If you're going to delve into the Tome of Magic for ideas, you shouldn't just ignore the best ideas it had, and when it comes to Truenames, nothing tops the Unname spell. Why can't my Onomancy wizard's capstone ability be deleting some poor schmuck from reality?

Put it in the playtest survey once its out.

I personally don't like that if they succeed vs your Extract Name then that is it, you can never use your Onomancy stuff against that target ever.

I feel like there should be a retry in there somehow.

Deleting something from reality is 9th level spell type stuff, not subclass abilities.

This Onomancy is a super weird take on Naming magic.  I don't think I've ever encountered a variation of Naming magic where your True Name and your plain ordinary given name are often the same thing, nor one where your True Name is mutable.  I get why they're doing it, because if True Names worked the way they usually do then an onomancer either doesn't get to use their subclass features at all or they make whatever it is they have a Name for their personal whipping boy, but it still feels kinda weird and off.

Oh well.  It's not bad per se, just odd.

I think the idea is the true name is defined by the being, being what they refer to themselves as. Honestly, it is weird, but I think they are trying to workshop it. At least this is UA, so they can do that.

Quote from Houligan >>

Put it in the playtest survey once its out.

I personally don't like that if they succeed vs your Extract Name then that is it, you can never use your Onomancy stuff against that target ever.

I feel like there should be a retry in there somehow.

 Strictly speaking it says "you can't use this feature on the target again" not that you can't use Onomancy against it ever. It just means you'd have to use a different method for learning the target's true name... which given the UA's concept of "true name" might literally be as simple as asking "What's your name?"

You'd only need this feature for an opponent who resists giving up their true name. And in that case you could try charming the opponent such as using the Friends cantrip, or casting Suggestion, Detect Thoughts, or general mundane trickery might work too. Kudos for the Onomancer who collects true names by passing out "Hello my name is _________" tags at an office party.

Granted,  unlike Extract Name these methods don't necessarily guarantee the name is true. So you'd Probably want to take the Insight skill for this character.

Quote from Yurei1453>>

This Onomancy is a super weird take on Naming magic.  I don't think I've ever encountered a variation of Naming magic where your True Name and your plain ordinary given name are often the same thing, nor one where your True Name is mutable.  I get why they're doing it, because if True Names worked the way they usually do then an onomancer either doesn't get to use their subclass features at all or they make whatever it is they have a Name for their personal whipping boy, but it still feels kinda weird and off.

I'm sure it has way less to do with game balance and far more to do with being inclusive towards trans and nonbinary people, who often adopt a new name that better reflects who they are.

Having someone's true name doesn't grant this subclass a huge amount of power over them and the rules clearly say you can't change your true name on a whim either so it's not about countering its abilities.

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

This Onomancy is a super weird take on Naming magic.  I don't think I've ever encountered a variation of Naming magic where your True Name and your plain ordinary given name are often the same thing, nor one where your True Name is mutable.  I get why they're doing it, because if True Names worked the way they usually do then an onomancer either doesn't get to use their subclass features at all or they make whatever it is they have a Name for their personal whipping boy, but it still feels kinda weird and off.

Oh well.  It's not bad per se, just odd.

 I don't know about all that.  In regards to your True Name being your given name, look at The Dresden Files or The Bartimeaus Trilogy. In both series if a devil/demon/djinni learns your given name they can use that to harm you.  In both series magic users take precautions to prevent those entities from learning their names.  As for True Names being mutable, check out the Eragon series in which one's True Name can be changed by a person making efforts to modify their nature, such as becoming a kinder person, thus breaking or diminishing spells cast using their True Name.

I don't think there's a definitive precedent on the matter.  A stone cannot change itself but a person can.  And your given name is typically how you define yourself until you replace it and thus modify your identity

Quote from InquisitiveCoder >>

Quote from Yurei1453>>

This Onomancy is a super weird take on Naming magic.  I don't think I've ever encountered a variation of Naming magic where your True Name and your plain ordinary given name are often the same thing, nor one where your True Name is mutable.  I get why they're doing it, because if True Names worked the way they usually do then an onomancer either doesn't get to use their subclass features at all or they make whatever it is they have a Name for their personal whipping boy, but it still feels kinda weird and off.

I'm sure it has way less to do with game balance and far more to do with being inclusive towards trans and nonbinary people, who often adopt a new name that better reflects who they are.

Having someone's true name doesn't grant this subclass a huge amount of power over them and the rules clearly say you can't change your true name on a whim either so it's not about countering its abilities.

 It does say that your true name can change over time, like Batman became his true name and Bruce Wayne was his alterego.

Sure, but it still only changes in accordance to how you perceive yourself. There is no reliable mechanism to change your true name without also radically altering your own conception of yourself. That's why I'm suggesting it has far more to do with being inclusive than some sort of mechanical countermeasure to the subclass.

Insisting that someone's dead name is their true name sucks.

I'm pretty sure no one's True Name is their birth name. I don't see any part of the UA material that specifies, but originally your True Name was some extremely complicated, borderline impronounceable nonsense that the True Namer in question had to recite perfectly or else the magic didn't work. 

The UA does say your true name is basically how you'd answer the question "My name is...", so they're not going for the "borderline unprounanceable nonsense" thing.

