Need Opinions on Wizard change

[Mechanize]

I'm new here, and suck at finding what I want in search so if this has been discussed, I apologize.

I want to run a homebrew campaign based off of 3.5 or pathfinder with a bunch of added house rules or twists. Some for balance, some for flavor. I know little about spell casters as I usually play martial PCs

I wanted to possibly play with the idea of Arcane mages only being able to take 1 school of magic. Some complaints I hear are that they are too diverse so this would obviously tame that aspect, if not break the caster period. I also wanted to do this for flavor though. I like the idea of specialized mages. Perhaps custom feats could be used to improve their chosen school further, or perhaps feats could be taken to open up new schools.

I'm sure this hurts the arcane users too much, but I want to get opinions on how to make it work. Not too complex, though, as I am not trying to completely change the game.

Also, is it possible to do somethign like this with divine spells, are they separated by domains/schools like the arcane spells?

[Dusk Eclipse]

IF that is the case, I would suggest yo ban wizard all together and use the list casters (Beguiler, Dread Necromancer and Warmage), there are some pretty good homebrew classes that fill in the other schools (conjuration, abjuration and Divination).

[Mechanize]

What is the problem with limiting schools? Is it too harsh? Are some schools more powerful than others?

I don't have much knowledge when it comes to classes out of core material. I know of the things you mentioned but not enough to form any opinions as to why or why not do what you suggested.

[ahenobarbi]

This could actually work. And you don't have to invent new feats just allow Extra Spell Feat (from Complete Arcane) to take Sor/Wiz from school other than chosen.

With this some wizards will be more powerful (conjurers, illusionists) and some less (diviners, evokers).

EDIT: Do you plan to do anything to Clerics, Druids and Sorcerers?

[ericgrau]

Unless you severely limit books as well there are work arounds for high optimizers, whereas low optimizers are frustrated. Those who abuse the game will continue, those who don't will have the game ruined for them. That's the opposite of what you want. If you're going to ruin the game for any casual player who dares play the wizard, it's better to just ban the class. I wouldn't ban it because removing magic removes much of the fun from D&D, and the whole reason you're playing a game is to have fun. But leaving a horrible trap is worse.

I would add dead caster levels to all full casting classes (not just wizard) and call it a day. The first dead level should not come until after they get 3rd level spells. That way it affects everyone equally and even low optimizers don't fall into an unplayable game. It discourages playing the class a little but still leaves it playable.

By no means is this supposed to be a fix for all problems. The real answer there is to play with people who don't abuse the game, and check their character sheets for issues. Most people aren't trying to break the system. Don't take on the gargantuan and failure prone task of reworking a big chunk of D&D just to deal with those who are.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Yes not all schools are made equal with conjuration and transmuting being the strongest and enchantment arguably being the weakest (a single spell makes the school all but useless, Mindblank). Divination or it's own is really difficult to use effectively in combat (it does have some awesome spells; but they are mostly for support).

Beguilers is base class from the PH II which specializes in Enchantment and Illusion spells, your perception is their playground.

Dread Necromancer from HoH and as their name implies, they specialize in Necromancy, being extremely proficient at raising hordes of undead (though a necromancy spec'd cleric beats them a having Big bad undeads) and with enough spells to be effective debuffers.

Warmage (CArc) gets most of the direct damage spells, with little to no utility spells which make him the weakest of the 3 official list casters; but they can get with some work incredible damage output.

[Tyndmyr]

As a general rule, if you have a "quick and easy" fix to casters, it should be used. Ever.

They annoy the crap out of low op people, who then turn to the forums with questions like "I'm a diviner, and my DM has this wierd house rule and my phb doesn't have any real choices for divination spells at this level."

And the high-op players grin gleefully, and break the game anyway.

Consider a gentleman's agreement instead.

[The Redwolf]

As a general rule, if you have a "quick and easy" fix to casters, it should be used. Ever.

Did you mean to say shouldn't?

[ahenobarbi]

As a general rule, if you have a "quick and easy" fix to casters, it should be used. Ever.

They annoy the crap out of low op people, who then turn to the forums with questions like "I'm a diviner, and my DM has this wierd house rule and my phb doesn't have any real choices for divination spells at this level."

And the high-op players grin gleefully, and break the game anyway.

Consider a gentleman's agreement instead.

You have a point it's a horrible as wizard fix. I wouldn't mind playing with it though because:
- It isn't advertised as a fix (but as fluff-based change to wizards).
- I could play sorcerer, cleric or druid if I didn't like the new wizard (at least I think so, that's why asked my question).
- I could play single-school wizard if I wanted to (and wouldn't be disappointed because I know what I do).

There could be a problem for people who would play wizards not knowing what they do though.

[Mechanize]

@ahenobarbi: I am not sure about the other casters. I honestly don't have much experience with those classes so I can't say 1 way or another.

This is definitely more for flavor than fix. I always hate it when a caster says "im an illusionist" while wielding spells from other schools.

How bad are some of the schools by themselves? I know divination tends to be support rather than combat, but even that could work in the right group, and a fair/fun game without people optimizing.

My biggest worry is there just being nothing to pick on certain levels. Is this just a lack of decent spells from some schools or what?

