Generalist wizard

[paladinn]

The Basic rules use the Evocation school for it's "generic" wizard. Since then, there have been a few attempts at a "generic" wizard subclass. The Lore Master UA subclass looked pretty cool, and is definitely school-neutral; but I understand it's considered crazy OP. The War Mage subclass looks less OP, but it doesn't seem all that "generic."

Does anyone know of a good true "generalist" wizard subclass that isn't gonzo?

Thanks!

[meandean]

Scribes? You're a Wizard who loves books, or in other words, a Wizard. Of course, Manifest Mind isn't something you'd just expect any Wizard to be able to do.

I don't exactly think most peoples' critique of the Wizard class is that the subclasses are so unique and distinctive that there need to be more generic ones...

[Sigreid]

Honestly, they can all be used for a generic wizard. That's more about the spells you choose than the few subclass abilities. I think my favorites for fitting the generic wizard trope would be the transmuter (being concerned with magic and the core nature of things) and the divination wizard (being information focused).

[Amnestic]

Scribe or War Magic both fit the concept of a generalist wizard to me. The former is based on manipulating magic in via your spellbook "beforehand", the latter on manipulating magic as it happens in the moment (counterspell/dispel magic stuff).

[Psyren]

Scribes fits as a generalist but that's not the only purpose behind the Basic version of a class, the other purpose is to be the easy-mode auto-pilot version (or as close as possible) for beginners. Scribes is definitely not that. Evoker fits that better because it helps with players who are still learning the basics of safely aiming blast spells on a tabletop grid, especially trickier shapes like cones.

For me though, the easiest generic wizard would be Diviner. Not only are their subclass powers easy to use even for beginners, but you have the perfect excuse to just slide them hints to help them fill their likely role of party know-it-all even better. Abjurer works well for newer players too because it helps them more easily survive mistakes like positioning errors.

[paladinn]

Scribes fits as a generalist but that's not the only purpose behind the Basic version of a class, the other purpose is to be the easy-mode auto-pilot version (or as close as possible) for beginners. Scribes is definitely not that. Evoker fits that better because it helps with players who are still learning the basics of safely aiming blast spells on a tabletop grid, especially trickier shapes like cones.

For me though, the easiest generic wizard would be Diviner. Not only are their subclass powers easy to use even for beginners, but you have the perfect excuse to just slide them hints to help them fill their likely role of party know-it-all even better. Abjurer works well for newer players too because it helps them more easily survive mistakes like positioning errors.

I think the "auto-pilot" version is what I'm shooting for. If a player couldn't decide on a school, s/he should still be able to be a wizard. Back in the 2e days, you didn't Have to specialize if you didn't want to.

And I do Not use a mat and/or minis. Just sayin'

[Keltest]

I think the "auto-pilot" version is what I'm shooting for. If a player couldn't decide on a school, s/he should still be able to be a wizard. Back in the 2e days, you didn't Have to specialize if you didn't want to.

And I do Not use a mat and/or minis. Just sayin'

Worth pointing out, back in the 2e days there were cons to specializing as well as pros. it was at least intended to be a lateral move from the generalist. In 5e, subclasses are strictly beneficial.

[paladinn]

Worth pointing out, back in the 2e days there were cons to specializing as well as pros. it was at least intended to be a lateral move from the generalist. In 5e, subclasses are strictly beneficial.

Understood. But I'd still like a wizard subclass that I can offer a player who can't decide on a school. So far Warmage is the best I've found, but it seems a little too.. war.. if that makes sense.

[Keltest]

Understood. But I'd still like a wizard subclass that I can offer a player who can't decide on a school. So far Warmage is the best I've found, but it seems a little too.. war.. if that makes sense.

I kind of get what youre saying, but asking for a subclass for people who cant decide on a subclass seems... maybe the wrong direction to go about it.

[Psyren]

I kind of get what youre saying, but asking for a subclass for people who cant decide on a subclass seems... maybe the wrong direction to go about it.

I think I understand what he's after. You have to recommend one since subclasses are mandatory, so you might as well recommend the most straightforward or least tricky one possible if the player doesn't otherwise care or is new.


Understood. But I'd still like a wizard subclass that I can offer a player who can't decide on a school. So far Warmage is the best I've found, but it seems a little too.. war.. if that makes sense.

You could just refluff/rename it as "Energy Wizard" since that's more or less what they do, they siphon off some of the residual magic from their spells to bolster their defenses and senses.

