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

[GMforPowergamers]

I think it is time for me to tell a story...it is funny becuse it is true...

we had a game (early 3e) with 8 players 1 rouge, and 1 multi classed character with rouge in it... and a bunch of casters...

In one dungeon with 3 traps and a locked door both rouges sat out the entire night...becuse it was full of undead that ment no sneak attack, and the wizards had a wand of knock, and the cleric find traps....oh and summoning as well.

The next dungeon I had traps everywhere, a tomb of horror like enviorment...guess what happened...all sorts of 'summon X...send first...animate Y send first'

SO after 12 levels the party all agreed it sucked having a chance to fail...and the wizards didn't


ANy 5th+ level straigh caster can have a whole arsanal of 'I can do that better' built up.

a party of a Druid, Wizard, Cleric, Sorcerer was not only a match but suppior to a party of Fighter, Rouge, Bard, Barbarian...

Infact I bet that if we made a dungeon for 9th level characters...and loaded it with traps, level correct monsters and other challenges, then sent two teams through

Team 1 Druid 8, Specilist wizard 8, Cleric 8, Sorcerer 8
Team 2 Fighter 10, Rouge 10, Bard 10, Barbarian 10

that team one has the easier time...heck I bet it isn't even close...

Do the same thing in 4e, only even the levels
a dungeon of level 9
team 1 Druid 9, Wizard 9, Cleric 9, SOrcerer 9
team 2 Fighter 9, Rouge 9, Bard 9, Barbarian 9

and I bet there is little diffrence in the hardness of the dingeon (with the only real diffrence being one has no defender the other has no controler)

 

[EroGaki]

Well, I'm glad the the Rogue understands his role is to deal with the trivial things your wizard is too important to waste precious spells on.

Wow... just wow. Of course you try and turn it into some kind of insult.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

No solution is really perfect.

Cheers, -- N

True that. I guess I'm feeling iconoclastic this week, though, so the system assumptions are rubbing me wrong. It'll pass. Usually does.

 

[pawsplay]

I think this quote nails it right on the head. If a choice is obviously superior to all other choices, that's bad design in a nutshell. The fact that you would be shocked that someone wouldn't prep this spell speaks volumes towards the brokenness of the spell, not the creativity of the player.

It's not an "obviously superior choice," I'm just surprised that a 12th level caster, who can cast 6th level spells, would not have this 5th level spell prepared once or otherwise something equally versatile.

Yup, 100% can the wizard bypass that trap better than a rogue. 1st level Summon Monster spell. Done. Never mind unseen servant or even Mage Hand.

If that's all it takes to trigger it, a rogue can do the same thing with a rabbit in a sack. I was thinking about a trap that was actually dangerous.

Are you seriously going to try to say that a wizard can't out rogue the rogue?

A single 1st level spell - unseen servant - can bypass pretty much every trap out there simply by triggering it at range. Combined with a wand of knock and what do I need a rogue for anyway?

First of all, a rogue can UMD to can access to knock and unseen servant if that's what's really called for. However, that's quite beside the point. At low levels, the wizard is unlikely to use spell slots or hundreds of gold pieces to open doors when the rogue can do that easily enough. Once the wizard is high enough level that the task becomes trivial, the rogue is high enough level that opening traps is far from their best shtick. Being able to read raise dead from a scroll to raise the cleric, flank with the fighter to deliver sneak attacks and opportunist attacks, and completely evading the breath weapon of a blue dragon should keep the rogue relatively busy.

In any case you have to find a trap before you can disarm it. It's unlikely that a 12th level wizard has anything close to the rogue's ability to Spot and Search, and there are few magical options for detecting the relatively subtle emanations of a magical trap.

When you have a character that can deliberately grease the floor and walk on it, who can attack a foe with two weapons for +6d6 sneak attack damage per attack, the fact that they may not do as much lockpicking as in the old days is probably not going to leave them sobbing to sleep at night. And you never know when some practical joker is going to set up an elaborate death trap in the middle of a an anti-magic field, or set up a door trap to affect everyone in the hallway, problems only a rogue is properly qualified to deal with.

