You're moving the goalposts. I just refuted your point that subclasses add a significant amount of complexity, and you respond with the earlier claim that wizards are a more complex class.
Why are y’all debating class complexity? Dnd isn’t that complex, and Wizards don’t make any more choices than any other class. Clerics and warlocks have just as much complexity. Cleric subclasses can affect spells and give bonus spells. Necromancer isn’t missing because WotC felt that giving Wizards 9 subclasses in the PHB made them too complex. It’s missing because they wanted things to be even because that was a major complaint about 2014 PHB. They most likely didn’t choose Necromancer for the PHB because it needs a lot of work to stop it from being a turn hog with an army of undead, while still feeling like it gives you an army of undead, and since it’s often considered evil it’s hard to make it one of 4 options. With the horror themed playtest im shocked they didn’t show us a new version of the Necromancer.
Why are y’all debating class complexity? Dnd isn’t that complex, and Wizards don’t make any more choices than any other class. Clerics and warlocks have just as much complexity. Cleric subclasses can affect spells and give bonus spells. Necromancer isn’t missing because WotC felt that giving Wizards 9 subclasses in the PHB made them too complex. It’s missing because they wanted things to be even because that was a major complaint about 2014 PHB. They most likely didn’t choose Necromancer for the PHB because it needs a lot of work to stop it from being a turn hog with an army of undead, while still feeling like it gives you an army of undead, and since it’s often considered evil it’s hard to make it one of 4 options. With the horror themed playtest im shocked they didn’t show us a new version of the Necromancer.
Wizards make significantly more choices than other classes. For example, Clerics get access to all spells of each level. Wizards have to decide which spells they'll get per level (2) and which they'll spend time finding and transcribing.
As I've said, adding more options when leveling up does not add that much complexity to a class.
Why are y’all debating class complexity? Dnd isn’t that complex, and Wizards don’t make any more choices than any other class. Clerics and warlocks have just as much complexity. Cleric subclasses can affect spells and give bonus spells. Necromancer isn’t missing because WotC felt that giving Wizards 9 subclasses in the PHB made them too complex. It’s missing because they wanted things to be even because that was a major complaint about 2014 PHB. They most likely didn’t choose Necromancer for the PHB because it needs a lot of work to stop it from being a turn hog with an army of undead, while still feeling like it gives you an army of undead, and since it’s often considered evil it’s hard to make it one of 4 options. With the horror themed playtest im shocked they didn’t show us a new version of the Necromancer.
Wizards make significantly more choices than other classes. For example, Clerics get access to all spells of each level. Wizards have to decide which spells they'll get per level (2) and which they'll spend time finding and transcribing.
As I've said, adding more options when leveling up does not add that much complexity to a class.
But it isn't just adding more options when levelling. As I said, "and which they'll spend time finding and transcribing."
No they don’t, they just get 2. They can also find and transcribe more. Nothing about that is more complex. It’s up to the DM what additional spells scrolls or books they find. Conversations can and should be had, but there is no more complexity than any spell caster picking spells. If you want to continue the debate please show new information, because as of right now you are objectively wrong. You are seemingly claiming choice equals complexity, but Cleric, Druid, and Warlock have more choices to make as they level. Bards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks are locked in with spell choices just like Wizards. Also the most important question hasn’t been answered. WHY IS THIS A DEBATE? What changes even if Wizards were more complex? That still has nothing to do with the lack of a Necromancer.
Why are y’all debating class complexity? Dnd isn’t that complex, and Wizards don’t make any more choices than any other class. Clerics and warlocks have just as much complexity. Cleric subclasses can affect spells and give bonus spells. Necromancer isn’t missing because WotC felt that giving Wizards 9 subclasses in the PHB made them too complex. It’s missing because they wanted things to be even because that was a major complaint about 2014 PHB. They most likely didn’t choose Necromancer for the PHB because it needs a lot of work to stop it from being a turn hog with an army of undead, while still feeling like it gives you an army of undead, and since it’s often considered evil it’s hard to make it one of 4 options. With the horror themed playtest im shocked they didn’t show us a new version of the Necromancer.