I tend to ignore a lot of D&D rules, hence my idea in the first place. I let players build customized classes and I balance them out as I see fit. I hinder optimizers or buff new players to keep the field fair but still fun for everyone

[TuggyNE]

How bad are some of the schools by themselves? I know divination tends to be support rather than combat, but even that could work in the right group, and a fair/fun game without people optimizing.

It's less about op level than about expectations of play, honestly. In D&D, combat is usually one of the most interesting parts, so many (most?) players will feel unhappy if they're noticeably ineffective in combat. (Whether they notice this is another matter, of course.)


Illusion is of widely varying power, depending mostly on how closely the DM hews to the rules and guidelines for adjudicating it, as well as on player ingenuity. 1-7 out of 10.
Necromancy is often effective, but lacks versatility compared to e.g. Conjuration or Transmutation. 3-5 out of 10.
Enchantment tends to be nullified increasingly at higher levels. 2-5 out of 10.
Abjuration can be useful, but isn't really enough to build an entire character around. 3-4 out of 10.
Arguably, same with Divination; there's just not enough there in most cases to build more than an NPC. 2-4 out of 10.
Evocation is moderately versatile, although it tends to be a bit underpowered, and lacks utility to a fair extent. 4-6 out of 10.
Conjuration can do nearly everything, and quite well (minions, battlefield control, damage, utility); a Conjuration-only Wizard will still be nearly as powerful and versatile as a generalist. 7-9 out of 10.
Transmutation is also very effective, especially because of open-ended effects like polymorph; again, a Transmutation-only Wizard will be almost the level of a generalist. 6-9 out of 10.


There are exceptions to these, but they mostly show up with lots of splat-diving, or extremely creative approaches to PHB spells, or both.


My biggest worry is there just being nothing to pick on certain levels. Is this just a lack of decent spells from some schools or what?

Yes, basically.


I hinder optimizers or buff new players to keep the field fair but still fun for everyone

This probably won't help matters any. The only way to compensate for the severe limitations this places on certain schools is to optimize, and therefore it is more than likely that optimizers will be less affected than non-optimizers, which is precisely the opposite of what you want. (That's actually a common property of most attempted Wizard fixes, unfortunately, probably due to the odd characteristics of the spell list.)

[Alabenson]

As a general rule, if you want to try to balance Wizards, you're much better off targeting specific spells than you are trying to meaningfully alter the class itself. The problem with what you're doing, as has already being pointed out, is that the different spell schools are nowhere near equal; a Wizard only using transmutation or conjuration is still likely going to outshine everyone else, while a Wizard using divination will almost certainly feel useless in any situation that doesn't play to his specialty.

If you must alter the class in a manner similar to this, I'd advise using the Shugenja class as a basis; the wizard cannot learn spells from the school opposed to his specialization, and is limited in how many spells he can learn from other schools.

[ericgrau]

Trying to get the schools to match each other sounds like a big headache. Or a delusion that it'll actually work.

One bit of homebrew I did not too long ago increased the spell level by 1 for most (not necessarily all) schools outside of one's specialty. Some thematically appropriate types of spells were not increased in level even though they were in one of these schools. I don't know how well it worked though. All this really does is lessen the impact of your mistakes when (not if) you screwup on balancing schools against eachother. But hopefully that means the differences are low enough to be tolerable. Then you can have your fluffy caster without making him unplayable.

One thing to add to that for many schools would be to increase the spell level by 1 for any spell that works around the school's limitations, even if it's within the school you're specializing in. But also ask the players nicely to try to stay within their theme instead of looking for loopholes (except those at +1 spell level, so they don't become useless diviners).

[Mechanize]

It's less about op level than about expectations of play, honestly. In D&D, combat is usually one of the most interesting parts, so many (most?) players will feel unhappy if they're noticeably ineffective in combat. (Whether they notice this is another matter, of course.)


Illusion is of widely varying power, depending mostly on how closely the DM hews to the rules and guidelines for adjudicating it, as well as on player ingenuity. 1-7 out of 10.
Necromancy is often effective, but lacks versatility compared to e.g. Conjuration or Transmutation. 3-5 out of 10.
Enchantment tends to be nullified increasingly at higher levels. 2-5 out of 10.
Abjuration can be useful, but isn't really enough to build an entire character around. 3-4 out of 10.
Arguably, same with Divination; there's just not enough there in most cases to build more than an NPC. 2-4 out of 10.
Evocation is moderately versatile, although it tends to be a bit underpowered, and lacks utility to a fair extent. 4-6 out of 10.
Conjuration can do nearly everything, and quite well (minions, battlefield control, damage, utility); a Conjuration-only Wizard will still be nearly as powerful and versatile as a generalist. 7-9 out of 10.
Transmutation is also very effective, especially because of open-ended effects like polymorph; again, a Transmutation-only Wizard will be almost the level of a generalist. 6-9 out of 10.


There are exceptions to these, but they mostly show up with lots of splat-diving, or extremely creative approaches to PHB spells, or both.



Yes, basically.



