Variant Wizard Spellbook

[Tovec]

Amusing.

[Clap, Clap, Clap]

So, why don't we take a look at the monk.

I'd rather not. Not because your arguments were logical and excellent but because the monk is a-typical. If you wanted to bring up the rogue then we could have a more accurate example, but monks are odd in terms of creation, role and power.

Oh no, he doesn't have to buy weapons or armor! How dare those designers make a class that gets Improved Unarmed Strike for free at 1st level, and then increases in damage to more than a two-handed sword! And heavens forbid, he gets another feat at 1st level (Stunning Fist) that normal characters can qualify for until they at eighth level! Eighth level! Even higher for those people with medium or low BAB.

But he isn't done! Oh no, the overpowered monk who doesn't have to spend any gold on anything gets a THIRD bonus feat, plus the one or two every character get at 1st level!

Oh, that poor, poor fighter who only has feats as his schtik.

Yes, and many of those feats will help with the power balance and giving the fighter more options in combat. They will never help the fighter get more in line with the wizard in terms of power or options but they do narrow the gap.

The monk gets all these abilities but has few ways of improving them, tuning them, altering them and making them better. Especially in these ways they are an under effective fighter. But that is okay, monks aren't meant to be fighters. They're meant to be 5th members of the party. The closest role they fall into from a design standpoint is rogue but just like the rogue they lack the raw power and adaptability afforded to casters.

Oh, that monk and his high armor? Let's say a monk could have 18 dex and 18 wis. That's AC 18, pretty nice. A fighter could have 18 dex and AC 14, not horrible. A wizard could have AC 22 if he has 18 dex, shield and mage armor.

And to top it off, the monk doesn't need armor, because he gets to add his Wisdom and Dexterity Modifier to his AC, while everyone else just gets Dexterity. He doesn't even lose his Wisdom mod when he is flat-footed! AND he gets more bonuses as he goes up in levels.

And he never, ever had to spend a single copper. That must be overpowered.

Not overpowered. Because he CAN'T effectively boost his power through money as the fighter (and wizard) can he gets left in the dust. I have long enjoyed monks but they aren't powerful. I like them because they ARE effective naked, they just aren't as effective when everyone else isn't naked too.

Well, now that I have finished with that little rant, characters in Pathfinder are expected to gain in wealth as they advance and they are expected to spend that wealth outfitting themselves with better items, weapons, armor, and miscellaneous gear throughout their entire adventuring career. Heaven forbid that the Wizard gets a few of the basic tools of his trade (spells) for free. No other class gets that! Except the Monk. And the Sorcerer. And the Bard. And the Cleric. And the Druid.

Wizard - caster
Sorcerer - caster
Cleric - caster
Druid - caster
Bard - caster
What do these all have in common?
As I've said, the monk isn't normal and I will not count.
I notice you didn't list rogue, ranger, paladin and fighter. All get other powers for free, true. But all must still spend more money to be effective - casters DON'T. A caster will be weakened without spending a silver, yes but they have a wide variety of spells to make up for it and unlike other classes they don't have to spend their gold to perform advanced maneuvers effectively.

Wealth by level guidelines were playtested and are considered to be appropriate, along with the Wizard gaining those two free spells at each of his levels. It is balanced, even if individual spells in specific circumstances are not (which you as DM are free to say don't exist in your campaign).

Just because it was playtested doesn't mean it is magically fixed. I can (but won't) go drag up examples showing how there are still improvements to be made. As I said earlier, yes pathfinder has closed the gap. I feel as though they closed it by making everything more powerful (to bring it in line with casters) instead of decreasing the power of things which are more powerful.

But having said all of this, if it is your campaign do what you want. Rule 0. Play the game your way. But do not try and convince the rest of us that something is a problem because you can't deal with and the rest of us can.

Master Arminas

Have I said you should change your game?
Please link me to when I said that. I have repeatedly said what my issue is and that I am looking for advice on that issue. Saying the issue doesn't exist doesn't help me.

Don't try and tell me that something is not a problem for you. It IS a problem for me. If you have a solution then great, if not it helps no one trying to convince me the issue I have been experiencing doesn't exist.

 

[master arminas]

I don't want sorcerers in place of wizards. I have played both and there are certainly roles for both and personalities for both. I think this is a silly thing to say (if the mods will allow) as I did originally say that sorcerers would be treated the same and lose all but 1 spell per spell level for free. Sorcerers would also get the spells a level later, but that is the drawback of spontaneous casting.

Oh boy, I missed this the first time around. Tovec, this is not a good idea at all. Terrible, in fact. One might even say horrendous. Sorcerers are already gaining their spells a level after a Wizard. You do realize they don't learn spells from scrolls, they simply know them. That is a good part of what being a spontaneous caster is.

And now you want to keep them gaining access to the spells behind a Wizard, while gaining one (1) [one!] spell known? Until they find a scroll they like and learn it? If you did this for my players, then the following week you wouldn't have any players. They would walk out en masse, even those who don't like playing sorcerers.

The implementation of this idea would utterly destroy the Sorcerer class. And I still don't get why you want to do this in the first place? If it is specific spells you are concerned about, hand out a list of spells that do not exist in your world! Or a list of those that do, and tell the players these are all that exist. But you don't wreck an entire class (or several classes) to fix a problem that quite frankly just isn't there. Not an expect anyone else to climb onto your bandwagon and cheer you on. It ain't happening, man.

If you are really having this much trouble with Sorcerers and Wizards and Clerics and Druids and Bards getting two many spells for free just go ahead and ban the classes. Play with only Barbarians, Fighters, Monks, Paladins, Rangers, and Rogues. That would solve all of your problems, now wouldn't it?

