All im hearing from the people raging against sorcerers being able to change a single spell out a day is "I miss when wizards had metamagic. Metamagic is god tier and immediately makes up for any other short comings the sorcerer may have. I wanna be the center of magic casting at the table and will feel worthless and insecure if the other player at the table can kinda do the same thing my wizard can do but worse. Wah"
All im hearing from the people raging against sorcerers being able to change a single spell out a day is "I miss when wizards had metamagic. Metamagic is god tier and immediately makes up for any other short comings the sorcerer may have. I wanna be the center of magic casting at the table and will feel worthless and insecure if the other player at the table can kinda do the same thing my wizard can do but worse. Wah"
Where do you have this from?
From what I have seen its about keeping different classes apart and avoiding one class overshadowing another.
as mentioned earlier each class should have shortcomings, that makes for diversity. For some reason people rarely have this argument over martial classes. Fighters cannot fly, cannot dispel magic and cannot do a lot of things. Instead they are really good at hitting things with sticks. Rogues are not as good at hitting with sticks, cannot fly, cannot dispel but can find traps and hide.
If the sorcerer gets even closer to the wizard we might just as well make it one class with spellpoints and call it a Magician (which by chance is what I do for in my setting).
This whole issue boils down to people who favor wizards wanting sorcerers to continue sucking and people who favor sorcerers wanting to suck less. The idea that sorcerers have "enormous flexibility with the limited spells they do know" is complete lollerskates.
A sorcerer's sorcery points are so tightly limited that they only ever get two or three Metamagic-enhanced casts per day tops, unless they convert half their spell slots into extra SP, and any given sorcerer is likely to have two UND PRECISELY TWO Metamagic options, because the game only ever offers you four and two of them are in the double-digit levels. Let's not pretend a sorcerer will always have the right metamagic option for the job, because we all know that's not true. And further, let us recall that DMs love ******* over sorcerers. When a wizard cleverly anticipates the game and prepares exactly the right spell ahead of time, the table claps and the DM smiles.
When a sorcerer tries to use her Subtle Spells to manipulate social encounters or stealthily perform magic, or when she uses Heightened Spell to try and force a critical spell through? The average DM will find any way they can to defeat that sorcerer's plan and smack them across the face. Because while it's perfectly okay for them to have the most sharply limited spell repertoire of any full caster (in addition to the worst hit dice and proficiencies), any sorcerer who dares to actually use their ostensibly class-defining Metamagic is being a cheap cheeseass who's trying to break the DM's game.
Really - is the thought of the sorcerer not being strictly inferior to the wizard so repugnant to everybody? I love sorcerers. I really enjoy striking that perfect balance between a thematic, true-to-origin spell list and one that's as moderately effective as I can make it...but I know that every time I build or play a sorcerer, that sorcerer would've been better as literally any other full-casting class. That's obnoxious, and the vicious community pushback against any attempt to improve sorcerers is even more so.
All im hearing from the people raging against sorcerers being able to change a single spell out a day is "I miss when wizards had metamagic. Metamagic is god tier and immediately makes up for any other short comings the sorcerer may have. I wanna be the center of magic casting at the table and will feel worthless and insecure if the other player at the table can kinda do the same thing my wizard can do but worse. Wah"
Where do you have this from?
From what I have seen its about keeping different classes apart and avoiding one class overshadowing another.
as mentioned earlier each class should have shortcomings, that makes for diversity. For some reason people rarely have this argument over martial classes. Fighters cannot fly, cannot dispel magic and cannot do a lot of things. Instead they are really good at hitting things with sticks. Rogues are not as good at hitting with sticks, cannot fly, cannot dispel but can find traps and hide.
If the sorcerer gets even closer to the wizard we might just as well make it one class with spellpoints and call it a Magician (which by chance is what I do for in my setting).
Simple every single person that rages about this makes the argument that sorcerers have meta magic and that is somehow the cure all to the other issues the class has. Ive even had people tell me a sorcerer is stronger than the wizard due soley to meta magic which is not the case and is just wrong. Versatility in dnd is going to be more helpful than the ability to cast a haste on two party members then potentially drop the spell after getting hit and leave 2 members unable to have a turn for a round.
