Sci-Fi Wizard Replacement

[8BitNinja]

If you haven't seen some of my previous threads, I love to make my own RPGs

I am making a new one called Futurequest, but the problem is, I can't think of a good "caster class" that uses the power of science

My only idea for one is a scientist, where he has the same function, but just buys different ammo for a special weapon he carries

An enemy unit that can attack is a Technomancer, who builds Minions, which are 3D humanoid silhouettes that function as ranged combatants, cybernetic "zombies" which are made from dead androids and spare cybernetic parts and "Liches", a bunch of cybernetic parts put together in a massive metal hulk

Then there are medics, who function as more of a nonviolent cleric, as they do in real life

What about druids, sorcerers, and Red Mages (heal and harm)?

Do you even think they are necessary?

[The Great Wyrm]

A scientist in sci-fi would function more like an Artificer than a Wizard. You could also base something off the Engineer from TF2, who focuses on team support (teleporters, dispensers) and area denial (sentries).

For something like Wizard, sci-fi usually uses psychic characters.

[noob]

There is also some settings who gives exactly the power of wizards to some people with the argument "nanomachines"

[8BitNinja]

A scientist in sci-fi would function more like an Artificer than a Wizard. You could also base something off the Engineer from TF2, who focuses on team support (teleporters, dispensers) and area denial (sentries).

For something like Wizard, sci-fi usually uses psychic characters.

I could add an Engineer which would be a sort of "red mage" which would be like the TF2 one (with some actual weapons, maybe being able to use handguns, shotguns, and assault rifles) and a PSI User would be a sort of a class that could be played by some sort of non-human race which could select a certain set of powers at the beginning and use a separate force, besides energy, which powers certain attacks, (energy powers everything from a scout's propelled leap to a marine's automatic fire and is replaced with batteries, the reason why it powers automatic fire is for balance)

[Mr. Mask]

[Scifi-noun]mancer

Neuromancer.

Nanomancer.

Cybermancer.

Etc..

[goto124]

A scientist in sci-fi would function more like an Artificer than a Wizard.

Batman Wizard?

[Anonymouswizard]

A scientist in sci-fi would function more like an Artificer than a Wizard.

Not really, a scientist would be more likely to study enemies and interactions, and isn't great as a 'character class'. And engineer would function almost exactly as an Artificer, and scientists can do engineering, but scientists are more about understanding. In short:

-Scientist: lots of deduction and breaking down, with some item making. (I'd give them an ability that allows them to get a bonus to rolls by preparing and running similar experiments)
-Engineer: lots of item creation, with some deduction.

[Scifi-noun]mancer

Neuromancer.

Nanomancer.

Cybermancer.

Etc..

*shudder* This is one of the worst ideas ever. Who would want to play a 'very small diviner' (yes, that is literally what Nanomancer means).


In short, if you want hard sci-fi the engineer and scientist are probably the closest you'd get to mages. If you want soft sci-fi then you can use psychics.

If you have a mesh-network and are willing to make hacking basic devices simple, hackers could also be decent hard sci-fi mages.

[Urpriest]

*shudder* This is one of the worst ideas ever. Who would want to play a 'very small diviner' (yes, that is literally what Nanomancer means).

It's great if you want to be a criminal. Then you can be a small medium at large.

Agreed that hackers are a good stand-in. Beyond that, you have to figure out what you want your "caster" classes to do. If most of your casters are blasters, then basically any class with heavy firepower will work. If healing is a role you want, you have to decide how good medical tech is in your setting, or how comfortable you are with 4e "inspiration"-based healing. Similarly, buffs can be medical, technological, or through tactical leadership. Scientists and hackers work well for the "toolbox" aspect of magic...but you can also make a more balanced game, where that toolbox aspect is a feature of actual tools, accessible to any class. Incidentally, Batman-style item ownership is also a good casting replacement. ("What do you mean, you packed shark repellent?")

[Anonymouswizard]

It's great if you want to be a criminal. Then you can be a small medium at large.

I just love that joke, whenever it turns up.