Master Arminas

 

[Bloodspoor]

I think I've only posted on this forum once before. It probably wasn't anything profound, so don't expect this to be either. Let me start by saying that I used to think wizards and sorcerers were a bit overpowered, but I've since changed my mind. At high levels, a wizard can destroy planets (albeit very unlikely) while fighters can only destroy armies (also very unlikely). I don't want to bash on your idea, but rather comment and give some constructive criticism. I'm using an app on iPad to create this, so I can't use the quote feature. Sorry for this. Bear with me.

Let me get this off my chest. How are sorcerers supposed to learn new spells? Are you going to create a new item that they can use to absorb spells from a spell book or do they learn spells normally as wizards do in your campaign? I'm mostly just curious as to how you planned on implementing this.

Also, let me get this out of the way. Mundane classes such as fighters and rogues get a lot of handouts in the form of loot. A scroll here or there isn't really much of a handout for mages especially since, as you've pointed out, they have an adequate number of spells already just from class levels. The difference here is that the average fighter doesn't rely on just one weapon. He's not committed to it and if he comes across something that suits him better, he's going to replace that dingy +2 frost dagger for a +2 longsword with flaming burst. Like a wizard, though he is probably going to hang onto that in case he comes across something immune to fire. Yes, his inventory may weigh him down more, but he also has a 16+ strength while the wiz has a meager 10 or maybe a 12 if he had good rolls. He can afford to carry more. But enough about wizard vs fighter.

What you want to know is how viable your campaign mod is. The short answer, as many have attempted to point out is that it's not. You came here asking for opinions on your proposed caster nerfs and have been I'm pretty certain, unanimously shunned, yet you still insist on showing us what makes your model so attractive. I must admit that I was intrigued by it at first, but I also assumed this was a mod for an all wizard campaign or something. That would be a very interesting campaign to be in as your goal as a group would be to increase your knowledge and spell library by traversing the globe.

Unfortunately, the real truth is that this will only drive players from being casters in your campaign and you're going to throw something at your all fighter party that they just can't handle without that Mage. As GM, it should be your goal to make all your players feel useful. If the Mage is taking all the glory, give that monster some good old magic armor in the form of spell resistance, steal his only spell book, or make the scrolls in your world cost more to buy. There are tons of ways to nerf players who are abusing a specific mechanic without throwing a wrench in the system.

If all of this still doesn't convince you, let's try to tweak it a bit. How about instead of giving them only one spell every two levels, try giving them one spell each level. Perhaps make copying spells an impossibility, where only a tutor can teach you the spells. Maybe they can copy spells and they get spells at the normal rate, but only one of those spells is from their studies (learned instantly), but the other is learned from a teacher in a far off land. This can provide hooks to get the party headed where you want them to go. How about they need to actually study that other spell, which takes a number of hours to learn equal to 10 x spell level. Reading more than 2 hours a day while adventuring wouldn't be feasible, but by sacrificing all but cantrip spells for the day, he could study up to 10 hours in a single day. This will keep them from instantly having an answer to an impending problem or at least prevent them from having too many solutions right away. Things like this are still a bit oppressive, but far less than what you suggest.

One last thought, with your method, I believe you're going to find other problems come up. Your mages are going to be very demanding about getting new spells and it may detract from the mundane classes' sense of adventuring if all they're ever doing is going to visit some arcane library in a forgotten place so that their wizard doesn't keep spamming fireballs. Also, you may see MORE min/max characters because of this. That Mage that was going to take Displacement and Haste will probably go with the fan favorite 3rd level spell Fireball just so he can feel like he's contributing. Also, be careful when you push them, they may push back by taking things like Shapechange which can really ruin your day even with Pathfinder's limitations.

Shapechange
School transmutation (polymorph); Level druid 9, sorcerer/wizard 9
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, F (jade circlet worth 1,500 gp)
Range personal
Target you
Duration 10 min./level (D)

This spell allows you to take the form of a wide variety of creatures. This spell can function as alter self , beast form IV, elemental body IV , form of the dragon III , giant form II , and plant shape III depending on what form you take. You can change form once each round as a free action. The change takes place either immediately before your regular action or immediately after it, but not during the action.

Food for thought. Hope this helps you with your ultimate goals. Happy gaming!

 

[Tovec]

I think I've only posted on this forum once before. It probably wasn't anything profound, so don't expect this to be either. Let me start by saying that I used to think wizards and sorcerers were a bit overpowered, but I've since changed my mind. At high levels, a wizard can destroy planets (albeit very unlikely) while fighters can only destroy armies (also very unlikely). I don't want to bash on your idea, but rather comment and give some constructive criticism. I'm using an app on iPad to create this, so I can't use the quote feature. Sorry for this. Bear with me.

Let me get this off my chest. How are sorcerers supposed to learn new spells? Are you going to create a new item that they can use to absorb spells from a spell book or do they learn spells normally as wizards do in your campaign? I'm mostly just curious as to how you planned on implementing this.

As my ideas seemed very unwelcome I haven't really felt the need to refresh them or modify them with minor things like how I would do the sorcerer and divine casters. I have come up with ideas but the main issue I saw was dealing with the iconic mage first - the wizard.

Also, let me get this out of the way. Mundane classes such as fighters and rogues get a lot of handouts in the form of loot. A scroll here or there isn't really much of a handout for mages especially since, as you've pointed out, they have an adequate number of spells already just from class levels. The difference here is that the average fighter doesn't rely on just one weapon. He's not committed to it and if he comes across something that suits him better, he's going to replace that dingy +2 frost dagger for a +2 longsword with flaming burst. Like a wizard, though he is probably going to hang onto that in case he comes across something immune to fire. Yes, his inventory may weigh him down more, but he also has a 16+ strength while the wiz has a meager 10 or maybe a 12 if he had good rolls. He can afford to carry more. But enough about wizard vs fighter.

The primary difference I guess is that it would force the wizard to spend money on their equipment and actually rely on loot to boost their power, as every other class already does. Yes a fighter can pick up a +2 frost dagger instead of his +2 longsword and use it. He doesn't get the benefits from his feat tree selected but yes he CAN use it. A wizard can pick up a scroll and learn it. Use it no problem. He may suffer if he has spell penetration and what not but even then he has several spells of each level within that school to learn before it becomes a sub-par choice. Either way I think this point is lost to me.

