D&D 5E Specialist wizards: Has anything been mentioned?

[TrippyHippy]

They don't have to specialize in the study of it, just in the doing of it.

You have to choose to specialize in it in some self-reflective sense though, still, rather than just 'doing it' spontaneously. Like I say, I thought that Sorcerer's powers were innate - their 'specialization', as such, is their bloodline. Likewise, a Cleric's powers are determined by their god, rather than a conscious desire to be good at casting a particular style of magic.

 

[Savage Wombat]

I hope the rules do contain a well-liked caster/warrior class, with a catchy name, that people will gladly use instead of the hated g-word.

 

[Ichneumon]

I have no objection to all eight wizard schools being represented as subclasses, but putting the PHB together is a balancing act between the content and the "look" (art, layout). If including those last 2 or 3 subclasses meant something else would suffer or be omitted, they then risk missing out.

 

[Mistwell]

You have to choose to specialize in it in some self-reflective sense though, still, rather than just 'doing it' spontaneously.

Why? An oracle has to CHOOSE to see the future? No, they just do see the future. It's a gift, or a burden, or the thing their deity wants them to do, or whatever. There is nothing about "specialization" that requires self-reflection. Sometimes you specialize because something greater than yourself chooses you.

Like I say, I thought that Sorcerer's powers were innate - their 'specialization', as such, is their bloodline.

Yes, their bloodline or entity with which they have a pact dictates the thing they do best. It's their specialty, even though they may not have reflected on it or it might not have been a choice.

You're using specialization as the "choice" definition, and I am saying it's also "the act of being restricted to some specific, or the act of becoming specialized (specify or particularize)."

 

[the Jester]

Good point. I remember them having an "academic" wizard in an older playtest packet that could prepare additional spells and such. Do you think that could work for a "generalist" wizard?

At the time, that's exactly what I thought it was, and I was going to post in this thread mostly to say, "Hey guys, haven't we seen the generalist, after all?"

 

[SkidAce]

It's not just about mechanical aspects, it's also a role-playing thing. Specializing in a school says something different than choosing not to specialize. We'll basically have a setting change if being a wizard now means you are forced to specialize.

I agree. I shouldn't have to close Tennyson's Mage Academy.

And the Red Wizards should also keep their specialized orders open for business.

Of course I have Dragon Wizards (not sorcerers) in my campaign, so I guess that says I can adapt, whatever they do.

Still, generic and eight schools should be in. World "changing" if it isn't, at least on a house rule level.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Good point. I remember them having an "academic" wizard in an older playtest packet that could prepare additional spells and such. Do you think that could work for a "generalist" wizard?

Absolutely. If they give each specialty spells that they always have prepared (like divine casters), then the generalist could have the ability to choose a spell of each level (or each level up to 5, as the case may be) that they always have prepared, instead of getting a pre-made list. The other features they would get would be weaker than the specialists in exchange for their flexibility. In no way should someone who wants to specialize be enticed to choose the generalist because it just seems so appealing, but neither should someone who wants to generalize be enticed to choose a specialty because it seems so appealing.

 

[Shadowsoul]

I could see all specialist wizards getting the spontaneous casting ability like that of 3.5 clerics and druids. They would be allowed to spontaneously cast 1 spell at each spell level, from their specialty school, that they have in their spellbook.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I could see all specialist wizards getting the spontaneous casting ability like that of 3.5 clerics and druids. They would be allowed to spontaneously cast 1 spell at each spell level, from their specialty school, that they have in their spellbook.

Spontaneous casting is already the norm in 5e, so half way there! Most spellcasters (including wizards, clerics, and druids) function similar to 3e sorcerers, but they can change their "known" spells each day. They have a number of castings at each level (spell slots), and their "prepared" spells don't fill those slots, but are like a 3e sorcerer's known spells, and they can cast any combination of them as long as they have the slots for it.

What clerics and druids get that wizards (as of the playtest) don't, is certain spells that are automatically always considered prepared at levels 1 through 5 (generally), based on their subclass. I'm suggesting that if they gave the same benefit to wizards based on their specialty (which they really should IMO), they could allow generalists to choose theirs (or even just let them prepare an extra X number of spells based on their level).

 

[Li Shenron]

If most classes are going to have 2-3 subclasses, for wizards to have 8 or 9 would be seen by many as showing that class a great deal of favoritism. I'm hoping to at least see the enchanter, evoker, illusionist and necromancer. Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy if they had all 8 specialist types in the PHB, but I don't expect them to.

I'm not sure how many Wizard subclasses we need in the core to "feel right" but how about the Cleric? IMXP Clerics of different ethos are more needed than Wizards of different schools in the vast majority of fairly classical settings, including most homebrews. Having only the domains of War, Light and Life is going to be super-lame

But I have a hunch that yes, we'll really get only 3 subclasses per class in the PHB, and we'll just be told not to worry and buy the upcoming supplements.