@@Birbucifer hey you are implying that orcs being dumb is a negative trait, like it makes them lesser beings, you bloody racist! ill have you know my dad was an orc, he wasnt too good with numbers, or staying long after the raid, or not dying, but hes still my dad!
@@AmigoRoberto okay, now I want to play a folksy farmhand, who discovers they're a Sorcerer, or learns how to read and inherits a Wizard Tome. Either gotta dump Intelligence or Charisma for some good RP.
Tenser's Transformation. Nope, the wizard can now swing any weapon, wear any armor and shield and even has advantage on str and dex attacks and gains the extra atack ability while dealing extra 2d10 force damage per hit
Kunaiechi I know was implying the condition of “party is about to go in an underground dungeon” Every other caster: Long rest to prep needed spells Sorcerer: Stuck with spell list from 3 sessions ago.
Problems with magic in 5e: -There aren't enough spells for every school of magic -The power gap between spells is massive and there are clear frontrunners leading to homogenization of spell lists or self-nerfing for flavour -90% of players don't read past the first sentence of the spell
@@magicrainbowkitties1023 Toll the Dead is pretty good, though. I've heard. I'm more annoyed that there is only _one_ necromancy spell that does damage (besides cantrips) at level three, namely poison spray. One of the features of the necromancy subclass is getting hitpoints by killing creatures from your (non-cantrip) spells, so you either have to pick that or wait for that feature until later. Edit: Not Poison Spray, Ray of Sickness.
@@MalloonTarka Thing is all the Necro spells are pretty good. They're just far too few and far between to use Death Clerics or Necromancers effectively
@@magicrainbowkitties1023 Pretty much. The necromancer I'm going to run at third level (admittedly a little nerfed for flavour) has a grand total of _three_ necromancy spells, the ones I've already mentioned and False Life. Admittedly, she can fake having an undead under her control using Phantasmal Force, but the options are rather sparse. I'm seriously considering multiclassing into a death domain cleric, just to have access to a few more necromantic spells and abilities, as well as the cleric spell list, even though my character's Wisdom isn't great and her Constitution and Strength really rule out melee attacks.
The other reason we always use fireball is because if we take all the spells the party wants you to (like detect magic, identify, hut, feather fall etc etc) then there's only room left for one damage spell...
All your sames are different, for you are all different. D&D has infinite possibilities. Whether you choose to explore those possibilities is up to you. And you can base your choice on an infinite number of reasons. Who'm I kidding?? You're all alike.
Sunlight Sensitivity is also a bitch. "Oh, you're fighting outdoors? Well, fuck you, enjoy disadvantage on everything." Thankfully my Kobold is an Artificer and the DM let me retool some Goggles of Night into what essentially is just magical sunglasses
Playing my first ever campaign as a wizard. Got straight fucking oneshot in the second session. Wizards are great for utility but in combat literally all the DM has to do is target us and we’re kinda fucked
Trevor Mouse I had a wizard player go so overboard with his wizard going down that at lvl4 he chose the “Tough” feat (mind you I reworked it to match my “higher threat setting” and combat fatigue system so it is overpowered for any normal game) and with his +2 Con mod he went from 17hp (a paltry sum) to 54hp at lvl4. And then they decided to go and attack Zell’s Tower of the Whimpering Dead to try and stall an event foretold by the town’s druidic guardian (who was a patron of the groups). Literally got hulk smashed by a forest encounter of Duergar Slavers (his Passive Perception was/is 8) and after the party got summarily trounced he declared “ When we get back to Orlain I am buying all the silver thread in that god forsaken Province and THAT is final.” Because the DC for seeing silver thread is merely a 15 perception, so even with the Tiny Hut and an Elven Druid taking watch after 6hrs of rest (another homerule because 4hr long rest is BS for a level 1-9 character in my opinion) a party can still be direct ambushed by a gang of Duergar in Hate-Steel Plate.
