What would you say is the biggest problem with Wizards, Clerics, Druids, and other "Tier 1" Spellcasters?

No. Not at all. 95% of randomly generated settlements..everything except a large city and a metropolis, has a 15,000 gp limit. The DMG goes on to say that nothing over that limit is available (no headbands of intellect +4, no high-level spells in wands) and anything under the limit is "likely available" (likely, not definitely). Tell me where I'm missing the requirement for large cities or metropolises?

What's to stop the Wizard from saying "I'm going to teleport to Waterdeep/Sharn/equivalent."? And if that fails (because 'likely' doesn't mean 'definitely'), waiting a day and then teleporting to the next large city, and the next, and so on. Or, indeed, just putting in a special order with the Artificers' Guild, arcane merchants, or whatever?

Granted, your campaign world could have no large cities or metropolises at all. But given that a "large city" is only 12,000+ people, that is a pretty dramatic campaign decision - London, Paris and Rome have all had at least that population almost continuously for 2,000 years, and they're hardly alone.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

However, if you play "by the rules" a campaign starting at level one, there is no real expected wealth guideline. You will get "appropriate" treasure as you go. You will not get to choose your own items. Unless you take crafting feats, have an unlimited amount of time, and plenty of funds.

Therefore, any "wizards are broken" argument predicated on headbands of intellect, haversacks, or unlimited scrolls is a fallacy.
So ignore wizards. Druids. Clerics. Sorcerers. We know that if you prevent wizards from ever learning new spells ever, you will hurt their power level.

Then see what happens when Fighters don't get to cherry-pick magic items, either.

-O
 

Because my wizard doesn't have teleport (his cheat sheet said to take Hold Monster and Wall of Force and Cloudkill and Dominate Person)? Because even if he had teleport, he doesn't have scrying magic to have "seen" Waterdeep or Sharn because he dumped Divination and Necromancy to get extra specialist spells? Because his mom had bad things happen in Waterdeep and that's why he's a half-orc? (I know, NOBODY plays half-orc wizards, that wouldn't be optimal, would it?) Because he gets airsick? Because he failed his teleport and got eaten by a dragon since he was by himself because the party did not want to randomly go shopping at the mall when there were sports to be watched and ale to be drank? Because its raining in Waterdeep/Sharn and he lost his favorite umbrella and his pointy hat with stars on it isn't waterproof? Because he worships a hipster god of knowledge that says knowledge must be researched and not bought? Because Waterdeep/Sharn is wretched hive of scum and villainy? Because he's a wanted man in 12 districts? Because because because because because....because of the wonderful things he does? Because he doesn't want to bump into Elminster or Drizzt or the Lord of Blades or Lady Vol? Because he's a racist who doesn't want to be in any place that allows filthy dwarves or even worse warforged. Because he owes someone money? Because he might owe someone child support? Because he's the hero of Canton, the man they call Jayne? Because the prophecy says that if he steps foot in a city the world will end? Because winter is coming and the night is dark and full of terrors? Because 42?

Is it really THAT hard to imagine the billions of reasons why a 10th level wizard might not have teleported to a big city at the first opportunity?
 

I don't even understand this. Any class can be fixed if you come up with extra-rule, intra-narrative conceits to justify binding them or boosting them. That tells you nothing about the ruleset, itself.

Druids aren't balanced because you decide the God of Nature has shut off the Wildshape, Summon Nature's Ally spicket (for any number of odd reasons) and all of the real world animals died to the plague so the druid can have no companion. They just have their assemblage of ridiculously powerful other spells outside of Summons and those that use animals for reconnaissance/divination.

Fighters aren't then balanced within the ruleset because your PC Fighter in your gameworld found a Delorian to take him back to the future and he returned as Batman with a Predator Drone, an anti-missile system, sat-nav, gps positioning/reconnaissance and how about an M1A2 Abrams Tank for good measure (I'm not sure an epic level wizard wouldn't still beat him, to be honest).

Stripping a Ferrari of all of its power:ratio, suspension, grip advantages over a Volkswagon Golf and then watching them level out in a race tells you nothing about the relative disparity of the true vehicles on the track. I'm not sure what this effort is intended to produce.
 

I didn't say you didn't find ANY magic items, I said you don't get to choose them.
There's a big important difference.
Maybe the DM seeded treasure himself. maybe he rolled randomly, maybe he used a pre-written adventure. The point is... you don't get a Haversack, a Headband of Intellect, a Wand of Knock and Boots of Speed just because you asked for them.

