D&D 5E The 5E Magic User

[Elf Witch]

Well if you haven't seen it, then it must never happen.

With which option does WotC run at the greatest chance of losing satisfied customers?

Not saying that it does not happen I have read people complaining about it here enough so it must happen. I am saying that in the 30 years I have been playing I have never seen it come up in a game as an issue.

I view it as a player issue not a design issue and the people I play with have the same view. A spell like knock is in the game so that the party can operate without a rogue and while it can be used to out shine the rogue that was not why it was put in the game.

I will not deny that certain spells can really make the wizard hard to deal with take fly and improved invisibility they can really ruin a DMs day. Which is why I think making those spells harder to cast is a great idea.

I think the direction they took in 4e was not the way to fix this issue. It is one of the main reasons we only played a few sessions of it before saying nope hate it not for us and went back to 3E and then to Pathfinder.

 

[Elf Witch]

Wait, you mean your PCs just behave sensibly and use the tools in front of them? And don't complain that they're being infringed on every time someone else does something? And the game that results plays well?

I think you've articulated an important point. Trying to design the game to be idiot-proof is a fool's errand in itself. I wonder how many design decisions are made because of these sorts of complaints that amount to "In my game, someone abused this rule, therefore the rule is bad".

I wonder that too sometimes. You can't make the game idiot proof nor can you put in rules to stop people being from being jerks at the table.

 

[Aldarc]

Not saying that it does not happen I have read people complaining about it here enough so it must happen. I am saying that in the 30 years I have been playing I have never seen it come up in a game as an issue.

I view it as a player issue not a design issue and the people I play with have the same view. A spell like knock is in the game so that the party can operate without a rogue and while it can be used to out shine the rogue that was not why it was put in the game.

I will not deny that certain spells can really make the wizard hard to deal with take fly and improved invisibility they can really ruin a DMs day. Which is why I think making those spells harder to cast is a great idea.

I think the direction they took in 4e was not the way to fix this issue. It is one of the main reasons we only played a few sessions of it before saying nope hate it not for us and went back to 3E and then to Pathfinder.

I see the bold as symptomatic of the larger problem: no class (or role, if you will) should be required for the functioning or well-being of the party. And that is a design issue.

 

[Gadget]

Not saying that it does not happen I have read people complaining about it here enough so it must happen. I am saying that in the 30 years I have been playing I have never seen it come up in a game as an issue.

I view it as a player issue not a design issue and the people I play with have the same view. A spell like knock is in the game so that the party can operate without a rogue and while it can be used to out shine the rogue that was not why it was put in the game.

I will not deny that certain spells can really make the wizard hard to deal with take fly and improved invisibility they can really ruin a DMs day. Which is why I think making those spells harder to cast is a great idea.

I think the direction they took in 4e was not the way to fix this issue. It is one of the main reasons we only played a few sessions of it before saying nope hate it not for us and went back to 3E and then to Pathfinder.

I'm sorry, but that has not been my experience, per se. While few people try to be a jerk on purpose, when the game is so predisposed to having the ultimate "I win" button (particularly at higher levels) for most situations, things do happen. The 3E wizard does not even have to waste one of his precious slots on knock, just have a scribed scroll handy. There a many things about 4e that are intentionally gamist and hard to swallow from a verisimilitude perspective, but I view rituals as far down on that list even if they serve as a balancing factor and have some implementation issues . Bashing someone's head with a golf club is quite quick, but performing brain surgery is not. Unleashing raw energy to quick destructive effect can happen rather fast, but more subtle and delicate manipulation takes a bit of time (and the results can be more wondrous if less immediately destructive). I sometimes wonder if the collective 30 (or insert your own number) years or so of playing many express has just had things so deeply impressed into our psyche that they are viewed as The Way Things Must Be tm.

But on the other hand, if it works for you, no reason to change it or re do it. I'm glad I'm not one that has to design the new edition.

 

[Elf Witch]

I'm sorry, but that has not been my experience, per se. While few people try to be a jerk on purpose, when the game is so predisposed to having the ultimate "I win" button (particularly at higher levels) for most situations, things do happen. The 3E wizard does not even have to waste one of his precious slots on knock, just have a scribed scroll handy. There a many things about 4e that are intentionally gamist and hard to swallow from a verisimilitude perspective, but I view rituals as far down on that list even if they serve as a balancing factor and have some implementation issues . Bashing someone's head with a golf club is quite quick, but performing brain surgery is not. Unleashing raw energy to quick destructive effect can happen rather fast, but more subtle and delicate manipulation takes a bit of time (and the results can be more wondrous if less immediately destructive). I sometimes wonder if the collective 30 (or insert your own number) years or so of playing many express has just had things so deeply impressed into our psyche that they are viewed as The Way Things Must Be tm.

But on the other hand, if it works for you, no reason to change it or re do it. I'm glad I'm not one that has to design the new edition.

I like the way magic worked in all the previous editions before 4E. I do recognize that each had flaws especially at higher levels. As much as I enjoy 3E I really dislike how easy it to scribe scrolls and make items.

In my games I handle it by not giving them enough time to accomplish a lot of this. So they really have to choose carefully what they want to scribe.

I can't speak for other people but my 30 years has given me the experience to see that no system will ever be perfect and that there are a lot of ways to do things. For example my favorite magic system is Shadowrun not the new edition but the older ones. I don't think there is one right way to make a RPG.

I am perfectly willing to try a completely new magical system but it has to make sense to me. .

Here again your example does not make sense to me unless you are saying the knock works like actually picking the lock the way a rogue does and that does take skill to manipulate the mechanism. Okay that can explain the ten minutes though like a rogue who gets better at picking a lock manually if that is how you view it then a wizard who uses it and uses it often should get better and then faster at it.

We all choose where to draw the line at what seems believable to us and what just blows that out of the water. For me the rituals and the various powers make the game not fun for me.

I would not want to be designing it either talk about a huge task ahead of them if their goal really is to try and please fans of editions.

 

[Aramax]

Under NO condition would I buy 5e without Vancian magic(its ok if they add other versions)and the wizard only casts spell,should have to have acsess to ALL spells.

 

[Aldarc]

Under NO condition would I buy 5e without Vancian magic(its ok if they add other versions)and the wizard only casts spell,should have to have acsess to ALL spells.

And thus the Vancianites dictate the all terms and conditions for what the magic system of 5e will be.

 

[Rex Blunder]

I can actually see the 3e and 4e wizards fitting in the page count of the 5e PHB.

1) You include a vancian wizard, very much like the 3e wizard, complete with a giant spell section in the back of the book. This guy is called a "wizard".

2) You include a class called "evoker", who gets 2 fire-based at-will attacks and maybe 2 encounter attacks. They scale with level, and there are no choices about what attacks to take. Also, the evoker can memorize a very small number of wizard spells. This evoker class only eats up like a page, pretty much the way the 3e sorcerer did.

The handy side effect is that WOTC can dole out the illusionist, necromancer, etc. in later sourcebooks.

The big obstacle I see: what level is the highest wizard spell? 9 or 30? I have a secret preference, and I will not buy 5e if WOTC guesses wrong!!

 

[Aramax]

And thus the Vancianites dictate the all terms and conditions for what the magic system of 5e will be.

I said it would be ok for other types also,but without vancian its not even D&D,and yes,I would be HAPPY to dictate!

 

[Lwaxy]

Rituals should be optional and only for some spells. Other than that, the way magic was done up to 4e worked fine, or better yet, look at what PF did.