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

[Hussar]

It's not like they ever could quite out-fighter the fighter (they didn't have the feats for it) when people claimed they could, nor that being able to fake-tank was ever an important part of what made them Tier 1. Strict superiority can be proof of brokenness but it's hardly a minimum requirement.
Concentration is oft-cited, but, really, is just 5e keeping buffing BA-compatible. A concentration spell can often swing a combat the way a whole raft of complicated 3.x pre-casting would have been needed to. Ultimately it means you need fewer spells to make the same high-impact sort of contributions.

Sorry, that's goalposts on roller skates.

If you think a single concentration spell has the same impact as the shopping list of effects a 3e cleric could lay down, then, well, we have no points in common here. I get that you want to "prove" that the classes in 5e are massively tiered, but, honestly, you're very wrong here.

 

[Tony Vargas]

If you think a single concentration spell has the same impact as the shopping list of effects a 3e cleric could lay down

A single pre-cast buff in 3e probably couldn't swing a combat (and every crazy thing in 3e had its crazy counters, you buff-layered the DM replied with targeted dispels), but 3e didn't have BA keeping the noise down, so you could tote up bunches of lower-level spells into something substantial. A single spell in 5e can, often a Concentrations spell - but not every concentration spell, certainly, some of 'em make you wonder why they bother slapping the only real restriction left on /that/ particular spell - but not always.

I get that you want to "prove" that the classes in 5e are massively tiered

There's nothing much to prove, really, the Tiers are back because the underlying class designs are back close to what they were: some (sub)classes have few resources and little versatility, others more and a great deal (a few more than ever). Inevitably, they shake out into Tiers. No class is so badly designed as the Tier 6 classes were, so that's vacant, and at worst, only a couple sub-classes fall all the way to Tier 5, because designs are weighted towards the top, that way.

 

[Hussar]

No. They are not.

While a few of the classes might be lagging a bit (fighter, I'm looking at you), the notion that we're actually in a 3 Tier system anywhere near what 3e was is ludicrous. It's simply not true.

Take wizards. Wizards in 3e were massively overpowered because of the ability to craft magic items and create wizards which were no longer bound by Vancian casting limits. You simply had enough scrolls and/or wands that you basically never ran out of spells. Add to this the MASSIVE list of spells that 3e had in addition to the meta-magic feats and wizards truly were Tier 1. I mean, good grief, 3e had more 1st level spells than 5e has spells total.

Now, it's extremely difficult for a wizard to dominate a game. You no longer have the ability to completely bypass the memorization limits with wands and scrolls. You no longer have the ability to stack effects - no more Greater Invisible, Flying, Whatevered Wizards raining death and destruction. PLUS, you have a vastly truncated spell list - wizards can't summon anything anymore, meaning you can no longer create teleporting armies the way you could in 3e, just as an example.

Look, I get that you want to bang this Tier drum. I get it. But, outside of white room theory crafting, people just aren't getting the results you are talking about. Games are not being totally dominated by full casters to the point where you were playing casters and caddies. The non-casters are very much holding their own in most levels of play.

At worst, we have Tier 1 and Tier 2 classes and, realistically, the difference between the two is not all that noticeable.

 

[Ashrym]

Concentration is fairly easy to break. It's just as much about losing spells as not stacking them. That's why a lot of spell casters invest in a feat instead of stat up at 4th level.

When a character has a +2 bonus for a 14 CON any damage is 35% minimum chance to lose concentration. 4 attacks against the caster and that's the end of the spell. That's also while shield is so important. That's the "save my concentration" spell defense on top of the actual damage prevention when attacks come that way.

It's a heavier restriction that people realize sometimes because of the damage checks. That impacts all casters to varying degrees and why it's nice to be a sorcerer or paladin sometimes.

 

[Garthanos]

3e-style MCing was one of those great ideas that was ultimately too good for the rest of the system. Still is.

It demands levels be swappable and equitable and the erratic advancement it isn't happening .... and further when not all the actual elements a class has is visible, a fighter of level 3 has 3 levels worth of advancement towards ability to multi-attack for instance shrug they didnt follow through

 

[Tony Vargas]

and further when not all the actual elements a class has is visible, a fighter of level 3 has 3 levels worth of advancement towards ability to multi-attack for instance shrug they didnt follow through

That could have been handled, though, the same way casting was.
Same with ASIs.

 

[Todd Roybark]

Wow, this is quite a bit of acrimony here.
Casts Calm Emotion

These UA additions are intended to increase player fun. If say MoonSong was a player in my group and expressed their dissatisfaction, and wanted something like these changes I would say yes. I think most DMs would....most of us play with friends and tweaks to realize a concept are common.

What is fun about scribbing costs? What does it add to the players enjoyment.
Mistwell argues that the costs are insignificant and scribbing scrolls is a class feature that is not even used nor needed......so let us posit this true.

Why have the rule at all. Let Wizards chose 2 spells per level to prepare from the total wizard list of spells like Divine Casters, keep the spellbook like a Component Pouch if you want, and call it day.

If the rule serves no practical balance purpose, and does not add to fun...ditch it....again this seems to be in line w/ the spirit of the UA article.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Mistwell argues that the costs are insignificant and scribbing scrolls is a class feature that is not even used nor needed......so let us posit this true.

Why have the rule at all?

Magic-user used to go ga-ga over scrolls and captured spellbooks, and trade spells with eachother, back in the day, so they left the door open to it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

View attachment 115681

Magic-user used to go ga-ga over scrolls and captured spellbooks, and trade spells with eachother, back in the day, so they left the door open to it.

Or because it’s fun and differentiates Wizards from Clerics.

 

[Todd Roybark]

How is it fun?

Find a magic sword and you are one short rest away from using it. Find a spell scroll and you are need a long rest at minimum, and lose the scroll.

There are plenty of ways to have a learning mechanic for wizards that is more flavorful than the atavistic trope of time, money, special inks and so forth.

Fight a blue dragon, and the genius wizard has an epiphany about magical lightning and learns the Lightning Spell.

Put in a mechanic where a wizard could learn a spell from observing it being cast.

To represent wizardly training give magical maneuvers similar to the Fighter Battlemaster....

In fantasy there is often a trope about trained wizards vs hedge wizard/ untrained caster.

The autodidact sorc gets metamagic, the bard learns Magical Secrets from their college....
meanwhile wizarding school is like a bad private college, you pay too much, do not learn much and are followed by student loans for the rest of your life ( scribbing costs).
Is role playing the Devry Education experience truly some people’s idea of a good time.

There are so many new things that could be done, than the tired old atavism.

If I wanted 1e mechanics, I will play 1e where a wizard at 1st level can put an ogre to Sleep via the spell, and not use it like the Coup de Grace it has been since 3e.