For this exercise we are outlawing crafting feats. Which is a specific set of feats that is extremely dependent on the broken economy system. And on the amount of treasure found. If someone wants to make TWO of these uber-wizards, one without crafting feats other than scribe scroll and one WITH crafting feats and crafted items following the crafting rules. Just so we can see if crafting is even over-powered or not.

I like this idea. For a much longer exercise, stevelabny, the person claiming Wizards are vastly overpowered could prepare a series of published scenarios from L1 to L10. If we're concerned about a cheat here, the list goes to a neutral arbitrator in advance. It is assumed the wizard gets his pick of arcane items (on the assumption only he can use them), likely gets stuck with arcane items because no one else can use them, but does not get his pick of items others could use. Post the L1 wizard. Then post the treasure gained to L2. Then the Wizard levels up. So on to L10. And let him have crafting feats under this model. There's the organic wizard.

As to "what if the fighter doesn't get his specialized weapons", perhaps a fighter growing in such a setting doesn't use specialization feats at all. There are lots of other feats. Maybe he isn't a fighter at all, but a Barbarian or a Ranger.

And a side note about expected wealth, and fighter items being consumable. In magic shop land, a wizard who stocks up on scrolls bought/found and casts from scroll...those were consumed. A fighter who buys/finds a +1 sword and then a +2 sword, still gets to sell his +1sword. And a mid-high level wizard being made with tons of scrolls? If he had been built up as a 1st level character who was that dependent on scrolls, he probably wouldnt have his full expected wealth by higher levels.

If we assume MagicMarts, then the Fighter should be able to augment the existing sword, not sell it for half and buy a new +2 one. And I agree on that scroll reliance issue. If the wizard is largely reliant on consumables, and the fighter focuses on non-consumables, the fighter will have more wealth, and the wizard less, at later levels. Whether the fighter has more than WBL, or the wizard less, or both, depends where you assume consumables are used as a standard.

And out of those scrolls that are found...how many of them will be from the list that the wizard already has? How many of the new spells will come with failed spellcraft rolls?

As a point of order, the Wizard can take 10 on a spellcraft check, so he should never fail a roll for a spell at his level, assuming he max'es spellcraft.

And like I said, my first post only said no to the crafting feats. A 10th level wizard only has TWO possible crafting feats. So if someone really wants to burn a good chunk of their money and a feat or two and a few specific spells to craft the items, okay...let's see that too.

The organic wizard becomes interesting in this regard.

Umm, by RAW in 3e, the "magic mart" is the default. If you look in your DMG, when they list the bit about creating towns and whatnot, they list a GP Limit for a given settlement. The presumption that you can buy anything that is equal to or lower than that GP limit is right there. It's not like this comes out of nowhere.

So let's see a third Wizard, with MagicMart in full swing. Let's see all three comparables, for Wizard and Fighter both. If removal of MagicMart is the answer to balance, it seems a simple enough fix.

Also, your feat limitations are a bit strange as well. I've got scribe scroll plus two bonus feats, either of which can be crafter feats. I've also got four more feats from class which potentially can be crafting feats. Possibly one extra if I'm human. I can, by 10th level, if I choose, have pretty much every crafting feat that exists in the game.

Let's vet that. The Wizard gets Scribe Scroll at L1, so that's automatic. The others have level requirements. Brew Potion L3; Magic Arms L5; Rod L9; Staff L12; Wand L5; Wondrous Item L3; Ring L12; Scroll L1 but that's automatic. 25% you can't have at all by 10th level. None can be taken at 1st, so the human's bonus feat is irrelevant. The other five will require all of your post-L1 feats (2 bonus and one each at L3, L6 and L9), but is do-able.

Show me the fully statted Wizard at each of levels 1 to 10 assuming you can buy whatever you can afford. Let's go with MagicMart. Let's assume unlimited down time. Offsetting these, though, you never find an item you keep - everything costs full price, except what you craft yourself. You can Take 10 on Spellcraft, so you should not fail any spell rolls, but remember you need to be able to take 10 for items you craft. Let's audit the character.

Now, really, the only ones I need are Scribe Scroll (which I start with) and Craft Wand. Craft Wonderous is a nice one to have too. Makes for getting those Haversacks and Headbands a breeze.

