Domain Wizard - How popular is it?

[KoDT69]

While trying to dust off my rusty old D&D gears, sorry not played in years and trying to get it all back in my brain, I've been looking at Variant classes and saw this Domain Wizard and had to wonder how popular is it? There are only benefits as far as I can tell. Is there a reason NOT to take that option?

[Kayden Prynn]

The thing you're missing is that, while a domain wizard is better than a vanilla wizard, there are ACFs introduced later on which are better still than a domain wizard, which require the wizard be a specialist.

[KoDT69]

What good ACF's require being a Specialist? I didn't see those in the SRD so I'm assuming other splatbooks come in to play?

[PhantasyPen]

There's the Focused Specialist for one thing, which gives your Wizard as many spell slots as a Sorcerer, at the cost of one extra forbidden school. As well as the "High" specialist variants on the SRD which give actual class features to your specialist wizards.

[Nifft]

What good ACF's require being a Specialist? I didn't see those in the SRD so I'm assuming other splatbooks come in to play?

Abrupt Jaunt (PHB2, Conjuror-only).

That's the poster child.

There are probably others.

[Bullet06320]

What good ACF's require being a Specialist?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/specialistWizardVariants.htm

[ryu]

Abrupt Jaunt (PHB2, Conjuror-only).

That's the poster child.

There are probably others.

It also gets you access to hummingbird familiar which has +4 initiative. If all dragon content is allowed you also have an alternative with +3 that isn't specific, but even if that is the case an extra +1 to initiative is hardly unimportant.

[gorfnab]

Requires being a specialist:
Changeling Wizard Substitution Levels (RoE 123)
Focused Specialist (CM 34)
Immediate Magic (PH2 68)
Gnome Illusionist Substitution Levels (RS, 148)
Specialist Wizard Variants (UA 59-64)

Requires being a non-specialist (these two combine nicely, see Easy Bake Wizard Handbook in my signature):
Domain Wizard (UA 57)
Elf Wizard Substitution Levels (RotW 157)

Alignment specialist (these two combine in an interesting way, either evil or chaotic):
Abyssal Specialist (DotU 59)
Planar Wizard Substitution Levels (PlH 36)

[ayvango]

It also gets you access to hummingbird familiar which has +4 initiative.
I always thought that this familiar is available only to tiny wizards

[Crake]

There's the Focused Specialist for one thing, which gives your Wizard as many spell slots as a Sorcerer, at the cost of one extra forbidden school. As well as the "High" specialist variants on the SRD which give actual class features to your specialist wizards.

Something I've found is often overlooked when discussing focused specialist is that you actually lose 1 spell slot per level, but gain 3 specialized slots, which can only be used for your school of choice, meaning at some levels, without sufficient int, you would actually be restricted entirely to your specialized school for your highest level spells.

[Jormengand]

Something I've found is often overlooked when discussing focused specialist is that you actually lose 1 spell slot per level, but gain 3 specialized slots, which can only be used for your school of choice, meaning at some levels, without sufficient int, you would actually be restricted entirely to your specialized school for your highest level spells.

Yeah, this is the reason I prefer Domain Wizard. I mean, quite apart from the fact that I have to lose three schools (and say what you will about enchantment, necromancy and evocation, they're nice to have in your back pocket) to be a focussed specialist. Plus, domain wizard still gets as many slots as a standard specialist at no cost (and abjuration, conjuration and transmutation domain, for example, mostly give you spells it's useful to have ready to cast anyway)

Also, if you're a specialist, conversely, you lose access to Elven Generalist. You lose access to Elven Generalist! That gives you a bunch of free spells, and an extra spell per day of the highest level you can cast anyway!

[ayvango]

Could domain coexist with elven generality?

[ryu]

I always thought that this familiar is available only to tiny wizards

Uh no? Focused specialist conjurers. Also there's a bit of a rules debate over whether domain and generalist are compatible. It mostly boils down to pure RAW language stating that they are with commonly intuited intent being that they aren't. If they ARE compatible not doing that is stupid in pretty much all environments that aren't level one oneshots.

[Crake]

Could domain coexist with elven generality?

That is a hotly debated topic, you won't find a consensus on the answer.

The argument goes that elven generalist takes away your ability to specialize, while domain wizard simply said that you cannot also be a specialist wizard.

Some argue that because of this, both ACF are trading away your ability to specialize, thus you cannot take them both.
Others argue that domain wizard simply requires that you don't specialize, and since an elven generalist isn't a specialist, you can take them both.

