Wizards in 4E have been 'neutered' argument...

[Jack99]

Well, since orc chiefs have 12 hp, a single fireball would take care of the main part of an orc lair. There might be an ogre or a troll with them, I suppose. That's not what I would consider grinding so much as shopping with extreme prejudice.

Tossing a 10th level fireball into the cave of orcs is not clever if you are hunting for potions (talk about a videogamey game btw). Since you would probably destroy those same potions in the process.

Depends really. Alot of creatures had far fewer hit points in 1e/2E. Thus damage spells were pretty effective.

Some of us were creative with our spell strategies. That didn't necessarily mean doing damage. It was more fun to have a spellbook that allowed you to figure out a spell strategy for helping the entire party do the job.

Effective use of spells like Wall of Force or Fire could control the battlefield allowing your melee and physical damage dealers to break up tough combatants. I know the majority of players are focused on damage dealing, but that wasn't me. I liked playing the wizard as a facilitator capable of changing the flow of a battle by applying a spell to a given situation.
That was always more fun.

Sad thing in 4E is that magic is very personal in effect. You can't do many group effects or effects on other people that last longer than a round or two. It's a very limiting game for players that like to use magic creatively. Same for DMs that like to use magic creatively. Even 1E/2E catered to wizard players that liked to come up with interesting ways to help the party get the job done.

Wall spells are plentiful in 4e and work just as well, and can even be used creatively. Regarding the older editions, lots of stuff done with spells was so much creative as bending the rules. If you had a easy-going DM, you could break the game, if you didn't the same spells could be almost useless.

Of course, this was rarely an issue, because there were so many spells that could break the game by RAW

 

[Hussar]

Why does it give you more options? Why can't it give you different options? Why is that a bad thing?

Well, pre-4e, it did give me more options. Far more options. A wizard or a cleric had a list of options as long as their spell list. What options does a fighter have that a cleric doesn't?

I would think that the 4e power system is an example where you have different options but relative parity in the number of options and a relative parity in the scale of those options.

I have no problem with the idea of one class having different options than another. That's fine. But, why should casters get several times more options than non-casters?

 

[MrMyth]

A hero can do deeds beyond the capability of normal folk. A heroic fighter can take punisnment that would kill more than a dozen men and single handedly slay creatures that could wipe out entire villages. As a hero living in a world where there is magic, he or she doesn't have to use or manipulate magic to be such a hero. The magical powers of a wizard are very different from those of the martially focused hero.

The martial hero shouldn't be doing the things a wizard does and the wizard shouldn't try and fight with weapons like the fighter.

And they don't. The high-level fighter is a pretty awesome dude who can take incredible punishment and dish it back out. Any supernatural performance will typically be coming from, say, an Epic Destiny - such as literally becoming a Demigod, or an incarnation of battle, or something else that does get to go beyond the natural at epic levels. Or from items. Or from multiclassing, or mastering Ritual Casting - something that should put him on similar territory to the Wizard, just like multiclassing did in 3rd Edition!

The two operate differently and have different flavor, both have different strengths and weaknesses and can be more or less useful in different circumstances. Either can apply creative ideas to combat either through clever use of powers and utilities, and imaginative use of stunts and the DMs use of page 42. It's just that those ideas no longer instantly win a combat, unless the DM decides they should - no longer are they built around finding loopholes in the rules, but instead rely on shared imagination and narrative flexibility. Which I think is a strength of the edition, not a weakness.

There should be situations that require magic to succeed and there should also be situations where magic will be of little use. Having every hero accomplish the same tasks with a differently flavored power is like having a superhero team with just different fluff and costumes.

As an aside, I noticed that you constantly make these superhero references without it having any actual support to back it up. It's very frustrating. That said, I disagree entirely that in order for characters to be meaningful, you have to outright design situations that only one character can solve. Sure, have situations that play to the strength of different characters, but limiting all options so that only one choice can save the party - having the wizard cast the right spell, for example - is just poor design.

And to draw your comments back towards 3rd Edition, the reason the Wizard needed to be neutered was that he typically had a trump card to avoid ever being in a situation where you needed the fighter or the rogue instead of him. Sure, there were situations supposed to be like that - an Iron Golem, for example, should be entirely there for the fighter to dispose of. Except the wizard knocks it down with Grease, blinds it with Glitterdust, and then blows it apart with Orbs of Force. Too many trump cards, not enough restrictions - that wasn't being 'more magical', that was taking advantage of poorly designed rules that let one character be the star of the show.

