what should the wizard's subclasses be?

[NotAYakk]

Then why are they one subclass?

There is little in common between them.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Then why are they one subclass?

There is little in common between them.

Because they share the same fundamental idea, specializing in a specific school, and because this would tamp down the "Wizard has eight freaking PHB subclasses" thing.

It's more organizational than mechanical. I might still trim some of the existing things down mildly, or make them "internally" scaling (that is, the ability gained at level X specifically says that at level Y you get more benefits, without needing to waste page space on a whole separate named subclass feature.)

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'd much rather abandon spell schools than crush them all into one subclass.

 

[Deekin]

When I say One Subclass, I mean something like this:

Wizard: School Master
Boring Fluff Text

School Savant
When you select this subclass at level X, choose one school of magic for you to master. The gold and time you must spend to copy a spell into your spellbook from that school is halved.

School Masters
At Xnd Level, you gain a special form of magic based on what school you chose to master as part of School Savant

If you chose abjuration, you gain Arcane Ward, if you chose Conjuration, gain Minor Conjuration. If you chose Divination, you gain Portent. If you chose Enchantment, you gain Hypnotic Gaze. If you Chose Evocation, you gain sculpt spell. If you chose illusion, you gain Improved Minor Illusion. If you chose Necromancy, you gain Grim Harvest. If you chose Transmutation, you gain Minor Alchemy.

ect ect

 

[EzekielRaiden]

When I say One Subclass, I mean something like this:

Wizard: School Master
Boring Fluff Text

School Savant
When you select this subclass at level X, choose one school of magic for you to master. The gold and time you must spend to copy a spell into your spellbook from that school is halved.

School Masters
At Xnd Level, you gain a special form of magic based on what school you chose to master as part of School Savant

If you chose abjuration, you gain Arcane Ward, if you chose Conjuration, gain Minor Conjuration. If you chose Divination, you gain Portent. If you chose Enchantment, you gain Hypnotic Gaze. If you Chose Evocation, you gain sculpt spell. If you chose illusion, you gain Improved Minor Illusion. If you chose Necromancy, you gain Grim Harvest. If you chose Transmutation, you gain Minor Alchemy.

ect ect

Precisely. I would present it more like this though.

Spoiler: Wizard writeup snop

Wizard: School Specialist
Explanatory Fluff Text

School Savant
When you select this subclass at level X, choose one school of magic to specialize in: Abjuration, Conjuration, Divination, Enchantment, Evocation, Illusion, Necromancy, or Transmutation. The gold and time you must spend to copy a spell into your spellbook from that school is halved.

Specialist Focus
When you reach level N, you gain a School Specialist feature associated with the school you chose for School Savant. Consult the table below. The mechanics for these features are listed at the end of this section.

School	Feature
Abjuration	Arcane Ward
Conjuration	Minor Conjuration
Divination	Portent
Enchantment	Hypnotic Gaze
Evocation	Sculpt Spells
Illusion	Improved Minor Illusion
Necromancy	Grim Harvest
Transmutation	Minor Alchemy

(etc. for remaining subclass features--Wizards don't get that many)

We already have the Warlock to precedent a list of class features at the end. These are more rigidly defined--which seems reasonable for the implicitly hidebound Wizard.

I would rework some of them, because some are weak or otherwise not very good, while others are quite strong (particularly Divination)--despite my usual criticism of Wizards, I would in fact actually like to see the subclass features brought up to the level of Portent, rather than bringing things down. But that's because I want "being a Wizard" to be more important than "I can cast a zillion powerful spells."

 

[Mind of tempest]

I'd much rather abandon spell schools than crush them all into one subclass.

then what should replace them?

 

[CreamCloud0]

then what should replace them?

i suggested this in the survivor companion thread a bit back but more relevant to this discussion

The Specialist: further reduces capacity for learning/casting from banned spell schools than standard in exchange for bonuses to learning/casting from a specific school(s).
The Generalist: removes limitations for learning banned schools in exchange for mid-tier access across the board.
The Librarian: reduced number of spell slots in exchange for extra knowledge proficiencies and bonuses to knowledge checks.
The Researcher: low number of spells inherently known but reduced costs to transcribing new spells and creating spell scrolls.
The Pioneer: limited access to metamagics and/or divine/primal magics.
The Battlemage: focus on combat magics, armour proficiencies and war casting.
The Supporter: limited combat magics learnt but large number and access to utility, ritual and support spells.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

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.

If subclasses got removed, I'd want a huge amount more classes instead.

 

[DND_Reborn]

If subclasses got removed, I'd want a huge amount more classes instead.

I understand why, but don't agree for the reasons stated in my first post. To avoid thread derailing, I'll leave it at that. If you want a discussing about it, feel free to message me.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I understand why, but don't agree for the reasons stated in my first post. To avoid thread derailing, I'll leave it at that. If you want a discussing about it, feel free to message me.

I think, that ship has sailed in 5e and OneDnD and for good reason.

But there are a lot of DnD games that don't use subclasses... so you might be happy with one of thoses...

but then, there are class kits in 2e, archetypes in pathfinder, prestige classes in 3e and pathfinder, so actually this ship has sailed loooooong ago.

