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

[abirdcall]

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?

The schools work the best when they have oppositional schools.

The wizard has such a huge spell list it would be fine to limit it by restricting the oppositional schools. That would add complexity though and people don't like feeling like something was taken away even though it is fine for other classes to have much smaller lists.

I would be happy if the wizard got more powers with their subclass at the expense of opposed schools.

 

[abirdcall]

We have a simple caster. It's the Warlock. You use Eldritch Blast 90% of the time and occasionally throw in a spell or invocation. That's why there's such a divide between the people who like the Warlock mechanics as they are and the people who like the Warlock flavor but want it to be more mechanically complex again.

Warlock is one of the most complex classes. Perhaps the most.

It isn't wrong to eldritch blast 90% of the time but you're leaving a lot of power on the table.

They have the most powerful spellcasting in the game at the expense of lower level spells. To make up for that they have powerful invocations.

Try not spending your invocations on eldritch blast and it opens up a lot.

 

[ECMO3]

I don't think the evoker has any identity. It's the boring subclass for casual players like the life cleric and the champion.

DM: What kind of wizard do you want to be?
Player: I dunno, someone who blasts things?

I would agree. It has little idenity either mechancially or thematically. It is also one of the worst sublcasses in terms of power (although on a Wizard Chassis it is still ahead of most other classes).

 

[ECMO3]

We have a simple caster. It's the Warlock. You use Eldritch Blast 90% of the time and occasionally throw in a spell or invocation. That's why there's such a divide between the people who like the Warlock mechanics as they are and the people who like the Warlock flavor but want it to be more mechanically complex again.

The Warlock complxity is in the pact type and invocations.

An Undying Warlock, pact of Chain with investment of the Chain master and a Sprite familiar can be pretty darn complex.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I don't think the evoker has any identity.

Not true.

 

[cbwjm]

Not true.

Ah, excuse me, he clearly stated he was an enchanter.

 

[Horwath]

I'd like a Hedge Mage, the conjurer of cheap tricks,

This could be a nice feat to get.

Conjurer of cheap tricks;

+1 int, wis or cha
You learn two cantrips from following list:

Dancing lights,
Druidcraft,
Light,
Mage Hand
Message, Minor illusion
Prestidgitation
thaumaturgy,

when you cast any spell from this list, you do it as a Bonus action without any spell components, double range and not using concentration.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I don't think the evoker has any identity. It's the boring subclass for casual players like the life cleric and the champion.

DM: What kind of wizard do you want to be?
Player: I dunno, someone who blasts things?

And the problem here is that they would probably be better off funnelled into the sorcerer, and the game would be better if the sorcerer was first pick for both evocation and necromancy.

But there's no problem with having a basic subclass.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think the schools are fine. I am not even a fan of the "war mage" addition, it wasn't really needed.

If anything, because the Wizard archetypes are presented as specialisations, maybe the game would benefit from a generalist/unspecialised Wizard subclass, perhaps a low-complexity option that mirrors the Fighter 's Champion. That would help casual players to not commit to anything specific.

The design room for more specific spellcasters character concepts is immense, but I wouldn't like it given to the Wizard. Otherwise it would end up again like in 3.5 where the Wizard could be anything and people started wanting the Sorcerer to be scrapped from the game. The Wizard can anyway be pretty much almost anything just because of an enormous spell list, so I'd say better to give the Sorcerer more flavourful subclasses, and let Wizard players micromanage their PC into whatever they want it to be. After all the Wizard is framed narratively as the 'scholar of magic' so it suits that Wizard players do their homework upon a relatively dry class/subclass canvas, while Sorcerers being less scholarly can also mean being more 'application-oriented' depending on their powers origin.

 

[DavyGreenwind]

This could be a nice feat to get.

Conjurer of cheap tricks;

+1 int, wis or cha
You learn two cantrips from following list:

Dancing lights,
Druidcraft,
Light,
Mage Hand
Message, Minor illusion
Prestidgitation
thaumaturgy,

when you cast any spell from this list, you do it as a Bonus action without any spell components, double range and not using concentration.

Cool! I dig. The phrase is a Gandalf quote, so I think it'd be a great name for a feat