Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
How would you houserule (nerf) magic at high levels.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5489134" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>The wizard's niche should be protected, too. But "being able to use magic" is an overly broad niche for a fantasy roleplaying game, IMO. 4e's concept of combat roles is a great start, and I believe that can be expanded to cover noncombat areas as well.</p><p></p><p>I've always liked the Wizard archetype as a sort of "Magical Scientist." Research, knowledge, arcane lore, the workings of thaumatrons and thaumiolis, the structure of the planes that they then rip a new one...</p><p></p><p>That's a pretty narrow archetype. A magical scientist isn't a charmer or a trap disarmer, they're not a regular combat powerhouse, and while they should be able to participate in every challenge (they do need some combat ability, and some exploration, and some social graces), they really shine when getting the party <strong>Information</strong>. They know stuff, and what they don't know, they know how to find out. A Wizard is your fantasy <a href="http://www.wolframalpha.com/" target="_blank">Wolfram Alpha</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a> all in one. </p><p></p><p>That means that if you want to be some sort of elemental kaboom artist, or some charming enchanter, or a crafty illusionist, or a dark-loving shadow mage, you're picking a different class (or at least a different build). You don't get to do all of that as a Wizard.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is why I am a fan of 4e making roles so central, though. It's possible to protect a niche if the niche is clearly defined in terms of what that character brings to the table. A little overlap is fine -- my pyromancer wizard is not too shabby about damage, but he's not like the party Strikers, who, in turn, can't affect as many targets as I could. And none of us are capable of the distraction power of the Paladin or the healing power of the Warlord. </p><p></p><p>Expanding on that concept, we have characters who get A+'s in various noncombat things: Intel, Exploration, Interaction, Recovery. Some characters are good at advancing the party through hostile terrain (think: a rogue who can find and disable traps and scout ahead for monsters). Some characters are good at dealing with NPC's (think: a charismatic paladin who can help anyone to feel like they can contribute). Some characters are great at learning about the dungeon or the threats, and no plot thread can hide from them for long (think: a wizard with scry and access to a library). Some characters shine when others screw up (think: a cleric who can heal the rogue that just failed to disarm the trap). </p><p></p><p>Those narrative roles, IMO, need to be as protected as the combat roles.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Climbing the cliff face falls into "exploration," so my theoretical wizard archetype would not be very good at that. That's perhaps the Rogue's territory.</p><p></p><p>So, the rogue can scale that wall easily, and can drop a rope down for everyone else to climb up, tying it to secure rocks and ensuring that the pitons are tight. </p><p></p><p>A wizard, even if they have <em>spider climb</em>, should not be as good at that as the rogue, because they have their own thing to contribute, and it's not this. Spider climb might compensate for weakness (it maybe helps you take 10 on a climb check), but it should not become a benefit (it's not better than a climb check).</p><p></p><p>Later on, when they're trying to pick out the shape-shifted doppelganger from the group of orphans, the wizard's <em>detect magic</em> shines, though.</p><p></p><p>Alternately, if the rogue can spot an impostor and the fighter can talk to anyone, perhaps the wizard should be able to help everyone climb that mountain.</p><p></p><p>But everyone should do one thing, and the wizard shouldn't get to do everything.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Why can't the rogue go invisible without your help? That's the issue of the wizard having baked-in powers that other classes should be able to do without help.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Which isn't great design, either, IMO. A character needs to be able to contribute to every challenge, even if it's not their specialization. Everyone can heal a little bit (in 4e, everyone has a second wind). Everyone can strike a little bit (in 4e, everyone deals damage). Everyone can defend and control a little bit (in 4e, everyone has some method of calling attention to themselves, or afflicting statuses, or moving enemies or allies around). </p><p></p><p>A wizard shouldn't have to choose between being effective in combat and being effective in exploration. They should be at a baseline in both, even if others do better, and they are more specialized at the information part of the adventure. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, this is the strength of Roles. In your example, druids and clerics both occupy the same role, so it's fine to have one without the other.</p><p></p><p>You could have a wizard occupying the same role as a rogue, but then you probably won't be in a party with both of them very often. Since the archetypal D&D party is a fighter, rogue, wizard, and cleric, I'd like to see them both contributing something different. