Quote from emerylopes >>

The most iconic class of DND is worse than 2014 comparing to other classes and I explain why:

Scholar — Level 2

The 2024 Wizard has become much more multidisciplinary and can gain Expertise in one of the following skills that they’re proficient in: Arcana, History, Investigation, Medicine, Nature, or Religion.

Now, your Arcana only slight is better than a Rogue that focus on Knowledge. If you pick a Rogue with Arcane Trickster and Focus on Knowledge skills you will be far ahead than any wizard spend his role life reading . This only touch a fix of bad design of the class when comes to knows things.

------

Memorize Spell — Level 5

A new level 5 feature, Wizards can now swap out one prepared spell for one in their spellbook whenever they take a Short Rest.

Really, a level 5 ability to change a prepared spell one short rest? My GOD this is really bad ... Sorry , but it is....

--------

Spell Mastery — Level 18

Spell Mastery sees a few minor changes, starting with the limitation that the chosen spells must have a casting time of one action, and you can only swap one spell at a time rather than both. However, the chosen spells now count as always prepared and can be swapped out on a Long Rest rather than requiring 8 hours of dedicated study.

 

We are talking a level 18 Wizard ^^ Do you think a level 18 wizard will ever prioritize a level 1 or level 2 spell other than shield? Now Shield is gone. [Irony] To fix this, you can cast Wish Spell and give yourself the ability to have innate spell of level 3. Oh I forgot to say , if you pick a fire spell like fireball and cant change its elements , most of the monsters in this level is immune to fire ^^. 

I'll fix this. I will create a Mage (Variant) on Homebrew on the next days.

BTW, I really like the Warlock, Druid, Paladin, Rogue and Fighter But the Mage was a lazy job, sorry, buts is true.

 

 The expertise is a nerf? The wizard didn't have expertise in 2014 how is it worse.

No class can change spells in the middle of the adventuring day. That's massive versatility for the wizard which, again, didn't exist before so idk how it can be a nerf.

Outside of your strawmen, the nerf to the 18th level feature indeed is right... But it's such a minuscule nerf. You still have very good spells to choose for 1st and 2nd level. 

What did you want Wizards of the Coast to do to Wizards? Add at will force fireball at level 5 or something?

There are some things that sound interesting and esp the abjurer feature is cool, but what about the subclasses that aren't tied to a school?

I love Order of the Scribes for the flavour but with how this is worded they'd get up to 3 spells less per level simply because there isn't an associated school...

Quote from Gammalolman >>

Outside of your strawmen, the nerf to the 18th level feature indeed is right... But it's such a minuscule nerf. You still have very good spells to choose for 1st and 2nd level. 

Calling Spell Mastery nerf "minuscule" is simply wrong.  Maybe it was needed. But saying that it is "minuscule" has to be some kind of a joke.

Please list me the good candidates for Spell Masery now

Quote from DMJeff >>

Conjuration Wizard was always my favorite Wizard class. Sad to see they didn't make didn't make the cut.

 I agree, in 5th edition, you could summon 80 magmins with 30 temporary hit points each using most spell slots to cast conjure minor elemental at level 20, plus another 72 with simulacrum version of yourself. (Not all at the same time, but if you really want to kill the last villain in your campaign…😁)

Good eye, yeah that boon is best for folks who have less spells. Honestly for a Wizard I'd either go for Boon of the Combat Prowess (Land that super big spell attack) or Boon of Truesight (Saving from casts of True Seeing)

Is it a free spell in that school for each level up, or each new spell level? The video and the article seem to conflict on that point.

At the top of the article, they say:

If you don’t see a feature covered, such as Signature Spells, that means it is unchanged from the 2014 Wizard, or only saw very minor changes.

 So, I would assume it means it is unchanged, and Phantasmal Creatures is added to their 6th level. However, it could be an oversight, and they forgot to mention it being replaced. I hope it's the former; I liked Malleable Illusions.

Quote from Nishrek >>

Quote from Gammalolman >>

Outside of your strawmen, the nerf to the 18th level feature indeed is right... But it's such a minuscule nerf. You still have very good spells to choose for 1st and 2nd level. 

Calling Spell Mastery nerf "minuscule" is simply wrong.  Maybe it was needed. But saying that it is "minuscule" has to be some kind of a joke.

Please list me the good candidates for Spell Masery now

 For 2nd level, web is quite powerful, as is locate objects, as can be rope trick. All of those were already better options than misty step.

For 1st level, unseen servant is quite nice utility, as is silent image and the reworked jump spell. That's also excluding Magic Missile, the evergreen spell. They're not as powerful as the shield spell or absorb element spells at will, but they're still quite solid. At 18th level you also have enough spell slots that shield at will doesn't truly cost you much anyways.

