D&D 5E I want more flavorful wizard subclasses.

[EzekielRaiden]

I'm usually one for thinking familiarity and tradition aren't awful reasons for keeping something (as long as it doesn't hurt others!). But is there any reason to keep these particular eight schools besides tradition, and are there any folks who are super-fans of the current division who would be upset if they were merged a bit? I can imagine illusionist having historical momentum, any others?

Evocation and Abjuration would have tradition-focused fans, I suspect, since they represent some of the most "classically D&D-Wizard" spells. Divination is in kind of a weird spot, because prior to 5e it was extremely weak as a school, but now it's arguably the best of the bunch because of Portent (probably the only truly powerful Wizard subclass feature.)

Conjuration and Transmutation might have fans because they were brokenly OP in 3e, and thus people might want to hold onto them.

Necromancy and Enchantment...harder to say. There's certainly room to argue that Illusion and Enchantment could just be folded into a single school, and that Necromancy could be classified as a subset of Transmutation since...I mean it literally is about transmuting (formerly-)living things into undead things.

If I were combining based on common themes, I would combine Illusion and Enchantment into a single school (probably still called "Enchantment" but "Glamour" could work), and probably just fully merge Necromancy in as a subset of Transmutation. From there, it's just a matter of looking for things that seem reasonable among the remainder. Combining Evocation and Abjuration into a single school seems pretty reasonable, and would make for probably the single most obviously "D&D Wizard" subclass you could get what with having fireball, mage armor, counterspell, magic missile, and a host of other quintessentially D&D spells in there.

So that would have Enchantment (absorbing Illusion), Transmutation (absorbing Necromancy), Evocation (absorbing Abjuration), Conjuration, and Divination. And those last two do have a kind of unexpected connection, since Conjuration relates to teleportation and thus depends on knowledge, and Divination depends on going to places (usually with magical sensors or remote viewing) and such. Probably have Conjuration absorb Divination.

 

[Cadence]

I suspect Evocation and Abjuration would have tradition-focused fans, I suspect, since they represent some of the most "classically D&D-Wizard" spells. Divination is in kind of a weird spot, because prior to 5e it was extremelyweak as a school, but now it's arguably the best of the bunch because of Portent (probably the only truly powerful Wizard subclass feature.)

Conjuration and Transmutation might have fans because they were brokenly OP in 3e, and thus people might want to hold onto them.

Necromancy and Enchantment...harder to say. There's certainly room to argue that Illusion and Enchantment could just be folded into a single school, and that Necromancy could be classified as a subset of Transmutation since...I mean it literally is about transmuting (formerly-)living things into undead things.

If I were combining based on common themes, I would combine Illusion and Enchantment into a single school (probably still called "Enchantment" but "Glamour" could work), and probably just fully merge Necromancy in as a subset of Transmutation. From there, it's just a matter of looking for things that seem reasonable among the remainder. Combining Evocation and Abjuration into a single school seems pretty reasonable, and would make for probably the single most obviously "D&D Wizard" subclass you could get what with having fireball, mage armor, counterspell, magic missile, and a host of other quintessentially D&D spells in there.

So that would have Enchantment (absorbing Illusion), Transmutation (absorbing Necromancy), Evocation (absorbing Abjuration), Conjuration, and Divination. And those last two do have a kind of unexpected connection, since Conjuration relates to teleportation and thus depends on knowledge, and Divination depends on going to places (usually with magical sensors or remote viewing) and such. Probably have Conjuration absorb Divination.

I had forgotten about Necromancy I imagine that would have lots of fans and be left alone.

The rest of your thoughts seem at least as reasonable as the current eight, and win by parsimony.

 

[jmartkdr2]

A Healer mage subclass would be useful if you didn't have a cleric in the party.

In a game with no cleric in the party, I played a wizard who could heal. It was fine, no one felt unclean from the lack if niche protection. Aside from making sure life clerics are unbeatable at healing, it’s just not a big deal.

 

[Kurotowa]

I could see potentially combining pairs of schools together, since some schools are pretty clearly weaker than others. Thematic pairs might work (e.g. Evocation/Abjuration), or try for something like conceptual opposites (e.g. Illusion/Divination).

We know that straight Evoker is one of the four from UA5. So they're likely going for the ones with strongest themes and identity, not trying to fit in all eight schools. My money is on Evoker, Illusionist, Necromancer, and the fourth will be a wildcard that isn't a school based subclass at all. Either Bladesinger if they're willing to put the melee cantrips in the PHB or a brand new subclass if they're not.

 

[Cadence]

In a game with no cleric in the party, I played a wizard who could heal. It was fine, no one felt unclean from the lack if niche protection. Aside from making sure life clerics are unbeatable at healing, it’s just not a big deal.

Once you open it for Bards to be both arcane and have healing, it feels like the cats already out of the bag.

 

[ECMO3]

I had a thought about the wizard recently. Most wizard subclasses are based on the wizard schools of magic. Some of them are fine, like illusionists and necromancers. Yet when I think of subclasses such as the abjurer, conjurer, or transmuter, I get a bit bored.

What I suggest instead is stronger, more flavorful archetypes. Something that says that they are still academic, learned mages at heart, but they do it in different ways. So while your illusionists and necromancers are still strong archetypes, I want to see rune mages, witches, and war mages as well.

To me, that would make the wizard more appealing. What do you think? If WotC took this approach, what are wizard subclasses you would want to see?

There is a 3rd party Witch that is really good and I like both the wOTC War Magic and Bladesinger as a nice change of pace from "school of magic".

