More about wizards by kunadam

[Gloombunny]

They said summoning. As in 'Summon X'. They didn't say Conjuration.

I am certain that there will be stinking cloud, web, etc as Orb-specific powers.

That's... exactly what I was saying.

 

[Kunimatyu]

I wouldn't be sad if Grease left -- it's a little too slapstick, IMO.

 

[Victim]

I'm looking for spellcasters that don't wake up one day a summoner, the next day casting all illusions, and the next casting all blasting. I understand the desire to be a generalist, but being a generalist doesn't mean you should be able to do a little of everything.

Like what they said in the last podcast, the problem is that the Wizard is supposed to be able to do everything, and so it ties their hands when they're trying to carve out his niche in the game.

Yeah. I like the versatility of wizards, but I can agree that it causes problems when the character can massively retool her abilities on a day to day basis. It can be very easy and rewarding to violate concept - even barred schools aren't that much of a problem, especially with lots of extra spells from supplements or UMD.

And the flexibility also makes it 'okay' for some types of wizards to really suck. Necromancers in DnD aren't so good at the whole raising the undead thing, although the school does pack some great debuffs (easily used by non necromancers). Non necromancy spells likely form the bulk of the character's abilities and generalist wizards aren't so far behind at using necromancy spells. The quality of being a necromancer (or pretty much any specialty) is seconded to the overall quality of being a wizard.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

I doubt enchantment is being removed entirely, but the "good" stuff is saved for psions.

Wizard: I'll charm the guard and tell him we need to see the King.
Psion: Meh. I dominate him and force him to let us, then I wipe his memory of the event.
Wizard: ....

This, sir, is perfection.

I'm really liking what I'm hearing so far, but I'll be very interested to see if the book gives any hint that the wizard will be getting flavor to match the new structure.

What I'm thinking is that the wizard will be the quintessential arcane pragmatist: a versatile problem solver with a lot of power who isn't really going to bother with the ultimate enchanter technique when a creative use of a simple charm will do just as well.

I think it also does a lot to make them feel like adventurers where before they always struck me as the sort of academics who were too eccentric to stay in the academy and got helplessly cycled out into the real world whether they willed it or not.

 

[Jack99]

They said summoning. As in 'Summon X'. They didn't say Conjuration.

I am certain that there will be stinking cloud, web, etc as Orb-specific powers.

Actually, didn't they say summoning was gone for clerics?

 

[ForceUser]

To me my fellow Tank Mages! Hooooo!!!!

hee hee

 

[pogre]

I'm not big on psions having a primary niche. Hopefully I can just relabel them as suggested above.

The rituals could certainly make Dming a lot easier - I hope most of the challenging spells (think adventure busters) become rituals.

I know I'm in the minority on this one, but I would like to see invisibility and flying go to a much higher level too.

 

[LightPhoenix]

So, I'm a little surprised no one has mention the Bard yet. I know that the posting suggests psionics taking enchantment, and maybe the Bard will have Psi as a source, though I hope not.

One of the Bard's biggest problems is that it was supposed to be more on the passive offense side of things, and enchantment fits that. If you wanted to be an enchanter, it was often more effective to be a Wiz/Sor to have a little more offensive clout and flexibility than to buff (passive defense), but be so diffuse in ability like the Bard. I know Bard has been talked about as an Arcane Leader, but enchantment (and enchantment spells) fits the concept of the Bard almost perfectly.

So, while I expect that Bards will end up being enchanters, I sincerely hope they stay Arcane rather than Psionic. I can see them fitting into both roles though.

 

[Andor]

One of the Bard's biggest problems is that it was supposed to be more on the passive offense side of things

I read that as "Bards are supposed to be passive-offensive" and it cracked me up.

 

[Imp]

I could see bards being good at mass enchantment effects, emotional manipulation, etc. while psions do the really deep stuff, the I-will-control-you and make-you-have-no-memory-of-what-you-did type of powers, but not really as much being able to move the crowd. Wizards still should be able to pull off charms, holds, suggestions of some sort, I think... it's not like their enchantment repertoire in core 3e is all that expansive anyway. I still really think they should have summoning abilities, though perhaps limited somehow, because it seems a huge part of being an arcane controller – I hope people are right about summoning just getting kicked away from the clerics. That's fine with me.

Grease is a pretty silly spell. Maybe some movement-limiting arcane bog/quicksand would be a better idea, and more wizard-like as well.

I like the distinction between spells and rituals. I always wanted to implement incantations in 3e.