Sorcerers and their connection to magic

[KyleG]

I'm considering what changes i would make to the next game i dm.
I, me myself have a fantasy picture in my head of sorcerers just being more natural castors and for me that may also mean removing verbal components, so what are the consequences of such a move? Is it likely to be too op?
A lite variant of this id thought of is that you choose a spell at each level it applies to maybe.

As part of this pursuit im considering removing wizard to a npc class, making the default magic user for the setting sorcerer.

It's all theory crafting at the moment. It's not an attempt to fix anything mechanical its an attempt to fulfill MY fantasy, it might not fit everyone's idea.

[kaervaak]

Removing verbal components is giving them the best part of subtle spell for free. That's pretty strong. This would allow them to cast spells from hiding without revealing their position and possibly otherwise disguise their spell casting.

What about making them able to cast without a focus or component pouch? Their body is a spell casting focus. That seems like a more reasonable way of implementing what you want.

[MoiMagnus]

I'm considering what changes i would make to the next game i dm.
I, me myself have a fantasy picture in my head of sorcerers just being more natural castors and for me that may also mean removing verbal components, so what are the consequences of such a move? Is it likely to be too op?
A lite variant of this id thought of is that you choose a spell at each level it applies to maybe.


If you replace Verbal components by "Sound" component (you know, the weird noises magic does) and keep the fact that the Silence spell negate them, then the differences are close to nothing.

If you turn those spells into truly silent spells, then this mean those spells are now immune to Silence, harder to notice for Counterspells, and this is a significant buff to using spells in non-combat situations (infiltration, or even at the middle of a social interaction), which might be very good or not much of a change depending on how you usually GM those.



As part of this pursuit im considering removing wizard to a npc class, making the default magic user for the setting sorcerer.


The main issue is that you significantly increase the likelihood of no PC having a high Int (hence choosing Int skills), which can be annoying for some campaigns. It can be partly compensated for by giving to the team some opportunity to befriend some more intelligent NPCs (like a librarian or something).

[JackPhoenix]

Verbal components don't have to be pseudo-latin. Screaming "Burn, you [censored]!" at the top of his lungs is perfectly valid verbal component for a sorcerer.
It's the material component that feels weird. Though, TBH, it feels weird sorcerers use the same spells as everyone else (metamagic excluded) in the first place.

[PhoenixPhyre]

It's the material component that feels weird. Though, TBH, it feels weird sorcerers use the same spells as everyone else (metamagic excluded) in the first place.

My personal headcanon (and homebrew setting canon) is that the spells are actually external patterns. Basically, the god of magic has "blessed" some particular interactions with the universal API. And so the parameters of the spell (components, restrictions, etc) are actually universal. The difference between arcane spell-casting classes isn't that they directly manipulate magic differently, it's in how they learn what the API calls look like.

Wizards figure them out from other people's writings and their own research. Warlocks learn them in payment for their Pact (or are pointed toward them/influenced to them by their Patron as part of that relationship). Bards noodle them out of the harmony of the spheres. Sorcerers are born with the call structure embedded in their souls (or have it injected due to <event>), rather than consciously learning them. But sorcerers also know some of the loopholes and can twist the calls.

None of them can actually execute the API calls (spells) without the proper API credits (spell slots in this analogy). But all of them need to provide the same parameters, including components, as a general rule.

Divine casters work somewhat differently--they're not executing the API calls themselves, they're getting the information/etc channeled through them from somewhere else. The API still requires the motions/words/etc, but the knowledge of the things aren't part of the caster but part of the source.

[Saelethil]

Yeah, I would just allow them to use their body as an arcane focus. The magic is coming from within but they still need to express their desired outcome (verbal) and direct the energy (somatic). You could even allow them to spend Sorcery Points/HP to cover GP material components.

As for Wizards, if they don’t fit in your world feel free to cut them but make sure to tell your players asap. Otherwise you could re-flavor them as another version of Warlock. If the mechanics are your concern and you still want the Intelligence skills covered you could allow it as a casting stat for the arcane casters.

