D&D 5E The 5E Magic User
- Thread starter MarkChevallier
- Start date
Spinachcat
First Post
I like running Swords & Sorcery, not High Fantasy. In my 0e games, the magic user is tremendously powerful, but he must choose when to cast and mostly does not. It creates a different kind of world than my 4e game where the entire world is heavily infused with gonzo magic.
I don't know how 5e is going to bridge both those extremes.
When you have limited amount of magic, it creates a different play experience than when you have nigh-unlimited magic thanks to crafting.
I don't know how 5e is going to bridge both those extremes.
When you have limited amount of magic, it creates a different play experience than when you have nigh-unlimited magic thanks to crafting.
Li Shenron
Legend
Completely agree. That has been the concept of Wizard in D&D for more than 30 years, let's relegate the alternate concept of the past 3 years to a modular option, and we're fine. Keeping the current concept on the forefront will make it impossible to heal the fractured D&D gamers base.
BTW, I'm fine whether they want to call it Wizard, Mage or even just Spellcaster. But I hope they don't call it Magic-User, that always sounded very dorky to me.
These are implementation problems, they only require some patience to be fixed, while the system itself was solid*. The problem was that in 3ed they didn't have enough patience for everything...
Someone must have done a good brainstorming on Dramwij's Instant Summons and realized how could it be exploited, if it ended up such at an inexplicable high level. Clearly not enough attention was given to Harm or Haste.
*Eventually very-high-level spellcasters were often regarded as hard to handle by the DM, which may lead someone to think that the system was in fact not solid enough. Personally I believe that very-high-level play should be different, and I'm totally fine if it is hard both for the players AND the DMs. Problem is... it's not usually the best players and best DMs that want to play very-high-levels campaigns.
MarkChevallier
First Post
I don't mind carrying a crossbow, but I didn't expect to be the one using it all the time - a lot of the time as a low-level wizard without spells, I was trying to find useful things to do while avoiding confrontation and realising that when it came to hitting things, I was pretty useless. Sometimes, I was running in terror and hiding from things that could kill me pretty quickly.
For me, this was a lot of fun! But not for everyone, obviously.
So, how do they reconcile the two sides? One side wants magic available constantly, one wants occasional bursts of big magic. Different classes? Possibly, but not necessarily.
The idea someone had above of passing off the "constant-magic" into an implement is a good one - it means I (or someone with my preferences) just don't have to buy my "wand of infinite missiles" and can instead spend that gold on some rare component or magic-enhancing device instead. Or a nice robe. With gold brocade. But someone who *wants* that constant supply of magic can then have it. Satisfies both those needs while leaving the default class fairly standard.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Hero
I don't think I want to go back to a wizard that doesn't have at-will spells. Unless the Wizard has enough "martial "abilities that he's actually decent with a staff or a sword.
I would also prefer to keep at-wills, encounters and dailies in general for Wizardry. But I could see re-envisioning them into something more... "Vancian".
You prepare a spell, say "Fireball". Having this spell prepared, gives you a set of spellcasting option.
1) As a Standard At-Will Action , you cast something like Scorching Burst. (Area Burst 1, 1d6+STAT fire damage)
2) As an Heroic Standard Action (= ENcounter Power), you can cast Flame Burst (Area Burst 1, 2d6+STAT fire damage, MIss Half Damage)
3) As a Decisive Standard Action (= Daily Power), you can cast Fireball itself. (Area Burst 3, 3d6+STAT fire damage, 5 ongoing damage (save ends), Miss Half Damage)
I would also prefer to keep at-wills, encounters and dailies in general for Wizardry. But I could see re-envisioning them into something more... "Vancian".
You prepare a spell, say "Fireball". Having this spell prepared, gives you a set of spellcasting option.
1) As a Standard At-Will Action , you cast something like Scorching Burst. (Area Burst 1, 1d6+STAT fire damage)
2) As an Heroic Standard Action (= ENcounter Power), you can cast Flame Burst (Area Burst 1, 2d6+STAT fire damage, MIss Half Damage)
3) As a Decisive Standard Action (= Daily Power), you can cast Fireball itself. (Area Burst 3, 3d6+STAT fire damage, 5 ongoing damage (save ends), Miss Half Damage)
Aldarc
Legend
With occasional encounter and only a few daily powers, the "alternate concept of the past 3 years" remains fundamentally the same as what was described. At-will powers were practically weapon skills. There's no need to beat around the bush with trying to malign 4E though.
