Why I should specialize in a School of Magic?

[Kharannos]

Greetings everyone !

The title is self-explanatory. I've searched the forum, but all the threads are about "WHICH ONE IS BETTER", or "WHICH SCHOOLS SHOULD I BAN", for exemple.

I've read both Treantmonk's guide (being a GOD) and Logic Ninja (Being Batman). I read all the arguments about how Divination and Conjuration being the "best school to specialize", but that is not my point.

Actually what I want is: Convince me that my wizard should become a Specialist, instead of a generalist.

Let's put aside those bonus to Spellcraft. We know It's not a big deal. We're actually talking about:
1 spell slot per level of magic VS banning 2 schools.

I have no problem in banning Evocation and Enchantment. Evocation is not a big deal, and although I like spells like Suggestion or Hold Person/Monster, It is as I say: If it fails a Will-save to an enchantment, It will fail my Will-save to an Illusion.

But the point is: Only one spell per level is really worth it? I mean... At low levels (say, 3~5), when you are used to 2 or 3 spells in a day, every one cast counts.
But this always comes to my mind: "I'm throwing away 2 schools for 1 spell per day?"

When you are mid-high level (say, 15~20), I already have a lots of spells per day for the lower level spells, so 1 cast is not worth it, but another 8th or 9th level spell is great.

So... That's it: There is something in my mind, keeping me one foot at each side:

1) Being an Generalist Wizard, that can cast whatever he wants, but with lesser spells per day
or
2) Being a "paranoid" Abjurer, that will always have that good-to-awesome "three-steps-ahead" tactics, sacrificing two whole schools of magic (No Suggestions/Bigsby hands for me =/).

Thanks in advance for reading this far, and another "thank you!" for those willing to participate, helping me to understand better my chosen class!

[Afgncaap5]

I generally play in lower level campaigns myself, and that may be where the benefit lies. One extra spell per day for each level means more at level 5 than at level 20. I can definitely see the benefit of generalist at level 20.

There are also in-story roleplaying benefits, but that's not really something that comes into play regarding the RAW mechanics.

[One Step Two]

I'm with you my friend, banning schools is okay, but I prefer to keep my options open.

Especially if you're an Elf, as Elven Generalist is awesome, gaining an additional spell to start with and when you level. Combine with Collegiate wizard, and you'll save a tonne of time adding spells to your spellbook. Natural Link is also pretty handy, as there's not alot of options for generalists to take to give up their familiars, so they might as well get more bang for their buck.
Their bonus spell slot at the highest level they can cast isn't as awesome as one additional slot at every level, but it more than makes up for not being able to specialize.

[HunterOfJello]

Being a generalist sound great in theory because you can potentially cast any spell from any of the schools.
However, this isn't what playing a wizard actually looks like.

As a wizard you have a spellbook that you fill up with spells and you don't get all wiz/sorc spells added to your spells known list automatically. This means that you're likely to have a spells known list that is pretty large, but nowhere near as large as the list you see at the back of the Player's Handbook. That also means that you will be picking and choosing which spells to learn with a pyramid shaped list of spells known. You'll know lots of lower level spells but far fewer high level ones.

The limitation on high-level spells known puts you in a position where you will be likely have between 2 and 6 spells known of your highest level at any given point in time. Your limitation on spells known in this regard will be your cherry-picking and the game itself rather than banned school limitations.

~

The second aspect of why a person should specialize in a school (or even better become a focused specialist) is the fact that you are more versatile with more spells prepared than more spells known. A wizard does not wield the force of all of the spells in his spellbook, he wields the force of the spells he has prepared for that day.

Simply put:
More Spells Prepared = Greater Versatility

If a wizard doesn't mind giving up a school or two, then he will become far more versatile by becoming a specialist and preparing more spells that day. More spell slots per day means that you can branch out from your core focus and prepare spells that may assist your party in other ways and may be situationally useful.

[eggynack]

That's not really the comparison at hand, and the true comparison paints an even less favorable picture for specialization. Taking on the domain wizard (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#wizardVariantDomainWiz ard) ACF can get you the extra spell/level you'd get from specialization, without requiring any banning, and the elven generalist substitution levels (RotW, 157) grant an extra spell of the highest level you can cast on top of that. Granted, the domain spells are significantly more constrained than specialist slots, but picking up something like the conjuration or transmutation domain is going to get you a bunch of spells that you'll likely cast every day.

Thus, you really need another reason, beyond the basic spell/level, to specialize. The big thing here is ACF's allowed only to specialists, with the biggest ones belonging to conjuration. In particular, abrupt jaunt from the immediate magic ACF (PHB II, 68) is an incredibly powerful defense, and something any wizard would be overjoyed to have, and rapid summoning (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/specialistWizardVariants.htm#rapidSummoning) is great on a summoning focused wizard build. Another option worth consideration is focused specialist, which goes even further down this road in exchange for actually having a spell/level -1 over the elven generalist domain wizard.

As for whether it's worth it, well, that's what those threads hope to answer, ultimately. If you really aren't getting any unique effects that you plan to make use of from evocation or enchantment, then the cost of specialization is pretty low, verging towards zero. Losing 2 schools is obviously worth it at that price. If you do see yourself making use of those few unique effects, then that sets your price. In that sense, the choice to specialize is really a personal one, depending on what you actually see yourself casting, and what kind of campaign you're in. There's not much that you'll get from enchantment in the crazy undead campaign, after all.

[Ghen]

Perhaps the greatest advantage to specialization lies in situations where a player would like to go towards a specific class that requires it, i.e. the Master Specialist or something like that.

Also, it is difficult to get ALL of the spells in the game. If you know that, even as a Generalist, your good Wizard will not use the majority of necromancy spells (many of them smacks of evil) and perhaps you find, say, the evocation school a bit boring, then why not specialize?

I don't think specialized Wizards are intended to have any advantage or disadvantage vs. Generalists; it's just a choice that you can make if you find it especially appropriate to do so (as in the above example, where we are leaning away from two schools of magic alltogether anyway.)

[Ghen]

A wizard does not wield the force of all of the spells in his spellbook, he wields the force of the spells he has prepared for that day.

HunterOfJello said it perfectly. That statement encapsulates a great deal of the benefits of specialization.

[da_chicken]

Personally, I always like going the route of Diviner and giving up Necromancy. Necromancy offers a few good single target spells and not much else. It's not a huge loss. Extra divination spells, OTOH, are always fantastic, especially when you take the Spontaneous Divination ACF [Complete Champion] at Wiz5. Once you get used to just having clairaudience/clairvoyance, detect thoughts, see invisibility, comprehend languages, etc. you get kind of spoiled.

[eggynack]

Personally, I always like going the route of Diviner and giving up Necromancy. Necromancy offers a few good single target spells and not much else. It's not a huge loss. Extra divination spells, OTOH, are always fantastic, especially when you take the Spontaneous Divination ACF [Complete Champion] at Wiz5. Once you get used to just having clairaudience/clairvoyance, detect thoughts, see invisibility, comprehend languages, etc. you get kind of spoiled.
Why would divination specialization and spontaneous divination go together? You should ideally prepare zero divination spells if you can access them spontaneously, and going diviner forces you to prepare a bunch of spells from the school. Going domain wizard with spontaneous divination is just about strictly superior to this combination.

[nedz]

Flavour
It's likely, if you know what you are doing, that you will be one of the most powerful characters in the party — so you can afford a minor loss of power.

Low level
If you start play at level 1, or so, then the extra spells per day will make a huge difference to your survival, and power.

[atomicwaffle]

For pure optimization, i'd pick either transmutation or conjuration, depending on what the party is doing. I like having extra transmutation spells, especially if using the Spell Compendium, where you get access to Fist of Stone and Fly, Mass. I always ban illusion not for power level, but for the fact that it just doesn't fit my play style. My second banned school is probably Necromancy, but i may ban Enchantment. It depends how badly i want Ray of Enfeeblement.

[jaybird]

Also, Domain Wizard is stupid.

[eggynack]

Also, Domain Wizard is stupid.
It is that. Still, you're not doing that badly with elven generalist on the spells/day front, especially because you are furthest behind when it matters least.

[Jeff the Green]

Especially if you're an Elf, as Elven Generalist is awesome, gaining an additional spell to start with and when you level. Combine with Collegiate wizard, and you'll save a tonne of time adding spells to your spellbook. Natural Link is also pretty handy, as there's not alot of options for generalists to take to give up their familiars, so they might as well get more bang for their buck.


Even more so if you're a changeling, as you can take Racial Emulation to pick up the 1st and 3rd levels of elven generalist, and then the 5th of changeling wizard to then swap your doubled bonus around whenever you want. And you aren't stuck being an elf.

[ericgrau]

Well splatbooks make it easier to fill holes with spells from other schools. And it's nice to cast your highest level spell for at least 3 rounds. But ya by the time you hit level 7 going a spell level lower isn't a huge deal, and often your substitute spell is weaker than going 1 level lower. High power splatbook spells are a decent reason to ban. But once you start pulling substitutes for a school that are weaker and/or 1+ levels lower than the spell from the banned school, then you really do have to ask why not be a generalist and cast the actual spell from one spell level lower rather than the weaker substitute? So having a substitute from another school is a pretty poor reason to ban a school.

Understanding that the real bottleneck is rounds and not the number of different things you can do works better. Then you pick your most powerful N spells and if they happen to fall within 5-6 schools then you ban the other two. This tends to leave abjuration, divination, enchantment or illusion on the wayside. Then people say "omfg I can't possibly live without illusion are you crazy?!" Yes, yes you can. Even it has 1,000 good spells, if you have just a few that are better then you cast those instead within your limited time. For that matter you could ban 3 schools containing the very best spell options, your alternatives would only be a little worse and you'd still have a perfectly playable character. If you instead banned the ones with the most good spells, then that's not the same thing as the ones with the few best spell options and you might then have even better spell options to cast within your limited time.



2) Being a "paranoid" Abjurer, that will always have that good-to-awesome "three-steps-ahead" tactics, sacrificing two whole schools of magic (No Suggestions/Bigsby hands for me =/).
Then be a generalist who has abjurations and do the same thing. You'll find more better fitting options for paranoia tactics looking a spell level lower but being able to choose among all schools. What if your plan would work better if only you could charm someone?

For a level 1-6 game such as E6 then it's different, or even a campaign that spends most of its time around these levels. You have to use a 2nd level spell as your backup in place of a 3rd, which is a much bigger jump than 4th to 3rd and so on. Then I'd say specialize for your concept and most others because that's when a spell per day is meaningful.

[KorbeltheReader]

The extra slots at low levels is clutch. Huge. Also, Abrupt Jaunt is awesome. Sure, you can go Elven Generalist and that's powerful, but specialist allows you not to play a candy-eating treehugger. Sorry, I'm a dwarf supremacist. :smallsmile:

Incidentally, I'm at level 9 with a focused conjurer (yes, I know, but I wanted to see what TRUE POWER is like, ok?), and I've missed Evocation on many more occasions than Necromancy. Shatter, blacklight, and gust of wind are really useful spells.

[Piggy Knowles]

At low levels, and in medium-OP or lower games, I prefer specialization, preferably Focused Specialist. Being able to cast a decently powered spell every round is just way too good to pass up.

In higher OP games, though, I highly discourage specialization. A high-OP wizard doesn't need to cast as much in combat, and probably has more ways to refresh spells regardless. Certain tricks such as Uncanny Forethought shenanigans also let you bring your whole spell book to bear when necessary anyhow, so having a lot of "pretty good" options becomes less important than having fewer spells, but always having the perfect answer to a situation. And giving up spells like Mindrape, Animate Dread Warrior, Contingency or Ice Assassin will dramatically reduce the number of high-powered tricks you have access to. Finally, some of the best prestige classes, such as Incantatrix, require you to give up a school of magic regardless, and so you'll end up feeling the pinch down the road.

[Chronos]

If you're playing core-only, then it's about a wash: Specialization is a bit better at low levels, but generalist is better at higher levels. You can, without too much effort, get every spell you'd be interested in into your spellbook, and while you only have a limited number prepared each day, it won't always be the same ones.

If you're playing with more options, then either Domain Wizard or Elven Generalist is far better than specialization, and using them together (which is technically legal but which no sane DM should allow) is far better yet. Either one gives you basically the same benefit as specialization, but without requiring you to give up anything at all.

[137beth]

Allowing spells from more supplements (or just opening up the spell compendium) somewhat alleviates the penalty for specializing. There are too many spells to learn all the good ones, and most important types of spells can be found in several schools. Specialization is also really good in a party consisting entirely of tier 1-2 characters: if there is another wizard they can ban different schools, if there is a sorcerer they can pick up the few good necromancy/enchantment spells, allowing you to ban those safely. That said, if you are starting at a higher level and have access to ACFs, generalist is not a bad idea.

Naturally, the good folks over at Paizo decided that generalist wizards were too good, so they 'solved' it by significantly buffing specialist wizards:smallsigh:

[Shining Wrath]

First question: are there any other casters in your party? My current party I'm the sorcerer next to the Focused Specialist Transmuter. And I'm going to pick up some Evocation and Necromancy because I know he can't get those. I'm not seeing the Enchantment (3rd banned school) spell I have-to-have once I'm done with Sleep at level 4. But we also have a Pixie :smallbiggrin:

So if someone else can cast the just-right spell when you can't it takes some of the sting out of banning schools.

On the other hand, there are feats to get more spells at lower levels - Apprentice will let you start with one more first level plus some bonuses, Precocious Apprentice will let you start with one more second level (slightly gimped). If you view specialization as primarily a lower-level benefit, maybe you should burn a feat at first level and keep your options open.

[SinsI]

HunterOfJello said it perfectly. That statement encapsulates a great deal of the benefits of specialization.

Unless he has 15 minutes and a free slot, in which case he wields all spells he knows...

Another huge advantage of generalist wizard is ability to use all magic items. I'd say that's the biggest weak point of specialization.

If you want to cast more often - get a wand or Pearl of Power!

[Chronos]

Quoth 137ben:

Allowing spells from more supplements (or just opening up the spell compendium) somewhat alleviates the penalty for specializing. There are too many spells to learn all the good ones...
Not true. Even if you literally wanted to learn all the spells, that only uses up something like 1/7 of your WBL. Just how many spells count as "the good ones" is a matter of taste, but it should be considerably less than that.

[SinsI]

Not true. Even if you literally wanted to learn all the spells, that only uses up something like 1/7 of your WBL. Just how many spells count as "the good ones" is a matter of taste, but it should be considerably less than that.

The only guaranteed way to get a spell is to research it.
You need:
Access to a library
1,000gp expenditure per week
1 week per spell level
Spellcraft check of 10 + level of spell means the character was successful.

If you want all the spells, that's considerably more than 1/7 of your WBL.

[Shining Wrath]

Not true. Even if you literally wanted to learn all the spells, that only uses up something like 1/7 of your WBL. Just how many spells count as "the good ones" is a matter of taste, but it should be considerably less than that.

I did the math (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?318002-Gotta-Get-em-All-cost-to-copy-every-spell-into-your-book) on this once upon a time. I came up with ~$91k, assuming you use Blessed Books.

[Sudain]

Being a generalist sound great in theory because you can potentially cast any spell from any of the schools.
However, this isn't what playing a wizard actually looks like.

As a wizard you have a spellbook that you fill up with spells and you don't get all wiz/sorc spells added to your spells known list automatically. This means that you're likely to have a spells known list that is pretty large, but nowhere near as large as the list you see at the back of the Player's Handbook. That also means that you will be picking and choosing which spells to learn with a pyramid shaped list of spells known. You'll know lots of lower level spells but far fewer high level ones.

The limitation on high-level spells known puts you in a position where you will be likely have between 2 and 6 spells known of your highest level at any given point in time. Your limitation on spells known in this regard will be your cherry-picking and the game itself rather than banned school limitations.

~

The second aspect of why a person should specialize in a school (or even better become a focused specialist) is the fact that you are more versatile with more spells prepared than more spells known. A wizard does not wield the force of all of the spells in his spellbook, he wields the force of the spells he has prepared for that day.

Simply put:
More Spells Prepared = Greater Versatility

If a wizard doesn't mind giving up a school or two, then he will become far more versatile by becoming a specialist and preparing more spells that day. More spell slots per day means that you can branch out from your core focus and prepare spells that may assist your party in other ways and may be situationally useful.


Understanding that the real bottleneck is rounds and not the number of different things you can do works better. Then you pick your most powerful N spells and if they happen to fall within 5-6 schools then you ban the other two.

These are the reasons why you would specialize or not.

For me, I would ask you can you fill your party role, and do you have enough 'fun' spells?

[Psyren]

Note that specializing in Pathfinder is less painful. You still give up two schools but if you absolutely need to cast a spell from one of them (say, you really want that Contingency from Evocation) you can still do so, it just costs you two slots instead of one.

