PDA

View Full Version : DM Help What are the Do's and Don'ts of DMing a wizard-focused campaign?



OttoVonBigby
2017-08-31, 09:12 AM
I'm in the earliest stage of preparing to DM (in a 3.5/Pathfinder hybrid houserule-y system) a solo campaign where the player will be a wizard of some kind, likely with NPC escort. Neither myself nor the player, despite 15+ years of D&Ding, has dealt with wizards much. Moreover, what I've read on this and similar forums suggests there's a lot of stuff I don't know/can't anticipate concerning wizard PCs.

FWIW, I'd characterize the player as having been a middling optimizer so far. Definitely not one to make choices that don't fit the character's nature or the story. Though I haven't decided much at all about the campaign, I can say with utter certainty that story is job #1 for both of us.

Altair_the_Vexed
2017-08-31, 09:44 AM
When both my mate and I were near-nocturnal layabouts back in the 90s, we used to run 1-on-1 games for each other after the day-shift gamers had gone home. My character was a wizard, so I have some experience in this.

Do remember the wizard is squishy.
Maybe have adversaries who want to capture the wizard for some reason? When I was playing in such a 1-on-1 game, my wizard was a prince, so there was a good reason to try to ransom him off.

Don't focus on combat.
The wizard may be squishy, but they can also sometimes deal with appropriately-levelled encounters (for a reduced group size) in a single spell. Adventures that play to the skills of the wizard, and use their massive magical power as a climax rather than routine worked best for us.

FreddyNoNose
2017-08-31, 01:59 PM
Well, you don't have to worry about doing all the usual adventures you have with a group. You can add lots of intrigue, investigation, magical research, and how do I say it: Obtaining rare antiquities......

Anymage
2017-08-31, 03:53 PM
What level range will you be looking at? Ninth level is one of the commonly agreed on points when casters start going off the rails. If you don't expect to go much over that, you should be okay.

Otherwise, while spells can be encounter enders, the real problem with wizards is their ability to fill a spellbook with very effective situational answers, and bring those to bear any time they have an opportunity to rest. (And any moderately intelligent wizard will have at least a couple of escape buttons on tap.) Crazy op-fu isn't something you'll have to worry too much about in a normal game. Having to mind the dozens of spells available in the spellbook so the wizard doesn't short-circuit a good chunk of your planned adventure after a good night's sleep, that's the catch.

OttoVonBigby
2017-09-01, 07:20 AM
It'd probably start at 3rd level.


Having to mind the dozens of spells available in the spellbook so the wizard doesn't short-circuit a good chunk of your planned adventure after a good night's sleep, that's the catch.
Yeah, I've been thinking about that, and one technique I've used in the past for dynamic high-level heroes is to not really CREATE "planned adventures," but rather develop a problem, antagonists, and consequences for failure--and NOT develop a climactic finale setpiece, but rather let the heroes figure out how to solve the problem. But that approach obviously works better for certain types of stories than others.

Nifft
2017-09-01, 05:27 PM
Exactly.

Stop planning adventures, and just try to figure out what the various factions / NPCs / natural forces would do if the PCs didn't screw everything up.

Prep NPC motivations, not actions nor events -- that'll allow you to adjust on the fly as everything goes to hell due to the PCs.

Figure out what would have happened if the PCs did nothing. Plan that roughly out to a week at most.

Plan out if any NPCs would have countered / discovered / exposed other NPCs.

Then, let the PCs disrupt stuff, and let the rocks fall where they may.

Velaryon
2017-09-03, 11:00 AM
Exactly.

Stop planning adventures, and just try to figure out what the various factions / NPCs / natural forces would do if the PCs didn't screw everything up.

Prep NPC motivations, not actions nor events -- that'll allow you to adjust on the fly as everything goes to hell due to the PCs.

Figure out what would have happened if the PCs did nothing. Plan that roughly out to a week at most.

Plan out if any NPCs would have countered / discovered / exposed other NPCs.

Then, let the PCs disrupt stuff, and let the rocks fall where they may.

That's pretty much how I run D&D games in general.

When it comes to solo adventures for a wizard, these are some things I would/wouldn't do:

DO have a solid understanding of what the wizard's capabilities are, as well as their limitations.