Wizards make significantly more choices than other classes. For example, Clerics get access to all spells of each level. Wizards have to decide which spells they'll get per level (2) and which they'll spend time finding and transcribing.
As I've said, adding more options when leveling up does not add that much complexity to a class.
But it isn't just adding more options when levelling. As I said, "and which they'll spend time finding and transcribing."
No they don’t, they just get 2. They can also find and transcribe more. Nothing about that is more complex. It’s up to the DM what additional spells scrolls or books they find. Conversations can and should be had, but there is no more complexity than any spell caster picking spells. If you want to continue the debate please show new information, because as of right now you are objectively wrong. You are seemingly claiming choice equals complexity, but Cleric, Druid, and Warlock have more choices to make as they level. Bards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks are locked in with spell choices just like Wizards. Also the most important question hasn’t been answered. WHY IS THIS A DEBATE? What changes even if Wizards were more complex? That still has nothing to do with the lack of a Necromancer.
"They can also find and transcribe more."
That's what I just said!
A Wizard doesn't have unlimited access to all the class's spells of each level. He must choose which of those spells he'll get when he levels and when he goes searching for more (and he has to pay gold to learn them). All of this creates meaningful choices the Wizard must make that most other classes don't.
Whenever there are more meaningful choices, there is more complexity. That is an objective fact.
By that logic Druid, Cleric and Warlock and Bard have more complexity. They have way more choices to make that change the way they play beyond just spell selection. The only thing the Wizard has is that it can’t just swap a spell on the long rest. Plus you are still avoiding the important question. What does any of this have to do with the absence of the Necromancer?
Counting the number of decisions can really get out of hand so I used ChatGPT to help. I arbitrarily chose Druid and 7th level. However, if you wish, we can change to another class and / or another level.
Choose 2 new Wizard spells to add to spellbook from any spell level you can cast (1st–4th). Permanent choice.
2
Preparation from known list
Choose ~12 spells to prepare from what’s in your spellbook. Since this is limited by known spells, it’s a narrower but more strategic daily choice.
3
Optional spell copying (downtime)
Any number of new spells can be copied (cost + time). The choice of which to seek and add is fully player-driven.
4
4th-Level Spell Access
Gain access to 4th-level spells. Must choose which ones to prepare (e.g., Polymorph, Greater Invisibility, Banishment).
5
Arcane Tradition Feature
At level 6, subclasses like Divination, Evocation, etc., grant new mechanics. At 7, the Wizard must decide how to apply this feature in spell use.
🧠 Note: While #5 isn’t a new feature at 7th, it does create new decision opportunities at this level, because of 4th-level spells interacting with subclass tools (e.g., Sculpt Spells with Polymorph, Portent + Banishment).
✅ Total Unique Choices at 7th: 5, including 2 mandatory (spellbook additions, daily prep), 1 optional (downtime copying), 1 strategic (new spell level decisions), and 1 subclass-related tactical application.
Prepare ~11 spells from entire Druid list daily — broader but simpler decision than a Wizard’s constrained prep.
2
Wild Shape Form Selection
Still choosing beast forms within allowed CR (1, no flying) — but no new CR or movement type unlocked at level 7.
3
4th-Level Spell Access
Gain access to 4th-level spells (e.g., Conjure Woodland Beings, Blight, Dominate Beast), and prepare from the full list.
🧠 But — unlike Wizards — Druids don't learn or "know" new spells permanently, so they aren’t making permanent choices at level-up.
✅ Total Unique Choices at 7th: 3, including 1 major daily (prep from full list), 1 ongoing (wild shape choice), and 1 strategic (new spell level access).
Yes, Druids have wild shape, but Wizards can get Polymorph, so that really isn't more decisions beinig made by the Druid, both have those decisions.
Such a terrible analysis can only come from chatgpt. It has copying spells into your spellbook as an option. It double counts preparing spells by counting 4th-level spells separately. It ignores the actual choice for druid (elemental fury) that would be the most significant thing in this chart. I could go on.
