A comprehensive argument for Sorcerers being Con casters

[Whiskeyjack8044]

First what we would Change*:

At level 1: Constitution is your spell casting ability for your sorcerer spells, since the power of your magic is inherent to you.

At level 2: Font of Magic. You gain a number of sorcery points equal to your Sorcerer level + half your charisma modifier rounded up.

At level 3: Meta Magic. You can select a number of Meta magic options equal to your Charisma modifier (minimum of 1).

At 10th level: Your Sorcery Points Equal your level + your Charisma modifier.

At 17th level: It now costs 1 Sorcery Point to create a 1st level spell slot.

Multi-Classing: You must have atleast a 13 in both Charisma and Constitution.

*Further changes were made from the orginal post bases on feedback.
.................................................. .........................

The Mechanical Argument:

The Sorcerer is functionally a less complicated Wizard. I believe it is intended to be the easiest spell caster and inviting to new players. The above alterations do not change that. In WotC efforts to make Sorcerers more accessible, they have given the Sorcerer less options. This is ok, but I'd we are going to give a class less options we should allow them to do more with those options.

WHY CAST WITH CONSTITUTION?
Firstly, to make the class distinctive from other casters. Sorcerers should be THE concentration spell caster, they are the best as maintaining their spells in the heat of battle. Unlike Wizards, Sorcerers and their Hitpoint bonus from Con, can be front and center in combat casting close range AOEs. This would be the arcane answer to the Cleric. The trade off is that without a proficiency in armor, most Sorcerers are going to be hit more often. They would play very differently than other casters, and those extra hitpoints will be more forgiving to a new player, who are the target demographic for this class.

WHY THE EXTRA SORCERY POINTS AND WHY TIE IT TO CHARISMA?
Mostly to insensitiveize players to not just put everything into Constitution. The added benefit is that low level Sorcerers get to interact with what makes their class special more often. The highest a Sorcerer's Charisma modifier can be at level two, is 4. This would give them a total of 6 Sorcery Points, or 3 extra 1st level spell slots. This seems like alot, but next level they will be spending SP on meta magic and an equilibrium will be reached. Since alot of Sorcerer spells are concentration (and I believe more concentration spells should be added to their spell list), these extra spell slots can incentivize a Sorcerer to drop one concentration spell for another.

WHY THE CHANGE TO META MAGIC OPTIONS?
Again, to incentivize players to put points in something other than Constitution. This also gives a player more opportunities to experiment with different meta magic and reduces the chance that they regret their choices.

WHY THE MULTI-CLASS RESTRICTIONS?
Requiring both Constitution and Charisma prevents everyone from being able to dip into Sorcerer with out making sacrifices.
.................................................. .........................

The Thematic Argument:

I understand that Charisma is also the "Willpower" stat, but I disagree that a Sorcerer's power comes from their will. Magic is like an organ to the Sorcerer, it is part of them. They are their own battery. A Sorcerer's will can be used to shape and modify their magic, that is why Charisma is tied to SP and MM. The reason Constitution is their spell casting ability is because it reflects their ability to contain and control their magic. A creature with low Constitution would be consumed by the raw magical power infused within them.

NOW THE MOST THEMATIC RACES NO LONGER SYNERGIZE WITH THE CLASS!

The nature of Sorcery, as opposed to Wizardry, is that it is random. Why are Halflings, Half-Elves, and Dragonborn more likely to be Sorcerers? There is no reason they should be, and Stout Halflings and Half-Elves still are even if there was. An argument could be made for Tiefling and Aasimar, but they still benefit from better than average MM and SP.

AND NOW LESS THEMATIC RACES SYNERGIZE BETTER WITH THE CLASS!!

This makes perfect sense. A race that does not have many magic users would quickly be outpaced by those who do. While Orcs may not have the capacity to train wizards, they can rely on their Sorcerers to fill that niche. The study of magic would take time away form the study of more practical arts in the eyes of Dwarves, but those with innate magic would still be valued by the Dwarven community. It would make since that these races would have more Sorcerers than other types of magic users. Dragonborn and Genasi already cast innate magic using Constitution, so this isn't a revolutionary idea.
.................................................. .........................

The Sorcerer as written is a fine class with great flavor, but other spell casting classes out pace in almost every way. It also doesn't play much differently than a Wizard. In the end its just a mechanically worse version of the Wizard. These subtle changes make the Sorcerer a very different experience and enable unique character builds and playstyles.

So what do you think? Is this good, is this terrible? I've had this debate many times, and I think I've refined it and balanced it so that most should find it acceptable.

[Kane0]

I think this seems reasonable and is worth playtesting

[JellyPooga]

The sole reason I would tend to disagree with it is that I don't like the idea of Mountain Dwarf being the optimal race for Sorcerer.