Unfortunately, the real truth is that this will only drive players from being casters in your campaign and you're going to throw something at your all fighter party that they just can't handle without that Mage. As GM, it should be your goal to make all your players feel useful. If the Mage is taking all the glory, give that monster some good old magic armor in the form of spell resistance, steal his only spell book, or make the scrolls in your world cost more to buy. There are tons of ways to nerf players who are abusing a specific mechanic without throwing a wrench in the system.

If anything less casters in my campaign would be welcomed, but not for the reasons assumed.

What you want to know is how viable your campaign mod is. The short answer, as many have attempted to point out is that it's not. You came here asking for opinions on your proposed caster nerfs and have been I'm pretty certain, unanimously shunned, yet you still insist on showing us what makes your model so attractive. I must admit that I was intrigued by it at first, but I also assumed this was a mod for an all wizard campaign or something. That would be a very interesting campaign to be in as your goal as a group would be to increase your knowledge and spell library by traversing the globe.

Less this.

If all of this still doesn't convince you, let's try to tweak it a bit. How about instead of giving them only one spell every two levels, try giving them one spell each level. Perhaps make copying spells an impossibility, where only a tutor can teach you the spells. Maybe they can copy spells and they get spells at the normal rate, but only one of those spells is from their studies (learned instantly), but the other is learned from a teacher in a far off land. This can provide hooks to get the party headed where you want them to go. How about they need to actually study that other spell, which takes a number of hours to learn equal to 10 x spell level. Reading more than 2 hours a day while adventuring wouldn't be feasible, but by sacrificing all but cantrip spells for the day, he could study up to 10 hours in a single day. This will keep them from instantly having an answer to an impending problem or at least prevent them from having too many solutions right away. Things like this are still a bit oppressive, but far less than what you suggest.

Certainly, more this. XP For you! I kept saying I looked for suggestions.

One last thought, with your method, I believe you're going to find other problems come up. Your mages are going to be very demanding about getting new spells and it may detract from the mundane classes' sense of adventuring if all they're ever doing is going to visit some arcane library in a forgotten place so that their wizard doesn't keep spamming fireballs. Also, you may see MORE min/max characters because of this. That Mage that was going to take Displacement and Haste will probably go with the fan favorite 3rd level spell Fireball just so he can feel like he's contributing. Also, be careful when you push them, they may push back by taking things like Shapechange which can really ruin your day even with Pathfinder's limitations.

Anymore demanding than that pesky fighter, pally, ranger, barb, or rogue that needs a new weapon, new armor, new wonderous item, etc.?

Yes, they'll be spamming fireballs, but the fighter can only swing with his sword one type of way over and over until the enemy is dead.

All it means is that they have to find and use stuff instead of being given it on a silver platter. I'm not opposed to giving them more spells for leveling but I feel they do get too many.

Shapechange
School transmutation (polymorph); Level druid 9, sorcerer/wizard 9
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, F (jade circlet worth 1,500 gp)
Range personal
Target you
Duration 10 min./level (D)

This spell allows you to take the form of a wide variety of creatures. This spell can function as alter self , beast form IV, elemental body IV , form of the dragon III , giant form II , and plant shape III depending on what form you take. You can change form once each round as a free action. The change takes place either immediately before your regular action or immediately after it, but not during the action.

Yes, but at level 9 spells there are worse things to deal with. It has been suggested (not here but other places) that I should outright ban wizards from taking 9th level spells and instead make them ALL quest related.

Food for thought. Hope this helps you with your ultimate goals. Happy gaming!

It does. Thank you, this is what I was looking for from the start. XP for you!

 

[Aaron L]

First off, I want to apologize for the frosty tone of the responses to your idea on this thread. I didn't want to set things off like that and I'm sorry if I did.

But I still don't understand, WHY is it you want to force your Wizard players to spend their money on equipment the way a Fighter does? Wizards DO have to spend their money on equipment... but their equipment is their spellbooks. They don't typically spend much money on things like magic weapons or armor, but a good Wizard should ALSO be spending some money on wands and staves and scrolls and the like. How is a Wizard spending his money on offensive and defensive spells any different than a Fighter spending his/her money on weapons and armor? The only difference is that they are all called SPELLS for a Wizard instead of being segregated into different categories. A Wizard's spells are his weapons, armor, and everything else combined. I don't know if there is some kind of disconnect somewhere that's telling you it's somehow different for a Wizard or something, or what. What you're proposing for your Wizards is the same as telling your Fighters that they have to spend their Feats to be proficient with each weapon from the Martial list instead of getting all of them as part of their class abilities like the book tells them they do.

That's why everyone here is objecting to your proposal, because a Wizard has nothing BUT his spells... without them he is nothing but a Commoner with high Intelligence.

If you're seriously having problems with casters dominating your game for some reason, a good solution is to not allow single-classed casters, and require all spellcasters to multiclass as something else, with no more than half of their levels being in a pure magic-using class.

I've seriously never come across a problem with Wizards, or any other casting class, dominating the game, except for ONE time, right after 3rd Edition came out, and I think your problem MIGHT be he same one we had. Our DM was allowing our party to pull out of literally ANY situation and rest for a full 8 hours ANY TIME WE WANTED TO, so the casters had no reason NOT to go into any situation guns blazing alpha-striking anything and everything. And yes, our melee combatants felt pretty useless, because by the time Joe Fighter had run up to get into the fight, the Mighty Wizard had literally vaporized the entire opposition, and then called for the party to retreat and rest for the night so we could go back into the dungeon (or whatever) to do the same thing in the NEXT ROOM. The DM gave us no penalties of consequences for pulling out and coming back over and over again. And in THAT situation, and that situation ONLY, were the casters dominating everything.


