OneDnD what should the wizard's subclasses be?

[Mind of tempest]

I have seen people complain about the concepts of the wizard's subclasses, what should the basic ideas be instead as I myself can't think of any?

 

[nevin]

None

 

[Greg Benage]

Scribe, War Magic, Elementalist, Summoner? Something like that. Maybe we hate summoning, so swap Bladesinger in there.

 

[Mind of tempest]

None

look it needs sub-classes and hell will become the garden of Eden before wotc gets rid of wizards so you got any idea beyond no?

Scribe, War Magic, Elementalist, Summoner? Something like that. Maybe we hate summoning, so swap Bladesinger in there.

I meant what are their niches and theme not just ideas we already have?
why those sub classes?

 

[Scribe]

Scribe - "All the spells!"
War Caster - "All the explosions!"
Bladesinger - "Not all Elves!"
Elementalist - "Forces of Nature!"

Oh, and take away cantrips, and make them have to find/discover spells, and you cannot just use slots all random like.

There ya go, Wizards brought back down to earth.

 

[DND_Reborn]

None. Remove subclasses entirely. They do nothing but decrease player imagination and add power/features. (There is some merit in an archetype design to help players define a direction for their PC, if they really need one.)

Wizards, more so than probably than any other class, can define itself by their spell selection, focusing on utility, combat, summoning, or whatever--including a "general" practitioner.

Now, if you want subclasses:

• Combat - focuses on combat spells, dealing massive damage or protecting others
• Lore - desires to uncover secrets and gain knowledge
• Specialist - studies one aspect (school?) of magic to the determent of others
• Summoner - uses conjured creatures in whatever role (servants, combatants, etc.)
• Utility - emphasis on making adventuring (general life) easier

I would stay away from "themes" (e.g. necromancer, firemage, etc.) and allow those to develop by spell choice and role-play. A "Necromancer" could be accomplished either via Combat, Lore, Summoner easily.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I have seen people complain about the concepts of the wizard's subclasses, what should the basic ideas be instead as I myself can't think of any?

Personally, I think "Specialist Wizard" should be one subclass. Not eight. The initial features would be common to nearly all Wizards anyway, so you'd just need to specify the individual features for each school.

Then, from there, you'd add thematic subclass options instead. Bladesinger is decent. Some kind of rune-master would be cool. Summoner is always a good one in my book (though I prefer the Charisma flavor thereof; it makes more sense to me that you need to either persuade or intimidate beings into working for you.) The Order of Scribes is a good close-to-generalist option. Something to do with mathematics and astronomy would be nice. Wu Jen, or some other "elemental focus"/feng shui practitioner, would be a solid thematic fit.

"Specialist Wizard," by these lights, would be the "ultra classic but not very flavorful" option, parallel to Life Cleric, Champion Fighter, or Thief Rogue.

 

[Scribe]

None. Remove subclasses entirely. They do nothing but decrease player imagination and add power/features. (There is some merit in an archetype design to help players define a direction for their PC, if they really need one.)

Wizards, more so than probably than any other class, can define itself by their spell selection, focusing on utility, combat, summoning, or whatever--including a "general" practitioner.

Now, if you want subclasses:

• Combat - focuses on combat spells, dealing massive damage or protecting others
• Lore - desires to uncover secrets and gain knowledge
• Specialist - studies one aspect (school?) of magic to the determent of others
• Summoner - uses conjured creatures in whatever role (servants, combatants, etc.)
• Utility - emphasis on making adventuring (general life) easier

I would stay away from "themes" (e.g. necromancer, firemage, etc.) and allow those to develop by spell choice and role-play. A "Necromancer" could be accomplished either via Combat, Lore, Summoner easily.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Beguiler: illusion and enchantment
Warmage: armored anti-magic, single target damage or terrain DOT
Elementalist: Elemental boom boom spells
Scholar: ritualist ++, skills, all them spells
Conjurer: summon and planar mobility/protection

 

[DND_Reborn]

This makes no sense to me at all.

 

[Vaalingrade]

War Mage
ISO Standard Blaster for those who want to play wizard wrong.

Ritualist
Make ritual interesting again, dang it!

Necromancer / Illusionist
The trad schools that deserve to continue existing, both require more than just spells to follow through with the promise of their premise. Should be classes on their own, but we can't have nice things.

 

[Scribe]

This makes no sense to me at all.

Subclasses/PrC, are just part of the game and (likely) have a massively favorable view among the playerbase.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Subclasses/PrC, are just part of the game and (likely) have a massively favorable view among the playerbase.

They are entirely unnecessary, but that isn't the focus of the thread and I don't want to derail it further.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Subclasses/PrC, are just part of the game and (likely) have a massively favorable view among the playerbase.

Don't bother. They basically play a home-made "5e Pathfinder" at this point anyway, with more than half the classes heavily reworked AIUI.

 

[Greg Benage]

I meant what are their niches and theme not just ideas we already have?
why those sub classes?

"My t-shirt is raising a lot of questions already answered by the shirt."

As to why, they seem to cover a lot of iconic wizard archetypes. I also sense that I've stepped into some perilous territory of which I was unaware, so I think I'll slink back out.

 

[Shiroiken]

Assuming they keep to only 4 for 1D&D, I'd suggest the following as the most obvious choices:

• Warmage - combat caster; focuses on Abjurations and Evocations
• Beguiler - combination of Enchanter and Illusionist
• Summoner - creates and boosts allies; possibly includes transmutation

The last spot is trickier, as I could see a Seer or Necromancer. Probably best to do Seer, with Necromancer as a DMG option.

 

[Cadence]

Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard

(I kid .. kind of).

Alchemist, Battlemage, Rune Caster, School Specialist

 

[Deekin]

Knowing the design team?

Bladesinger ( wizard with access to Warrior group special features)

Mystic Theruge (Wizard with access to priest group special feature and divine/primal spell lists)

Lore Master (Wizard with extra proficency and Expertise)

School Specialist ( the existing PHB subclasses but lumped into one overarching subclass)

 

[NotAYakk]

While I get the school specialist as an overaching thing, it doesn't work.

A necromancer should be more than a generic "specialist of necromancy spells". The fun parts of abjurer and necromancer aren't those that are generic "you are better at spells of school X by this factor", but are thematically tied to abjuration and necromancy (and to the spells in question! Just not generically).

 

[EzekielRaiden]

While I get the school specialist as an overaching thing, it doesn't work.

A necromancer should be more than a generic "specialist of necromancy spells". The fun parts of abjurer and necromancer aren't those that are generic "you are better at spells of school X by this factor", but are thematically tied to abjuration and necromancy (and to the spells in question! Just not generically).

What makes you think that would go away? Those school-specific things would just be "consult table for which feature you get at level X, based on the school you chose." Possibly streamlined a little to conserve space.