D&D 5E Spell Preparation - A Better Vancian or a Bridge Too Far?

[Sekhmet]

I am traditionally a Wizard. The vast majority of my characters have been Wizards, and (to put it very succinctly) I love Wizards. I've been playing them since AD&D. They're my favorite.

I have no interest in playing a Wizard with the current playtest.

On one hand, it is a lot more like fantasy book/movie wizardry, where powerful casters can throw around a variety of spells (seemingly at whim) until they're exhausted. How many times did Gandalf cast low level spells throughout the Hobbit? What about Raistlin in the Dragonlance series?
On the other, it has basically turned Wizards into Sorcerers or Psions, with a slightly more flexible pool of spells to choose from on a given day, which I have never enjoyed playing.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I'll be a voice of cautious dissent.

I think it is kind of a playstyle thing, but being inflexible and locked-in is part of the "fun failure" of the Wizard class. It emphasizes that this is a class about advanced preparation and specific solutions. A wizard caught with her pants down, in a chaotic situation she wasn't ready for, should get screwed. On the other side, when things go according to plan, she should have just the right tools for the specific jobs she needs accomplished.

That needn't be true for every single spellcaster, but it should be true for the academic wizard archetype in my games. Flexibility is not a virtue, it leads to a class I'm not as interested in playing. If I wanted flexibility, I'd go with a different spellcaster, or a different class altogether.

Wizards still have to choose which spells they have prepared each day, and are still vulnerable if they are ill prepared for a given situation. If anything, wizards have a harder time now than they did in the past. A 20th level wizard can prepare 21 total spells and can cast 19 per day. That's about half the number of prepared and daily spells a wizard could cast in previous editions, if not less. The only thing a wizard has gained is the ability to cast a prepared spell multiple times, but he has arguably lost far more power and flexibility than he has gained. That could be a good thing, though. I always thought high level spellcasters were too powerful before.

 

[Gadget]

I kind of like the the new system in theory, but I'm kind of unimpressed with a lot of the spells themselves. Why, with scaling spells built in, do we still have Greater and/or lesser spells? Shouldn't they just have have an effect and than a scaling effect for using in a higher level slot? Shouldn't there only be one cure wounds spell, for instance, with a scaling effect based on the slot used to cast? Right now they only have the direct damage spells that scale. I guess they still have a lot of heavy lifting to do with the spells yet.

I'm not sure the scaling damage is really going to keep up with inflated monster his points though. If you use a 9th level slot to cast Magic Missile, you get 18 1d4 + 2 missiles average damage 75.6. Is this worth a 9th level slot?

Also, many spells now have a duration of concentration or one minute. Does casting another spell ruin your concentration? That would stop the sometimes insane spell layering that happened in 3.x.

 

[variant]

Right now my worry on the wizard is the complete lack of progression after level 17. There is basically no point for a wizard to level up any further except for a couple extra dice to hit points and an additional a +1 spell save DC. It's the same issue the cleric has.

Another worry I have is that they are really restricting the spellcasting progression way too much at high levels. Only 1 spell of each spell level from 6 to 9?

 

[the Jester]

Also, many spells now have a duration of concentration or one minute. Does casting another spell ruin your concentration? That would stop the sometimes insane spell layering that happened in 3.x.

IIRC casting a second spell that requires concentration interrupts concentration on the first one.

Right now my worry on the wizard is the complete lack of progression after level 17. There is basically no point for a wizard to level up any further except for a couple extra dice to hit points and an additional a +1 spell save DC. It's the same issue the cleric has.

Rumor is that mearls has stated that dead levels (especially at higher levels) are still a work in progress. It looks kind of like high level feats are too.

 

[Alzrius]

I haven't read the packet, but from what people are saying here it sounds like the wizard chooses spells from his spellbook to fill a list of "spells known" each day, and then has a selection of "spell slots" that he expends to cast one of his spells known. In essence, it's something of a 3.X wizard/sorcerer hybrid.

Personally, I don't care much for the idea - I don't think wizards need yet another power-up (which includes removing traditional weaknesses). I also suspect that there'll be some cognitive dissonance when the people who think that this is a good idea then complain that "quadratic wizards" dominate the game at higher levels.

In earlier editions, wizards had no metamagic options, automatically lost a spell if they were damaged during cast, couldn't cast in rough situations, casting times took segments of rounds (leaving them vulnerable), and there were caps on how many spells could be known at each level. Each of these balancing factors has been removed as the game has progressed, and suddenly people are upset that wizards have become the game's high-level win-button. The answer isn't to try and bump other classes up, it's to knock the wizard back down.

I've heard some people say that this is actually a greater limit than in previous editions. I disagree - this grants the wizard a great deal more flexibility in how often they can use their spells, while still preserving the versatility that comes from being able to change what spells are prepared each day. Now that utility spell you prepared is much less of a waste if you don't need it that day, since you can still expend the slots elsewhere, etc.

