Kryx's Sorcerer/Warlock Combination (Draft)

[Kryx]

I've recently been inspired to explore combining the Sorcerer and Warlock as a result of the discussion in I don't get the Sorcerer.

This document should be considered a very rough draft. I've polished what I've come up with so far, but the ideas are no where near final. Normally I wouldn't post this until I've thought about these ideas for several more days, but I'm going on vacation for the weekend and a few people asked, so here it is:

Kryx's Sorcerer/Warlock (Draft)

The concept is to combine the two classes. The basic motivation:

Consider the following subclasses:

• Dragon - Sorcerer subclass and popular Warlock homebrew subclass: 1,
  2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
• Fey - Warlock subclass and popular Sorcerer homebrew subclass: 1,
  2, 3,
  4, 5
• Fiend - Warlock subclass and popular Sorcerer homebrew subclass: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

I'm sure I could find similar results for other subclasses of these classes as well.

There is an incredible amount of crossover in the themes of the classes. Should we just have 2 of the same subclass - one for each class? It could be a workable option, but both classes are lacking by RAW imo. The Sorcerer is especially lacking an identity and worthwhileness in comparison to other classes which simple fixes nor even complex fixes like mine really solve perfectly. Warlock struggles less, but is significantly more enjoyable with spell points and slightly altered pacts so that Blade is viable. Since the classes already need some touch ups, my thought is why not go for it?

The invocation system is perfect for allowing the player to choose precisely the type of caster they want to build - whether they want to focus more on the occult, more on the arcane, more on the elements, etc. From a mechanical perspective I believe this is a mcuh better option for players.

Things missing:

• More invocations
• Spell list refinement
• More fluff
• Better fluff in some areas
• 18th and 20th level features for GOO and Seeker
• More refinement

Thanks for any feedback provided.

[Deleted]

It's a bit busy with the way the spellcasting works for this but I do like it.

Is there a specific reason why Boons and Invocations are separate things? It seems like the fluff of both overlap a bit.

[Kryx]

It's a bit busy with the way the spellcasting works for this but I do like it.

It's quite similar to the warlock, but points instead of the max level slots. I'm unsure about that 20th level arcanum, but the rest is much more straightforward than RAW warlock I believe.

Is there a specific reason why Boons and Invocations are separate things? It seems like the fluff of both overlap a bit.

The same reason that a warlock's pact boon and invocations are not combined: a boon defines how the character plays while an invocation is a nice to have.

In this case the boons quite heavily define the playstyle of the sorcerer/warlock by presenting 3 options:
- Stronger spellcasting (Arcane)
- Stronger melee (Blade)
- More utility in a pet (Chain)

Whereas invocations are generally not playstyle defining nearly as much (hex would be the strongest playstyle defining one I think).



Side note: if I can I will see if I can merge my summoner into this class. I think that'd be nice as well.

[Deleted]

It's quite similar to the warlock, but points instead of the max level slots. I'm unsure about that 20th level arcanum, but the rest is much more straightforward than RAW warlock I believe.


The same reason that a warlock's pact boon and invocations are not combined: a boon defines how the character plays while an invocation is a nice to have.

In this case the boons quite heavily define the playstyle of the sorcerer/warlock by presenting 3 options:
- Stronger spellcasting (Arcane)
- Stronger melee (Blade)
- More utility in a pet (Chain)

Whereas invocations are generally not playstyle defining nearly as much (hex would be the strongest playstyle defining one I think).



Side note: if I can I will see if I can merge my summoner into this class. I think that'd be nice as well.

Well, even the original Warlock has the same issue. Had a player trade out the pact of chain for an invocation until I asked how they had so many invocations and he explained it to me. New players can be fun lol.

Choosing invocations can define your play style just as much or even moreso than your boon. Picking up Misty Visions over Frost Lance is a much bigger choice since it will determine if I'm going to be a sneaky bastard or a blaster.

The other cantrips will be nice to have as back up but won't compare to my EB (especially with more Invocation support), a weapon is nice if I have other tools to compliment it (armor or healing), and the familiar is something that if I really wanted could get a suitable replacement for a feat.

The big thing though is that all the boons is something someone else can readily do. So making a big deal out of them seems a bit off. Someone else is going to have those cantrips and use them more often, someone else is going to be swinging a weapon a lot more and for a lot longer, and anyone can have a pretty good familiar (even if you aren't the most generous DM with the rules). These boons seem more like the Sorcerer dabbling in other areas as even the support of the boons are found in invocations (such as the Chain Meld invocation).

So throwing these boons under invocations really won't hurt anything, but it will help streamline this sorcerer.

[supergoji18]

I really like it. The way it is combined makes the class able to fit a whole bunch of archetypes all by itself, which is fantastic for roleplaying without having to sacrifice power or time by multiclassing. I do have a few things I want to talk about though.

1. I think they should get light armor proficiency, so a spellsword becomes more viable with this class. It might be redundant with the Sorcerous Resilience feature, so maybe incorporate an extra benefit into Sorcerous Resilience at higher levels to encourage its use and create a more important choice between wearing a set of magic light armor or just using the Sorcerous Resilience's features. Something unique for each origin would be really cool, like a frost cloak effect for the Boreal origin, or increased strength for Dragon origin.
2. The option from your earlier Warlock rewrite to have INT as a spellcasting ability should be present in my opinion. Just to add more variety.
3. I think the class should get an extra cantrip at higher levels (16 and above).
4. Not really that important, but I like the name Mystic Arcanum more than Arcanum. It sounds more... mystic
5. I'd suggest adding in some of the features from the subclasses of your old Warlock rewrite either as part of the features of the equivalent subclasses or as invocations. For example, Hoard Sense from the Ancient Dragon patron.

I will attempt to come up with ideas to help you with figuring out the Seeker's and Old One's 18th and 20th level features when I am not so tired. But overall I really like this new class rewrite, easily my new favorite.

[InspectorG]

I've recently been inspired to explore combining the Sorcerer and Warlock as a result of the discussion in I don't get the Sorcerer.

Thanks for any feedback provided.

I've recently been inspired to explore combining the Sorcerer and Warlock as a result of the discussion in I don't get the Sorcerer.


Thanks for any feedback provided.

Personally, i dont see the need to merge the classes, but...

Your Doc is nicely done. Reminds me of RIFTS(rpg), for some reason, but laid out a lot better. I would advice chopping it down and making it more concise.

Seems like it would fit a certain campaign. You homebrew any campaigns?

[Kryx]

So throwing these boons under invocations really won't hurt anything, but it will help streamline this sorcerer.

It would lessen the explicitly stated, mandatory bonuses which could potentially create clarity, but it would also have design consequences:

• The current structure allows for mutually exclusive options. For example a Blade boon shouldn't be compatible with the Arcane boon. Giving both strong melee and strong magic is problematic
• Too many options/Major power points could be easy to miss. This issue is a positive for some people and a negative for others - new players will want something that forces choice a bit more while players with system mastery will want more open ended options. A balance should be struck here.

On reflection I'm inclined to make the chain boon invocations - it isn't a playstyle defining choice and could easily be added on to melee or stronger casting without balance concerns.

