D&D General Why Do You Think Wizards Are Boring?

[Vaalingrade]

While making the wizard more difficult/frustrating to use might technically make it less boring, I feel like it's trading one problem for another.

Honestly though, all of D&D's magic kind of needs to go back to formula. The wizard is just the poster boy.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I don't think wizards are boring. I prefer to play a wizard when I'm not DM'ing. I see it as a resource management character. I am always trying to gauge which spells to use and when; if I use up my high level spells, I am unable to contribute my share of beneficial actions (including damage) in and out of combat.

It's honestly a blessing to be able to cast damage cantrips instead of only using the Old School™ crossbow.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

One way to make wizards less boring is to revert to some version of the old (unpopular and frequently ditched) rule where spells got added to their lists in a randomized fashion. It’s hard to play cookie cutter Mages when it’s highly improbable that they’d get the same spells. I always liked it for that reason. You almost always wound up with spells you’d need to THINK about uses for.

I am often challenged when I say that I liked that randomness, but it’s true. To me:

1) it modeled a mage who might be researching all kinds of arcane theories and practices, and just happened to have a breakthrough in an unexpected area. Or who found a spell hidden where none expected it to be secreted away.

Does that really reflect being a researcher, though? Real research is almost never the result of utterly random, blink-and-you-miss-it stuff. Even true absolute genius requires a lot of dedication to take those offbeat ideas and turn them into something practical.

I'd much rather we instead actually make Wizards have real mechanics for researching things. Including the possibility of developing a brand-new spell! Because that would actually be much more like real, isolated researchers. Consider Ramanujan.

2) it also encouraged casters to share knowledge. If you’re in a party and your latest new spell is Aunty’s Bath, but your teammate learned Mirror Image, you might want to give access to your spellbook in order to gain access to hers.

I have no idea why anyone wouldn't do this. Coordinating with ally Wizards is one of the best possible plans a budding Wizard can have. It's a simple application of the iterated trust game: even if you're on the losing end of a deal now, trust in the long term is actually quite an effective strategy, so long as you apply a moderate amount of reason to it (e.g. tit-for-tat). Sounds to me like if people aren't doing this, it's because they're too short-sighted to see the benefits of cooperation.

Re: #2
The last Diviner (multiclassed into Spellsword) I played was in a party with the guy with the decades-long history of “photocopied” wizard spell lists. It was in yet another campaign where the randomized spell-learning rule had been ditched. He bitched about my PC’s spell selection- especially his lack of attack spells- but simultaneously refused to have his PC teach mine anything, nor learn any spells mine knew.

I had no problems playing my PC, and contributed every session. Nonetheless, I retired the character mid-campaign when- over a period of a few months- we lost the only player with a divine caster over 2nd level, and replaced him with another…who also left. Both moved out of town. I replaced my Diviner with a Geomancer in order to keep the party healthy.

As said above: sounds like you have been playing with folks who have rather un-enlightened self-interest. Cutting off your nose to spite your face. Randomized spell research isn't going to do crap about someone who isn't willing to consider the benefits of cooperation.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Does that really reflect being a researcher, though? Real research is almost never the result of utterly random, blink-and-you-miss-it stuff. Even true absolute genius requires a lot of dedication to take those offbeat ideas and turn them into something practical.

Depends on a lot of things, like the mind doing the research, TBH. Look at the notebooks & creations of Leonardo Da Vinci, Nicola Tesla and other giants, and you’ll see they made discoveries in multiple disciplines.

And discoveries via accident is a COMMON story in science. Gunpowder, Velcro, quinine, warfarin, viagra, Valium, penicillin, Rogaine, matches, and other discoveries were made by accident, chance observations, or had other effects that were- in the long run- more highly valued than their initially intended uses.

I have no idea why anyone wouldn't do this. Coordinating with ally Wizards is one of the best possible plans a budding Wizard can have. It's a simple application of the iterated trust game: even if you're on the losing end of a deal now, trust in the long term is actually quite an effective strategy, so long as you apply a moderate amount of reason to it (e.g. tit-for-tat). Sounds to me like if people aren't doing this, it's because they're too short-sighted to see the benefits of cooperation.

My buddy is an odd duck. Veteran gamer, mostly D&D. Damn smart, too.

But in one of the earlier editions of the game, there was a throwaway line about wizards jealously guarding their hard-won knowledge (paraphrasing) and he took that as roleplaying writ. To the best of my knowledge, he has NEVER run an arcane caster who shared spells from scrolls or spellbooks in the decades we’ve gamed together.

As said above: sounds like you have been playing with folks who have rather un-enlightened self-interest. Cutting off your nose to spite your face. Randomized spell research isn't going to do crap about someone who isn't willing to consider the benefits of cooperation.

I’d bet dollars to donuts he’d change his tune on sharing if random chance gave someone else’s PC a spell he liked that fickle fate denied his.

But odds are good I’ll never know, because every DM we’ve both played under has ditched that rule, so he routinely picks the same spells every time it comes up.