[Kane0]

I'm considering what changes i would make to the next game i dm.
I, me myself have a fantasy picture in my head of sorcerers just being more natural castors and for me that may also mean removing verbal components, so what are the consequences of such a move? Is it likely to be too op?
A lite variant of this id thought of is that you choose a spell at each level it applies to maybe.

As part of this pursuit im considering removing wizard to a npc class, making the default magic user for the setting sorcerer.

It's all theory crafting at the moment. It's not an attempt to fix anything mechanical its an attempt to fulfill MY fantasy, it might not fit everyone's idea.

May I recommend some of my own houserules/homebrew?

- Let sorcerers use their body as spell focus
- Let sorcerers (and only sorcerers) use the Spell Point Variant*
- Let sorcerers cast a flexible spell once or twice per LR, like hot-swapping out a spell known or a mini-wish
- An extra metamagic in the mid levels or the ability to swap them around more freely
- Add in another feature in Tier 3 or 4 to match Arcane Guidance but applied to Saves

*Merge the two SP pools even, but make sure to account for the 'loss' of the Font of Magic feature and counter 5-min nova workdays. I opt to ignore the +level SP and instead let short rests recover SP equal to Prof bonus, effectively moving the a version of the capstone to level 2.

[JonBeowulf]

I pursued the same goal, but got rid of material components instead of the verbal. I also went nuts changing their spell list so they didn't just do the same stuff everyone else could do. I certainly made them a unique class but my table didn't want to touch them, so I figure it sucked.

[KyleG]

Spell point variant i think is appropriate for sorcerers so already considering the impact of that and material components ive always allowed a focus use.
As to your houserules in general... they have been viewed repeatedly for ideas.



You could even allow them to spend Sorcery Points/HP to cover GP material components.

As for Wizards, if they don’t fit in your world feel free to cut them but make sure to tell your players asap. Otherwise you could re-flavor them as another version of Warlock. If the mechanics are your concern and you still want the Intelligence skills covered you could allow it as a casting stat for the arcane casters.
How would you apply the sp/hp to cover gp material components? I like that there is a cost for some spells but a random material bothers me and even more so on sorcerers.
As to wizards, as i said this is before I've even brought people together at a table. And intelligence as a casting stat i like for warlocks and offer that option. Don't really think it applies to others although id possibly allow on an arcane cleric.



Verbal components don't have to be pseudo-latin. Screaming "Burn, you [censored]!" at the top of his lungs is perfectly valid verbal component for a sorcerer.
It's the material component that feels weird. Though, TBH, it feels weird sorcerers use the same spells as everyone else (metamagic excluded) in the first place.

In all these years how have i never considered that verbal component is just an outward expression of what you want the power to do, weird. It's always been less harry Potter and more verbal calculus.


If you turn those spells into truly silent spells, then this mean those spells are now immune to Silence, harder to notice for Counterspells, and this is a significant buff to using spells in non-combat situations (infiltration, or even at the middle of a social interaction), which might be very good or not much of a change depending on how you usually GM those.

There are 25 sorcerer spells with only verbal component. Yep some could significantly diminish Counterspells. The teleport spells in particular and the power word spells become weird .
Does anyone think changing the requirements on some of these to somatic changes much? Even material for some might be more appropriate. Sometimes it feels like wizards just randomly assigned a combination of requirements to spells.

[KyleG]

I pursued the same goal, but got rid of material components instead of the verbal. I also went nuts changing their spell list so they didn't just do the same stuff everyone else could do. I certainly made them a unique class but my table didn't want to touch them, so I figure it sucked.

Bummer, that's why i dont want to make sweeping changes just a change that fits my world if they choose it.

There are no pure material spells so that works ok but what did you do with material costs?