I'll need to think through this idea - I think there is some room for adjustment, but "main playstyles" still feel like they belong in a separate track to invocations. I'll see how the summoner merge would work with these as well.

======================

I really like it. The way it is combined makes the class able to fit a whole bunch of archetypes all by itself, which is fantastic for roleplaying without having to sacrifice power or time by multiclassing.
...
overall I really like this new class rewrite, easily my new favorite.

Thanks for the encouragement!

1. I think they should get light armor proficiency, so a spellsword becomes more viable with this class. It might be redundant with the Sorcerous Resilience feature, so maybe incorporate an extra benefit into Sorcerous Resilience at higher levels to encourage its use and create a more important choice between wearing a set of magic light armor or just using the Sorcerous Resilience's features.

Light armor is strictly inferior to the Sorcerous Resilience feature. 13 + Dex > 12 + Dex. I did consider 10 + Dex + Cha, but that is too much for a 9th level caster.

2. The option from your earlier Warlock rewrite to have INT as a spellcasting ability should be present in my opinion. Just to add more variety.

I'm not sure about this. A Lore Bard focuses heavily on learning, but provides no Intelligence option. A Knowledge Domain Cleric relies heavily on knowledge, but provides no Intelligence option. Even if I increase the flavor of knowledge seeking for some Sorcerers I'm unsure if an INT option is warranted.

Hear me out:
The spellcasting of a Sorcerer (one who developers innate powers or is given powers by their patron) is a matter of outward manifestation of their power that now lies within them. Intelligence has nothing to do with such manifestation of power. It could allow them to learn new powers to manifest and I wish Intelligence was more represented in 5e in such a capacity, but it feels like the wrong choice for a spellcasting ability for this class.

3. I think the class should get an extra cantrip at higher levels (16 and above).

There are several cantrips progressions in the game:
2->4: Bard, Druid, RAW Warlock
3->5: Cleric, Wizard
4->6: RAW Sorcerer

I've put this Sorcerer on the middle track by giving 1 cantrip per subclass. If a Sorcerer wants more cantrips then the Arcane boon is their best option. With the Arcane Boon's ability to pick up 3 cantrips I believe that is already pushing the limit.

4. Not really that important, but I like the name Mystic Arcanum more than Arcanum. It sounds more... mystic

I renamed it for a few reasons:

• It could remind people of the new Mystic class
• "Mystic" emphasis the occult side of the class, which isn't for all Sorcerers. Some may focus on the occult, but that shouldn't be core to the class.

5. I'd suggest adding in some of the features from the subclasses of your old Warlock rewrite either as part of the features of the equivalent subclasses or as invocations. For example, Hoard Sense from the Ancient Dragon patron.

This is something that I expect to cover under the "More refinement" that I listed in the OP. 1st level features of subclasses could use a bit more flavor. Perhaps you could provide some examples of flavor missing. I believe I have captured all of my Warlock into this class. The Ancient Dragon patron isn't a creation of mine, but I will reference it when I seek to refine the subclasses further - that author is quite good.

====================

Personally, i dont see the need to merge the classes, but...

Your Doc is nicely done. Reminds me of RIFTS(rpg), for some reason, but laid out a lot better.

Seems like it would fit a certain campaign. You homebrew any campaigns?

Muahaha, if I can impress naysayers with my formatting then at least I've done something good! Thanks for the kind words.

I run campaigns based on Pathfinder Adventure Paths.

I would advice chopping it down and making it more concise.

What do you mean by "chopping it down and making it more concise"? I plan to expand it with more subclasses, images, and invocations. What, currently, isn't straightforward enough?


Thanks for the feedback everyone. I'll think on some of these and itterate on the class next week.

[Kryx]

One option to consider: Allow the Sorcerer to cast a different cantrip as a bonus action if they cast a cantrip on their turn (scale up to allow it on a 1st level spell at 5th level). This would actually do less damage than EB spam and would allow for Sorcerers to be the cantrip masters. This would require removing "Agony" (+Cha to cantrip damage), limiting Booming Blade/GFB (which I do in my games already), and potentially adjusting Hex. This could actually be a workable option in terms of unique identity, diversity of options, and mechanical prowess as long as I get the balance correct.

[Azreal]

Hey there big fan of your homebrews on general. So Im not an expert on balance by any means but this new Sorc seems super feature heavy to me. With being a full Caster it seems they get a lot more then most classes. So I guess I'm just asking what you what made you give them that amount of features?

[Kryx]

Hi Azreal,

The chassis of the class is quite similar toy warlock chassis which is quite similar to the RAW warlock chassis. I believe there are a fair amount of features currently, but perhaps I've missed something.

[supergoji18]

Thanks for the encouragement!

You're welcome

Light armor is strictly inferior to the Sorcerous Resilience feature. 13 + Dex > 12 + Dex. I did consider 10 + Dex + Cha, but that is too much for a 9th level caster.

Fair enough, though I think there should still be features of sorcerous resilience unique to each subclass. Like a passive armor of agathys for the boreal origin or a holy aura for celestial origin. This should only be gained at later levels though so that at lower levels the sorcerer isn't super broken.

I'm not sure about this. A Lore Bard focuses heavily on learning, but provides no Intelligence option. A Knowledge Domain Cleric relies heavily on knowledge, but provides no Intelligence option. Even if I increase the flavor of knowledge seeking for some Sorcerers I'm unsure if an INT option is warranted.

Hear me out:
The spellcasting of a Sorcerer (one who developers innate powers or is given powers by their patron) is a matter of outward manifestation of their power that now lies within them. Intelligence has nothing to do with such manifestation of power. It could allow them to learn new powers to manifest and I wish Intelligence was more represented in 5e in such a capacity, but it feels like the wrong choice for a spellcasting ability for this class.

Fair enough. I just like the idea of giving players the option. In case you can't tell, I'm a big fan of diversity and wide variety of options in roleplaying games.

There are several cantrips progressions in the game:
2->4: Bard, Druid, RAW Warlock
3->5: Cleric, Wizard
4->6: RAW Sorcerer

I've put this Sorcerer on the middle track by giving 1 cantrip per subclass. If a Sorcerer wants more cantrips then the Arcane boon is their best option. With the Arcane Boon's ability to pick up 3 cantrips I believe that is already pushing the limit.

You make a good point. I forgot about the Arcane Boon for a minute.

I renamed it for a few reasons:

• It could remind people of the new Mystic class
• "Mystic" emphasis the occult side of the class, which isn't for all Sorcerers. Some may focus on the occult, but that shouldn't be core to the class.

That's a good point.

This is something that I expect to cover under the "More refinement" that I listed in the OP. 1st level features of subclasses could use a bit more flavor. Perhaps you could provide some examples of flavor missing. I believe I have captured all of my Warlock into this class. The Ancient Dragon patron isn't a creation of mine, but I will reference it when I seek to refine the subclasses further - that author is quite good.

Ancient dragon pact isn't one of your creations? I didn't know, my bad. In any case, I'm glad to hear that you're still considering adding features.

[supergoji18]

Hey there big fan of your homebrews on general. So Im not an expert on balance by any means but this new Sorc seems super feature heavy to me. With being a full Caster it seems they get a lot more then most classes. So I guess I'm just asking what you what made you give them that amount of features?