[Ssalarn]

Note that specializing in Pathfinder is less painful. You still give up two schools but if you absolutely need to cast a spell from one of them (say, you really want that Contingency from Evocation) you can still do so, it just costs you two slots instead of one.

So if you memorize one spell from your opposition school, you're basically in the exact same place as the generalist. In PF there's pretty much no reason not to specialize.

[Kharannos]

Being a generalist sound great in theory because you can potentially cast any spell from any of the schools.
However, this isn't what playing a wizard actually looks like.

As a wizard you have a spellbook that you fill up with spells and you don't get all wiz/sorc spells added to your spells known list automatically. This means that you're likely to have a spells known list that is pretty large, but nowhere near as large as the list you see at the back of the Player's Handbook. That also means that you will be picking and choosing which spells to learn with a pyramid shaped list of spells known. You'll know lots of lower level spells but far fewer high level ones.

The limitation on high-level spells known puts you in a position where you will be likely have between 2 and 6 spells known of your highest level at any given point in time. Your limitation on spells known in this regard will be your cherry-picking and the game itself rather than banned school limitations.

~

The second aspect of why a person should specialize in a school (or even better become a focused specialist) is the fact that you are more versatile with more spells prepared than more spells known. A wizard does not wield the force of all of the spells in his spellbook, he wields the force of the spells he has prepared for that day.

Actually, This is one of the best arguments in this thread towards specialization. I'll keep that in mind =)


Then be a generalist who has abjurations and do the same thing. You'll find more better fitting options for paranoia tactics looking a spell level lower but being able to choose among all schools. What if your plan would work better if only you could charm someone?

Ok, good point: I don't need to be a specialist to have a "favored" school. Or roleplay an Abjurer. I can be a Generalist that simply LIKES Abjuration. Or Illusion (as I do). The point is: spell slots.
If you have more spell slots, you have more "cunning tricks" in the sleeve. But I've got your point.
People tend to discard Enchantment because of combat. Enchantment can be easily replaced by other schools as far as we're talking about combat, BUT when we are talking about a roleplay situation, or actually we're talking about solving something without a combat (they won't attack you if they actually LIKE you), then Enchantment is actually very good. For example:

You and your party is being held captive in a prision cell.
You can see the guard, but casting suggestion on him won't make him hand over the keys. It can't force you to do something stupid like that, but you can cast an Illusion, of a frightening monster, crawling and sneezing for food, towards the guard. Maybe NOW is a good time to cast that Suggestion spell and say:
"Hey, we're really good at killing monsters. You already know that, right? Maybe if you can free us from this cell, we can kill the monster and by that, we can save you... Or would you rather die to that thing just to keep us locked for your so-called master that is not even here, while you are about to be attacked doing his job?"


First question: are there any other casters in your party? My current party I'm the sorcerer next to the Focused Specialist Transmuter. And I'm going to pick up some Evocation and Necromancy because I know he can't get those. I'm not seeing the Enchantment (3rd banned school) spell I have-to-have once I'm done with Sleep at level 4. But we also have a Pixie :smallbiggrin:

So if someone else can cast the just-right spell when you can't it takes some of the sting out of banning schools.

On the other hand, there are feats to get more spells at lower levels - Apprentice will let you start with one more first level plus some bonuses, Precocious Apprentice will let you start with one more second level (slightly gimped). If you view specialization as primarily a lower-level benefit, maybe you should burn a feat at first level and keep your options open.

Ok, I just noticed I haven't talked about my character. I'll be playing a Human Wizard (so no elf-feats for me =/). I enjoy sticking with the Core books spells and feats, BUT the DM allows them. Of course, I'll get some of the good things, but I don't like being way overpowered (Abrupt Jaunt? Really? The same goes for Domain wizard... Really that some DM allow this kind of stuff?), but you can be sure I'll have some Orb spells in my list =)

We USUALLY play low-level campaigns with low-magic. That means levels from 3 to 10, and low magical gear, BUT this time, It's a new DM.
I don't know what he'll do, but I don't think he'll be wandering much from this.

But don't consider this as useful information! I'm actually researching this build because I like to do it. The little abjurer in my likes to create a build for the sake of build-creating purposes. I don't care if I'll never use a 9th level spell, as long as this Wizard is MY wizard, and I like him.

About the feats.... I don't know many of these... I'll look it up. Maybe i can solve the "2 spells per day" problem with something less-aggressive than burning up two schools =)


Unless he has 15 minutes and a free slot, in which case he wields all spells he knows...

Another huge advantage of generalist wizard is ability to use all magic items. I'd say that's the biggest weak point of specialization.

If you want to cast more often - get a wand or Pearl of Power!

As I said, probably I'll never see a Pearl of Power in my game, but that's OK. :smallsmile:

Not being able to cast an enchantment scroll hurts. A lot.
And It is fun for you to bring up the topic of Free Slots. I never saw ANYONE talking about It.

I think It's incredibly useful, but no one talks about It. It almost looks like everyone comes out of bed with the spells prepared.

================================================== ==========

Let me ask you a question, then:
Let's pretend I'll give up the specialization idea, because I really don't want to give up some good Evocations (Shatter is amazing!) and Enchantment (Read again what I said about Suggestion up there).

So, I'm wasting spells per day to keep these schools available.
But, even so, I'm a Wizard. I have a limited amount of castings per day, specialist or not.

I would probably favour Abjurations (C'mon... being alive is way too much fun!), Illusions (i love those !), Conjurations (it does everything), Transmutations (it does everything), Necromancies (debuffs) and some Divinations here and there.

For those more experienced in the Wizard Class than myself: You actually HAD spell slots enough to use all those spells? I mean... It's not that I don't like Enchantment, but with the limited amount of castings per day, would I actually have it prepared (in the place of something else)?
Or it would be one of those spells that you have in your Spellbook, but you will NEVER have it prepared... And then... BAM! The perfect moment appears.... and I don't have it...

What I'm most concerned right now is: I'll sacrifice spells per day to keep those two schools, but I probably won't have them prepared, because there is a lot of more useful and powerful stuff using my slots. And then, I'll have sacrificed all those spell slots for what? A scroll of shatter here, a scroll of Suggestion there... Or the those rare moments you atually KNOW what you will find, and It is only will-limited human enemies (like thugs in the docs), and dominating them is more useful than using an illusion (since both will work on will-limited thugs).

What do you guys think about it?
Thanks again for your time and insight about this topic. I'm having a great time talking to you guys.
I can't remeber the last time I had such a nice conversation about RPG rules, builds and stuff! :smallsmile:

PS: Ah, a quick question: A lot of people said that specialization works better on low-level, but a 20th level wizard probably won't have a lot of 9th level spells, either. Being able to cast something like Time Stop twice in a combat isn't enough to think Specialization is good at higher-levels too?

[ericgrau]

When you have 9ths you also have 8ths which are also pretty darn good. Even 7ths are pretty handy at level 17. Running out of useful spells isn't really an issue and those extra spells aren't all that useful. Plus you likely have 2 9ths from a bonus spell and tons of magical gear. Heck at that point you can even afford a staff with more 9s on it (but before 17 there are other options besides staff). And so without spending days digging through splatbooks you may lose more from missing a good 8th or 7th than having yet another 9th that's not in the school you want.

When you run out of 3rd level spells OTOH you need to substitute in a 2nd level spell. Which hurts quite a bit. So does a 1st for a 2nd. A 1st-5th level specialist is usually better than a generalist. Casting a 3rd instead of a 4th only hurts a little, and you barely even feel casting a 4th instead of a 5th even though it is a little worse. And so on.

Being forced to flesh to stone (level 6) cast finger of death (level 7) or irresistible dance (level 8) when a resilient sphere (level 4) is usually better OTOH really hurts. You have more 4th through 6th-8th level spells than you'll ever cast in a day, but having an extra finger of death really isn't getting you anywhere for taking out that single target via SR no, immunity unlikely and targeting the lowest average save. Even lumbering giants have a surprisingly high will save but their reflex save is poor. And few things have low fort that aren't immune or resistant to most fort effects.

By mid level the question isn't how many options you have. You have 20+, more than most people know what to do with. The real question is how good are those options? You might assume spell level is all that matters and so specialization is better for more high level spells. But when you need a particular spell for a situation and your alternative is as bad as a spell 2 or more levels lower, the exact opposite is true since your extra "high level" spell effectively isn't and then the generalist effectively has more high level spells.

[Angelalex242]

Isn't a specialist wizard (Tier 1) just trying too hard to be a Sorcerer (Tier 2) for no good reason?

[chaos_redefined]

Let's take a conjurer who bans evocation and enchantment, and a generalist. We'll give them both 18 intelligence.

At first level, he has 3 spells per day, while the generalist has 2. (Not counting cantrips coz they hardly matter) This means that, each day, the conjurer bans 5 schools when choosing his list, while the generalist chooses to ban 6! Sure, some of the conjurer's choices are locked in, but that means that the generalist is less general than the wizard.

At second level, not much changes. Both are still banning more than 2 schools simply because they can't prepare that many spells.

At third level, the conjurer has 7 spells per day, 2 of which are conjuration. The generalist has 5. So, the conjurer gets to represent 6 schools in his spells per day, while the generalist has 5. Funny... that still sounds like the generalist is less general than the conjurer. Clearly crazy talk, right?

At fourth level, the conjurer has 9 spells per day, 2 of which are conjuration. The generalist has 7. Finally, the generalist has more schools represented in his spell list than the conjurer. If he chooses 7 different spells from different schools. If you wanted to cast Grease and Glitterdust... maybe you should have been a conjurer instead?

The trend does eventually allow you to have spells of all schools with a few representations... but most of those castings are from low level spells. Some schools won't be represented in your higher level spells at all. As in, a 10th level wizard won't be able to represent all 8 schools in his level 4s and level 5s. Sure, the lower levels are a different matter. But the best part of being a 10th level wizard isn't your ability to cast first level spells.

[Chronos]

Again a reminder that the whole point of a wizard is that you don't need to prepare the same spells each day. In the beginning of an adventure, you might not know much about what's going on, and so want to prepare a bunch of divination spells to try to figure things out. At the end of the adventure, you probably know exactly what you need to do, and just need to go in and do it, and so might not prepare any divinations at all. And depending on what you get from those early divination spells, you might learn that you're facing a bunch of undead, or no undead at all, or large masses of weak opponents, or a few strong ones, or other spellcasters, or melee brutes. The best spells are different for all of those situations, so you'll be preparing different spells in each of them. And don't forget about item crafting: There are some really nice magic items out there, that require spells which are very seldom useful. If you're a generalist wizard for whom having a niche spell in your book costs you almost nothing, that's no problem: You just prepare that spell once, make your item, and then go back to ignoring it. But if you've banned that spell's school, you're out of luck.

[Kharannos]

Let's take a conjurer who bans evocation and enchantment, and a generalist. We'll give them both 18 intelligence.

At first level, he has 3 spells per day, while the generalist has 2. (Not counting cantrips coz they hardly matter) This means that, each day, the conjurer bans 5 schools when choosing his list, while the generalist chooses to ban 6! Sure, some of the conjurer's choices are locked in, but that means that the generalist is less general than the wizard.

At second level, not much changes. Both are still banning more than 2 schools simply because they can't prepare that many spells.

At third level, the conjurer has 7 spells per day, 2 of which are conjuration. The generalist has 5. So, the conjurer gets to represent 6 schools in his spells per day, while the generalist has 5. Funny... that still sounds like the generalist is less general than the conjurer. Clearly crazy talk, right?

At fourth level, the conjurer has 9 spells per day, 2 of which are conjuration. The generalist has 7. Finally, the generalist has more schools represented in his spell list than the conjurer. If he chooses 7 different spells from different schools. If you wanted to cast Grease and Glitterdust... maybe you should have been a conjurer instead?

The trend does eventually allow you to have spells of all schools with a few representations... but most of those castings are from low level spells. Some schools won't be represented in your higher level spells at all. As in, a 10th level wizard won't be able to represent all 8 schools in his level 4s and level 5s. Sure, the lower levels are a different matter. But the best part of being a 10th level wizard isn't your ability to cast first level spells.

The whole point is: why should my 4th level wizard cast 7 spells, if he can cast 9?
In the other hand: 2 spells really compensate the loss of two schools?

What I'm really concerned is that I'll give up those slots AND I'll never have enchantment spells prepared anyway. Not because it is bad. Because I can barely see "encounters" (combat or not), that I can solve with an enchantment spell and cannot with other schools.

Don't get me wrong. In this moment, I'm inclined to be a Generalist, after reading all the replies. I just "feel" that i will ocasionally "ban" both evocation and enchantment anyway, because as you stated, my spell list is not great enough to allow me to prepare those spells.
It's important to remember I probably will need more than 1 spell slot for spells I wanna cast twice.

[KorbeltheReader]

People tend to discard Enchantment because of combat. Enchantment can be easily replaced by other schools as far as we're talking about combat, BUT when we are talking about a roleplay situation, or actually we're talking about solving something without a combat (they won't attack you if they actually LIKE you), then Enchantment is actually very good. For example:

You and your party is being held captive in a prision cell.
You can see the guard, but casting suggestion on him won't make him hand over the keys. It can't force you to do something stupid like that, but you can cast an Illusion, of a frightening monster, crawling and sneezing for food, towards the guard. Maybe NOW is a good time to cast that Suggestion spell and say:
"Hey, we're really good at killing monsters. You already know that, right? Maybe if you can free us from this cell, we can kill the monster and by that, we can save you... Or would you rather die to that thing just to keep us locked for your so-called master that is not even here, while you are about to be attacked doing his job?"
I would advise against using this line of reasoning to determine what spells to pick. Almost every spell in the game is clutch in one situation or another. You can look at any spell and think, "this would be great if I were neck deep in quicksand..." or "ooh, because I could run into this exact creature after I've blown through my higher level spells, in which case..." or "well, if I were polymorphed into a peanut butter sorcerer with a thick candy shell..."

What you actually want are spells that are broadly useful, where it's pretty rare for you to be in a situation where they wouldn't be helpful. Suggestion is great for many situations, yes, which is why it's considered one of the very best enchantments. Now, a much more common scenario than the jail situation you described is the party facing a dungeon full of undead. Now tell me how helpful that suggestion spell is going to be. Or the party facing an evil spellcaster (unlikely to fail any will saves). Or any type of construct. Or any type of plant creature. Or even something that doesn't speak your language, if you didn't first cast tongues. Good luck in that ogre/goblin/orc/giant/justaboutanythingevil adventure.

This is why conjuration and transmutation are considered so good. Summons are almost always useful: for combat, for spellcasting backup, as BFC, for setting off traps, for intimidation, for scouting, etc. A cloud spell is useful in almost any combat. Teleports are always handy. You'll never, ever go a full day of adventuring without casting polymorph if it's in your spellbook. Buffs are often broadly useful. Most of all, often these spells are still helpful even if the bad guy has good saves, unlike the vast majority of enchantments.

Not saying you should definitely go specialist or anything like that, nor am I saying you shouldn't memorize suggestion. Just saying that, whatever you pick, look for spells you are pretty sure you would use every day rather than spells that you think would be helpful in specific situations (unless, of course, it's extremely likely that you are going to find yourself in that situation on a regular basis).

[Kharannos]

I would advise against using this line of reasoning to determine what spells to pick. Almost every spell in the game is clutch in one situation or another. You can look at any spell and think, "this would be great if I were neck deep in quicksand..." or "ooh, because I could run into this exact creature after I've blown through my higher level spells, in which case..." or "well, if I were polymorphed into a peanut butter sorcerer with a thick candy shell..."

What you actually want are spells that are broadly useful, where it's pretty rare for you to be in a situation where they wouldn't be helpful. Suggestion is great for many situations, yes, which is why it's considered one of the very best enchantments. Now, a much more common scenario than the jail situation you described is the party facing a dungeon full of undead. Now tell me how helpful that suggestion spell is going to be. Or the party facing an evil spellcaster (unlikely to fail any will saves). Or any type of construct. Or any type of plant creature. Or even something that doesn't speak your language, if you didn't first cast tongues. Good luck in that ogre/goblin/orc/giant/justaboutanythingevil adventure.

This is why conjuration and transmutation are considered so good. Summons are almost always useful: for combat, for spellcasting backup, as BFC, for setting off traps, for intimidation, for scouting, etc. A cloud spell is useful in almost any combat. Teleports are always handy. You'll never, ever go a full day of adventuring without casting polymorph if it's in your spellbook. Buffs are often broadly useful. Most of all, often these spells are still helpful even if the bad guy has good saves, unlike the vast majority of enchantments.

