D&D 5E It’s Official: I don’t like 5th Edition Wizards and ‘Specialists’

[Coroc]

Odd, the guy playing a Gnome Illusionist in my campaign does not complain. But i told him upfront, without making it a strict rule, that he should select appropriate spells.

So no evocation specialist pretending to be an Illusionist. Otoh in my homebrew GHK campaign wizards may learn every spell available in the book if they got the cash for it.

 

[Fractal Rabbit]

What exactly is the feel you are missing?

A good question. And yet, one I find difficult to answer.

As someone mentioned here, though, perhaps part of it (but not all of it) is the spell lists: there really are no spells forbidden to various 'Specialists'. So, for example, while you get a couple of school specific abilities (some much more useful or flavorful or cool than others), you don't see an Illusionist who can't cast Necromancy spells at all.

And perhaps it is the spells themselves. Is Egalitarian the right word? Possibly. Maybe Democratized is better. Regardless, it feels like in changing spells over all, and allowing all Wizards access to them, that we've lost the feel that made Specialists Special. Kind of a paraphrase of The Incredibles: No School feels Special anymore? Maybe that is closer to what I am trying to say.

 

[Fractal Rabbit]

I missed the old system until I went back and played it.
Suddenly I couldn't get back to 5E fast enough.

That was a AD&D 2E game though and nothing worse in D&D than a 1st level wizard in 2E unless........it's a 1st rogue in 2E.

Ha Ha! See, that was my favorite edition, in regards to Specialists (And Rogues, by the way!). I always felt such a sense of accomplishment just surviving to the next level: There was no expectation that you would get to 2nd (or even beyond). It felt fantastic and nothing was taken for granted.

 

[LapBandit]

I would love if they had preserved the 2E spellcasters into 5E. The 5E spellcasters are too tough and specialists as well as generalists. They can cast opposing school's spells as well. Yeah, they got too much love in 3E and it stuck.

 

[5ekyu]

Personally i thought the generalist wizard in 5e was the wizard - since all the sub-class stuff is just adders with no restrictions on any other choices. I see the sorc and warlock as the specialist arcane classes. But still no other idea what feel is missing for the OP.

 

[Fractal Rabbit]

"Me too" -> what are the elements that make up the old feel which you don't find in 5e?

I am not sure about very old editions, but at least the 3e specialist wizards "feel" had everything to do with:

- which spells you knew
- which spells you were forbidden to ever know

Wizards in 5e play differently in general due to the loss of vancian preparation restrictions, so maybe you mean this general difference? Or do you mean that the actual spells have changed so much that you can't for example recreate some favourite tactics of yours?

Otherwise you can certainly force a specialist wizards in 5e to simply learn more or less the same spells as usual (at least by name), and to not learn any spell of another school or two, if that's what you want. Personally I do not miss that restriction at all, but a specific PC could of course just decide to focus on other schools.

As my overall opinion on the 5e Wizard class, I also kind of miss a "generalist" archetype (the UA Loremaster would have been good, with a more balanced implementation). But as for how school specialization works, IMHO it has never been better than now: in fact, it's always been lacklustre and boring in the past, if not outright "wrong".

You had me right up to wrong. I was trying to avoid saying that the way 5e does Specialists is wrong and going down thewrong-bad-fun rabbit hole. I'm not ready to say its wrong until I know that I'm not getting something or doing something wrong myself.

I just find 5e Specialists lacking something. But I do think that your mention of spell lists and forbidden spells helped me crystallize my amorphous thoughts better.

 

[5ekyu]

A good question. And yet, one I find difficult to answer.

As someone mentioned here, though, perhaps part of it (but not all of it) is the spell lists: there really are no spells forbidden to various 'Specialists'. So, for example, while you get a couple of school specific abilities (some much more useful or flavorful or cool than others), you don't see an Illusionist who can't cast Necromancy spells at all.

And perhaps it is the spells themselves. Is Egalitarian the right word? Possibly. Maybe Democratized is better. Regardless, it feels like in changing spells over all, and allowing all Wizards access to them, that we've lost the feel that made Specialists Special. Kind of a paraphrase of The Incredibles: No School feels Special anymore? Maybe that is closer to what I am trying to say.

But as someone else pointed out you *can* create that desired effect for your own characters by just deciding to not take those forbidden fruits. if you find it more fun to play an illusionist without necromancy - you can and can even take flaws and ideals and bonds to refelct why you dislike necromancy so much and feed into the inspiration when it plays a role.

The fact that they do not force the fell you love on *all* illusionists does not mean they took that away from you, right? They just opened it up... maybe my illusionist does not like evocation (due to a tragic error while training which cost lives?) lotsa character potential there and plenty of tools in 5e i can use to implement that vision without it being mandated from some guys on the left coast.

 

[Fractal Rabbit]

But as someone else pointed out you *can* create that desired effect for your own characters by just deciding to not take those forbidden fruits. if you find it more fun to play an illusionist without necromancy - you can and can even take flaws and ideals and bonds to refelct why you dislike necromancy so much and feed into the inspiration when it plays a role.

The fact that they do not force the fell you love on *all* illusionists does not mean they took that away from you, right? They just opened it up... maybe my illusionist does not like evocation (due to a tragic error while training which cost lives?) lotsa character potential there and plenty of tools in 5e i can use to implement that vision without it being mandated from some guys on the left coast.

That’s an excellent point and I get that I (personally) can only take Illusionist spells. I may even, after some deliberation and seeing what else comes of the thread, decide to House Rule that and make Specialists Special, at least in my home game.

But (you probably guessed that was coming),I don’t like having to House Rule things. Or modify them.

Or maybe this has served its purpose and made me come to terms with the fact that, yes, I am Grognard after all.

 

[jaelis]

A few house rules that might help make the various specializations more distinct:

- Choose two schools different from your specialization: you can't learn spells from those schools

- Add 1 to the DC and attack rolls for spells from your school.

- When picking cantrips at first level, at least one must come from your school of specialization. If your specialization offers an additional cantrip from your school and you already have it, you must replace it with another cantrip from your school. (You'll need books beyond the PHB and/or make up some new spells for this.)

- When picking first-level spells for your starting spellbook, at least two must be from your school. When you first gain the ability to cast spells of a new level, at least one of the spells you learn must be from your school.

(There is currently only one cantrip from the schools of abjuration, illusion, enchantment and divination. This inspires me to make up some more!)

 

[Swarmkeeper]

A few house rules that might help make the various specializations more distinct:

- Choose two schools different from your specialization: you can't learn spells from those schools

- Add 1 to the DC and attack rolls for spells from your school.

- When picking cantrips at first level, at least one must come from your school of specialization. If your specialization offers an additional cantrip from your school and you already have it, you must replace it with another cantrip from your school. (You'll need books beyond the PHB and/or make up some new spells for this.)

- When picking first-level spells for your starting spellbook, at least two must be from your school. When you first gain the ability to cast spells of a new level, at least one of the spells you learn must be from your school.

(There is currently only one cantrip from the schools of abjuration, illusion, enchantment and divination. This inspires me to make up some more!)

I like these ideas. At first glance, I thought the exclusion of spells from two other schools was too harsh. But the more I think on it, the more I like that house rule, too. It could serve to bring some of the less commonly selected spells into play more often.