[3.5] The Standard Wizard

[AgentPaper]

Ok, so I think everyone here knows all about the "Schrodinger Wizard" and his always-mutable spell lists and items and PrCs and so on.

So, in an attempt to remedy this, I propose we put together a couple of "standard" wizard builds, which can operate in a standard campaign environment and has a set spell list and spells known.

In total there will be 4 "standard" wizards. Two will be core, built to fight in core, and two will be non-core, built to fight non-core. Two will be straight wizard 20, two will use PrCs.

To start, we will make a level 20 straight wizard in core-only. Race is human, stats are 32 point-buy. I think the following should work, but of course feel free to say if you think I messed up:

Str: 5 (8; -3 age)
Con: 18 (15; +6 enhancement, -3 age)
Dex: 16 (13; +6 enhancement, -3 age)
Int: 34 (18; +5 level, +5 tome, +2 age +6 enhancement)
Wis: 10 (8; +2 age)
Cha: 10 (8; +2 age)

This gives us the following spells/spells known:
{table=head]Level|Slots|Known
0|4|all
1|7|9
2|6|4
3|6|4
4|6|4
5|6|4
6|5|4
7|5|4
8|5|4
9|5|8[/table]
Note that these spells known can be traded down for lower level spells, though most likely that won't matter, except possibly for level 9. As well, remember that we'll be able to spend our wealth on scrolls to buy spells as well, and this is just what we get for free.

Speaking of wealth, we have (IIRC) 760,000g to spend. I've assumed we would buy some items to boost int, dex, and con, but the rest is up for debate. Remember we're making the ultimate batman wizard here, so he should be able to deal with any and all threats, with or without preparation, and with or without allies.

Anyways, feel free to argue and debate, I'll try to add stuff to this post when it seems we've agreed on something, but no stinky cheese, and keep it core. (aka, PHB1, MM1, and DMG1) To start, let's try and get a basic list of spells we want to have at each level. Then, we can start on items, and finally prepared spells.

This is mostly a thought experiment, but is meant to be something to point to in the various debates that constantly come up, so keep that in mind as well.

[sonofzeal]

Tomes. A lvl 20 Wizard should (probably) have read a +5 Tome. Shifting the 1 ap from Dex gives us Int 34.


I suggest a Conjuration-focussed Wizard with Evocation and Enchantment banned.

[Lycanthromancer]

You're missing at least +6 on Int. +1 from level and +5 from a book or 5 wishes. This could be quite a bit higher if age and/or PAO are taken into account.

[AgentPaper]

Tomes. A lvl 20 Wizard should (probably) have read a +5 Tome. Shifting the 1 ap from Dex gives us Int 34.


I suggest a Conjuration-focussed Wizard with Evocation and Enchantment banned.

It'll be a generalist wizard. The PrC wizard will likely be specialized, but for now we'll keep it simple.

And I didn't really think the +5 tome would be worth the cost, since unless we can get to 36 we don't get an extra level 9 spell slot.

However, don't worry about all of that too much until we start looking at items to buy, which will include stuff like tomes. Before that, I want to get a list of important spells for each level. Feel free to include meta-magic'ed stuff, though make sure it's in the level appropriate to it's meta-magic level. (though it might be safe to assume a rod of quicken)

Edit: Age is a good point, though unless we get a way to ignore the penalties it might not be worth it for how much it hurts our dex and con. Definitely useful to hit an int benchmark for another level 9 spell or something, though.

[lsfreak]

Take the last +1 from levelup and put it back into Int. Then get the +5 tome. That's +3 to all save DC's. That's a lot more important than an extra +1 on touch attacks or +1AC.

[Lycanthromancer]

It'll be a generalist wizard. The PrC wizard will likely be specialized, but for now we'll keep it simple.

And I didn't really think the +5 tome would be worth the cost, since unless we can get to 36 we don't get an extra level 9 spell slot.

However, don't worry about all of that too much until we start looking at items to buy, which will include stuff like tomes. Before that, I want to get a list of important spells for each level. Feel free to include meta-magic'ed stuff, though make sure it's in the level appropriate to it's meta-magic level. (though it might be safe to assume a rod of quicken)

Edit: Age is a good point, though unless we get a way to ignore the penalties it might not be worth it for how much it hurts our dex and con. Definitely useful to hit an int benchmark for another level 9 spell or something, though.Who cares what the physical scores are? You can have a permanent polymorph any object into whatever you like, so long as it has a good Intelligence score. Outsiders and sarrukhs are good for this, y'ken?

[AgentPaper]

Ok, ok, if it's going to be a sticking point, then I'll assume we start with a 36 int. Just remember that we're using core, which means only monsters in the MM1 can be polymorphed into.

[Lycanthromancer]

Most of his feats should be split between item creation, metamagic, and Improved Initiative.

Especially go for Craft Wondrous Item, Craft Rod, Extend Spell, Heighten Spell (though this one is debatable), and Empower/Maximize Spell.

He can do without the books for his physical stats, and he should spend most of his gold on filling up his Boccob's Blessed Book and on crafted items. I like to have a wand of mnemonic enhancer and two rods of absorption (one empty, one halfway full) both as offense and extra defense.

Everything else is gravy.

[Runestar]

I wouldn't be caught dead playing a generalist wizard at lower lvs in core. :smalltongue:

[sonofzeal]

Note: the following are incomplete lists, but these are the spells that I think are necessary as the default "freebie" list. Others can be added via scrolls, of course, and indeed should be.


6th level

Antimagic Field
Dispel Magic, Greater
True Seeing
Disintegrate


7th level

Forcecage
Ethereal Jaunt
Reverse Gravity
Scrying, Greater


8th level

Dimensional Lock
Mind Blank
Polymorph Any Object
Shadow Evocation, Greater



9th level

Disjunction
Gate
Foresight
Shades
Astral Projection
Shapechange
Time Stop
Wish

[AgentPaper]

Looks good, though is that all core? For some reason I thought Shadow Evocation wasn't, though I'm AFB at the moment.

[Math_Mage]

For the record, anyone who is planning on making a Wizard and needs a 'standard Wizard build' setup to help them with character creation is not starting at level 20. I mean, I don't want to presume that this is the reason why you're making these builds, since there's already a couple of useful handbooks on the subject, but someone who is interested in actually playing one of these in a game would probably want to know something about useful items and spells at level 5 and/or level 12, not just at level 20. And on that subject, are these builds meant to remain viable through 20 levels of play, or is the goal simply to make them good at level 20?

Shadow Evocation is in the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/shadowevocation.htm).

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The problem with Schrodinger's Wizard is that a Wizard *CAN* have literally every spell in the game scribed into a Blessed book (using Secret Page cheese).

The issue isn't with spell list, it's with a daily Spells Prepared list. If you didn't prepare the spell "I Win vs Oozes", then you generally can't cast it, barring other methods of getting spells out. And the problem is that the standard wizard will have sufficient divination available to him to know which spells to prepare.

Also, if it gets too bad, he pops a Rope Trick/Magnificent Mansion and changes out his spell list, with very little repercussion.

This is the secret of the Schrodinger's Wizard which is the main problem with the OP. "If I win, then I win. If I may loose, I hit a reset button on my powers, which I switch up to be most advantageous, then proceed to win."

