What about feats? For every class that the wizard wants to dip into they need to grab a feat for an additional power that is in their spellbook that they can swap out during short rests. I'm not sure you could gain access to all the powers of a given arcane class maybe start with an encounter and then have a feat chain whereby you gain access to utilities or dailys.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Creating a generalist "Mage" class?
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
Well, I don't think the current Wizard is well balanced at the moment anyway! sub-par at-wills for 'controlling', no 'controlling' class ability and such.
My suggestion would be removing the implement mastery options and the spellbook (thus reducing his power slightly per encounter and his per-day variety) and I think that would be enough.
If a higher cost was desired then you could make them take a feat for access to each new role after the first, but I think that would be too big a cost for them.
After all, there is always the opportunity cost of whether to take 'this' or 'that' power.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
Warlock and Wizard use different statistics for their powers. Maybe that's a way to "balance" them? Of course, Artificers and Swordmage seem to work differently already, so it's just for this specific combination it can work.
An other alternative might be:
The Wizard can use other classes encounter powers as daily powers only?
1.)
Remove the Arcane Implement abilities.
2.)
The Wizard gets one extra Encounter and one Extra Daily power each day.
He can use the encounter slots to fill them with any at-will attack OR utility power from the arcane power source.
He can use the daily slot to fill them with any encounter attack or utility power from the arcane power source.
He can spend both slots to prepare one daily arcane utility or attack power with the arcane power source.
3.)
A Wizard doesn't gain any non-Wizard spells by default. He has to learn them and write into his book. This might require buying a "scroll" of the power. (I suggest prices like equivalent level scrolls or potions?)
4.)
A feat that might replace Expanded Spellbook allows him to prepare at-will powers from other arcane classes as Encounter powers, and encounter powers from other arcane classes as daily powers, in both cases using his "regular" slots for them.
This is a benefit most wizards might not be all that interested in, since it probably weakens his abilities.
5.)
If the Wizard multiclass in any class with the arcane power source, he can prepare encounters as encounter powers and daily powers as daily powers with his extra encounter/daily slot. If he uses Paragon Multiclassing, he can treat all powers of the arcane class as wizard powers. (So at each power level, he can select any powers up to that level he knows from his wizard list and his multiclass list of powers. This benefit probably shouldn't apply to the power slots gained by Paragon Pathes/Multiclassing)
And a Paragon Path might instead expand his abilities to treat powers from a different power source similar to arcane powers. (Especially Divine, Primal or Shadow might make sense.)
---
Personally, I am not a big fan of Expanded Spellbook and other feats that give you more powers. It creates a big laundry list and you still use only a very select few. It bloats the character sheet, too.
But I like coming up with rules
Last edited:
Ginnel
Explorer
the Wizards got to give a lot up for getting access to other classes spells thats for sure, giving up cantrips would take away from the can do all mage concept surely?
As it is the only way to gain a power from another class (apart from half elf diletente) is to take a multiclass feat which you must qualify for, 13s in one or two stats, and then you must spend your feats after that on swapping your existing powers over, so considering its so difficult already to swap powers over; this thing we want to give to the mage is going to have a hefty price.
giving up implement mastery? yup but still not enough
how about giving up daily abilities and most of your feats? an initial qualification feat requiring 13int 13wis 13cha (for being the uber arcane master maybe even 13 con ) you lose your first daily power you lose you implement mastery and your first feat has to be spent on this.
The losing of the daily power will gain you an encounter ability of another "arcane" class that you can use twice per day (like paladins lay on hands) or something similar (I feel once a day to be not enough and once per encounter would be too much)
The lack of dailies would mean his bang would be reduced but the versatility would be increased by a lot.
Anyway these are just random mad musing think of them what you will
As it is the only way to gain a power from another class (apart from half elf diletente) is to take a multiclass feat which you must qualify for, 13s in one or two stats, and then you must spend your feats after that on swapping your existing powers over, so considering its so difficult already to swap powers over; this thing we want to give to the mage is going to have a hefty price.
giving up implement mastery? yup but still not enough
how about giving up daily abilities and most of your feats? an initial qualification feat requiring 13int 13wis 13cha (for being the uber arcane master maybe even 13 con
) you lose your first daily power you lose you implement mastery and your first feat has to be spent on this.The losing of the daily power will gain you an encounter ability of another "arcane" class that you can use twice per day (like paladins lay on hands) or something similar (I feel once a day to be not enough and once per encounter would be too much)
The lack of dailies would mean his bang would be reduced but the versatility would be increased by a lot.