Once our DM realized that he needed to put some consequences in for pulling that kind of stunt, like reinforcements for the enemy, time-sensitive adventures, and enemy attacks while our party was trying to rest and recover spells, did our spellcasters realize that they couldn't get away with unloading everything they had in every fight. Not only THAT, but our melee characters got time to shine BIG-TIME during those attacks while the casters were trying to recover their spells, because the casters were totally spent and the Fighters ended up saving their butts every time. It didn't take very long for the Wizard to realize he needed to be as cautious as the Fighters and hold back on the big guns until the situation DEMANDED the heavy artillery, and the game became a LOT more enjoyable for everyone concerned, the Wizard included, because he was starting to get bored with just nuking everything in sight every single combat. (Seriously, it was just one guy doing it, and he only kept doing it because he thought the DM WANTED him to do it because he kept allowing it... he thought the DM LIKED it and was encouraging him to keep doing it, simply BECAUSE the DM kept allowing it. It was just a miscommunication.)

Does that sound like the problem you've been having? Are your casters opening up with everything they've got in every fight and rendering the opposition down into glowing, radioactive soup-stock? If that's the case then it's no WONDER you're frustrated with magic-users. You just need to not allow then to go into every single fight totally fresh with a full spell list.

If that's NOT the case, well, I don't know what to tell you. It's your game, and if the magic-users are making you pull out your hair in frustration because they're always crazy-prepared and always have JUST the right spell ready for EVERY situation... well, maybe you need to take a closer look at exactly what spells your Wizard actually has prepared. Because, after getting past that initial new-to-the-system NUKE EVERYTHING phase, our Wizards and Clerics usually had 1/4 to 1/3 of their spells left over after most adventures because they simply weren't useful to the situation, I've never seen a game where a Wizard used every single spell he had prepared unless he just loaded every single spell-slot with nuke after nuke after nuke. And yeah, they DID do that, at first, but after a while literally EVERYONE who ever played a caster in our group got sick of being nothing but artillery and started taking utility spells in addition to attack spells, and had a lot more fun with the game when they did. After once or twice when they pulled out a KNOCK spell when we came across a door we couldn't open any other way, or had some nifty utility spell that made a puzzle or trap a LOT easier to solve, they realized the fun of being versatile instead of just being unholy glowing nuclear death all the time.


Now, I'm not saying that casters won't eventually be the most powerful characters in the game. They WILL be. It's always been that way, always has been and always will be, ever since 1st Edition, ever since OD&D. It's the nature of the game, and the nature of the GENRE; Merlin amazing the Knights of the Round Table with powers and abilities that none of the Knights could even dream of, and Gandalf standing on the bridge in front of the Balrog yelling "FLEE YOU FOOLS! Swords are of no use here!" and all that kind of stuff.

BUT, since it IS a game and everyone needs to get a roughly equal opportunity to contribute, it's not NEARLY as bad as it is in the fiction and mythology. Hell, THIS version of the game is LEAGUES better at it than 1E was. Fighters are HUNDREDS of times more capable of doing cool stuff in relation to the Wizard now. I just don't get where you say that the Wizard is ALWAYS better than the Fighter and ALWAYS going to win a fight. Yeah, at 1st level a Wizard can have Sleep. And any Fighter is going to have a more than equal chance of shrugging the spell off. Even a Magic Missile that always hits and does damage won't be able to drop a Fighter in one hit, and it's a DUMB Fighter that won't have a bow and be able to drop a Wizard in one hit, that he has a better than even chance of pulling off, with almost an indefinite number of chances to try again, only his ammunition limiting him. The Wizard has 3 spells if he's specialized in a school, the Fighter has attacks with his weapon until he's DEAD. So yeah, each of the Wizard's individual spells are more powerful than each of the Fighter's individual attacks with his weapon, because it's a little hard to balance out the 3 spells of the Wizard with the theoretically unlimited attacks of the Fighter, but they've managed to pull it off pretty well.

But I'm babbling now. I just want to stress that spells are ALL A WIZARD HAS, and he is designed to be VERSATILE with them. Whereas a Fighter has his main weapon, backup weapon, armor, shield, and utility equipment to play with, a Wizard has... just his spells. And every spell you take away from that Wizard is like taking away a swing of the Fighters weapon. And you really shouldn't FORCE a Wizard to spend his money in a certain way, buying a certain type of equipment, any more than you would force a Fighter to buy a certain weapon or armor because you thought it would be cooler if he used an axe or a glaive instead of a sword. Every time the Wizard spends a gold piece buying a new spell or scroll, he IS buying equipment, just like the Fighter buying a new weapon or adding an enhancement to his armor.

Because a Wizards spells ARE his weapon, armor, shield, lockpicks, musical instrument, and maybe even his backpack, food, and water, too!


But it's your game, and I'm not there and I don't (and can't) understand the problems you're having, I can only relate to your problems through experiences I've had in my own games. I think what everyone here is mostly trying to say is: take a second and think, is the problem you're having really what you think it is, is it really that Wizards can have a lot of spells in their spellbook, or is it really something else? Because, collectively, even with the worst min/maxing, power-gaming player I've ever HEARD of, none of the rest of us have ever had a problem with a Wizard KNOWING too many spells. Because, when it comes down to it, a Wizard can know every single spell in the book (and I've played in SEVERAL games where our characters became so rich and powerful that the DM just GAVE EVERY WIZARD CHARACTER access to EVERY SINGLE SPELL IN THE PHB, WITHOUT it upsetting the game one bit) but that same Wizard can still only have maybe 5 or 6 spells of any level prepared at any one time. And unless something fishy is going on, SOME of those spells simply just AREN'T going to be useful every single time.

 

[master arminas]

Right you are, Aaron.

I would just like to add one more thing: the Wizard needs equipment just as much as the rest of the party. Aaron L already mentions staves and wands, but the arcane casty-types need Rings of Protection, Cloaks of Resistances, Headbands of Vast Intelligence, Amulets of Natural Armor, Bracers of Armor, Robes of the Archmagi, etc., etc., etc.

