MarkChevallier
First Post
Ok, what should they do with Magic Users, Wizards, Mages, call them what you will in 5E? This is a pretty basic, and very divisive question.
I very much liked how wizards were in editions prior to fourth edition, but 4E fans I imagine will strongly disagree. And between the two of us, there's unlikely to be much common ground.
I will say this, I think the notion of 4E Rituals, taking historically troublesome spells and making them arduous and costly, as well as time consuming, is a good idea. But implemented poorly. And it definitely shouldn't be a dumping ground for all (or most) non-combat magic.
My "vision" of a 5E magic user is someone who has limited power but can bring it to bear with awesome effect. Who makes a big difference when they cast their spells, but can't do that to solve every problem. Who has to make tough decisions about when to use their power. Whose magic is flexible and useful for many different kinds of things, provided they have the right spell prepared. Yes, I prefer Vancian magic.
I think 3E got it wrong in the following ways:
Too many spells in one wizard's hands at higher levels.
Too many spells that did what other classes could do, without any drawbacks or inherent limitations.
Spells which fundamentally changed the game (Teleport) without appropriate costing/casting time/limitations to prevent their "spamming".
Too much buffing (more the cleric's domain, but wizards could be guilty of the multibuff too).
I think these flaws could largely be overcome by limiting a wizard's spells dramatically, but making each spell count for a lot.
This is obviously my own opinion: what does everyone else think?
I very much liked how wizards were in editions prior to fourth edition, but 4E fans I imagine will strongly disagree. And between the two of us, there's unlikely to be much common ground.
I will say this, I think the notion of 4E Rituals, taking historically troublesome spells and making them arduous and costly, as well as time consuming, is a good idea. But implemented poorly. And it definitely shouldn't be a dumping ground for all (or most) non-combat magic.
My "vision" of a 5E magic user is someone who has limited power but can bring it to bear with awesome effect. Who makes a big difference when they cast their spells, but can't do that to solve every problem. Who has to make tough decisions about when to use their power. Whose magic is flexible and useful for many different kinds of things, provided they have the right spell prepared. Yes, I prefer Vancian magic.
I think 3E got it wrong in the following ways:
Too many spells in one wizard's hands at higher levels.
Too many spells that did what other classes could do, without any drawbacks or inherent limitations.
Spells which fundamentally changed the game (Teleport) without appropriate costing/casting time/limitations to prevent their "spamming".
Too much buffing (more the cleric's domain, but wizards could be guilty of the multibuff too).
I think these flaws could largely be overcome by limiting a wizard's spells dramatically, but making each spell count for a lot.
This is obviously my own opinion: what does everyone else think?