Weak argument? Absolutely. Am I sticking by it? Yes :smallbiggrin:

[sophontteks]

This isn't entirely relevent to the proposition. But sorcerers are not the easiest casters. They are the most difficult and punishing class in the game. When I DM with new players I ban the class outright making exceptions only if that player is willing to put in all the research nessesary to make good spell and metamagic choices. Its far too easy to make a useless sorcerer.

[JellyPooga]

Its far too easy to make a useless sorcerer.

I dispute this. It's no easier to make a "useless" Sorcerer than it is to make a "useless" Fighter or any other Class, for that matter. Perhaps the ceiling of optimisation for Sorcerers is not quite as high as, for instance, a Wizard, but that does not make the floor of their respective power-levels significantly different. Yes, Sorcerers (as with any Class) might have some "trap" options and being as limited in options as Sorcerer is, a new player could stumble into some of them, but to make a truly useless character would still take a lot of doing and I doubt anyone could do it accidentally. Heck, doing it intentionally is hard enough. The simple advice "take Firebolt" for a 1st level Sorcerer stops them from being entirely useless in low-tier play; the rest is developmental and down to preference and a large helping of opinion (your "useless" might be my "awesome", for all you know).

[stoutstien]

I dispute this. It's no easier to make a "useless" Sorcerer than it is to make a "useless" Fighter or any other Class, for that matter. Perhaps the ceiling of optimisation for Sorcerers is not quite as high as, for instance, a Wizard, but that does not make the floor of their respective power-levels significantly different. Yes, Sorcerers (as with any Class) might have some "trap" options and being as limited in options as Sorcerer is, a new player could stumble into some of them, but to make a truly useless character would still take a lot of doing and I doubt anyone could do it accidentally. Heck, doing it intentionally is hard enough. The simple advice "take Firebolt" for a 1st level Sorcerer stops them from being entirely useless in low-tier play; the rest is developmental and down to preference and a large helping of opinion (your "useless" might be my "awesome", for all you know).

Agreed. I think online the need for perfect spell and ability choices are greatly exaggerated.
I made a wild magic sorcerer who picked spells by rolling for them randomly and the party had 2 optimized players in it. I never felt useless or hopeless.

[Lupine]

I find the idea of having constitution based Sorcerer to be a great idea. Logically, charisma doesn't make a lot of sense for the sorcerer. He's not convincing something for power (that's a warlock) He is literally drawing from his own body for his magic.
If the question was running extra hard for a long time, the matter at hand would be whether or not he can draw enough endurance to run that hard. For sorcerers, they have a pair of legs in magic, and so they likewise are drawing from themselves to call their magic.

In addition, its just a cool idea: a spellcaster pulling from his own body.


Sorcerers would be able to gain an extra spell slot, on a constitution check, gaining a level of exhaustion, regardless if you succeed or fail.

Another interesting idea would be for the sorcerer's body to be the sorcerer spell-casting focus.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

The sole reason I would tend to disagree with it is that I don't like the idea of Mountain Dwarf being the optimal race for Sorcerer.:

"They ran for as long as they could, but the time had come to make a stand. As the goblin horde closed Soggi Singed-beard stepped before his shield brothers. With a mad laugh a gout of flame leap from his hands and enveloped the goblins, slowing their charge. Then it came to the rise and fall of hammer an axe, Soggi's flames illuminating the battlefield. While Dwarves distrust magic, his shield brothers said a prayer of thanks to Moradin for Soggi's gifts."

I would argue that Genasi would become the most optimal Sorcerer since they get extra spells, and that is very on brand lol


In regards to Sorcerers not being class friendly, I don't want to dismiss your experience, but I believe they are the simplest caster. Since the Sorcerer spell list is smaller, and they have less spells known, new players are less likely to be paralyzed by options or be overwhelmed by alot of spell reading. I think the current UA is gonna make spell selection more forgiving if it becomes official, but if you just make suggestions to your new player you shouldn't have to worry.

[J-H]

I like this.

[Misterwhisper]

I would be completely behind this as just a straight switch from charisma to constitution.

Anything to stop the constant warlock dip.

[Aimeryan]

I dispute this. It's no easier to make a "useless" Sorcerer than it is to make a "useless" Fighter or any other Class, for that matter. Perhaps the ceiling of optimisation for Sorcerers is not quite as high as, for instance, a Wizard, but that does not make the floor of their respective power-levels significantly different. Yes, Sorcerers (as with any Class) might have some "trap" options and being as limited in options as Sorcerer is, a new player could stumble into some of them, but to make a truly useless character would still take a lot of doing and I doubt anyone could do it accidentally. Heck, doing it intentionally is hard enough. The simple advice "take Firebolt" for a 1st level Sorcerer stops them from being entirely useless in low-tier play; the rest is developmental and down to preference and a large helping of opinion (your "useless" might be my "awesome", for all you know).

