Minimum to make the wizard tier 3.

[Devronq]

This might be a bit of an awkward question, but what would be the minmum to make a wizard down to a tier 3 class. i know you could just say be a beguiler or be a dread necomancer but what could you do to the wizard to be teir 3 but still be a wizard. would only being able to cast spells from one school do it, if not what could you do to it.

[nobodez]

This might be a bit of an awkward question, but what would be the minmum to make a wizard down to a tier 3 class. i know you could just say be a beguiler or be a dread necomancer but what could you do to the wizard to be teir 3 but still be a wizard. would only being able to cast spells from one school do it, if not what could you do to it.

Well, you'd pretty much have to destroy the spell list. Perhaps have a dedicated spell list akin to the Beguilers and Dread Necromancers and Warmages for each school/pair of schools (since Beguiler seems like an Enchantment/Illusion combo while Warmage is a Conjuration/Evocation combo). Removing the polymorph and wish/lesser wish (though you can keep least wish, aka prestidigitation:smallbiggrin:).

[Snowbluff]

Well, you'd pretty much have to destroy the spell list. Perhaps have a dedicated spell list akin to the Beguilers and Dread Necromancers and Warmages for each school/pair of schools (since Beguiler seems like an Enchantment/Illusion combo while Warmage is a Conjuration/Evocation combo). Removing the polymorph and wish/lesser wish (though you can keep least wish, aka prestidigitation:smallbiggrin:).

Well, you beat me to it. Hit it where it hurts. That being the spell list.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Probably by going specialized wizard but specializing the worst spell groups and banning the best ones.

[Tvtyrant]

Eliminate all 8th and 9th level spells (they no longer exist) and alter the rate at which Wizards get spell levels. I would pick bardic progression and get 7th level spells at level 19. Wizards are still powerful, but they lack the 8th and 9th level spells that shatter the game.

[Kudaku]

I'd have to agree with the other posters - the main feature of the wizard is that he can learn damn near every single arcane spell out there. In my humble opinion, it also makes wizards kind of bland. Giving him a spell list like the dread necromancer or the beguiler would go a long way. You could also take a look at the pathfinder Witch - it is tier 1 as well, but its spell list is more narrowly defined.

[Emperor Tippy]

Total rewrite of the spell's on the spell list. Doing that for all of 3.5 is practically impossible. Doing that for all of core is only moderately a pain in the ass.

[Devronq]

Total rewrite of the spell's on the spell list. Doing that for all of 3.5 is practically impossible. Doing that for all of core is only moderately a pain in the ass.

Ok this might be alot to ask but... what would be a complete list of all spells in core that would need to rewritten. i know not all but which spells

[Vaz]

Limitless ones. Ones which do not have a set effect. I.e Wish. Even prestigidation. Mass utility spells. Save or dies. Save or sucks. Save AND sucks. No SR spells. No save spells.

In tier 3, you have warblades, trip/knockback crusader/bullrush fighters, and set list spellcasters like beguilers, or warmages, and factotum makes a showing.

Essentially, a minor amount of versatility, but not so much that they can choose one spell to do 500 tasks. They are defined roles within a party, a party could be made up of dofferent tier 3's and not step on each others toes, a 'bank job' so to speak.

[Emperor Tippy]

Ok this might be alot to ask but... what would be a complete list of all spells in core that would need to rewritten. i know not all but which spells

Just of the 9th level spells you need to do Disjunction, Prismatic Sphere, Gate, Foresight, Teleportation Circle, Astral Projection, Shapechange, Time Stop, and Wish. The only one out of those 9 that is even really somewhat optional is Teleportation Circle.

The problem with doing it is that lots of spells are fine in isolation but end up incredibly powerful when used in conjunction so you need to take that into account as well.

And you can't even start doing that until you have actually decided how powerful you want the wizard (and to a lesser extent Sorcerer or anyone else using the Sor/Wiz spell list) to be; and just "tier 3" isn't remotely detailed enough.

[Waker]

Limiting the available spells, perhaps capping the number of spells known are both needed. I did a redo of the wizard in homebrew that I have in my signature under the name of mage scholar that is T2/3ish.

[Curmudgeon]

I agree that a general solution will require going through all the spells available. However, you can make some improvement with programmatic changes. The following alterations drop Wizards down a full tier, I think.

All spells for full casting classes are +1 level higher than listed, so Prestidigitation is level 1 and Wish is level 10.
There are no level 0 spell slots.
No metamagic cost reducers exist.
Every metamagic effect costs at least +1 spell level.
If your primary spellcasting ability is INT, your bonus spells are determined by your CHA ability. If your primary spellcasting ability is CHA, your bonus spells are determined by your WIS ability. If your primary spellcasting ability is WIS, your bonus spells are determined by your INT ability.
There's no rolling for stats, or any other part of level advancement. (Hit points at levels after the first are always average + ½.) Instead, adjust the points available for point buy (points used to buy stats, as per DMG page 169) based on the Tier System for Classes (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266559) (before any of these alterations):

15 point buy (This is where the Wizard is.)
22 point buy
28 point buy
32 point buy
40 point buy (This is where the Monk is.)
You might try 50 here, but frankly you're better off just forgetting classes this weak.
This assumes you're going to start in your primary class. If you change the primary class in later levels you'd retroactively lose points if necessary, but would never retroactively gain points.
Edit: forgot one, added in red above.

[Eslin]

To be honest, I think spell list editing is the only possible change - you either allow the wizard as is, edit the spell list, or don't allow wizards. If you give it a set list like the beguiler or dread necromancer it isn't a wizard any more, it's a homebrew class that you should give a different name and fluff background to (which isn't a bad idea, those two are some of my favourite classes. They just aren't wizards).

If you put changes like making spells have a chance of failure, take longer time to cast or making them all +1 level it just makes the class flat out less fun and screws players who aren't very good with wizard, while leaving the optimisers still able to pull tier 1 tricks.

Almost every change mentioned has meant the player in one of my games who slings fireballs and lightning bolts tear her her out with frustration, while almost none of them would really hinder the one who has his own decanter of endless water powered death star.

Wizards are powerful because of their access to a very strong spell list. You carefully edit the spell list or you go home, everything else reduces player fun too much.

[Namfuak]

I agree that a general solution will require going through all the spells available. However, you can make some improvement with programmatic changes. The following alterations drop Wizards down a full tier, I think.

