Wizard vs. Cleric Spells known and change in feel

Wizard vs. Cleric Spells known and change in feel

Wizard vs. Cleric Spells known and change in feel

A cleric can prepare any spell matching their level while a wizard knows only a few spells from which to choose. Every level the Wizard gets to learn 1 new spell and prepare and additional level of spell while the cleric can just prepare more.

Therefore the wizard feels like they get more at a level up,

It also makes playing a wizard easier since they have a more limited amount of spells, therefore lowering decision paralysis when preparing new spells.

What do you think of this theory?

16 thoughts on “Wizard vs. Cleric Spells known and change in feel”

  1. Oh cleric have incredible high level spells and moves.

    The cleric, especially at low levels, has more support spells and has maybe more need to change his suit regularly depending on the situation. The wizard spells are a bit more self sufficient and not so reliant on others.

    On the other hand a player might feel bad if they picked a spell at level 3 that they are not happy with and that is now their 1 high level spell.

  2. I think the mage is the less interesting class among all basic classes. A first level DW mage  reminds me of a character of first level in D&D. I’m not the only one to think it.

    A first-second level mage look limited compared to all other classes. 

    The ritual move is cool, sure, but it is limited to a place of power and subject to the choices of GM.

    Sorry for my english 😛

  3. For places of power, I’ve seen the Wizard in my group use a spout lore+book with help from the Ranger to “find” one in their surroundings. So, PCs just created one by themselves !

  4. Neither class particularly jumps out to me, on paper. Decision paralysis, as you say – the cleric has too much, the wizard not enough. (At early levels, agreeing with Luca Maiorani above.) We used Jacob Randolph’s mage in my group instead.

  5. More complexity thoughts. 

    Ritual is one of the most open and complex moves in the game. Therefore it is good that a Wizard get a simpler spell selection so that they get some complexity relief on that level.


    Also a Wizard plays a bit harder then say a Fighter. The Fighter “always” has the options to just go and attack something. A Wizard has low damage and hitpoints so even if they take good STR and CON or DEX they are not well equipped for combat. They have the option to just blast things if they want. It is a simple choice and gives them something to do. 

    Now the other option is to go a more support role, casting helpful spells on allies and providing information on tactics through spout lore. That is a bit more harder to do in game. 

    Dominic Claveau is completely right on places of power though Luca Maiorani. A GM should offer plenty of opportunities to use ritual and access to places of power. Restricting that is really not being a fan of the character. Rituals should be a regular thing in your game (at least every second session or so) with a Wizard in the party. Fearing its power is understandable but seeing what happens if you use these tools is also unique and will create a lot of interesting situations. Therefore don’T strongly restrict the Wizard. That will also stops them from feeling like puny Level 1 characters.  

  6. As a GM, I love the Wizard. The Ritual move is a quest-generator. Couple that with Detect Magic (which helped me launch our campaign by forcing me to create some kinda crone character who then became a Front) and the Wizard will create so much opportunities for adventures !

    Also, the fact that casting a spell doesn’t necessarily mean forgetting it makes spells like Magic Missile quite powerful.

    Plus, in old-school D&D, Magic-Users where always “weak” at first level. Wizards, M-U, etc. are about potential. You play one because you know that if he survives the first levels, he’ll become a force to reckon. This also means that players will have a tendency to become power-hungry and work for those XPs. They’ll be the ones pushing the rest of the group to gain loot, treasure, magic items, scrolls, etc. Magic-Users bring so much drive at the table !

    In comparison, Clerics are played towards the others. Most of their spells are for the benefit of the party. Which makes sense because they want to spread the message and blessings of their divinity. But notice how players are “peer-pressured” to prepare Cure Light Wounds (or maybe Bless).

    Wizards are ambitious egoists while Clerics are helpful altruists.

  7. I may be off topic, but I’d like to say the wizard, in my games, is the class that more than any other shows the true personality of a player. Spells are varied and choosing them reveals a lot about the player (magic missile sucks but most people still feel the need to deal some damage just to get more attention; invisibility and charm person are more powerful than even some level 3 and level 5 spells but only a few realize why this is), and with ritual you can do anything, you’re almost all-powerful. I remember players using the ritual always to help others, by resurrecting them, giving them boons and enchanted items and whatnot; players using it mainly to solve problems and overcome obstacles; and players using it only to empower themselves (like the wizard in my current campaign).

    While the cleric and the wizard may seem similar because they have basically the same move, in my experience they play totally different on more levels than one might think of. I don’t feel like you can compare such different classes.

  8. My group’s cleric multiclassed so as to able to cast fireballs, and the wizard expanded spellbook for cure light wounds. I’m sure this is in some way significant.

Comments are closed.