 

[Zardnaar]

I have learned that both PCs and players have limitations.

Why’d the party let someone unsuited to the task make the attempt?

People don't line conflict or interrupting I suppose so everyone went with it. Group fell apart next session or two anyway DM and one if the players we getting frisky and it turned to crap.

 

[Zardnaar]

I don't think wizards are boring. I prefer to play a wizard when I'm not DM'ing. I see it as a resource management character. I am always trying to gauge which spells to use and when; if I use up my high level spells, I am unable to contribute my share of beneficial actions (including damage) in and out of combat.

It's honestly a blessing to be able to cast damage cantrips instead of only using the Old School™ crossbow.

Crossbow what is this 3.0? Darts!!

 

[Neonchameleon]

Wizards would make a great and popular subclass of sorcerer in 5e. But thematically their subclasses leave a lot to be desired because the wizard class is too domineering both mechanically and thematically.

The wizard is the arcane caster who gets their power from learning and investigating magic, and because of this they gain an unrivalled flexibility with arcane spells (which of course are the most flexible type of magic), able to scribe them into their book and change their spells on a daily basis as well as learning more new spells than other arcanists and being able to learn spells from other wizards' books. This is great! It's got the power and specificity of a strong subclass.

However that's the problem. Wizard subclasses are (with a couple of honourable exceptions) their schools of magic. But specialising in one school of magic is in direct conflict to the wizard's core identity of being able to learn any arcane magic. And due to far more of the power budget being invested in the base class an e.g. wizard storm mage is never going to be able to be as stormy as a storm sorcerer. So the wizard does one thing and does it well.

This used to be much more interesting back in the day when spells were things you found. And you had to make use of whatever spells you picked up because they were what you had. But when you get to actively select spells then no matter how good the designers are you'll find that some spells are better than others. Wizards therefore come with only three or four spell sets used by 90% of players. By contrast because there's much more power (and for that matter actual access to spells) built into the subclasses, doing more to change both the access to spells and the power of spells for the sorcerer the Aberrant Mind might only have two main spell lists that are played - but it's going to be different lists from the Celestial Sorcerer due to different access to spells and different spell boosts.

So the wizard is a fine class/subclass combo. But this leaves little room for interesting subclasses (and even some it has like the necromancer would be better as sorcerers).

 

[Shardstone]

For all I slag him for a lack of creativity, the guy running the xeroxed arcanists was wickedly talented at playing them like a professional race car driver nursing his gas tank for every precious mile and second.

His husbanding of spells was truly something to learn from. He’d cast spells as economically as possible, which usually meant NOT slinging spells every turn. Hell, he might not even use a magic item either. Typically, only the party rogues would carry more daggers than his mages.

Result: he was rarely the one demanding the party rest, and he usually held 1-2 decent combat spells until the party camped for the night.

This unironically sounds like such a blast to play with.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

This unironically sounds like such a blast to play with.

NGL, watching him play a D&D wizard in combat is akin to watching a competitive pool player run a table or a NFL QB pick apart a prevent defense. He more or less won’t make mistakes.

But it also means that the arcane caster role is “his” in a lot of campaigns. Nobody else can play one if you want all the roles covered, unless the group is big enough to do so with players left over.

 

[DammitVictor]

So full stop, my favorite class in the world is wizard. I absolutely love including them in my worlds, I like dropping them in as NPCs, and I love what they can do to and for players. But recently, I've heard from some folks who think wizards are boring. So if you think wizards are boring, please elaborate! Why do think wizards are boring?

I think, specifically in the context of 5e, one could find them somewhat mechanically boring because they have the best single class feature (full spellcasting from the broadest, most powerful spell list), and most of their other class features and subclass options just broaden that feature a bit. There isn't a lot to optimize or build around for a wizard, because they're pretty self-contained.

Probably already been said a million times already, but it's this. The problem is that a well-played Wizard-- a Wizard that plays to a Wizard's strengths-- doesn't overcome challenges, he bypasses them. A Wizard's primary class feature is his collection of specific "i win" buttons and a Wizard's primary tactics aren't decided during an "encounter", they're decided in camp when the Wizard decides which subset of his "i win" buttons he's going to carry with him that day.

Wizards would be improved not by adding, but primarily by taking away. Restrict their access to the full Wizard spell list-- imagine the 3.5 Psion where powers are sorted by discipline, but some powers are specialist only-- go back to having mandatory prohibited schools. They don't have to be 100% gannonbanned, but it has to be a lot harder than Pathfinder's "prepare/cast it as two slots". The hard work is redesigning spells, so many spells, to be part of a strategy instead of being whole strategies unto themselves.

Then... yeah. Give them something back. Give them more non-spell class features based on their school/tradition, let them double-specialize or something like patron/pact like Warlocks. Give them exploits like the PF Arcanist, choices to make on a permanent basis that they have to learn to take advantage of and live with every day.