They need these items as bad as the fighter needs his +4 Mithril Full-Plate and +5 Ghost Touch Keen Holy Greatsword.

Why? They have spells, why do they need items?

Because spells are a finite resource that have to be husbanded carefully. Sure, a well built Wizard can pretty much duplicate all of the normal equipment--but those spells have durations. If he does that to save gold, he's putting the party on the clock, knowing that if they don't finish and hole up in x minutes he is gonna be one soft target just waiting for a backstab.

With equipment appropriate for his level, that reduces the spells he has to use to defend himself and lets the Wizard prepare utility spells, save or suck spells, and blasting spells to his heart's content.

So, there are a lot of things a Wizard spends his hard-earned cash for, and he has to make difficult choices, because if he wants more than the two free spells per level, he has to cut back on the gear that everyone else is packing. But hey, that is the price of power.

Master Arminas

 

[Tovec]

But I still don't understand, WHY is it you want to force your Wizard players to spend their money on equipment the way a Fighter does? Wizards DO have to spend their money on equipment... but their equipment is their spellbooks.

Which, as a previous post showed, by 20th level that consists of 30 gp by 20th level, a drop in the bucket.

How is a Wizard spending his money on offensive and defensive spells any different than a Fighter spending his/her money on weapons and armor?

Mostly because wizards aren't required to spend money to get vastly better at doing what they're doing, fighters are.

A Wizard's spells are his weapons, armor, and everything else combined.

What you're proposing for your Wizards is the same as telling your Fighters that they have to spend their Feats to be proficient with each weapon from the Martial list instead of getting all of them as part of their class abilities like the book tells them they do.

Exotic Weapon Proficiency.
Plus, I haven't said (at any time) they have to spend money to learn ALL their spells. They'd get (at least) 1 per 2 levels. More at first, more if they specialize. Based on suggestions from here, I have considered giving them 1 for 1 for free.

That's why everyone here is objecting to your proposal, because a Wizard has nothing BUT his spells... without them he is nothing but a Commoner with high Intelligence.

Think on low level or trainee wizards from stories. They shouldn't be much more than commoners with high int. Similarly, fighters aren't as good at killing things at low levels, better than wizards but certainly not veteran soldiers or legionnaires.

If you're seriously having problems with casters dominating your game for some reason, a good solution is to not allow single-classed casters, and require all spellcasters to multiclass as something else, with no more than half of their levels being in a pure magic-using class.

That's an option I guess.

I've seriously never come across a problem with Wizards, or any other casting class, dominating the game, except for ONE time, right after 3rd Edition came out, and I think your problem MIGHT be he same one we had. Our DM was allowing our party to pull out of literally ANY situation and rest for a full 8 hours ANY TIME WE WANTED TO, so the casters had no reason NOT to go into any situation guns blazing alpha-striking anything and everything. And yes, our melee combatants felt pretty useless, because by the time Joe Fighter had run up to get into the fight, the Mighty Wizard had literally vaporized the entire opposition, and then called for the party to retreat and rest for the night so we could go back into the dungeon (or whatever) to do the same thing in the NEXT ROOM. The DM gave us no penalties of consequences for pulling out and coming back over and over again. And in THAT situation, and that situation ONLY, were the casters dominating everything.

What about situations where they burn through the whole dungeon because of foresight and knowledge of the creatures inside without having to leave and reinforce? More accurately, what about situations where the wizard is able to keep the party in the dungeon without having the opportunity of midnight attacks? There are several spells which stop this problem.

Does that sound like the problem you've been having? Are your casters opening up with everything they've got in every fight and rendering the opposition down into glowing, radioactive soup-stock? If that's the case then it's no WONDER you're frustrated with magic-users. You just need to not allow then to go into every single fight totally fresh with a full spell list.

No, it doesn't sound like the problem I've been having. My issue isn't with them nuking the world. Granted, it is a concern but it is not my root problem. My problem has to do with the choices or options that the wizard has. I have problems when they use 3 divination spells, teleport in, nuke everything, teleport out. I don't appreciate when the wizard single-handed decimates an army but my issue is when they act as a single person strike team. Reducing the number of spells they know and then forcing them to buy scrolls to learn said spells means they'll think twice before acquiring spells which make them god-awfully strong.

If that's NOT the case, well, I don't know what to tell you. It's your game, and if the magic-users are making you pull out your hair in frustration because they're always crazy-prepared and always have JUST the right spell ready for EVERY situation... well, maybe you need to take a closer look at exactly what spells your Wizard actually has prepared. Because, after getting past that initial new-to-the-system NUKE EVERYTHING phase, our Wizards and Clerics usually had 1/4 to 1/3 of their spells left over after most adventures because they simply weren't useful to the situation, I've never seen a game where a Wizard used every single spell he had prepared unless he just loaded every single spell-slot with nuke after nuke after nuke. And yeah, they DID do that, at first, but after a while literally EVERYONE who ever played a caster in our group got sick of being nothing but artillery and started taking utility spells in addition to attack spells, and had a lot more fun with the game when they did. After once or twice when they pulled out a KNOCK spell when we came across a door we couldn't open any other way, or had some nifty utility spell that made a puzzle or trap a LOT easier to solve, they realized the fun of being versatile instead of just being unholy glowing nuclear death all the time.

My problem is when magic is used as a front line option. It was heavily discussed in the detect magic vs illusions thread that a simple cantrip can find most things that are needed to be hiding. Spell durations are often very long for utility spells. While they may only prepare 1 or 2 a day, those spells can be more effective than a fighter or rogue's natural abilities. A knock spell, or item of knock, reduces the need for a rogue's ability to unlock doors. Invisibility and flight means a wizard can avoid being found and killed. Greater invisibility vastly outweighs the benefits from a stealth check.

