2) Counterspell now requires the target to make a constitution saving throw.
Why would Sorcercer or an Eldrich Knight be better at resisting a Counterspell than another caster like Warlock or Clerics? Another even worse example: 4 Figher/1Wizard is better at resisting counterspell than 5 Wizard.
Yeah, I thought something like an Arcana check would be better, but then, of course, there's lots of casters who don't have arcana. So maybe a save based on the casting stat, whatever that may be.
I'd recommend changing the concentration so that it isn't cheesed by taking a multiclass. They already got rid of the action surge strategy which I think is a very good move. I like any steps they take to strengthen staying in one class. Mechanically the easiest way to do that is buffs to some of your tools that happens at set levels as you go. Happens already but they could have leaned even more into that style. I like multiclass to diversify some specializations and variety not to get every buff to make you hit like a truck. I respect folks that like to optimize too though, I get how that is fun. It's a conundrum to appease both playstyles :).
Counterspell is better and since monsters don’t use spellslots it’s geared to not hurt PCs but still stop monsters in their tracks completely.
An interesting and potentially thorny point for the new Counterspell, since WotC decided to phase out spell slots on NPC blocks. How does innate casting and other non spell slot using instances interact with the refreshment of spell slots? There's obviously the by the letter of the effect interpretation that innate casts are still consumed, but honestly seems to me like RAI is that it should function in the same manner as spell slots.
No if you watch the video JC specifically said if it used a spell slot the spell slot isn’t wasted. If your magic initiate or magic item spell gets countered then the charge should be gone. More importantly for monsters there per day use should be gone.
2) Counterspell now requires the target to make a constitution saving throw.
Why would Sorcercer or an Eldrich Knight be better at resisting a Counterspell than another caster like Warlock or Clerics? Another even worse example: 4 Figher/1Wizard is better at resisting counterspell than 5 Wizard.
Yeah, I thought something like an Arcana check would be better, but then, of course, there's lots of casters who don't have arcana. So maybe a save based on the casting stat, whatever that may be.
I'd recommend changing the concentration so that it isn't cheesed by taking a multiclass. They already got rid of the action surge strategy which I think is a very good move. I like any steps they take to strengthen staying in one class. Mechanically the easiest way to do that is buffs to some of your tools that happens at set levels as you go. Happens already but they could have leaned even more into that style. I like multiclass to diversify some specializations and variety not to get every buff to make you hit like a truck. I respect folks that like to optimize too though, I get how that is fun. It's a conundrum to appease both playstyles :).
Concentration its mind and body, but Constitution by balance perspective I guess and I'm OK. The problem is bringing CS to Constitution. Don't make sense to me. Even INT makes more sense, but i think the caster main ability should be the focus.
If you think, INT is the most dumped STATs in D&D 5.e
2) Counterspell now requires the target to make a constitution saving throw.
Why would Sorcercer or an Eldrich Knight be better at resisting a Counterspell than another caster like Warlock or Clerics? Another even worse example: 4 Figher/1Wizard is better at resisting counterspell than 5 Wizard.
Yeah, I thought something like an Arcana check would be better, but then, of course, there's lots of casters who don't have arcana. So maybe a save based on the casting stat, whatever that may be.
I'd recommend changing the concentration so that it isn't cheesed by taking a multiclass. They already got rid of the action surge strategy which I think is a very good move. I like any steps they take to strengthen staying in one class. Mechanically the easiest way to do that is buffs to some of your tools that happens at set levels as you go. Happens already but they could have leaned even more into that style. I like multiclass to diversify some specializations and variety not to get every buff to make you hit like a truck. I respect folks that like to optimize too though, I get how that is fun. It's a conundrum to appease both playstyles :).
Concentration its mind and body, but Constitution by balance perspective I guess and I'm OK. The problem is bringing CS to Constitution. Don't make sense to me. Even INT makes more sense, but i think the caster main ability should be the focus.
If you think, INT is the most dumped STATs in D&D 5.e
CS has ALWAYS been con. Con, by its nature, has NO PROFICIENCIES and virtually no other saves except for being against con itself.
Your con doesnt matter either, it's the creature/DM NPC that has to make the con save.
My impression is that Concentration saves come up more frequently than Counterspell [I think the fact that both can be abbreviated to “CS” caused confusion above]. Despite that, you rarely see the Resilient (Cons) feat described as mandatory for spellcasters: worthwhile having, but one out of a variety of worthwhile options. Nor does starting with a level as a Fighter or Artificer seem to be deemed crucial for Wizard builds. Sorcerers are supposed to be naturally stronger but less versatile casters than Wizards, while Eldritch Knights and multi-classed characters sacrifice the number of slots and levels of a full Wizard, so their better ability to maintain concentration and resist Counterspell is balanced.