[paladinn]

I think I understand what he's after. You have to recommend one since subclasses are mandatory, so you might as well recommend the most straightforward or least tricky one possible if the player doesn't otherwise care or is new.

You could just refluff/rename it as "Energy Wizard" since that's more or less what they do, they siphon off some of the residual magic from their spells to bolster their defenses and senses.

I think what I'm looking for would not have the fiddly extra abilities. Mainly just extra spells prepared and/or spells per day. Maybe access to Some metamagic?

[Keltest]

I think what I'm looking for would not have the fiddly extra abilities. Mainly just extra spells prepared and/or spells per day. Maybe access to Some metamagic?

I dont think youre going to find any wizard subclasses like that in any official material. Spells prepared and spells per day are carefully controlled resources.

[paladinn]

I dont think youre going to find any wizard subclasses like that in any official material. Spells prepared and spells per day are carefully controlled resources.

The Transmuted Spell metamagic from Tasha's sort of duplicates a feature from the LoreMaster. I'd grab it in a heartbeat.

[Christew]

I think what I'm looking for would not have the fiddly extra abilities. Mainly just extra spells prepared and/or spells per day. Maybe access to Some metamagic?
This is exactly why the basic rules use Evocation -- its abilities could hardly be described as fiddly until maybe Overchannel at level 14.

Extra spells per day would be homebrewing a more powerful wizard, not a less fiddly one.

[Psyren]

Extra spells per day would be homebrewing a more powerful wizard, not a less fiddly one.

That.


I think what I'm looking for would not have the fiddly extra abilities. Mainly just extra spells prepared and/or spells per day. Maybe access to Some metamagic?

Why not just let them play a Sorcerer? They can get extra spells per day AND metamagic through their sorcery points. You can just make them Int-focused instead.

[paladinn]

That.



Why not just let them play a Sorcerer? They can get extra spells per day AND metamagic through their sorcery points. You can just make them Int-focused instead.

I've actually considered a mash-up of the two. The Sorcerer has some limitations I don't care for. And I'd have the same issues with a subclass. I haven't seen anything for a wizardly sorcerer.

[Psyren]

I've actually considered a mash-up of the two. The Sorcerer has some limitations I don't care for. And I'd have the same issues with a subclass. I haven't seen anything for a wizardly sorcerer.

For what you appear to want, you're going to have to homebrew somewhere.

Maybe start with War Wizard, remove Arcane Recovery + Power Surge, and add Font of Magic and Metamagic instead.

[paladinn]

For what you appear to want, you're going to have to homebrew somewhere.

Maybe start with War Wizard, remove Arcane Recovery + Power Surge, and add Font of Magic and Metamagic instead.

Thanks. Since 5e has been around a while, I'm surprised no one's come up with something like this.

[Psyren]

Thanks. Since 5e has been around a while, I'm surprised no one's come up with something like this.

Haven't they? There's a ton of homebrew I haven't read at least...

[animorte]

There’s an excellent place for lots of home brew (sub)classes and more found in my signature. From what I gather, most of them were made and posted within these forums.

[JNAProductions]

Yeah, I think I've linked it to you before. It's here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?481588-D-amp-D-5e-Homebrew-Compendium-2).

Remember to give Twelvetrees an e-cookie for maintaining it!

[animorte]

Yeah, I think I've linked it to you before. It's here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?481588-D-amp-D-5e-Homebrew-Compendium-2).

Remember to give Twelvetrees an e-cookie for maintaining it!
Yup, you're the reason I discovered it in the first place, so thank you again.

I second this!!!

[MadMusketeer]

While I want to agree with everyone who's said that Scribes Wizard is the clear option for generalist wizard, I can see why it wouldn't be great for a new player - the abilities are quite fiddly. Instead, I'll try to establish a rule for what I think makes a 'generic' wizard subclass - how much it pushes you into a particular playstyle/role. Because wizard subclasses tend to have a much lower power budget than those of other classes (seeing as the wizard puts so much into their spell list), how many spells of that school, and how playstyle-defining those are, has a huge impact on this - for example, Diviners are a pretty good generic subclass, seeing as wizards don't get that many divination spell, and those they get were either a) already an obvious choice (Arcane Eye, Detect Magic, Identify, etc) or b) kinda niche and DM-dependent (Clairvoyance, Augury, etc). Because of this, most of the spells Diviners take aren't going to be defined by their subclass.

