D&D 4E Some thoughts on 4e magic from a designer

[Merlin the Tuna]

Mouse, the only hangup I'd point out with that idea is that competent necromancers -- whether or not they're capital-N-Necromancers -- need to be available pretty quickly given how often they're villains.

 

[Imaro]

This worries me a little, as I was hoping they would go the route of talents being used to specialize say a "wizard" into a "necromancer". This, IMHO, would have made it possible for talents to be distinctly different from feats and make them better than just more new cool powers. I wasn't a fan of introducing a new stream of base classes and was really psyched that talents would eliminate this design principle in a good way. I just wonder exactly what talents are for then.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Mouse, the only hangup I'd point out with that idea is that competent necromancers -- whether or not they're capital-N-Necromancers -- need to be available pretty quickly given how often they're villains.

Indeed, which is one of the reasons my feelings on this possibility hinge, at least partially, on how well the "generic" casters can fill in the gaps until we get specialists.

I don't care if I have to wait to create Teh Ultimate Necromancer!!11!!one! (or Illusionist), either as a PC or NPC, as long as I can at least create Teh Competent Necromancer!!11!!one! (or Illusionist) in the interim.

 

[Irda Ranger]

With the usual caveats about needing to see the actual rules and all that, I think these are good changes. I reservedly approve.

I particularly look forward to "real" Illusionist and Necromancy classes.

As a niche "win", I'm also hopeful that the "wizardly orders" rules will present good mechanics for recreating Dragonlance's Orders of High Sorcery.

 

[Scribble]

Indeed, which is one of the reasons my feelings on this possibility hinge, at least partially, on how well the "generic" casters can fill in the gaps until we get specialists.

I don't care if I have to wait to create Teh Ultimate Necromancer!!11!!one! (or Illusionist), either as a PC or NPC, as long as I can at least create Teh Competent Necromancer!!11!!one! (or Illusionist) in the interim.

It's just a guess obviously, but I think to start at least, it will be similar to taking a general 3.5 Wizard, and just loading his/her spellbook in favor of necromancer or illusion spells, and then simply calling it a necromancer...

It's necromancer enough as far as someone trying to kill it is concerned... But not "really" a necromancer.

Shrug.

 

[Benben]

Interesting, this fills me with a lot of hope.

I loved the feel of 1st ed illusionists a lot. I never got to play one, but I spent hours going over the spell list as a kid and was just charmed by how unique the spell list was. The same was true of the Druid in 1st ed.

The illusionist was ravaged and made incredibly boring by 2nd ed. 3rd ed's various splat books never brought back the magic to the class. All the prestige classes ever did was offer dry increases to spell dc's and a few minor powers, generally usable 1/day. Actually the beguiller was pretty close to getting it right, but it wasn't a core caster like the illusionist.

Spending time and really designing the specialists sounds like a fantastic idea to me and I'm willing to wait for it, the necromancer, and the druid. (Assuming the druid is coming later).

 

[akaddk]

Hmmm, how soon is that arcane sourcebook coming out? Actual illusionist and necromancer classes sounds like they're already planning for the 2008 arcanist book ...

It'd be my guess that classes like this would be saved for the PHB II rather than specialist books like Arcanist. Those are more fitting for PrC's than new core classes.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It'd be my guess that classes like this would be saved for the PHB II rather than specialist books like Arcanist. Those are more fitting for PrC's than new core classes.

Well, there is apparently going to be an arcane book released in 2008. It would be awfully soon for them to be talking about 2009 classes, IMO.

 

[MerricB]

The illusionist was ravaged and made incredibly boring by 2nd ed. 3rd ed's various splat books never brought back the magic to the class. All the prestige classes ever did was offer dry increases to spell dc's and a few minor powers, generally usable 1/day. Actually the beguiller was pretty close to getting it right, but it wasn't a core caster like the illusionist.

The Bard and the Beguiler are the 3.5e takes on the Illusionist.

Specialist wizards were a bad idea, implemented poorly. If they're dead, much like cleric spheres from 2e, I will rejoice.

The 1e illusionist - that didn't share all of its spells with a regular magic-user - was cool.

Cheers!

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The Bard and the Beguiler are the 3.5e takes on the Illusionist.

Specialist wizards were a bad idea, implemented poorly. If they're dead, much like cleric spheres from 2e, I will rejoice.

The 1e illusionist - that didn't share all of its spells with a regular magic-user - was cool.

Cheers!

The only thing about specialist wizards is that I hope all of them eventually reappear in 4E. No, not everyone wanted to be an abjurer, but properly played, they were really cool and flavorful.

Obviously, illusionists and necromancers have always been the best bets to reappear first, if only a few specialist wizards were to reappear at a time, with enchanters and evokers probably next on the list.

Still, here's hoping we get the full gamut again someday. (But illusionists soon! My gnome illusionist/bard is going to be hard to reimagine in 4E if his race and his classes are all absent in PHB1.)