New Design: Wizards...

[Wormwood]

(edit: doing my part to keep this thread on topic)

 

[gothmaugCC]

Hmm... THis is the first 4th edition change I've seen that I think I might be able to get wholeheartedly behind. Its always irked me that a wizards staff has been regulated to a mere stick with charges. I've always been a fan of the classic wizard in literature who is tied to his staff. It amplifies his powers, but if it breaks, his power does as well. I've tried many different dynamics over the years to reflect this in my home games, perhaps 4th edition will get it right.

Then again, if the staff/wand/orb/tome just becomes a numerical enhancement ( Ie +3 to DC's or something) I'm gonan gouge my eyes out with a pointy stick, and scrap it in my home games for something a bit more dynamic.

 

[sidonunspa]

Why? Just off the top of my head, I can see two very easy ways, and one more complicated way, to do it.

1) Change the forms. Instead of wants, use daggers. Instead of orbs, use amulets. Instead of staves, use the wizard's familiar.

2) Eliminate them. Wizards suffer no penalties for not using the items, and gain no benefits for using the items. Done.

3) Change the forms, as with #1, but also change the sorts of spells to which they apply. This one requires more work, but it's still certainly possible.

Even if #3 is too much work, the first two are easily applied to almost any setting with about 30 seconds' work.

I dont know but this tosses a small glitch into the mix for Arcanis casters...

In Arcanis all arcane casters are hunted by the Harvesters of Yomandragor, caring around these items would be like painting a bulls eye on your back. I guess once 4e is out I would need to work up some Talent tree for them to work around needing these items, but they would end up becoming weaker overall, thus creating a catch 22.

Changing the "slots" needed again weaken the caster, why? lets say I use amulets for wands... well now that can't use a magical amulet.

Maybe a feat or two that lets you swap out sword for wand or something like that? I don't know... I think I may have just found one thing I may need to completely re-write for the Arcanis setting.

 

[Cadfan]

Then again, if the staff/wand/orb/tome just becomes a numerical enhancement ( Ie +3 to DC's or something) I'm gonan gouge my eyes out with a pointy stick, and scrap it in my home games for something a bit more dynamic.

I don't know, I expect that magical staffs will be at least as dynamic as magical swords.

Which... historically hasn't been all that dynamic, but that's been acknowledged and improvements in that area have been promised. At the very least, I imagine there will be other enhancements that a staff/wand/orb/tome will be capable of holding besides just the +X.

 

[sidonunspa]

I suspect there will be a magical enchantment similar to flaming or ghosttouch (or whatever the new equivalent is) that makes the weapon function as one of the four components. For example a wandstrike longsword +1 or a set of runic full plate +2 that functions like a tome.

I really dig this new change, if for no other reason than I never liked the way wands and staffs worked before.

:::types some notes:::

Well if wizards dosint use this idea, I think we may have to

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Restraint in this case being defined as ignoring the PC Wealth by Level guidelines?

I once had the "privilege" of playing in a game where the DM didn't give the party any magic items. We were 16th or 17th level by the time we got a couple of magic weapons. We were consistently wrecked by challenges of a more-or-less appropriate level (and by inappropriate challenges, but that's a separate complaint). I explained to the DM, each time he expressed his surprise at our asses getting handed to us, that without appropriate wealth for our level, we were actually five to seven effective levels lower than we should be. He never seemed to follow that logic, and we kept losing fight after fight until the game broke up.

 

[sidonunspa]

This is the one feature of 4E I don't understand honestly. How can one make it so that a character is less dependent on magic items and yet at the same time, have it so that actually getting a magic item is an actual REWARD?

Anyone want to help me out here?

I got to agree on this point... in one hand they say "less dependent" and yet they tie a classes features to items which will have a magical bonus.

 

[Malhost Zormaeril]

I might replace the implements with Sword, Cup, Pentacle, and Wand. As it should be

Poser items. Real Men(TM) use Sword, Cup, Coin and Baton

Also, I think this change is positive -- magic weapons give characters different flavour (just ask the producers of the Dungeons and Dragons cartoon), which magic foci would do, as well. Swapping the foci around can change the flavour of the wizards -- wooden swords, paper tags, mirrors and geomancy boards for Chinese mages, for instance.

It also makes sense that, since fighters with different gear work differently, wizards should have also different options according to the implements they use... Overall, I think it's a positive change.

 

[LightPhoenix]

I'm ambivalent.

I like the idea, and it adds a lot of flavor. Even the tome does in my mind - I love the idea of a wizard chanting from a book in the middle of chaos. It's gotten my imagination churning, and that can only be a good thing.

On the other hand, I don't like the way it was presented. It seems rather arbitrary, and I'd rather just let the wizard pick two foci, especially if it's tied to the major/minor thing people have been talking about.

I'll have to see more to be sold on it.

 

[CleverNickName]

I am intrigued. I've tinkered with the idea of replacing all material components with a single arcane focus (staff or wand), but I think I will wait and see what these new-fangled "orb, staff, tome, wand" rules bring to the table before I go much further with it.