PDA

View Full Version : A Wizard with only One School



CheshireCatAW
2009-09-24, 12:07 PM
If Wizards were limited to only one school of magic to cast from, would that make them unplayable or would it balance the playing field? How about making a "general" school of magic (which would probably include most divinations) all wizards have access to, but otherwise have them limited to one other school?

Will they still completely overshadow the non-magic types?

Doc Roc
2009-09-24, 12:09 PM
I can probably crack your game in half with just conjuration.

Random832
2009-09-24, 12:11 PM
The problem is, the schools aren't really balanced to have all of them have equal value. It's just less noticeable when you have access to six of them than it would be with only one.

Djinn_in_Tonic
2009-09-24, 12:11 PM
I can probably crack your game in half with just conjuration.

Sadly, this is probably true.

Still, it would go a long way towards balancing them. The only problem is that then it further magnifies the discrepency between the schools. Conjuration would be a definite winner, while no one would pick Evocation or Divination.

Edit: Ninja'ed.

Doc Roc
2009-09-24, 12:11 PM
Sadly, this is probably true.

Still, it would go a long way towards balancing them. The only problem is that then it further magnifies the discrepency between the schools. Conjuration would be a definite winner, while no one would pick Evocation or Divination.

I don't know that it would go terribly far towards balancing them, but it'd help a bit, I guess?

Indon
2009-09-24, 12:13 PM
With some school rebalancing (split Conjuration and a couple others into different schools, merge others), it could work out okay.

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-24, 12:13 PM
But wouldn't it be easier to balance the schools if they were separated like this since you wouldn't have to think of how, say, conjurations spells worked with Illusion spells and what possible loopholes there might be there? You could focus more on individual schools and it'd be easier to focus on how to fix things or balance them.

By no means am I implying that it'd be easy to fix but making the job "bite size" so to speak, might make it easier to do.

But, back to my actual question, you guys are saying they would probably still be a few tiers above most martial characters, but it wouldn't be as bad as it currently is?

Morty
2009-09-24, 12:13 PM
I don't think it would work. Sure, it would make wizards weaker, but also boring and perhaps too weak on low levels unless they choose Conjuration. But since half of the Conjuration school shouldn't exist, it might not be that much of a problem. But it's not a good idea anyway.

Djinn_in_Tonic
2009-09-24, 12:14 PM
I don't know that it would go terribly far towards balancing them, but it'd help a bit, I guess?

Eh, I'd say a good amount. You are, after all, eliminating about...maybe 1/2 to 3/4 (depending on the school selected) of the problem spells. The only issue is that a 50% reduction of a Wizard's versatility still puts him at Tier 1 or 1.5. So he's down by a good bit, but not enough to really matter.

valadil
2009-09-24, 12:14 PM
I think it would be interesting if DnD had been designed that way to begin with, but adding that to 3.5 as it is now would result in a silly, broken game.

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-24, 12:17 PM
I think it would be interesting if DnD had been designed that way to begin with, but adding that to 3.5 as it is now would result in a silly, broken game.

This, pretty much. I think it'd be cool to have a group of wizards who wouldn't be carbon copies of eachother.

While it might be a difficult job to make work, I can see it making sense thematically.

I mean, we have how many Martial classes? They each have a specialty and for some reason the wizard (which concievably COULD be a few different classes in and of himself) is one class who can use just about every facet of arcane magic.

Lapak
2009-09-24, 12:24 PM
I've actually been toying with this as part of my implementation of deities in an E6 campaign - I've been attempting to model them more mythological/traditional, where Thor is an actual physical being, and so is Apollo, even if he does drive the sun around every day. Basically I've been working up various kinds of superhuman level advancement (superhuman for E6) and this is one of methods I've been considering to limit what they can do. Thanks for asking the question!

Something to think about at high levels: there are a number of effects that would allow your casters to work around these limits - people rightly point out Conjuration as covering a lot of ground, there are Shadow Conjurations and Shadow Evocations that jump the divide, Wish and Limited Wish both sidestep the gap - basically, there are strictly superior choices for a wizard either because of the number of options a school gives outright or because one school might allow them to duplicate or imitate other schools. I think that it's a very good idea, but if you're going to make it the rule for all casters you'd have to put some work into balancing the schools a bit.

Xenogears
2009-09-24, 12:25 PM
I think a sorcerer would make a good generalist wizard if you implement this idea since they get access to every school but only a few spells. (assuming no method of increasing spells known beyond the basic amount is allowed)

Thespianus
2009-09-24, 12:31 PM
I can probably crack your game in half with just conjuration.
Well, Read Magic is Divination, so you might have a problem preparing your spells. ;)

Indon
2009-09-24, 12:33 PM
Well, Read Magic is Divination, so you might have a problem preparing your spells. ;)

Even if you restricted cantrips, Wizards get 1 spell every 2 levels, and I'm pretty sure a decent Spellcraft check can be used to read magic.

Thespianus
2009-09-24, 12:38 PM
Even if you restricted cantrips, Wizards get 1 spell every 2 levels, and I'm pretty sure a decent Spellcraft check can be used to read magic.

Well, perhaps. It might be a misunderstanding on my behlaf. I thought you needed to be able to cast Read Magic to prepare your spells, but I read through the PHB part about preparing spells, and it doesn't mention this. So I'm probably wrong, I usually am in these matters. ;)

Random832
2009-09-24, 12:40 PM
Read Magic would be the first candidate to move to Universal under this system anyway (fun fact: in 2nd edition, Universal was called Lesser Divination)

bosssmiley
2009-09-24, 12:43 PM
If Wizards were limited to only one school of magic to cast from, would that make them unplayable or would it balance the playing field? How about making a "general" school of magic (which would probably include most divinations) all wizards have access to, but otherwise have them limited to one other school?

Oh, you mean like the Birthright Magician class? (A Diviner/Illusionist double school specialist, with level 1-2 only access to all other schools) Yeah, they were fun. Almost qualified as a self-imposed challenge class. :smallcool:

Eldariel
2009-09-24, 12:54 PM
Sadly, this is probably true.

Still, it would go a long way towards balancing them. The only problem is that then it further magnifies the discrepency between the schools. Conjuration would be a definite winner, while no one would pick Evocation or Divination.

Edit: Ninja'ed.