Not saying you should definitely go specialist or anything like that, nor am I saying you shouldn't memorize suggestion. Just saying that, whatever you pick, look for spells you are pretty sure you would use every day rather than spells that you think would be helpful in specific situations (unless, of course, it's extremely likely that you are going to find yourself in that situation on a regular basis).

YEEEES! You got it! That's the major concern. All enchantment spells, for me, are way too situational for me to have them prepared, so I'll lose the specialization slots AND won't cast thosespells anyway.

[Killer Angel]

But the point is: Only one spell per level is really worth it? I mean... At low levels (say, 3~5), when you are used to 2 or 3 spells in a day, every one cast counts.
But this always comes to my mind: "I'm throwing away 2 schools for 1 spell per day?"

Let's keep it simple.
IMO, the key is: you gain an additional spell for every level you can cast, so also the highest one.
this means: at lev. 15, you don't cast ONE 8th lev. spell, but TWO 8th lev. spells. Basically, it doubles your maximum power.

[SinsI]

For those more experienced in the Wizard Class than myself: You actually HAD spell slots enough to use all those spells? I mean... It's not that I don't like Enchantment, but with the limited amount of castings per day, would I actually have it prepared (in the place of something else)?
Or it would be one of those spells that you have in your Spellbook, but you will NEVER have it prepared... And then... BAM! The perfect moment appears.... and I don't have it...

What I'm most concerned right now is: I'll sacrifice spells per day to keep those two schools, but I probably won't have them prepared, because there is a lot of more useful and powerful stuff using my slots. And then, I'll have sacrificed all those spell slots for what? A scroll of shatter here, a scroll of Suggestion there... Or the those rare moments you actually KNOW what you will find, and It is only will-limited human enemies (like thugs in the docs), and dominating them is more useful than using an illusion (since both will work on will-limited thugs).

The answer is: have you ever had enough ROUNDS to use all your spell slots?
As a wizard, you memorize spells that are good once per encounter and refresh the ones you've used up with Pearls of Power after the encounter.
For spells like Fireball that you might want to cast a bit more often, it is usually better to rely on a wand( or reserve feat for specialist).
It is best to not prepare Divination spells in the morning - instead, keep those slots free. (also, IIRC, there's a prestige class that allows you to cast Divination spells spontaneously)
If "the perfect moment appears", you either use that free slot and memorize it, or, if you are in combat, use a scroll with the appropriate spell - an option you are denied if you ban that spell school.

[Angelalex242]

Again, isn't the specialist just trying to be a sorcerer, and actually moving himself DOWN the Tier List for his lack of versatility?

[Psyren]

Again, isn't the specialist just trying to be a sorcerer, and actually moving himself DOWN the Tier List for his lack of versatility?

No, because he retains the main advantage of a wizard i.e. being able to prepare one-off/utility spells without locking himself out of valuable general-use spells known. (Also supplementary benefits, like Intelligence being more useful overall than Charisma, getting bonus feats that the sorcerer does not, and access to useful ACFs like Abrupt Jaunt.)

[Talya]

You probably shouldn't specialize. You take Elven generalist and enjoy having the best spells from every school...because every school has great things it can do that nobody else can replicate.

[Psyren]

EG only gives you a bonus slot of your highest level though, while specializing gives you a bonus slot of every level. And as mentioned above and previously in this thread, the specializations also have useful ACFs like Abrupt Jaunt.

[Kurald Galain]

Again, isn't the specialist just trying to be a sorcerer, and actually moving himself DOWN the Tier List for his lack of versatility?

No; rather, it's the exact opposite: the specialist is more versatile than the generalist, and the Focused Specialist (if allowed) is even better than that. Here's why (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1145491). I'm using level 8 as an example, but it applies just as well to other levels. At level eight, your most powerful spells (obviously) are the 4th level ones.

The generalist can cast three 4th level spells per day. How many schools can he have represented with those three spells? The answer is three.
The specialist can cast four 4th level spells per day. How many schools can he have a a spell from available? The answer is four. Of course, the same applies to his lower level spells; the generalist might have 3rd-level spells from eight schools in his spellbook, but in practice he can only use spells from four schools per day.




The answer is: have you ever had enough ROUNDS to use all your spell slots?
Yes. At low level, quite often; at high level, you'll eventually run out of your highest two levels of spell slots, which are the ones that count most.

[gorfnab]

You can do quite a bit with Elven Generalist Domain Wizards ... got a handbook on it in my signature (Easy Bake Wizard).

[Svata]

Even more so if you're a changeling, as you can take Racial Emulation to pick up the 1st and 3rd levels of elven generalist, and then the 5th of changeling wizard to then swap your doubled bonus around whenever you want. And you aren't stuck being an elf.

Elves make decent undead. The CON penalty doesn't affect you, and the dex boost is nice. Grey Elves moreso, as always, but still.

[eggynack]

No, because he retains the main advantage of a wizard i.e. being able to prepare one-off/utility spells without locking himself out of valuable general-use spells known. (Also supplementary benefits, like Intelligence being more useful overall than Charisma, getting bonus feats that the sorcerer does not, and access to useful ACFs like Abrupt Jaunt.)
Yeah, there are some pretty cool things you can do with wizard casting that you can't really do as well as a sorcerer. My usual example for this is planar binding. On a wizard, you just say, "Oh, today I'll bind this creature. Thus, I'll prepare lesser planar binding, magic circle against good, and maybe cat's grace along with some trick spell to lower the creature's defenses."

On a sorcerer, planar binding is not like that. If you start playing at a level before normal planar binding, then getting full access to the line at each stage of your development requires picking up all three planar bindings, probably two magic circles (to hit non-good and non-evil, which adds up to everything), and possibly one of those buff/debuff options if your natural charisma isn't enough on its own. That is a lot of spells on a sorcerer, even if you're not taking all of them.

Issues also arise if you want to cast long duration or out of combat spells, like most divinations, or anything out of the heart of X line. The cost of using these things is just so much higher on a sorcerer. A lot of a wizard's power is defined by what spells they have prepared on a given day, but a good amount of it is actually defined by what's in your book. Really, the difference between a specialist, or even focused specialist wizard, and a sorcerer, might as well be night and day in these terms.

Indeed, I'm pretty certain that a core specialist wizard at level 3 is running access to a higher quantity of spells than a 20th level sorcerer. You could probably also pull that off with a focused specialist, given how many frigging transmutations there are. I mean, damn, it looks like an ultra focused specialist transmuter, losing access to all but core transmutation spells, would be running spell access that is as broad as that of a sorcerer, at every level, at every spell level, apart from cantrips. Big difference.

[Talya]

And yet, guys like Tippy, who take optimizing wizards to insane levels, don't generally specialize. Unless you're playing at very low levels (and even then, low levels don't last long) - slots per day are rarely an issue. A properly prepared generalist isn't using all their slots anyway.

[Kurald Galain]

And yet, guys like Tippy, who take optimizing wizards to insane levels, don't generally specialize.

Incorrect. Tippy's most well-known build relies on the Incantatrix prestige class, which turns a wizard into a specialist abjurer with prohibited schools (also, this relies on setting-specific and 3.0-only material, so it's not really practical for most campaigns anyway).

More to the point, Treantmonk and Logic Ninja, who wrote the definitive field guides on playing a wizard for 3.5 and PF, both recommend specialist wizards.

[eggynack]

And yet, guys like Tippy, who take optimizing wizards to insane levels, don't generally specialize. Unless you're playing at very low levels (and even then, low levels don't last long) - slots per day are rarely an issue. A properly prepared generalist isn't using all their slots anyway.
Sure, generalizing definitely has its advantages, especially if you do stuff to gain piles of slots anyway. My main point is just that you're never going to hit sorcerer levels of spell versatility, because there are just so many spells.

Incorrect. Tippy's most well-known build relies on the Incantatrix prestige class, which turns a wizard into a specialist abjurer with prohibited schools (also, this relies on setting-specific and 3.0-only material, so it's not really practical for most campaigns anyway).
First, incantatrix doesn't turn you into a specialist anything. It makes you ban one school, and it does so in exchange for benefits far in excess of what specialization grants. Second, the really good incantatrix, from player's guide to faerun, is very much from a 3.5 book. Third, "don't generally specialize" doesn't mean "doesn't ever specialize at all." It's a statement that makes very clear allowances for occasional school bannings, and it is thus not incorrect, even were your other claims accurate. Finally, your two points, Tippy's incantatrix use, and the incantatrix's obscurity, contradict each other. If the only time that Tippy would specialize is a situation that never comes up, then it's safe to say that Tippy nearly always advises not specializing.


More to the point, Treantmonk and Logic Ninja, who wrote the definitive field guides on playing a wizard for 3.5 and PF, both recommend specialist wizards.
Yeah, but they're probably not all that correct. The optimization landscape has changed a lot since, holy crap, was Treantmonk's guide actually written seven years ago? Damn, that's a lot. Did they even have all of the books back then? I don't even know when Logic Ninja's guide was posted, because the version we're looking at now came after some variety of thread purge that wiped the original. A lot has happened since then.

[Kurald Galain]

Yeah, but they're probably not all that correct. The optimization landscape has changed a lot since, holy crap, was Treantmonk's guide actually written seven years ago?
If you search a bit better you'll find that he's rewritten it for Pathfinder, actually. So yes, it's current.

You're going to need a lot better argument than just handwaving away the two most famous Wizard Optimization Guides with zero evidence, really. I don't see any reason to take your word over theirs.

[eggynack]

If you search a bit better you'll find that he's rewritten it for Pathfinder, actually. So yes, it's current.
The pathfinder guide is current for pathfinder. That has nothing to do with 3.5, which is ostensibly what we're discussing.


You're going to need a lot better argument than just handwaving away the two most famous Wizard Optimization Guides with zero evidence, really. I don't see any reason to take your word over theirs.
You mean aside from the fact that you can actually gain more spells/day as a generalist than you can as a focused specialist? I don't see why I need much more than that.

[Karnith]

Incorrect. Tippy's most well-known build relies on the Incantatrix prestige class, which turns a wizard into a specialist abjurer with prohibited schools (also, this relies on setting-specific and 3.0-only material, so it's not really practical for most campaigns anyway).
Tippy has explicitly stated many (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=15302615&postcount=11), many (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=13078942&postcount=8) times (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=15266507&postcount=6) that specializing is almost never worth it. That he made one build about 7 years ago using Incantatrix (which was not a specialist Wizard build, mind; the Wizard part of the build was Elven Generalist (http://www.thetangledweb.net/forums/profiler/view_char.php?cid=7809), and Incantatrix does not make you an Abjuration specialist) does not mean that he endorses specialization.

Besides, he'd surely say that being a Psion is the best way to play a wizard.

[Angelalex242]

That's my thought. The point of a wizard is perfect flexibility. Anything that reduces flexibility just makes him more sorcerer like.

The point of a wizard is to be a generalist with every single spell in the PHB in your spellbook, and as many from other books as the GM will let you write down.

[chaos_redefined]

Just a note: Tippy also has tricks that his table allows for infinite low-level spells. So, he is never gonna be short on spells.

And I do remember him saying that he would be willing to dump Necromancy if Domain Wizard and/or Elf Generalist were banned or something similar.

(Necromancy has a lot of good spells, but nothing worth keeping the school for. Evocation has Contingency and Resilient Sphere. Enchantment has Love's Pain)

In any case, this is merely a point that if you are willing to go with game-breaking tricks such as the ones Tippy uses, then generalizing is better. I believe he has some tricks to allow him to re-prepare his spellbook throughout the day. Treantmonk and Logicninja still have mostly valid arguments, especially since not much has changed since Treantmonk wrote his guide. There wasn't a lot published in the last 7 years for 3.5, so that argument is kinda moot. However, the arguments they present are more towards the players at tables where the party isn't druid/cleric/wizard/psion.

So, yes. If you are playing at a table where contingency-based-contingencies are a thing, and Love's Pain sees regular use, etc... then generalization is the way to go. If you are playing at a table where the other players include T3 and below, then specialize. Taking the example of suggestion from earlier, why are you casting suggestion when you can turn to the party face and say "Go on. Show off your awesome skills. No pun intended."? Why are you casting shatter when you can turn to the party ToBer and ask them to mountain hammer it? Or the party non-ToB melee-er and ask them to hit it hard enough that it may as well be mountain hammer. The reason people suggest specialization is because you have 3 other party members who need to do stuff, and making them contribute is worth the ability to cast more often.

[eggynack]

Treantmonk and Logicninja still have mostly valid arguments, especially since not much has changed since Treantmonk wrote his guide. There wasn't a lot published in the last 7 years for 3.5, so that argument is kinda moot.
I didn't mean the argument entirely in those terms, and that aspect only really came up because I noticed just how frigging old the guide is. I meant it more in terms of the general optimization landscape. For example, Treantmonk rated astral projection, one of the most critical wizard defenses out there, with a thumbs down. I just don't think that would really happen nowadays. Also, I just noticed that Treantmonk's guide actually does recommend domain wizard over specialist, so there's that.

[Kurald Galain]

In any case, this is merely a point that if you are willing to go with game-breaking tricks such as the ones Tippy uses, then generalizing is better. I believe he has some tricks to allow him to re-prepare his spellbook throughout the day. Treantmonk and Logicninja still have mostly valid arguments, especially since not much has changed since Treantmonk wrote his guide. There wasn't a lot published in the last 7 years for 3.5, so that argument is kinda moot. However, the arguments they present are more towards the players at tables where the party isn't druid/cleric/wizard/psion.
Precisely. Tippy's stuff is not written to apply on most game tables; TM's and TLN's is.


That's my thought. The point of a wizard is perfect flexibility. Anything that reduces flexibility just makes him more sorcerer like.
Yes, and the point that you're missing is that your flexibility is defined not by how big your spellbook is, but by how many spells you have memorized.

It's really very simple. A level-5 wizard with Dispel Magic, Summon Monster III, and Slow prepared is more flexible in actual gameplay than a wizard with only DM and SM3 prepared. A level-9 wizard with Wall of Force and Teleport is less flexible in actual gameplay than a wizard with WOF, TP, and Baleful Polymorph memorized. In both cases, the specialist can handle a wider variety of situations (expected or unexpected) during the day, and can handle more of them, making the specialist more flexible.


[at level 8], the generalist can cast three 4th level spells per day. How many schools can he have represented with those three spells? The answer is three.
The specialist can cast four 4th level spells per day. How many schools can he have a a spell from available? The answer is four. Of course, the same applies to his lower level spells; the generalist might have 3rd-level spells from eight schools in his spellbook, but in practice he can only use spells from four schools per day.

[chaos_redefined]

I didn't mean the argument entirely in those terms, and that aspect only really came up because I noticed just how frigging old the guide is. I meant it more in terms of the general optimization landscape. For example, Treantmonk rated astral projection, one of the most critical wizard defenses out there, with a thumbs down. I just don't think that would really happen nowadays. Also, I just noticed that Treantmonk's guide actually does recommend domain wizard over specialist, so there's that.

I haven't seen much high level play, but a lot of them avoid tricks that make you entirely indestructible.

And yeah. If you have the option of domain wizard, do so. To be honest, the benefits of the domain are not as good as the benefits of the extra spell at each level (since the domain spells are locked in), but the lack of specialization makes up for that a lot.

[eggynack]

I haven't seen much high level play, but a lot of them avoid tricks that make you entirely indestructible.
Perhaps, though it's not so much that it's a trick unmentioned, but that the spell is rated and rated poorly.

[Jeff the Green]

Yes, and the point that you're missing is that your flexibility is defined not by how big your spellbook is, but by how many spells you have memorized.

That's only partly true. You can (and should) leave slots open to prepare later in the day. And there's also Alacritous Cogitation and Uncanny Forethought.

[Kurald Galain]

That's only partly true. You can (and should) leave slots open to prepare later in the day. And there's also Alacritous Cogitation and Uncanny Forethought.
That's a good point.

So we end up with the following,
(1) In core only, specialist beats generalist, because it gets substantially more spells per day; I don't see anyone disputing that.
(2) Outside of core, a generalist can match spells per day by being an Elven Generalist or Domain Wizard, and gets a bigger spellbook and more mileage out of AC and UF (although a specialist can use those, too).
(3) However, if the generalist gets to use extra tricks, then the specialist does too: there's the low-level Master Specialist prestige class, alternative class features like the crazily powerful Abrupt Jaunt, and then there's Focused Specialist for even more spells per day, and tricks to get access to banned spells anyway. In terms of both options available and staying power, a Focused Conjurer with AJ and going into MS still beats a domain wizard.
(4) Regardless, we're still talking about the wizard, which is arguably the strongest class in the game. All of these are still very powerful, and indeed many DMs may ban both options 2 and 3 on grounds of cheese. I think that's the best argument here: a specialist has options that are so good that many DMs will ban them outright.