This probably won't help matters any. The only way to compensate for the severe limitations this places on certain schools is to optimize, and therefore it is more than likely that optimizers will be less affected than non-optimizers, which is precisely the opposite of what you want. (That's actually a common property of most attempted Wizard fixes, unfortunately, probably due to the odd characteristics of the spell list.)

Good post, thank you for the comparisons.

The campaign I run will, with intent, be with other folks who are more into flavor and RP than combat. I actually find combat boring as hell, at least when minis and a grid are involved. A simple 6 round 1 minute (IRL) fight ends up taking 30 minutes due to people contemplating strategy for minutes per turn.

How far fetched is it to allow players (or myself) to think of custom spells if their chosen school seems lacking, as long as they fit the theme of the school? Or to allow players to minorly alter some weaker spells in order to bring them up to par with conjuration and transmutation?

Man, I have to start reading up on spells. It sucks not knowing enough about it. I'm usually really good at altering things for balance once I actually KNOW what I am dealing with haha.

[The Redwolf]

I actually find combat boring as hell, at least when minis and a grid are involved. A simple 6 round 1 minute (IRL) fight ends up taking 30 minutes due to people contemplating strategy for minutes per turn.


1 minute is 10 rounds, one round is 6 seconds.

[Mechanize]

the wizard cannot learn spells from the school opposed to his specialization, and is limited in how many spells he can learn from other schools.

Yes I was actually just thinking of this. How does it play out?

[Mechanize]

1 minute is 10 rounds, one round is 6 seconds.

Yeah yeah, brain fart! lol Ok so 36 second fight. :P taking 36 minutes :smalltongue:

[Alabenson]

Yes I was actually just thinking of this. How does it play out?

Honestly, I have no clue; it's not the sort of fix I would attempt in one of my games (I prefer nerfing individual spells to trying to fix the class itself).

I just tossed it out as a concept similar to what you seemed to want from a thematic perspective, but that wouldn't reduce the playability of the weaker schools as much.

[Mechanize]

Honestly, I have no clue; it's not the sort of fix I would attempt in one of my games (I prefer nerfing individual spells to trying to fix the class itself).

I just tossed it out as a concept similar to what you seemed to want from a thematic perspective, but that wouldn't reduce the playability of the weaker schools as much.

Yeah that is true.

Now comes the question of how many spells are actually too good? Is it that there are particular combos that are too strong, or just the single spells themselves? If there are too many to name, then don't bother... but if it is a small handful of spells that I should look into banning or nerfing then I would appreciate knowing.

[ericgrau]

Opinions vary. Which falls back to the gentleman's agreement.

Generally any infinite loops are obvious then as for any other combos (a) players probably won't try them and (b) just check for them on the character sheet or say "no" in game.

[Azimov]

Ok, I pretty much never, ever post (Usually lurk like all crud), but this tickled something in my heart, probably because a DM i used to run with used a similar sort of approach. Try this on for size.

All wizards are Specialist Wizards (PHB 1, Somewhere in the Wizard section), gaining the additional +1 spell per day as usual. Wizards can cast spells from their specialist school normally, without restrictions, but can only cast/know spells one level lower from the other schools, and cannot cast from their banned schools at all.

This sort of achieves what you want with flavour, without screwing your newbie wizards too much. OFC it wont affect an optimizer at all, but in their case the Gentlemans Agreement is the best policy (All players agree not to break the game)

[ahenobarbi]

Or you could make all wizards focused specialists (from Complete Mage): like specialist wizard but has one more prohibited school, one less general-use slot per spell level, and 3 slots (not 1) for specialization school per level.

[Kelb_Panthera]

On the idea of some schools being considered opposites of one another, how's this sound?

Divination opposite Illusion - Find the truth V obscure the truth

Enchantment opposite conjuration - work with what's here V bring in something new

transmutation opposite necromancy - upgrade life V downgrade life

Evocation opposite Abjuration - shoot magic V block magic

:smallbiggrin:

[Mechanize]

Or you could make all wizards focused specialists (from Complete Mage): like specialist wizard but has one more prohibited school, one less general-use slot per spell level, and 3 slots (not 1) for specialization school per level.

I'll have to look into that. Sounds interesting.

@kelb: I was actually wondering if there was some sort of magic wheel (in relation to color wheel for art) that showed which schools oppose eachother and which are related.

[Cruiser1]

I was actually wondering if there was some sort of magic wheel (in relation to color wheel for art) that showed which schools oppose eachother and which are related.

http://www.astrolog.org/other/schools.gif

The star image above is one way to show how each D&D school of magic relates to the others. Each school has two "friend" schools similar to it, represented by blue lines between adjacent schools. Each school also has two "enemy" schools opposed to it, represented by red lines crossing the star. This is similar to the colors in "Magic: The Gathering", except each school also has two other "neutral" schools that it neither supports nor opposes. If you specialize in a school, consider barring the two opposing schools (for fluff reasons, where it may or may not be optimized).

Divination, since it's a weaker school that can't be barred, is in the middle of the star. It's neutral with all other schools, with no friends nor enemies. For example, one could say Divination (revealing things) and Illusion (hiding things) are opposites, but that same logic could say they're similar because they both deal with knowledge.

