :smallbiggrin:

In any case, if you're all about the fire, you won't get a fire cantrip with a warlock like you will with a sorc or wizard.

[NeoSeraphi]

Oh no fire cantrip for warlocks? Laaaame

[Easy_Lee]

Evocation Wizards...Damage wise you are actually superior to the Sorcerer, if I am not mistaken.

Warlock (Fiend Pact): Fiend Pact grants fire spells.

Not so much. Watlocks get spells but only up to 5th level slots and no way to modify the spell's damage. Evocation wizards get some nice tricks. But sorcerers get metamagic, opening up endless possibilities.

You can fire off a twinned disintegrate to destroy two targets at once.

You can quicken and twin a firebolt plus another twinned firebolt for great burst without even using a spell slot.

Oh, and you can concentrate on two copies of the same spell at once by twinning it. Double haste, no other class is gonna do that.

Sorcerers are fantastic this edition. You play wizard if you want to alter the world around you and play batman. You play warlock if you want a short rest caster with the best always-on casting. If you want to blow
**** up, you play sorcerer.

[Madfellow]

Oh, and you can concentrate on two copies of the same spell at once by twinning it. Double haste, no other class is gonna do that.

No. Nobody can concentrate on two spells at once, sorcerer or no.

[MaxWilson]

I just get frustrated with the sorcerer's general lack of interesting class features. It's just kind of an empty class.

Are you kidding? Take a Wild Magic sorc + Ritual Casting (wizard) and you're golden. Manipulate die rolls to your heart's content while Polymorphing allies into Tyrranosaurs and throwing Fireballs, except when you're busy creating tiny invulnerable fortresses and linking the party to each other telepathically while granting them water breathing to pursue the underwater Sahuagin threat.


No. Nobody can concentrate on two spells at once, sorcerer or no.

You're correct, but what a Sorcerer can do is make a spell (e.g. Haste) affect two targets instead of one, and then concentrate on that spell.

[NeoSeraphi]

My DM finds Wild Magic annoying so Draconic is my only option for sorcerer.

[Easy_Lee]

No. Nobody can concentrate on two spells at once, sorcerer or no.


You're correct, but what a Sorcerer can do is make a spell (e.g. Haste) affect two targets instead of one, and then concentrate on that spell.

Probably ought to read the rules before you correct somebody, Mad. Double-concentration is a thing when it's a single, twinned spell.

[CyberThread]

My DM finds Wild Magic annoying so Draconic is my only optandion for sorcerer.



Tell yOur dm that wild magic finds him annoying. He will grow smitten with wm tusendre behavior and invite it back to the table.

[Dalebert]

My DM finds Wild Magic annoying so Draconic is my only option for sorcerer.

Well that's douchey, but FWIW, you want draconic anyway if you're all about burning things.

[Greybones]

Not so much. Watlocks get spells but only up to 5th level slots and no way to modify the spell's damage. Evocation wizards get some nice tricks. But sorcerers get metamagic, opening up endless possibilities.


This is a common misconception, but Warlocks can actually cast up to level 9 spells. It's just that the ability to do so is buried in their class features under Mystic Arcanum. For spells higher than level 5 spells they only get one spell slot per spell level and they recover after a long rest instead of a short rest.

[Ashrym]

Probably ought to read the rules before you correct somebody, Mad. Double-concentration is a thing when it's a single, twinned spell.

This is correct. Twinned spells are a single instance with a second target. This was clarified in sage advice and it's valid to twin a concentration spell and maintain the twinned spell on both targets. Twin is a great meta.

[DCraw]

This is a common misconception, but Warlocks can actually cast up to level 9 spells. It's just that the ability to do so is buried in their class features under Mystic Arcanum. For spells higher than level 5 spells they only get one spell slot per spell level and they recover after a long rest instead of a short rest.