[Kharannos]

So many arguments x.x
I'm really confused right now...

Lemme break it:
We all agree that a Wizard's power is his versatility. This can be undestood as these 2 statements:

1) Spells per day, meaning you can affect the world MORE TIMES.
or
2) Spells known, meaning you are able to affect the world IN MORE WAYS

Being able to keep slots free to prepare them during the day can be used for both specialists and generalist. I fail to see why It should be considered "advantage" for the generalist.
If you have 15 minutes, It's great. If you need that spell NOW, It's not.

For example: If you are locked in a cell, you can fill those free slots with "Dominate Person" and then cast it, forcing the soldier with the key to unlock you.
If you are being chased by an ogre, you don't have 15 minutes.

When I prepare my spells, I tend to favour those that can be used EVERYWHERE, instead of chosing spells that are good under certain conditions.
That being said, probably I'll favour Illusion spells over Enchantment spells, aside from situations where I REALLY NEED that approach.
For example: I'm going to a social meeting, where I need the king's favour to finance an expedition. In this case, I don't want to DOMINATE someone, I want them to favour me. I want them to like me. Forcing them to help me will only make him more angry when the spell is over.

Aside from this specific scenario, I can't see why I would prepare an Enchantment spell.

If I'll stay as a generalist so I can keep this school, but I end up the campaign without selecting it ONCE, then being a generalist sucked, beacause i lost the spell slot AND never used this school.
If I prepare it ONCE, then it was not useless, but not optimized either.
If I prepare it often, then Generalist is better. But i don't see this happening.

Can anyone list me situations where choosing an Enchantment spell is USED IN MORE WAYS than other schools?

Maybe I'm just using Enchantment the wrong way.

[amalcon]

Specializing provides a benefit at low levels (when the added spell slots matter), and a penalty at high levels (when there are more than about 2 useful Enchantment/Evocation/Necromancy spells).

Wizards are awesome at high levels even with (focused) specialization, so the low-level benefit tends to matter more. At high levels, the prohibited schools may reduce abstract power a bit, but it's not as though the specialist wizard is going to actually run into a situation that can't be solved with spells from the "Big Five" (Cojuration, Transmutation, Abjuration, Divination, Illusion). Also, groups tend to spend a lot more time at low levels than high levels, just because of how the game is structured.

The best school to specialize in is Conjuration (prohibiting Enchantment+Necromancy if the character is good, or Enchantment+Evocation if the character is evil). This is because Conjuration spells are very powerful and have a variety of purposes, so you'll get strong benefits out of the extra slot. The next best school to specialize in is Divination (prohibiting really any one of those three schools), because Divination is a second-tier school already (first tier is Conjuration+Transmutation), and the drawback is much smaller. Illusion has its advantages with Shadowcraft Mage and such, and it's of course got plenty of theme, but it shouldn't be considered over Conjuration or Divination outside of that.

Elven Generalist is, of course, obviously better than specializing if it's available to you. If nothing else, the money it saves is substantial. The problem there is basically that you need to be an Elf: PHB Elves are, due to the CON penalty, the next-worst race for Wizards after the lowly Half-Orc. Sun Elves help a lot, but they are still likely not as strong as Humans, and only comparable with Dwarves and Gnomes.

Domain Wizard is also obviously better. Given that it's explicitly a variant rule, and an obviously bad one at that, we probably shouldn't assume that it's available.

[Piggy Knowles]

When I prepare my spells, I tend to favour those that can be used EVERYWHERE, instead of chosing spells that are good under certain conditions.

This right here is key. If this is your preferred playstyle, then a specialist will be the better option for you. Specialists are workhorses who want to be able to throw out as many spells per day as possible, and fill up on spells that will pretty much always get used, even if they aren't the absolute perfect option. Generalists are more tactical, leaving spell slots open and using tricks like Uncanny Forethought to cast the exact spell for the circumstance as a full-round action.

If you tend to seek out spells that are good in most circumstances, a specialist is the one for you, since you'll get more of those spells per day. A focused specialist can brute force its way through just about any situation with just a handful of spells, after all. If, on the other hand, you prefer to be the mastermind who uses the exact perfect spell to shut things down, but often only casts a single spell per combat, then a generalist is the one for you.

Like I said, I tend to prefer to play specialists at the low to mid levels, and generalists at levels 13+, but your mileage may vary.

[Kharannos]

This right here is key. If this is your preferred playstyle, then a specialist will be the better option for you. Specialists are workhorses who want to be able to throw out as many spells per day as possible, and fill up on spells that will pretty much always get used, even if they aren't the absolute perfect option. Generalists are more tactical, leaving spell slots open and using tricks like Uncanny Forethought to cast the exact spell for the circumstance as a full-round action.

If you tend to seek out spells that are good in most circumstances, a specialist is the one for you, since you'll get more of those spells per day. A focused specialist can brute force its way through just about any situation with just a handful of spells, after all. If, on the other hand, you prefer to be the mastermind who uses the exact perfect spell to shut things down, but often only casts a single spell per combat, then a generalist is the one for you.

Like I said, I tend to prefer to play specialists at the low to mid levels, and generalists at levels 13+, but your mileage may vary.

Thank you ! You actually helped me understand more my own playstyle. You are accurate. I'll keep that in mind.

Fun fact: When I played Baldur's Gate II (as a Generalist), I never felt without slots.

But we're talking about a mid-to-high level wizard (starts with 7th level, i guess, but usually I played around 13~14th level).
I could cast more than 5 spells of 4th or 5th level.

Also, The choices in those games are WAY TOO LIMITED. You can't, for example, use your Illusions in a crafty way, dominate a guard or polymorph your way into a building with an open window.
Maybe I'm just "paranoid" about the lower levels, after all... When I get to 10th level, Maybe I'll get used to it?

Ahh! But there is another catch ! And one that I'll quote an answer in this post:


The answer is: have you ever had enough ROUNDS to use all your spell slots?
As a wizard, you memorize spells that are good once per encounter and refresh the ones you've used up with Pearls of Power after the encounter.
For spells like Fireball that you might want to cast a bit more often, it is usually better to rely on a wand( or reserve feat for specialist).
It is best to not prepare Divination spells in the morning - instead, keep those slots free. (also, IIRC, there's a prestige class that allows you to cast Divination spells spontaneously)
If "the perfect moment appears", you either use that free slot and memorize it, or, if you are in combat, use a scroll with the appropriate spell - an option you are denied if you ban that spell school.

In Baldur's Gate 2, you can rest a many times as you want.
You can, LITERALLY, sleep, unleash arcane destruction in 10 rounds, and then sleep again for another 8 hours, recovering all spells.

In a roleplaying table, that is not viable.

I don't know If you are considering one of those builds that are awesome in theory, but aren't really practical in a simple table, or if i misunderstood what you said, but what i understood is that, so, let me ask: You are considering each encounter a sleep?

When you questioned about "If I had enough ROUNDS to cast them", the point is: Probably not.... You are right. I can tell the laws of the Universe to shut up with just half of my prepared spells, but can I do it 3 times in the same day? What about next encounter? Those Mummies in the dungeon won't wait me to sleep. And you can't ask for your allies to adventure for 3 hours a day and then sleep the last 21 hours (:smallbiggrin:)

And probably the DM won't allow everybody to some kind of "self-induced-comma", where i can force my human body to sleep 45 minutes after awakening, because I need my spells back.
I can't cast 3 of my 4 spells of highest level in the first encounter and then be a useless piece of crap for the rest of the day.

Or did I misunderstood what you said?

[da_chicken]

Why would divination specialization and spontaneous divination go together? You should ideally prepare zero divination spells if you can access them spontaneously, and going diviner forces you to prepare a bunch of spells from the school. Going domain wizard with spontaneous divination is just about strictly superior to this combination.

Because you get extra spell slots and can cast every spell you're specialized in. You can just write read magic down for all your specialization slots from then on since it doesn't matter.

Then again, I wouldn't allow an evoker to use bonus specialization slots with spontaneous divination. Yes, school specialization rules only limit your spell preparations, but since in the Wizard's class description which the specialization rules are a part of equates preparation slots to casting slots (it has no reason to make any distinction), I choose to interpret the preparation requirement as a casting requirement as well.

[eggynack]

Because you get extra spell slots and can cast every spell you're specialized in. You can just write read magic down for all your specialization slots from then on since it doesn't matter.

Then again, I wouldn't allow an evoker to use bonus specialization slots with spontaneous divination. Yes, school specialization rules only limit your spell preparations, but since in the Wizard's class description which the specialization rules are a part of equates preparation slots to casting slots (it has no reason to make any distinction), I choose to interpret the preparation requirement as a casting requirement as well.
So, it's a combo due largely to your somewhat arbitrary house rules. I suppose that makes sense, in its own odd way.

[Ansem]

50% more spell slots (if you specialize, you go focused specialist) and ACF's beat a generalist Wizard simply.

[SinsI]

I don't know If you are considering one of those builds that are awesome in theory, but aren't really practical in a simple table, or if i misunderstood what you said, but what i understood is that, so, let me ask: You are considering each encounter a sleep? Or did I misunderstood what you said?
You have a very, very limited number of rounds in each encounter where your contribution actually makes a big difference, so 2-3 spells is all you really need per one, and only the spells you cast in the first round are really critical.
Since you get up to 4 encounters a day, you only really need 4 spell slots for your two highest spell levels. At low levels you get enough of those due to high Intelligence, and at high levels you can afford the Pearls of Power to refresh them.

[Kharannos]

The answer is: have you ever had enough ROUNDS to use all your spell slots?
As a wizard, you memorize spells that are good once per encounter and refresh the ones you've used up with Pearls of Power after the encounter.
For spells like Fireball that you might want to cast a bit more often, it is usually better to rely on a wand( or reserve feat for specialist).
It is best to not prepare Divination spells in the morning - instead, keep those slots free. (also, IIRC, there's a prestige class that allows you to cast Divination spells spontaneously)
If "the perfect moment appears", you either use that free slot and memorize it, or, if you are in combat, use a scroll with the appropriate spell - an option you are denied if you ban that spell school.


Again, isn't the specialist just trying to be a sorcerer, and actually moving himself DOWN the Tier List for his lack of versatility?


You have a very, very limited number of rounds in each encounter where your contribution actually makes a big difference, so 2-3 spells is all you really need per one, and only the spells you cast in the first round are really critical.
Since you get up to 4 encounters a day, you only really need 4 spell slots for your two highest spell levels. At low levels you get enough of those due to high Intelligence, and at high levels you can afford the Pearls of Power to refresh them.

Are you saying that, in low level encounters, i should use a battlefield control and a buff, for example, to alter the tide of the fight, and then fire a crossbow, since my most powerfull spells should be used in the start of the combat,where my allies are gathered and my enemies can be weakened before doing some harm?
Of course, I'm exagerating. Every encounter is a different situation/approach, but if I could use a battlefield control, a buff AND a debuff, wouldn't It be even better? I mean.. for that extra spell slot...

[eggynack]

Are you saying that, in low level encounters, i should use a battlefield control and a buff, for example, to alter the tide of the fight, and then fire a crossbow, since my most powerfull spells should be used in the start of the combat,where my allies are gathered and my enemies can be weakened before doing some harm?
Of course, I'm exagerating. Every encounter is a different situation/approach, but if I could use a battlefield control, a buff AND a debuff, wouldn't It be even better? I mean.. for that extra spell slot...
I don't think it necessarily has much to do with timing. It's just that one or two spells go a long way, and if two spells already ensure your inevitable victory, and they often do, then why cast a third? Sure, you might be able to win "better" by throwing out an enervation after your opponents are all ensnared in black tentacles, and your allies are buffed by haste, but the marginal returns here aren't that big. Similarly, the marginal returns on spells/day overall reduces as you accrue more slots,.

[SinsI]

Are you saying that, in low level encounters, i should use a battlefield control and a buff, for example, to alter the tide of the fight, and then fire a crossbow, since my most powerfull spells should be used in the start of the combat,where my allies are gathered and my enemies can be weakened before doing some harm?
Pretty much that, though I'd prefer to use a wand of magic missiles - firing crossbow with wizard's aiming ability is a pretty bad idea, especially since by that time enemies are already engaged in melee, so you get the -4 penalty as well.
That's also one of the main reasons you usually can't cast anything fancy after first couple rounds, as you risk friendly fire.

[Jeff the Green]

Pretty much that, though I'd prefer to use a wand of magic missiles - firing crossbow with wizard's aiming ability is a pretty bad idea, especially since by that time enemies are already engaged in melee, so you get the -4 penalty as well.
That's also one of the main reasons you usually can't cast anything fancy after first couple rounds, as you risk friendly fire.

And of course, once you hit level ~7 there's all your low-level slots.

[da_chicken]

So, it's a combo due largely to your somewhat arbitrary house rules. I suppose that makes sense, in its own odd way.

As opposed to requiring the authors of the PHB to know that at some arbitrary point in the future Wizards would gain the ability to cast spontaneously? Or requiring the ACF authors to remember to tell us how it works with another class option? It's not like it's a huge leap in logic considering that's exactly how clerics work with domains and their spontaneous casting feature.

[eggynack]

As opposed to requiring the authors of the PHB to know that at some arbitrary point in the future Wizards would gain the ability to cast spontaneously? Or requiring the ACF authors to remember to tell us how it works with another class option? It's not like it's a huge leap in logic considering that's exactly how clerics work with domains and their spontaneous casting feature.
Either you can spontaneously cast from bonus slots of various kinds, which seems to be how it works, or you can't. There's no situation where you can spontaneously turn all of your divinations from bonus slots into different divinations, while you can't turn everything else into divinations. That, beyond any odd notion of RAI, is why this is a nonbo. If other schools of magic didn't require banning two schools, then spontaneous divination plus a non-divination specialization would be just about strictly better than what you're offering. As is, only domain wizard holds that just about strictly better position, with the combination with other forms of specialization just being mostly better.

[da_chicken]

Either you can spontaneously cast from bonus slots of various kinds, which seems to be how it works, or you can't. There's no situation where you can spontaneously turn all of your divinations from bonus slots into different divinations, while you can't turn everything else into divinations. That, beyond any odd notion of RAI, is why this is a nonbo. If other schools of magic didn't require banning two schools, then spontaneous divination plus a non-divination specialization would be just about strictly better than what you're offering. As is, only domain wizard holds that just about strictly better position, with the combination with other forms of specialization just being mostly better.

Nonsense.

A specialization slot allows you to prepare and cast additional spells of one school. If you're an Illusionist, why would you ever be able to use those slots to cast anything other than a spell from the Illusion school regardless of the manner in which you do it? As I said, the PHB only mentions "prepare" when describing specialization because there's no difference between "prepare" and "cast" in the PHB so there's no reason for both terms to be used. Thus, by restricting you to what you prepare the PHB implicitly limits you to what you can cast.

If you're a Diviner and losing the spell to cast a divination, however, you've still met the requirements of preparing and casting only divination spells with your Diviner spell slots. I wouldn't allow an Illusionist who took Signature Spell fireball to loose his 3rd+ level Illusionist slot to cast the signature spell, either, but an Evoker would be just fine.

[eggynack]

Nonsense.

A specialization slot allows you to prepare and cast additional spells of one school. If you're an Illusionist, why would you ever be able to use those slots to cast anything other than a spell from the Illusion school regardless of the manner in which you do it? As I said, the PHB only mentions "prepare" when describing specialization because there's no difference between "prepare" and "cast" in the PHB so there's no reason for both terms to be used. Thus, by restricting you to what you prepare the PHB implicitly limits you to what you can cast.

If you're a Diviner and losing the spell to cast a divination, however, you've still met the requirements of preparing and casting only divination spells with your Diviner spell slots. I wouldn't allow an Illusionist who took Signature Spell fireball to loose his 3rd+ level Illusionist slot to cast the signature spell, either, but an Evoker would be just fine.
It's not nonsense at all. There is no implicit restriction from prepare to cast, and you can thus do whatever you wish with those spells once you've prepped them. There is a difference between prepare and cast, right there in the PHB, and you've cited it yourself in talking about the inability to spontaneously cast out of domain slots. You're using a house rule here, and that's fine, but it's not something that's going to impact the power level of these options outside of a game with those house rules.

[Doug Lampert]

Let's take a conjurer who bans evocation and enchantment, and a generalist. We'll give them both 18 intelligence.

At first level, he has 3 spells per day, while the generalist has 2. (Not counting cantrips coz they hardly matter) This means that, each day, the conjurer bans 5 schools when choosing his list, while the generalist chooses to ban 6! Sure, some of the conjurer's choices are locked in, but that means that the generalist is less general than the wizard.

At second level, not much changes. Both are still banning more than 2 schools simply because they can't prepare that many spells.