It wouldn't matter if a Fighter was easier to make useless (and I think this is actually very difficult) - it isn't a caster. All the other full casters are prepared casters, with the exception of the Bard who has more spells known and is less reliant on spells anyway. Being a prepared caster means if you make a mistake with one or more of your preparations you can fix all of them after just a long rest. Being a Sorcerer means you have to wait for the next level to fix one spell choice, and then hope your replacement is good otherwise you have possibly compounded the issue.

You are right that it would be difficult at later levels to have a useless Sorcerer (a lot easier at early levels, though). However, the statement was that Sorcerer is the easiest caster for new players, which is just so far from true.


~~~


Whiskeyjack8044, I feel the idea of being fueled by Con for a Sorcerer. However, their casting ability should be Cha, since it is their will to manifest and manipulate. I would thus go the opposite way with most of the changes and add a few:


Spell Points, instead of Spell Slots, based on Sorcerer Level and Con (some rebalancing of the DMG variant to suit this)
Sorcery Points based on Sorcerer Level (on a 1:1 ratio) and Con
Metamagic based on Cha
Spellcasting Ability based on Proficiency and Cha
Spells Known based on Sorcerer Level (on a 1:1 ratio) and Cha
Cast an unknown Sorcerer Spell with your Spellcasting Ability against a DC of 15 + Spell Level. Failure results in nothing happening and Spell Points expended.

[sophontteks]

I have no idea how to make a useless fighter. Swing anything and deal amazing damage.

Sorcerer. You have 2 spells + 1 a level. If they are not amazing spells, you'll be in a very bad spot. There is a reason why many people call sorcerers bad wizards.

[BigPixie]

I would be completely behind this as just a straight switch from charisma to constitution.

Anything to stop the constant warlock dip.

Listen to this guy, sorclocks cause many headaches for DM's everywhere (myself included)

[Nidgit]

Binding Metamagic to Charisma is a pretty bad idea because it completely devalues the 10th and 17th level additions. A better plan would be to keep Metamagic the same as is but also switching of Metamagics when you level up.

[Sindal]

While I can understand and logically see the argument, I find this change a conflict of interests. Mostly because it solves nothing of what the main gripes I've had with sorcerer.

Magic is in my blood. Great. Magic blood is magic and healthy.
"But do I know how to use it?"

Your constitution, for most part, is passive. Your vitality. Your stamina. Thats just your body. It runs itself. A magic body would similarly work the same way. It runs itself it's own magical way. Even doing stamina and strenuous based tasks is considered athletics (which is strength)

You've still tied charisma to sorcery points and metamagic. This leads me to believe that to "do" sorcery, to be to bend magic to my will, I need charisma.

Metamagic, and sp by extension, are the main reasons I pick sorcerer. It is 'the one thing wizards can't do at will'. But you've made it the secondary stat. You've made less important to cast metamagic.

A secondary stat it typically something that's nice to have but inst that important to a classes make up. The half casters casting stat is a secondary and often they don't even need to use it that much because their spells are carried by their physical abilities such as hitting.

I don't pick sorceror to frontline or be anywhere near it on principle. Its certainly nice to have and we already prof in saving throws so we're half incentivized to take it but that's true for everyone. Everyone needs hp. I pick sorcerer to be a FANCY full caster.

Switching them up to be 'different' from the other casters is not a worthwhile argument to me, then you could just give them more resources tied to charisma to cast their current unique features and cement the difference in play. I don't need to have all the spells a wizard has if I can regularly change the rules of how my spells work and MAKE my spells more impactful.

So yeah. An intriguing idea and one that's probably worth testing for accurate data but based on what's suggested: a no from me.

Ps (I personally dislike multiclassing. Especially since classes get throw around becuase "oh he can't have that. What if someone else multi classes into them." Thankfully none of my players have tried)

[Aimeryan]

Binding Metamagic to Charisma is a pretty bad idea because it completely devalues the 10th and 17th level additions. A better plan would be to keep Metamagic the same as is but also switching of Metamagics when you level up.

You would replace those with some more interesting option, seems obvious to me.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

Binding Metamagic to Charisma is a pretty bad idea because it completely devalues the 10th and 17th level additions. A better plan would be to keep Metamagic the same as is but also switching of Metamagics when you level up.

What we are doing is making the Sorcerer a very front heavy class, and that makes sense. This power is a part of you, either since birth or it was bestowed upon you. With the new meta magic options becoming available (hopefully) we can easily leave the 10th and 17th features as written. An optimized Sorcerer would have a total of 7 Meta Magic options. A sub optimized Sorcerer could make up for low Charisma by getting two "free" meta magic options.

[Spiritchaser]

This isn't entirely relevent to the proposition. But sorcerers are not the easiest casters. They are the most difficult and punishing class in the game. When I DM with new players I ban the class outright making exceptions only if that player is willing to put in all the research nessesary to make good spell and metamagic choices. Its far too easy to make a useless sorcerer.