I'd honestly like to see a wizard that has less power in their spellcasting, not more.

 

[Gadget]

Alzrius,

In the current packet, the wizard gets to prepare 1 + wizard level spells per day and has a spell slot chart based on their level to cast spells. The 'quadratic wizard' issue is addressed in the number of slots available (a 20th level wizard only gets 4 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 slots), no bonus spells for high int., and the spells themselves do not scale with caster level (with the exception of cantrips). If you want a better effect with a spell, you have to expend a higher level slot to get it. Right now, only the direct damage spells are listed with this scaling built in (so you could cast Magic Missile with a 9th level slot and get 18 1d4+2 missiles). That goes a long way to help tone down the wizard. Also, individual spells seem to be adjusted, with many of the most egregious abuses brought under control, though I don't doubt that there are still loopholes. So this new system may give wizards more flexibility in that the opportunity cost of having that situational utility spell prepared is less, this is mitigated by the lack of automatic spell scaling and reduced number of overall slots available. Besides, I've always felt that some spells where more 'trap' options than anything, and seldom prepared until they could be relegated to scroll or wand duty.

But YMMV.

 

[I'm A Banana]

depending on the level of power gaming at hand, you could easily craft a Wizard that had a couple of incredibly effective generic answers to most situations.

That's not ideal, either. That doesn't fit my view of a D&D wizard, either.

Besides, I'm fairly certain that the old system of fire & forget was at least partially responsible for the wonky power balance of arcane spells in earlier editions (sans 4E obviously).

Eh. Binary design (which would be part of the appeal of a wizard I would want to play) can be problematic, but it doesn't need to be. Without getting more specific as to the "power balance" you're talking about, I can't say whether I agree or disagree, really.

I suppose I just like the fact that you still have to prepare spells rather carefully due to the (rather elegant) way that works now, even if it is ultimately a lot more flexible.

It's not enough for me, personally. This doesn't mean it's bad in any absolute terms, it's just not a wizard I personally want to play.

Wizards still have to choose which spells they have prepared each day, and are still vulnerable if they are ill prepared for a given situation.

They don't have to allot specific slots to specific spells, and that flexibility isn't what I'm looking for in a D&D wizard that I want to play.

If anything, wizards have a harder time now than they did in the past. A 20th level wizard can prepare 21 total spells and can cast 19 per day. That's about half the number of prepared and daily spells a wizard could cast in previous editions, if not less. The only thing a wizard has gained is the ability to cast a prepared spell multiple times, but he has arguably lost far more power and flexibility than he has gained. That could be a good thing, though. I always thought high level spellcasters were too powerful before.

Casting anything on the fly doesn't fit my image of what a D&D wizard is or should be, so it's not going to work for me. It's a non-starter.

Again, that doesn't mean it doesn't have a role to play, even as a default, but if there's not an option to turn that off, there's going to be some frowning here at the KM table.

 

[hbarsquared]

Prefacing this post with the fact I like this wizard.

First, I think it harkens enough back to Vancian spellcasting with this "cleric-style" mechanic. I wouldn't entirely consider it "on-the-fly" because of the sure restriction of the number of spells to memorize. If you're covering all levels, it's still only about two or three spells for one or two slots. It's cut pretty close, and nowhere near a 3.5 spontaneous caster. Like the example, most situations the wizard will run into with two slots will be to choose between AA, AB, or BB. I actually like this slight increase in versatility and strategy.

Second, it seems like an incredibly easy house rule/module/variant: drop the 1+caster level prepared spells. It's strikethrough on literally one sentence of the rules, with replacement text of "you prepare spells in your spell slots." No change in power level or balance.

Making cantrips work with the Vancian crowd is a little more work, but in terms of the whole spellcasting mechanic I think this is the best compromise: as long as a sidebar with the one replacement sentence is included.

 

[MoonSong]

I'm not entirely sold on it, it would take a lot more to be fit to my tastes, one or more of the above changes would have to happen for me to like it:

-Reign in the amount of spells preppared at the same time, right now it is too high (A 20th level academy wizard can have 30 preppared spells at the same time) cap that number at 11 or so spells, maybe allow some traditions to have always preppared some "signature spells" in addition to the limit, and academy wizards to add their Int modiffier to the number of spells they can cast.
-Bring back reversible spells, but force preppared casters to preppare each version separately and allow spontanoues casters to use whatever version on the fly.
-Compress the lesser, greater and normal versions into a single spell and have it scale propperly depending on slot.
-Bring back maximum spells known per level
-Give spontaneous casters more slots than those that can preppare spell lists (between 1.5 to two times that amount), but not access to ritual magic.
-Bring back real metamagic -instead of "once per day" silly things- they can work pretty much as "a spell modiffied by this feat is treated as if cast on a slot x levels lower". The extra flexibility is traded for less power.