• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Wizardry and Societal Verisimilitude, or Why Mages Need Muzzles

GrinningBuddha

First Post
Hello ENWorld denizens. It's my first time posting a thread here, and there's something I'd like to address.

There is one thing that bothers me significantly about at-will spells in common society. In a world of 4 hp commoners and 5 hp town guards, a wizard who has access to a 2d4 + 2 at-will damage spell essentially has the equivalent of an infinitely loaded crossbow at his disposal. I can't really think of a fantasy world where there are wizards running around with this kind of unchecked power having just completed their apprenticeships.

The debate about daily resource management has been raging since before Next was announced. Many like the Vancian system, while others are fans of the AEDU system of 4e. I would like to address it from a different angle.

Long ago, dungeon design began to ask how the inhabitants of the area managed to meet their daily needs. Providing access to food, water, and other basic needs became a staple of good dungeon design, evolving from Gygaxian mystery rooms with vastly contrasting monsters behind each door.

I think it's time we took a look at giving PC development in the same framework. 1st level characters, while cut from a different cloth than commoners, are still not all that different than the common folk. A little stronger, a little smarter, and more capable of taking a jab from a sharp stick without crumpling to the ground (other than the wizard, of course.) It hurts my sense of immersion when I run a wizard who has the capability to shoot up a small town on his own, or a cleric that can pick archers off a battlement one by one the day after receiving his holy symbol.

Here's where I'd like to see the magic system go. I would like to see the return of the specialization/domain system, and I would like to see damage-dealing spells limited to daily use only, or spell slots in a Vancian system (since we all know that's what we're getting, at least in part.) Here's an example of what an Abjurer would look like:

- Extra cantrips from the Abjuration school (Resistance, Alarm added to the general at-will cantrips)
- Casting Mastery feat: Choose any 1 spell from your school 3 levels below your current highest spell level to cast at-will.
- Example 1st level Abjuration spells: Endure Elements, Hold Portal, Protection from Alignment, Shield
- Additional spells can be taken from any school. Spells cast from other schools do not benefit from implement or level bonuses since the caster has not devoted the study required to master the intricate movements and subtle incantations that maximize the magical energy available to the caster. e.g. A 16 Int. Abjurer casts Magic Missile with a +2 to hit and 2d4 damage. An identical Evoker casts Magic Missile with a +4 to hit and 2d4+4 damage.

So what does this do for us? Here's what I feel we gain:

- Casters are still powerful and deserve respect. They are not, however, walking turrets of destruction, at least at low levels.
- Casters feel much less homogenous. An Abjurer feels vastly different from an Evoker and Transmuter.
- Casters who prefer at-will spells have the opportunity to perfect their craft as they gain levels at the expense of other options via the feat system.
- The fantasy society that the DM has built is not overpowered by 1st level mages running around blasting everything in sight. Even a specialist Evoker has to be at least level 5 or 7 (needs testing) before he can begin to run amok with at-will damage spells.
- The 15-minute workday effect can be reduced by allowing specialist wizards and clerics to still pursue their craft with their school/domain-specific at-will spells (cantrips) even after their daily spells are used up.

And so I ask of you, what are your thoughts about the system as presented? The objectives are primarily to address verisimilitude and the short work day. Is this a step in the right direction? Does it appeal to YOUR sense of what D&D is or should be?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

MarkB

Legend
Hello ENWorld denizens. It's my first time posting a thread here, and there's something I'd like to address.

There is one thing that bothers me significantly about at-will spells in common society. In a world of 4 hp commoners and 5 hp town guards, a wizard who has access to a 2d4 + 2 at-will damage spell essentially has the equivalent of an infinitely loaded crossbow at his disposal. I can't really think of a fantasy world where there are wizards running around with this kind of unchecked power having just completed their apprenticeships.

Well, wizards in the Harry Potter setting can pretty much bend reality to their will by the time they've finished school. Jedi padawans can throw pieces of scenery around to their hearts' content. Even in a standard fantasy setting, anyone who's gone through the training and earned themselves the title and pointy hat of "wizard" is a wielder of significant power.

And as you say, it's the equivalent of an infinitely-loaded crossbow, and that's something that any commoner with enough cash has access to.

I like your thoughts on making spellcasters more individually distinctive, but their power level isn't a problem.
 

Gold Roger

First Post
Well, we don't actually know how many hp and what stats a commoner or guard will be expected to have. I highly doubt 5hp guards though, they couldn't protect themself, leave alone a town.

Also, a lot of the things you talk about are to me matters of the DM, campaign settings and DMG advise.


With those caveats, I'm not a big fan of the attack at wills currently included in the playtest. I don't get why they turned away from the idea that cantrip attacks where utility abilities that could be used to deal minor damage at the last minute before releasing the playtest.

As for your ideas: This isn't really a solution to the magic missile, but a approach to schools of magic. I'll note, it's an approach that would see me unhappy. I like my generalist casters and none to specialised school wizards.
 

Li Shenron

Legend
There is one thing that bothers me significantly about at-will spells in common society. In a world of 4 hp commoners and 5 hp town guards, a wizard who has access to a 2d4 + 2 at-will damage spell essentially has the equivalent of an infinitely loaded crossbow at his disposal. I can't really think of a fantasy world where there are wizards running around with this kind of unchecked power having just completed their apprenticeships.

I have the same feelings, but also towards non-damaging spells. One 5e wizard in a village who knows the Light cantrip, and how could you not have street illuminations?

