High Wizardrying

[graymachine]

I'm playing in a high level game (18th) and my barbarian just bit it due to a lucky roll with a vorpal sword. At any rate, I've decided to build a wizard (read tiny god.) Unfortunately, I don't have any experience with building high level wizards, especially ones with access to 8th and 9th level spells. Any suggestions? It seems as though I have a good bit of flexibility here and any book available. I plan on taking a look through CMag when I get the chance. I took a look at Incantrix and like the metamagic goodness; what's the best way to take advantage of that? A series of obscure metamagics? Is Ultimate Magus worth it? Thanks for any help.

[Yukitsu]

What do you want to do? Wizards aren't really limited to any particular niche of play, but you do need to specialize to fit into some of the optimally. What sort of spells do you think you will use most often? How paranoid do you plan on playing it?

[Emperor Tippy]

What power level do you want? That's the real question.

[Keld Denar]

From the 12th level Batman thread, my build with some modifications for level...

Yea, I actually wouldn't go Incantrix. Personally, it leaves me feeling....not so fresh, in a not so fresh kind of way...

Hmmmm, what to build...

Human Focused Conjourer3/Master Specialist2/Divine Oracle2/Loremaster3/FateSpinner4/Archmage4

Ban Evocation, Enchantment, and Abjuration
Use the Abrupt Jaunt ACF found in the PHBII

1 Spell Focus: Conjouration
1 B Cloudy Conjouration
1 B Scribe Scroll
3 Skill Focus: Knowledge(Religion)
5 B Skill Focus: Spellcraft
6 Extend Spell
8 B Quicken Spell (Loremaster)
9 Spell Focus: Necromancy or Transmutation
12 Empower Spell
15 Split Ray
18 Minor Shapeshift

Every time you cast a Conjouration, you get a mini cloud that lasts for 1 turn. Its pretty much awesome, and can be used to block line of effect from you to a bad guy looking to snipe you. Abrupt Jaunt keeps you out of harms way well enough. Loremaster gives you UMD as a class skill. Dump almost all of your skill points for those 3 levels into this skill. Its THAT good. Especially if you buy a Bead of Karma (part of a Strand of Prayer Beads). The bead will make your buffs like Greater Magic Weapon cast as level 16, which nets you +4 bonus on all your melee friends weapons.

For spells, take lots of clouds, a couple save/die spells for each save and some mobility/buffage. Quickened Benign Transposition is pretty much amazing for moving your party fighter or rogue into full attack range. You can move up to a foe, quicken BT yourself and your fighter, and STILL cast a spell like Solid Fog or Evards or similar to hamper your opponents. My friend plays a mage and swears by his Dimension Door, claiming its the highest damage spell he knows, since he can Dim Door the party's fighter and rogue into full attack position and watch them decimate whatevers in front of them.

For High Arcana, take Master of Shaping with 1, and Spell Power with 2. 3 and 4 are good to take SLAs, Timestop and maybe like, Forsight?

Oh, and for gear, check out MIC. A Circlet of Rapid Casting of Intelect is a pretty hot item. Retails at about 51,000 for the +6 version, about the best item you can buy as a wizard. Action economy is king at that level. Belt of Battle gives you more nova, and even a Greater Rod of Quicken could probably be purchesed if you want. Bead of Karma with UMD from Loremaster also kicks ass. Its only a DC20 to con it into thinking you can cast divine spells.

Check out the rest of that thread for more details on strategies. Hope this helps. Link

[ericgrau]

^ Ban necromancy over evocation, just as one possible example. Honestly, don't give in to the fads. And IMO if you're gonna play a master specialist you may be better off playing a sorc for the spells per day and better in-action versatility (I don't care so much about versatility that only applies with 8-24 hours notice).

Okay, on to the real point: Spell Selection
I categorize spells into: control, direct damage, single-target SoDs, single target short buffs, long duration buffs, mass buffs and utility.

Control: Anything that impedes the enemy: barriers, etc. I lump AoE save-or-sucks into this category 'cuz there'd be a lot of overlap otherwise. Often your best option, provided that your party can mop up half the monsters with direct damage before the half you screwed over recovers. The direct damage could come from casters or non-casters; see how much your party already has first. Otherwise you may be disappointed if you find everyone is following the internet fads and no one is doing damage.

Direct Damage: Being 2nd best does not equal being the worst, in spite of internet fads. But offline DD can be quite popular, so just see what your party has and decide whether or not you need this. Having at least a tiny bit is nice, especially if you run into things immune to your control. Even when some have energy immunity or resistance it's often easy to just switch types; whereas immunity to control may be more problematic.

Mass Buffs: Unlike single target buffs, these are often worth a round as long as enough of your party benefits from this. The best by far is probably haste, which might be worth it even with 1 target.

