D&D General Why Do You Think Wizards Are Boring?


log in or register to remove this ad

Tonguez

A suffusion of yellow
My design approach would be to design a number of wizard variants each with a very thematic focus. Illusion wizard, fire magic wizard, telekinesis wizard etc. etc. These core powers would be represented by a class ability that scales as you level up and which contains some degree of flexibility. For example a fire wizard shouldn't just have fireball so a fire wizard's main ability should consist of a few different fire related powers.

In addition to this, each wizard should have a small set of utility spells. These can be swapped out as needed, but the keyword is they have a small amount of these. In short: A hypothetical fire wizard would have
  • A main ability that provides a few different ways to use fire both offensively and defensively. This scales with level. This includes an at-will power like a cantrip.
  • A set of support spells whose number is small and which are not restricted to the theme of the wizard
In a non-DnD game I wanted to create a character based on the Little Match girl (Hans Christian Andersen) who had survived the night and grown up to be a alchemist pyromancer - so she got to use her matches for divination (scry through fire) and arcane portal (via fires) as well as the more offensive flare, firebomb, smoke cloud and wall of fire
 

UmbraCarmen

Villager
Given that Vancian casting hasn't returned in 5e and I have literally never heard anyone complain no they weren't. 5e magic uses the 3.5 psionics system. The core problem with 4e is that the entire project was given 24 months from initiation to release - and they went back to the drawing board 10 months in while not changing the release date. 14 months simply was nowhere near enough time and 4e was released undercooked (as well as the tools being derailed by a murder-suicide).

And I'm trying to think if I've ever met someone in the real world who liked the wizard "pretty much as is". Rather than takes the wizard class because they want to play a wizard and is disappointed by the implementation. Which is another reason I think the wizard would make a fine subclass; the spellbook mechanic is a niche interest that absolutely should not be cut and absolutely would support a subclass.
You're so wrong it's laughable. Seriously are you trolling?

Wizard as a sub-class? Put that to the vote and you'll be buried under an overwhelming vote of no!

Pick a different class if you hate the existing wizard class so much - give it a different name and have fun playing it. Who knows I may even give it a try. If you want something different then invent it but don't destroy what's already there that people love. Don't you get this?
 




jgsugden

Legend
Let's ask about Vancian another way and see if you can see people that would be enticed to still use the mechanic.

Let's say they added a new feature to the wizard class that any wizard could use: VANCIAN PREPARATION.

During a long rest you may elect to prepare spells using the Vancian method. If you make this election, you will select the specific spells you wish to cast during the time before your next long rest at the time you make the election, but you'll gain additional spell slots to use to cast spells. This means you can cast more spells, but at the cost of being less versatile.

When using this election you will determine how many spell slots of each level you would have based only upon your wizard levels. If you are not multiclass, this will be all of your spell slots. If you are multiclass, this will likely be all of your lower level spells slots, but perhaps not all of your higher level spell slots.

For each level of spell that you have spell slots for based upon your wizard levels, you will effectively increase the number of slots by 50% (rounded up). You will do this by extending these spell slots immediately to gain the additional spell slots that are immediately tied to the spell that will be cast using that slot.

You must now select the spells you will cast with those spell slots before your next rest. You may select any spell in your spellbook (of the appropriate level) as well as any spells you know or have prepared. These may come from another class based upon multiclassing, feats or other mechanics.

If you want to cast a spell multiple times, you will need to prepare it in multiple Vancian slots.

You will still prepare spells as normal, but if you are not multiclass you will not have spells to access those prepared slots unless you use arcane recover, a Pearl of Power, or other options. If you are multiclass, you'll also access them using your remaining 'non-Vancian' higher level spell slots.

Example: Bob is a cleric 5/wizard 5. A 5th level wizard gets 4 first level spells, 3 2nd level spells, and 2 3rd level spells. A 10th level full spellcaster gets 4 1st level spells, 3 2nd, through 4th level spells, and 2 5th level spells. If Bob makes this election, Bob will immediately treat the 4 first, 3 2nd and 2 of the 3rd level slots as if they had already been cast. This will leave him with a 3rd, 3 4th and 2 5th level slots that he can use normally. However, it will also give him 6 1st level Vancian slots, 5 2nd level Vancian slots, and 3 3rd level Vancian slots. Bob will select what spells will be prepared in each of these slots - selecting from his spellbook, the clericic spell list, and the domain spells of his cleric domain (as well as any spells accessed via feats or other methods). Then he can select from his normally prepared Wizard spells to use that remaining 3rd, 3 4th and 2 5th level slots. Bob elects to prepare Healing Word in 1 st level Vancian slot. Later, during his adventuring, he uses that spell to heal his ally. During the following round, he wants to heal that ally again, but has not more Vancian prepared slots. If he prepared Holy word as normal using his cleric spell preparation, we could use the 3rd, 4th or 5th level 'non-Vancian' slots to cast it. If he did not prepare it or does not have those slots available, he would not be able to cast it.

If that option existed, a decent number of players would find it convoluted and frustrating - which I'd argue is fine for an optional feature. However, I believe there would be a decent contingenct of players that would see it as an interesting (and perhaps nostalgic) exercise worth utilizing.
 



You're so wrong it's laughable. Seriously are you trolling?

Wizard as a sub-class? Put that to the vote and you'll be buried under an overwhelming vote of no!

Pick a different class if you hate the existing wizard class so much - give it a different name and have fun playing it. Who knows I may even give it a try. If you want something different then invent it but don't destroy what's already there that people love. Don't you get this?
I'm not saying it will happen. I'm saying that it's what it deserves to be. It has all the range and diversity of a subclass and is a spellcaster with one central mechanic the way a sorcerer subclass should be. If we were to start from a blank sheet it's where it would be. It will, however, continue to be the single most over-supported class despite being bland because tradition.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top