Making magic fun

[KumaBozu]

I've always avoided playing wizards and sorcerers because it just seems a little too easy. They kinda have answers to pretty much everything. Even when they don't, they can just summon something that has an answer anyway. What interesting tricks have you guys come up with to make the class fun enough to play regularly?

[Segev]

Have you actually played one? I ask, because I find that, in practice, the "ideal wizard" we discuss on the boards almost never happens. It requires a cooperative DM - at least, a DM who is willing to let you get access to resources in a generic setting that doesn't have a pressing timetable keeping you busy - and a very high degree of precision play with your mechanics to really have exactly the right options every time. And even then, you can make mistakes.

In practice, I have found that you can be useful, even sometimes stomp on non-mages' roles if you try too hard in their direction, but that you won't truly have an answer for everything that is actually on hand when you need it. There's a lot of "come back tomorrow" to it, and you very often will find that to be a less satisfactory solution than you might think, unless you're able to do 15 min. adventuring days and take as long as you want on every challenge.

[Uncle Pine]

Think outside the box. Solve problems using needlessly obscure spells from sourcebooks no one ever heard of (this is better done as a Wizard because a Sorcerer risks to shoehorn himself in very bad situations if they can't change their spells known).

Use spell components to solve problems instead of relying on spells. Did you know a spell component pouch contains the spell components necessary to cast all your spells, provided they have no listed cost or are worth less than 1 gp? Look for spells with weird components and have fun. I remember a fog spell in the Spell Compendium that uses a snotty tissue.

Nerf yourself into what you want to be. Some people decide to optimize Commoners and Fighters instead of Wizards because they like the challenge: choose a level of optimization and stick to it.

Pick a theme. Themes are awesome. Remember that by RAW you don't need Spell Thematics to change the visual effects of all your spells.

If themes aren't enough, come up with your own accent. That helps turning munchkin Commoner number 13 or GOD Wizard number 4 into Radislav the cursed kulak or Cosainteor the drunken Irish spellcaster.

[Fizban]

In practice, I have found that you can be useful, even sometimes stomp on non-mages' roles if you try too hard in their direction, but that you won't truly have an answer for everything that is actually on hand when you need it. There's a lot of "come back tomorrow" to it, and you very often will find that to be a less satisfactory solution than you might think, unless you're able to do 15 min. adventuring days and take as long as you want on every challenge.
Careful, someone from one of the tier threads might show up. It'd be nice if we had more than 2 people for the dissent.

What he said. The only time I've seen or played a spellcaster who didn't run into situations they were unprepared for was when I had an incarnate/totemist//cleric gestalt against a new DM who was making things up as they went along and basically allowing anything people asked for (so. much. power.), and even then I wasn't actually prepared for a jailbreak on my own-had to milk the Hat of Disguise for that. I'll note also that the wizard//archivist ran into a demon when he was separated from the party and only survived because it let him run, though admittedly it would have killed us all if the DM had used all its abilities. And gestalt was the DM's idea.

[Segev]

The trouble with "tier threads" is that they're right...in theorycraft.

It really takes actually getting into real play for the practice/theory divide to manifest. Too many variables have to be "assumed" in theorycraft, so that you wind up either assuming the diabolus ex machina is out to get the wizard and thus aren't letting him use his mechanics, or you wind up doing what actually happens in theorycraft threads and assuming enough is "ideal" that the wizard is omni-prepared.

And for particular kinds of DMs, the theorycraft works. I just haven't ever played under one. It takes a peculiar kind of unawareness and permissive willingness to go along. In my experience, the unaware are more prone to heavy railroading and thus aren't permissive (even getting into that diabolus ex machina that will prevent the wizard's powers from working the way they should), and the permissive are aware enough to play a living world that has the practical limits. Or, the permissive are SO permissive that the RAW-theorizing is needless because you can step outside of the RAW and just make things up.

But this is my experience with DMs, not necessarily representative as a true sampling of the population.

[Darth Ultron]

Trust me, magic does not in any way make the game easy and give a wizard all the answers. The only time that can even happen is with a Buddy DM that lets it happen or a bad DM that does not know the rules.

I ''break'' players all the time...and have for years. It's a hobby. The classic is where a player is all excited about the super awesome character they have that like ''once killed two gods at one time'' or something else ridiculous. Then they come and play in my game and are just lost. They break down in tears as their all powerful wizard can't, say, open a door or find a hiding Halfling.