[AgentPaper]

Hmm, that's a good point. I might want to re-structure this to start with a level 1 character, get it nice and locked in stone, and then after that we can start adding levels. (at least 2-4 at a time, of course)

The purpose of this thread isn't to make a character for people to actually play, though it should be something that *could* be used to play if someone wanted to. What it's meant to be is a benchmark and reference point for people to point to to say "This is a normal wizard. X sucks because nothing they can do can really compete with that."

So, yes, let's start with a level 1 wizard. Let's start with the ability scores. We could still go with 8/14/14/18/8/8, but the 18 doesn't really do anything and a couple more points of con/dex would really help out at this point, so perhaps we should go for an int of 17, which gives us enough points to increase con to 16.

We have 6 known level 1 spells, 2 level 1 spell slots, 3 level 0 slots, 2 feats, and 75g.

[sonofzeal]

I recommend stating out the lvl20 version, and extrapolating backwards. Much easier (and more fair) that way. He should still be reasonably optimized at most levels in between.

[Draz74]

but the 18 doesn't really do anything

Arguable. It's another 5% chance that Bad Guy won't pass your Sleep or Color Spray or Grease spell.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Hmm, that's a good point. I might want to re-structure this to start with a level 1 character, get it nice and locked in stone, and then after that we can start adding levels. (at least 2-4 at a time, of course)

The purpose of this thread isn't to make a character for people to actually play, though it should be something that *could* be used to play if someone wanted to. What it's meant to be is a benchmark and reference point for people to point to to say "This is a normal wizard. X sucks because nothing they can do can really compete with that."

So, yes, let's start with a level 1 wizard. Let's start with the ability scores. We could still go with 8/14/14/18/8/8, but the 18 doesn't really do anything and a couple more points of con/dex would really help out at this point, so perhaps we should go for an int of 17, which gives us enough points to increase con to 16.

We have 6 known level 1 spells, 2 level 1 spell slots, 3 level 0 slots, 2 feats, and 75g.

At 1st level? I pick up Sleep, Grease, True Strike, Ray of Feeblement, Mage Armor, and Shield. With 25gp, I buy, and scribe into my book, Magic Missile.

I also specialize Conjurer so that I actually have an additional 1st level spell slot which must be Conjuration. Which is generally Grease.

I've got a Reflex SoL, a Will SoL, and depending on the circumstances, may also be substantially harder to hit than the party tank, if I know what I need beforehand.

This is Core. Going non-core, Nerveskitter will definitely make the list.

Once the character hits 3rd (Rope Trick), Schrodinger's Cheese (or Save-State cheese, if you prefer to call it that) will begin to affect game play.

[Math_Mage]

How useful is True Strike at level 1? Only the one Ray and maybe a crossbow to make it worthwhile. If there's some other spell that you'd want in your book at this stage (Color Spray or Silent Image, maybe), I'd pick it over True Strike.

Also, agreed with sonofzeal that setting down the level-20 build first might still be useful. At the very least, it lays out the feat structure and a checklist to work towards.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

How useful is True Strike at level 1? Only the one Ray and maybe a crossbow to make it worthwhile. If there's some other spell that you'd want in your book at this stage (Color Spray or Silent Image, maybe), I'd pick it over True Strike.

Also, agreed with sonofzeal that setting down the level-20 build first might still be useful. At the very least, it lays out the feat structure and a checklist to work towards.

You already have a Will SoL in Sleep, and easier to aim, so at this level, Color Spray is less useful. I will give you that Silent Image can replace True Strike, however the combo True Strike and Ray of Enfeeblement can be used in tandem to disable someone who thought to try to pit him up against a 1st level Monk.

[sonofzeal]

For feats, item creation is going to be controversial. XP is a river, yes, but standard practice is that you have to earn that xp in-game by being lower level. For the purposes of this build, I think it's best we avoid that. We're unlikely to have gp problems, and crafting just complicates everything. A truly optimized Wizard probably crafts his own stuff, but I think for the purposes of generating a "Standard Wizard" we should avoid that. It'll be plenty powerful anyway.



FEATS (in no particular order)

(B) Scribe Scroll
(B) Extend Spell
(B) Silent Spell
(B) Still Spell
(B) Quicken Spell

(H) Improved Initiative
(1) Empower Spell
(3) Heighten Spell
(6) Spell Focus: Illusion {any better options?}
(9) Greater Spell Focus: Illusion {any better options?}
(12) Spell Penetration
(15) Greater Spell Penetration
(18) Great Fortitude



- Illusion was chosen for Spell Focus because it's one of the most DC-dependent schools out there, but still a good one.

- Order isn't really established. Any suggestions?

- I honestly got kind of desperate for choices towards the end there, but there's probably better options even in Core. This is just a basic template list from which we can make exchanges.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Are we getting into Candle of Invocation cheese here?

[sonofzeal]

Are we getting into Candle of Invocation cheese here?
I would assume not. I would also assume we're ignoring Planar Binding cheese, Astral Projection cheese, Wish economy, and Shapechanging to gain 20th level spellcasting in other classes. Basically, I'm going to assume we're trying to do this in a way that, while powerful, avoids cheese and cheap "I win" buttons. Not that he won't win anyway, but let's at least keep things within reason.

[Superglucose]

I think the Core PrC progression is pretty obvious:
Wizard 7/Loremaster 10/Archmage 3, taking Mastery of Shaping and Spell-Like Ability (Time Stop) as well as Spell-Like Ability (Shapechange)

Probably do Conjurer 7 just to keep those upper level slots from being swamped in Shapechange and Timestop.

EDIT: If we're going to do an out of core generalist, it must be a Grey Elf using the Elven Generalist sub levels. I'd say it'd be the non-multiclassing wizard.

[AgentPaper]

We're doing an in-core straight wizard generalist, and an out of core straight generalist wizard, but the non-straight wizards don't need to be generalists.

I think the standard build for a level 20 wizard in core is easy enough to construct that we don't need a complete picture of the level 20 wizard to figure out what we want at the lower levels, and if we start at level 1, it's less likely that we'll choose some option or spells at that point because it'll be good later on at the cost of being worthless or near-worthless now. (Mostly in terms of spell selection, though)

And you're right, that 1 point of int does make it 5% harder for your spells to be resisted, which can be important, but so is that couple more points of HP and 1 AC when those are your only defenses at this level, and so is 5% more likely to hit with touch attack spells, which are some of the most powerful spells in the game.

[sonofzeal]

More spells.....


1st Level

Grease
Alarm
Protection from Evil
Identify


2nd Level

Rope Trick
Mirror Image
Glitterdust
Web



3rd Level

Protection from Energy
Displacement
Ray of Exhaustion
Haste


4th Level

Dimensional Anchor
Black Tentacles
Solid Fog
Enervation


5th Level

Cloudkill
Teleport
Contact Other Plane
Overland Flight

[Superglucose]

And you're right, that 1 point of int does make it 5% harder for your spells to be resisted, which can be important, but so is that couple more points of HP and 1 AC when those are your only defenses at this level, and so is 5% more likely to hit with touch attack spells, which are some of the most powerful spells in the game.
Um... it's lose 1 HP and gain one AC at low levels, at high levels it's "Oh wait I have 9th level spells, whatever." In any case the typical 32 point buy human wizard is

STR: 8
DEX: 16
CON: 14
INT: 18
WIS: 8
CHA: 8

You can pull that off with elf, I'll let you guess how.