I fully agree with the sentiment. Sorcerers are way too easy to get wrong, and take too long to adapt to a new party composition... but I don’t ban sorcerers from new players, instead I let them switch out a spell on a long rest (the new UA throws in something really similar with the stipulation that the level of the new and old spells need to match) this allows new players to evolve into a role and capability that works with the party.

I think it’s a small but important change with large QoL improvements for new players.

Of course I also let them change out metamagic on level up... but anyway...

[Trandir]

I have no idea how to make a useless fighter. Swing anything and deal amazing damage.

Sorcerer. You have 2 spells + 1 a level. If they are not amazing spells, you'll be in a very bad spot. There is a reason why many people call sorcerers bad wizards.

Pick a fighting style that you won't use and battlemaster that choses trash maneuvers and take niche or bad feats instead of your ASI and voialla you are a beatsick with nothing usefull and just lot of attacks.

Also I wouldn't call damage on pair with a warlock that just spams eldritch blast amazing damage.

[Onos]

Probably the most comprehensive line of reasoning I've seen regarding Sorcs and Con, the fluff implications in particular have really got me. Definitely making this change to my table for future games.
The real question is, should Sorcerors be able to cast from hitpoints (to any extent)? I'm toying with voluntary Con damage to generate SP, but worry that it might be a little unbalanced.

[Yunru]

Listen to this guy, sorclocks cause many headaches for DM's everywhere (myself included)

Give Agonising Blast a level 5 prerequisite, done. No need to take drastic action.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

Probably the most comprehensive line of reasoning I've seen regarding Sorcs and Con, the fluff implications in particular have really got me. Definitely making this change to my table for future games.
The real question is, should Sorcerors be able to cast from hitpoints (to any extent)? I'm toying with voluntary Con damage to generate SP, but worry that it might be a little unbalanced.

We are already giving them a maximum of 5 extra SP, anything else could be unbalanced or overly complex. I rarely Homebrew, but when I do I try to adhere to 5es design philosophy. My players are not intrested in running a Sorcerer, so this hasn't been play-tested. If you run one let me know how it goes!

[Misterwhisper]

Give Agonising Blast a level 5 prerequisite, done. No need to take drastic action.

That just makes warlock it self worse to keep people from taking it.

Just make Eldritch Blast a class ability not a can trip like it should have been.

[Dork_Forge]

Give Agonising Blast a level 5 prerequisite, done. No need to take drastic action.

I think also limiting AB to just one ray per casting would also help. Eldritch Blast is too much of a "must have" for Warlocks that basically amounts to picking up AB and that's it. There's plenty more fun controlling invocations and other cantrips in general.

[Teaguethebean]

I think also limiting AB to just one ray per casting would also help. Eldritch Blast is too much of a "must have" for Warlocks that basically amounts to picking up AB and that's it. There's plenty more fun controlling invocations and other cantrips in general.

Though then the warlock is extremely weak. With 1 spell per fight taking away there favorite toy does them no favors. And at least on my experience warlock isn't an op class.

[Dork_Forge]

Though then the warlock is extremely weak. With 1 spell per fight taking away there favorite toy does them no favors. And at least on my experience warlock isn't an op class.

Bumping it down doesn't really make them weak at all, especially since it scales with multiple beams and each one will still proc hex. It's also not all about damage, they can also make EB push, pull and slow people in addition to turning hex into an aoe. They still remain competitve in damage but have more encouragement to try new things.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

My very simple solution for multi classing shenanigans? You can't Multi-Class until level 6.

But please, let's not stray too far from the original topic :).

[Garfunion]

I don’t really have much to add to this topic except that I really like these changes.

The only thing that really concerns me are the extra sorcery points.

Some have argued that constitution isn’t a casting stat because it lacks the “will” or intelligence needed to cast spells but. One could argue that your blood is speaking to you, passing its knowledge down to you from your ancestors or wherever you were infused with this power.

Charisma being tied to meta-magic and sorcery points still reflect the sorcerer’s “will” or capability of casting spells. Just in a smaller way. This makes constitution represent the strength and power of your magic while your charisma reflects your “will” to use it.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

I too worry about a level 2 Sorcerer potentially having 3 extra spell slots, but we have to have a carrot in place so that the player wont focus on one stat.

Anyone claiming that Constitution isn't a casting ability should be reminded that Dragonborn and Genasi cast their racial magic with Constitution. Realizing that an Air Genasi was a poor pick for Storm Sorcerer when using Point-Buy is what inspired my idea.

[Yunru]

Though then the warlock is extremely weak. With 1 spell per fight taking away there favorite toy does them no favors. And at least on my experience warlock isn't an op class.