This reworked sorcerer isn't a full spellcaster. It's using the casting system of the warlocks, which is considered distinct from the way other spellcasting works in the game. In fact, this sorcerer at max level only has the ability to cast up to 15 1st level spells. Compared to the Paladin, which has a total of 15 spell slots at the same level, of which all but 4 are higher than 1st level, the Sorcerer actually has weaker spellcasting by itself. The extra features are designed to bring this rewritten sorcerer to the same power level as the other classes.

[Kryx]

this sorcerer at max level only has the ability to cast up to 15 1st level spells. Compared to the Paladin, which has a total of 15 spell slots at the same level, of which all but 4 are higher than 1st level

The game is balanced around 2 expected short rests so this isn't really the best representation of the Sorcerer's capabilities.

[Azreal]

The chassis of the class is quite similar toy warlock chassis which is quite similar to the RAW warlock chassis. I believe there are a fair amount of features currently, but perhaps I've missed something.

Ah okay I completely missed it was based on Warlock casting and not full Caster. I retract my question. My bad.

[supergoji18]

The game is balanced around 2 expected short rests so this isn't really the best representation of the Sorcerer's capabilities.

Missed the part about them recovering all spell points during a short or long rest. I thought it was just a long rest. In any case, this is a strong class but it's not gamebreaking and it's far from the most powerful class available

[Terra Reveene]

It... Feels very patchy. A lot of the desciptions are very clearly either sorcerer or warlock descriptions tacked onto each other, combined, or mix and matched (things like "depending on your power source", it feels like you're supposed to make a choice that matters, but that choice never really happens. It doesn't matter which power source you choose because they're all combined and do the same thing essentially. So why have a choice there at all?)

Suppose that is why it's called a draft, but I can't help but feel like it'll remain just as patchy unless you make most of the descriptions ambiguous. But that's rather difficult to do when the power sources of both the Sorcerer and Warlock have such key differences.

Sorcerers: Born with their powers or gifted (difference) or gained through a pact (similar)
Warlock: Gained through search of otherworldly secrets and knowledge (difference) or gained through a pact (similar)

To make it less patchy, I think one would have to combine these three different power sources into one somehow.


Just to throw an idea against a wall: Combine said three power sources (gift/born with it + search for knowledge/secrets + make a pact) into one under one name (sorcerous spark, or something similar), and have all of them gain more power through feeding their spark with a combination of the old sorcerer and warlock power sources.

A sorcerer might discover that they have their spark from birth and decides to make a pact with a devil for knowledge on how to unlock and grow their spark to gain more power than they had at birth for example. Or perhaps they searched for knowledge and eventually accidentally ended up in contact with an angel and they gifted them power, and they now just grow in power through trial and error, the angel contacting them at times by giving them directions for more secret knowledge to fuel their spark. Both of these examples combine aspects of all three power sources from both classes.


EDIT: I hope I'm making some sort of sense. It feels like I don't, and if so, then perhaps I should take some more time to gather my thoughts and then come back. Let's hope my comment is worth a read regardless.

[Kryx]

It... Feels very patchy. A lot of the desciptions are very clearly either sorcerer or warlock descriptions tacked onto each other, combined, or mix and matched (things like "depending on your power source"

This isn't intended to be a new class, but a class that covers both the Sorcerer and Warlock niche. It is based on the idea that they are very very similar options so wording was reused and adjusted appropriately.

If you think there are specific sections of the core class that needs to be cleaned up please let me know. The subclasses need a fair amount of wording work - hence the draft. ;)

It doesn't matter which power source you choose because they're all combined and do the same thing essentially. So why have a choice there at all?)

You're right - there is no mechanical difference in the flavor choice - that's by design.

the power sources of both the Sorcerer and Warlock have such key differences.

They don't, that's the whole point of this project. The Sorcerer and Warlock both use their force of will to manifest their powers outwordly. The difference between the classes by RAW is how they get that power - via some kind of bloodline, pact, or experience.

Sorcerers: Born with their powers or gifted (difference) or gained through a pact (similar)
Warlock: Gained through search of otherworldly secrets and knowledge (difference) or gained through a pact (similar)

A Warlock does not gain Pact Magic via otherworld secrets. See the first section in the Warlock: "A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being"

The class I've made allows for acquisition of power via Curse (Sorcerer), Bloodline (Sorcerer), Extraordinary event (Sorcerer), or Pact (Warlock).

Just to throw an idea against a wall: Combine said three power sources (gift/born with it + search for knowledge/secrets + make a pact) into one under one name (sorcerous spark, or something similar)

I did exactly this. It's named "Sorcerous Magic".

A sorcerer might discover that they have their spark from birth and decides to make a pact with a devil for knowledge on how to unlock and grow their spark to gain more power than they had at birth for example. Or perhaps they searched for knowledge and eventually accidentally ended up in contact with an angel and they gifted them power, and they now just grow in power through trial and error, the angel contacting them at times by giving them directions for more secret knowledge to fuel their spark. Both of these examples combine aspects of all three power sources from both classes.

That is a very different flavor than the RAW Sorcerer or Warlock or the implementation that I have created. How the power is acquired is up to the player in my case - there are several options above, none of which are mandatory.

[Kryx]

Changes:

• Added Summoning Boon - effectively merging my Summoner class into this class. Added eidolon info, invocations, and 2 spells for it.
• Added a 15 + Dex (max 2) option for Blade Boon so they are less MAD.
• "Varied Cantrips" renamed to "Assorted Arcana" and moved to an invocation. It allows you to choose 2 cantrips, not 3. It will be significantly stronger with the following change:
• Arcane Boon's 2nd level feature (formerly "Varied Cantrips") is now "Quickened Cantrips": "When you cast a cantrip, you can cast a different cantrip as a bonus action." There are some limitations to prevent SCAG cantrips and stacking Charisma on top of cantrips
• Eldritch Blast adjusted to scale as follows: 1st level: 1 beam for 1d10, 5th level: 1 beam for 2d10, 11th level: 2 beams, one for 2d10 and 1 for 1d10, 17th level: 2 beams for 2d10.

Boon choices:

• Arcane = more cantrips (slightly less damage than RAW EB most likely)
• Blade = melee focused
• Summoning = Eidolon. Eidolon damage is basically equivalent to a cantrip and he would absorb invocations to make stronger

[Terra Reveene]

Fair enough. I suppose this just isn't something I particularly like then (at least not at the moment). I'll keep an eye on it though, because this amalgamation does look very interesting to me, and it's getting more interesting with your summoner thrown into the mix as well. If I find anything that looks odd or out of place I'll let you know. I'm not sure I'd have any suggestions worth considering, but if any good ones crop up I'll throw them at you as well.

[Kryx]

Changes:

• Wording for subclass introductions redone
• Added a Sea Sorcery subclass
• Renamed formerly Warlock subclasses (GOO -> Aberrant, Seeker -> Astral), refactored some of their features, and added 18th and 20th level features.
• Adjusted the 20th level features of several classes
• Moved Life Tap and Transmogrify to the Summoning Boon section
• Added Hoard Sense to Draconic

[Kryx]

I suppose this just isn't something I particularly like then (at least not at the moment).

I've released a more updated version. What is missing from it in your eyes? What is not up to par with my old Sorcerer/Warlock/Summoner?


