Iconic Wizard Abilities

[VoxRationis]

So, I was thinking of homebrewing a lower-magic wizard, more along the lines of Gandalf or Melisandre than your baseline D&D wizard, where a fair number of their magical abilities are things we wouldn't consider magic. I'm putting this topic here, however, because I don't have the thing actually done, as I would otherwise put it in the "Homebrew" section; instead, I'm looking for input on what people think a wizard, even a low-magic one, should be able to do. What abilities from myth, legend, and literature are so iconic that you shouldn't remove them, even if you remove a lot of other wizardly arts?

[Dr.Gunsforhands]

Let's see... robes... extended lifespan... and, uh, ability to see magic things that non-wizards usually can't, including ghostly messages, premonitions and such as the plot requires.

...I think that's pretty much it. Most media seem to have it as more of a race than a class. The fairy-tale enchanters who turn children into cookies and whatnot are almost exclusively the antagonists.

[atomicwaffle]

im a fan of specialists, transmuters in particular. They tend to be more thematic. But every wizard i make has Evard's Black Tentacles. I call it The Wizard Killer.

[Spore]

No magic without the bound item. It hurts but if you have noticed most low magic settings have the wizard wield a staff, a rod or a wand. This brings problems with itself. Also I find that most good concepts are easily covered by sorcerers instead of wizards. Tomes are used for unknown incantations and rituals and not to just prepare random energy rays shot at the bad guy/hero. Now that I've talked about what wizards shouldn't have for story telling purposes, let me continue on what they must have:

1) A trademark spell, useable at will. This will be very expensive but I've never heard about a movie wizard claiming "he's out of useable spells/day or out of mana". I know they call it exhaustion or similar but a Wizard is just not threatening if he can run out of anything to do.

2) Some form of attack: Gandalf was - very - proficient with his sword. Others shoot fire or lightning or have frost breath.

Other than that magic is more often than not plot convenience and wizards and the rituals they perform just does what the author needs to advance the story.

[Vhaidara]

I would say at will Cantrips would be a good start. I mean, 90% of Gandalf is Light, Flare, and Prestidigitation.

[Slipperychicken]

a Wizard is just not threatening if he can run out of anything to do.

Is a gunman not threatening if he can run out of bullets?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Is a gunman not threatening if he can run out of bullets?
When was the last time anyone in a (action) movie ran out of bullets?

[Vhaidara]

Also, honestly, yes, in most cases a gunman without bullets is not threatening.

[Humble Master]

Also, honestly, yes, in most cases a gunman without bullets is not threatening.How do you know he's out of bullets?

But anyway, their are a ton of variants of Wizards throughout literature. One thing you might want for a "low magic Wizard" could be the though that "Subtler magic is easier/more powerful". My example will be the Jedi from Star Wars (thematically, Jedi are very similar to Wizards, they just have lazer swords too). One of their biggest abilities is the whole "sense a disturbance in the Force" thing. They can't call on it all the time, it isn't very flashy but it is very thematic and would be extremely usefull for storytelling.

[Zanos]

When was the last time anyone in a (action) movie ran out of bullets?
When drama demanded that they do so?

As far as iconic wizards go, I think being mysterious as hell and knowing a bunch of stuff nobody else has any business knowing is pretty key. Maybe also always showing up precisely when you mean to. :smalltongue:

[Vhaidara]

How do you know he's out of bullets?

Because I misread the word "can" and thought the question was "Is a gunman scary if he has run out of bullets?"

[Slipperychicken]

I think the hazards of magic are somewhat integral to the concept of wizardry, but not completely so. Like how screwing up could end up costing the caster his sanity, harming the caster physically, or making his spell malfunction (or fizzle harmlessly, or spiral dangerously out of control), or letting some nasty beast roam free in the world. It also explains why apprenticeship is so important to the trade, since an inexperienced/overconfident magic-user can wind up doing far more harm than good. The degree and nature of the hazard varies with the story, but it's usually there in one form or another. Typically, greater power is associated with greater danger. Even Gandalf needed to keep himself in check (from possessing the One Ring), lest he be corrupted and become like Sauron.