Only at levels 1-4,which happen to be where the Warlock is the strongest spellcaster in terms of spells per day (according to spell point conversion).

[Garfunion]

I too worry about a level 2 Sorcerer potentially having 3 extra spell slots, but we have to have a carrot in place so that the player wont focus on one stat.
There are two meta-magic that use charisma modifier to determine their effects (careful and empowered spell meta-magic). Which adds a little incentive to boost charisma.


Anyone claiming that Constitution isn't a casting ability should be reminded that Dragonborn and Genasi cast their racial magic with Constitution. Realizing that an Air Genasi was a poor pick for Storm Sorcerer when using Point-Buy is what inspired my idea.
This is true too. You also don’t need a significant caster stat to learn magic initiate feat as well.

[Dessunri]

I absolutely love this idea. The concept that a sorcerer needs to maintain control over their own body (i.e. higher constitution score) is awesome. And as you mentioned, it opens the magic user role to more races without making a "sub-par" caster. I wish this were implemented in print, maybe in 6e whenever we get that. For now, though, I'll be bugging my DM to see if we can try this change out and work with him to see if we can add more concentration spells to the sorcerer list.

[Yunru]

And as you mentioned, it opens the magic user role to more races without making a "sub-par" caster.

Except it also makes those that make the most thematic sense (Aasamir, Tieflings, etc) sub-par, since spellcasting stat is so important.

[Garfunion]

Except it also makes those that make the most thematic sense (Aasamir, Tieflings, etc) sub-par, since spellcasting stat is so important.
Warlock class is more thematic appropriate for the Tiefling.
Paladin class is more thematic appropriate for the Aasamir.

However this is a role playing game and thematic appropriateness is based on personal taste and campaign setting.

[Lunali]

Charisma is the constitution of mental stats. If you're converting sorcerers to con, you're making their magic purely based on their physical bodies rather than their minds. Personally, I prefer the idea that your magic is governed by what your mind can stand rather than what your body can stand, but I can see where you might prefer otherwise. In a similar way you might consider a dex based bard that uses dance instead of music.

[ezekielraiden]

If this entails tweaking Dragonborn so they suck less and have Con as a bonus stat option, you can sign me up. Otherwise, hard pass.

[ZorroGames]

In my past 5e playing and DMing I have the only Sorcerer-Warlock I have seen in any game. Most players locally hard pass on multi-classing. The DMs do not have to restrict it in any form.

And while it is not a frequent PC it also is neither OP or useless, just so so.

Just my experience.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

Except it also makes those that make the most thematic sense (Aasamir, Tieflings, etc) sub-par, since spellcasting stat is so important.

Charisma is still important, both of those races will have more SP to convert into spell slots on top of their Racial spells. Obviously the Aasimar is very flavorful as a Divine Soul but is there really a subclass that fits well with Tieflings? The Shadow Sorcerer maybe, but that has little to do with Devils or Demons.

Both races make better Warlocks, an Aasimar already has an angelic guide that could easily be made a Patron, and the Tiefling's family has presumably already made a deal with a devil in the past.

[Garresh]

I really like this idea. Nothing else to add.

[Evaar]

I like the idea, but Dragonborn do need to make good Sorcerers. The Draconic Sorcerer was clearly designed with Dragonborn in mind.

Now, Dragonborn as a race needs a lot of help, so maybe one way to offer that is to let them pick +2 Str/Con/Cha and +1 Str/Con/Cha and call it a day. (Requiring the choices to be exclusive of course: No choosing +2 Str and then +1 Str.)

Then it fits with this idea and gives the race far more flexibility. Their other features aren't great, but that's not a huge deal anyway.

[Garfunion]

I like the idea, but Dragonborn do need to make good Sorcerers. The Draconic Sorcerer was clearly designed with Dragonborn in mind.

Now, Dragonborn as a race needs a lot of help, so maybe one way to offer that is to let them pick +2 Str/Con/Cha and +1 Str/Con/Cha and call it a day. (Requiring the choices to be exclusive of course: No choosing +2 Str and then +1 Str.)

Then it fits with this idea and gives the race far more flexibility. Their other features aren't great, but that's not a huge deal anyway.
A +1 to charisma hardly makes them a “good” sorcerer now.
And this thread isn’t about making certain races better at being a sorcerer. It’s about making the sorcerer a more unique class.

The Dragonborn’s +1 to charisma will still help them get more sorcery points and more meta-magic choices.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

I would also say that according forgotten realms lore, Dragonborn hate dragons. That said, I don't really use FR lore.

[MaxWilson]

I would be completely behind this as just a straight switch from charisma to constitution.

Anything to stop the constant warlock dip.

Just switch warlocks from Cha to Int. Warlocks are all about forbidden knowledge, so Int is thematic. Cha is a weird attribute dependency for warlocks.

[Fable Wright]

Sorcerers: Mistrusted and feared users of wild magic. They cast spells with the power of their popularity. :smallconfused:

This has always been an issue for me. Constitution makes sense, from a thematic standpoint. Sorcerers are feared. They have to endure through quite a lot to survive long enough to control their powers.