Evocation & Conjuration are similar because they both create things with matter (e.g. Wall of Ice vs. Wall of Stone) or attack with energy (e.g. Fireball vs. Orb of Fire).
Conjuration & Abjuration are similar because they both protect (Healing is a subschool of Conjuration) and both transport things (e.g. Teleport vs. Banishment)
Abjuration & Transmutation are similar because they both buff (e.g. Circle of Protection vs. the various stat enhancers)
Transmutation & Enchantment are similar because they both internally change things.
Enchantment & Necromancy are similar because they both manipulate life.
Necromancy & Illusion are similar because they both deal with shadow energies.
Illusion & Evocation are similar because they both create things with energy (e.g. Minor Image vs. Dancing Lights)

Evocation (forcefulness) is opposed by Transmutation & Enchantment (subtlety)
Conjuration (positive energy, healing) is opposed by Enchantment & Necromancy (negative energy, manipulation)
Abjuration (protection) is opposed by Necromancy & Illusion (debuffs & nightmares)
Transmutation (changing matter) is opposed by Illusion & Evocation (creating energy)
Enchantment (subtle tweaking) is opposed by Evocation & Conjuration (active creation)
Necromancy (using death) is opposed by Conjuration & Abjuration (serving life)
Illusion (confusion from outside) is opposed by Abjuration & Transmutation (strength from inside i.e. buffs)

The star is arranged with Evocation (the most active/external/yang school) at the top, and Enchantment & Transmutation (the most subtle/internal/yin schools) at the bottom.

Note also the left half of the star shows what might be considered "good" schools: Conjuration that covers healing, Abjuration that covers protection, and Transmutation that covers buffs. The right half of the star shows "evil" schools: Illusion that covers lies, Necromancy that covers death, and Enchantment that covers manipulation. Evocation (pure force) and Divination (knowledge), are neither "good" nor "evil", so are on the middle line.

An easy way to remember this star is when you read down the left half "good" schools and look at the abbreviations you get a purring "CAT", and when you read down the right half "evil" schools you get an entrapping "VINE". :smallsmile:

[Mechanize]

http://www.astrolog.org/other/schools.gif

The star image above is one way to show how each D&D school of magic relates to the others. Each school has two "friend" schools similar to it, represented by blue lines between adjacent schools. Each school also has two "enemy" schools opposed to it, represented by red lines crossing the star. This is similar to the colors in "Magic: The Gathering", except each school also has two other "neutral" schools that it neither supports nor opposes. If you specialize in a school, consider barring the two opposing schools (for fluff reasons, where it may or may not be optimized).

Divination, since it's a weaker school that can't be barred, is in the middle of the star. It's neutral with all other schools, with no friends nor enemies. For example, one could say Divination (revealing things) and Illusion (hiding things) are opposites, but that same logic could say they're similar because they both deal with knowledge.

Evocation & Conjuration are similar because they both create things with matter (e.g. Wall of Ice vs. Wall of Stone) or attack with energy (e.g. Fireball vs. Orb of Fire).
Conjuration & Abjuration are similar because they both protect (Healing is a subschool of Conjuration) and both transport things (e.g. Teleport vs. Banishment)
Abjuration & Transmutation are similar because they both buff (e.g. Circle of Protection vs. the various stat enhancers)
Transmutation & Enchantment are similar because they both internally change things.
Enchantment & Necromancy are similar because they both manipulate life.
Necromancy & Illusion are similar because they both deal with shadow energies.
Illusion & Evocation are similar because they both create things with energy (e.g. Minor Image vs. Dancing Lights)

Evocation (forcefulness) is opposed by Transmutation & Enchantment (subtlety)
Conjuration (positive energy, healing) is opposed by Enchantment & Necromancy (negative energy, manipulation)
Abjuration (protection) is opposed by Necromancy & Illusion (debuffs & nightmares)
Transmutation (changing matter) is opposed by Illusion & Evocation (creating energy)
Enchantment (subtle tweaking) is opposed by Evocation & Conjuration (active creation)
Necromancy (using death) is opposed by Conjuration & Abjuration (serving life)
Illusion (confusion from outside) is opposed by Abjuration & Transmutation (strength from inside i.e. buffs)

The star is arranged with Evocation (the most active/external/yang school) at the top, and Enchantment & Transmutation (the most subtle/internal/yin schools) at the bottom.

Note also the left half of the star shows what might be considered "good" schools: Conjuration that covers healing, Abjuration that covers protection, and Transmutation that covers buffs. The right half of the star shows "evil" schools: Illusion that covers lies, Necromancy that covers death, and Enchantment that covers manipulation. Evocation (pure force) and Divination (knowledge), are neither "good" nor "evil", so are on the middle line.

An easy way to remember this star is when you read down the left half "good" schools and look at the abbreviations you get a purring "CAT", and when you read down the right half "evil" schools you get an entrapping "VINE". :smallsmile:

This is really good info. Thank you so much. :) Did you find it somewhere else or just think of it alone? No offense meant, I just wonder if you found this discussion else where so that I could see even more opinions.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

This is really good info. Thank you so much. :) Did you find it somewhere else or just think of it alone? No offense meant, I just wonder if you found this discussion else where so that I could see even more opinions.