All spells for full casting classes are +1 level higher than listed, so Prestidigitation is level 1 and Wish is level 10.
There are no level 0 spell slots.
No metamagic cost reducers exist.
Every metamagic effect costs at least +1 spell level.
There's no rolling for stats, or any other part of level advancement. (Hit points at levels after the first are always average + ½.) Instead, adjust the points available for point buy (points used to buy stats, as per DMG page 169) based on the Tier System for Classes (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266559) (before any of these alterations):

15 point buy (This is where the Wizard is.)
22 point buy
28 point buy
32 point buy
40 point buy (This is where the Monk is.)
You might try 50 here, but frankly you're better off just forgetting classes this weak.
This assumes you're going to start in your primary class. If you change the primary class in later levels you'd retroactively lose points if necessary, but would never retroactively gain points.

What I dislike about the point buy disparity solution is that it is very heavy handed. I prefer a similarly programmatic solution which is make all classes have a primary attribute and a secondary attribute, where neither of those is constitution (so constitution becomes the "tertiary" attribute, so to speak). For wizards, this could be accomplished by doing something like archivist casting, so spells per day/maximum spell level is set by intelligence, and spell DCs are set by charisma (with similar changes to cleric, druid and sorcerer).

As for the wizard, to bring him all the way down to tier 3 I imagine you would need to start by limiting him to 2-3 schools perhaps, but also would need to take apart conjuration and put many of the spells that make it so versatile (orb line especially) into different schools, so each school has one thing that it is good at, and a well defined weakness (evocation being only good for damage, most of enchantment failing against mindless targets, etc).

EDIT: This all is in addition to going through every spell that comes up in campaign and adjusting it so that it is not open ended and common tricks with it are taken out or nerfed, such as polymorph.

[Curmudgeon]

I prefer a similarly programmatic solution which is make all classes have a primary attribute and a secondary attribute ...
Aha! I knew I'd forgotten something. I'll Edit the original post, but here it is:
If your primary spellcasting ability is INT, your bonus spells are determined by your CHA ability. If your primary spellcasting ability is CHA, your bonus spells are determined by your WIS ability. If your primary spellcasting ability is WIS, your bonus spells are determined by your INT ability.

[Eslin]

Cue every caster playing an aeshkrau illumian with persistent bite of the werebear.

Again, the problem is you guys are thinking in negatives - what can we take away? How do we make this class less troublesome? The objective here is to have wizards - generalist, study and research based arcanists - have a lower optimisation ceiling. That's a fine goal, but you need to raise the floor at the same time, not lower it.

If you want wizards to spread themselves out a bit, give them incentives to do so. Give them wisdom and charisma based class features, useful things (possibly not directly related to spellcasting - fixed features that a low op player will be able to use, like sorcerer bloodlines or smite evil if smite evil were good) that require spreading out of stats and actual choices in building beyond int>con>dex>whatever, and at the same time remove or alter the spells that make wizards tier one.

Again, the objective of the game is fun. You want wizards to be fun to play or you don't want them in the game at all.

[Psyren]

Aha! I knew I'd forgotten something. I'll Edit the original post, but here it is:
If your primary spellcasting ability is INT, your bonus spells are determined by your CHA ability. If your primary spellcasting ability is CHA, your bonus spells are determined by your WIS ability. If your primary spellcasting ability is WIS, your bonus spells are determined by your INT ability.


Cue every Wizard now focusing primarily on Cha for the bonus slots, prepping no-save spells (like summons, polymorph, solid fog, utility like Fly/DimDoor/Invisibility etc.) and scraping to 20 Int via items - and only when they need 9ths (i.e. starting the game with 14 Int or so and making Cha the best stat.

MAD casting doesn't change much even if you do the most painful MAD possible (decoupling bonus spells and save DC.) There are too many spells out there that are dead useful even with no save at all. And since they still have the primary hallmark of T1 (freedom to change their spell list daily) they haven't dropped a tier.

Heck, Archivists are MAD and they are arguably more powerful than Wizards. The devil is the list.

[Curious]

My personal fix would go something like -

Divination is gone, entirely.
Enchantment and Illusion become one school.
Abjuration and Evocation become one school.
Conjuration is the same. (Move Orb type spells into Evocation).
Transmutation is the same.
Necromancy is the same.

You must specialize in one of these schools, all other schools are banned, completely, no way to get them back. AT ALL.

Ninth level spells don't exist.
Planar Binding doesn't exist.

[kabreras]

Tbh Curmudgeon...

Just ban wizard from your game if its to create a complete new game and way to make charracters.

Your changes not only drop wizard (and clerics) to the bottom of the hell pit for any power it make them unplayable.

[IncoherentEssay]

You could rearrange the spell list, kicking all the better spells up a level or three. Polymorph is great but looks a lot less impressive as 7th level spell.
Most of current the 7th-9th level spells would have to be kicked all the way to epic spells (that is, you'd need the Epic Spellcasting feat to learn & cast them and would only have the epic spell slots to use them with (1/10 knowledge ranks i think). The original spell seed epic spell system would be scrapped as the mess of broken/uselessness that it is.

The advantage of the spell level shuffle is that you get to address the spell power levels on individual basis but only need a few pages of space for it. You also get to keep the generalist wizard as an option and minimize collateral nerfage (ex. fireball can stay where it is so low-op 'zards still have their shiny spell-slinger toys).

A more detailed fix could include casting times and durations on the list and change those around as well. A lot of the stronger combat spells could do with a bump to full-round action and the same goes for cutting the duration of some buffs.

[Kasbark]

When trying to put the wizard (or other full casting classes) in line with the rest of the classes, i think it's important to keep in mind that they should be playable at low level as well. Increasing all spells 1 level makes a low level wizard very unfun to play.

Instead, i would limit their spell selection by only allowing spells from the PHB (you, as the DM could still give him scrolls of spells from other books, but when he levels up he can only choose PHB spells) and then go through that list and ban some more spells. I would focus on:

Spells that gives more actions
Spells that can ruin a plot (depends on your campaign, but many divination spells, and some teleportation spells are banned in my campaigns)
Spells that allow for a a 15-min workday (rope trick and the hut/mansion spell line)

Thats T2 right there. Next up I think i would add a saves to several spells that does not allow for one now. Spells that makes a character unable to act in combat should allow for further saves each round to end the effect.
I should think that would make him T3. And would also have the added benifit of making these spells useful against players, without ending up in a situation where one of your players have to make a saving throw or not be able to participate for the next 3 hours.

[Eslin]

My personal fix would go something like -

Divination is gone, entirely.
Enchantment and Illusion become one school.
Abjuration and Evocation become one school.
Conjuration is the same. (Move Orb type spells into Evocation).
Transmutation is the same.
Necromancy is the same.

You must specialize in one of these schools, all other schools are banned, completely, no way to get them back. AT ALL.

Ninth level spells don't exist.
Planar Binding doesn't exist.