[nyjastul69]

The problem here is: what's an iconic wizard? I wouldn't consider Gandalf an iconic because he purposefully reigns in his potential. I've never heard of the latter one you referred to so I can't comment on that one. To me an iconic wizard wouldn't do what Gandalf did. An iconic wizard would do what Raistlin tried to do.

[Forrestfire]

I'd say it depends on the type of wizard (and their power level), honestly... Hrm... I think that central to my concept of "wizard" is having most or all of these traits:


Some sort of combat ability, even if it's just shooting basic magic missiles or hitting things with a stick. After all, they're in a dangerous profession.
Knowledgeability. If he's a wizard, he's learning his stuff through study, research, or just practice, which lends a certain ability to know what he's doing.
Powerful wizards will have the ability to go flashy if they worked at it, even if their most powerful stuff is subtle.
Some sort of signature spell that they're best at, or a specialization of magic. Even a generalist wizard probably favors something over other spells.
The ability to use magic (duh), but more importantly than that, the ability to improve their magic. In my mind, a wizard/mage is separated from someone with superpowers by their ability to change, improve, or outright invent new uses of their powers.
Channeled through something. Personally, I like it when wizards have to have a focus of some sort to work their magic, be it glyphs and runes, or a wand, or a staff, a ring, a sword, or another implement.
Overall, I think the thing that separates "wizardry" from other sorts of magic is how much of a science it is. In D&D, wizards are basically academic researchers who can also bend reality. From what I've read of Discworld, the wizards have a good idea of how magic works, and it has a good amount of consistency between wizards, even if the details seem random and all over the place. Heck, in many stories, wizardry (or something extremely similar but named differently, like Alchemy in Fullmetal Alchemist) is, in fact, a formal science.
Building on that, magic should have rules, even if they're nonsensical, hard to know, or change outright when magic feels like it.

I would consider a lot of characters to be "wizards" of some sort, even if they aren't explicitly so. Characters like Gandalf, Doctor Strange, Vaarsuvius, Dumbledore, Negi Springfield, and Harry Dresden are all wizards. In my eyes, characters like Edward Elric and the other alchemists from FMA, or the Kidou users from Bleach, the ninja in Naruto, and even characters like The Doctor are probably wizards of a sort.

I'd expect a low-powered wizard to be able to be a conjurer of cheap tricks, with maybe some combat magic if they're specialized in it, along with generally knowing how (at least their) magic works.
Examples:
Making light, cooking food, making a pipe's smoke turn into a little ship that flies through a smoke ring.
Tossing a bolt of charged energy at someone.
Sending a message with magic.
Jedi mind tricks.
Staying out of sight, be it through invisibility or a perception filter.
Understanding other peoples' magic if it's explained to them.


A middle-tier wizard is probably going to be something similar to what most people think of when they hear "wizard": ability to conjure a ball of fire, or change things into other things, divine information if they know how, and create new spells by working on them.
Examples:
Throwing fireballs, summoning monsters, and conjuring force fields in combat, along with other thematically-appropriate things of the sort.
Taking flight or possibly teleporting around.
Cursing someone, or removing a curse. Healing, possibly, if it's not locked outside of that sort of magic like D&D wants it to be.
Turning things into other things, including self.
Countering other spells if you're ready for them.
Identifying other peoples' magic when it's used.


A high-powered wizard is going to be an artillery piece when he feels like it and a genius magic developer when he doesn't. These sorts of wizards will have complex combinations of spells and ways of using magic that lesser beings would only dream of, and maybe a Dangerous Forbidden Technique or three sitting around locked in a scroll until needed.
Examples:
Raising a floating island.
Raining lightning and hellfire from the heavens to destroy an army.
Implementing a complex ritual in the middle of a fight, then using it at just the right moment.
Identifying someone's unique spell when it's used in your presence, and having precisely the sort of counterspell necessary at the tip of their fingers.
Teleporting around, possibly to other planes of existence.
Taking the form of a terrifyingly powerful dragon.
Adapting and improving on a spell or ritual taught by someone else.
Inventing a new sort of magic entirely.

[Leviting]

I honestly have always thought of summoning and shapeshifting as a more warlock-druid-cultist-witch thing, not as much as a wizard.
However, you cannot remove fireballs. And staves. Those are the two things you need to make someone count as a wizard, and the staff can be replaced. Potions and excessive amounts of books also help.