Looks suspiciously like something out of my old AD&D books, actually...

[Cruiser1]

This is really good info. Thank you so much. :) Did you find it somewhere else or just think of it alone? No offense meant, I just wonder if you found this discussion else where so that I could see even more opinions.
I made it up myself. :smallsmile: I first posted it here on GITP over 5 years ago, in June 2007. Original thread: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46720

[Gamer Girl]

How far fetched is it to allow players (or myself) to think of custom spells if their chosen school seems lacking, as long as they fit the theme of the school? Or to allow players to minorly alter some weaker spells in order to bring them up to par with conjuration and transmutation?

Man, I have to start reading up on spells. It sucks not knowing enough about it. I'm usually really good at altering things for balance once I actually KNOW what I am dealing with haha.

I think it would be fine to limit casters to one school, though it would be a bit annoying. A lot of useful spells are sprinkled around the schools.

I don't agree with most others about the schools(or anything else). For example I think Divination is a very powerful school as knowledge is power and I don't rank power as ''just how many dragons you can kill''. I also don't agree with the statements like ''enchantment is useless as there is an 8th level spell that blocks it.'' (Sigh)

The easy thing to do is to add all the other d20 spells you can find to your game to add to each school. Races of the Dragon has a bunch of enchantment power word spells, for example. And don't forget to look through the Homebrew here and online.

But adding spells to fill the gaps is a great idea. Though note lots of people have done this and posted stuff already you can use. Phantasmal Smell is a great add on spell for illusion and Learn rumors is a great divination spell.

[TuggyNE]

I don't agree with most others about the schools(or anything else). For example I think Divination is a very powerful school as knowledge is power and I don't rank power as ''just how many dragons you can kill''. I also don't agree with the statements like ''enchantment is useless as there is an 8th level spell that blocks it.'' (Sigh)

While Divination is, indeed, quite powerful in its niche, it has nearly no direct effect on a given encounter — whether combat, social, or what have you. If all one has is info-gathering, staying back at base and calling shots would be more sensible, which is unfortunately more of an NPC type of job. Sure, it's not the worst thing ever, but it's going to be kind of unpleasant most of the time. That's why I gave it 2-4 out of 10; it has definite utility, but almost never wins an encounter, and only significantly eases it some of the time.

As far as enchantment, while there is an eighth-level spell to block it (as well as divination), it would be much more sensible to consider the more common counters: undead type, construct type, plant type, protection from <alignment> (a first-level spell!), ooze type, vermin type.... Really, protection from evil and friends are probably the worst; they almost completely shut down the whole school, and they appear on several widely-available lists. There are, in fact, good reasons enchantment is considered the most easily-countered school, and mind blank is pretty far down on the list.

Like any wizard/fighter fix, a lot of legwork needs to be done to make it really solid, and while I would really love to have decently balanced schools, I don't think anyone has yet finished a project to do that.

[Mechanize]

So far I have been playing with some ideas and opinions with friends and here is what I have. Sorta blends in the Incantrix class ideas.

- All casters must specialize in 1 'master' school and can only cast from that school (I think... this might ruin bards though huh?)
- a feat can be taken that allows to open another school. But you can only open a relating school based off cruiser1's diagram. (just a thought)
- level 1 specialist gets bonus spell per level and +1DC
- divination school is open to all but gets no bonuses
- +1 to DC saves in master school at lvl 3,8
- bonus MM feat at lvl 5, 10, 15 in master school
- reduce spell slot cost of MM feat for master school at lvl 6,12,18

So what I am trying to do is buff the 1 school specialist a bit here so that he isn't too hindered in 1 school of magic.

The hard part I am having here, is that I want a generalist to be an option, but a very weakened option, yet still fairly equal to the specialist. Any ideas how to achieve that?

Try to keep optimizing out of the picture because good optimizer can get around just about any system based on rules. Just throw out ideas with the gentleman's rule in mind.

Edit: Honestly though, if its too hard to balance out this 1 school caster vs a generalist, I might prohibit any way to open up other schools, or just make the feats to open the schools have steep requirements.

[Invader]

I'd increase the save DC at levels 1, 4, and 9 instead of 1, 3, and 8. Or leave it at 3 and 8 and get rid of the bonus at 1st level altogether.

[Mechanize]

I'd increase the save DC at levels 1, 4, and 9 instead of 1, 3, and 8. Or leave it at 3 and 8 and get rid of the bonus at 1st level altogether.

It was just an attempt to clean up dead levels. May I ask why you have this opinion?

[Invader]

It was just an attempt to clean up dead levels. May I ask why you have this opinion?

Because it was originally my idea :smallamused:

When I said give the bonuses at 3 and 8 I meant to get rid of the 1st lvl one altogether since they can still boost the DC with spell focus. Giving them a +3 bonus to saves all before 10th level might be a bit to powerful.

Alternatively, you could go something like3, 9, 17 or something to spread it out even more.

I think I like that level spread the most so far.

[TuggyNE]

- All casters must specialize in 1 'master' school and can only cast from that school (I think... this might ruin bards though huh?)