There's no real way to know which is the right answer, though personally I believe that they cannot be taken in tandem, I think the intention is pretty obviously that domain wizard is meant to remove your ability to specialize, an ability which the elven generalist also removes, and thus they cannot be taken together. But of course, that's my opinion on it, and people will argue to high heaven insisting the opposite is true.

[ayvango]

I think mutual exclusion is fair. Given wizards two bonuses at one time is too much.

[Jormengand]

Could domain coexist with elven generality?

Yes. So long as you're not a specialist, you can be a domain wizard. Elven generalists are generalists. Generalists are not specialists. Therefore...

[Scots Dragon]

Yes. So long as you're not a specialist, you can be a domain wizard. Elven generalists are generalists. Generalists are not specialists. Therefore...

This pretty obviously violates the spirit of the rules. The domain wizard and elven generalist are both intended as replacements for specialisation...


This substitution feature replaces the standard wizard's ability to specialise in a school of magic.


A domain wizard cannot also be a specialist wizard; in exchange for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead of an entire school, the domain wizard casts her chosen spells with increased power.

... and thus cannot be chosen together.

[Jormengand]

This pretty obviously violates the spirit of the rules. The domain wizard and elven generalist are both intended as replacements for specialisation...





... and thus cannot be chosen together.

One replaces the class feature, one just prohibits making use of it, and "Gives up versatility", in a sort of allegorical sense. What the "Spirit of the rules" (whatever that is) has to say about it, I frankly don't give a damn, because that's just, like, your opinion on the "Spirit of the rules". And to be quite frank, in a game so messed-up as D&D (any edition, honestly), no-one's quite sure what's intentional and what's not.

[Crake]

One replaces the class feature, one just prohibits making use of it, and "Gives up versatility", in a sort of allegorical sense. What the "Spirit of the rules" (whatever that is) has to say about it, I frankly don't give a damn, because that's just, like, your opinion on the "Spirit of the rules". And to be quite frank, in a game so messed-up as D&D (any edition, honestly), no-one's quite sure what's intentional and what's not.

"Prohibits making use of it" sounds an awful lot like not having it at all.

[Jormengand]

"Prohibits making use of it" sounds an awful lot like not having it at all.

So, knight/feat rogue is an impossible build because knight prohibits using sneak attacks and feat rogue replaces sneak attacks? A vow of peace sorcerer can't, as he trades out spells on level-up trade out his spells which only deal damage and only to living creatures because he's not allowed to make use of them? If I have a large greataxe, I can't trade it for money because I can't wield it?

You don't lose class features, spells or greataxes just because you can't use them. You still have them, and can still totally trade them for something else.

[ayvango]

Is there any useful domain besides transmutation?

[Kurald Galain]

Something I've found is often overlooked when discussing focused specialist is that you actually lose 1 spell slot per level, but gain 3 specialized slots, which can only be used for your school of choice, meaning at some levels, without sufficient int, you would actually be restricted entirely to your specialized school for your highest level spells.

A wizard is never without sufficient int. We're talking about things like 20 int by the time you get 5th level spells? Yeah, you don't even need to optimize, any wizard totally has that.

[Scots Dragon]

One replaces the class feature, one just prohibits making use of it, and "Gives up versatility", in a sort of allegorical sense. What the "Spirit of the rules" (whatever that is) has to say about it, I frankly don't give a damn, because that's just, like, your opinion on the "Spirit of the rules". And to be quite frank, in a game so messed-up as D&D (any edition, honestly), no-one's quite sure what's intentional and what's not.

You know, I don't even like this edition all that much, but I kind of feel like there are at least three potential fallacies worth coining here alone.

'Just because the current edition of Dungeons & Dragons is broken in a certain way does not mean that all editions of Dungeons & Dragons everywhere are also similarly broken.'

'Just because something doesn't explicitly say you can't do something in those exact words does not necessarily mean that you're allowed to abuse that as a loophole.'

'And just because you choose to abuse loopholes in this manner does not actually add up to the edition itself being broken for this specific reason. It's not broken, you're breaking it.'


Incidentally this whole thing is a case study in why people hate optimisation.

[Jormengand]

Is there any useful domain besides transmutation?

Abjuration, Conjuration and Divination mostly contain spells you probably wanted anyway: fire contains most of the good-for-damaging-evocations damaging evocations, and antimagic domain is fine if messing with other casters is your style.