[Tanarii]

My personal headcanon (and homebrew setting canon) is that the spells are actually external patterns. Basically, the god of magic has "blessed" some particular interactions with the universal API. And so the parameters of the spell (components, restrictions, etc) are actually universal. The difference between arcane spell-casting classes isn't that they directly manipulate magic differently, it's in how they learn what the API calls look like.
Mike, the God of the Market, is a harsh master:
https://critical-hits.com/blog/2014/09/27/fiat-magic-reagents-the-god-of-the-market-and-modrons/

[Dienekes]

Verbal components don't have to be pseudo-latin. Screaming "Burn, you [censored]!" at the top of his lungs is perfectly valid verbal component for a sorcerer.
It's the material component that feels weird. Though, TBH, it feels weird sorcerers use the same spells as everyone else (metamagic excluded) in the first place.

Exactly the motivation for a weird spell-less sorcerer I was working on a bit ago.

Anyway, others I think answer OP, no verbal components for all your spells would be very strong.

[Mastikator]

One idea I had was to give sorcerer's sorcerer cantrips extra functionality, attacking cantrips would gain either a defensive or utility option, and utility/defensive ones would gain an attacking option. The goal was to make sure that sorcerers always have at least 4 utility and 4 offensive cantrips, they should be casually throwing magic around. But I quickly realized that it would be a lot of work.

I do like the idea that sorcerer's are their own arcane focus though.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Mike, the God of the Market, is a harsh master:
https://critical-hits.com/blog/2014/09/27/fiat-magic-reagents-the-god-of-the-market-and-modrons/

Hah. Except mine is closer to the modrons version. Without the modrons.

Specifically, the value of the currency derives[1] from the value of the gems needed for particular spells, which is fixed by the quantity of (particular varieties of) aether/soul-stuff/anima found in them.

There's the Great Mechanism (yes, conveniently, the initials of that spell GM) which is the "mechanism" (although it's really the blood and nerves of the entity who dreamed the universe into existence) that keeps the universe in order. Circulates energy, allows for changes. The gods are admins, each with their own area and access. So the god of magic defines all the API calls that will work and what they'll do and what they need.

So a 50 gp diamond is always[1] 50 gp and enough for chromatic orb. A pearl worth 100gp is always 100 gp. There are many other such components, and you can measure the amount of energy they contain.

Basically the gem standard. And there are ways to measure that energy.

[1] ok, there are societies that deviate. They tend to collapse or not use money. But generally, you can go anywhere and 1 gp = 1 gp.

[JonBeowulf]

There are no pure material spells so that works ok but what did you do with material costs?

Casting a spell that required a material component (you know, one with a cost) gave you a level of exhaustion. That's only 80 of the 458 spells in the PHB, XGtE, and UA. Sorcerers are their source of magic, so I figured it made sense.

I added a bunch of stuff to counter the fear of exhaustion. The main one being new elemental and school sub-classes with their own spell lists. There were alternate spells for every non-psychic damage spell, so a Cold Sorcerer could cast Ice Storm and a Poison Sorcerer could cast Poison Storm. A Divination Sorcerer had access to all Divination spells and an Abjuration Sorcerer had access to all Abjuration spells.

Yeah, Evocation Sorcerers were nuts and Divine Sorcerers never met a foe they couldn't damage, but it certainly gave the class a unique feeling.

Whatever, I enjoyed the exercise.

[KyleG]

I like it, might be too much for what i want but still cool. Its also harsh on lower level spells like chaos bolt

[f5anor]

I'm considering what changes i would make to the next game i dm.
I, me myself have a fantasy picture in my head of sorcerers just being more natural castors and for me that may also mean removing verbal components, so what are the consequences of such a move? Is it likely to be too op?
A lite variant of this id thought of is that you choose a spell at each level it applies to maybe.

As part of this pursuit im considering removing wizard to a npc class, making the default magic user for the setting sorcerer.

It's all theory crafting at the moment. It's not an attempt to fix anything mechanical its an attempt to fulfill MY fantasy, it might not fit everyone's idea.