At third level, the conjurer has 7 spells per day, 2 of which are conjuration. The generalist has 5. So, the conjurer gets to represent 6 schools in his spells per day, while the generalist has 5. Funny... that still sounds like the generalist is less general than the conjurer. Clearly crazy talk, right?

At fourth level, the conjurer has 9 spells per day, 2 of which are conjuration. The generalist has 7. Finally, the generalist has more schools represented in his spell list than the conjurer. If he chooses 7 different spells from different schools. If you wanted to cast Grease and Glitterdust... maybe you should have been a conjurer instead?

The trend does eventually allow you to have spells of all schools with a few representations... but most of those castings are from low level spells. Some schools won't be represented in your higher level spells at all. As in, a 10th level wizard won't be able to represent all 8 schools in his level 4s and level 5s. Sure, the lower levels are a different matter. But the best part of being a 10th level wizard isn't your ability to cast first level spells.

Except that the Generalist notices that he gets SCRIBE SCROLL as a class feature, and notices that he can scribe utility spells from every school and use them any time he needs them and that the specialist can't.

You need the loot and XP from roughly 1 encounter to by the book learn enough spells and scribe enough scrolls to be more versatile than the specialist.

Given even 1 day in town after even 1 encounter with standard rewards the generalist can in fact have one spell of EVERY school prepared and ready to use if needed.

This is ignoring the fact that my entire spellbook is available if I have 15 minutes to spare.

Basically, the arguments for specialist come down to one of two things: (1) I'm playing a blaster type who cares about saving throws or who hasn't noticed items exist and I can make them or (2) Abrupt Jaunt.

Really, 2-3 spells per day of your top level on an adventuring day? Why? Scrolls just aren't that expensive compared to what you get from solving an encounter, at mid to high level pearls of power just aren't that expensive. Past level 5 or so you should NEVER run out of useful spells pretty much regardless of build, so past level 5 or so the specialist's "advantage" has gone away.

[da_chicken]

It's not nonsense at all. There is no implicit restriction from prepare to cast, and you can thus do whatever you wish with those spells once you've prepped them.

And that's where we disagree. And you know what? That's okay.

[eggynack]

And that's where we disagree. And you know what? That's okay.
You disagree that there is one, or that there should be one? Cause RAI can be as you want it to be, but the RAW is pretty solidly in keeping with my position.

[da_chicken]

You disagree that there is one, or that there should be one? Cause RAI can be as you want it to be, but the RAW is pretty solidly in keeping with my position.

I'm glad that you feel justified, just like I feel justified in my interpretation.

[eggynack]

I'm glad that you feel justified, just like I feel justified in my interpretation.
It's not really an interpretation that matches the rules at all. Prepared means a thing. Cast means a different thing. There really isn't any support for your position in the RAW that I can see, and if you think there actually is some, you could point it out. Most of your current argument seems to be, "I really want it to be this way, and I think the designers did too." A valid reason for house rules, but not really a valid reason to call something RAW.

[da_chicken]

It's not really an interpretation that matches the rules at all. Prepared means a thing. Cast means a different thing. There really isn't any support for your position in the RAW that I can see, and if you think there actually is some, you could point it out.

Yes, I heard that argument when you made it the first time. I still disagree with it for the reasons I've given.


Most of your current argument seems to be, "I really want it to be this way, and I think the designers did too." A valid reason for house rules, but not really a valid reason to call something RAW.

Actually, I'm not arguing.

OP asked why he should specialize. I gave my response. You asked me about it. I gave you my interpretation of the rules. You asked again. I clarified. You now appear to understand what I was saying.

None of this is an argument. Again: you approached me for clarification. I'm not trying to convince you. I'm not open to having my mind changed. I'm not asking for your opinion, your analysis, or your approval. I'm very happy you have a justification for your interpretation. I can absolutely see that interpretation and understand why you've made it. I just don't agree with it. Period.

[eggynack]

Yes, I heard that argument when you made it the first time. I still disagree with it for the reasons I've given.
You didn't really justify the position at all afterwards, however. There is absolutely a difference between prepare and cast in the PHB, as there needs to be one just for spontaneous casting to exist. To quote the PHB, page 32, "The cleric can "lose" any prepared spell that is not a domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower." So, y'know, the first absolutely doesn't perfectly imply the second, because a prepared spell can become a different cast spell. Furthermore, even if the difference between the two didn't exist at the time, which it did, the spontaneous divination entry had the authority to make the rules as you want them to be, and it didn't.



None of this is an argument. Again: you approached me for clarification. I'm not trying to convince you. I'm not open to having my mind changed. I'm not asking for your opinion, your analysis, or your approval. I'm very happy you have a justification for your interpretation. I can absolutely see that interpretation and understand why you've made it. I just don't agree with it. Period.
It's entirely your prerogative not to argue your side if you don't want to, but the fact of the matter is that the things I'm saying aren't an interpretation of the text. It's just the text, written in stone, within the books. Spontaneous divination says that you can sacrifice any prepared spell. Specialization allows you to have more prepared spells, of your given specialization. There is no further restriction on what you can cast. As is, with the evidence accrued before us, you're just kinda wrong. If you have other evidence, if you choose to argue instead of not arguing, then you may present it, but that's the state of things as they are currently.

[chaos_redefined]

Except that the Generalist notices that he gets SCRIBE SCROLL as a class feature, and notices that he can scribe utility spells from every school and use them any time he needs them and that the specialist can't.

You need the loot and XP from roughly 1 encounter to by the book learn enough spells and scribe enough scrolls to be more versatile than the specialist.

Given even 1 day in town after even 1 encounter with standard rewards the generalist can in fact have one spell of EVERY school prepared and ready to use if needed.

This is ignoring the fact that my entire spellbook is available if I have 15 minutes to spare.

Basically, the arguments for specialist come down to one of two things: (1) I'm playing a blaster type who cares about saving throws or who hasn't noticed items exist and I can make them or (2) Abrupt Jaunt.

Really, 2-3 spells per day of your top level on an adventuring day? Why? Scrolls just aren't that expensive compared to what you get from solving an encounter, at mid to high level pearls of power just aren't that expensive. Past level 5 or so you should NEVER run out of useful spells pretty much regardless of build, so past level 5 or so the specialist's "advantage" has gone away.

At level 10, the focused specialist has enough 5th level spells to cast one in every encounter, assuming a 4-encounter-day, plus a spare. The generalist does not So yeah, the advantage is still there. Scrolls of your highest level are a) based on a really shotty DC, and b) expensive to keep up with for the whole of your career. At the same level 10, where you should have 49000 gp according to WBL guidelines, a 5th level pearl of power costs 25000 gp. That's more than half your wealth! I can't see how this is supposed to be a cheap option...

Also, you should be getting about 1500 gp per encounter at 10th level. Scrolls of 5th level spells cost 1125 gp. So, it's still quite a bit... Even halfing that for scribe scroll means you are losing about half of your wealth just for these scrolls that apparently "aren't that expensive compared to what you get from solving an encounter."

And level 10 seems to be the higher than 5. While you might not run out of spells, more than half your spells will be levels 1 and 2. Grease is a lot less impressive when everyone can fly.

[Kharannos]

I was just about to say "Generalist" out loud, but the last argument, about the number of spells per day, really bugs me off.
I really have a feeling that I'll keep Enchantment school and probably won't use it. Evocation also hurts, but way less than Enchantment.

I'm still leaning towards "Generalist" right now.
Ok, I'll lose one slot every level, but the whole point is: scrolls.

Honestly, I know I won't prepare "suggestion" in my spell slots. Probably I'll end the game not preparing it ONCE in my daily spells, but if I can keep a scroll, just one.... maybe I'll cast it.
Scrolls are a really powerfull tool, even if I'm a moron using them, thinking to myself: "Oh my god, my gold and XP !". But they are really a life saver.

As It have been said about scrolls being expensive, yes. They are.
5th level scrolls are expensive, but I think this time of the game, even without pearls of power or some fancy item like that, I'll have enough spell slots to prepare the useful level 1, 2 and 3 spells, keep scrolls of the utility ones in these levels and focus myself on the greater levels (4 and 5th).

I know. The spell slot is AMAZING, don't get me wrong, but I'm just thinking to myself that between those two arguments:

SPECIALIST:
At level 10, the focused specialist has enough 5th level spells to cast one in every encounter, assuming a 4-encounter-day, plus a spare. The generalist does not So yeah, the advantage is still there.



GENERALIST:
I don't think it necessarily has much to do with timing. It's just that one or two spells go a long way, and if two spells already ensure your inevitable victory, and they often do, then why cast a third? Sure, you might be able to win "better" by throwing out an enervation after your opponents are all ensnared in black tentacles, and your allies are buffed by haste, but the marginal returns here aren't that big. Similarly, the marginal returns on spells/day overall reduces as you accrue more slots,.

One point is about: I should get as much castings per day as I can, considering I'm sacrificing something that is not even that important...
The other one is: I should never limit my options so much to say "NEVER". Also, Do I really need all those extra slots? Can I be useful (low, mid and/or high level) with less spells?

Actually, we're reaching a point in the thread that It's not even about WHAT IS BETTER, since they are just two different playstyles. It's more about WHICH ONE DO I FAVOUR? And that is something you all can't answer for me, but I thank you all. You have helped me a lot to have "all the cards on the table" to decide which one.

Just a little question: I was about to ask you guys about feats and spell selection for this same 3th level Human Wizard, but I'm pretty sure there are a lot of threads about this already.
Do you want me to ask anyways, to keep the discution "moving"? Or should I just go do my own home work on those topics? :smallbiggrin:

PS: This doesn't mean I'm stopping you guys from posting your opinion, ok!? If you can convince me, leave your argument, PLEASE ! :smallcool:
I want to hear what everyone thinks about this debate.

Thank you again!

[da_chicken]

You didn't really justify the position at all afterwards, however. There is absolutely a difference between prepare and cast in the PHB, as there needs to be one just for spontaneous casting to exist. To quote the PHB, page 32, "The cleric can "lose" any prepared spell that is not a domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower." So, y'know, the first absolutely doesn't perfectly imply the second, because a prepared spell can become a different cast spell. Furthermore, even if the difference between the two didn't exist at the time, which it did, the spontaneous divination entry had the authority to make the rules as you want them to be, and it didn't.

It's entirely your prerogative not to argue your side if you don't want to, but the fact of the matter is that the things I'm saying aren't an interpretation of the text. It's just the text, written in stone, within the books. Spontaneous divination says that you can sacrifice any prepared spell. Specialization allows you to have more prepared spells, of your given specialization. There is no further restriction on what you can cast. As is, with the evidence accrued before us, you're just kinda wrong. If you have other evidence, if you choose to argue instead of not arguing, then you may present it, but that's the state of things as they are currently.

So, you want me to say that you're right? Is that what you're looking for? Well, too bad. You're not getting what I'm saying. This topic isn't open for discussion. The only reason I keep responding is the vain hope that you'll understand what futility is (http://i.imgur.com/7LjqrCc.jpg).

I disagree with you. There is nothing you can say or do, no matter how well-reasoned you believe it to be, to get me to agree with you. I acknowledge and understand your argument, but disagree with it. Do you understand that repeatedly asking more than that when I have refused to do so is both rude and pointless?

Let. It. Go.

[eggynack]

So, you want me to say that you're right? Is that what you're looking for? Well, too bad. You're not getting what I'm saying. This topic isn't open for discussion. The only reason I keep responding is the vain hope that you'll understand what futility is (http://i.imgur.com/7LjqrCc.jpg).

I disagree with you. There is nothing you can say or do, no matter how well-reasoned you believe it to be, to get me to agree with you. I acknowledge and understand your argument, but disagree with it. Do you understand that repeatedly asking more than that when I have refused to do so is both rude and pointless?

Let. It. Go.
I don't really care all that much what you do. You can say things, or not say things, as you choose. You'll just continue to be wrong. I mean, really, it seems at least as futile to attempt to convince me to stop saying that you're mistaken on this point, if not moreso, given that your side lacks any kind of book support. This is a matter of fact, rather than one of opinion, and there is an absolute right and wrong. You can silently continue to be wrong, if you want, or you can not-silently continue to be wrong, but it doesn't seem to be your place to choose whether I be silently or not-silently correct.

[Kharannos]

Oh ! Another question!
I saw many people saying that cloud-spells... or area-control spells being awesome, incredible and etcetera...
How do you use them? I mean... You have to cast them and ask your teammates to focus on missile weapons while the effect is active?
Because there is no way to "disable" that cloudkill you just casted.

Or even spells like grease, for example, that make people fall... Your rogue and fighter won't be able to strike the enemies with the grease effect still active.

How do you guys cast this kind of spell effectively?
Thanks again!

[Piggy Knowles]

They're effective if you've got a smart party that is willing to coordinate attacks. I played a control mage in a "charge the nearest target" sort of group, and I just ended up pissing off the rest of the party.

Work with your party to focus-fire, and use your cloud spells to disable all but one enemy at a time. With the action advantage of the whole party focusing on one enemy at a time, you should be able to take them out swiftly and without injury. Also, think about using those types of spells to dictate exactly where the action DOES happen. Create bottle necks that force enemies into the waiting arms of your best melee buddies. Pay attention to the "distraction" rules for Concentration checks when going up against opposing mages or creatures with SLAs. Avoid combats entirely by scouting ahead (via familiar or divination magic or party sucker rogue or what have you), and just shutting down enemies before they can ever think about engaging you.

EDIT: Oh, and regarding grease... reach weapons, ranged weapons, and make sure your rogue takes 5 ranks in Balance.

[eggynack]

Oh ! Another question!
I saw many people saying that cloud-spells... or area-control spells being awesome, incredible and etcetera...
How do you use them? I mean... You have to cast them and ask your teammates to focus on missile weapons while the effect is active?
Because there is no way to "disable" that cloudkill you just casted.

Or even spells like grease, for example, that make people fall... Your rogue and fighter won't be able to strike the enemies with the grease effect still active.

How do you guys cast this kind of spell effectively?
Thanks again!
It depends on the situation, and it depends on the spell. The traditional method is only catching a majority of your enemies in a fog, rather than all of them, thus allowing you to mop up the remaining opponents. A second way is placing a lingering damage effect, like vortex of teeth, or better yet, black tentacles, in the same area, thus turning that time directly into damage. Third, there's always vision modes of various kinds, which can allow you to break the parity of fogs. There are other ways to pull it off too, I think.

As for grease, I don't really know what you're talking about. An attacker doesn't have to enter grease to attack an enemy with grease, no matter where they are, because grease is only in a 10 ft. square. Prone makes targets weaker to melee attacks too, and a reach weapon makes it even easier to just pummel the guy. There's not even really anything stopping the fighter and rogue from team attacking a fallen foe, as the opponent is necessarily hanging out on a square with two adjacent ungreased squares.

[Chronos]

The arguments that a specialist has more schools prepared than a generalist also assume that the wizard prepares exactly the same set of spells every day. Yes, a wizard will generally have some general-use default spell selection that they use on most days... But not always. If you have three slots of your highest level, that doesn't mean you can only cast from three schools. You can still cast from nine schools; it just takes you three days to do it.

[Kurald Galain]

Since you get up to 4 encounters a day, you only really need 4 spell slots for your two highest spell levels. At low levels you get enough of those due to high Intelligence, and at high levels you can afford the Pearls of Power to refresh them.


Really, 2-3 spells per day of your top level on an adventuring day? Why? Scrolls just aren't that expensive compared to what you get from solving an encounter, at mid to high level pearls of power just aren't that expensive. Past level 5 or so you should NEVER run out of useful spells pretty much regardless of build, so past level 5 or so the specialist's "advantage" has gone away.

Let's see how realistic this is.

Expected wealth for a 7th-level wizard (by WBL guidelines, no Minor Creation cheese) is 19,000 gold. A pearl of power for a 4th-level spell costs 16,000 gold; so the wizard can just barely afford one top-level pearl or two third-level ones, if he doesn't get any other magical items at all. A 12th-level wizard can just cover two top-level pearls, but only if he skimps out on necessities like a cloak of resistance or metamagic rod.

That's not good. So no, you can't actually rely on pearls to get more of your top-level spells.

[Captnq]

So, if I specialize, it's -2 schools.
Then I take incanatrix, -1 school
Red wizard, another -1 school.
I think You can double specialize again, right? -1 school.

So You could be a wizard with only three schools, one has to be divination, so... Conjuration and Transmutation.

I want to build this guy.

[Kharannos]

It depends on the situation, and it depends on the spell. The traditional method is only catching a majority of your enemies in a fog, rather than all of them, thus allowing you to mop up the remaining opponents. A second way is placing a lingering damage effect, like vortex of teeth, or better yet, black tentacles, in the same area, thus turning that time directly into damage. Third, there's always vision modes of various kinds, which can allow you to break the parity of fogs. There are other ways to pull it off too, I think.