Which means they aren't arcane generalists any more, and have very little similarity with the wizard class. The first one is a less interesting beguiler, the last one is less interesting dread necromancer and the three in between are boring, featureless classes. With no ninth level spells.

In what way is that a wizard? Most importantly, in what way is that fun?

[The Boz]

destroy the spell list

This.
It is complete and utter bullpuckey that the casters don't need to take fifteen feats to make a spell useful as well.

[mattie_p]

Again, the problem is you guys are thinking in negatives - what can we take away? How do we make this class less troublesome?

Again, the objective of the game is fun. You want wizards to be fun to play or you don't want them in the game at all.

Umm, how many class features do barbarians get? How many do warblades get? How many do rangers or factotums get?

Wizards have over 1400 spells available in all the books (http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21494/how-many-sorcerer-and-wizard-spells-are-there-in-dd-3-5). I don't know the exact number, I don't know if anyone does. But that arbitrarily high number, whatever it is, is the number of class features that a wizard can get, not even counting going into a PrC.

That number has to shrink in order for wizards to come down to tier 3.

Wizards can still have fun with a smaller number. So can Archivists and clerics and druids.

The alternative is to give every class 1000 or more class features, to "bring them up." Which is more work?

[Eslin]

Read any post I've made for about five seconds - editing a wizard's spell list is the only reasonable way to keep them in the game in their present form without them overshadowing most other party members.

What won't work, however, is any blanket fix. No cutting out of schools, no increasing cast times or spell levels or pointlessly induced MAD. As stated before, if you want MAD you give them new class features, something that helps out newbies. Any blanket cuts screw over low op players more than high op players, whereas careful cutting or incision of spells only reduces high op (since low op players wouldn't be low op if they were taking them).

[Amnestic]

Umm, how many class features do barbarians get? How many do warblades get? How many do rangers or factotums get?

Wizards have over 1400 spells available in all the books (http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21494/how-many-sorcerer-and-wizard-spells-are-there-in-dd-3-5). I don't know the exact number, I don't know if anyone does. But that arbitrarily high number, whatever it is, is the number of class features that a wizard can get, not even counting going into a PrC.

That number has to shrink in order for wizards to come down to tier 3.

Wizards can still have fun with a smaller number. So can Archivists and clerics and druids.

The alternative is to give every class 1000 or more class features, to "bring them up." Which is more work?

The Spells=Class features is a decent argument if you ignore the fact that there are Prestige Classes which generally advance spellcasting and give class features. At that point it normally falls apart. What incentive does a Wizard have not to immediately jump out to the first PrC they qualify for?

Beguilers, Warmages and Dread Necros each got class features in addition to their spellcasting. Bear in mind that by trimming the spell list down to a few schools you're aiming to force them into the T3 bracket. If they get T3 spellcasting but no T3 class features, then that's not terribly fair when compared to the T3 Beguiler or the T3 Dread Necro.

[BowStreetRunner]

I could keep the wizard in the same tier as a sorcerer without changing ANY of the rules of the game. Let's take a look at what the Wizard (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#wizard) gets:


A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from her prohibited school or schools, if any; see School Specialization...)

So the wizard starts with all 0-level spells. This is hardly game-breaking, so no problem here. Moving on...


...plus three 1st-level spells of your choice. For each point of Intelligence bonus the wizard has, the spellbook holds one additional 1st-level spell of your choice.

Okay, so the player can select between 3 and about 8 spells of 1st-level. Very nice, but again - hardly game-breaking. Moving on...


At each new wizard level, she gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that she can cast (based on her new wizard level) for her spellbook.

Assuming the wizard always selects the highest-level spells available, we are talking about 2 more spells of 1st level, 4 spells of each level from 2nd through 8th, and 8 spells of 9th level.

By 20th level, a wizard who started with an Intelligence score of 20 would then have all 0-level spells, 10 1st-level spells, 4 spells of each level from 2nd through 8th, and 8 spells of 9th level. In comparison, a sorcerer would have 9 0-level spells, 5 spells each of 1st and 2nd level, 4 spells at each level 3rd through 5th, and 3 spells of each level afterward.

Since the wizard has to prepare his spells, the DM can immediately start to diminish the wizard's advantage over the sorcerer by throwing encounters at the party that the wizard is not prepared for. So thus far, everything seems pretty well balanced between the two classes. Moving on...


At any time, a wizard can also add spells found in other wizards’ spellbooks to her own.

And there it is. This is the part that makes wizards so unbelievably powerful. By finding additional spells along the way, they have the ability to potentially learn EVERY spell on the wizard's spell list. Assuming they can find them, of course.

So, as a DM, if you want to keep the wizard in the same tier as the sorcerer, you need to keep a tight rein on the spells a wizard finds over-and-above those they gain automatically as they level. Play an open-book game where the wizard can go into any town and buy scrolls of any spell he wishes, sure the wizard is going to be over-the-top. Make it hard for the wizard to find more spells than his standard allotment, and make sure those he finds aren't necessarily optimal for his character, and the wizard isn't going to be quite so ridiculous as all that.

Whether you as a DM feel comfortable with this approach is another matter altogether another issue, of course. But it is by no means impossible by employing two simple steps (unexpected encounters and hard-to-find spells) to keep the wizard in the same tier as, at the very least, the sorcerer.

[mattie_p]

Read any post I've made for about five seconds - editing a wizard's spell list is the only reasonable way to keep them in the game in their present form without them overshadowing most other party members.

What won't work, however, is any blanket fix. No cutting out of schools, no increasing cast times or spell levels or pointlessly induced MAD. As stated before, if you want MAD you give them new class features, something that helps out newbies. Any blanket cuts screw over low op players more than high op players, whereas careful cutting or incision of spells only reduces high op (since low op players wouldn't be low op if they were taking them).

Err, sorry. I misread what you were trying to say. I agree a blanket fix not the way to solve things.


The Spells=Class features is a decent argument if you ignore the fact that there are Prestige Classes which generally advance spellcasting and give class features. At that point it normally falls apart. What incentive does a Wizard have not to immediately jump out to the first PrC they qualify for?

Beguilers, Warmages and Dread Necros each got class features in addition to their spellcasting. Bear in mind that by trimming the spell list down to a few schools you're aiming to force them into the T3 bracket. If they get T3 spellcasting but no T3 class features, then that's not terribly fair when compared to the T3 Beguiler or the T3 Dread Necro.

I did address the PrC issue, but it was just slid in there. And I think the point of this exercise is to force them into tier 3. Banning schools might get the wizard list from 1400 spells to 500-600 spells, which is still more "class features" than the beguiler or DN gets.