This project is getting pretty far along now. I'll likely use it and replace my Sorcerer/Warlock/Summoner with this class soon. So please feel free to heavily nitpick.

[Terra Reveene]

I've released a more updated version. What is missing from it in your eyes? What is not up to par with my old Sorcerer/Warlock/Summoner?


This project is getting pretty far along now. I'll likely use it and replace my Sorcerer/Warlock/Summoner with this class soon. So please feel free to heavily nitpick.

If it's just a compilation class of those three classes, then I think it's about as good as it's gonna get. If it's not supposed to represent a kind of new class combining the ideas of Sorcerer, Warlock, and Summoner (which I had originally thought), I have a couple of things only (with it being a sorcerer/warlock/summoner hybrid in mind):

Give the eidolon a heavy armor option that requires a certain amount of strength, giving a flat amount of AC. I just feel like it's missing. Did you have a reason not to include it?

3 evolutions is not a whole lot, it's a shame that it has all of those options but is only allowed to pick 3 of them (2 if you don't pick monstrosity). You have the invocations that can give more evolutions, sure, but the main problem I have is that those evolutions are going to be used to improve your eidolon's combat abilities only. It's very similar to the old feat problem you solved a good while back. I'd love for you to not run into that same problem again. I'd split the non-combat centered evolutions with the combat centered ones and give the eidolon a few of both (there's not that many flavorful evolutions, but I think they deserve being used, yeah? You could even add some more to make them less alone. Take inspiration from the normal 'traits').

I'm not a fan of Transmogify. Although I suppose it does fit a similar role to what I suggested above, as well as filling a similar role to Find Familiar's ability to change its shape. I suppose it's not supposed to be as static as the old summoner's eidolon. Still, I'll leave my suggestion here anyways. Just in case.

Rambling
There are some spelling errors, some weird names, and just general weirdness around, but I don't have time to look through and catch all of it right now. Some of it might even be from me not liking the name and associating it with one of the three classes that had it as a defining difference.
For example, 'Sorcerous Weapon' just feels wrong. I can't not read that and thinkg "that's supposed to read 'Pact Weapon'". It's just very deeply engraved into my head, I can't stop thinking it's weird. But here's the thing: I know that for your amalgamation, this is the correct name. It's just supposed to have the name that it has.
That name is easy for me to look at and think "yeah, it's weird, but that's supposed to be right. But there are some other names and flavor I look at and I can't tell if it's supposed to be that way or if it's a mistake (it's easy to make mistakes when creating amalgamations. I know this for a fact. I've made plenty of them myself). Am I making any sense?

The other classes I've went through and checked out were all easy to understand, and if I didn't understand something, I could just ask about it to get help with wrapping my head around your ideas. But this? I don't even know where to start. Flavor-wise, that is. It's just... an amalgamation. Like multiple bodies stitched together by a mad scientist, it was just supposed to be that way for its creator, even if it doesn't make sense for an outsider.

TLDR Your creation might be the correct way of solving the sorcerer's identity crisis, but it's a lot to swallow.

Final Thing
Aaah... Hmmm... What kind of heavy nitpicking do you want? Want me to assault your flavor decisions, mechanical ones, wording, ...?
Also, just to be clear (and making critique easier to give), this isn't supposed to be a new class, it's just supposed to collect all the different flavor aspects of the Sorcerer, Warlock, and Summoner, combine them into one, and allow players to pick either the Sorcerer, Warlock, or Summoner flavor aspects, correct?
And any mechanical stuff is just there to... Be there? Some of the things that belong to one class doesn't work in another (flavor-wise). This is mostly true for the Sorcerer and Warlock, as the Summoner's eidolon works rather well flavor-wise in both the Warlock and Sorcerer as it is.
If you're not supposed to pick either the sorcerer flavor or the warlock flavor (which I originally thought you wasn't trying to do), then... What do?
I'll stop here, since I don't think I could do anything more but to ask more questions. Color me thoroughly confused. /end

[Kryx]

It's one class that is based on controlling power. They can acquire their power through several means:
Flavor:

• Born with it
• Experience it (elemental plane exposure)
• Pact

They can then choose 3 main fighting styles:

• Arcane = more cantrips (slightly less damage than RAW EB most likely)
• Blade = melee focused
• Summoning = Eidolon. Eidolon damage is basically equivalent to a cantrip and he would absorb invocations to make stronger

Beyond that everything else is one solid class. It incorporates the ideas of several classes, but it should all fit together. All the features from the old classes are incorporated into this class.

Give the eidolon a heavy armor option that requires a certain amount of strength, giving a flat amount of AC. I just feel like it's missing. Did you have a reason not to include it?

The eidolon is setup the way it is to prevent it being too strong. It will generally have less HP, but more AC than a Revised Ranger's Animal companion I believe. Giving the eidolon heavy armor would skew that scale too far in the eidolon's favor I believe.

3 evolutions is not a whole lot, it's a shame that it has all of those options but is only allowed to pick 3 of them (2 if you don't pick monstrosity). You have the invocations that can give more evolutions, sure, but the main problem I have is that those evolutions are going to be used to improve your eidolon's combat abilities only. It's very similar to the old feat problem you solved a good while back. I'd love for you to not run into that same problem again. I'd split the non-combat centered evolutions with the combat centered ones and give the eidolon a few of both (there's not that many flavorful evolutions, but I think they deserve being used, yeah? You could even add some more to make them less alone. Take inspiration from the normal 'traits').

The amount of evolutions for the eidolon is again limited for balance reasons. A Summoning Boon Sorcerer can choose to sacrifice their individual capabilities for the eidolon's capabilities.

I should definitely make the eidolon's type based on the sorcerer subclass chosen - I'll modify that in the next version.

Which evolutions do you think are underpowered enough to be traits? I believe most are worth an invocation, but maybe I'm missing some.

I'm not a fan of Transmogify. Although I suppose it does fit a similar role to what I suggested above, as well as filling a similar role to Find Familiar's ability to change its shape. I suppose it's not supposed to be as static as the old summoner's eidolon. Still, I'll leave my suggestion here anyways. Just in case.

Pathfinder's eidolon wasn't so static: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-sp.../transmogrify/

What is wrong with it? Eidolons are meant to be mostly static and changing them up takes resources.

There are some spelling errors, some weird names, and just general weirdness around, but I don't have time to look through and catch all of it right now. Some of it might even be from me not liking the name and associating it with one of the three classes that had it as a defining difference.
For example, 'Sorcerous Weapon' just feels wrong. I can't not read that and thinkg "that's supposed to read 'Pact Weapon'". It's just very deeply engraved into my head, I can't stop thinking it's weird. But here's the thing: I know that for your amalgamation, this is the correct name. It's just supposed to have the name that it has.
That name is easy for me to look at and think "yeah, it's weird, but that's supposed to be right. But there are some other names and flavor I look at and I can't tell if it's supposed to be that way or if it's a mistake (it's easy to make mistakes when creating amalgamations. I know this for a fact. I've made plenty of them myself). Am I making any sense?

That makes sense, but it doesn't really give me a route to resolve the problem. I agree the names "Sorcerous Weapon" and "Sorcerous Resilience" are lazy names. I couldn't think of better ones. Perhaps you have ideas?