TrippyHippy
Hero
I think that the major advantage of a Vancian magic system is familiarity and it is pretty much the simplest magic system out there.
I do think that Wizards (or whatever) need a handful of relatively minor spells that they can always cast - isn't this the idea for Cantrips? - but I do think the resource management aspect of playing a magic user actually provides a gaming experience that some people like.
What I don't want is Magic Users reduced to being blasters - I want some outlet for creativity and variation - both in terms of distinction from other spell casters (being able to develop your own style), and in term of being significantly different to other classes in play. I could see an argument for an entire shift of approach - creating a Mage: The Ascension style freeform system would be interesting to me. But then this may still be alienating to others.
I do think that Wizards (or whatever) need a handful of relatively minor spells that they can always cast - isn't this the idea for Cantrips? - but I do think the resource management aspect of playing a magic user actually provides a gaming experience that some people like.
What I don't want is Magic Users reduced to being blasters - I want some outlet for creativity and variation - both in terms of distinction from other spell casters (being able to develop your own style), and in term of being significantly different to other classes in play. I could see an argument for an entire shift of approach - creating a Mage: The Ascension style freeform system would be interesting to me. But then this may still be alienating to others.
not smart enough
I realized that I am not smart enough to answer this question. I don't know what I want. See;
I kind of like the 4th edition Magic-User, and
I kind of like the old (pre-3rd) Magic-User, and
I kind of like the 3rd edition Magic-User
But, I also kind of not like each of them too.
I think I agree with those that said 3rd was pretty good, but the scrolls/wand availability was too easy, and therefore they got out of control.
So maybe something like 3rd, with a ritual component, and less creation/purchase of items?
I realized that I am not smart enough to answer this question. I don't know what I want. See;
I kind of like the 4th edition Magic-User, and
I kind of like the old (pre-3rd) Magic-User, and
I kind of like the 3rd edition Magic-User
But, I also kind of not like each of them too.
I think I agree with those that said 3rd was pretty good, but the scrolls/wand availability was too easy, and therefore they got out of control.
So maybe something like 3rd, with a ritual component, and less creation/purchase of items?
delericho
Legend
I suspect this will be one of the fault lines in the 5e development. Many people really like what 4e did with Wizards, and many other dislike it just as strongly.
I think it is possible to cover both bases, but not at once.
Consider this:
5e retains the At-Will, Encounter, Daily structure of 4e powers, and adds "Always On" and "Conditional" ("Always On" is obvious; "Conditional" powers are ones that you can trigger any time you meet the conditions. For instance "when you score a critical hit, you can...") You'll note that I've removed "Utility" from the list - each of these powers was actually already one of the other times, depending on how it was used... they may or may not be given on a different progression, but they're not really their own category.
Then, you create two classes, the Wizard and the Mage.
The Wizard works basically like the 4e Wizard - he has At-Will, Encounter and Daily powers, he has a limited ability to switch out his Dailies each day, and so on.
The Mage, on the other hand, works much more like the pre-4e Magic User/Mage/Wizard - he has no (or very few) At-Wills or Encounters, but can know as many Dailies as he wishes to add to his spellbook. Each day, he then prepares a subset of those Dailies for use (and can prepare the same spell several times if he wishes).
That covers both camps. (Unfortunately, I doubt the Core Rulebook could incorporate both. The Starter Set certainly can't. Given the need for a choice, I would advocate the Wizard get the nod, as it is the easier class to play.)
Rituals should remain, and should perhaps be expanded. The "Ritual Caster" feat should be eliminated - each ritual should have its own prerequisites, but anyone who can meet those prerequisites can learn and use the ritual. And rituals in general should be easier to use - rather than having an enormous cost for a minor trick, there should be a fairly modest cost. Though there should be some cost to stop the Wizard/Mage simply spamming Knock and rendering the Rogue obselete - perhaps it should cost a Healing Surge (or equivalent), to reflect that using the magic thus is exhausting?
I think it is possible to cover both bases, but not at once.