I do think Divination would be worth picking; it's got a lot of completely irreplaceable abilities (such as Contact Other Plane, Scrying, True Seeing, Greater Prying Eyes, Foresight, Moment of Prescience, etc.) so while it lacks in terms of traditional Wizard-mojo, in combination with some other primary focus, it would still be great. Really, I find Divination to be up there in terms of school simply on back of the power of exclusive effects.

Bang
2009-09-24, 12:56 PM
I mean, we have how many Martial classes? They each have a specialty and for some reason the wizard (which concievably COULD be a few different classes in and of himself) is one class who can use just about every facet of arcane magic.
The Wizard is designed to have acess to every facet of arcane magic. It's kind of their schtick.

If you want to create diversity between casters while reducing their power, try basing them on the Warmage model. It's easy to slap together this sort of homebrew: choose two casting stats, choose a list of thematic spells (dropping any which aren't consistant with the power level you want to see in your game), throw a few related class abilities into the mix. Work with players -- let chime in with the abilities they want to see and what sorts of spells they'd like to use.

Myrmex
2009-09-24, 12:57 PM
Transmutation is another terrific school. Conjuration is borked 'cause of Gate and Planar Binding.

Godskook
2009-09-24, 01:01 PM
Eh, I'd say a good amount. You are, after all, eliminating about...maybe 1/2 to 3/4 (depending on the school selected) of the problem spells. The only issue is that a 50% reduction of a Wizard's versatility still puts him at Tier 1 or 1.5. So he's down by a good bit, but not enough to really matter.

If sorcerers are tier 2, 1-school wizards shouldn't be any higher, and are probably slightly lower. I'd say 2.5.

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-24, 01:15 PM
The Wizard is designed to have acess to every facet of arcane magic. It's kind of their schtick.



Yes, but it's only their schtick because the game says so. In my limited perception of the rules, it seems to be a major reason for why the Wizard is oodles of rungs above and beyond it's competitors.

Kobold-Bard
2009-09-24, 01:18 PM
Beguiler - Enchantment/Illusion
Dread Necromancer - Necromancy
Warmage - Evocation
Savant (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5207261#post5207261) - Abjuration/Divination
Summoner (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5207270#post5207270) - Conjuration
Rearranger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99314) - Transmutation

Bottom three courtesy of arguskos. Of course for these to work you need to ban Wizards as PC classes, otherwise there's no reason to play any of these.

Myrmex
2009-09-24, 01:18 PM
Yes, but it's only their schtick because the game says so. In my limited perception of the rules, it seems to be a major reason for why the Wizard is oodles of rungs above and beyond it's competitors.

It wouldn't be a problem if there weren't so many overpowered spells.

But a wizard's daily spell load out and a sorcerer's spells known looks surprisingly similar.

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-09-24, 01:18 PM
Well, as the beguiler, dread necromancer, and warmage show, limiting spell selection to a thematic grouping can work rather well. The key word here is a thematic grouping--just because Conjuration spells are all in the same school doesn't mean they have anything in common beyond that (web and orb of electricity, summon monster IV and teleport, etc. are similar in effect and method, but wildly different in "theme").

Yuki Akuma
2009-09-24, 01:19 PM
I can crack your game in half as a Gnome who only has Illusion.

Because then I get two and a half schools! >.> <.<

(Yes I do love Shadowcraft Mages. And, for that matter, Shadow Evocation and Shadow COnjuration.)

arguskos
2009-09-24, 01:22 PM
Beguiler - Enchantment/Illusion
Dread Necromancer - Necromancy
Warmage - Evocation
Savant (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5207261#post5207261) - Abjuration/Divination
Summoner (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5207270#post5207270) - Conjuration
Rearranger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99314) - Transmutation

Bottom three courtesy of arguskos. Of course for these to work you need to ban Wizards as PC classes, otherwise there's no reason to play any of these.
YAY! I'm getting attention! :smallbiggrin:

Anyways, I do think that school-based casters are quite nice and enjoyable. They're around Tier 3 in practice, which is totally fine, and is the sweet spot of D&D 3.5, in my opinion.

Myrmex
2009-09-24, 01:25 PM
I can crack your game in half as a Gnome who only has Illusion.

What if there are no gnomes in my game?

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-24, 01:25 PM
Beguiler - Enchantment/Illusion
Dread Necromancer - Necromancy
Warmage - Evocation
Savant (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5207261#post5207261) - Abjuration/Divination
Summoner (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5207270#post5207270) - Conjuration
Rearranger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99314) - Transmutation

Bottom three courtesy of arguskos. Of course for these to work you need to ban Wizards as PC classes, otherwise there's no reason to play any of these.

This is a good example of what I'm thinking of. Has anyone used them and noticed that the Wizard was closer in power levels to the rest of the group? Or perhaps that they have fallen behind?


Well, as the beguiler, dread necromancer, and warmage show, limiting spell selection to a thematic grouping can work rather well. The key word here is a thematic grouping--just because Conjuration spells are all in the same school doesn't mean they have anything in common beyond that (web and orb of electricity, summon monster IV and teleport, etc. are similar in effect and method, but wildly different in "theme").

Now, this logic might work when you're a Necromancer trying to find any way to make more undead or the like, but these are Wizards. The primary thing that differenciates them from Sorcerors are that they can go to school! I mean, when I see a Wizard school in my mind, I see Conjuration 101. The theme for each class would, in fact, be the school.

Hmm... interesting thought. Perhaps while Wizards are restricted to single schools, Sorcerors could be restircted to themes? A good bit harder to put together, but it has the option to be more diverse initially and still be limited.

jiriku
2009-09-24, 01:26 PM
You could also try a halfway approach similar to the psion, putting all of the iconic and/or truly borked spells in a restricted list available only to a wizard who specializes, and then forcing all wizards to specialize.

For example, the conjuration specialty list could contain the teleport series, the planar binding series, and gate, and only conjurers could learn these spells, the shadow spell series and the invisibility series could be illusionist-only, magic missile, fly, fireball, and similar spells are only for evokers, and so forth.

This won't solve all problems (if there was a simple and easy way to do it, someone would have done it by now), but it could create more theme and reduce abusive combos among wizards without making each specialty feel one-dimensional.

Edit: I'd also recommend adding in a number of interesting and unique class features for each specialist, so that players who like wizards feel like they're getting something new, and not just getting whacked in the face with the nerf-bat.