Plus switching to Con means fewer Sorcadins, and it conversely makes the class a better dip for martial characters, giving them a unique edge.

I'm always extremely dubious whenever HP and Magic are the same stat, but within bounded accuracy, and specifically within the confines of 5e and Charisma keying to everything, I'd be OK to test the change.

[ezekielraiden]

I would also say that according forgotten realms lore, Dragonborn hate dragons. That said, I don't really use FR lore.

Hating something you are biologically, culturally, linguistically, historically, and/or economically connected to is pretty frickin' common IRL, so I don't see why it would be such a problem here. Dragonborn speak the language of dragons (they get draconic for free), must pick a dragon type for an ancestor, and in FR lore specifically they come from cultures controlled by dragons on that world (even if that wasn't something they liked). Plus, FR has Bahamut and Tiamat vying for their worship. So....yeah, I completely agree that they hate dragons. It's also mechanically and narratively explicit that they're connected to dragons biologically, which is the explanation for (one form of) sorcery.

[ezekielraiden]

Sorcerers: Mistrusted and feared users of wild magic. They cast spells with the power of their popularity. :smallconfused:
"Charisma" isn't "popularity" any more than it is attractiveness (though some characters may express their Charisma in part through these things). People can be fairly popular and also very uncharismatic; they're easily pushed around but genial, or don't communicate very well but always have your back, or easily put their feet into their mouths in endearing ways. A fictional example of going from unpopular to (relatively) popular without being even slightly charismatic is Worf's son Alexander attempting to "make it" in the Klingon military. He's a doofus, doesn't get a lot of Klingon culture, and really is a little "soft" from having grown up accustomed to Federation creature comforts, which his shipmates are quite used to doing without. However, he eventually finds a role on the ship, as "the fool," and people start to like him--not because they respect him per se, nor because he really has any influence over them or all that much "force of personality," but because he's endearing to them, and they see him as a good-luck-charm. He repeatedly makes foolish mistakes that would destroy a seasoned warrior's career, but for a fool, such mistakes are acceptable (though they won't earn respect, they won't lose any either).


I'm always extremely dubious whenever HP and Magic are the same stat, but within bounded accuracy, and specifically within the confines of 5e and Charisma keying to everything, I'd be OK to test the change.
I share these concerns, but I don't think bounded accuracy actually addresses this. Remember that it's not just HP and magic, it's also Con saves...which means maintaining Concentration. Between already having proficiency in Con saves, and now making 20 Con by far the most desirable stat for Sorcerers, things may get a little wonky.

Of course, I am also 100% fine with Sorcerers being Charisma-based, because D&D has never cleanly defined what "willpower" cashes out as stat-wise, and it seems blatantly obvious to me that while the source of the magic is biological, the use of it is through the will. Wizards are reality-hackers, like Super Mario World speedrunners doing an incredibly bizarre sequence of precise actions in order to insert new executable code into "system-locked" memory; less "commanding" reality and more "reprogramming" it, because they've mastered enough of the universe's "source code" that they can do that overwriting process without it either failing or "crashing the program." Meanwhile, Sorcerers, like Warlocks, genuinely command reality to be a certain way, and it relents because they have been granted that power (whether by blood or by contract)--think of it as the difference between the aforementioned code-injection trickery and having superuser command prompt access. Sorcery, to my eye, works like how channeling saidin is described in the Wheel of Time: "seizing" it, having to fight against a never-ending, raging, violent torrent of raw power, having to bend it to your will at every moment. Nynaeve, when initially leading the circle to cleanse the taint on saidin, is shocked, perhaps even terrified, by the "chaos and rage" that fills it, and struggles to believe that anyone could ever control it.

That's what I imagine being a Sorcerer is like. And it's why I LOVED the early-playtest Sorcerer, where you were literally a being with two souls, your mortal soul and your magic soul, and tapping your power meant letting your other soul gain a greater foothold...always running the risk of letting the other soul take over completely, consuming your mortal soul, leaving nothing of "you" except the twisted monster-abomination running around in "your" body.

Wizards inject code into the universe, and out pops their desired effect. Sorcerers metaphorically bully the universe into doing what they want. Warlocks swagger around with a metaphorical "badge" that, similarly, intimidates the universe into doing what they want. Bards, ironically, are more similar to Wizards than either of the other two, but because musical performance is a Charisma-related task, they're Charisma casters.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

OP here, I want to make it clear that I think a Charisma based Sorcerer makes total thematic sense. I just think that Constitution makes MORE sense and it makes the class stand out in a role dominated by Charisma casters. I love Sorcerers.

