D&D 5E How would YOU nerf the wizard? +

[Micah Sweet]

That's fine. You do you. But I was answering for me, and responding to someone other than you.
And all three of us, then, are apt to have highly different opinions of what constitutes "realism", and why we want one bit of realism, but are willing to discard others. I find those discussions to be unproductive, so I am not going there.

But, in the end, if you want your fighters "realistic", that suggests changes to the fighter, not to the wizard.

All the changes I might want to make to the fighter class are covered by the Level Up version. Not so the wizard (although Level Up improves that class too).

I still think too much attention is paid here to nerfing the wizard. Other casters should feel the pain too. Sorcerers have access to nearly all the same spells. Clerics and druids have better access to their spell list than either.

 

[FrogReaver]

I’m more of the mind that introducing casting obstacles simply means casters take build options to bypass them. (See resilient con / warcaster).

If it’s more situational like OAs when casting then hitting that sweet spot where wizards still are playable in melee while taking OA’s but not stupid OP when not is too fine a line to balance around. (Especially when additional considerations like spells to bypass such restrictions and resting being unlimited and mostly self restrained come into consideration)

thus it’s just not a good way to nerf wizards imo.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Okay, real question:

For those who want to go back to True Vancian Casting: do you honestly feel this will be a serious check on the wizard's power considering it was present during the height of the wizard's power.... or do you just want it back because you liked playing that way?

 

[Reynard]

Okay, real question:

For those who want to go back to True Vancian Casting: do you honestly feel this will be a serious check on the wizard's power considering it was present during the height of the wizard's power.... or do you just want it back because you liked playing that way?

When do you consider the "height of the wizard's power"?

 

[CreamCloud0]

I am somewhat confused.
Why do arcane casters have to be put "on a similar footing" to non-martials? The ARE non-martials.

that last part was meant to be read from the opposite perspecive to the rest of the sentence, i think?
"non-martials now have to pay to upgrade their gear(spells), this puts arcane casters on a similar footing to martials"

 

[Cadence]

Okay, real question:

For those who want to go back to True Vancian Casting: do you honestly feel this will be a serious check on the wizard's power considering it was present during the height of the wizard's power.... or do you just want it back because you liked playing that way?

In my dream game I would have something closer to true Vancian casting (from Dying Earth, Overworld, and Cugel, but not Rhialto) where casters had a very small number of memorized spells (I might make the max be six) . But I would add in things inspired by Lord Darcy where they could have something like Cantrips that drew on a pool (so not unlimited enough to not have an actual weapon, but enough that in many combats it might not be needed) and rituals (which might also draw on the pool, but not much). A lot of that is from a world building flavor thing that I completely get wouldn't appeal to many.

As far as going back in time, 1e is strange because at low levels the Wizard blows chunks and then becomes silly at the end. In 3.5/PF we never really used the (in retrospect) really obvious item creation things to make the Wizards really out there. All in all I'm probably a bad judge because we don't get past 10th or so level very often.

 

[leozg]

I still think too much attention is paid here to nerfing the wizard.

That's because it is the tittle of this thread.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's because it is the tittle of this thread.

Read the rest of the post. I have no issue with nerfing wizards, but stopping there without considering other casters is bad game design. You can't take these issues in isolation.

 

[Reynard]

Read the rest of the post. I have no issue with nerfing wizards, but stopping there without considering other casters is bad game design. You can't take these issues in isolation.

Sure, but the solutions for each class would be different. There is nothing stopping folks from starting threads on how to nerf the cleric or druid or warlock.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, but the solutions for each class would be different. There is nothing stopping folks from starting threads on how to nerf the cleric or druid or warlock.

You don't think the way this thread is set up implies that wizards are the biggest problem and more important to fix than other casters? If so, I mis-read the issue and I apologize.