D&D 5E In Defense of the Lore Wizard

The 6th level feature to me is ok, not great. Adding 11 dmg to blast spells is good, but blast spells in general are poor. Making the range one mile is sort of stupid, how many encounters have you started one mile from each other? It works both ways also, as the PC's approach the Tower of the Lich getting disintegrated from a mile away will create a bad feeling at the table, that's not good for the game. The same Lich dominating the fighter from a mile away and then attacking the players wont go over well either.

I think Lore Master and Prodigious Memory are pretty much all you need to define a sweet, sweet loremaster. The other abilities are mostly overpowered, and thematically unnecessary. I might replace them with something like the Bard's Magical Secrets -- just add a few non-wizard spells to your book every few levels, and that should give the loremaster the spell flexibility they need, especially in combination with Prodigious Memory. It also encourages the player to study the PHB spell list, but not in the game-halting way that Master of Magic produces.

One pet peeve: Why are they calling these wizards "savants" instead of "loremasters?" Does anyone else find that to be a really weird and dumb use of terminology? We already have the term "loremaster," and I thought savant was a type of psio-- er, mystic?

smbakeresq said:

The 6th level feature to me is ok, not great. Adding 11 dmg to blast spells is good, but blast spells in general are poor. Making the range one mile is sort of stupid, how many encounters have you started one mile from each other? It works both ways also, as the PC's approach the Tower of the Lich getting disintegrated from a mile away will create a bad feeling at the table, that's not good for the game. The same Lich dominating the fighter from a mile away and then attacking the players wont go over well either.

Click to expand...

The answer to your question about how many fights start at a mile is "a lot more often with this option". If the wizard is willing to nova for it, then even large groups of enemies can be decimated from afar. You've also hit the nail on the head when you say neither team is really going to be stoked about this development. It's a corner case, but it's not like there aren't more common-use options to drop back to when mile-sniping isn't available.

Also, 11 force damage isn't bad. Average damage on fireball is 28, 31.5 if cast at 4th level. The loremaster gets to hit 39 damage with that cast, while also conserving the more valuable 4th level spell slot for other use.

My own comments
Lore Master - it's fine. I think it makes sense.

Spell Secrets - I'd drop out force and radiant, more for RP reasons than OP reasons. I think explicitly linking it to Lore Master would be smart. "As a bonus action, you can do an X roll to determine resistances and vulnerabilities, then change a spell damage type" sort of thing.
The change the save is fine.

Alchemical casting - horrible name.
the level 1 ability should be altered to be

• 2d10 for a single target spell, save for half
• 2d6 for AOE/multitarget
• half that for no save spells
• shift the die up one for save for no damage.
• damage is type of the spell, not force (but this can be changed by level 2)

this maps exactly to the DMG new spell damage guidance. This makes the magic missile example essentially the same as casting another magic missile, but without the action. fireball gets another 2d6. Chromatic orb gets another 2d12. yes, this is more complicated, but honestly, it makes sense.

rest of it is just fine.

Dualazi said:

This is one of the many problems with the loremaster though, if you simply refluffed those spells on an actual necromancer, then they run the risk of being handicapped when fighting creatures resistant to necrotic. The loremaster just switches to lightning or radiant and carries on.

Click to expand...

Yes as implemented it is energy substitution as a free feat. But it makes for a more tailored Wizard.

The mile is the upper limit, but not the only break point.

How about spells from 700 ft away? No archer could hit you, ever.

1400 ft away, they can't even get in range, on horseback, before you've finished blowing them sky high.

Granted, Eldritch blast + spell sniper + Eldritch Spear + Distant + whatever can get you similiar results, but that is a huge investment in feats and class features and multi-classing.

Or take Lore Wizard.


I think that is where this conversation keeps breaking down, honestly.

Each ability, taken alone, has perhaps 1 or 2 crazy good uses, but outside of that they don't seem very good. However, the Lore Wizard gets all of them he doesn't have to pick to gain the ability to add damage over the ability to add range over the ability to ignore fire resistance and immunity (which other people need a feat to ignore resistance)

They get all of those abilities, by 6th level. Along with all of the normal versatility and power of every other wizard.

I see portent pulled up a lot as an example of something better than the Lore wizard's ability. Let's say I grant you that portent is the better ability. 2 per day vs the expected 3 per day of the Lore Wizard.

And Lore has increased Initiative and damage swapping and Expertise at lv 2.

I can't remember what the Lv 6 ability for Divination is, is it as good as the versatility offered in the Alchemical casting, if you look at all 3 abilities?

Go down the line, compare each ability and look at the whole. Even if portent is better than the 3 per day save swap and the +2 DC from Alchemical combined onto the same spell. Are all the other things the Lore Wizard gains more or less valuable?

Sure, maybe you don't want damage, maybe you play the God Wizard and damage spells are a trap you avoid.

Think of all the times a buff or debuff thrown from outside your normal range would be clinch.
Think of how great swapping a spell you prepared out would be
Think of the crazy things you can do with access to every spell in the game, even if it is only once per day

And you get increased damage potential.



And, to just take a step back and look at flavor. How does this concept of the general wizard work anyways?

"I've studied magic deeply, so I can draw forth more of its potential" ... Isn't that why wizards specialize? Wouldn't studying general magic just get you the same effects those wizards get when casting outside their schools? Shouldn't you be worse at casting spells of the particular school than the specialists?

"I have a prodigious intellect, so I can call forth entire spells without needing to have memorized them" .... Isn't this all wizards? Or is the General/Lore wizard the actual smart one and the others only specialized because they were too dumb to be a Lore wizard? All wizards have prodigious intellects and highly analytical minds, that's what makes them wizards! Saying the Lore wizard is smarter than the Illusionist or Necromancer is like saying the College Senior in 7 different degree programs is smarter than the guy who is in Law or Theoretical Physics... because he didn't specialize in a field of study?

And yes, they need to take a long hard look at the sorcerer. They perhaps need to rewrite it from the ground up.

Storyteller Hero said:

Spyglass. 1,000 gp, 1 lb. (PHB chapter 5)

Click to expand...

You wouldn't even need that, the human eye can spot things much further away than 1 mile. Mind you, you may end up toasting the local kids out for a nature walk with your fireball instead of the bandits due to not being able to make out enough detail...

Eagle Barbarian 6/Lore Wizard 6: simultaneously the most broken and the most underpowered character design ever.

Here is what I would do.

Get rid of the elemental substitution, a once a day save substitution is good enough.

Instead of getting access to an overpowered version of metamagic, just give them the choice of 1 sorceror metamagic, and then instead of access to any spell, give them access to a second metamagic and a few sorcery points to power it.

The save-swap is insanely good, but restricted by being a 1/rest thing. But it's still insanely good.

If I were going to do this, I'd probably nerf it to "the first save changes type". So you can make Hold Person with *one* str save, or dex save, or whatever, increasing your initial chances, but it reverts for any future saves. This is a big deal for continuing-effect spells with saves every round.