Okay so I didn't miss it. Was wondering why I wasn't seeing them.

Magic Missile has damage compared to the cantrip at this level

Web requires concentration, so it's doubtful you will cast it more than once in combat.

Locate Objects and Rope Trick are situational. Rope Trick is made obsolete by Tiny Hut (which is a Ritual) anyway.

Unseen Servant is very situational, and lasts 1 hour, so the ability to cast it at will is redundant.

And on 18th level you have enough spell slots to cast all of the above once or twice per day, while spells like Shield or Misty Step are useful during every round of combat.

The most compelling reason to stay Wizard after 17th level (and not multiclass into any other full caster) is Epic Boon at 19th level (though Signature Spell is quite cool, even if not powerful).

None of that affects my main complaint which is that requiring you to get spell scrolls firmly ties your power and versatility to DM willingness to dangle spell scrolls in front of you. Clerics and druids have fewer choice of spells, but they have access to every single one of those spells. Wizards can access 44 without scrolls. If you look at modules it’s fairly common for spells acquired during play to be quite limited for wizard. 

coming back to this the next day, memorize spell is (at least in situations where you won’t be punished for taking an hour break) good for letting you swap between the spells you do have, as you should have double the number of spells known than prepared. 

 The expertise is a nerf? The wizard didn't have expertise in 2014 how is it worse.

No class can change spells in the middle of the adventuring day. That's massive versatility for the wizard which, again, didn't exist before so idk how it can be a nerf.

Outside of your strawmen, the nerf to the 18th level feature indeed is right... But it's such a minuscule nerf. You still have very good spells to choose for 1st and 2nd level. 

What did you want Wizards of the Coast to do to Wizards? Add at will force fireball at level 5 or something?

I think you didn't get it. I said a Rogue was better than the Wizard on that aspect, so Its not a upgrade.

It is really cool that you said that because Ranger has come today and guess what:

Deft Explorer (Level 2)

Gain Expertise in one skill and learn two languages.

How Its possible the Ranger is better on languages and Expertise than a Wizard ?  hehehe What you say?

did the default wizard just get stuff the order of the scribes wizard had? kinda sad, now i dont feel going order of the scribes anymore.

Spell mastery requiring an action means you can't take your best low spell-level options (shield and absorb elements)

What a weird and unnecessary change, which seems to be a running theme with the new PHB

We’ve always learned 2 spells per level:

Learning Spells of 1st Level and Higher

Each time you gain a wizard level, you can add two wizard spells of your choice to your spellbook for free. Each of these spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots, as shown on the Wizard table.

What @thechewsonthemove is referring to is that it really doesn’t matter if the wizard list has 300 spells or 3,000 spells. It is the only class where the list’s availability is gated behind the DM for anything other than the 2 spells you get when you level, when the mechanics for wizard gameplay is that wizards are designed to *find* spells in the wild to enhance what they get when they level. 

For instance, once per long rest, your druid or cleric gets to swap out their spells from their 170 or 125 list (based on their level). Every spell they are able to cast is available to choose on any given Long Rest. So these classes (and others that have a similar mechanic) basically have a “soft spellbook” of 170, 125, etc spells on hand. 

Wizards do not. Wizards have what is in their spellbook (which is as of 5e I think 6 first level spells at level 1, and 2 additional spells thereafter - so a level 10 is maybe 24 spells, and if you chose poorly, there is nothing you can do about that beyond DM fiat). The rest are designed to be acquired in the world, either through purchasing scrolls or being rewarded spellbooks or scrolls. This requires your DM to make these items available or build them into loot tables just so your wizard can wizard. If your DM is frugal, or not paying attention, that means your wizard is starved for opportunity - there is literally no other option a wizard has BUT to rely on the DM to actively make spells available. Basically, a wizard’s spell is no different than a +n weapon, in this regard, except that a melee class can function without a +n weapon, but a wizard’s whole thing is bringing spell versatility to the table.

On top of that, the wizard is the only casting class to have to pay (and indeed WotC double-dips - pay for the scroll AND pay for the transcription) to acquire spells. Outside of the occasional spellbook or scroll reward, the wizard has to rely on buying scrolls, which can reach hundreds of thousands of gold, and then spend the equivalent of 50 gold per level of spell (with the risk of screwing that up) to add that spell to their spellbook. Bad napkin math I did yesterday, a wizard could spend upwards of 600,000 gold just for transcribing spells, and almost 2 million gold to acquire  just 90 spells (in this instance, I assumed 10 spells per level). If that’s the gold cost for 90 spells, there isn’t enough gold in a campaign's economy for the wizard to have access to all 350 spells. So what is the point of having a list of 350 spells when the mechanics of making those spells accessible grossly limits the player to a fraction of the wizard’s spell list (again, druids and clerics have ACCESS to every spell on their list at any given long rest. Wizards only have ACCESS to what is in their spellbook at any given long rest, which by design is constrained and limited)?