Agreed that hackers are a good stand-in. Beyond that, you have to figure out what you want your "caster" classes to do. If most of your casters are blasters, then basically any class with heavy firepower will work. If healing is a role you want, you have to decide how good medical tech is in your setting, or how comfortable you are with 4e "inspiration"-based healing. Similarly, buffs can be medical, technological, or through tactical leadership. Scientists and hackers work well for the "toolbox" aspect of magic...but you can also make a more balanced game, where that toolbox aspect is a feature of actual tools, accessible to any class. Incidentally, Batman-style item ownership is also a good casting replacement. ("What do you mean, you packed shark repellent?")

I'll admit that this would be the first thing you'd have to do, and I'm now ashamed I didn't think to mention it.

[Keltest]

*shudder* This is one of the worst ideas ever. Who would want to play a 'very small diviner' (yes, that is literally what Nanomancer means).

Wouldn't "diviner of the very small" be more accurate?

Im not contradicting you, I genuinely don't know.

[Anonymouswizard]

Wouldn't "diviner of the very small" be more accurate?

Im not contradicting you, I genuinely don't know.

I used the literal translation as I know it, nano=very small and -mancer=diviner.

'Diviner of the very small' is the correct translation, but it's far less funny. Less more accurate, and more that the words need to be reordered to fit with modern English.

I don't actually know ancient Greek though, so I might be completely wrong about the meaning of -mancer, my point is 'fire diviner' and 'diviner of the flames' would both get the point across.

[Mr. Mask]

Nanomachines. That is all.

[Slipperychicken]

I can't think of a good "caster class" that uses the power of science

Do you even need one?

[Zalphon]

For Soft Sci-Fi? Psionics do the trick.

For Moderate Sci-Fi? Hackers or Engineers do the trick.

For Hard Sci-Fi? Scientists like Physicists, Chemists, and Biologists.

[Cealocanth]

Well, as far as druids go, I'm thinking something like a mad nanoroboticist. Everything from healing to raising the dead as zombies or otherwise can be explained fairly easily by adaptive and specially programmed nanites which repair damaged cell tissue, deliver or destroy toxins or disease, or amplify physical ability by chemically reprogramming the genetic code of the organisms they enter and 'infect'. Some of the stuff druids are known to do would be a little beyond the theoretical abilities of nanotechnology (like transforming into beasts or communicating with plants), but if you are okay with your sci-fi being a little soft, then it works pretty well.

[VoxRationis]

The problem with having a wizard-esque class in a sci-fi setting is that a wizard is generally the keeper of an esoteric kind of lore whose effects are barred to society at large, whereas most scientists work in support of society at large. A scientist is much less likely to deploy their work as a practical effect than they are to develop the practical effect and give it to someone else to use. If you think of a lot of spell effects in most fantasy games, you see that they're self-contained field-practical affairs which stem from the mind or abilities intrinsic to the user. But in a sci-fi setting (unless you use "psionics" or something to that effect, and that's really just magic by another name), those effects would be deployed through some sort of equipment, and most of them could probably be used by any grunt after 15 minutes' training the day before.
The stuff the scientist can do that a soldier could not are mostly diagnostics and analysis—they'd be more like the thief class in D&D, dealing with out-of-combat obstacles with their skills and know-how, than like most wizards in fantasy games.
For an example of this in fiction, we can look at Stargate: SG-1, which has a very RPG-like cast setup. Samantha Carter is the "wizard" of the titular squad, clearly, but she doesn't really do anything in combat that anyone else with firearms training couldn't. Instead, she looks at alien technology or phenomena and figures them out for a few hours while the others wander around stand guard, before applying them to solve the problem the group is facing. She doesn't have specific abilities so much as a generally-applicable skill set which can be applied to many kinds of problem. It's a concept that would be very hard to base a full-fledged, satisfying class around, since in gameplay terms it would really boil down to a few skill rolls. (Notably, Carter isn't just a tech geek; she's also a fully-capable combat character.)

[Lord Raziere]

*shudder* This is one of the worst ideas ever. Who would want to play a 'very small diviner' (yes, that is literally what Nanomancer means).