[BWR]

Too difficult to tell. There are too many differences in magic-user power level and types of abilities across fiction to compile a list any more meaningful than "able to use magic".
Not every magician in fiction throws around fireballs but I consider it a sacred cow in D&D. Likewise I like my D&D wizards more powerful than other classes (not full Tippy-level RAWtardity, but still capable of making reality their plaything).

[MrNobody]

No magic without the bound item. It hurts but if you have noticed most low magic settings have the wizard wield a staff, a rod or a wand.

Let's not forget, talking about low magic, Prospero from The tempest" (W.Shakespeare): his magic is strictly bound to his staff and his book. When he destroys them, he loses his power. It his similar to the "item familar" option used in Pathfinder.

Also, I feel like the iconic wizard should rely on Wisdom more than Intelligence: all the iconic mages (Gandalf, Merlin) are really old and their vast knowledge comes from experience. Gandalf know things, can recall the the names of kings and queen, can remember battles and so on because he was there, not because he studied! And he his wise: he can easily understand "human" nature (has a really high Sense motive, which is based on wisdom) and can foresee many events looking at the "big picture" behind the single event.
Maybe you can set Wisdom as the casting skill: most iconic wizard also use power of nature in thier spells, and are in contact with nature's creatures (feys, elves, elemental spirits) with little difference from druids.
Another interesting add could be something similar to bardic knowledge but based on wisdom.

[Scots Dragon]

I honestly have always thought of summoning and shapeshifting as a more warlock-druid-cultist-witch thing, not as much as a wizard.

Sparrowhawk never had any trouble changing his form when he needed to, and I doubt anyone's going to call him anything other than a wizard.

I think the most important thing, however, is probably the one that is pretty obvious in hindsight but is almost always forgotten about. The most important thing about wizards, as opposed to simple mages, is that a wizard is wise. Indeed, the iconic image of a wizard is far more often a wise old man along the lines of Gandalf or Sparrowhawk, or occasionally a wise woman like Granny Weatherwax* or Galadriel, rather than a power hungry figure like Raistlin. It's useful to remember that the term 'wizard' usually simply refers to a wise individual.

A True Wizard would almost certainly be a wisdom-based caster, and it'd be an interesting class concept to actually go about trying to create.


* - labels as a witch aside, she's pretty much the first example I list of an iconic 'female wizard'.

[Spore]

As for our gunman side tangent here: I don't find a gunner particularly scary because "everyone can pick up a gun and kill someone". I know that it takes training to really hit someone with that stuff. But the cool heroes all do some kills in melee range. Rambo uses his trusty knife, Schwarzenegger's roles often utilize his burly physique or explosives.

The wisdom vs. intelligence thing: I realize that most wizard need high wisdom to be really scary or cool. If Gandalf was as stupid as Gargamel the wizard who tries to turn Smurfs into gold, a lot of his appeal would've been lost. Frail physique and no strength is a given here, dexterity is key. You should be able to see that a brute could snap him like a twig but no one would dare to do so.

[VoxRationis]

I'd expect a low-powered wizard to be able to be a conjurer of cheap tricks, with maybe some combat magic if they're specialized in it, along with generally knowing how (at least their) magic works.
Examples:
Making light, cooking food, making a pipe's smoke turn into a little ship that flies through a smoke ring.
Tossing a bolt of charged energy at someone.
Sending a message with magic.
Jedi mind tricks.
Staying out of sight, be it through invisibility or a perception filter.
Understanding other peoples' magic if it's explained to them.



I was looking for something along this line of general power level, keeping largely to subtler tricks than overt combat skills. Maybe with scrying as well. Are there any other ideas out there?

[Prime32]

Knowledgeability. If he's a wizard, he's learning his stuff through study, research, or just practice, which lends a certain ability to know what he's doing.This. If there's a magical barrier around something, a wizard should be able to dismantle it given enough time (basically an expanded form of Trapfinding). If you need a location protected then a wizard might be able to create a large-scale magical barrier, but only as long as he maintains his concentration (i.e. no other magic at the same time). Finally a wizard might know the methods to banish enemies, but only once they've already been beaten up enough that they can't resist it (the tarrasque's regeneration is a good example).

