How many extra spells for Wizards?

[Erelamar]

Broken down by level (e.g. two more every level; one more every two levels), how many extra spells should a wizard discover during the course of their careers. This can include treasure, or scrolls purchased in towns, or spells copied from allied wizards. These need not come at perfect intervals. Perhaps a wizard only finds one scroll before sixth level, then in the horde of a dragon they find an old spellbook with six or seven more (much like Raistlin did in Dragons of Autumn Twilight).

I guess I'm looking to find a sort of consensus for how many spells are given out and what the typical sources' proportions are (e.g. 75% from treasure, 25% from trading with the Arcane Order, etc.).

[Waazraath]

Broken down by level (e.g. two more every level; one more every two levels), how many extra spells should a wizard discover during the course of their careers. This can include treasure, or scrolls purchased in towns, or spells copied from allied wizards. These need not come at perfect intervals. Perhaps a wizard only finds one scroll before sixth level, then in the horde of a dragon they find an old spellbook with six or seven more (much like Raistlin did in Dragons of Autumn Twilight).

I guess I'm looking to find a sort of consensus for how many spells are given out and what the typical sources' proportions are (e.g. 75% from treasure, 25% from trading with the Arcane Order, etc.).

Good question; I think at the very least a Wizard should be able to learn 1-2 spells from each level in addtion to the ones known from leveling. But that's a minimum. For the rest, I'd simply have the campaign and campaign locations that are available deceide it. When going to big cities with public libraries or accesible wizard guilds, learning new spells should be pretty easy (though not free). Going up against casters and defeating them, or having npc-wizard allies also should gain a lot of extra spells learned. From the other side, if the campaign are mainly wilderniss treks fighiting unintelligent beasts, there shoundn't be much more spells available aside from the occasional scroll or spellbook on a slain adventurer.

If you really want a benchmark, I'd check some of the published adventures; after all, they are the official standard, as far as that exists. From what I remember, they tend to be quite generous with having spellbooks and scrolls as loot.

[Unoriginal]

Broken down by level (e.g. two more every level; one more every two levels), how many extra spells should a wizard discover during the course of their careers. This can include treasure, or scrolls purchased in towns, or spells copied from allied wizards. These need not come at perfect intervals. Perhaps a wizard only finds one scroll before sixth level, then in the horde of a dragon they find an old spellbook with six or seven more (much like Raistlin did in Dragons of Autumn Twilight).

I guess I'm looking to find a sort of consensus for how many spells are given out and what the typical sources' proportions are (e.g. 75% from treasure, 25% from trading with the Arcane Order, etc.).

There is no "should".

A wizard can discover extra spells. But there is no "must" or "should" in this happening.

What I do is what makes sense for the setting and the campaign. In Waterdeep: Dragon Heist, there's a shop that let a wizard get a lot of extra spells and the PCs can have access to it at early levels, for example, which wouldn't be the case in Out of the Abyss or Storm King's Thunder.

[Waazraath]

There is no "should".


True, of course, but then again, if I played a wizard and by the time I was (for example) level 8 I never learned a new spell (asides from leveling), I wouldn't be happy. Similair to a Ranger that never meets his favored terrain or enemy, or the like. A DM should make the game fun for the players, and that includes imo not having (important) class features be unused

[Man_Over_Game]

There is no "should".

A wizard can discover extra spells. But there is no "must" or "should" in this happening.

What I do is what makes sense for the setting and the campaign. In Waterdeep: Dragon Heist, there's a shop that let a wizard get a lot of extra spells and the PCs can have access to it at early levels, for example, which wouldn't be the case in Out of the Abyss or Storm King's Thunder.

There kind of is. One of the major differences between each Wizard School is their Savant ability, which only kicks in when finding spells to copy. For a School like Transmutation (powerful spell list, weak subclass benefits), the Savant feature is a major part of the subclass. Not having any spells found results in a wasted feature (and a weakened subclass, in the case of Transmuation/Conjuration), which is something that should never be caused by a DM.

There are 207 Wizard spells in the SRD.

15 of those are cantrips, which leaves 192.

Wizards start with 6 and gain 2 each level past level 1. This means, without finding any spells, a Wizard will learn 44 spells, or about 23% of Wizard spells.

1 additional spell per level puts them at 66 (34%)
2 additional spells per level puts them at 86 (45%)
3 additional spells per level puts them at 106 (56%)

However, this assumes a Wizard will start learning new spells as early as level 1 (not likely, not by DnD's default magic item rarities). Rather, I'd have it scale more so that higher level Wizards are much more likely to find magic than lower level ones.

