PDA

View Full Version : A stereotypical wizard (3.5)



NM020110
2010-03-17, 08:49 PM
For the creation of a standard wizard effective in most situations; will the following build be sufficient?
http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=193191
What would you recommend to improve this without causing any prospective DM to attempt the removal of the sheet from existance?
First post...Please don't kill me!

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-17, 08:53 PM
For the creation of a standard wizard effective in most situations; will the following build be sufficient?
http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=193191
What would you recommend to improve this without causing any prospective DM to attempt the removal of the sheet from existance?
First post...Please don't kill me!

Not to rain on your parade, but when have we ever needed a level 1 example? Also change the attribute scores to

6
16/14/18
14/16/12
20
8
8

EDIT: wait, were you asking for build advice? Sorry, I thought this was about a thread a while ago where people were making a 'standard wizard' to avoid people calling 'Schrodinger's Wizard' to any build made.

Eldariel
2010-03-17, 08:56 PM
For the creation of a standard wizard effective in most situations; will the following build be sufficient?
http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=193191
What would you recommend to improve this without causing any prospective DM to attempt the removal of the sheet from existance?
First post...Please don't kill me!

What sources? Also, Level 1? Get some Dex in there. Your better defensive spells don't step into play for another couple of levels; Dex is very key early on. I'd also want more Con, but as a Gray Elf, that's a tad expensive.

It may be worth investing some ranks in Hide & Move Silently early on (with the to-be-added Dex) to ensure you have at least some chance of avoiding attacks. This "Erudite Wizard" confuses me greatly; are you a Wizard that learns spells as an Erudite or something?


Also, specialization is a good idea on level 1; the extra slot will come in more handy than anything else. Conjurer in particular is amazing with Abrupt Jaunt [PHBII] giving you incomparable defensive abilities for the level, especially with 20 Int.

Math_Mage
2010-03-17, 09:10 PM
How are ability scores set? If you can (say, you're in a point-buy system), go for more Dex and Con, reducing Str, Wis, and Cha to compensate. You want health, and you want to be able to hit with your rays.

Speaking of hitting with rays, True Strike (maybe not this early). Mage Armor for defense. Ray of Enfeeblement is a good debuff. Sleep is a win spell if you're starting at level 1. Enlarge Person is a great spell if you have a Big Stupid Fighter to use it on.

Are you planning on using the Elven Generalist substitution levels from Races of the Wild? If not, consider specialization or focused specialization. More spells/day, and the schools you give up shouldn't matter too much. The schools to drop would *probably* be Evocation, Enchantment, Necromancy, in that order--but it depends on what you want to do. Just don't drop Conjuration or Transmutation, as those are unequivocally the best schools a wizard has.

If you have a lot of extraneous skill points, consider cross-class Tumble and Balance.

There's loads and loads of further advice, but wizards are so broad that this wouldn't be productive. Here are a couple (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19873034/Treantmonks_guide_to_Wizards:_Being_a_God) of guides (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104002) to help you out. Good luck!

Godskook
2010-03-17, 09:13 PM
I'm unfamiliar with Eurudite Wizard. What is it?

Magic Weapon is....not a very good spell. It does very little, and what little it does do, isn't really called upon for a few levels, probably not until after you get reasons not to learn it(such as its bigger brother, who is useful, or actual magic weapons). Also, a cleric in the party can cast that with no opportunity 'cost', so let him do it, if you *really* think it is needed in your group.

Repair X Damage is not worth it at all unless you have a warforged in the party, and if you do, ugh.

I recommend not playing an illusionist your first time through with a wizard. They come in two categories, and neither is the greatest for beginners(Those being Killer Gnomes and a finesse illusionist. The latter is perfectly capable of defeating just about anything with an unmodified silent image. The former does it with a modified silent image) Try a conjurer for general fun.

Abrupt Jaunt will add to your survival as a Conjurer, allowing you to pick to not take hits when you don't want to. Barbarin is charging you? Jaunt away while he wastes his swing on nothing. PHBII, iirc. Costs your familiar, but is worth the trade.

