New Design: Wizards...

[WayneLigon]

On a side note, I think this will be differentiated from the Sorcerer in that I think the sorcerer will be built around a more specialist framework.

All this has got me to wondering just what sorcerers will be like and what they'll be doing. I don't think we've heard word one about sorcerers or, really, clerics.

 

[Malhost Zormaeril]

I really wish people could get past the idea that names = organization. That is an assumption, & IMO a poor one. We don't expect Transmutation organizations in 3.xe just because Transmutation exists as a school of magic; I likewise see no reason to expect Serpent's Eye as an organization (as opposed to named tradition) in 4e.

...Serpent Eye cabalists...
...mages of the Iron Sigil...
...Servants of the Hidden Flame...
...Golden Wyvern initiates...
...Emerald Frost adepts...
...Stormwalker theurges...

I certainly hope I'm assuming poorly, because that would mean I have nothing to worry about, but consider the actual words reported by Alaric on post #311 (repeated above). If the Serpent Eye were nothing but a new name for a grouping of spells, shouldn't we see "wizards who draw upon the Serpent Eye" rather than "Serpent Eye cabalists"?

ca·bal
Pronunciation: k&-'bäl, -'bal
Function: noun
Etymology: French cabale cabala, intrigue, cabal, from Medieval Latin cabbala cabala, from Late Hebrew qabbAlAh, literally, received (lore)
1 : the artifices and intrigues of a group of persons secretly united in a plot (as to overturn a government); also : a group engaged in such artifices and intrigues
2 : CLUB, GROUP <a cabal of artists>

The word "initiates" in "Golden Wyvern initiates" has the same kind of problem. I'll admit that the others can be construed in good faith not to be organisations, but it cannot be that some groupings of spells give rise to an organisation while others do not? So yes, I am assuming, but unfortunately I do not have reason to believe it is a poor assumption.

EDIT: From the last paragraph of the (new) article:

For instance, a wizard belonging to the Hidden Flame order...

 

[Rugger]

Nothing I've seen in the changed article has changed my mind about the new focuses: That they may simply be class features that you prioritize as you level up.

It could be that a wizard attunes himself to the appropriate item, and then prioritizes their potency: Lvl 1 lets them pick one at +1, and then going forward, the others start to fall into place, so that by 10 lvl or so, the Wizard will have a +4 focus, +3 focus, +2 focus and a +1 focus?

And these "order names" seem to have NO rules elements... I'd bet that they are simply fluff names in the class writeup to describe how someone decided to prioritize their "focuses."

-Matt

 

[Raven Crowking]

Except that line isnt a classic (as it never appeared in the book). It was cobbled together from information from the Simmirilion for the movie.

so you need to say, "even Movies based on a classic" sound like anime.

Just being a pain in the arse

I think you need to go back and read Fellowship of the Ring once more.

The line may be misquoted, but it is in there. Of course, Gandalf says things like that....what, once in how many pages? Good luck with your serpent eye coming up as infrequently......

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Ah, that works well

Thank you, though I expected you to note that a villainous John Hurt is useless verbiage of its own sort.

 

[GreatLemur]

If we get a list of traditions that "use this focus, and these two spheres of magic"...

And a list of those spheres, maybe one from utility, one from combat...

Wow... awesomeness. They successfully MtA'ed D&D for me...

This is my uber wishful hope...

Yeah, this is what I'm hoping for, too. If these schools of magic and like clerical domains rather than Tom of Battle disciplines, I will be completely happy. A nice, modular, adaptable system that encourages players or DMs to come up with their own schools of magic would be extremely awesome.

 

[apoptosis]

For that matter, given how little we actually know, isn't it possible that these sample names/traditions/organizations/whatevers are just that--samples? For all we know, the wizard picks from a variety of "talent trees," schools of magic, or some other means of dividing powers, and these names simply refer to some organizations that combine them?

In that respect (and I think someone else may have suggested this), the Iron Sigil then becomes the wizardly equivalent of a god, such as Asmodeus. Worshipers of Asmodeus (using 3E as a baseline) tend toward LE alignment, and have access to domains X, Y, and Z. Similarly, wizards of the Iron Sigil tend toward blah personality, and have access to orb spells of effects A, B, and C.

And just like clerics need not choose from the default list of gods, unless the DM decides to use them in his campaign, wizards need not choose from the listed traditions, unless the DM decides to use them in his campaign.

Obviously, I have no way of knowing if this setup is how they're going. But I think it's no less feasible than anything else, and the fact that it's at least possible just goes to show how little we actually know.

(I can say, though, that if these traditions are, in fact, optional, or merely represent a few choices among may, that I wish the article had made that fact clear. It would have prevented a lot of fretting.)

Strangely that is exactly how I took them. I thought of them more like just vague examples for some flavor and not some defined traditions that are a necessary part of play.

I really liked in Gary's writing where he just would throw out some flavorful lore that was not necessarily part of a campaign but just added some evocative flavor to make reading the game books more interesting.

 

[sidonunspa]

Yeah, this is what I'm hoping for, too. If these schools of magic and like clerical domains rather than Tom of Battle disciplines, I will be completely happy. A nice, modular, adaptable system that encourages players or DMs to come up with their own schools of magic would be extremely awesome.

I agree,

besides if WoTC dosing do it, I'm sure some d20 publisher will pick it up and run with it. ::evil smirk:::

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

If these schools of magic are like clerical domains rather than Tom of Battle disciplines, I will be completely happy. A nice, modular, adaptable system that encourages players or DMs to come up with their own schools of magic would be extremely awesome.

If "Wizard of the Emerald Frost" is a parallel structure to "Cleric of Loviatar" that'd be just fine.

I still think it's an unnecessary addition of fluff to a core rulebook, however. The 3rd edition PHB would be significantly improved if the gods were removed and "Pick any two domains" was the default ruleset. (Actually, this is acceptable as written in the cleric class description, but nobody I know plays it that way-- everybody assumes that "Choose the diety, then choose your domains..." is the only way.)

 

[Irda Ranger]

If "Wizard of the Emerald Frost" is a parallel structure to "Cleric of Loviatar" that'd be just fine.

Each school as any X Spell Descriptors + 1 Implement? I hadn't read it that way, but yes, this would be fine. There's also a strong literary tradition of "magical schools as actual 'teacher and student' schools" with their own traditions, rather than themed groups of spells, so rules of this nature would actually help with world-building. I would be in favor of that.

I still think it's an unnecessary addition of fluff to a core rulebook, however. The 3rd edition PHB would be significantly improved if the gods were removed and "Pick any two domains" was the default ruleset.

I'm going to disagree here. I think it's helpful to provide some samples and flavor, so that new players and DM's have at least a base to work from. Honestly, I thought Grim Tales was a little too dry, and could have used a little more flavor to show what was possible using the (awesome) rules given.

(Actually, this is acceptable as written in the cleric class description, but nobody I know plays it that way-- everybody assumes that "Choose the diety, then choose your domains..." is the only way.)

Most people build characters in an already-existing world though, with a defined deity list. "Pick the domains, then name the god" is a good way of building a pantheon at the world-building stage, but I think it's perfectly reasonable for a player to pick from the list of Gods available once his character concept is clear.