D&D (2024) 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 access to a large number of 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.