Your build. You pick the feats and the items. But, as stevelabny said, core only. If you want, provide a second example where you can pick from anywhere, but all that really proves is that OPTIONAL rules should be vetted, and selectively added as appropriate to the specific campagn. I think we also need some attrition of those scrolls you rely on at each and every level. What's a fair proportion of those scrolls you scribe that get used up over the course of the level? I think it depends on which scrolls you scribe - utility spells only get used if the situation comes up (caveat - where's the added power if they are never used? that means they are never needed!) but offense/defense/buff scrolls likely get used up much faster.

We're also assuming no item is ever lost, stolen, broken, sundered, etc.

Again, I'd point something out here. "Unlimited scrolls" isn't what's been talked about. It's spending a minor investment (30% of wealth by 7th level - even less as levels go up) to completely bypass the Vancian limitations on my class. Heck, it costs less to have that hundred scrolls than it does to add the Flaming quality to the fighter's +1 sword.

Oh, that reminds me - comparable fighters are assumed to have access to an item crafter as well, with his choice of as many Craft feats as your wizard takes. It's a team game.

Likewise, the PHB indicates that it should be fairly easy to gain access to borrowed spellbooks for scribing low-level spells. Again, it suggests there may be difficulties with high-level spells, but that's not actually relevant here.

To me, it should be exactly as easy as it is to get a PC to lend his spellbook out to a stranger.

By stating that the Wizard hasn't found any spell books or scrolls in 10 levels of adventuring, you've moved from looking at an 'organic' example to looking at what happens in a game where the DM specifically sets out to screw over the Wizard.

We started 3.0 with a party including a sorcerer, not a wizard (though our rogue multiclassed for Arcane Archer). My recollection was that many arcane adversaries were sorcerors - I remember looking for spell books pretty often specifically because the sorcerer wouldn't take them, so we could sell them. I found few if any - that was using the earliest published modules, IIRC. Modules tend to skew to scrolls of curatives, IIRC, and a lot more potions than one would expect.

But, again, use a "buy what you like" model. Let's see that.
 

Is it really THAT hard to imagine the billions of reasons why a 10th level wizard might not have teleported to a big city at the first opportunity?
You're still missing the forest for the trees, man. If you use the same item guidelines - no purchases, completely random treasure, etc - it does, indeed, hurt the Wizard. It hurts a Fighter more. And it barely hurts Druids, Clerics, Sorcerers, or even Bards.

-O
 

This is what I want to see.
Someone who thinks wizards are over-powered needs to make me a 3.5 10th level wizard - PHB only.
Use the standard point-buy.
DO NOT BUY ITEMS. There are no rules in the core books that say that magic shops exist and you can buy anything you want. You can make your army of 1st-3rd level scrolls if you really want to. Wizards get scribe scroll.

Well actually it is RAW; see DMG page 137, Commuity Wealth and Population

For the sake of this exercise, don't take other crafting feats. If I was DMing and a player really wanted crafting feats I would consider it. But let's say you can't make your own items.

If magic items are more restricted than the general conceit offered by the game, crafting feats are MORE valuable to a character and the group at large. In a magic-restricted game, it is most likely each caster will pick up at least one -- especially Wizards since they get the bonus feats evey 5 levels and metamagic feats are quite weak.

Show me your stats. If your INT is 20. your other stats are going to be super weak.
You get TWO spells per level. show me at what level you took what spells. I want to see if this 10th level character had a chance to survive 2nd level.

Two free plus any found/purchased.

That means you don't automatically get other spells as scrolls. The DM made you fight goblins and orcs and sahuagin and orges and fighter/rogue bandits and maybe a sorcerer. You haven't found any spell books or scrolls. You have YOUR 20 spells and thats it.

So, the best version of balance you can come up with is to lock the spellcasters in a cave without any access to a community larger than a hamlet so they don't find a 3rd level caster in their class? Even a thorp has a high enough gp threshold to support first level scrolls.

Show me your spells known, your spells memorized and then we'll see how you handle different scenarios such as "you're woken up after a night's rest to find the princess has been kidnapped and a note left saying she will be killed at midnight." in addition to "you know today's mission is fighting a dragon" or "you're infiltrating an enemy base led by an enemy sorcerer and his deadly rogue and barbarian brothers"

Show me this completely broken, no-weaknesses showing, perfect suite of spells that allows for offense, defense, utility, scrying, no matter the situation.
 

