"D&D Essentials"-Style Wizard [3.5]

[Elves]

-
Back in 4e they did "D&D Essentials" books that redid the classes into easy-bake versions that were more straightforward, with higher power floors but much lower ceilings.

This is my attempt at making an "easy-bake" wizard in the same vein. It's intended to be a fun single class character to play from 1-20.

I took two steps:

• Give a much more restricted spell choice based on school specialization.
• Put wizard, master specialist, archmage, and a bunch of ACFs in a blender, add a few things, and clarify the results into two class features.

The intended result is to be easier to build, and more straightforward for a new player or a 4e/5e player to understand.


"Essentials" Wizard (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DHkKQFG_Hac8flsrWE_UUElzfkhlc62GbzSORZGqWwY/edit?usp=sharing) (gdocs link)


The spell lists for several levels have yet to be pared down. The higher level lists are about the size I'm imagining.

PEACH

[NigelWalmsley]

It seems like just writing some Beguiler-style classes would be a better way of doing what you want. In practice, that's basically what this is, there's just some weird shared material that probably ends up diluting the identity of the instantiated classes.

Two editing notes:

You should explain precisely what "Your specialization determines what spells you can cast" means in the spells section (your school + All).

You should list non-core sources for spells, e.g. Cloud of Bewilderment (SpC).


The intended result is to be easier to build

I feel like you failed here. The class ends up with more selectable features than the Wizard. I feel like if this is what you want, the RAW Sorcerer plus a "these spells are good" guide is sufficient.

[Elves]

It seems like just writing some Beguiler-style classes would be a better way of doing what you want. In practice, that's basically what this is, there's just some weird shared material that probably ends up diluting the identity of the instantiated classes.
It's still supposed to be a generalist, but with specific key abilities only available to specialists.

If I were doing a themed caster, I would change a lot more and certainly abandon per-day spells.

Probably I wouldn't even do them in 3.5, but instead in some idealized compote of the past three editions that doesn't exist but is what I'd have liked Pathfinder 2 to be, or could see 6e being. Tired of 3.5's optimization rigors for the time being and would like to see something simplified, but not in a boring way like 5e. That's the impulse this came from.



I feel like you failed here. The class ends up with more selectable features than the Wizard.

Hard to go more bare bones than the original sor/wiz, what I meant is that it's prefab, all in one place, and relatively clean.

OG wizard also has to choose whether to specialize, so this class only adds 2 decision points compared to wiz 15/archmage 5, which is what it's based on.

(You could reduce the arcana to 7 or 5, with 3 categories instead of 4, without much trouble.)

One problem I do see is that knowing all eligible spells as soon as you gain spell levels makes it simpler but could cause decision overload.



I feel like if this is what you want, the RAW Sorcerer plus a "these spells are good" guide is sufficient.
Probably true, and that's what it was made for. There's still a difference between knowing 5 spells of a level vs getting to prepare from a list of 20. Overall, it's probably better to have the big playstyle divergence of the original classes, ultra spammy vs ultra prepared, to suit both kinds of players, but the target audience here is people who want to play a 3e wizard but with less hassle.

(FWIW, that playstyle divergence bit is also an argument for having all spells available on level up.)


Anyway, I'm going to go back to the Tome of Battle stuff and finish it, then be done with D&D for the time being. This is just a one-off.

[Just to Browse]

I think the spell list restrictions are a very good idea. The mid-levels are tough to pare down, though, since so many of those spells are interesting.

I disagree with NigelWalmsley that these will be harder to build. I think that your constrained spell lists & the 5e archetype-esque advancement track would make this pretty easy. Your miscellaneous Arcanas don't overcomplicate the class, and I think they serve as a nice "ramp" for complexity as a player progresses from level 1 to level 20.

Feedback:
I think that the generalist wizards should be a variant class, with a sidebar or separate section. That will push the idea that specialist wizards are the default class, which reduces the number of players who try to play a specialist and get hit with analysis paralysis during character creation.
I recommend removing some of the abilities at 1st level. Between 11 cantrips, 1st level spells, scribe scroll, your passive specialization, and your active specialization, new Wizards will have a lot to grok. I'd prefer to see some of that spread across the early levels.
On that topic, you could leave the passive at level 1 and move the immediate action to level 2. I think this would be nice.
Also on that topic, you could make Scribe Scroll an Arcana.
Illustion (17th) could be written as: Creatures cannot see through your illusions with magical abilities, such as true seeing

[Elves]

Thanks for the feedback.


On that topic, you could leave the passive at level 1 and move the immediate action to level 2. I think this would be nice.
Problematic because most of them are 1/2 wizard level or only apply to things that happen at higher levels (like dispels, animate dead).


Also on that topic, you could make Scribe Scroll an Arcana.
Yeah, Scribe Scroll is the thing I'd be most inclined to remove as it adds a whole little subsystem of GP/XP for bonus spell slots.


Illustion (17th) could be written as: Creatures cannot see through your illusions with magical abilities, such as true seeing
Blanket immunity is too much imo, added this:

"False Seeing: True seeing doesn’t let creatures automatically see through your illusions; instead, it grants a +8 insight bonus on saves against them. It still lets creatures see through your invisibility spells."

[Just to Browse]

It doesn't look like there are too many 1/2-level scalings at the low levels, and I don't think I see any that would really struggle if they were moved a little higher in the level progression.

Fair point on False Seeing.

A thought on Enchanter's 2nd level ability. A good number of the SoD spells depend on HD (geas, sleep, daze), which isn't that useful later on. How about increasing HD caps (or overriding HD caps) on enchantment spells & effects? I think existing HD cap + 1/2 level wouldn't be so bad, though it would be pretty limited. Later on you'll still be eschewing HD-based effects for dominate person and whatnot anyways.

[Elves]

Dope idea, adding.

[smetzger]

Why not a Sorcerer but pair down the list of spell choices?
You could do several different 'flavors'...
Like fire, cold, electric, etc.

Limit the spell choices to match the theme, don't include 'trap' spells, don't include overly complicated spells or easily abused spells (Polymorph).
You could also include non arcane spells. Call Lightning for the Electric Sorcerer etc.

[Elves]

That's the route they went with beguiler, warmage and dread necro. For spontaneous casters, IMO, those classes have too many spell choices at certain levels (they say people can hold 5 to 9 items in short term memory, sorcerer is at the low end of that and maybe feels too limited sometimes, but shouldn't exceed 8-9 per level), but that's very easy to change if you want to.

But the point of this edit is not to totally change wizard, just to create a simplified, build-a-bear experience for it.

I don't see any point to a sorcerer edit. Maybe to add class features. TBH, if I did a sorcerer edit it would probably be to make it more like warlock with at-wills. Or not based on daily abilities at any rate.