Is D&D (WotC) flaming out?

[ProfessorCirno]

Thing is, speaking as a wizard player, you don't and shouldn't have access to those things all the time. Your murder mystery example only works if the mage has the spell. A DM can keep scrolls and wands away from the wizard for that adventure; if that magic were that plentiful, there wouldn't be a mystery in the first place. Besides that fact, the deceased doesn't necessarily know the answer

1) In most cases where the deceased doesn't know, magic is involved there, so you need magic to counter magic - not a selling point. Or, again, just divination it up.

2) Why don't you have access to this? YOu can teleport and fly to any city in the world. Are you saying that no wizards ever offer their services or sell scrolls or let other wizards copy from their spell books?

Magic is like a secret. If 10 people know a secret and 9 don't tell, the secret is out.

Your other examples have similar issues. The lower-level spells you mention are not terribly unbalancing except in the most rudimentary setups. The knock spell can unlock most doors, but it doesn't disarm traps (which there is no spell for). Arcane Lock locks most doors, but the lock doesn't matter if the door is bashed in by a fighter, or the lock dispelled.

Summon Monster

Fly is only a pain if you are trying to lock them in a hole. Archers can make short work of a wizard scout trying to do recon. Traps or odd setups cure its use in any locked rooms with ledges.

Again, flight has power far, far beyond combat. I'm talking about narrative power. The wizard can literally fly over raging rivers or dangerous mountains and sheer cliffs. A towering citadel is worthless to something that flies.

Summon Monster is not terribly bad. At lower levels, who really cares about badgers, and at upper levels banishment/antimagic is a real pain.

Again, if the only answer to magic is more magic then my point is proven even stronger.

Polymorph is a pain in the rear, but size and level constraints are sort of put a muzzle on it.

Not really. You don't need to be a Gargantuan creature to be hilariously powerful.

Time Stop isn't really a problem. A character can't do a whole lot, and the level/benefit causes most people to overlook it during spell selection.

People overlook a lot of good things.

Invisibility gets canceled/thwarted by so many things that a single failed role can leave worse off then if you hadn't tried to sneak by magically at all.

Here I will agree - invisibility can be cancelled by a lot.

Unless you're invisible and flying ;p

Blur and Mirror Image do give cover bonuses, but in the case of Blur it's much better to be used on the fighters then the wizard. Mirror Image is a pain, but area effects counter it nicely and can take the wizard out of the game entirely.

Again, magic cancelling magic doesn't disprove my point.

Disintegrate is the worst one, but even it is muted. It can only disintegrate 10x10x10 of matter, so a small hut or large rock. Normal weapons and shields are of course dead. An average amount of damage is 100 for that spell, which is a lot. A high fort save by the target limits its likely damage to 15 points, which isn't that much. It's actually less then the average fighter of equivalent level.

The power of disintegrate isn't in the HP damage, which is why I think a lot of people tend to ignore it more then they should. It's a trend I see a lot, really. HP damage is so minute of a thing that wizards can do compared to their ability to completely reshape a battlefield to their desires. Being able to disintegrate any amount of matter is insanely potent. Walls - or almost any type of barrier - no longer have meaning.

The point of all this has not been to poke holes in the handful of examples post here; rather, just to illustrate two things. First, that it isn't as all powerful as it seems, second, that the wizard may be able to rip reality, but the DM gets to line it with kevlar.

See, that's my problem.

To give a fighter challenges is easy. Most things can be a challenge to a fighter. Sheer cliffs, dangerous terrain, deadly monsters. But to challenge a wizard you have to go out of your way to do it. You need magic to cancel out magic, because that's the only thing that can. A fighter cannot cancel out a wizard, but a wizard can cancel out a fighter. Unless the fighter is using something that another wizard made.

If a person wants to play in the traditional D&D world where the clerics augment the fighters into blessed juggernauts wading into undead foes while the wizard spends several rounds trying to send them back to the graves which the party rogue is currently looting, then they jive quite nicely in my experience. Just my 2 cents though.

I actually agree here.

My gripe is this - in order to play this way, the wizard and cleric either have to, be it purposefully or accidentally, not play up to their actual narrative power. Bringing a gun to a fist fight isn't unfair if the guy never shoots the gun...but he still has a gun while everyone else has a knife. And the wizard gun shoots antimatter bullets and creates an anti-fist shield around him and then changes all of reality.