Maybe an odd choice, but one character who stands out to me as a good example of a wizard is Margery Daw from Shakugan no Shana (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/LightNovel/ShakuganNoShana). All the important characters are supernatural, but most of their powers are universal things that anyone with PC levels can do in that setting, and their actual unique powers tend to be heavily combat-focused. Margery is no slouch at combat*, but she also has a high understanding of how magic works - a lot of the time she acts in a support role, scanning for enemies, analysing or cancelling out plot devices, or helping other characters come up with new techniques, and for bonus points her familiar takes the form of a book. She can also create all sorts of enchanted bookmarks that act as alarms, store weapons in compact form, let Muggles see magical entities, etc.

*Specifically her fighting style is "turn into a wolf-bear that can fly, breathe fire and create illusory copies of itself". Yeah...

[VoxRationis]

Well, I was hoping for a feel of wizard more low-key than creating large magical barriers or turning into fire-breathing caniforms.

[Prime32]

Well, I was hoping for a feel of wizard more low-key than creating large magical barriers or turning into fire-breathing caniforms.To clarify, I only mentioned that part because it was weird. It didn't contribute to her "wizardness" as I perceived it. :smalltongue:

[TuggyNE]

Well, I was hoping for a feel of wizard more low-key than creating large magical barriers or turning into fire-breathing caniforms.

Those abilities that are commonly characteristic of wizards are so precisely because they are not low-key, so this request is inherently paradoxical.

[Red Fel]

The thing to remember is that there are really two major types of "wizard" - Wizard-as-protagonist, and Wizard-as-plot-device.

I'll start with the latter. The Wizard-as-plot-device is precisely that. He can do exactly what the plot demands, but only when the plot demands it. Gandalf can rise from the dead. Melisandre can make creepy shadow things. Dumbledore can know pretty much whatever he has to. There's a reason "A Wizard Did It (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AWizardDidIt)" is a trope, and this sort of character is precisely the Wizard who did it. As such, there are no "iconic" abilities for these Wizards - their abilities are whatever the plot demands, whenever the plot demands, in precisely the manner the plot demands. The only constant is an appropriate level of drama.

Now, the former. The Wizard-as-protagonist has one of two iconic settings - power and knowledge. A classic example of the Power Wizard is Lina Inverse from The Slayers. She may or may not be mature, intelligent, or capable, but what she lacks in those areas she makes up for with big freaking explosions. The Power Wizard is likely to have a signature move - Lina had Dragon Slave (and later Giga Slave), Harry Potter had Expelliarmus, and so forth. They may not get all the important details of the plot until it's too late, but they will blast and blast and blast until they get there. The iconic abilities of Power Wizards fall into two fields. First, a signature ability - usually one freely reusable (but see Lina Inverse, above). Second, a big baddaboom - a tactical nuke that ends encounters but isn't freely reusable. The thing to remember about Power Wizards is that their iconic abilities tend to be damage-based, not tactic-based. Expect fireballs, fireworks, generally anything fire related.

The other Wizard-as-protagonist is the Knowledge Wizard. An excellent example is Harry Dresden, who points out that the danger of a Wizard isn't his spells, but the fact that, with enough information and preparation, he can do almost anything to anyone. The Knowledge Wizard's iconic ability isn't so much a single spell or power, as it is his ability to deduce. Harry Dresden figures out who the vampires are, the Doctor realizes that the new company is run by aliens, and so forth. And while they may have signature abilities (ranging from Flickum Bickus to the Sonic Screwdriver), they have many abilities, fitting someone who sees power as a toolbox instead of as a cannon.

Note also that the two are not exclusive. Harry Dresden, for example, plays the detective card, and unravels supernatural mysteries and plots and conspiracies. He is also a walking natural disaster.

The tl;dr version: Wizards are too diverse, in my mind, to have a singular set of "this is what a Wizard does" abilities. Plot!Wizards can do whatever the author needs. Power!Wizards blow things up. Knowledge!Wizards have tools to fit the need. That's what makes Wizards potent - an inconsistent but diverse ability to do "stuff" that normal people can't do.