Kobold-Bard
2009-09-24, 01:27 PM
YAY! I'm getting attention! :smallbiggrin:

Anyways, I do think that school-based casters are quite nice and enjoyable. They're around Tier 3 in practice, which is totally fine, and is the sweet spot of D&D 3.5, in my opinion.

I'm like viral marketing for things I like, I've been linking to these things all over the place. I did the same with Zeta Kai's Final Fantasy X d20 conversion (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79241) for ages. I just like to spread the awesome around :smallbiggrin: Probably because I can't make anything good myself.

Bang
2009-09-24, 01:27 PM
In my limited perception of the rules, it seems to be a major reason for why the Wizard is oodles of rungs above and beyond it's competitors.
Certainly.

When the concept of a class is basically "omnipotence through learning," that class tends to be pretty powerful.

If you don't like it, don't use it.
The Sorcerer/Witch and the spell list custimization rules in DMG provide an alternative to the Cleric/Druid/Wizard, even for core games.

KellKheraptis
2009-09-24, 01:34 PM
Keep in mind if you're going to hose Wizards this badly, you'd better be hosing every other tier one caster at least as badly, otherwise it'll only take one to snap the campaign in two. Oh, and don't forget to kill Boccob off...otherwise his little Tome means Transmuters lose nothing.

Yuki Akuma
2009-09-24, 01:34 PM
What if there are no gnomes in my game?

Then you're silly, because gnomes are awesome.

(In a pinch, any Illusionist who knows the Shadow x line of spells will work.)

KellKheraptis
2009-09-24, 01:36 PM
Then you're silly, because gnomes are awesome.

(In a pinch, any Illusionist who knows the Shadow x line of spells will work.)

And not to mention there is a clause for those particular Illusionists not needing to be gnomes :smallsmile:

Lapak
2009-09-24, 01:39 PM
Well, as the beguiler, dread necromancer, and warmage show, limiting spell selection to a thematic grouping can work rather well. The key word here is a thematic grouping--just because Conjuration spells are all in the same school doesn't mean they have anything in common beyond that (web and orb of electricity, summon monster IV and teleport, etc. are similar in effect and method, but wildly different in "theme").This is why I liked the clerical spheres of 2e. I'd love to attack the entire wizard spell list this way, but it's a major undertaking.

Kobold-Bard
2009-09-24, 01:39 PM
Keep in mind if you're going to hose Wizards this badly, you'd better be hosing every other tier one caster at least as badly, otherwise it'll only take one to snap the campaign in two. Oh, and don't forget to kill Boccob off...otherwise his little Tome means Transmuters lose nothing.

Druid's use Shapeshift, Clerics lose Heavy Armour and a couple of the more killer spells go bye bye (Divine Power etc) or are all Cloistered Clerics, Sorcerers are all Battle Sorcerers (not sure about this one, just thought of it), not familiar enough with other casters to make suggestions.

Also there is no such thing as a full caster PrC, with the possible exception of Archmage, meaning taking one isn't just free class features any more.

taltamir
2009-09-24, 01:54 PM
I am actually playing a rearranger right now with arguskos. It is really quite fun, and since everyone is also limited in a similar fashion i don't feel gimped. Due to the sheer amount of spells in splat books, I always have something to do, I find myself only a little limited in choice.
Also, the class abilities and fluff are cool.

arguskos
2009-09-24, 01:56 PM
I am actually playing a rearranger right now with arguskos. It is really quite fun, and since everyone is also limited in a similar fashion i don't feel gimped. Due to the sheer amount of spells in splat books, I always have something to do, I find myself only a little limited in choice.
Also, the class abilities and fluff are cool.
So far, you are basically the best character in the party, next to the ghaele eladrin. The artificer hasn't hit his stride yet (should happen pretty soon though), the beguiler needs to be more creative, and the paladin is... yeah.

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-24, 01:58 PM
Keep in mind if you're going to hose Wizards this badly, you'd better be hosing every other tier one caster at least as badly, otherwise it'll only take one to snap the campaign in two. Oh, and don't forget to kill Boccob off...otherwise his little Tome means Transmuters lose nothing.

Oh! Of course, of course. I never meant this to be the only change to a campaign, it was just something that flittered through my head and roused my curiosity. The same would definitely have to be done to the other Tier 1's.

Perhaps divide Arcane casters into Wizards/Schools and Sorcerors/Themes.

I'd probably do something different for Divine casters, but I'm still trying to acertain how badly crippled this would make Wizards/Sorcerors and get a broad bearing of how much balancing would have to happen between spell schools and wether or not to include a "general" school to cover the very basics.

taltamir
2009-09-24, 02:11 PM
So far, you are basically the best character in the party, next to the ghaele eladrin. The artificer hasn't hit his stride yet (should happen pretty soon though), the beguiler needs to be more creative, and the paladin is... yeah.

well... :)
"The power of magic lies in it's ability to change matter, for better, or worse..."
-Aznar Thrull, Master Rearranger

arguskos
2009-09-24, 02:12 PM
well... :)
"The power of magic lies in it's ability to change matter, for better, or worse..."
-Aznar Thrull, Master Rearranger
I see what you did there. :smallcool:

Also, hope you never encounter Aznar. :smallamused:

KellKheraptis
2009-09-24, 02:38 PM
Oh! Of course, of course. I never meant this to be the only change to a campaign, it was just something that flittered through my head and roused my curiosity. The same would definitely have to be done to the other Tier 1's.

Perhaps divide Arcane casters into Wizards/Schools and Sorcerors/Themes.

I'd probably do something different for Divine casters, but I'm still trying to acertain how badly crippled this would make Wizards/Sorcerors and get a broad bearing of how much balancing would have to happen between spell schools and wether or not to include a "general" school to cover the very basics.

Only one school though will 100% get you super-munchkins who make even ME look tame in comparison. Like, we're talking conjurers who pull exotic matter into the game just because, and transmuters who decide that since they can screw their spell range high enough, they can transmute the core of the planet into something like feathers, without increasing volume to compensate for the MASSIVE loss in mass. Or how about the Illusionist cabal who in the grand prank of the century decides to run a ritual that completely destroys the crops for the year by keeping the entire world in darkness (i.e. global eclipse, so all the plants eventually wither and die). Oh, oh, and lets not forget the best one of all...Evokers who get sick of not being able to teleport, so invent Fireball propulsion in addition to Gust of Wind jets, and then begin dropping nukes since they're the only ones with high-speed long range movement, other than the Transmuters.