 

[pawsplay]

Good for a laugh when playing with people who have been playing D&D for 15+ years. Good for a lot of strange looks and "Wait, what? I need what to even hurt this thing?" when you play with adults who are new-ish to the game....All these rules about weird immunities make perfect sense when you learn them at age 8 or while high in college. Liches and ghosts are apparently under every rock such that run-of-the-mill adventurers are going out of their way to get the standard issue item that will bypass their immunities.

My basic assumptions may not hold as much when you are talking about an eight year old playing a 12th level wizard in a Living Forgotten Realms Game, but I think it must be admitted that at that point, it may be difficult to generalize what, exactly, to expect.

This doesn't smash verisimilitude with a big, fat cold iron morningstar?

Not really. If in the course of six months I battle some shadows, a young dragon, and a lair of orcs and ogres, it would shatter disbelief to think that if I intended to once again deliberately go into harm's way, I would not equip myself properly. A fighter's backpack should be better packed than a Navy SEAL's. Certainly, if I suspect I might be fighting a 600-year-old lich or an ancient dragon, I'm going to at least make an extra stop at the Sam's club to pick up some beef jerky and a 16 gp cold iron morningstar.

Picture how completely confused and thrown out of the film the audience would have been if when the orcs in Moria attacked, Aragorn told everyone their steel would be useless against Moria orcs, and they need to pull out their cold iron weapons.

That would be bizarre because orcs don't have special immunities. However, I will observe that Aragorn has an enchanted mithril sword, and he has also been observed to use a bow as well as a dagger. Perhaps Mr. Aragorn would have something to say about you insulting his play style.

If they were in a D&D-based world, Eowyn would have been able to hurt the Witch King not because of prophecy, but because she was the only one with a <insert magic metal here> weapon.

For all you know, that's why the prophecy was true.

Having an anti-Lich weapon and an anti-ghost weapon and an anti-dragon weapon and so on ad nauseum is a huge D&Dism that came out of nowhere. It's a codification of the old quest for a special material schtick that takes away all the potential wonder and coolness of such.

Perseus had a special sword capable of cleaving iron scales, a reflective shield to defeat the medusa, and a cap of invisibility. In Dragonslayer, they craft a +1 keen bane vs. dragons lance to fight one specific foe.

D&D owes a lot to Jack Vance's stories, stories in which characters walk around with the Excellent Prismatic Spray just in case they need to make someone really dead, a rapier in case they want to hold onto the prismatic spray, and anything else they might consider useful. Pandalume lives in, essentially, a magic item warehouse that ordinarily allows him to deal with almost any threat, up to and including demi-god-like fiends.

A better model for D&D, in which hardened adventurers roam the countryside defeating mighty opponents and delving devious tombs, is something like Supernatural, Blade, Dragonheart, or Ghostbusters. "Class nine non-repeating terminal phantasm" should be the battle cry of a 12th level character who has defeated dragons, demons, and undead sages.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

In your examples, the wizard trumps the rogue's ability to sneak, what? Once a day? As opposed to the rogue being able to do the same thing at will, including in the middle of a battle? Being able to turn the whole party invisible is a cool tactic for some situations, but it is hardly superior to a rogue being able to slip into the shadows and reemerge at an enemy's flank to bring the hurt.

Normally you only need to use a particular skill once a day. Most adventures are structured in terms of "encounters". They always have been. With there being 5-10 "encounters" per day, not all of them combat.

A typical encounter requires the use of one skill to pass. Each encounter normally uses a different skill because DMs like to mix it up a bit. So, a typical adventure might go:

1. The PCs must get past the guards of the castle.
2. The PCs must get into the castle.
3. The PCs must find their way through the traps in the hallways.
4. The PCs must find their way to the throne room.
5. The PCs must get past the guards inside the castle.
6. The PCs must defeat the evil overlord.
7. The PCs must escape the castle with the hostage.

