Let's redo the Wizard class(Community Project)

[Steven McRownt]

The Wizard
Hit Dice: d4
Skill Points: 2+ Int
Class Skills: The core ones
BAB: worst
Fort: Bad
Ref: Bad
Will: Good

The wizard should be ....well... a wizard. After all there's the multiclass option to let him became something different. And loads of PrC. So the starting point shouldn't be different form the core one... (i'm trying to completely redraw the sorcerer in another thread, but just because i don't feel it like a wizard).

So, in my opinion, the problem is the spellcasting method. Spell points? channeling? Half fixed-Half spontaneus? Back to 2nd edition schools, utilising massively specialisation to let each wizard being a little different from another one (the 2nd edition invoker is -after all- the sorcerer of 3e)?

Consider better this last solution: a wizard who do not specialize -i will call it "magus"- will have some hindrances with spells he can cast/spell points per day, but a wider selection. A specialist... instead of having one to three opposite scholl will have one school of specialization and one to three schools open to him (perhaps even in limited power, until 6th level spell i would say at once, but i need to study carefully the Players handbook to be more exact)

Another idea could be that it's possible to swap one spell that is not from the specialized school in one specialized... or add as a template an effect of the specializerd school to another spell (this could be an high level power anyway):read thoughts on a fireball for a diviner, dispel magic on a melf's acid arrow for an abjurer and so on...

Steven McRownt

 

[Irda Ranger]

Wysiwyg

There's another thread where a couple folks are rewriting the Wizard. Its a rough draft, so we could use some more advice on what people think of it.

Here's the gist:
HD, Saves, Weapons, etc are all the same, just spellcasting is differnt.

You have a books of spells. This functions as a regular spellbook.

You prepare a group of spells for the say, not all of them.

When you cast the spells however, they don't go away. You can cast that same spell again. The trick is that you have to channel Mana to power the spell, and it can take several rounds to channel enough Mana for one spell. Concentration checks are necessary to not lose the spell, and the more Mana you have stored, the higher the DC. Lost Mana can backlash on you as Subdual Damage, so you can knock yourself out trying to cast a high spell (or on a bad roll).

So,
Upside: As many spells as you want from the list you have prepared.
Downside: Several rounds to cast, usually about a 5% of a backlash.

Also, you can cast on the fly by casting directly from your spellbook. Doing so requires twice as much Mana; which means twice the cast time and a arithmetically increasing chance of spell failure as you go up in spell level. (And therefore twice as much Subdual Damage if you do fail)

If this sounds interesting,
check it out.

Irda Ranger

PS- I have run the numbers through a spreadsheet to figure out exactly how much chance there is of spell failure, how many rounds it takes to cast, etc. Just let me know if you want them.

 

[Shirt Guy John]

Can I just say that I like the wizard how he is, and I feel that the spellcasters are all pretty balanced as is. I do however see that the Sorcerer is a "bazooka", but wasn't that the point?

Why don't you spend your time playing wizards instead of changing them?

The wizard works. Leave it alone. If you want, work on the "Magus" idea, because it sounds pretty cool. Otherwise, leave the poor old wizard alone, he doesn't have enough hit points to servive being poked at by a large group of people.

 

[The Kender]

I liked that system where it took so long to cast spells. Something like that would be a good idea.

 

[Steven McRownt]

Can I just say that I like the wizard how he is, and I feel that the spellcasters are all pretty balanced as is. I do however see that the Sorcerer is a "bazooka", but wasn't that the point?

snip

The wizard works. Leave it alone.

snip

...well i have to check again the name of his thread.
uhm. That's it. I was remembering well. "Let's redo the wizard class": what does it means? If i understand it, it should be a way to discuss on alternatives for the wizard class. I could even be satisfied with the core wizard, but if someone needs some feedback and/or suggestion, i will help him. The true specialist and the magus ideas are something that, it's true, i wanted to develop; it is true that my complainin' on sorcerer could be off topic, but the point was: if we want make a new wizard who cast spontaneusly do we'll still need the sorcerer?

...I've used, for a time, the mana system is skills and powers, the channeling way. At first glance is not so distant from Irda Ranger's ideas. A quite good idea, but at the end it wasn't so good when played. It slowed a lot the game, and put in more danger the wizard. After a couple of weeks we turned back to the old way.... do you think that rolling dices for every spell is a good idea? If yes, go on with those systems, otherwise it is needed a different one.

Steven McRownt

 

[Eternalknight]

...I've used, for a time, the mana system is skills and powers, the channeling way. At first glance is not so distant from Irda Ranger's ideas. A quite good idea, but at the end it wasn't so good when played. It slowed a lot the game, and put in more danger the wizard. After a couple of weeks we turned back to the old way.... do you think that rolling dices for every spell is a good idea? If yes, go on with those systems, otherwise it is needed a different one.

Steven McRownt

Umm, Steve, if by Irda Ranger's ideas you are referring to the alt.wizard he pointed out, then how could you have played it for a couple of weeks? I only posted the information under a week ago. If you aren't refering to that, please ignore this rant.

I am interested in hearing feedback from people you have played with my wizard, but I want honest feedback. (Again, please ignore if you weren't refering to my wizard)

 

[Steven McRownt]

...I've used, for a time, the mana system is skills and powers, the channeling way. At first glance is not so distant from Irda Ranger's ideas.

I am terribly sorry
I wanted to say that we used -when still playing 2nd Ed AD&D- the player's option:Spells and magic's channeling system (chapter 6), that is something close to your ideas. But i will probably talk with my group to see if system your system could be playtested tomorrow.

Steven McRownt

 

[Eternalknight]

Thanks Steve, if you would be so kind as to post the playtest results when you have finished?