To put it another way, at level 16, the wizard can create his own demiplane. The fighter, the barbarian, the rogue, the monk, the ranger, and so on, and so on, get the ability to hit things with a stick a bit better. The wizard isn't even playing the same game as they are - he's playing Exalted while they're playing World of Darkness: Mortals. And both of those are fun games*! But they don't really play well together.

*Exalted really isn't a fun game, though for mechanical reasons, not fluff reasons

For what it's worth, so you know this isn't just me arm-chairing things, I have - quite a few times now - sat down and tried to think on how to reconcile this. The answer I eventually came up with is this: First, you need to decide if you want a high magic, low magic, or "mid-level" game. From there, you have to adjust. In anything but high magic, wizards and their insane versatility are too much. As are clerics and druids, really. Sorcerers, funny enough, I don't have that big of a problem with, simply because they lack the insane versatility of always having a spell for every occasion. For a high magic game, you want to REALLY boost up the noncasters, and give them a means of accomplishing over the top heroic and, really, mythological feats of power and strength, such as Beowulf ripping the arm off Grendel and spending hours underwater searching for the lair, Cu Chulainn's epic warp spasms, or...just about anything that was ever done in the Three Kingdoms. For a mid level game, which is probably easiest, just nudge players towards classes like the Factotum, the specialized casters (like the beguiler), or Tome of Battle classes. For low-magic...well, that's it's own thread entirely, and I'd be more then happy to comment on that subject elsewhere if you want

This is, of course, going off a 3e chassis. A 4e chassis, at least for a low magic style game, easier in some aspects, and harder in others. I unfortunately haven't had a chance to really stare at 4e mechanics and build a really low-magic style game out of them.

*Exalted really isn't a fun game, though for mechanical reasons, not fluff reasons

Stoneskin is the only one of those worth comparing to magical platemail and tower shield in terms of reliability. IMO you're an armchair general on this topic.

Yes, a flat chance to miss is way worse then AC which becomes increasingly hilariously worthless as you level, unless you devout a lot of resources into it, at which point only half the creatures will simply auto-bypass it

 

[khantroll]

1) In most cases where the deceased doesn't know, magic is involved there, so you need magic to counter magic - not a selling point. Or, again, just divination it up.

Not necessarily. Not everyone sees their assassin. If Col. Mustard smacks you in the back of the head with his candlestick, you probably won't know it. Chemical attacks or accidents will leave you with no answers as well.

Also, I disagree about magic countering magic. To quote the Sword of Truth "We are steel against the steel, he is the magic against the magic". In most fantasy literature, that is what inevitably happens when one party leverages magic. It wouldn't be magic if a sword could take it down. By the same token, I am reminded of a cartoon I saw as a child where a knight tilts toward a dragon and the lance breaks. Toasted Knight. Magic is what you use outside the bounds of the sword.

2) Why don't you have access to this? YOu can teleport and fly to any city in the world. Are you saying that no wizards ever offer their services or sell scrolls or let other wizards copy from their spell books?

Depends on the level and the story. If it is wayside tavern in the middle of nowhere, I would have to travel a ways, spend more time and money, and depending on how hard the foreign wizard dickers the assassin could have blown the inn sky high before I return.

A murder mystery in a metropolitan area lends itself to other problems. Why am I handling it at all if better mages are around? How does the constabulary feel about me fooling around and bringing more civilians into the picture? There are times when the yellow pages won't help you.

The above assumes that I cannot cast the necessary spells. If I can, I may not have access to them for the above, or I may simply not have the gold for them. I doubt I'll have time to earn it with a murderer on the loose. Point is that there are any number of nuisance reasons I don't necessarily have everything at my disposal.

Quote:
Your other examples have similar issues. The lower-level spells you mention are not terribly unbalancing except in the most rudimentary setups. The knock spell can unlock most doors, but it doesn't disarm traps (which there is no spell for). Arcane Lock locks most doors, but the lock doesn't matter if the door is bashed in by a fighter, or the lock dispelled.
Summon Monster

Point taken about disabling traps. A waste, but it does work.