If you apply this to all casters, including Rangers, Paladins, Assassins, etc, then it will have some pretty horribly unintended effects.


- a feat can be taken that allows to open another school. But you can only open a relating school based off cruiser1's diagram. (just a thought)
- level 1 specialist gets bonus spell per level and +1DC
- divination school is open to all but gets no bonuses
- +1 to DC saves in master school at lvl 3,8
- bonus MM feat at lvl 5, 10, 15 in master school
- reduce spell slot cost of MM feat for master school at lvl 6,12,18

None of this addresses imbalance between schools directly. (In particular, some schools, such as Abjuration, don't use saves much.)


Try to keep optimizing out of the picture because good optimizer can get around just about any system based on rules. Just throw out ideas with the gentleman's rule in mind.

If you have a good gentleman's agreement already, you don't need this fix. If you don't have it, the fix will not noticeably help, and may well hurt (because it affects low optimization more than high). What, then, is the intended use?


Edit: Honestly though, if its too hard to balance out this 1 school caster vs a generalist, I might prohibit any way to open up other schools, or just make the feats to open the schools have steep requirements.

Again, casting from multiple schools isn't the problem as much as which schools you get. You could make a perfectly functional "generalist" wizard with nothing but Conjuration, although there would be a few areas they'd be slower at than an ordinary wizard.

[Mechanize]

Because it was originally my idea :smallamused:

When I said give the bonuses at 3 and 8 I meant to get rid of the 1st lvl one altogether since they can still boost the DC with spell focus. Giving them a +3 bonus to saves all before 10th level might be a bit to powerful.

Alternatively, you could go something like3, 9, 17 or something to spread it out even more.

I think I like that level spread the most so far.

Lol, my friend Ken that I game with brought up that idea, and now, after you saying that, I am not sure if you are him or not! :smallconfused: lol

I was thinking the level 1 boost to DC would help out due to the lack of diversity compared to a generalist caster. I also wouldn't be adverse to spreading them out over a wider level base like you mentioned, but only with a caster that sticks with his 1 school. Any caster that veers off into the generalist area should be less efficient and powerful with his spells than a caster who focuses.

[Invader]

If you apply this to all casters, including Rangers, Paladins, Assassins, etc, then it will have some pretty horribly unintended effects.



None of this addresses imbalance between schools directly. (In particular, some schools, such as Abjuration, don't use saves much.)



If you have a good gentleman's agreement already, you don't need this fix. If you don't have it, the fix will not noticeably help, and may well hurt (because it affects low optimization more than high). What, then, is the intended use?



Again, casting from multiple schools isn't the problem as much as which schools you get. You could make a perfectly functional "generalist" wizard with nothing but Conjuration, although there would be a few areas they'd be slower at than an ordinary wizard.

He's not trying to balance the schools or even neccesarily nerf/balance casters. He already said its more for fluff reasons.

The listed changes would most likely only affect full progression casters as well although I don't think that's been discussed here.

[Invader]

Lol, my friend Ken that I game with brought up that idea, and now, after you saying that, I am not sure if you are him or not! :smallconfused: lol


Indeed I am lol :smallbiggrin:

[Mechanize]

If you apply this to all casters, including Rangers, Paladins, Assassins, etc, then it will have some pretty horribly unintended effects..

I agree. Those casters have very limited access to the spell list right? I think this fix is just intended for the wizard, sorc, druid, and cleric.


None of this addresses imbalance between schools directly. (In particular, some schools, such as Abjuration, don't use saves much.).

Its not intended to address school imbalances because I honestly don't know what those imbalances are. This is just to buff the school limited specialist vs a generalist of which I will make very feat intensive to pull off. There are far too many spells for me to know what those imbalances are, so I'd rather the player bring them to my attention as hes doing his homework and we can work it out behind the scenes and alter some stuff. Based on other feedback I have seen thus far, it sounds like the school imbalance issue is a huge project.




If you have a good gentleman's agreement already, you don't need this fix. If you don't have it, the fix will not noticeably help, and may well hurt (because it affects low optimization more than high). What, then, is the intended use?.

Flavor... change. I want to see some TRUE illusionists, or Necromancers, etc. I don't want a Necromancer to shoot fireballs. It's purely for flavor. I just want to see how creative players get when stuck in 1 school. I want to see spells that don't get much use put into play. For fun, something different. Nothing more.


Again, casting from multiple schools isn't the problem as much as which schools you get. You could make a perfectly functional "generalist" wizard with nothing but Conjuration, although there would be a few areas they'd be slower at than an ordinary wizard.

Conjuration and Transmutation have been mentioned before as being the strongest. Other than buffing other schools, is there any simple fix that could slow down these 2 schools?