While I sympathize with your issue, I suggest a more mild approach. How about giving spell points a spin?



Spell Points
One way to modify how a class feels is to change how it uses its spells. With this variant system, a character who has the Spellcasting feature uses spell points instead spell slots to fuel spells. Spell points give a caster more flexibility, at the cost of greater complexity.

In this variant, each spell has a point cost based on its level. The Spell Point Cost table summarizes the cost in spell points of slots from 1st to 9th level. Cantrips don't require slots and therefore don't require spell points.

This gives great flexibility to Sorcerers, especially coupled with Metamagic, since it removes the conversion costs between spell levels. Most importantly it removes the main limitation of Wizards, regarding the number of high level spells per day available to them. A 20th level Wizard can only cast one 9th level spell. A 20th level Sorcerer with spell points can cast 10 of them (and little else of course).

Regarding components, I generally find the whole concept silly, and not matching with my perception of magic. I generally to do enforce component related requirements.

There are two exception however, that are important for game balance purposes. Verbal components, and expensive material components.

Verbal components are needed to keep the power of magic users in check, otherwise they would run around charming every NPC and ruining every social encounter.

Expensive material components are needed obviously to restrict the power of ridiculously powerful spells.

[Amnestic]

Verbal components don't have to be pseudo-latin. Screaming "Burn, you [censored]!" at the top of his lungs is perfectly valid verbal component for a sorcerer.


That's not RAW, or even RAI. That'd be a house rule.

PHB 203:
Verbal (V)

Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words them selves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can’t cast a spell with a verbal component.

So no, "Burn, you [x]" is not a valid verbal component unless you are houseruling.

[JackPhoenix]

So no, "Burn, you [x]" is not a valid verbal component unless you are houseruling.

How is "Burn, you [x]!" not a particular combination of sounds? The same quote explicitly says the exact words are irrelevant.

[tokek]

I'm considering what changes i would make to the next game i dm.
I, me myself have a fantasy picture in my head of sorcerers just being more natural castors and for me that may also mean removing verbal components, so what are the consequences of such a move? Is it likely to be too op?
A lite variant of this id thought of is that you choose a spell at each level it applies to maybe.

As part of this pursuit im considering removing wizard to a npc class, making the default magic user for the setting sorcerer.

It's all theory crafting at the moment. It's not an attempt to fix anything mechanical its an attempt to fulfill MY fantasy, it might not fit everyone's idea.

I think this is effectively giving all sorcerers the Subtle metamagic without cost. That is pretty powerful, I am not however saying its broken because is not quite the full power of Subtle and Sorcerers do tend to be one of the weaker full casters anyway.

What I think you do need to watch out for will be Sorcerers dominating social encounters with this - the party Face with Subtle Charm Person is already a decent build but if you take away the need to invest one of their two metamagics and also remove the sorcery point cost you are making this build extremely inviting.

Perhaps as a way to balance Sorcerers up with Abberant mind you could as you suggest do this on one spell per level - and let the Abberent Mind sorcerers get full subtle on two spells per level as they get now. I don't think that breaks anything and it helps a fair number of subclasses that could use a little help.

[Amnestic]

How is "Burn, you [x]!" not a particular combination of sounds? The same quote explicitly says the exact words are irrelevant.

Screaming "Burn, you [x]!" at the top of your lungs is not "chanting mystic words".

Just say you want to give sorcs subtle spell for free (like I do) and vibe with that, don't try to paint RAW as something it's not.

[tokek]

That's not RAW, or even RAI. That'd be a house rule.

PHB 203:
Verbal (V)


So no, "Burn, you [x]" is not a valid verbal component unless you are houseruling.

I think most DMs are cool with it so long as the words are highly distinctive and the intonation is such that to anyone with knowledge of magic they are clearly a spell invocation. My Harengon would for example say "Hippety hoppity, bouncity bounce" to cast his Jump spell. Rhyming couplets feel appropriate for some characters - and its fun and the whole party seem amused by him.

