Wizard specialization incentives

[Rystil Arden]

Here's something I posted in the Elf Generalist thread. It is a numerical comparison of Generalists to Specialists:

Assuming that you choose a specialisation that fits your character concept correctly, you will always want to prepare 1 spell per spell level from your specialty each day, so the requirement for the bonus slot to be from the school is nearly meaningless (I have met *one* wizard who felt chafed at all by this requirement, and he turned out to have specialised to reach a prestige class and not because he liked the school). That said, let's look at an 18 Int wizard (I would just use the base chart to illiustrate my point, but that would be unfair: most wizards eventually get 18 Int, and less Int makes this very bad for the generalist very quickly) and how many spells per day he gains from specialising (for simplicity's sake, I have converted spells into their SP equivalent so I can add them all up, counting cantrips as 1/2). Gain is the ratio of specialist to generalist. Notice how the generalist falls over a level behind the specialist starting at level 7, and it goes downhill very very quickly from there. In fact, after 14, the generalist falls over 2 levels behind the specialist!

Level 1: Generalist-3.5, Specialist-5, Gain-1.42857
Level 2: Generalist-5, Specialist-6.5, Gain-1.3
Level 3: Generalist-11, Specialist-15.5, Gain-1.409
Level 4: Generalist-15, Specialist-19.5, Gain-1.3
Level 5: Generalist-25, Specialist-34.5, Gain-1.38
Level 6: Generalist-33, Specialist-42.5, Gain-1.2878
Level 7: Generalist-48, Specialist-64.5, Gain-1.34375
Level 8: Generalist-60, Specialist-76.5, Gain-1.275
Level 9: Generalist-72, Specialist-97.5, Gain-1.35416
Level 10: Generalist-88, Specialist-113.5, Gain-1.2897
Level 11: Generalist-104, Specialist-140.5, Gain-1.35096
Level 12: Generalist-124, Specialist-160.5, Gain-1.29435
Level 13: Generalist-144, Specialist-193.5, Gain-1.34375
Level 14: Generalist-168, Specialist-217.5, Gain-1.29464
Level 15: Generalist-192, Specialist-256.5, Gain-1.33593
Level 16: Generalist-220, Specialist-284.5, Gain-1.29318
Level 17: Generalist-248, Specialist-329.5, Gain-1.32862
Level 18: Generalist-280, Specialist-361.5, Gain-1.29107

After this, the wizard spell progression breaks the usual pattern, plus most campaigns probably don't go this far, so I'm stopping. It's worth noting the general ratio is usually about 1.3ish, so the specialist might last four encounters, while the generalist runs out of spells after three. Sometimes, this advantage isn't worth losing two schools, but more often than not, it is. At low levels, the ratio is larger, and at high levels, the gap is so wide that the generalist is multiple levels behind.

 

[Roman]

Hmm, the last few posts have been pretty convincing. I think I am starting to come around to the idea that specialists are not underpowered compared to generalist wizards after all, though I am still instinctually uneasy about it.

Rystil Arden, nice calculations - very convincing I must admit, though I am not sure how you converted the spells into spell points - you did not just count the number of spells and multiply by level - you must be using some other form of conversion. Just out of interest - would it be possible to follow your progression to 20th level? Also, would it be possible to do the same analysis for the most extreme case (though this is not directly relevant, since such extreme cases are not common, but I find these calculations interesting in their own right): a min-maxed wizard with maximum intelligence: Sun Elf with int 20 at level 1, and raising his int at every opportunity, plus by highest levels acquiring a +5 inherent bonus to int and perhaps the headband of intellect +6. I would appreciate it.

 

[Li Shenron]

Hmm, the last few posts have been pretty convincing. I think I am starting to come around to the idea that specialists are not underpowered compared to generalist wizards after all, though I am still instinctually uneasy about it.

Well I was going to post that to me specializing or not seem quite on par, but I think you have already changed your view

I second the opinion (at least from my own XP) that specialization is somewhat more worth at low levels, since you cast less spells - and therefore the extra slots are very good - and you also know less spells - and therefore you don't suffer that much for the banned schools.

