Additions to the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list

[Merlion]

As I've brought up in the past, I dont feel that the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list is really all it should be, mechanically or themeatically.
Especially since Sorcerers and Wizards get nothing at all aside from their magic (and in the wizards case, bonus feats to enhance their magic).

To help this, these are the spells I'd be likely to add to the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list if I was running a basic DnD game.


0th level: Create Water, Purify Food and Drink

1st level: Command, Death Watch, Doom, Sanctuary

2nd level: Align Weapon, Augury, Death Knell, Detect Chaos/Evil/Good/Law, Enthrall, Find Traps, Make Whole, Searing Light, Shield Of Faith*, Shield Other, Silence

3rd level: Create Food and Water, Glyph of Warding, Helping Hand, Invisibility Purge, Restoration, Lesser, Zone of Truth

4th level: Air Walk, Divination, Flame Strike (all fire), Freedom of Movement, Spell Immunity

5th level: Command, Greater, Death Ward, Discern Lies, Spell Resistance

6th level: Animate Objects, Antilife Shell, Find the Path, Forbiddance, Glyph of Warding, Greater, Wind Walk

7th level:

8th level: Blasphemy, Dictum, Holy Word, Spell Immunity, Greater, Word of Chaos

9th level: Cloak of Chaos, Holy Aura, Shield of Law, Storm of Vengeance, Unholy Aura

*Shield of Faith would have a difference name of course.


Also, if it was really up to me, in my ideal world (aside from also doing away with the whole Arcane/Divine concept), I would give mages limited healing ability, as follows.

0th level: Cure Minor Wounds
2nd level: Cure Light Wounds
3rd level: Cure Moderate Wounds
4th level: Remove Blindness/Deafness, Remove Disease, Slow Poison
5th level: Cure Serious Wounds, Cure Poison
6th: Cure Light Wounds, Mass, Cure Critical Wounds, Restoration
7th level: Cure Moderate Wounds, Mass
8th level: Cure Serious Wounds, Mass, Restoration, Greater
9th level: Cure Critical Wounds, Mass, Heal


Now I realize that most are totaly against the idea of mages healing, which is why I didnt include it in the main body. But its a prejudice that makes no sense to me, so while I was at it I figured I'd include how I would go about doing that.

I might would even slice off a few of the higher level ones entirely.


Anyway, I just wanted to get peoples thoughts on the issue, and this aproach.

 

[Kerrick]

If you're going with the basic mage/sorcerer, I would agree with some of those spells:

0: Create water

1: Command, death watch (maybe)

2: Align weapon (maybe; we have a spell called alter weapon material), Augury, Death Knell, Detect Chaos/Evil/Good/Law (these are arcane), Enthrall (arcane), Find Traps, Make Whole (this one is arcane), Searing Light, Silence

3: invisbility purge

4: divination, freedom of movement, spell immunity

5: greater command, spell resistance

6: animate objects (arcane already), antilife shell (maybe), forbiddance (also arcane)

8: greater spell immunity

9: none

Note that most of the spells I omitted were support and healing-type spells - they should remain strictly in the divine domain - if the wizard can do everything a cleric could do, why bother playing the cleric? Now, if you want to get rid of the distinction between divine and arcane (which shouldn't be hard - it's been done with great success before), then you could dispense with my advice altogether. I also didn't include the warding spells because mages have symbols, and the holy word spells because mages have power words (and also because those are definitely divine and would be badly out of place on a wizard's spell list).

I think the prejudice against giving mages healing is the same as I stated above - divine magic does one thing, and arcane magic does another, and (with some overlap) nary the twain shall meet. If you're interested in blurring the lines, I'd suggest checking out Monte's AU magic system.

 

[JDowling]

... if the wizard can do everything a cleric could do, why bother playing the cleric? ...

I think the prejudice against giving mages healing is the same as I stated above - divine magic does one thing, and arcane magic does another, and (with some overlap) nary the twain shall meet. If you're interested in blurring the lines, I'd suggest checking out Monte's AU magic system.

Say there's 3 basic roles that magic fills -
Healing
Damage
Utility

Clerics get Excellent healing, Okay damage, and Decent utility.
Wizards get No healing, Excellent damage, excellent utility.

If a cleric can be excellent at healing, okay at everything else, wear plate armor, use okay weapons... why can't a Wizard be excellent at damage, excellent utility, poor healing but give up armor and weapons?

 

[Merlion]

divine magic does one thing, and arcane magic does another, and (with some overlap) nary the twain shall meet.

The first part is somewhat inacurate. there are no actual rules about what either arcane or divine magic can or cannot do. Their are guidlines about what they tend towards. The Shugenja in OA for instance is a divine nuker

Casting stat, spell failure or no, and source of the power are the only hard and fast rule differences between the two.

Also remember that spells are not arcane or divine, casting classes are.



