Five Suggestions to Limit Wizard Power

[Kunimatyu]

Why do wizards need level-based spell slots in the first place? Let them memorize up to their class level in spells per day, with a small one or two spell bonus for a high Int. No more of this 30+ spells at level 10 nonsense.

You want Vancian? There you go. Be thankful it isn't five.

 

[Uller]

WHY DO PEOPLE KEEPING LEAVING THIS FACT OUT OF THEIR "WIZARD SHUTS OUT THE ROGUE" ARGUMENT?

.

I think you misunderstand me. We're in agreement. The wizard can outshine the rogue (or the fighter, or the paladin, or the cleric except for healing), but in a very limited capacity. The rogue can make endless stealth (or Move Silently/Hide) checks. The Wizard can only cast invisibility so many times (if he even has it prepared).

And it isn't just Rogues...what about Fighters. The fighter is supposed to be the one that consistently deals AND absorbs the most damage...then along comes the wizard with Stone Skill, Resist Elements, Displacement, Haste, Mirror Image and lays down some Evard's Black Tentacles to make the fighter look feeble. But again...he can only do this a limited number of times.

In a 2e game a long time ago I was DMing, the party was being attacked by a Green Dragon...the only one who could really hurt it was the wizard. So the dragon breathed on him, then landed on him...squish. I made saves for all his magic items...his wand of lightning bolts survived. Once the badly wounded dragon took flight again, the rogue calmly walked over, picked up the wizard's wand of lightning bolts and felled the dragon with a 10d6 bold of electric doom....who outshone who?

 

[variant]

The 3rd Rogue got two major features: Sneak Attack and Lots of Skills. It's the Lot's of Skills that get trampled all over by the wizard. Let's look at the 3.5 SRD Skill list for the class. For the record, a lot of this is theory crafting. Theory craft doesn't always apply one to one in actual play.

Charm Person (1st) and Suggestion (2nd) covers most of the Cha / Social Skills
Knock (2nd)and Open/Close (0th) can cover most of the door opening things you might require (Knock has a range of 100 ft + 10 ft per level, so you can be a good distance away from any possible trapped door).
Spider Climb (2nd), Jump (1st), Fly (3rd), and Gaseous Form (3rd) can handle almost all of the movement based skills
Detect Thoughts (2nd) can cover sense motive
Invisibility (2nd) covers hide
Alter Self (2nd) and Disguise Self (1st) covers Disguise
Silent Image (1st) gets you pretty close to forgery (assuming you can keep concentrating on the document at hand)
Comprehend Languages (1st) gets Decipher Script
Various Divination spells greatly help Search and Spot, though these are not great 1 to 1 matches
Wizards can already use magical devices, so that's covered
Prestidigitation (0th) covers Sleight of Hand
Wizards already have access to Craft, Knowledge, and Profession
Animate Rope (1st) will probably cover most usages of Use Rope

What skills does that leave us?

• Appraise (Int)
• Disable Device
• Listen (Wis)
• Move Silently (Dex)
• Perform (Cha)

Can a good DM overcome this? Absolutely. The problem isn't that these spells exist. It's that these spells can be easily accessed either through lots of spell slots and cheap, player produced scrolls and wands.

None of the spells listed are beyond 3rd level, most are 2nd or 1st. Scribing a 3rd level spell cast by a 5th level wizard cost 15 XP and 375 gold. A 2nd level spell cast by a 3rd level wizard: 6 XP and 150 gold.

Skills are not attached to classes in 5e, so these take nothing from the Rogue class.

 

[satori01]

Yep. Heck, in Baldur's Gate, I'd spam summon spells so that the uber mages in that game would waste all of their magic on my summons while I was in the next room, and they're about as automatic as a trap.

These are always hilarious arguments to me. Someone takes behavior they do in a singe party game, and then complain when they transfer anti social behavoir to the quenesential cooperative game table, and somehow the rules are completely at fault because they are not proof?