Although nowadays the schools overlap a lot, there are still some tactical areas covered by one school only, such as teleportation and invisibility, which often don't come into play until later in levels. But you don't necessarily need to cover all tactics with one character, or even with the whole group (I mean, teleportation and invisibility are largely useful, but shouldn't be strictly necessary either).

Overall I think that the more spells are published, the more schools overlap, and then the more convenient is to specialize.

 

[nothing to see here]

In one of the cooler under-cited rules innovations to come from Wizards, Unearthed Arcana has some great specialist variations where you swap out the vanilla version of specialist wizards for some pretty neat school-specific special abilities instead. It certainly helped our group.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Absolutely Roman. The SP cost of a spell is equal to the spell's level times 2 minus 1. So a 9th-level spell costs 17 SP. 0-level spells cost 1/2 SP. You can actually use this system to convert all arcane spellcasters into a point casting class instead of fire-and-forget, although that is probably irrelevant right now. It is possible to follow the conversion to 20th-level, but misleading. This is because there is a standard formula for how many spells a wizard gains each level (slot of new level plus slot of one level lower at odd levels and slot of two highest levels at even levels) that is broken after level 18 (because there are no 10th-level slots at 19 so you wind up exactly 2 SP below where you should be). I can certainly do it if you consider this important, but I won't unless you give me the word, as it does take time to crunch the numbers. I can analyse for the most extreme case too, if you desire. The multiplier for gain comes out better for the generalist the more you min/max your Int (because those free specialist slots become less and less of a percentage of your total spells), but the total number of SP he is behind does not change.

Super-Uber-Ultra-Min-Maxer (SUUMM):
Sun Elf who has convinced his DM to allow Spellcasting Prodigy from 3.0, and then boosts his Int at every opportunity including buying Int items when they first become available (I'm not going to have him Polymorph any Object himself for more Int, but a true SUUMM would do it).

Level 1: Generalist-4.5, Specialist-6, Gain-1.33333
Level 2: Generalist-6, Specialist-7.5, Gain-1.25
Level 3: Generalist-15, Specialist-19.5, Gain-1.3
Level 4: Generalist-19, Specialist-23.5, Gain-1.23684
Level 5: Generalist-34, Specialist-43.5, Gain-1.27941
Level 6: Generalist-42, Specialist-51.5, Gain-1.22619
Level 7: Generalist-65, Specialist-81.5, Gain-1.25385
Level 8: Generalist-77, Specialist-93.5, Gain-1.21429
Level 9: Generalist-101, Specialist-126.5, Gain-1.25248
Level 10: Generalist-117, Specialist-142.5, Gain-1.21795
Level 11: Generalist-149, Specialist-185.5, Gain-1.24497
Level 12: Generalist-169, Specialist-205.5, Gain-1.21598
Level 13: Generalist-209, Specialist-258.5, Gain-1.23684
Level 14: Generalist-233, Specialist-282.5, Gain-1.21245
Level 15: Generalist-281, Specialist-345.5, Gain-1.22954
Level 16: Generalist-309, Specialist-373.5, Gain-1.20874
Level 17: Generalist-365, Specialist-446.5, Gain-1.22329
Level 18: Generalist-397, Specialist-478.5, Gain-1.20529

But here's the more interesting comparison. I'll do a SUUMM Generalist vs a normal ho-hum 18-Int throughout his whole life Specialist, but no gain because they take too long. Just watch and see who's ahead at which levels and by how much. Its mighty close for a while because the SUUMM gets the 1 spell per day per level back from his Int bonus that he doesn't get from specialising. Ultimately, this is a false comparison because no specialist would let their Int sit so low, and no generalist is likely to be a SUUMM, but notice how the specialist is closer to the SUUMM than the generalist is to the specialist! (the specialist never falls a full caster level worth of SP behind until level 18 [that is, a caster is a full level behind when the other guy has more SP at a lower level], and normally the generalist falls over two caster levels behind)