My impression is that Concentration saves come up more frequently than Counterspell [I think the fact that both can be abbreviated to “CS” caused confusion above]. Despite that, you rarely see the Resilient (Cons) feat described as mandatory for spellcasters: worthwhile having, but one out of a variety of worthwhile options. Nor does starting with a level as a Fighter or Artificer seem to be deemed crucial for Wizard builds. Sorcerers are supposed to be naturally stronger but less versatile casters than Wizards, while Eldritch Knights and multi-classed characters sacrifice the number of slots and levels of a full Wizard, so their better ability to maintain concentration and resist Counterspell is balanced.
Not a must, but it is highly recommended for spell casters who are going to constantly receive damage and/or who are going to use a lot of spells with Concentration. But it's not mandatory, no. Among other things because many of those spell casters, like the bladesinger, already have a buff to their Concentration saves.
Counterspell for Wizard issue coukd be fixed if they just changed Wiz saves to Int & Con.
I think the idea behind the Sorc Innate Sorcery +1 to DC & Attack is thematically to release a burst. But yes, maybe abit too powerful. To counter it, I'd suggest giving Wizzys way more spells known at level up, and more spells prepared. Maybe boost their Memorize Spell feature, too. Really lean in to the Wizard's versatility?
Counterspell for Wizard issue coukd be fixed if they just changed Wiz saves to Int & Con.
I think the idea behind the Sorc Innate Sorcery +1 to DC & Attack is thematically to release a burst. But yes, maybe abit too powerful. To counter it, I'd suggest giving Wizzys way more spells known at level up, and more spells prepared. Maybe boost their Memorize Spell feature, too. Really lean in to the Wizard's versatility?
Why do you think it needs to be countered. Do you realize that because of memorize spell a Wizard has access to every spell they know everyday. They will never run into that moment of oh I have a spell for that, but I have to wait until tomorrow. This UA improved wizard versatility already. The new version of counterspell is just better for the game.
Counterspell for Wizard issue coukd be fixed if they just changed Wiz saves to Int & Con.
I think the idea behind the Sorc Innate Sorcery +1 to DC & Attack is thematically to release a burst. But yes, maybe abit too powerful. To counter it, I'd suggest giving Wizzys way more spells known at level up, and more spells prepared. Maybe boost their Memorize Spell feature, too. Really lean in to the Wizard's versatility?
Why do you think it needs to be countered. Do you realize that because of memorize spell a Wizard has access to every spell they know everyday. They will never run into that moment of oh I have a spell for that, but I have to wait until tomorrow. This UA improved wizard versatility already. The new version of counterspell is just better for the game.
Because a minor sorcerer boost needs to be met with massive boosts to the wizard. We can't possibly have that massive gap between wiz and sorcerer close any, it needs to be preserved at all costs.
My impression is that Concentration saves come up more frequently than Counterspell [I think the fact that both can be abbreviated to “CS” caused confusion above]. Despite that, you rarely see the Resilient (Cons) feat described as mandatory for spellcasters: worthwhile having, but one out of a variety of worthwhile options. Nor does starting with a level as a Fighter or Artificer seem to be deemed crucial for Wizard builds. Sorcerers are supposed to be naturally stronger but less versatile casters than Wizards, while Eldritch Knights and multi-classed characters sacrifice the number of slots and levels of a full Wizard, so their better ability to maintain concentration and resist Counterspell is balanced.
Nothing is mandatory as every table will have different gameplay styles. Tables where enemies target spell casters who are concentrating on spells it or warcaster is as close to mandatory as you can get. If you can park in the back and only get shot once in a blue moon you don't need much in the way of defense or concentration protection. So basically if you are at a table where things like counter spell, or attacks to break concentration will be used against the players, it becomes close to mandatory.
Analyzing the Wizard class changes in UA5 we noticed that there was an attempt to improve the class, of course with some errors (e.g. Arcane Magic list).
But the recent UA7, in addition to eliminating attempts at improvement, basically reversed the changes and placed the class even in a lower position.
Analyzing the changes:
1) Modify Spell and Create Spell are gone.
Why? They are really cool concepts that needs some tweaks. The argument that they make the sorcerer have less identity is not true. Just look at the 3rd edition. Metamagic Feats were spellcasters' abilities in general, which are now the sorcerer's, but that doesn't mean that other spellcasters can't have abilities that improve their spells. Indeed they must have, as they are spellcasters.