Saying that the ability to change ONE spell of equal level out a day is comparable to the wizard changing ALL SPELLS KNOWN of every level out is being overly dramatic. People who play primarily wizards are scared they will be outshined by an objectively inferior casting class. The Wizard will still reign supreme in flexibility to handling situations . They will still have a library of over 300 spells compared to the sorcerers 150 or so. They will still know more spells than a 20th level sorc by level 6 and by the time THEY hit 20 will have a minimum of over 3 times that of a sorcerer.
Wizard weakness's- Low health pool (d6's - Low AC (Can't wear armor) - Spells known vs Prepared - Can lose access to spells ( book can be destroyed) - Such large spell libraries can make choosing the right ones hard (oh no too many options!)
Wizard Strength- Massive list of spells to choose from - gain 2 spells upon level up - Can change out all spells per day - Over 11 subclasses to choose from helping with versatility from campaign to campagin - Arcane recovery can help you get more spell slots to continue casting for longer - gets spells exclusive to their class
Sorcerer weakness's -Low health (d6's) - Low AC (can't wear armor) -Spells known vs Prepared - Low spell selection - Can only change spells upon level up - Can not get class resource back on a short rest (sorcery points) - low amount of subclasses (5) - gains no additional spells per subclass or upon leveling up
Sorcerer Strengths - Meta magic allows for versatility in casting what few spells you do know -Meta magic allows you to output more damage than the average caster - Font of magic can help you get more spell slots back - you get alot of cantrips
@guytza My bad >.< I'll see about finding the relevant homebrew forum. And thanks for the observations, I hadn't considered either of those points.
As for the Unarmed Fighting Style for Order of the Lycan, that's a pretty interesting take (although I confess, I'm not sure I see why you wouldn't be able to use your Crimson Rite damage with your fists, seeing as the Predatory Strikes feature simply states that your unarmed strikes count as a single weapon)
No worries.
regarding the Rites on Fists, the Rite damage is like enchanting a weapon, when you drop the weapon, the rite ends after all. Fists are not considered 'weapons'. The claws exist in a half way state known as Natural Weapons (which is a concept that is rarely brought up in 5e) so it exists in a bit of a weird spot and has to be specifically called out. But putting my DM hat on, I would not by the RAW allow the Rite damage on the fist.
That being said, the Rule of Cool in me would say 'Sure you can light your fists on fire and punch the living bejeebus out of that goblin.
I completely agree with you Sternsenpai. I just want to say, it annoys me when people say "Sorcerer can now change all spells known on their spell list with a month of downtime" but ignore the idea that a wizard with a month of downtime could conceivably add their entire spell list to their spells known, and the sorcerer spell list is really just a cherrypicked list of commonly known wizard spells. Like, you should FEAR a wizard that has that amount of downtime on their hands, they can do A LOT worse than just change their spells.
You left out the part about Wizards (and every other full cast except the Sorcerer for that matter) being able to cast a lot of their spells without any resource cost whatsoever as long as they pause to take a 10 minute smoke break. Sorcerers have to take an entire Feat to gain something marginally resembling that Feature, and then they have to keep two spell lists, one for the spells that they can only cast normally, and a completely separate list for the spells they can only cast as Rituals. And if they accidentally leave their book in the outhouse, or if someone steals it, or they fall into a river, or anything else happens to the damned thing they have to start all over. In that regard they are as powerful as the Arcane Trickster. 🙄
You left out the part about Wizards (and every other full cast except the Sorcerer for that matter) being able to cast a lot of their spells without any resource cost whatsoever as long as they pause to take a 10 minute smoke break. Sorcerers have to take an entire Feat to gain something marginally resembling that Feature, and then they have to keep two spell lists, one for the spells that they can only cast normally, and a completely separate list for the spells they can only cast as Rituals. And if they accidentally leave their book in the outhouse, or if someone steals it, or they fall into a river, or anything else happens to the damned thing they have to start all over. In that regard they are as powerful as the Arcane Trickster. 🙄
Sorcerers are clearly OP, didn’t you realize?
