5E Essentials Spellcaster "class"

[paladinn]

I've finally had a chance to look over the 5e Essentials Box set (thanks, shelter-in-place)

Appendix A details the concept of Sidekicks, which was previously a UA topic. I'm assuming that the inclusion in the Essentials box makes it "official" now, if optional.

Looking at the Spellcaster "class".. it's a 1st level "character" that leans either Healer (using Cleric spells) or Mage (using Wizard spells). Regardless of which type of magic, a Spellcaster gets three interesting features (at 1st level): 2d8 HP, light armor and simple weapons. I can see where a Healer is lacking compared to a standard Cleric (especially a Life cleric); but a Mage seems to have some serious advantages over a typical Wizard, especially at low levels.

I'm wondering.. if a player doesn't feel led to a specific Wizard school, c/should the Mage "class" be an option? What would be the issues involved with allowing it?

Gratzi!

[Luccan]

I haven't read it in awhile. There's the issue that those classes are intended for sidekicks. Specifically, IIRC, so the DM can supplement a 1 or 2 PC group. So, presumably, they get more HP so the players don't have to constantly worry about their followers dropping dead, armor so they don't have to spend spells known on selfish things like Mage Armor, and simple weapons to let them contribute a bit more in melee if need be. Whether or not that's a balance issue I can't be sure until I get a chance to look at the class again

[EdenIndustries]

I've finally had a chance to look over the 5e Essentials Box set (thanks, shelter-in-place)

Appendix A details the concept of Sidekicks, which was previously a UA topic. I'm assuming that the inclusion in the Essentials box makes it "official" now, if optional.

Looking at the Spellcaster "class".. it's a 1st level "character" that leans either Healer (using Cleric spells) or Mage (using Wizard spells). Regardless of which type of magic, a Spellcaster gets three interesting features (at 1st level): 2d8 HP, light armor and simple weapons. I can see where a Healer is lacking compared to a standard Cleric (especially a Life cleric); but a Mage seems to have some serious advantages over a typical Wizard, especially at low levels.

I'm wondering.. if a player doesn't feel led to a specific Wizard school, c/should the Mage "class" be an option? What would be the issues involved with allowing it?

Gratzi!

To me the main issue in allowing it would be that the sidekick is severely underpowered compared to a normal character. 12 AC, 9 HP, one single 1st level spell?

Even a Wizard with 14 dex would match that 12 AC even without armor proficiency. A Cleric would get way higher. A Wizard could even match that HP with 16 Con (which is easily doable with point-buy), and a Cleric can do it with only 12 Con.

So could the spellcaster "class" be an option? Sure, but the player will be in for a tough career as far as I can tell, especially since the level-up features are pretty bad. They only learn level 2 spells at level 5, and aren't even allowed picking what spells they learn! Brutal.

Edit: I see below the statblock that the spellcaster can equip light armor, it's not limited to the 12 AC in its statblock. Nevertheless, the class still seems extremely underpowered compared to an actual Cleric or Wizard.

[Kane0]

I dont have the book on hand, how does a level 5 spellcaster compare to a level 5 sorcerer?

[EdenIndustries]

I dont have the book on hand, how does a level 5 spellcaster compare to a level 5 sorcerer?

Poorly. Level 5 spellcaster has 4 1st-level slots and 2 2nd-level slots, and knows:

Cantrips:
Fire bolt
Light
Mage Hand

1st level spells:
Sleep
Burning Hands
Shield

2nd level spells:
Invisibility

So, fewer cantrips, no 3rd level spells, fewer slots, fewer spells (and you can't choose which spells).

Plus a Sorcerer would have SP, metamagic, and subclass goodies too.

[paladinn]

I'm sure the "Mage class" would need to be filled out with other spell slots/levels as it levels up. I would think the extra xp, light armor and simple weapons might make it more viable.

[EdenIndustries]

I'm sure the "Mage class" would need to be filled out with other spell slots/levels as it levels up. I would think the extra xp, light armor and simple weapons might make it more viable.

By the book it doesn't have anything written for it after level 6. So if you mean, filled out with stuff after level 6, surely it would. If you mean, slots/levels to fill out the existing as-written abilities in the book to make it comparable to other spellcasting classes...well sure, but then it's not by the book anymore. And at that point, it's the DM's prerogative to add anything to anything.

[Lyracian]

Blade singers get Light Armour so I could see creating a homebrew school that has that and simple weapons.

Otherwise I do not think Sidekicks work as a PC class

[Arkhios]

Sidekicks are treated like any other npcs or monsters.

Though they're mentioned as getting 2d8 at first level, they get their hit points based on averages + Con.

1d8 average is 4.5 which means a sidekick has hit points equal to 2×(4.5+con) at first level.

It's not a lot, but it's more than a wizard is likely to have (unless it's a race that gets a bump on Con and/or you roll stats).

[Monster Manuel]

I'm still hopeful that we see a fully-realized sidekick system in print at some point. The UA was about how to convert an existing npc into a sidekick, essentially 3 sidekick classes that could be plugged into anything. The rules in the starter set are more like pre-gen npcs; here's three guys with the sidekick classes already applied. You can kind of retrofit a universal sidekick rule up to the level provided, but that's not really the intent. Until we see the full rules like they presented in the UA, and details on how to apply them to any npc you come across, it's hard to make a real comparison between these sidekicks and an existing pc class.