Did you trade scribe scroll for improved initiative? If you did, you're missing a feat. If you didn't, do so, and pick a feat. Its a UA variant wizard.

Rope Trick isn't 'worth' it until you can cast it for 8 hours and go undisturbed in your rest, so no point learning it until L4, which is your last chance before 3rd level spells become available.

Precocious Apprentice isn't worth it unless you're using it as a trick to get into some PrC or something like that, and even then, the 'dead' feat is kinda annoying. Consider something that you'll like all through the game as opposed to something that's got limited level use.

SSGoW
2010-03-17, 09:20 PM
Another vote for not being a illusionist if you are new to 3.5, conjugation is fun and also transmutor could be fun (specially if you want a fullmetal alchemist :p)

Remember that you won't have armor to help you so magic defense + dex is your friend

Nohwl
2010-03-17, 09:29 PM
i thought the limit for flaws was 2, and you forgot to list the elf bonus feats. why no traits?

actually, where did you get the flaws from?

Godskook
2010-03-17, 09:37 PM
i thought the limit for flaws was 2, and you forgot to list the elf bonus feats. why no traits?

actually, where did you get the flaws from?

Flaws are entirely DM houseruled. There's no '2 flaw' limit.

Nohwl
2010-03-17, 09:43 PM
A player may select up to two flaws when creating a character. After 1st level, a character cannot take on additional flaws unless the game master specifically allows it (for examples of times when doing this might be appropriate, see Character Traits). Each flaw a player selects entitles his character to a bonus feat. In other words, when you create a character, if you select two flaws, you can also take two bonus feats beyond those your character would be normally entitled to.

can you explain what that means then?

Godskook
2010-03-17, 09:47 PM
can you explain what that means then?

1.Ok, I'm wrong about there being a 'standard' limit. So used to pbp that I didn't even think about it.

2.They're from Unearthed Arcana, and as such, are in the realm of houserules.

Math_Mage
2010-03-17, 09:49 PM
Another vote for not being a illusionist if you are new to 3.5, conjugation is fun and also transmutor could be fun (specially if you want a fullmetal alchemist :p)

Remember that you won't have armor to help you so magic defense + dex is your friend

Meh, I personally find conjugation to be boring, and prefer the Freezing Alchemist to the Fullmetal one (too bad the latter died off). :smalltongue:

Back on subject, Spell Focus (illusion) is subpar unless you're really really focused on illusions, and that's not easy to pull off. As mentioned, Precocious Apprentice also has limited utility. Take some metamagic you'd be happy with--Extend Spell, maybe.

Abrupt Jaunt is really really good--so good that a DM might be at least tempted to ban it. If he doesn't, take it as a Conjurer and be happy.

Your sheet shows three flaws. You only get two. Take that into account.

Bibliomancer
2010-03-17, 09:52 PM
Flaws are entirely DM houseruled. There's no '2 flaw' limit.

Two flaws tends to be default, though (as mentioned in Unearthed Arcana).

I would recommend Generalist Wizard, if you're the only caster in the party. Otherwise, focused specialist (conjurer) with the PHBII alternative class feature is rather good.

I'm also unfamiliar with Erudite Wizard, and google isn't showing anything. (It isn't even in the feat index (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats)). Could you possibly clarify?

Pluto
2010-03-17, 09:58 PM
Back on subject, Spell Focus (illusion) is subpar unless you're really really focused on illusions, and that's not easy to pull off. As mentioned, Precocious Apprentice also has limited utility. Take some metamagic you'd be happy with--Extend Spell, maybe.
Or better: Keep SF(Illusion) until around level 5, when Color Spray ceases to be the final word in combat resolution and when you have spell slots for metamagic. Then add a dash of PHB2 retraining.


Abrupt Jaunt is really really good--so good that a DM might be at least tempted to ban it. If he doesn't, take it as a Conjurer and be happy.Abrupt Jaunt is ridiculous. And Familiars, though incredibly useful, are a headache.

Private-Prinny
2010-03-17, 10:12 PM
I would recommend Generalist Wizard, if you're the only caster in the party. Otherwise, focused specialist (conjurer) with the PHBII alternative class feature is rather good.