Quote:
Fly is only a pain if you are trying to lock them in a hole. Archers can make short work of a wizard scout trying to do recon. Traps or odd setups cure its use in any locked rooms with ledges.
Again, flight has power far, far beyond combat. I'm talking about narrative power. The wizard can literally fly over raging rivers or dangerous mountains and sheer cliffs. A towering citadel is worthless to something that flies.

I wasn't necessarily talking about combat either. I meant scouting. Rivers you have a point on. But mountains he is going to either ) be close enough to the ground it won't matter or B) he is going to find himself with a whole new set of environmental problems and random encounters. A citadel is a still a problem unless depend on sheer walls for your defense, and leave a window open. He still has to get inside, fight the guards, get past the traps, and defeat me. So he got in with a spell instead of DC climb check. Big whoop, IMHO.

Quote:
Polymorph is a pain in the rear, but size and level constraints are sort of put a muzzle on it.
Not really. You don't need to be a Gargantuan creature to be hilariously powerful.

Nope, but because it does not mimic the truly nasty aspects of most creatures, you still have to be pretty big for it be worth it. Plus, depending on form, you may have to give up spellcasting, or you may open yourself to environmental threats.

Quote:
Time Stop isn't really a problem. A character can't do a whole lot, and the level/benefit causes most people to overlook it during spell selection.
People overlook a lot of good things.

Don't get me wrong. Time Stop is a good spell with the right application, but the level/usefulness ratio is far from the best. Not like polymorph.

Quote:
Invisibility gets canceled/thwarted by so many things that a single failed role can leave worse off then if you hadn't tried to sneak by magically at all.
Here I will agree - invisibility can be cancelled by a lot.

Unless you're invisible and flying ;p

Depends on what you are flying over. Campfires + Spot Check + Arrow still = boned.

Quote:
Blur and Mirror Image do give cover bonuses, but in the case of Blur it's much better to be used on the fighters then the wizard. Mirror Image is a pain, but area effects counter it nicely and can take the wizard out of the game entirely.
Again, magic cancelling magic doesn't disprove my point.

Not necessarily talking about magic. Breath weapons are area effects, as are landslides, earth quakes, basically anything that strikes a large area. Grenades will work.

Quote:
Disintegrate is the worst one, but even it is muted. It can only disintegrate 10x10x10 of matter, so a small hut or large rock. Normal weapons and shields are of course dead. An average amount of damage is 100 for that spell, which is a lot. A high fort save by the target limits its likely damage to 15 points, which isn't that much. It's actually less then the average fighter of equivalent level.
The power of disintegrate isn't in the HP damage, which is why I think a lot of people tend to ignore it more then they should. It's a trend I see a lot, really. HP damage is so minute of a thing that wizards can do compared to their ability to completely reshape a battlefield to their desires. Being able to disintegrate any amount of matter is insanely potent. Walls - or almost any type of barrier - no longer have meaning.

You are onto something there. I think that, if he can cast enough disintegrates for it to be an issue he can come up with a better way to circumvent walls. Still, though, grenades, gunpowder, or fantasy siege engine accomplish similar feats of destruction as far as barriers are concerned.

See, that's my problem.

To give a fighter challenges is easy. Most things can be a challenge to a fighter. Sheer cliffs, dangerous terrain, deadly monsters. But to challenge a wizard you have to go out of your way to do it. You need magic to cancel out magic, because that's the only thing that can. A fighter cannot cancel out a wizard, but a wizard can cancel out a fighter. Unless the fighter is using something that another wizard made.

Depends on a lot of factors. In a stand up fighter, you are correct. The beauty of the fighter is that he is versatile. He can take away the wizard's toys, hire soldiers to distract the summoned creatures, and then take his greatbow and with a few feats kill the same wizard before the wizard's next turn. Depending on the player, it might no make it that far. At the first sign of distraction, the wizard is either going A) armor up or B) summon or C) attack. Distracting hirelings take care of those. The fighter sneaks up behind him. The wizard does whichever of the three above he hasn't done. The fighter nails the wizard three times (or more) with said great bow, and he's down.

That is just one example, and I can already see a couple of things the wizard might have ready if he's paranoid. Point is, hit points can be an equalizer, as can feat selection and being sneakier then the other guy.

I can honestly say that wizards have never been an issue in my gaming group. The players work together, and toward the end of the power band they all achieve extreme power levels.