For example, providing a number of spells equal to 1/4 of the Wizard's current level (rounded down) upon level up provides 45 spells, or roughly double what they'd learn naturally.
This would mean something like this:

0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5


Rounding provides 55 spells, and something like this:

0
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5


And Rounding Up provides 60 spells, and this list:

1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5

[patchyman]

True, of course, but then again, if I played a wizard and by the time I was (for example) level 8 I never learned a new spell (asides from leveling), I wouldn't be happy. d

While I understand your point, I disagree. Wizards, compared to both other arcane casters and divine casters, are extremely versatile and powerful even if they never find a new spell.

At 8th level, assuming no spells found, a wizard knows 20 spells and can prepare 11 or 12. At the same level, a sorcerer knows what, 8?

The only casters who know more spells are clerics and druids and the wizard spell list is more versatile than either of their lists.

Finding spells is definitely a plus, but a wizard remains a powerful class even if he ir she doesn’t find a single spell.

[Man_Over_Game]

While I understand your point, I disagree. Wizards, compared to both other arcane casters and divine casters, are extremely versatile and powerful even if they never find a new spell.

At 8th level, assuming no spells found, a wizard knows 20 spells and can prepare 11 or 12. At the same level, a sorcerer knows what, 8?

The only casters who know more spells are clerics and druids and the wizard spell list is more versatile than either of their lists.

Finding spells is definitely a plus, but a wizard remains a powerful class even if he ir she doesn’t find a single spell.

What is your solution regarding the lost level 2 Savant features that set the School subclasses apart from the Non-school ones (Bladesinger, War Mage)?

[Unoriginal]

Another point to note is that while it is not written on their statblock, any enemy with wizard spellcasting will have a spellbook, unless exceptional circumstences.

Sometime it will be a travel spellbook containing just the spells they have prepared, but if fought near their homebase it'll likely be their main spellbook.

If a DM made the PCs fight several wizardry-casting enemies without any spellbooks in the loot, then I would seriously question the DM.

But on the other hand, nothing forces a DM to put wizard-type enemies in a game.

[Amdy_vill]

Broken down by level (e.g. two more every level; one more every two levels), how many extra spells should a wizard discover during the course of their careers. This can include treasure, or scrolls purchased in towns, or spells copied from allied wizards. These need not come at perfect intervals. Perhaps a wizard only finds one scroll before sixth level, then in the horde of a dragon they find an old spellbook with six or seven more (much like Raistlin did in Dragons of Autumn Twilight).

I guess I'm looking to find a sort of consensus for how many spells are given out and what the typical sources' proportions are (e.g. 75% from treasure, 25% from trading with the Arcane Order, etc.).

I have played games with non and i have played game where i got/gave a dozen. really depends on you game. in a game with the wizard as our only magic user i would give a lot as they may need to cover more then one roll. in a game with mostly spell casters only hand out a few or non. remember wizards can copy scroll so giving out spells can have more than one uses.

[Rafaelfras]

Another point to note is that while it is not written on their statblock, any enemy with wizard spellcasting will have a spellbook, unless exceptional circumstences.

Sometime it will be a travel spellbook containing just the spells they have prepared, but if fought near their homebase it'll likely be their main spellbook.

If a DM made the PCs fight several wizardry-casting enemies without any spellbooks in the loot, then I would seriously question the DM.

But on the other hand, nothing forces a DM to put wizard-type enemies in a game.

This is true for both Aerisi Kalinof (Air prophet in PotA) and Sansuri (cloud giant lord on SKT). They both have their spellbooks described in their loot, Sansuri´s one having a custom (and more powerful) Simulacrum spell.

In my opinion you can give the wizard access to his full list through the campaign, it will give him something to spend gold and time on and his savant feature will not go to waste.
In my campaings i usualy roll for loot, so if the wizard is lucky enough he will find a good deal of scrolls through his career and will take the spells he REALY wants on level up

[Trustypeaches]

I'd argue Wizards are balanced with the assumption they never learn any extra spells. And they're still very strong.

That's not to say I don't give them options for learning spells: enemies with spellbooks, spell scrolls as part of loot, places to buy ink, etc. But I wouldn't stress about making sure to provide them extra spells every level or anything.

[patchyman]

What is your solution regarding the lost level 2 Savant features that set the School subclasses apart from the Non-school ones (Bladesinger, War Mage)?

I would disagree with the premise of your argument. Of the features that distinguish a conjurer from a War Wizard, the Savant feature is the least important one, particularly since past the early levels, wizards tend to have enough gold to pick up the spells they need. Also, a wizard’s savant feature never coming up in game hardly has an incidence on how powerful the class is.