While it is true that Mystic Arcarnum does allow a Warlock to cast 6-9th level spells, it does not provide actual 6-9th level slots. This means that they can't use them to heighten a lower level spell. Generally speaking, this is not an issue, as high level spells are usually more potent that heightened lower level spells - but for a character trying to put out the most fire damage possible in a nova round It's hard to go past Scorching Ray cast from an 8th-9th level slot (especially if your DM ignores the Sage ruling regarding whether spells with multiple independent rays all aimed at the same person can be twinned).

[Easy_Lee]

While it is true that Mystic Arcarnum does allow a Warlock to cast 6-9th level spells, it does not provide actual 6-9th level slots. This means that they can't use them to heighten a lower level spell. Generally speaking, this is not an issue, as high level spells are usually more potent that heightened lower level spells - but for a character trying to put out the most fire damage possible in a nova round It's hard to go past Scorching Ray cast from an 8th-9th level slot (especially if your DM ignores the Sage ruling regarding whether spells with multiple independent rays all aimed at the same person can be twinned).

Right, and this was my basic point. Sometimes you'd really like to use that sixth level slot for a scorching ray, but warlocks don't get to do that. So warlocks are easily the least competent of the three when it comes to pure fire damage, for that reason alone. Admittedly, in a low level campaign you wouldn't notice it as much. But I still say sorcerers are the overall best blasters for just about any level, because of the versatility of metamagic.

[Yagyujubei]

everyone knows you gotta go lore bard. cutting words throws out the sickest burns

[Giant2005]

everyone knows you gotta go lore bard. cutting words throws out the sickest burns

No way! Vicious Mockery throws out way sicker burns than Cutting Words - Vicious Mockery's burns hurt the target's self-esteem so bad that he actually takes physical damage from a psychological event.

[Yagyujubei]

No way! Vicious Mockery throws out way sicker burns than Cutting Words - Vicious Mockery's burns hurt the target's self-esteem so bad that he actually takes physical damage from a psychological event.

luckily bard gets BOTH! so you're enemies better be packing aloe vera, because you'll be spitting hot fire.

[NeoSeraphi]

Oh you can't Twin scorching ray?

[bloodshed343]

Oh you can't Twin scorching ray?

RaW, sure, you CAN twin it. It's unclear how that works though.

[Dalebert]

Oh you can't Twin scorching ray?

No, you can't, apparently.

From another thread:


Twin scorching ray isn't valid per Jeremy Crawford and listed on the sage advice page. It doesn't matter if a spell is only cast on a single target if it can be cast on multiple targets.

[Ashrym]

Right, and this was my basic point. Sometimes you'd really like to use that sixth level slot for a scorching ray, but warlocks don't get to do that. So warlocks are easily the least competent of the three when it comes to pure fire damage, for that reason alone. Admittedly, in a low level campaign you wouldn't notice it as much. But I still say sorcerers are the overall best blasters for just about any level, because of the versatility of metamagic.

I wouldn't say easily the least competent because the weakest scorching ray still in a 5th level slot. While it's true another caster can slot higher, the bulk would also be slotted lower.

Given 2 short rests and the warlock capstone that's 16 slots for similar end results to another caster using all his or her slots on scorching ray and the warlock would still have arcanum to use plus better at-wills and the invocations.

I don't think warlocks are as thematic because adding firebolt normally won't create any incentive to use firebolt over eldritch blast, and it's hard to consider a fire theme when the class is likely to only use scorching ray, fireball, wall of fire, and maybe fire shield.

Without meteor swarm among other spells and using eldritch blast a lot it's hard to see the warlock in that fire theme regardless of the fiend patron or effectiveness of the build.

Scorching ray isn't what I would consider the key deciding factor. The sorcerer also has affinity as part of the full package going fire draconic and the better choice for that reason and more complete spell selection.

Of course, we might just have a different interpretation of "competent" in the context and all I did was add more reasons to the same intent. ;-)


Edit regarding twinning scorching ray: per Jeremy Crawford's response the answer is twin is not intended for use with magic missile or scorching ray because they do affect multiple targets even if the caster chooses to only target one enemy with those spells. Jeremy is the official answers on rules guy if anyone is not aware, so his answers tend to trump everything except DM choices per table and adventurer league rules.

