Why Won't Some People Play Spellcasters?
- Thread starter ptolemy18
- Start date
AFGNCAAP
First Post
I like spellcasters, but I ain't too crazy `bout their current incarnations.
Ultimately, I like the non-prep of the sorcerer, but the limitless variety/knowledge of the wizard/cleric (wizard counts since they can feasibly learn all of the spells in their list). And, I like to be able to both heal, protect, detect, damage, & whatnot without needing to multiclass.
I really like the generic Spellcaster class from Unearthed Arcana, since the caster can choose pretty much any spell he/she wants to know. However, I'm not crazy about the limits pn the # of spells known.
Then again, I'm not crazy about the huge list/diversity of spells, esp. damage spells and the like. I'd prefer the spell list to be a bit more condensed, and have feats for adjusting spells as needed. Energy Substitution is a great one, for example--allowing a spellcaster to switch out the fire of a fireball for cold, acid, electricity, or sonic energy (IIRC).
Personally, I'd prefer it if attack spells were a bit more generic, all being considered pure magical energy/force, and allowing the caster to gain feats for imbuing those spells with different energies (if they wanted). For other spells, have the potential of the spell improve according to caster level: have a generic wall spell, and have the materials available for use in the wall grow/expand as the character gains levels (like 1st allowing mist or thorns, then gradually gaining access to ice, fire, earth, stone, metal, & force as the caster gains levels). Essenitally, having 1 or a few spells instead of many spells.
But, then again, this of course would hinder any future sales of products that the term "new spells" might produce.
Also, though spell ranges like "as long as the caster's shadow" & other flavorful descriptions may sound nice, IMHO they are not worth the trouble they cause. It's a gasoline-soaked wad of paper, wrapped over gunpowder, waiting for the 1st spark to hit it. Things that leave room for interpretation leave a whole heck of a lot more room for misinterpretation as well.
All in all, I like spellcasters. I rarely get to play one since many other players often choose to play a spellcaster--I often wind up taking a non-spellcaster or a class that covers the areas that the rest of the group doesn't have covered.
Ultimately, I like the non-prep of the sorcerer, but the limitless variety/knowledge of the wizard/cleric (wizard counts since they can feasibly learn all of the spells in their list). And, I like to be able to both heal, protect, detect, damage, & whatnot without needing to multiclass.
I really like the generic Spellcaster class from Unearthed Arcana, since the caster can choose pretty much any spell he/she wants to know. However, I'm not crazy about the limits pn the # of spells known.
Then again, I'm not crazy about the huge list/diversity of spells, esp. damage spells and the like. I'd prefer the spell list to be a bit more condensed, and have feats for adjusting spells as needed. Energy Substitution is a great one, for example--allowing a spellcaster to switch out the fire of a fireball for cold, acid, electricity, or sonic energy (IIRC).
Personally, I'd prefer it if attack spells were a bit more generic, all being considered pure magical energy/force, and allowing the caster to gain feats for imbuing those spells with different energies (if they wanted). For other spells, have the potential of the spell improve according to caster level: have a generic wall spell, and have the materials available for use in the wall grow/expand as the character gains levels (like 1st allowing mist or thorns, then gradually gaining access to ice, fire, earth, stone, metal, & force as the caster gains levels). Essenitally, having 1 or a few spells instead of many spells.
But, then again, this of course would hinder any future sales of products that the term "new spells" might produce.
Also, though spell ranges like "as long as the caster's shadow" & other flavorful descriptions may sound nice, IMHO they are not worth the trouble they cause. It's a gasoline-soaked wad of paper, wrapped over gunpowder, waiting for the 1st spark to hit it. Things that leave room for interpretation leave a whole heck of a lot more room for misinterpretation as well.
All in all, I like spellcasters. I rarely get to play one since many other players often choose to play a spellcaster--I often wind up taking a non-spellcaster or a class that covers the areas that the rest of the group doesn't have covered.