Just following the rules and common sense can fix a lot of the spellcaster ''problems''. The rest can be fixed by a complex world setting and uncommon sense(though that is rare).

[ryu]

Or alternative let everything work the way it says it does, but face the caster with actual equals to fight or in other words casters fighting casters.

[Uncle Pine]

Segev's point is an important one: before drawing conclusions from the theoretical potential of a "solve everything" class, be sure to have at least some actual practice with it. Wizards can theoretically solve everything, but outside the forums they have to deal with human players which are less than perfect. I'm not saying that Wizards aren't far better than Monks, just to mention a glaring example, but even though he should be prepared against it you'd be surprised to know how many conjurers can get their asses handed to them when it turns out the climatic boss did his homeworks and casted Protection from Evil/Good/Law/Chaos on himself (mainly because most conjurer players don't know the spell works like that).

[ryu]

Segev's point is an important one: before drawing conclusions from the theoretical potential of a "solve everything" class, be sure to have at least some actual practice with it. Wizards can theoretically solve everything, but outside the forums they have to deal with human players which are less than perfect. I'm not saying that Wizards aren't far better than Monks, just to mention a glaring example, but even though he should be prepared against it you'd be surprised to know how many conjurers can get their asses handed to them when it turns out the climatic boss did his homeworks and casted Protection from Evil/Good/Law/Chaos on himself (mainly because most conjurer players don't know the spell works like that).

And in that case it's not the wizard class being weak. It's the player not putting in the effort to understand their tools and the counters enemies will attempt to bring in. Also that's a caster versus caster fight. That doesn't end automatically in PC winning. That will almost unilaterally end in whichever caster prepared more heavily winning, if not fully than at least in gaining a significant advantage and forcing the loser into much less fair circumstances until they can manage to correct their mistake and regroup.

[Uncle Pine]

And in that case it's not the wizard class being weak. It's the player not putting in the effort to understand their tools and the counters enemies will attempt to bring in. Also that's a caster versus caster fight. That doesn't end automatically in PC winning. That will almost unilaterally end in whichever caster prepared more heavily winning, if not fully than at least in gaining a significant advantage and forcing the loser into much less fair circumstances until they can manage to correct their mistake and regroup.

Protection from Evil/Good/Chaos/Law is a 1st level spell which can be easily accessed via scrolls, wands, eternal wands and/or other magic consumables or magic items with limited uses per day by any non casting class.

EDIT: The fact that the Wizard class isn't objectively weak but it's instead generally downplayed by less than perfect players is exactly my point.

[Aetis]

I don't think forum level Wizards/sorcerers actually happen in real games, or at least, I have never come across one in years of playing and meeting dozens of new players.

The impact a player makes in a game is generally player-dependent, not class-dependent.

[ryu]

I don't think forum level Wizards/sorcerers actually happen in real games, or at least, I have never come across one in years of playing and meeting dozens of new players.

The impact a player makes in a game is generally player-dependent, not class-dependent.

This likely because it takes a very special kind of DM to give a consistently engaging yet fair challenge to a group of tier 1s. It's generally not something you can have a plan set out beforehand so much as giving them some objective and playing whatever they end up fighting as competently as you can. Any planning beyond that is a bit... hard.

[Zanos]

Or alternative let everything work the way it says it does, but face the caster with actual equals to fight or in other words casters fighting casters.
I think if you have resort to a wizard to beat the wizard, then you sort of prove the point that they're too strong. And at that point it's kind of just player vs DM skill than anything else.



I ''break'' players all the time...and have for years. It's a hobby. The classic is where a player is all excited about the super awesome character they have that like ''once killed two gods at one time'' or something else ridiculous. Then they come and play in my game and are just lost. They break down in tears as their all powerful wizard can't, say, open a door or find a hiding Halfling.
I think it's weird that some DMs enjoy messing with their players so much. If someone wants to a player a character that's capable in most scenarios that's fine, and I don't think I've ever actually seen someone attempt to bind like 20 devils or whatever to solve all their problems for them. In most cases I've found, players that "killed two gods at once" or something similar were from games where the DM was very generous with character power and handed out a lot of unique stuff, rather than players who thought they were amazing rules wizards.