I do agree that it should usually not be something that a character would naturally say while throwing a vial of alchemist fire - for example. It should sound distinctive and have a fixed intonation.

[1] The somatic component is him hopping from foot to foot faster and faster in time with his hand movements until its all a blur.

[Mastikator]

That's not RAW, or even RAI. That'd be a house rule.

PHB 203:
Verbal (V)


So no, "Burn, you [x]" is not a valid verbal component unless you are houseruling.

Do the rules specify what "mystic words" are and aren't? Who's to say that "burn you [x]" isn't the appropriate mystic words for a fireball? There's nothing to indicate that the mystic words for any two spell casters and spell is the same. Or even that it's the same every time, especially for sorcerers who surely are modifying their mystic words when they apply meta magic.

[Amnestic]

Do the rules specify what "mystic words" are and aren't? Who's to say that "burn you [x]" isn't the appropriate mystic words for a fireball?

Literally anyone who knows what the word "mystic" means? Absolutely stunned this is trying to be debated as if it would fly at a table.

If I bring you my wizard and say "okay so to cast his spells with verbal components he whispers 'you got this' quietly under his breath in a manner which can't be heard by other people" would you say okay? I mean, it's got a "specific pitch" right? No, of course not, that'd be giving them subtle spell for free.

That subtle spell exists at all makes it clear that V components aren't something you should be able to disguise with conversational words, further supported when we see games like Baldur's Gate/Neverwinter Nights spell chants which are, you know, chanting mystic words.

[Mastikator]

Literally anyone who knows what the word "mystic" means? Absolutely stunned this is trying to be debated as if it would fly at a table.

If I bring you my wizard and say "okay so to cast his spells with verbal components he whispers 'you got this' quietly under his breath in a manner which can't be heard by other people" would you say okay? I mean, it's got a "specific pitch" right? No, of course not, that'd be giving them subtle spell for free.

That subtle spell exists at all makes it clear that V components aren't something you should be able to disguise with conversational words, further supported when we see games like Baldur's Gate/Neverwinter Nights spell chants which are, you know, chanting mystic words.

https://www.google.com/search?q=mystical+definition

Plenty of actual "mystic words" are in English and other contemporary languages. And some of it is in dead languages.

Subtle spell means you don't say anything, not that you whisper it. Without subtle spell you have to shout out "fireball no-jutsu" and do the ninja hand signs, with subtle spell the fireball just emerges from you.

[KorvinStarmast]

What about making them able to cast without a focus or component pouch? Their body is a spell casting focus. That seems like a more reasonable way of implementing what you want. Great idea, however, spells that requires a component with a price that is consumed, or a component with a price (100 gp pearl for identify, for example) still require those components to cast. I love this idea. Might implement it at our table, we have a Draconic origins sorcerer (Gold Dragon) and this fits my brain very well.

Verbal components don't have to be pseudo-latin. Screaming "Burn, you [censored]!" at the top of his lungs is perfectly valid verbal component for a sorcerer. Or say it in German if you play in English, or say it in Thai if you play in German ...

My personal headcanon Works for me. To get this reproducible result you have to set the conditions, Very science+engineering based. People who got fluff majors (not science/math/engineering) in college may not intuitively feel this the way we technically trained folks do...

Yeah, I would just allow them to use their body as an arcane focus. The magic is coming from within but they still need to express their desired outcome (verbal) and direct the energy (somatic). My problem with this, mechanically and conceptually, is that magic is from "the weave" that the caster taps into somehow (Chapter 10 PHB). What is "from within" or "internal to" the sorcerer is the means to tap into a manipulate the weave.

