Poll: How do Illusionists compare, then/now?

[Driddle]

How do illusionists compare, then vs. now?

 

[buzzard]

How about you define 'then'? If you mean vs. 1st edition, well things are radically different. If you mean vs. 2nd Ed. , well things are pretty different, but all wizards were different, though not as much as some other classes compared to 3rd. If you mean vs. 3.0, not much of a change, though the school exclusions are a bit harsh.

buzzard

 

[Wombat]

Back in the blue-printed copy of The Strategic Review (sound of Mists of Time parting) there was a wonderful add-on core class to D&D called the Illusionist. It was a fun, but probably overly powerful class. With time it got mellowed out and all was well.

Nowadays Illusionists are really fun at low levels, but at the higher levels they tend to get the shaft; there are just too many ways to get around their powers.

So in the aggregate, I'd say they dropped in potential power.

 

[rogueattorney]

In my opinion, 2e really dropped the ball with the specialist wizards. Rather than genericizing the illusionist, they should have developed the new specialists to the same degree as the illusionist. This is the type of thing us old timers are complaining about when we say the newer editions lack flavor.

R.A.

 

[Orius]

I have no experience with the Basic/1e illusionist at all. I only know the illusionist from 2/3.x e examples, and there hasn't been much significant change in how specialists work since the beginning of 2e. Personally, I don't think the illusionist works badly under current rules, however, I think other specialists during the 2e days may have pushed the illusionist out of popularity because other specialists had a "better " spell selection.

 

[Keldryn]

I agree regarding the blandness of the 2e and 3e Illusionist class. Playing an Illusionist in 1e was a fairly different experience than playing a Magic-User. They had a much more unique spell list, with many spells that a standard Magic-User did not have access to. In addition, the basic "Phantasmal Force" spell was a 3rd-level Magic-User spell, but a 1st-Level Illusionist spell. Their magic item restrictions were a little goofy, but helped provide some flavour.

I'm not a big fan of any of the specialist wizards in 2e or 3e. They're just incredibly bland.

 

[Driddle]

I remember my 1st ed. Illusionist was really cool because he was, well, something other than the standard mage.
Nowadays, though, it's as though you're attaching a means-nothing title just to gain access to an extra spell; anyone can do it as a "diviner" or an "abjurer" or whatever. Those so-called specialists still share like 80 percent of the same spell list (or at least the spells anyone cares to cast). Nothing special there.

 

[3catcircus]

I remember my 1st ed. Illusionist was really cool because he was, well, something other than the standard mage.
Nowadays, though, it's as though you're attaching a means-nothing title just to gain access to an extra spell; anyone can do it as a "diviner" or an "abjurer" or whatever. Those so-called specialists still share like 80 percent of the same spell list (or at least the spells anyone cares to cast). Nothing special there.

And that is where a little bit of self-restriction comes in. When I make a specialist wizard, I limit myself *only* to the spells of my school and to universal spells.

 

[Kalendraf]

Having played since the 1e days, I've seen all incarnations of illusionists. Originally, they had their own unique spell lists making them much more attractive. Now they are just a subclass of wizard and they seem weaker than they used to be.

I originally liked the subclass wizard idea when it came around in 2nd edition. However, I've grown to dislike it, and would have preferred to see these developed as something more like prestige classes. I don't really like prestige classes in general, but I think having prestige classes to focus on each school of magic to properly balance and differentiate them would have been a much better strategy in this case. Entering the class would have required something obvious like focus in the school of magic they are vying for as well as knowing several spells of that school. The whole idea of opposition school could have been handled within each of the prestige classes.

 

[Thanee]

I remember my 1st ed. Illusionist was really cool because he was, well, something other than the standard mage.
Nowadays, though, it's as though you're attaching a means-nothing title just to gain access to an extra spell; anyone can do it as a "diviner" or an "abjurer" or whatever. Those so-called specialists still share like 80 percent of the same spell list (or at least the spells anyone cares to cast). Nothing special there.

Sorry, your poll doesn't really have any reasonable answer for me.

I somewhat remember 1st edition, but while I see the difference now, I don't think it's bad!

I never really saw the point for illusionists to be special. Why illusionists and not evocers, transmuters, abjurers, enchanters, necromancers, and so on?

Just because of gnomes? Sorry, I don't really get it. Illusionist is not a class.

There is no need for that special something, you are looking for. That's what the player is for. Every character is unique and should be. It's the background and behaviour, which makes a character unique, not the stats and abilities.

You can have two mechanically exactly equal characters who are drastically different, feel different, play different, have a different impact on the game, just because of the way you utilize their abilities and build them into the story.

It's called roleplaying game for a reason.

Bye
Thanee