No, the problem is this: In 2e, you could have a group of three fighters and a cleric for healing and that group would get along fine. They might have some issues with traps, but, by and large, they'd be groovy. In 3e, that same group are walking corpses. The first decent Will save attack and the cleric gets curb stomped by his three fighter allies.

Some of us would like to play D&D where the casters don't turn the non-casters into bystanders. Granted, you can do this with social contract. That's what appears to have happened in some tables. Me, I'd rather be able to sit down at any table, be able to make any class that is appropriate to the group and know that I'm not going to either suck hind :):):) or be able to completely dominate the game. Either way.

And, again, I'm not talking about people cherry picking fifteen different supplements. I'm talking about using baseline, core material that should work out of the gate. The DM shouldn't have to strip away class abilities from my character simply to bring me back in line with the other PC's. That should be true right from the outset.

That is bullcrap plenty of games have been played with no dedicated mage and the party has lived. And I saw parties with just fighters and a cleric turned into corpses back in the days of AD&D so much depends on planning and sheer luck of the dice.

And plemty of people have mo problem playing 3.5 or Pathfinder and don't feel buy this whole meme of casters turning everyone into by standers. Yes I nerf some of the magic in my games but not because I think magic is broken and ruins the game but because I prefer as more low magic grit and gritty style game. My son and his group play both 3.5 and Pathfinder and they are all a bunch of power gamers and optimizers. They know how to build super optimized wizards and they do, we talked about this subject at my son's birthday dinner and they don't buy the whole mundane and muggles meme either.

The reason this annoys me so much is the attitude that those of us who enjoy 3.5 and don't agree with all the issues that some people have are some how just not playing the game in an optimized way or the the DM is going out of his way to just nerf and punish the mages in every session. It s an assumption that we don't know what we are doing well maybe the reason you have such an issue is that your DMs don't what they are doing when it comes to running a high level game with high powered magic in it so that everyone gets to have fun.
 

I think it should be designed so that you don't have one class that's inherently incredible while the other needs to rely on finding the right magic doodads through random chance or DM placement, yes.

If you want to call that "rigid" that's your prerogative, but I think it's just good sense.

I mean, I think it's kind of illustrative when the solution to "Rogues are useless" is "well, let them pretend to be Wizards" :)

-O

Well first you have to buy the whole meme that one class is incredible and the rest or mediocre which sorry I don't.

Well 4E balanced the classes to the point of making the game rigid and boring for a lot of us which is why we don't play it.

Rogues are one of the most versatile classes in the game they are hardly useless. Not only are they best at sneaking around, opening locked doors ans treasure chests, they can handle themselves in combat and with use magic device they can access both divine and arcane spells.

A wizard may with spells be able to do some of what a rogue does when it comes to opening doors, but they give up combat spells to do so. They can emulate a fighter with certain buff spells but then they won't ever have the fighters BAB, amount of attacks and hit points. And they won't be able to cast any divine spells.

Other than the rogue and the bard, the bard does do it as well, there are not a lot of classes that can cover every aspect of the game the way a rogue can. Hardly a useless class.
 

Since we're throwing 2nd level spells around, let's see them waltz through the goblins after Glitterdust or Web.



My problem is that in every situation there's a solution available; provided you're a wizard. It's not that three wizards are better at something, they're good enough to succeed at everything. I also find it amusing that your solution to spells being better is to have the rogues use spells.

And in a class based game I do expect classes to have limited repertoires. If I want to play a game where any character has the potential to do anything then I play one of the hundreds of RPGs which manage without classes. I do not want a game where doing something outside your class isn't possible, and the answer to "What is outside the Wizard's class?" is Nothing.



There's a poll on the WotC site asking what people would like to see reprinted next. Vote Now! for the Rules Cyclopedia. :cool:

This is always going to be an issue where there is magic in the game. If you want every class not to have any over lap then you need to take out any spell that allows this and as DM you are going to have to design your encounters that has things in that the party can handle. Which means a party of all non magic users should never face something that only magic can handle. And your game needs to have some way to get by without any healing magic if they don't have a healer.



I have noticed that no one seems to have an issue with the fact that a high level rogue with maxed out use magic device can access both divine and arcane spells, use any alignment restricted weapon or device they can fill the shoes of fighter, wizard, cleric and still do all the rogue things.
 

Remove ads

Top