The other classes I've went through and checked out were all easy to understand, and if I didn't understand something, I could just ask about it to get help with wrapping my head around your ideas. But this? I don't even know where to start. Flavor-wise, that is. It's just... an amalgamation. Like multiple bodies stitched together by a mad scientist, it was just supposed to be that way for its creator, even if it doesn't make sense for an outsider.

I think that perception may be flawed based on you knowing the old classes so well. If you took a fresh eyed player and asked them if anything was weird I expect that they wouldn't have the same perception.

Sorcerer and Warlock really weren't that different in terms of flavor - it was just the acquisition of their power that was different, some of which was already quite blurred.

What kind of heavy nitpicking do you want? Want me to assault your flavor decisions, mechanical ones, wording, ...?

If you find it interesting then feel free to assault everything where you can provide a better option or can clearly identify issues. Only specific really helps me improve.

And any mechanical stuff is just there to... Be there? Some of the things that belong to one class doesn't work in another (flavor-wise). This is mostly true for the Sorcerer and Warlock, as the Summoner's eidolon works rather well flavor-wise in both the Warlock and Sorcerer as it is.

Hmm? I'm not sure what you're saying here. The mechanics are intended to reflect the flavor of the class.

If you're not supposed to pick either the sorcerer flavor or the warlock flavor (which I originally thought you wasn't trying to do), then... What do?

You choose how you acquired your powers, just like you do on the Sorcerer and Warlock. That choice has flavor implications, but how that is handled is largely up to the Player and GM as it is by RAW.

[Kryx]

Changes:

• Eidolons updated to have more clear attacks and types
• Keen senses combined into advantage on all Perception

[Terra Reveene]

That's not an easy reply :d

I have a good view of what your 'new' class is supposed to be now, which is nice, but it raises more questions:

If you choose ONE way that you aquired your powers, then how does that decision affect the features? If I got my magic through being exposed to another plane (I'm not sure if this ever was a sorcerer thing. Is it new? I thought they got their powers through some sort of event, nothing specific attached to it? Or do you have a different take on that?), then how come I end up with a 'Sorcerous Weapon'? There's some bit of information missing there. I gained magical powers, not magical weapons, right?
Explanation: The reason why it's so weird is because normally the weapon is granted by another being. I get the 'a wizard did it' feel about it. Like you just happened to get this weird weapon-like thing that you can wield from being exposed to a plane.

And what if I got my powers through a pact? Why would ALL beings in a pact with another creature grant them 'Sorcerous Resilience'? The flavor doesn't always line up that well for me. In other cases it's great and it works, but because of how modular this class is in how many combinations you can have, it ends up producing a few weird ones around with the normal and the great.
Explanation: The reason why it's weird is because the Sorcerer normally gained their added toughness due to having their body being modified by the event, but in this case it's granted through the pact, and it's ALWAYS granted from a pact. It becomes an universal thing. "all pacts result in the one accepting the pact being able to modify their bodies". I guess it's not THAT weird, it appears throughout a lot of different fantasy stories, but it just... Feels weird.

You bring up a good point on me having a skewed view on all of this, because I know the Sorcerer and Warlock so well, and have a really good idea on what they're both supposed to be as individual classes. Looking past that and looking at this like it's a completely new class is rather difficult, since it's got so many themes from the other two classes as well as literally having the same name as one of them, as well as haivng it appear all over the place.

Heavy Nitpicking. (EDIT: I'm not deleting this part and downwards, just telling you not to read it. It's not worth it. Feel free to not take my advice, but I will be posting a new comment tomorrow that I think'll be much easier to read regardless of your choice.)
If you want to replace both the Sorcerer and Warlock with this amalgamation of three different classes (technically two, the summoner is kind of weak flavor wise imo), then there are several things that needs to be sorted if I were to give you my approval of it (I guess... Big deal, why should you care right? You seem to like everything you have and only want small details, while I see glaring holes. Our opinions are pretty incompatible, but here goes...)

* There should be some sort of reason why a Sorcerer gets their 'Sorcerous Boon'. Right now, they just sort of have it, they just get it. I'd be okay with you just writing "your past event manifests itself into one of these boons, or your experience with your magic has granted you..., or your patron bestows you with a boon", but that feels very lazy since this is supposed to be a new class.
* I wouldn't be too happy with having this 'either this, this, or this' text slapped onto any feature. I know that doesn't really give you a route to solve that issue, but I'm not sure if there is any way to solve it with the way you currently have things set up. Either there is exactly one easy solution which is difficult to find, or there exists exactly zero solutions. You can always change up how the sorcerer gains their powers, but you don't want to go for that, which is understandable.

Which evolutions do you think are underpowered enough to be traits? I believe most are worth an invocation, but maybe I'm missing some.

Most of the speed or sense evolutions I don't think are worth taking most of the times, as well as the amphibious, camouflage, small and limbs evolutions. Even if you can change the eidolon's evolutions on the fly, I don't think there'd ever be a situation where you'd want to take any of those evolutions (save for perhaps the evolution that gives you a flying speed, for obvious reasons). My suggestion is that you just give the eidolon the option of picking one of those evolutions for free and have it as a trait that can't be changed, similarly to how you can't change the evolution you gain from your chosen types or shapes.

Pathfinder's eidolon wasn't so static: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-sp.../transmogrify/

What is wrong with it? Eidolons are meant to be mostly static and changing them up takes resources.

No we're on the same page here! You misunderstood me, but that's fine.

That makes sense, but it doesn't really give me a route to resolve the problem. I agree the names "Sorcerous Weapon" and "Sorcerous Resilience" are lazy names. I couldn't think of better ones. Perhaps you have ideas?

Ideas are pending.

Sorcerer and Warlock really weren't that different in terms of flavor - it was just the acquisition of their power that was different, some of which was already quite blurred.

the 'some' part is quite small imo, which is why this is such a difficult thing for me to accept.

Look at the Cleric. Why aren't you including it in this amalgamation? The only thing that's special about it is that it gets their powers from another being, a god. Which is very similar to how the warlock gets their powers from an otherworldly being. The only thing that's special about the cleric is that they are commonly thought of as being in mainstream churches while warlocks are more commonly viewed as more cult-like underground religions.

Take a look at the Wizard, they literally have nothing special going for them. The only thing that's special about the wizard is how they aquired their magic, the rest of the features can be slapped onto almost anything and it'll look good. You proved just that with your Magus (and I believe your psion as well?).

The Druid gains their powers from nature, also very similar to the Cleric and Warlock if you consider Nature to be another being. The only thing they have going for them that is uniquely theirs is how they aren't in any mainstream churches or underground, they're hidden from society as a whole.