Might be kind of an extreme view, but that's how I'd see it. Not to mention, Shadowcraft Mages would end up ruling the world. No contest. They'd have all the usual tricks, all based on one spell, with 100% access to everything in the game, and if they're tricky about it...at will, inside a mythal, pre-epic.

I guess the real moral of the story is talk to the wizard player. I'm planning on entering a game with something even more wicked than that, but I won't be using nearly my full potential. If you ever saw Jaerom Darkwind's Red Mage class, this combo comes close (actually, exceeds in almost every way, but is far less elegant than simply reworking a single PrC) : Arcane (Unarmed) Swordsage 3/Warblade 1/AUS +1/Swiftblade 10/Incantatrix 3/Warblade +1/AUS +1 . As a Kalashtar, and paid for PsyChir with WBL. Congrats, you're a triple caster with 9th level maneuvers :) Could he dominate the world? Probably, since it's one full round action to recharge EVERYTHING, and he can do that immediately inside a time stop, but that's not the character...that's the PLAYER (me) being a jerk. So as I said, I think it all comes down to the player.

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-24, 03:19 PM
Only one school though will 100% get you super-munchkins who make even ME look tame in comparison. Like, we're talking conjurers who pull exotic matter into the game just because, and transmuters who decide that since they can screw their spell range high enough, they can transmute the core of the planet into something like feathers, without increasing volume to compensate for the MASSIVE loss in mass. Or how about the Illusionist cabal who in the grand prank of the century decides to run a ritual that completely destroys the crops for the year by keeping the entire world in darkness (i.e. global eclipse, so all the plants eventually wither and die). Oh, oh, and lets not forget the best one of all...Evokers who get sick of not being able to teleport, so invent Fireball propulsion in addition to Gust of Wind jets, and then begin dropping nukes since they're the only ones with high-speed long range movement, other than the Transmuters.

Might be kind of an extreme view, but that's how I'd see it. Not to mention, Shadowcraft Mages would end up ruling the world. No contest. They'd have all the usual tricks, all based on one spell, with 100% access to everything in the game, and if they're tricky about it...at will, inside a mythal, pre-epic.

I guess the real moral of the story is talk to the wizard player. I'm planning on entering a game with something even more wicked than that, but I won't be using nearly my full potential. If you ever saw Jaerom Darkwind's Red Mage class, this combo comes close (actually, exceeds in almost every way, but is far less elegant than simply reworking a single PrC) : Arcane (Unarmed) Swordsage 3/Warblade 1/AUS +1/Swiftblade 10/Incantatrix 3/Warblade +1/AUS +1 . As a Kalashtar, and paid for PsyChir with WBL. Congrats, you're a triple caster with 9th level maneuvers :) Could he dominate the world? Probably, since it's one full round action to recharge EVERYTHING, and he can do that immediately inside a time stop, but that's not the character...that's the PLAYER (me) being a jerk. So as I said, I think it all comes down to the player.

I'm confused at your 100%. Do you mean that all of the wizards that have to have one school will be super munchkins because that's how the class is set up, or are you saying that all of the players will be super-munchkins because that's how the Players plays the character?

I'm not talking at all about having Wizards research Fireball-Thrusters for the same reason I'm not having the party rogue research solid fuel rockets. I'm talking about having each individual wizard have its own niche like most of the classes in the game have.

Wether or not players will attempt to break the game is not something I'm trying to adjucate. As it is, I'm certain the player that's creating the world-darkness spell can still create that spell As-Is, except he can also make the Gust of Wind rockets and Nuke the world at the same time.

What you explained merely said that each segment of wizard can possibly destroy the world if the DM allows certain research to take place.

What I'm saying is that currently the wizard can do the same thing. No, more than the same thing, he could do every crazy thing you just suggested.

100% solution to Tac-Nuke-Wizard is not what I'm shooting for here. It'd be nice, but it's not what I think I'll reach. I'm looking at pulling the Wizard back a bit from Tier 1. Reducing his ability to destroy the world by 1/5th seems like it's a bit of a success on that note.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-24, 03:41 PM
The problem is, the schools aren't really balanced to have all of them have equal value. It's just less noticeable when you have access to six of them than it would be with only one.

I tried to do enchantment specialization once...just because playing "tim the enchanter" is classic. It's doable, but the spell selection is really terrible. You have to go outside the school, honestly.

Conjuration, you could probably live pretty fat and happy in, necromancy is also a somewhat smaller school in core, but if you allow splatbooks, it has some rather good stuff added to it.

I think it'd be interesting to allow banning of additional schools to further boost a favored school. So if you opted to ban down to one-two schools, you'd be quite effective with what you have.

sadi
2009-09-24, 03:49 PM
I actually played a game like this in 2nd ed. Every pc was a specialist wizard with access to their school only. We had 2 npcs to make up the missing schools. Some characters worked fairly well, some just sucked royally it all depends on what school you use.

KellKheraptis
2009-09-24, 03:57 PM
The problem with taking away most of their versatility is that then you are left with something less optimal than a sorcerer. If playing Tier 3-4 is your thing, and having options is anathema to you, more power to you. Hell they'd barely make Tier 3, given that those tiers are earmarked by their versatility, and outside of two schools and one PrC, that versatility is gone. If that's all you're really upset over, is that wizards are so versatile, it begs the question what would you do with artificers, druids, and clerics? And the gods forbid, erudites and arcane swordsages? Individual combos and spells that break the game can be errata-ed/house-ruled. That's no problem. But something like this I would say goes so far as to be a new class. And using it's basis of thought as a yardstick, a gimped one. Far-reaching changes require a whole lot more than simply "one school only, wizards, and oh, sorcs...hehe you thought you were boned before, here's a theme list. NEVER will you add to it!" (dramatized for effect, but you get the message, and it'll be closer to that than a rational argument from a player's point of view, when you needlessly gimp their ENTIRE favorite class). Best to keep it to individual spells, feat combos, and the like, and dealing with trouble players on an individual basis. Because otherwise either no one will play the class anymore, or they will play it too well, and then you've only given yourself a bigger problem. All issues of Pun-ification aside, I can get a mythal up well pre-epic. And that means I can directly oppose gods (seriously. Look at what a freakin' mythal can do). I can't kill them by any means, but they can't autostamp me like they can a mortal. And that's just two schools of magic. One can potentially have in excess of 700 epic spells per day by level 20. Again, only needs one school of magic. These are extreme examples, but personally I would EXPECT this from a long-time wizard player who's nice and versatile party buffer just got gimped into having to choose between teleporting and buffing while NEVER AGAIN being able to summon a single celestial monkey, or drawing out elements from their rawest form and bringing life from other planes (and eventually from nothing) while never being able to teleport, turn invisible, or change shape. When they were ICONS of the class. Overspecialization = BAD.

woodenbandman
2009-09-24, 04:06 PM
Hell, I could probably win with only Evocation if I put my mind to it.