DO expect them to sometimes end combat threats with a single spell, if the player is reasonably clever and good at preparing relevant spells.

DO let the wizard occasionally win easy battles with pure arcane might, such as roasting an entire gang of bandits with a fireball.

DO remember that a wizard lacks hit points and Fortitude save, and that especially at early levels, one or two solid hits from an enemy that can deal good damage will end them.

DO have adventures in exotic conditions where the wizard can take advantage of their versatility by making use of unusual or situational spells that otherwise don't come up often in games.

DO provide some down time for the wizard to add new spells to their repertoire, scribe some scrolls for future adventures, and perhaps research additional spells or craft magic items if they so choose.

DO keep in mind that a rare or exceptionally useful spell can serve as a quest reward or treasure, as well if not better than some magic items.

DON'T let the wizard always fall into the 15 Minute Adventuring Day by resting and changing their spells after every encounter. DO make them occasionally have to face multiple challenges in a row because they're on a time-sensitive quest and have to decide whether to burn their best spells now or save them for the next encounter (emphasis on occasionally, though).

DON'T get frustrated when they simply fly out of reach of monsters whose only attacks are melee-based, thus rendering that encounter trivial. This is what wizards do, and when they aren't expending resources to help party members do the heavy lifting, "win buttons" will become a bigger part of their arsenal than a wizard in a full party might have.

DON'T rely too heavily on screwing over the wizard by having every encounter packed with antimagic fields, taking away their spellbook and/or component pouch, etc. Used sparingly, it can be a tense adventure sequence where the wizard has to rely only on their considerable intellect and possibly the help of allies to triumph, rather than their towering arcane power, but if you do it poorly or do it all the time, it just feels like you can't handle challenging the player and are just screwing them over instead.


And most of all, communicate with the player to see what they enjoy, what they don't, and build the adventure around that. It should be easier to please just one player than it is to please a whole group, although tuning encounters will likely be harder.

ChaiGuy
2017-09-03, 09:00 PM
If the wizard is an illusionist or an enchanter make sure you have a discussion on how those schools of magic work in your game, their effectiveness varies greatly depending on the DM/GM.

I'd second not targeting the spell book / spell component pouch too often. If they have a familiar, then that too should be targeted rarely.

goto124
2017-09-03, 10:35 PM
I figured a wizard-focused campaign would also have plenty of wizards (/sorcerors/psionicists/truenamers/what have you) as NPCs, opposing the wizard PC(s).

Endarire
2017-09-03, 11:38 PM
Wizards generally rely on spell slots to be effective. Damage that way is normally finite/small.

OttoVonBigby
2017-09-04, 04:07 AM
If the wizard is an illusionist or an enchanter make sure you have a discussion on how those schools of magic work in your game, their effectiveness varies greatly depending on the DM/GM.

I have only a vague sense of what you mean here. Could you elaborate, and/or point to relevant threads?

ChaiGuy
2017-09-04, 10:51 AM
I have only a vague sense of what you mean here. Could you elaborate, and/or point to relevant threads?

Here are two threads on the Pathfinder Paizo forums that will hopefully give some insight about illusions:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2r6f3?how-do-you-properly-use-illusions#30

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2u421?Help-GM-ing-for-Illusions-Please#3

The main issue with illusions sees to be, among other things, is when are disbelief saves allowed. In the Pathfinder book pg. 211 that is when the creature studies it or interacts with the illusion, since both of these are rather vague some DMs interpret interacting with illusions differently that others. There are also different kinds of illusion spells that all interact with the world differently.

ChaiGuy
2017-09-04, 11:41 AM
I'll also try to give more concrete examples concerning the enchantment school of magic. To be honest I've never run an illusionist or enchanter, mainly I've heard these spell schools are strongly GM/DM and perhaps campaign dependant.

Here's a Paizo thread: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ocnx?Problem-with-enchantment-spells#17

When it comes to enchantment there are certainly enemies that will be immune to the entire school: such as vermin, plants, and undead. In an undead heavy campaign the enchantment school is going to be weaker, although I think Pathfinder has options to get around undead enchantment immunity.

