It’s been a long road through this playtest packet. It’s huge, and it hit us with not just the reveal of the martial overhaul, but also showed us the rather drastic changes to the arcane spellcasters.
The Sorcerer and Warlock got their due last week, and both presented changes to regular problems, even if the approach taken wasn’t to some people’s liking, they were attempting to fix a problem. Which makes the significant changes to the Wizard intriguing to dig into.
I think it’s best just to get on with it. This could be a long one.
Get the packet for yourself on DnDBeyond: Playtest Packet 5
What I Like
Subclass Savant
Let’s start with some positivity. In the 2014 PHB the “X Savant” feature for Wizard subclasses gave the character the ability to copy spells of a certain school into their book cheaply. The new one also allows the wizard to learn two spells associated with that school.
This is a nice touch to show the wizard actually becoming a practiced expert in the field of (in this case) Evocation. The only flaw is that you gain these two new spells at 3rd level, which means you’re only able to pick from 1st and 2nd level spells, which is a little disappointing. Especially since 3rd level spells are were all the “iconic” ones live (counterspell, fireball, fly, etc).
Less Maths in Preparation
If there’s one element of the 2014 Wizard that is a barrier to entry, it’s that their method of spell learning, and preparation, is much more confusing than any other class in the PHB. This playtest at least streamlined one element of this with the number of spells you prepare no longer being a calculation based on your intelligence and wizard level.
Instead, now it’s a simple look up as part of the class table, which makes it easily referenceable for players. At first glance, it appears to arbitrarily jump two spells at times, but it’s been done to try and enable the new “spells as feature” design that we will discuss later. It then slows down at the higher tiers of play as well.
So while it is more “obvious” it doesn’t follow a logical progression either which may confuse players a little bit as they try to parse exactly which spells they could/should be preparing.
What I Dislike
Spells as Features
I complained about a similar thing with the Sorcerer and Warlock, as we see WotC decide the design for spellcasters is for their features to be “you gain X spell”. There’s enough problem with this already discussed, but for the Wizard it takes it a step further because these spells do not behave as traditional spells.
Scribe Spell being a main culprit of this, the new “spell” is almost a direct copy of the feature as it existed in 2014, so what makes it a spell. Not only that but it also requires longer to copy spells now, since the ritual tag adds 10 minutes – unless you randomly feel like spending spell slots – for no real reason.
Memorize Spell is another one that reads as a feature much more than a spell. A spell that costs a spell slot to be able to cast another spell is a very odd and unsatisfactory design. Weird still is the fact it has a 1 minute casting time, meaning it is functionally useless inside combat, and only got for rest periods, at which point you’re almost certainly using it as a ritual. At which point again why not just make it a feature? At that point you could make it a feature that expands the wizard’s ability in combat by making it an action instead?
As a whole this design makes downtime activities spells instead of activities. I really cannot fathom how or why this design approach has been taken, it doesn’t make sense, and it feels very much like jamming a square peg in a round hole. Not only that by narratively it doesn’t fit, the idea of wizard’s having a “spell” that copies spells or reminds them of spells feels very weird. It honestly implies to me that wizards aren’t doing this with intellect but with “short cuts”.
Wierd Granularity
The Wizard is definitely a “technical” class, however there is a limit to how technical it should read. There are multiple bits through the class description that are unnecessarily specific. For example the description of a wizard’s spellbook which says it contains exactly 100 pages. Why does that need to be written? Was this a problem with the Wizard as it plays now? Were people somehow earning their 101th spell and the logic of the game collapsed?
It also squashes player creativity. The scope of originality for your spellbook is more restricted because of the wording presented making it clear it is a book. Gone are the “long scrolls”, the tattoo spell books, or the music boxes.
Similarly the period of time that is required to prepare your spells. Where usually you would expect it to be handwaved as part of your long rest, now you have to complete the long rest, and then you get to prepare your spells which takes an additional minute per spell level of the spells prepared. Let’s consider a classic 5th level wizard, preparing 9 spells spread across 1st-3rd level. They have to spend another 16 minutes of in game time preparing spells.
This doesn’t sound like much, but is it anything anyone is really tracking? Is the system itself set up for this to have any relevance or importance to gameplay? Short answer, no. So why bother making a specific reference to it?
Modifying Spells
Is altering spells the Wizard core fantasy? I get core fantasy differs slightly from person to person, but I’m not sure if this is what people expect from their wizard.
Wizard always felt like the “by the book” class, compared to the Sorcerer’s more “testing the boundaries” vibe. So to see Wizard’s given the ability to modify spells – in a less dynamic way than the Sorcerer mind you – feels odd in a game where you are trying to provide a distinction between Wizard and Sorcerer on a mechanical level.
Mechanically speaking the Modify Spell “spell” – which similarly could be a feature that is used upon completing a long rest I might add – is ripe for exploitation. There is a real likelihood of a sub-meta coming out of this feature for players to break the game. To the point I came up with four problematic combinations with only 2 minutes of looking:
- Remove the verbal component of the spell Power Word Kill – now there is no component and it’s an instant unstoppable death with no warning or signs.
- Remove the material component for Plane Shift – since it specifies only material components that are consumed are exempt, the 250gp metal rod of the plane you’re going is no longer needed.