2) Counterspell now requires the target to make a constitution saving throw.
Why would Sorcercer or an Eldrich Knight be better at resisting a Counterspell than another caster like Warlock or Clerics? Another even worse example: 4 Figher/1Wizard is better at resisting counterspell than 5 Wizard.
3) Spell Mastery returns to level 18. Allowing at-will casting of non-action spells, such as Shield, was too powerful
Spell Mastery is very cool concept and reminds me of the old Archmage. Although this skill is extremely cool and flavorful, its a level 18 feature.
In other words, anyone at this level will hardly worry about focusing on level 1 or 2 spells. This nerf to Shield was funny because who will be worried about this at level 18? Serious.
The problem here is that the Wizard's improvements happen at levels that don't make much difference to the overwhelming majority of players.
4) Innate Sorcery empowers your spells' attack rolls and save DCs for a limited time.
What is a Sorcerer spells? All spells from his list?
This Sorcerer ability puts every other spellcaster in the game as a second hand spellcasters. Getting +1 to DC and advantage on every single roll for 10 turns is insane.
Not only did Wizards miss out on two class abilities they could have had, they fell short of their counterpart.
What do you think? What are the community's views?
1. It should be in the DMG as an expensive optional rule for all casters to futz around with. I'd dig it if they went back to 2e and you built a research lab costing 10,000 of thousands of gold, with thousands of gold for each spell. The red book complete book of wizards had some sweet rules on it. One of thier hard covers did as well. Spells and Magic maybe. The mechanics of 2e are very dated, but man they wrote sweet supplements. Very evocative writing in them.
2. Con may overly favor the PCs. Casters usually have weak con saves(archmage is +1) and monsters in 5e don't seem to learn feats like resilient con, or have many skills or much of anything past, me hit you, me take damage.That being said I agree on the vs PC part where it creates odd results where starting as a fighter means you are better at resisting counter spell. It should be casting stat imo. One it wont make getting it off on a archmage trivial, and two it makes sense that a pure wizard is better at resisting it than a fighter dip.
3, I think it was good as for too many people shield/misty step were just the no brainer choice. Sure like my enchanter too enchantments but that was because it fit my character even if it was the sub optimal choice. But the game should not be here are the two choices you will always make unless you make a inferior role playing choice. It should hopefully have a small pile of equally good options. I think this change helps that. Not that 99% of people will ever see it.
I don't think the point here is to counter Sorcerer. Its really sad to see many people raging about that the intention is to nerf Sorcerer.
The point is:
1) All full caster should have compatible in terms of magic strength. That means Savings DC, should be the same for all casters.
2) But each class should have their flavor.
3) Forcing Multiclassing to get one Perk is a bad design.
e.g. Action Surge being used to cast Magic is one of them.
About the Wizards, what they lack, is some how to modify their spells. Fireball is always Fireball. If your enemy has resistance to your prepared spells, you just sit and watch. That's why metamagic feats is so strong and cool and they should be !!!!
Modify Spell is needed just to give us some options to to play with.
modify and create spell abilities made wizards interesting. They've been removed and not replaced with anything.
This turns wizards back into the most boring class. They get spells, and literally thats it. The subclasses are all rather flavorless. Their huge "advantage" is usually only on "white boards" and not in games. You never have ALL the spells memorized, so you don't have every choice. As well, unless your dm is literally raining gold on you, you probably don't own every spell either.
Sorcerer subclasses are interesting and flavorful. Wizards go back to just being so bland that its hard to really tell them apart.
modify and create spell abilities made wizards interesting. They've been removed and not replaced with anything.
This turns wizards back into the most boring class. They get spells, and literally thats it. The subclasses are all rather flavorless. Their huge "advantage" is usually only on "white boards" and not in games. You never have ALL the spells memorized, so you don't have every choice. As well, unless your dm is literally raining gold on you, you probably don't own every spell either.
Sorcerer subclasses are interesting and flavorful. Wizards go back to just being so bland that its hard to really tell them apart.
Ok. I don't want those abilities to go to ANY spellcasters AT ALL, but I get your frustration at lack of flavor.
Perhaps the best thing is to ditch the existing spell schools, reflavor as magical academies, and then focus each subclass better towards the utility and flavor of the spells themselves.
I have a setting where I want wizards to feel like they are civil servants along side artificers. I want to give utility cantrips that fit that image for free.