Now, I'm not saying that casters won't eventually be the most powerful characters in the game. They WILL be. It's always been that way, always has been and always will be, ever since 1st Edition, ever since OD&D. It's the nature of the game, and the nature of the GENRE; Merlin amazing the Knights of the Round Table with powers and abilities that none of the Knights could even dream of, and Gandalf standing on the bridge in front of the Balrog yelling "FLEE YOU FOOLS! Swords are of no use here!" and all that kind of stuff.

Gandalf didn't go around throwing spells ALL THE TIME. He was also a much higher level than any of the people in the fellowship. I mean he was an "angel".
I've heard tales from editions prior to 3rd in which wizards had a MUCH harder time locating, learning and using spells. None of which significantly applies in 3rd. As 3rd is the only edition I am familiar, I'll stick to it for my examples. As Pathfinder is the base system I'm proposing the rule, I find points about 1e and OD&D to be moot.

I just don't get where you say that the Wizard is ALWAYS better than the Fighter and ALWAYS going to win a fight.

When I was saying ALWAYS better, I meant since 3rd which is where my knowledge source is based. I mean they ALWAYS kick butt vs other classes. Not that they have ALWAYS done it.

Yeah, at 1st level a Wizard can have Sleep. And any Fighter is going to have a more than equal chance of shrugging the spell off. <snip> The Wizard has 3 spells if he's specialized in a school, the Fighter has attacks with his weapon until he's DEAD.

That wizard can't prepare 3 sleeps? If (as you suggest) a fighter has a roughyl 50/50 chance of shrugging it off what is to stop the wizard from casting it again? At level 1, the fighter probably isn't doing much (per round) against the wizard either. That drops the chances over 3 rounds from 1/2 to 1/6 of not falling asleep? But yes, I'm babbling.

But I'm babbling now. I just want to stress that spells are ALL A WIZARD HAS, and he is designed to be VERSATILE with them.

It is this versatility I take exception to.

Whereas a Fighter has his main weapon, backup weapon, armor, shield, and utility equipment to play with, a Wizard has... just his spells.

Whereas a fighter has had to spend money on his main weapon, backup weapon, armor, shield and utility equipment to play with, a wizard has... just his spells.

any more than you would force a Fighter to buy a certain weapon or armor because you thought it would be cooler if he used an axe or a glaive instead of a sword.

IF and I stress, IF I said that the wizard had to take an illusion spell over a conjuration spell would this be a little bit true. I don't specify which spells they can take, nor do I pick their school.

Every time the Wizard spends a gold piece buying a new spell or scroll, he IS buying equipment, just like the Fighter buying a new weapon or adding an enhancement to his armor.

Yes but the wizard doesn't have to currently. He can very simply get away with spending no money on his equipment, or at least not having to spend money on his base mechanic - like a fighter or a rogue must.

I would just like to add one more thing: the Wizard needs equipment just as much as the rest of the party. Aaron L already mentions staves and wands, but the arcane casty-types need Rings of Protection, Cloaks of Resistances, Headbands of Vast Intelligence, Amulets of Natural Armor, Bracers of Armor, Robes of the Archmagi, etc., etc., etc.

Non-casters don't benefit from rings of protection, cloaks of resistance, belts of strength (and dex and con), amulets of natural armor, bracers of armor/actual armor, [insert misc. wondrous item here], etc.? I guess I've been making my characters wrong.

They need these items as bad as the fighter needs his +4 Mithril Full-Plate and +5 Ghost Touch Keen Holy Greatsword.

The fighter has to pay for his +4 mithril full-plate and his +5 ghost touch keen holy greatsword in addition to the stuff above. And .. see the next 2 quotes...

Why? They have spells, why do they need items?

Because a Wizards spells ARE his weapon, armor, shield, lockpicks, musical instrument, and maybe even his backpack, food, and water, too!

And a fighter isn't his weapons, a rogue isn't his lockpicks. They need to invest in such things.

With equipment appropriate for his level, that reduces the spells he has to use to defend himself and lets the Wizard prepare utility spells, save or suck spells, and blasting spells to his heart's content.

Leaving him more spells left over. Increasing the number of save or suck(or save or die), or blasting, or teleport, or divination, or whatever he wants. Once again, my issue is the vast array of options each of which turning a wizard from a simple commoner into a master-whatever he wants to be at that time.

 

[master arminas]

Think on low level or trainee wizards from stories. They shouldn't be much more than commoners with high int. Similarly, fighters aren't as good at killing things at low levels, better than wizards but certainly not veteran soldiers or legionnaires.

At low level, wizards are the easiest thing in the game to kill. It has been like that since 1st edition AD&D, and is partly because of the sheer power they can generate at high levels.

No, it doesn't sound like the problem I've been having. My issue isn't with them nuking the world. Granted, it is a concern but it is not my root problem. My problem has to do with the choices or options that the wizard has. I have problems when they use 3 divination spells, teleport in, nuke everything, teleport out. I don't appreciate when the wizard single-handed decimates an army but my issue is when they act as a single person strike team. Reducing the number of spells they know and then forcing them to buy scrolls to learn said spells means they'll think twice before acquiring spells which make them god-awfully strong.

And how does your proposed method of making them buy the scrolls to learn these spells stop that problem? If they are high enough level, if they want to spend the money, and if they want to use this tactic, then they will still do so.

My problem is when magic is used as a front line option. It was heavily discussed in the detect magic vs illusions thread that a simple cantrip can find most things that are needed to be hiding. Spell durations are often very long for utility spells. While they may only prepare 1 or 2 a day, those spells can be more effective than a fighter or rogue's natural abilities. A knock spell, or item of knock, reduces the need for a rogue's ability to unlock doors. Invisibility and flight means a wizard can avoid being found and killed. Greater invisibility vastly outweighs the benefits from a stealth check.

Boo-hoo. Magic changes the game. Hello! It has been that way since Gygax first wrote the rules.