As for grease, I don't really know what you're talking about. An attacker doesn't have to enter grease to attack an enemy with grease, no matter where they are, because grease is only in a 10 ft. square. Prone makes targets weaker to melee attacks too, and a reach weapon makes it even easier to just pummel the guy. There's not even really anything stopping the fighter and rogue from team attacking a fallen foe, as the opponent is necessarily hanging out on a square with two adjacent ungreased squares.

Actually, when i created this thread, I wasn't considering multi-classing. That being said, It's just an argument about 1 extra spell per day VERSUS losing evocation and enchantment.

I just considered something, also: A specialist can still use summon creatures and planar binding. You can ask those "minions" to use enchantment spells or spelll-like abilities, right?
That being said, although not optimized, you lose 2 schools, beign one that is not a big deal and the other one that can be "emulated".
Yesterday I was all about going Generalist. But then I've read Treantmonk's guide to Abjuration, and there are a lot of amazing things there.

As I've said, this is not about WHAT IS BEST. Clearly It's a matter of OPTION, not OPTIMIZATION. I still don't know what I'll do =)

[Kurald Galain]

Actually, when i created this thread, I wasn't considering multi-classing. That being said, It's just an argument about 1 extra spell per day VERSUS losing evocation and enchantment.
Not just that; specialists also get school-based abilities; and there are school-related feats like Augment Summoning that further reward specialization.


A specialist can still use summon creatures and planar binding. You can ask those "minions" to use enchantment spells or spelll-like abilities, right?
Correct.


As I've said, this is not about WHAT IS BEST. Clearly It's a matter of OPTION, not OPTIMIZATION. I still don't know what I'll do =)
Well, in terms of OPTION, it is very easy. Pick something you like (that is at least moderately effective) and get more of that. Do you like illusions? Ok, so play an illusionist who specializes in illusions and casts lots of illusory spells. Do you like summoning stuff? Well, a summoner specialist can summon more stuff then take feats to summon better stuff, making you a clearer example of your chosen role. And so on. Straightforward character building is simply finding something fun and doing as much of that as possible.

[Kharannos]

Well, in terms of OPTION, it is very easy. Pick something you like (that is at least moderately effective) and get more of that. Do you like illusions? Ok, so play an illusionist who specializes in illusions and casts lots of illusory spells. Do you like summoning stuff? Well, a summoner specialist can summon more stuff then take feats to summon better stuff, making you a clearer example of your chosen role. And so on. Straightforward character building is simply finding something fun and doing as much of that as possible.

Yes, but with one thing... TWO SCHOOLS BANNED =/
I mean... YES, the spell slots are awesome. But I'll never be able to cast a ****ing SUGGESTION! Not even to mention the other good evocation and/or enchantment spells.

Ahhhh !! I forgot to mention WANDS and SCROLLS ! A crafty scroll of suggestion could be enough to never have it prepared... and still benefit from it.

So... what I'm trying to say is: It's not exactly easy. Both sides are good and have their pros and cons...

[Kurald Galain]

Yes, but with one thing... TWO SCHOOLS BANNED =/
I mean... YES, the spell slots are awesome. But I'll never be able to cast a ****ing SUGGESTION! Not even to mention the other good evocation and/or enchantment spells.
Well, if you want Suggestion so badly, you can always ban Necromancy instead... :smallbiggrin:

[Rubik]

So, if I specialize, it's -2 schools.
Then I take incanatrix, -1 school
Red wizard, another -1 school.
I think You can double specialize again, right? -1 school.

So You could be a wizard with only three schools, one has to be divination, so... Conjuration and Transmutation.

I want to build this guy.The changeling double-specialist specializes in illusion and transmutation -- unless there's an option out there somewhere which changes one's specialization.

[Kharannos]

Well, if you want Suggestion so badly, you can always ban Necromancy instead... :smallbiggrin:

Not really =/
If you see me bitching about suggestion, can you imagine what I'll say when i lose Ray of enfeeblement and enervation ? =/

[chaos_redefined]

You can cast lesser planar binding. And you can bind a succubus. And the succubus can cast suggestion, with a higher DC than you will muster for quite a good portion of your career. And it can use alternate form to look human.

And you can cast Voice of the Dragon, which allows you to use Suggestion.

So... what were you saying again?

[SinsI]

Let's see how realistic this is.

Expected wealth for a 7th-level wizard (by WBL guidelines, no Minor Creation cheese) is 19,000 gold. A pearl of power for a 4th-level spell costs 16,000 gold; so the wizard can just barely afford one top-level pearl or two third-level ones, if he doesn't get any other magical items at all. A 12th-level wizard can just cover two top-level pearls, but only if he skimps out on necessities like a cloak of resistance or metamagic rod.

That's not good. So no, you can't actually rely on pearls to get more of your top-level spells.

Let me repeat - Pearls of Power are for High Levels, at low levels you get enough Bonus Spell Slots due to high Int:
A 7th level Wizard gets 2 3rd level and 1 4th level spells, and 18 Int gives 1 additional 3rd and 4th level spell slot.
So you get a total of 3 3rd and 2 4th level spells.

As for the topic - I think the main reason to specialize is if your party has more than one wizard. In that case the disadvantage doesn't matter as much, as your weakness is covered by your buddies; it also allows everyone to shine better at different tasks, instead of one player pawning everything. Also, if for some reason you are denied maximum ability score for your primary casting stat, being specialist might help.

[Kurald Galain]

Let me repeat - Pearls of Power are for High Levels, at low levels you get enough Bonus Spell Slots due to high Int:
Yes, I get that. But at high levels it's still not a viable option. At any level, the specialist wizard has 30% to 40% more spells slots of his two highest levels, and buying two pearls to cover for that takes up almost all of your WBL (for example, 85k out of 110k at level thirteen, all of which the specialist can spend on something better).



As for the topic - I think the main reason to specialize is if your party has more than one wizard. In that case the disadvantage doesn't matter as much, as your weakness is covered by your buddies;
I have no idea where you're getting the idea that a specialist transmuter or conjurer has "weakness", as it is still one of the strongest possible builds in the game.

[chaos_redefined]

The cost of the two pearls is less than half your wealth from level 16 onwards. So, before that, we need an int score to provide the bonus. So, at level 10 (a convenient midpoint), the wizard has 2 lvl5 spells and 3 lvl4 spells from level alone. His WBL gives him 49k, so he can afford a +4 item without spending more than half his health. If he had an 18 before racials, and got a +2 bonus from being a grey elf, and +2 for levelups, then he sits at a nice +26 total. That gives him an extra 2 lvl4 spells and an extra lvl5 spell.

So, that's 5 lvl4 spells and 3 lvl5 spells. With 4 encounters per day, you have exactly enough to cast 2 of these per encounter. That meahs, however, that if you get 5 encounters in a day, or someone dispels one of your spells, or you get a surprise disruption by, say, an invisible rogue preparing an action to sneak attack you, then you end up short. Oh, and one of those encounters, you won't get to cast from your highest level of spells.

In the meantime, a specialist can cast 6 lvl 4 spells and 4 lvl5 spells. You can cope with a bit of unexpected. Or you can use one of your high level spells to cover some utility. And you can cast a lvl5 spell in every encounter for most days.

[Kurald Galain]

The cost of the two pearls is less than half your wealth from level 16 onwards. So, before that, we need an int score to provide the bonus. So, at level 10 (a convenient midpoint), the wizard has 2 lvl5 spells and 3 lvl4 spells from level alone. His WBL gives him 49k, so he can afford a +4 item without spending more than half his health. If he had an 18 before racials, and got a +2 bonus from being a grey elf, and +2 for levelups, then he sits at a nice +26 total. That gives him an extra 2 lvl4 spells and an extra lvl5 spell.

Every wizard wants a +int item. That's not a bonus of the generalist. It is very silly to claim that a strong side of the generalist is that he can buy items that everybody else can also buy.

[Aquillion]

Remember, if you absolutely do not want to give up any schools at all, Domain Wizard will give you a bonus spell slot anyway, for free (albeit with much more limited options), plus +1 CL to your domain spells, all your Domain spells added to your spellbook for free, and access to (potentially) a few spells outside of the Wiz / Sorc spell list. There is absolutely no reason not to be a Domain Wizard if you're not specializing; it costs you nothing at all beyond the opportunity to specialize.

Storm Domain is probably the best choice -- almost all the spells are decent, and you get four non Wiz / Sorc spells, including Control Winds, which is a spell that also benefits a lot from stacking as many CL boosts as you can. (Admittedly, you could do better than Storm of Vengeance in your 9th level slot, but at least it's a spell you wouldn't normally get, and it has some applications for damaging wide areas at long range.)


Every wizard wants a +int item. That's not a bonus of the generalist. It is very silly to claim that a strong side of the generalist is that he can buy items that everybody else can also buy.What they mean is that the added bonuses (which both types buy, in their examples) waters down the value of the extra specialist slots -- 5 vs 6 is not as much of an advantage as 2 vs 3, say; the more spells you have, the less they feel each one is worth.

I'm not sure I agree, but anyway, Domain Wizard changes the calculations a lot, too.

[Killer Angel]

The cost of the two pearls is less than half your wealth from level 16 onwards.

Are you suggesting that is a good solution, to spend a significative amount of your WBL, to stay on par with a specialist wizard that got those bonus slots almost for free?

[Kharannos]

As for the topic - I think the main reason to specialize is if your party has more than one wizard. In that case the disadvantage doesn't matter as much, as your weakness is covered by your buddies; it also allows everyone to shine better at different tasks, instead of one player pawning everything. Also, if for some reason you are denied maximum ability score for your primary casting stat, being specialist might help.

The point is: Is it a weakness to lose Enchantment school? On a combat, It's mostly save or suck spells versus will. We have a lot of save or suck spells on other schools, conjuration being awesome at that. Also, they also have save or suck against reflexes, not only will. Outside a combat, spells like suggestion has It's uses, I just can think of ANYTHING that will make me prepare enchantment spells ANY day at all.

Take a look at the prestige classes on theComplete Arcane. There are example of mages, both generalists and sspecialists. Look at their spell selection. No one learns/prepares enchantment spells.
If I won't use them anyway, at least I'll get the bonus slots...
Can ANYONE tell me why i should prepare enchantment spells, that aren't highly situational OR replaced by spells of other schools?

[Piggy Knowles]

There is a workaround, if you want to get the benefits of specialization but still want to carry scrolls of, say, Suggestion. Specialize, and at 5th level, use the rules in Complete Champion that allow you to trade your level 5 feat for the domain granted ability from a cleric domain of your choice. Choose the Magic domain, which allows you to use spell completion and spell trigger items (such as wands or scrolls) as though you were a wizard of one half your cleric level. Thus may seem redundant, but you're using it here solely for access to magic items of spells from a school you've banned.

[Kharannos]

There is a workaround, if you want to get the benefits of specialization but still want to carry scrolls of, say, Suggestion. Specialize, and at 5th level, use the rules in Complete Champion that allow you to trade your level 5 feat for the domain granted ability from a cleric domain of your choice. Choose the Magic domain, which allows you to use spell completion and spell trigger items (such as wands or scrolls) as though you were a wizard of one half your cleric level. Thus may seem redundant, but you're using it here solely for access to magic items of spells from a school you've banned.

What I'm trying to say is the opposite: I can't see why I should keep enchantment.

[eggynack]

What I'm trying to say is the opposite: I can't see why I should keep enchantment.
There are a few spells from enchantment, charm X, dominate X, mind rape, sleep, some others too, that are pretty good. It's not the longest or best list. In fact, it's pretty much the shortest and worst list. But it's there, and they're spells that are more useful in some places than others. Some folks get some decent mileage out of creating mind slaves. That's pretty much it. I don't really know what you're looking for here, as the pros and cons are pretty well established.

[Piggy Knowles]

What I'm trying to say is the opposite: I can't see why I should keep enchantment.

Right. I'm saying, go ahead and ditch Enchantment. If you absolutely need access to an Enchantment spell that can't be replicated with an Illusion or Transmutation spell, like Feeblemind or Ray of Stupidity or Mind Rape, get an item of it, which you can use despite banning Enchantment thanks to the Magic domain.

[Kharannos]

There are a few spells from enchantment, charm X, dominate X, mind rape, sleep, some others too, that are pretty good. It's not the longest or best list. In fact, it's pretty much the shortest and worst list. But it's there, and they're spells that are more useful in some places than others. Some folks get some decent mileage out of creating mind slaves. That's pretty much it. I don't really know what you're looking for here, as the pros and cons are pretty well established.

"What I want" is to be convinced that this school is worth not specializing. I want someone saying: "If you specialize, you'll be losing THAT. And losing THAT hurts. I mean... uses for enchantment that can't be replaced (or at least, are hard to be replicated).

[eggynack]

"What I want" is to be convinced that this school is worth not specializing. I want someone saying: "If you specialize, you'll be losing THAT. And losing THAT hurts. I mean... uses for enchantment that can't be replaced (or at least, are hard to be replicated).
But that stuff is also clear cut. It's mostly those spells I listed, and they tend to be occasionally useful for dealing in intrigue. Not great, cause the defenses make things harder, but good.

[Kharannos]

But that stuff is also clear cut. It's mostly those spells I listed, and they tend to be occasionally useful for dealing in intrigue. Not great, cause the defenses make things harder, but good.

Ok. Thanks! Just somthing that came to my mind: what about your personal opinion? You've helped a lot in this thread, I want to know your personal opinion, If you don't mind. If you would make a wizard, would you be a specialist or a generalist?
Thanks again!

[eggynack]

Ok. Thanks! Just somthing that came to my mind: what about your personal opinion? You've helped a lot in this thread, I want to know your personal opinion, If you don't mind. If you would make a wizard, would you be a specialist or a generalist?
Thanks again!
Depends on what's allowed to me, I think. With access to everything, I suppose I'd run the domain wizard/elven generalist I mentioned earlier. With more limited access, possibly a conjurer, banning enchantment and necromancy, or maybe enchantment and evocation. That one would definitely run abrupt jaunt, because that's the possibly the best reason to specialize, and maybe cloudy conjuration, cause it's cool. Really though, enchantment isn't even the issue, at least for me. Banning necromancy or evocation is a significantly bigger hardship.

[SinsI]

The point is: Is it a weakness to lose Enchantment school? On a combat, It's mostly save or suck spells versus will. We have a lot of save or suck spells on other schools, conjuration being awesome at that. Also, they also have save or suck against reflexes, not only will. Outside a combat, spells like suggestion has It's uses, I just can think of ANYTHING that will make me prepare enchantment spells ANY day at all.

Take a look at the prestige classes on theComplete Arcane. There are example of mages, both generalists and sspecialists. Look at their spell selection. No one learns/prepares enchantment spells.
If I won't use them anyway, at least I'll get the bonus slots...
Can ANYONE tell me why i should prepare enchantment spells, that aren't highly situational OR replaced by spells of other schools?
Instead of disabling or killing the monster, Enchantment allows you to ADD his fighting prowess and abilities to your team. And that's worth a lot!
Who do you think is stronger - a specialist wizard that banned Enchantment, or generalist that has made that specialist his slave?

If they weren't giving out protection from it to everything around you, it would be the best and most powerful school of them all.
The good thing is that those protections (like Mind Blank, or Protection from Evil/Good) can often be brought down by your dominated subordinates.

[Kharannos]

Instead of disabling or killing the monster, Enchantment allows you to ADD his fighting prowess and abilities to your team. And that's worth a lot!
Who do you think is stronger - a specialist wizard that banned Enchantment, or generalist that has made that specialist his slave?

If they weren't giving out protection from it to everything around you, it would be the best and most powerful school of them all.
The good thing is that those protections (like Mind Blank, or Protection from Evil/Good) can often be brought down by your dominated subordinates.

That's the point. Even low level spells protect against it. I mean... protection from good/evil is level 1. The circle version can immunize the whole party against it. Considering how specific it is to fight weak-willed monster WITHOUT an arcane or divine spellcaster to give them that kind of protection, I'm really unsure. Ok, i can cast a dispel magic and then dominate monster. That is good. But even then, It's normally to dominate only one monster of higher HD or lots of weak monsters.
Considering both domain wizard and elven generalist not an option, I'm REALLY leaning towards an Abjurer right now, banning evocation and enchantment.
The sad thing is that I actually WANTED to be convinced that Generalist is a better option, but as this discussion goes, i really can't see benefits worth keeping those two schools. They suck? Not at all, but with my limited castings per day, probably I'll never prepare them anyway, so why don't get extra slots from it?