Side note. At present, the group contains a bard, two wizards (different specialties) a cleric, a paladin a fighter and a rogue. The paladin is the least powerful (no surprise), at 8th level the fighter leads on average realized damage. The cleric is the most unbalancing, but that is the player.

 

[Sorrowdusk]

@khantroll

On the polymorph issue-there is always Shapechange, albeit a 9nth lvl spell. Ever thought of changing shape into a Shambling Mound zapping and then yourself with a permanent, energy-substituted-to-electric wall of fire to produce limitless Constitution? You only lose the points at a rate of 1 con point per hour. No? Good.

I'm think you're underestimating the potential of Time Stop. Also consider that with Greater Celerity the wiz (or the cleric with domains*) can take a full round worth of actions as an immediate action-before you even take your turn, even if you won init. Winning init is actually only as valuable as the unlikelyhood your enemy hasnt prepared for you to go first. For example, they use regular turn firing off enervation, then follow it up with celerity and finger of death to take advantage of the target's reduced saves before the target gets to react.

Also combo-able with Foresight. Cast Foresight in advance to negate surprise; then Greater Celerity; follow with Quickened Disjunction, then Maximized Timestop (Rod of Maximize). You're dazed for the first round of the Timestop. Dimensional Lock in the second round of Timestop, Quickened Cloudkill, then Forcecage in the third Timestop round.

The last two rounds of Timestop? Enjoy a good smoke, have a little drink, make a little love, laugh maniacally.

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/1161/justpf.jpg

*[I believe Magic Item Compendium notes that you CAN have Swift & Immediate Action magic items, including wands. The Activation time of the spell within is the activation time of the item-SO the cleric with enough UMD could have a Staff of Greater Celerity]

Antimagic can be a PITA but hypotheticall with Invoke Magic (a 9nth lvl spell) the Wiz can cast INSIDE of an Antimagic Field as long as the spell is 4th or less. Spell Resistance and Spell immunity could prove a hindurance -or it may not.

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=9943.0

And even if somebody killed them, they MIGHT not have killed them. It may be a clever ruse as they may have only been an Astral Projection, have a Clone Spell as a backup, or be under the effect of a Death Pact-allowing them to be instantly True Ressurected on the spot. Then...there's Craft Contingent Spell.

Of course-there's no reason the caster cant convey ALL of these benefits on his PARTY MEMBERS too.

(Actually with Astral Projection...because it has no duration and affects multiple targets, the PCs entire party, and also an entire party of recurring enemies could not "actually be there" but be able to use all their abilities and even magical items. They'd never be in danger...unless someone tried to Discern Location their real bodies OR the DM decided their opponents were packing Githyanki Silver Swords.

A funny note-aside from the Demon Lords in Fiendish Codex, the Nightmare is the only creature I can think of that has Astral Projection as a usable At-Will SLA, which is pretty powerful compared to its CR. Actually, it could be...a "recurring" nightmare to fight the same Nightmare or Cauchemar over and over again.)

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I'll limit my response to two quotes

Also, I disagree about magic countering magic. To quote the Sword of Truth "We are steel against the steel, he is the magic against the magic". In most fantasy literature, that is what inevitably happens when one party leverages magic. It wouldn't be magic if a sword could take it down. By the same token, I am reminded of a cartoon I saw as a child where a knight tilts toward a dragon and the lance breaks. Toasted Knight. Magic is what you use outside the bounds of the sword.

If magic is rare and powerful and beats everything, a PC should not have it.

Magic counters magic, certainly. But magic also counters steel. In fact, magic counters everything. The only thing that counters magic is more magic.

Incidentally, magic is beaten by the sword in basically every source of literature or mythology ever, so this idea of wizards being unkillable is utterly bizarre. The most common cause of death for wizards in Hyboria is due to Conan Threw a Chair at Him. Mouser and the Grey Fafner murdered about a billion wizards. Pretty much every mythological hero ever has a scene where they fight or wrestle some horrible supernatural creature and defeat it. The Bible has a dude wrestling God and holding his ground. The D&D wizard is utterly and completely alien as far as narrative function goes - he simply doesn't exist. You know that thread asking what makes D&D unique? The God Wizard does. He's something that exists nowhere else.