Single Target SoDs: This is kind of an all or nothing category. Good for high HP, high SR single powerful baddies. Preferably you'd target his weak save. Against other monsters, you may drop him faster with direct damage, rather than watching him repeatedly make his save. Or even if it's a hard monster with decent HP he may have too much resistance to SoDs, like dragons, and DD may still be better.

Single Target Short Buffs: Are not worth the round it takes to cast them. You could do more damage with DD, for example. But if you have a buffing round available and the spell slots to spare then having a couple of these ready may be good. Or a long fight against a BBEG might make it worth the combat round, since the benefit of that piddly buff will add up over several rounds. Spells that border on control like greater invisibility are often better than some minor stat buffs.

Long Duration Buffs: Handy b/c you can cast them in the morning without wasting combat time. Especially if you have the spell slots to spare while playing a sorceror or <shudder> a master specialist.

Utility: Some of these may see frequent use, but most of those fall under other categories. The true, rare-situation utility spells should not see the light of day on your spell list. Put them on scrolls or maybe wands instead. It will cost little gold since you use them so infrequently, and this way the spell won't consume a precious spell slot every day. For divine casters & bards I'd also lump low level healing and restoration spells in this category, since you can get them so cheaply. Don't get me wrong though; these can be quite handy. Pack lots of different oddball scrolls.

Illusions are their own animal. They may fall under control or utility or something else entirely like a complicated plan. You can play with or without them, just have a plan on how you'll use them. Likewise polymorph, summons and animated dead could fall under direct damage, utility or something else entirely, and you can go with or without them. Cheese / powergaming (depending on your interpretation) is another category I left out. I think Keld and that other thread can help you put together some pretty nasty spell combos.

[Stupendous_Man]

Direct Damage: Being 2nd best does not equal being the worst, in spite of internet fads. But offline DD can be quite popular,

Again, how do you know this? Did you do a survey of offline DnD games adhering to proper survey procedures, with control groups, controlling for independent variables, and using stratified random samples?

Forgive my questioning your assertion, but that's quite some claim to make without any statistically sound evidence to back it up with.

[ericgrau]

Nah, I just do quite a bit more than most people do online - include people who complain about DD - and I am satisfied with that. A lot of it comes from reasoning, a lot comes from mathematical comparisons to other categories listed (which is why i bash single target short buffs so much), and a lot comes from reading about other people's games.

[Deth Muncher]

I've got The Logic Ninja's Guide to Being Batman in my signature, which may or may not be of help to you.

[Stupendous_Man]

Nah, I just do quite a bit more than most people do online - include people who complain about DD -

Proof please.

and I am satisfied with that.

The proper mathematician is not satisfied until he has a statistically sound batch of evidence.

Sometimes not even then.

A lot of it comes from reasoning, a lot comes from mathematical comparisons to other categories listed

May we see your evidence, then?

and a lot comes from reading about other people's games.

The plural of evidence is not anecdotes.

[JackMage666]

You keep asking for evidence, but where is yours?

[Stupendous_Man]

You keep asking for evidence, but where is yours?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. He who makes the claim bears the burden of supplying with it the proof.

What claims have I made on this thread? None. What then do you want me to supply proof for?

[JackMage666]

I don't see anything extraordinary about what he said. Furthermore, this isn't a presidential debate, it's an internet gaming forum.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Keld, in the other thread I nodded at your assessment of Abjuration, because Abjuration really is weak at most levels (at least with a cleric in the party). But by 18th level Abjuration is one of the most powerful schools, and as much as I hate to say it, by the time you get 9th level spells, Necromancy doesn't have much to offer that other schools don't. I'd ban Necromancy over Abjuration.

[Tacoma]

StupendousMan, is your comment regarding the claim that offline D&D can be popular? Or is it that being 2nd best is not equal to being the worst?

Because in a race between two people being 2nd best actually does mean you are the worst. So it also depends on the size of the party.

[ericgrau]

Jackmage said it for me, thanks. That's exactly it.

Let the O.P. weigh his options.

[Stupendous_Man]

StupendousMan, is your comment regarding the claim that offline D&D can be popular?

No.

For the record, he didn't make such a claim either. I think you might have skipped something when reading his post. He has a small typo, if you'll notice.

I think what he meant to say was that blasting wizards enjoy a great deal of poluarity offline.

I don't see anything extraordinary about what he said. Furthermore, this isn't a presidential debate, it's an internet gaming forum.

But the internet is serious business.