As for Wizards, if they don’t fit in your world feel free to cut them but make sure to tell your players asap. Otherwise you could re-flavor them as another version of Warlock. That's my next campaign, right there. No wizards, yes warlocks. (still debating on Sorcerers).
[QUOTE=Mastikator;25352495] Do the rules specify what "mystic words" are and aren't? Who's to say that "burn you [x]" isn't the appropriate mystic words for a fireball?
Or sing a verse from Fireball (https://youtu.be/GaHftXx8CVE)
(baby baby baby baby, I'm a fireball!) :smallcool:

[Segev]

While you may or may not want to delve fully into the third party material (as it's an entirely new and different subsystem), you could perhaps explore alternate casting requirements for sorcerers by looking at Spheres of Powers's "Casting Traditions." (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions)

I'm not even going to recommend using the mechanics directly, since they lean heavily into the spell points as Spheres uses them (which isn't at all how the DMG alternate rule does, save for one small corner of the Spherecaster Sorcerer's adaptation), and often they're a bit all-or-nothing in ways that you could be more nuanced with.

But I'd look at the drawbacks, essentially, and decide on one of them to give Sorcerers in exchange for removing Sorcerers needing Verbal components. If you really want to, you could also look at replacing Somatic components with another one. Magical Signs (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions#toc17) and Emotional Casting (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions#toc14), perhaps. Or Witch Marked (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions#toc31) and Mental Focus (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions#toc20).

Maybe they have magical signs if the spell has a verbal component (so the sorcerer doesn't need to know any words, but magical runes glow around them or something instead when they use the spell), and if it has a somatic component the sorcerer instead has to have a particular mental focus that is disrupted by heavy armor if he's not proficient in it. Or maybe the verbal component instead is replaced by needing to have a particular emotional state of mind, and his witch mark acts up in ways that armor he's not proficient in suppresses if he casts a spell that would require a somatic component from another class.

[Tanarii]

I think most DMs are cool with it so long as the words are highly distinctive and the intonation is such that to anyone with knowledge of magic they are clearly a spell invocation. My Harengon would for example say "Hippety hoppity, bouncity bounce" to cast his Jump spell. Rhyming couplets feel appropriate for some characters - and its fun and the whole party seem amused by him.

I do agree that it should usually not be something that a character would naturally say while throwing a vial of alchemist fire - for example. It should sound distinctive and have a fixed intonation.

[1] The somatic component is him hopping from foot to foot faster and faster in time with his hand movements until its all a blur.Right. The Verbal component words are clearly recognizable as spellcasting, but other than that there is no requirement that they can't be normal words in the user's native language. They might even change with each casting of the spells, such as [X] to designate target.

[Burley]

I've always thought that the Subtle Spell metamagic was about casting "subtly" not "silently." You can layer the spell on top of normal conversation and hand movements, rather then the usual gibberish and gesticulation. There used to be "silent" and "still" metamagic and, I'm sure "subtle spell" was meant to just combine the two (like perception combining spot and listen), but subtle doesn't mean non-existent, it means not noticeable.

If I'm hiding in a bush, the subtle spell effectively means silent and still. If I'm in the tavern, I think it could be mug waving and... what do tavern patrons discuss? Hobbit inflation rates?


As far as Sorcerers always casting silently, nah, I don't buy it. Two wizards may have researched the same spell from two different directions. Maybe one researched fire magic words (Harash) and then shape magic words (Telebath) and another researched shape, then fire. They still get a Fireball, but "HarashTelebath" and "TelebathHarash" could both invoke the same magic.
A sorcerer, though, doesn't research. Maybe they don't use those magic words at all and "BigittyBing" is their Fireball. Maybe, if you want to give Sorcerers a bonus, they impose disadvantage on a caster attempting to Counterspell them?

P.S. - Mad props on trying to add to the magic system of your game world. I love seeing players creating interesting mechanics for how their individual magic functions because sometimes it's a little too point-and-shoot.