If I may offer a bit of insight, I let my players use any mental stat for any caster. So I've had an INT Warlock and a WIS wizard. The compromise is that they can't multi-class if they do this. Its perfectly balanced.

[Garfunion]

I share these concerns, but I don't think bounded accuracy actually addresses this. Remember that it's not just HP and magic, it's also Con saves...which means maintaining Concentration. Between already having proficiency in Con saves, and now making 20 Con by far the most desirable stat for Sorcerers, things may get a little wonky
I would like to point out that the rogue class can devote all their resources into dexterity. Dexterity controls initiative, light and medium armor, dexterity saving throws, Finesse weapons, ranged weapons, stealth check, thieves tools, sleight of hand, and a few others I maybe missing.
I think we can allow a little bit of leeway for sorcerers to use constitution as their spellcasting ability.

[ezekielraiden]

I would like to point out that the rogue class can devote all their resources into dexterity. Dexterity controls initiative, light and medium armor, dexterity saving throws, Finesse weapons, ranged weapons, stealth check, thieves tools, sleight of hand, and a few others I maybe missing.
I think we can allow a little bit of leeway for sorcerers to use constitution as their spellcasting ability.

It's true that Rogues are probably the closest to a purely SAD class in 5e, and yes, the Sorcerer would thus come to resemble them if they were made so Con-dependent. I don't see either of these things as a positive and would in fact prefer to make the Rogue less purely-Dex-focused rather than use it as a justification for making other classes more SAD.

[Garfunion]

It's true that Rogues are probably the closest to a purely SAD class in 5e, and yes, the Sorcerer would thus come to resemble them if they were made so Con-dependent. I don't see either of these things as a positive and would in fact prefer to make the Rogue less purely-Dex-focused rather than use it as a justification for making other classes more SAD.
Actually with the OP’s suggested changes the sorcerer will still need charisma as well. So not as SAD. Kind of like the paladin can just focus on strength(or dexterity) and charisma.

[JellyPooga]

It's true that Rogues are probably the closest to a purely SAD class in 5e, and yes, the Sorcerer would thus come to resemble them if they were made so Con-dependent. I don't see either of these things as a positive and would in fact prefer to make the Rogue less purely-Dex-focused rather than use it as a justification for making other classes more SAD.

Wow. Really? :smallconfused: Yeah, I guess Rogues can get by with solely Dex, but it'd still be a pretty rough ride. Druids on the other hand...

[djreynolds]

Con is the one stat that ties all the classes together

Every class needs this stat because its tied to Hit Points

So players have to choose between ASI for main stats, tertiary stats, feats, and more Hit Points

[Garfunion]

Con is the one stat that ties all the classes together

Every class needs this stat because its tied to Hit Points

So players have to choose between ASI for main stats, tertiary stats, feats, and more Hit Points
Hit point aren’t everything. Many classes can get by rather well with a low con score.
Barbarian have a d12 hit die and a way to resist damage.
Fighters have a d10 hit die, can wear heavy armor, shields, and have a way to restore hit points to themselves.
Paladins have a d10 hit die, can wear heavy armor, shields, and have a way to restore hit points.
Druids... yay their op
And so on.

Dexterity is needed by everyone unless you wear heavy armor.
Wisdom is needed by everyone because nobody likes being surprised.
It is all in the way you look at it.

[djreynolds]

Hit point aren’t everything. Many classes can get by rather well with a low con score.
Barbarian have a d12 hit die and a way to resist damage.
Fighters have a d10 hit die, can wear heavy armor, shields, and have a way to restore hit points to themselves.
Paladins have a d10 hit die, can wear heavy armor, shields, and have a way to restore hit points.
Druids... yay their op
And so on.

Dexterity is needed by everyone unless you wear heavy armor.
Wisdom is needed by everyone because nobody likes being surprised.
It is all in the way you look at it.

But con is humbly, IMO, the stat we all use. And to have it as a main stat, especially either attack or casting... feels odd.

I like the OPs idea, the con stat is never going to be more than 20... its no more overpowered than hexblade using charisma for both casting and attack.

[Garfunion]

its no more overpowered than hexblade using charisma for both casting and attack.Gods I hate the hexblade.

[ezekielraiden]

But con is humbly, IMO, the stat we all use. And to have it as a main stat, especially either attack or casting... feels odd.

I like the OPs idea, the con stat is never going to be more than 20... its no more overpowered than hexblade using charisma for both casting and attack.

You may be surprised to know that (a) I somewhat disagree with this assertion, as the Hexblade is specifically compensating for the weaknesses of a class that implies you can do melee fighting but fails to actually support it, and (b) I somewhat agree with this assertion, in that I would prefer the Hexblade also be less mono-stat-focused.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

What about this, instead of giving them extra SP equal to their Charisma modifier, we half it and round up. With a 12 they get 1 extra SP, with a 14 they get 1, with a 16 they get 2, with an 18 they get 2, with a 20 they get 3. They also get a number of MM options equal to their Charisma modifier.