That's cute! They may like this book a friend of mine wrote. Its called "Fire and You!" Chapter1: You are on fire (explosive runes) (in 5th ed you could use symbol and create a new option. But in 3.5 my friend used a feat to change the element too. Then just stuck it in a library and walked away from the town forever.)
something about jacob tellin me to have a good day at school even though i start classes agian in another week fills me with the need to make him proud. ...i'll get those As for you
I feel like the solution of "the DM just takes everything the wizard can do into account and counters it" is a bit ridiculous and makes the game feel like DM Vs Players. If every second enemy you fight has some sort of magic countering abilities and every dungeon you go into has this elaborate anti-magic, anti-wizard defense system it becomes super obvious that the DM is trying to counter you, and it makes a lot of people get annoyed or upset.
At that point, the dm would be railroading if you have to make anti-magic stuff. Just accept whats going to happen. Or have a session 0 (like the video stated)... Honestly there are many other points stated just watch the video.
1) It's not supposed to be an "all-the-time-every-time" opposition. As the DM it's your job to make sure that the players are both challenged and rewarded for their character choices. From encounter to encounter, players should feel a mix of being powerful and being challenged. 2) If you feel like one of your players is too powerful for the good of the campaign... have a talk with the party. Let them know that you plan on designing more difficult encounters for them, or might throw in more features of encounters that make certain characters be more creative with their abilities to still be helpful.
@@CombatSportsNerd The issue is that you run into your counter constantly. Having a counter is fine if it's a rare occurrence, but for wizards to not trivialize encounters or dungeons you need to do it constantly.
In a world with magic the rich and able actually would built and set up anti-magic systems. Its just logical and believeable, and I design it so players can get the knowledge about it and how to counteract it, which turns into sorta sidequest itself. But I agree when its a location like petty bandits den or completely wrecked ruins or just some cave in wilderness then its stupid to have those, atleast working well.
It's a fine, fine line between "tailoring your challenges to the player to avoid them solving everything easily" and "Bullying your players by deliberately making everything immune to the tools they have, or choosing enemies that are only weak to things your party doesn't have"
@@phelps6205 We actually have a Kobold Barbarian with a greataxe in our party, they sort of make up for it with the kobold pack tactics but mostly it's just a funny concept.
Current DM is writing side quests around and based on the backgrounds of each specific character in the party. It's going really well. So yeah, definitely write your game around your players. It's great.
They found that two wizards had a shootout with glocks and magic outside the apartment of a PC and turned that into a quest themselves. They stole the insurance papers from the car, found the apartment of one wizard and got hired for a job.
I started playing dnd a year ago, they told me to make a character that isn't too different from myself to make roleplaying easier. So i made a wizard school graduate who, to pay his wizarding school fees, chased after money like a dragon whose hoard has vanished.
Party with a barbarian runs in to fight evil wizard, wizard casts enemies abound at 6th level on the entire party, half of them probably fail their saves and they start killing each other, barbarian is doing quite a good job killing their companions. I would love to see how an adventuring party deals with that situation. Really.
_Enemies abound_ affects one creature, so not really possible. Also, when the barbarian (assuming a failed save) must choose a new target, it must do so among the creatures within range of its attack, and for pretty much every barbarian ever, that means melee range. So, it'd be pretty easy for the adventuring party to not stand next to an afflicted barbarian. Plus, the afflicted gets a new save every time it takes damage and barbarians are really good at tanking lots of damage, so to deal with it, the party snaps their friend out by making many minor attacks at him, from a short distance. So, that was easy. A ranger would've been a better choice of target, here. In fact, the only character you could've picked for a worse example would be the paladin.
One thing to note, this makes it seem that wizards are always op. I can assure they are not. At low levels they are practically useless since they are so limited on quite almost everything. All of the points in the video are made when the wizard is high level and ARE extremely powerful.
i mean thats mostly because people dont use their spells right. your wizard cant be that smart if hes throwing his fire bolt from within 30 ft so he can be ganked up by all melee enemies.
@@lordpepper6932 even if your ambushed at low level you can still thunder wave, its a good spell even if your surrounded because how box area effect spells works, you can usually shape it to avoid your allies and has good damage for level one spell plus knock back on a fail.
I wonder can you make a barbarian have more versatility than a wizard? Ideas: -pole vaulting to replace jump/ movement skills -Seduction with your buff muscles glistening in the moon light to replace charm person/fear -out tank fireball to replace counter spell -lasso people to replace entangle Got any other ideas?
The barbarian is fairly versatile, because they can get through most situations by forcing the problem. It won’t be unique, but they will be able to solve a surprisingly high number of problems with muscles.
