[L&L] Balancing the Wizards in D&D

[Tortoise]

so your DM targets non threats with MORE attacks then whimpy AC combatants...even counting melee with a staff?

maybe that was not what you ment, but it is what it comes off as, I will asume there is some miscommunication and move on...

Ok, your group all charge in and...um what?

miss alot, AND be on the line of combat...

I guess they are all fighter Mages? or something? I know I can only remember 1 or 2 times that a straight wizard entered combat and made a diffrence. Infact I can think of only 1 time, and it was totaly badass BECUSE it was so rare.

If wizards got +1 to hit (or-1thac0) for the first 3 or 4 levels and d6's for those hp and leather armor (or like 4e int mod over dex) then I would agree, this class is meant to go into a fight with a weapon, and then at latter levels use spells


is getting very old very quicky, and this is not just to you or even on this topic... but it is SUCH BS... "Your problem is becuse your players are not smart enough" "Your problem can be solved with Better players" is BS
The problem can be solved by makeing all classes contribute to the game.

I'll cover everything above briefly. 1> I did not say your player's lacked intelligence, just that the choice to stand around doing nothing is on them, not the system. 2> I'm one of the DM's and what you said above makes no sense in the context of the previous part of the conversation. 3> I notice you skipped all the other options that were available besides jumping into the combat line. Does that mean you see combat or standing around doing nothing as the only two available options? That isn't a limitation in any edition.

I ran a 2e campaign with a party consisting of 3 wizards, 2 fighters, 1 fighter/thief, 1 fighter/wizard, and no clerics. The wizards proved their worth time and again both with and without using spells. They were always doing something with the goal being to aid the fighters, and sometimes even they stepped into combat, but never did they stand around doing nothing for 7-10 rounds. When we converted to 3e they kept doing things, both combat and non-combat. System made no difference to how the players chose to run their characters.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I'll cover everything above briefly. 1> I did not say your player's lacked intelligence, just that the choice to stand around doing nothing is on them, not the system. 2> I'm one of the DM's and what you said above makes no sense in the context of the previous part of the conversation. 3> I notice you skipped all the other options that were available besides jumping into the combat line. Does that mean you see combat or standing around doing nothing as the only two available options? That isn't a limitation in any edition.

I ran a 2e campaign with a party consisting of 3 wizards, 2 fighters, 1 fighter/thief, 1 fighter/wizard, and no clerics. The wizards proved their worth time and again both with and without using spells. They were always doing something with the goal being to aid the fighters, and sometimes even they stepped into combat, but never did they stand around doing nothing for 7-10 rounds. When we converted to 3e they kept doing things, both combat and non-combat. System made no difference to how the players chose to run their characters.

I have had players do awsome things, I have even seen a level 2 wizard (technicly still had all his spells) fight off 4 memebers of town guard with 2 daggers (well miss used throwing knife from combat and tactics) and a staff. (long story) but for everystory of that we have way more were PCs did nothing of consaqence all night.

 

[Tortoise]

With respect, I don't care.

See it looks like this (from my point of view)



in this case I can tell you, Not everyone sees it, and to be honnest I hope you never do, but what does it hurt to fix a problem?
that is like wanting Norton's anti virus not to update until AFTER you get a virus, becuse if you haven't yet you don't think you will.

Wait, let me get this straight. You want the game to tell the player what their character does every round or for the character to have a "never-empty-gun"? So the game is broken unless either of those conditions are met?

 

[Tortoise]

I have had players do awsome things, I have even seen a level 2 wizard (technicly still had all his spells) fight off 4 memebers of town guard with 2 daggers (well miss used throwing knife from combat and tactics) and a staff. (long story) but for everystory of that we have way more were PCs did nothing of consaqence all night.

Ah, now I see the communications issue. Equating doing nothing of consequence with doing nothing during a round.

Even simple things are important. PC's do not have to be firing the BFG every round to matter. As long as they are making an effort to do something toward the party goal however minor they might see it at the moment, it adds up toward survival and/or a win.

When a player only considers what their character does in combat as important it indicates a couple possibilities. 1> playstyle is aimed at the tactical almost excusively, or 2> They don't really care about other elements of the game. If I had to guess by your moniker, I think we have our answer.