The main reason for plugging the out of core generalist to be an elven generalist is that the Races of the Wild substitution levels are really good. Adds a lot of free spells to the list (2 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th as well as 4 9th) which, I'll admit, isn't that noticeable at 20th (seriously 12 9th level spells), but at third level you're often stuck between choosing Glitterdust or Web.

Plus if you're going straight wizard, you'll have good use of your familiar and the Elven sub levels make familiars slightly more powerful.

[Kurald Galain]

Why do people always assume level 20 for such thought exercises?

Level 20 isn't common: the vast majority of campaigns play at lower or much lower levels. Level 20 isn't the limit either, as characters can easily be of higher level (although yes, epic magic pretty much defies the point of the exercise). Also, level 20 gets a ludicrous amount of WBL, so even a Commoner/20 can shine using the right sets of magical items.

Simply put, level 20 is not a very reliable base for comparing characters.

[Saph]

Level 20 and venerable age is about as non-standard as you can get. I've never seen a game starting at level 20, ever.

Beyond that, I think you need to figure out what you mean by "standard". Do you mean "this is a fairly average sort of Wizard of the kind you're likely to run across in an actual game"? Or do you mean: "this is an optimisation exercise designed to show that I'm right and you're wrong"?

[sonofzeal]

Level 20 and venerable age is about as non-standard as you can get. I've never seen a game starting at level 20, ever.

Beyond that, I think you need to figure out what you mean by "standard". Do you mean "this is a fairly average sort of Wizard of the kind you're likely to run across in an actual game"? Or do you mean: "this is an optimisation exercise designed to show that I'm right and you're wrong"?
I think it's "here's a build we can reference when comparing Wizards to other classes", because otherwise you run into Schrodinger's Wizard trouble. Since many such comparisons happen at 20th level, this should be up there too. It's also far easier to extrapolate downwards rather than upwards, so it's fairly easy to generate, say, a lvl 10 version if needed. If we made a lvl 10 version and someone wanted to compare at lvl 15, that'd be a lot more work.

[Saph]

I think it's "here's a build we can reference when comparing Wizards to other classes"

Yes, but is it a build of a kind you're likely to ever actually run across in a real game? Or is it a theoretical exercise designed to show that "Wizards are better"?

Most of the Wizard vs X threads I see on these forums are, IMO, completely useless as a reference to actual tabletop games, partly because they keep on being set at level 20 and partly because they're focused on PvP.

[sonofzeal]

Yes, but is it a build of a kind you're likely to ever actually run across in a real game? Or is it a theoretical exercise designed to show that "Wizards are better"?

Most of the Wizard vs X threads I see on these forums are, IMO, completely useless as a reference to actual tabletop games, partly because they keep on being set at level 20 and partly because they're focused on PvP.
Good points, all.

But... whatever you say, those threads and discussions are going to go right on coming up, with all the same problems. We'll always get lvl 20 PvP threads, and neither you nor I have much chance changing that.

We can, however, try to get a better idea of what a lvl 20 Wizard actually looks like. I've been on this forum for years, and listened to many of those discussions, and I still don't really know beyond "omg he knows everything ever and has every spell and every defense always active and always the right offence to beat everyone's defense". Or something like that. I'm participating here because I'm honestly rather curious just how close he'll get to that standard. My guess is, not very, but I'm willing to be surprised.

[Saph]

We can, however, try to get a better idea of what a lvl 20 Wizard actually looks like. I've been on this forum for years, and listened to many of those discussions, and I still don't really know beyond "omg he knows everything ever and has every spell and every defense always active and always the right offence to beat everyone's defense". Or something like that. I'm participating here because I'm honestly rather curious just how close he'll get to that standard. My guess is, not very, but I'm willing to be surprised.

The thing is, there's not much consistency about what any level 20 character will look like, because D&D 3.5 allows for so much customisation.

In general, the list of things that a level 20 wizard is expected to do in a party is some combination of artillery, party buffing, enemy debuffing, battlefield control, utility spells, knowledge monkey, and item creation. A well-build wizard will be able to do all of them to some extent, but there's no correct way to prioritise between them.

[sonofzeal]

The thing is, there's not much consistency about what any level 20 character will look like, because D&D 3.5 allows for so much customisation.

In general, the list of things that a level 20 wizard is expected to do in a party is some combination of artillery, party buffing, enemy debuffing, battlefield control, utility spells, knowledge monkey, and item creation. A well-build wizard will be able to do all of them to some extent, but there's no correct way to prioritise between them.
Of course. We can still get a general picture though. What will (hopefully) get produced is something that isn't the total-optimization be-all-end-all Wizard, more just a suitable benchmark of what one should reasonably expect from a Wizard of that level. Of course a specialist Necromancer is going to look rather different, as is a specialist Transmuter or Evoker, or even a generalist who's maybe focussed on Rays or on utility or something else. However, except for the most exceedingly-focused builds, they're all going to have at least some degree of similarity.

Take the spells I've chosen - not all wizards of the appropriate level will have all of those, but most Wizards will probably have a good solid chunk of them, and looking at that spell list will give someone a general idea of what to expect.

(It also functions as a template from which to build PC Wizards for actual games. I know I'll be checking that spell list next time I put a Wizard together, and then deviating from it accordingly)

[Math_Mage]

Level 20 and venerable age is about as non-standard as you can get. I've never seen a game starting at level 20, ever.

Beyond that, I think you need to figure out what you mean by "standard". Do you mean "this is a fairly average sort of Wizard of the kind you're likely to run across in an actual game"? Or do you mean: "this is an optimisation exercise designed to show that I'm right and you're wrong"?

Yes. :smallcool:

The fact that the build is progressing from level 1 up, and is going straight Wizard rather than trying to optimize PrC entry, is an indication that this is supposed to be a *reasonably* optimized Wizard that you could *reasonably* expect to run across in an actual game. This is almost exactly why I suggested building from the ground up in the first place--to make sure this theoretical exercise had some practical application in actual character creation situations.

In any case, this is not a thread to show what *all* wizards are capable of in *all* situations, but to show what *most* wizards are capable of in *most* situations. If that means a lot of mageslayer builds get shot down by pointing to this thread as an example of what an ordinary wizard will do to them, well, what did you expect? :smallwink:

[lesser_minion]

I think the most useful thing you can really get out of this sort of exercise is a basic list of general-purpose spells - basically, spells that it would be reasonable to see in play regardless of what the wizard knows about his opponents.

At level 11, for example, Contingency is almost guaranteed (CCS does exist, but has no place in serious discussion), and you'll probably see lots of fly and/or overland flight spells around as well.

[Runestar]

Here are sample builds for a non-core wizard at lvs 5, 10 and 15, courtesy of treantmonk's god thread.

Despite what you may have read elsewhere - wizards do not have every spell they need whenever they need it. The goal of building your Wizard with Focused Specialist and Maxing out Int is to have as many as possible.