-snip-

Oh, cut it out, would you? It's not a loophole: it's just what the rules say. And do you know what the rules as intended are? They're almost certainly "We don't know, we never even considered whether or not anyone would be able to combine these things". You need to deliberately read in an implication which isn't there to come to the conclusion that they can't be used together (which is why I never even considered that they couldn't until someone tried making the "It's trading away the same feature once and prohi... I mean, it's trading away the same feature twice!" argument.

[Crake]

So, knight/feat rogue is an impossible build because knight prohibits using sneak attacks and feat rogue replaces sneak attacks? A vow of peace sorcerer can't, as he trades out spells on level-up trade out his spells which only deal damage and only to living creatures because he's not allowed to make use of them? If I have a large greataxe, I can't trade it for money because I can't wield it?

You don't lose class features, spells or greataxes just because you can't use them. You still have them, and can still totally trade them for something else.

Knight doesn't prohibit using sneak attacks, it punishes you for using it. You can still sneak attack, but you get a penalty. Specializing on the other hand, isn't something you do, it's a class choice. You can't be a domain wizard, then suddenly decide one day, you'd rather specialize, but oops, no, domain wizard stops you from doing so. It's a choice you make, domain wizard removes your ability to select that choice, thus you don't have that choice, and oh, what do you know, that's functionally the same as what elven generalist does.

[Jormengand]

Knight doesn't prohibit using sneak attacks, it punishes you for using it. You can still sneak attack, but you get a penalty. Specializing on the other hand, isn't something you do, it's a class choice. You can't be a domain wizard, then suddenly decide one day, you'd rather specialize, but oops, no, domain wizard stops you from doing so. It's a choice you make, domain wizard removes your ability to select that choice, thus you don't have that choice, and oh, what do you know, that's functionally the same as what elven generalist does.

Okay, spell-less ranger variant/ur priest, yes or no? Ur priest actually prohibits you from having divine spells.

The point is that if you have a class feature but no opportunity to use it, you relatively trivially still have that class feature. You also, incidentally, can totally trade away feats that you no longer qualify for (but still have, just can't use) via DCS. So you can absolutely trade away things that you can't use.

[Crake]

Okay, spell-less ranger variant/ur priest, yes or no? Ur priest actually prohibits you from having divine spells.

The point is that if you have a class feature but no opportunity to use it, you relatively trivially still have that class feature. You also, incidentally, can totally trade away feats that you no longer qualify for (but still have, just can't use) via DCS. So you can absolutely trade away things that you can't use.

Look, you aren't going to change your mind on the subject, and as I said, this is a hotly debated topic, but not the topic of this thread. You do you and play it how you want, but don't go making out like your interpretation is the only one, and that your word is law anywhere else than your own table while you're DMing. That's all I ask.

[ayvango]

Ur priest actually prohibits you from having divine spells.

Nope. It prohibits you from ability to cast spells. So find allip, make it drain your wisdom, took cleric to get two domains, levelup, now you could take Ur-priest and restore your wisdom score after that.

[Eldariel]

Is there any useful domain besides transmutation?

Storm Domain is nice in that it offers a few spells not usually on the Wizard spell list (notably Control Winds, which is quite the powerhouse).

[KoDT69]

Ok so Domain Wizard says you can't specialize. - class substitution

Elven Generalist says you can take it as long as you're NOT a Specialist. It does NOT expressly stated that you need that option available in the first place though. This is like a magic gate that won't allow ogres to pass. A shapeshifter comes along that can't shift into an ogre for whatever reason. Would that gate stop him because he didn't have the option to turn into an ogre in the first place? No. It only matters that he isn't one when passing through the gate.

As a side note, this edition IS broken. Just because you can choose to ignore parts or houseruled stuff away you don't like, doesn't change the fact. You can enjoy it anyway. Just because it's official doesn't make it good. Too many writers, too little communication.

[johnbragg]

So, knight/feat rogue is an impossible build because knight prohibits using sneak attacks and feat rogue replaces sneak attacks? A vow of peace sorcerer can't, as he trades out spells on level-up trade out his spells which only deal damage and only to living creatures because he's not allowed to make use of them? If I have a large greataxe, I can't trade it for money because I can't wield it?

You don't lose class features, spells or greataxes just because you can't use them. You still have them, and can still totally trade them for something else.

I know you just dismissed RAI because the developers were self-contradictory and didn't anticipate a lot of things. But if we're talking RAI, we're talking about the original 3rd edition developers and playtesters, then the Knight/Feat Rogue combo would be allowed as a flavorful and mechanically interesting combo, while the Domain Generalist Wizard would be banned and books thrown at a powergaming munchkin.

