Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 9328935" data-attributes="member: 6802951">Ooof. OK. let's have a think: Most of my objection to the wizard as compared to martial classes can be summed up in a couple of examples: Bladesinger and Steel Wind Strike.Comparing the Bladesinger with the Eldritch Knight, the Bladesinger gets (a better!) version of the fighter's archetypal 5th level ability at level 6. The eldritch Knight gets the Wizard's archetypal 5th level ability at over twice that level.Steel Wind Strike takes what should be a martial forte (combat movement and damage through attacks) and does it better than any martial can.These examples are symptomatic but not exhaustive. . . . and then we have the issue of sheer power and versatility.Stuff I wouldn't change: Wizard hit points, Scaling cantrips, spell casting times. We want to reduce the supremacy of wizard power in many games, not make them unpleasant to play.Stuff I would change: Remove Bladesinger subclass, and spells that directly outdo martial capabilities. Adjust many to give buffs to performing an action rather than auto-success.Make Shield spell Concentration.Wizards are now actual Vancian casters - They memorise spells by slot. Arcane Recovery changed to give neo-vancian slots that can be spent on any spell that the wizard has prepared, with subclass potentially giving further based on spell school. Wizards still retain their ability to Ritual cast out of their spellbook.This gives the Wizard a unique concept and place of the methodical and prepared caster. Technically it makes them more powerful, but only in a theoretical situation where they have been able to correctly predict all the spells that they would use. Practically, it should probably reduce their power, since they are more likely to not be able to use all of their spell slots optimally.</blockquote>

Verification