[Eslin]

...Sharply reduce spells known etc etc

That doesn't remove any of the broken combinations though, it just makes the wizard tier 2. A wizard with a sharp limit on spells known is close to the literal definition of tier 2, not 3 =P

[Squirrel_Dude]

Forcing a specialization in divination, and then weakening all the spells that they have to choose from. Drop metamagic feats like Quicken, or other abilities that let them break the action economy.

Strengthening all the other classes might also help

[Eslin]

I don't actually mind the idea of removing wizard entirely and going back to tier 3s. I'd get rid of clerics and druids too in that kind of situation.

Bard and beguiler for enchantment/illusion

Dread necromancer for necromancy

Warmage for evocation

then homebrew everything else?

Abduration/divination specialist supporter type, with medium BAB and a strong class feature that they can use offensively - a ball of light with varying properties, perhaps?

New challenge: make a conjuration/transmutation only character without it being overpowered =P

[Amnestic]

Warmage for evocation
[...]
New challenge: make a conjuration/transmutation only character without it being overpowered =P

Warmage already gets some Conjuration (Orbs), so if we're homebrewing I'd expand that since he's already T4 to buff him up to T3 and have him be the Conjuration/Evocation specialist.

Which just leaves Transmutation. Probably a strong enough school to have all on its own really if you give some decent class features to back it up.

[Emperor Tippy]

A class that gives you nothing but the polymorph spells is Tier 2.

Hell, Commoner 20 + Shapechange is Tier 2; yes, shapechange it just that powerful and good.

[Eslin]

A class that gives you nothing but the polymorph spells is Tier 2.

Hell, Commoner 20 + Shapechange is Tier 2; yes, shapechange it just that powerful and good.

Honestly I'd call it tier 1 with access to all legal books

[Emperor Tippy]

Honestly I'd call it tier 1 with access to all legal books

Nah, not unless you start abusing Wish or Astral Projection. Shapechange makes you Tier 2, it doesn't break you into Tier 1.

[SSGoW]

Play a game such as E6 where everyone is pretty much equal in terms of balance. Sure the wizard gets spells but they only get up to level 3. Higher level spells are incantations and although the wizard has some tasty low level spells... The mundanes are still a threat and are still in the picture.

The wizard is still powerful, grease is an awesome spell, however by getting rid of the higher level spells you essentially "fix" the wizard without putting to much effort into it.

Do note that this is not for everyone but your wizard won't be able to be god in quite the same way.

[Talya]

This talk of cutting back the sheer numbers of spells is silly. Each spell does not equal "a class feature." We don't need to remove level 9 spells. (Hell, how many campaigns even get to that stage anyway, and if they do, and I'm playing a caster, I want my capstone. I damn well better be able to tell reality to sit down and shut up.) This does not present a balance issue, either.

Look at Warmage, Beguiler, and Dread Necromancer. Warmage is tier 4. The other two are tier 3, which is the OPs target for Wizards.

All three of these have massive spell lists, that include level 9 spells. Yet you don't see people complaining about them.

And you know what, while tier 3/4 is considered the best balance point, anytime someone starts discussing tier 2 sorcerers, suddenly people are bemoaning how much they suck. Any fix that reduces the versatility of individual wizard spells hurts sorcerers way more than wizards. Now, if tier 3 is your target, and you successfully drop wizard to tier 3 with spell alteration, sorcerer is now a low tier 4, perhaps even tier 5 and needs fixing. Worse yet, some of the spells you're changing will be on the spell lists of Warmages, Beguilers, and Dread Necromancers. That will lower these classes further, and you're already admitting that they are the perfect balance point before being nerfed. What about Bards? They are, in my opinion, the perfectly designed class, yet your nerfs to lower level wizard spells will hit bards HARD.

Beware of unintended consequences. Every class that shares parts of the spell list with wizards, druids, or clerics will be affected by castrating of their spells. If tier 1 and maybe 2 are the only ones you want to lower, you have to be a bit more selective than going after their problematic spells.

[Grod_The_Giant]

You can't make him T3 without writing a thematically limited list. And doing so carefully, at that-- transmutation- or conjuration-heavy lists may still wind up T2. (Beguiler nearly is; it's only held back because of how easy it is to be immune to his stuff).

But a T2 class is much, much more manageable than a T1. You've gone from worrying about "always has the right spell" to "hope he didn't pick broken spells." A sorcerer or favored soul who didn't pick spells like Polymorph can play quite nicely with warblades and psionic warriors.

So... how I treat the wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12623421&postcount=2)is to give 'em a limited list of spells known that they can cast spontaneously. Beyond that, casting spells from their spellbook takes a long time (10 minutes/spell level).

[Eslin]

Nah, not unless you start abusing Wish or Astral Projection. Shapechange makes you Tier 2, it doesn't break you into Tier 1.

Why not? You can easily use it to grab spellcasting, and even without that there are a bunch of forms with really interesting solutions to problems - and there are a heap of them, the hallmark of tier 1.


...don't cut individual spells, will nerf sorcerers, etc

Actually, it'll just knock sorcerers down to tier 3 as well. We're talking offenders like shapechange, astral projection, polymorph, rope trick, alter self, shivering touch, celerity and genesis - stuff you'll notice is not on the spell list of the beguiler or dread necromancer. Sorcerers will still be powerful, and will definitely not go near tier 5.

[Emperor Tippy]

Why not? You can easily use it to grab spellcasting,
Only what is SU. The idea that you can grab, say, a Solar's Cleric casting is a farce.

and even without that there are a bunch of forms with really interesting solutions to problems - and there are a heap of them, the hallmark of tier 1.
Except that those forms all come with their own restrictions. A golem might give you magic immunity but it doesn't give you Regeneration or Teleport, for example. A Choker might give you an extra standard action but without other spells to cast that is a lot less powerful.

Commoner 20+ Shapechange is Tier 2; and generally low Tier 2 at that.

Pure Transmuter on a Wizard base is a solid Tier 2.

[Eslin]

We'll have to agree to disagree then. From my experience/logic shapechange is so incredibly variable that it would qualify you for tier 1 on its own, from yours it is not.

[Telonius]

Would increasing the casting time based on spell level help at all? Something like, normal casting for 1-3, a minimum of one full round for 4-6, two rounds for 7-8, and three rounds for 9th-level spells. (Obviously limit fast-casting and metamagic reducers as well). The Wizard would still get plenty of versatility from the lower-level spells, but wouldn't be able to use his highest-level stuff at the drop of a hat.

[Eslin]

No. A hundred times I've debated this, the answer's no. The optimisers find ways around it and the less skilled combatants start casting meteor swarm, get bored after a few minutes, start playing on their laptops and come back three rounds like when their character's dead from standing there doing nothing and get fed up.

It takes away options, nerfs the good and the bad spells equally and worst of all removes a lot of fun. It's a terrible idea and always has been, no-one likes doing nothing.