In short, if you want hard sci-fi the engineer and scientist are probably the closest you'd get to mages. If you want soft sci-fi then you can use psychics.

If you have a mesh-network and are willing to make hacking basic devices simple, hackers could also be decent hard sci-fi mages.

Um, EXCUSE ME.

Nanomancer is the one of the BEST ideas ever.

why? because Psychic is too soft, while an engineer or scientist or hacker are too bound to situational things.

a Nanomancer that controls a cloud of nanorobots are the ones that could replace a wizard, because you could do anything with nanorobotics in a more hard-scifi way than psychics. want a fireball? cloud of nanorobots instantly making a ball of plasma to throw at somebody. shapeshifting? nanorobots manipulating your body, mind-reading? nanorobots implanted in someones mind and transmitting the thoughts so that you can hear them, and so and so forth.

its the ultimate plausible sci-fi excuse.

[Anonymouswizard]

Um, EXCUSE ME.

Nanomancer is the one of the BEST ideas ever.

why? because Psychic is too soft, while an engineer or scientist or hacker are too bound to situational things.

a Nanomancer that controls a cloud of nanorobots are the ones that could replace a wizard, because you could do anything with nanorobotics in a more hard-scifi way than psychics. want a fireball? cloud of nanorobots instantly making a ball of plasma to throw at somebody. shapeshifting? nanorobots manipulating your body, mind-reading? nanorobots implanted in someones mind and transmitting the thoughts so that you can hear them, and so and so forth.

its the ultimate plausible sci-fi excuse.

That's a NanoMAGUS

[JoeJ]

Um, EXCUSE ME.

Nanomancer is the one of the BEST ideas ever.

why? because Psychic is too soft, while an engineer or scientist or hacker are too bound to situational things.

a Nanomancer that controls a cloud of nanorobots are the ones that could replace a wizard, because you could do anything with nanorobotics in a more hard-scifi way than psychics. want a fireball? cloud of nanorobots instantly making a ball of plasma to throw at somebody. shapeshifting? nanorobots manipulating your body, mind-reading? nanorobots implanted in someones mind and transmitting the thoughts so that you can hear them, and so and so forth.

its the ultimate plausible sci-fi excuse.

But in almost any plausible SF scenario, a person who controls a swarm of nanobots is simply using technology that somebody else built and put on the market. There may be laws restricting the technology, but it's still something that is, or could be, mass produced. The only "magic" is in the gadget they bought, or were issued.

In a non-plausible SF setting you can go wild and have a character like Tony Stark who can build whatever "magic" the story requires him to have.

[Lord Raziere]

But in almost any plausible SF scenario, a person who controls a swarm of nanobots is simply using technology that somebody else built and put on the market. There may be laws restricting the technology, but it's still something that is, or could be, mass produced. The only "magic" is in the gadget they bought, or were issued.

In a non-plausible SF setting you can go wild and have a character like Tony Stark who can build whatever "magic" the story requires him to have.

market?

Wrong. if you have nanorobots able to transmute anything to anything else, then things are post-scarcity and markets are obsolete, and they got them through personal fabbers.

[JoeJ]

market?

Wrong. if you have nanorobots able to transmute anything to anything else, then things are post-scarcity and markets are obsolete, and they got them through personal fabbers.

And everybody else has them too. Not much of a wizard, then.

[Lord Raziere]

And everybody else has them too. Not much of a wizard, then.

not really. does everyone have the smarts to make nanorobots using a fabber to do what you want? probably not. matter is a complex thing, and their very creation might involve a super AI making it only for people he trusts or something, you can't predict this stuff.

[JoeJ]

not really. does everyone have the smarts to make nanorobots using a fabber to do what you want? probably not. matter is a complex thing, and their very creation might involve a super AI making it only for people he trusts or something, you can't predict this stuff.

I don't need smarts. If personal fabbers have replaced markets, then they're really easy to use. I'll just download the plans for the nanobots from the internet.

If there's a mysterious AI who alone knows the secrets and who doles out nanobots to a few chosen, then the AI might count as a wizard, but the slob with the 'bots is still just using a magic item they don't understand.