Well, if I remember the lore of Truenames from the Tome of Magic, your Truename gains syllables as you progress through life. The original syllable doesn't change and neither does the ones you already have, but the new ones are based on how you change as a person.

Obviously lore doesn't stay the same between editions, and it seems that the above poster is right about the lore of the current iteration. Though I must say, lorewise, I too preferred the 3.5 version of it. Mechanically, I prefer 5th edition.

Reading the title, I have to say I disagree. I LOVE this subclass. While it doesn't have as much flare as the circle of wildfire, or as much flavor as the twilight domain, I love this subclass. Before playing DND, wizards were my favorite thing, I've always loved them, but looking at how they functioned on DND, I don't like using them. I would rather play as a sorcerer or my favorite class which is warlock.

This subclass makes wizards have a cool change when they cast their spells, making it with the amount of onomancy's and spells a wizard could learn give them an amazing arsenal. It also has more flavor than the other school subclasses. They can be cool, but make your wizard build more specialized, and I like the idea of someone casting magic as something fun to do, rather than something to study so much. While the power of names is still a little brainy, not as much as the other schools.

Would love to see the revised version, but I think its more balanced than the other 2 subclasses in the PDF.

Is it intentional inclusiveness, or just a reflection of how names change through your life - and so basic manners and common sense if we’re going with the mechanical concept that True Names are how you name yourself in your inner thoughts (as opposed to, idk, the social security number of your soul. Hi, my name is Bob, but my true name is ŠFJØ-46#%2-FĮīGŴ-NÖŁŻ). In terms of mechanical game balance, it’s just as effective as an onomancer structure built from the SSN approach. It’s the lore effect that makes it messy as written, where Soul-SSNs are clean cut and inflexible.

I know enough trans people to know that the adoption of a name is a major decision in their transition, but I suspect most name changes aren’t as momentous a decision, and more a drift of time (which, mechanically is one effective way of changing your true name, though identifying the tipping point would be a challenge. How long can you leave an NPC in witness protection before their new name sticks? Whereas characters who change their name as part of a major momentous occasion - transition, baptism, initiation, and similar would presumably have a near-instant switch in their true name and that event forms the mechanical trigger)

Worked example, to get it more clear in my head: Did Vecna spring from the womb thinking of himself as Vecna The Undying King, or did his conception of himself change and develop as he acquired power? Does your onomancer need to find out that his birth name is  Stuart Williamson (doesn’t look like it, though a malicious DM could rule that the God of Secrets still makes time to think of himself as Stuey to stop Onomancers divining his true name) or do they need the precise order of his titles “I name thee Vecna, Arch-Lich, Master of the Spider Throne, Lord of the Rotted Tower, the Chained God, the Whispered One, the Undying King - £@#&, that should have been The Lord of the Rotted Tower” (seems to be where the subclass design is going). Or is it enough to shout “oi, Vecna!” (Not against RAW, seems a bit.....light).

What if there are two Joe Smiths in that group of bandits or peasant rabble - which one gets truenamed? What about constructs with the ability to reason and speak? How do we define “self” for an Oblex? 

Thing is, it’s this discussion that makes me wary of onomancy and feel it needs a lot more development. I cannot abide the idea of a trans/nb player sitting down at a table and being told that their true name is their deadname either in ignorance or malice, but as written, there’s not enough clarity to either prevent that kind of thing or a thousand other rules-lawyering arguments between DM and players. 

The trans issue is one that should ideally be solved in session zero, or even more ideally well before that by discussing with your friends and the people you're gaming with how the change in name is important to you.  If there's an onomancer in the group, that onomancer should be part of a discussion on this issue and what qualifies as a true name.

I'll also note that the true name/deadname issue is maybe a bit of a deflection; as a nonbinary individual myself, adopting my new general handle was a big deal, yeah.  I asked my friends to use it if they could, and it still puts a smile on my face every time someone in Discord uses 'Rei' instead of my older names.  But that doesn't really affect my characters, who are not Rei but instead Red or Cynai or Memory or Chan Eil Duine or so forth.  If I'm playing a nonbinary/trans character, then it becomes a thing I'd want to discuss with the onomancer, but there's a difference between the onomancer truenaming Vecna the Undying King by yelling "oi, Vecna!", and the onomancer's player knowing I'd like him to use the name I gave him instead of asking me what my 'real' name is.

I think a True Name is what someone calls themselves, as they call themselves it. The name someone calls themselves and a specific, difficult to copy tone and cadence, only reflected on the inner thoughts of that person. 

 How did this topic devolve into the discussion of deadnaming trans people? I just wanted to erase hapless fools from existence.

Hueh.  I mean shit, you can do that with a Fireball.  But yeah, kind of an inevitable by-discussion of a class whose entire focus is True Names.

I will admit, the phrase "social security number of the soul" amused me greatly, tho

Quote from Bill_Poole >>

 How did this topic devolve into the discussion of deadnaming trans people? I just wanted to erase hapless fools from existence.

 
Wish for it.

Personally a subclass feature to erase from existence is OP extreme, and would very much be banned from my games. Just killing them, erasing the remains and imprisoning their soul to prevent resurrection? Or maybe just putting them somewhere to never be a bother again? These are acceptable, and already doable in 5e by any Wizard choosing the right spells.