If I could make one change to wizard, it would be to bring back an opposition school from previous editions. Let them choose any school they want that isn't thier subclass, and just make it so that spells from that school are a little bit harder to learn, and a little bit harder to cast. This would also bring out a bit of their character as well.
Unfortunately, WOTC is becoming increasingly allergic to negative modifiers and class features. Despite them opening up the road to cool abilities that would be broken without some sort of offset.
The problem with opposition schools in 5th edition is that in 2nd edition, school specialization was optional. If you specialized, you were forbidden from casting from an opposing school of magic. Even in 2nd edition, a general mage had access to all wizard spells. In 5th edition, all wizards choose a specialization*, so opposing schools wouldn't work well--especially since any non-wizard would be under no such restriction--making wizards seem like anything but the masters of magic. * Until supplemental material came out offering archetypes not in the Player's Handbook.
@@Arby631 Kobolds have that as well as a -2 to strength, none of the other small races have that, and the only other race with a negative is Orcs -1 to int. Overall, Kobolds get a whopping +0 to all stats
I like this video because it applies to so much more than just the wizard, or classes/character choices in general. Whenever I'm on a dnd reddit there are always a bunch of stories about how a player or players ruined something in the game by picking/doing x, y, or z. And every time I'm just like, "you don't have to let them do it." It is perfectly reasonable to say that the dragon does not and will not have any attraction to humanoids and therefore you can't charm it, or the BBEG has a necklace or ring or something that prevents scrying, or a dead body didn't see who killed it. There are so many ways to avoid these pitfalls and tropes if you just use more of the books than just the numbers.
I would be fine with most of this, unless it's obviously stupid. E.g. the guy with the dagger in the chest should have seen his murderer. And charms are magic,.the dragon doesn't need to feel attracted.
@@WayanMajere Yes, obviously there are situations where this doesn't work, that is why I'm saying MAKE IT WORK or don't complain about it. As for your specific examples, even those can be dealt with. For a guy with a dagger in his chest, Invisibility or a simple mask means he has no info on his attacker, effectively the same thing unless you want him to give them a clue. For the charm, that was just poor word choice, I meant charm in real world definition which I realize is confusing in this context. I meant for like the stereotype of the bard seducing the dragon, don't let them make the role, because no matter how high they go, they can not succeed.
@@thothrax5621 Yeah, that reminds me of that one reddit story who could fly because he rolled a double 20 after saying "I flap really hard with my arms." I wouldn't want to play such games...
I had an encounter, the party took it out. One of the encounter enemies was an occultist wizard. When the party wizard took the enemies book he wanted to use that book or copy it down onto his book. He only ran into one snag. The book was written in infernal. So now the wizard had to get along with the partys tiefling and essentially have study buddy sessions to translate the book. One spell at a time.
>it's just really fun to make a 5e character finally someone explained it. I always found it fun and have more characters on D&D Beyond than I'll ever use...
Character customization in 5e is actually pretty damn limited. Pathfinder 2e has it beat easily as far making characters goes. We actually switched over to P2e and it's been pretty fun. Also, they are going to release even more classes this year (4) plus even more options for other classes, as well as a bunch of other races, compared to wotc releasing only artificer in however long 5e has been out.
@@DarkDoomguy Pathfinder 2e is like 4e minus any of the innovation. It's like the worst aspects of every dnd based system in a long while, with meaning less choices and no actual meaningful choices.
@@DarkDoomguy I agree with you man, after some years of playing d&d 5e it makes me really sad that characters aren't that versatile at all, at least from a optimized point of view. It really makes me think if at least 5e had some really meaningful feats outside from standart feats like GWM or Polearm Master, I think 5e also starves from having a larger pool of actions a martial character can do.
Wizard, more than any other class, is implicitly balanced by how much money they have. Another really good approach is to ensure that the other characters have things they can and want to spend money on so it's not just funneled into the wizard's ability to buy all the spells.
