Potential Fall Out From Removing Wizards

[Sredni Vashtar]

I've been considering how I want magic to feel in my homebrew setting. In that consideration, I decided that I like the concept that magic must come with a cost attached, typically through a deal or relation to something powerful and external. All the spell casting classes in 5e seem to have that in some form or another aside from Wizards, Eldritch Knights, and Arcane Tricksters.

So here's what I'm thinking:

Wizards (as a class) don't exist.
Warlocks use Intelligence as their casting stat. They also have Proficiency in Intelligence saves instead of Charisma.
Sorcerers use the Wizard spell list instead of the Sorcerer one. (Alternately, both spell lists are combined.)
Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters remain the same more or less, except that they must choose an Otherworldly Patron that they draw their spells from. (They still draw from the Wizard spell list, and may or may not receive the Bonus Patron Spells, haven't decided yet.)



What does the Playground think? Are there any other potential issues that I may have missed?

[Shining Wrath]

Sorcerers get their power from an ancestor, which is a pretty low price to pay unless the ancestor is still around and expects obedience. Suggest that each sorcerer belong to a clan which has a living ancestor. Ancestor dies, sorcerer loses power.

Bards also don't pay much of a price unless you enforce something along the lines of owing actual allegiance to the college.

Clerics, Druids, and Warlocks - yeah, there's Someone who expects to be obeyed.

[Toadkiller]

Sorcerers become quite a bit more powerful with an expanded spell list plus metamagic. More powerful than wizards I'd think.

I wouldn't play a warlock in the scenario. Sorc are worlds better now and intelligence is much less useful, in my opinion, than charisma for the game.

[DanyBallon]

Why not keep Wizards, EK, and AT the way they are, but add a cost to their magic (i.e. every time the cast a spell the must succeed a DC 8+spell level Con check or get some consequence, temp damage, exhaustion level, disadvantange for 1min, etc.)

Like Shinning Wrath said, in your scenario, Sorcerers and Bards, don't have much penalties, unless you have something up your sleeves.

[Tenmujiin]

Rather than removing wizards it's probably better just to change them slightly.

Something along the lines of having cover all rule requireing magic to always need a deal/connection/patron of some kind even if the class doesn't require it by default and then work it out on a case by case basis.

Edit: just had an idea that wizards could get their power directly from the spellbook. I.E. you need to obtain the book from something that will likeley ask for somethibg in return before you can begin scribing spells into it

[KorvinStarmast]

So here's what I'm thinking:

Wizards (as a class) don't exist.
Warlocks use Intelligence as their casting stat. They also have Proficiency in Intelligence saves instead of Charisma.
Sorcerers use the Wizard spell list instead of the Sorcerer one. (Alternately, both spell lists are combined.)
Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters remain the same more or less, except that they must choose an Otherworldly Patron that they draw their spells from. (They still draw from the Wizard spell list, and may or may not receive the Bonus Patron Spells, haven't decided yet.)


What does the Playground think? Are there any other potential issues that I may have missed?
Why not just remove Wizards from the choices available to play as PC's and leave everything else alone?

Besides making Int a universal dump stat for anyone not an EK or AT, you need only address the AT or EK's source of magic.

I'd suggest that they can only learn magic from scrolls, or from being tutored/mentored by a Warlock, EK, AT, or Sorcerer. (Learn by doing).

Seems like a low impact way to get rid of those meddlesome Wizards after whom a company is named that makes the game. :)

[Gastronomie]

In the anime "A Particular Magical Index", spellbooks are depicted as being sorta Cthulhu-ish.

Spellbooks in the Index World have written inside the laws and physics of an alternate and utterly alien universe, and simply reading through several lines can be enough to drive over 99% of people insane. Or the immeasurable power stored inside can cause malfunction and make the reader *insert random nasty effect here*.

Only the most talented scholars, with a mix of both high intelligence and slight insanity from the start, can hope to decipher, understand, and wield the power of a Spellbook. And Spellbooks have their own will - they wish its master to keep on researching, adding more eldritch information to the vast knowledge stored within itself. If the master refuses and declares he's gonna stop being a wizard, or tries to store away the Spellbook for fear of its power, the Spellbook will unleash its "wrath" and *again, insert random nasty effect here*.

It's impossible to destroy a Spellbook. Attempting it will cause the Spellbook to counter-attack, and most people don't like what happens then. Even if someone miraculously succeeded, powerful Spellbooks reform on their own, much like certain artifacts in D&D.

So, "a cost attached, typically through a deal or relation to something powerful and external".
I think you could just copy-paste the ideas from the Index world into your campaign. In which case, you could maybe keep the Wizards.

I think the idea of Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters deriving their powers from patrons is nice. Maybe something War God oriented for the former, and Trickster God (obvious) oriented for the latter? I mean, patrons generally aren't "gods", but I mean by its "nature".

Not sure about making Warlocks INT, though. Warlocks often need to tell lies to conceal their magical origins from public, especially if he has a Fiend Patron, and I'm pretty sure that's the whole reason they decided to use CHA for its spell stat in the first place. One of the Warlock's nice points is how it does well in RPs, so I'd keep it CHA. But that's just my opinion.

[Dalebert]

Wizards are beholden to the almighty dollar. My wizard is always broke from learning new spells.

[Bellberith]

If you wanted to remove the Wizard class purely because it doesn't fit. Why don't you come up with something? Like they have to worship Mystra, The Goddess of Magic.

Wizards are already slaves to their spellbooks and for one to be a good wizard they have to spend time, and gold learning new spells.