Even has picked their nose, but it is generally considered rude to do so at the table in a public restaurant.


Also 3e and 4e made the mistake of traps bring mere dice roles at locations. When taps are described and go beyond being just static DC, the trap monkeys get the pits, and the other things stay.


Moreover, I play D&D to explore moral dimensions as well. The summon trap monkey has some moral issues if the creature can remember the events of their summoning. Exposing someone to simulated death, IS considered torture by most international standards.


I would also argue Knock is needed to be able to model reality. Doors locked from the other side, portals blocked by a large boulder, a broken lock etc.
Plane Sailing has the right of this.


The easiest thing is make some magic effects, primarily focused on combat, do a low amount of avg dmg and be usable at will...like 4E....and the spell slots and non combat spells of 1e, and some 5E balanced "Daily" for combat spells.


If a Fighter, can slash, disarm, trip, and attack a foe again, all day long, then Fireball has to do more than 3d6.... Like it did in 4E.


A spell should not be "once a day you can slight hurt more, a slightly larger grouping of enemies than you can with your at will power". This is why in 4E, condition riders trumped pure blasting. You could only really just blast minions. 4e, level Kobolds could survive fireball.

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

Wouldn't simply limiting the number of spells per day accomplish what you want? After all, a wizard _should_ be able to emulate a rogue or fighter and accomplish what they can do in spectacular (albeit limited) fashion.

The party needs to infiltrate a tower by entering a high window, disabling a guard and opening a locked door...by the time the rogue climbs in the window the wizard has flown up, used hold person on the guard, killed him and unlocked the door. The thief (and the fighter, for that matter) are completely shown up.

BUT! The wizard can only pull this off once AND he must have prepared the right spells. If he showed up with all AoE and defensive buff spells, he'd be SOL.

Absolutely. I'm in favor of limiting the number of available spell slots for a wizard. This includes extra slots gained from int and easily produced scrolls/wands.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

I've been thinking a lot about the Linear Fighter, Quadratic Wizard problem. We all know it was a major problem in 3rd, it was defeated in 4th by a radical overhaul to the way class mechanics work. With the return of Vancian Magic, there's a great fear that this will once again be a problem.

I'm for limiting them, sure. I think most of your limitations are a bit unnecessary.

1. Reduce Spell Slots: In 3.5, Wizards maxed out at 4 slots per day per level, before bonus slots for a high int modifier. By reducing the number of spell slots per day, you begin to reduce the flexibility a wizard can have on any given day.

I fail to understand how flexibility = quadratic wizard. Broken spells? Yes. Not enough options for other classes? Well, certainly a problem, but not the cause of the quadratic wizard.

2. No Player Created Magic Items: A first level wizard in 3.5 got Scribe Scroll. Right away, the game designers are giving Wizards a tool to break the game. This one change essentially gave wizards access to their entire spellbook at any time for the cost of a few XP. Utility or situational spells could be scribed and access at will, further expanding the versatility of the 3.5 wizard. Likewise, player created wands contribute to this problem.

This is more of a problem with unregulated down time. Exactly when are wizards making these items? What is the cleric doing? Charging for healing? Is the rogue working jobs/stealing from banks? Magic item creation is balanced by three things:
1. Cost. (does it cost xp, gold, etc?) If the cost is too low, its unbalanced.
2. Time. How does the wizard get enough time to do this?
3. Opportunity cost. This fits into 1 and 2 and itself as well. What could the mage spending that xp, gold, and time in making an item have spend it on instead? e.g. Good rules for "downtime professions" for the rogue, fighter, cleric making their own money would expand this opportunity cost. One addtional opportunity cost is any feats that the mage used up to be able to make magic items.

Making magic items is not a problem, but there are elements to it that need to be addressed.

3. Remove Unlimited Spell Access and Learning: In 3.5, every time a wizard gained a level, they added two new spells of the player's choice to their spell book. The DM, not the player, should have the final say in what the PC Wizard has access to.