Maybe wizards should be given schools/academies that award some spells or discount spells based on what the end "career" would be. Divination and illusion are fairly ok as is, but the other spells might need sorting differently. This sort of "utility first" methodology might also lead to a lot of new spells, and necromancy might lean into healing spells, learning to create golems as well as raise the dead, polymorph as it's manipulation of the body, etc. Mend and item enchantment being for the more entrepreneurial wizard. (Though really close to what an artificer is there ..), a focus on communications yields things like message, telepathy oriented spells,comprehend languages, skills for copying spell scrolls easier/cheaper, etc (it's basically transcribing and writing), mold earth, shape water, etc along with other elemental spells might indicate someone more adept at engineering projects where material manipulation is super important (and though this sounds dull or useless, you can always redo a spell to make it do utility AND combat...)
A change like that though requires its own new edition. It would still make wizards a hell of a lot more interesting that sticking to war casters and the old tired schools from 2e
aye, my frustration is more that they weren't replaced. I understand that they were unbalanced. However there was no attempt to tune them, or even replace them. Just give up and let wizards go back to being the most boring class in the game.
I don't think the point here is to counter Sorcerer. Its really sad to see many people raging about that the intention is to nerf Sorcerer.
The point is:
1) All full caster should have compatible in terms of magic strength. That means Savings DC, should be the same for all casters.
2) But each class should have their flavor.
3) Forcing Multiclassing to get one Perk is a bad design.
e.g. Action Surge being used to cast Magic is one of them.
About the Wizards, what they lack, is some how to modify their spells. Fireball is always Fireball. If your enemy has resistance to your prepared spells, you just sit and watch. That's why metamagic feats is so strong and cool and they should be !!!!
Modify Spell is needed just to give us some options to to play with.
1) Then Sorcerers should be getting access to a lot more spells
2) How, you literally want them to be the same.
3) Don’t multiclass to get the perk. You aren’t forced and the perk isn’t that great and comes at the cost of you higher level spells.
Wizards don’t need to modify spells because they have more spells available to them. They can have fireball and lightning bolt prepared because it only takes them one minute to get any non combat spell thanks to memorize spell. They also are still the only class that just needs a ritual in their book to cast it. A wizard is a versatile caster who can have more spells available to them from a larger spell list. Sorcerers do more with a much smaller amount of spells. That is the flavor. If you let wizards do everything sorcerers do then there is no flavor.
Create Spell was the most interesting and thematic thing they could've done to the Wizard and they just tossed it out without even trying to balance it. Deeply disappointing.
Counterpoint, Creating a Spell (if it should be allowed at all) shouldn't be a thing only Wizards can do. It should instead be a potential downtime activity in a similar vein to crafting magic items. Restricting it to a "Wizards only" class feature gate-keeps out other character concepts of non-wizards who might just happen to like experimenting and investigating into the inner workings of magic and spell-craft. Just because its something commonly thematic to wizards doesn't mean it should be a mechanic only accessible to Wizards.
I don't think the point here is to counter Sorcerer. Its really sad to see many people raging about that the intention is to nerf Sorcerer.
The point is:
1) All full caster should have compatible in terms of magic strength. That means Savings DC, should be the same for all casters.
2) But each class should have their flavor.
3) Forcing Multiclassing to get one Perk is a bad design.
e.g. Action Surge being used to cast Magic is one of them.
About the Wizards, what they lack, is some how to modify their spells. Fireball is always Fireball. If your enemy has resistance to your prepared spells, you just sit and watch. That's why metamagic feats is so strong and cool and they should be !!!!
Modify Spell is needed just to give us some options to to play with.
1) Then Sorcerers should be getting access to a lot more spells
2) How, you literally want them to be the same.
3) Don’t multiclass to get the perk. You aren’t forced and the perk isn’t that great and comes at the cost of you higher level spells.
Wizards don’t need to modify spells because they have more spells available to them. They can have fireball and lightning bolt prepared because it only takes them one minute to get any non combat spell thanks to memorize spell. They also are still the only class that just needs a ritual in their book to cast it. A wizard is a versatile caster who can have more spells available to them from a larger spell list. Sorcerers do more with a much smaller amount of spells. That is the flavor. If you let wizards do everything sorcerers do then there is no flavor.
1) This topic is about Wizards and not about Sorcerer. You mixing your feelings with the topic discussion. if you think Sorcerer should have access to more spells, cool. Open a thread to discuss it, you are most welcome.
2) What are you trying to say here? Wizards and Sorcerer are very different, (Have you played both?). Every level progression and abilities are different . But yet, they are full caster, with their own lore.