I'm also unfamiliar with Erudite Wizard, and google isn't showing anything. (It isn't even in the feat index (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats)). Could you possibly clarify?

I've never found a Generalist to be all that useful. Enchantment, Evocation, and Necromancy seem to always be a good choice to dump.

And I can't find anything about Erudite Wizards or that "Finesse Illusionist" build that Godskook mentioned.

Ozymandias9
2010-03-17, 10:13 PM
ignore this post

Sjet
2010-03-17, 10:15 PM
Did you trade scribe scroll for improved initiative? If you did, you're missing a feat. If you didn't, do so, and pick a feat. Its a UA variant wizard.


That variant goes off of the fighter bonus feat list doesn't it?

If the character goes to lvl 5 or higher in wizard he'll have to take a fighter bonus feat instead of a metamagic, item creation, or spell mastery feat.

Depends on how much multiclassing is going to occur imo.

Optimystik
2010-03-17, 10:16 PM
Elves make decent Generalists, but everyone else should specialize.

NM020110
2010-03-17, 10:23 PM
A few responses...
1.) This is not intended as an optimized build; nor should it be able to solo the wotc test party...
2.) The campaign/DM/group I'm playing with are as of yet undetermined, so I can make no garuntees as to the houserules involved.
3.) This is intended to be an illusionist/trap wizard capable of creating a defense-in-depth for the party.
4.) I expect to parties optimization levels to be around the level of a blaster cleric...:smalleek:
5.) Eurudite wizard is an alternative class feature (don't have original source, was found on these boards) which allows a wizard to trade in the spellbook and scribe scroll for not having a spellbook (prepares spells from memory).
6.) Flaws are homebrewed and have the following characteristics:
a.) Infirm: -2 to saves vs. disease, -2 to concentration
b.) Arachnophobia: treat all spiders as having a fear aura (DC=HD+2)
c.) Poor vision: -2 to any check which requires sight.
7.) This is intended to be a preset touchstone in the event that I enter a campaign sometime in the near future.
8.) Thank you for the excellent suggestions!

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-17, 10:28 PM
A few responses...
1.) This is not intended as an optimized build; nor should it be able to solo the wotc test party...
2.) The campaign/DM/group I'm playing with are as of yet undetermined, so I can make no garuntees as to the houserules involved.
3.) This is intended to be an illusionist/trap wizard capable of creating a defense-in-depth for the party.
4.) I expect to parties optimization levels to be around the level of a blaster cleric...:smalleek:
5.) Eurudite wizard is an alternative class feature (don't have original source, was found on these boards) which allows a wizard to trade in the spellbook and scribe scroll for not having a spellbook (prepares spells from memory).
6.) Flaws are homebrewed and have the following characteristics:
a.) Infirm: -2 to saves vs. disease, -2 to concentration
b.) Arachnophobia: treat all spiders as having a fear aura (DC=HD+2)
c.) Poor vision: -2 to any check which requires sight.
7.) This is intended to be a preset touchstone in the event that I enter a campaign sometime in the near future.
8.) Thank you for the excellent suggestions!

In that case, ignore all the above suggestions and just pick some tasty looking spells. Outclassing your party is not a good idea. (for various health and fun reasons)

NM020110
2010-03-17, 10:31 PM
Agreed. My reflex saves are worse than my wizard's...Do you think it's too optimized?

Private-Prinny
2010-03-17, 10:35 PM
Agreed. My reflex saves are worse than my wizard's...Do you think it's too optimized?

Personally, I don't think there's any such thing. If you don't want to upset people, you can always scale it back a bit, but there's no scaling up if you find yourself in a pinch.

Optimystik
2010-03-17, 10:39 PM
5.) Eurudite wizard is an alternative class feature (don't have original source, was found on these boards) which allows a wizard to trade in the spellbook and scribe scroll for not having a spellbook (prepares spells from memory).

I think you mean Eidetic Spellcaster there - it's from Dragon Magazine IIRC.

Godskook
2010-03-17, 10:42 PM
And I can't find anything about Erudite Wizards or that "Finesse Illusionist" build that Godskook mentioned.