That said, here's a convenient list of classics:

Plot!Wizards:
Raising from the dead
Performing elaborate and context-specific rituals
Making the hero look like an idiot
Defeating otherwise unstoppable enemies
Noble sacrifice (but see raising from the dead, above)

Power!Wizards:
Fireball
Lightning bolt
Giant orb of doom
Kamehameha
Whole lot of fireballs
Lava

Knowledge!Wizards:
Sonic Screwdriver
Transmute any thing into another thing
Scrying, dowsing, or other psychic sensory apparatus
Disarming, immobilizing or incapacitating enemies
Solving riddles

[Vhaidara]

You left out Fireball on the power wizard abilities.

[Red Fel]

You left out Fireball on the power wizard abilities.

Power!Wizards never have enough Fireball.

[Felvion]

Illusions could be a thing.
An illusion themed wizard could work wonders with abilities like silent image, prestidigitation, mirror image, dream related stuff and in special occasions flashy spells like invisibility, phantasmal killer and blink...
The fact that he "bends" reality would make him quite fearsome and prestigious. TBH i think i have Pyat Pree in mind...

[BWR]

Sparrowhawk never had any trouble changing his form when he needed to, and I doubt anyone's going to call him anything other than a wizard.

I think the most important thing, however, is probably the one that is pretty obvious in hindsight but is almost always forgotten about. The most important thing about wizards, as opposed to simple mages, is that a wizard is wise. Indeed, the iconic image of a wizard is far more often a wise old man along the lines of Gandalf or Sparrowhawk, or occasionally a wise woman like Granny Weatherwax* or Galadriel, rather than a power hungry figure like Raistlin. It's useful to remember that the term 'wizard' usually simply refers to a wise individual.

A True Wizard would almost certainly be a wisdom-based caster, and it'd be an interesting class concept to actually go about trying to create.


* - labels as a witch aside, she's pretty much the first example I list of an iconic 'female wizard'.

The problem with this is that 'wisdom' basically means knowledge. The distinction between intelligence and wisdom is bascially a D&D invention. Knowledge gained through study I think is the most iconic ability of a wizard.

[VoxRationis]

Okay, I shall be more specific: While keeping in the vein of low-power wizards that don't use a lot of story-breaking (or story-writing) power, what abilities from myth and literature do you think should be included in a wizard class?

[Red Fel]

Okay, I shall be more specific: While keeping in the vein of low-power wizards that don't use a lot of story-breaking (or story-writing) power, what abilities from myth and literature do you think should be included in a wizard class?

1. Knowledge. The wizard has some way to know things. Maybe he has an extensive library. Maybe he has a crystal ball or mystical scrying pool. Maybe he has a spirit of knowledge who lives in a skull. Maybe he's just really freaking old and has seen it all. But he has a way of knowing things. See e.g. Mumm-Ra's scrying pool, Harry Dresden's Bob the Skull, Taliesin drinking from the Cauldron of Ceridwen. See also G.I. Joe ("And knowing is half the battle!")

2. Drama. When a wizard has to be impressive, he will be impressive. Pulling himself up to his full height (ProTip: Tall wizards are awesome), booming voice and thunder/lightning in the background are a plus. See e.g. Gandalf. Full stop.

3. Boom. All wizards must have at least one "things go boom now" spell. Unless they're the plucky comic relief, in whichcase they must have a utility spell (e.g. shapeshifting, paralysis, etc.) that perpetually backfires. See e.g. Lina Inverse for the former, Neville Longbottom for the latter.

4. Nemesis. Wizards are naturally powerful beings; there must always be something the wizard, even a low-power wizard, fears. Maybe it's the cosmic forces that punish those who overuse magic; maybe it's the Fae or a demon; maybe it's the wizard's vindictive old master or rebellious former pupil. This is a necessary aspect of any character with a big toolbox - there must be someone who can match him, someone who exists as a threat to him. (True of most characters, actually, but particularly for a wizard.) See e.g. Merlin (Morgan leFay and Nimue), Harry Potter (Voldemort), Harry Dresden (the entire freaking supernatural world).