P.P.S. - Don't "remove" wizards. Just don't make them the default magic caster, like they almost always are. Why are we shocked and amazed by those who can do magic naturally (sorcerers) but those who researched and practiced for years are humdrum boring? If you want wizards to stand out more, just remove the concept of wizard schools, enclaves, guilds, etc. Each wizard does their own research and adventuring to add to their spellbook; they trade spells with each other during a friendly encounter; they write their spells in code to prevent others from stealing their work. There's no magic shop selling spell recipes and you can't just go refill your magical reagents at the corner store. You need to find a cave and scrape that guano off the rocks if you wanna Harash that Telabath.

[MoiMagnus]

I've always thought that the Subtle Spell metamagic was about casting "subtly" not "silently." You can layer the spell on top of normal conversation and hand movements, rather then the usual gibberish and gesticulation. There used to be "silent" and "still" metamagic and, I'm sure "subtle spell" was meant to just combine the two (like perception combining spot and listen), but subtle doesn't mean non-existent, it means not noticeable.

How do you rule the interaction with the Silence spell?
This spell prevents any sound, and in particular prevent the casting of spells with a Verbal components.

Would you allow a Subtle spell, which no longer has a verbal component, to be cast under Silence?

[Saelethil]

How would you apply the sp/hp to cover gp material components? I like that there is a cost for some spells but a random material bothers me and even more so on sorcerers.
As to wizards, as i said this is before I've even brought people together at a table. And intelligence as a casting stat i like for warlocks and offer that option. Don't really think it applies to others although id possibly allow on an arcane cleric.
I was just spitballing with the sp/hp to cover gp material costs. But off the top of my head I would say 1 sp and 1d6 hp could cover 10 gp worth of material components? I wouldn’t want it to be too good of a deal as the gp cost is meant to balance spells power.
I could also see Lore Bards being Intelligence casters. You might need to refluff a couple things but that’s not what this thread is about so I’ll drop it.



My problem with this, mechanically and conceptually, is that magic is from "the weave" that the caster taps into somehow (Chapter 10 PHB). What is "from within" or "internal to" the sorcerer is the means to tap into a manipulate the weave.

Fair point. The magic is still flowing through Sorcerers in a way it doesn’t with other casters. They are, in essence, magical creatures. I just think it makes sense for them to function as their own arcane focus because they are innately connected to “the weave.”

[KorvinStarmast]

- Let sorcerers use their body as spell focus {like}

- Let sorcerers (and only sorcerers) use the Spell Point Variant* {like, sort of; as it is tied to how Flexible Casting and SP work on the same point basis it's the best class to do that with but that runs into MC problems a bit, doesn't it? Maybe restrict to "pure sorcs only get this feature" and that problem goes away"...whaddya think?}

- Let sorcerers cast a flexible spell once or twice per LR, like hot-swapping out a spell known or a mini-wish {dislike as KISS principle is violated. For me the fix is (a) increase the spells known in a simple progression: 2 at level 1 up to 21 at level 20 and (b) each sorc origin gets one "domain spell" at spell levels 1 through 5 (not two like a paladin or cleric, and the Tasha's sorcs went overboard. Spell choice issue now solved and less fiddly at the table during play}

- An extra metamagic in the mid levels or the ability to swap them around more freely {Like a lot; I have long felt that another MM at level 7 was 'just right' and they missed a trick on this. Flexibility with magic is a sorcerer's schtick}.

- Add in another feature in Tier 3 or 4 to match Arcane Guidance1 but applied to Saves {need to think about this one a bit, but I'd slide that in at level 15}

I once again find your tinkering to be value added. +1 :smallsmile:

(1 Arcane Guidance is not coming up on my search, do you mean Magical Guidance per Tasha's?).

[tokek]

Right. The Verbal component words are clearly recognizable as spellcasting, but other than that there is no requirement that they can't be normal words in the user's native language. They might even change with each casting of the spells, such as [X] to designate target.

I think this is the key - that however you flavour it should never get away from the basic mechanic that at conversational distances it should clearly be identifiable by an intelligent NPC as magical words. Its character flavour with no attempted mechanical advantage.