Likewise, being able to auto-learn an infinite amount of new spells gives the wizard an absurd amount of power. Learning new spells should be limited to X number per level or require an Intelligence check.

Learning new spells should be an accomplishment as each spell enhances the wizard's power. Steps should be made to protect the game from unlimited spell access. A wizard's spell book should not be all spells from the 3.5 PHB and Spell Compendium.

Here I want to ask "have you ever played a wizard or seen a wizard played?" I don't mean to be rude with that, but what you're suggesting is so far from RAW it's like another game.

No wizard is "able to auto-learn an infinite amount of new spells." Nor is any wizard, per RAW able to have "all spells from the 3.5 PHB and Spell Comendium."

This, here, is something that irritates me nearly every time the "quadratic wizard" comes up. It's a theoretical wizard that does not/cannot exist without a monty haul DM and/or massive deviation from RAW.

A lvl 20 wizard has 40 known spells from his 2 spells per day. Thats approximately 2 spells per spell level. That is it.

Apart from that, there is treasure (and wizards might find scrolls just as fighters might find swords). Then there is also buying the ability to learn the spells.

People who complain about wizards having every spell in the PHB must be overlooking this VERY KEY rule to limit wizards...making them buy their spells. Not making a wizard buy his spells would be like handing a vorpal sword to a fighter for free and then complaining about those quadratic fighters always beheading things.

4. Additional Cost for Class Stealing Spells: Invisibility and Knock have become iconic spells for the Wizard and should not be removed from the game. However, these spells directly conflict with key abilities of the Rogue. These spells should have some additional cost to them. Perhaps requiring two spell slots, a heavy time penalty, or the use of hit points. Regardless, spells that step into another class's niche need to have some additional cost to casting them.

This one I sort of agree with, but it will fall into my "ultimate solution" to balancing wizards. There is a simpler and easier way than your solution.

5. Make Combat Casting Difficult: This was a huge change from 2nd to 3rd. The change to initiative system, the five-foot step, and the concentration skill made casting in combat almost trivial. Wizards should have to cast spells over several initiative segments. Damage should interrupt the spell. If you want to be kind, allow a check to not lose the interrupted spell

I actually totally agree with this.



There is one simple way to fix wizards. Balance spells. That's it.

If a spell steps on another classes' toes, make it higher level. If a spell breaks the game, limit it (teleport as 1 person only) or remove it entirely (looking at some of the lvl 9 spells here, or a lot of the non core spells).

While wizards are somewhat quadratic in 3e, there has never been an issue at my table, or indeed at anyone who I've ever talked to off of message boards whose groups never had anyone wanting to play fighters.

In my opinion, much of the quadratic/linear bruhaha is because it seems broken, but plays relatively well, with some problems to be sure, but relatively well....well enough that no one ever has said "AWWW, I don't want to have to be the fighter" and every group I've ever played with had at least one fighter (or fighter type...barbarian, paladin, etc).

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

Just for the record, I think two or three of these should be implemented, not all of them. You make some good points too

1. Limit Spell Slots

I fail to understand how flexibility = quadratic wizard. Broken spells? Yes. Not enough options for other classes? Well, certainly a problem, but not the cause of the quadratic wizard.

Flexibility is part of the quadratic wizard problem.

2. No Player Created Magic Items:

This is more of a problem with unregulated down time. Exactly when are wizards making these items? What is the cleric doing? Charging for healing? Is the rogue working jobs/stealing from banks? Magic item creation is balanced by three things:
1. Cost. (does it cost xp, gold, etc?) If the cost is too low, its unbalanced.
2. Time. How does the wizard get enough time to do this?
3. Opportunity cost. This fits into 1 and 2 and itself as well. What could the mage spending that xp, gold, and time in making an item have spend it on instead? e.g. Good rules for "downtime professions" for the rogue, fighter, cleric making their own money would expand this opportunity cost. One addtional opportunity cost is any feats that the mage used up to be able to make magic items.