The next trick is to have the right spells in your slots. You can keep open slots which you can fill later in the day if you want - that comes down to personal play style. I tend to fill all my slots right away so they can be cast on a moments notice.

I'll give some examples of memorizations for a the Versitile Caster/Focused Specialist conjurer example above. I'll use a few different levels (5th, 10th, 15th) to give perspective.

5th level: Slots: 0: 6, 1: 7, 2: 5, 3: 4

0: Caltropsx3, Detect Magic, Light, Mage Hand
1: Mage Armor, Wall of Smoke, Grease x2, Expeditious Retreat (swift), Targeting Ray, Silent Image
2: Web, Glitterdust, Cloud of Bewilderment, Rope Trick, Invisibility
3: Stinking Cloud, Glitterdust (Sculpt spell meta), Bands of Steel, Haste

Recommended Magic Items: Rod of Extend (lesser), Wand of Benign Transposition, Cloak of Resistance (+1), Headband of Intellect (Totals 8750gp) (The Rod is probably your first priority here - the Cloak of Resistance is the most expendable)

Recommended Strategy: You aren't high enough level to just blow all your spells yet. Start each battle with one of your 3rd level memorizations and then assess your situation. If it should be easy going from here on, then cast down some caltrops and make use of your cloudy conjuration feat for minor battlefield control. If things are tough - go into 2nd and 1st level spells in following rounds. Keep at least 1 Glitterdust or Cloud of Bewilderment in reserve in case there are more combats than you expected.

10th Level: Memorizations: 0: 6, 1: 8, 2: 8, 3: 7, 4: 6, 5: 5

0: As level 5 example
1: Mage Armor, Wall of Smoke, Grease, Expeditious Retreat (swift), Targeting Ray, Silent Image, Blockade x2
2: Web, Glitterdust x2 (sculpt meta for free on both), Cloud of Bewilderment, Rope Trick, Invisibility, Create Magic Tattoo, Fog Cloud
3: Bands of Steel, Haste x2, Corpse Candle, Stinking Cloud, Dimension step, Mage Armor (greater)
4: Dimension Door, Solid Fog, Bloodstar, Wall of Sand, Assay Spell Resistance, Celerity
5: Teleport, Cloudkill, Wall of Stone, Overland Flight (extend for free), Wall of Good

Recommended magic items: Rod of extend (lesser), Headband of Intellect (+4), Pearls of power - level 1 (x 5), Rod of silent spell (lesser), Heward's handy haversack, Heward's fortifying bedroll, Amulet of health (+2), Cloak of Resistance (+2), Wand of True Casting (Total gp value: 39,750 - leaves some extra room for incedentals)

Recommended strategy: You now have a lot more spells. Use your rod of extend on your greater mage armor and your Create Magic Tattoo at the beginning of the day.

Cast blockades or swift expeditious whenever they're helpful and recover them with pearls of power. Start battles with a 4th or 5th level spell. Follow it up with 1st or 2nd level spells in following rounds. Use cloudy conjuration for defense (place in front of you). You stillcan't just waste spells or you will still run out - but you can nova at need without completely draining yourself.

You also have spellpool to swap out spells as required. Use it.

15th Level: Memorizations: 0: 6, 1: 8, 2: 8, 3: 8, 4: 8, 5: 8, 6: 6, 7: 5, 8: 4

0: As level 5 example
1: Wall of Smoke, Grease, Expeditious Retreat (swift)x2, Targeting Ray, Silent Image, Blockade x2
2: Web, Glitterdust x2 (sculpt meta on both for free), Cloud of Bewilderment, Rope Trick, Invisibility, Create Magic Tattoo, Fog Cloud
3: Haste x2, Corpse Candle, Stinking Cloud, Dimension step, Mage Armor (greater), Phantom Steed x2
4: Dimension Door, Solid Fog, Bloodstar, Wall of Sand, Assay Spell Resistance x2, Celerity x2
5: Teleport, Cloudkill, Wall of Stone, Wall of Good, Friend to Foe, Evacuation Rune, Shadow Evocation (sculpt for free), Transmute Rock to Mud
6: Freezing Fog x2, Tunnel Swallow, True Seeing, Antimagic Field, Dispel Magic (Greater)
7: Stun Ray (Extend for free), Choking Cobwebs (CS) (Sculpt Spell for free), Summon Monster VII, Brilliant Aura, Reverse Gravity
8: Maze, Plane Shift (Greater), Deadly Lahar (CS - huge cone slow effect), Chain Dispel

Recommended magic items: Ring of Feather Fall, Ring of Enduring Arcana, Headband of Intellect (+6), Amulet of health (+4), Metamagic Rod of Quicken (lesser), Metamagic Rod of Extend (lesser), Metamagic rod of Silent Spell (lesser), Heward's handy haversack, Heward's fortifying bedroll, and treat yourself to a nice metamagic rod as well. Should have lots left over for whatever else you like.

Recommended strategy: You are now flying at 240' on your phantom steed all day. The second is in case the first goes down. There are more spells on the list that simply enhance other spells (Celerity, Assay spell resistance) - since you can now afford more castings of these type of spells. There are lots of Battlefield controls, Buffs and Debuffs on the list. Use mid level spells for most battles - plus you can afford a high level spell for every battle with some left for reserve.

[Tyndmyr]

I think the Core PrC progression is pretty obvious:
Wizard 7/Loremaster 10/Archmage 3, taking Mastery of Shaping and Spell-Like Ability (Time Stop) as well as Spell-Like Ability (Shapechange)

Probably do Conjurer 7 just to keep those upper level slots from being swamped in Shapechange and Timestop.

EDIT: If we're going to do an out of core generalist, it must be a Grey Elf using the Elven Generalist sub levels. I'd say it'd be the non-multiclassing wizard.

This or something like this. A wizard might play around with red wizard, but most builds are going to end up with loremaster or archmage in a core environment, without any crazy optimization.

They'll likely have a few metamagic feats, and probably one or two magic item crafting feats. Frankly, there just isn't that many caster feats in core. Improved Init can be assumed.

Specialist is reasonably likely. Those extra spell slots have always been considered pretty potent, and while in core, specializing limits options to some extent, taking that hit for more spellpower isn't that unusual, especially at early levels, or if your DM tends not to give many scrolls.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Another thing which needs to be addressed:

Is this a 'solo wizard vs the world' kind of guy, or is he 'party wizard who also supports and enhances his party' kind of guy. Because the two are built differently, and use different spells.

Best spell in 3rd level for solo action in Core? Stinking Cloud (or Slow)
Best spell in 3rd level for party action in Core? Haste.

non-core, PrC Wizard would likely have War Weaver + Uncanny Trickster + something else to end up with 9th level spells in the Weave. Probably splash n dash in Incantatrix to get free metamagic.

Non-Core PrC Solo Wizard would likely have Incantatrix and Iot7V.

It's a different build focus, with different things being important. And people are going to attack this difference, because no one plays D&D without others playing with him, therefore the 'solo wizard' build is 'silly, designed exclusively for PvP arena combat, and not a realistic projection of what a 'real' wizard would have'. Yadda yadda yadda.

I think an interesting side-challenge would be to make a Wizard who could help a group of NPC-build characters defeat higher CR challenges, graded on how much higher the CR is.

