D&D 5E Building a better Wizard

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Anyone tried the Spell Point system from the DMG with the wizard? [/I]

My DM didn't tell me about this - I'll will have to ask him. Thank you for the tip!

 

[mrpopstar]

The capability of the wizard is too broad. Narrowing their focus would make them better.

Currently, the "specializations" only encourage focused capability, but there should be design that enforces it.

 

[Croesus]

Anyone tried the Spell Point system from the DMG with the wizard?

My group is currently experimenting with using spell points for sorcerers. Sorcery points just add to the total spell points available each day.

Pros:
- The character has a lot of flexibility. Sometimes you need multiple fireballs, sometimes you need to constantly cast low level utility spells.
- Really does make the caster feel different, using spell points vs. spell slots.

Cons:
- Incredibly easy to blow through one's spell points in a hurry casting higher level spells. The player has to be careful, or you'll run out quickly.
- The DMG spell point costs favor some spell levels over others.

1st = 2 SP, 2nd = 3 SP, 3rd = 5 SP, 4th = 6 SP, 5th = 7 SP.

As you can see, casting a 4th level spell only costs one extra spell point vs. a 3rd level. Same for 2nd vs. 1st, 5th vs. 4th. So there's a temptation to cast higher level spells because they are more "efficient" in spell point terms. I'm not sure this is really a problem, but we'll see with more testing.

Bottom line: so far, we've found using spell points to be more positive than negative.

 

[Cognomen's Cassowary]

My biggest complaint about wizards is that they are so broad and bland. Their entire shtick is that they cast a lot of spells. They have very few class features because they are so focused on casting a lot of spells, and the ones they do have are all focused on casting a lot of spells. The subclass features add value to spells and encourage the casting of certain spells over others, but still a fair number of them just support casting a lot of spells.

Contrast it with the sorcerer, where sorcery points and metamagic give the class entire a distinctive feel, and where each subclass has a feel of its own beyond that, or with warlock, whose invocations and spell-slot structure make it unique as well, or with druid, which can cast a lot of spells and shapeshift.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

My group is currently experimenting with using spell points for sorcerers. Sorcery points just add to the total spell points available each day.

Pros:
- The character has a lot of flexibility. Sometimes you need multiple fireballs, sometimes you need to constantly cast low level utility spells.
- Really does make the caster feel different, using spell points vs. spell slots.

Cons:
- Incredibly easy to blow through one's spell points in a hurry casting higher level spells. The player has to be careful, or you'll run out quickly.
- The DMG spell point costs favor some spell levels over others.

1st = 2 SP, 2nd = 3 SP, 3rd = 5 SP, 4th = 6 SP, 5th = 7 SP.

As you can see, casting a 4th level spell only costs one extra spell point vs. a 3rd level. Same for 2nd vs. 1st, 5th vs. 4th. So there's a temptation to cast higher level spells because they are more "efficient" in spell point terms. I'm not sure this is really a problem, but we'll see with more testing.

Bottom line: so far, we've found using spell points to be more positive than negative.

Thank you! Very interesting.

Hmm..I wonder if wizards using such a system would step on the toes/continue to erode the identity of sorcerers...

 

[Thurmas]

I would like to see some of the subclass/school abilities be a bit more defining and more thought out, although this would likely make them more powerful. I just find too many of them to be not very useful. For example:

The level 6 evocation ability Potent Cantrip, for example, is bad because there are no good wizard saving throw cantrips. It should be +Int to cantrip damage.

The 10th level Transmutation ability Shapechanger, it is named to imply you gain the ability to shapechange. But polymorph changes you mental ability scores, so if you change yourself into an animal, you are just as smart as that normal animal, which is probably not going to be smart enough to do whatever trickery you intended, or smart enough to drop concentration when it is time to change back.

I think a bigger issue is that some spells just don't belong to the right school (why are wall spells evocation and not conjuration?), and for the number of schools that we have, there just aren't enough spells to make their abilities fully realized. Hopefully the new book this fall will help that by adding new spells.

That being said, overall the Wizard is one of the better designed classes and I'd be happy with it staying exactly the way it is. You really have to dig to find problems with it.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

The School of Necromancy seems to get a fair amount of flack - it's strength is its undead minions. And yet, in an Edition where the Ranger's pet isn't trusted to act as an independent entity, Necromancer wizards are given the aok to run rampant with a mob of undead minions. Without even straying into the unlikely-but-possible 1 squillion skeleton minion scenario, 5-6 skeletons is enough to bog down play.

 

[Leatherhead]

The only class easier to fix than the Rogue.

Step one:
Make a generalist subclass.

Step two:
Fix the problem spells (which is something that should be done for all casters anyway).

 

[Immoralkickass]

You can't build a better wizard, because the wizard is already the best there is, and the best there will ever be.

 

[aco175]

I could go for some sort of cross over at 3rd level, similar to arcane trickster and sword mage. A mage with some fighter or thief abilities at some sort of cost would fill in some roles without going multi-class. I could just play arcane trickster, but I would like a generalist or elementalist with second story powers and a mage who may get 2 attacks at whatever level (11th?).