 

[Fifth Element]

I'll cover everything above briefly. 1> I did not say your player's lacked intelligence, just that the choice to stand around doing nothing is on them, not the system.

No, it's a matter of meaning. You interpret "doing nothing" as literally doing nothing. Those making the argument actually mean "doing nothing of real consequence".

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Wait, let me get this straight. You want the game to tell the player what their character does every round or for the character to have a "never-empty-gun"? So the game is broken unless either of those conditions are met?

No what I want is to have options that are not ultimate power at one end and 0 at the other. I want Cool and bad ass daily powers, but a few fall back weaker powers.

I would be fine with encounter or at will (or some mix).

I would love to see these cantrips look like 4e cantrips (Utilities) mixed with some f the combat at wills (Scorching burst, Magic missle,cloud of daggers and thunder wave)

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Ah, now I see the communications issue. Equating doing nothing of consequence with doing nothing during a round.

correct, if my wizard spends a round casting a spell that effects the battle, then 2 rounds fireing off arrows that miss, then 2 rounds makeing rp moments and 1 round in tha bath room yelling pass, then I think I only did somethin 1 round.

Even simple things are important. PC's do not have to be firing the BFG every round to matter. As long as they are making an effort to do something toward the party goal however minor they might see it at the moment, it adds up toward survival and/or a win.

ok, so if the goal is kill the necromacer and his death knight, and the last 2 fights of the night will be the death knight, an undead horse, and 6-10 skeletal warriors, and the last fight is the necromancer, a ghost dog, and 2 tomb guardians.

so if the wizard starts the day at 13 spells per day, and when they get to that last 2 encounters he is down to 5, so if both fights last 5+ rounds what does he do in those last 2 fights that are not combat?

When a player only considers what their character does in combat as important it indicates a couple possibilities. 1> playstyle is aimed at the tactical almost excusively, or 2> They don't really care about other elements of the game. If I had to guess by your moniker, I think we have our answer.

[/QUOTE]

we are only talking about combat, I have no need for spells or not to RP, or exploration... combat is the problem.



I HATE the idea of combat 1= 2 goblins, wizard makes a half hearted roll for cross bow
combat 2 7 goblins, wizard casts sleep 6 goblins go down
combat 3 goblin king and 2 hobgoblin mercs oh and the wizard is back to doing nothing of value

 

[Dausuul]

I've been over this at length in other threads, but suffice it to say that it is entirely possible to balance spellcasters for infrequent spike effects when other characters can't -- it is one of the things that adventure-based design enables much more easily than encounter-based design.

The maths I applied kept wizards balanced with 3 spells/day at first level, and you could conceivably change that number, with tweaks to things like check results and damage maths.

I like the idea of balancing across the adventure, but no edition of D&D has yet done this. "Adventure" and "day" are not synonymous. Maybe you run mostly grueling dungeon crawls with a dozen encounters in a day, while I run overland quests where several days are apt to pass between encounters. Wizards in my campaign can blow a wad of spells on each battle, putting fighters in the shade. Wizards in your campaign must ration every casting and look with envy on the fighter's tireless sword arm.

I'd really like to have some "per-adventure" resources rather than daily ones, but it'd be venturing rather far afield from D&D as we know it.

 

[Doug McCrae]

"Adventure" and "day" are not synonymous.

I get the impression that, at first, in early D&D all dungeon trips AKA adventures, did indeed take one day. At some point players got the idea to rest in the dungeon, barricading the door against wandering monsters with iron spikes or a hold portal spell.

I've seen a quote from the 1970s about some DMs permitting the party to rest in the dungeon and others not. So it was definitely a thing, and a somewhat controversial one.

 

[Elf Witch]

If you are trying to stab someone and you get stabbed first, your sword won't explode because you failed to hold onto it properly.

But if I'm channeling the forces of the cosmos and I get stabbed, I might want to take a second to gather my focus before I try bending reality to my whim. My whim is very fickle, especially when I've just been stabbed.

No it won't explode but the pain can stun you. Have you ever been seriously injured? I have I broke my back and I was in shock and confused for a good five minutes before I could react. If a round is 6 seconds it would make sens that getting hurt could make you lose your focus for the brief amount of time.

I would be okay with rules that mirrored this that taking x amount of damage requires a con check to act that round but it should be for all classes not just wizards.