Gandalf didn't go around throwing spells ALL THE TIME. He was also a much higher level than any of the people in the fellowship. I mean he was an "angel".
I've heard tales from editions prior to 3rd in which wizards had a MUCH harder time locating, learning and using spells. None of which significantly applies in 3rd. As 3rd is the only edition I am familiar, I'll stick to it for my examples. As Pathfinder is the base system I'm proposing the rule, I find points about 1e and OD&D to be moot.

1st edition AD&D and the even older Basic, Expert, etc. Sets are the foundation of the game. Wizards have always been the single most powerful high level character. They pay for this by being riducously easy to kill, cripple, or render useless at lower levels. To understand why things are the way they are, it helps to understand where the game started and why it has evolved.

It is this versatility I take exception to.

So don't allow Wizards in your game at all. Because your 'fix' to this problem doesn't fix the problem you seem to be having.

Non-casters don't benefit from rings of protection, cloaks of resistance, belts of strength (and dex and con), amulets of natural armor, bracers of armor/actual armor, [insert misc. wondrous item here], etc.? I guess I've been making my characters wrong.

If you are going to twist my words, you could quote the entire section. Unless you deliberately attempting to be obtuse. I said the following:

I would just like to add one more thing: the Wizard needs equipment just as much as the rest of the party. Aaron L already mentions staves and wands, but the arcane casty-types need Rings of Protection, Cloaks of Resistances, Headbands of Vast Intelligence, Amulets of Natural Armor, Bracers of Armor, Robes of the Archmagi, etc., etc., etc.

YOU are the one who keeps insisting that the Wizard doesn't need to buy equipment. I did point out (see the bolded text in the quote above) that the Wizard needs magical equipment just like the rest of the party.

Leaving him more spells left over. Increasing the number of save or suck(or save or die), or blasting, or teleport, or divination, or whatever he wants. Once again, my issue is the vast array of options each of which turning a wizard from a simple commoner into a master-whatever he wants to be at that time.

In which case it seems like your problem is not with how many spells a Wizard gets, you have a problem that he has any spells that change your pre-conceived notions of the game. Dude, magic is a game-changer; it breaks the rules and it does allow for . . . (wait for it) . . . magical effects that exceed what is humanly (or elvenly or dwarvenly) possible. If it is really this much of problem then just ban all spellcasting classes in your game.

Or, maybe, you can adapt and deal with a Wizard's spells and versatility in a reasonable fashion that doesn't destroy the class and the fun a player is suppossed to have. Either way, it is your game, do what you want. Just don't be suprised if you wind up with no players once you royallly piss them off by ruining their fun.

Master Arminas

 

[IronWolf]

Mostly because wizards aren't required to spend money to get vastly better at doing what they're doing, fighters are.

A wizard that doesn't spend money is going to be trivial to hit at higher levels, have a hard time getting through spell resistance, have lower spell DCs and probably fail a lot of saves. Not spending gold as a wizard is not without its drawbacks.

What about situations where they burn through the whole dungeon because of foresight and knowledge of the creatures inside without having to leave and reinforce? More accurately, what about situations where the wizard is able to keep the party in the dungeon without having the opportunity of midnight attacks? There are several spells which stop this problem.

They as in the party? More power to them if the wizard cast a divination spell or used knowledge checks to help the rest of the party be more effective. I doubt a wizard that spent zero gold is going to be able to "burn" through a dungeon of any moderate length without help from the rest of his or her party.

Sure the wizard can provide some extra-dimensional spaces for the party to rest in the dungeon. I don't think a dungeon is going to stay static during that time and rest themselves. They will call up reinforcements, they will try to determine where the intruders were last seen and strengthen defenses. Maybe even get some low-level casters of their own up to cast some detect magics to help narrow their location down. They might get their 8 hours of rest, but I suspect the environment will have changed during that time.

My issue isn't with them nuking the world. Granted, it is a concern but it is not my root problem. My problem has to do with the choices or options that the wizard has. I have problems when they use 3 divination spells, teleport in, nuke everything, teleport out. I don't appreciate when the wizard single-handed decimates an army but my issue is when they act as a single person strike team.

If they are to the point where they are using "fry and scry" tactics then they likely are high enough level to have some reputation. And folks they consider adversaries are likely high enough level and intelligent enough to take some precautions. There are lots of tactics that the enemy NPCs might have put in place to either outright avoid these types of ambush or readily escape if PCs show up in their feast hall.

And really, if this wizard that spent no gold during his leveling up teleports in he's getting maybe one round off before he is crippled by adequately geared enemy NPCs. I mean the wizard is going to be super easy to hit and have a tough time making saves that count.

If the wizard brought his buddies with him, then it sounds like they are providing a valuable purpose.

A knock spell, or item of knock, reduces the need for a rogue's ability to unlock doors. Invisibility and flight means a wizard can avoid being found and killed.

Shoot, a strong fighter or barbarian gets around locked doors too.

Again if a wizard is up to invisibility, greater invisibility and flight then the folks he is fighting likely have level appropriate counter measures against such tactics.

That wizard can't prepare 3 sleeps? If (as you suggest) a fighter has a roughyl 50/50 chance of shrugging it off what is to stop the wizard from casting it again? At level 1, the fighter probably isn't doing much (per round) against the wizard either. That drops the chances over 3 rounds from 1/2 to 1/6 of not falling asleep? But yes, I'm babbling.

Sleep takes a full round to cast. If the wizard tries to cast this in a one-on-one fight as you seem to be describing above the wizard will need a concentration check. It is really all going to come down to the the dice, one good hit by the fighter and the wizard is dead. One good concentration check and a bad save by the fighter and he's asleep. I'm not seeing either one as particularly overpowered in the above scenario.

Whereas a fighter has had to spend money on his main weapon, backup weapon, armor, shield and utility equipment to play with, a wizard has... just his spells.