Mechanically, I hear you that Sorcerers are pretty much the only full casters that can't cast rituals but I would like to point out that neither can warlocks, only specific pact of the tome (who also take the book of secrets invocation.
but on the flip side, I would say thematically, it would actually make a lot of sense for them not to as they innately draw their powers and do not know how to do things the 'academic way'. To compare; a wizard, obviously knows rituals do their studies. Clerics and druids.. all religious people do are rituals.. a bard, whether they're studying music or theater, writes down, copies, duplicates, practices, rehearses, etc. Honestly, it can go either way (in allowing them or not allowing them). I would actually say ALL warlocks SHOULD know how to do rituals, I mean if you're going to summon a (semi) omnipotent cosmic power you're darn well making sure that the RITUAL used to summon them is correct, same with a ranger who 'prepares' themselves before a hunt, but a sorcerer is like a musician who picked up a guitar since they can hold one in their hands but hasn't looked at sheet music in their life. They can play the best thing you've ever heard but don't know what a single string is called or what a 'power chord' is or anything else pertaining to the 'study of music' or the same about a painter, as opposed to someone who's actually studied the old masters, their brush strokes, styles, etc and someone who can paint even better but doesn't know who Van Gogh is.
But on the flip side, with these new feature variants, I don't see why, instead of taking a feat, you can have a sorcerer (or warlock or ranger) who has figured they have innate magic then chose to look into it, research, study and do more (which would RP be a wizard mutliclass but would be simpler)
I completely agree with you Sternsenpai. I just want to say, it annoys me when people say "Sorcerer can now change all spells known on their spell list with a month of downtime" but ignore the idea that a wizard with a month of downtime could conceivably add their entire spell list to their spells known, and the sorcerer spell list is really just a cherrypicked list of commonly known wizard spells. Like, you should FEAR a wizard that has that amount of downtime on their hands, they can do A LOT worse than just change their spells.
Have you consider the cost of this? It's not free for a wizard to copy the "entire list of spells to spellbook" and even worse, its not easy to find spellbooks or scrolls to copy. You assumption is based that its free for a wizard to do it. It's not.
From the player's handbook:
YOUR SPELLBOOK
The spells that you add to your spellbook as you gain levels reflect the arcane research you conduct on your own, as well as intellectual breakthroughs you have had about the nature of the multiverse. You might find other spells during your adventures. You could discover a spell recorded on a scroll in an evil wizard’s chest, for example, or in a dusty tome in an ancient library.
Copying a Spell into the Book. When you find a wizard spell of 1st level or higher, you can add it to your spellbook if it is of a spell level you can prepare and if you can spare the time to decipher and copy it.
Copying that spell into your spellbook involves reproducing the basic form of the spell, then deciphering the unique system of notation used by the wizard who wrote it. You must practice the spell until you understand the sounds or gestures required, then transcribe it into your spellbook using your own notation.
For each level of the spell, the process takes 2 hours and costs 50 gp. The cost represents material components you expend as you experiment with the spell to master it, as well as the fine inks you need to record it. Once you have spent this time and money, you can prepare the spell just like your other spells.
Replacing the Book.You can copy a spell from your own spellbook into another book—for example, if you want to make a backup copy of your spellbook. This is just like copying a new spell into your spellbook, but faster and easier, since you understand your own notation and already know how to cast the spell. You need spend only 1 hour and 10 gp for each level of the copied spell.
If you lose your spellbook, you can use the same procedure to transcribe the spells that you have prepared into a new spellbook. Filling out the remainder of your spellbook requires you to find new spells to do so, as normal. For this reason, many wizards keep backup spellbooks in a safe place.
