A Rekindled Glimmer of Hope

[I'm A Banana]

As Neonchameleon said... you go to the bathroom that often, and look how mundane that is.

I don't know 'bout you, but when I use the bathroom, I don't warp time and space to manifest my will.

The D&D magic system really should be completely overhauled.

No one is saying it should be, Captain Strawman.

What people ARE saying is that they want an option for wizards to be able to run out of magic.

And your issue with giving them that option is....?

You can have wizards in the game without at will abilities - which means that the high magic fans won't be happy.

If they can get at-will magic from a theme or a different class, why wouldn't they be happy with that?

And you have wizards with a pile of effective and choosable magic with very little cost or drawback. Which means low magic fans won't be happy.

Those people have been content with their older-e wizards doing that since the '70's, why wouldn't they be happy with that in the newest e?

As compromises go, it might have the benefit of appealing to no one.

It lets people who want at-will magic to have it, and people who want no at-will magic to have it. That appeals to what seems to be both camps here.

I wasn't saying ban all spellcasters. I explicitely mentioned leaving the bard as a caster. What I said was ban all primary casters if you want to make a low magic game.

Which is an unnecessary extreme when people are very happy with a wizard that doesn't have at-will powers, and the game can provide that (while still providing plenty of at-will options).

Now you can allow the Vancian wizard without at wills on the grounds of Tradition. But for low magic, magic needs to have a genuine cost or to be genuinely rare. Not something that a class gets a dump truck full of every day with only a token cost and that are their primary rather than their reserve means of problem solving.

You don't need to move the goalposts. People have said they don't want wizards with at-will magic. The current game as far as we know doesn't permit that. You can solve that problem without going into the whole rabbit-hole of what "low magic" is or means or is represented as mechanically.

Stay on target, Luke.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't know 'bout you, but when I use the bathroom, I don't warp time and space to manifest my will.

Then I can categorically say you are having BadWrongFun when you use the facilities! If you aren't Gating monsters out into the metropolitan sewage system, then you aren't doing it correctly!

What people ARE saying is that they want an option for wizards to be able to run out of magic.

And your issue with giving them that option is....?

I have none... I'm right there with you on having the option available (whatever the option happens to manifest itself as). I have no problems with both in the game whatsoever. My comments to Keldryn were explaining how someone on my side of the fence came about our opinion, as well as then to argue with you on the semantical issues of what constitutes "rarity" when it comes to magic. Because when you use the traditional D&D magic system as the example of "remarkable" or "not easily done" magic... THAT I'm happy to debate with you on till the cows come home.

 

[Neonchameleon]

What people ARE saying is that they want an option for wizards to be able to run out of magic.

And your issue with giving them that option is....?

That it shouldn't be the default?

If they can get at-will magic from a theme or a different class, why wouldn't they be happy with that?

It's a battle over the name wizard in part. If someone wants a high magic class they are going to look at the name wizard, not at the name warlock. If they can give up at will magic to get a bonus why shouldn't you be happy with that?

Those people have been content with their older-e wizards doing that since the '70's, why wouldn't they be happy with that in the newest e?

One of the players round my 4e table has been playing D&D since the 1970s and has repeatedly stated that he's happy that wizards now don't run out of magic as it makes them feel magical. To lose that would be a step backwards.

It lets people who want at-will magic to have it, and people who want no at-will magic to have it. That appeals to what seems to be both camps here.

It also means that there are classes better at magic than the wizard.

You don't need to move the goalposts. People have said they don't want wizards with at-will magic. The current game as far as we know doesn't permit that. You can solve that problem without going into the whole rabbit-hole of what "low magic" is or means or is represented as mechanically.

You were the one who brought up magic feeling magical. And about magic feeling "significant and remarkable". I'm now punting the ball straight between those goalposts. And classic Vancian D&D doesn't make magic significant and remarkable.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It's a battle over the name wizard in part. If someone wants a high magic class they are going to look at the name wizard, not at the name warlock. If they can give up at will magic to get a bonus why shouldn't you be happy with that?