"Finesse Illusionist" would be an obvious Illusionist, who would be challenging to play as a newer player. It involves a lot of the non-obvious, such as using a silent image to convince your opponents that you've just become a fleshraker. Or traveling with a silent image party. Or using a wall of silent image, in the round after you put up an actual wall of X. Or using disguise self so that the party's fighter looks like an easy target and the party's mage looks scary as hell, but only against NPCs that will react properly to that sort of thing. Or using invisibility sphere + major image to cause opponents to waste their time fighting things that aren't there while the party's tank solos them. And then there's shadow spells, which, while I don't like them personally for balance/flavor reasons, they're quite potent, giving you access to entire sub-schools worth of spells for a single spell slot.

Conjurer spells tend to be a little more straight forward. Grease makes fighters fall down. Many uses, but easy to make effective.

Private-Prinny
2010-03-17, 10:44 PM
"Finesse Illusionist" would be an obvious Illusionist, who would be challenging to play as a newer player. It involves a lot of the non-obvious, such as using a silent image to convince your opponents that you've just become a fleshraker. Or traveling with a silent image party. Or using a wall of silent image, in the round after you put up an actual wall of X. Or using disguise self so that the party's fighter looks like an easy target and the party's mage looks scary as hell, but only against NPCs that will react properly to that sort of thing. Or using invisibility sphere + major image to cause opponents to waste their time fighting things that aren't there while the party's tank solos them. And then there's shadow spells, which, while I don't like them personally for balance/flavor reasons, they're quite potent, giving you access to entire sub-schools worth of spells for a single spell slot.

Oh. I actually already do stuff like that. With my Killer Gnome. :smallbiggrin:

Lycanthromancer
2010-03-17, 11:51 PM
...obvious Illusionist...Isn't that a contradiction in terms?

Math_Mage
2010-03-18, 12:27 AM
Isn't that a contradiction in terms?

But harken to the words of the great Salvor Hardin: "It pays to be obvious, especially when you have a reputation for subtlety."

[/Asimov geek]

Corey
2010-03-18, 12:50 AM
Meh, I personally find conjugation to be boring,

So do Latin students everywhere.

Corey
2010-03-18, 12:53 AM
But harken to the words of the great Salvor Hardin: "It pays to be obvious, especially when you have a reputation for subtlety."

[/Asimov geek]

Isn't the illusionists' motto "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent?"

:smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:

Corey
2010-03-18, 12:59 AM
Sleep is too awesome at Level 1 to leave off a spell list. But I have similar feelings about Color Spray.

What the others said about having something to do other that cast a few spells and spend the rest of the day curled up in a ball.

Specialist wizard or some variant that gives bonus spells (e.g., domain wizard), definitely. Conjurer has great spells at every level (if you don't like anything else, you can always take a Summon Monster). Transmuter has really good stuff at most levels too.

Riffington
2010-03-18, 04:22 AM
Meh, I personally find conjugation to be boring,

You just haven't found the right person with whom to conjugate :p

Devils_Advocate
2010-03-18, 08:23 PM
If you want to make a generic Wizard for use in any campaign, which you'll then adjust as needed based on the campaign's particulars, and you aren't concerned with optimization, I'd recommend just using PHB material. You can make a perfectly fine Wizard with that. The assumption that flaws will be allowed just so long as you can come up with meaningful ones is particularly odd. Balanced flaws, by their very nature, won't make a character generally more powerful anyway, and are only really useful if a particular handicap beyond those given by low ability scores is part of your character concept. And that's hardly generic.

You chose gray elf instead of gnome as the race for a stereotypical, non-optimized Illusionist? You fool! Anyway, Illusion is very much the iconic arcane school -- divine magic and psionics barely touch on it -- and Wizard the iconic arcane class, so Illusionists are sort of extra wizardy like that.

