Harry Potter-Style Wizards

[Pyrex]

...
As far as high caster level wands, you create the wand at whatever level you are. You can't create a wand at a higher or lower level than your actual, current level. So really, you craft a wand at your level, the only question is if you find or purchase (purchase? Gods no) a wand, what level was it's creator?...Did any of that answer the questions, or does the hiccup still stand out for you?

So a first-level student wizard crafts his very first wand at CL 1 and attunes it. Yay! I've got a wand!

15 years later our aspiring archmage is still using his CL1 student wand simply because there's absolutely no reason to go to the effort of crafting and attuning a "more powerful" one.

*That's* what's not making sense to me.

 

[Pyrex]

I'd say wands raise you power by 3 levels, 300%. Rare wands 500%. There is no rhyme or reason why a wand chooses what wizard except that two wizards casting with the same wand construction cause unexpected results eg Harry & Voldemort in the graveyard.

A simple way to model that would be to rule that Wandless Casting is a +2SL Metamagic feat.

Extraordinarily powerful wands might Heighten your spells 1 or 2 levels.

 

[Wolv0rine]

So a first-level student wizard crafts his very first wand at CL 1 and attunes it. Yay! I've got a wand!

15 years later our aspiring archmage is still using his CL1 student wand simply because there's absolutely no reason to go to the effort of crafting and attuning a "more powerful" one.

*That's* what's not making sense to me.

Hmm, okay, I'm not quite sure I'm getting which of the two possible interpretations of that seem possible from what you're saying. Do you mean that...
1. It's a problem in that it doesn't support the school of thought that says a character should pour gp and xp down the drain periodically to create magic items, but this doesn't have any built-in reasons for the character to pour that gp and xp down the drain because his wand doesn't become obsolete, or...
2. It's a problem because 15 years later our aspiring archmage knows a lot more about magic than he did when he was a snot-nosed student wizard, and should thus make a more potent wand because of that?

#1 I'd just have to harumph at and agree to ideological differences, while #2 I'd be perfectly open to considering. I made the effect of the wands static to keep it relatively simple, actually. It could be worse, this could be a discussion on staves. The text on staves I've got is a bit dense.

 

[trav_laney]

So a first-level student wizard crafts his very first wand at CL 1 and attunes it. Yay! I've got a wand!

15 years later our aspiring archmage is still using his CL1 student wand simply because there's absolutely no reason to go to the effort of crafting and attuning a "more powerful" one.

*That's* what's not making sense to me.

Perhaps the wands grow in power along with the wizards, sort of like Weapons of Legacy?

 

[Cabral]

There was a thread on this board using the Warlock (Complete Arcane) to emulate Harry Potterness. If you can find it, it's pretty sharp,

 

[Pyrex]

Hmm, okay, I'm not quite sure I'm getting which of the two possible interpretations of that seem possible from what you're saying. Do you mean that...
1. It's a problem in that it doesn't support the school of thought that says a character should pour gp and xp down the drain periodically to create magic items, but this doesn't have any built-in reasons for the character to pour that gp and xp down the drain because his wand doesn't become obsolete, or...
2. It's a problem because 15 years later our aspiring archmage knows a lot more about magic than he did when he was a snot-nosed student wizard, and should thus make a more potent wand because of that?

#1 I'd just have to harumph at and agree to ideological differences, while #2 I'd be perfectly open to considering. I made the effect of the wands static to keep it relatively simple, actually. It could be worse, this could be a discussion on staves. The text on staves I've got is a bit dense.

My point isn't exactly either of those, let me try and clarify again.

Wands of different caster level have different creation costs but identical effect, which, from a purely mechanical design standpoint seems a bit off.

When Bob the 15th lvl archmage breaks his wand he has two options. He can craft & attune his own replacement wand by spending something on the order of 15*n gp.

Or, he can make his apprentice do it, spend 1*n gp, make a trivial attunement roll, and have a wand that is every bit as useful as the one he made himself at a fraction the cost.

There should be some motivation for a) Bob to craft his own wand instead of making his apprentice do it and b) for Bob to seek out the long-lost wand of the fabled Arch-Wizard Darryl.

Your current system not only doesn't provide motivation for a) and b), but instead actively discourages them.

Does that make more sense?

 

[Wolv0rine]

My point isn't exactly either of those, let me try and clarify again.

