Rob Kuntz hates Wizards (spoiler)

[Sulimo]

The way you played 1e or 2e was not the only way it was played, apparently, based on the fact that Necromancer, according to your post, uses a lot of sorcerers in lieu of wizards. They seem to think 1e feel is evoked with sorcerers.

And add to that the fact that there were many house rules that people used that made wizards more sorceror like back in the 1/2e days. I certainly played in more than a few groups that did just that, with all spell casters (both arcane & divine) choosing their spells as they cast them rather than selecting them at the end of each day. I even used spell point systems in a couple of campaigns.

 

[Orcus]

I'll tell you what, I'll ask Rob why he wanted all the Sorcerers and I'll let you know what he says.

Clark

 

[Nightfall]

Actually Clark, answer me this. WHY CAN'T YOU WRITE BARD'S GATE FASTER?!! *is teasing*

 

[Starfox]

I played a lot of magic-users in 1ed. No wizards, though. And all my magic users used spells like sorcerers; they came loaded for bear with magic missile and fireball memorized several times over So, if I were to simulate those characters in 3E, they would all be sorcerers.

Not everyone played magic users this way. Some played them more like 3E wizards. But most of the players I played with then did.

As to the gripe with spellbooks, that is simply not a problem. The cost of getting another spellcaster to perform a spell for you is 10 gp * caster level * spell level; usually a lot less than the 200 gp/level of spell required to scribe the scroll. And you CANNOT use a spell from a captured spellbook unless you have first scribed it into your own spellbook. Thus a spell from a captured spellbook has very little gp value - you can only sell it for scrap.

Using the rules from Magic of Faerun, you could master a captured spellbook, cut it up, re-bind the pages with spells that you know, and use the result as a cheap replacement spellbook. This is useful if your DM is sadistic enough to destroy your own spellbook. But these are extra rule additions, not core rules, and the adress a problem that is quite unusual.

 

[Henry]

I'll tell you why Rob Kuntz hates wizards.

Back in the heyday of Original D&D, when Rob and Gary and crew were still playing together, Gary (using Mordenkainen and Bigby and a whole slew of wizard PC's) used to come up with the darndest ways to dash Rob's dungeons and scenarios to flinders. He also used to dream up spells to research that would threaten to tear the fabric of gaming reality to shreds and to make Rob's life a living hell.

For this reason, Rob has decided, in perpetuity, that no wizards shall ever exist in his campaigns or in anything else he writes, ever again.

Good enough for you?

 

[PatrickLawinger]

Well, I hope it does not generate flames. From the NG side of the house, I would think you guys would take comments like this seriously.

As for these adventures, they shouted 1E to me with the exception of the abundance of Sorcerers.

In fact, these adventures looked exactly like old ones that Rob pulled out of the closet, dusted off, and revamped for 3E.

<break>

As I understand it, Rob did pull them out of the closet, dust them off, and revamp them for 3E.

When it comes to the sorc/wizard debate. The slogan is "Third edition rules, first edition feel." Tons of people have different ideas of what "first edition feel" is. It looks like part of your problem is that "first edition feel" includes some of the "rules" from first edition. We do use third edition rules and presume the gamers do. This means that we use all of the classes available in the PHB for npcs, and presume that PCs have access to all of these classes and spells (good game design dictates we have to).

I have already said I like wizards. I use both wizards and sorcs in my adventures. Spellbooks are often found amidst the "treasure" in my adventures.

Necromancer Games does listen to the comments and questions of our customers. We try to be present on these boards, but the vast number of posts and topics here tends to bury some things before we ever see them. Hmmm, sometimes we miss things on our own boards.

A number of scheduled NG releases have wizard NPCs/baddies and what have you. Many also have sorcs, bards, barbs, etc. NG has a large team of authors now, and a large slate of adventures and other materials coming out this year. Adventures and materials from different authors vary in theme and design, but we believe all of the products have a "first edition feel" that is most simply described as creating an environment where the PCs make the decisions.

Hmm, got three phone calls during this post, wonder if the internet connection is still up. I wonder if the post is coherent, oh well...