"Prepare ~11 spells from entire Druid list daily — broader but simpler decision than a Wizard’s constrained prep." Like WTF. Dude, clerics and druids have it harder there. And neither is really hard. A wizard has a harder choice one time at each level, when they make the choice what spells to add to their spell book. But each day, the divine casters have a harder choices.
Wizards can learn new spells when they next level up, so they that doesn't really have lasting consequences either. Though also, if there is a place that has scrolls, you can, in fact "Just plop down the money, buy a scroll, and voila".
There's a whole conversation you can read if you really want to know.
No, because I already know the correct answer. It doesn’t have anything to do with the absence of the Necromancer. This is a silly tangent arguement, and you’ll never prove them wrong, because they fully believe what they are saying is true, even if it’s not.
Wizards can learn new spells when they next level up, so they that doesn't really have lasting consequences either. Though also, if there is a place that has scrolls, you can, in fact "Just plop down the money, buy a scroll, and voila".
Wizards can learn exactly _two_ spells when they level up (sometimes three depending on the subclass). Just _two_. That makes it a far more significant decision.
More significant but infrequent, and wizards choose from less spells every long rest. (druids have 18 to choose from at level 1)
Wizard spells gained at level-up are far more significant that Cleric daily choices.
Still of little significance. You choose a damage spell a control, and a utility spell when you get a new level of spell slots. You then get to choose two more spells of any variety when you next level up. Also, if you really want a spell, you might be able to find a magic library or something and purchase the spell scroll for it.
Wizard spells gained at level-up are far more significant that Cleric daily choices.
Still of little significance. You choose a damage spell a control, and a utility spell when you get a new level of spell slots. You then get to choose two more spells of any variety when you next level up. Also, if you really want a spell, you might be able to find a magic library or something and purchase the spell scroll for it.
four spells of each spell level throughout the character's class levels. Just four. That's very significant. Especially when you consider 1 is probably defensive, 1 offensive, 1 utility, and 1 is free. Where do rituals fit in? That one offensive, is it area of effect? Is it charm/enchantment, energy-based, or illusion (types of spells which there are known resistances or immunities to?) Is it save or die? These are all significant decisions for the wizard's precious few highest level spells.
5 spells (1 from subclass). Also, you do not need a defensive spell for every spell level. (nor does one exist, I believe) Rituals would obviously be part of your one or two utility per level.
Charm Person targets only humanoids while Suggestion affects many more targets.
Charm Person lasts an hour, Suggestion lasts eight.
Charm Person can't be used in combat easily. Suggestion can make you drop your weapon.
Charm Person is obvious
Charm Person just makes people like you. Suggestion is mind control.
Charm Person requires concentration
The only significant thing here is charm person only works for humanoids, but most enemies that can understand you will be humanoids anyways. Sure, suggestion lasts longer. That rarely comes into play due to the long durations both spells have. Charm person can be used in combat - it gives the incredible charmed condition. Suggestion is a little more powerful, but both fulfill similar use cases. Also, you have it backwards - charm person doesn't require concentration while suggestion does.
And greatly improved on most levels. but they gutted the Undead thralls feature. I understand designing the subclass ina way to not push players to mass summoning but the new feature is broken and not in a good way, As long as your using Summon Undead you cant do anything a Wizard would do, NO Slow, No Hypnotic Pattern, No Concentrations spells... im not summoning one undead at THAT cost
Honestly, I love the new necromancer. I don't like the whole command undead aspect; I do however like the life-magic type thing. So, buffing my allies with temp hitpoints and such is right up my alley in how I'd want to play a "white necromancer" anyways.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You're moving the goalposts. I just refuted your point that subclasses add a significant amount of complexity, and you respond with the earlier claim that wizards are a more complex class.
Why are y’all debating class complexity? Dnd isn’t that complex, and Wizards don’t make any more choices than any other class. Clerics and warlocks have just as much complexity. Cleric subclasses can affect spells and give bonus spells. Necromancer isn’t missing because WotC felt that giving Wizards 9 subclasses in the PHB made them too complex. It’s missing because they wanted things to be even because that was a major complaint about 2014 PHB. They most likely didn’t choose Necromancer for the PHB because it needs a lot of work to stop it from being a turn hog with an army of undead, while still feeling like it gives you an army of undead, and since it’s often considered evil it’s hard to make it one of 4 options. With the horror themed playtest im shocked they didn’t show us a new version of the Necromancer.