[Inyssius Tor]

You want proof? I'll give you what proof I can provide:

60% of all the wizards I have seen other people play were blasty evokers.
I have played a blasty wizard myself.
It is widely accepted that the 3.X wizard was balanced with blasty builds in mind, and the designers and playtesters just didn't notice that the batman style was far better. The only way this would be possible is if the ratio of blasters to batmans was fairly high. There were hundreds of 3.X playtesters.

Furthermore, why shouldn't you have to provide evidence? You have made a claim, if not very clearly.

H0: Blasty wizards = quite popular.
H1: (your claim) Blasty wizards ≠ quite popular.

If you aren't implying the possibility that H1 might concievably be true, then what are we talking about here?

[Stupendous_Man]

It is widely accepted that the 3.X wizard was balanced with blasty builds in mind, and the designers and playtesters just didn't notice that the batman style was far better. The only way this would be possible is if the ratio of blasters to batmans was fairly high. There were hundreds of 3.X playtesters.

So why are there only a handful of core spells, per level, that deal with blasting, if wizards were intended to be blasters?

I have heard the rumor, same as you, but have never seen definite proof as to its truthiness.

Furthermore, why shouldn't you have to provide evidence? You have made a claim, if not very clearly.

H0: Blasty wizards = quite popular.
H1: (your claim) Blasty wizards ≠ quite popular.

I said no such thing. I merely request proof of *his* claim. Please quote me where I said that blaster wizards are not popular.

If you aren't implying the possibility that H1 might concievably be true, then what are we talking about here?

I would, for once, like to see how Eracagu came to the conclusion that he has come to. He has been saying for a while that he has calculated and number crunched that supports his position. I wish to see it.

[Yukitsu]

It's still wrong in assertion for several reasons. Damage is best done in real play via secondary sources, such as minions, or as a side effect of control. This is because it actually is just as hard to switch elemental types of spells on the fly as a wizard as it is to swap out save types. It is also because a single blast is a spell slot lost at no decrease in enemy efficacy. Psions are the ones that can do switch hit blasting, not wizards. Also, wizards can top the charts in damage. They aren't second best. They just have much better things they can do with their time.

[Keld Denar]

Eric's comment about wizarding, that being a blaster is 2nd best to being a CCer/buffer, is correct. Even as a blaster, you are still a freakin wizard, the top class in the game powerwise. And if you want to, you CAN do absurd amounts of damage just like an ubercharger, or blender rogue, or DMM cleric, or anything. Just take a look at Emp Tippy's Cindy character. Stack enough MM on a single 4th level orb and you can do enough damage to drop a Balor in a swift action, and you still have your standard left! Typically, you can expend a lot fewer spell slots/encounter though, being a debuffer/buffer/CCer and leaving the damage for those classes that can't affort the ability to bend reality over their knee and give it a good spanking. And at the highest levels, efficiency is king. You can still contribute as a blaster, if you build well, but you'll never be as efficient, or useful, or supportive, as a contemporarily trained Batman wizard.

And as far as Abjurations vs Necromancy at high levels, this depends on 2 things. 1) You want to abuse the hell out of Enervation with MM, and 2) Whether or not you have an agreement with your DM concerning M. Disjunction. If M. Disjuntion is in play, for gods sake, don't ban Abjuration. Keep it and prep as many as you can to use as counterspells. You do NOT want to get MDJed, or all your crap is toast. If M. Disjuntion is not in play, then you need to choose between Maw of Chaos (AoE damage + Control) is worth more than a Split Ray Empowered Maximized Twinned Quickened Occular Enervation. My build didn't build to quite that extreme, but is still capable of a Split Ray Empowered Enervation in an 8th level slot, or a Quickened Split Ray Empowered Enervation as a 9th level slot if you change the 18th level feat to Arcane Thesis (Enervation). Its a tough choice, but due to who party unfriendly Maw of Chaos is, I'd rather stick with Necromany.

But thats my opinion.

EDIT: It is my experience that outside of the people who spend a large majority of time reading online forums such as this or CharOps actually do consider blasting as practically the ONLY role of wizards. Now, this is purely anecdotal experience, and not empirical by any means, but just look at the number of people who come to this board requesting build help. When they post their current builds, you find a lot of redundant blasty spells, a lot of blasty feats like Sudden Maximize and the like, and a general preconception that the more dice you throw on the table, the more useful you are. I've also spent a lot of time playing Living Greyhawk across the country, from New England to the Midwest to the Pacific Northwest, and even in the south. I've played at conventions that bring people in from all over the world, cons like Gencon and DDXP. The VAST majority of people that I've met who play wizards (again, purely anecdotal, I have no population base) play them as blasters. Hell, even among clerics I've seen quite a few blasters. Now, I have seen a few wizards who play a more controling route, but I've also been frustrated to sit at a table with a stranger who has Wizard6 written at the top of his sheet, and Fireballx4 written next to it. Gah, take a Haste or 2 at least! Therefore, it is in my humble experience as a well traveled and observative player that a majority tend to think that blasting is the best thing since Fireball was first printed almost 40 years ago.