[Lycanthromancer]

The thing is that any wizard can reasonably be a Schroedinger's Wizard, pulling out the exact spell he needs any time he needs it.

The reason? Scribe Scroll. Wizards can conceivably get more use out of this one feat than any other, building up their arsenal both to have the perfect spell for any situation and in case something happens to their paranoidally-protected spellbook (since they can rescribe).

Any reasonable wizard's wealth should be tied up in crafted scrolls and their spellbook (though branching out to a few items that enhance their casting, such as metamagic rods, rods of absorption, pearls of power, and rings of wizardry) are heavily encouraged.

So yes. A wizard can pull any spell in his spell book out of his arse hat, and thus the circle of Schroedinger continues unabated.

[Beorn080]

A rather basic question, but does anyone have any actual straight wizards they've played to 20? I think seeing an actual, in game straight wizards character sheet would help.

The problem with schrodinger's wizard is that you should never reasonably see one in any game. If the DM is using one effectively, well the PCs don't really have a chance without some massive cheese or DM assist. If a PC is playing one, in a "standard" party, well it pretty much becomes Wizard with packmules vs the world.

So, could we get a few lvl 20 wizards that have seen actual game time? I think that might help with this exercise.

[Saph]

Well, I had a wizard I played from level 2 up through level 12 a few years back. That's the widest level range I've ever done with an arcane caster.

My current wizard's up to level 5 and might break the level 12 mark, but that's a Pathfinder game instead.

[AgentPaper]

The point of this exercise is to create a "normal" wizard, as much as that can be done. This is supposed to be a wizard you wouldn't be surprised to come across in a "normal" game of D&D. He will be optimized in a practical sense, trying to be effective in whatever he's needed in, but not in a theoretical sense, giving up everything else to be absurdly good at one thing.

He should be functional both in a party and without, but the focus will likely be more in a party environment, since that is more common and likely. For this first wizard, I want to keep everything core and non-exotic, as something to point to when someone claims that wizards are only powerful with other books, or when they use weird races or PrCs or feats.

To this end, his build is Human Wizard 20, with no bells or whistles. We will also build another wizard, using other races and PrCs and so on, though still core, to show just how broken a wizard can be in core, while still being a completely functional (and absurdly powerful) character in a campaign.

Anyways, right now we're focusing on level 1. It's definitely a good point that most games don't even get to level 20, and while we want our wizard to be good at that level as well, the lower levels are more important, because that's where most games take place, and where optimization is most needed. Once you get to level 20, it really doesn't matter much whether you have 5 nuclear devices or 6.


Anyways, from what I've seen so far, I'm thinking this as our level 1 wizard:

Human Wizard 1

Str: 8
Con: 14
Dex: 16
Int: 17
Wis: 8
Cha: 8

Feats:
[H]: Improved Initiative
[L1]: Extend Spell
: Scribe Scroll

Spells Known:
[B]Level 0:
All
Level 1:
Grease
Mage Armor
Enlarge Person
Identify
Sleep
Ray of Enfeeblement
Silent Image
[B]Protection from Evil

Spells Prepared:
[B]Level 0:
Prestidigitation
Detect Magic
Ghost Sound
Level 1:
Grease
Sleep


How does this look? I chose grease and sleep because they're all around good, in PvP, in a party, or solo, though in any one of those you'd probably want to prepare Ray of Enfeeblement, Enlarge Person, and Mage Armor, respectively, as one of your choices. Identify is there to be prepared the day after you find some magic item, or in your down time.

The [B] spells are ones bought with the starting money, and so can't be assumed to be had, since not all DMs allow you to just buy scrolls like that. It's mostly a good place for runner-up spells and such.

So, does this look good as a starting point for our build? Or does someone see something that should be tweaked?

[Draz74]

First: 29-point build? :smallconfused:

Second: In my experience, if point-buy is used and a Wizard player is an optimizer at all, he will buy 18 Intelligence. Maybe he shouldn't, but he probably will.

Third: While I think the suggestion earlier of Venerable was a little extreme, I think it's sensible to consider whether our example Wizard(s) could be Middle-Aged.

Fourth: I think the dogged dedication to being Human is silly, if we're doing more than one Wizard. If you're committed to drawing up four Wizards, for example, then I could see two Humans, one Gray Elf, and one Gnome or something. But not four Humans.

Fifth: I definitely disagree with the Core-Only, no-PrC, Generalist Wizard. If these builds are supposed to represent practical optimization ... well, specializing is one of the very basic principles of optimizing a Wizard. If you really want a Core-Only Generalist, for some reason, at least let him be the guy with PrCs.

I might suggest something like the following, keeping to your idea of 2 Core-Onlys and 2 pureclass:


Gnome Illusionist 20
Human Conjurer 7/Loremaster 10/Archmage 3
Gray Elf Generalist Wizard 20
Lesser Tiefling Conjurer 3/Master Specialist 10/Mindbender 1/Fatespinner 4/Divine Oracle 2 (or something)


But if you really want to avoid this level of optimization, you can change the Tiefling into a Human, and change the Loremaster/Archmage into a Generalist. Still, I think I've avoided any of the usual insanities that generally push Wizards from Practical Optimization into Theoretical Optimization.

[Lycanthromancer]

Don't forget to make the wizard's hat a (possibly permanencied) shrink item'd cone-or-dome-shaped piece of wood. Protects against AMFs, and if you have a raven familiar it can ready an action to deflect one attack per round.

[AgentPaper]

The first wizard we're making is going to be human. This is to keep things simple, and really, it's not much of a big deal. Humans are some of the best wizards anyways, after all.

The shrink item deal is more of a trick, one that the wizard will likely use, but won't come into play until later on, so you can suggest shrink item and permanency once we get the wizard to a point where he can use those.

Once we have this human generalist wizard up to 20, we'll make one that makes use of other races and PrCs and specialization, but first I want to get this basic build settled.

[Draz74]

Once we have this human generalist wizard up to 20, we'll make one that makes use of other races and PrCs and specialization, but first I want to get this basic build settled.

Human, fine. But why generalist? That's "deliberately gimping" one's self in my book.

[mostlyharmful]

This or something like this. A wizard might play around with red wizard, but most builds are going to end up with loremaster or archmage in a core environment, without any crazy optimization.

They'll likely have a few metamagic feats, and probably one or two magic item crafting feats. Frankly, there just isn't that many caster feats in core. Improved Init can be assumed.

Specialist is reasonably likely. Those extra spell slots have always been considered pretty potent, and while in core, specializing limits options to some extent, taking that hit for more spellpower isn't that unusual, especially at early levels, or if your DM tends not to give many scrolls.

funny you should mention that, I'm using basically exactly that at the moment as a model 'normal' Wiz, see here. (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=143324)

And I thought there was a general rule of using cindy (http://www.thetangledweb.net/forums/profiler/view_char.php?cid=5890) as the starting point for an out of core build?

[Superglucose]

What we should be doing (if we want to do this) is to start the wizard at level 1 with a 28 point buy and explain what you do at each level. That way we show how the wizard progresses over 20 levels.