[sleepyphoenixx]

In addition to the widespread immunity enchantment also has the problem that your pre-dominated slaves are one AMF, Dispel or Protection/Circle against X away from turning on you.

Regarding specialization, it's only worth it for the the specialist ACFs imo. The additional spell slots are nice but not really necessary unless you have uncommonly low Int.
The only specialist ACF that's really worth giving up two schools (and the familiar) is Abrupt Jaunt, at least imo. All of the others range from bad to adequate but don't make up for the lack of versatility.
I'd only consider specializing in any non-conjuration school for a short low-level campaign.

With all the methods available to get more free spells at level up versatility is worth more to me than one more slot/level, especially if you take Uncanny Forethought. Once you have enough slots to comfortably last for your day any more are going to be wasted a lot of the time anyway.

[Zirconia]

With all the methods available to get more free spells at level up versatility is worth more to me than one more slot/level, especially if you take Uncanny Forethought. Once you have enough slots to comfortably last for your day any more are going to be wasted a lot of the time anyway.

This can also depend on how your DM runs campaigns. Mine is fond of starting a session with "roll for initiative", after which he tells us what we are facing. Thus the superior ability to prep for specific situations a generalist would have is somewhat reduced. In addition, it is not unusual to have 5-6 fights in a "day", and he has a house rule which allows a lot of self buffs to be swift cast, so I've often run through most of my spell slots of all levels and a few scrolls by the end of an adventuring day.

To Kharannos, also remember Illusory Script to replace Suggestion. Though keep in mind that in some unusual situations you describe, such as being in prison, it is rather unlikely they will have let you keep your spell book, spell component pouch, scrolls, etc. If they do, you can probably find quite a few ways to get out once past, say, 2nd level. . . :)

[Chronos]

Enchantment might lose its luster at high levels, when Mind Blank runs rampant on anything which isn't already undead or a construct, and everything has high SR and often high Will saves. But it's absolutely amazing at low level. At first level, two of the three best spells available are enchantment: Sleep and Charm Person. And given that low levels are precisely where the benefits of specialization are most significant, it becomes significantly harder to justify banning enchantment.

[Kurald Galain]

At first level, two of the three best spells available are enchantment: Sleep and Charm Person.
And I suppose the third spell is Grease, Color Spray, Enlarge Person, Shield, Minor Image, and Mage Armor, all at the same time? (edit: yes, those too, thanks!)

At a level where you can only cast three or four spells per day total, it doesn't make a difference whether you have access to six or eight schools.

[WesleyVos]

And I suppose the third spell is Grease, Color Spray, Enlarge Person, and Shield all at the same time?

You forgot silent image, by RAW at least, since there has to be interaction to even get a save. And mage armor. And Benign Transposition.

[Chronos]

I was thinking Color Spray. Grease and Mage Armor become useful later, but at CL 1 they usually don't last long enough (Mage Armor can, if you know a battle's coming, but that's a luxury you often lack at first level). Shield and Enlarge Person only last for one combat at best, and have short enough durations that you probably need to cast them on the first round of combat. I'll maybe grant Silent Image.


At a level where you can only cast three or four spells per day total, it doesn't make a difference whether you have access to six or eight schools.
Yes, I acknowledged that.

[Zweisteine]

Having read only the first few posts, this is my answer:

You don't need all the spells, but you do new the slots.
A Wizard can get along just fine without Evocation, because he will almost never need those spells.

A Wizards greatest weakness is his limited spells per day. Specialization helps with that.

Also, Focused Specialist. You don't need Evocation, Enchantment is useless higher up, Necromancy, while it does have a few true gems, isn't amazing overall, and Illusion is so situational (I'd say its usually all-or-nothing. An Illisionist wants illusions, but most other mages can do just fine without them). Pick three, and get a massive load of extra Conjurations or Transmutations.

[chaos_redefined]

That's the point. Even low level spells protect against it. I mean... protection from good/evil is level 1. The circle version can immunize the whole party against it. Considering how specific it is to fight weak-willed monster WITHOUT an arcane or divine spellcaster to give them that kind of protection, I'm really unsure. Ok, i can cast a dispel magic and then dominate monster. That is good. But even then, It's normally to dominate only one monster of higher HD or lots of weak monsters.
Considering both domain wizard and elven generalist not an option, I'm REALLY leaning towards an Abjurer right now, banning evocation and enchantment.
The sad thing is that I actually WANTED to be convinced that Generalist is a better option, but as this discussion goes, i really can't see benefits worth keeping those two schools. They suck? Not at all, but with my limited castings per day, probably I'll never prepare them anyway, so why don't get extra slots from it?

While I can't make a good case for enchantment, there are a couple of evocation spells I wish I had access to on my specialist wizards. Enough to make me consider banning enchantment and necromancy instead.

The first is Otiluke's Resilient Sphere. This is a versatile spell, giving you a reflex-save-vs-maze, or a target-is-no-longer-about-to-die. Reflex saves are usually the lowest, and the only other reflex-save-or-suck that comes to mind is Bands of Steel at one level lower, which has some DM dependency problems.

The second is contingency. There are two workarounds: Craft Contingent Spell, which is thoroughly broken, and Greater Shadow Evocation, which comes online 4 levels later. Forgive me for thinking that 4 levels is a big deal, especially since everyone points out that sorcerers delaying access by 1 level is a big deal.

After that, there are a bunch of battlefield control spells, which Conjuration can do as well, but there is enough difference between the two.

Yes, Necromancy has ray of enfeeblement/exhaustion, enervation, etc... But transmutation has a pretty good list of debuffs too.

[Emperor Tippy]

Incorrect. Tippy's most well-known build relies on the Incantatrix prestige class, which turns a wizard into a specialist abjurer with prohibited schools (also, this relies on setting-specific and 3.0-only material, so it's not really practical for most campaigns anyway).
Cindy might be the build most associated with me but its not mine, she was created by Karsh. In addition to that, she was made with various campaign and scenairo specific things in mind.

She is also, not even remotely, how to play the best wizard you can.

In point of fact, the reason that you don't see Incantatrix in most of my wizard builds is specifically because it costs you a school of magic.


More to the point, Treantmonk and Logic Ninja, who wrote the definitive field guides on playing a wizard for 3.5 and PF, both recommend specialist wizards.
And I vehemently disagree with them. Hell, The Logic Ninja even concedes that generalists are more powerful than specialists. His guide is about how to play a wizard without disrupting the party, not how to play a wizard as optimally as possible.


Tippy has explicitly stated many (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=15302615&postcount=11), many (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=13078942&postcount=8) times (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=15266507&postcount=6) that specializing is almost never worth it. That he made one build about 7 years ago using Incantatrix (which was not a specialist Wizard build, mind; the Wizard part of the build was Elven Generalist (http://www.thetangledweb.net/forums/profiler/view_char.php?cid=7809), and Incantatrix does not make you an Abjuration specialist) does not mean that he endorses specialization.

Besides, he'd surely say that being a Psion is the best way to play a wizard.

Pretty much. ;)


Having read only the first few posts, this is my answer:

You don't need all the spells, but you do new the slots.
A Wizard can get along just fine without Evocation, because he will almost never need those spells.
Evocation is spectacularly good if you know what you are doing with it.


A Wizards greatest weakness is his limited spells per day. Specialization helps with that.
No, his greatest weakness is a lack of options.


Also, Focused Specialist. You don't need Evocation, Enchantment is useless higher up, Necromancy, while it does have a few true gems, isn't amazing overall, and Illusion is so situational (I'd say its usually all-or-nothing. An Illisionist wants illusions, but most other mages can do just fine without them). Pick three, and get a massive load of extra Conjurations or Transmutations.
Evocation is the best defensive school in the game.
Enchantment is only useless if you don't know how to use it or have an amazing lack of imagination. Charm + Hypnotism is hideous at low levels and Mind Rape lets you make anything your utterly loyal slave with only a handful of ways to ever be free.
Necromancy is critical if you want actual full on immortality.
Illusion can fake two other schools of magic, has Ice Assassin, has Invisibility, and has most of the methods of getting miss chance in the game.

[WesleyVos]

I have to disagree with Tippy on this, but only in part.

If the specialist/focused specialist is a conjurer or transmuter, he/she is more powerful than a generalist wizard. ACFs for conjurers and transmuters are excellent. These two schools have the most splatbook love. By themselves, they can pretty much handle anything thrown their way, with a bit of divination sprinkled in to make sure they know what's coming. On top of that, the Master Specialist Prestige Class for Conjurers is excellent, and very good (if not also excellent) for the Transmuter. On top of that, Enchantment and Evocation are both fairly easily replicable. For those spells that cannot be replicated (mindrape), there are other ways of solving such problems (e.g., planar binding - it solves almost everything). The ease of replication of those two schools makes their loss bearable, particularly for the benefits gained (assuming prestiging into Master Specialist and, at least for a Conjurer, taking Immediate Magic for Abrupt Jaunt).

If the specialist is focusing on any other school, the generalist is probably more powerful in that he/she has more options, through both spells known and magic items, and is more versatile than the specialist.

[Emperor Tippy]

I have to disagree with Tippy on this, but only in part.

If the specialist/focused specialist is a conjurer or transmuter, he/she is more powerful than a generalist wizard. ACFs for conjurers and transmuters are excellent. These two schools have the most splatbook love. By themselves, they can pretty much handle anything thrown their way, with a bit of divination sprinkled in to make sure they know what's coming. On top of that, the Master Specialist Prestige Class for Conjurers is excellent, and very good (if not also excellent) for the Transmuter. On top of that, Enchantment and Evocation are both fairly easily replicable. For those spells that cannot be replicated (mindrape), there are other ways of solving such problems (e.g., planar binding - it solves almost everything). The ease of replication of those two schools makes their loss bearable, particularly for the benefits gained (assuming prestiging into Master Specialist and, at least for a Conjurer, taking Immediate Magic for Abrupt Jaunt).

If the specialist is focusing on any other school, the generalist is probably more powerful in that he/she has more options, through both spells known and magic items, and is more versatile than the specialist.

No, they aren't.

Specialization gets you, best case, 2 additional spell slots per spell level over the full 17 levels of spell progression.

It gets you 8 spells slots over a domain wizard elf generalist.

You gain those spell slots by giving up approximately 25% of your classes versatility.

The various other benefits you can pick up from specialization aren't enough to make up for that kind of hit.

[aleucard]

To decide between Specialization of any flavor (focused or otherwise) and Generalization, a few questions need to be asked of yourself.

Are you taking the Elf Substitution level for generalist Wizards? If yes, then there are very few situations where you will be better suited with a Focused Specialist, and it's strictly better than a regular in the vast majority of situations, at worst breaking even.

Are you going to regret not being able to take Master Specialist or any of its relatives (including ACF's such as Abrupt Jaunt)? There are some VERY interesting abilities in those, and not everyone is willing to give them up.

Is there any 2-3 Schools of magic (besides Divination) that you feel won't suit your character at all, or do so in such little amounts that their loss would be trivial?

We can argue about which option's more powerful from now until the end of time, but we can't answer any of these questions for you. There's benefit in being able to pull from all Schools at your wish, and there's benefits to focusing your efforts on a more limited number. If we're to help you with this, we need to know more about what you're wanting to do with this information.

[Kurald Galain]

His guide is about how to play a wizard without disrupting the party, not how to play a wizard as optimally as possible.
More to the point, TLN's and TM's guides are about playing a wizard without (1) using splatbooks that many people don't have, and (2) relying on tricks that many DMs won't allow at their table. We're talking about an ordinary campaign here, not the Test Of Spite, so different rules apply.



You gain those spell slots by giving up approximately 25% of your classes versatility.
That doesn't add up; the eight schools aren't equal by a long shot. Just having conjuration and transmutation can easily cover 70-80% of your versatility all by themselves, due to having more good spells in general and some extremely versatile ones like Summon Monster #.

[chaos_redefined]

Tippy: I will give the conjurer one point over the generalist for the Abrupt Jaunt ACF. But, in most cases, you are generally right.

I believe we both agree that Necromancy can be cut, as long as you aren't after immortality.

My problem with enchantment is the same problem everyone has with blasting: There is a party member usually up for that. I won't deny, however, that you can do enchantment better than you can blast.

Illusion... the only time I've banned illusion is for a malconvoker, who wants to focus, but has to ban 3 schools to do it. Can't ban conjuration for obvious reasons. Can't ban transmutation for similarly obvious reasons. Can't ban abjuration because magic circle. Can't ban enchantment for the debuffs to the creatures it goes locking in planar binding. That leaves evocation, necromancy and illusion.

So, another point to discuss....

Abjuration has no wizard-unique spells. If the cleric is cool pitching in, then abjuration can be reluctantly banned for a specialist wizard.

[Aquillion]

More to the point, TLN's and TM's guides are about playing a wizard without (1) using splatbooks that many people don't have, and (2) relying on tricks that many DMs won't allow at their table. We're talking about an ordinary campaign here, not the Test Of Spite, so different rules apply.While the elf substitution level is from a relatively overpowered sourcebook (and stacking them might at least make some DMs quirk an eyebrow), Domain Wizard is from the SRD. There's no particular reason for any DMs to ban it beyond "I favor Specialists and will arbitrarily forbid parts of the SRD that make them less optimal."

[Piggy Knowles]

Tippy: I will give the conjurer one point over the generalist for the Abrupt Jaunt ACF. But, in most cases, you are generally right.

I believe we both agree that Necromancy can be cut, as long as you aren't after immortality.

My problem with enchantment is the same problem everyone has with blasting: There is a party member usually up for that. I won't deny, however, that you can do enchantment better than you can blast.

Illusion... the only time I've banned illusion is for a malconvoker, who wants to focus, but has to ban 3 schools to do it. Can't ban conjuration for obvious reasons. Can't ban transmutation for similarly obvious reasons. Can't ban abjuration because magic circle. Can't ban enchantment for the debuffs to the creatures it goes locking in planar binding. That leaves evocation, necromancy and illusion.

So, another point to discuss....

Abjuration has no wizard-unique spells. If the cleric is cool pitching in, then abjuration can be reluctantly banned for a specialist wizard.

Necromancy's Animate Dread Warrior is pretty tough to replicate even if you're not after immortality.

Abjuration's big loss that's not on the cleric list is Mind Blank, which is a straight up essential spell at higher levels. Disjunction also gets a bad rap on these boards, but it's almost impossible to take on other mages or high CR dragons without it. Also, if you plan to do any planar binding, you'll need access to Magic Circle and Dimensional Anchor.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and I can't remember the last time I've played a wizard or chameleon without casting Anticipate Teleportation more or less every day.

[Chronos]

If immortality is the goal, it's worth mentioning that neither Necropolitan nor Lich actually requires you to have access to necromancy. It'd be thematically quite odd for an undead spellcaster to ban necromancy, but it's possible.

[Vedhin]

My problem with enchantment is the same problem everyone has with blasting: There is a party member usually up for that. I won't deny, however, that you can do enchantment better than you can blast.

I'd argue this point. You can do enchantment well easier than you can blast well, but blasting eventually goes into Mailman territory/Locate City Nuke.



Abjuration has no wizard-unique spells. If the cleric is cool pitching in, then abjuration can be reluctantly banned for a specialist wizard.

I've actually played this. I Focused Specialized in... either Conjuration or Transmutation, and banned Abjuration, Enchantment, and Necromancy. Enchantment just isn't my style, and we tended to fight lots of little things more than one big thing (a point in favor of keeping Evocation), and the big things we did fight tended to have defenses against mind control. We had a cleric of Pelor, who had turn undead fairly high, so he took care of undead problems, and there are plenty of other debuffs. The cleric also tended to prepare or carry scrolls of (Greater) Dispel Magic, and my Lantern Archon Improved Familiar gave a constant Magic Circle Against Evil.

In the end, we barely felt the loss. The cleric and my familiar took care of most of the important functions of Abjuration. I also discovered that Lantern Archons are incredible options for Improved Familiars. DR, perfect flight, universal translator, blocks mind control and summons, self-only Greater Teleport at will, light source, some neat SLAs, possible debuffs from Aura of Menace (rolling a 1 happens occasionally), and light rays that ignore DR.


Necromancy's Animate Dread Warrior is pretty tough to replicate even if you're not after immortality.

Don't forget Animate Infectious Zombie, for all your zombie apocalypse needs.

[LordBlades]

While the elf substitution level is from a relatively overpowered sourcebook (and stacking them might at least make some DMs quirk an eyebrow), Domain Wizard is from the SRD. There's no particular reason for any DMs to ban it beyond "I favor Specialists and will arbitrarily forbid parts of the SRD that make them less optimal."

Apart from that elf generalist, what exactly is ao OP in races of the wild?