Edit: one thing I have to admit is, that one subclass should be the default and just enhance the bas class features without a twist. And as we can extrapolate from the classes we have seen already, and from what Crawford has said in the video, the designers do agree.
So chances are that if you just use the SRD, you will get exactly what you want.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think, that ship has sailed in 5e and OneDnD and for good reason.

But there are a lot of DnD games that don't use subclasses... so you might be happy with one of thoses...

but then, there are class kits in 2e, archetypes in pathfinder, prestige classes in 3e and pathfinder, so actually this ship has sailed loooooong ago.

Yeah, it has sailed for certain, but for the same reason I was never a fan of kits in 2E, either. My groups play 5E, so I am basically stuck with it.

Edit: one thing I have to admit is, that one subclass should be the default and just enhance the bas class features without a twist. And as we can extrapolate from the classes we have seen already, and from what Crawford has said in the video, the designers do agree.
So chances are that if you just use the SRD, you will get exactly what you want.

Honestly, I commonly just go with the defaults or popular options, but most of the time feel like they are just mechanical benefits which either I don't need or should be baked into classes.

Take Frenzy for the Barbarian Beserker. Why can't any warrior type use a bonus action to gain an additional attack with the weapon they have when you can make a second weapon attack via TWF and your bonus action. Even if the second attack was with disadvantage if you used your bonus action? It could still involve a level of Exhaustion even if you wanted it to really represent that "extra effort" concept.

Another example is Polearm Master. Using your bonus action to make the attack with the other end is hardly different from TWF either. Even using your reaction when a creature enters your reach can be done via the Ready Action on the prior turn.

Many other things in subclasses or 5E mechanics should be simply part of the system IMO.

 

[ECMO3]

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?

I like the subclasses they have now except Chronogy and Graviturgy. Some of them should gets some boosts to be brought up to the level of the best.

I also think Wizards who specialize is spell schools (necromancy, evocation, enchantment ...) should have access to every spell from those schools from all classes. They should be considered Wizard spells for Wizards of those schools.

The thematic elements behind this are they studied that spell school, even if a spell is only god-granted they know enough about bending the magic to their will so they can fake it.

 

[BookTenTiger]

If I were a designer, I'd stick to the classic archetypes of wizards in fantasy literature and pop culture. I'd probably do something like:

The Sojourner - a wizard who has traveled vastly, collecting a variety of magic and martial skills. Gandalf, Merlin...

The Academic - a wizard who prefers the hallways of a library to those of a dungeon, but ventures out to collect and spread knowledge. Dumbledore.

The Mystic - a wizard whose knowledge comes from self-study, often connected to the land, tradition, and deals with supernatural creatures. Witches, herbalists, etc.

The War Wizard - a wizard who makes things go boom. Magic the Gathering style wizard.

 

[Yaarel]

If the Wizard has four subclasses, the important ones are:

• Evoker
• Illusionist
• Transmuter
• Gish (Bladesinger)



I would even go farther.

Remove Necromancy and give it to Cleric and Warlock.
Remove Enchantment and give it to Bard and Warlock.
Remove Divination and give it Cleric and Bard.

The schools that remain focus on the Wizard doing the magic of creation.

 

[Charlaquin]

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

I like these, though I would probably swap elementalist for Summoner - “All the minions!” Then add a Necromancer - “All the edge!” in the DMG.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I like these, though I would probably swap elementalist for Summoner - “All the minions!” Then add a Necromancer - “All the edge!” in the DMG.

I'd like to see summoner as its own class, like the pathfinder 2e summoner.

Then again I've always thought that name was poor for it. It's more of a pet/mount class than a traditional summoner. So maybe there is room for both.

 

[Minigiant]

Bladesinger: More martial wizard
Scribe: Pure caster
Mind Mage: Specializes in divination and enchantment
Nethermancer: Specializes in illusion and nercomancy
Summoner: Specializes in conjuration and transmutation
Warmage: Specializes in abjuration and evocation

 

[Mind of tempest]

Bladesinger: More martial wizard
Scribe: Pure caster
Mind Mage: Specializes in divination and enchantment
Nethermancer: Specializes in illusion and nercomancy
Summoner: Specializes in conjuration and transmutation
Warmage: Specializes in abjuration and evocation

yeah, mind mage and summoner see odd combos as they do not feel right, secondly how would you make scribe even feel interesting as it would just be hyper generic?

 

[Minigiant]

yeah, mind mage and summoner see odd combos as they do not feel right, secondly how would you make scribe even feel interesting as it would just be hyper generic?

In most games, summoners focus on summons (conjuration) and physically buffing them (transmutation). The 5e conjurer and necromancer do that.

 

[Yaarel]

The summoner is pretty much what the words "sorcerer" and "sorcery" mean.

If the character wants to fly, they summon an Air Elemental to carry them. If the character wants to divinate information, they summon an Imp to go spy for them. And so on.

A Summoner is a solid class concept. Elric of Melnibone is a good fictional example of one.