For instance:

Human Conjurer (drop Evoc/Ench):

STR: 8
DEX: 14
CON: 14
INT: 18
WIS: 8
CHA: 8

Wizard 1: Take Empower Spell, Spell Focus: Conjuration and Skill Focus: Knowledge (Arcana) have Scribe Scroll
Wizard 2
Wizard 3: Spell Focus: Illusion
Wizard 4 (+int)
Wizard 5: Extend Spell
Wizard 6: Craft Wondrous Item
Wizard 7
Wizard 7/Loremaster 1: +int, Lore of True Stamina
Wizard 7/Loremaster 2: Quicken Spell
Wizard 7/Loremaster 3: Lore of Applicable Knowledge (Skill Focus: Spellcraft)
Wizard 7/Loremaster 4: Bonus Language: Druidic (for the lulz)
Wizard 7/Loremaster 5: +int, Craft Ring, Lore of More Newfound Arcana (Invisibility)
Wizard 7/Loremaster 6:
Wizard 7/Loremaster 7: Lore of Newfound Arcana (Reduce Person)
Wizard 7/Loremaster 8: Improved Initiative
Wizard 7/Loremaster 9: Secrets of Inner Strength, +int
Wizard 7/Loremaster 10:
Wizard 7/Loremaster 10/Archmage 1: Spell Penetration, Mastery of Shaping
Wizard 7/Loremaster 10/Archmage 2: Spell-Like Ability (Time Stop)
Wizard 7/Loremaster 10/Archmage 3: +int, Spell-Like Ability (Shapechange)

spells and the level I scribe them:

Protection From X
Identify
True Strike
Comprehend Languages
Grease
Color Spray
Ray of Enfeeblement
Enlarge Person

Level 2:
Magic Weapon, Feather Fall

Level 3:
Web, Detect Thoughts

Level 4:
Glitterdust, See Invisibility

Level 5:
Stinking Cloud, Haste

Level 6:
Tongues, Fly

Level 7:
Black Tentacles, Scrying

Level 8:
Enervation, Dimension Door

Level 9:
Cloudkill, Baleful Polymorph

Level 10:
Overland Flight, Teleport

Level 11:
Acid Fog, Disintegrate

Level 12:
True Seeing, Greater Dispel Magic

Level 13:
Plane Shift, Ethereal Jaunt

Level 14:
Finger of Death, Greater Teleport

Level 15:
Mind Blank, Prismatic Wall

Level 16:
Discern Location, Maze

level 17:
Prismatic Sphere, Time Stop

Level 18:
Gate, Shapechange

Level 19:
Astral Projection, Foresight

Level 20:
Disjunction, Wish

EDIT: MOSTLYHARMFUL! I need to apologize, it turns out I *did* have revivify prepared, I'm sorry :smallredface:

[Tao the Ninja]

EDIT: If we're going to do an out of core generalist, it must be a Grey Elf using the Elven Generalist sub levels. I'd say it'd be the non-multiclassing wizard.

I prefer Fire Elf.

[Superglucose]

Some kind of +int elf and elven generalist, happy? :smallbiggrin:

[Kurald Galain]

Anyways, from what I've seen so far, I'm thinking this as our level 1 wizard:

Human Wizard 1

Why isn't he specialized? I've only very rarely seen wizards that don't specialize, either for flavor or power, and especially at low levels the extra spells per day are an excellent deal. The common choices being conjuration or transmutation, predictably.



[H]: Improved Initiative
[L1]: Extend Spell
I'm not sure I'd take Extend Spell at level one consider you can't actually use it until you get 2nd level spell slots. I'm not sure about imp init either, although it sure is effective. How about Collegiate Wizard, that's pretty standard?

I'm not sure you'll find enough magical items at level one to warrant spending a slot on identify, either. You'd buy it at some later point, I'm sure.

[Draz74]

Why isn't he specialized? I've only very rarely seen wizards that don't specialize, either for flavor or power, and especially at low levels the extra spells per day are an excellent deal. The common choices being conjuration or transmutation, predictably.
Or Divination, though that's more popular outside of Core where Divination spells themselves become a lot more diverse.

But yeah, thanks for backing up my point in general.


I'm not sure I'd take Extend Spell at level one consider you can't actually use it until you get 2nd level spell slots.
Well, technically you can use it to extend Cantrips, but you're right, it's not a normal Level 1 choice.


I'm not sure about imp init either, although it sure is effective. How about Collegiate Wizard, that's pretty standard?

And non-Core. :smalltongue:

[AgentPaper]

Ok ok, fine, we'll specialize. Conjuration with enchantment and evocation dropped seemed like a fine idea. As for Extend Spell, I took it mostly because I couldn't find anything else really at first level. It'd be perfect to instead take at level 3 or 5, though, if we can find something else that will be of more use. (while still being core, remember)

[mostlyharmful]

If you're doing a standerd Core build looking ahead to the long term (high level) build in core the early levels are a good time to pick up the Spell Focus (Illusion, Transmutation or Conjuration) feats since you'll need them for the predictable PrC and the extra +1 on your standerd attack spells are actually darn useful.

[Superglucose]

Well I posted my 1-20 build for core-only wizard :P

Lots of spells I want to have but don't quite have room for.

[Draz74]

OK, sweet, so we're looking at Human Conjurer 20, Core-Only, banned Enchantment and Evocation.

Feats I'd consider for Level 1:

Improved Initiative
Skill Focus (concentration)
Spell Focus (conjuration or illusion)
Spell Penetration


I'd probably take any of those ahead of the ability to Extend a cantrip. It's not a big list, I grant you that.

On the other hand, I rarely take Extend Spell in general, just because Lesser Metamagic (Extend) Rods are so nice and cheap. :smallsmile:

For a full feat list, I'd nominate something like this:

1B) Scribe Scroll
1) Improved Initiative
H) Skill Focus (concentration)
3) Craft Wondrous Item
5B) Empower Spell
6) Improved Familiar
9) Quicken Spell
10B) Still Spell
12) Spell Penetration
15) Greater Spell Penetration
15B) Maximize Spell
18) Extend Spell
20B) Craft Rod

[Tyndmyr]

A rather basic question, but does anyone have any actual straight wizards they've played to 20? I think seeing an actual, in game straight wizards character sheet would help.

The problem with schrodinger's wizard is that you should never reasonably see one in any game. If the DM is using one effectively, well the PCs don't really have a chance without some massive cheese or DM assist. If a PC is playing one, in a "standard" party, well it pretty much becomes Wizard with packmules vs the world.

So, could we get a few lvl 20 wizards that have seen actual game time? I think that might help with this exercise.

I've never actually played a wizard from 1 to 20. I currently have a level 11 that I've played from 1, and which may make it to 20, but it's not your typical, blasty wizard.

[Noedig]

I've been perusing this thread for a couple of days, and as a noob to the site, I've got a few questions.
1. What is Schrodinger's Wizard exactly? I see the term a lot and there is never an explantation.
2. If no one has actually played a human wizard from 1 to 20, after a certain level doesnt this all become theoretical? I mean certainly there is the ability to *predict* what will happen, but there are a myriad of other variables that can drastically change a given concept.
3. What about the DM? All DM's are different, and therefore run different games. His/Her unique way of controlling a game tosses a whole slew of problems at you, and you are forced to adapt, not in the way you wish, but in a way that fits your current situation be it a single battle, or an entire campaign.