Other hombrew options that seem pretty easy thematically:
1. A conjurer variant that focuses on either Elements or Fiends and is less about conjuration school spells.

2. Hedge Wizard as others have mentioned, free Friends cantip, slight of hand, deception and thieves tools proficiency. Additional abilities with certain spells like Friends and Knock at 6th level.

3. Sage - get expertise in History and either Religion or Medicine at 2nd level. Then an ability to go into a trance and recall knowlege once a day.

4. Ships Wizard - athletics and water vehicles proficiency, Fog Cloud and Gust of Wind are always prepared. Swim speed at 6th level

5. Court Wizard - Specialized in protecting the King and his court. Intimidation, insight, Land Vehicle and poison proficiencies.

Overall I don't think this is very difficult.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Evocation and Abjuration would have tradition-focused fans, I suspect, since they represent some of the most "classically D&D-Wizard" spells. Divination is in kind of a weird spot, because prior to 5e it was extremely weak as a school, but now it's arguably the best of the bunch because of Portent (probably the only truly powerful Wizard subclass feature.)

Conjuration and Transmutation might have fans because they were brokenly OP in 3e, and thus people might want to hold onto them.

Necromancy and Enchantment...harder to say. There's certainly room to argue that Illusion and Enchantment could just be folded into a single school, and that Necromancy could be classified as a subset of Transmutation since...I mean it literally is about transmuting (formerly-)living things into undead things.

If I were combining based on common themes, I would combine Illusion and Enchantment into a single school (probably still called "Enchantment" but "Glamour" could work), and probably just fully merge Necromancy in as a subset of Transmutation. From there, it's just a matter of looking for things that seem reasonable among the remainder. Combining Evocation and Abjuration into a single school seems pretty reasonable, and would make for probably the single most obviously "D&D Wizard" subclass you could get what with having fireball, mage armor, counterspell, magic missile, and a host of other quintessentially D&D spells in there.

So that would have Enchantment (absorbing Illusion), Transmutation (absorbing Necromancy), Evocation (absorbing Abjuration), Conjuration, and Divination. And those last two do have a kind of unexpected connection, since Conjuration relates to teleportation and thus depends on knowledge, and Divination depends on going to places (usually with magical sensors or remote viewing) and such. Probably have Conjuration absorb Divination.

if i were to reduce the number of spell schools, this is how i think i might personally break it down:

schools kept: enchantment(influence), transmutation(change), evocation(create), divination(know)
schools removed: illusion, necromancy, abjuration, conjuration

illusion and abjuration being split between enchantment and divination
necromancy and conjuration being split between transmutation and evocation

now, i know illusion and abjuration might seem a little wierd for divination but hear me out, the concept of divination could be presented to include how people percieve and process information which illusions naturally play with, and abjuration would work as protections cast ahead of time designed to kick in at specific moments that they're needed, like how the diviner ability portent can insert a pre-rolled number into a saving throw.

 

[ECMO3]

I personally do not believe that the existing Wizard class permits enough room for flavorful subclasses at present. Too much of its power is in the class itself. Subclass features have to be thin in order to not make the Wizard blatantly overpowered.

Bladesinger, Enchantment, Necromancy and Divination have extremely powerful subclass abilities already. I think the only schools with mechanically thin subclasses right now are Evocation and Illusion.

I would love to see a class redesign that actually allows for subclasses that ooze with flavor. But we won't be getting that in "One D&D," and we certainly don't have it now.

I think the class Chassis offers a lot to go on here. I think Bladesingers, Necomancers, Illusionists and Enchantment Wizard already ooze flavor with their subclass abilities (or can ooze flavor if you lean into it with spell selection and ability score prioritization). Less so with other subclasses, but I think the framework is already there in the class design, especially since they have so many spells to select from.

 

[Golroc]

if i were to reduce the number of spell schools, this is how i think i might personally break it down:

schools kept: enchantment(influence), transmutation(change), evocation(create), divination(know)
schools removed: illusion, necromancy, abjuration, conjuration

illusion and abjuration being split between enchantment and divination
necromancy and conjuration being split between transmutation and evocation

now, i know illusion and abjuration might seem a little wierd for divination but hear me out, the concept of divination could be presented to include how people percieve and process information which illusions naturally play with, and abjuration would work as protections cast ahead of time designed to kick in at specific moments that they're needed, like how the diviner ability portent can insert a pre-rolled number into a saving throw.

Where does summoning magic fit in with these 4? But I really don't see why the schools are even needed - as even when reduced in number, they're still mostly going to be a keyword for various effects to target. Wouldn't it be cooler to have dedicated spell lists for variant casters and sub-classes?

I think Necromancer is different enough that it should really have a fully class. If Artificer has a spell list then Necromancer can too. Sub-classes can operate on tags and/or lists.

Simply removing the schools makes it so that design effort can be used on tags and spell lists instead. Wizard subclasses can then work with concepts instead of the schools. Not to mention how much less awkward it makes creating new (arcane-style) magic-using classes.

 

[Minigiant]

In large part that, but also the 2014 PHB had eight Wizard subclasses in it. It doesn't matter that most of them are pretty forgettable, just by existing they take up a huge chuck of the potential design space for the class. It's those two things together that are why it's been so hard to get a new Wizard subclass through UA testing.

It's less the number of subclasses which is the hurder and more the Wizard spell list. Especially when compared to the other classes.

There is not so much you can add to the 5e base wizard that doesn't quickly step on the toes of other classes. There is a lot of flavor but you can't actual do anything with your subclass design without quickly reaching OP status and getting banned at many tables with meta knowledgable DMs.

Every wizard sublass borders from meh to busted for a reason.