Making Warlocks Intelligence based really doesn't make sense. Firstly, Intelligence is significantly worse as a stat than charisma considering the charisma based skills are more useful and there is no such thing as an intelligence save anything in the RAW. On top of that, intelligence implies the way they cast must be learned. Whereas charisma implies the way they cast is natural and/or gifted. Warlocks certainly fall under the latter in all cases. Whether they got their power from something otherworldly, or had it from birth (more 3.5 than 5e).

Giving Wizards a reason to exist in your world seems better than removing them completely and limiting the options the players can choose from by 1 entire class and 2 sub-classes.

[Sredni Vashtar]

Frankly, I had forgotten all about Bards. :smallredface: They almost never ping on my radar when I'm considering spellcasters. As for sorcerers, I feel like their magic being tied to their ancestry makes them ripe for the old "living in the shadow of the legacy" trope.

As for the primary discussion: I like the idea of the educated magic user, and wanted to tie that to the "deals with dark forces" superstition of old. Granted, Cha-based Warlocks do make sense. Alternately, I could make a wizard somewhat beholden to their teacher, emphasizing the apprenticeship aspect a bit more. It could be that I'm still coming from a 3.5 mindset as a GM, but I don't like the "magic as technology" feel. Tying it to some greater power gives the caster a sort of accountability to someone other than him or herself.

[krugaan]

"Show me on this doll where the wizard touched you."

"It... it was HERE."

/sob

[Bellberith]

Frankly, I had forgotten all about Bards. :smallredface: They almost never ping on my radar when I'm considering spellcasters. As for sorcerers, I feel like their magic being tied to their ancestry makes them ripe for the old "living in the shadow of the legacy" trope.

As for the primary discussion: I like the idea of the educated magic user, and wanted to tie that to the "deals with dark forces" superstition of old. Granted, Cha-based Warlocks do make sense. Alternately, I could make a wizard somewhat beholden to their teacher, emphasizing the apprenticeship aspect a bit more. It could be that I'm still coming from a 3.5 mindset as a GM, but I don't like the "magic as technology" feel. Tying it to some greater power gives the caster a sort of accountability to someone other than him or herself.

In my previous post i mentioned that Wizards can always be tied to the goddess of magic, the weave will also work for this.

That is if you wanted Wizards to be slaves to something other than their spellbooks and gold.

[Sredni Vashtar]

In my previous post i mentioned that Wizards can always be tied to the goddess of magic, the weave will also work for this.

That is if you wanted Wizards to be slaves to something other than their spellbooks and gold.

I feel like that would be too similar to clerics, unless the Weave is somehow seperate from the gods (which would work for my setting, since there's not just one Deity of Magic). Definitely some food for thought there. Thanks! :smallsmile:

[Bellberith]

I feel like that would be too similar to clerics, unless the Weave is somehow seperate from the gods (which would work for my setting, since there's not just one Deity of Magic). Definitely some food for thought there. Thanks! :smallsmile:

The Weave is separate from gods and not at the same time. Do a little research on the forgotten realms wiki or something. But long story short is the weave is basically some mystic force out in the world that is controlled and maintained by the goddess of magic and all spellcasters draw upon it in some way to cast their spells.

When the goddess of magic was killed, the spellplague happened. That is why sections of the map are plaguelands. There is a new goddess of magic now under the same name and in D&D lore its hundreds of years later for 5e, so the spellplague is a non-issue unless the players try to head down to Halruaa or the plaguewrought lands... Some areas that had it the worst and are still heavily plagued. (The Spellplague is when magic goes haywire and everyone has little control over magic, if any. But most casters lost the ability to cast spells or straight up died when it happened. Even powerful liches died.)

[Tanarii]

Warlocks are a natural for Int based casting. They're already flavored to get part of their Pact Magic from arcane research, and have a thirst for knowledge (as well as power). They also are one of the few classes that gets Proficiency in all five Int skills.

I'd also say give Warlocks the Wizard spell list, not Sorcerers. But you'll have to tell players that you reserve the right to house rule out spells from their list after the fact, if they turn out to be too abusive with SR-returning spell slots.

[Bellberith]

Warlocks are a natural for Int based casting. They're already flavored to get part of their Pact Magic from arcane research, and have a thirst for knowledge (as well as power). They also are one of the few classes that gets Proficiency in all five Int skills.

I'd also say give Warlocks the Wizard spell list, not Sorcerers. But you'll have to tell players that you reserve the right to house rule out spells from their list after the fact, if they turn out to be too abusive with SR-returning spell slots.

Animate Dead in particular would be a must to rule out for a warlock. The ability to have 8-12 undead and then rest for 1 hour and be in 100% top shape would be ridiculous. Even if those undead are fairly lackluster or die to a large aoe. They are undead you wouldnt normally have and they didnt cost you anything but 1 hour of your day and perhaps a little prep time beforehand. Unlike if you were a wizard and had to use a few of your precious spells per long rest to achieve the same result.

[Rusvul]

I'm in favor of leaving them in, messing with rules runs the risk of breaking things. I'd say just refluff them to have external attachments.

Speaking of which. All of your other lore involves asking for power or being given power- what if wizards and/or bards stole power from somewhere. It gives them a unique flavor, might make them fit better in your campaign, and it doesn't change anything mechanically.

[Demonic Spoon]

Another avenue along the lines of "making wizards beholden to something external" would be to just have some kind of organization - perhaps one ruled by powerful extraplanar beings - that has almost a monopoly on arcane magic. All arcane magic users (sorcerers excepted, 'cause wild magic and dragons) must be part of this organization, or have some background reason about how they would have learned magic from such an organization (And deal with the fact that said organization will likely want to hunt down unsanctioned users of such magic). This organization is the only one with the knowledge and resources to teach such spellcasting; it's just not a thing anyone knows outside of it.

This preserves your goal for the setting while leaving character options and game balance intact.