[Talya]

Actually, it'll just knock sorcerers down to tier 3 as well. We're talking offenders like shapechange, astral projection, polymorph, rope trick, alter self, shivering touch, celerity and genesis - stuff you'll notice is not on the spell list of the beguiler or dread necromancer. Sorcerers will still be powerful, and will definitely not go near tier 5.

Not true. Sorcerers rely on spells like "alter self." For that matter, so do bards. Bards are tier 3 classes, EVEN USING all the most broken spells on their list. Sorcerers are similar, except those broken spells are their only class features.

There may be the occasional spell that is just too broken as written (shapechange, perhaps. Wish, maybe, although that 5000 xp is a pretty big deterrent.) But "rope trick" (I've never even wanted that spell on any of my spellcasters), shivering touch, polymorph and alter self aren't among them. They may be strong spells, but they aren't broken on their own. And sorcerers rely on the most versatile spells on the list because they get so few spells known, they need those spells to do as many things as possible. (Therefore, on my sorcerers, I'd take spells like alter self, and polymorph, but might not necessarily take shivering touch.)

[Curmudgeon]

Instead, i would limit their spell selection by only allowing spells from the PHB (you, as the DM could still give him scrolls of spells from other books, but when he levels up he can only choose PHB spells) and then go through that list and ban some more spells.
Since most of the broken spells are in the Player's Handbook, that accomplishes almost nothing.

[Eslin]

Not true. Sorcerers rely on spells like "alter self." For that matter, so do bards. Bards are tier 3 classes, EVEN USING all the most broken spells on their list. Sorcerers are similar, except those broken spells are their only class features.

There may be the occasional spell that is just too broken as written (shapechange, perhaps. Wish, maybe, although that 5000 xp is a pretty big deterrent.) But "rope trick" (I've never even wanted that spell on any of my spellcasters), shivering touch, polymorph and alter self aren't among them. They may be strong spells, but they aren't broken on their own. And sorcerers rely on the most versatile spells on the list because they get so few spells known, they need those spells to do as many things as possible. (Therefore, on my sorcerers, I'd take spells like alter self, and polymorph, but might not necessarily take shivering touch.)

Alter self is a second level spell which is a lot better than several second and third level spells which are considered quite good in their own right (such as fly). Polymorph is even worse in its comparative strength, single handedly making the sorcerer a better melee combatant than a fighter. If we get rid of spells like this it knocks the sorcerer from tier 2 to tier 3, which is perfectly acceptable (though as stated before, I'd want them to get actual class features to soften the blow).


Since most of the broken spells are in the Player's Handbook, that accomplishes almost nothing.

Seconded. There are a few broken or too good spells outside of core, but they don't occur with anywhere near the frequency.

(though I'm not trying to say persistent choose destiny is balanced =P)

[Telonius]

No. A hundred times I've debated this, the answer's no. The optimisers find ways around it and the less skilled combatants start casting meteor swarm, get bored after a few minutes, start playing on their laptops and come back three rounds like when their character's dead from standing there doing nothing and get fed up.

It takes away options, nerfs the good and the bad spells equally and worst of all removes a lot of fun. It's a terrible idea and always has been, no-one likes doing nothing.

I wouldn't call being able to cast anything up to a 6th-level spell in a round nothing. If the player's stuck on casting only the highest-level stuff, they have to set it up and plan for it - which is basically what Tier 3 is supposed to be. Capable of doing anything, but not all at once and not all the time.

[Eslin]

I wouldn't call being able to cast anything up to a 6th-level spell in a round nothing. If the player's stuck on casting only the highest-level stuff, they have to set it up and plan for it - which is basically what Tier 3 is supposed to be. Capable of doing anything, but not all at once and not all the time.

No, but it means that as you get to higher levels then the guy who doesn't know any better than to throw meteor swarms and disintegrates around (making him the equivalent of a tier 4) is unfairly nerfed.

Again, that solution reduces fun (no other class's high level features make them sit around doing nothing for several rounds) and has no effect on a lot of the really overpowered stuff but makes a lot of mediocre or poor options terrible. It's the second worst of all commonly mentioned solutions, running up only to mandatory spell failure chance.

[Gavinfoxx]

Use only these classes:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174628

Or play Legend.

[Talya]

Alter self is a second level spell which is a lot better than several second and third level spells which are considered quite good in their own right (such as fly).


Exactly. Is fly broken?

You're not complaining about a game breaking spell. You're complaining about a spell being too powerful in respect to other spells of its level. That's not a class-balance issue. You're addressing something different entirely. But in so doing, you are creating new class balance issues.

Want proof? Almost every bard takes alter self. There's no such thing as a tier 2 bard. (Sublime Chord is another matter.) Bard is tier 3 taking Alter Self into consideration. Everyone knows bards can fly at class level 4. You weaken what is basically a standard bard class feature by removing it.

[Eslin]

Exactly. Is fly broken?

You're not complaining about a game breaking spell. You're complaining about a spell being too powerful in respect to other spells of its level. That's not a class-balance issue. You're addressing something different entirely. But in so doing, you are creating new class balance issues.

Want proof? Almost every bard takes alter self. There's no such thing as a tier 2 bard. (Sublime Chord is another matter.) Bard is tier 3 taking Alter Self into consideration. Everyone knows bards can fly at class level 4. You weaken what is basically a standard bard class feature by removing it.

And yet bards are still tier 3. Alter self is does far more than a spell of its level should be able to do (judging by other useful spells of its level), therefore in the interests of balance should be raised to a higher level, altered or cut entirely.

The fact that every bard takes alter self is a bad thing. No spell or feat should be an auto pick, it takes away the entire point of having choice.

[Devronq]

So Op here, my plan was to basically rewrite all the spells. (yes i know huge project)

Would rewritting all the broken spells, just that and that alone be enough?

[Curious]

Which means they aren't arcane generalists any more, and have very little similarity with the wizard class. The first one is a less interesting beguiler, the last one is less interesting dread necromancer and the three in between are boring, featureless classes. With no ninth level spells.

In what way is that a wizard? Most importantly, in what way is that fun?

I'm sorry, but you are using an arbitrary definition of wizard which also includes them being broken as hell. The reason wizards are so powerful is almost entirely because they can have access to any spell they need for any situation (the other reason being that spells in general scale way better than any other class features in the game). If being a "wizard" includes being an arcane generalist, then you shouldn't be allowed to play wizards without completely revamping their spell lists. Seeing as that would be an absolutely gigantic amount of work, I don't think anyone wants to do so.

Thus, limiting spell access.