3) This argument is very poor. Saying just "don't use it" is not a good argument neither is a good design. What's your argument not multiclassing?
Wizards don’t need to modify spells because they have more spells available to them. They can have fireball and lightning bolt prepared because it only takes them one minute to get any non combat spell thanks to memorize spell. They also are still the only class that just needs a ritual in their book to cast it. A wizard is a versatile caster who can have more spells available to them from a larger spell list. Sorcerers do more with a much smaller amount of spells. That is the flavor. If you let wizards do everything sorcerers do then there is no flavor.
Do you think Wizards have unlimited spells slots? Its only takes 1 minute to prepare a spell, but If you are in combat what do you do? Do you think lighting bolt and fireball can be used in the same circumstance?
Its very clear that you feel bad about Sorcerer learning less spells. What about discussing that?
Modify and create spell could have worked if they spell slot required went up as you modified. If you wanted to change your fireball to be a lightning ball it would become 4th level. If you wanted to add more to it, it became a 5th or 6th level spell. Or something like that
I agree that as the were written they could break the game, just like the classes that got wish with no chance of side effects (sorcerer and cleric). But it might have been nice to see a rewrite.
I’m fine with the change to Counterspell. CON save makes sense. Just like if you Readied a spell you had to maintain concentration until it triggered. We will see if it lasts. I know there are some out there who don’t like Counterspell, period, and don’t allow it in their game. Maybe this will help.
I don't think the point here is to counter Sorcerer. Its really sad to see many people raging about that the intention is to nerf Sorcerer.
The point is:
1) All full caster should have compatible in terms of magic strength. That means Savings DC, should be the same for all casters.
2) But each class should have their flavor.
3) Forcing Multiclassing to get one Perk is a bad design.
e.g. Action Surge being used to cast Magic is one of them.
About the Wizards, what they lack, is some how to modify their spells. Fireball is always Fireball. If your enemy has resistance to your prepared spells, you just sit and watch. That's why metamagic feats is so strong and cool and they should be !!!!
Modify Spell is needed just to give us some options to to play with.
1) Then Sorcerers should be getting access to a lot more spells
2) How, you literally want them to be the same.
3) Don’t multiclass to get the perk. You aren’t forced and the perk isn’t that great and comes at the cost of you higher level spells.
Wizards don’t need to modify spells because they have more spells available to them. They can have fireball and lightning bolt prepared because it only takes them one minute to get any non combat spell thanks to memorize spell. They also are still the only class that just needs a ritual in their book to cast it. A wizard is a versatile caster who can have more spells available to them from a larger spell list. Sorcerers do more with a much smaller amount of spells. That is the flavor. If you let wizards do everything sorcerers do then there is no flavor.
1) This topic is about Wizards and not about Sorcerer. You mixing your feelings with the topic discussion. if you think Sorcerer should have access to more spells, cool. Open a thread to discuss it, you are most welcome.
2) What are you trying to say here? Wizards and Sorcerer are very different, (Have you played both?). Every level progression and abilities are different . But yet, they are full caster, with their own lore.
3) This argument is very poor. Saying just "don't use it" is not a good argument neither is a good design. What's your argument not multiclassing?
Wizards don’t need to modify spells because they have more spells available to them. They can have fireball and lightning bolt prepared because it only takes them one minute to get any non combat spell thanks to memorize spell. They also are still the only class that just needs a ritual in their book to cast it. A wizard is a versatile caster who can have more spells available to them from a larger spell list. Sorcerers do more with a much smaller amount of spells. That is the flavor. If you let wizards do everything sorcerers do then there is no flavor.
Do you think Wizards have unlimited spells slots? Its only takes 1 minute to prepare a spell, but If you are in combat what do you do? Do you think lighting bolt and fireball can be used in the same circumstance?
Its very clear that you feel bad about Sorcerer learning less spells. What about discussing that?
1) You said sorcerers got a thing, so wizards should get it too. I replied wizards already have this thing so if you want to give wizards the the thing sorcerers are getting then you should give sorcerers the thing wizards have. You know balancing them.
2) I’m saying wizards and sorcerers are not very different and yes I have played them both. Their level progressions are mostly just more spells. Let’s talk about how they are different and what themes make them different. Wizards have more spell options (bigger list and ritual casting spells that aren’t prepared) and more spells per day (arcane recovery). Sorcerers have less spells options, but can alter spells through metamagic or use that resource to try to get more spells per day to keep up to the wizard. The Wizard now got Memorize spell Which gives them even more spell options per day and the sorcerer gets Sorcery Incarnate which for 1 minute gives them a boost in DC and Spell Attack. You want to give the sorcerers thing to the Wizard, but don’t want the Sorcerer to get the wizards thing.
