...
That sounds like D&D, to me.
This was how it was in early D&D...
Yeah, it's just that sometimes I find out that the way we played things wasn't what everyone else was doing and I worry I am losing my grip on reality
I find out that loads of people ignored rules we followed or that we interpreted things very differently etc.
It's remind me of the DM dictator style of the 1985. DM saying openly that it will be a miracle if a wizard find fireball in his world.
It though this style was dead for good with 3ed, and place in a museum with the 4ed.
But no! It seem to be popular again.
Casters are fine in 5ed. Let them live.
Rest is also fine, Pc are meant to go adventuring, not play cards at the inn.
And I respect your play-style as well
I mention this mostly because of the fun I had as a PLAYER of a magic user in those sorts of games. Like I mentioned the spells seemed sooo much more important and magic was more magical
It does make it possible for the GM to add more of a unique flavour to the setting and game, but like I mentioned, it takes a lot more work on the GM's behalf (imo) to do it well.
I love what I have played of 5e so far, which has mostly been fairly strictly by the book mechanics wise, but I do find myself wishing I could try out playing a wizard or bard in a game like this. Especially with casting in higher slots, etc. Unfortunately good GM's always seem to be the limiting factor, never seems to be a shortage of players in comparison.
Some people prefer a lower magic campaign world, more sword and sorcery style. While not directly leading to this sort of world, restricting the spells available to those the DM adds to the campaign will likely lead that way. I think this style of play has its merits, though I haven't seen it pulled off well using D&D as a basis. It can certainly work in theory, though. Changing spell acquisition methods in 5e, you're fundamentally altering power levels of classes which have theoretically been balanced against each other; maybe not in a straight damage-per-round balance, but balanced for overall level of usefulness in a party. It would almost require rebalancing all classes against this new paradigm, which then spirals to needing to rebalance all encounters to compensate, and so forth.
First of all, as you touch on, whether or not the wizard gets spells automatically or not doesn't
necessarily alter the level of magic in a game. The GM could hand them out like candy, for example the PCs finding a spellbook, as can happen now in 5e.
Second of all, I don't think simply changing spell acquisition methods necessarily will fundamentally alter the power levels of classes. For example, the wizard is already able to add spells to their book, along with their automatic gains. It is very possible for the GM to allow them to gain the same number of spells as they would automatically but not necessarily being able to choose any spell at a particular time. This
might result in a loss of "utility" but not a change in power level, or vice versa, the same also applies to a player choosing particular spells in the default way.
As for "balancing encounters" I know not what that means
... The warlock and sorcerer don't fit this paradigm well, as warlocks spells are granted/powered by the patron, but the warlock could still have to seek out new ones through questing or petitioning his/her patron. Sorcerers are the hardest to justify, as their mechanics are tied to the fluff of their magic being intrinsic due to bloodline.
They are granted spells by their patron, or gain them from their bloodline, but that doesn't mean that they
necessarily get to choose exactly which ones the get. In fact, a situation where they don't have 100% control over the spells they acquire/learn might actually make more "sense" in some ways.
All classes which use magic should operate under the same guidelines for spell research and acquisition. The actual fluff of the mechanics can be different (wizard spends x days scribing an ancient fireball spell in his spellbook, priest communes with his deity in seclusion in a temple until knowledge of the miracle of spiritual weapon is granted, a druid sits out in a thunderstorm on the top of a mountain in order to gain enough insight into nature to harness the call lightning ability, and warlock requires x days of service to her patron before the patron reveals the secrets of hexing her foes.
Further, you could/should enforce similar training requirements for non-magical class features which directly add combat prowess to a character, such as battle master maneuvers, rogue sneak attack increases, monk chi abilities, or learning new feats.
First of all, as for other classes, I see no reason that they need to spend the same x amount of time on learning new spells. I really love when different classes actually play different, asymmetrical play is one of my favorite things about D&D in particular (4e aside). I agree that simply applying this to wizards would be strange, unless of course that is the only caster in the game.
I see no reason why this has to apply to non-magical classes like the battle master. I am not talking about this as a way to "punish" the wizard, I am talking about it because I think it can make magic more interesting. I don't think it necessarily would do the same for maneuvers (for example). Things don't have to be the same for all classes "just because". It is fine that they are all different. I do like it when players/gms put some thought into how/what "powers" are given to characters though and it might work even better in games like this.
Arbitrarily forcing this only on the wizard class will likely result in a lot more sorcerers and warlocks at the table, and likely fewer players at the table as some won't want the restrictions of this kind of gameplay on their character concept.
Well, first off that's assuming that there are any sorcerers or warlocks in the game to begin with
Then it is assuming that the players won't think it is really cool (as I do as a player).
That aside, like I already mentioned, I never intended it to be just about the wizard, that was just my best reference. That is what I played a lot and it was really great, for me and others.
