Search results

I'm not sure I understand. How will making it so Wizards don't run out of resources quicker than the other classes eliminate this? And how does having the option to remain more effective in combat for longer and/or having more combat options effect that? Just because a wizard will be able...

Mathmatically perhaps. But conceptually, its a pretty big difference. Also, I think the options will be a little broader than that. It may be more than that Wizards will always have some sort of magical *attack* that would just equate to the crossbow. A Wizard who has expended their daily...

But, from what I understand and what you just said, the "ideal condition" was still basically Good, and excess of "law" or "chaos" basically amounted to "Evil". Most conflicts...especially most fantasy conflicts, come down to some form of "right" and "wrong"...which is usually translated to...

Except that chances are there are rules in place to avoid what you describe, we just dont know what they are yet. Remember, we still know very little. We know that wizards will have per day and per encounter abilities in addition to the usual spells. Thats pretty much it. Hardly enough to...

First off, I dont see Hit Points changing much at all. Second, from what little we know, it seems that characters...or really I think most specifically spellcasters, will still have spells per day, but will also have per day and per encounter non spell abilities. So its still very possible to...

Yes, in more or less all fantasy mages guard/hoard their power to varying degrees. Almost always because they have a finite amount of "energy" and/or it tires them physically or mentally. And there is often also (as in the case of Gandalf, who isnt really a wizard, and in Earthsea) of their use...

Many of the spells described as "world changing" tecnically arent. At least not automatically. because they've already existed in the world, and the world has most likely compensated. Teleport, other travel spells etc. They can still mess with a DMs plots, but part of the proccess becomes...

So you dont think they are making any of the changes because theres mechanical reason to believe it will improve the game? And/or because it is inline with what players have expressed a desire for?

Well, since you don't wish me to express my feelings to you, and I really have no way to "prove" what I am saying other than going and posting links to the various ubiquitious threads on the subject, and cant really see how you could never have seen such posts before, and since you're now...

I dont see how the number of spell levels is relevent, if the spells are balanced.

Read through these and the wizard forums. Complaints about Vancian magic etc are pretty commonplace and widespread. But I dont think anything I say or that you see will affect your view. And thats fine, but just as several people have said to Sun Knight, the change wont prevent you from playing...

Who said anything about having the SAME strengths and weaknesses? The problem is with classes like the Cleric, that have no real weaknesses...or instances where a class has a weakness that is far greater than the weaknesses of other classes. The point is for a rough equality of...

We really have no way of knowing that. And neither do the designers. But, they can see the inherent mechanical flaws in the current system. You dont see them as flaws, but from the point of view of their overall design philosophy, the wizard not be able to keep up with the other classes...

This is about being able to be effective while staying within your primary role. Most people play a class for its primary role. So to be faced with being ineffective in that role while many of the other players can still keep going is frustrating and problematic for many. Not for you, I...

You dont like them, and love the Vancian system. Fine. Many, many people feel differently. If your already happy with what you have, why not leave them alone? You realize people screamed "marketing ploy" about 3rd edition and its changes as well. As near as I can tell, the designers are...

Oh dear. it isnt a sterotype. Look up "Wizard" in the dictionary. A Wizard is someone who DOES MAGIC. I have no problem with branching out. But a wizards main focus, and currently only truly mechanically viable option is magic. You should be able to play a magical wizard, remain effective...

Then why do so many people who play it complain about it and/or change it in their own games? And why then did the designers feel it was finally time to if not remove it, make it less central to the use of magic in the game?

Sorry if I was a bit sharp then

First off, I never said anything about pointy hats. To me Wizard=Magic. Wizards accomplish things through supernatural power, not physical means. Thats the point. Wizards as it stands dont HAVE "other abilities". they have spells. You can choose to take combat feats etc with your wizard, but...

You missed all the posts about suspension of disbelief and versimilitude apparently. And it does affect gameplay. It means you have to decide wether to set a watch and who to do it. And it means you have to re prepare spells etc.