3) Most Wizards don’t Multiclass. Why would you give up spell progression. So to get action surge you have to give up spell progression. So yes at Wiz 5/Fighter 2 you can drop two fireballs in one turn or do some really cool two spell thing, but you just spent two spell slots and you gave up being able to cast 4th level spells and having another 3 level spell slot. Don’t get it wrong I’ve played the heavy mage and did just that, but it comes at a cost as it should. You can have fun doing that but there is a cost and doing that and it is not mandatory. A wizard is strong on its own. Wizard are considered the one of the strongest classes in the game.
As far as Memorize Spell I said you prepare your combat spells and use Memorize spell to switch between you non combat spells. And you have rituals for non combat spells.
I don’t think Sorcerers need more spells now. They are in a healthy place right now, but I do believe transmute spell should be usable with other metamagics the way empower spell and seeking spell. Honestly the Scribes Wizard is better at switching damage types than sorcerer with transmute spell metamagic. If you give sorcerers the same amount of spells as the wizard you are killing there individual flavor. It will become do you want to be a INT Wizard or a CHA Wizard. I don’t want that. Every spellcaster does not need Innate Sorcery as you claim. If they did we would have seen this feature before now. It’s a cool little thing to attempt to create more of a difference between Sorcerers and Wizards.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'd recommend changing the concentration so that it isn't cheesed by taking a multiclass. They already got rid of the action surge strategy which I think is a very good move. I like any steps they take to strengthen staying in one class. Mechanically the easiest way to do that is buffs to some of your tools that happens at set levels as you go. Happens already but they could have leaned even more into that style. I like multiclass to diversify some specializations and variety not to get every buff to make you hit like a truck. I respect folks that like to optimize too though, I get how that is fun. It's a conundrum to appease both playstyles :).
No if you watch the video JC specifically said if it used a spell slot the spell slot isn’t wasted. If your magic initiate or magic item spell gets countered then the charge should be gone. More importantly for monsters there per day use should be gone.
Concentration its mind and body, but Constitution by balance perspective I guess and I'm OK. The problem is bringing CS to Constitution. Don't make sense to me. Even INT makes more sense, but i think the caster main ability should be the focus.
If you think, INT is the most dumped STATs in D&D 5.e
CS has ALWAYS been con. Con, by its nature, has NO PROFICIENCIES and virtually no other saves except for being against con itself.
Your con doesnt matter either, it's the creature/DM NPC that has to make the con save.
My impression is that Concentration saves come up more frequently than Counterspell [I think the fact that both can be abbreviated to “CS” caused confusion above]. Despite that, you rarely see the Resilient (Cons) feat described as mandatory for spellcasters: worthwhile having, but one out of a variety of worthwhile options. Nor does starting with a level as a Fighter or Artificer seem to be deemed crucial for Wizard builds. Sorcerers are supposed to be naturally stronger but less versatile casters than Wizards, while Eldritch Knights and multi-classed characters sacrifice the number of slots and levels of a full Wizard, so their better ability to maintain concentration and resist Counterspell is balanced.
Not a must, but it is highly recommended for spell casters who are going to constantly receive damage and/or who are going to use a lot of spells with Concentration.
But it's not mandatory, no. Among other things because many of those spell casters, like the bladesinger, already have a buff to their Concentration saves.
Counterspell for Wizard issue coukd be fixed if they just changed Wiz saves to Int & Con.
I think the idea behind the Sorc Innate Sorcery +1 to DC & Attack is thematically to release a burst. But yes, maybe abit too powerful. To counter it, I'd suggest giving Wizzys way more spells known at level up, and more spells prepared. Maybe boost their Memorize Spell feature, too. Really lean in to the Wizard's versatility?
Why do you think it needs to be countered. Do you realize that because of memorize spell a Wizard has access to every spell they know everyday. They will never run into that moment of oh I have a spell for that, but I have to wait until tomorrow. This UA improved wizard versatility already. The new version of counterspell is just better for the game.
Because a minor sorcerer boost needs to be met with massive boosts to the wizard. We can't possibly have that massive gap between wiz and sorcerer close any, it needs to be preserved at all costs.
