D&D 5E How would YOU nerf the wizard? +

[Peter BOSCO'S]

Shield is not +5 AC, shield is + Proficiency Bonus AC (which technically is not a nerf to very high level casters, but it is a nerf to almost all of them). If the attack hits anyway, then the Shield spell is dispelled (broken) right away, rather than lasting until their next turn.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

If you nerf/rewrite the ten percent of spells that are causing most of the issues, I think you can fix at least ninety percent of the problems with the Wizard and at least pull it into parity with the other full spell casters.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Well, the problem is, in order to nerf the Wizard, you have to rewrite spells. Like...almost all of them. Because that's all there is in the 5e Wizard. Its subclasses (excluding Bladesinger) are nowhere near powerful enough to be worth nerfing. Not even Divination + Lucky.

The Wizard is overpowered because its specialty is "(almost) all the (good) spells, (almost) all the time."

The one and only way I can think of to nerf the Wizard without rewriting spells is to reduce the number of spell slots they regain with a long rest, while increasing their uses of Arcane Recovery. E.g. they can do Arcane Recovery twice each day, but not more than the amount they currently can on any given short rest, and now they only regain half (round down, minimum 1) of their spell slots with a long rest. Now, the Wizard ABSOLUTELY ALWAYS wants to be taking at least a couple short rests per day. With this method, the Wizard is now actually hoping that days last a relatively long amount of time, because that's how they make sure they get the most bang for their buck. It'll still be crazy powerful, but now they'll have to actually conserve resources and worry about the tension between blowing all their stuff now and running out later, or holding off and possibly wasting resources.

 

[ECMO3]

Some spells are broken. Magic isn't less cool for fixing the broken spells - the average spell becomes more magical because it's an actually viable spell now.

I think the average spells are already viable. The ones that aren't viable are the trap spells and this would not make them viable.

For example, nerfing Shield undoubtedly makes the game more balanced, but it does not make Witchbolt a good spell and does not make it likely that anyone will choose Witchbolt for anything other than thematic reasons.

If you make shield less powerful it is conceivable someone could give it up and choose both Cause Fear and Tasha's Laughter when they would normally only choose one of those "good" spells, but those spells are getting a lot of play anyway and that is not likely where they will turn.

Shield is a defensive reaction and if you make shield less powerful, the other spells that would most likely compete for that spot would most likely be defensive reactions. I think a weaker Shield means more Wizards take Silvery Barbs, not more Wizards take Cause Fear and THL. Unlike Shield, SB is not OP and although this would make those casters less powerful and more balanced then if they had RAW Shield; SB is also one of the most immersion-breaking "unfun" at the table spells in the game.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Split combat magic and ritual magic. Give everyone, yes...everyone...access to rituals.

3E incantations from Unearthed Arcana, made a core rule at last!

 

[ECMO3]

Split combat magic and ritual magic. Give everyone, yes...everyone...access to rituals.

Combat magic is anything that causes damage, prevents damage, heals damage, or alters the battlefield.

I think you left out a lot of the most powerful spells in the game, the ones that don't cause damage, don't change the battlefield but affect creatures on the battlefield. Things like Fear, Hold Monster or Dominate Person.

These kinds of spells are for the most part the most powerful offensive spells in the game IME.

Overall I like it as a method to nerf Wizards though. I would go a lot cheaper - say 10gp per level to cast instead of 1000 for the rituals, but it would do nicely.

 

[THEMNGMNT]

I'm a big fan of magic "traditions" from Shadow of the Demon Lord. They're like spell schools, sorta. If you want to fly, you need to know the Air tradition. Fireball? Fire tradition. Etc. It results in spellcasters feeling much more focused and thematic--as well as capping their power.

 

[overgeeked]

3E incantations from Unearthed Arcana, made a core rule at last!

4E rituals say hello.

 

[Quickleaf]

Get rid of the Counterspell spell. In its place, allow opponents to Counterspell as a readied action, using an Intelligence (Arcana) check.

That's a good approach. Generally, I'm pro anything that changes counterspelling. Here's my version which encourages creative thinking & special effects...

The counterspell spell doesn’t exist. Instead, any spellcaster can attempt to counter a spell with a sensible spell (e.g. water walk might be used to counter a gust of wind pushing you over a cliff into a river, while a cone of cold might be used to counter fireball). As a reaction to an enemy caster you can see casting a spell, you expend a spell slot of at least 3rd level to attempt to counter the caster’s spell. Your spell’s range must allow it to intervene. Then the casters roll opposed spellcasting ability checks, whoever’s spell is higher level gaining a commensurate bonus. If you succeed then you counter the spell and a complication arises as determined by the GM. If you tie, there is a dramatic blowback from both spells determined by the GM. If you fail, the enemy’s spell takes effect (and you still expend your reaction and spell slot).

 

[Mistwell]

I think the average spells are already viable. The ones that aren't viable are the trap spells and this would not make them viable.

For example, nerfing Shield undoubtedly makes the game more balanced, but it does not make Witchbolt a good spell and does not make it likely that anyone will choose Witchbolt for anything other than thematic reasons.

If you make shield less powerful it is conceivable someone could give it up and choose both Cause Fear and Tasha's Laughter when they would normally only choose one of those "good" spells, but those spells are getting a lot of play anyway and that is not likely where they will turn.

Shield is a defensive reaction and if you make shield less powerful, the other spells that would most likely compete for that spot would most likely be defensive reactions. I think a weaker Shield means more Wizards take Silvery Barbs, not more Wizards take Cause Fear and THL. Unlike Shield, SB is not OP and although this would make those casters less powerful and more balanced then if they had RAW Shield; SB is also one of the most immersion-breaking "unfun" at the table spells in the game.

I think some of the really bad spells should be improved (and they're doing that, like with Jump).

I am not counting Silvery Barbs because it's not a PHB spell. It's also broken but it's not a core spell anyway.