[bloodshed343]

No, you can't, apparently.

From another thread:

Ahh. Missed that.

[odigity]

If the only problem is fluff, just ask your DM to let you change Eldritch Blast from force to fire, which he couldn't possibly argue against, mechanically, since fire is across-the-board weaker than force. There are tons of creatures that are immune or resistant to fire, but almost none for force, and as far as I know, and certainly almost none (or perhaps truly none) that are resistant to force but *not* fire, meaning fire is truly inferior. In fact, since that's true, it would be entirely fire to fluff EB to let you use force OR fire at your discretion -- fire most of the time for fluff, but force when you encounter fire resistance. That's still, strictly speaking, in no way more powerful than the original EB, because letting you switch to fire at-will gives you zero advantage beyond fluff.

Of course, you should be taking the Elemental Affinity feat anyway, so you can get by fire resistance, and be able to use the fire version of EB almost all the time.

And of course, the Fiend pact spell list is almost entirely fire spells. In fact, it's all the GOOD fire spells. Thematically, I'd say Fiend pact is on-par with Gold/Red Dragonborn + Dragon Sorceror for Lord of Fire (both can still get Elemental Affinity, so that's not relevant for the comparison).

[Giant2005]

If the only problem is fluff, just ask your DM to let you change Eldritch Blast from force to fire, which he couldn't possibly argue against, mechanically, since fire is across-the-board weaker than force. There are tons of creatures that are immune or resistant to fire, but almost none for force, and as far as I know, and certainly almost none (or perhaps truly none) that are resistant to force but *not* fire, meaning fire is truly inferior. In fact, since that's true, it would be entirely fire to fluff EB to let you use force OR fire at your discretion -- fire most of the time for fluff, but force when you encounter fire resistance. That's still, strictly speaking, in no way more powerful than the original EB, because letting you switch to fire at-will gives you zero advantage beyond fluff.

Of course, you should be taking the Elemental Affinity feat anyway, so you can get by fire resistance, and be able to use the fire version of EB almost all the time.

And of course, the Fiend pact spell list is almost entirely fire spells. In fact, it's all the GOOD fire spells. Thematically, I'd say Fiend pact is on-par with Gold/Red Dragonborn + Dragon Sorceror for Lord of Fire (both can still get Elemental Affinity, so that's not relevant for the comparison).

Letting Eldritch Blast do fire damage would be extremely OP.
As you said the disadvantages could be simply overridden via Elemental Affinity which would also marginally increase the EB's average damage beyond the level a normal Warlock could achieve. More significantly than that, it would then qualify for the Draconic Sorcerer's Elemental Affinity which would result in EB's inflicting 1D10+10 per beam. That is crazy for a Cantrip.

[Dalebert]

What Giant said plus there's already a separate cantrip that is essentially the fire version of EB which both wizards and sorcerers get. So they apparently consider it more than fluff and did not intend for warlocks to be able to shoot firebolts for whatever reason.

Being able to change energy types could be used to take advantage of a creatures vulnerabilities. I'm sure there are lots of cold creatures vulnerable to fire and vice versa just as a for instance. So force is not always better than fire. This is the whole point behind chromatic orb and a good reason to learn it over magic missile. Plus it can be twinned and MM can't.

[odigity]

True, I forgot about:

a) fire vulnerability
b) the additional +Cha dmg from Elemental Affinity (Dragon Sorceror 6)

So yes, if you refluff EB to be fire damage and take 6 levels of Sorc, you'd get +Cha twice, which is not good. Assuming you take Agonizing Blast. But you could rule that AB only applies to unfluffed EB to avoid that.

I don't care about the minor damage benefit from Elemental Adept feat (1s becomes 2s).

You could still take Produce Flame cantrip as a Warlock by going Tome (three cantrips from any class), but it's weird to play Warlock and not take advantage of EB.

I guess if you only care about the burn, just be a Dragon Sorceror.