It does not have to be pseudo-latin. After all abracadabra is the most iconic of magic words and is not pseudo-latin. I went with light-hearted rhymes for that character to fit the slightly fey nature (in my head canon) of harengon.

[Burley]

How do you rule the interaction with the Silence spell?
This spell prevents any sound, and in particular prevent the casting of spells with a Verbal components.

Would you allow a Subtle spell, which no longer has a verbal component, to be cast under Silence?

Yeah, I would because the metamagic's wording pretty clearly allows that.
However, I wouldn't allow a player to stand perfectly still and silent in a full view and have a fireball appear. I think that'd be an instance of mechanics breaking the immersion. Unless the player is purposely trying to play Carrie, I'd allow it, with the added spell component of pig's blood. :smallwink:

And, as with every DM ruling I make at table, I'd ask the player if they're okay with my interpretation and find a middle ground if they weren't.

[KyleG]

While you may or may not want to delve fully into the third party material (as it's an entirely new and different subsystem), you could perhaps explore alternate casting requirements for sorcerers by looking at Spheres of Powers's "Casting Traditions." (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions)

I'm not even going to recommend using the mechanics directly, since they lean heavily into the spell points as Spheres uses them (which isn't at all how the DMG alternate rule does, save for one small corner of the Spherecaster Sorcerer's adaptation), and often they're a bit all-or-nothing in ways that you could be more nuanced with.

But I'd look at the drawbacks, essentially, and decide on one of them to give Sorcerers in exchange for removing Sorcerers needing Verbal components. If you really want to, you could also look at replacing Somatic components with another one. Magical Signs (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions#toc17) and Emotional Casting (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions#toc14), perhaps. Or Witch Marked (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions#toc31) and Mental Focus (http://spheres5e.wikidot.com/casting-traditions#toc20).

Maybe they have magical signs if the spell has a verbal component (so the sorcerer doesn't need to know any words, but magical runes glow around them or something instead when they use the spell), and if it has a somatic component the sorcerer instead has to have a particular mental focus that is disrupted by heavy armor if he's not proficient in it. Or maybe the verbal component instead is replaced by needing to have a particular emotional state of mind, and his witch mark acts up in ways that armor he's not proficient in suppresses if he casts a spell that would require a somatic component from another class.

Magic signs could be a great alternative....a magic sound emanates from the Sorcerer aligning themselves with the weave.
Obvious to observers, affected by silence, only thing that is no longer affected is if they are gagged.

That just leaves costed material components and maybe they could be either a sp cost or hp... maybe in the realm of 1d10 per 50gp value?

[Segev]

Magic signs could be a great alternative....a magic sound emanates from the Sorcerer aligning themselves with the weave.
Obvious to observers, affected by silence, only thing that is no longer affected is if they are gagged.

That just leaves costed material components and maybe they could be either a sp cost or hp... maybe in the realm of 1d10 per 50gp value?

You could just leave the need for material components (or expensive ones) as something they need to resonate with, or that the magic acts upon to create its effect. The guano and sulfer becomes the burning bead that flies out; without this fuel, the fireball can't ignite. The pearl changes colors in ways that the sorcerer's magically-attuned senses can use to discern the function of the magic item upon which he's casting identify; without the pearl, he lacks the colors to interpret. While it's his magic that extracts the wall-crawling properties from the spider for spider climb, without eating the spider, where would it get the wall-crawling properties to extract?

etc.

[JackPhoenix]

However, I wouldn't allow a player to stand perfectly still and silent in a full view and have a fireball appear. I think that'd be an instance of mechanics breaking the immersion.

Of course not. Subtle Spell does not remove the need for material component, so the sorcerer still needs to play with sulfur and batcrap or fiddle with his wand. And the Fireball still originates from the caster, as per description.

[KorvinStarmast]

Of course not. True in the general case, but if the sorcerer has eaten my three alarm chili it might happen! :smallbiggrin: