D&D 5E Dragon+ Issue 33 out now!

[Todd Roybark]

My conclusion: WotC are having a really really hard time creating new wizard subclases that people don't hate.

Another possibility that fits Occam's Razor, is with 4 published settings, outside the Forgotten Realms world,, why wouldn't you take cool content from the low selling SCAG to the most likely, well selling Tasha's?

 

[Todd Roybark]

I'm interested in what WotC thinks the class needs in their changes

Did the reprints from SCAG in XGE change at all? My recollection is that there were no changes.

 

[Marandahir]

Did the reprints from SCAG in XGE change at all? My recollection is that there were no changes.

Not that I recall. Nor did the reprints from EEPC -> SCAG, VGM, and MTF (and SCAG -> MTF) seem to change anything.

However, the DMG -> MTF changed Aasimar and Eladrin Elf. And VGM -> E:RLW, EGW, and MOT revised both the Orc and the Triton write ups.

Basically, there weren't major revisions upon reprint of material from 2014-2017, and but some reprints from 2018 onward have been errata'd.

D&D Beyond dealt with these reprint erratas differently, FYI. They created a whole separate "race" entry for "Feral" Tieflings from SCAG, so similarly they created entire separate entries for "Orc of Eberron" and "Orc of Exandria," even though these were identical to each other and the changes were intentional erratas of "Orc" from Volo's Guide to Monsters. But instead of creating a "Triton of Theros" entry, they just quietly errata'd Triton to match Theros when you're reading D&D Beyond. It's a mess, but that's to be expected when you outsource your main digital platform to Wikia. No wonder there's rumblings of WotC considering their own in-house set of digital tools again. Maybe they can actually get them right this time, though.

 

[ChaosOS]

I mean, it's hard to blame DDB when WotC themselves are less-than-clear about whether changes are errata or not. JC seems to thrive on creating uncertainty

 

[Ancalagon]

You and I might believe that, but there are a lot of people who feel that between the subclass and the 3 weapon attack spells introduced in the book, that it was a sloppy attempted at a Wizard-base Gish. I'm interested in what WotC thinks the class needs in their changes.

I've given Gish a lot of thought, both in general and for 5e in particular. For the concept to make some kind of sense, there has to be some synergy (otherwise you are a 2nd rate fighter and a 2nd rate caster). This usually means using magic to make yourself a better warrior - because while magic can make you better at swording, swording really doesn't help you do magic much does it? If this doesn't exist, at higher level you are often better off casting spells in battle than using your sword - and if that is what you are doing now, you would have better off being a full mage.

Therefore, a wizard subclass for a gish is "not the right place" for it to work. The Hexblade makes a lot more sense, although it seems to not quite make it - unless you take a small dip in the fighter class and then it works a lot better.

In 5e though, the best gish is clearly a re-skinned paladin...

 

[lkj]

Not that I recall. Nor did the reprints from EEPC -> SCAG, VGM, and MTF (and SCAG -> MTF) seem to change anything.

However, the DMG -> MTF changed Aasimar and Eladrin Elf. And VGM -> E:RLW, EGW, and MOT revised both the Orc and the Triton write ups.

Basically, there weren't major revisions upon reprint of material from 2014-2017, and but some reprints from 2018 onward have been errata'd.

D&D Beyond dealt with these reprint erratas differently, FYI. They created a whole separate "race" entry for "Feral" Tieflings from SCAG, so similarly they created entire separate entries for "Orc of Eberron" and "Orc of Exandria," even though these were identical to each other and the changes were intentional erratas of "Orc" from Volo's Guide to Monsters. But instead of creating a "Triton of Theros" entry, they just quietly errata'd Triton to match Theros when you're reading D&D Beyond. It's a mess, but that's to be expected when you outsource your main digital platform to Wikia. No wonder there's rumblings of WotC considering their own in-house set of digital tools again. Maybe they can actually get them right this time, though.

DDB are clearly under pretty strict guidelines about how they do anything with WotC material. If I had to guess, they are doing what WotC told them to do. But you could probably ask and find out.

AD

 

[Weiley31]

In 5e though, the best gish is clearly a re-skinned paladin...

The Forge Adept Artificer from Exploring Eberron, a few people have said, is also another fantastic Gish done right take.

 

[Ancalagon]

The Forge Adept Artificer from Exploring Eberron, a few people have said, is also another fantastic Gish done right take.

It's very "techno" which for some may not be what they want. I don't have the class (probably will with the Tasha's book when it's out), but from the little I know, it very well could be a solid Gish.

 

[Weiley31]

It's very "techno" which for some may not be what they want. I don't have the class (probably will with the Tasha's book when it's out), but from the little I know, it very well could be a solid Gish.

True, but with 5E's love of Reskinng/Refluffing, you could call it a Sword Mage and dial back the Magitek/techno in describing it. Like how Rising from The Last War explained that for the Artificer, you magitek up the Cantrip descriptions and spells.

 

[Leatherhead]

My conclusion: WotC are having a really really hard time creating new wizard subclases that people don't hate.

I agree, to a point.

I blame hate generated from the sorcerer stans who can't stand when a wizard subclass gets anything that remotely resembles metamagic. Further supplemented by general anti-wizard bias left over from old 3.x players, which makes it so any wizard subclass face an uphill battle.

If WotC would only stop making metamagic-like powers for wizard subclasses, we might be able to see a few more make it though. Or they just might be tossing out obvious bombs in order to make the meh subclasses they actually want in (War Wizard, and presumably scribe wizard) seem like they are actually ok.