Narratively speaking wizards hold two roles - the Wise Old Sage, and the Deus Ex Machina. The problem with the D&D wizard is that he embodies the second, not the first - and the Deus Ex Machina isn't a playable character. It's the hand of Plot. It's you, the DM.

Imagine you got all set to play a cool game based vaguely on the Illiad and the Odyssey. You tell your players to make crafty, strong, valiant, and intelligent warriors. Their fights will be deadly, and they'll need to use their wits to escape from all manner of monsters and environments.

Then one guy says "Ok, but I call dibs on playing as Poseidon."

That's the D&D wizard

NDepends on a lot of factors. In a stand up fighter, you are correct. The beauty of the fighter is that he is versatile. He can take away the wizard's toys, hire soldiers to distract the summoned creatures, and then take his greatbow and with a few feats kill the same wizard before the wizard's next turn. Depending on the player, it might no make it that far. At the first sign of distraction, the wizard is either going A) armor up or B) summon or C) attack. Distracting hirelings take care of those. The fighter sneaks up behind him. The wizard does whichever of the three above he hasn't done. The fighter nails the wizard three times (or more) with said great bow, and he's down.

I'm going to point something out here, though:

Everything listed here can be done by a wizard.

Nothing that you listed is a fighter only thing. Or a barbarian or rogue only thing.

In the grand scheme of things, you have class abilities, and they're specialized. Then, you have non-spontanious casting, which can be specialized, or not, or it can be specialized towards one thing one day and another thing another day, and it can devour most class abilities.

 

[Mallus]

Magic is what you use outside the bounds of the sword.

Exactly. That's the problem. A sword is useful in a sword fight and magic is useful everywhere else (and magic ain't bad in a sword fight, either).

I was never a fan of the magical arms race that developed in older-school D&D by mid-to-high level. A DM had to either equip foes with countermeasures for the PC casters magical abilities and/or create situations where the PC caster's spells don't work --ie like the location-based nerfs found in puzzle rooms in classic AD&D tournament modules.

The first is a lot of work for the DM and the second isn't a lot fun for the players. At least in my experience, YMMV, etc.

The thing I like best about the latest iteration of D&D, and this in from a DM's perspective, is the magical arms race is largely absent. I don't need to spend time figuring out how to nerf or counter PC magic. I can let players use whatever abilities they have to their fullest measure at the time of their choosing without the game breaking down.

This is terrific for the sort of player-driven story-heavy games I run. The game's action can go wherever the players take it, without me having to heard the PC's into a null-magic room in a generic mega-dungeon in order to challenge them.

 

[rounser]

4E's cure for this problem you have with D&D is worse than the disease. The result is just another fantasy heartbreaker, and no amount of ridiculously hyperbolic Poseidon analogies will change that.

 

[Votan]

4E's cure for this problem you have with D&D is worse than the disease. The result is just another fantasy heartbreaker, and no amount of ridiculously hyperbolic Poseidon analogies will change that.

Perhaps, but there are a lot of ways to make magic useful (in a plot sense) without it being overbearing. Fred Saberhagen had a version of magic where steel and blood made it extremely hard to cast spells. Only the greatest of wizards could possibly cast spells during an actual fight (and these are clearly not the people playing the roles of protagonists).

The result (in the novels) was that wizards/clerics and such had a sharply defined plot role that was different than the non-magical warriors.

Other ploys have simply included very long casting times for spells or making magic very subtle. Gandalf could cast an offensive spell but he was more likely to use a sword in a fight.

It's possible 4E over-corrected but it wasn't the only solution to the problem.

 

[Sorrowdusk]

@ProfessorCirno

What if instead of WIZARDS-the games casters were more like Warlocks?


I feel this thread has kinda sorta moved a considerable way from its original topic, but here's just a thought as far as magic countering more magic-dont a lot of creatures have Spell-Like Abilities or basically "magical powers" to use against the PCs? Certainly they dont always have to be countered by magic, do they I mean of course, they're abilities are usually limited in number, and may be usable at will or a few times ber day.

Warlock lacks many of the utility abilities of the Wizard or Cleric has BUT he has High UMD so he can use any magic item he comes across, as well as any scrolls, wands, or staves he is allowed to buy or loot and he can craft items as a class feature even though he cannot actually cast any of the requisite spells if he makes a high enough UMD check and expends the gold. If he fails the check, he can never try to craft an item with that spell again, until he gains a level.

