Proper way to play a Caster?

[Caliber]

A member of my gaming group maintains that a caster should avoid actually casting unless a spell is obviously needed. This is the same member who always complained when other party members insisted on resting because they were out of spells.

Playing a caster himself, now, he seems to be following his own advice, and hasn't yet cast a spell (the battles we have been in have been relatively minor ones.)

I'm posting this because he claims that he has seen this idea expressed several times ... but frankly its pretty new to me. Is this a common practice? Or are most casters played like most of my group plays them ... as walking masses of spells to be used, not hoarded and saved?

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Tell him you won't shoot any arrows unless you're sure they're absolutely needed.

Actually, if you're defeating the monsters there isn't anything technically wrong with what he's doing. And you don't have to stop every five feet because he used up his entire spell selection to kill an orc.

He does sound a little pretentious though. But if that's his only flaw then just shrug your shoulders and pretend you're playing in one of those low-magic worlds that are so vogue these days.

 

[DanMcS]

You don't get points at the end of the night for spells you didn't cast.

I can kind of see his point about not blowing all your spells in one encounter, but for pete's sake, do _something_!

Renewable resources should be used as much as possible, they make a difference. I'm not even playing a spellcaster, but I try to use my monk's stunning fist attacks as much as possible.

 

[JoeBlank]

First, I would say there is no right or wrong way to play any sort of character. If that is the player's concept for this PC, that he hoards his spells and only casts when there is no other option, then that sounds like a fine idea to me. There are plenty of examples in fiction where the young apprentice is cautioned about using magic in a careful manner, and not abusing it.

Of course, if the player believes that this is the "best" way to play a caster, in the min/max sense, then I would have to say he is wrong. For arcane casters in particular, spells are just about all they get. Not using them is not using your character to his full potential.

My most recent arcane caster is a sorcerer, and I make it a goal to use up all his spells for the day. I've come close a couple of time, and certianly run out of higher level spells. But his character concept is the opposite of your friend's idea, my sorcerer uses magic for everything, even mundane tasks, and sees no reason not to do so.

 

[Henry]

I'm posting this because he claims that he has seen this idea expressed several times ... but frankly its pretty new to me. Is this a common practice? Or are most casters played like most of my group plays them ... as walking masses of spells to be used, not hoarded and saved?

Actually, he's right, to a point. This used to be a MUCH more prevalent thought back in the days when Magic-users got a very few select spells per day. Imagine a magic user with no INT bonus for spells, and NO cantrips, and you have an idea how many spells wizards were walking around with in those days. In the days of OD&D, clerics didn't even have ANY spells at first level!

Spellcasters (wizards especially) should not waste a spell when a nonmagically means of doing the same thing is readily available. A Wizard in a level 5 party for instance, should not be flinging his magic missiles at every overt goblin combatant, when the fighter's sword or the archer's arrows will dispatch it just the same. Wizards now have access to fairly powerful mundane missiles themselves, so they do not have to sit out, even if they conserve their spells.

A famous story in Dragon Magazine goes on how a party grew mad at its magic-user (1st edition) refused to cast knock to open the entry door to a dungeon; the door was forced open instead. Later, when fleeing for their lives from a superior foe, the wizard cast his Knock on a locked portal standing between them and freedom - and it was his last spell.

On the other hand, when a spell is needed, it's NEEDED. No sense endangering a party member when a wizard "thinks he'll need it later." When it's time, it's time - no dallying! If he conserves spells and people are dying because of it, then something is wrong.

 

[Felix]

This is how my wizard sees things:

[and keep in mind this is only my character, not how I think all characters should be. Think of a grown up Stewie from Family Guy and this is him.]

--I am by far the most intelligent person in this group.
--I know what is going on.
--I am terribly powerful with my arcane magicks.
--My hands should never be sullied with work.
--I should never be allowed to be physically accosted by anyone.
--Those others have their uses.
--Those others should be put to their use.
--When a task arises in which those others can provide a solution, I will allow them to provide it even if by casting a spell I would solve the problem sooner, unless time is of the essence.
--My resivoir of power shall never be tapped when those others below my station can be bent to my design.

So yeah, he doesn't cast spells when mundane means can solve a problem. Though it does require a bit of a haughty holier-than-thou attitude to allow others to do grunt work while you don't cast a spell.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

What Henry said.

And Felix...with that attitude, why do your adventuring companions keep you around? Any of my characters would dump you for a wizard that took his place right alongside the rest of us, rather than trying to lord it over us.

 

[babomb]

You're okay as long as he's not as bad as Red Mage (2).

 

[HellHound]

3e has certainly changed the way casters operate, ESPECIALLY low-level casters.

As with Henry, I'm used to conserving spells as much as possible. I'm used to wizards using thrown darts and daggers instead of spells much of the time. Thus it comes as a surprise to see how readily spells can be thrown around... In the old days, NPC spellcasters were terrifying because they DIDN'T have the compunction to save spells, they would dump all their spells in the one encounter with the party (and would actually run out before the fight was over typically, as opposed to 3e casters, where I've never seen an NPC caster actually run out of spells in a fight).

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

Hm. I seem to remember a little of this attitude in the game I played back in high school (AD&D2e with oodles of house rules, being played by adolescent boys); like Henry said, the rules back then really did leave magic users with a very limited number of spells and not much for them to do once those spells were gone. Also, the style of the game generally had anywhere from three to six consecutive combats with no opportunities to rest and re-memorize, so husbanding your limited spell resources was essential.

I wouldn't say that it was better--oh god, I would never say that--it was just the way things were. Fortunately, with sorcerors and bonus spells for high attributes and (in the games I've played in, at least) less emphasis on one-fight-after-another gameplay, the days when wizards had to be obsessively preoccupied with "wasting" spells are over. If you want to play a character who takes genuine pleasure in showing off all the cool things that spells can do, you can, and in many campaigns it will be as tactically valid an option as spell-hoarding.

There are still some things smart wizards shouldn't do, of course. They shouldn't blow big, powerful spells on spindly, weak opponents. They shouldn't waste a spell on something that one of the other people in the party is going to take down in one round or less. They shouldn't cast a spell at nothing. But that's the same kind of thinking behind archers only using their magic arrows against piddly little critters when a normal arrow works just as well, not a blanket condemnation of casting spells semi-whimsically.


I laughed at JoeBlank's description of his sorceror, because I had the same goal (to never have spells left at the end of the day) when I was playing a wizard in our last game. Once you pass a certain level, it's harder than it sounds; I think the breakpoint for me came somewhere around 7th or 8th level. I went from being able to empty my entire spell rack on an average day to having at least three spells left even after a really difficult day's work. Sometimes I'd even have big-ticket, high-level spells left, just because I never got the opportunity to use them, and I'd actually be hoping for a late-night ambush on the camp just to have the chance to unleash 'em.

It was fun (more fun for me than running a spellcaster was in my high school game, to be certain), and I highly recommend it.

--
hoarding is cool, but using is better
ryan