I don't really see this as a semantic battle, but as a gameplay one: folks want a class that can run out of spells.

Now, I think it makes probably the most sense for the wizard to be that class, given the history of the game and Vancian magic and and the likely players and such, but that point is largely orthogonal to the point of having a class that does not have at-will magic.

I don't know why anyone would be particularly attached to the word "wizard" for an at-will spellcaster, given that only 4e wizards really HAVE that option (and EVERY spellcaster -- every character! -- in 4e has that option, and no option to be otherwise), but whatever.

 

[JamesonCourage]

No, too much of a restraint. There are Always Fighters who are willing to fight as dirty as they need to, to win. Pretty much, the one's who are still alive.

It's like Bronn's fight in season one of Game of Thrones:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZSFpeLEAok]Game of Thrones - Bronn's Fight Scene - YouTube[/ame]

"You don't fight with honor."
"No. He did."

 

[slobster]

I don't know why anyone would be particularly attached to the word "wizard" for an at-will spellcaster, given that only 4e wizards really HAVE that option (and EVERY spellcaster -- every character! -- in 4e has that option, and no option to be otherwise), but whatever.

Well not everyone is coming into the game firmly steeped in D&D tropes. If a new player comes to try out a fantasy game, there is a good chance they want to sling some spells. If you ask that person what they want their character to be, they'll likely say "wizard!" And if you tell them that a wizard only gets to be magical 2 or 3 times per day, and spend the rest of the day chucking flasks of lantern oil, they might get confused.

It's not the strongest reason to give at-will options to wizards, but then I don't think that "because previous editions haven't done it like that" is a strong reason to deny it to them, either.

I want casters to have access to at-will magic, whether that is core or an option (presented from the beginning) is immaterial.

 

[DMKastmaria]

Well not everyone is coming into the game firmly steeped in D&D tropes. If a new player comes to try out a fantasy game, there is a good chance they want to sling some spells. If you ask that person what they want their character to be, they'll likely say "wizard!" And if you tell them that a wizard only gets to be magical 2 or 3 times per day, and spend the rest of the day chucking flasks of lantern oil, they might get confused.

In almost 30 years of playing the game, I've yet to meet a single individual who couldn't grok the concept.

 

[slobster]

In almost 30 years of playing the game, I've yet to meet a single individual who couldn't grok the concept.

Fair. My personal experience is different. Over the past decade or so, I can recall about six players of Vancian spellcasters. Every one of them wanted to have at-will options in addition to their daily spells. So we houseruled it in. (This obviously doesn't count 4E, where casters did have at-will stuff).

Only one of those people really hated the wizard-out-of-gas thing to the point where he wouldn't play the class otherwise; everyone else saw it as an odd and regrettable part of playing a spellcaster, but rejoiced once we added in at-will casting.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I don't really see this as a semantic battle, but as a gameplay one: folks want a class that can run out of spells.

And folks want a class that doesn't.

Now, I think it makes probably the most sense for the wizard to be that class, given the history of the game and Vancian magic and and the likely players and such, but that point is largely orthogonal to the point of having a class that does not have at-will magic.

When I look at the name "Wizard" I see a master of magic. The sort of person who can manipulate magic at will, not the sort of person who's low enough magic that he never masters it and runs out. The wizard has always been the single highest magic in the game - and it would be turning back on history and on common sense to reverse that. Certain 4e classes can run out of magic - Skalds spring to mind.

 

[DMKastmaria]

And folks want a class that doesn't.


When I look at the name "Wizard" I see a master of magic. The sort of person who can manipulate magic at will, not the sort of person who's low enough magic that he never masters it and runs out.

Not really an accurate assessment. A low-level "wizard" hasn't mastered magic Yet.

You know. Because he's low-level.