As I've said, adding more options when leveling up does not add that much complexity to a class.
No they don’t, they just get 2. They can also find and transcribe more. Nothing about that is more complex. It’s up to the DM what additional spells scrolls or books they find. Conversations can and should be had, but there is no more complexity than any spell caster picking spells. If you want to continue the debate please show new information, because as of right now you are objectively wrong. You are seemingly claiming choice equals complexity, but Cleric, Druid, and Warlock have more choices to make as they level. Bards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks are locked in with spell choices just like Wizards. Also the most important question hasn’t been answered. WHY IS THIS A DEBATE? What changes even if Wizards were more complex? That still has nothing to do with the lack of a Necromancer.
By that logic Druid, Cleric and Warlock and Bard have more complexity. They have way more choices to make that change the way they play beyond just spell selection. The only thing the Wizard has is that it can’t just swap a spell on the long rest. Plus you are still avoiding the important question. What does any of this have to do with the absence of the Necromancer?
Such a terrible analysis can only come from chatgpt. It has copying spells into your spellbook as an option. It double counts preparing spells by counting 4th-level spells separately. It ignores the actual choice for druid (elemental fury) that would be the most significant thing in this chart. I could go on.
"Prepare ~11 spells from entire Druid list daily — broader but simpler decision than a Wizard’s constrained prep." Like WTF. Dude, clerics and druids have it harder there. And neither is really hard. A wizard has a harder choice one time at each level, when they make the choice what spells to add to their spell book. But each day, the divine casters have a harder choices.
Wizards can learn new spells when they next level up, so they that doesn't really have lasting consequences either. Though also, if there is a place that has scrolls, you can, in fact "Just plop down the money, buy a scroll, and voila".
STOP AVOIDING THE QUESTION. What does this nonsense have to do with the absence of the Necromancer?!!
There's a whole conversation you can read if you really want to know.
No, because I already know the correct answer. It doesn’t have anything to do with the absence of the Necromancer. This is a silly tangent arguement, and you’ll never prove them wrong, because they fully believe what they are saying is true, even if it’s not.
More significant but infrequent, and wizards choose from less spells every long rest. (druids have 18 to choose from at level 1)
Exactly.
Still of little significance. You choose a damage spell a control, and a utility spell when you get a new level of spell slots. You then get to choose two more spells of any variety when you next level up. Also, if you really want a spell, you might be able to find a magic library or something and purchase the spell scroll for it.
5 spells (1 from subclass). Also, you do not need a defensive spell for every spell level. (nor does one exist, I believe) Rituals would obviously be part of your one or two utility per level.
Sure, but half of those spells are doing pretty much the same thing. eg: charm person and suggestion, or fireball and lightning bolt.
The only significant thing here is charm person only works for humanoids, but most enemies that can understand you will be humanoids anyways. Sure, suggestion lasts longer. That rarely comes into play due to the long durations both spells have. Charm person can be used in combat - it gives the incredible charmed condition. Suggestion is a little more powerful, but both fulfill similar use cases. Also, you have it backwards - charm person doesn't require concentration while suggestion does.
Necromancer is listed in the new UA Playtest. :)
Food, Scifi/fantasy, anime, DND 5E and OSR geek.
And greatly improved on most levels. but they gutted the Undead thralls feature. I understand designing the subclass ina way to not push players to mass summoning but the new feature is broken and not in a good way, As long as your using Summon Undead you cant do anything a Wizard would do, NO Slow, No Hypnotic Pattern, No Concentrations spells... im not summoning one undead at THAT cost
Honestly, I love the new necromancer. I don't like the whole command undead aspect; I do however like the life-magic type thing. So, buffing my allies with temp hitpoints and such is right up my alley in how I'd want to play a "white necromancer" anyways.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha