D&D 5E D&D Next Q&A: 02/28/2014

[Li Shenron]

Today's Q&A article is very short, but has some quite important clarifications on some classes concepts IMHO:

1) Do sorcerers and wizards have the same spell list?
2) Will wizards have access to metamagic effects or is that exclusively a sorcerer thing now?
3) Does the gish fighter subclass mentioned in Legends & Lore have spells or just magical effects during combat?

Check the answers here and share your opinions:

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/dndqa/20140228

 

[thewok]

1) I like this. I think it's a good idea to reuse one spell for an effect than to create four or five different spells all with the same effect just for the illusion of every class having a different spell list. A Fireball is a Fireball, and a Lightning Bolt is a Lightning Bolt. I do like that there will be some overlap, but also some spells that one class will have that the other won't. Of course, there's nothing stopping a wizard player from asking his DM to be able to research a Sorcerer's spell, and nothing stopping a Sorcerer player from asking the DM if he can somehow "reverse-engineer" a Wizard's spell. But I like that, officially, there's going to be some difference between their spell lists.

2) Honestly, I never used metamagics in 3E. I never got high enough level to start memorizing a maximized Fireball or a Heightened Charm Person instead of other spells of their modified levels. I never wanted to take the extra time as a Sorcerer to use them, either. The system they've shown in the preview Sorcerers from the 25-hour marathon and the recent NPC entry seem to be a much easier and more appropriate way to handle metamagic to me. Wizards left out? Maybe. But they already have some ways to do metamagic by simply casting spells at higher levels, so they're not completely out of ways to modify spells.

3) I loved the playtest sorcerer. I thought it was a great Dragon sorcerer option. So I'm anxious to see what this caster-Fighter is like. I can't really comment on it any more than that, though, as I haven't seen anything to really comment on here. I would like to see an example character or something, though. Being able to make a Swordmage again would be cool.

 

[Falling Icicle]

1. I'm very glad that sorcerers and wizards won't have the same exact spell list. This was one of the things I was most hoping for.

2. I'm disappointed that wizards can't get metamagics. I can understand why the base class itself wouldn't include them, but they should at least have the option to get them with feats. What else are wizards supposed to get with feats? If they can't have metamagics, and (presumably) item creation feats don't exist anymore (since magic items are purely optional), then what else is there for them to get? Plus, how is a wizard supposed to hide his spellcasting without things like still spell, and how is he supposed to cast spells in a silence effect without silent spell? Are we really going to go back to the days when the 2nd level silence spell is basically an anti-magic field again?

 

[Plaguescarred]

I like that wizard and sorcerer have different spell lists while each having unique spells as well as identical ones.

I also think metamagic works better thematically with the sorcery point mechanic.

​Gish fighter spells is a must have IMO and thus it makes sense to me that it has both spells and class features that rely on magical effects as well.

 

[pemerton]

These all sound sensible to me. If the game is going to be class-based, make the class difference real ones!

 

[Li Shenron]

2. I'm disappointed that wizards can't get metamagics. I can understand why the base class itself wouldn't include them, but they should at least have the option to get them with feats.

But they probably will! We have feats which let a non-caster gain (limited) spellcasting and feats which let a non-martial gain (limited) combat proficiency. We will certainly get more feats that act as "mild multiclassing", tho obviously not necessarily in the core book.

The article highlights one important point: "metamagic" is what metamagic does Metamagic is in general the ability of modifying the way spells work. Many 5e spells already scale by level, and that's one metamagic option already there, for any character who learns that spell. Then there will likely be spells which modify other spells, e.g. Permanency and the like. Feats will be designed with other options. Then there is a new metamagic mechanic in the game, which is built around spell points, and only the Sorcerer gets that because only the Sorcerer (for a while at least) has spell points. Let's not get too hung up on what gets the label "metamagic" and try to see what actually works as metamagic.

Personally I like the idea of differentiating Wizard and Sorcerer (much) more than in 3e for example. Then if you really want to be a Wizard with spell points, you can multiclass into Sorcerer (and hopefully with the current multiclassing rules, this should work much better than in 3e). This is still an option within "standard D&D", and then of course there will be "advanced D&D" territory where we might get guidelines to mixing Wizard and Sorcerer even more.

 

[Bluenose]

My largest doubt on the first point is whether they'll be able to restrain themselves from giving Wizards a comprehensive range of spells that make the ones unique to Sorcerors (and Psions, perhaps) into mildly reskinned version of the Wizard ones. Personally I have some doubts that they'll show such restraint, and I rather suspect if they did them it would raise complaints from the people who demand Wizards have the full range of everything arcane available to them. And I don't consider giving Wizards Burning Hands while Sorcerors get Freezing Hands to be more than a cosmetic difference.

 

[Minigiant]

I like all the answers. The mage sorceror divide is coming out stronger with each edition. The mage as the Library. And the socreror as "Giant Flaming Round Peg into Square Hole". And the warlock bringing in the rear as "Infinite spellz".

 

[Blackbrrd]

1. I'm very glad that sorcerers and wizards won't have the same exact spell list. This was one of the things I was most hoping for.

2. I'm disappointed that wizards can't get metamagics. I can understand why the base class itself wouldn't include them, but they should at least have the option to get them with feats. What else are wizards supposed to get with feats? If they can't have metamagics, and (presumably) item creation feats don't exist anymore (since magic items are purely optional), then what else is there for them to get? Plus, how is a wizard supposed to hide his spellcasting without things like still spell, and how is he supposed to cast spells in a silence effect without silent spell? Are we really going to go back to the days when the 2nd level silence spell is basically an anti-magic field again?

I think it's important to take note of what they now call metamagic is: "the ability to alter the way a spell works on the fly". In other words, they have taken the metamagic of 3e and used it in another meaning. In 3e it could also mean that a wizard prepared a metamagic'd spell in advance. I am assuming wizards will have another mechanic for this.

 

[Li Shenron]

My largest doubt on the first point is whether they'll be able to restrain themselves from giving Wizards a comprehensive range of spells that make the ones unique to Sorcerors (and Psions, perhaps) into mildly reskinned version of the Wizard ones. Personally I have some doubts that they'll show such restraint, and I rather suspect if they did them it would raise complaints from the people who demand Wizards have the full range of everything arcane available to them. And I don't consider giving Wizards Burning Hands while Sorcerors get Freezing Hands to be more than a cosmetic difference.

Yep, we definitely need to see the final lists... The Wizard has a similarity with the Fighter in the sense that as one of the original OD&D classes it covered all arcane spellcaster character concepts for decades. Except for the Bard (which is at a complicated crossroad), there was no other arcane core class until 3e. Because of this, a lot of D&D players expect to be able to create any arcane spellcaster concept with the Wizard class, thus not including some spells in the Wizard list can meet a lot of resistance.

I have to say that also I wouldn't like it, if they removed old spells from the Wizard's list. Legacy and tradition are important values for me in the game of D&D. OTOH 5e is very promising in its flexibility and options to create just the PC you want using a variety of methods: feats, subclasses, multiclassing... with this in mind, a more significant separation between different classes' spells list may be quite acceptable.