[mostlyharmful]

I've been perusing this thread for a couple of days, and as a noob to the site, I've got a few questions.
1. What is Schrodinger's Wizard exactly? I see the term a lot and there is never an explantation.

A wizard under discussion that hasn't finalized their build or spell selection until after they know what they're up against, a term used to call posters on allowing their hypothetical mages too much flexibility when it's exactly that pre-picking of feats, spells, etc... that acts as a limiting factor on wizards.


2. If no one has actually played a human wizard from 1 to 20, after a certain level doesnt this all become theoretical? I mean certainly there is the ability to *predict* what will happen, but there are a myriad of other variables that can drastically change a given concept.

Few games play all the way through from 1st level to 20th, that's not to say that the issues of caster/non-caster power difference doesn't come up or that Wizards can't break the game pre-20th. The question of running 1st through to 20th is mostly about whether the 20th level builds are realistic in terms of being produced by actual gameplay and not slapped together knowing they don't have to wade through the early levels with just Skill Focus (Spellcraft) and unusable Meta feats...


3. What about the DM? All DM's are different, and therefore run different games. His/Her unique way of controlling a game tosses a whole slew of problems at you, and you are forced to adapt, not in the way you wish, but in a way that fits your current situation be it a single battle, or an entire campaign.

This is traditionally regarded as a caster strength, given there's so many more options and compensaters in magic than in the rest of the game it's exactly this that is held to give magic users an edge.

[Tyndmyr]

I've been perusing this thread for a couple of days, and as a noob to the site, I've got a few questions.
1. What is Schrodinger's Wizard exactly? I see the term a lot and there is never an explantation.
2. If no one has actually played a human wizard from 1 to 20, after a certain level doesnt this all become theoretical? I mean certainly there is the ability to *predict* what will happen, but there are a myriad of other variables that can drastically change a given concept.
3. What about the DM? All DM's are different, and therefore run different games. His/Her unique way of controlling a game tosses a whole slew of problems at you, and you are forced to adapt, not in the way you wish, but in a way that fits your current situation be it a single battle, or an entire campaign.

2. Nah. I've never actually played any one character for 20 consecutive levels. I think 15 is my record. However, Ive played a LOT of characters, some of which are very similar to each other. Many started at level 1, one started at level 19, one started in epic levels. Many started somewhere in the middle. So, high level play isn't just theoretical.

3. The whole point of a wizard is that they are flexible enough to adapt without having to rebuild from scratch. If your DM likes to use fireball, you'll likely run fire resist. If your DM likes to use grappling, you'll be a big fan of dimension door and freedom of movement. Spells enable you to prepare for things by simply learning and prepping different spells. Other characters need to change concepts much more radically.

[Kurald Galain]

1. What is Schrodinger's Wizard exactly? I see the term a lot and there is never an explantation.
It means that he always has the exact things you need in the current situation, and casts doubt on the likelihood of that. On the one hand, there are some obvious utility spells that pretty much every wizard uses, like Fly and Dispel Magic. On the other hand, there is some pretty obscure stuff that may require heavy investment.

If a wizard can be built that does X, and a wizard can be built that does Y, is it also easy to build a wizard that does both in a short period of time? The answer is that, to a certain extent, he can: if X requires four spell slots, and Y requires three, then a moderate level wizard can do both, and have slots left over for V, W and Z.

The flipside of this is Schrodinger's Fighter (or Monk, or Barbarian, or whatnot). If a fighter can be built that does X, and a fighter can be built that does Y, is it also easy to build a fighter that does both? The answer is generally "no", because it would require him to retrain several feats, rearrange his skill points or even ability scores, and maybe take different equipment.


2. If no one has actually played a human wizard from 1 to 20, after a certain level doesnt this all become theoretical?
Yes. It appears that campaigns above level 10 are uncommon, and campaigns above level 15 are very rare.

[Mushroom Ninja]

Yes. It appears that campaigns above level 10 are uncommon, and campaigns above level 15 are very rare.

I've always found this strange since, of the semi-regularly meeting campaigns that I run/play in, there are two at 18-20th level, three are at 10-12th level, and one is at 3rd level.

[Tyndmyr]

Shrodinger's isn't entirely limited to wizards...it tends to come up in class vs class comparisons...

Well obviously, the fighter would have mage slayer.
Well obviously, the wizard would have abrupt jaunt, and thus, never be threatened.
Well obviously, the fighter would be using a spiked chain, and thus, still reach the wizard. And have a custom item of dimension lock.
Well obviously, the wizard would be able to five foot adjust before casting, and have a ring of counterspells, with dimension lock in it at all times.

It usually starts out reasonable, and quickly approaches ridicuousness. This is why it's generally better to compare actual finished builds, or pit two finished builds against each other or an equal challenge.

[Kurald Galain]

I've always found this strange since, of the semi-regularly meeting campaigns that I run/play in, there are two at 18-20th level, three are at 10-12th level, and one is at 3rd level.

38% of all statistics are made up :smallbiggrin:

[Tyndmyr]

I've always found this strange since, of the semi-regularly meeting campaigns that I run/play in, there are two at 18-20th level, three are at 10-12th level, and one is at 3rd level.

I believe this was a WOTC done survey, which was used to justify high level balance not being that important.

I dunno who got surveyed, or how it was done, but nobody I know was asked about it, and I know a rather good collection of roleplayers. Campaigns I've played in have a very wide level spread, in my experience. Relatively few start higher than 20, though, and level 1 probably has slightly more than average. Time in play, tho...Ive seen campaigns anywhere up to level 70+. Anything between 1 and 20 is relatively normal.

[Saph]

I mostly base my guesses on a poll I took on this site a while ago (back before the poll ability got shut down). The question was "What's the average level you play D&D at?" and the answers were:

Low (1-5): 31.91%
Low-Mid (6-10): 53.90%
Mid-High (11-15): 9.93%
High (16-20): 3.55%
Epic (21+): 0.71%

It matches closely with my own experience; I see lots of games starting at level 1, lots of games in the 5-10 range, a handful up to level 15, and hardly any beyond that.

[Kurald Galain]

I believe this was a WOTC done survey, which was used to justify high level balance not being that important.

Also, WOTC has at some point stated that 3E "just works" around levels 6-10 (or something like that, quoting from memory here) so that this is where players have the most fun. This was used to justify basing 4E on the way 3E plays in that level range. I'm not sure if this was survey-based or not, but obviously if people have the most fun in levels X through Y, then those levels would tend to be played more often. The inverse also holds.

[Tyndmyr]

Well, that poll suffers from a few problems.

First off, you said average level. Someone that plays in anything from level 1 to 20 will have an average level of...somewhere in the middle. This is begging for the 6-10 slot to be stuffed.

Secondly, it's a web based poll on a forum. Sample biases, self selection...

It tells you pretty much nothing about what proportion of games or characters are played at which levels.

[Tyndmyr]

Also, WOTC has at some point stated that 3E "just works" around levels 6-10 (or something like that, quoting from memory here) so that this is where players have the most fun. This was used to justify basing 4E on the way 3E plays in that level range. I'm not sure if this was survey-based or not, but obviously if people have the most fun in levels X through Y, then those levels would tend to be played more often. The inverse also holds.