At-will spells change a lot in the settings, especially lower level spells because they have the most mundane use. At-will Meteor Swarm or Implosion could be used to quickly eradicate civilization, but then the consequences on how the setting works is minimal: either the mad wizard uses them (and then the world is over) or he only keeps them as a threat (so what? every campaign already has a world-end threat at some point) or they're not using them. But at-will Message, Mage Hand, Cure Light Wounds... now those spells if at-will carry many more practical consequences to society IMHO.
 

Chris_Nightwing

First Post
I'm pretty sure the average apprentice wizard that goes on a magic missile rampage will get crossbowed by the guard captain in no time. It's no worse than someone going on a literal crossbow rampage.

But if you consider magic to be that dangerous, then incorporate it into your world building - I enjoyed Dragon Age's take on wizardry, with the intertwined relationship between mages and the church.
 

Someone

Adventurer
I don't really see the problem from a verisimilitude standpoint. A wizard with an at-will equivalent to a crossbow, it's the equivalent of a guy armed with a crossbow. The difference, from a world building standpoint, is that the wizard has been studying for years, he's probably a weakling from lack of proper exercise and can't use armor. Meanwhile a regular chump can pick up a crossbow, learn how to use it in 10 minutes, and wear chainmail while he shoots it. Only disadvantage: he has to carry bolt quivers, hardly crippling.

Where spellcasters can damage verisimilitude isn't with weak, single target damage spells, but with things like Wall of Fire, Teleport, Zone of Truth, Detect good/evil, Fabricate...
 

GX.Sigma

Adventurer
Based on traditional wisdom, 1st-level Fighters are relatively rare, and 1st-level Wizards are much rarer. Sure, if a 1st-level Wizard just randomly decided to murder commoners, he'd cause some damage, but so would a 1st-level Fighter.

What's wrong with a Wizard having something like a crossbow? It doesn't ruin verisimilitude any more than a Fighter having a crossbow, and I'm not sure how 1d4+1 (which has a 25% chance of one-shotting a 5 hp commoner; while a good Fighter's crossbow deals 8-15 on a hit and only misses on a 1, 2, or 3) qualifies as "unchecked power."

Edit: I like how 3 of us has the same idea at the same time. lol
 

In my opinion there is nothing wrong with Magic Missile damage = Crossbow damage. If that much damage is already a problem there should be very strict laws restricting the possibility of carrying all kinds of mundane weapons in the public.
I don't want to imagine what a Barbarian with a 2h weapon will do if we let him carry around that much destructive potential unchecked.


And I believe there is nothing wrong with generalist and specialist wizards in the same game. I don't want to be forced to play either but I want to be able to make the choice if I want to.
GrinningBuddha said:
It hurts my sense of immersion when I run a wizard who has the capability to shoot up a small town on his own, or a cleric that can pick archers off a battlement one by one the day after receiving his holy symbol.

You are talking about LVL1 chars? I don't know if you believe that a first level wizard using magic missile can lay waste to a town; then anyone who knows how to use a weapon can do the same b/c obviously the townsfolk are too stupid to hit the wizard with 2-3 attacks of any kind.

And your cleric does not gain the power to blast away with lances of divine light the day he becomes a level 1 cleric. The rules make it appear so.
Think of learning how to drive a car. You can drive a car after you had several practice sessions but you still need the license. The license does not give you the ability to drive a car its makes your ability legal.
Regarding your cleric, he can blast away with lances since a certain point in his training but only a certain ceremony makes him a level 1 cleric.

Therefore, I assume you have a problem with the cleric shooting lances at all. Which is pretty much what you say here:
GrinningBuddha said:
I would like to see damage-dealing spells limited to daily use only, or spell slots in a Vancian system (since we all know that's what we're getting, at least in part.)

So after he used up his daily allotment of attack spells is the cleric/wizard only a support caster - if so why?

Does he have to use his mundane weapons - if so why? - Take a look at my statement about the dangers of mundane weapons in a world described by you.

I pretty much prefer that such highly magical/divine characters can shoot away with magical attacks especially if they are not outright better than mundane weapons. Even more so, if they would truly be inept at wielding mundane weapons.




Oh glorious 2E wizards...
"I have cast my one spell a day, now give me my crossbow for the remaining 23h59m." The glory, the joy.
 

Empath Negative

First Post
Well, wizards in the Harry Potter setting can pretty much bend reality to their will by the time they've finished school. Jedi padawans can throw pieces of scenery around to their hearts' content. Even in a standard fantasy setting, anyone who's gone through the training and earned themselves the title and pointy hat of "wizard" is a wielder of significant power.

And as you say, it's the equivalent of an infinitely-loaded crossbow, and that's something that any commoner with enough cash has access to.

I like your thoughts on making spellcasters more individually distinctive, but their power level isn't a problem.



Their power level isn't what's at issue here. It's their longevity.


Being able to chuck a fireball is all well and good... being able to chuck a fireball all day and night makes you a killing machine.



The idea I proposed a few weeks back was to limit number of spells per day to the characters "bonus spells" from intelligence, charisma, whatever and from other sources. Such as your domain and specialist bonus spells.

This would make reserve feats, wands, and staves MUCH more valuable.... and serve as a limiting factor on the wizards longevity WITHOUT the nonsense of a 15 minute workday. Specialist Wizards would become the defacto... and FOCUSED specialist wizards would be MUCH much more common.
 

MarkB

Legend
Their power level isn't what's at issue here. It's their longevity.


Being able to chuck a fireball is all well and good... being able to chuck a fireball all day and night makes you a killing machine.

Well, it's not fireballs we're talking about here. And in terms of verisimilitude, a wizard who can be magical maybe half-a-dozen times and then reverts to being a commoner in a pointy hat for the rest of the day seems far more jarring to me than one who can throw around basic-level magic all day long.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top