Making magic items is not a problem, but there are elements to it that need to be addressed.

You raise some valid points. Wizards need down time to learn new spells and to craft magic items. A DM can limit this by reducing down time or eliminating it all together.

Part of the problem you touch on is that Wizards (and Clerics to an extent) have very tangible benefits for down time. They learn new spells, scribe scrolls, and make magic items. This increases their overall power in the game world.

The Fighter and Rogue have no such down time benefit (robbing a Bank sounds like an adventure, not down time).

3. Remove Unlimited Spell Access and Learning

Here I want to ask "have you ever played a wizard or seen a wizard played?" I don't mean to be rude with that, but what you're suggesting is so far from RAW it's like another game.

No wizard is "able to auto-learn an infinite amount of new spells." Nor is any wizard, per RAW able to have "all spells from the 3.5 PHB and Spell Comendium."

This, here, is something that irritates me nearly every time the "quadratic wizard" comes up. It's a theoretical wizard that does not/cannot exist without a monty haul DM and/or massive deviation from RAW.

A lvl 20 wizard has 40 known spells from his 2 spells per day. Thats approximately 2 spells per spell level. That is it.

Apart from that, there is treasure (and wizards might find scrolls just as fighters might find swords). Then there is also buying the ability to learn the spells.

People who complain about wizards having every spell in the PHB must be overlooking this VERY KEY rule to limit wizards...making them buy their spells. Not making a wizard buy his spells would be like handing a vorpal sword to a fighter for free and then complaining about those quadratic fighters always beheading things.

No rudeness taken

I've played Wizards. Obviously, there are not an infinite number of spells, so forgive my exaggeration. What is stated is the following: At any time, a wizard can also add spells found in other wizards’ spellbooks to her own.

However, I was actually unaware that there was a Spellcraft check associated with learning new spells in 3rd (15 + Spell Level). I've played 3rd since it came out and I've never once been asked to make such a roll (or seen another player make it).

In all the games I've played, the DM did make a wizard purchase spells or recover them from enemy spellbooks. In the games I've played, this was never a significant limitation on the class. I acknowledge that your experience may be different.

So, keep the Spellcraft check to learn new spells and remove the 40 free spells they are given as they level. Spells should be found or purchased. What spells are in the game world should be purely at the discretion of the DM.

4. Additional Cost for Class Stealing Spells

This one I sort of agree with, but it will fall into my "ultimate solution" to balancing wizards. There is a simpler and easier way than your solution.

5. Make Combat Casting Difficult

I actually totally agree with this.

I agree with my point as well , but this doesn't have to be part of the solution if other suggestions are used.

There is one simple way to fix wizards. Balance spells. That's it.

If a spell steps on another classes' toes, make it higher level. If a spell breaks the game, limit it (teleport as 1 person only) or remove it entirely (looking at some of the lvl 9 spells here, or a lot of the non core spells).

This was a suggestion I was trying to avoid. The reason is power creep. Sure, perhaps every PHB spell is balanced perfectly. However, spells from Arcane Power, Dragon, PHBII, etc all have to be perfectly balanced as well. I think that's a herculean task and one that's not needed if you accept my premises that Wizard power in 3rd had more to do with easy spell access then the spells themselves being fundamentally flawed or overpowered for a given level.

While wizards are somewhat quadratic in 3e, there has never been an issue at my table, or indeed at anyone who I've ever talked to off of message boards whose groups never had anyone wanting to play fighters.

In my opinion, much of the quadratic/linear bruhaha is because it seems broken, but plays relatively well, with some problems to be sure, but relatively well....well enough that no one ever has said "AWWW, I don't want to have to be the fighter" and every group I've ever played with had at least one fighter (or fighter type...barbarian, paladin, etc).

I've played both casters and non-casters in long running games that went from low level to high level. I've enjoyed my play experience in both, so add another person who believes that some of the Quadratic/Linear argument invalid.

