Why aren't Illusionists a base class in 3.x?

[GnomishPride]

As title.
More specifically, I am wondering why Illusionists (a base class in AD&D), are delegated to a wizard specialization in other editions. Illusionists in AD&D were actually pretty cool. They had some unique and powerful spells exclusive to them, had some neat fluff for how they worked and had a really special feel that I haven't seen replicated anywhere else. In, 3.x Illusionists are no where near as cool. They were downgraded to a subclass at best, a spell label at worst. Their spell list contained some ye olden Illusionist spells, but tapped with a nerf bat a little. Does anyone have any ideas as to why they were downgraded from AD&D, and better yet, how to make them a (balanced) 3.x class?

Much thanks!

P.S. This isn't in the 3.x or AD&D/Older forums because it could fit into either.

[Thrudd]

Probably because they were mechanically identical to magic users, just with a mostly different spell list. 2e introduced the idea of specialist wizards, combined the spell lists, and gave the spell schools a mechanical purpose in the game (in 1e they were just fluff/descriptive).

3e just continued from 2e.

If you're going to make them a different class in 3e, take away all their spells from the wizard list (and maybe the cleric lists, too) and create an illusionist only list. In 1e they had a shorter spell list than magic users, so don't worry if that's the case. Go through the 1e and 2e spells and see if there's anything that isn't already in 3e that you could use. Give them a different set of class skills, sleight of hand and a couple other dex based skills should be on there.

[Draconium]

I know 3.5 had a class known as the Beguiler, from the Player's Handbook II, which focuses on Illusion/Enchantment magic. Theyhave a somewhat limited list, but can pick up more Illusion or Enchantment spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard list as they level. I don't see why you can't just fluff them as Illusionists.

[Darth Ultron]

AD&D illusionists got unique spells, but little else. The only big thing was the vague and poorly written rules for illusions. You could make someone ''think'' themselves to death with a simple first level illusion spell, for example.

2E and even more 3E made illusions make more sense, and nerfed everything....but then they nerfed everything else too.

If your looking to create the ''I make an illusion with my first level spell of a hole under the ogre and it thinks it falls like a mile and kills itself'', you simply can't do that in any balanced way in 3E.

But other then that, what ''feel'' are you looking for?

[nedz]

3.5 has a few Illusionist PrCs: the Gnome one is famous, but there are others.

3.5 took the view that an illusionist is just a type of arcane caster. Also, there is a type of specialist Wizard called an illusionist and some ACFs exist to support this.

[Necroticplague]

Probably because they were mechanically identical to magic users, just with a mostly different spell list. 2e introduced the idea of specialist wizards, combined the spell lists, and gave the spell schools a mechanical purpose in the game (in 1e they were just fluff/descriptive).

3e just continued from 2e.

This. If you have two classes that work pretty much identically, with some slight variation, it makes more sense to use something like an ACF (like the specialized wizard ACFs), or as a prestige class that expands on the base class (like the Shadowcraft mage). A different base class is only really needed if there's a significant difference in mechanics. When the difference is as small as it is, simply relegating it to the option of he more broad class is pretty reasonable.

[obryn]

Yeah, this started in 2e rather than 3e, but I still think it was ultimately a mistake.

The merging of the Wizard and Illusionist spell lists (and likewise Cleric and Druid spell lists), while perhaps sensible from an efficiency perspective, inflated the power & versatility of wizards and contributed to wizard power creep.

[Jay R]

The simple answer to your question is this: illusionist isn't a separate class in 3.x because it wasn't a separate class in AD&D 2e.

But that only pushes the question back one edition. We now ask, why did illusionists stop being a separate class between 1e and 2e?

TSR hasn't explicitly given the answer, but my guess is that it was a consequence of trying to allow specialists in other schools of magic as well.

Illusionists first appeared as a separate class in original D&D, in an article in The Strategic Review (the precursor to The Dragon). It had a separate spell list, and illusion spells were usually a level lower for an illusionist than for a magic-user, if they were available to magic-users at all. (But the stat requirements were so high that I never saw one played.)

In 1e, illusionists were included as a core class, not merely a magazine article. it was a separate class, with a separate spell list. There was a lot of overlap, but they weren't the same. Going from 1e to 2e, they tried to generalize the idea of illusionists to include specialists in any classes. This meant either producing separate spell lists for 8 kinds of specialists, or combining the spell lists.

But 2e wasn't written by Gygax, so they actually chose the less complicated option - a single wizard spell list. So all specialists, including illusionists, became merely specialists in the wizard class.

[Thrudd]

The problem I always had with specialists in 2e was that some schools barely had any spells. They didn't really put much effort into that, they just merged illusionist spells and magic user spells (and druid with cleric spells, creating the similar "spheres" mechanic for clerics).

I also prefer separate classes. They represent separate learning traditions, should have different spell lists.

[obryn]

The problem I always had with specialists in 2e was that some schools barely had any spells. They didn't really put much effort into that, they just merged illusionist spells and magic user spells (and druid with cleric spells, creating the similar "spheres" mechanic for clerics).

I also prefer separate classes. They represent separate learning traditions, should have different spell lists.
Right. It was really lazily done in 2e, especially for Clerics. Much like a lot of 2e's changes (and 3e's for that matter), the designers didn't always pay very close attention to what their changes would actually do in play.