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There's enough complaints from others to suggest that this isn't a universal experience, though, and if it's causing problems, it would be smart to look at it and try to fix those problems. </p><p></p><p>Noncombat roles is one of those fixes.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 5489134, member: 2067"] The wizard's niche should be protected, too. But "being able to use magic" is an overly broad niche for a fantasy roleplaying game, IMO. 4e's concept of combat roles is a great start, and I believe that can be expanded to cover noncombat areas as well. I've always liked the Wizard archetype as a sort of "Magical Scientist." Research, knowledge, arcane lore, the workings of thaumatrons and thaumiolis, the structure of the planes that they then rip a new one... That's a pretty narrow archetype. A magical scientist isn't a charmer or a trap disarmer, they're not a regular combat powerhouse, and while they should be able to participate in every challenge (they do need some combat ability, and some exploration, and some social graces), they really shine when getting the party [B]Information[/B]. They know stuff, and what they don't know, they know how to find out. A Wizard is your fantasy [URL="http://www.wolframalpha.com/"]Wolfram Alpha[/URL] and [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page"]Wikipedia[/URL] all in one. That means that if you want to be some sort of elemental kaboom artist, or some charming enchanter, or a crafty illusionist, or a dark-loving shadow mage, you're picking a different class (or at least a different build). You don't get to do all of that as a Wizard. This is why I am a fan of 4e making roles so central, though. It's possible to protect a niche if the niche is clearly defined in terms of what that character brings to the table. A little overlap is fine -- my pyromancer wizard is not too shabby about damage, but he's not like the party Strikers, who, in turn, can't affect as many targets as I could. And none of us are capable of the distraction power of the Paladin or the healing power of the Warlord. Expanding on that concept, we have characters who get A+'s in various noncombat things: Intel, Exploration, Interaction, Recovery. Some characters are good at advancing the party through hostile terrain (think: a rogue who can find and disable traps and scout ahead for monsters). Some characters are good at dealing with NPC's (think: a charismatic paladin who can help anyone to feel like they can contribute). Some characters are great at learning about the dungeon or the threats, and no plot thread can hide from them for long (think: a wizard with scry and access to a library). Some characters shine when others screw up (think: a cleric who can heal the rogue that just failed to disarm the trap). Those narrative roles, IMO, need to be as protected as the combat roles. Climbing the cliff face falls into "exploration," so my theoretical wizard archetype would not be very good at that. That's perhaps the Rogue's territory. So, the rogue can scale that wall easily, and can drop a rope down for everyone else to climb up, tying it to secure rocks and ensuring that the pitons are tight. A wizard, even if they have [I]spider climb[/I], should not be as good at that as the rogue, because they have their own thing to contribute, and it's not this. Spider climb might compensate for weakness (it maybe helps you take 10 on a climb check), but it should not become a benefit (it's not better than a climb check). Later on, when they're trying to pick out the shape-shifted doppelganger from the group of orphans, the wizard's [I]detect magic[/I] shines, though. Alternately, if the rogue can spot an impostor and the fighter can talk to anyone, perhaps the wizard should be able to help everyone climb that mountain. But everyone should do one thing, and the wizard shouldn't get to do everything. Why can't the rogue go invisible without your help? That's the issue of the wizard having baked-in powers that other classes should be able to do without help. Which isn't great design, either, IMO. A character needs to be able to contribute to every challenge, even if it's not their specialization. Everyone can heal a little bit (in 4e, everyone has a second wind). Everyone can strike a little bit (in 4e, everyone deals damage). Everyone can defend and control a little bit (in 4e, everyone has some method of calling attention to themselves, or afflicting statuses, or moving enemies or allies around). A wizard shouldn't have to choose between being effective in combat and being effective in exploration. They should be at a baseline in both, even if others do better, and they are more specialized at the information part of the adventure. Again, this is the strength of Roles. In your example, druids and clerics both occupy the same role, so it's fine to have one without the other. You could have a wizard occupying the same role as a rogue, but then you probably won't be in a party with both of them very often. Since the archetypal D&D party is a fighter, rogue, wizard, and cleric, I'd like to see them both contributing something different. There's enough complaints from others to suggest that this isn't a universal experience, though, and if it's causing problems, it would be smart to look at it and try to fix those problems. Noncombat roles is one of those fixes. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
How would you houserule (nerf) magic at high levels.
Top