log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E New class options in Tasha

OB1

Jedi Master
I love it. Yes, this is better.
Think that's a decent solution, but I still say that by simply making the below change to the Wizards casting and preparing spells is more thematically on point for the wizard and is just enough of a hindrance to keep it from being way OP. Suddenly need to teleport or fly away? If the monsters on on your heels and you don't already have it prepared, it isn't going to help you. Suddenly ambushed by a dozen monsters and don't have fireball? Out of luck. But if you have the time, your spellbook should be open to you.

"You can change your list of prepared spells when you finish a long rest. Preparing a new list of wizard spells requires time spent studying your spellbook and memorizing the incantations and gestures you must make to cast the spell: at least 1 minute per spell level for each spell on your list. "
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mistwell

Legend
Think that's a decent solution, but I still say that by simply making the below change to the Wizards casting and preparing spells is more thematically on point for the wizard and is just enough of a hindrance to keep it from being way OP. Suddenly need to teleport or fly away? If the monsters on on your heels and you don't already have it prepared, it isn't going to help you. Suddenly ambushed by a dozen monsters and don't have fireball? Out of luck. But if you have the time, your spellbook should be open to you.

"You can change your list of prepared spells when you finish a long rest. Preparing a new list of wizard spells requires time spent studying your spellbook and memorizing the incantations and gestures you must make to cast the spell: at least 1 minute per spell level for each spell on your list. "

That's great too! I did always wonder why it takes 8 hours to read your spellbook, regardless of how high level you are and how many spells you're changing.
 

Because you can only get one that way per long rest, and it's not permanently in your spellbook.

Um, a few things.

1) Your proposed change was for them to get a new spell on a Short Rest. There are no limits on Short Rests per Long Rest, so a wizard could change between one and five spells per long rest. Unless the rule you were referencing was once per day, once per short rest.

2) Why does it matter if it is in your spellbook or not? To use the argument being used against Sorcerers, you now know every single spell on your Wizard's spell list. So why would you need to learn more to put in your wizard's spellbook? Unless your rule was to swap a spell prepared for a different spell prepared, in which case I misunderstood.
 

Hohige

Explorer
No he doesnt. He has access to his whole list.

Which at the end of a Long rest he can switch out one spell known for a different one from that list.

Which for all intents and purposes is not a big deal.

The Wizard can switch out ALL his spells known at the end of a Long rest for a totally different loadout, and also knows more spells than the Sorcerer at all material times, with that gap only growing as the Wizard advances in level.

As I said, the Wizard is supposed to be the most versatile caster. Sorcerer and Warlock has its compensation with metamagic and Invocations. Now, it doesn't matter that they can swap all spells with a Long Rest, if the specific spell is not in your Spellbook (DM fiat), the Wizard has failed. The sorcerer / Warlock now has access to any spell on his list without penalty AND still has Metamagic / Invocations. Yes, a single spell/long rest, but it is enough to solve problems on average.
This is the point.
 

Mistwell

Legend
Um, a few things.

1) Your proposed change was for them to get a new spell on a Short Rest. There are no limits on Short Rests per Long Rest, so a wizard could change between one and five spells per long rest. Unless the rule you were referencing was once per day, once per short rest.

Average party gets two short rests a day. Not a big deal. It's funny though, it seems you do understand the concept of flexibility from just a couple of changes to selection. All of a sudden. When it's wizards being talked about instead of sorcerers.

2) Why does it matter if it is in your spellbook or not?

Because unlike Sorcerers, they are completely limited in spell selection to what's in their book. A grand total across 20 levels of 44 spells, unless they get magic items. It matters a whole heck of a lot.

I am starting to wonder if you've ever played a Wizard in 5e? This is basic stuff you learn really quick if you play a wizard.
 

Average party gets two short rests a day. Not a big deal. It's funny though, it seems you do understand the concept of flexibility from just a couple of changes to selection. All of a sudden. When it's wizards being talked about instead of sorcerers.


Because unlike Sorcerers, they are completely limited in spell selection to what's in their book. A grand total across 20 levels of 44 spells, unless they get magic items. It matters a whole heck of a lot.

I am starting to wonder if you've ever played a Wizard in 5e? This is basic stuff you learn really quick if you play a wizard.

Okay, you seem to not understand what my problem was, and jumped immediately to snark and thinking that you somehow proved something. My confusion came from you sounding like you had no idea what you were talking about.

First off, I have always understood the concept of flexibility, even when talking about the sorcerer. I never even questioned it when applied to this wizard idea. I took and keep the stance of, if you feel like you need this for your game, go ahead.

Instead, I said this would remove the need for a wizard to scribe new spells. They would never need to do so. And that the removal of that key part of the wizard identity would make it so WoTC is very unlikely to make your proposed rule as I understood it.


Your response was to say they would only be able to change spells this once per day (false, because short rests are an average of twice. So, you were wrong) and that the spell was not permanently in your spell book, so you would want to copy it anyways.

But, again I ask why?

Your response was to say that wizards are limited in the spells they can select for the day (after a long rest) by the spells in their spellbook. The 44 spells you mentioned. However, I am guessing you have forgotten that that is only partially true. Because a wizard only needs to memorize new spells to prepare, if they are changing them. If their spell book is destroyed, for example, they do not lose the ability to cast spells, they are simply stuck with their selection of spells that they had chosen for that day.

So, since you don't need to rememorize them from your spell book, and it is only an hour to get new spells, and following your own path of logic that a full day for a single spell is trivial, then the wizard would have full access to their entire spell list and have no need to write their spells down in their book. If a spell was so important and necessary that you wanted to have it available to easily swap in and out constantly, take it as one of those 44 spells on level up.

Of course, if it is so important that you want to have it every single day... don't. Because that is wasting space in your spell book. Since you would never need it in there.


P.S. I considered it possible that you meant that the wizard spell gained on the short rest had to come from your book, an explanation which would make your assertion make sense. But, re-reading your response, you clearly said that the spell would not "permanently" be in your spellbook, so you meant it to work the way I assumed.
 

Because unlike Sorcerers, they are completely limited in spell selection to what's in their book. A grand total across 20 levels of 44 spells, unless they get magic items. It matters a whole heck of a lot.

They can also add spells from other spell books. Allied and friendly Wizards or magic colleges etc.
 


Time, NPCs and Gold. DM fiat

Wut?

What DM fiat is really needed for the presence of other Wizards in the game world?

They're literally everywhere in Faerun, and they all pretty much form organisations to share spells (Red Wizards, War Wizards, Arcane Brotherhood etc etc) and use the Apprenticeship system etc.

If your DM says 'no' to you wanting to learn a spell without a good reason, then find a new DM. He could just as easily exercise 'DM fiat' to stop a Sorcerer switching a spell on a Long rest.
 



MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
Well, It's a common sense. It isn't official.
If it wasn't the official intent, how did wizards lose anything they were intended to have?

Edit: to make clear, the arguments here are:
1.- Wizards are meant to be the most versatile casters
2.- Ergo versatility is the wizards sole (or main) schtick
3.- Spell Versatility makes sorcerers and bards more versatile than wizards.
4.- Thus Spell Versatility infringes in the wizard identity
5.- So Wizards need to be compensated for it existing

However, this constructs falls appart if turns out 1 is not true. And by this I mean, there is no evidence that 1 is true or was ever true. There hasn't been any official expression of designer intent to claim that wizards are indeed meant to be the most (if not sole) versatile caster. So Spell versatility existing takes nothing away from wizards even if we conceded that it makes sorcerers more versatile and optimal than wizards. (And that is yet to be proven to begin with).
 
Last edited:


Halloween Horror For 5E

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top