[BWR]

Okay, I shall be more specific: While keeping in the vein of low-power wizards that don't use a lot of story-breaking (or story-writing) power, what abilities from myth and literature do you think should be included in a wizard class?

What do you consider 'low power'?
For instance, most wizards in e.g. Howard's stories would be considered fairly wussy by D&D standards. Sure they can summon an Elder Evil to end the world, or travel in time or turn into a snake or something, but a sword in the gut generally spoils their day and they have a hard time guarding against it, and can't just autowin a battle by casting a spell without some preparation. Yet, they are seriously scary and powerful by the standards of their world. Also, lots of what someone might consider 'iconic' are things that others might consider overpowered.

The problem of 'story-breaking' is that every ability breaks, in the sense of altering, the story in some way. Sneaking into the BBEG's secret meeting is a lot harder if you can't turn invisible. Being able to call up the shades of the dead to answer easily questions that would otherwise take months of painstaking digging and bribing can be storybreaking. Tossing a fireball to incinerate a bunch of bandits that would otherwise kill you is pretty impressive. Convincing an otherwise impenetrable official to ease up on the rules and let you off the hook or into some place you normally couldn't go are all situations where magic alters the story to your advantage.

So really, you have to give us some sort of upper limit to how powerful you want. I've read a lot of different types of wizards from the kind where they basically are little more than advanced con artists to the kind which can go toe to toe with gods, and the one universal factor, the sine qua non, is a requirement for intelligence, intense practise and long hours of studying.

[Telonius]

Sparrowhawk never had any trouble changing his form when he needed to, and I doubt anyone's going to call him anything other than a wizard.



Sparrowhawk is what a Truenamer would be, if Truenamer weren't terrible.

[Gnaeus]

So, I was thinking of homebrewing a lower-magic wizard, more along the lines of Gandalf or Melisandre than your baseline D&D wizard, where a fair number of their magical abilities are things we wouldn't consider magic. I'm putting this topic here, however, because I don't have the thing actually done, as I would otherwise put it in the "Homebrew" section; instead, I'm looking for input on what people think a wizard, even a low-magic one, should be able to do. What abilities from myth, legend, and literature are so iconic that you shouldn't remove them, even if you remove a lot of other wizardly arts?

Sorry. The Iconic abilities are kind of broken by default. Gandalf and Melisandre both have some setting specific version of planar binding/planar ally. Gandalf can summon supernormal animals to serve him and get him out of jams (Shadowfax, the eagles). Melisandre can call up demons to kill people. They might not be throwing Fireball, but they are totally making use of some variant form of the summoning line. Summoning or creating spirits or animals to serve you is incredibly common among iconic wizards, even in low magic worlds like Hyborea or Middle Earth.

Changing yourself and others into animals is also incredibly iconic. While Gandalf doesn't do it, other Tolkein casters do (Sauron can turn into a wolf ages before he is making rings. Finrod Felagund the elf prince can polymorph self and other as well). Magicians in welsh literature do it. Magicians in greek myth do it. Merlin does it.

Warping the forms of mundane creatures into servants (Elves>Orcs, Ents> Trolls) is super common among bad guys, again, even in low magic worlds like middle earth.

Knowledge of the future via prophecy is another iconic ability. Merlin does it. Melisandre does it. Very, very common in a variety of fantasy literature and mythology.

[VoxRationis]

Okay, here's the idea behind this rewrite.
Most of the wizard's abilities are actually the application of mundane knowledge.
However, they have a few outright magical abilities. These are limited by either being:
1) petty (e.g., creating a small spark to light a flame with), or
2) long, difficult to cast, and of questionable use in a straight fight (i.e., scrying).
In fact, the wizard should generally be of little use in a straight fight, save for whatever martial abilities the wizard has. The wizard runs great support for the party, but can't do too much on his own unless he's really well prepared for it.

[Forrestfire]

So... a wizard constrained to low-level powers for the entirety of the progression? Even fighters get to the point where they can do relatively badass and superhuman feats... Or do you mean just thematically, and that a smart wizard could still do the sorts of things that a more fantastical wizard could do by applying knowledge and minor magic in the right place (conjuring a bit of fluorine in the right conditions is just as good as many kill spells, for instance).