Anyway these are just random mad musing think of them what you will
Last edited:
This I think is really your primary difficulty in this system. It promotes specialisation and generalisation suffers. Not only does it hurt the class balance, but it hurts the group as well, since play is generally balanced around having the roles covered. If you don't fulfil,a particular role well, then why does the party want you along?
So I think that has to be the primary focus of any answer to your question: what role will a generalist arcane caster fill and how can I go about implementing that?
As a controller, I think the wizard falls flat. However, I also believe that WotC was definitely on the right track in terms of how to answer the above question. As far as I see it, I think the controller schtick suits the wizard the best.
So, if we go with that logic, then the problem becomes, "How do we make the wizard more... controllerish?"
I think there are two answers to that question. I honestly believe that Arcane Power will be one of those answers. The other is obviously to change the current powers on offer and/or build new ones that are more controller oriented.
However, I also believe that the class features a wizard has should be altered to be more controllerish as well. IMO, the Spellbook class feature is a remnant of previous editions that needs to be discarded. It's a clunky mechanic that increases a player's work and doesn't really increase the versatility or power of the wizard.
IMO, I've solved this with a new class feature. You can check that out here (metamagic mastery replaces spellbook and feats enhance it). I believe it offers more interesting options to the class that are more useful and also fulfil a controller element by giving the player the choice to manipulate his own powers to have a greater effect, when the greater effect is needed. Obviously, YMMV.
Secondly, I think Implement Mastery does little to nothing to offer any real controller ability to the class. As for that, I'm still trying to nut that one out myself so I can't offer any solutions.
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
But that argument would say "Push off Paladin - you're not as good a defender as the fighter and who cares that you have a bit of second class leaderish abilities? We don't want you!"
The Paladin is a leaderish defender by default. The Cleric is a controllerish leader.
Even with a free choice of arcane abilities, the resulting Mage would be one role with a flavour of another (and possibly a taste of a third - equivalent to having a multiclass feat). It would probably be unlikely to have a striker at-will, a leader utility, a defender encounter and a controller daily power, but even if he does, big deal.
My brilliance shines through yet again: Arcane Mastery. This feature replaces Implement Mastery.
I think I need to go lie down and bask in my awesomeness for a bit
I think I need to go lie down and bask in my awesomeness for a bit
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
My brilliance shines through yet again: Arcane Mastery. This feature replaces Implement Mastery.
I think I need to go lie down and bask in my awesomeness for a bit
It#s a neat idea, but it doesn't solve the original goal outlined by Morrus.
The goal is to have a generalist mage, not a better controller. A better controller might be a desirable goal, too, but it's not the topic.
It is, IMO. As I stated earlier, you can't have a generalist in this system without making it a worthless class to have. And if you go the opposite route and give it powers and abilities that cross-over from every role, then it's too powerful.
So the only real solution is to ask what role a wizard can play with a 'generalist' feel. That, I believe, is as a controller. You could do it as a leader, I suppose, but the big problem there is the healing factor which really doesn't fit the schtick.
A striker and defender role don't fit the concept because they're about as specialised as you can get.
So you have to bend the controller schtick into what most represents the 'old' style mage. And the best way to do that, IMO, is to make it a better controller.
*shrug*
P.S. I still think I'm awesome.
Last edited:
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
You still fail at the goal of creating a generalist mage.
A typical problem in these kinds of threads: "I want X. How can I do it?" "You can't. You shouldn't. It's wrong. Do Y, it's decidedly not X, but it's also a very cool idea." "I agree Y is cool. But I want X."
BTW, your arcane mastery features might be a good example on what alternative way one could go. The Generalist Mage could apply this benefits to all arcane powers, and thus give them all a "controllerish" feel. But of course, it won't be balanced against regular powers.
If Morrus doesn't want to create an entirely new class, he will have to make compromises. Maybe it's okay if the result is a little unbalanced. It is possible to design a class even if you know it's not quite balanced.
Sometimes other goals have priority. Just know that you do and maybe try to minimize the impact, as long as you can still achieve your goal.Well, no one is denying that.
Maybe just because the opposite is obvious?
Similar Threads