Level 1: Generalist (SUUMM)-4.5, Specialist-5,
Level 2: Generalist (SUUMM)-6, Specialist-6.5,
Level 3: Generalist (SUUMM)-15, Specialist-15.5,
Level 4: Generalist (SUUMM)-19, Specialist-19.5,
Level 5: Generalist (SUUMM)-34, Specialist-34.5,
Level 6: Generalist (SUUMM)-42, Specialist-42.5,
Level 7: Generalist (SUUMM)-65, Specialist-64.5,
Level 8: Generalist (SUUMM)-77, Specialist-76.5,
Level 9: Generalist (SUUMM)-101, Specialist-97.5,
Level 10: Generalist (SUUMM)-117, Specialist-113.5,
Level 11: Generalist (SUUMM)-149, Specialist-140.5,
Level 12: Generalist (SUUMM)-169, Specialist-160.5,
Level 13: Generalist (SUUMM)-209, Specialist-193.5,
Level 14: Generalist (SUUMM)-233, Specialist-217.5,
Level 15: Generalist (SUUMM)-281, Specialist-256.5,
Level 16: Generalist (SUUMM)-309, Specialist-284.5,
Level 17: Generalist (SUUMM)-365, Specialist-329.5,
Level 18: Generalist (SUUMM)-397, Specialist-361.5,

Oh, and Roman, I have to say that you are the most amiable and open-minded person who I have posted here with evidence against their original PoV, so I'm glad to do these calculations for you (they only took about 25 minutes).

 

[IndyPendant]

I think it's balanced. The number-crunchers drool over the extra spells, and howl wonderingly in amazement at the idea that anyone could be so foolish as to choose broader access over bonus spells. However, I can't help but wonder why those people don't play sorcerors. I mean, you get even *more* spells/day, you can still take most of the spells you would use most of the time, and the spells you would use rarely can just go on scrolls! (Then again, maybe that's exactly what they they do. *shrug*.)

But it's really a matter of preference. Some people very much prefer the versatility and preparation options over the increased spells per day. And that's a valid concept too; if you can prepare well enough, you shouldn't *need* the extra spells per day! And don't forget Scribe Scolls. Itemcrafters often go generalist so they can scribe any spell for emergencies, and create any item with the right feats.

I have seen all three (generalist, specialist, sorceror) played in my campaigns, and all three have been enjoyed immensely by the players, and been a great asset to the party. It really is just a matter of preference.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I disagree with you on several points, but I don't want to turn this thread into a large argument, so all I'll say is that as roleplayers and number-crunchers, we would prefer if you kept your insulting stereotypes (i.e.

number-crunchers drool over the extra spells, and howl wonderingly in amazement at the idea that anyone could be so foolish as to choose broader access over bonus spells

)

to yourself.

 

[smootrk]

I disagree with you on several points, but I don't want to turn this thread into a large argument, so all I'll say is that as roleplayers and number-crunchers, we would prefer if you kept your insulting stereotypes (i.e. )to yourself.

I think that is rather harsh. I believe the individual was just trying to inject a little humor while he expressed his views. I can see the point of justifying (with mathmatics) the basis of particular views, but I also happen to believe that the role-play ultimately determines the amount of 'fun' to be had during a 'game'.

That being said. Your points are valid, and I agree with your assesments other than admonishing someone who does not feel the same about your methods of justification.

 

[IndyPendant]

Err...perhaps I should have used a different term other than number-cruncher. Maybe it's being taken as an insult? Sorry if so, I didn't mean it that way. And if it's the 'howling' statement you have to admit, that's been the general tone of many of the posts in this thread. (Along the lines of, 'Look at these numbers for sheer spell power! How can you possibly say generalists are better?')

I wasn't meaning to be insulting--just to point out that quantity of spells isn't the only--or even the primary--consideration for all players.

And, for the record, I prefer playing specialists over generalists myself. : )

 

[Andre]

Although nowadays the schools overlap a lot, there are still some tactical areas covered by one school only, such as teleportation and invisibility, which often don't come into play until later in levels. But you don't necessarily need to cover all tactics with one character, or even with the whole group (I mean, teleportation and invisibility are largely useful, but shouldn't be strictly necessary either).

Overall I think that the more spells are published, the more schools overlap, and then the more convenient is to specialize.

So let me ask the original question with the following caveat: Using only the core books (no CA, CD, FRCS, etc.), is the specialist so obviously superior to the generalist? Every time I consider creating a specialist with the core books, I can't help noticing all the useful spells I lose - spells which don't have good alternatives in the core books. Opinions?