[Mechanize]

Indeed I am lol :smallbiggrin:

haha, well good, that means I can stop being the man in the middle between our emails and what people have to say here. :smallcool:

[Wise Green Bean]

One thing that would work pretty well would be to put 9 level casters on the bard track of spell progression. End it at level 6. You'd think it would put them behind characters like bards, who have all sorts of class features to compensate, but the spell lists of wizards, sorcerers, and clerics are already ridiculously far beyond lesser classes. You lose the game breakers, like gate, time stop, shapechange, wish, and so on, but really, a wizard with 6th level spells is still incredibly powerful. The only problems I foresee are that it would be pretty tough on damage spells and summoning. The damage would probably be too low to make a significant difference in the fight(really that was the case before but this exacerbates it) and the fact that SMVI critters are going to be small potatoes on a 16+ battle field if left unoptimized is an issue. But if it weakens them too much, you can always drop the spell level on a few spells, or let them research new spells, or let them 'discover' a cache of ancient, lost to the ages spells that are unusually powerful in the areas of spell casting that were unduly alleviated. People always complain of wizards tearing up battle fields with sleep at level 1 or haste at level 5. This alleviates that.

Note: I said all 9 level casters. Maybe spare the tier 3s and down this treatment.

[Mechanize]

Note: I said all 9 level casters. Maybe spare the tier 3s and down this treatment.

I am not sure I would want to do this. I know those top level spells are game breakers, but I also really like some of them. Stoping a 20th level mage at level 6 spells just seems... wrong lol. Isn't it just easier as a DM to never hand out some of the game breaker scrolls for players to learn in the first place?

[Wise Green Bean]

It's only wrong in a sense of what's traditional. But as we all know, tradition is far from balanced. The more narrow mages that have been suggested thus far are equally valid, but in a sense, I think I might be more in keeping with tradition anyway by keeping the flexible mage in the game. He's weaker, sure, but it still leaves lots of room for the creative wizardry we all know and love.
As for not handing out broken spells in the first place, sure, you can do that. It's kind of a lot of work though. DM's don't have the easiest job in the world, and this is an easy solution.
So yeah, nothing wrong with a conjurer who conjures and nothing else. But it isn't particularly enjoyable to me. I'd take versatility over power in a game anyday. I like the idea of an underdog mage who has to use his head to deal with his more specialized big brothers, the single school or few school mages.

[Mechanize]

It's only wrong in a sense of what's traditional. But as we all know, tradition is far from balanced. The more narrow mages that have been suggested thus far are equally valid, but in a sense, I think I might be more in keeping with tradition anyway by keeping the flexible mage in the game. He's weaker, sure, but it still leaves lots of room for the creative wizardry we all know and love.
As for not handing out broken spells in the first place, sure, you can do that. It's kind of a lot of work though. DM's don't have the easiest job in the world, and this is an easy solution.
So yeah, nothing wrong with a conjurer who conjures and nothing else. But it isn't particularly enjoyable to me. I'd take versatility over power in a game anyday. I like the idea of an underdog mage who has to use his head to deal with his more specialized big brothers, the single school or few school mages.

I normally would agree with you about diversity being more fun that power, but there are hundreds and hundreds of spells per school in the spell book. I have a hard time believe that casters can't be creative within their own school. I think people just tend to keep reusing the same popular spells.

[TuggyNE]

I agree. Those casters have very limited access to the spell list right? I think this fix is just intended for the wizard, sorc, druid, and cleric.

One downside of applying this to Druid and Cleric (however well-deserved otherwise) is that they lose access to their classic spontaneously-cast spells like Cure X Wounds and Summon Nature's Ally X unless they specialize in Conjuration.


Based on other feedback I have seen thus far, it sounds like the school imbalance issue is a huge project.

Oh, it is. In fact, the schools suffer much the same problem of imbalanced expectations, in miniature, that the Wizard and Fighter have: Abjuration, for example, is always going to be weak unless you deliberately include spells that break the expectations (not much flexibility in targeting saves or AC, not much damage, and so on).


Flavor... change. I want to see some TRUE illusionists, or Necromancers, etc. I don't want a Necromancer to shoot fireballs. It's purely for flavor. I just want to see how creative players get when stuck in 1 school. I want to see spells that don't get much use put into play. For fun, something different. Nothing more.

Well, for those two in particular the spontaneous full-list casters (Beguiler and Dread Necromancer respectively, as well as Warmage) would be a lot easier. They've already been written, they mostly use Sor/Wiz spells, and they clock in at Tier 3 already.


Conjuration and Transmutation have been mentioned before as being the strongest. Other than buffing other schools, is there any simple fix that could slow down these 2 schools?

Simple? Not really, that I'm aware of. Moving (Healing) out of Conjuration (probably into Necromancy) helps some, but only for divine casters. You can stick orb of X in Evocation and make them SR:yes, shift around (greater) mage armor, but by that time you're already out of the easy area and into spell-list revision.

You could perhaps split (calling) and (summoning) off from the rest of Conjuration, and use PHB2's (polymorph) subschool, splitting it off from Transmutation as well, but then you end up with a wizard that can't do anything but call and summon monsters.

And can still be brokenly powerful. :smallsigh:

(A better idea might be to break up the schools as mentioned, and give everyone two or three. Not sure whether that really hits the target though; it's quite difficult to drop a wizard with even a piece of Conjuration below Tier 2.)


I am not sure I would want to do this. I know those top level spells are game breakers, but I also really like some of them. Stoping a 20th level mage at level 6 spells just seems... wrong lol. Isn't it just easier as a DM to never hand out some of the game breaker scrolls for players to learn in the first place?