Subclass abilities are also important, of course. Wizards that are heavily defined by subclass tend to rely a lot on subclass abilities - after all, as any wizard can take any wizard spell, what would be the point of taking a particular archetype? Diviner subclass abilities also don't really point to a playstyle - abilities like Portent benefit any Wizard, and while it does give you benefits for casting Divination spells, it doesn't really boost those spells. The Diviner's subclass abilities don't really give it much identity as a subclass. By contrast, take something like a Necromancer or Illusionist. While neither of their associated schools have that many spells in them, both of them have abilities that benefit their playstyles strongly enough that they end up being highly specialized, lest they waste their abilities.

Evokers fall into a weird spot as far as this goes - while wizards get lots of good evocation spells, and the Evoker's kit is highly specialized to a blasting playstyle, most new players are going to come to the wizard assuming that's the playstyle they're supposed to use. Therefore, to a newer player, Evoker will feel like a fairly basic, general subclass - the playstyle it benefits is the playstyle they were already most likely to go for. War Mage is a little different - while it doesn't benefit any one school of magic more than other, most of its abilities clearly benefit a playstyle focused around Evocation and Aburation, with benefits to other roles being, while substantial, almost accidental - the initiative buff benefits a controller more, but doesn't really seem like that's why its there. While it would make a decent generalist wizard, it benefits a particular playstyle pretty strongly, and it is kinda fiddly to use.a

[paladinn]

I've narrowed my generalist options down to two, and probably to one. The Warmage "school" is appealing, but I find almost everything "special" about it seems combat-related. That's not a bad thing, but not as "generalist" as I'd like.

I'm back to considering the UA LoreMaster archetype. It's very much school-neutral, but most of the comments I've seen label it as Very OP. I'm not sure I agree with that, but I would tweak it a bit:

L2 - Spell Secrets: I think I would drop the "change the saving throw" feature.. It seems very clearly OP. I do like the "changing the damage type" feature a lot, but it may be OP as well. It's basically the metamagic Transmuted Spell with more damage types but with no sorcery point requirements or other limits. Not sure what's a good nerf for it.

L6 - Alchemical Casting: it seems to be several other metamagic types, only using spell slots instead of sorcery points. Again, not sure it's actually worth sacrificing the slots.

L10 - Prodigious Memory: Should be fine

L14 - Master of Magic: the ability to duplicate spells from other lists is way cool; and it would seem to be OP, but this is almost a capstone, at least for the archetype

I've looked into some other takes on the LoreMaster or on a generalist wizard. The homebrew one from our own Kane0 is particularly interesting. Any other thoughts?

Thanks!

[Keltest]

Important question. Are you a player or the DM here? If its the former, i think you really need to get explicit permission for homebrew before you go any further down that road. Many, many DMs would probably flat out refuse to allow it, especially in the direction you seem to want it.

[paladinn]

Important question. Are you a player or the DM here? If its the former, i think you really need to get explicit permission for homebrew before you go any further down that road. Many, many DMs would probably flat out refuse to allow it, especially in the direction you seem to want it.

I'm a player and a DM, but in this case I'm looking into it as a DM.

Why does that matter here and now?

[animorte]

I'm a player and a DM, but in this case I'm looking into it as a DM.

Why does that matter here and now?

It's easier to homebrew some new fancy stuff into the game when you're the boss.

[Keltest]

It's easier to homebrew some new fancy stuff into the game when you're the boss.

Indeed. Homebrew isnt a terribly helpful solution if you arent the one deciding if it is allowed or not.

[Psyren]

Could you link to the UA you're looking at?

[paladinn]

Indeed. Homebrew isnt a terribly helpful solution if you arent the one deciding if it is allowed or not.

Ultimately I want to have "basic" versions of the big 4 classes (fighter, cleric, wizard, rogue) to use mainly with the Basic set as an intro for new-ish players. But have them be engaging enough that a player might want to still use them later.

The Champion fighter is pretty underwhelming to most anyone who has commented. I've done a mash-up of the Champion and the UA Brute fighter that is pretty cool, a bit more powerful, but still "basic." I've got a good direction on using the LoreMaster as a basis for a basic Wizard. I'm liable to stick pretty close to the PHB Thief for my Rogue. Not sure about the Cleric, but it's hard to get much more basic than the Life Cleric. But I'm open to suggestions.

[paladinn]

Could you link to the UA you're looking at?

https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/20170213_Wizrd_Wrlck_UAv2_i48nf.pdf

[animorte]

Ultimately I want to have "basic" versions of the big 4 classes (fighter, cleric, wizard, rogue) to use mainly with the Basic set as an intro for new-ish players.