ShorelisNailo
First Post
Choice is yours
Everybody likes something different and that's a fact.I love priests,i know how to make them,how to play them,and of course how to choose spells...but that's me...In my party,a friend play's rogues...he loves rogues...another play's paladin...he loves paladins-i hate them
...The thing is that my best character(for his history alone)...played from 5th to 12th lvl and continiuing is NOT a priest,is a bard...What i'm trying to say is that every one should try everything....A very good friend of mine,playing only a barbarian or fighter...usually bored in sessions,after for the first time played wizard-Diviner/Transmuter he was reborn... ...And of course you can play same classes with different way... Is your cleric healer or fighter?(yes clerics CAN fight better than a fighter)...Necromancer or Diviner?A cheating rogish bard,or a expert musician?A ranged -I'll kill you fast- or a grappler fighter... thief or scout? ....SOoooooooooooo many variations....Don't stuck in one think...HAVE FUN ...your character is someone else...not you and that's the best of him....
-Shorelis Nailjo son of Dark King Abalos
Everybody likes something different and that's a fact.I love priests,i know how to make them,how to play them,and of course how to choose spells...but that's me...In my party,a friend play's rogues...he loves rogues...another play's paladin...he loves paladins-i hate them
...The thing is that my best character(for his history alone)...played from 5th to 12th lvl and continiuing is NOT a priest,is a bard...What i'm trying to say is that every one should try everything....A very good friend of mine,playing only a barbarian or fighter...usually bored in sessions,after for the first time played wizard-Diviner/Transmuter he was reborn... ...And of course you can play same classes with different way... Is your cleric healer or fighter?(yes clerics CAN fight better than a fighter)...Necromancer or Diviner?A cheating rogish bard,or a expert musician?A ranged -I'll kill you fast- or a grappler fighter... thief or scout? ....SOoooooooooooo many variations....Don't stuck in one think...HAVE FUN ...your character is someone else...not you and that's the best of him....-Shorelis Nailjo son of Dark King Abalos
Thanee
First Post
Hmm... for my sorceress (11th level) I have one sheet (front and back), which covers all information needed (still needs a bit of refinement, once I get around making some changes to it, but it works).Saeviomagy said:
The only time, when I have more than that is, when playing a higher level wizard, then some extra pages are needed for a decent spellbook. I think biggest up to date was 4 extra pages of spells for a 19th level character.
Bye
Thanee
Mercule
Adventurer
My #1 reason for not playing casters is that I see fighters/rangers/rogues as being more heroic than casters. Period. Merlin wasn't the hero, he was the mentor. Arthur was the hero. Etc., etc. Some people disagree -- one of my players was rendered speechless when I told him that. That's fine. But it doesn't make my reason any less valid for me.
Now, I have played a couple of sorcerers since 3.0 was released. They were created to, intentionally, be something other than the "hero". They were also based around themes. The one I most enjoyed was basically an arcane trickster, but that PrC hadn't been released yet. All his spells focused on Shrink Item, Minor Creation, Fabricate, etc. He had almost no combat spells, but what he did, he did very well.
Overall, though, I prefer the mundane archetypes.
Now, I have played a couple of sorcerers since 3.0 was released. They were created to, intentionally, be something other than the "hero". They were also based around themes. The one I most enjoyed was basically an arcane trickster, but that PrC hadn't been released yet. All his spells focused on Shrink Item, Minor Creation, Fabricate, etc. He had almost no combat spells, but what he did, he did very well.
Overall, though, I prefer the mundane archetypes.
Galethorn
First Post
I'm in the same boat as Mercule; I find the warrior classes more heroic, and I like playing heroic characters.
That said, I also have the problem of too many spells to look up and choose. Now, it's not because I'm inexperienced with the rules (I've been diligently reading over confusing parts of the PHB and DMG going on five years), but for a different, far more important reason...
I'm lazy.
That's right; I don't like spending inordinate amounts of time looking up (or memorizing) spells so I don't have to look them up during combat.
Now, that said, I'm also the sort of guy who doesn't like playing characters that actually have to avoid melee combat. Give me a sword over a wand any day.
That said, I also have the problem of too many spells to look up and choose. Now, it's not because I'm inexperienced with the rules (I've been diligently reading over confusing parts of the PHB and DMG going on five years), but for a different, far more important reason...
I'm lazy.
That's right; I don't like spending inordinate amounts of time looking up (or memorizing) spells so I don't have to look them up during combat.