[Larkas]

A quick-fix idea I've been toying with lately is giving wizards (and other T1s and T2s, for that matter) the bard's spell progression. It should help a lot with balance, with the worst offending spells being completely gone from the game, and the "linear warriors, quadratic wizards (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards)" problem should be softened somewhat.

However, as any "quick fix", it tries to sidestep the real problem (broken spells) by attacking a proxy (spell levels most broken spells are found at). It is far from perfect. Problematic spells are still there (Polymorph, Celerity and Teleport, for example), and spells that were perfectly fine are gone (Meteor Swarm, for instance).

Like most people have been saying, the problem with the wizard doesn't lie within the class itself, but within its spell list. I would say more: the wizard can enjoy supreme versatility and still be T3 if you manage to take out all the problematic spells (if it'll still step on other character's toes or not, however, is a different matter).

So the ideal solution would be to go over the wizard's spell list with a fine-tooth comb, noting all the problematic spells and doing something about them (bumping its spell level, rewriting it, or banning it entirely). "Just" by doing that, you would end up with a T3+ class (i.e.: able to contribute to almost everything, maybe even better than specialists, but unable to break the game). And that is not a bad thing: they would still be "batman scholars", always able to figure something out, but now unable to wreck the game. Sorcerers would be knocked to a lower T3, but still probably higher than the beguiler, for example.

Anyways, I've been thinking of expanding that quick-fix I described into something not-so-quick, but (hopefully) still quicker than going through the entire spell list: doing something about the broken spells present in the lower levels and reintroducing balanced spells banned due to being from high levels (think Otto's Irresistible Dance for bards) -- Meteor Swarm could be present as a 6th-level spell for this rebalanced wizard, for example. Oh, and of course, giving sorcerers and wizards actual class features. This would break the "9 spell levels" paradigm, but that's not a sacred cow as far as I'm concerned. And I liked the idea of making spells from levels 7-9 available at epic levels (which would actually help with banning Epic Spellcasting, or at least delaying it to much higher levels), so that's a plus. Be it as it may, this is merely in the realm of ideas so far, so it might not be such a great choice, after all. Time will tell.

PS: One thing I don't see brought up often concerning Talya's arguments: there are sorcerer-only spells. You could ban Alter Self from the wizard's list and still make it available to sorcerers and bards. I'd still make it level 3, and Polymorph, if available, level 6.

[Eslin]

I'm sorry, but you are using an arbitrary definition of wizard which also includes them being broken as hell. The reason wizards are so powerful is almost entirely because they can have access to any spell they need for any situation (the other reason being that spells in general scale way better than any other class features in the game). If being a "wizard" includes being an arcane generalist, then you shouldn't be allowed to play wizards without completely revamping their spell lists. Seeing as that would be an absolutely gigantic amount of work, I don't think anyone wants to do so.

Thus, limiting spell access.

You're nearly correct - it's rare you should be allowed to play a wizard without completely revamping their spell list. A wizard should only be played in a game where others are tier 1/2, 3 at the absolute worst, the game isn't likely to go beyond level 6 or so or the person playing the wizard isn't very good at it. In all other cases, just use a different class entirely.

[Blightedmarsh]

What I would do:

Spell schools:

-Wizards get a school, they get free spells in a school as they level.
-Wizards may not apply meta magic to spells outside their school.
-They may only memorize a spell outside of their school once per day.
-They must ban 1 school of their choice and are particularly vulnerable to spells of that school

Alter spell balance:

-Certain spells get redone
-Spells get rebalanced in level
-Touch AC requires a good dex to hit reliably.
-The way summoned monsters work must be changed
-The way conditions are tracked and inflicted must be altered

[angry_bear]

For wish spells, rule it so that they can't make the wish themselves. Like, they can still cast it, however only if someone else says something like, "I wish for a deck of many things," However, they can't tell the person how to word the wish, just give general pointers on phrasing. The wish also cannot be something that directly benefits the wizard, "Gee Magicinnar I sure wish you had a castle of your own," etc.

For polymorph and similar spells, make it so that they've had to have direct interactions with what they're turning somebody into. So if the player has only read about a troll or something, but has never seen one in person, they can't poly into it.

Summon spells are a bit trickier, but I think that if they had to make a knowledge the planes roll it could work alright. So yes, they can summon a Fiendish Orangutan; but only after researching the plane where they can find one, and then they also have to maintain their relationship with what they summoned. So rather than a mindless servant each time, they always summon the same fiendish orangutan, or others of it's family. So if the wizard wants to summon something to set off a few traps, after a while they either have to roll for diplomacy, or run the risk of fighting what they summoned. Maybe bring in the plane ban for summoned creatures that died. So, if the wizard burns through the entire family of a creature he typically summons, he's got to wait a hundred years or so before he can summon creatures of that type again.

When it comes to access to spells, they don't get free ones when they level. It limits their finances, since they have to buy or find multiple scrolls; which means they shouldn't be able to afford super awesome gear while having a bazillion spells at their disposal. I'm debating on whether or not they should be allowed more than a single spellbook with a finite number of pages... Rough estimate what does everyone think would be a fair number for that?

It's not about limiting spell selection, but limiting the freedom of the spells they want to cast. They can still deal extreme damage, and alter reality; but they still have some rules to follow.

[Eslin]

For wish spells, rule it so that they can't make the wish themselves. Like, they can still cast it, however only if someone else says something like, "I wish for a deck of many things," However, they can't tell the person how to word the wish, just give general pointers on phrasing. The wish also cannot be something that directly benefits the wizard, "Gee Magicinnar I sure wish you had a castle of your own," etc.

For polymorph and similar spells, make it so that they've had to have direct interactions with what they're turning somebody into. So if the player has only read about a troll or something, but has never seen one in person, they can't poly into it.

Summon spells are a bit trickier, but I think that if they had to make a knowledge the planes roll it could work alright. So yes, they can summon a Fiendish Orangutan; but only after researching the plane where they can find one, and then they also have to maintain their relationship with what they summoned. So rather than a mindless servant each time, they always summon the same fiendish orangutan, or others of it's family. So if the wizard wants to summon something to set off a few traps, after a while they either have to roll for diplomacy, or run the risk of fighting what they summoned. Maybe bring in the plane ban for summoned creatures that died. So, if the wizard burns through the entire family of a creature he typically summons, he's got to wait a hundred years or so before he can summon creatures of that type again.

When it comes to access to spells, they don't get free ones when they level. It limits their finances, since they have to buy or find multiple scrolls; which means they shouldn't be able to afford super awesome gear while having a bazillion spells at their disposal. I'm debating on whether or not they should be allowed more than a single spellbook with a finite number of pages... Rough estimate what does everyone think would be a fair number for that?