It's all a matter of feats and spell choices from there.

taltamir
2009-09-24, 06:08 PM
1. Players will not all "munchiken out" as a response to this, especially not mature players who are well aware of the power of the tier one classes.

1a. hasn't been a problem in the game I am playing right now for example.

1b. why would a DM allow that?


The problem with taking away most of their versatility is that then you are left with something less optimal than a sorcerer.


The problem is, the schools aren't really balanced to have all of them have equal value.

2. In regards to versatility of various schools and versatility of sorcerers, what you should do is declare that sorcerers and wizards do not exist as is.

Now create various "school based" casters. Some based on wizard, some based on sorc.

A certain school seems too weak? give them access to a few spells outside their school, extra feats, extra hit die, and unique class abilities. A certain school too strong? nerf select spells.

Example:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95336

Blue Paladin
2009-09-24, 06:12 PM
Perhaps divide Arcane casters into Wizards/Schools and Sorcerors/Themes.That's eerie. Have you been using your telepathy on me again? Need to dig out the old tinfoil hat...

I've been experimenting with exactly this divide: Wizards divided into the various schools and Sorcerors restricted by elemental theme.

Wizards that specialize in a school get unique effects related to that school (usually supernatural effects, not spells or spell-like abilities). A wizard could otherwise choose to be a generalist Mage who only received lower level spells. I expect that would make them heavy metamagic users (since they have, for example, 2nd level spell slots but only know 1st level spells).

Sorcerors get supernatural and spell like abilities themed to each element: Earth, Metal, Water, Wood, Fire. Elements have generative and suppressive effects on one another as per standard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_Xing).

And for the people saying they can break such a game in half with a single school, three things:
1) PHB spells only ("Celeriwhat? Orb of whosits? Never heard of em...")
2) Certain spells have been entirely removed (notably Poly, Shadow X, Gate)
3) The rest of the spells have been edited by me (this was time consuming...), mostly to fit in the world's 5 element system rather than the 4 element system

It's a huge nerfbat IMO, and the trick so far has been tailoring the rest of the casters down to the same level...

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-24, 07:04 PM
The problem with taking away most of their versatility is that then you are left with something less optimal than a sorcerer. If playing Tier 3-4 is your thing, and having options is anathema to you, more power to you. Hell they'd barely make Tier 3, given that those tiers are earmarked by their versatility, and outside of two schools and one PrC, that versatility is gone. If that's all you're really upset over, is that wizards are so versatile, it begs the question what would you do with artificers, druids, and clerics? And the gods forbid, erudites and arcane swordsages? Individual combos and spells that break the game can be errata-ed/house-ruled. That's no problem. But something like this I would say goes so far as to be a new class. And using it's basis of thought as a yardstick, a gimped one. Far-reaching changes require a whole lot more than simply "one school only, wizards, and oh, sorcs...hehe you thought you were boned before, here's a theme list. NEVER will you add to it!" (dramatized for effect, but you get the message, and it'll be closer to that than a rational argument from a player's point of view, when you needlessly gimp their ENTIRE favorite class). Best to keep it to individual spells, feat combos, and the like, and dealing with trouble players on an individual basis. Because otherwise either no one will play the class anymore, or they will play it too well, and then you've only given yourself a bigger problem. All issues of Pun-ification aside, I can get a mythal up well pre-epic. And that means I can directly oppose gods (seriously. Look at what a freakin' mythal can do). I can't kill them by any means, but they can't autostamp me like they can a mortal. And that's just two schools of magic. One can potentially have in excess of 700 epic spells per day by level 20. Again, only needs one school of magic. These are extreme examples, but personally I would EXPECT this from a long-time wizard player who's nice and versatile party buffer just got gimped into having to choose between teleporting and buffing while NEVER AGAIN being able to summon a single celestial monkey, or drawing out elements from their rawest form and bringing life from other planes (and eventually from nothing) while never being able to teleport, turn invisible, or change shape. When they were ICONS of the class. Overspecialization = BAD.

Ok, I'm incredibly confused at what your point is. I'm trying to argue that a Wizard is still strong with one or two specializations and you're trying to counter me by stating that with two schools you can oppose Gods. I guess I really don't have to say much about it since you've essentially answered what I wanted to know. That being that if Wizards were cut down to two schools, would they still be competitive in game. And the answer is yes.

Nostalgia (which is a bad reason to do things if that's the only reason to do it) aside, it's merely that the D&D concept of Wizards was too broadly defined at the beginning. You mention the Druid and Cleric. They can be "fixed" with simple changes to the class. As Kobold-Bard mentioned, removing heavy armor proficiency from the Cleric and making the Druid use Shapeshift.

Versatility is important to any play style. Any of them. Rogues, Fighters, Barbarians and Bards. You decry splitting the Wizard into classes that, by your own admission, would STILL have more power and versatility than these classes because it would dent the ultimate versatility of the class. The versatility -is- a problem, and the more you argue your points, the more clear you make it.

Why should the Wizard player be more versatile than every other player in the game?

If your answer is "Because he's a Wizard", you get no points.

It seems unfair to have someone play the other classes to protect you in lower levels just so you can hit your stride and forget them later while you make your mythals to challenge gods.

Zaq
2009-09-24, 09:17 PM
1) PHB spells only ("Celeriwhat? Orb of whosits? Never heard of em...")

Bad idea. Yes, I saw your second bullet point there, but still, you'll have more problems in Core than you will out of it.

I'd like to see a Wizard with zero PHB spells, actually. They'd still be damn powerful, just... a little less so.