- Increase the range of Earth Tremor – even at 7th level when you gain this feature you can now force every creature within 220 feet of you to make a Dexterity save or fall prone, with a 1st level spell.
- Enhance Antimagic Field with Concentration modification – now there is literally nothing that can end this spell, Dispel Magic is prevented, and no one can stop it working by hitting you.
That was the briefest of considerations, I’m sure a little more digging will reveal some extremely dangerous combinations. I think this needs serious consideration if it is going to remain. The fact you can undermine entire elements of the system with this feature is a real problem.
One last quick note on the narrative of it all. Magic in D&D feels like this ancient practice that only the strongest and most extraordinary and famous wizards are capable of creating new spells. Having every mid-tier Wizard able to easily fiddle with spells feels odd. I can kind of get on board with subtle twists on known spells, but being able to then codify them and make the stable with a “spell”, implies this practice is well known to the point that a spell that makes spells has been shared across wizard schools just takes it to a level I don’t think meshes.
Maybe I’m in the minority, and this is how WotC view the wizard core fantasy. But when even the most famous wizards in their lore (Tasha, Mordenkinen, Bigby) have a most four spells named after them, accomplished over decades and centuries of their lives, giving the player characters the ability to make as many as they want, it breaks down that “archmage” concept, in my opinion.
What I Would Change
Features Are Features
I’m not sure why the designers like this idea, of features giving you 1 hyper-specific spell. All it serves to do is confuse and complicate the matter. I can’t tell you how frustrated I became writing my thoughts on the Wizard for this article having to constantly scroll back and forth between the end of the document and the beginning, just to know what this next feature actually did. Now imagine doing that, but with an entire 300 page book.
You claim to want to make D&D easier to pick up and play, and yet this genuinely makes it much harder to know what the class is meant to be about.
For the Wizard all of these “spells” could easily be made into features with a number of uses, especially since they’re all rituals so don’t even use the spell slot resource. If the design concept was to have each class run on a single resource pool to avoid multiple elements of resource management that make some sense (although I don’t agree with it). But since these “spells” are clearly meant to be done in down time as rituals, it doesn’t do that. So you get the confusing and hard to find part, without any upside.
Turn Modify Spell into a once per day end of long rest feature, with Create Spell an extension of it. Scribe Spell should go back to what it’s worked as for 10 years – with minimal complaint. And then make Memorize Spell a feature you can use a number of times per day equal to your Proficiency Bonus, or roll it in with the Arcane Recovery feature.
The Spell Creation System
I’m not sure this whole concept should stay in, but if it’s going to, it needs a proper assessment. Firstly the material component clause also needs to include monetary costs as far as I’m concerned, there is a lot of spells that include that as an element of the narrative (Plane Shift, Soul Cage, Magnificent Mansion to name a few), and being able to cheat that feels wrong. Material components are so often hand waved in most games anyway, removing the one element that matters breaks the system in my eyes.
The range increase is too large, the maths on it just reaches frankly ludicrous levels from the point you get it, let alone the 600 feet extension you’re getting at 20th level. The change to Concentration removes the only non-DM-fiat way to break concentration. And the change to Targets undermines the Evoker’s unique ability a little bit too.
If it’s going to stay a lot more consideration has to go into the impact it causes, which is a huge tasks with the number of spells and combinations it could have. Initial thought would be to reduce the range to being 10 foot per wizard level, drop the concentration removal option.
I would much prefer a system which would help you create a brand new spell from scratch that can engage player’s creativity and let them feel like they really made something new, rather than just “breaking” something that already exists. Although this poses it’s own challenge.
Subclass Spell Learning
By and large I didn’t think the Wizard needed much changing about it, but the one thing I did feel that needed work was the mathematical reality that wizards of a certain school were better off not learning spells of their school when they levelled up and instead acquiring scrolls/spellbooks containing those spells and copying them.
While now when they get those two spells at 3rd level, there is still no incentive to take the spells of their subclass at later levels. Most players still will because it “makes sense”, but I’d like to see something tweaked to that regard.
Perhaps a continued ability to gain school spells at levels through the class, rather than just at 3rd level. Or possibly if you learn a spell of your school when you level you can modify it for free?
Closing Remarks
Oh boy. When I first read the Wizard I had some issues, upon rereading it didn’t get better. I actually came out of this more and more frustrated. This might be the first class in One D&D that I actively think made the class worse, and less enticing to play.
At various points through this process the phrase “What are we doing here” has been said, this phrase sums up the Wizard for me. Very little about the process here makes sense. I’m not sure what problems they were trying to solve, but they aren’t ones that I were aware off. And the solutions presented just leave me feeling confused and frustrated.
There are some elements which can be salvaged for sure, Memorize Spell and Modify Spell will both make workable features with a little rework. But most of all I really want to understand just how Crawford and the other designers envision the Wizard, and just what it’s meant to “be”.
What do you think about the Wizard Playtest?
Are you a fan of features being presented as spells?
Have you found any powerful modifications yet?
Let me know on social media, and share this with your TTRPG buddies.
The Dragon's Library 
One thought on “One D&D: Wizard Review”