There's no doubt a perfectly sensible argument that a spellcaster would just adapt their combat tactics to attack the things their target isn't resistant to. A spellcaster can also do perfectly well for the group without ever casting a single offensively. Buffing, summoned monsters, and 'area denial' magic are all sensible tactics. However, to some extent this misses what I think some people (cetainly me) dislike most about the ubiquity of magic. Past a certain point it solves the part of the game that isn't combat. The chasm has no saving throw against being flown over, the wall doesn't have a save against spider climb, the plane doesn't have magic resistance to plane shift. If the problem is mundane then there will be a mundane skill that can solve it, and there will be a spell that can solve it. If the problem is magical then it's not likely there's a mundane solution. Reduce the spellcasters' toolkit, and mundane skills and clever solutions become much more viable.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
How would you houserule (nerf) magic at high levels.
- Thread starter Aberzanzorax
- Start date
There's no doubt a perfectly sensible argument that a spellcaster would just adapt their combat tactics to attack the things their target isn't resistant to. A spellcaster can also do perfectly well for the group without ever casting a single offensively. Buffing, summoned monsters, and 'area denial' magic are all sensible tactics. However, to some extent this misses what I think some people (cetainly me) dislike most about the ubiquity of magic. Past a certain point it solves the part of the game that isn't combat. The chasm has no saving throw against being flown over, the wall doesn't have a save against spider climb, the plane doesn't have magic resistance to plane shift. If the problem is mundane then there will be a mundane skill that can solve it, and there will be a spell that can solve it. If the problem is magical then it's not likely there's a mundane solution. Reduce the spellcasters' toolkit, and mundane skills and clever solutions become much more viable.
JoeGKushner
First Post
How does this differ from magic item use though?
High level characters of all sorts will have access to many of the things on your list that do the same thing as a spell with no real cost associated with it ranging from various potions and carpets of flying to magic gates and other classic items. In editions prior to 3rd you could argue that such items were not built in with an assumption that players would have access to them but in 3rd and higher, the default assumption seems to be that if its there, players can and should have access to them.
Brother MacLaren
Explorer
Yeah, but sometimes the spell *is* the clever and fun solution. Had a game of 3.5 where we were on a boat, and the boat hit a chain stretched across the river as a trap. The way the adventure was supposed to go, we would be ambushed and have to fight (the mundane solution). As it was, my druid happened to have a lot of utility spells prepared, and with one Control Water spell we were over the chain and on down the river. Pretty cool and memorable and fun. Though I see your point about magic removing the travel challenges. I think 4E made flight too high-level (near-Epic), but I do think they did a good thing by making it require concentration.
'I use climb skill'
'I use spider climb'
I dont see the effective difference.
I think that you are missing the point tho. A chasm is wandering damage. It does nothing to advance the plot yet still carries risk. A wall is frequently the same. A plane shift is an inherently magical effect that requires magic to even be part of the game. If the players think that the cost of the mundane solution is unattractive, they will look for an alternate. I dont see that as a problem. A chasm is interesing once or twice. Then it becomes annoying.
The easiest way to nerf magic is 'For every magic there is a counter'. In alot of cases, simply detecting the magic is sufficient to ruin the effect. Sometimes it is 'God N finds the use of that magic unforgivable. You can use it, but every paladin of god N is going to want to kill you'. Sometimes it is 'you fo realize that most half intelligent people know that Teleport exists, and that some people are quite able to make it so that you cannot teleport into their home? You do realize that there is a reason that the acid-breathing shark industy exists?'
You mean like DR, AC, flight, invisibility, cover, displacement, mirror image, and a thousand other things?
Because those already exist.
Meanwhile, immunity to elements is meaningless when wizards don't blast, and SR - at least in 3.x - is hilariously and easily bypassed.
Last edited:
Perhaps this will help quantify my feelings:
Wish should not be a spell. Ever. Wish should never be a spell that the wizard can just cast. It shouldn't be a spell that costs XP, it shouldn't be a spell that ages you, it shouldn't be a spell that the DM tries to twist the wording of. Wish should not be a spell.
Wish should be a plot point.
The issue with wizards and fighters is that fighters are given tools and weapons, whereas wizards are given plot points.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Yeah, I see your case. I was just plucking Wish out of a barrel labeled "high level wizard abilities." Maybe a +5 Vorpal Sword is more equal to a hypothetical Death spell or something (both kill things right away with a good chance of success).
But your last point matches up to what I was saying. Those mythic fighters often relied on plot points for their power -- Achilles dipped in the Styx made him invulnerable. Wizard in classical D&D have never depended on plot points -- they get plot points as class abilities. They get to be invulnerable because they picked the Invulnerability spell. This legacy probably came from attempts to emulate fiction, where wizards just had power, and fighters often had to do something like eat the heart of a dragon, or pull a magic sword out of a rock of destiny, for them to have those powers.
The equalization mechanism is thus to remove some of the plot-point ability from wizards (no, you don't get to grant your own wishes) and give some plot-point ability to fighters (sure, you can kill things with a vorpal sword without having to have the DM drop one for you, at about the same level that a wizard can kill things with their death spell), and keep some plot-point ability only in the hands of the DM, for them to hand out, that apply equally across all character classes (free the genie, get a wish, whether you're Merlin, Aladdin, or Conan; you can't plane shift except when the DM allows it, etc).
The 4e solution is a step in the right direction, but it just puts every plot-point ability in the hands of a DM and makes wizards and fighters equal in their ability to do jack-all to affect the plot.
Which isn't my ideal solution, though it does equalize. I want to give wizards scry and teleport, but I don't want to give it to them without giving fighters magic mirrors and pegasi. I like the idea of making both of them treasures, rather than making both of them class abilities, meaning that at some point, someone gets an ability like scry or teleport, but they don't get to pick it when they level up, and it's not relegated to a particular character class. They get it as a matter of adventure -- a plot point. A magic item. A supernatural creature. Even a tome of mighty magic (that doesn't require you to be a mighty mage to read the thing).
JoeGKushner
First Post
It has not been my experience that SR is hilariously and easily bypassed.
It has also not been my experience that "when wizards don't blast" as most wizards, well at least in the games I've been in or run, have had the 'blasting' wizard.
Our experiences must have worlds of differences where you see the 30 hit point 10th level wizard being some godly entity that isn't bluffing himself most of the combat in order to survive.
Mine either; it's a point of system mastery, though. The first time you run a mid to high level caster, if you don't know to expect it, you run in to all sorts of enemies that have SR you can't plausibly beat and have few spells that can get around it. The next time (or as your character goes up in level) you invest in feats and items to get though SR and that works most of the time (though I think SR is an awful mechanic, as it's giving a monster two saving throws for one spell), but occasionally some things will still have night-on-impossible to beat SR. And then you start looking through sources other than the PHB for spells that just bypass SR completely and focus on those. Typically followed by your DM nerfing the spells you were using to get around SR. While some people might enjoy going through that cycle, I don't think most people who play wizards do.
JoeGKushner
First Post
It's not only that, but you sacrifice, usually feats, to do that.
This prevents a whole slew of other options, like crafting magic items, say, from being open.
It's a limited focus.
One thing I wonder when I read some of the conversations like this, is what are these people's actual play experiences like that they think there is this wealth of unlimited mana boiling from the earth that provides this all around power to spell users.
And that's single class users. When you multi-class for flavor or to capture an old idea like bladesinging, ugh, the magic capability gets much worse.
Similar Threads