Seriously though, if you're willing to ban spells in the first place, don't limit them to Core only. (Besides, that makes you look like you think Core, and in particular Core spells, are balanced, and that's just silly.) Go ahead, please, ban the problem spells. However, "non-PHB" does not equal "problem."

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-24, 09:45 PM
Perhaps a good balance would be to give those wizards with weak schools better class abilities. Maybe some Su or Ex abilities. Maybe a Spell-like or two? I mean, this certainly wont work well without some serious picking through of spell lists and fixing of the broken spells, but instead of simply adding new spells to the list, this could make an Illusionist or Enchanter more appealing compared to a Conjurer or Necromancer.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-24, 10:07 PM
That's eerie. Have you been using your telepathy on me again? Need to dig out the old tinfoil hat...

I've been experimenting with exactly this divide: Wizards divided into the various schools and Sorcerors restricted by elemental theme.

Wizards that specialize in a school get unique effects related to that school (usually supernatural effects, not spells or spell-like abilities). A wizard could otherwise choose to be a generalist Mage who only received lower level spells. I expect that would make them heavy metamagic users (since they have, for example, 2nd level spell slots but only know 1st level spells).

Sorcerors get supernatural and spell like abilities themed to each element: Earth, Metal, Water, Wood, Fire. Elements have generative and suppressive effects on one another as per standard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_Xing).

And for the people saying they can break such a game in half with a single school, three things:
1) PHB spells only ("Celeriwhat? Orb of whosits? Never heard of em...")
2) Certain spells have been entirely removed (notably Poly, Shadow X, Gate)
3) The rest of the spells have been edited by me (this was time consuming...), mostly to fit in the world's 5 element system rather than the 4 element system

It's a huge nerfbat IMO, and the trick so far has been tailoring the rest of the casters down to the same level...

Elemental themes? Thats unfortunate. Especially in conjunction with core only. Have fun with not having damage options for most elements at a given level, and dying horribly when you run into a mob that's immune or heavily resistant to your element.

Sticking to core only inflates the difference between the schools, too. Lets look at enchantment a bit:
1: three choices. No universal spells at this level.
2: one choice. Again, no universal.
3: two choices. No universal.
4: four, no universal.
5: Four, one universal(permanency, which I wouldn't be surprised to see on your ban list)
6: two, no universal.
7: one, one universal.

Flexibility is completely shot...You won't even be able to fully utilize your automatic two spells learned per level. If you're adding stuff to the banned list in addition, the situation only gets worse.

Five element system? D&D has more than five elements, even in core.

In short, I don't see this as an attempt to balance casters, it looks more like an attempt to break casters. In such a world, what would you rather have...the crippled evoker, or a tooled up archer/warlock? The conjurer that's essentially limited to Summon Monsters, or a real tank?

Hawriel
2009-09-24, 10:18 PM
This is why I liked the clerical spheres of 2e. I'd love to attack the entire wizard spell list this way, but it's a major undertaking.

Ive been thinking the same thing. Ive wanted to reorganize 3rd ed spells back into the 2nd ed spheres for awile. It's just alot of work.

As for arcane spells I was thinking about braking them down into 6 schools based on elimental magic. The extra two would be life/death (healing/necromancy) and universal or pure arcane (dispell and magic missile).

Spells would over lap schools or elements as make sence.

Zeta Kai
2009-09-24, 10:18 PM
I do think Divination would be worth picking; it's got a lot of completely irreplaceable abilities (such as Contact Other Plane, Scrying, True Seeing, Greater Prying Eyes, Foresight, Moment of Prescience, etc.) so while it lacks in terms of traditional Wizard-mojo, in combination with some other primary focus, it would still be great. Really, I find Divination to be up there in terms of school simply on back of the power of exclusive effects.

The abjurer with mind blank (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mindBlank.htm) is immune to your entire class. Then again, an abjurer is immune to a lot of things.

Akal Saris
2009-09-24, 10:23 PM
Keep in mind if you're going to hose Wizards this badly, you'd better be hosing every other tier one caster at least as badly, otherwise it'll only take one to snap the campaign in two. Oh, and don't forget to kill Boccob off...otherwise his little Tome means Transmuters lose nothing.

Ya know Kell, I knew this was you posting before I even checked the name =P

On another note, SHOUTOUT to the other Birthright player who was thinking of the Magician when reading this thread! =)

This is similar to what the d20 Warcraft game did with Necromancy and Conjuration, by the way - in order to cast spells from either of those schools you need to enter into a prestige class for that school.

As far as nerfing spell-casting goes, I just RTJ'd for a PBP game where spells of 4th level have a 20% failure, increasing up to 70% for 9th level spells, and a 50% chance for failed spells to backfire horribly on you. I plan on playing a malconvoker and screaming in terror as my summoned balor turns upon me for my hubris =P

Myrmex
2009-09-24, 11:18 PM
Then you're silly, because gnomes are awesome.

(In a pinch, any Illusionist who knows the Shadow x line of spells will work.)

My real point was that when you say "you can break my game with X", the simple answer is "no, because my game is not the internet."

Claims that "X can break Y in your game" are always going to be wrong, or at least unknowable, since you don't know anything about "my game."

That's why everyone likes RAW so much on the internets. No arbitrariness.

Ozymandias9
2009-09-24, 11:43 PM
Unless you pare it down a bit, Conj. will likely still be the most powerful school by far, especially if you exit the core spell lists. A natural place to cut it would be to treat Conj.(summoning) spells as a separate school, though that does still leaves some problems.

Depending on what power level you're going for with this alteration, I might suggest adding in some of the specialist wizard ACFs from Unearthed Arcana (pg. 59) with no or reduced tradeoffs.

You'll likely have to do some spell list editing to keep things balanced. You also will probably need to take a look at (at least) Sorcerers, Clerics, and Druids as well to keep things in balance.

Eldariel
2009-09-25, 03:50 AM
The abjurer with mind blank (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mindBlank.htm) is immune to your entire class. Then again, an abjurer is immune to a lot of things.

Naa, Contact Other Plane among others gets past it.

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-25, 08:28 AM
Unless you pare it down a bit, Conj. will likely still be the most powerful school by far, especially if you exit the core spell lists. A natural place to cut it would be to treat Conj.(summoning) spells as a separate school, though that does still leaves some problems.