I personally disagree with the notion that since you want to limit the party's wizard, you have to kneecap the party by not giving them spell scrolls, and remove wizard NPCs from the game. Also, the thing with the other classes that can change their spell lists, is that they have a total of like 100 spells or so. Not the near 500 that wizards do. Either way, I hope they revise wizards so that the subclasses divide up their spell pool. Not too much, but enough to the point where an evocation wizard specialises in evocation magic, especially at high levels
When he mentioned a encounter that was supposed to be difficult but wasn’t at all it reminded me of my party’s fight against Strahd. Our first fight was an epic battle that involved a dead PC brought to life to fight for Strahd and while we technically killed him, we forgot the sunlight was a thing so he got away. The next time we fought him it took two rounds, Grave Cleric Channel Divinity and a Paladin smiting Strahd for a mega powerful blow that killed him so fast we didn’t even know what happened.
You see a Tarrasque in the distance. On its back is a howdah, with what appears to be every demon lord and archdevil inside. Also, Tiamat is behind you and has levels in barbarian.
"Really really awesome" 3.5 characters be like "Y'all so weak, i'll hit you with my +20/+15+/10/+5" "LOL you gotta concentrate on your spells, let me caste haste+stoneskin+mirror+image+mage armor+fly+improved invisibility"
That's exactly why 5e feels awesome. None of this numbers grind that you have designed at level 1, but need to wait 2 years to come alive. And none of this take 5 turns to do something action economy battles that makes everything takes 2 hours to finish just the prep. The building process can be fun if you're a minmaxer who just wanted good damage. But if you're a person who wants to see the battle field change quickly and effectively, 5e is the game.
@@FFXfever Pathfinder and 3.5 just have more and more interesting options yeah feats might be weaker but they can completely change your playstyle, a rogue that gets +4 AC versus attacks of opportunity has a lot more options for positioning which is really important because you need to be flanking to sneak attack which makes positioning really important and just matter more there is just more to consider of what options you have in combat or in character building
Casters in 3.5 had to concentrate on spells too, just an FYI, and most of the time the DM could literally make up any excuse in the world out-side of the usual reasons. "Oh, it's really cold outside, roll a concentration check," "The creature is so scary and hideous that it unnerves you, make a concentration check," "Hey, it smells really, really, really bad down here, roll a concentration check."
I notice you forgot to include "other magical effects" which are specifically blocked, as per the same line in the spell description from which you got the spell example.
@@PatrixBest You know what? You are right. It is a weird technicality, but verified it isn't counted as a magical effect. So, I do apologize. Nonetheless, the dome also blocks objects, so it still blocks the non-magical effect.
@@chukyuniqul well, I have been thinking about writing fantasy novels. Im just not super good at description so I was thinking more about being a game dev for story focused games
@@juicyjuustar121 unless you've written stories before, you're prolly not good at anything. You have the talent for it and clearly the passion. My point is- no one is born skilled, hell my first drafts of writing were so painfully cliche I cringed once I started proofreading them.
Wizard instantly resurrects using his pre-prepared clone hidden in a pocket dimension. Crushes several stones to recall all his powerful magic items, uses a ninth level wish to instantly create a second ready to go clone. Takes a long rest to get his spells back, planeshifted back straight to you and casts power word kill.
@@MJ-jd7rs Some level 1 fighter has a vorpal sword and just takes rolling a natural 20 for granted. He comes from Munchkinland. There's no need to respond intelligently.
Game: Gives players the tools to solve problems DM: Makes problems that need solving Players: Use the tools they were given to solve problems DM: *You weren't supposed to do that*
If I dont want my wizard player to get a spell, lets say force cage, I do this crazy thing where I ask them not to do it because I dont want all of my BBEGs to know how to teleport. Crazy I know.
Technically, misty step alone solves the issue. Or dimension door. Also, if the bbeg is a spell caster, force caging them can actually just kill the party. There are plenty of sight only needed spells in the game :)
@@deathwrow9652 Yes thats what I said, spell casters solve the force cage problem but I dont want all of my tough guys to be spell casters or able to teleport
When you mentioned diseases I had to chuckle because yesterday I was dungeon mastering a one shot game with a new player and no one in the party could heal diseases.. specifically russet mold... one of my characters had to seek out a potion that cure diseases just to live... now we know why we need a healer
2ed had a really cool idea in opposing schools of magic that I liked. If you were an evocation wizard you couldn’t learn enchantment spells for example. Maybe that could “solve” some of the issues of access to so many spells.
