D&D 5E Why does Wizards of the Coast hate Wizards?

[MoonSong]

Nah, no one plays them anyway. Besides, I can leave them in as NPCs and have them eaten by dragons or something LOL!

Too many people plays sorcerers and warlocks. Not many people plays sorcerers and warlocks...
Who gets you people?

 

[DND_Reborn]

Too many people plays sorcerers and warlocks. Not many people plays sorcerers and warlocks...
Who gets you people?

Umm... Not sure where you are going with this, but I was talking about Bards...

We have people playing sorcerers currently and warlocks as well (though not as often).

 

[Salthorae]

Nah, no one plays them anyway.

I guess you're talking about in your group? I see bard's all the time in groups I play with.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I guess you're talking about in your group? I see bard's all the time in groups I play with.

Yep.

 

[Undrave]

I'm still wondering what Wizards are supposedly lacking that should have been fixed by this UA... it would be important to know going into the survey section.

I'm sure it was adressed in this thread but there's a lot of stuff to wade through here...

 

[Ashrym]

I'm still wondering what Wizards are supposedly lacking that should have been fixed by this UA... it would be important to know going into the survey section.

I'm sure it was adressed in this thread but there's a lot of stuff to wade through here...

The ability to respec cantrips and not be stuck with a poor choice forever, and giving a few more divinations for diviners to cast.

 

[Undrave]

The ability to respec cantrips and not be stuck with a poor choice forever, and giving a few more divinations for diviners to cast.

But they got Cantrip Versatility like everybody else, no?

Second point is one I'll pass along in my survey answer. I'm not well versed in Wizards so I wouldn't have had much to say about it.

 

[Ashrym]

But they got Cantrip Versatility like everybody else, no?

Second point is one I'll pass along in my survey answer. I'm not well versed in Wizards so I wouldn't have had much to say about it.

Yes. The UA covers both of those points with a couple more divinations and cantrip versatility. The only odd spell added is enhance ability, which was one of the few sorcerer spells wizards didn't have.

Speak with the dead was also added and I think that's just giving necromancers a non-evil option but didn't hear anything in the UA videos on it so far.

 

[tetrasodium]

I think that the sorcerer defenders finally came out & revealed their true reason for defending the sorcerer by suggesting literal nerfs to wizard

But they got Cantrip Versatility like everybody else, no?

Second point is one I'll pass along in my survey answer. I'm not well versed in Wizards so I wouldn't have had much to say about it.

no. The wizard version is objectively worse than the version rolled into scorlock & bard spell versatility. Spell versatility given to the classes that get it includes the ability to change one cantrip when you finish a long rest as the spell hey can swap. Cantrip versatility given to wizards & clerics is limited to 1 cantrip when you gain a level.
End result is that sorcerer/warlock gets the ability to swap spells like the wizard without the cost of maintaining a spellbook or having options limited to that spellbook (they are limited to entire class spell list) with the restriction of only being able to change 1 spell or cantrip per long rest. The wizard still needs to gather scrolls & spellbooks in order to invest massive amounts of coin into their spellbook & gains an ability to swap cantrips that is objectively worse than what spell versatility allows with cantrips.

 

[Ashrym]

I think that the sorcerer defenders finally came out & revealed their true reason for defending the sorcerer by suggesting literal nerfs to wizard

Lol, wizards don't need a nerf. They just don't need a buff either. They are in a good place relative to 5e mechanics.

no. The wizard version is objectively worse than the version rolled into scorlock & bard spell versatility. Spell versatility given to the classes that get it includes the ability to change one cantrip when you finish a long rest as the spell hey can swap. Cantrip versatility given to wizards & clerics is limited to 1 cantrip when you gain a level.
End result is that sorcerer/warlock gets the ability to swap spells like the wizard without the cost of maintaining a spellbook or having options limited to that spellbook (they are limited to entire class spell list) with the restriction of only being able to change 1 spell or cantrip per long rest. The wizard still needs to gather scrolls & spellbooks in order to invest massive amounts of coin into their spellbook & gains an ability to swap cantrips that is objectively worse than what spell versatility allows with cantrips.

Sorlocks are more about blasting than versatility. I would argue wizards and bards both win out in versatility, and even standard warlock for that matter. Sorcerers are just giving up progression and high level slots for better at-will damage. I would argue the sorlock splash argument isn't necessary because wizards don't match the warlock's at-will damage or sorcerer's nova potential regardless.

What a bard might accomplish in downtime is the place to look for potential issues. If any class can actually abuse the spell versatility mechanic it will be the bard with downtime.

During regular adventuring the wizard still seems solid because of the greater number of spells prepped vs known and ritual casting mechanic and broader spell list. Changing a lot more spells and still facing that actual restriction in play makes it hard for me to argue that spell versatility is really that impacting, at least on my initial impression. That can still change.

All the arcane casters play in different ways so it's hard to see the swapping making eldritch blast or meta-magic more effective.