Consider this:
5e retains the At-Will, Encounter, Daily structure of 4e powers, and adds "Always On" and "Conditional" ("Always On" is obvious; "Conditional" powers are ones that you can trigger any time you meet the conditions. For instance "when you score a critical hit, you can...") You'll note that I've removed "Utility" from the list - each of these powers was actually already one of the other times, depending on how it was used... they may or may not be given on a different progression, but they're not really their own category.
Then, you create two classes, the Wizard and the Mage.
The Wizard works basically like the 4e Wizard - he has At-Will, Encounter and Daily powers, he has a limited ability to switch out his Dailies each day, and so on.
The Mage, on the other hand, works much more like the pre-4e Magic User/Mage/Wizard - he has no (or very few) At-Wills or Encounters, but can know as many Dailies as he wishes to add to his spellbook. Each day, he then prepares a subset of those Dailies for use (and can prepare the same spell several times if he wishes).
That covers both camps. (Unfortunately, I doubt the Core Rulebook could incorporate both. The Starter Set certainly can't. Given the need for a choice, I would advocate the Wizard get the nod, as it is the easier class to play.)
Rituals should remain, and should perhaps be expanded. The "Ritual Caster" feat should be eliminated - each ritual should have its own prerequisites, but anyone who can meet those prerequisites can learn and use the ritual. And rituals in general should be easier to use - rather than having an enormous cost for a minor trick, there should be a fairly modest cost. Though there should be some cost to stop the Wizard/Mage simply spamming Knock and rendering the Rogue obselete - perhaps it should cost a Healing Surge (or equivalent), to reflect that using the magic thus is exhausting?
delericho
Legend
Incidentally, I'm all for the addition of an Artifice power source (or equivalent) covering those characters whose 'thing' is the creation and use of magic items - the Eberron-style Artificer, the Alchemist, the steampunk-style Mad Scientist, or even characters like Jarlaxle or Iron Man (who may not create the items, but gain their power from using them).
This allows us to specify characters who primarily use items. It also allows us to have items that level with the character (Weapons of Legacy in 3e, or their equivalent), or 'signature items' (Anduril, Excalibur), or the equivalent, via the use of multi-classing.
Finally, it should mean we can remove the 'need' for items generally to be considered part of the character progression - most characters can be assumed to have a couple of (fairly minor) items, and indeed possibly to only have those items for a short while. It is only if they invest in the Artifice power source, to tie those items into their overall progression, that they consider those items as intrinsically 'theirs'.
(One other net effect of this is that the creation of magic items probably ceases to be the field of the Wizard, necessarily - although there should be nothing in particular stopping the Wizard from taking the appropriate cross-class powers if he wishes.)
This allows us to specify characters who primarily use items. It also allows us to have items that level with the character (Weapons of Legacy in 3e, or their equivalent), or 'signature items' (Anduril, Excalibur), or the equivalent, via the use of multi-classing.
Finally, it should mean we can remove the 'need' for items generally to be considered part of the character progression - most characters can be assumed to have a couple of (fairly minor) items, and indeed possibly to only have those items for a short while. It is only if they invest in the Artifice power source, to tie those items into their overall progression, that they consider those items as intrinsically 'theirs'.
(One other net effect of this is that the creation of magic items probably ceases to be the field of the Wizard, necessarily - although there should be nothing in particular stopping the Wizard from taking the appropriate cross-class powers if he wishes.)
Szatany
First Post
For 5e, I think I would like a system that takes a little from vancian magic and a little from 3e psionics. (4e power system of at-wills/enc/dailies IMO works best with divine magic, as divine casters are allowed to cast this spell that often, and have no say in it).
I would prefer a system that separates spells into fast-cast combat magic and slow-cast utilities/rituals.
--Combat spells are cast with mana, they don't have to be memorized or anything. Casters have always small amounts of mana that recharges quickly.
--Noncombat magic is dealt with vancian system. Because it only deals with noncombat spells, wizards don't risk running out of spells in battle (but they very well might run out of "rituals".
So for example, a first-level wizard might look like this:
COMBAT SPELLS
Mana 1+Int (say, 5)
spells known: magic missile, ray of enfeeblement, expeditious retreat
UTILITY SPELLS
one 1-st level slot
spells known: detect magic (memorized), endure elements, floating disk
I would prefer a system that separates spells into fast-cast combat magic and slow-cast utilities/rituals.