[Kayden Prynn]

@everyone who thinks they work together (and everyone who thinks they don't but can't properly formulate why)

Domain wizard is not an ACF. It is a variant class. Which means that, while it's very similar to the wizard, it's technically it's own separate class, just like a rogue and a ranger are different classes. Which means, as far as RAW is concerned, it doesn't qualify for Elven Generalist because it's not a wizard. This is why the domain wizard doesn't use the same language, because it's not "trade x for y", it's "copy/paste everything except x. Add y."

[Nifft]

Domain Wizard is a world-building tool for DMs. It's not a thing that should be assumed unless you're doing white-room theory-crafting, in which case you're also the DM so you can just do whatever you want.

If the DM adds the Domain Wizard variant into a game, then it's quite possible the racial sub levels will also be changed, or will just be absent.

I've never played an IRL game which allowed Domain Wizards, nor have I added them to any of my games.

[Jormengand]

@everyone who thinks they work together (and everyone who thinks they don't but can't properly formulate why)

Domain wizard is not an ACF. It is a variant class. Which means that, while it's very similar to the wizard, it's technically it's own separate class, just like a rogue and a ranger are different classes. Which means, as far as RAW is concerned, it doesn't qualify for Elven Generalist because it's not a wizard. This is why the domain wizard doesn't use the same language, because it's not "trade x for y", it's "copy/paste everything except x. Add y."

"Variant Character Classes

This section presents sixteen variant versions of the standard character classes, along with several additional variants created by swapping one or more class features for features of other classes."
"Multiclassing And Variant Classes

Multiclassing between variants of the same class is a tricky subject. In cases where a single class offers a variety of paths (such as the totem barbarian or the monk fighting styles), the easiest solution is simply to bar multiclassing between different versions of the same class (just as a character can't multiclass between different versions of specialist wizards). For variants that are wholly separate from the character class—such as the bardic sage or the urban ranger—multiclassing, even into multiple variants of the same class, is probably okay. Identical class features should stack if gained from multiple versions of the same class (except for spellcasting, which is always separate). "
"Wizard Variant: Domain Wizard

A wizard who uses the arcane domain system (called a domain wizard) selects a specific arcane domain of spells, much like a cleric selects a pair of domains associated with his deity."

And are you seriously going to suggest that a thug fighter can't take weapon specialisation because he's not a 4th- or higher-level fighter?

[Scots Dragon]

I'm just gonna call up the exact same quotes I did earlier, because if we're going to go by the nitpicking approach, it doesn't even work there.


This substitution feature replaces the standard wizard’s ability to specialize in a school of magic.

Okay, from this we establish the important point about the elven generalist. It loses the ability to specialise in a school of magic, and under any reasonable reading this would cover any similar concept even when that doesn't fall into specialising in one of the specific eight schools, because while those are not explicitly 'specialising in a school of magic', they do apply as part of that ability.


A wizard who uses the arcane domain system (called a domain wizard) selects a specific arcane domain of spells, much like a cleric selects a pair of domains associated with his deity. A domain wizard cannot also be a specialist wizard; in exchange for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead of an entire school, the domain wizard casts her chosen spells with increased power.

Previously, I'd highlighted this section;

in exchange for the versatility given up by specializing in a domain instead of an entire school,

Let's narrow that down further;

by specializing in a domain

The domain wizard explicitly, and in those exact words, specialises in a domain rather than specialising in an entire school. It is by definition a variation upon the specialist wizard, which is why it cannot also be a specialist wizard. The elven generalist does not have the ability to specialise in a school of magic, and thus also cannot specialise in a domain. I mean you could maybe argue that the domain wizard isn't specialising in a school, and that would open up a loophole, but that'd be immensely disingenuous.

Seriously. As I've mentioned elsewhere, I don't even like this edition all that much, but about half of what's actually 'broken' about it is just powergamers deciding that they can selectively ignore the rules whenever it suits them.

[Jormengand]

It is by definition a variation upon the specialist wizard, which is why it cannot also be a specialist wizard.

So the reason it can't be a specialist wizard is because it's a specialist wizard? That's some pretty serious T=F you've got going on there.

[Scots Dragon]

So the reason it can't be a specialist wizard is because it's already a specialist wizard? That's some pretty serious T=F you've got going on there.

With just a minor fix... yeah. Got it in one. You can't be an evoker if you're already a necromancer after all.

[Jormengand]

With just a minor fix... yeah. Got it in one. You can't be an evoker if you're already a necromancer after all.

