S
Sunseeker
Guest
A class system must work as a whole, so it's impossible to answer that question without knowing what the other classes do. 3e classes are very flexible, for a class-based system, though caster flexibility is far greater due to the ability to switch spell loadout on a daily basis. But even rogues and fighters can vary quite a bit dependent on skill and feat selection.
In a tight class-based system with a high degree of niche protection, the wizard would not have anything like the range of spells they do in 1e to 3e. Even OD&D probably has too many. I can't say what a wizard would be. An AoE specialist? A sage? A diviner? Whatever it is, it should be what other classes are not.
Another method would be to allow any of these options and more for the wizard, but determined during character generation, so the wizard would be more like the sorcerer, or 3e fighter, or rogue.
There are many other possibilities. One could vary the number of areas in which each class can contribute and the degree to which they can contribute. If one put a value from 1-10, then a fighter might be combat 10; a bard social 5, information gathering 5; a rogue stealth 5, combat 5 and so forth. The problem is if you then introduce a wizard who can be combat 20 one day, information gathering 20 the next, and so forth.
Or the wizard could be 'spiky', a nova class, contributing a high value in one encounter, and virtually nothing in another. This is, traditionally, what D&D has tried to do.
All approaches are problematic. In a game with high niche protection, what happens if the class that fills a niche is unpopular or unavailable for any reason? World of Warcraft suffers from this problem, with tanks and healers both essential for group PvE play, but far rarer than damage-dealers.
The 'valued niche' approach can fail if it puts the wrong value on a niche. Maybe combat is a rare occurence in a particular campaign, making the fighter worth a lot less than anticipated.
The 15-minute day, the necessity of the traditional D&D dungeon, and player boredom, are obvious problems with the spiky wizard.
In some games, the solution to utility was the Hybrid Tax. The more things you were capable of doing in a given moment, the lower the quality at which u did those things. So a Wizard who could only blast was very effective at it, while a wizard who could buff, blast, unlock, and sneak was less effective. Problematically D&D has always presented the Wizard as the utility man who could do anything, at any time, and be great at it. So, with a Vancian system on the way for DDN, WOTC will either have to scale down spells per day or establish some sort of system to restrict non-specialization.