A Wizard or Cleric can complete this adventure by themselves. Even better if they combine their efforts:

1. The Wizard or Cleric casts Charm Person or the Wizard casts Invisibility Sphere and walks past the guards. If you're high enough level and allow splat books Superior Invisibility covers pretty much everything. If that fails, they fireball them all.
2. The Wizard casts Knock or Fly to get over the walls. Cleric with the travel domain casts Fly or any other cleric casts Wind Walk.
3. The Wizard has a great search check for lower DC traps(or intelligently took 1 level of Rogue), also he can summon creatures to trigger traps. Clerics can cast summon spells as well as Find Traps. Passwall, Fly, Dimension Door let you avoid obvious traps.
4. Divination spells on both Cleric and Wizard to find their way there safely. Invisibility and Silence continues to be of use after one casting. Passwall and Fly let you get their easier.
5. Invisibility and Silence continues to help. When all else fails break out the Charms, Fireballs, and SoD/SoS. Clerics cast Divine Power and kill everything.
6. SoD/SoS for the win.
7. Teleport/Wind Walk/Plane Shift/Word of Recall

Total Spells required: 10 at most. At the levels we are talking about(where it becomes a problem, it isn't at low levels), the Wizard has enough spells/scrolls/wands to finish another adventure(or two) of the same type again before resting.

That is, assuming they don't bypass most of the encounters with a Scrye/Teleport/SoD/Teleport out.

And it's not like any of the uses of these spells are particularly "creative". They are all being used for precisely what they are meant to be used for.

As for flying, this is so completely situational as to be pointless. Being able to do something once or twice a day is no match for being able to do something at will, without equipment, without having rested for eight hours, or having the time to read it off a scroll, or whatever.

As I mention above, for the purposes of 90% of all D&D adventures "twice a day" is equal to "at will". Every once in a while you run into an adventure that requires you to Fly 3 times a day and you are forced to rely on a skill to get passed.

It's really for that 10% of the time that you keep your companions around. Someone has to jump over the pit and throw the rope back to you after you've used all your fly and short ranged teleportation for the day.

Yes, people can game the system to make uber wizards. But that doesn't mean there's a problem with the system.

I'm not sure "gaming the system" is what is going on. Just by picking spells I think will be useful at every level I can outclass the rest of the party. I don't count that as "gaming the system".

It's simply a problem when a game let's you play the BMX Bandit and Angel Summoner in the same group. If you haven't seen the video, do a search on YouTube. I'm too lazy to find it right now. "Angel Summoner and the BMX Bandit"

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

If you haven't seen the video, do a search on YouTube. I'm too lazy to find it right now. "Angel Summoner and the BMX Bandit"

That has made my week!

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Certainly, if I suspect I might be fighting a 600-year-old lich or an ancient dragon, I'm going to at least make an extra stop at the Sam's club to pick up some beef jerky and a 16 gp cold iron morningstar.

My current gripe seems to be that I don't think a cold iron morningstar should be available at Sam's Club.

That would be bizarre because orcs don't have special immunities. However, I will observe that Aragorn has an enchanted mithril sword, and he has also been observed to use a bow as well as a dagger. Perhaps Mr. Aragorn would have something to say about you insulting his play style.

A magical sword, a dagger, and a ranged weapon makes sense. When you add in the cold iron morningstar, the ghost touch sword, and a half dozen others I start to feel less like a hero and more like an exterminator. In the literature, a magical sword tends to be good enough for people. You don't put that thing away and use something else, as a general rule.

In Dragonslayer, they craft a +1 keen bane vs. dragons lance to fight one specific foe.

Exactly. Singular enemy. Singular doodad for killing it. It's not just common knowledge for every Tom, Dick, and Tanis that you need to get yourself one o' them lances.

D&D owes a lot to Jack Vance's stories...

And that may be the problem. Outside of these boards, I've never met or talked to anyone who read any of those. For that matter, besides myself I know only one person who ever heard of Vance. If D&D is trying to be a mass market game, why cling to tropes that no one knows?

I run with cats who have read Tolkien, Eddings, and maybe some Brooks when we were kids. In high school and college we bumped into Kay, Gaiman, Dunsany, Howard, Lieber, etc. D&D does a pretty poor job of simulating those kinds of worlds, especially where equipment and magic are concerned (rituals are a big step in the right direction, though, from what I've seen).

I like many of the mechanics in D&D, but some just really throw me out of the scenario every time they come up because they don't fit narrative logic. My limited 4e experience indicates that they've thrown out or minimized many of the ones that don't fit with my preferences. Maybe I'll get into a game again and discover it's not so bad.