At level 10 their extra meta magic equals their Charisma modifier, so with a 20 they get 5 SP instead of 3.

At level 17 a 1st level spell slot only cost 1sp to regain.

I'm going to edit the OP with these changes.

[Kane0]

I dont think i’ve ever made a PC with a Con other than 14, this might prompt a nice change.

[Bigmouth]

Personally I think you need to scrap any and all reasons for CHA. Make them a pure con caster.
In games that don't feature non-stop combat, HP isn't a huge concern for non-melee folks IME. Meanwhile, CHA is full of candy goodness. You don't need to be bribed into taking it. It is already bribing you. Meanwhile con has zero active uses, it isn't sexy.

And also, add me to those voting against Sorcs being the noob friendliest of casters. Metamagics are not intuitive or evocative. Picking invocations for a warlock is MUCH easier.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

@BigMouth

They do need a reason to not put everything into one stat and any class Design has to take into account all playstyles. If you are a Sorcerer in a dungeon crawl those hitpoints are going to give you a huge advantage.

I think Sorcerer are simpler. I compare them to Monks; spend points do this. Almost everyone I've played with are people who I've introduced to the game. I say its noob friendly because I've witnessed it.

Most of the Sorcerer class features are passive or otherwise very straightforward. Warlocks on the other hand requires you to pick a Patron which does many different things, a Boon which does many different things, and Evocations which do many other things, along with spell selection. Now for a veteran player these are hugely complex, but when you are also learning about everything else in the game it can be daunting to remember everything you can do. Thus I believe Sorcerers to be the most noob friendly.

[ezekielraiden]

Personally I think you need to scrap any and all reasons for CHA. Make them a pure con caster.
In games that don't feature non-stop combat, HP isn't a huge concern for non-melee folks IME. Meanwhile, CHA is full of candy goodness. You don't need to be bribed into taking it. It is already bribing you. Meanwhile con has zero active uses, it isn't sexy.
Games where socialization is that much more important than combat are not as common as you might think. D&D has always been a fairly combat-heavy game, even in the early eras. (The reputation for low-combat comes mostly from avoidance of anything even vaguely resembling a "fair" fight--you used any dirty trick you could to get an advantage. Tucker's Kobolds are an example of what happens when "complacent" early-edition players went up against opponents that viewed their characters the way the DM expected the characters to view all combat encounters.)

Thing is? Numerous guides will strongly encourage dumping (or at least "investing nothing into") Charisma if it isn't a key stat for you. Wizards, Clerics, Fighters, and Monks all get recommended to dump it. Even Barbarians and Rogues can easily choose to dump it, and many guides have no problem recommending that you do so if it isn't directly relevant to something you do (even Barbarians can get away with throwing their Strength around rather than Cha for Intimidate, unless they go for the not-so-great Berserker subclass). Outside of niche or build-specific contexts, Charisma is a common dump stat, especially because a group really only needs two people who are good with it (one each deception and persuasion).


And also, add me to those voting against Sorcs being the noob friendliest of casters. Metamagics are not intuitive or evocative. Picking invocations for a warlock is MUCH easier.
The main problem--for both--is that there are front-and-center pseudo-"trap" options. As you say, metamagic options can be subtle. Warlock, however, has right at the start the Pact of the Blade that...isn't very good at the specific thing it's for unless you carefully build for it (or specifically take Hexblade, which is powerful solely because it's a patch to fix how weak the Pact of the Blade is on its own). There are also a ton more Invocations, which many players will find daunting, and all those "once per day you may cast X using a Warlock spell slot" Invocations are in their own way pseudo-"trap" options.

(I say "pseudo-'trap'" because they aren't actually trap options, but they're so much worse than effectively any alternative that it's a little hard to justify their presence in the book. Not impossible, they have niche uses, but yeah, I would have cut out 90% or more of the "once a day cast this spell" options and replaced them with more at-will spell access to double down on the "I just have tools ALL the time" nature of the class, which would have differentiated it from the Sorcerer more fully. Wizards have "the most spells" by having the most slots, via Arcane Recovery; Sorcerers squeeze the most out of their spells, via Metamagic; Warlocks have "the most spells" by having lots of at-will spells plus short-rest slots.)

[Warlush]

The only thing that balances casters is MAD. Once you can cast with CON or DEX, why would anyone play a martial character again?

[stoutstien]

The only thing that balances casters is MAD. Once you can cast with CON or DEX, why would anyone play a martial character again?

Because some people don't want to be casters.
Con is currently everyone's trinary stat so making one class Con as primary stat wouldn't change much.
Saying that, I generally dislike 'mental' stats. I'm working on replacing Cha, wis, and int with Constitution and Will.
In the end all casters are going to want both so it prevents SaD.

[KorvinStarmast]

Listen to this guy, sorclocks cause many headaches for DM's everywhere (myself included) Or, go with the original plan and make warlocks INT based casters.