I like Warlock class, its fun and has a lot of flavor. I've played Warlock, Hellfire Warlock, and right now I'm playing a CE Cleric3(Cloistered)/Warlock4/Eldritch Disciple8. As a 15th lvl character I only just got 5th lvl spells. Though I do enjoy the versatility gained, what I really like is the thematic combined Warlock and Divine angle, and my Warlock abilities are still my favorites -especially The Dead Walk and Nightmare Made Real.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Other ploys have simply included very long casting times for spells or making magic very subtle. Gandalf could cast an offensive spell but he was more likely to use a sword in a fight.

This is so very, very true.

Typically, spells used by casters against heroes in fiction were either out of combat spells that took a lot of time, summonings of beings to fight for the casters, pre-cast spells with long durations or were defensive in nature. Sure, Gandalf did a bit of TK in the movie, and you might see a shapechanger or two, but direct, reliable and quick attack spells were rare.

I mean, look at the aforementioned Conan, Grey Mouser and Fafhrd: typically, enemy casters got one or two spells off against them before they closed and the fight was over. Ulrich of Craggenmoor's attacks against Vermithrax Pejoritve were repetitive and not exactly quick.

 

[Beginning of the End]

How many spells does a wizard need to destroy a fight?

2. Maybe 3.

How many spells does a level, let's keep it small, 4 wizard have?

Way more then needed.

Balance breaks down far earlier then level 12. Colorspray is a level 1 spell, Glitterdust and Web level 2.

The point you're missing is that it doesn't matter if the wizard blows up an encounter. I want them to blow up encounters. That's what wizards do.

I ran a session of OD&D the other day: We got through 14 combat encounters in 4-5 hours.

How is that possible? Because clerics can blow up encounters with turning and wizards can blow up encounters with spells. (In ways which completely dwarf their 3E counterparts.)

Was it fun? Sure. Why? Because they weren't My Precious Encounters(TM) and none of us viewed the 8-10 encounters rapidly dispensed with as "spoiled fun". The use of the wizard's spells is strategically interesting and often requires the tactical abilities of the other characters in order to work to best effect. And, of course, when the strategy calls for the wizard not to blow-up an encounter (or he can't because their strategy has failed and they've used up their blow-up powers while still being stuck in the dungeon) then the tactical abilities of the other classes are given their moment.

Want to have a murder mystery? Nope! The spellcaster can just ask the dead guy what happened.

That's like designing a modern murder mystery where the weapon is next to the victim, there are fingerprints on the weapon, and the fingerprints are in the national database and trivially identify the murderer. (Who can be found watching TV at the address listed on his driver's license.)

You're right: That sounds like a boring adventure. You should probably take into consideration the investigatory capabilities of the characters while designing your mystery scenarios.

The problem is that D&D tried to be a high powered awesome world changing campaign with the wizard and the low magic gritty sword and sandals kicked out of the inn game with the warrior. And those two types of games are mutually exclusive.

Not in my experience. You're projecting your inadequacies.

It's funny - for all the anger and whinging that 4e is just about combat, whenever the discussion about pre-4e wizard power comes out, combat seems to be all people talk about

Only when you do your selective quoting thing. You surely don't think that all those servants and followers a high-level fighter lord receives are only useful for combat, do you?

Edit: And for the one billionth time you are Alexander, stop referring to yourself in the third person.

And for the one billionth time, you are bizarrely paranoid and mendacious.

Anyway, to sum up:

(1) If you don't buy into My Precious Encounter(TM), the wizard blowing up encounters is irrelevant from a prep-to-play standpoint.

(2) Quite a few of the spellcasters' "blow up this encounter" techniques work by making the other PCs look awesome (through buffing and the like). The others rapidly dispose of entire encounters in mere moments, so their impact on spotlight time is minimal.

(3) When played by mature people, D&D is a cooperative game. The guy who comes up with a nifty plan involving the wizard's spells is often having just as much fun as the guy actually rolling the dice to use those spells.

(4) If you aren't trying to railroad your players, the ability for spellcasters to blow up the railroad is irrelevant.