I could go on, but my main point is this (RANT): How a spellcaster gained their powers is the biggest thing that differentiates them from other spellcasters. Everything else is quite small and largely based on what each individual campaign has to offer. You seem to say that the Sorcerer and Warlock are very similar in how they aquired their powers, but that just isn't the case. Look at the other classes and ask yourself if all of it just isn't quite the big blur. The only thing I see when I look at a spellcaster class is: 'how they aquire their powers + a bunch of features which are offsprings to their way of aquiring their powers'. Sure, the Sorcerer's and Warlock's 'offspring' parts can be quite similar and overlap in some areas, but their aquisition of power is vastly different. And other classes' 'offspring' can be quite similar as well. But that doesn't really change the fact that their core is different.
TLDR: The way a spellcaster aquires their powers is everything that the spellcaster is. The rest is hanging loosely from the class. You've already plucked the hanging parts from one class (the Wizard) quite a lot and added it onto other classes. If anything you should know just how little those hanging parts mean to the core of a class better than most. If you want to combine the core of a Sorcerer (magic is suffused with the caster, their magic and bodies as one) and a Warlock (magic is aquired from a patron, they seek more power through following the patron's instructions), then I think a better job has to be done. There is no common ground in the core ideas at all, and you seem to be looking at the hanging parts and go "this can be combined!".

If you want to try and combine them regardless of that, then I am willing to help and watch. But I don't agree with this being anything more than 'interesting'. I'm not really that good with telling people what's wrong about something, so I'll give you an example:

I think this next bit under here is the only important thing that could come out of my messy reply and messy brain from just above there ^. Sorry, but I'm really tired, trying to get my brain to put a structure on thing isn't really going to work right now. If you can't tell, I'm not good at explaining things to people. The best I can do is say the same thing in as many ways as I can to try and get other people to home in on what I intend. If you have any good solutions for solving that problem of mine, then feel free to lecture me on how to communicate better with other people xD)

Hmm? I'm not sure what you're saying here. The mechanics are intended to reflect the flavor of the class.

The mechanics (hanging parts) are supposed to reflect the core idea of the spellcaster. What I said originally was that some of the hanging parts you're trying to combine don't really fit with the core idea of the other that well. A 'Sorcerous Weapon' doesn't really fit the idea of a Sorcerer that's suffused with magical powers. A Warlock with a patron on the other hand could easily be gifted a weapon by their patron.
In short, it's hard to justify the Sorcerer gaining that boon without having to add something else into the mix that wasn't there from the beginning. You seem to be trying to combine these two ideas together without adding that 'something' into the mix. If you'd add something like "the magic that suffuses you can be (word that I can't think of right now... argh!) into a weapon", then it'd be all good. You now have something in place to hold one of the hanging things. See? If you combine two cores, and attempt to combine all of the hanging things, then some of the things will fall off. They'll look weird.
You remedied this in some areas, but I don't like the way you remedied them. It feels way too choosy. The 'core' of your class is a bunch of different ideas together, and that's why it's so choosy, and so that's why I said "I guess I just don't like this". If I were to combine every single spellcasting class in the game into one and have extremely long descriptions for every feature saying "You gain this from nature, your studying in magic, your patron, your god, your convictions, or your whatever, etc." and then state a mechanical benefit, then that'd look really messy. There's a good reason why we split up the core ideas into classes and hang things from each separate one, and that's because it'll look messy otherwise. Too much text in the hanging things referring to far too many cores.

Different bit
Sure, they give out the same exact mechanical benefit, but it's the cores that give them that shine that makes them different. In a lot of cases, the mechanics don't really reflect the flavor of the class, rather, it's the core that defines which mechanics the class can have! And the mechanics, in turn, can point towards that core.

Look, I'm really tired. My mind is super messy. I think I have an idea as to how I could explain this to you in a very mechanical way. It'd probably be far better than my emotional way of writing, which only ever surfaces when I'm tired. If you got anything out of reading this reply, then... Good. That means it wasn't a completely wasted read!
If you have, as I said earlier, anything that could help me explain this to you in a manner that makes complete and total sense to you, then feel free to tell. I have absolutely no idea on how to best communicate with people, even if I do try my best.

This is probably the "Stream of Consciousness" you mentioned at some point in the past, yeah? I can't make that stop. At least not right now. More structured things are for the first hour or so of me being awake. That or several hours poured into something while I'm like this. But that generally only ever produces a few lines of text covering far less ground, and that just doesn't work this time. Sorry.

[supergoji18]

Changes:

• Added Summoning Boon - effectively merging my Summoner class into this class. Added eidolon info, invocations, and 2 spells for it.
  
• Eldritch Blast adjusted to scale as follows: 1st level: 1 beam for 1d10, 5th level: 1 beam for 2d10, 11th level: 2 beams, one for 2d10 and 1 for 1d10, 17th level: 2 beams for 2d10.

So summoning is taking the place of the familiar? or is it in addition to the familiar?

Regarding the Eldritch Blast, I have two things to say about it.
1. The new scaling is weird for 5e in my opinion. Something more simplistic would be better in my opinion.
2. There was once a discussion a long time ago about having Eldritch Blast as a class feature as opposed to a cantrip, which I think would be a much better idea since that would open up more options for changing it and/or adding effects from invocations focused on it. Plus, I think it would make eldritch blast just cooler in general.

Changes:

• Renamed formerly Warlock subclasses (GOO -> Aberrant, Seeker -> Astral), refactored some of their features, and added 18th and 20th level features.

I like the change from Seeker to Astral, but personally I'm not too keen on Aberrant. How about calling it Eldritch Origin?

Regarding expanding on Eldritch Blast, I have some ideas for it. I think if it's done properly it could be a very cool feature of the class as opposed to just being a stronger than normal cantrip:
- Have Eldritch Blast be a class feature instead of a cantrip. Have it usable a limited number of times per day.
- Make its damage type dependent on the Sorcerer's Origin (ex: Boreal = Cold, Celestial = Radiant, Aberrant = Psychic, etc.)
- At higher levels (around levels 5, 11, and 17) give a new feature for it depending on the origin (ex: Draconic deals extra damage over time, fey briefly charms them, fiend does hellfire damage, etc.)
- have the boon affect some aspect of the eldritch blast (ex: Arcane Boon strengthens the damage, Blade Pact lets you attack with your weapon right after using the blast as part of the action, Summoning Boon lets your summon use the Eldritch Blast).

EDIT: just to clarify, these are merely suggestions. I'm not telling you to do anything, I just want to give you some ideas to use. I know I have a tendency to come off as being demanding or sounding like I'm telling people to do things, so I just want to clarify. Feel free to use my ideas as you like, modify them, or completely ignore them. It's all up to you.

[Kryx]

If you choose ONE way that you aquired your powers, then how does that decision affect the features?

It is a flavorful choice that has no mechanical consequences, just like it is for the RAW Sorcerer.

If I got my magic through being exposed to another plane (I'm not sure if this ever was a sorcerer thing. Is it new? I thought they got their powers through some sort of event, nothing specific attached to it? Or do you have a different take on that?)

Player's Handbook page 99, 3rd paragraph: "Sorcerers carry a magical birthright conferred upon them by an exotic bloodline, some otherworldly influence, or exposure to unknown cosmic forces." The RAW Sorcerer is literally the same flavor as this Sorcerer. Several other RAW Sorcerer sections have similar implications.

then how come I end up with a 'Sorcerous Weapon'? There's some bit of information missing there. I gained magical powers, not magical weapons, right?
Explanation: The reason why it's so weird is because normally the weapon is granted by another being. I get the 'a wizard did it' feel about it. Like you just happened to get this weird weapon-like thing that you can wield from being exposed to a plane.