Wands of different caster level have different creation costs but identical effect, which, from a purely mechanical design standpoint seems a bit off.

When Bob the 15th lvl archmage breaks his wand he has two options. He can craft & attune his own replacement wand by spending something on the order of 15*n gp.

Or, he can make his apprentice do it, spend 1*n gp, make a trivial attunement roll, and have a wand that is every bit as useful as the one he made himself at a fraction the cost.

There should be some motivation for a) Bob to craft his own wand instead of making his apprentice do it and b) for Bob to seek out the long-lost wand of the fabled Arch-Wizard Darryl.

Your current system not only doesn't provide motivation for a) and b), but instead actively discourages them.

Does that make more sense?

Okay, yeah now I think I get you. Hmm, definately that is a hole in the thing. I'll have to put some thought behind that, try to plug that hole while not letting wands drift from the new function and place in the magic item scheme I'd put them in.
My first thought is to make attunement of your own wand easier than a strange wand (you made it, after all, what better starting point?), and to possibly replace the static ECL boost of a wand with one that scales with the difference in levels of the creator & wielder. That'd solve the "Why make my own wand?" problem (although in a Potterverse game, as opposed to the setting this wand was written for, that problem's actually a feature. No one makes their own wand, they go to Ollivander's), while a scaling effect by level disparity would keep you from slapping your office boy in the back of the head and ordering him to go make you a new wand, OR give you impetus to find the wand of Whoever.

Well, that should prove some interesting work, thanks Pyrex.

(And maybe it's just because it's a Potter thread, but if that's the biggest problem with my redefinition of what a wand is, I'm pleased. hehe)

 

[smootrk]

I would make the wands necessary for casting spells, period. Any spellcasting without a wand is done at CL minus 4, or something like that. With such an extreme reduction, it would be absurd for anyone to venture out sans their wand. Makes it easier than trying to make some goofy mechanic for increasing power level. K.I.S.S. in other words (keep it simple stupid).

But this is just my own opinion.

 

[Wolv0rine]

I would make the wands necessary for casting spells, period. Any spellcasting without a wand is done at CL minus 4, or something like that. With such an extreme reduction, it would be absurd for anyone to venture out sans their wand. Makes it easier than trying to make some goofy mechanic for increasing power level. K.I.S.S. in other words (keep it simple stupid).

But this is just my own opinion.

It's my fault, but there is a kind of sub-topic going on between Pyrex and myself that isn't strictly on-topic. Having thrown out my non-Potter (but somewhat Potter inspired) Wand system for my D&D campaign world because I thought it might be interesting to the topic, but I'm taking his feedback on the system itself too.
For a Potterverse game, I would say nothing over Cantrip level magic is permissable sans wand, and even then I'd be inclined to introduce a chaos factor into it to account for the slightly uncontrolled nature of that magic. I could be mis-remembering, but didn't Harry at one point get some instruction on how to control his magic wandless? If I'm remembering that rightly, I'd say it'd be possible to buy off the chaos-factor, but not the upper limit of the spell capacity when wandless.
So in effect, I'd suggest for a Potter game that the wand doesn't buff the wizard so much as the lack of a wand gimps him.

And that's not even going into the matter of the wrong wand, broken wands, and the nasty things that can happen. You ever wonder if Ron would make a good wizard if Harry took some of that overflowing gold he's got and bought his best buddy a frelling wand that wasn't hand-me-down? I mean really, Mrs. Weasley makes Harry sweaters and treats him almost like a foster mother, and the boy doesn't ever think to buy his mate something new? Cheap bugger.

 

[Sigurd]

I would make the wands necessary for casting spells, period. Any spellcasting without a wand is done at CL minus 4, or something like that. With such an extreme reduction, it would be absurd for anyone to venture out sans their wand. Makes it easier than trying to make some goofy mechanic for increasing power level. K.I.S.S. in other words (keep it simple stupid).

Thats how I'd do it too. Maybe if you were a dumbeldore you could cast some magic without a wand or maybe there is a specialized subtype but the the common rule would be no wand - no magic.

Any wand would be better than no wand

The right wand would make everything easier

In time a wizard would attune himself more to his wand - not the other way around.

Losing a wand would be terrible. Fixing a wand often impossible. Finding a new wand very difficult.