Aldarc
Legend
We are trying to fix the problem of class balance because class imbalance is a feature and not a bug: ergo, wizards should be less powerful than fighters.
D&D 5E Companion thread to 5E Survivor - Subclasses (Part XV: The FINAL ROUND)
Vaalingrade
Legend
It was not fun for me to go from a being of magic born, a sorcerous birth of miracle, capable of commanding fire at my whim...
To crossbow mook.
Vaalingrade
Legend
Wizards.
CleverNickName
Limit Break Dancing
Ah, gotcha. I'm a poor person to ask, then, because I don't agree that the classes are that imbalanced in 5E...I haven't noticed any problems with balance at my table, anyway. EDIT: That's not entirely true. There was a problem with a certain Sorcerer/Warlock character, but the balance issues were caused by feats and multiclassing, not from the default rules of the game. I don't believe that wizards should be less powerful than fighters, either, but only because it doesn't really fit the vibe I'm going for in my campaign. (My wife, on the other hand, is looking for a low-magic game system to play for their next campaign, because 5E D&D is basically All Magic, All the TimeTM and it's nigh impossible to dial it back. They're looking into the Witcher RPG at the moment.)
Sorry, got off track.
But for the sake of discussion? If I did think that wizards were too powerful, I'd go the super-easy route and add this to my house-rules: "The wizard class has been removed from this campaign. If you were interested in playing a wizardly character, ask me about other options." And then if someone had any heartburn with it, I'd chat with them, find out what they were hoping to get out of the wizard, and meet them in the middle. If it was just certain cantrips or the 6th+ level spells, I could add those to the Artificer spell list. If they were just hoping for a Necromancer with the Arcane Recovery feature, I could replace the cleric's Channel Divinity ability with it. And so on.
But I'd bet dollars to donuts that nobody at my table would care. If I got any response at all from my friends, it would be something like "No wizards? Weird. Oh well, I'll play a sorcerer instead."
Last edited:
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
I applaud your willingness to seek out what the player desires and meet in the middle. That's generally what I look for in almost any DM.
That said, I don't really know if this actually solves the problem of casters or not. As you say, it's "all magic all the time," and people who don't have magic are left out pretty hard. That's kind of the core of the problem.
CleverNickName
Limit Break Dancing
My point is that it is only a problem for a few people. Describing it as a universal problem that all have experienced, and all agree needs to be fixed, is a pretty big exaggeration. Suggesting (demanding?) large changes for something that only a few people are troubled by isn't a recipe for success. My advice remains: keep it small, talk to your players, be flexible.
CleverNickName
Limit Break Dancing
"It's not a crossbow! It's a cantrip! It does 1d8 points of piercing damage on a hit, and requires a crossbow bolt as a material component. Why is that so hard to understand? Stop calling it a crossbow!"
Vaalingrade
Legend
Do you have to count bolts and pretend to care about the weight of the xbow?
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
It would be for me, but again I know I am in the minority on that...
And I don't think we need to remove cantrips, but limit them. In my MOD, damage-causing cantrips are called jinxes. You can use your jinxes a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus per short rest. They scale once at 5th level, but that's it.
Frankly, I would be fine with removing any damage causing cantrips. If you want to deal damage every round in combat, play a martial.
Similar Threads
