"Siloing" Class Abilities

[Sammael]

To me, "siloing" means that wizards will have several separate slots (or groups of slots) - one for utility spells, one for offensive spells, and one for defensive spells (for example). In other words, a wizard will have to decide whether to memorize (broadly speaking) fireball or lightning bolt and fly or phantom steed, but he'll never have to make a choice between fireball and phantom steed.

 

[hong]

What Sammael said. Heck, they could extend this to other areas as well: you have N combat feat slots and M noncombat/social feat slots. Everybody would thus have some minimum level of competency at things besides just bashing monsters.

 

[DarthDiablo]

To me, "siloing" means that wizards will have several separate slots (or groups of slots) - one for utility spells, one for offensive spells, and one for defensive spells (for example). In other words, a wizard will have to decide whether to memorize (broadly speaking) fireball or lightning bolt and fly or phantom steed, but he'll never have to make a choice between fireball and phantom steed.

That's basically how I read it as well. Different groupings for spells of different purpose. What they should have done in 3.5 was make the Wizard prep his spells for the day but allow him to cast any of those spells up to his slot limit. I.E. he preps spells according to his daily limit (including Int bonus), and can cast any of those spells upto his spell slot limit for that day. He might use all his lvl3 slots on fireball, or not use it at all. It's more or less like the Sorcerer's spells know, the Wizard just gets to change them every day. Having said that the Sorcerer should have been something more like the Warlock or Dragonfire Adept. I just hope they make "Magic-users" fun to play at lower levels in 4E. I always hated that I had to wait til lvl 5 to do anything cool other than fire a magic missile or put a group of Kobolds to sleep.

 

[Traycor]

...otherwise a caster character should have to make choices between utility versus combat.

This goes back to the whole "Characters are punished for doing their role" thing. Just because a cleric heals doesn't mean he should suck in combat. Just because a rogue has many social skills doesn't mean you take away his combat ability.

Sounds like the wizard is going to be the same way. They will have their combat powers, but that doesn't mean they can't conjure up horses or do the other cool things that players expect that their wizard characters should be able to.

 

[Atlatl Jones]

Remember that some powers/spells will be "at will", some will be "per encounter" and some will be "per day".

It's also possible that some "at will" powers have effectively endless durations, but a wizard has a limited number he can have in use at any given time. A wizard might have 2 "continuous" at will spells, so he might choose to always have a mage armor and phantom steed, or he might choose to have overland flight up instead of phantom steed. This is pure speculation, but you never know. Just because a spell is a vancian "per day" spell now doesn't mean it will be in 4e. This would also solve the problem of tracking durations.

 

[RigaMortus2]

To me, "siloing" means that wizards will have several separate slots (or groups of slots) - one for utility spells, one for offensive spells, and one for defensive spells (for example). In other words, a wizard will have to decide whether to memorize (broadly speaking) fireball or lightning bolt and fly or phantom steed, but he'll never have to make a choice between fireball and phantom steed.

Well, I guess that wouldn't be so bad, if that's how it does indeed work out... Guess we'll have to wait for more info as it becomes available.

 

[RigaMortus2]

A friend of mine uses this (HR) for his campaigns...

We ended up dropping/modifying the Vancian system about a year and a half ago. The primary difference we focussed on between the sorcerer and wizard was one of power vs utility. A sorceror can cast way more spells per day, but from a much smaller set of spells, where a wizard could spontaneously cast a smaller number per day, but from a broader, and more easily retooled spell list.

For example a base 3rd level sorceror could cast:

0 lvl - 6 spells from a list of 5
1st lvl - 5 spells from a list of 3

and could only change three of his "known spells" at each new level.

While a base 3rd level wizard could cast:

0 - 4 spells from a list of 6
1 - 2 spells from a list of 4
2 - 1 spell from a list of 1

and could change up his list of "known spells" whenever he wanted to in exchange for an hour of study per level of the spell.

 

[Jack7]

To me, it sounds more like each individual spell is going to be more flexible, the opposite direction of movement from 3.5, where spells with versatility were separated into different spells with no versatility.

For example, a Globe of Fire spell might have just been an attack before, it can now be used to create a potent, long lasting light source as well. Or a Bigby's Hand spell can now be used to lift objects or move statues in addition to grappling or pushing foes. Or maybe a Phantom Steed can be used to send a ghost steed forward to trample foes in a line, instead of just being used as a mount.

An extremely useful potentiality and one that my campaign/world has employed for a long time, simply based on the Wizard's intention. Of course in my game every Wizard originates from another world and in that world magic is often channeled or controlled by willpower and so the Wizards have the opportunity to modify certain functional aspects of the spell even as it is being employed. Some Wizards even have the ability to eventually morph one spell into another or to create hybrid spells during usage by modifying effects and functions during employment. Of course these abilities cost in other ways. And are often unpredictable in ultimate effect.

The same basically applies to Clerical magic (thaumaturgy) which is based upon Divine "miracles" and so miracles can change or transform over time, or sometimes during their occurrence. Of course miracles (and magic) often produce strange side-effects or spell functions occur in completely unforeseen ways, not anticipated by the cleric or magic-user.

I think it's a good idea for the game to make use of generally and widely because it makes magic much less scientific and far more magical. I'm glad to see ideas about magic proceeding in a better, more interesting, and more functional direction.

To me, "siloing" means that wizards will have several separate slots (or groups of slots) - one for utility spells, one for offensive spells, and one for defensive spells (for example). In other words, a wizard will have to decide whether to memorize (broadly speaking) fireball or lightning bolt and fly or phantom steed, but he'll never have to make a choice between fireball and phantom steed.

There is no particular reason Sam's idea and a modified version of TB's idea could not be employed conjunctively and simultaneously, magic functioning in both ways at the same time.

This would make all Wizards very powerful, but counter-affecting limitations could be employed to keep it viable and fair (for instance magical employment might draw "unwanted" attention to itself, it might be physically, psychologically - or both - draining, it would be balanced by having monsters and NPC's/enemies be able to employ it in the same way, etc.)

 

[Aaron L]

"I really need to attack, but I only have Phantom Steed ready."


"Use it as an attack spell, the horse runs over the enemy for 1d6 damage per caster level."


No idea if that's even close (I doubt it.) I just had the image flash in my head.

 

[Irda Ranger]

What Sammael said.

Yup.

Heck, they could extend this to other areas as well: you have N combat feat slots and M noncombat/social feat slots. Everybody would thus have some minimum level of competency at things besides just bashing monsters.

Interesting thought. That would probably for classes other than Fighter/Wiz/Cler/Rogue though. Those four are pretty much the "epitome" of their particular niches, while the other classes are a bit of "fingers in more than one pie."

I'm not sure I actually want social feats though. I'm not a fan of how Iron Heroes has handled it, since I'd rather handle "political favors" and such through role-playing, not Political Mastermind tokens. It suggests by inference that characters without PM1 cannot collect and cash in favors. Maybe 4e will do a better job of it though.