But domain wizards say that you can't be a specialist, not that you can't "Already" be a specialist (Because they're not actually specialist wizards in any real sense)

[Scots Dragon]

But domain wizards say that you can't be a specialist, not that you can't "Already" be a specialist (Because they're not actually specialist wizards in any real sense)

They are wizards who specialise in an arcane domain. This makes them specialists for the purposes of whether or not they can be elven generalists.

Which they can't.

[Thurbane]

This particular combo has been debated ever since they were both published...I'd be surprised if we reached a consensus now.

[Scots Dragon]

This particular combo has been debated ever since they were both published...I'd be surprised if we reached a consensus now.

Honestly the fact that it's considered debatable at all rather than being universally called out as a munchkin tactic says a lot more about the community than it should.

[Crake]

Honestly the fact that it's considered debatable at all rather than being universally called out as a munchkin tactic says a lot more about the community than it should.

Whether it's munchkinism or not entirely comes down to the table, which is why I pointed out both sides of the argument, gave my opinion, then moved on. Let the OP's table decide if they think it should work or not rather than having a pointless debate where both sides are set in their decision and have no intention of changing their minds.

[KoDT69]

Technically this whole Elvish Generalist thing was not a thing I even knew about until I stumbled on the Domain Wizard thing. Being a DM I have no issues with this combo for the one simple reason.

A Specialist Wizard is tagged as such and has a restricted magic school, and also still counts as a Wizard in all respects.
A Domain Wizard, while being called an alternate class, is still a Wizard, a Generalist, and not tagged as a Specialist. There are no restricted schools of magic and the Domain Wizard entry does not expressly state that you become a Specialist. Having a similar ability does not change what you are. The previous example of a Thug Fighter and Weapon Specialization comes to mind.

I don't see any evidence contradicting this. If you are extrapolating details or read it different, so be it. Play it how you like. My goal as DM is for everyone to enjoy the game. My players don't really possess the drive to optimize in such a way. They are happy to play a band of Fighters with Weapon Focus and Endurance as long as the storyline is fun.

[Luccan]

The weird thing about Domain Wizard is the total lack of reason to not take it if it's available and you were going to be a generalist anyway. Sure, if you think you're going to be an elf and your table decided Elven Generalist and Domain don't synergize that's a reason, but even at a table where they do, you might not take E.G. because you don't want to be an elf. But there's no reason to not be a Domain Wizard if you're going to be a generalist beyond it being forbidden by the DM.

[Kurald Galain]

The weird thing about Domain Wizard is the total lack of reason to not take it if it's available and you were going to be a generalist anyway.

That's not weird, that's making generalists a viable choice. Without this option, there's no reason to not be a specialist. :smallamused:

[Luccan]

That's not weird, that's making generalists a viable choice. Without this option, there's no reason to not be a specialist. :smallamused:

While I'm aware that's the commonly bandied wisdom, not being a specialist always had the benefit of being able to cast spells from any school. I'm aware that every wizard "should" be a conjurer who ignores evocation and enchantment (those are the ones to always get rid of, right?), but being able to choose spells from any school did have an advantage. I won't deny, the gap exists, but I don't think it's as big a deal as some people make it out to be. And I don't know, the domains don't feel like they really do much to make up the difference, but now suddenly you're themed around a school of magic anyway (seriously, are any of the non-spell school domains worth it?).

[Kurald Galain]

While I'm aware that's the commonly bandied wisdom, not being a specialist always had the benefit of being able to cast spells from any school. I'm aware that every wizard "should" be a conjurer who ignores evocation and enchantment (those are the ones to always get rid of, right?),
No, that's not the reason.

The reason is that in theory power comes from how large your spell list is, but in practice power comes from how many (top-level) spells you can cast per day.

[Nifft]

While I'm aware that's the commonly bandied wisdom, not being a specialist always had the benefit of being able to cast spells from any school. I'm aware that every wizard "should" be a conjurer who ignores evocation and enchantment (those are the ones to always get rid of, right?), but being able to choose spells from any school did have an advantage. I won't deny, the gap exists, but I don't think it's as big a deal as some people make it out to be. And I don't know, the domains don't feel like they really do much to make up the difference, but now suddenly you're themed around a school of magic anyway (seriously, are any of the non-spell school domains worth it?).

Very good points here.

Optimal white-room single-character optimization is not real-world practical optimization.

The reason to be a Conjurer is because there's no DM to prevent you from abusing planar binding to compensate for all other schools. If you have a DM, that's obviously inapplicable.

