Spell Hatred & 4e: A question !

[delericho]

I don't think the utility spells have ever been much of a problem.

They're not a huge problem, certainly, but there is an issue that Wizards and Clerics tend to overshadow other characters (particularly Rogues) at higher levels if they have the right spells. Having a high Hide is meaningless if the Wizard can just fire off a trivial invisibility, and having high Search means little when the Cleric can find traps. Likewise Climb and spider climb or [/i]fly[/i].

I think 3e actually did a lot of good in this area, by changing find traps so that it only gives a bonus on the roll, rather than auto-success. But I think there's a lot more to be done.

One thing I certainly don't think should be done, though, is turning the Wizard into a glorified blaster. There's a middle ground there somewhere that I think it would be good to find.

 

[billd91]

One thing I certainly don't think should be done, though, is turning the Wizard into a glorified blaster. There's a middle ground there somewhere that I think it would be good to find.

That would largely be the sorcerer's niche.

 

[SSquirrel]

Every game I ever witnessed that had a Sorcerer, he was the glorified blaster. I'm not sure what would be the middle ground between the 2 classes. I'll have to wait and see how the 4E spell system is, but I definitely prefer the Arcana Evolved spell system for a 3.x game. Besides, then I can use the point buy system designed for Core 3.5+AE here on the house rules forums

 

[frankthedm]

They're not a huge problem, certainly, but there is an issue that Wizards and Clerics tend to overshadow other characters (particularly Rogues) at higher levels if they have the right spells. Having a high Hide is meaningless if the Wizard can just fire off a trivial invisibility, and having high Search means little when the Cleric can find traps.

While you argumant is solid, Find traps is not a spell that overshadows the rogue at all...

You gain intuitive insight into the workings of traps. You can use the Search skill to detect traps just as a rogue can. In addition, you gain an insight bonus equal to one-half your caster level (maximum +10) on Search checks made to find traps while the spell is in effect.

It lets the cleric try the rogues schtick, but unless he has the skill points invested, the rogue still is in the lead as far as that spell goes.

Detect Secret Doors IS a spell that makes the rogue wonder, "Why did I bother showing up."

 

[SpydersWebbing]

You're all right. The answer is what 4th is already doing: up the amount of healing for all classes so that way the spellcasters can do cooler stuff.

 

[Stalker0]

To me its not the fact that the wizard is vastly more powerful in combat (although at high levels he can be). My problem is that not only are you great in combat, your great at everything else.

Magical Traps? Dispel Magic. Problem Solving? Divinations. Moving Around? Teleportation? Armor Class? No fighter can beat a wizard when he's got his spells on. Mobility? Fly, D Door, etc.

A wizard does everything, on and off of combat. Fighting is a fighter's schtick, but the wizard does so much more.

 

[Victim]

Most people that have taken the time to look at our own rules forum, or the boards of WOTC, will see a common trend of advising people to not make the Blaster, for the lack of effectiveness, but for the battle field controller.
The power of the Orb line of spells, (and Conjuration magic in general) is because this type of magic does not allow for SR, or Saving Throws alot of the time.

Moreover, I will contend 3.5 is the edition of the Melee class, magic is good for getting your raging barbarians, of Divine Might, Smite Evil, Bless Weapon, Power Attacking Greatsword wielding Paladins.

I'm not seeing how this in anyway makes wizards not powerful. How is battlefield control less powerful than damage dealing? Just because the wizard isn't usually a spectacular damage dealer doesn't mean he's not exerting a disproportionately powerful effect on both the ways combat is fought and non combat strategies. If a caster is deciding who gets to deal damage, that's often better than dealing damage himself.

 

[Pierson_Lowgal]

A different perspective on this -

What's wrong with spells isn't the spells, per se, it's the monsters. The party versus one creature default assumption just doesn't work as well as party versus group of monsters. Mix single monster as enemy with save or sit spells and now you've got a problem.

Though it happens less frequently, the caster versus party has another problem. The enemy caster can blow their whole load on the party. The upside of 4th edition handling NPCs and PCs differently is the solving of this problem.

 

[billd91]

To me its not the fact that the wizard is vastly more powerful in combat (although at high levels he can be). My problem is that not only are you great in combat, your great at everything else.

Magical Traps? Dispel Magic. Problem Solving? Divinations. Moving Around? Teleportation? Armor Class? No fighter can beat a wizard when he's got his spells on. Mobility? Fly, D Door, etc.

A wizard does everything, on and off of combat. Fighting is a fighter's schtick, but the wizard does so much more.

I've never had a problem with any of this in any edition of D&D. Why? Because it means you're not stuck with needing all of the 4 main character classes if someone wants to play something else. And every use of magic to accomplish these tasks means less magic devoted to being the blaster, which is a fine thing. Too many wizards, in all the years I've played, have just stocked up on offense and a few defenses (or now offense and buffs) without any care for utilities.

 

[billd91]

You're all right. The answer is what 4th is already doing: up the amount of healing for all classes so that way the spellcasters can do cooler stuff.

Well, that means the cleric has the potential to do cooler stuff. It shouldn't affect the ability of non-healing casters to do "cool" stuff.