Why are wizards always getting nerfed?

Cyraneth

First Post
Has anyone else noticed how wizards (and sorcerers for that matter) always get nerfed whenever there's a revision, new edition, or errata?

Most recently, 3.5th Edition wasted the Spell Focus feats, but also earlier, as with the Epic Level Handbook. Saves and attack bonuses just keep increasing in epic levels, making it continually harder for a wizard's spells to have effect and for a wizard to survive an encounter with something as simple and straightforward as an equal-level fighter.

They might be able to slay that fighter with a single spell, but that's only once per day per spell slot expended and unlikely, depending on the level of both of them, and a fighter with 4 attacks, dealing 2d6+18 points of damage with each strike, is at least as lethal, except, he is always so, even if the attacks failed in the first round.

Wizards should be feared for their arcane power, not just be viewed as "useful" or "second-rate buffers". No fiend fears a guy able to levitate and hurl balls of flame that only deal 4 points of damage 'cause of the fiend's save and resistance.

Wizards can be powerful, but only 10 rounds or so each day, never continually so. It only takes a creature with spell resistance, high saves, or enough poundin' power to drop a wizard. Theoretically, anything with enough hit points can ignore Reflex saves, fearing only save-or-die spells, that could also be called fail-or-nothing. If that hit point powerhouse then just boosts Fortitude and Will saves (not a hard task for a cleric), they're virtually impossible to drop like that. Wizards on the other hand, must have an improbably high Constitution to get to that point. Please take note, however, that I'm not encouraging that style of play. The feared death effects should be part of any game, but they should have be effective too. Not just once in 20. Fighters taking on anything 'cause they know they've got more than enough hit points to swim through a pool of lava, and Fortitude save bonuses enough to ignore a finger of death, even if cast by Szass Tam himself, are simply a ridiculous evolution, or rather, devolution of the "tank" concept. Assassins are no longer feared, slay living is no longer feared, and worst of all, combat has degenerated to a hack-and-slash fest.

To prove my point, we can look at 3.5th Edition once more. Fighters have only grown stronger (Greater Weapon Focus and Specialization), and Barbarians, Paladins, and Rangers too, having been granted several new abilities, but wizards and sorcerers have only gotten nerfed (although not that much). Even the rogue has gotten her uncanny dodge delayed by one or two levels, getting the impressive trap sense in return. Mind you, that last sentence was ironic. It almost seems like WotC wants everybody to play only fighter-type characters.

Anyway, I hope I got my point across without causing any insult.

- Cyraneth
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I think it's because Wizards and Sorcerors have the greatest ability to end entire encounters (not just combat encounters) with a single standard action, which makes the DMs life difficult. (On the other hand, what is an arcane spellcaster but a person who can change reality with a wave of the hand?) It's hard to make it somewhat more difficult to do that without going in the other extreme and making it insanely hard to do it.

If you give an enemy a little bit of DR, or an AC boost, or a hit point boost, it makes the Fighter's job harder without negating his effectiveness entirely. Spell Resistance, on the other hand, can make a spellcaster's job nearly impossible, especially since spell slots are limited and sword swings are not. Nerfing spells works a bit better in this respect.

The Metallian
 

OK.
I sure don't see wizards and sorcerers being a rare class for people to pick, even with all the 'nerfing'.
They are incredibly powerful at mid to high levels, regardless of some slight decreases in some spells.

The only reason why people think they're being nerfed is because they were so ridiculously over the top powerful in 1E and 2E, and even with 3E.
The nerf to Haste actually affects them more than any other thing in 3.5, and it's a darn good thing they made that change, too.

Let's put it this way: given a random landscape, and medium range starting points, at 12th level who do you think would be more powerful and flexible in both skills and abilities/powers in an encounter?
A mage or a fighter-type?

I rest my case.

Therefore, D&D has a long way to go before any amount of nerfing even comes close to biting into the power that mages weild.

BTW: I don't believe wizards should be feared for their arcane power - that's IMO a sacred cow.
 

