D&D (2024) Final Guesses: packet 7 subclasses

[Charlaquin]

Nope. Continuity is King. We're getting the four most popular school specialists and we'll like it!

Besides, nearly every new wizard subclass ever featured in UA has been shot down. We got bladesinger, war mage, and scribe, the latter wasn't even a wizard sub to start! Psionics, artifice, theurgy, invention, lore mastery, and rune caster all failed to Spark Joy. Why shouldn't they just pick 4 of the specialists since nothing else has worked?

I’m probably preaching to the choir here, but I think a huge part of the reason other wizard subclasses have performed poorly is precisely that the existing wizard subclasses were all (or nearly all) school specializations. When you’ve got a clearly defined and complete set of subclasses, anything outside that set has to work harder to feel cohesive alongside that set. The Theurgy Tradition, for example, just feels like an awkward fit alongside the specialist subclasses that all correspond to a school of magic, when Theurgy is decidedly not one of the schools of magic. I feel like Order of Scribes only made it past the post because it does a decent impression of a School Generalist, and Bladesinging and War Magic squeak by because they have associations with elves and dwarves respectively.

This is why I think the wisest move would be to combine the various school specialties into one subclass, or make it a core wizard feature you can choose at 1st level.

 

[Remathilis]

I’m probably preaching to the choir here, but I think a huge part of the reason other wizard subclasses have performed poorly is precisely that the existing wizard subclasses were all (or nearly all) school specializations. When you’ve got a clearly defined and complete set of subclasses, anything outside that set has to work harder to feel cohesive alongside that set. The Theurgy Tradition, for example, just feels like an awkward fit alongside the specialist subclasses that all correspond to a school of magic, when Theurgy is decidedly not one of the schools of magic. I feel like Order of Scribes only made it past the post because it does a decent impression of a School Generalist, and Bladesinging and War Magic squeak by because they have associations with elves and dwarves respectively.

This is why I think the wisest move would be to combine the various school specialties into one subclass, or make it a core wizard feature you can choose at 1st level.

Unfortunately, that would invalidate the former subclasses something something backwards compatible something 5.5 something. And WotC has almost no stomach for changes that would remotely invalidate older material, so we're stuck with four of the eight schools as our subs. We already know we have evoker and all-but-guaranteed necromancer. Simply put, the boat for a single "all specialist" subclass sailed back in 2014...

 

[Charlaquin]

Unfortunately, that would invalidate the former subclasses something something backwards compatible something 5.5 something. And WotC has almost no stomach for changes that would remotely invalidate older material, so we're stuck with four of the eight schools as our subs. We already know we have evoker and all-but-guaranteed necromancer. Simply put, the boat for a single "all specialist" subclass sailed back in 2014...

True

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Well, if we aren't getting the int warlock, that opens the space for the Contract Law Wizard who uses that big brain to negotiate contracts with modrons, devils, and yugoloths (and maybe MtG style Archons). Sure, Conjuration Wizards think they are masters of space, but they get distracted by summoning stuff, instead of focusing on summoning somebody you can negotiate with.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Imho, for 'school' wizard, it should be one subclass and at 2nd(or 3rd),6th, 10th and 14th level just pick and chose school features.

Like current Totem barbarian.

Then just add:
War wizard,
Blade singer,
Runecrafter/artificer,

I thought the same as you, create a "Specialist" wizard subclass that covered all 8 schools. Unfortunately, that one subclass would have to fit in the 32+ class abilities from all those subclasses, some of them with larger word-counts. (Add up the words for all eight L14 abilities, for instance. It is still adding the same word/page count as 8 subclasses.

On the other hand, if you simplify those class abilities too much to fit them in, it may be hard for each school specialist to do their theme justice.

Would it be better for all eight schools to be represented with rules-light abilities? Or for each Specialist to have solid abilities that make them feel like that Specialist?

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

The notion of spellbook-using wizards is very specific. I can't think of too many wizards in pop culture that use spellbooks outside of witches and some occultists. Maybe if wizard moved from spellbook to a variety of magical objects, the design space would open up more.

I like Spellbooks as the THING for Wizards. It's one of the most D&D things of D&D magic, and it should not be removed or lessened for Wizards. We have Sorcerers, Warlocks, Artificers, and Bards to build non-spellbook casters from pop-culture.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I like Spellbooks as the THING for Wizards. It's one of the most D&D things of D&D magic, and it should not be removed or lessened for Wizards. We have Sorcerers, Warlocks, Artificers, and Bards to build non-spellbook casters from pop-culture.

They should double-down on it, but current WotC aren't competent enough to do that, imho.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

What we know:

• the current roadmap has only 3 more UA packets for PHB playtesting before DMG and MM packets start at Packet 10.
• Warlocks are confirmed and have Pact Magic back.
• Individual spell lists are back, but that doesn't imply all classes with spell lists are in the packet.

Aside from that, not sure.

Playtest packets for the MM were not only not confirmed, but it appears they were skipped entirely for the DMG. WotC 5e does not have a history of playtesting if any monsters. Its entirely possible there will be no playtest MM packet at all.

 

[Vaalingrade]

We have Sorcerers, Warlocks, Artificers, and Bards to build non-spellbook casters from pop-culture.

Except they can't because they're all shackled to the shredded corpse of Jack Vance's work and a desperate desire to keep daily attrition mechanics alive to the detriment of the game.

Except the Warlock, the single bright light in a sea of spell slots they tried so gamely to snuff out.

 

[Horwath]

Except they can't because they're all shackled to the shredded corpse of Jack Vance's work and a desperate desire to keep daily attrition mechanics alive to the detriment of the game.

Except the Warlock, the single bright light in a sea of spell slots they tried so gamely to snuff out.

well, we have spell points option in DMG. maybe it should be the other way around...