--Combat spells are cast with mana, they don't have to be memorized or anything. Casters have always small amounts of mana that recharges quickly.
--Noncombat magic is dealt with vancian system. Because it only deals with noncombat spells, wizards don't risk running out of spells in battle (but they very well might run out of "rituals".
So for example, a first-level wizard might look like this:
COMBAT SPELLS
Mana 1+Int (say, 5)
spells known: magic missile, ray of enfeeblement, expeditious retreat
UTILITY SPELLS
one 1-st level slot
spells known: detect magic (memorized), endure elements, floating disk
Li Shenron
Legend
I feel the same. One of my pet peeve has always been that "magic shopping" is the cause of a lot of problems. The problem is not in the spellcasting rules. But take away magic shopping and a lot of players will hate you.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Hero
Too much of a player character's "build" hinges on equipment these days. If you take Weapon Focus (Longsword), you really want o find a Longsword +3, not a Greataxe +3.
I think you wouldn't need as much if the equipment wasn't that dominant in that regard.
What I could see is that magic items do not give bonuses, but give alternate abilities. (I mentioned this before).
You find only one or two magical weapons in your entire fighter career. But this magical weapon grows with you and your character will revolve more around it than it does now. I don't believe players will miss magic item shops as much when this happens, and if a player really wants a particular item, and the DM is nice, the DM can build it as a plot point into his campaign, instead of having to put up with magic items hops.
I like it and I think the best bet is to split spells in groups.
Cantrips: Weak at will spells
Sorcery: Moderate strong spells that can be casted spontaneously and recharge over time (encounter spells)
Channel: Passive spells that stay on the target until the duration ends or the effect is used.
Wizardry (needs better name): Stronger spells that can must be prepared on slots.
Prayers: just like Wizardries but slightly weaker and more times a day.
Invocations: Moderately strong spells that recharge after the caster uses a second wind
Rituals: Very strong spells that require long periods of time to cast.
Incantations: Extremely powerful spells that not only take time but have expensive material costs.
Then each magic user could get the ably to cast spells in certain ways.
A wizard can cast Fireball as a cantrip, wizardry, ritual, or incantation. A sorceror, due to there lack of academic training must cast Fireball as cantrip, sorcery, or ritual.
Last edited:
Nebulous
Legend
Yeah, 4e killed the magic of D&D in every way. Sure, older editions might not have been perfectly balanced, but it was always fun. I actually think that WotC is in the perfect place now to work out Fun AND Balanced at the same time. And as others have stated, they need to be careful so that wizards don't step on the toes of other classes too much. Like Knock for example. Well, maybe it takes a LONG time to cast, or has a costly component, or maybe it's not as effective as a highly skilled thief. And no Wizard should ever be able to transform into a fighting machine that outshines the Fighter.
Fanaelialae
Legend
I originally posted this over in the Vancian thread, but it was somewhat well received there so I figured I'd cross-post.
I wonder if there might be some appeal in balancing AW/E/D around increased flexibility. Something like, every spell has 3 versions, one for each level of frequency. You have x spell slots, but you can choose to memorize any combination of spells. You could memorize x at-wills, x encounters, x dailies, or some combination thereof. 3 options might be overkill, but even if you dropped it to just at-wills and dailies I could still see it working.
For example, Invisibility. The at-will version might only last until your next turn (1 round), while the daily version might last for an entire encounter (5 minutes). If there's an encounter version, it would be somewhere between those options. That's just an example of course; the standard could instead be that at wills last for rounds, encounters last for minutes, and dailies last for hours. Either way, those are just fiddly details.
So, if you had 5 spell slots, you could memorize at-will Invisibility and 4 other spells, or Daily Invisibility five times, or some combination thereof. It might be a reasonable compromise between the various editions, and it would allow players to play their casters as they prefer. Like the 3e warlock, memorize at will versions of spells. Like the 3e wizard, memorize dailies exclusively. Like 4e casters, take your preferred combination of frequencies.
I wonder if there might be some appeal in balancing AW/E/D around increased flexibility. Something like, every spell has 3 versions, one for each level of frequency. You have x spell slots, but you can choose to memorize any combination of spells. You could memorize x at-wills, x encounters, x dailies, or some combination thereof. 3 options might be overkill, but even if you dropped it to just at-wills and dailies I could still see it working.