3 and 3.5 had a similar system In 3, you had options. IIRC, specializing in any school of magic would exclude the wizard from one school *of their choice*. I think I chose to exclude myself from necromancy. IDK, it was a long time ago. In 3.5, reach school excluded you from another specific school. For example, an evoker could never learn any conjuration spells. When I rebuilt my character in 3.5, I abandoned my school specialization because the drawback was too much for my taste.
Actually in 2e the specialist class barred you from TWO schools. An invoker could not cast enchantment or conjuration spells. (I think people believe there's only one barred school because video games like Baldur's gate and BG2 only had one school to not make specialisation so punishing, I doubt most players today have played 2e) Also 3.5, Rules as Written, makes the specialist wizard give up two schools of his/her choice. Most video games only make you give up one school if any, I'm sure many tables use that as a house rule, but in the official rules it's two schools
I like how schools of magic were handled in second edition where you get bonuses for your school and can still cast other spells, but just can’t cast the opposite school of magic
Wizards get 44 spells total across 20 levels + whatever they scrounge up from spell scrolls. Yes, other classes get their entire spell list, but Wizards have the most extensive spell list in the game. In spite of the seeming limitation they still get more spell variety even if you give them NO scrolls, which is unrealistic across a full campaign. Limiting them to their school choice doesn't fully work however, since there simply aren't 44 spells of every school on the list. Additionally, it's actually DEEPLY suboptimal to pick too many spells from your chosen school when you level up, because those are given to you FREE while the subclass gives you a heavy discount on copying spells outside of levelling, making it better to take other types of spells that you don't get that discount for. Finally, due to simply how good the spells are, there are some spells you basically MUST get through levelling to be playing well, including: Fire Bolt, Expeditious Retreat, Shield, Alter Self, Dragon's Breath, Invisibility, Counterspell, Dispel Magic, Fireball, Fly, Haste, Leomund's Tiny Hut, Otiluke's Resilient Sphere, Polymorph, Bigby's Hand, Teleportation Circle (Fast Travel Yay), Disintegrate, at least one Investiture, Crown of Stars, Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion, Plane Shift, Teleport, Meteor Swarm, True Polymorph, and Wish. Long story short, the problem with Wizard isn't overwhelming choices, it's that some choices are inherently superior, meaning once you know those choices you basically HAVE to use them or be playing sub-optimally.
Counterpoint, optimization isn’t the most important for most people. Nobody wants to be a weakling, but most people don’t memorize every book and make the perfect character by choosing every correct choice to get there. Sure, you can take fireball and counterspell, and you certainly shouldn’t be frowned upon for doing so, but nobody is forcing you to, and there are other spells to choose from.
@@Aplesedjr I can agree that sometimes having fun means playing suboptimally, but that feeling that you could be doing better than you are will still always be there. This is one of the reasons I like Sorcerer better even though it is INFINITELY worse, because you have ways to change the spells you get so having worse ones doesn't always matter when you're skilled enough. The Unearthed Arcana that expands what you can do with Sorcery Points makes it even better (And not infinitely worse than Wizard anymore yay!), although you could argue that it should have been part of the class the entire time.
supersmily 5 yes but, A they can’t have all those spells at the same time( they essentially have to predict the encounter ). B their Limited by spell slots once they run out they’re very screwed. C. Their very squishy if you focus them they will either die or be forced to burn a spell slot. D what’s the last time you’ve made it to level 20. E wizards are vulnerable to strength, dex, and con, saving throws . F just give an enemy wizard counter spell. G read the rules and spells most often you’ll find a flaw in them. H. Learning spells, and spell components have insane gold and time investments if your dm is giving them that much gold the party is gonna be pretty powerful anyways
This is always my biggest argument when it comes to people complaining. Like I know some people hate flying PC because noone else has range. I always say if noone has range why did the dm design the encounter that way. When I had a flying PC. The wolves were goblin riders with shortbows. The owlbear had a team of giant vultures(used giant eagle stat block) that would feast on the carcasses it would leave. None of these singled out the flying PC but now he can be damaged just like everyone else. All the problems in dnd5e can be fixed by a session zero and a good DM. nothing in it is inherently broken or OP and if it is for your campaign then just take it out or modify it.