This touches on part of the unwritten social contract of Dungeons and Dragons: Let everyone have time in the spotlight. This is something that gets overlooked when mechanic wonks pick apart the rules.

That said, I do think Wizards and Casters outshine Fighters and Rogues at high levels and steps should be taken to see that they are better balanced across all levels of play. The reason is simple, they have a significantly more options to overcome challenges then the "melee" classes.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

I wanted to post a bit more regarding the "unlimited spell knowledge" point, because it's one that comes up so often, and appears to me, to be so erroneous.


I DO think this is a huge issue for Clerics and Druids in 3.5 and I usually, when DMing, houserule how many source books one can draw from. My two favorite houserules are "phb and any ONE other book; not the spell compendium" or "phb and any [light] spell from any book" for example, for a priest of the sun god. But I digress.



Let's talk about the limitations that are in place for wizards that people often gloss over.


Checking out this:
Arcane Spells :: d20srd.org

Indicates that a wizard DOES have to make a check to learn a spell.

No matter what the spell’s source, the wizard must first decipher the magical writing (see Arcane Magical Writings, above). Next, she must spend a day studying the spell. At the end of the day, she must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell’s level).

<snip irrelevant stuff>

If the check fails, the wizard cannot understand or copy the spell. She cannot attempt to learn or copy that spell again until she gains another rank in Spellcraft.

So each spell takes 24 hours for a chance to learn it. Success is not assured.


More importantly, here are the costs for spell aquisition:

In most cases, wizards charge a fee for the privilege of copying spells from their spellbooks. This fee is usually equal to the spell’s level × 50 gp.

and

A spell takes up one page of the spellbook per spell level. Even a 0-level spell (cantrip) takes one page. A spellbook has one hundred pages.

Materials for writing the spell cost 100 gp per page.

There is also the trivial cost of the blank spellbook, which has 100 pages, costs 15 gold, and weighs 3 lbs (too many spellbooks could easily encumber a low str wizard). But, as I said, that's trivial compared to the other costs.

I'm not clear on whether a wizard who failed to learn a spell would have to pay the copying fee of the "cost to learn". In my games, the wizard only pays upon successful copying of the spell. I could see an argument for the wizard to have to pay every time they tried to learn, however. After all, they are spending 24 hours with someone else's spellbook, and it's hardly that person's fault the wizard attempting to copy it doesn't have enough skill with spellcraft.

So there's the chance of the mean sourcebook wizard who charges every time, and there's even the chance of the supernice sourcebook wizard who never charges. Even in that case (which isn't really RAW and starts getting into monty haul territory) the wizard is only being saved a third the cost of the spell (2/3rds of the cost are actually writing it in his spellbook).

If we do have the mean sourcebook wizard, that means paying to fail on occasion. A lvl 1 wizard maxed in spellcraft, with an ability score of 18 has a spellcraft score of 8. Since the dc for lvl 1 spells is 16 (15 +1), the wizard will fail on a roll of 7 or below. This gets significantly better as the wizard levels, as at lvl 3 his spellcraft could be 10 (2 better from ranks), but the dc only goes up 1 for the increased spell level. Hence, the wizard fails on a 6 for lvl 2 spells and a 5 for lvl 1. Barring other improvements to spellcraft beyond ranks, the wizard has a 0 percent chance of failure for any spell starting at lvl 16. However, this ignores intelligence boosts from items and from the boost every four levels. In any case, a wizard starts his career failing approximately 1/3 of the time, which would be a hefty blow to the coin purse of a low level adventurer. Even if not charged for failure, it means that most low level wizards will have a difficult time learning every spell they feel like.


But for the purposes of the following, let's forget all about spellcraft DCs, and assume the wizard only ever pays for spells he learns (never paying for spells he fails to learn).

