For the good of the party, do not allow that. there are literally 3 different spellcasting classes all with 4 subclasses, not even including druid, clerics, and paladins, and they ALL want to be Wizards! There is party synergy for a reason, one Anti-Magic Field and they are the equivalent of commoners.
Counterpoint: Let them play what seems fun to them and throw occasional curveballs like this as challenges. A campaign full of antimagic fields would suck, but one combat or even one dungeon that's a hard counter to mages isn't going to ruin the game. Variety is the spice of life.
No you don't get it. It would literally render them completely useless. Also that's not the only reason a bunch of wizards would not work. Having a bunch of wizards casting the same spells is very monotonous. Until about level 7, Offensive wizards are pretty much all casting the same spells (Magic Missile, Fireball, Cloud of Daggers) It also makes encounters difficult to balance for the DM and ultimately makes combat much less fun for all the players. Also It limits the roleplaying ability at the table, everyone's primary ability is Intelligence, meaning that wisdom, and charisma, dex and strength saves are usually weaker. And honestly you've seen one wizard personality you've seen at least 1/4 of them. When ambushed, the enemies have no priority because they are all mages, and high damage dealing AOEs will one shot a lot of them because of their low HP.
Ok, I was really tired when I wrote this.
I understand that it is possible to do this, but it's definitely more of a challenge for the DM. And when I said 'you've seen at least 1/4 of them', I was just yapping. What I was trying to say was mostly that having all spell-casters Is very powerful in some situations and very fatal in others. That's why it is always better to have a synergy, and try to have each-others builds complement eachother in the best way, as opposed to all having the same build with the same strengths and weaknesses.
Ok, I was really tired when I wrote this.
I understand that it is possible to do this, but it's definitely more of a challenge for the DM. And when I said 'you've seen at least 1/4 of them', I was just yapping. What I was trying to say was mostly that having all spell-casters Is very powerful in some situations and very fatal in others. That's why it is always better to have a synergy, and try to have each-others builds complement eachother in the best way, as opposed to all having the same build with the same strengths and weaknesses.
"Uh, I have Illusory Script. I think I can read that."