Depending on what power level you're going for with this alteration, I might suggest adding in some of the specialist wizard ACFs from Unearthed Arcana (pg. 59) with no or reduced tradeoffs.

You'll likely have to do some spell list editing to keep things balanced. You also will probably need to take a look at (at least) Sorcerers, Clerics, and Druids as well to keep things in balance.

I had imagined this much. Conjuration does seem quite powerful, but what should be done to balance it? And what are some ways to balance out the weaker schools? I suggested earlier giving those schools more class abilities, but I don't know how that would affect their power levels.

In this mostly theoretical exercise, I have no real intention of keeping to core. My intention is giving each "class" of wizard a similar number of spells with a similar power level for the spells of equal power level.

It *might* start out with core spells, but that's just because it's usually easier to start at the beginning and work your way out from there.


Elemental themes? Thats unfortunate. Especially in conjunction with core only. Have fun with not having damage options for most elements at a given level, and dying horribly when you run into a mob that's immune or heavily resistant to your element.

Sticking to core only inflates the difference between the schools, too. Lets look at enchantment a bit:
1: three choices. No universal spells at this level.
2: one choice. Again, no universal.
3: two choices. No universal.
4: four, no universal.
5: Four, one universal(permanency, which I wouldn't be surprised to see on your ban list)
6: two, no universal.
7: one, one universal.

Flexibility is completely shot...You won't even be able to fully utilize your automatic two spells learned per level. If you're adding stuff to the banned list in addition, the situation only gets worse.

Five element system? D&D has more than five elements, even in core.

In short, I don't see this as an attempt to balance casters, it looks more like an attempt to break casters. In such a world, what would you rather have...the crippled evoker, or a tooled up archer/warlock? The conjurer that's essentially limited to Summon Monsters, or a real tank?

This is important criticism. It helpfully points out how few spells there are in Enchantment core-only. It means that, should I decide to proceed with this, I'll have to either add more spells to the Enchantment list while making sure they're just as powerful (if not in the exact same ways) as equivalent spells of other schools OR I'll have to beef up the Enchanter class itself with abilities that are inherent to only that class, so as to make it unique and balanced.

I've noticed the same thing about an element-based system of casting, that's why I personally would be staying away from any single element as a casting theme. It would probably be more like The Elementalist (The 4 classical elements), Doom and Gloom (Shadow and Fear) and so on. This way you retain some measure of flexibility while still having constraints that
(IMPORTANT)----------HALF OF THE CLASSES IN THE GAME ALREADY HAVE.----------(IMPORTANT)
A normal Rogue is pretty worthless against enemies immune to sneak attack.
A fighter and barbarian is pretty much useless against an enemy who can shrug off attacks done by their favored weapon.
These seem to me as if they're more gimped than any of the changes that I'm proposing.

If it seems like I want to constrain Wizards and magic users in general, it's because I -DO-. I think it's really off kilter that magic is so EASY. I mean, sincerely, if you can completely negate the need for some other classes at level 5, why in the world would people continue to plan on having careers in those other classes instead of being crappy wizards who would still be better than them in the end. Magic should be at LEAST as hard as becoming proficient in something physical. I mean, at least with the physical part of it, your mind can actually relate to what's going on.

It just seems incredibly selfish on the Wizards part. And I don't mean In-Game. It's basically the Wizard proponents saying "Hey, even if you gimp me, I'm still better than most classes, but I will take it personally and never play Wizard again unless you let me have power unfettered by stupid things like team balance or fairness."

Am I wrong?

Tyndmyr
2009-09-26, 10:24 AM
Keep in mind that the minute an enchanter runs into something highly resistant to, or immune to mind affecting, they also die. IIRC, almost every single enchanter spell is mind affecting.

I would approach balancing it from the other side. Say...everyone has to ban a school. This school does not count torwards the banning required for specialist schools. This reduces options, without requiring massive changes to the schools.

Now, conjuration is still too powerful, I dunno what to do about that short of breaking it into two schools.

Flickerdart
2009-09-26, 10:40 AM
Keep in mind that the minute an enchanter runs into something highly resistant to, or immune to mind affecting, they also die. IIRC, almost every single enchanter spell is mind affecting.

I would approach balancing it from the other side. Say...everyone has to ban a school. This school does not count torwards the banning required for specialist schools. This reduces options, without requiring massive changes to the schools.

Now, conjuration is still too powerful, I dunno what to do about that short of breaking it into two schools.
So now instead of banning Evocation, and Enchantment OR Necromancy, people will ban all three and life goes on.

Eldariel
2009-09-26, 10:54 AM
Just tossing Teleportation and all the non-Acid energy attacks to Evocation goes a long way towards balancing Evocation and Conjuration. Then collapse Illusion and Enchantment into one school and do something about Necromancy and you're done.

tyckspoon
2009-09-26, 10:57 AM
I've noticed the same thing about an element-based system of casting, that's why I personally would be staying away from any single element as a casting theme. It would probably be more like The Elementalist (The 4 classical elements), Doom and Gloom (Shadow and Fear) and so on. This way you retain some measure of flexibility while still having constraints that
(IMPORTANT)----------HALF OF THE CLASSES IN THE GAME ALREADY HAVE.----------(IMPORTANT)
A normal Rogue is pretty worthless against enemies immune to sneak attack.
A fighter and barbarian is pretty much useless against an enemy who can shrug off attacks done by their favored weapon.
These seem to me as if they're more gimped than any of the changes that I'm proposing.


Those other cases you've mentioned have several workarounds, however. Rogues have half a dozen ways to sneak attack things that are otherwise immune, from alternate class features to spells to items. Melee damage characters.. well, really shouldn't be focusing on a single weapon to that extent, but even if they are they can get versions of that weapon with different materials and enhancements to deal with DR, take feats to help deal with the problem, or just power through it with massive damage. DR 5 or 10/whatever isn't too much trouble when you're swinging 50+ a shot. A caster built on a severely restricted spell list would need the same kinds of options (preferably as class features). Feats do at least already exist for a possible Elementalist-style class, with Searing Spell/Piercing Cold/Elemental Substitution/Admixture.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-26, 05:57 PM
So now instead of banning Evocation, and Enchantment OR Necromancy, people will ban all three and life goes on.

And this is why I prefer a positive approach, encouraging people to ban as many schools as they dare for more power within a school.