It's both. It is absolutely not cheap to add a complete spell list to your book, but compared to the sorcerer, you don't lose access to the spells you already had and you can update your list much faster. Best case scenario the wizard can add 8 levels worth of new spells to their spell book a day to the sorcerer's one spell of any level. Assuming their subclass cost reductions don't apply, which if you are having to radically alter their spell list I think is a fair assumption. The sorcerer isn't going to be swapping an 8/9th level spell every day in this theoretical change their whole spell selection month. The wizard does have to put in more resources to radically alter their spell list, and the sorcerer does have the advantage of being able to do it while adventuring while the wizard needs downtime, but the wizard will always have more spells available at a given time and these expenditures are 1 time costs barring spell book destruction, which I don't hear about many DMs doing. I'd say the wizard has "versatile spell caster" on lock down vs the Sorcerer even before factoring in rituals. Just by virtue of them knowing 2-3 (depending on level) times as many spells as the sorcerer before counting purchased add ons to their list. Sorcerer's limited spell selections and metamagic synergies favor them specializing in one or two things. With the additions they can shift their specialization given time, but wizard's greater spell list will always make them better generalists, and if they sink money into it they can further the generalist gap, or with a big enough spellbook, gain the ability to be specialized in something different each day of the week.
Yes it costs gold and time to do it but the point is that you still have the OPTION to do so. And the frequency with which you may or may not find scrolls or spellbooks varies from campaign to campaign and can be discussed with your dungeon master so you don't end up playing a wizard that gets nothing. Ive played in a group through dragon heist and most of mad mage. The wizard in my party ended up collecting a small library of enemy wizard spell books. By the end she had about 10 spellbooks or more and we found a pretty decent amount of scrolls with which to transcribe into said book and more than enough gold to do it. Your complaint is based on the assumption that it will be hard to find more spells to put into your book which it is not unless of course you playing in a campaign that dictates so in which case why did you pick wizard or your playing with a DM that is somewhat stingy with giving you access to such things. Wizards are the broke college kids in dnd mixed with a little batman. Because given the time and gold a wizard can and will have a spell for literally ANY situation
Option is always a option its not versatility when you CAN'T have access to everything. Btw Sorcerers still have OPTION to change spells, just Level UP, no cost, no downtime... I Got that you would like to have more access to fix your bad choices. No problem in make mistakes and fix them. I my opinion Sorcerers could have more spells on the list and the problem with choices should be fixed. I've been playing D&D since the 1st edition, and this thing simple remove the Wizard class from the table. And it's not a matter of versatility any more. It's players who want more options against each others. It's cool to have more options, as long it does not break the game balance between the classes.
I'm not going to argue anymore, I have more important things to do. All I can say is: Its an optional rule, ok, in my table are not allowed. Simple! I don't see it as balanced. I'm Sorry.
For my table these variants are a pretty big boon, especially seeing as my table was recently forced to kick our wizard due to IRL events, so unfortunately we did lose a lot of that versatility we used to have. That plus the fact that unfortunately, my group is one of those ones that doesn't have a lot of time to schedule our sessions (We haven't been able to play for all of November, and unfortunately December looks like it's going to be exactly the same boat...)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I agree with you in the most part, but the Rule Tip on page 3 of the UA points out that Cantrips are spells for the purpose of Spell Versatility.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
well that was quite the oversight on my part. fair enough.
All im hearing from the people raging against sorcerers being able to change a single spell out a day is "I miss when wizards had metamagic. Metamagic is god tier and immediately makes up for any other short comings the sorcerer may have. I wanna be the center of magic casting at the table and will feel worthless and insecure if the other player at the table can kinda do the same thing my wizard can do but worse. Wah"
Metamagic should absolutely only be for sorcerers. I love that part of 5e. It really gives them their own specialty.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137390-weretouched-beasthide
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137424-weretouched-longtooth
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137431-weretouched-razorclaw
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137461-weretouched-swiftstride
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137646-weretouched-wildhunt
Where do you have this from?
From what I have seen its about keeping different classes apart and avoiding one class overshadowing another.
as mentioned earlier each class should have shortcomings, that makes for diversity. For some reason people rarely have this argument over martial classes. Fighters cannot fly, cannot dispel magic and cannot do a lot of things. Instead they are really good at hitting things with sticks. Rogues are not as good at hitting with sticks, cannot fly, cannot dispel but can find traps and hide.
If the sorcerer gets even closer to the wizard we might just as well make it one class with spellpoints and call it a Magician (which by chance is what I do for in my setting).
Honestly?
This whole issue boils down to people who favor wizards wanting sorcerers to continue sucking and people who favor sorcerers wanting to suck less. The idea that sorcerers have "enormous flexibility with the limited spells they do know" is complete lollerskates.