It's the whole "why didn't the fellowship just use the eagles to fly to mordor" argument all over again. Somehow people think flying is way more OP than it actually is. There's so many ways to deal with it, that it's just ridiculous to think you could fix everything with just flying alone.
..."The wolves were goblin riders with shortbows"... Sounds like something I'd like to see painted professionally. Rabid goblins foaming at the mouth being ridden by wolves carrying bows.
in my second run of Lost Mines, one of my players asked if he could be an aarakokra ranger with a shit eating grin. I said sure. He was like "holy shit". First encounter along the road he took to the air. A goblin pointed up. An aarakokra fell. An aarakokra died.
I'd be upset if I learned the Fly spell and suddenly 99% of our encounters had ranged/flying enemies. It would be like grabbing the Dungeon Delver Feat and having the DM stop using traps because the PCs are just going to find it anyway.
@@theodorehunter4765 why wouldn't encounters have ranged options the whole time. Like ranged weapons are the most effective weapons in human history. There is a reason today we use guns and not swords. Also I never really plan an encounter in the first place without ranged options. Why would a fearful goblin run up to you with a sword if he has too. He will will try to shoot you first. Same with human and any thing that has ranged. If everything was melee then rangers who have high movement speed would be op af. There will be some encounters that the PCs can just fly away from but most of the time it doesn't make sense that the whole group of enemies has to be within 5 feet of you or else it cant do damage. Also i probably wouldn't let a PC take the dungeon delver feat in a long campaign because they will probably feel like they wasted a feat unless I include alot of dungeons. If I was running a dungeon and someone had the feat I probably would give them plenty of time to shine but there will still be puzzles that are as easy just a saving throw and then your good.
I had a funny character idea A Hyperactive Pyromancer Gnome That fireballs himself He’s an Evocation Wizard, so he can make it so he takes no damage from *BLOWING HIMSELF UP* Also, apparently Orcs’ stupidity and Kobolds’ physical weakness aren’t negatives
Well put. However, there is one thing Wizards can't do: heal, or otherwise undo damage done to them or their team. Unless there is something I've missed in the new books or Unearthed Arcana. Anyhow, yes. Tailoring your game to your party is probably about as good as DM advice can get.
I mean, there are some tad more indirect ways. There's the enervation and vampiric touch spells, both which can drain hp from the target Then there's the life transference spell, which can be used to heal other by losing some hp, or just straight up healing yourself And finally there's the healing elixir spell from the starting spells ua, which creates healing potions
@@enderking5220 Also the Shadow Touched feat has Cure Wounds as an option, and I've seen a lot of artificer wizard multiclasses which also have healing spells including Healing Word at level 1.
Yeah, with every reason he mentioned why 5e is awesome I could just think how pathfinder does it better. The main reason people like 5e is that it's simple to play.
Elderich Knight: YOU SUCK, WIZARD! Wizard: Tough talk for someone within Fireball distance. Elderich Knight: You are aware I can throw TWO fireballs, right?
*limitations are lessened* I understand that, for the most part, limitations are lessened. But I still want some of those epic-level multiclass combos Edit: also poison is trash in 5e
There's a few decent ones buried in the DMG, which is pretty dumb, considering some of the items that WOTC wasted page space on their descriptions in the PHB.
The wizard is my favorite class specifically because of how their spell list works. They get 2 spells from their list, and if they want to increase their spell list to up their options, they need to explore, spend money, and track down that spell. That really fits with the theme of the wizard being a scholar, learning how things work to attempt to unravel the mysteries of the weave and bend it to their will. As opposed to clerics for example, who quite literally pray to a deity and request power. Which isn't bad by any means, I really like all the classes in 5E (Some maybe with a few tweaks), but the Wizard I believe has the best theme and works the best WITH that theme. This interacts with the world as a whole the best, as it encourages you to explore the world and make allies, especially to ally with other wizards. You can avoid the wrong spells falling into their hand as the dungeon master, or require extra steps to get a specific spell. I'm making a DnD world actually, and in my world, in the "main" kingdom, Enchantment magic is actually basically illegal. You CAN practice it, but you need a license to even KNOW spells like charm person or suggestion. Cause magic like that is SUPER powerful actually, and given a high enough level could collapse an entire empire with ONE casting. Enchanters in this kingdom have to abide by certain laws and breaking those laws result in jail time AT BEST, more often than not though, they result in execution. If an adventurer finds a spell scroll of dominate person, they HAVE to turn it in to an authority. However, they'll be PAID for the scroll, so they'll be encouraged to turn it in and not just keep it and sell it on a black market. This also makes these kinds of scrolls VERY expensive on said black market, since they're so damn dangerous to have and hard to get. This really only works very well with the existence of Wizards, as they can turn spell scrolls into infinite castings. If say a druid uses a charm person scroll, that's just ONE usage. Wizards, with a bit of time and money, can use it forever.