Now, the wizard can be the archmage with myriad options at his fingertips, master of countless rituals and the ability to call forth magic at any given moment and apply it in creative ways... without relegating the rest of the party to the back seat. I can only see that as a good thing.

 

[MrMyth]

Also, an anecdote, since I saw someone commenting earlier in this thread (or a related one) about how sad it was that wizards no longer ever chose "Fireball":

I was playing a mid-heroic LFR game last week, and the final battle consisted of us getting the drop on the bad guys - finding them holed up in a warehouse. Our wizard kicked the door in, and tossed a fireball right into the middle of the room to tremendous effect. The spell gets passed over quite a bit in optimization forums and the like because it doesn't really do much other than a bit of damage - but the real strength, especially at level 5, is that it is simply an enormous area. Half the enemies never got to act that fight, in large part because of the wizard simply scorching the earth before they ever got to go.

A lot of folks overlook that, but filling a room with fire and roasting everyone in it is just as viable a tactic now as in previous editions, and that moment in the LFR game felt just as classic as chucking a fireball into an enclosed room in my early days of playing D&D.

 

[ExploderWizard]

As an aside, I noticed that you constantly make these superhero references without it having any actual support to back it up. It's very frustrating.

4E without modification does have a superhero feel compared to the early (non 3E) editions. It is just an opinion. City of Heroes(A supers MMO) = Striker/Defender/Controller/Leader = 4E roles.

That said, I disagree entirely that in order for characters to be meaningful, you have to outright design situations that only one character can solve. Sure, have situations that play to the strength of different characters, but limiting all options so that only one choice can save the party - having the wizard cast the right spell, for example - is just poor design.

And to draw your comments back towards 3rd Edition, the reason the Wizard needed to be neutered was that he typically had a trump card to avoid ever being in a situation where you needed the fighter or the rogue instead of him. Sure, there were situations supposed to be like that - an Iron Golem, for example, should be entirely there for the fighter to dispose of. Except the wizard knocks it down with Grease, blinds it with Glitterdust, and then blows it apart with Orbs of Force. Too many trump cards, not enough restrictions - that wasn't being 'more magical', that was taking advantage of poorly designed rules that let one character be the star of the show.

I quite agree that 3E casters overshadowed other classes. The problem wasn't being "too magical". You are correct about the lack of restrictions. Getting rid of declared casting prior to intiative, the wide availability of wands and movement during the casting round, powered up the caster beyond what they should have been able to do. Older edition D&D spells were very powerful but tricky and risky to attempt in combat. Getting a spell disrupted and lost isn't fun so it was ditched.

Now, the wizard can be the archmage with myriad options at his fingertips, master of countless rituals and the ability to call forth magic at any given moment and apply it in creative ways... without relegating the rest of the party to the back seat. I can only see that as a good thing.

As long as any given moment takes at least 10 minutes, you are accurate. The PC's always have as much time as they need because they have narrative control and being time pressured isn't fun. I can only see that as a snooze fest.

 

[LostSoul]

I think that Warlocks are the ones with all the good spells these days, the spells that can be used creatively. Usually to warp someone's mind.

The Wizard has a few, I guess. Faced with a chasm? Use Bigby's Icy Hand to pick you up and carry you across.

As long as any given moment takes at least 10 minutes, you are accurate. The PC's always have as much time as they need because they have narrative control and being time pressured isn't fun. I can only see that as a snooze fest.

I think getting those extra few minutes to cast a ritual can be an exciting challenge.

 

[MrMyth]

4E without modification does have a superhero feel compared to the early (non 3E) editions. It is just an opinion. City of Heroes(A supers MMO) = Striker/Defender/Controller/Leader = 4E roles.

Fair enough, everyone is entitled to an opinion. I definitely found that 3rd Edition, and the emphasis on optimization - as well as the requirement of having different roles, rather than just the guidelines for it - had a far more video-game/super-hero feel to it, in my experience.

As long as any given moment takes at least 10 minutes, you are accurate. The PC's always have as much time as they need because they have narrative control and being time pressured isn't fun. I can only see that as a snooze fest.

I think you've misread my statement, there.