[Man_Over_Game]

I would disagree with the premise of your argument. Of the features that distinguish a conjurer from a War Wizard, the Savant feature is the least important one, particularly since past the early levels, wizards tend to have enough gold to pick up the spells they need. Also, a wizard’s savant feature never coming up in game hardly has an incidence on how powerful the class is.

I feel that may be true for certain subclasses (like Illusion), but for something like Transmutation, who has one of the largest lists of spells per school, has the most versatile list of spells (lots of combat and non-combat spells) and the most versatile spells (spells often doing multiple different things), and the lack of powerful subclass-specific features, the School of Transmutation is defined by their ability to gain Transmutation spells (which is encouraged via their Savant feature).

It might not seem like a big deal at first, but it's the biggest difference I see when comparing someone picking a Bladesinger with Transmutation spells vs. just being a Transmuter.



I look at Wizards, and I recognize their limited Hit Die, limited armor, limited prepared spell number (Int + Level). They can prepare as many spells as a Cleric at one time but can only have access to half as many without spells being introduced (Wizards naturally gain about 50 spells, Clerics naturally have about 100). Clerics have higher hit die, martial and weapon proficiencies, and debatably better subclass features.

---------------------------------

Would Wizards having as many spells available as a Cleric be harmful? You'd have to introduce 50 Wizard spells (2.5 per level) before that happens.

[patchyman]

There are a lot of points here, so I will deal with them one at a time.


I feel that may be true for certain subclasses (like Illusion), but for something like Transmutation, who has one of the largest lists of spells per school, has the most versatile list of spells (lots of combat and non-combat spells) and the most versatile spells (spells often doing multiple different things), and the lack of powerful subclass-specific features, the School of Transmutation is defined by their ability to gain Transmutation spells (which is encouraged via their Savant feature).

Of the eight specialist subclasses, Abjurer, Conjurer, Illusionist, Diviner, Necromancer, Enchanter and Evoker (so 7 out of 8) all have strong low-level features which differentiate them from War Wizards and Bladesingers. So my feeling is that overall, Savant really comes across as a ribbon feature.

Even in the case of the Transmuter, where the subclass features are somewhat weaker, I'm not sure that Savant really makes much of a difference. 9th level spells cost 450 gp and 18 hours to copy. That's peanuts for a caster that can cast 9th level spells, whether the amounts are halved or not. 2nd level spells are 100 gp and 1 hour to copy. Savant is nice, but not really more than a ribbon feature even for a low level caster.


Would Wizards having as many spells available as a Cleric be harmful? You'd have to introduce 50 Wizard spells (2.5 per level) before that happens.

No one is arguing that Wizards having as many spells available as a Cleric would be harmful. The discussion started when a poster said that he would be frustrated if he reached level 8 as a wizard and had not found any new spells. I responded even without finding new spells, wizards are one of the more powerful classes, and function as intended even if they don't find any spells. Specifically, I pointed out that a wizard who only receives the base number of spells has 20 spells available at 8th level (and can prepare about 12), considerable more than sorcerers and warlocks (9 spells known) and bards (11 or 13 if Lore bard). Wizards are balanced even if they don't get additional spells. Moreover, since the number of spells a wizard can prepare is much less than the total spells available, the marginal utility of each additional spell available decreases with their number.


I look at Wizards, and I recognize their limited Hit Die, limited armor, limited prepared spell number (Int + Level). They can prepare as many spells as a Cleric at one time but can only have access to half as many without spells being introduced (Wizards naturally gain about 50 spells, Clerics naturally have about 100). Clerics have higher hit die, martial and weapon proficiencies, and debatably better subclass features.

I disagree with this for several reasons. First, you have omitted to include any of the wizard class features in your comparison. Arcane Recovery means that Wizards will always be able to cast more spells over the day than clerics. Spell Mastery means that Wizards get free unlimited use of a level 1 and a level 2 wizard spell. With 1 day's notice, they can change this spell. Signature spells gets you even more magic goodness.

Second, you can't compare the Cleric and the Wizard spell lists simply by looking at the number of spells. The Cleric spell list has healing spells (which wizards don't), and some pretty good buff spells, and reasonable utility. The Wizard spell list also has some pretty good buff spells, but is much stronger both in damage spells, AOE, debuffs and utility spells. The Wizard spell list also contains certain spells that the developers have admitted are overpowered for their level (Fireball, Lightning Bolt and Haste come to mind).