It's not about limiting spell selection, but limiting the freedom of the spells they want to cast. They can still deal extreme damage, and alter reality; but they still have some rules to follow.

The wish thing still lets you get away with anything you want, you just need to trade wishes with another wizard.

Polymorph wise, a lot of people do that, but a higher optimisation player can utilise scrying and teleportation in their downtime to become familiar with anything they want - plus it doesn't make sense that a high knowledge nature check wouldn't let you count as familiar with a bear.

No spells wise, again, that's a blanket fix that hits meteor swarm as hard as it does shapechange and low op harder than it does high op.

[wayfare]

So Op here, my plan was to basically rewrite all the spells. (yes i know huge project)

Would rewritting all the broken spells, just that and that alone be enough?

Well, it will help, but it won't solve the problem.

Metamagic has not been brought up yet, which as its own issues. Quicken + Celerity + Twin/Split + Dual Wand User means you are effectively getting extra actions -- a TON of extra actions. It gets worse when you planar bind or gate in a thing with casting.

Also, broken varies by setting and GM.

Thematic casting isn't the answer you want (as per your OP), but it is the best solution. If you go full re-write, start with core and work out. If you search through my posts, I created a thread where somebody was kind enough to put together a list of the more broken spells.

[Talya]

You're nearly correct - it's rare you should be allowed to play a wizard without completely revamping their spell list. A wizard should only be played in a game where others are tier 1/2, 3 at the absolute worst, the game isn't likely to go beyond level 6 or so or the person playing the wizard isn't very good at it. In all other cases, just use a different class entirely.

I disagree. Wizards have only been problematic as far as I've seen in games with very good or higher op levels.

The wizard is very hard to play well. Newbies are intimidated, I find few even consider playing a wizard, and those that do either die early (common...actually, you don't need to be a newbie to die early. The wizard and sorcerer are incredibly fragile at level 1, and are without any of the defenses and preparations they can make to mitigate that), or they play the wizard they way WotC playtested them and load up on blasting and evocations, because, believe it or not, that's intuitively what they look like they're meant for on a casual glance. Most of the really bad spells require people to have a certain level of system mastery to both recognize and often to misuse.

It's optimization forums like the old Gleemax and BrilliantGameologists and this one that have made the wizard into the monster that it is, because we poke and prod at the system trying to see how effective we can make things. There's nothing wrong with this, except that so much of what is discovered by people who do this is not readily apparent to the average player. I've seen countless people say that they think the monk is "overpowered." (The delusion that monks are at least adequate still seems to plague such forums at least once a week.) Wizards and sorcerers load up on spells like Fireball. Clerics smack things with a hammer and use spontaneous healing spells. The fighter often shines. This is also why so many groups ban Tome of Battle... they think it's overpowered because TOB's optimization floor is at about mid-optimization level for other classes.


Even in games I play in, I can easily play a tier 1 to the best of my ability without overshadowing the others, because I optimize to a theme rather than for performance. I'm currently playing a druid in a game where natural spell is banned. I took Vow of Poverty on her, not to lower her power levels (and certainly not to raise them), but to fit the theme I was running. She hasn't significantly outshone a party swordsage. (Okay, the rogue has seemed useless, but the player is mechanically incompetent.) I'm not having to hold back.

I guess my point here is that while there are huge differences in power potential between Tier 1 and Tier 5, they don't always come to the fore. In fact, I'd argue in most cases they do not come to the fore. We're just jaded because we know how to make them do so, and we constantly chat with others on this forum who also know how to do so.

The OP asked how to make the wizard tier 3, that's a legitimate goal. If you're playing with a bunch of people who post here, it's probably a great idea. However, I would argue that it's actually not that common that the people playing are going to have the system mastery to break the game with wizard. 3.x is not that broken out of the box, for the majority of players. You have to work at it to break it. And that work includes spending a lot of time studying it, that many people simply won't bother. Gaming is something they think about for a third of the time they spend at your house drinking your beer and making jokes on a sunday night, then they forget about it for the rest of the week.

[wayfare]

I disagree. Wizards have only been problematic as far as I've seen in games with very good or higher op levels.

The wizard is very hard to play well. Newbies are intimidated, I find few even consider playing a wizard, and those that do either die early (common...actually, you don't need to be a newbie to die early. The wizard and sorcerer are incredibly fragile at level 1, and are without any of the defenses and preparations they can make to mitigate that), or they play the wizard they way WotC playtested them and load up on blasting and evocations, because, believe it or not, that's intuitively what they look like they're meant for on a casual glance. Most of the really bad spells require people to have a certain level of system mastery to both recognize and often to misuse.

It's optimization forums like the old Gleemax and BrilliantGameologists and this one that have made the wizard into the monster that it is, because we poke and prod at the system trying to see how effective we can make things. There's nothing wrong with this, except that so much of what is discovered by people who do this is not readily apparent to the average player. I've seen countless people say that they think the monk is "overpowered." (The delusion that monks are at least adequate still seems to plague such forums at least once a week.) Wizards and sorcerers load up on spells like Fireball. Clerics smack things with a hammer and use spontaneous healing spells. The fighter often shines. This is also why so many groups ban Tome of Battle... they think it's overpowered because TOB's optimization floor is at about mid-optimization level for other classes.


Even in games I play in, I can easily play a tier 1 to the best of my ability without overshadowing the others, because I optimize to a theme rather than for performance. I'm currently playing a druid in a game where natural spell is banned. I took Vow of Poverty on her, not to lower her power levels (and certainly not to raise them), but to fit the theme I was running. She hasn't significantly outshone a party swordsage. (Okay, the rogue has seemed useless, but the player is mechanically incompetent.) I'm not having to hold back.

I guess my point here is that while there are huge differences in power potential between Tier 1 and Tier 5, they don't always come to the fore. In fact, I'd argue in most cases they do not come to the fore. We're just jaded because we know how to make them do so, and we constantly chat with others on this forum who also know how to do so.

The OP asked how to make the wizard tier 3, that's a legitimate goal. If you're playing with a bunch of people who post here, it's probably a great idea. However, I would argue that it's actually not that common that the people playing are going to have the system mastery to break the game with wizard. 3.x is not that broken out of the box, for the majority of players. You have to work at it to break it. And that work includes spending a lot of time studying it, that many people simply won't bother. Gaming is something they think about for a third of the time they spend at your house drinking your beer and making jokes on a sunday night, then they forget about it for the rest of the week.

A few years ago I would have agreed with you, but I recently played a druid in a party of muggles...and the results were not pretty.

I played thematically -- I made my animal companion an owl, never shapeshifted ONCE (we had a Bear Warrior, and i didn't want to walk on his deal), took weapon focus scimitar, the works for a low-op druid.