Covered this above, but again - a wizard that doesn't spend his gold is going to be trivial to hit at higher levels, have a hard time getting through spell resistance, have lower spell DCs and probably fail a lot of saves.

Yes but the wizard doesn't have to currently. He can very simply get away with spending no money on his equipment, or at least not having to spend money on his base mechanic - like a fighter or a rogue must.

A wizard that doesn't spend some money on some scrolls and such simply isn't going to be able to accomplish all the feats you've described above - clearing entire dungeons in one fell swoop, etc, etc.

 

[Tovec]

A wizard that doesn't spend money is going to be trivial to hit at higher levels, have a hard time getting through spell resistance, have lower spell DCs and probably fail a lot of saves. Not spending gold as a wizard is not without its drawbacks.

My point was that all classes have to spend money on gear.

1A. The fighter has to spend money on gear to do his primary thing.
1B. That the wizard doesn't. He just casts. Naked.
2. If the fighter has to spend 30 k gold to bring up his numbers and the wizard has to spend 0 k in the same measure that it is unfair.
3. That the wizard needs more "rings of protection,etc." than the fighter then I highly disagree. ALL classes need these basic protection items. Wizards are the ones who get more gold to spend on them because they get their bigger spells for free vs the fighter who has to pay an exponential rate to copy it - at higher levels.

Once again, I never said zero gold while doing a dungeon or any other scenario that follows later. So I'm not going to address those individually.

My point was that the wizard can create extra-dimensional spaces, reinforcements or not, to hide out in and the non-casters can't. A wizard can make these extra-dimensional places in addition to throwing fireballs, casting divination (to know what spells to prepare or what to expect later), and any other number of contingency and utility effects. FOR FREE!

If they are to the point where they are using "fry and scry" tactics then they likely are high enough level to have some reputation. And folks they consider adversaries are likely high enough level and intelligent enough to take some precautions. There are lots of tactics that the enemy NPCs might have put in place to either outright avoid these types of ambush or readily escape if PCs show up in their feast hall.

Yes there are a lot of tactics the party could encounter if the enemy is at the same level and without going into a huge side tangent - the party can become annoyed if the enemy constantly uses their own Wizard related tricks to avoid the fight every time.

Sidenote: The whole "reputation" thing only arises if they leave survivors, which is often unlikely, or if they're being watched already.

If the wizard brought his buddies with him, then it sounds like they are providing a valuable purpose.

Which is great if the party can perform a valuable function instead of wizard casting scry to see room, wizard teleporting in, wizard nuking whatever is there, wizard teleporting out.

If the fighter and rogue came with then they can deal with a couple in the corner.
Meanwhile the wizard has dealt with the rest of the room and still be able to use knock on the locked door or teleport through.
This is why I try to avoid absurdities and tangents.

Shoot, a strong fighter or barbarian gets around locked doors too.

By smashing them.
A wizard can blow them up, trap them, disintegrate them, unlock them, seal them, create a portal in them, etc.
See where I'm going with the "multiple options" thing?

Again if a wizard is up to invisibility, greater invisibility and flight then the folks he is fighting likely have level appropriate counter measures against such tactics.

Right, but the class most likely to be able to handle such tactics against them are OTHER WIZARDS. Not the non-casters. The non-casters have few defenses or contingencies against them. This is what I was saying earlier about the best choice to take out a wizard is another wizard, whereas the best choice to take out any other class is still a wizard.

Sleep takes a full round to cast. If the wizard tries to cast this in a one-on-one fight as you seem to be describing above the wizard will need a concentration check.

It also has a range of (100+10ft/level) so.. min 110 feet. A fighter or ranger (at best) is going to have to fire a composite longbow, 1d8+STR. In order to require a concentration check the attacker would have to be within melee to provoke an attack of opportunity.

It is really all going to come down to the the dice, one good hit by the fighter and the wizard is dead. One good concentration check and a bad save by the fighter and he's asleep. I'm not seeing either one as particularly overpowered in the above scenario.

Alright, yes, one good hit and the wizard is dead. One failed save and the fighter is dead. About even, sure. Except the fighter has no guarantee to make the WILL SAVE against a practiced wizard on the first try and every guarantee he'll die if he fails. Plus, as I repeatedly state, this is just one spell the wizard has in his array. Others stop the fighter from finding the wizard, getting to the wizard or killing the wizard. All at level 1, all without buying a stick of equipment or spending a single gold piece beyond their spellbook.

[MENTION=9287]master arminas[/MENTION]

The part you bolded was a statement, not a proof. One asserts something the other shows how it is correct. The statement meant nothing to me and the proof did not persuade me, I re-quoted you in my post to underline how silly your proof had been in my opinion.

(Your proof will be what I bold.)

I would just like to add one more thing: the Wizard needs equipment just as much as the rest of the party. Aaron L already mentions staves and wands, but the arcane casty-types need Rings of Protection, Cloaks of Resistances, Headbands of Vast Intelligence, Amulets of Natural Armor, Bracers of Armor, Robes of the Archmagi, etc., etc., etc.

As the last few items, as I said, are needed by every character at higher levels they aren't valid proofs. All classes need protective items and benefit from wondrous items.
The "staves and wands" can be used by rogues or any with UMD as much as any caster. The caster doesn't NEED to buy the staves and wands because they do have spells. A fighter DOES NEED his weapons and shield. He can't get away with it and still be a fighter. (I'm hedging because I know there are fighter-builds which are similar to monks in that they are unarmoured and weaponless but they aren't the typical fighters.)

As for..

And how does your proposed method of making them buy the scrolls to learn these spells stop that problem? If they are high enough level, if they want to spend the money, and if they want to use this tactic, then they will still do so.

Making them buy scrolls in order to learn more spells means that they have to find them and it hurts their overall standing (in terms of gold and time) to learn those spells. Certainly with some players that expense will not matter but with many of the players in my area this will be something they don't want to expend their time and money on and they'll have a reduced list because of it.