A sorcerer's sorcery points are so tightly limited that they only ever get two or three Metamagic-enhanced casts per day tops, unless they convert half their spell slots into extra SP, and any given sorcerer is likely to have two UND PRECISELY TWO Metamagic options, because the game only ever offers you four and two of them are in the double-digit levels. Let's not pretend a sorcerer will always have the right metamagic option for the job, because we all know that's not true. And further, let us recall that DMs love ******* over sorcerers. When a wizard cleverly anticipates the game and prepares exactly the right spell ahead of time, the table claps and the DM smiles.
When a sorcerer tries to use her Subtle Spells to manipulate social encounters or stealthily perform magic, or when she uses Heightened Spell to try and force a critical spell through? The average DM will find any way they can to defeat that sorcerer's plan and smack them across the face. Because while it's perfectly okay for them to have the most sharply limited spell repertoire of any full caster (in addition to the worst hit dice and proficiencies), any sorcerer who dares to actually use their ostensibly class-defining Metamagic is being a cheap cheeseass who's trying to break the DM's game.
Really - is the thought of the sorcerer not being strictly inferior to the wizard so repugnant to everybody? I love sorcerers. I really enjoy striking that perfect balance between a thematic, true-to-origin spell list and one that's as moderately effective as I can make it...but I know that every time I build or play a sorcerer, that sorcerer would've been better as literally any other full-casting class. That's obnoxious, and the vicious community pushback against any attempt to improve sorcerers is even more so.
Please do not contact or message me.
Simple every single person that rages about this makes the argument that sorcerers have meta magic and that is somehow the cure all to the other issues the class has. Ive even had people tell me a sorcerer is stronger than the wizard due soley to meta magic which is not the case and is just wrong. Versatility in dnd is going to be more helpful than the ability to cast a haste on two party members then potentially drop the spell after getting hit and leave 2 members unable to have a turn for a round.
Saying that the ability to change ONE spell of equal level out a day is comparable to the wizard changing ALL SPELLS KNOWN of every level out is being overly dramatic. People who play primarily wizards are scared they will be outshined by an objectively inferior casting class. The Wizard will still reign supreme in flexibility to handling situations . They will still have a library of over 300 spells compared to the sorcerers 150 or so. They will still know more spells than a 20th level sorc by level 6 and by the time THEY hit 20 will have a minimum of over 3 times that of a sorcerer.
Wizard weakness's- Low health pool (d6's
- Low AC (Can't wear armor)
- Spells known vs Prepared
- Can lose access to spells ( book can be destroyed)
- Such large spell libraries can make choosing the right ones hard (oh no too many options!)
Wizard Strength- Massive list of spells to choose from
- gain 2 spells upon level up
- Can change out all spells per day
- Over 11 subclasses to choose from helping with versatility from campaign to campagin
- Arcane recovery can help you get more spell slots to continue casting for longer
- gets spells exclusive to their class
Sorcerer weakness's -Low health (d6's)
- Low AC (can't wear armor)
-Spells known vs Prepared
- Low spell selection
- Can only change spells upon level up
- Can not get class resource back on a short rest (sorcery points)
- low amount of subclasses (5)
- gains no additional spells per subclass or upon leveling up
Sorcerer Strengths - Meta magic allows for versatility in casting what few spells you do know
-Meta magic allows you to output more damage than the average caster
- Font of magic can help you get more spell slots back
- you get alot of cantrips
No worries.
regarding the Rites on Fists, the Rite damage is like enchanting a weapon, when you drop the weapon, the rite ends after all. Fists are not considered 'weapons'. The claws exist in a half way state known as Natural Weapons (which is a concept that is rarely brought up in 5e) so it exists in a bit of a weird spot and has to be specifically called out. But putting my DM hat on, I would not by the RAW allow the Rite damage on the fist.
That being said, the Rule of Cool in me would say 'Sure you can light your fists on fire and punch the living bejeebus out of that goblin.
Any update yet on when this content will be on dndbeyond?
No, and it will likely not happen before december is over. Maybe not even until March.