 

[KarinsDad]

When it comes to the sorc/wizard debate. The slogan is "Third edition rules, first edition feel." Tons of people have different ideas of what "first edition feel" is. It looks like part of your problem is that "first edition feel" includes some of the "rules" from first edition. We do use third edition rules and presume the gamers do. This means that we use all of the classes available in the PHB for npcs, and presume that PCs have access to all of these classes and spells (good game design dictates we have to).

My problem has nothing to do with the rules.

My problem has to do with the single non-1E class (e.g. Barbarians showed up in a supplement book) taking center stage multiple times in two consecutive modules that are supposed to have a 1E feel.

Many posters claimed that the Sorcerer does have a 1E feel. They are entitled to their opinion, but I do not really buy that. If you say that your Magic-User from 1E had to still study spells, had to still study multiple offensive spells to have them, and had a boatload of spells to choose from, then you are talking about a 3E Wizard, not a 3E Sorcerer. If you are talking about a 1E Magic-User who could pick and choose which spells he could cast on the fly (like some house rules for some 1E campaigns), then you are still not talking about a 3E Sorcerer due to the wide spell selection, nor are you talking core 1E rules.

When you face a Sorcerer and when you face a Wizard, the feel is totally different after several rounds. The Sorcerer tends to consistently pull out spells that should work in the situation and often casts the same spell on multiple rounds. The Wizard starts running out of "good for this situation spells" and rarely casts the same spell twice, so he tends to cast peripheral spells which are nearly as good or which try to solve a given problem in a different, non-direct manner. YMMV.

The fact that Rob converted them from 1E Magic-Users to 3E Sorcerers should also say something since 3E Sorcerers are unlike 1E Magic-Users with the exception of which spells they cast. It means that he purposely avoided making them 3E Wizards, although the 3E Wizard is directly derived from the 1E Magic-User.

To me, having nothing both Sorcerers in a series (so far) is like having a 1E feel oriental adventure that has multiple Iaijutsu Masters in it, but not a single Monk. It just does not feel like 1E with respect to this single facet. JMO.

But, it has zip to do with the rules.

 

[Celestian]

Can't imagine why someone would think Sorcerers in a module are the defining factors of making a module not have 1st edition feel. FEEL, not First Edition RULES.

Go check out Zelkor in R1, he is a wizard ... and omg, he has spell books as a treasure.

First Edition Feel isnt about class rules, its mostly about a style of module that the DM does not rail-road players. Some DMs dont need 128 page modules when 12 would do. Some DMs can create their own flavor text when given the specifics of the encounter.

Some people actually like first edition feel modules. Thankfully D20 exists so that we can get it... lord knows WoTC doesn't produce them.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Some people actually like first edition feel modules. Thankfully D20 exists so that we can get it... lord knows WoTC doesn't produce them.

So true...

 

[KarinsDad]

Can't imagine why someone would think Sorcerers in a module are the defining factors of making a module not have 1st edition feel. FEEL, not First Edition RULES.

Actually, I did not state that they were the defining factor. I stated that they were a glaring exception.

I guess if you've read the entire thread and still don't get it, nothing I can say to make you understand.

If you have not read the entire thread, bottom line it's because Sorcerers are not Wizards, they do not have a corresponding 1E class, and none of the 1E re-occurring arcane spell casting villains I ever ran across as either a DM or a player was as two dimensional as a Sorcerer. They all had more than a few spells, they all had more flexibility if encountered multiple times, and they all had spell book stashes, regardless of whether the PCs could find them.

Simple example: If an NPC arcane spell caster throws 3 Fireballs, 2 Magic Missile spells, and possibly a full round metamagicked spell at the group before being killed in 3E, what do you do next? Well, you probably search his body for magic items, but you may not search the room for spell books. In 1E, this exact same scenario would result in looting the body for items and expressly looking for spell books simply because all (house rules withstanding) arcane spell casters were Magic-Users in 1E.

All in all, a different feel. And, I also mentioned that the rest of each module did feel like 1E. This just happened to be a glaring (for me) exception to the feel. Kind of like your 14 year old daughter bringing home a cake that she baked in Home Economics at school, tasting it, and finding out that it's a Rum Cake. Not exactly the expectation for that situation. It's still a cake, but just not the kind of cake you would expect.