Or maybe I'm just suffering through another phase where I get irritable with the rules of gaming systems. I stepped out of WoW recently, too.

 

[TwinBahamut]

I mean, Jack the Giant Killer kills one giant.

Actually, in some variations of the story "Jack the Giant Killer" he kills at least seven. Of course, he kills them all with totally different strategies and tools, from a pit trap to a cloak of invisibility and a magic trumpet. I guess that just goes to show that in folklore there is no such thing as a single thing you need to do in order to kill every monster of the same kind. Heroes of myth killed with their wits, not by exploiting well-known metallic allergies...

 

[pawsplay]

My current gripe seems to be that I don't think a cold iron morningstar should be available at Sam's Club.

Perhaps. Then again, maybe cold iron should just mean "weapons made of steel or iron," as the phrase is often used.

A magical sword, a dagger, and a ranged weapon makes sense. When you add in the cold iron morningstar, the ghost touch sword, and a half dozen others I start to feel less like a hero and more like an exterminator. In the literature, a magical sword tends to be good enough for people. You don't put that thing away and use something else, as a general rule.

PCs are exterminators, among other things. They begin as dire rat exterminators and end up as pit fiend exterminators. For the most part, a PC is going to use his best weapon. He is likely to reach into the toolkit only when he needs a special tool for a special job. For instance, a barbarian with a +2 flaming greatsword is probably going to keep using it against low DR opponents, because the damage and to-hits bonuses compensate. On the other hand, the lich may be less impressed.

Exactly. Singular enemy. Singular doodad for killing it. It's not just common knowledge for every Tom, Dick, and Tanis that you need to get yourself one o' them lances.

Correct, but a D&D adventurer encounters this sort of problem several times a year. They don't have the task of hunting the last known great dragon in Europe, they line in a world where a dragon might move in any time local heroes or giants move out.

And that may be the problem. Outside of these boards, I've never met or talked to anyone who read any of those. For that matter, besides myself I know only one person who ever heard of Vance. If D&D is trying to be a mass market game, why cling to tropes that no one knows?

First of all, because those tropes are well known through D&D. Second, those tropes have expanded and magnified thanks to the CRPG industry and then the MMO world. Third, those tropes are not unique to Vance, they are simply present in Vance while less present in Lewis's Narnia. As the trope of specialized magic items appears in Vance's Dying Earth, Tolkien's The Hobbit and LOTR, Watt-Evans Esthshar books, and the mythological stories of Perseus and Hercules, they are pretty well-grounded.

The "golfbag" trope is less common in works like Lackey's romantic fantasy, the Arthurian tales, and the like. But those aren't swords-and-sorcery stories, so it's not surprising that the tropes of swords-and-sorcery are less prominent in other kinds of high fantasy.

I run with cats who have read Tolkien, Eddings, and maybe some Brooks when we were kids. In high school and college we bumped into Kay, Gaiman, Dunsany, Howard, Lieber, etc. D&D does a pretty poor job of simulating those kinds of worlds, especially where equipment and magic are concerned (rituals are a big step in the right direction, though, from what I've seen).

In the People of the Black Circle, Conan fights a spell-hurling sorcerer and survives because of a spell-absorbing belt or vest he finds by happenstance. Dunansy's stories are practically monty haul campaigns.

You are correct that Lieber's Lankhmar has less magic and fewer monsters. That would be because of different campaign assumptions, rather than because the concept itself is illogical. If the Gray Mouser had and needed more magic items, he would certainly use them.

I like many of the mechanics in D&D, but some just really throw me out of the scenario every time they come up because they don't fit narrative logic. My limited 4e experience indicates that they've thrown out or minimized many of the ones that don't fit with my preferences. Maybe I'll get into a game again and discover it's not so bad.

Or maybe I'm just suffering through another phase where I get irritable with the rules of gaming systems. I stepped out of WoW recently, too.

4e changes some things, but remains much the same. In fact, in some ways it is, in my view, worse. The idea that there is +2 starleather and such lying here and there reminds me too much Final Fantasy and its item slots and sockets. "Golfbags", while cumbersome in some ways, are reasonable in a world where magic turns the pages of history.