Gestalt: any preferred Paladin/Arcane Trickster Rouge...

Obviously, that's not really what you're trying to accomplish, especially considering newer players. Still pretty much covers your entire theme all in one PC though.

[paladinn]

Gestalt: any preferred Paladin/Arcane Trickster Rouge...

Obviously, that's not really what you're trying to accomplish, especially considering newer players. Still pretty much covers your entire theme all in one PC though.

Umm.. ok...

[animorte]

What I don't understand is what exactly you're trying to present to your players.

Do you want everyone to play the same generalized Wizard that can do everything?
Do you want them to each play a different Wizard that has their own specialization to simulate one of the primary class concepts?

If the first, there are plenty of classes that are very generalized already, some of which can be set apart by their subclasses from level 1 (Cleric, Warlock).
If the second, why not just apply the exact 4 classes that you mentioned (Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Rogue)? Provided there are 4 players.

[paladinn]

What I don't understand is what exactly you're trying to present to your players.

Do you want everyone to play the same generalized Wizard that can do everything?
Do you want them to each play a different Wizard that has their own specialization to simulate one of the primary class concepts?

If the first, there are plenty of classes that are very generalized already, some of which can be set apart by their subclasses from level 1 (Cleric, Warlock).
If the second, why not just apply the exact 4 classes that you mentioned (Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Rogue)? Provided there are 4 players.

No, not all my players are going to play "a different Wizard."

Are you familiar with the 5e Basic set? It features 4 playable classes, each with one subclass. But the subclass for the fighter, the champion, isn't very good. And the subclass for the wizard is the evoker, which is not at all basic. I want to provide an alternative which will be basic and engaging. That's what I'm shooting for. Don't get it twisted.

[Keltest]

No, not all my players are going to play "a different Wizard."

Are you familiar with the 5e Basic set? It features 4 playable classes, each with one subclass. But the subclass for the fighter, the champion, isn't very good. And the subclass for the wizard is the evoker, which is not at all basic. I want to provide an alternative which will be basic and engaging. That's what I'm shooting for. Don't get it twisted.

The evoker is about as basic a wizard subclass as you can get short of just not having one. The problem is that the wizard itself is a class with a lot of levers to pull and knobs to twist. ANY subclass for them is going to end up complex, because the wizard base class is complex.

[paladinn]

The evoker is about as basic a wizard subclass as you can get short of just not having one. The problem is that the wizard itself is a class with a lot of levers to pull and knobs to twist. ANY subclass for them is going to end up complex, because the wizard base class is complex.

It doesn't have to be that complex. The LoreMaster might have been OP, but a lot of it was pretty simple. I want to build on the core features of the wizard without adding too much extra stuff. That's my idea of basic.

[Psyren]

https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/20170213_Wizrd_Wrlck_UAv2_i48nf.pdf

I think Evoker is a lot simpler than that one. Alchemical Casting requires not only the player remember to push the "button," but also to figure out which slot they want to spend for what effect. They also need to track Spell Secrets for the optimal SoD/SoS to use it on.

[JNAProductions]

It doesn't have to be that complex. The LoreMaster might have been OP, but a lot of it was pretty simple. I want to build on the core features of the wizard without adding too much extra stuff. That's my idea of basic.

What's complex about Evocation?

Evocation Savant is a ribbon, and not complicated.
Sculpt Spells is pretty simple-pick Spell Level+1 people to autopass and ignore any damage from your blasting spells. Helps make it easier to target too, since you don't have to worry about friendly fire as much.
Potent Cantrip changes stuff like Toll The Dead to Save For Half instead of Save For Nothing.
Empowered Evocation is just +Int to evocation damage-you can literally write that on spell cards if the player finds it tricky to remember what spells it applies to.
Overchannel might be a little finicky to use properly, but it's not complicated, really.

[Keltest]

It doesn't have to be that complex. The LoreMaster might have been OP, but a lot of it was pretty simple. I want to build on the core features of the wizard without adding too much extra stuff. That's my idea of basic.

And what is actually wrong with the Evoker then? Be as specific as possible. It only has two buttons to push, and one of them is "I go bang like normal but dont kill my friends" which is about as straightforward as it gets, and the other one is "all my numbers are big" which also seems pretty straightforward.

[paladinn]

And what is actually wrong with the Evoker then? Be as specific as possible. It only has two buttons to push, and one of them is "I go bang like normal but dont kill my friends" which is about as straightforward as it gets, and the other one is "all my numbers are big" which also seems pretty straightforward.