You left in Spell Resistance, so thats good. Mages in my opnion should have ALL the anti magic magic (not to say no one else should have any, just that mages should have all thats avaible). Wizards and Sorcerers live and breathe magic, they should be the best at it, and the best at countering it.

they should remain strictly in the divine domain

you mean the Cleric domain.

if the wizard can do everything a cleric could do, why bother playing the cleric?

Since the Cleric can already do almost everything the Wizard can to some extent magically, do several things better, and do it all in full plate with average BAB, twice the hitpoints and 2 good saves, why bother playing the wizard?

I also didn't include the warding spells because mages have symbols

But they have no low level ward an area spells with a basic effect (damage etc) unless you count alarm...and thats another of those things that to me all users of magic should have.

and the holy word spells because mages have power words

I dont really see the connection.

and also because those are definitely divine

They are only "divine" right now because the only class than can cast them is a Divine spellcasting class. The spells are just there.

would be badly out of place on a wizard's spell list

Why? they have other banishment spells. And alignment and religion are not exclusive. Why cant a good or evil wizard use good or evil magic?

I think the prejudice against giving mages healing is the same as I stated above - divine magic does one thing, and arcane magic does another

Your right of course. But its a misplaced prejudice with only small support from the rules.

Especially when you consider the Bard.

I'd suggest checking out Monte's AU magic system.

I own AU and like it very much. But I still like DnD despite its silly baggage.

If a cleric can be excellent at healing, okay at everything else, wear plate armor, use okay weapons... why can't a Wizard be excellent at damage, excellent utility, poor healing but give up armor and weapons?

You've hit upon the very heart of both why the wizard spell list could use some additions, and why the Cleric is an overpowered class.

No combat=powerful magic.

Good combat=little to no magic.

Those too me have always been the two most important and basic class factors. Magic and combat. and they must be balanced.

The Wizard has only magic and NO combat ability, so he should have lots of magic.

The Cleric currently has way to much magic to have as much combat ability as they do.

 

[JDowling]

...You've hit upon the very heart of both why the wizard spell list could use some additions, and why the Cleric is an overpowered class...

I'm largely playing Devil's Advocate about the whole "divine casters should be this, arcane should be this" bit and the whole "if wizards can do everything, why play a cleric?" when clerics already do everything . It's your world so whatever floats your boat

That said, I don't think wizard needs anything to be a fun class to play (it's one of my favorites), but I certainly don't think adding weak healing to them would unbalance or turn them into "THE spellcaster class".

Why? Because a Wizard can't heal during combat like a Cleric can. If you not only have d4 hit points but also can't use a shield or wear armor, are you *really* going to risk your life and limb (literally) wading into combat to patch up that fighter who is bleeding? or will you need to wait until after combat and hope he's still standing?

Clerics can wade right into combat to deliver their touch-healing, they have plate armor, more hit points, a shield if they want one, and a nice mace (or whatever) to beat off anything attacking them.

You see Wizards start walking up *next to* the enemy fighters to heal their own fighters, and you'll start to see a lot more dead Wizards (unless your DM is silly and never attacks the weak-but-powerful guys).

"what about that feat that gives touch spells range?" well, it's short range, and a nice charge attack against the wizard is a deterant, especially if someone readies their action to be: "the next time that robey guy moves in to try to heal anyone I'm taking him out..."

et cetera.

in closing - I say go ahead and add healing to Arcane casters. However, I would add some flavor to it in some way. Perhaps they are spells that regenerate, or weaker in another way (Arcane casters can't heal non-lethal, but divine can) or some such.

 

[Merlion]

I dont actually care that much about the healing to be honest...since really healing is only good for the accasional save situation, and for patching up after fights.


Its the other stuff that I'm really more interested in.


As I said since Wizards only get magic and absolutely nothing else, they should have REALLY good magic. At least some of everything etc.


And since Clerics have heavy full caster type magic, having them have a d8 hd heavy armor average bab and 2 good saves seems a bit much.

 

[JDowling]

a couple spells you post adding to wizard seem kind of "clericy" such as Holy Aura and Unholy Aura.

You might want to considor making an alternate spell Arcane Aura with similar effects but without the holy / unholy sort of aspects, if that makes sense at all. mod the specifics to be less-gody.

where as I would agree with end results of magic being similar, I don't think from a style stand point that wizards really belong casting things that are "holy" or "unholy". good, evil, lawful, or chaotic - sure. holy / unholy - that's more cleric realm.

 

[Merlion]

Well, fantasy and mythology are pretty full of good and evil magic, both connected and unconnected to religion. I dont really see a meaningful difference between "holy/unholy" and "good/evil"

Also remember that the "alignment aura" spells are basicaly the next, much higher level step along the path of "Protection from....Magic Circle Against" which are among the few alignment oriented spells wizards already get.


