What spells do you get tired of seeing wizard players take? Cliche's, etc.

[Plane Sailing]

I don't really worry - typically the wizards have all kinds of spells (one players' PCs are regularly chastised by his compatriots for 'never having any useful spells').

FWIW my first magic user in 3.0e was a sorcerer, and I was determined to avoid all the classic 'must have' spells - so planning their spell list I eliminated mage armour, shield, magic missile, invisibility, fly, haste etc - and had a ball with the character! Regrettably the spell and metamagic changes in 3.5e knackered her spell list and I had to make several changes to fit into the 3.5e world...

 

[Kestrel]

If the player is having fun with the standard spells, who are you to tell him he's wrong?

That's the one I'll never get about some GMs. They go out of thier way to interfere with the one and only thing a player has control over, his character. Don't you have enough control with the rest of your world?

Maybe you controlling GMs should show the player interesting non-standard spells with your NPCS instead of throwing arbitrary restrictions at a player just trying to have fun the way he wants?

 

[VirgilCaine]

If the player is having fun with the standard spells, who are you to tell him he's wrong?

That's the one I'll never get about some GMs. They go out of thier way to interfere with the one and only thing a player has control over, his character. Don't you have enough control with the rest of your world?

Maybe you controlling GMs should show the player interesting non-standard spells with your NPCS instead of throwing arbitrary restrictions at a player just trying to have fun the way he wants?

Totally agree here.

 

[lukelightning]

One man's cliche is another man's "classic old-school."

 

[Wolfwood2]

I would love to see this come back. It sure would eliminate carbon copy wizards.

From the SRD:

Spells Gained at a New Level: Wizards perform a certain amount of spell research between adventures. Each time a character attains a new wizard level, she gains two spells of her choice to add to her spellbook. The two free spells must be of spell levels she can cast. If she has chosen to specialize in a school of magic, one of the two free spells must be from her specialty school.

Spells Copied from Another’s Spellbook or a Scroll: A wizard can also add a spell to her book whenever she encounters one on a magic scroll or in another wizard’s spellbook. No matter what the spell’s source, the wizard must first decipher the magical writing (see Arcane Magical Writings, above). Next, she must spend a day studying the spell. At the end of the day, she must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell’s level). A wizard who has specialized in a school of spells gains a +2 bonus on the Spellcraft check if the new spell is from her specialty school. She cannot, however, learn any spells from her prohibited schools. If the check succeeds, the wizard understands the spell and can copy it into her spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook, below). The process leaves a spellbook that was copied from unharmed, but a spell successfully copied from a magic scroll disappears from the parchment.

If the check fails, the wizard cannot understand or copy the spell. She cannot attempt to learn or copy that spell again until she gains another rank in Spellcraft. A spell that was being copied from a scroll does not vanish from the scroll.

Pretty much the same thing, isn't it?

Granted they still get the free two spells per level, but for anything else they have to roll the dice or be unable to learn it.

 

[VirgilCaine]

From the SRD:

Pretty much the same thing, isn't it?

Granted they still get the free two spells per level, but for anything else they have to roll the dice or be unable to learn it.

Oh , I forgot about that.

 

[KB9JMQ]

Oh , I forgot about that.

Hmmmmm, so did I. Actually I don't remember ever seeing it before.

 

[Victim]

It's not a real issue since wizards will pretty much always be able to take 10 and succeed.

 

[Celebrim]

Fireball? That underpowered bit of showmanship? It's hardly worth it.

Magic missile is not bad for finishing things off when you absolutely can't afford to waste your action, and it doesn't cost much, but fireball is for kids and grey haired guys still playing 1st edition.

For the most part stock evocation from the SRD just isn't worth it. Monsters have too many answers now: like lots of hitpoints to just shrug off 10d6 worth of damage, high saving throws, evasion, spell resistance, elemental resistance or even immunity. As a 10th level Wizard, I'd feel lucky to even do as much damage with a fireball as a 10th level fighter does with one swing.

Anything that you need a fireball to kill can be killed with celerity by fighters with a decent build. Attempting to use your Wizard in a fighter role is a waste of time, as is wasting spells to kill off mook hordes that don't really present a threat to the party (that's what cleave is for). Save your spells for things that fighters can't do.

Like Fly. As a DM I get tired of fly. It solves so many problems. Invisibility is pretty bad too. Polymorph gets old at higher levels. Hold Person at lower levels. Wall of stone. Telekinesis. Teleport. Disentegrate I'd imagine...but rarely do my games get that far.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Kestrel
If the player is having fun with the standard spells, who are you to tell him he's wrong?

I'm not telling anyone they're wrong.

I'm just saying I'm tired of people playing carbon copy PCs of any type.

In my current group, we have a guy who plays Wizards 85% of the time (over 20 years of gaming with him), all with spell lists that are basically identical, and another guy who plays a Ranger (or as close as he can get it) in every RPG I've ever played with him.

This is:

1) Boring to watch.

2) Generally prevents someone else from trying out those archetypes.