Undrave
Legend
I can agree with this as well. Wizards are the only class which do one thing--cast spells. They should do it more and better than any other spell caster but don't as written. There are lots of ways to make wizards more unique compared to other casters than by simply giving them the largest spell list (what good is it if it takes them thousands of gold and hundreds of hours to get them all?).
Ritual casting for wizards IS strong, but not enough IMO to make up for things like metamagic and eldritch invocations.
I'd agree with this. I played a ton of wizards in 2E and 3E, but the one wizard I played in 5e was kinda blah. "I cast spells" isn't much of a schtick when half the official classes are full (or pact) casters.
The 5e Wizard is the 3e Fighter of Casters...
young DM that will not understand how unbalanced this optional rule is and that will wonder why no one is playing wizards at their table anymore.
Will they really notice or care that no one is playing Wizard? Is that actually a big deal? Like, get that from a player's perspective, feeling like your class choice sucks is bad (just ask Ranger and Monk players who get told to just 'deal with it' or 'role-play better' or 'they're fine' on this forum whenever they talk about buffing those two classes) but as a DM, do you REALLY care if no one plays X class? There could be a bajillion reason someone wouldn't want to play a Wizard and 'the sorcerer can trade one spell every day' is probably low on that list. Someone who think the Wizard is too much work tracking spell is probably not going to abuse Spell Versatility because it would mean reading more of the spells and not just picking whatever's cool at level up.