D&D 5E Am I too strict?

[DND_Reborn]

This is the main reason that I don't have a lot of sorcerer in my games. Not enough known spells and we often go up to 20th ok 15th +. The lack of known spells is a greater hinderance at these levels. Just as the lack of castable spells is for the warlock.

BUT...

Both those classes make of for the lack spells either with metamagic or invocations. That is why neither gets a lot of spell slots. They are supposed to be a "few trick" ponies, but that is it.

I've had plenty of times playing my wizard where I envied our sorcerer subtle spell, for instance... shrug

 

[Helldritch]

BUT...

Both those classes make of for the lack spells either with metamagic or invocations. That is why neither gets a lot of spell slots. They are supposed to be a "few trick" ponies, but that is it.

I've had plenty of times playing my wizard where I envied our sorcerer subtle spell, for instance... shrug

And I agree. But how often a metamagic or a pact feature has been key to success compared to the versatility the wizards enjoy? Versatility is always "on". Whereas the features of the warlock and sorcerer can be situationnal.

For the sorcerer, I see more spell slots created or quickened spells than anything else.
For the warlock, EB spamming is just about it. He can't even take the SS feat with his spells. So a SS will always be better than him. Of course repelling blast can be a nuisance for some monsters but otherwise, the wizard can do everything the warlock does.

 

[Chaosmancer]

2) The player was very well aware of the rule. We roll for who will choose first pick of character as we try to have balanced groups. It is the first time in 6 years that he gets to pick the wizard. He is a power gamer and a very good manipulator at that (no insult meant to him. He is quite good at debating his points, I mean, very good). He told me the rule was too strict and he wanted a, shall we say, exemption for him. Before I met all players I wanted advice on how people here see the rule. I should've given more details in the opening posts about the context of our groups, my mistake.

*PS: And a vote passed that players, not me, decided to keep this rule (along with the expanses in upkeep and down time) 11 to 1. Guess who's the one was? And two other wizards voted on that.)

A side point at best but, how is this the first time in 6 years this guy has rolled to have a wizard, but two other wizards are in the party? Something seems really weird about that.

Do you see this in your gaming groups? That is a predominance of wizards vs other arcane casters?

I see Bards and Warlocks far more often than I see wizards.

 

[Lanefan]

If you are playing the party wizard, do you keep track of how much the rogue spends on arrows? Seriously?

No, but if I'm the wizard (and I often am, these days) and I remember the rogue going through lots of arrows last time out, you can bet I'll remind her to pick up some more while in town and then keep half an ear open to make sure she does.

Also, it's possible there's some groups for whom such common-good expenses are paid by the party rather than the individual character.

 

[Helldritch]

A side point at best but, how is this the first time in 6 years this guy has rolled to have a wizard, but two other wizards are in the party? Something seems really weird about that.

I see Bards and Warlocks far more often than I see wizards.

He usually do rogues and rangers type characters. Often do druids and monks. The few times he wanted to roll wizards, he was the last to choose. Bad luck I guess?

Edit: Bards are almost as common as the wizards. They are very good and versatile (especially the lore ones).

 

[cbwjm]

He usually do rogues and rangers type characters. Often do druids and monks. The few times he wanted to roll wizards, he was the last to choose. Bad luck I guess?

Edit: Bards are almost as common as the wizards. They are very good and versatile (especially the lore ones).

Does your group play with a no more than 1 of each class rule?

 

[DND_Reborn]

And I agree. But how often a metamagic or a pact feature has been key to success compared to the versatility the wizards enjoy? Versatility is always "on". Whereas the features of the warlock and sorcerer can be situationnal.

For the sorcerer, I see more spell slots created or quickened spells than anything else.
For the warlock, EB spamming is just about it. He can't even take the SS feat with his spells. So a SS will always be better than him. Of course repelling blast can be a nuisance for some monsters but otherwise, the wizard can do everything the warlock does.

IME, metamagic and invocations are HUGE and offer enormous benefits to those classes. Nothing says loving like dropping darkness on a foe and having advantage to hit him with EB and he has disadvantage to hit you at the same time. And the Shadow Magic Sorcerer who creates darkness with spell points can also see into it, gaining the advantage on his attacks as well; and it frees the Warlock to concentrate on Hex. Arguably, there are only a handful of invocations I think are really awesome, but they are there.

I see a lot of Subtle, Distance, Quicken, and Twin spells for metamagic as well as using swapping slots for points both ways.

Although versatility is also huge and always "on", you still need a long rest to prep new spells when you want to change them out. IMHO, the Wizard's ritual casting is their REAL strength. Every other ritual caster needs to still have those spells prepared, and being able to cast them without needing to prepare them is SO big for Wizards. Versatility is great, but 90% of the time the Wizard typically has the same spells prepared. I hardly ever change them out on my wizard unless I know I will need something, but I use ritual casting a lot!

Anyway, I think bumping Warlock and Sorcerer known spells maybe to 18-20 would be good. I don't know if going to 22 like Bard would be balanced--it might be too much. Of course, with our house-rule for Expanded Spells for Warlocks, they can know up to 25 spells, even if 10 are predetermined. With that in mind, really only Sorcerer's need a bump IMO. Maybe something as simple as start them with 2, give them +1 known spell per level, up to 17, and stop it there? Then they would have 18 spells and could do 2 per spell level if desired.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Does your group play with a no more than 1 of each class rule?

But they can't because there are two other wizards in the group, that's why I am confused by what @Helldritch is saying

 

[Magister Ludorum]

Do what you want at your table. But you asked if you were too strict. IMO this rule is terrible. I would never want to play at a table with a rule like this.

 

[Helldritch]

Does your group play with a no more than 1 of each class rule?

No. But we try to be as balanced as possible.