I completely agree with you Sternsenpai. I just want to say, it annoys me when people say "Sorcerer can now change all spells known on their spell list with a month of downtime" but ignore the idea that a wizard with a month of downtime could conceivably add their entire spell list to their spells known, and the sorcerer spell list is really just a cherrypicked list of commonly known wizard spells. Like, you should FEAR a wizard that has that amount of downtime on their hands, they can do A LOT worse than just change their spells.
Why do you say march?
@Sternsenpai
You left out the part about Wizards (and every other full cast except the Sorcerer for that matter) being able to cast a lot of their spells without any resource cost whatsoever as long as they pause to take a 10 minute smoke break. Sorcerers have to take an entire Feat to gain something marginally resembling that Feature, and then they have to keep two spell lists, one for the spells that they can only cast normally, and a completely separate list for the spells they can only cast as Rituals. And if they accidentally leave their book in the outhouse, or if someone steals it, or they fall into a river, or anything else happens to the damned thing they have to start all over. In that regard they are as powerful as the Arcane Trickster. 🙄
Sorcerers are clearly OP, didn’t you realize?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Mechanically, I hear you that Sorcerers are pretty much the only full casters that can't cast rituals but I would like to point out that neither can warlocks, only specific pact of the tome (who also take the book of secrets invocation.
but on the flip side, I would say thematically, it would actually make a lot of sense for them not to as they innately draw their powers and do not know how to do things the 'academic way'. To compare; a wizard, obviously knows rituals do their studies. Clerics and druids.. all religious people do are rituals.. a bard, whether they're studying music or theater, writes down, copies, duplicates, practices, rehearses, etc. Honestly, it can go either way (in allowing them or not allowing them). I would actually say ALL warlocks SHOULD know how to do rituals, I mean if you're going to summon a (semi) omnipotent cosmic power you're darn well making sure that the RITUAL used to summon them is correct, same with a ranger who 'prepares' themselves before a hunt, but a sorcerer is like a musician who picked up a guitar since they can hold one in their hands but hasn't looked at sheet music in their life. They can play the best thing you've ever heard but don't know what a single string is called or what a 'power chord' is or anything else pertaining to the 'study of music' or the same about a painter, as opposed to someone who's actually studied the old masters, their brush strokes, styles, etc and someone who can paint even better but doesn't know who Van Gogh is.
But on the flip side, with these new feature variants, I don't see why, instead of taking a feat, you can have a sorcerer (or warlock or ranger) who has figured they have innate magic then chose to look into it, research, study and do more (which would RP be a wizard mutliclass but would be simpler)
Have you consider the cost of this? It's not free for a wizard to copy the "entire list of spells to spellbook" and even worse, its not easy to find spellbooks or scrolls to copy. You assumption is based that its free for a wizard to do it. It's not.
From the player's handbook:
YOUR SPELLBOOK
The spells that you add to your spellbook as you gain levels reflect the arcane research you conduct on your own, as well as intellectual breakthroughs you have had about the nature of the multiverse. You might find other spells during your adventures. You could discover a spell recorded on a scroll in an evil wizard’s chest, for example, or in a dusty tome in an ancient library.
Copying a Spell into the Book. When you find a wizard spell of 1st level or higher, you can add it to your spellbook if it is of a spell level you can prepare and if you can spare the time to decipher and copy it.
Copying that spell into your spellbook involves reproducing the basic form of the spell, then deciphering the unique system of notation used by the wizard who wrote it. You must practice the spell until you understand the sounds or gestures required, then transcribe it into your spellbook using your own notation.
For each level of the spell, the process takes 2 hours and costs 50 gp. The cost represents material components you expend as you experiment with the spell to master it, as well as the fine inks you need to record it. Once you have spent this time and money, you can prepare the spell just like your other spells.
Replacing the Book. You can copy a spell from your own spellbook into another book—for example, if you want to make a backup copy of your spellbook. This is just like copying a new spell into your spellbook, but faster and easier, since you understand your own notation and already know how to cast the spell. You need spend only 1 hour and 10 gp for each level of the copied spell.