Basic fighter items, their cost in gold, and a wizard spell cost comparison):
masterwork chain mail 300 (2 level 1 spells)
masterwork longsword 315 (approx 2 lvl 1 spells)

+1 chain mail 1,300 (approx 3 lvl 3 spells)
+1 full plate 2,650 (approx 6 lvl 3 spells)
+1 longsword 2,315 (approx 5 lvl 3 spells)


The point is, that wizards DO have limitations, but too often (especially in message board conversations) those limitations are ignored.



Just for fun, I thought it's be interesting to add up the cost of all the sorceror/wizard spells in the SRD.

The total sum for all spells in the SRD (paying for every one) is 248,825 gold.

While I was at it, I added up the total spellbook pages that'd take: 1,662 pages. That's 17 spellbooks, for the piddly cost of 255 gold, and the not so piddly weight (for most wizards) of 51 lbs to lug around.


I hadn't done the math yet, but a +5 vorpal sword is 200,000 gold plus the cost of the masterwork sword (about 300 gold, give or take, depending on which sword).

So giving a wizard access to any spell in the SRD or PHB is like giving a fighter a free +5 vorpal sword along with another 48,000 gold.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Just for the record, I think two or three of these should be implemented, not all of them. You make some good points too .

That's good sense...some not all does change my perspective on using them.

1. Limit Spell Slots


Flexibility is part of the quadratic wizard problem.

Well, yes and no. It is certainly a balancing factor. It does provide a type of power. Heck, that's one of the things weighed against the sorceror. However, I don't think that flexibility itself is the quadratic component. I think it adds some linear power, and could be one way to limit wizards.

Part of the problem you touch on is that Wizards (and Clerics to an extent) have very tangible benefits for down time. They learn new spells, scribe scrolls, and make magic items. This increases their overall power in the game world.

The Fighter and Rogue have no such down time benefit (robbing a Bank sounds like an adventure, not down time).

I would love for there to either be down time benefits for all or for none. It makes balancing down time an easier decision for both players and DMs.

No rudeness taken

I've played Wizards. Obviously, there are not an infinite number of spells, so forgive my exaggeration. What is stated is the following: At any time, a wizard can also add spells found in other wizards’ spellbooks to her own.

That is true, but see my post above regarding the costs for doing so. There's a fee from the other wizards and there's the cost of actually writing the spell into one's spell book even if the other wizard (e.g. a fellow pc) doesn't charge.

This was a suggestion I was trying to avoid. The reason is power creep.

Very good point. I guess my response to that is that power creep is present in feats and magic items as well, so this is not a wizard only problem (or a spell only problem). The potential for spell abuse is probably larger than that of items and feats though.

Perhaps more clear guidelines or rules for what can and can't happen (or shouldn't happen) need to be present from the outset. E.G. Mearls said something similar to what you say about class stealing spells. A wizard should never do as much damage with a spell as a fighter. Fighters should be best at fighting. (Something like that).

Maybe that guideline alone would allow for wizards to, for example, cast knock, but instead of automatically working, the spell give a wizard the open locks skill at half their level for 1 minute (or somesuch). Or maybe it DOES magically open a door automatically, but it can only do it once per day for the spell and it's a 5th level spell, and thieves of that level could do it just as easily.

That said, I do think Wizards and Casters outshine Fighters and Rogues at high levels and steps should be taken to see that they are better balanced across all levels of play. The reason is simple, they have a significantly more options to overcome challenges then the "melee" classes

I do agree with this. I think there is something to the "Casters outshine non-casters, especially at high levels". I think the argument is often overblown or made to seem to be more of a divide than there is. I would like to see more options and more awesomeness for non casters, though, and I'd especially like to see some severe limitations on Clerics and Druids regarding their spell selection rather than "any spell from any book...they're all mine!"

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

There is also the trivial cost of the blank spellbook, which has 100 pages, costs 15 gold, and weighs 3 lbs (too many spellbooks could easily encumber a low str wizard). But, as I said, that's trivial compared to the other costs.

This is why mules are broken. The Wizard can just place all of his spell books on the mule!
Ban the Mule and the wizard is balanced for 5th Edition!