There's nothing "wrong" with Evoker. It's great if you want to be a blaster. It's just not what I call generic.

In 2e (and, I think, 3e) school specialization was optional. There was a cost for specializing, but you didn't Have to. In 5e there is not an "official" way to do that: you Have to have a subclass. I'd just like to have as basic/generic a subclass as possible.

[Psyren]

Your best bet might be replacing every subclass feature with Metamagic Adept or something.

[paladinn]

Your best bet might be replacing every subclass feature with Metamagic Adept or something.

Obviously I need to take this topic over to the Homebrew forum.

Sorry to impose on you all.

[Kane0]

Generalist Wizard:

Level 2: Ritual Savant
Same as all the [school] savant subclass features, but for ritual spells.

Level 2: Better spellbook
You can use your spellbook as an arcane focus, and as a bonus action you can send it to a safe extradimensional storage space or summon it again to your hand.

Level 6: Better cantrips
Add Int to one damage roll of any Wizard cantrip you cast

Level 10: Better Rituals
You can cast rituals by adding 1 minute instead of 10 minutes

Level 14: Better spell slots
Any Wizard spell of 5th level or lower that you cast is treated as being upcast by one spell level for free.

[paladinn]

Generalist Wizard:

Level 2: Ritual Savant
Same as all the [school] savant subclass features, but for ritual spells.

Level 2: Better spellbook
You can use your spellbook as an arcane focus, and as a bonus action you can send it to a safe extradimensional storage space or summon it again to your hand.

Level 6: Better cantrips
Add Int to one damage roll of any Wizard cantrip you cast

Level 10: Better Rituals
You can cast rituals by adding 1 minute instead of 10 minutes

Level 14: Better spell slots
Any Wizard spell of 5th level or lower that you cast is treated as being upcast by one spell level for free.

We're pretty close.. Here are my thoughts:

L2: Arcane Savant - Your broad knowledge allows you to be more efficient in copying more complex spells. All spells are counted as one level lower for purposes of time and money, to a minimum of 1st level.

Learned Scholar - Upon assuming this tradition, you receive Expertise in the Arcana skill, allowing you to double your proficiency bonus with that skill. If you are already trained in Arcana, you still gain this benefit, but almost gain proficiency in another wizard skill of choice.

L6: Greater Arcane Recovery - You gain a second use of Arcane Recovery per day, though you can only use it once per short rest.

L10: Rapid Cantrips - You gain an additional cantrip of choice from the Wizard spell list. You may cast a cantrip as a bonus action a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus. This ability resets after a long rest.

L14: Upcasting (from Kane0)
Any Wizard spell of 5th level or lower that you cast is treated as being upcast by one spell level for free

I like this because it enhances all the General abilities of a Wizard without being gonzo, or treading too hard on a particular school.

Thanks!

[Psyren]

Obviously I need to take this topic over to the Homebrew forum.

Sorry to impose on you all.

No imposition, just being clear that homebrew is really the only solution given the requirements.



Learned Scholar - Upon assuming this tradition, you receive Expertise in the Arcana skill, allowing you to double your proficiency bonus with that skill. If you are already trained in Arcana, you still gain this benefit, but almost gain proficiency in another wizard skill of choice.

Uh, what? How do you "almost" gain proficiency?


L6: Greater Arcane Recovery - You gain a second use of Arcane Recovery per day, though you can only use it once per short rest.

I'm confused, is the second one 1/SR or 1/day?


L10: Rapid Cantrips - You gain an additional cantrip of choice from the Wizard spell list. You may cast a cantrip as a bonus action a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus. This ability resets after a long rest.

I'd limit this to cantrips with a casting time of 1 action.

[paladinn]

Uh, what? How do you "almost" gain proficiency?

I'm confused, is the second one 1/SR or 1/day?
.

My bad.. Serves me right for posting on zero sleep.

You gain proficiency, no almost. And the second one is 1/SR.

Nice catch!

[yisopo]

What do you think about this generalist wizard?

Ritual Savant
Beginning when you select this school at 2nd level, the gold and time you must spend to copy a ritual spell into your spellbook is halved.

Cantrip Expert
Starting at 2nd level, you learn 3 more cantrips.

Prodigious Memory
Starting at 6th level, you prepare 2 more spells.

Exceptional Academic
Starting at 10th level, each time you gain a wizard level, you can add 1 additional wizard spell of your choice to your spellbook. This spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots.

Spell Expertise
Starting at 14th level, you get one additional 2nd-level slot.