So let’s pursue the argument that the goal is to be selective in which spells you pursue, and that wizards have the most POTENTIAL versatility - with other classes being limited in their spell versatility as a consequence of having smaller spell lists. That...is actually a fair point. The problem there is that because wizards are at the whim of their DM, it is again on the DM to make those spells available. And if the DM isn’t being cooperative, or simply given how “dear” spell access is, the player is going to keep choosing the “old standbys” and not risk exploring the more esoteric options. Wizard casts Fireball. Why? Because that’s the spell the wizard has to take because they can’t risk not having it.

For the gameplay of the wizard to be all about study and acquiring power, then ACCESS to the larger spell list has to be present though class mechanics, and not be reliant on DM whim or force a DM to go all monty hall just to ensure his wizard player has the resources to actually kit out a meaningfully diverse spellbook.

Look, I’m lucky. One of DMs opened the purse strings fairly early on in the campaign, so my one wizard was well-stocked, and my other DM, upon hearing my concerns, ensured that every salient town/city had a vendor who sold scrolls, and makes sure that the occasional spellbook gets on someone’s loot table. But a lot of DMs don’t think about these things, and I still have one wizard who is completely blocked from transcribing spells because the module we are playing is extremely light on gold as a reward - you can’t transcribe a level 5 spell when you only have 300 gold to your name (and you’re been breathtakingly frugal in order to even get to 300 gold). Where did the gold go? Transcribing the other spells in the spellbook the character was given by the DM to help flesh out her own spellbook. It shouldn’t solely be the DM’s problem to ensure their wizard player is able to develop their wizard organically. The class mechanics needs to do some lifting here, as well. If part of the wizard fantasy is to be the scholar, then part of being a scholar should entail exposing access to more spells than the 2 per level allocates as part of wizard gameplay.

Ultimately, the wizard may have the largest spell table, but is gated behind the lack of availability - a design flaw that extends back to Gary Gygax, who purportedly HATED wizards. If it were me? I would have simply made the following adjustment - no cost for transcribing spells from spell scrolls or spellbooks. Once per long rest, you can roll an arcana check to see if you learn any new spells, (DC to 15, the DC being 10 if it is your school), the cost of this research is 50 gold per level of spell, and must be of a level you are able to cast. Once you learn a spell this way, you cannot do so again for 1d10 minus INT modifier weeks, minimum of 1 week. This allows wizards to keep learning more spells, and gives a cooldown period which would reflect the time spent researching. You could actually then tie this to part of a wizard's long rest having to be spent doing this research (and they must declare that). If the DM feels like they need some more control beyond the gold gate, you simply look at spell (scroll) rarity and state that epic or legendary level spells cannot be learned in this manner. 

The chokepoint on spell accessibility was something I brought up during playtest that WotC ignored. Which is fine - it’s their game, but it is still the major flaw of the class. Other casting classes have far more versatility simply because they have every spell of the levels they are able to cast available to them. And while it’s nice to be able to swap out a prepared spell on the fly, if you never picked up Polymorph as a wizard, well, you can’t swap it, and if spell availability is a premium, what good is having new spells because you “should always have” Polymorph, so you never have the opportunity TO try the new spells?

The tl;dnr is that wizards ironically have the least spell versatility while having the largest spell list because they have the least spontaneous access to that spell list, are reliant on the dungeon master to facilitate access to spells, and are gated behind gold in ways that severely limit the wizard’s efficacy with regards to spell acquisition. The fix for this is to have the class mechanic itself broaden the opportunity for spell accessibility beyond the 2 spells per level limit, allowing for self-discovery and to re-approtion the gold-gate to prevent unlimited access to that spell list.

no lvl 20 feature?

The new rules are backwards compatible just use 2014 rules for necromancy 

Quote from zedkabgi >>

The new rules are backwards compatible just use 2014 rules for necromancy 

I know, but Necromancy needed an urgent update so that it is useful, does not depend on a single spell and does not create a huge, unnecessary and annoying army of undead, and not wait for a tasha2.0 to bring the rest to update. (Artifice included, which must also have been among the trio of updated books.)

and yet my transmuter gets no love.