That can help, but a wizard or sorcerer or Animal domain cleric or druid will always be able to get e.g. Shapechange if they really want it. (For that matter, there are ACFs to crank up the number of free spells per level that a wizard gets, and so on.)

[Mechanize]

One downside of applying this to Druid and Cleric (however well-deserved otherwise) is that they lose access to their classic spontaneously-cast spells like Cure X Wounds and Summon Nature's Ally X unless they specialize in Conjuration.

I already have some ideas, that would help with healing issues, for altering the HP system which is a whole other story, though much more simple than this magic user stuff lol. And or just stuffing healing into a free category of magic. Any class that can take a heal just knows the stuff naturally rather than having to study a particular school.


Well, for those two in particular the spontaneous full-list casters (Beguiler and Dread Necromancer respectively, as well as Warmage) would be a lot easier. They've already been written, they mostly use Sor/Wiz spells, and they clock in at Tier 3 already.

yeah I thought about it but what about the other schools?! lol... I know it keeps coming back down to lack of school balance. This is why I want to see it played though. I want to give players the opportunity to create a specialist in one of those weak schools and be creative enough to make it work or to create new spells that help the school.


Simple? Not really, that I'm aware of. Moving (Healing) out of Conjuration (probably into Necromancy) helps some, but only for divine casters. You can stick orb of X in Evocation and make them SR:yes, shift around (greater) mage armor, but by that time you're already out of the easy area and into spell-list revision.

You could perhaps split (calling) and (summoning) off from the rest of Conjuration, and use PHB2's (polymorph) subschool, splitting it off from Transmutation as well, but then you end up with a wizard that can't do anything but call and summon monsters.

And can still be brokenly powerful. :smallsigh:

(A better idea might be to break up the schools as mentioned, and give everyone two or three. Not sure whether that really hits the target though; it's quite difficult to drop a wizard with even a piece of Conjuration below Tier 2.)

I don't think I would force splits in those powerful schools, then the caster would be far too 1 sided I think. I thought there were spells or abilities to dismiss summons? Or am I thinking a whole other game?

Also as for druids or summoners... I could always take a 4e approach and force players to spend actions to command their summons rather than having a pet, summons, shape shifting, and running rampant all over the place just by his/her lonesome. *shrug*

[Roguenewb]

2 things

1.) Find SonofZeal's least intervention fix list. His fix for wizards is what yuou want and works well. (Simple explanation:Wizards can only cast an Adept level worth of general spells, all the difference between wizard and adept must be in school)

2.) Whenever you are setting up auto-banned school lists, you have to do it strategically. Conjuration and Transmutation must each ban each other and a good school. Evocation and Enchantment should ban two weak schools (probably each other and illusion). No specialist wizard should ever have access to both Conjuration and Transmutation.

[Wise Green Bean]

I love the enchantment school. It is a cool school with cool flavor, and sometimes I want that flavor for my character. That said, a pure enchanter is literally worthless in maybe 1/2 of high level encounters without resorting to evil methods(thrall is a mystical euphemism for slave). When I play an enchanter, by god I had better be able to pull out a wall of stone or a fireball or something that doesn't target the will save or get caught under immunity to mind-effecting abilities. Some school will never see play not just because one school is infinitely better than another but because some schools simply cannot be played alone. Divination and illusion have similar problems.
I'd still suggest you drop the power as the balancer, but if you decide to drop versatility, at least make sure not to cut the full 7 schools and leave a PC with one. It leaves some that are near and dear to my heart virtually unplayable without reducing a the wizard to firing a light crossbow once a round for a whole lot of encounters. Even beguilers, the class that is thematically associated with illusion and abjuration, has a healthy sprinkling of other schools to make sure they aren't useless when their forte isn't suitable.

[Mechanize]

2 things

1.) Find SonofZeal's least intervention fix list. His fix for wizards is what yuou want and works well. (Simple explanation:Wizards can only cast an Adept level worth of general spells, all the difference between wizard and adept must be in school)

Where do I find this? These forums? google?

[Mechanize]

I love the enchantment school. It is a cool school with cool flavor, and sometimes I want that flavor for my character. That said, a pure enchanter is literally worthless in maybe 1/2 of high level encounters without resorting to evil methods(thrall is a mystical euphemism for slave). When I play an enchanter, by god I had better be able to pull out a wall of stone or a fireball or something that doesn't target the will save or get caught under immunity to mind-effecting abilities. Some school will never see play not just because one school is infinitely better than another but because some schools simply cannot be played alone. Divination and illusion have similar problems.
I'd still suggest you drop the power as the balancer, but if you decide to drop versatility, at least make sure not to cut the full 7 schools and leave a PC with one. It leaves some that are near and dear to my heart virtually unplayable without reducing a the wizard to firing a light crossbow once a round for a whole lot of encounters. Even beguilers, the class that is thematically associated with illusion and abjuration, has a healthy sprinkling of other schools to make sure they aren't useless when their forte isn't suitable.

Well the good news is that I am screwing with the system so much in other ways, not just what is mentioned in this thread, that I will be running a handful of play test sessions to see how things feel.