The DM probably needs to be on the same page as the player concerning how effective charm spells of the enchantment school are. They after all don't force the subject to do anything, so there is a lot of variance on how effective they will be. Core pathfinder book pg 561.

As a final thought there's DM fudging, that is many enchantment spells can shut down BBEGs and some DMs will just hand wave any attempt to shut down a BBEG with a single save or suck spell, as they may claim it creates an anticlimactic end of a story arc (they may also do the same if they just don't like SoS spells in general and to more kinds of encounters too I guess).

Nifft
2017-09-04, 05:39 PM
That's pretty much how I run D&D games in general.

Cool.

My Wizard-game advice is also what I do for D&D in general.

I highlight it here because a Wizard-game will tend to vigorously contradict some bad habits which can persist in lower-power games.

== == ==

Some additional thoughts:

Don't worry about giving your players "solvable" problems. Just simulate a reasonable world with problems, and let them figure out the solutions.

In the specific case of an investigation, figure out what happened, and then have the antagonist(s) take reasonable steps to prevent getting caught. For example: a murder mystery could be solved by talking to the corpse, or talking to the weapon, or talking to nearby trees, or maybe there were 2 epic astral wizards nearby who just happened to see the murder (if you're playing in FR). How is murder even a thing in these circumstances?

- Both hide from view and disguise yourself in case someone sees anyway. This is common sense.

- Use a proxy (i.e. someone else does the murder).

- Use a cut-out (i.e. someone else contacts & pays the assassin for you so the assassin can't point a finger at you, then you kill the cut-out).

- Frame someone with a reasonable motive. Once the authorities find a likely explanation, they may stop looking. This works in real life, too -- it's much easier to hide when people aren't looking, because they stop looking once they have a story that fits their expectations.

- Then, of course, there's magic. What if the root-cause assassin is an Enchanter who merely uses suggestion to propose: "I bet you could get away with killing that guy over there." Then the visible assassin may do the job without being able to implicate the Enchanter.

Velaryon
2017-09-09, 09:56 AM
I figured a wizard-focused campaign would also have plenty of wizards (/sorcerors/psionicists/truenamers/what have you) as NPCs, opposing the wizard PC(s).

I would expect the same. So it's probably a good idea to have a stockpile of spell lists for generic spellcasting NPC's handy, in case it becomes important to know what Joe McNecromancer or Helga Druidsdottr is capable of on the fly.



Cool.

My Wizard-game advice is also what I do for D&D in general.

I highlight it here because a Wizard-game will tend to vigorously contradict some bad habits which can persist in lower-power games.

== == ==

Some additional thoughts:

Don't worry about giving your players "solvable" problems. Just simulate a reasonable world with problems, and let them figure out the solutions.

In the specific case of an investigation, figure out what happened, and then have the antagonist(s) take reasonable steps to prevent getting caught. For example: a murder mystery could be solved by talking to the corpse, or talking to the weapon, or talking to nearby trees, or maybe there were 2 epic astral wizards nearby who just happened to see the murder (if you're playing in FR). How is murder even a thing in these circumstances?

- Both hide from view and disguise yourself in case someone sees anyway. This is common sense.

- Use a proxy (i.e. someone else does the murder).

- Use a cut-out (i.e. someone else contacts & pays the assassin for you so the assassin can't point a finger at you, then you kill the cut-out).

- Frame someone with a reasonable motive. Once the authorities find a likely explanation, they may stop looking. This works in real life, too -- it's much easier to hide when people aren't looking, because they stop looking once they have a story that fits their expectations.

- Then, of course, there's magic. What if the root-cause assassin is an Enchanter who merely uses suggestion to propose: "I bet you could get away with killing that guy over there." Then the visible assassin may do the job without being able to implicate the Enchanter.

Awesome advice. It's important to remember that any reasonably magic-savvy characters should not be caught off guard by a fairly common second-level spell. Anyone trying to commit illicit acts in a world where magic is fairly common should not rely on a simple invisibility spell to hide all evidence of their presence if there's any chance at all that someone with a little magical know-how will be investigating.

On the other hand, you probably don't want to go full Tippyverse either, unless that's your thing and your player can hang with that. So finding a middle ground is important.