You made a Neutral gray elf barred from Necromancy worship Velsharoon? Um, wow. For starters, gray elves are from Greyhawk and Velsharoon is from the Forgotten Realms. Secondly and more significantly, "follower of Velsharoon" and "barred from Necromancy" are pretty much mutually exclusive; if a god's dogma primarily tells you to learn a particular type of magic, and you're a spellcaster who neglects that type of magic, then you don't really follow that god, now do you? And finally, it's not like there aren't multiple far more appropriate, not to mention non-Evil, gods. So, in conclusion, WTF?

Trapmaking seems more useful for someone with a permanent home, rather than your typical group of wandering adventurers. Of limited use on an adventure, anyway, I'd think. What you're planning to make out of stone I have no idea. Craft (alchemy) would be the stereotypical wizard Craft skill, especially for gnomes -- traps are more of a kobold thing -- although the various Knowledges are the class skill most likely to be useful after Spellcraft and Concentration.


I think you mean Eidetic Spellcaster there - it's from Dragon Magazine IIRC.
Indeed; #357. It's also not all that great. You give up your familiar in addition to Scribe Scroll, and you still have to pay the normal cost of learning new spells. And now you can't use a Boccob's blessed book to eliminate that cost, since you don't use a spellbook. Although the Collegiate Wizard feat gives you 8 spells per spell level instead of the normal 4, so if you've got that, you're less likely to buy a lot for spells.

Which brings me to the Collegiate Wizard feat. I had trouble finding this, because it's hidden away in a sidebar far away from Complete Arcane's actual feat section. Rather like how the Leadership feat is hidden away in the DMG. And this similarity doesn't seem to be a coincidence. Like Leadership, Collegiate Wizard is described as something that the DM might choose to include in the campaign, rather than as a default option for players. And given that the feat (either one) is overpowered and that there's even a special clause to throw back at players who whine about being disallowed this particular piece of cheese, a lot of DMs might choose to exclude it.

Besides, an archetypal wizard has a spellbook and learns spells from arcane magical writings. Having all of your spells memorized and gaining most of them automatically runs counter to that. I'd prefer to get rid of the bonus spells from leveling, really, because having them poof in breaks my suspension of disbelief. Though at that point I'd probably make some other adjustments, too. (While we're on the subject of verisimilitude: Why have inexpensive material components (rather than foci) if you're going to completely abstract away their getting used up? :smallconfused:)

Private-Prinny
2010-03-18, 08:31 PM
I'd prefer to get rid of the bonus spells from leveling, really, because having them poof in breaks my suspension of disbelief. Though at that point I'd probably make some other adjustments, too.

I always imagined it as the wizard constantly reading and re-reading his tomes, learning new spells as the result of independent research. A Collegiate Wizard has learned the art of magic more efficiently, and can therefore learn more spells.

At least, that's how I handwave it.

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-18, 08:52 PM
I always imagined it as the wizard constantly reading and re-reading his tomes, learning new spells as the result of independent research. A Collegiate Wizard has learned the art of magic more efficiently, and can therefore learn more spells.

At least, that's how I handwave it.

I believe that's the canonical explanation.

Devils_Advocate
2010-03-18, 10:20 PM
I'm not sure if the rules spell (heh) this out, but I think that the common assumption is that the spells gained by leveling up aren't just learned for free, but scribed for free. And that's what makes no sense.

I mean, a Wizard's spellbook is a physical object that isn't actually a part of the character and can be lost or destroyed or even sold. And if the bonus spells known are added at no cost, then ink that's worth 100 gp per page -- actual, highly valuable, physical material -- just... becomes a part of the Wizard's equipment. As a class feature. With no explanation for how the heck this works in-universe.

Even if they still have to pay for writing materials, it seems odd that independent research would by default cause Wizards to rediscover existing spells instead of come up with new ones. I guess you could say that the Wizard learns the bonus spells offscreen, while the rest have to be acquired in-character, but it's just weird for the game to handle the same thing in two different ways like that. Same deal with completely handwaving the effort and cost of restocking on inexpensive material components. No other equipment (to my knowledge) is treated that way, so it's weird.

Gaiyamato
2010-03-18, 11:33 PM
I would go for an Elf Generalist Wizard and take the Elf substitution levels in the Races of the Wild.

I will also add my voice to how hard illusionists are to play.