*This really only works very well with the existence of Wizards, as they can turn spell scrolls into infinite castings. If say a druid uses a charm person scroll, that's just ONE usage. Wizards, with a bit of time and money, can use it forever.* That's misplaced logic. Druids don't need to track down a scroll and spend time and money to cast it forever. It's on their list and they can prepare it every day, just like a wizard who went through all that extra effort. Yeah, they can use the scroll only once, but so can a wizard. For a wizard to do it as well as a druid, he needs to sacrifice a scroll netting him one fewer castings.
@@FlatOnHisFace This is under the assumption that the Druid CANNOT cast it normally. It's illegal for them to TAKE the spell, if anyone finds out they CAN perform the spell, well for Dominate Person they'd be executed literally on the spot. It's actually for that reason I alter the spell lists of Clerics and Paladins to remove those spells normally if their patron god is good, and only enable access if that player has gotten the permission. If they travel to a kingdom where Enchantment is NOT illegal they can take those spells, and then they will be automatically replaced if they go back into those kingdoms. Scrolls enable almost ANYONE to use these spells, and wizards can take one, learn it, and start producing scrolls for other people to use. This is REALLY powerful magic. Dominate Person is a 5th level spell, which is NOT magic many people can get access to. So a wizard that can produce scrolls of Dominate Person with enough time and funding could topple empires without once setting foot into the kingdom. Hence why they're so well guarded against.
@@haku8135 Oh, I see. You're claim that wizards are better than druids because they can scribe the spells is based entirely on the lore of your personal campaign setting. Under RAW, druids have better access. But even then, how would anyone know what spells the druid prepared that day? I mean, you can physically apprehend and read a wizard's spell book and discover that he has illegal spells in it. The only way to know a druid is using an illegal spell is to witness her performing it, which is already a risk a wizard would face. How does this favor wizards?
@@FlatOnHisFace Whaaaat are you talking about? Ok, first of all, this is DISadvantage, not ADVANTAGE. This is a NEGATIVE for wizards because if you steal their book you can with some work figure out they know spells they shouldn't. Druids have different restrictions placed upon them, I'm not going to sit here typing out the entire legal structure of a world I've not fully created yet. Enchantment is RESTRICTED so NOBODY has an "advantage" regarding it. Second of all, Druids have access to only a small selection of enchantment spells. Wizards get a LOT of them, and the POWERFUL ones too. Druids have 10 enchantment spells, not even reaching 9th level, they cap out at Feeblemind at 8th level, which is a REALLY powerful and useful spell, but it can't topple an empire with one casting like the lower level dominate person can. Wizards have MANY more, including cantrips and VERY lethal spells that deal damage. Third, never claimed Wizards were BETTER than any other class. I said their spell system was my favorite. I mean they are my favorite class, but I like all the classes. Lastly, if a wizard gets their hand on ANY enchantment scroll, they can certainly learn it and have permanent access with the ability to create MORE scrolls of that spell. Druids need the scrolls to PERFORM most of the enchantment spells that exist, and they certainly need them if they want to cast spells such as dominate person (they only get dominate beast) or power word kill and so on. Druids may have access to their entire spell list, but their spell list is also much shorter to compensate. They do have VERY powerful spells in their arsenal, but those spells generally focus around summoning lightning or fire, conjuring beasts, teleporting via plants, and so on. Wizards can specialize with their subclass, but they can also diversify as much as they want. They have greater access to ALL the spells available in exchange for not having their entire spell list available to them. Aside from letting the DM balance around their spells more easily, this encourages exploration to earn loot and maybe find some helpful spell scrolls. THIS is the opening I utilized to focus my banned enchantment laws around. A Warlock can still take Crown Of Madness, and there's really nothing anyone can do to STOP them taking it. However, if they USE it and they're caught doing so, the punishment is SEVERE. So that's something that player has to take into account, do they take this useful spell and risk getting caught using it? Or do they choose to obey the law and pick a more legal spell? The act of choosing an enchantment spell itself is an illegal action in world, so the players taking that action is basically an indication they're willing to break the law for their own benefit. Lawful good characters just won't do it on principle. Evil characters will do it regardless, but they make themselves bigger targets if they're caught using them, and the ones it's easiest to catch, is wizards. Cause they write their crimes down.