They've said that...but frankly, unless they explain WHY they believe something to be true...Im quite skeptical. This is especially true when they are using this as a justification to sell something.

For instance, I feel that caster/melee imbalances can easily become apparent before level 10, and optimization differences can be felt in a party from level 1 onward.

[Saph]

Well, that poll suffers from a few problems.

First off, you said average level. Someone that plays in anything from level 1 to 20 will have an average level of...somewhere in the middle. This is begging for the 6-10 slot to be stuffed.

Secondly, it's a web based poll on a forum. Sample biases, self selection...

It tells you pretty much nothing about what proportion of games or characters are played at which levels.

It tells me a lot more than your own personal experience, which you were citing as meaningful data a few posts back. If you think you can do better, make your own. :smalltongue:

[Tyndmyr]

It tells me a lot more than your own personal experience, which you were citing as meaningful data a few posts back. If you think you can do better, make your own. :smalltongue:

No...it actually doesn't. The pural of anecdote is not data.

You're also using inference from the anecdotes. Thus, it's actually less accurate than the anecdotes themselves.

As for the backhanded charge of hypocrisy, I did not potray my experience as anything other than personal experiences of myself, and the gamers I know. It was not made in the context of "this is how all people play", it was in the context of "this is how people I know play, and I don't see anyone surveying them", calling into question the assumption that anyone has done meaningful survey of playstyles.

[Saph]

As for the backhanded charge of hypocrisy, I did not potray my experience as anything other than personal experiences of myself, and the gamers I know. It was not made in the context of "this is how all people play", it was in the context of "this is how people I know play, and I don't see anyone surveying them", calling into question the assumption that anyone has done meaningful survey of playstyles.

Yes, but it's also completely unhelpful. Questioning other people's anecdotes when all you've got is more anecdotes achieves nothing, and "calling assumptions into question" when you've got nothing to put in their place isn't particularly useful either. If you seriously think the subject is important, then put in some effort and get some data.

[lesser_minion]

I'd be tempted to keep evocation, if only because a lot of campaigns don't play to a high enough level that you aren't losing much. Even then, there are a few evocation spells that are worth keeping around on scrolls, and out of all evocation spells, the good ones are the ones that are least likely to work when duplicated.

Of course, you do have to figure out what to drop instead if you go down that route.

I'm pretty sure there's a school of thought out there that suggests avoiding Abjuration because a lot of it can be duplicated by a cleric. I'm not sure how far I subscribe to that, however.

[AgentPaper]

I'd be tempted to keep evocation, if only because a lot of campaigns don't play to a high enough level that you aren't losing much. Even then, there are a few evocation spells that are worth keeping around on scrolls, and out of all evocation spells, the good ones are the ones that are least likely to work when duplicated.

Of course, you do have to figure out what to drop instead if you go down that route.

I'm pretty sure there's a school of thought out there that suggests avoiding Abjuration because a lot of it can be duplicated by a cleric. I'm not sure how far I subscribe to that, however.

Actually, most of the actually useful stuff in evocation (Wind Wall, Contingency) is best duplicated by shadow evocation, because it's just as good as the normal spell, and shadow evocation essentially allows you to spontaneously cast from that slot, if I understand how it all works correctly.

However, I'm not sure I understand it completely, and if it doesn't really work like that, it might be worthwhile to consider banning some other school, though I don't think abjuration is a good choice. Perhaps necromancy? We already have at least one save-or-die in illusion with phantasmal killer, and probably more that I'm not remembering, so I don't think we actually lose that much. Undead minions probably fall under the category of "cheese" when used in the right way, and even when not abused, still isn't really something you expect the "typical" wizard to be doing, since it's evil and all.

[Draz74]

Yeah, if you want to drop Necromancy instead of Evocation, I think that's fine. Losing out on Enervation is painful, but not crucial unless you were planning to do all kinds of stacking-metamagic cheese on Enervation anyway (which you weren't). The rest of Necromancy really isn't a big deal.

It's not an optimal choice, but it shouldn't upset this Wizard build from its place as The Golden Standard to Compare Other Characters With. And it does prevent a slew of rules arguments about how well Shadow Evocation spells really can duplicate Evocation.

With both Necromancy and Enchantment gone, a lot of the best Will Save or Suck spells are gone (Fear, Confusion ...), but there are still a few that can cover the niche.

[lesser_minion]

Actually, most of the actually useful stuff in evocation (Wind Wall, Contingency) is best duplicated by shadow evocation, because it's just as good as the normal spell, and shadow evocation essentially allows you to spontaneously cast from that slot, if I understand how it all works correctly.

Shadow Wind Wall doesn't work at all - objects automatically succeed, and they aren't damaged by the spell, just deflected so that they miss. The same goes for any shadow wall - they don't block LoE, just movement, because objects are never affected.

Shadow contingency is about the only good shadow evocation spell, IIRC, and that means delaying access to it for four levels.

Admittedly, Shadow Resilient Sphere is not too bad as attack spells go (the target now suffers only the downsides of the spell), and GSE can give you forcecage as well.

[AgentPaper]

Shadow Wind Wall doesn't work at all - objects automatically succeed, and they aren't damaged by the spell, just deflected so that they miss. The same goes for any shadow wall - they don't block LoE, just movement, because objects are never affected.

Shadow contingency is about the only good shadow evocation spell, IIRC, and that means delaying access to it for four levels.

Admittedly, Shadow Resilient Sphere is not too bad as attack spells go (the target now suffers only the downsides of the spell), and GSE can give you forcecage as well.

Very true. I like the idea of using shadow resilient sphere/forcecage to hold someone in place while still being able to fill them with arrows or swords, or spells, and that's probably a good trick to use later on, but yes, there's just too many good evocation spells (read: All of the non-damaging ones) to give it up. Losing some of those will-based SoL spells will hurt, but not as much as losing contingency. (If I read the effects of Shadow Evocation right, shadow contingency only has a 60% chance of going off)

As for feats, Skill Focus (Concentration)? Really? Spell Penetration or spell focus on something is probably the way to go, though. Is there any school that really benefits from spell focus?

[lesser_minion]

Very true. I like the idea of using shadow resilient sphere/forcecage to hold someone in place while still being able to fill them with arrows or swords, or spells, and that's probably a good trick to use later on, but yes, there's just too many good evocation spells (read: All of the non-damaging ones) to give it up. Losing some of those will-based SoL spells will hurt, but not as much as losing contingency. (If I read the effects of Shadow Evocation right, shadow contingency only has a 60% chance of going off)

As for feats, Skill Focus (Concentration)? Really? Spell Penetration or spell focus on something is probably the way to go, though. Is there any school that really benefits from spell focus?

Shadow contingency is also rules-encumbered. I'm pretty sure allowing it to work blatantly contradicts "A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw". You can't exactly choose to fail a saving throw that is never taken.

Skill Focus(Concentration) is only ever suggested as an explanation of why Combat Casting is utterly worthless.

[Kurald Galain]

Shadow Evocation is also available several levels later than the spells usually intended to be mimicked with it. That's not a good thing if you're starting at level one.