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

[Slife]

While I applaud this kind of creativity, I'm curious as to how you balance that spell versus the original that can be nullified by lighting it on fire.

And I mean that in a general sense- how do you balance thematically/visually/materially altered spells if not with taking a feat?

Well, as any wizard of that calibur should know, fields, magical in nature, which are generated primarily via the means of the manipulation of preexisting gravitational forces for the express purpose of containing and immobilizing opponents for a limited duration are by their very nature diametrically opposed to the freedom symbolized by the element of fire.

 

[Chupacabra]

I'm not so much tired of players picking Fireball, per se, but rather in HOW they choose to implement that spell. Its kinda like the 98 pound weakling who all of a sudden learns ninjistu: "Now its payback time!" - in other words after four levels of cowering in fear they become the biggest bullies on the block just because they can. Gang of orcs over the hill -- Fireball 'em. Don't want to answer the King's Summons brought to you by a band of marshalls -- Fireball 'em. Want to persuade the unfriendly tribesmen to assist you (and your Intimidate and/or Diplomacy skills are laughable b/c CHA was your dump stat) -- Fireball a few mud huts.

Power corrupts.....

At least the fighter has to kill 'em one (or two) at a time.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

BTW, here's my list of "cliche'" spells that I get tired of seeing players choose

Create water
Command
Detect (alignment)
Entangle
Hold person
Create Food & Water
Polymorph

I can't remember anyone in the last 4 years of our gaming group casting the abovementioned spells more than 10 times in the last couple of years (Except the free detecting of evil by the Paladin). Were were incredibly excited in the last adventure because a location text mentioned "channels cut out as if they once contained water" and the Favored Soul could use his Create Water spell for the first time in 11 character levels.

DS

 

[Tarek]

In 1st edition, there was this lovely little thing called a "% chance to learn spell".

I had a magic-user blow his chance to learn Detect Invisible. Another mage I had blew his roll for the Invisibility spell. Neither of them will ever be able to learn those spells.

In that campaign, when you went up a level, you went to someone to train. That person might like you... or might not. And a magic-user could only teach a spell that they knew. So you could ask for a particular spell, and if your teacher liked you and knew the spell, they'd teach it to you. Then you'd see if you could learn it. IF they didn't like you, they might teach you a similar spell or at least one from the same school. If they hated you, they'd teach you the most useless spell they knew (Zephyr is one that comes to mind... though I think I did use it once in a useful manner).

You could also learn spells from scrolls and spellbooks you ran across, but that didn't happen too often. Many times, the spellbooks we found were trapped.

This is something that is discouraged in 3rd edition. In 3e, you have a guarantee that you will get the two spells you want to get when you level up. And you can repeat attempts to learn a spell every level, if you failed a spellcraft check when learning from a captured spellbook or scroll.

The key to diversity among spellcasters is the DM controlling what spells are available in the campaign.

 

[Storyteller01]

No offense, but isnt that just min-maxing then?
jh

Is the police officer who carries a .40 instead of a .22 just not being creative enough? Is he in-maxing, or saving his arse?



Seriously though, I don't get tired of seeing them. I enjoy them every time I see them in some movie/cartoon/sci-fi episode. I enjoy seeing players use them creatively as well as any other spell.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

In 1st edition, there was this lovely little thing called a "% chance to learn spell".

It was a brilliant concept, IMHO, that should have been kept. I'm reintroducing something like that in my next campaign.

The key to diversity among spellcasters is the DM controlling what spells are available in the campaign.

Only to a certain extent. From what I've seen, unless there is some real difficulty in learning a particular spell, once one PC learns a spell, any one can.*

* There has only been one exeption to this observation in my 28 years of gaming. One guy I have played with for 20 years NEVER shares stuff from his spellbook. Playing a spellcaster in a campaign in which he is also playing a Wizard (which he does 85% of the time) means always fighting over the scrolls and tomes.

 

[awayfarer]

I'm not trying to be a smarta$$ about it- my fatigue with D&D archetypes/stereotypes is partially because I've spent the last 10 years playing in games that were Core + Completes & the 2Ed equivalent. Add 1Ed campaigning back to 1978 and I've pretty much covered the basics.

Fair enough but I feel like the point was missed. If you're given three tools and one is clearly superior you use the superior one. A hammer works best with nails, a screwdriver works best with screws. You could bash on screws with the hammer or smack nails into a plank with the blunt end of a screwdriver but it's not the best choice in the world.

Basically the point is that people use what works most effectively. It's not uncreative, it's just sensible.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

"Best" is still open to interpretation. Is it "best" to kill everyone in the room with an explosion of arcane fire or to sneak the party past them invisibly?

Is it "best" to have every mage in a campaign (or in your personal stable of PCs) be largely indistinguishable from all the others, or to have the "real Slim Shady" stand up and be recognized?

If you're playing a game on your computer, do you set it on its easiest setting and forget about it, or do you (eventually) try the games at higher challenge levels?

Playing the game isn't just about results, its about the paths we take to get there.

And, to extend your tools analogy, there are several ways to cut down a tree.

The typical min-maxed wizard's spell list is like a lumberjack using a state-of-the-art chainsaw to cut down a tree.

A different one might be useing an axe.

A very different one might use a strand of titanium wire with diamond teeth...

End result, the tree is cut down.

I've been around enough guys with chainsaws- they're noisy and they stink. Thus, I'm trying out the axes and wires...

 

[FireLance]

In 1st edition, there was this lovely little thing called a "% chance to learn spell".

IMO, "% chance to learn spell" used as a method to restrict access to problematic spells would be nothing more than a cop-out. If a particular spell would cause problems in your campaign, just be upfront about it and tell the player he can't pick it. :\

 

[Slife]

Read magic.