D&D 5E New class options in Tasha

Mistwell · Sep 25, 2020

dnd4vr said:
Which Wizards can't access their entire spell list.... so that is a big part of the issue.

If Wizards had access to their entire spell list, just as Clerics, Druids, and Paladins do, then there would be no ground for arguing against Spell Versatility, but they don't and in terms of flavor it doesn't make sense to give them full access.

And again, Sorcerers thing is Metamagic--which a lot of people seem to conveniently be ignoring.

It's funny. Usually in these discussions people argue that you cannot assume any magic items because each campaign varies so much in the number of items they give out, and some PCs may have none while others may have many, so just don't assume them in these conversations.

And yet here we are with the wizard. ZERO people have listed their actual spells known without obtaining magic items (scrolls and spell books from foes). All the conversation revolves around an assumption they have more than their actual spells known as listed in the Player's Handbook.

Here are the Wizard Spells Known from the PHB. This is in comparison to the Sorcerer Spell's Known, which is all of the 133 spells on their list:

Mistwell · Sep 25, 2020

Todd Roybark said:
Your neighbor getting a raise doesn't make you poorer, even if it makes you feel bad.

Nobody here is objecting to a sorcerer getting a boost in power. I think they could use such a boost and I have advocated for it in the past.

The objection is that my neighbor is TAKING MY SCHTICK FOR THEIR OWN, AND THEN GETTING TO DO IT BETTER.

That's the objection, and it most certainly isn't just "getting a raise". Their "raise" is coming at the expense of my niche in the game. A lot of this game revolves around issues of spotlight, moments to shine, specialization, etc. and giving the Sorcerer the thing that Wizards did best (and have done best since the beginning of the game in the 1970s) is a bad idea for the game. There are lots of options to boost the power of the Sorcerer without choosing to give them another classes identity.

I mentioned earlier but got no response, that I think people would "get it" better if the Ranger was suddenly a better unarmed fighter than the monk, or the paladin was suddenly a better wild-shaper than the druid. Its not that people would freak out if the ranger got a boost, but they sure don't want that boost to be "get's the monk's schtick, but better" now right?

Helldritch · Sep 25, 2020

It is easier to assume the best in the class that is to be gimped than the worst. They want the wizard to look better as to justify the nerf.

DND_Reborn · Sep 25, 2020

Mistwell said:
It's funny. Usually in these discussions people argue that you cannot assume any magic items because each campaign varies so much in the number of items they give out, and some PCs may have none while others may have many, so just don't assume them in these conversations.

And yet here we are with the wizard. ZERO people have listed their actual spells known without obtaining magic items (scrolls and spell books from foes). All the conversation revolves around an assumption they have more than their actual spells known as listed in the Player's Handbook.

Here are the Wizard Spells Known from the PHB. This is in comparison to the Sorcerer Spell's Known, which is all of the 133 spells on their list:

Yeah, I did that for another post when I was actually going to argue just to make the prepared spell casters known-spell caster classes. I mean, with Spell Versatility, Wizards are literally the only spell-caster who does not have access to the entire spell list (whether it is 1 at a time, or all overnight).

I might start another thread on the idea of making all classes known-spell casters, but I know just as many people probably won't like that concept, either.

Anyway, without rules in place for Wizards to acquire more spells without relying on DM fiat, the number of spells a Wizard can learn is not great compared to the unlimited access known-spell casters would now have.

TaranTheWanderer · Sep 25, 2020

I came into this late and we are 300+ posts in and haven't read all(any posts so far) so I'm probably reiterating some stuff that was stated:

Spell versatility gives other classes a Wizard's versatility...and, I'd argue, it's even better because wizard only has what's in his book while sorcerer/bard can choose from the whole list.

New Fighting style: unarmed Fighting. Pretty much makes the Tavern brawler feat useless. Does more damage than a monk?

Just my thoughts.

DND_Reborn · Sep 25, 2020

TaranTheWanderer said:
Spell versatility gives other classes a Wizard's versatility...and, I'd argue, it's even better because wizard only has what's in his book while sorcerer/bard can choose from the whole list.

Fresh perspective ... gets it pretty quickly.

TaranTheWanderer said:
New Fighting style: unarmed Fighting. Pretty much makes the Tavern brawler feat useless. Does more damage than a monk?

Yep, they would have been better off including a revised Ranger and Monk class in the new book---but oh, well.

FWIW, nothing against Fighter-types getting an unarmed style... just to make that clear.

Hohige · Sep 25, 2020

Look, the community loved UA class variants as mentioned. This problem wasnt mentioned previously...Now is too late.

WayOfTheFourElements · Sep 25, 2020

Hohige said:
Look, the community loved UA class variants as mentioned. This problem wasnt mentioned previously...Now is too late.

Fake news. I mentioned it before, and I completely derailed the original thread.

Lucas Blackstone · Sep 25, 2020

I think some sorcerers needed help, but I agree with the people who think that it shouldn't come at the cost of a portion of another class's identity. I don't think it is overpowering really, but I think it is the wrong kind of patch up. It's traditionally not supposed to be the sorcerer's job to be the versatile spellcaster. They are supposed to do funky things with a smaller list ( subtle, twin, quicken, etc ). I think a better option may have been to allow one free cast of each metamagic they have per short rest or something. I'd have to see it in play but that doesn't sound too powerful and I think it is more in theme with sorcerers with the possible exception of wild magic sorcerers. This optional rule does feel up their alley to some degree, except that they would be controlling what spell they got. That's not really wild/random.