D&D (2024) My wishes for 6e: less dark vision and spellcasting classes

[TaranTheWanderer]

I feel like most issues with spell casting come down to the Wizard being too damn flexible and being too vague of a concept. Picking a specialization as a Wizard doesn't really mean much beyond the first few levels.

I think a 6e Wizard should have a small base list of generic utility spells (Light, Tenser's Floating Disk, Feather Fall, Sending, that sort of thing, maybe Magic Missile and Shield) and have all their cooler spells based on their chosen specialty. So, yes, you can build a Wizard in many different ways, but you can't just pile up all the BEST SPELLS on the same character because some of them would be mutually exclusive.

But I bet Wizard fans would riot and apparently they're the most important fans so we HAVE to bend over backward for them.

I agree that each wizard school should also be unique. The risk there is, instead of picking all the BEST spells, people will pick the type of wizard with the BEST LIST. It’s doable.

In a game I was in, the DM separated the wizard schools: high wizards with divination, abjuration and evocation;

black wizards with enchantment, and necromancy and conjuration

illusionists: illusion and compulsions

low wizards: low level utility spells

All wizards got ‘general’ spells.

in any case, as you can see, illusionists got shafted and there was a a huge list of creatures that their spells didn’t work on.

 

[Undrave]

I agree that each wizard school should also be unique. The risk there is, instead of picking all the BEST spells, people will pick the type of wizard with the BEST LIST. It’s doable.

In a game I was in, the DM separated the wizard schools: high wizards with divination, abjuration and evocation;

black wizards with enchantment, and necromancy and conjuration

illusionists: illusion and compulsions

low wizards: low level utility spells

All wizards got ‘general’ spells.

in any case, as you can see, illusionists got shafted and there was a a huge list of creatures that their spells didn’t work on.

I think using the 'magic school' system as the basis for a Wizard subclass (except maybe Illusionists and Necromancer) is probably the most boring thing they could have went with. A school specialty for the rebate on copying spells? Sure, that's a decent flavorful class feature, but it shouldn't be the only basis for a subclass. And a lot of classifications feel arbitrary.

I'd imagine Wizard subclasses with more thematic spell list than purely label-based. More thoughts given to the place of that specific tradition in the world.

Also, Divination should be more of a Cleric thing anyway

 

[Undrave]

Yeah, WotC is not going to nerf the wizard to the degree many people around here seem to want.

Wizard privilege.

 

[James Gasik]

When Wizards were brought down to "normal" in 4e, there was tons of backlash that they didn't "feel like Wizards", even with Ritual casting and the Spellbook feature that no other Class had. What consistently strikes me as odd in discussions about powering down the Wizard, is that many of the same people who don't want the Fighter to change, are the same people who don't want the Wizard to change! It's like, can't you see the problem of a game that has "Badass Normal Fighters" and "Godlike Magical Wizards" on the same team?

It's like having Batman and Superman on the Justice League- sure, you can tell great stories about them, but so many things have to happen for it to work. Actually, scratch that, we know what it's really like.


My personal solution to Wizards comes from the old Cormanthor: Empire of Elves. There, it introduced a new approach to specialist Wizards the ancient Elves had developed, the Dualist. Instead of seeing the various schools of magic as opposed to one another, they saw them as two sides of the same coin. A Dualist specialized in two, normally opposed schools of magic (like, say, Invocation/Evocation and Enchantment), and could cast NOTHING ELSE. This has the effect that, if something is immune to say, Enchantment spells, you can still light them up with magical energies.

 

[Undrave]

What consistently strikes me as odd in discussions about powering down the Wizard, is that many of the same people who don't want the Fighter to change, are the same people who don't want the Wizard to change! It's like, can't you see the problem of a game that has "Badass Normal Fighters" and "Godlike Magical Wizards" on the same team?

Because that's what they want.

I'm convinced Wizard fans are just fans of feeling like the best character in the party. Wizard player LOVE this scenario:

DM: Your path is blocked by [OBSTACLE]

Fighter: I will overcome [OBSTACLE] with my strength!

DM: Sorry, it doesn't work.

Rogue: I will overcome [OBSTACLE] with my skills!

DM: Sorry, it doesn't work. To overcome [OBSTACLE] you will need [PLOT COUPON A] that can only be obtained through this long side quest.

Fighter & Rogue: Curses! We don't have time for this.

Wizard: Step aside, I know how to overcome [OBSTACLE]! I have prepared [SPELL A] this morning for such an occasion!

DM: But [SPELL A] cannot overcome [OBSTACLE]?

Wizard: But what if I use it like this: [CONVOLUTED METHOD]

DM: It works! Curses! You've foiled my plans again!

Rogue: That was brilliant, Wizard!

Fighter: What would we do without you?

Then repeat adnauseum until the end of the campaign. Not even counting the Fireballs and other combat spells. Anything that interferes with this gameplay loop or lets somebody else perform it is seen as a bad thing, is 'Not D&D!' and causes the Wizard to 'not feel like a Wizard'.

 

[James Gasik]

That's sad, but also pretty much true. I just don't understand why it has to be that way.

 

[Minigiant]

Scholar class.

There is more to brainpower than magic spells. Especially in fantasy. And eventual D&D will be dragged kicking and screaming into accepting this.

 

[Undrave]

That's sad, but also pretty much true. I just don't understand why it has to be that way.

Because, somehow, the words of Wizard players have been given WAY too much weight. They decided they were the 'canary in the mine' of D&D and the sole keeper of what is 'True D&D'. If the Wizards player are unhappy, apparently your game will be slandered and tanked like 4e.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because, somehow, the words of Wizard players have been given WAY too much weight. They decided they were the 'canary in the mine' of D&D and the sole keeper of what is 'True D&D'. If the Wizards player are unhappy, apparently your game will be slandered and tanked like 4e.

Hey, if WotC really wanted to nerf wizards, they would do it. More people like crazy magic powers than not.

 

[James Gasik]

It's hard to say, since they rarely do anything but give Wizards more power. The only times when they haven't that I can think of are 3.5's polymorph subschool, and maybe early 4e (but they were quick to give the class back it's toys- there are more options for Wizards than any other class by the end).