[Kharannos]

Ok, I've read a lot of arguments in this topic and I have decided what character I'll create =)

I'll roll a Generalist =)

I know the odds are against it, considering everything stated (even more in the last 2 pages of this thread).
Actually, Specialist are "better", the way I see it. But honestly...
BAN 2 schools?

If I was using Pathfinder rules, It wouldn't be that hard, but BAN is a really strong word.

I've also read a lot and noticed Evocation is AWESOME. Not the blast spells, of course, but Evocation has even more useful stuff than Enchantment.
If I was worried about losing Enchantment... Now I'm even more concerned about losing Evocation... and losing both is a no-go.

The last point is: Scrolls, Wands and stuff like that.
Maybe I'll never prepare Sugestion in my daily spell, but if a have a scroll, It's like having that spell prepared everyday. Ok, a specialist can still use scrolls? Sure. But not that one.

Optimal or not, that is my Wizard. And I thank you all for helping me out.

I have A LOT of questions about my build. Do you guys wanna help me? =)
I'm planning to create the "Complete 20th level build".

I have questions mostly about Feats and Prestige Classes.
Should I post my questions here?

Thanks again !

[aleucard]

So, the concensus for the board seems to be these thoughts.

1. If you're not going to be using 2-3 schools anyway (some people don't like certain schools, some characters aren't going to use them by fluff), then there is little that's stopping you from going Specialist (the few Generalist ACFs/PrCs, for instance).

2. Failing #1, you need to weigh the additional potential versatility of having those 2-3 extra schools (though keep in mind that WBL restricts how many spells you can put into your book, tippy-level shenanigans aside) and whatever ACFs/PrCs/etc. are available for generalist that you would/could use (not all DMs feel the love for these things, for example) against the added spell slots (admittedly not THAT many overall, but being able to pop out more of your top-level spells is a VERY noticeable thing when you need it) and ACFs/PrCs available to whatever Specialist you're looking at (not all Specialists are created equal, after all).

If you're doing pure Core (PHB's, DMG's, MM's), then chances are the Generalist isn't going to be the best pick against most Specialists (not Focused Specialist, though, since that shows up in a different book I think). Otherwise, the choices get much less clear. Really depends on what sort of library you have access to. Overall, though, which one's better depends on your priority judgement.

[chaos_redefined]

Ok, I've read a lot of arguments in this topic and I have decided what character I'll create =)

I'll roll a Generalist =)

I know the odds are against it, considering everything stated (even more in the last 2 pages of this thread).
Actually, Specialist are "better", the way I see it. But honestly...
BAN 2 schools?

If I was using Pathfinder rules, It wouldn't be that hard, but BAN is a really strong word.

I've also read a lot and noticed Evocation is AWESOME. Not the blast spells, of course, but Evocation has even more useful stuff than Enchantment.
If I was worried about losing Enchantment... Now I'm even more concerned about losing Evocation... and losing both is a no-go.

The last point is: Scrolls, Wands and stuff like that.
Maybe I'll never prepare Sugestion in my daily spell, but if a have a scroll, It's like having that spell prepared everyday. Ok, a specialist can still use scrolls? Sure. But not that one.

Optimal or not, that is my Wizard. And I thank you all for helping me out.

I have A LOT of questions about my build. Do you guys wanna help me? =)
I'm planning to create the "Complete 20th level build".

I have questions mostly about Feats and Prestige Classes.
Should I post my questions here?

Thanks again !

This thread has convinced me of something as well, but it's a bit different. I'm gonna be banning Enchantment and Necromancy a lot more often than Enchantment and Evocation.

Spells lost: Ray of you-suck-now across various levels
Spells gained:
Nothing at first level, sadly.
Second level has a slightly weaker Mass Snake's Swiftness that should be worth a second level slot with ease. Oh, and it stacks with haste.
And some save-or-suck spells that also happen to damage people. Sure, glitterdust results in more suckage, but sometimes, we just need some more variety than that.
Third level gives a save-or-suck-and-then-save-or-suck-again. And a fog cloud that doesn't obscure your vision. And auto-death-to-archers.
Fourth level gives resilient sphere, a short BFC that also deals respectable damage, one of the earliest wall spells around, and a no-save-minor-suck-plus-save-or-suck-next-turn.
Fifth gives very little, unfortunately, although I could see Channeled Sonic Blast being an actually respectable blast, if only because it can be cast as a swift action.
Sixth gives howling chain and the real contingency.
It unfortunately drops off from here on out.

I could see specialization in evocation as a thing, as long as the game doesn't want to go too far into high levels.

[Chronos]

Quoth LordBlades:

Apart from that elf generalist, what exactly is ao OP in races of the wild?
Ruathar, for one. Yeah, it doesn't give you an incredible amount of benefit, but it's definitely an upgrade in every way from straight wizard or cleric, and costs you absolutely nothing to qualify for (probably not even the opportunity to take a different prestige class, since you can qualify earlier than most).

[chaos_redefined]

Ruathar, for one. Yeah, it doesn't give you an incredible amount of benefit, but it's definitely an upgrade in every way from straight wizard or cleric, and costs you absolutely nothing to qualify for (probably not even the opportunity to take a different prestige class, since you can qualify earlier than most).

Go check out Paragnostic Apostle in complete champion. Instead of a magic item that you'll soon forget about, some minor skill bonuses, a +1 to hit and saves, and some roleplaying oppurtunities, you get +1 to the DC of any side-effects of damaging spells (say... Orb of Fire) and +2 to AC as long as you've got mage armor or the like up, your summons get fast healing 1, and your haste spell does marginally more (gives +3 AC instead of the usual +1), and still some roleplaying oppurtunities. You qualify at the same level too.

Mage of the Arcane Order from Complete Arcane allows spontaneous casting for wizards. With some drawbacks, yes, but that statement should speak for itself. And you can qualify at the same level as Ruathar.

For specialist mages, go check out Master Specialist in Complete Mage. You qualify earlier than the ruathar does, and you get boosts to the CL and DC for the school you specialized in. Additionally, you get some neat stuff based on your school. For example, conjurers get the ability to quicken a conjuration spell 3 times per day.

[Jeff the Green]

Ruathar, for one. Yeah, it doesn't give you an incredible amount of benefit, but it's definitely an upgrade in every way from straight wizard or cleric, and costs you absolutely nothing to qualify for (probably not even the opportunity to take a different prestige class, since you can qualify earlier than most).

Huh? It requires 3rd-level spells, just like a bunch of other casting PrCs. Yeah, it's a straight upgrade from Wizard, but not from all the other PrCs you could go into—like, say, Incantatrix.

[Chronos]

Yes, there are other PrCs you can qualify for at that level or earlier. I said earlier than most, not all.

[Jeff the Green]

Yes, there are other PrCs you can qualify for at that level or earlier. I said earlier than most, not all.

6th level is kind of standard for PrC entry, though. Off the top of my head, Mindbender, Ultimate Magus, Halfling Whistler, Divine Oracle, Recaster, and Planar Shepherd are all available starting then.

[Piggy Knowles]

I'm actually going to disagree that Ruathar is any better than straight wizard levels, unless you specifically need the skills or weapon proficiencies. I've got a couple of Unseen Seer builds that rely on Ruathar to get in, and a wizardly archer that uses it for the longbow proficiency, but otherwise? Probably not worth it.

Don't forget that prestige classes that advance spellcasting don't advance everything. Specifically, for the wizard, they don't advance the free spells added to your spellbook. This is especially important for an elven generalist using the RotW sub levels, and doubly so if you've taken Collegiate Wizard. Unless I actively need those skills or proficiencies for something, I'd much rather have 9-15 free spells added to my spellbook without requiring downtime, research or cash.

[Reshy]

You could always become a Domain Wizard, it's like specialization but without taking hits to anything at the cost of a smaller pool of affected spells.


However, with exception to Power Word Pain there aren't really any super powerful spells in the Enchantment school, so that can easily be sacrificed. Then you just need to sacrifice one other thing.

[Agincourt]

You could always become a Domain Wizard, it's like specialization but without taking hits to anything at the cost of a smaller pool of affected spells.


However, with exception to Power Word Pain there aren't really any super powerful spells in the Enchantment school, so that can easily be sacrificed. Then you just need to sacrifice one other thing.

Many DMs do not allow the Domain Wizard variant precisely because there is no downside. A Domain Wizard gets everything a regular wizard gets, as well as extra spells and a higher Caster Level on domain spells, but does not surrender anything in return. If the OPs DM allows it, then by all means go for it, but it is not safe to assume that it will be allowed.

[dextercorvia]

Don't forget that prestige classes that advance spellcasting don't advance everything. Specifically, for the wizard, they don't advance the free spells added to your spellbook. This is especially important for an elven generalist using the RotW sub levels, and doubly so if you've taken Collegiate Wizard. Unless I actively need those skills or proficiencies for something, I'd much rather have 9-15 free spells added to my spellbook without requiring downtime, research or cash.

While PrC descriptions are dysfunctional in regards to specifying CL, Spells Known, and Spells/day in all cases, Spells Known is the same as spells added to your spellbook. You would lose your Collegiate Wizard spells known (tied explicitly to wizard levels), but since generalist is the class you are advancing with a PrC you would get 3 spells in your book each level.

[Ghen]

I started out reading this thread as a proponent of specialization, but there are some very good points here in favor of Generalization. I think I'll try it out with my next Wizard.

[tadkins]

I see specialization as kind of a nice RP tool. A wizard character will have a personality that reflects their spell choices. A good, humble, caring wizard will likely be packing very few Necromancy spells. A clever trickster of a wizard probably favors Illusion and Enchantment. That crazy wizard who loves to blow things up, including the very notion of subtlety, will instead ban Illusion and Enchantment.

If you've got the wizard character concept in mind, and you just don't picture that character using certain spells, why not ban 'em and get something out of it?

[Jeff the Green]

. You would lose your Collegiate Wizard spells known (tied explicitly to wizard levels).

I don't think this is true. PrCs say you gain spells known "as if you had gained a level in" whatever sort of class it's advancing. So you go back to Wizard to see how many spells you learn, and Collegiate Wizard says "four," so you get four new spells known.

Incidentally, is that four spells in addition to the normal two, or does it replace it? I'm having trouble parsing it.

[dextercorvia]

I don't think this is true. PrCs say you gain spells known "as if you had gained a level in" whatever sort of class it's advancing. So you go back to Wizard to see how many spells you learn, and Collegiate Wizard says "four," so you get four new spells known.

Incidentally, is that four spells in addition to the normal two, or does it replace it? I'm having trouble parsing it.

It could definitely be read as working with PrC +1 spellcasting classes. It's how I treat it when I DM.

Replacement. Since the Normal section calls out the two spells, it is replacing the normal class benefit.

[Kharannos]

Ok people, let me ask for some advice for my build then.

I'll play a True Neutral Human Wizard(Generalist) 3rd level. I want to plan the whole build (lvl 3 to 20), even If I won't reach 20th level in the campaign. Just for the sake of planing a good build. My build.

I play this wizard as both a BFC and a booster. I intend to make him a scholar character. He is a studious academic, used to the library and feels really uncomfortable outdoors (Role-playing stuff. Don't expect me to walk for days without bitching a lot about it).

What I expect of him:
Since he is a scholar, "Mage of the Arcane Order" PrC is a MUST for him.
He enjoys learning and teaching and I expect the Arcane Order to be fully explored by my DM.
Also, It's great to have a room, a library, research places and all that a Teleport away for this kind of character. I expect to use a lot of Activated Itens. As a Generalist, always being prepared is part of my job.
Whatever I can't solve with my intelligence and wits can be solved with my prepared spells. And If I don't have that spell prepared, of course I carry a scroll or wand of that spell.

Collegiate Wizard Feat is another MUST. Won't give up on that. Not only for role-playing reasons, but also 4 spells per level instead of 2 is incredible when we're talking about a generalist, as I said above.

Sculpt Spell and (even more) Extend Spell PROBABLY will be my favored Metamagic Feats early to mid levels, for both BFC and Boost. Quickened Spell will appear high levels.

I was considering taking Archmage PrC, (just a level or two), considering the ascension of a student to a well-renowned arcane teacher.

But Archmage seems like a pretty poor choice, honestly. People say a lot about this PrC, but Arcane Reach is the only High Arcana that seems REALLY good, but It's like a really expensive metamagic ability. Maybe I'm not understanding how to use this High Arcana, but the way I see it, a well placed chain spell completely overshadows this High Arcana.

Can anyone give me tips, suggestions and adviced to build this character??

Thanks again!

[Vedhin]

*scholar*

I see a serious lack of Paragnostic Apostle from Complete Champion.

Edit: Mind Over Matter, Mortal Coil, and Spatial Awareness jump out as being useful.

[Kharannos]

I see a serious lack of Paragnostic Apostle from Complete Champion.

Edit: Mind Over Matter, Mortal Coil, and Spatial Awareness jump out as being useful.

Hmm... I've never heard of It, so I did a little research, but I really fail to see this PrC actually being good. For role-playing reasons, on the other hand, It looks great, but It costs me 1 level of PrC + 5 points in a Knowledge to... Increase my caster level by one when casting Teleportation Spells? Or to increase 2 hitpoints to a Wall?

I mean... I'm not a "hardcore optimizer" player and the concept is great, but It needed to be buffed HARD to be actually worth picking it up.
Weird thing is: The ability that most interested my is Lore :smallbiggrin:
And I mean It. Even if I can cast Divinations, being able to know about general stuff like a bard is really great.

Am I missing something? Maybe It Is great and I'm ****ting through my mouth :smallbiggrin:

[Vedhin]

Hmm... I've never heard of It, so I did a little research, but I really fail to see this PrC actually being good. For role-playing reasons, on the other hand, It looks great, but It costs me 1 level of PrC + 5 points in a Knowledge to... Increase my caster level by one when casting Teleportation Spells? Or to increase 2 hitpoints to a Wall?

I mean... I'm not a "hardcore optimizer" player and the concept is great, but It needed to be buffed HARD to be actually worth picking it up.
Weird thing is: The ability that most interested my is Lore :smallbiggrin:
And I mean It. Even if I can cast Divinations, being able to know about general stuff like a bard is really great.

Am I missing something? Maybe It Is great and I'm ****ting through my mouth :smallbiggrin:

It's not so much great as just plain nice. It's easy entry, and you lose nothing. The bonuses are minor, but chances are at least one of them will be nice. Mind Over Matter also increases bonuses from Mage Armor and such by 2, and can be worthwhile.

[Kharannos]

It's not so much great as just plain nice. It's easy entry, and you lose nothing. The bonuses are minor, but chances are at least one of them will be nice. Mind Over Matter also increases bonuses from Mage Armor and such by 2, and can be worthwhile.

Ok, thanks for the suggestion ^^

I'm not actually convinced, since leveling up is something too "expensive" to use a PrC with so little effect, BUT you are right. It's actually better to be Wizard 5/Paragnostic Apostle 2/Mage of the Arcane Order 10/Archmage 3 than Wizard 7/Mage of the Arcane Order 10/Archmage 3

It's like leveling up as a wizard AND getting extra bonuses.

Any suggestion on the feats? I could really use a hand.
I'm considering in starting the game with Improved Initiative, Collegiate Wizard and Sculpt Spell (for BFC) or Extend Spell (for buffs).
Don't know which metamagic I'll get first, but I'll get both easrly in the game, since they only add 1 level for the spell.

I intend to get: Cooperative Spell (for PrC), Quickened Spell (level 12, approximate) and a crafting feat (wand or rod)
If I I'm reading towards Archmage, I'll need the feats, but honestly? Even with a lot of people saying It's awesome, I haven't found anything REALLY worth those talents. Is Archmage really good?

[chaos_redefined]

Paragnostic Apostle costs no feats to get in, and you lose out on one feat compared to pure wizard levels. So, the class features of paragnostic apostle are worth 1 feat as a total. Are you willing to accept, say:
+2 AC from mage armor, haste and spider skin (all stack, so +6 AC when affected by all 3)
+1 DC to spells of dual-threat blast+debuff spells. (A lot of decent evocation spells, a lot of decent necromancy spells, basically all the good spells you kept by going generalist)
+1 to CL for the purposes of overcoming spell resistance
Fast Healing on all your summoned creatures
Lore ability.

Considering that +1 to CL is worth half a feat (Spell Penetration), and the others are going to be worth more than half a feat, I'd say that's a good deal. You do have to put some skill points in weird places, but other than that, seems to be all good.

In comparison, something like Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil costs you 3 feats to enter, and you lose out on 1.4 wizard feats (7 levels long, every 5 levels = 1 wizard feat), so it needs to be worth 4.4 feats. Yes, it's going to be better. But it's also costs more.

[Kharannos]

Ok, you both gave me enough reasons to not underestimate this PrC =)

Any other advices, related to Archmage PrC or the feat selection?
Thanks again !