For example, Invisibility. The at-will version might only last until your next turn (1 round), while the daily version might last for an entire encounter (5 minutes). If there's an encounter version, it would be somewhere between those options. That's just an example of course; the standard could instead be that at wills last for rounds, encounters last for minutes, and dailies last for hours. Either way, those are just fiddly details.
So, if you had 5 spell slots, you could memorize at-will Invisibility and 4 other spells, or Daily Invisibility five times, or some combination thereof. It might be a reasonable compromise between the various editions, and it would allow players to play their casters as they prefer. Like the 3e warlock, memorize at will versions of spells. Like the 3e wizard, memorize dailies exclusively. Like 4e casters, take your preferred combination of frequencies.
Fanaelialae
Legend
I feel that magic shopping, while problematic, is the lesser issue when compared to the 3e magic item creation feats. A possible solution for shopping might be to allow it, but strictly limit the availability of what magic items are on the market. In any case, 5e should support both shopping and "no magic shop" styles of play.
The problem with the crafting feats is that they allow you to circumvent the gold limit (and potentially limited availability) of shopping. It costs 1/2 gold and a (usually) marginal amount of xp. Now granted, some players were turned off by the idea of spending xp and simply didn't craft, but those who wanted to could break the system pretty fast...
Yeah! I mean, look at the real world, where it takes just as much time to toss a grenade as it does to pick a lock. 4E can be so unrealistic.
(I do in fact think rituals should be merged back into regular spells, but this line of argument doesn't hold up IMO.)
FoxWander
Adventurer
I myself would prefer a system that had a limited number of base spells but each spell would have a scalable power level. For instance, a mage might know "Create Fire" and the level he casts it at would determine its effects. Cast as a cantrip you'd have a Firefinger effect. At 1st level its more like Burning Hands. 3rd level is your Fireball and at higher levels you get the Firestorm or Meteor Swarm.
Many of the existing spells already fall into this sort of system- the same basic effect at various levels. The spells I just mentioned are like that. But doing it this way eliminates much of the complexity/intimidation of playing a mage. Instead of hundreds of spells that can overwhelm players you have a core of base spells that scale with level. The "Create Fire" example would roll 9 spells into one- which is a lot easier to grasp than the individual spells PLUS all the minor variations of 'I blast it with fire'.
This could make for a much simpler spell list that still covers all the canon effects one would expect. A reworking of 4E's rituals would cover many of the one-off effects that are covered by the plethora of specific spells that exist now. Also this could easily be rolled into a Vancian style system- except you're memorized spells are chosen from the handful of base spells you know and you're daily spell allowance limit how often, and at what level, you can cast them. So if you're expecting trouble you could memorize "Create Fire" and "Call Lightning", but if you're exploring what you hope is an abandoned castle you might go with "Telekinesis" instead- which covers all the Knock and Unseen Servant type effects which have so many utility uses.
Many of the existing spells already fall into this sort of system- the same basic effect at various levels. The spells I just mentioned are like that. But doing it this way eliminates much of the complexity/intimidation of playing a mage. Instead of hundreds of spells that can overwhelm players you have a core of base spells that scale with level. The "Create Fire" example would roll 9 spells into one- which is a lot easier to grasp than the individual spells PLUS all the minor variations of 'I blast it with fire'.
This could make for a much simpler spell list that still covers all the canon effects one would expect. A reworking of 4E's rituals would cover many of the one-off effects that are covered by the plethora of specific spells that exist now. Also this could easily be rolled into a Vancian style system- except you're memorized spells are chosen from the handful of base spells you know and you're daily spell allowance limit how often, and at what level, you can cast them. So if you're expecting trouble you could memorize "Create Fire" and "Call Lightning", but if you're exploring what you hope is an abandoned castle you might go with "Telekinesis" instead- which covers all the Knock and Unseen Servant type effects which have so many utility uses.
Someone
Adventurer
The image of the wizard, holding back before unleashing an earth shattering spell is dramatic and works well in literature, but not that well at the table, IMO. The average of a bored mage player one fight and a frustrated fighter player the second fight is not two happy players both fights.
Similar Threads