Metallian said:
Spell Resistance, on the other hand, can make a spellcaster's job nearly impossible, especially since spell slots are limited and sword swings are not.
This is the biggest fallacy currently going on these boards, if not elsewhere.
Even with unstoppable SR, there are many things a mage can do, either to himself to escape/get by the challenge, or to the environment (Scroll of Stone Shape and the like) to still defeat an enemy even if they have the "best defense possible" vs his l33t powerzz.
 

reapersaurus said:
Let's put it this way: given a random landscape, and medium range starting points, at 12th level who do you think would be more powerful and flexible in both skills and abilities/powers in an encounter? A mage or a fighter-type?
I wonder why you picked the mid-levels. Could it be 'cause it's where wizards are in fact a bit powerful. At low levels they're easily killed and don't stand a chance in combat, only slinging 1d4+1 magic missiles or sleep spells about, while at epic levels, the fighter's hit points and Fortitude saves makes him an invincible powerhouse?
reapersaurus said:
BTW: I don't believe wizards should be feared for their arcane power - that's IMO a sacred cow.
Perhaps so, but in all fantasy literature, wizards are feared or at least respected for their power over the arcane powers. As soon as the fighter knows a power word kill won't touch him anymore, that wizard'll get as much respect as a skewered goblin.

- Cyraneth
 

Cyraneth said:
Why are wizards always getting nerfed?

RPG game design theory has changed radically.

When D&D was first created, it was acceptable to have high-level wizards be a fearsome figure that could outstrip other professions. It was acceptable for magic-users to be weaker at low level and more powerful at high level. Part of the motivation was for RPGs to be kind of a thematic-simulation, and match up with the kinds of things seen in fantasy literature (wizards as feared super-villains, etc.)

For example, if you go back in early Dragon magazines, for years the axis of debate in game design was over "playability vs. realism". The understanding was that games were made as simulations up until the complexity of the rules made them unplayable, at which point you backed off for playability sake. Now, the key measurement is not that, but rather "balance".

Largely influenced by the rise of computer games and CCG's (esp., now that the major CCG maker has actually bought out D&D), the RPG game is now considered fundamentally more of a player-power competitive exercise. As this has happened, it's been a requirement that any standout class (namely, the wizard) has to be dialed back onto an even playing field, combatively, with all others. Over the years it's become unacceptable for one class to dominate the fabric late in their career. And therefore, I think, you've seen the wizard dialed back continually from where it began originally.

Of course, the 3.5 revision has made more changes to spells than any previous edition of D&D since the 1970's, so it might be more obvious right at the moment. PC takeout in general has become more verboten, and therefore you see things like more nerfing of polymorph, instant-kill spells, hold spells, sleep, calls to nerf magic missile, etc., etc., while hit point safety and ability bonuses have gone up.

Over time, it has become unacceptable for any class to have an advantage over another in face-to-face combat. The desire to simulate fantasy mythology been discarded in favor of a balanced competitive game situation.
 

reapersaurus said:
This is the biggest fallacy currently going on these boards, if not elsewhere.
Even with unstoppable SR, there are many things a mage can do, either to himself to escape/get by the challenge, or to the environment (Scroll of Stone Shape and the like) to still defeat an enemy even if they have the "best defense possible" vs his l33t powerzz.

Right, but even with "environmental bypass" type spells (like Teleport or Ethereal Jaunt) they tend to be an either/or proposition.

Either: The Wizard can walk straight into the enemy stronghold with a single spell. (as opposed to a Rogue making many Hide, Move Silently, Open Lock, Disable Device, and Climb checks)

Or: The Wizard is blocked by (whatever) and wasted a spell slot. (as opposed to the Rogue, who might make it partway through before being noticed)

"Either" tends to annoy the DM (because the DM invests time creating obstacles and things to do so the group can fill a whole evening with activity) but "or" tends to annoy the player (because the only thing their character can do well - cast spells - is useless). Obviously, there are ways to mitigate this, but reaching a happy medium with Sorcerors and Wizards requires more effort on the part of DMs and players.