Now, that said, I'm also the sort of guy who doesn't like playing characters that actually have to avoid melee combat. Give me a sword over a wand any day.
Galethorn said:
But it's so FUUUUNNN!!!
You can play the "heavy artillery mage": "SCULPTED MAXIMIZED EARTHBURST!" "SCULPTED ICE STORM!"
Or you can play the "weirdo magic researcher": "I Balefully Polymorph the Bullette into a little mole, and pick him up and put him in a glass jar. I'll Dispel it later, in case we need a Bullette."
Or you can play the "monster summoner", which was considerably more fun in 3.0: "I summon eight Worker Formians... then I instruct them to Cure Serious Wounds on everybody!"
Or you can play the "zany bard": "Using a Silent Image spell, I entertain the crowds with an illusionary recreation of our last battle."
Or you can play the "fighting cleric": "I beef myself up with multiple spells, then charge into battle! Oh, but first a Flame Strike!"
Or you can play the "all-purpose stretching-the-rules mage": "I'm falling 500 feet...? Uh... I cast Plant Growth to cause the vegetation to rise up to slow my fall!"
All characters I myself have played, of course...
Jason
Keska
Explorer
I have so far only attempted to play one dedicated spellcaster - a druid/wizard. She isn't terribly effective in combat, being very specialized towards summoning creatures. Usually that's fine with me, tho. However, I have really come to hate the bookkeeping and paperwork that goes with spellcasting. When I'm playing, as opposed to GMing, I don't like having work to do between sessions. But if I wait until game time, it holds up not just myself but everyone else. I do keep a list of "usually memorized spells," which helps somewhat, but deciding what spells to put into my spellbook at each level - and coordinating with the other wizard in the party so as to maximize our total spell selsction - became a major pain, what with having to at least skim all of the spells available at that level from all of the books available to us - which, since the game was set in FR, was quite a few.
Now don't get me wrong. I adore that character; she's one of the most challenging and rewarding characters I have ever played. But the complicated spellcasting system only gets in the way of that. Time spent preparing a new spell list? That's time I'm not roleplaying the character. Time spent looking up a spell for precise ruling of its effects? That's time I'm holding up combat. And I am far more interested in roleplaying the character I created than playing with the mechanics of the system.
So that's my opinion. YMMV, of course.
Now don't get me wrong. I adore that character; she's one of the most challenging and rewarding characters I have ever played. But the complicated spellcasting system only gets in the way of that. Time spent preparing a new spell list? That's time I'm not roleplaying the character. Time spent looking up a spell for precise ruling of its effects? That's time I'm holding up combat. And I am far more interested in roleplaying the character I created than playing with the mechanics of the system.
So that's my opinion. YMMV, of course.
Henry
Autoexreginated
All right, time to throw in my two cents.
I enjoy playing casters, in fact so much more than fighters, because fighter-types have so few options available. If I'm a fighter, the solution to 90% of all problems is "poke it with a pointy stick." As a wizard or cleric or druid, the solution can be to slice, fry, freeze, toss, dispel, banish, blast, solve, or even compel the problem to go away!
My favorite is possibly cleric, however, because it's like a fighter/wizard who can cast spells in armor. There's little to compare to a cleric loaded with divine favor, shield of faith, protection from energy and greater magic weapon wading into combat to smite the wicked. At higher levels, you can wade in encased in an anti-magic field, or shouting holy words until the foes stop twitching. Gods, what a feeling.
Can you tell I like to play clerics?
I enjoy playing casters, in fact so much more than fighters, because fighter-types have so few options available. If I'm a fighter, the solution to 90% of all problems is "poke it with a pointy stick." As a wizard or cleric or druid, the solution can be to slice, fry, freeze, toss, dispel, banish, blast, solve, or even compel the problem to go away!
My favorite is possibly cleric, however, because it's like a fighter/wizard who can cast spells in armor.
There's little to compare to a cleric loaded with divine favor, shield of faith, protection from energy and greater magic weapon wading into combat to smite the wicked. At higher levels, you can wade in encased in an anti-magic field, or shouting holy words until the foes stop twitching. Gods, what a feeling.Can you tell I like to play clerics?
Similar Threads