1) Having magic at 'any given moment' was my reference to the existence of at-will powers and renewable encounter powers (as well as cantrips). Not eventually 'running dry' of the smallest magics, combined with the ability to use those combat and utility powers in creative ways (as well as in conjunction with DM use of page 42) allows for more imaginative use of abilities than simply having to find a loophole in how powers are described, and forcing the DM to accept it. The mention of rituals was seperate from this, and are just another tool in the wizard's bag of tricks.

2) Narrative control doesn't mean the PCs get to choose when story happens and when it doesn't. It means they have a variety of ways to influence things and suggest creative uses of power for the DM to accept. "I throw my ray of cold at the waterfall as the enemy rushes through, to temporarily freeze him in a block of ice." Letting players have a bit more voice, along with encouraging DMs to be more open about how powers work and what they can accomplish, frees the game from earlier more rigid limitations.

3) I'm not sure where the comments about a snooze fest come from. The pacing of a game and encounters is something that will vary from DM to DM, and if anything, 4E does more to encourage regular encounters rather than the approach of '15 minutes of spellcasting and then sleep for 8 hours'.

 

[TwinBahamut]

It is actualy the whole (ok one of the) theme of the movie...Dash in the car points out when it is brought up early in the movie, then later when Mr Incredable and Invsable woman are argueing it gets brought up again (in the vain of dash compeating) then of cource syndrome's threat...

the end result is up to the audince to decide, but I always hold the dash talk in the car in my heart when I think about life...

Dash "We're special"
Invsable woman "Everyone is dear"
Dash "thats just another way to say no one is"

Really, that scene is just there to emphasize that Dash is someone who needs to grow and mature more. His mother is the one who is right.

Yes, the idea of is a theme of the movie, but only in the sense that Dash and the villain are both mistaken in that same belief, and that Dash's triumph is how he gets over it, and the villain's failure is that he does not.

Also, it is important to not forget the most important theme of the movie is the idea that what makes a person a hero isn't their powers, but what they do with those powers. Mr. Incredible isn't a hero because he is strong, but because he is a good man who cares about his family. He is at his best when he is a loving father, and at his worst when he is obsessing over the glory days when he used his powers more. Similarly, the villain's acquisition of super powers through his gadgets doesn't make him a superhero, and doesn't change the fact that he is a pathetic, vile little man.

Anyways...

I really do think that 4E has taken the best approach. Every class really is special in 4E, since no two classes play out similarly at all. Sure, the wizard is a bit different than he used to be, in no small part because he is no longer trying to encompass every magical archetype at once. But now, because of the variety in the Arcane Power Source and different options in class choices, you can actually have a team of "wizards" who each do very different things without stepping on each other's toes, which I think is a huge advantage over older editions. What is more, classes like Fighters and Warlords are just as strong and creative as the Wizard, but they play very differently and do different things.

 

[Henry]

4E without modification does have a superhero feel compared to the early (non 3E) editions. It is just an opinion. City of Heroes(A supers MMO) = Striker/Defender/Controller/Leader = 4E roles.

I've often wondered about this - compared to AD&D casters, PCs can't attack multiple times in a round, fly for more than a few minutes, teleport more than 30 or 40 feet, or target anything more than about 50 feet away in most cases. They have to get in the mid-teens before they can even think about flying or teleporting more than 5 minutes away, whereas casters from 5th to 10th level in AD&D can do all these and more. They can toss fireballs half a football field away; some spell effects go the length of football fields even at 2nd and 3rd spell level. Heck, a 9th level caster can (rules as written) use teleport and summon monster as offensive weapons. I know it's just an opinion, but to me the power curve to me went WAAY down as opposed to up.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I've often wondered about this - compared to AD&D casters, PCs can't attack multiple times in a round, fly for more than a few minutes, teleport more than 30 or 40 feet, or target anything more than about 50 feet away in most cases. They have to get in the mid-teens before they can even think about flying or teleporting more than 5 minutes away, whereas casters from 5th to 10th level in AD&D can do all these and more. They can toss fireballs half a football field away; some spell effects go the length of football fields even at 2nd and 3rd spell level. Heck, a 9th level caster can (rules as written) use teleport and summon monster as offensive weapons. I know it's just an opinion, but to me the power curve to me went WAAY down as opposed to up.

9th level in 1E AD&D was getting close to epic 4E by comparison. The number of normal playable levels has gone up so each "bracket" has more levels in 4E than 1E had but the power curve is similar. AD&D 1-4= heroic, 5-8= paragon, 9+= epic.