The reason to discard Enchantment is because every monster you face is using mind blank, and you never have non-combat encounters with NPCs who are susceptible to magical influence (or who can't detect magical influence). If you have a DM who allows you to influence NPCs using magic, that's obviously an invalidation of the premise.

Evocation is easily discarded because you're assumed to have access to all splatbooks which means you have enough non-Evocation spells to cover the role. If you have a DM who doesn't allow all possible sources, then that's not a valid premise either.

In a real game:
- Area damage can be a worthwhile contribution, and Evocation can be the most practical source of area damage.
- Influencing NPCs can be a worthwhile pursuit, and Enchantment can be the most practical method for influence.

[Crake]

The weird thing about Domain Wizard is the total lack of reason to not take it if it's available and you were going to be a generalist anyway. Sure, if you think you're going to be an elf and your table decided Elven Generalist and Domain don't synergize that's a reason, but even at a table where they do, you might not take E.G. because you don't want to be an elf. But there's no reason to not be a Domain Wizard if you're going to be a generalist beyond it being forbidden by the DM.

The thing is, you could say the same thing about elven generalist (as long as you're an elf of course). In fact, one of my DMs did say that about elven generalist, and subsequently told me I'm not allowed to take elven generalist because it's too powerful.


The reason to discard Enchantment is because every monster you face is using mind blank, and you never have non-combat encounters with NPCs who are susceptible to magical influence (or who can't detect magical influence). If you have a DM who allows you to influence NPCs using magic, that's obviously an invalidation of the premise.

No, the reason to discard enchantment isn't becasue every enemy is using mind blank, it's because constructs, vermin, plants, undead and oozes all come with mind blank built in.

[Luccan]

The thing is, you could say the same thing about elven generalist (as long as you're an elf of course). In fact, one of my DMs did say that about elven generalist, and subsequently told me I'm not allowed to take elven generalist because it's too powerful.



No, the reason to discard enchantment isn't becasue every enemy is using mind blank, it's because constructs, vermin, plants, undead and oozes all come with mind blank built in.

Oh certainly, but that was kind of my point: you might not want to be an elf, but elf or no, Domain wizard is strictly superior. Of course Elven Generalist is better than regular generalist, but that at least comes with an actual build decision from the player. More than a few wizards I've seen have just been generalists out of not knowing what schools they'd be willing to give up. I dunno, it just seems weird (to me) that Domain Wizard is a strict benefit. Especially since I don't think it was intended for balance between generalists and specialists at all (its almost phrased like they thought you could pick a specialization after character creation).

[Jormengand]

I, incidentally, tend to avoid specialists because the ability to shoot your versatility in the foot to improve your number of spells per day is called sorcerer isn't actually appealing. That, and spells like charm person are ludicrously good if your enemies aren't throwing spells seven levels higher trying to stop them. If I had to drop two schools, I'd probably throw abjuration (Conjuration and Evocation can do all of the force-gets-in-stuff's-way spells anyway) and necromancy (conjuration makes minions and enchantment does mind stuff and evocation does damage and negative levels suck to have used on you but aren't useful to use on other people when you can just kill them). Domain wizard elven generalist is just an added bonus.

[ayvango]

I, incidentally, tend to avoid specialists because the ability to shoot your versatility in the foot to improve your number of spells per day is called sorcerer isn't actually appealing.
You could have 2 wizards in a party, or even 3. They could combine their spell knowledge to mask each weak points

[Kurald Galain]

You could have 2 wizards in a party, or even 3. They could combine their spell knowledge to mask each weak points

Yep. Plus it's more appealing to play a wizard with a theme to his spells that fits his personality, instead of a wizard that just uses every powerful option regardless of consistency.

[Celestia]

You could have 2 wizards in a party, or even 3. They could combine their spell knowledge to mask each weak points
One could bar enchantment and illusion and have a thing against messing with people's minds. The other could bar evocation and necromancy and be the sort who avoids direct confrontation. Practicality and roleplay justification. *nods*

[Jormengand]

You could have 2 wizards in a party, or even 3. They could combine their spell knowledge to mask each weak points

I mean, that's a thing you can do if your party has two wizards, sure.

[ryu]

Also lets take a moment to remember that a a wizard dropping three full schools WITH NO BENEFIT is still better than a sorcerer because they still have many more spells known, aren't a spell level behind at base, and the worst three schools just aren't enough to compensate either of those if you even took more than one or two spells from them on your sorcerer.

I can't even call sorcerer a good training class for wizard hopefuls because they have much worse recourse for having picked all bad spells than literally any wizard.