Actually, that could be really cool. A wizard constrained to more minor magic, that uses smart combinations of spells and their interactions with things to defeat his enemies. Maybe he could also have stuff like pre-prepared rituals, contingent spells set up earlier, and the like.

[VoxRationis]

It's meant for low-power settings and campaigns. I'm not sure what the upper-level abilities would be like, but they'd probably involve a lot of poisons, maybe some hallucinogens or suggestions to mess with people's heads, and the like.
I'd probably use some of the grittier damage variants in UA or variants thereof, by the way.

[Forrestfire]

I would definitely make sure to write your fluff in such a way that it makes sense for manipulation of, say, minds and bodies to be easier than manipulation of elements, other matter, or energy, if only so that it doesn't break verisimilitude for such a mage to be constrained to those sorts of acts (one possible explanation is one that was used in Frozen regarding mind-magic).

When the trolls heal Anna's head at the beginning, they're able to do so because "a mind can be convinced", as opposed to if she'd been hit in the heart, because only love can melt a frozen heart in that canon. Applying something similar in your fluff when writing the class would be a good way to help it make sense. Maybe something like "minds are easier to manipulate because they're filled with ideas that are inherently mutable, whereas matter is a fact, and changing that sort of thing is much harder."

I'm not really the target audience, here, but this does seem like a really neat idea for a class. I look forward to seeing it :smallbiggrin:

[VoxRationis]

Well, that might take a while, if no one has any ideas that work for the character (and I'm sorry if my communication skills aren't quite up to explaining what I'm after.)

[MrNobody]

Thinking about all it was said in this topic, i had a little flash idea for this "to be" class, using a little patchwork between different classes.
I think i would be useful to use the bard as a base. D6 is good to show the resilience of iconic mages (higher than simple wizards); good Ref and Will saves show the mix of agility and strong will power. Spells up to 6th level help keep it "low magic". Also 6+int skill points is good, because "iconic mages" usually have a lot of different skills, not only knowledge.

That said, what would I remove? From skills, i'd take away some STR- and DEX- based skill, like climb, swim, hide and move silently. I'd add instead autoipnonis, even if the character is a non-psionic one. The iconic wizard has an high self control and can use his mind to push his body to endure things that others can't. Keep Use Magic Device! The iconic mage is usually capable of using ancient magic item.
From special remove... everything! bardic knowledge needs to be replaced by the Lore ability from loremaster (that is based on int... mayse shift to Wis?).

What to add? Spell... don't care about the list, make a new one for this class! Iconic mage can do various thing that go beyond the normal division between arcane and divine magic. They can call the power of nature, heal, purify from venoms, deal various tipe of damage, deal with "ousiders"...
So keep it low but mix the classes. Suppose, as said, that we keep the bard spellcasting from 1st to 6th level: for healing, you could put cure light wounds as a 2nd level spell, moderate as 3rd, serious as 4th, critical at 5th. At 6th not "heal" (it heals too much), but mass cure light wounds should be good.
I'd make the iconic wizard a spontaneous caster (never saw/read of gandalf, merlin or other mages to study for their spells).

For the special, i'd add at 1st level a "mage staff", using part of the "bonded item" rules from PF wizard, only appliable to a Staff. Maybe you can substitute the ability to grant one spontaneus cast a day with an extra spell slot of the highest level spell.
For the "great ritual spells" side, i'd had a special "book of rituals", which can use to scribe spells usually of 8th-9th level. Not things usable in combat, but that can do fabulous thinks, either good or bad. Portal, Discern location, Earthquake, Whirlwind and so on. The cons? Every spell has his casting time increased to 10 minutes (or more), and an "iconic wizard" can use only 1-2 (scaling with level) of this spells per week. He may have tons of them in his book of rituals, but for each week it can cast only two (even twice the same spell).
The casting will need the wizard to read from the book, just like a scroll, but the spell doesn't disappear after the casting. Because of this, the wizard won't need to prepare ths rituals in advance.

This is just in input, an idea i had... hope it's been useful!:smile:

[VoxRationis]

My first draft of the Low-Magic Wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?339797-Low-Magic-Wizard&p=17262547#post17262547) is going on a post in the Homebrew section shortly.