I'll preface this by saying that even stuff that's coming from Wizards right now seems pretty much in the, "Here's what we're looking at doing but it may change" camp, so I maintain that it's premature to spazz. 
I do feel a certain weird niggling need to respond to a pair of statements made.
"Or they could plan for their "useless"ness and compensate for it in by being useful in other ways other ways like 1) making contacts, aka role playing, 2) working with their backstory, aka role playing, 3) investigate some leads, aka using their knowledge skills and role playing or etc. Just because their class skills aren't useful doesn't mean that they are useless."
-- Useless was a poor choice of words on my part. I'll be more precise; ignoring your seemingly pointed attempts to accuse me of poor role playing.
The accepted role of a wizard in an adventuring party is that of dealing damage through magic, with secondary roles of arcane "buffing" and "utility." This is not to imply that these functions are all wizards are capable of...it IS to imply that these are the activities with which a wizard is most likely to be called upon to perform in the course of adventuring. When a wizard is no longer capable of performing these functions, their ability to perform their role is significantly, almost entirely, impaired. That is what I meant by 'useless.'
I don't generally expect mechanics to involve themselves with roleplaying, to be honest. Role playing doesn't usually have, nor require, rules. It's about dialogue, and story, and other things that aren't governed by dice (though may be influenced by them). As such, anything I say with regards to the mechanics of the game pretty much automatically excludes pure roleplaying concerns. If a game doesn't involve combat, it doesn't MATTER how many spells a wizard can cast, or how he gets them back. Thus, I confine my observations to the tactical game, in which I can safely say that a wizard who has exhausted his spells for the day, is (statistical anomalies that nevertheless make entertaining anecdotes aside) pretty much useless.
"Ummm 9 levels of magic is a bedrock system for how many editions now?!? All of them?"
-- So? Note that I said a new edition is an opportunity to learn from previous editions -without being limited to them-. I see the 9 levels of magic as a potential shackle in this case, which is being discarded in favor of a more open design.
That doesn't mean it definitely won't suck. It very well might. But I approve of the concept of not feeling that they HAVE to retain it just because it was there before.
I do feel a certain weird niggling need to respond to a pair of statements made.
"Or they could plan for their "useless"ness and compensate for it in by being useful in other ways other ways like 1) making contacts, aka role playing, 2) working with their backstory, aka role playing, 3) investigate some leads, aka using their knowledge skills and role playing or etc. Just because their class skills aren't useful doesn't mean that they are useless."
-- Useless was a poor choice of words on my part. I'll be more precise; ignoring your seemingly pointed attempts to accuse me of poor role playing.
The accepted role of a wizard in an adventuring party is that of dealing damage through magic, with secondary roles of arcane "buffing" and "utility." This is not to imply that these functions are all wizards are capable of...it IS to imply that these are the activities with which a wizard is most likely to be called upon to perform in the course of adventuring. When a wizard is no longer capable of performing these functions, their ability to perform their role is significantly, almost entirely, impaired. That is what I meant by 'useless.'
I don't generally expect mechanics to involve themselves with roleplaying, to be honest. Role playing doesn't usually have, nor require, rules. It's about dialogue, and story, and other things that aren't governed by dice (though may be influenced by them). As such, anything I say with regards to the mechanics of the game pretty much automatically excludes pure roleplaying concerns. If a game doesn't involve combat, it doesn't MATTER how many spells a wizard can cast, or how he gets them back. Thus, I confine my observations to the tactical game, in which I can safely say that a wizard who has exhausted his spells for the day, is (statistical anomalies that nevertheless make entertaining anecdotes aside) pretty much useless.
"Ummm 9 levels of magic is a bedrock system for how many editions now?!? All of them?"
-- So? Note that I said a new edition is an opportunity to learn from previous editions -without being limited to them-. I see the 9 levels of magic as a potential shackle in this case, which is being discarded in favor of a more open design.
That doesn't mean it definitely won't suck. It very well might. But I approve of the concept of not feeling that they HAVE to retain it just because it was there before.