[Bayar]

I'm playing in a high level game (18th) and my barbarian just bit it due to a lucky roll with a vorpal sword. At any rate, I've decided to build a wizard (read tiny god.) Unfortunately, I don't have any experience with building high level wizards, especially ones with access to 8th and 9th level spells. Any suggestions? It seems as though I have a good bit of flexibility here and any book available. I plan on taking a look through CMag when I get the chance. I took a look at Incantrix and like the metamagic goodness; what's the best way to take advantage of that? A series of obscure metamagics? Is Ultimate Magus worth it? Thanks for any help.

Tiny God ?

MAKE A REAL GOD FFS !!!

How to make a GOD wizard handbook

[Stupendous_Man]

And if you want to, you CAN do absurd amounts of damage just like an ubercharger, or blender rogue, or DMM cleric, or anything. Just take a look at Emp Tippy's Cindy character. Stack enough MM on a single 4th level orb and you can do enough damage to drop a Balor in a swift action, and you still have your standard left!

Ah, the Orb spells. One of the few good Evocation spells.

[Inyssius Tor]

Now, why--logically--would you question what he said?

Do you doubt the veracity of his statement?

[Yukitsu]

Some people don't like other people giving innocent people bad advice.

[Stupendous_Man]

Now, why--logically--would you question what he said?

I enjoy seeing claims backed up with proof when enguaging in hotly debated topics. It prevents a lot of baseless claims from gaining traction.

Do you doubt the veracity of his statement?

I doubt the accuracy of the statement, but not the veracity.

They mean slightly different things, for the record.

Accuracy refers to how close his argument comes to describing reality. Veracity is a term used to describe truthfulness.

I don't doubt that he has calculations, but I don't think the calculations are accurate.

[Keld Denar]

Ah, the Orb spells. One of the few good Evocation spells.

Except that they are Conjourations. But I won't tell anyone if you don't.

"Conjouration, killing Evocation and taking its stuff since 3.5."

[Inyssius Tor]

@Yukitsu:
I believe we're talking about different things. Eric made two distinct assertions.

1. Blasty wizards are "the second-best" kind of wizard. This is utter rubbish, unless you're using some fairly nonstandard definitions.
2. Blasty wizards "can be quite popular". This seems fairly reasonable to me, although admittedly it is completely off topic so I'll shut up now.

EDIT: And yeah, Stupendous Man, you're definitely right there. Baseless arguments really suck, and they are getting a little tiresome.

[Stupendous_Man]

Ah, I believe we're talking about different things. Eric made two distinct assertions, both of which are apparently being contested by Stupendous Man (as much as he denies it).

1. Blasty wizards are "the second-best" kind of wizard. This is indeed utter rubbish, unless you're using some fairly nonstandard definitions.

I do not believe I have touched upon this topic in this thread. Please quote me doing so, as I may have forgotten due to my dotage.

2. Blasty wizards "can be quite popular". This seems fairly reasonable to me, although admittedly it is completely off topic so I'll shut up now.

See, here's the thing I have against saying that, well, the term is too nebulous.

What do you mean by blasty? Do you mean someone who only loads up on Evocation, or someone who casts evocation half the time, or a quarter of the time, or what? Without any clear criteria, the term "blasty" means anything we want it to mean.

And without data showing what each of these wizards do, we can never know how "blasty" they are*.

Of course, as you may have noticed, I am needlessly anal at times, so feel free to ignore me...

It is my experience that outside of the people who spend a large majority of time reading online forums such as this or CharOps actually do consider blasting as practically the ONLY role of wizards. Now, this is purely anecdotal experience, and not empirical by any means, but just look at the number of people who come to this board requesting build help.

It could be argued that this is a form of bias: The ones who come here to ask for help are the ones who don't know about DnD and play an inefficient wizard.

The people who independently play Batmen wouldn't come to this forum nearly as often asking for help.

So there's definitely some bias there.


*Not even in bed.

[Tacoma]

I think Wizards should be more fun to play.

I like to play a Cleric so I can cast Create Food in someone's stomach. And then they are not hungry for mysterious reasons.

And I keep doing it every day until he gets freaked out that he can't seem to eat anything because he's always full.

And he sneaks off to the privy to throw up and all this grey oatmeal comes out. And he hasn't eaten anything in weeks.

And then when he comes back, flushed and headachey,

I cast Create Food in his stomach.

[Siosilvar]

I cast Create Food in his stomach.

From Create Water:

Conjuration spells can’t create substances or objects within a creature.

Good idea though.