ezo
Hero
It would be a better feature for WAR MAGIC since it is combat focused.
Neither is you not answering me how it is actually useful in game play and how often does that come up?
D&D 5E Companion thread to 5E Survivor - Subclasses (Part XIV: Wizard)
- Thread starter Undrave
- Start date
Leatherhead
Possibly a Idiot.
The scribes wizard is literally an artificer subclass that was crammed into the wizard.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
Excellent point. That explains why it annoys me so much, I don't allow Artificers in my games.
Aldarc
Legend
Yeah, speaking purely for myself (as I am not actually any other people
I like the School of Necromancy wizard just fine. Grim Harvest really isn't all THAT as far as I'm concerned: My usual strategy when playing Wizard is to try to avoid damage altogether. And with a party to cower behind...it's often pretty easy to do so. The hit point returns from it aren't usually all that great either, though of course every little bit helps. The main attraction of the subclass to me is the Undead Thralls ability. Animate Dead is actually a pretty good spell, considering that it's not a concentration effect. The damage bonuses from Undead Thralls help keep the undead minions actually somewhat-relevant when massed. And since skeletons come with ranged attacks you're not competing for space at the front with the party melee specialists. Inured to Undeath is kinda meh. Command Thralls is good, but comes pretty late in an Adventurer's career for most games.
Mostly, the subclass is functional and not broken. And absolutely a solid choice if you want to build a necromancer-type character. But there are more exciting Wizard subclasses IMO?
IMO, I find it a bit much to essentially create a subclass around a single spell (i.e., Animate Dead). I would probably change Animate Dead, Create Undead, and similar summoning spells so there isn't so much book-keeping required. I suspect that there would be a mutiny if Animate Dead and Create Undead were removed from the game because "TRADITION!" but I'm not sure if D&D's Necromancer is really sustainable with the changing times.
Worlds Without Number, IMHO, created a really good Necromancer mage, so I would look at that as a potential model.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Scribes triples down on the spellbook, while not specializing in any school or type of effect.
It’s about as “The Wizard” as it gets IMO.
The only way I can see a more generalist wizard would be a wizard that gets different benefits from different arcane focus, can use spellbook as focus, and only has to choose which benefit they are currently getting.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
So it triples down on a thing ALL wizards have? Making this subclass even MORE dependent on the object that is the class's greatest potential weakness?
I would say it potentially does more harm than good, but YMMV of course!
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
Actually, I do. I think their 6th level feature is one of the better features.
Tonguez
A suffusion of yellow
The Stone is the ONLY good thing about the Transmuter, but the rest is crap.
Minor alchemy should be a cantrip rather than a level 2 ability,
shapechange at level 10 means you can cast polymorph but only on yourself to become a dumber animal, and the capstone Mastery ability requires you to bust your precious Stone to cast a free greater restoration or raise dead - you then spend 8 hours to make a new one: Fun!
Last edited:
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Right. Exactly what a generalist should do, focus on part of the class that defines all wizards.
Oh I don’t care at all about whether it’s good or bad or whatever, I’m talking about how well it typifies The Wizard.
I mean make the spellbook impossible to damage for Scribes, and the only potential negative of the subclass goes away, and it’s just a subclass that takes base class themes and mechanics, and makes them the focus.