Honestly I've never understood the presence of the Cleric as it is in DnD. I dont really see much of anything as "clericy" in a base fantasy way because I've never seen anything much like it.

Spellcasters who focus on healing/defense etc yes...but all the religious connections and all (and combined with heavy armor etc)...

 

[Kerrick]

Also remember that spells are not arcane or divine, casting classes are.

No.. cleric/druid/paladin spells = divine. Bard/sorcer/wizards spells = arcane.

they should remain strictly in the divine domain

you mean the Cleric domain.

No, I mean the divine domain. Don't forget, adepts, paladins and druids can cast some of the same spells as clerics.

if the wizard can do everything a cleric could do, why bother playing the cleric?

Since the Cleric can already do almost everything the Wizard can to some extent magically, do several things better, and do it all in full plate with average BAB, twice the hitpoints and 2 good saves, why bother playing the wizard?

The key word here is "almost". Wizards have MUCH better "blow 'em up" potential, and they have a wider variety of spells, since they have to rely on them more. Sure, clerics have the edge in undead control, healing, and possibly divination; it just depends on what kind of spellcaster you want to play, I guess - I prefer mages.

and the holy word spells because mages have power words

I dont really see the connection.

Granted, the connection is rather tenuous; both types of spells are very powerful, single-word spells of power designed to achieve an end. It's just that the power words achieve more than the holy words. Maybe give clerics power word: kill?

I think the prejudice against giving mages healing is the same as I stated above - divine magic does one thing, and arcane magic does another

Your right of course. But its a misplaced prejudice with only small support from the rules.

Especially when you consider the Bard.

Ugh.. now THERE'S one thing I totally did not like about the bard. There's absolutely NO good justification for giving bards healing spells. (BTW - I wanted to change one of my spell choices in the first post - command and greater command should be bardic spells only, not sor/wiz.)

The Wizard has only magic and NO combat ability, so he should have lots of magic.

The Cleric currently has way to much magic to have as much combat ability as they do.

It's not the quantity of spells they have, but the type. Divine spells run heavy toward support and divination, while arcane spells run the gamut, with more emphasis on the flashy combat spells. Clerics get a few (flame strike, blade barrier), but not enough to encroach on the realm of wiards.

[shameless plug]If you're interested in giving wizards "REALLY good" magic, check out Arcane Strife, our big book of arcane spells. [/shameless plug]

 

[Merlion]

No.. cleric/druid/paladin spells = divine. Bard/sorcer/wizards spells = arcane.

We're saying the same thing in a different way. Cure Light Wounds is not a Divine spell. Magic Missile is not an Arcane spell.

But any spell cast by a Cleric is divine, and any spell cast by a Wizard is arcane.

No, I mean the divine domain. Don't forget, adepts, paladins and druids can cast some of the same spells as clerics

True. But healing and support are not strickly the realm of Divine magic. They are focus areas for the classes you mention (and also for the arcane-casting bard).

The key word here is "almost". Wizards have MUCH better "blow 'em up" potential, and they have a wider variety of spells, since they have to rely on them more. Sure, clerics have the edge in undead control, healing, and possibly divination; it just depends on what kind of spellcaster you want to play, I guess - I prefer mages.

You said "if the wizard can do everything the cleric can do, why play the cleric?"
Not "if the wizard can do everything a cleric can do better, why play the cleric?"

Likewise my rebutall is: since the Cleric can do more or less everything a wizard do, why play the wizard?

Not: Since the cleric can do more or less everything a wizard can do better, why play the wizard?

The wizard is better at a couple things, but theres almost nothing a Wizard can do that a Cleric cant do to some degree. Illusion is really the only thing that springs to mind.

Point being: With spellcasters, two spellcasters being able to do a given thing doesnt make either of them absolite

Maybe give clerics power word: kill?

They can already get it with the War Domain.

There's absolutely NO good justification for giving bards healing spells

Aside from how in fantasy and mythology, generally, anyone who uses magic can use it to heal at least somewhat. Or the fact that the idea of music having healing power is rather common.

It's not the quantity of spells they have, but the type. Divine spells run heavy toward support and divination, while arcane spells run the gamut

You mean Cleric spells and Wizard spells.

while arcane spells run the gamut, with more emphasis on the flashy combat spells. Clerics get a few (flame strike, blade barrier), but not enough to encroach on the realm of wiards.

Clerics are full blown 9 level primary spellcasters and medium level melee's at once. Thats an imbalance of Magic ability and Combat ability in the class. What type they are doesnt really matter, if they are useful which the vast majority of Cleric spells are.

but thats a whole other thing.

Also...Arcane spells supposedly run the gamut with a stronger emphasis on flashy attacks, but the more I think about it the more it seems the flashy attacks and a few nifty utility things is about all the have.

Either way not enough for a class whose sole class ability is magic.