Nothing is mandatory as every table will have different gameplay styles. Tables where enemies target spell casters who are concentrating on spells it or warcaster is as close to mandatory as you can get. If you can park in the back and only get shot once in a blue moon you don't need much in the way of defense or concentration protection. So basically if you are at a table where things like counter spell, or attacks to break concentration will be used against the players, it becomes close to mandatory.
1. It should be in the DMG as an expensive optional rule for all casters to futz around with. I'd dig it if they went back to 2e and you built a research lab costing 10,000 of thousands of gold, with thousands of gold for each spell. The red book complete book of wizards had some sweet rules on it. One of thier hard covers did as well. Spells and Magic maybe. The mechanics of 2e are very dated, but man they wrote sweet supplements. Very evocative writing in them.
2. Con may overly favor the PCs. Casters usually have weak con saves(archmage is +1) and monsters in 5e don't seem to learn feats like resilient con, or have many skills or much of anything past, me hit you, me take damage.That being said I agree on the vs PC part where it creates odd results where starting as a fighter means you are better at resisting counter spell. It should be casting stat imo. One it wont make getting it off on a archmage trivial, and two it makes sense that a pure wizard is better at resisting it than a fighter dip.
3, I think it was good as for too many people shield/misty step were just the no brainer choice. Sure like my enchanter too enchantments but that was because it fit my character even if it was the sub optimal choice. But the game should not be here are the two choices you will always make unless you make a inferior role playing choice. It should hopefully have a small pile of equally good options. I think this change helps that. Not that 99% of people will ever see it.
4. Its decent but not over powered.
I don't think the point here is to counter Sorcerer. Its really sad to see many people raging about that the intention is to nerf Sorcerer.
The point is:
1) All full caster should have compatible in terms of magic strength. That means Savings DC, should be the same for all casters.
2) But each class should have their flavor.
3) Forcing Multiclassing to get one Perk is a bad design.
e.g. Action Surge being used to cast Magic is one of them.
About the Wizards, what they lack, is some how to modify their spells. Fireball is always Fireball. If your enemy has resistance to your prepared spells, you just sit and watch. That's why metamagic feats is so strong and cool and they should be !!!!
Modify Spell is needed just to give us some options to to play with.
modify and create spell abilities made wizards interesting. They've been removed and not replaced with anything.
This turns wizards back into the most boring class. They get spells, and literally thats it. The subclasses are all rather flavorless. Their huge "advantage" is usually only on "white boards" and not in games. You never have ALL the spells memorized, so you don't have every choice. As well, unless your dm is literally raining gold on you, you probably don't own every spell either.
Sorcerer subclasses are interesting and flavorful. Wizards go back to just being so bland that its hard to really tell them apart.
Ok. I don't want those abilities to go to ANY spellcasters AT ALL, but I get your frustration at lack of flavor.
Perhaps the best thing is to ditch the existing spell schools, reflavor as magical academies, and then focus each subclass better towards the utility and flavor of the spells themselves.
I have a setting where I want wizards to feel like they are civil servants along side artificers. I want to give utility cantrips that fit that image for free.
Maybe wizards should be given schools/academies that award some spells or discount spells based on what the end "career" would be. Divination and illusion are fairly ok as is, but the other spells might need sorting differently. This sort of "utility first" methodology might also lead to a lot of new spells, and necromancy might lean into healing spells, learning to create golems as well as raise the dead, polymorph as it's manipulation of the body, etc. Mend and item enchantment being for the more entrepreneurial wizard. (Though really close to what an artificer is there ..), a focus on communications yields things like message, telepathy oriented spells,comprehend languages, skills for copying spell scrolls easier/cheaper, etc (it's basically transcribing and writing), mold earth, shape water, etc along with other elemental spells might indicate someone more adept at engineering projects where material manipulation is super important (and though this sounds dull or useless, you can always redo a spell to make it do utility AND combat...)
A change like that though requires its own new edition. It would still make wizards a hell of a lot more interesting that sticking to war casters and the old tired schools from 2e
aye, my frustration is more that they weren't replaced. I understand that they were unbalanced. However there was no attempt to tune them, or even replace them. Just give up and let wizards go back to being the most boring class in the game.
1) Then Sorcerers should be getting access to a lot more spells
2) How, you literally want them to be the same.
3) Don’t multiclass to get the perk. You aren’t forced and the perk isn’t that great and comes at the cost of you higher level spells.
Wizards don’t need to modify spells because they have more spells available to them. They can have fireball and lightning bolt prepared because it only takes them one minute to get any non combat spell thanks to memorize spell. They also are still the only class that just needs a ritual in their book to cast it. A wizard is a versatile caster who can have more spells available to them from a larger spell list. Sorcerers do more with a much smaller amount of spells. That is the flavor. If you let wizards do everything sorcerers do then there is no flavor.