[noob]

If there's a mysterious AI who alone knows the secrets and who doles out nanobots to a few chosen, then the AI might count as a wizard, but the slob with the 'bots is still just using a magic item they don't understand.

That would make of those slobs "Warlocks"

[Lord Raziere]

I don't need smarts. If personal fabbers have replaced markets, then they're really easy to use. I'll just download the plans for the nanobots from the internet.

If there's a mysterious AI who alone knows the secrets and who doles out nanobots to a few chosen, then the AI might count as a wizard, but the slob with the 'bots is still just using a magic item they don't understand.

or they're just a bigger wizard who is teaching the smaller wizard arcane secrets. like any archmage.

I don't see why your so against the nanobots just being a part of the character. if you really want to argue, magic doesn't seem all that intrinsic to wizard because its a separate force from them, therefore they are using an incorporeal magic item that fits inside their brain.

[the_david]

Savage Worlds has a weird scientist with inventions that work only for him. (Ray gun, force field, teleporter, zombifier. They can learn any power that a wizard or psionicist can learn.)
Money would be the main limitation for a tech character, although you could also go for a restricted limitation. Even though the technology you need might exist, it isn't generally available to the general public because they wouldn't be able to afford it. This works especially well in a post-apocalyptic setting, or you might just need unobtainium to make it work. Another explanation is that there isn't a market for what you need so it rots in developing hell forever.
Ofcourse, this would basically make you Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne and it wouldn't stop you from sharing your wealth with your allies. This also means that you're just a rogue with a wand of scorching ray.
I guess another thing you could do then is make someone who excels at using equipment. If a fighter excels at fighting and a wizard at magic, than wouldn't a technologist excel at using technology?

[JoeJ]

or they're just a bigger wizard who is teaching the smaller wizard arcane secrets. like any archmage.

What secrets? We're talking about using an ordinary piece of household equipment here.

I don't see why your so against the nanobots just being a part of the character. if you really want to argue, magic doesn't seem all that intrinsic to wizard because its a separate force from them, therefore they are using an incorporeal magic item that fits inside their brain.

I'm not against nanobots being part of a character. I just don't think you can reasonably call that character a "wizard" in any plausible SF setting. Just like IRL the fact that I can pick up a gun and "magically" fire off a metal projectile at tremendous speed doesn't make me a wizard.

The fundamental problem with wizards as a concept is that in any plausible SF setting, "magic" is something that anybody can do, subject only to laws regulating the requisite technology. Any setting in which one character has access to super technology that nobody else can get (Tony Stark, for example) is not a very plausible one IMO - although it can still be an extremely fun one.

[Anonymouswizard]

The fundamental problem with wizards as a concept is that in any plausible SF setting, "magic" is something that anybody can do, subject only to laws regulating the requisite technology.

In simple terms, less Tony Stark, more Juan Rico? As in, anyone with the access and training can use it, not just inventor-man.

[JoeJ]

In simple terms, less Tony Stark, more Juan Rico? As in, anyone with the access and training can use it, not just inventor-man.

Pretty much this. I enjoy playing superhero RPGs, so I certainly don't have a problem with Tony Stark. I just don't consider his universe to be in any way plausible.

[Keltest]

What secrets? We're talking about using an ordinary piece of household equipment here.



I'm not against nanobots being part of a character. I just don't think you can reasonably call that character a "wizard" in any plausible SF setting. Just like IRL the fact that I can pick up a gun and "magically" fire off a metal projectile at tremendous speed doesn't make me a wizard.

The fundamental problem with wizards as a concept is that in any plausible SF setting, "magic" is something that anybody can do, subject only to laws regulating the requisite technology. Any setting in which one character has access to super technology that nobody else can get (Tony Stark, for example) is not a very plausible one IMO - although it can still be an extremely fun one.

in many fantasy settings, magic is also something anyone can do, regulated only by their level of training and knowledge of how to make it work (and laws, if such exist). It takes a lot more training than the stuff Tony Stark makes, but then Stark isn't a good analogue for a wizard the way he does superheroing.