I don't think forum level Wizards/sorcerers actually happen in real games, or at least, I have never come across one in years of playing and meeting dozens of new players.

The impact a player makes in a game is generally player-dependent, not class-dependent.
I play them a lot, I just generally don't actually exercise the full power. Planar binding an army of devils and becoming a demigod isn't at all necessary in most games with DMs running the monsters normally out of the book. It just makes you a jerk. I just cast fireball and haste and save the mean stuff if we get really desperate.

[Segev]

And in that case it's not the wizard class being weak. It's the player not putting in the effort to understand their tools and the counters enemies will attempt to bring in. Also that's a caster versus caster fight. That doesn't end automatically in PC winning. That will almost unilaterally end in whichever caster prepared more heavily winning, if not fully than at least in gaining a significant advantage and forcing the loser into much less fair circumstances until they can manage to correct their mistake and regroup.You're missing the point. Nobody is saying the wizard is weak, and I'm not even arguing he's not Tier 1. He's the poster boy for the Tier 1 (though I'd argue the Druid fills the role more fully).

I'm saying that it's not a player failing to "put in the effort." It's a player who isn't perfect, doesn't have perfect foreknowledge of what is to come, lacks a DM who will cooperatively help him garner that information, and hasn't got the luxury of time and resources and an infinite magic mart to spend his gp on any item or spell ever printed anywhere. Even assuming free access to every CORE spell is risky; I've had more than one DM who just plain wasn't cooperative about allowing my wizard to find the spells he wanted. They weren't even stonewalling; we weren't in towns big enough to have a cornucopia of wizards with whom to collaborate, so "sorry, only this handful of spells are available to buy" was relatively reasonable.

Actually, that might be a good thread topic: construct the "god wizard's" spellbook, assuming he ONLY gets the spells that come freely from leveling up. (On the basis that he's got to have a DM who'll let him find copies of any spells he adds to his spellbook via gp.)

But anyway, the point isn't that wizards are weak, and accusing players who can't play them the way the board theorizes they should be of not putting in the work or otherwise being deficient as players is ignoring that game worlds aren't always presenting the ideal environment to be able to do that. They still can be very strong. But having an answer to everything they will encounter just when they need it is...tricky. (They also are very subject to the Bigger Spider problem.)


I don't think forum level Wizards/sorcerers actually happen in real games, or at least, I have never come across one in years of playing and meeting dozens of new players.

The impact a player makes in a game is generally player-dependent, not class-dependent.


This likely because it takes a very special kind of DM to give a consistently engaging yet fair challenge to a group of tier 1s. It's generally not something you can have a plan set out beforehand so much as giving them some objective and playing whatever they end up fighting as competently as you can. Any planning beyond that is a bit... hard.
In this response to Aetis's quote above, I think you're reversing cause and effect. Aetis is talking about not finding "forum level Wizards/sorcerers" in actual games. Your reply about DMs not knowing how to handle it would seem to suggest that the reason they don't show up is that DMs can't challenge them. This doesn't make much sense; the actual outcome of that, if "forum-level wizards" showed up in games, would be that such DMs find those forum-level wizards running roughshod over their campaigns. Not that the forum-level wizards wouldn't appear.

The real reason they tend not to show up in practice is simply that the moment a real DM is added to the equation, rather than the hypothetical one we use for theoretical discussions (and we use that hypothetical one for good reasons), the real DM and his breathing setting and the scenarios in which he places the characters don't provide the required underpinnings of time and resources for the "forum level wizard" to always be perfectly prepared for exactly what he's going to encounter today.

[Aetis]

This likely because it takes a very special kind of DM to give a consistently engaging yet fair challenge to a group of tier 1s. It's generally not something you can have a plan set out beforehand so much as giving them some objective and playing whatever they end up fighting as competently as you can. Any planning beyond that is a bit... hard.

I agree that you need a competent DM, but I don't think it's that difficult to challenge the tier 1s.

Ban the OP stuff and play at lower levels.

[ryu]

I think if you have resort to a wizard to beat the wizard, then you sort of prove the point that they're too strong. And at that point it's kind of just player vs DM skill than anything else.


I think it's weird that some DMs enjoy messing with their players so much. If someone wants to a player a character that's capable in most scenarios that's fine, and I don't think I've ever actually seen someone attempt to bind like 20 devils or whatever to solve all their problems for them. In most cases I've found, players that "killed two gods at once" or something similar were from games where the DM was very generous with character power and handed out a lot of unique stuff, rather than players who thought they were amazing rules wizards.