[LibraryOgre]

Also consider that the 1e illusionist violated a lot of what they tried to do with 3.x. It had a different XP chart than the core magic-user, whereas 3.x had a single chart for everyone. It had only 7 levels of spells, while 3.x moved core casters to 9 levels of spells. Then it had the wonkiness of the 7th level illusion spell "First Level Magic User Spells", and the lack of requirement for Read Magic. Even if they'd used the 1e illusionist as the core of 3.x illusionists, I think it would've looked a lot like the one we wound up with... or the beguiler.

[nedz]

Also consider that the 1e illusionist violated a lot of what they tried to do with 3.x. It had a different XP chart than the core magic-user, whereas 3.x had a single chart for everyone. It had only 7 levels of spells, while 3.x moved core casters to 9 levels of spells. Then it had the wonkiness of the 7th level illusion spell "First Level Magic User Spells", and the lack of requirement for Read Magic. Even if they'd used the 1e illusionist as the core of 3.x illusionists, I think it would've looked a lot like the one we wound up with... or the beguiler.

this, pretty much.

However whilst I like the Beguiler it is missing a lot of key spells - and more than you can make up for with the Advanced Learning feature.

[Psyren]

In, 3.x Illusionists are no where near as cool.

Yeah well, you know, that's just like, your opinion, man. :smalltongue:

If you want an illusionist that actually gets some illusion tricks outside of picking illusion spells themselves, I recommend Pathfinder, which gives all the wizard schools unique powers and variants on those powers. Illusion and its subsidiaries (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/arcane-schools/paizo---arcane-schools/classic-arcane-schools/illusion) get some fun toys.

[Beheld]

The problem with Illusionist is that it's actually a terrible concept.

1) Illusion spells are basically three kinds of things: a) Kill spells, b) Visual Illusions that may or may not have more senses attached, c) Shadow real conjuration/evocation spells.

2) Aside from c, mind affecting immunity and true seeing completely cancel out the other two. C is basically just being a conjurer. If your entire concept negates down to "is basically a worse conjurer" as soon as someone knows your class name, you probably shouldn't be a separate class.

3) The power of illusions is not balanceable. If you ask someone "what can you do with Silent Image" the very basic answer under the RAW is "You can at least give all your allies total concealment while they have free reign to attack enemies, or just no save beat any amount of Golems or Vermin, or Mindless undead." But yet, some DMs will strive as hard as possible to say that you can't do either of those things. Other DMs will allow you to do all sorts of much stronger more creative uses too.

That is way too much variation for a class, because no one know what you can and can't do until they have a long talk with their DM, and find out they are either Way OP, or way UP.

[Willie the Duck]

P.S. This isn't in the 3.x or AD&D/Older forums because it could fit into either.

No, the change to illusionist being one of many specialist happened between 1e and 2e. This thread completely belongs in the AD&D/Older forum.

[Segev]

If you take a hard look at the Shadow line of spells (shadow conjuration, shadow evocation, etc.) from 1e AD&D, the Illusionist starts to look almost like a prototype for shoehorning 3e's spontaneous casting into 1e's Vancian system. I say that because the big thing those spells do is let you choose on the fly what spell you're casting out of that slot. It's not unlimited, but it is a fairly broad list, letting you (for example) choose a different shape and damage type for your evocation, or tailor your choice of monster or other conjured thing to the situation rather than having to have the right spell already ready already.


That said, making an Illusionist in 3.5 isn't too difficult; you could honestly do it by looking at the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer as prototypes; the Beguiler is an Enchanter, and the Dread Necromancer is (obviously) a Necromancer. Build your Phantasmage base class along their lines, with a fixed spells-known list themed around illusions and spontaneous casting.

[GnomishPride]

Thanks guys, that makes a lot of sense. Really appreciate the feedback.

[nedz]

If you take a hard look at the Shadow line of spells (shadow conjuration, shadow evocation, etc.) from 1e AD&D, the Illusionist starts to look almost like a prototype for shoehorning 3e's spontaneous casting into 1e's Vancian system. I say that because the big thing those spells do is let you choose on the fly what spell you're casting out of that slot. It's not unlimited, but it is a fairly broad list, letting you (for example) choose a different shape and damage type for your evocation, or tailor your choice of monster or other conjured thing to the situation rather than having to have the right spell already ready already.


That said, making an Illusionist in 3.5 isn't too difficult; you could honestly do it by looking at the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer as prototypes; the Beguiler is an Enchanter, and the Dread Necromancer is (obviously) a Necromancer. Build your Phantasmage base class along their lines, with a fixed spells-known list themed around illusions and spontaneous casting.

Beguiler has 111 spells on it's list: 33 are Enchantment and 33 are Illusion so calling it an Enchanter is a little inaccurate. (The other 45 are: 9 Abjurations, 6 Conjurations, 15 Divinations, 2 Evocations, 0 Necromancy, 13 Transmutations, 0 Universal FWIW).

It's just missing several spells any illusionist would want: most Shadow spells and most advanced Illusions mainly. Now you can grab a few of these with Advanced Learning and there are further well know tricks: Arcane Disciple, Bloodline feats, PrCs; which can add to these.