D&D 5E Am I too strict?

[TheSword]

So I'm partly just playing devil's advocate here, but the OP did mention wanting to discourage players from playing wizards. Does that make it okay?

To answer my own question, the problem is probably that it's a case of trying to solve an out-of-character problem with an in-character penalty. Which rarely, if ever, works.

I don’t think it’s a problem imposing limitations on players. There several spells I outright ban from the game (leomunds tiny hut/rope trick) and I’m fond of restrictions on character building where it suits the flavor of the campaign.

If the intent is to create a harsh restriction to discourage players of wizards then that doesn’t stop it being harsh. The OP asked for an opinion, not our permission. I personally don’t see why you would want to discourage wizards though. Who cares whether a player chooses sorcerer, wizard or warlock.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

This could be a feature if the number of spells a sorcerer knows were greater than then number a wizard had prepared daily. Unfortunately, it is the opposite--the wizard has more prepared daily than the sorcerer knows. This means there is no benefit to the sorcerer from that whatsoever. And that isn't even counting rituals.

That's a different argument than "Nobody prepares spells in 5e", which is an untrue statement.

I think the biggest slap in the face of sorcerer design is that they are probably only going to end up knowing one spell of levels 6-7-8-9 because of the slowing of the spells known track and the lack of other ways to add spells to their known spells pile (I don't even think there is a feat or magic item that allows this).

 

[Helldritch]

That's a different argument than "Nobody prepares spells in 5e", which is an untrue statement.

I think the biggest slap in the face of sorcerer design is that they are probably only going to end up knowing one spell of levels 6-7-8-9 because of the slowing of the spells known track and the lack of other ways to add spells to their known spells pile (I don't even think there is a feat or magic item that allows this).

Which is maybe a symptom as to why I see so many wizards.

I don’t think it’s a problem imposing limitations on players. There several spells I outright ban from the game (leomunds tiny hut/rope trick) and I’m fond of restrictions on character building where it suits the flavor of the campaign.

If the intent is to create a harsh restriction to discourage players of wizards then that doesn’t stop it being harsh. The OP asked for an opinion, not our permission. I personally don’t see why you would want to discourage wizards though. Who cares whether a player chooses sorcerer, wizard or warlock.

And I must reiterate my thanks. All opinions were welcomed and I fully exposed the three sides of the discussion to my players. I did state that most here were finding it a harsh rule but my players decided to support the rule wholeheartedly (saved one, but he rallied, so...).

Again, it is not that I do not want to discourage wizards (well, yes and no) it is more akin that I want to see more of the other classes. We discussed it in our messenger group and they agreed that if a second arcane caster is chosen, one should choose something other than a wizard. But they want to keep the rule! Playing this way suits them (as well as I).

 

[DND_Reborn]

That's a different argument than "Nobody prepares spells in 5e", which is an untrue statement.

I think the biggest slap in the face of sorcerer design is that they are probably only going to end up knowing one spell of levels 6-7-8-9 because of the slowing of the spells known track and the lack of other ways to add spells to their known spells pile (I don't even think there is a feat or magic item that allows this).

While I agree Sorcerers would be better off with some more known spells, your statement isn't quite accurate when you consider they can still swap out a known spell for a new one each level. I mean, technically by 20th level their known spells could include (I don't recommend it) 3 6th, 3 7th, 3 8th, and 4 9th. Of course, they would only have 2 spells left for levels 1-5... so not a great idea, but possible.

What I think is laughable is they cannot even know just 2 spells at each level they can cast! That is pathetic.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Which is maybe a symptom as to why I see so many wizards.

I think this might have hit a root of an idea for an alternate (or additional) method of hooking players into choosing a sorcerer. I have long since thought that each subclass of sorcerer should have access to a bespoke list of spells appropriate to their origin (even if those spells are traditionally found on other classes spell lists). Perhaps you can offer up to the next sorcerer an additional spell-known for each level that is from outside the sorcerer spell list, with the GM having the final say on its "connection" to the power source.

 

[Helldritch]

While I agree Sorcerers would be better off with some more known spells, your statement isn't quite accurate when you consider they can still swap out a known spell for a new one each level. I mean, technically by 20th level their known spells could include (I don't recommend it) 3 6th, 3 7th, 3 8th, and 4 9th. Of course, they would only have 2 spells left for levels 1-5... so not a great idea, but possible.

What I think is laughable is they cannot even know just 2 spells at each level they can cast! That is pathetic.

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.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

While I agree Sorcerers would be better off with some more known spells, your statement isn't quite accurate when you consider they can still swap out a known spell for a new one each level. I mean, technically by 20th level their known spells could include (I don't recommend it) 3 6th, 3 7th, 3 8th, and 4 9th. Of course, they would only have 2 spells left for levels 1-5... so not a great idea, but possible.

What I think is laughable is they cannot even know just 2 spells at each level they can cast! That is pathetic.

That would be a LOT of upcast Magic Missles....

 

[JiffyPopTart]

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.

I'm surprised nobody (especially the power gamer) hadn't dipped into the warlock just long enough to get darkness and devil's sight. I discovered that accidentally then told the GM I would never do that to him again after the first time I used it. When I played a warlock it was all about the always-on abilities and the spell slots were just a bonus.

 

[Helldritch]

I think this might have hit a root of an idea for an alternate (or additional) method of hooking players into choosing a sorcerer. I have long since thought that each subclass of sorcerer should have access to a bespoke list of spells appropriate to their origin (even if those spells are traditionally found on other classes spell lists). Perhaps you can offer up to the next sorcerer an additional spell-known for each level that is from outside the sorcerer spell list, with the GM having the final say on its "connection" to the power source.

Not a bad idea. I was thinking of using the Guilds of Ravnica as a basis for the sorcerers and the warlocks (to a lesser extent). It seems it could help these two classes.

 

[Helldritch]

I'm surprised nobody (especially the power gamer) hadn't dipped into the warlock just long enough to get darkness and devil's sight. I discovered that accidentally then told the GM I would never do that to him again after the first time I used it. When I played a warlock it was all about the always-on abilities and the spell slots were just a bonus.

Ho but we had our share of high level warlocks and sorcerers. It's just that the downsides are just not up to the versatility (or perceived versatility) that the wizard enjoys.