Why does Wizards of the Coast hate Wizards?

Todd Roybark

Explorer
So read the most recent Unearthed Arcana....Major flavor/Mechanical bonuses for Sorcerer, followed by Bard and Warlock.....and next to nothing for the Wizard...unless you are a Diviner (& even then not much gain).

-Any flavor/enhancement to the Spellbook....nope.
-Any Expertise like enhancement to the Arcana or Investigation skill.....nope....that Arcane Trickster with Expertise Arcana is a better scholar than Wizard,
(and has a better True Strike alternative with Aim now)
-Automatic Tool Prof in Calligrapahy...nope


WOTC needs more love for Barbarians and Wizards in 5e
 

5ekyu

Adventurer
So read the most recent Unearthed Arcana....Major flavor/Mechanical bonuses for Sorcerer, followed by Bard and Warlock.....and next to nothing for the Wizard...unless you are a Diviner (& even then not much gain).

-Any flavor/enhancement to the Spellbook....nope.
-Any Expertise like enhancement to the Arcana or Investigation skill.....nope....that Arcane Trickster with Expertise Arcana is a better scholar than Wizard,
(and has a better True Strike alternative with Aim now)
-Automatic Tool Prof in Calligrapahy...nope


WOTC needs more love for Barbarians and Wizards in 5e
As the designer noted this was about versatility and flexibility adds, not power. Wizard already had those. Also already had short rest slot recoveries. Personally, really like those spells.
 

MonkeezOnFire

Explorer
Whenever they release any kind of expansion or options that includes all the classes at least one of them usually gets the short end of the stick. It's playtest material that hasn't been very carefully balanced yet so it happens. I especially get the feeling that the last UA was just as much about the structure of adding in these options than it was about the options themselves.

That being said the wizard class in particular doesn't have many weaknesses that really need shoring up which seems to have been the focus with enhancements being much more prevalent than alternatives.
 

Celebrim

Legend
In general, the problem is that usually wizards as the eldest child receive a disproportionate share of the love and attention, and WotC has to go back and try to correct this imbalance to some extent.

Usually what I see is also overcorrection where the class neglected in a prior edition, in this case Bard, gets a bit too much love. (In 3e, it was Cleric and Druid, with Rogue also getting a lot of love but considering how weak Rogue/Thief had been in 2e/1e it was needed.)
 

practicalm

Explorer
It would be interesting to have a few more bonus action options for wizards, but I don't think they need it since they have action to bonus action spells.
Also as mentioned Wizards are already quite good and the UA class modifications were to shore up some of the weaker parts.
 

tetrasodium

Explorer
I think there were two glaring omissions that the wizard class had in that UA.

The first is that there were no non-ritual spells that got the ritual tag. The wizard ritual caster is different from every other class granted ritual caster ability in that it only needs to be in the spellbook not prepared, this is great up ntil level 3 spells where a wizard could have pretty much every ritual spell available if they wanted. After third level spells they pretty much stop being ritual.That could be fixed by adding the ritual tag to some or adding a variant ritual tag like "greater ritual" or something that takes more time (ie hours instead of minutes)/possibly even resources.

There are plenty of spells that could easily be ritual under one of those two thoug... For example Darkvision, zone of truth, dispel magic, project image, astral projection, Knock, teleport, detect evil and good, sending, locate object, magic aura, scrying, find the path, create food and water, transport via plants, hallow, mighty fortress, magnificent mansion ,tongues, arcane eye. Yes some of those spells are also available to other classes & maing them ritual would be a boon for those classes too, but none of them are spells that are really balancing concern ones.

The second omission is more of an oddity & probably oversight rather than omission, unfortunately WotC continued with Scorrlock having most favored class "dating the GM" status by having the dramatically improved version. Multiple classes got "Whenever you gain a level in a class that has $feature, you can replace a $option of that $feature that you know with another spell/cantrip/fighting style available to your class. Classes with fighting styles can swap those, prepared spell classes (cleric/wizard) with cantrips can swap cantrips. The problem comes with sorcerer & warlock can replace a leveled spell during a long rest giving them limited access to the kind of versatility Grated by a wizard's spellbook; that is fine& reasonable since having their spells locked until level up was a bit too restrictive for inexperienced players & players subjected to dramatic gamestyle shifts. Bard Ranger & Pally got to replace a leveled spell during a long rest, also reasonable for reasons stated. Cleric got the ability to change a cantrip when they level, this is great as a divine caster who always has access to their entire spell list when preparing spells during a long rest. Wizards get the same thing as clerics but as a class that has the cost of scribing spells to their spellbook who already pretty much had a massively expensive & limited by treasure availability version of what everyone else is getting it's unreasonable to limit the wizard cantrip versatility to level rather than long rest like the scorlock spell versatility abilities.
 

Undrave

Adventurer
The lack of Arcana Expertise IS a bit weird for the Wizard. Seems like that would be his forte... aside from that the Wizard is fine.

The Wizard has EIGHT subclass in the PHB when I could EASILY convert all 8 'school specialist' into a single subclass with a school-based choice, but they went the extra way to create all 8 different ones. WOTC doesn't hate the Wizard.
 

Yaarel

Adventurer
What is the Char Op assessment of the Wizard class?

Low-tiers (1-4, 5-8)
High-tiers (9-12, 13-16)
Legend (17-20)

?
 
What is the Char Op assessment of the Wizard class?
Low-tiers (1-4, 5-8)
High-tiers (9-12, 13-16)
Legend (17-20)
As an aside, I think it's funny that making 'Tiers' jargon for level bands has finally caught on enough to make it slightly harder to talk about Class Tiers. The Wizard is still solidly Class Tier 1, given the unprecedented versatility of prepping daily and casting spontaneously, it'd be Tier 0 if spells had proliferated in number & power the way they did in 3.x, but it's place on the top of the heap is the same as in 3e, either way. Really, the Bard is the only class that's dramatically changed in the rankings since 3e, though most boats have been floated on the rising tide of increased versatility, loosened restrictions, and spells for all. Like, it's hard to put any whole class at Tier 5. The Champion and Berserker may arguably languish there, as sub-classes, but they're pretty lonely. Nothing is so badly designed as to rate Tier 6, not even the Ranger.
 

lowkey13

I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
"Why does Wizards of the Coast hate Wizards?"

You often see this question.

But why does no one ever think to ask, "Why does Wizards of the Coast hate Coasts?"

Won't someone think of the beaches? It's just like when the famous Knight, Sir Mix-A-Lot, brought this matter to the attention of the entire Wu Tang Clan by asking, "Wassup ..... beaches?"
 

Advertisement

Top