I still typically had a spell for every situation, and was as good a combatant as the barbarian. T1 classes have that much going for them.

[Eslin]

Are you sure? I mean, as you can see from my posts earlier I'm aware there are plenty of inexperienced wizard players that straight out nerfs would screw over, but anyone can get relevant information very easily from google - I've had a player switch from magic missile to grease mid session upon spending a couple of minutes checking her phone.

Playing a non blaster wizard isn't intuitively obvious, it's true, but it is tremendously easy to do well once you've got an inkling of what you should be trying.

[Talya]

I've had a player switch from magic missile to grease mid session upon spending a couple of minutes checking her phone.



This, by the way, is a very good thing.

Grease is the perfect type of spell. It doesn't overpower anything. Ultimately, grease can't win combat. Even if it works perfectly, someone has to go over there with a pointy stick and stab the baddie flopping around on the ground. Grease makes fighters more powerful, not wizards.


Which is a second point...players who do learn a certain amount of system mastery with the wizard will often switch to battlefield control. This isn't because they don't want to outshine the rest of the party, but because it's very effective. However, battlefield control can't win battles. It lowers the difficulty so the rest of your party can win battles.

I think we've been fairly good at suggesting this so far, but the only spells that really need addressing are the spells that let the wizard be EVERYTHING. (Shapechange and summonings and planer bindings are perfect examples, by the way.) The wizard can remain a tier 1 and not be a problem for the party at all so long as they still need the party to win. A tier 1 battlefield controller and buffer still can't win the fight by themselves. They may be able to simplify the fight so much that they can win it with 3 people playing NPC-Warrior classes, but they still can't win it by themselves. The typical "batman wizard" even if played perfectly is not a problem to party balance. He makes the party feel like gods. The only difference is, if by some fluke, the rest of the party dies, he still wins. It just takes him more resources to do so.

[Kaeso]

This, by the way, is a very good thing.

Grease is the perfect type of spell. It doesn't overpower anything. Ultimately, grease can't win combat. Even if it works perfectly, someone has to go over there with a pointy stick and stab the baddie flopping around on the ground. Grease makes fighters more powerful, not wizards.

It's more subtle, but it does allow the wizard to be far more effective than the rest of his party combined. Spells like Grease and Sleep are the iconic save-or-lose spells for low levels. If the monster can't make his save, he's effectively toast. The fighter is no longer a viable party member, he's only there to finish the dirty business for the wizard, dirty work that he could easily do himself (for more on this, check a video by TheSpoonyOne titled "leaping wizards").



Which is a second point...players who do learn a certain amount of system mastery with the wizard will often switch to battlefield control. This isn't because they don't want to outshine the rest of the party, but because it's very effective. However, battlefield control can't win battles. It lowers the difficulty so the rest of your party can win battles.

I think this is the same problem as before. Battlefield control is more effective than most other things a wizard can do, I mostly agree on that (with a few exceptions). However, this does not mean that the wizard is incapable of outshining the rest of the party. With a few "silver bullet" spells a wizard can utterly trivialize what was intended to be a challenging encounter. The "party of four with combined strengths and weaknesses that help them save the day" has been reduced to "the God wizard and the chumps that do the dirty work for him until he can summon monsters to do that".

[Psyren]

It's more subtle, but it does allow the wizard to be far more effective than the rest of his party combined. Spells like Grease and Sleep are the iconic save-or-lose spells for low levels. If the monster can't make his save, he's effectively toast. The fighter is no longer a viable party member, he's only there to finish the dirty business for the wizard, dirty work that he could easily do himself (for more on this, check a video by TheSpoonyOne titled "leaping wizards").

1) Grease is a 10' square. If that really does end the encounter, the DM should be designing the fight better, i.e. having more than 4 goblins joined at the hip to walk in tight formation. Sleep is a 10' radius burst - slightly better, but again, the enemy should really be spreading out some. In my games, even a skilled control wizard typically shuts down only half of the fight with one move at most, not all of it; he makes the melee's job much easier, but certainly doesn't remove the need for melee entirely.

2) Maybe you don't like playing a fighter that gets to roll coup de grace in every combat, but the fighters I play with do. To them, walking up and cleaving through the three harpies I pulled out of the sky is just as much fun as fighting them normally, especially for more annoying enemies. I remember one PF encounter where the DM had regular bandits, and they had a ninja sniping us somewhere from the shadows with some kind of greater invisibility effect active; the fighters were weathering his attacks but getting royally pissed off because nobody could find him. My witch had a bat familiar that I made invisible (deception patron) and had loop around the battlefield; eventually, she detected someone lurking in a square towards the back, and one glitterdust later our poor sniper was both revealed and blinded. In charges the barbarian and lops his head off, spits on his corpse, and high-fives me. I did my job and so did he - fun for all.

[Larkas]

I think we've been fairly good at suggesting this so far, but the only spells that really need addressing are the spells that let the wizard be EVERYTHING. (Shapechange and summonings and planer bindings are perfect examples, by the way.) The wizard can remain a tier 1 and not be a problem for the party at all so long as they still need the party to win. A tier 1 battlefield controller and buffer still can't win the fight by themselves. They may be able to simplify the fight so much that they can win it with 3 people playing NPC-Warrior classes, but they still can't win it by themselves. The typical "batman wizard" even if played perfectly is not a problem to party balance. He makes the party feel like gods. The only difference is, if by some fluke, the rest of the party dies, he still wins. It just takes him more resources to do so.

You do realize that being able to contribute to everything and unable to break the game is pretty much the definition of T3, right? :smallbiggrin:

[Eslin]

The problem here is the wizard is so much better. We build wizards that mostly go towards suck/save or suck/save or die stuff so their melee party members can chop them to pieces - but that's just because they're convenient, if there wasn't a fighter to do that the wizard would just use one of her many, many other solutions.

The reverse isn't close to true - without the wizard, the fighter's screwed. There are so many situations in the game only higher tier characters have access to the solutions to, and wizard gets the best ones.

My players are all level four, currently being stalked by a crazy old lady they pissed off by destroying her village and consistently the only reason they stay alive is the wizard pulling tricks like rope trip and invisibility out of the bag - when the fighter was left alone with her he ended up at -8, when the wizard was left alone with her the wizard turned spider climb on and ran away straight up a cliff.

Admittedly, I'm straying a bit far from the point here, that kind of stuff is tier 3 type play that the fighter's not invited to because all the non casters prior to warlock/DFA/ToB/incarnum/binder etc are kind of boringly limited in what they can do. But my point still stands - the fact that the wizard incapacitates while the fighter CDGs doesn't mean the fighter is any good, just that it's mildly more convenient to have the fighter do it than it is to find a way to do it himself.