I'd love to write wording that is more clear for boons.

That said it's not really that weird. A Sorcerer can channel some of their power into a weapon - fairly simple explanation. Always empowering an existing weapon would probably work better from a fluff perspective.

And what if I got my powers through a pact? Why would ALL beings in a pact with another creature grant them 'Sorcerous Resilience'? The flavor doesn't always line up that well for me. In other cases it's great and it works, but because of how modular this class is in how many combinations you can have, it ends up producing a few weird ones around with the normal and the great.
Explanation: The reason why it's weird is because the Sorcerer normally gained their added toughness due to having their body being modified by the event, but in this case it's granted through the pact, and it's ALWAYS granted from a pact. It becomes an universal thing. "all pacts result in the one accepting the pact being able to modify their bodies". I guess it's not THAT weird, it appears throughout a lot of different fantasy stories, but it just... Feels weird.

Why does this feel weird? There is plenty of explanation for examples of the manifestation of such features (ice armor, scales, leathery hide, etc). I used to have different mechanical results for several subclasses, but having it in the core class is significantly easier to process and takes up less space.

* There should be some sort of reason why a Sorcerer gets their 'Sorcerous Boon'. Right now, they just sort of have it, they just get it. I'd be okay with you just writing "your past event manifests itself into one of these boons, or your experience with your magic has granted you..., or your patron bestows you with a boon", but that feels very lazy since this is supposed to be a new class.

As above I agree that the wording of the general boon should be reworded or even the whole name reimagined. The wording you use isn't lazy - it's just taking the existing options and giving a reason for the boon for each.

* I wouldn't be too happy with having this 'either this, this, or this' text slapped onto any feature. I know that doesn't really give you a route to solve that issue, but I'm not sure if there is any way to solve it with the way you currently have things set up. Either there is exactly one easy solution which is difficult to find, or there exists exactly zero solutions. You can always change up how the sorcerer gains their powers, but you don't want to go for that, which is understandable.

The class can achieve power through many means - so can the original Sorcerer. The wording has to provide various options if it goes into detail about how the feature is given.

Most of the speed or sense evolutions I don't think are worth taking most of the times, as well as the amphibious, camouflage, small and limbs evolutions. Even if you can change the eidolon's evolutions on the fly, I don't think there'd ever be a situation where you'd want to take any of those evolutions (save for perhaps the evolution that gives you a flying speed, for obvious reasons). My suggestion is that you just give the eidolon the option of picking one of those evolutions for free and have it as a trait that can't be changed, similarly to how you can't change the evolution you gain from your chosen types or shapes.

• Sense - I combined it into 1 in the last revision. It's now advantage on Perception which could be very worth it on a scouting Eidolon
• Burrow/Climb/Fly/Swim allows you to bypass DM obstacles - worth it for out of combat utility. Some are more niche than others depending on the campaign, but they aren't weak in those scenarios imo.
• Amphibious - imagine a pirate campaign or an aquatic campaign. This evolution becomes more valuable for those, but is generally niche.
• Camouflage - Similar to Sense in that it is useful on a scout to avoid being detected.
• Limbs is generally weak. +10 speed isn't terrible, but it's weak.
• Small is potentially useful for scouting or other purposes, but it is very weak - I should remove this option

All of those except limbs and small have value - especially when Transmogrify is available. Limbs was intended to provide more options for crazy creatures things like octopus.

I tried to avoid evolution points like PF did it, but perhaps that'd have value. I honestly haven't looked too much at my summoner until recently.

the 'some' part is quite small imo, which is why this is such a difficult thing for me to accept.

Look at the Cleric. Why aren't you including it in this amalgamation? The only thing that's special about it is that it gets their powers from another being, a god. Which is very similar to how the warlock gets their powers from an otherworldly being. The only thing that's special about the cleric is that they are commonly thought of as being in mainstream churches while warlocks are more commonly viewed as more cult-like underground religions.

The Cleric is incredibly different - their power is granted by their deity and their deity can take it away any time. A Cleric literally channels their deities' power. Conversely a Warlock (or this Sorcerer) is given power by a powerful creature, but that power is now the Sorcerer's power and the being can't take it away on a whim. A Sorcerer/Warlock exerts their power their force of will while a Cleric is an intermediary. These flavors are very very different while a Sorcerer/Warlock only differ on the acquistion of power, and even the acquisition methods that I use on this Sorcerer are present on the RAW Sorcerer - they are just made more clear. That said - my writing is intermediary and isn't my strongest asset.

Take a look at the Wizard, they literally have nothing special going for them. The only thing that's special about the wizard is how they aquired their magic, the rest of the features can be slapped onto almost anything and it'll look good. You proved just that with your Magus (and I believe your psion as well?).

Mechanically and flavor-wise the Magus and Wizard are very similar, but those classes are very different to the Sorcerer/Warlock. They study for their magic - it's about logic, not manifestation of will.

How a spellcaster gained their powers is the biggest thing that differentiates them from other spellcasters. Everything else is quite small and largely based on what each individual campaign has to offer. You seem to say that the Sorcerer and Warlock are very similar in how they aquired their powers, but that just isn't the case.

I would challenge you to read the RAW Sorcerer. All of the options I use are in the Sorcerer's RAW description.

If you want to combine the core of a Sorcerer (magic is suffused with the caster, their magic and bodies as one) and a Warlock (magic is aquired from a patron, they seek more power through following the patron's instructions), then I think a better job has to be done. There is no common ground in the core ideas at all, and you seem to be looking at the hanging parts and go "this can be combined!".

Now we're getting to the meat of the issue - playstyle difference. But here's the thing - a RAW Sorcerer who just acquired power from an elemental plane could surely be just as power hungry as a Warlock who acquired their power from an elemental being. Source of power =/= playstyle. A character can choose how much they focus on their (now) internal power or how much they focus on growing their power - that's entirely a character motivation choice for the player, not a choice bound by the class.

The mechanics (hanging parts) are supposed to reflect the core idea of the spellcaster. What I said originally was that some of the hanging parts you're trying to combine don't really fit with the core idea of the other that well. A 'Sorcerous Weapon' doesn't really fit the idea of a Sorcerer that's suffused with magical powers.

It surely does. Eldritch Knight, my Magus, and several other homebrew classes have weapons suffused with magical powers - there is no patron required for such a feature. I can make this wording more clear, though I'd be happy to have a better justification for boons in general.


I'm skipping over the recap as I believe I have covered most of that above so I'll avoid repeating it and sounding defensive.

This is probably the "Stream of Consciousness" you mentioned at some point in the past, yeah? I can't make that stop. At least not right now. More structured things are for the first hour or so of me being awake. That or several hours poured into something while I'm like this. But that generally only ever produces a few lines of text covering far less ground, and that just doesn't work this time. Sorry.

Don't apologize - your replies are stream of consciousness, but they generate discussion and that allows me to be introspective and improve. Thanks for contributing!

[Kryx]

So summoning is taking the place of the familiar? or is it in addition to the familiar?

Familar is now an invocation. Summoning is a new Boon. A familiar is a useful choice and it still has a bit of invocation support, but that choice isn't going to define the class and let it compete with other strong choices like cantrip damage, melee damage, or a pet.

