Do wands destroy the 3.x adventure paradigm?

[Quartz]

I don't see the problem with wands. If you think that wands are a problem, I dread what you think about scrolls: they can be created at first level, there's no limit as to the level of their contents, etc.

 

[Psion]

Uhm, that was WHY clerics were given so much power in 3E.

Whether or not it was, that doesn't mean that we have to adhere to that design principle ever-after.

I toyed with a few options to add flexibility to cleric builds, but I kept of running up against the healing issue. It's a rules detail that I find typecasts clerics too much.

I'd rather have tools/items be typecast than characters.

 

[sfedi]

Just as Shilsen, I´ve found that wands forbids me to deteriorate the party hit points-wise, combat after combat.

The problem is those encounters were the ONLY resource the party expends is hit points, in which case, they patch up with healing wands and the resources expended by the party are virtually zero.

 

[Cabral]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the reason I like wands:
Use Magic Device.

Don't have a cleric, druid, bard, sorcerer, or wizard?
Take ranks in Use Magic Device and grab a wand.

In our Eberon based game, the Artificer and the Sorcerer both have maxed Use Magic Device ranks (of course the Artificer's max is higher than the Sorcerer's) so that they can use wands. The group consists of an Artificer, Fighter, Psychic Warrior, and Sorcerer; no healer (Well the Psychic Warrior can heal himself). The wand of cure light wounds means it doesn't take a week to get back up to full health after a nasty battle.

 

[FireLance]

Just as Shilsen, I´ve found that wands forbids me to deteriorate the party hit points-wise, combat after combat.

The problem is those encounters were the ONLY resource the party expends is hit points, in which case, they patch up with healing wands and the resources expended by the party are virtually zero.

If the only resource expended by the PCs in the encounters were hit points, then either:

a. The party is mostly composed of classes which have only hit points as a limited resource, e.g. fighter, rogue, warlock, binder; or
b. The encounters simply weren't tough enough to force the PCs to expend more resources.

In any case, I wonder why taking on successive encounters in a progressively weaker state is such a key component of an enjoyable D&D experience. It adds an element of tension during a time-sensitive mission, but otherwise, I don't see it as something that needs to be present all the time. In fact, some would argue that since adventuring is such a dangerous profession, it would be reckless, unwise and foolish for the players to take on any challenge at less than full strength if they could avoid it.

 

[shilsen]

In any case, I wonder why taking on successive encounters in a progressively weaker state is such a key component of an enjoyable D&D experience. It adds an element of tension during a time-sensitive mission, but otherwise, I don't see it as something that needs to be present all the time. In fact, some would argue that since adventuring is such a dangerous profession, it would be reckless, unwise and foolish for the players to take on any challenge at less than full strength if they could avoid it.

For a lot of us, it isn't. I'm currently DMing a 2 year campaign where the PCs have only once (in 46 sessions) had three encounters in a game day, maybe a dozen times had two encounters in the same day, and the rest of the time, have had just one fight in a given day. The group also consists of three primary spellcasters and a multiclassed spellcaster, with only one non-spellcaster, which - in theory - should cause problems because they can unload all their spells in one or two fights. But it's worked just fine for me, and challenging them is never an issue.

 

[werk]

Just as Shilsen, I´ve found that wands forbids me to deteriorate the party hit points-wise, combat after combat.

The problem is those encounters were the ONLY resource the party expends is hit points, in which case, they patch up with healing wands and the resources expended by the party are virtually zero.

But...the wands are resources. Again, this comes back to party wealth.

If you aren't keeping track of wealth, of course the party is going to have disposable income for all these wands. Why would a cleric waste his magic on healing when he uses wands like they are as valuable as tissues?

Your argument may hold at high level using CLW wands, but otherwise, I still don't think it's a problem.

 

[pallandrome]

Sunder < Wand

 

[frankthedm]

Anybody allow the players to take the average result on low level wands outside of combat to speed things up?

 

[pallandrome]

All the time. I actually encourage them to take the average of any spellcasting they do out of combat. Fewer rolls made the better.