If you lose your spellbook, you can use the same procedure to transcribe the spells that you have prepared into a new spellbook. Filling out the remainder of your spellbook requires you to find new spells to do so, as normal. For this reason, many wizards keep backup spellbooks in a safe place.
This is not versatility, this is COST.
Mergim, Gnome Wizard, School of Conjuration, Clockwork designer! https://www.dndbeyond.com/profile/Mergim/characters/12817200
New Citizen of Golden Hills, Bytopia
Brasileiro, com orgulho!
It's both. It is absolutely not cheap to add a complete spell list to your book, but compared to the sorcerer, you don't lose access to the spells you already had and you can update your list much faster. Best case scenario the wizard can add 8 levels worth of new spells to their spell book a day to the sorcerer's one spell of any level. Assuming their subclass cost reductions don't apply, which if you are having to radically alter their spell list I think is a fair assumption. The sorcerer isn't going to be swapping an 8/9th level spell every day in this theoretical change their whole spell selection month. The wizard does have to put in more resources to radically alter their spell list, and the sorcerer does have the advantage of being able to do it while adventuring while the wizard needs downtime, but the wizard will always have more spells available at a given time and these expenditures are 1 time costs barring spell book destruction, which I don't hear about many DMs doing. I'd say the wizard has "versatile spell caster" on lock down vs the Sorcerer even before factoring in rituals. Just by virtue of them knowing 2-3 (depending on level) times as many spells as the sorcerer before counting purchased add ons to their list. Sorcerer's limited spell selections and metamagic synergies favor them specializing in one or two things. With the additions they can shift their specialization given time, but wizard's greater spell list will always make them better generalists, and if they sink money into it they can further the generalist gap, or with a big enough spellbook, gain the ability to be specialized in something different each day of the week.
@Mergim
Yes it costs gold and time to do it but the point is that you still have the OPTION to do so. And the frequency with which you may or may not find scrolls or spellbooks varies from campaign to campaign and can be discussed with your dungeon master so you don't end up playing a wizard that gets nothing. Ive played in a group through dragon heist and most of mad mage. The wizard in my party ended up collecting a small library of enemy wizard spell books. By the end she had about 10 spellbooks or more and we found a pretty decent amount of scrolls with which to transcribe into said book and more than enough gold to do it. Your complaint is based on the assumption that it will be hard to find more spells to put into your book which it is not unless of course you playing in a campaign that dictates so in which case why did you pick wizard or your playing with a DM that is somewhat stingy with giving you access to such things. Wizards are the broke college kids in dnd mixed with a little batman. Because given the time and gold a wizard can and will have a spell for literally ANY situation
@Sternsempai
Option is always a option its not versatility when you CAN'T have access to everything. Btw Sorcerers still have OPTION to change spells, just Level UP, no cost, no downtime... I Got that you would like to have more access to fix your bad choices. No problem in make mistakes and fix them. I my opinion Sorcerers could have more spells on the list and the problem with choices should be fixed. I've been playing D&D since the 1st edition, and this thing simple remove the Wizard class from the table. And it's not a matter of versatility any more. It's players who want more options against each others. It's cool to have more options, as long it does not break the game balance between the classes.
Cheers!
Mergim, Gnome Wizard, School of Conjuration, Clockwork designer! https://www.dndbeyond.com/profile/Mergim/characters/12817200
New Citizen of Golden Hills, Bytopia
Brasileiro, com orgulho!
I'm not going to argue anymore, I have more important things to do. All I can say is: Its an optional rule, ok, in my table are not allowed. Simple! I don't see it as balanced. I'm Sorry.
Mergim, Gnome Wizard, School of Conjuration, Clockwork designer! https://www.dndbeyond.com/profile/Mergim/characters/12817200
New Citizen of Golden Hills, Bytopia
Brasileiro, com orgulho!
For my table these variants are a pretty big boon, especially seeing as my table was recently forced to kick our wizard due to IRL events, so unfortunately we did lose a lot of that versatility we used to have. That plus the fact that unfortunately, my group is one of those ones that doesn't have a lot of time to schedule our sessions (We haven't been able to play for all of November, and unfortunately December looks like it's going to be exactly the same boat...)