Regarding the Eldritch Blast, I have two things to say about it.
1. The new scaling is weird for 5e in my opinion. Something more simplistic would be better in my opinion.
2. There was once a discussion a long time ago about having Eldritch Blast as a class feature as opposed to a cantrip, which I think would be a much better idea since that would open up more options for changing it and/or adding effects from invocations focused on it. Plus, I think it would make eldritch blast just cooler in general.

1. Green-Flame Blade, Booming Blade, and Lightning Lure aren't as simple as other cantrips either. My goal was to reduce the attacks from 4. I think the current option works quite well, but if you think there is a better way to accomplish that or better wording for my way, please do suggest it. In 3.5 Eldritch Blast simply dealt more single target damage, but transposing that to 5e would simply make it a clone of Fire Bolt that does force damage. It would be a rather large nerf.
2. I've considered a class feature for it, but I don't see the need. The main reason is multiclassing, but if fixing that is a goal then several classes would need to be significantly adjusted (Fighter, Paladin, Warlock). I'm happy to make adjustments where possible (Like I did with Paladin Smite), but the goal should be clear and the reasoning should be strong. In this case a Sorcerer could surely choose to never pick up Eldritch Blast. For example a Boreal Sorcerer could shoot Ray of Frost and Frostbite every round - never using Eldritch Blast. It isn't a core concept for all Sorcerers.

I like the change from Seeker to Astral, but personally I'm not too keen on Aberrant. How about calling it Eldritch Origin?

I think Eldritch is a better choice, thanks!

Regarding expanding on Eldritch Blast, I have some ideas for it. I think if it's done properly it could be a very cool feature of the class as opposed to just being a stronger than normal cantrip:
- Have Eldritch Blast be a class feature instead of a cantrip. Have it usable a limited number of times per day.
- Make its damage type dependent on the Sorcerer's Origin (ex: Boreal = Cold, Celestial = Radiant, Aberrant = Psychic, etc.)
- At higher levels (around levels 5, 11, and 17) give a new feature for it depending on the origin (ex: Draconic deals extra damage over time, fey briefly charms them, fiend does hellfire damage, etc.)
- have the boon affect some aspect of the eldritch blast (ex: Arcane Boon strengthens the damage, Blade Pact lets you attack with your weapon right after using the blast as part of the action, Summoning Boon lets your summon use the Eldritch Blast).

I do like the idea of damage type dependent on the Sorcerous Origin and I like the idea of it gaining new features, but that's basically what cantrips do right now. For example Ray of Frost slows and does more damage while Frostbite gives disadvantage and does some damage. I could alter EB to be dependent on the Origin, but instead I chose to simply allow more cantrip casting which therefore buffs those options and makes them viable choices. Why take this approach instead? It feels like it's basically duplicating the current cantrips.

just to clarify, these are merely suggestions. I'm not telling you to do anything, I just want to give you some ideas to use. I know I have a tendency to come off as being demanding or sounding like I'm telling people to do things, so I just want to clarify. Feel free to use my ideas as you like, modify them, or completely ignore them. It's all up to you.

Thank you for contributing to the discussion - it's an exchange of ideas so I'm happy to have your opinion given here.

[Kryx]

Changes:

• Sorcerous Weapon -> Weapon Bond with much of the wording changed.
• Aberrant Origin -> Eldritch Origin
• Formerly EB Invocations now work on any cantrip - Arcane Spears and Grasp of Hadar. Frost Lance removed as it's just Ray of Frost, but now that cantrips are more accessible it isn't needed.
• Removed Small Evolution

[supergoji18]

Familar is now an invocation. Summoning is a new Boon. A familiar is a useful choice and it still has a bit of invocation support, but that choice isn't going to define the class and let it compete with other strong choices like cantrip damage, melee damage, or a pet.

1. Green-Flame Blade, Booming Blade, and Lightning Lure aren't as simple as other cantrips either. My goal was to reduce the attacks from 4. I think the current option works quite well, but if you think there is a better way to accomplish that or better wording for my way, please do suggest it. In 3.5 Eldritch Blast simply dealt more single target damage, but transposing that to 5e would simply make it a clone of Fire Bolt that does force damage. It would be a rather large nerf.
2. I've considered a class feature for it, but I don't see the need. The main reason is multiclassing, but if fixing that is a goal then several classes would need to be significantly adjusted (Fighter, Paladin, Warlock). I'm happy to make adjustments where possible (Like I did with Paladin Smite), but the goal should be clear and the reasoning should be strong. In this case a Sorcerer could surely choose to never pick up Eldritch Blast. For example a Boreal Sorcerer could shoot Ray of Frost and Frostbite every round - never using Eldritch Blast. It isn't a core concept for all Sorcerers.

I think Eldritch is a better choice, thanks!

I do like the idea of damage type dependent on the Sorcerous Origin and I like the idea of it gaining new features, but that's basically what cantrips do right now. For example Ray of Frost slows and does more damage while Frostbite gives disadvantage and does some damage. I could alter EB to be dependent on the Origin, but instead I chose to simply allow more cantrip casting which therefore buffs those options and makes them viable choices. Why take this approach instead? It feels like it's basically duplicating the current cantrips.

Thank you for contributing to the discussion - it's an exchange of ideas so I'm happy to have your opinion given here.

Good points all around. I still think Eldritch Blast as a class feature would be awesome, but you are correct it really isn't necessary. Also, good to see the invocations changed to affect more cantrips.

A few more things I want to discuss. One minor thing and one major thing.

The first thing is regarding the resistances and immunities for Celestial origin and Shadow origin. It feels strange to me that Shadow origin sorcerers only have resistance to necrotic damage while Celestial sorcerers can gain full immunity to it despite being more focused on light (and also only retaining resistance to radiant damage at the same time). I know solars get this too, but to be honest I found it to be a strange thing on them too.

The bigger thing I wanted to talk about is regarding the Summoning Boon. I love it's design and I think this is what summoning and what familiars/animal companions should have been to begin with in standard 5e. That said, I feel it is much more powerful compared to the other two options. While I'm not against there being a difference in power between certain features or choices in the game, I feel that it shouldn't make someone feel like they're missing out on something or that their character is somehow weak because they didn't take the blatantly better option. In this case, I think the Summoning Boon is very much like that.

The first major advantage the Eidolon has other the other two boons is that it scales with the player throughout every level of gameplay. As the sorcerer gets stronger, so does the Eidolon. Every level the sorcerer gains, the Eidolon essentially gains a level itself gaining a significant spike in power. The other two do not have any such scaling. They stop gaining benefits after level 5. You can improve them with invocations, but you can do the same with the Eidolon as well.

Second, choosing the Eidolon is essentially like controlling two characters at once, one of which is a spellcaster and the other is essentially a melee fighter or a tank to draw enemy agro. The fact that it can be commanded for free makes this even more true. It would be like controlling a fighter and a wizard at once, and calling it one character.

My suggestion for evening out the power gap here would be to
- nerf the Eidolon in some way, either its hit points, damage, and/or making commanding it cost a bonus action or action
OR
- buff the other two boons so they also gain similar scaling and benefits
OR
- meet half way by giving small nerfs to the Eidolon while also giving some buffs to the other two boons to even out the power