The Metallian
 

dcollins said:
RPG game design theory has changed radically... (Look to the original post for the entire message.)
Truly, a good reply, and I honestly thank dcollins for the background material on this discussion. With everything in the clear, I hope this discussion will have an extra dimension added: Wizards as they used to be. Powerful, but only in for seconds at a time. No matter how powerful (speaking both 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Edition) a wizard was, we wouldn't last for a prolonged battle. On that field, the fighter will always prevail.

- Cyraneth
 

Yeah, in high level, a spellcaster will have some difficulty. As the saves continu to raise, the spells with saves become less effective, but it is here that spells with partial or half effect with save become effective, or even better with the no save spells. Get rid of the figther for 10 minutes with a maze spell!

For Damage resistance, more and more powerfull energy resistance can be seen, but no one is invulnerable to all energy (and Horrid Whilting is not an energy attack).

For Spell Resistance, your caster level continu to raise, so even with a monster with a spell resistance of 11+level, at equal level, the spell will be effective with a mage with Greater Spell Penetration 70% of the time (up to 80% if you have a archmagi robe, higher with a similar epic item), so you'll need for a SR of 47 to block all spells of a mage of 20th level with Greater spell penetration and archmagi robe. Name one non-epic monster who have such resistance.

Yeah, life is harder at higher level for the mage, but with the good spell, he will shift the balance of combat more easily than a figther, and generally, if a mage have difficulty to beat a creature, the figther/rogue/cleric will not neceserly have the same difficulty, and that's the reason of a team. If you spells can't easily affect that big bad guy, let the figther do hgis job and help him by killing all the minion with your area spells.
 

Virtues

No matter how powerful (speaking both 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Edition) a wizard was, we wouldn't last for a prolonged battle. On that field, the fighter will always prevail.

I never liked this argument because its making up situations that don't really occur (at least, in my experience, and from what I've read/heard). While it is true if a fighter and a mage were on the field of battle all day eventually the mage would run out of spells (or at least, spells that are worthwhile in a pitched battle) there is little reason for the mage to stay. Unless the low-level mage was packing scrolls, potions, and wands. Unless the mid-level mage had wands and rods. Unless the high-level mage had rods and staves. While these are "resources" that will be used up at the end of a battle, a mage can be viable all day if prepared to fight all day. I'm sure the fighter would need some curative magic during the day to keep swinging, and that means a LOT of potions, multiclassing, or depending on another class (not that its a bad thing). Of course, the response is to extend this hypothetical pitched battle. Lets say their sleep was disrupted and the mage couldn't memorize more spells, most of his expendable resources are used up in a week (if that) and clearly the fighter is still "prevailing" on the battlefield. As long as he has potions and cleric-friends around.

I think dcollins put something I have felt on occasion into a cohesive thought. The older editions of the game were unbalanced, but it was cool. The fighter who stopped getting a lot of hp after level 9 (?) understood that the mage would continue to grow in power, after all the mage had been sloughing it with hardly any magic for those first few levels (needing as much if not more Exp to advance). It was cool that thieves advanced quickly, that mages eventually were the most powerful uber villians (next to monsters, namely dragons), and that clerics didn't have 9th level spells.

Of course, there are a lot of elements that are awesome about 3e, feats and skills are far better (imo naturally) than proficiencies and non-weapon proficiencies (with book heroes and villains occasionally just assigned special powers). It makes sense that you get an ability bonus every 4 levels and that everyone keeps getting hp after 10th level, that demihumans don't have puny level caps, that all classes advance at the same rate, and that multiclassing can be so darn easy.

While those 2 paragraphs may seem to be in contradiction with one another, they aren't. Both ways were cool, in fact having recently met someone still enamored with 2e I realise there are/were tons of neat little things in 2e that I miss. But to play 2e after seeing some of 3e...I shudder. Hopefully 4th edition will find a way to bring back some of that mystique and be more than just 4.11 or Dungeons 2005. And I'm talking about more than just the names of the books :)

Technik
 

Remove ads

Top