However, even banning three schools has some good. I mean, if you go incantrix, you have to ban one more. Tough decisions at that point.

Ledeas
2009-09-26, 06:08 PM
Wow, I never seen the Wizard as the Be all End all that you guys seem to make them.

Low hp, bad armor, horriable weapon skills.

Taking a wizard is easy, Shoot them in the back, just dont let them see you.

Someone wrote a Warrior or Barbarian loosing favarite weapon is dead meat, I disagree. Roy was slowed down, but bashing things with a club.

Rogues are in trouble if they can not see? Range attacks are your friend.

Everyclass has +'s and -'s, it is all in how you play it.

I say add an ALL school and have the 8 old ones still there.

VIVA la MAGI

Tyndmyr
2009-09-26, 06:13 PM
At low levels, sure, Ledeas. At higher levels, doing that is pretty much impossible. By high I mean "can cast level three spells", which include fly and protection from arrows.

Wizards are currently powerful, yes. However, some people do overestimate just how powerful. A wizard with only one school, and a heavily edited one at that, would indeed be very vulnerable, and probably quite a bit underpowered.

Solaris
2009-09-26, 06:55 PM
What if there are no gnomes in my game?

Then you're dead inside.

Volkov
2009-09-26, 06:59 PM
This would make a circle of eight wizards more special. One wizard per school.

Eldariel
2009-09-26, 07:22 PM
Then the gnomes are dead and sprung inside-out.

Fixed that for you.

Ozymandias9
2009-09-26, 11:07 PM
A wizard with only one school, [...] probably quite a bit underpowered.

That's going to depend heavily on where you're trying to balance. Toss in a couple of the alternate class features from the UA specialist wizard variants, and you should be able to balance them relatively close to a sorcerer.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-26, 11:42 PM
The value of those varies heavily between schools, and require the loss of a familiar.

I mean, sure, you *could* eventually balance a class around a specific school I guess. I just think by the time you do so, it won't look much like a wizard anymore.

CheshireCatAW
2009-09-28, 10:40 AM
Those other cases you've mentioned have several workarounds, however. Rogues have half a dozen ways to sneak attack things that are otherwise immune, from alternate class features to spells to items. Melee damage characters.. well, really shouldn't be focusing on a single weapon to that extent, but even if they are they can get versions of that weapon with different materials and enhancements to deal with DR, take feats to help deal with the problem, or just power through it with massive damage. DR 5 or 10/whatever isn't too much trouble when you're swinging 50+ a shot. A caster built on a severely restricted spell list would need the same kinds of options (preferably as class features). Feats do at least already exist for a possible Elementalist-style class, with Searing Spell/Piercing Cold/Elemental Substitution/Admixture.

While it's true the other classes have workarounds, they are, in fact, workarounds. Meaning, you have to work at it to be able to get around that problem.

Lets take the Rogue, for example, since I'm most familiar with them. You can take some feats so you do half-sneak attack damage to constructs and plants and the like. Or you could get magic items, such as potions or wands (and even then, you lose actions in combat after the first strike). The lot of this costs fairly significant monies. In the case of the feat, it's significant because it costs a very precious resource for the Rogue so that he can be less effective against that particular creature than he normally is against others. It's helping to bring him up to par, and it doesn't even do that completely.

The Fighter, as was my understanding, generally only has enough WBL to invest heavily in one weapon. I could be wrong, since I do not play Fighters, but between their armor and their weapon, I imagine it would be quite a hanicap to get a second or third weapon of special types and then enchant them so they become halfway decent. You -can- do it, but it's a significant expenditure of income to be able to work around this handicap. And that's not even addressing situational problems. Such as a dragon flying by and using a breath weapon. The Fighers' axe will do little to no good against that enemy, and he will be reduced to plinking away with an arrow. Similarly to the Rogue, it gives him an ability to contribute, but it's still far below par compared to his normal abilities.

Wizards simply do not have this problem, for the most part. Most of their workarounds are simply choosing a different spell for the situation. Maybe, in extreme cases, researching a special spell. Whereas the other classes have to choose a feat or expensive items to become workable, the Wizard turns the page. Antimagic fields come up far less often than flying creatures and I have yet to find a fairly common creature so immune to magic that it couldn't be affected by a Wizard merely switching tactics with little to no cost to himself.


The value of those varies heavily between schools, and require the loss of a familiar.

I mean, sure, you *could* eventually balance a class around a specific school I guess. I just think by the time you do so, it won't look much like a wizard anymore.

Why wouldn't it look like a Wizard anymore? It would have to choose it's spells, just as Wizards do now. The big difference is that the Wizard would actually have class abilities. Wizards would still cast spells. However, if by "not looking much like a Wizard" you mean he wouldn't obviate the majority of other classes by his mere existance, I'd consider that a good thing.

I -LIKE- Wizards as they are, but I also like the classes that, in the hands of a competent player, they make completely useless. I like the idea that Magic is at least as hard as a martial discipline, and that a Wizard could spend his whole life in a school and not miss the other schools overly. Granted, this means they'll have to be limited but wouldn't it also be great to have a Wizard with One School who has a spell list he feels comfortable with and still only fills a niche in the party instead of being a party unto himself?

It would indeed be a lot of work. I mean, some schools are given a lot more love than others, and it's pretty obvious when you see how many spells of each school there are. However, if one could create a decent spell list and the spells were balanced against the other schools, I think it could lead to a wonderful role for a Wizard. I mean, a Wizard might actually have reason to seek out Wizards of different schools or to become a permanent part of a College that has multiple schools in it.

Another thing that I've mentioned before is beefing up the Wizard class itself. The class is quite weak. I'm pretty sure there's not many level 20 Wizards out there, only slightly more than there are level 20 Sorcerors. By hitting the spell list really hard, you can feel more free to give the Wizards some decent class abilities that arn't a Familiar, metamagic or magic item creation feats. It's funny you mention making it "look" like a Wizard, because according to the Wizard class itself, it would take very, very little to make one look like one. Your sentence would be true, though. I would make the Wizard class stronger and reign back the spells themselves. That would indeed make for a different Wizard, true, but it would be much more readily identifiable as a Wizard.

quick_comment
2009-09-29, 09:51 AM
What if there are no gnomes in my game?

Then you can take stoneblessed