@@haku8135 "The act of choosing an enchantment spell itself is illegal." Ok, how do you enforce the law against a druid? True, they have weaker enchantments, but they do have them, and there's no way to objectively determine what spells a druid has prepared. Lawful Good doesn't always obey the laws as written. Sometimes they follow a personal code of conduct. A Lawful Good character might decide that their personal code requires them to resist oppression, and defy unjust laws. I would argue that Rosa Parks was LG, even though she broke the law. Also, remember the existence of Chaotic Good characters who believe in doing whatever they determine is "right" regardless of whether or not it's illegal. They might be "the end justifies the means" kind of good characters. My CG character discovered a black market brothel. I had to ask for clarification: is it a black market because of anti-prostitution laws (and this is consensual)? Or is it black market because they're enslaved and trafficked? If it was consensual, I would leave them alone, regardless of the law. If they were enslaved, I would dispatch the slave masters in cold blood, regardless of the law.
When I play wizard i always choose a theme for choosing my spells related to it, my last wizard got a primal mana and he could only cast fire damage spells, it was very cool
I gotta be honest, 3.5 Is too complicated most of the times. I prefer 5e because it's more simple and compact. Like, who tf plays a Buomman? Or a Healer, dude just pick a Life Cleric/Paladin if you want to heal AND have a pegasus,/unicorn
Besides new spells, Wizards really only get subclass benefits and ability score bonuses, and then you get Spell Mastery at 18th level and Signature Spell at 20th level. That's kind of dumb
Great job! The smooth transition near the end made me laugh. It is on the DM to work with the players to keep them “powerful” but still part of the group so that Wizards are not OP
As a necromancer, I do my best to pick necromancy spells, but like divination, I get about 1 spell per 2 spell levels. Many sad. At I can look forward to 9th level in Xanathars!
As a necromancer i build more into minions and safety stuff like fly, invisibility, shields, self heal. And when i don't have any undeads i feel a bit useless cause all i have is like haste, magic missiles and disintegrate.
@@deezboyeed6764 a monk can spam stunning fist provided they have a large pool of ki, almost as ridiculous as 5e limitless cantrips that power up as you level
@@kenmann4074 yes and no, they can, but at beyond level 8 you really start fighting things that are good at resisting it. So you need to spam it just to get to go off, monk is a good and really only a massive damage dealer with support
This is why I like wizards in 2nd edition... they were glass cannons. Your hit dice are 1d4s so you are easy to kill if someone can kill you but you are able to unleash hell upon your foes so long as you have a party good at crowd control.
One issue I find the wizards have concerning their large list of potential spells is that the more you have...the harder it is to choose. Just like having not enough options having to many can be an issue. I played a wizard who, late into the game near max level, acquired a spellbook with all known wizard spells and at the time we ignored prep so I had every option...however...with all those options and limited slots it becomes hard to know whats best to do in any given situation. Lastly I think the school subclasses do lock you into a type of playstyle cause Evo Wizards will focus on damage given the fact its just better to do that thanks to their abilities while Abjur Wizards will focus on protection magic since they get more benefits from them. Basically a school dosnt lock you out but it does enhance that type of magic giving you flavor and theme for your character. My current character is an Eldritch Knight and his teacher/mentor was a Conjuration Wizard which influenced his style of magic. He has 2 levels in wizard and his school is Conjuration. This adds to his backstory and character cause it fits with how he was taught magic, it's fitting with the race of his mentor (Tiefling), and it hints at the fact that he understands summoning and likely knows something about Demons and Devils. In his story he summons a devil and makes a deal with it to let him win a fight, summoning it by using an old tome his mentor had. While it dosnt lock you in the subclasses add flavor and themes while leaving you with the options to customize further.