I play them a lot, I just generally don't actually exercise the full power. Planar binding an army of devils and becoming a demigod isn't at all necessary in most games with DMs running the monsters normally out of the book. It just makes you a jerk. I just cast fireball and haste and save the mean stuff if we get really desperate.

Saying that only caster are fighting in this game is acknowledgement for the fact that they're the most powerful thing in this system, though not that they're too powerful necessarily. It's about preferred level of power in a game. I, for example, am thoroughly disinterested in playing in any game below tier 1, because I feel that every other tier has other games that mimic most if not all the good parts of the experience without taking as much time or effort as a D&D session. The concept of watching the game play out with blaster wizards, healbot clerics, corpse rogues, and beatstick fighters is literally equivalent to watching paint dry as far as I'm concerned. Not saying you can't like it. Just saying I'm not interested.

[Fizban]

I don't know if I corrupted this thread or was merely the instrument of the inevitable.

For what it's worth: who cares if Spell Thematics isn't required to mess with your spells? It's also a perfectly usable feat that has little danger of making magic unfun.

[Mordaedil]

The first time I played a wizard thinking "man, I better be careful otherwise I'm gonna mess everything up and make our game less fun", I accidentally won the initative count, walked in front of our meat shields on a narrow stair case, shot a bolt at a brown bear(we started at 4th level), miscalculated how long distance a bear can charge and took a paw to my face for my troubles and ended up bleeding out in the first round of combat.

Yeah, the whole "wizards run the show" is only as true as much as a DM wants to make it. The other party members ended up being far more effective in that encounter. (I managed to undo my emberassment by the next one though)

[ryu]

The first time I played a wizard thinking "man, I better be careful otherwise I'm gonna mess everything up and make our game less fun", I accidentally won the initative count, walked in front of our meat shields on a narrow stair case, shot a bolt at a brown bear(we started at 4th level), miscalculated how long distance a bear can charge and took a paw to my face for my troubles and ended up bleeding out in the first round of combat.

Yeah, the whole "wizards run the show" is only as true as much as a DM wants to make it. The other party members ended up being far more effective in that encounter. (I managed to undo my emberassment by the next one though)

Because you walked in front of your meatshields.... and didn't cast a spell? Like, even if you were gonna not cast a spell why walk in front of your meat before crossbowing? I don't see what's to be gained considering that as they aren't in melee with your target the fighters aren't even relevant to your attack on the bear. They can't be hit and wouldn't reduce your accuracy or anything.

[Zanos]

The first time I played a wizard thinking "man, I better be careful otherwise I'm gonna mess everything up and make our game less fun", I accidentally won the initative count, walked in front of our meat shields on a narrow stair case, shot a bolt at a brown bear(we started at 4th level), miscalculated how long distance a bear can charge and took a paw to my face for my troubles and ended up bleeding out in the first round of combat.

Yeah, the whole "wizards run the show" is only as true as much as a DM wants to make it. The other party members ended up being far more effective in that encounter. (I managed to undo my emberassment by the next one though)
The DM had very little to do with your decision to put your d4 with no defensive spells in front of a dangerous melee combatant and not use your class features. Nobody ever said it's not possible to screw up a wizard if you don't know what you're doing.

[Morphic tide]

The DM had very little to do with your decision to put your d4 with no defensive spells in front of a dangerous melee combatant and not use your class features. Nobody ever said it's not possible to screw up a wizard if you don't know what you're doing.

Whereas Cleric and Druid need you only get a clue to become nigh-omnipotent. You have 19 Wis? You have a t1 Cleric or Druid build.

[Zanos]

Whereas Cleric and Druid need you only get a clue to become nigh-omnipotent. You have 19 Wis? You have a t1 Cleric or Druid build.
A cleric or druid that doesn't cast any spells isn't tier 1 either. And you can argue about the thread specifically for that if you want.

[KumaBozu]

A cleric or druid that doesn't cast any spells isn't tier 1 either. And you can argue about the thread specifically for that if you want.

The druid in my party does nothing but turn into a bear and summon bears. He's having the time of his life. As the cleric, I barely have time to give the party fast healing before the enemies are all dead