Counterpoint, Creating a Spell (if it should be allowed at all) shouldn't be a thing only Wizards can do. It should instead be a potential downtime activity in a similar vein to crafting magic items. Restricting it to a "Wizards only" class feature gate-keeps out other character concepts of non-wizards who might just happen to like experimenting and investigating into the inner workings of magic and spell-craft. Just because its something commonly thematic to wizards doesn't mean it should be a mechanic only accessible to Wizards.
1) This topic is about Wizards and not about Sorcerer. You mixing your feelings with the topic discussion. if you think Sorcerer should have access to more spells, cool. Open a thread to discuss it, you are most welcome.
2) What are you trying to say here? Wizards and Sorcerer are very different, (Have you played both?). Every level progression and abilities are different . But yet, they are full caster, with their own lore.
3) This argument is very poor. Saying just "don't use it" is not a good argument neither is a good design. What's your argument not multiclassing?
Wizards don’t need to modify spells because they have more spells available to them. They can have fireball and lightning bolt prepared because it only takes them one minute to get any non combat spell thanks to memorize spell. They also are still the only class that just needs a ritual in their book to cast it. A wizard is a versatile caster who can have more spells available to them from a larger spell list. Sorcerers do more with a much smaller amount of spells. That is the flavor. If you let wizards do everything sorcerers do then there is no flavor.
Do you think Wizards have unlimited spells slots? Its only takes 1 minute to prepare a spell, but If you are in combat what do you do? Do you think lighting bolt and fireball can be used in the same circumstance?
Its very clear that you feel bad about Sorcerer learning less spells. What about discussing that?
Modify and create spell could have worked if they spell slot required went up as you modified. If you wanted to change your fireball to be a lightning ball it would become 4th level. If you wanted to add more to it, it became a 5th or 6th level spell. Or something like that
I agree that as the were written they could break the game, just like the classes that got wish with no chance of side effects (sorcerer and cleric). But it might have been nice to see a rewrite.
I’m fine with the change to Counterspell. CON save makes sense. Just like if you Readied a spell you had to maintain concentration until it triggered. We will see if it lasts. I know there are some out there who don’t like Counterspell, period, and don’t allow it in their game. Maybe this will help.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
1) You said sorcerers got a thing, so wizards should get it too. I replied wizards already have this thing so if you want to give wizards the the thing sorcerers are getting then you should give sorcerers the thing wizards have. You know balancing them.
2) I’m saying wizards and sorcerers are not very different and yes I have played them both. Their level progressions are mostly just more spells. Let’s talk about how they are different and what themes make them different. Wizards have more spell options (bigger list and ritual casting spells that aren’t prepared) and more spells per day (arcane recovery). Sorcerers have less spells options, but can alter spells through metamagic or use that resource to try to get more spells per day to keep up to the wizard. The Wizard now got Memorize spell Which gives them even more spell options per day and the sorcerer gets Sorcery Incarnate which for 1 minute gives them a boost in DC and Spell Attack. You want to give the sorcerers thing to the Wizard, but don’t want the Sorcerer to get the wizards thing.
3) Most Wizards don’t Multiclass. Why would you give up spell progression. So to get action surge you have to give up spell progression. So yes at Wiz 5/Fighter 2 you can drop two fireballs in one turn or do some really cool two spell thing, but you just spent two spell slots and you gave up being able to cast 4th level spells and having another 3 level spell slot. Don’t get it wrong I’ve played the heavy mage and did just that, but it comes at a cost as it should. You can have fun doing that but there is a cost and doing that and it is not mandatory. A wizard is strong on its own. Wizard are considered the one of the strongest classes in the game.
As far as Memorize Spell I said you prepare your combat spells and use Memorize spell to switch between you non combat spells. And you have rituals for non combat spells.
I don’t think Sorcerers need more spells now. They are in a healthy place right now, but I do believe transmute spell should be usable with other metamagics the way empower spell and seeking spell. Honestly the Scribes Wizard is better at switching damage types than sorcerer with transmute spell metamagic. If you give sorcerers the same amount of spells as the wizard you are killing there individual flavor. It will become do you want to be a INT Wizard or a CHA Wizard. I don’t want that. Every spellcaster does not need Innate Sorcery as you claim. If they did we would have seen this feature before now. It’s a cool little thing to attempt to create more of a difference between Sorcerers and Wizards.