Wizard Specialization [Rant]

[Liquid Snake]

PeterLind, even though I don't agree with your solution, I do agree the benefits form school specialization doesn't seem to be worth banning two schools.

 

[PeterLind]

In essence .. .

If I want to play a classic blaster wizard, then I would probably take the Divination school as the Speciality and then eliminate Necromancy - giving the most versatile spell selection and allowing the wizard to always have a divination spell in reserve (which are always useful).

If I want to play an enchanter or illusionist type wizard, then I would probably eliminate Invocation and Necromancy.

I probably would not choose to play a necromancer . . .

The point is . . . why should these choices even have to be made? Divine spell casters get to cast from all Schools, plus get Domains/class abilities, better Attack Bonus, better Armor, casting in armor, higher hit dice, two good saves . . . So just giving the extra spell slots with a specific school to the wizard will not be an appreciable change in power level or game balance . . .

 

[humble minion]

Look at things from a necromancer's point of view... as someone who is big into death and negative energy...

The necromancer isn't going to try to go toe to toe with evokers, he's going to send out his Legions of Undead (TM) to deal with them first. The evokers will bolow through their area-effect spells mowing down his minions.

A necromancer has undead, animated minions - he doesn't WANT to have dispel magics going off because that will "un-animate" them. Dispel magic is bad for business - causes too much collateral damage to the necromancer's own handiwork.

An evil, animating-type necromancer has minions, true (but not until 7th level). The doubling of Aniimate Dead's controlled undead hit dice limit is a nice bonus.

Dispel magic does not un-animate created undead. Or I would be even grumpier...

Again, the necromancer doesn't get his way by blasting things. The necromancer gets his way by sending out Legions of Undead or dealing personally with his targets. The threat of being withered or level-drained or tortured to death only to rise in undeath is not something most people particularly enjoy. The necromancer's power isn't feared because he can turn the town into ash... he's feared because he can turn the town into his mindless, undead slaves.

Who needs to conjure creatures when you can animate them? Granted, the teleport and plane shift and demon summoning spells are probably within the flavor of a necromancer, but a good necromancer is never "in the thick of combat."

Because you can conjure creatures that have wagonloads of spell-like abilities.

And how does a necromancer stay away from the thick of combat when his enemies are hunting him (which they will!)? Teleport...

Why on earth does a necromancer want to have anything to do with enchantment? He can't use it on his zombies. He (usually) doesn't have other people around to use it on. As for interrogation, a necromancer doesn't need to be your friend - he'll just kill you and then use speak with dead. Or worse, threaten to kill you and use animate dead so you can't be raised.

Speak with Dead is not a Wizard spell. Still clerics-only, darnit. But necromancers should not be stereotyped as isolated-tower-with-undead-servants-and-evil-plot types, in my opinion. Why shouldn't a civilised kingdom have a court necromancer to clone the Royal family in case of assassination, to research possible ways of using arcane magic to heal (and therefore helping the crown gain more independence from the churches), to help defend against assaults from undead, and to scare the living hell out of neighbouring kingdoms by the mere fact of his existence?

The necromancer doesn't do the dirty work himself. Why cast water-breathing when you can just send some zombies and skeletons (which don't breathe) into the water instead? Why use gaseous form when you can send in an incorporeal wraith or spectre instead?

Zombies and skeletons will wilt before serious opposition. And sometimes you need to be able to breathe water! (Sinking ship, for instance...)

Again, you're trying to make the necromancer a "blast mage" - he's not. Necromancers work best behind the scenes, out of sight, until they have their prey in their power.

No arguments here - evn though a disproportionate number of necromancy spells seem to be rather marginal attack spells like Chill Touch, Blight, Contagion and so on. But even an eeeevil necromancer has to somehow survive until he can actually start animating things.

I said:

I mean come on. Evil Necromancers are supposed to terrorise fantasy worlds. How can they do this if they can't summon demons, or teleport, or make their minions look like fair damsels, or put the king under their spell, or level city walls to let their rotting legions in, or even erect spell defences worth a damn. If any of these evil wizards chose necromancy because of the forbidden power it offered, they would probably have been better off getting a good nights sleep, drinking a nice mug of hot chocolate, and having another look at Conjuration instead...

Again, your problem is that you are equating "necromancer" to "megamage." As I said before, evil necromancers do not terrorize a village by threatening to turn it to ash - they terrorize the village by threatening to "involuntarily enlist" the populace into his unholy undead legions. They don't want to put the king under their spell, they want the king dead - or at least intimidated enough to stay out of their way. They don't need to summon demons - they have vampires and liches that will be happy to work with them. They don't need to erect spell defences - because nothing living should be able to get close enough to make them sweat.

I'm regretting writing this last paragraph (or at least not putting a after it. I was only half serious here - I'm perfectly accepting of the need for a necromancer to sacrifice something to specialise, but I believe that 3.5e asks too much. I'm not equating 'necromancer' with 'megamage' - I'm trying to resist your equation of 'necromancer' with 'evil sod who wants to rule a world populated only by unliving vassals'.

Part of my reaction stems from the fact that the PC necromancer I was referring to was not going to animate except in extreme circumstances - partly as an aesthetic choice, partly as a nod to the way my GM wants the campaign to run (no "Zombie! Trigger that trap!") So am aware that I'm putting extra limitations on myself here in addition to the mechanical ones. I'd just like necromancy to be more about the primal forces of flesh and bone, life and death rather than simply undead-creation and eeeeevilness.

 

[Number47]

PeterLind, even though I don't agree with your solution, I do agree the benefits form school specialization doesn't seem to be worth banning two schools.

Well, if everyone agreed that the benefit is worth it, it is probably overpowered. As a rule of thumb, about half of people should think it is worth the cost, about half should think the cost is too high. Much like playing a wizard vs. sorcerors. Is the benefit of more spells, spontaneous casting worth getting top level spells a level later? Some say yes, some say no. As it should be.

 

[muhcashin]

Why is sending an evocation spell? Doesn't make any sense.

 

[Seule]

Well, if everyone agreed that the benefit is worth it, it is probably overpowered. As a rule of thumb, about half of people should think it is worth the cost, about half should think the cost is too high. Much like playing a wizard vs. sorcerors. Is the benefit of more spells, spontaneous casting worth getting top level spells a level later? Some say yes, some say no. As it should be.

What we seem to be seeing here is about half the posters think it's worth 2 barred schools for the extra spells, and the other half think it isn't. Personally, having played a 3.0 wizard to 21st level, I think it absolutely is worth it, but that's just me. Half and half means it's probably about balanced.

--Seule

 

[Liquid Snake]

Well worth it or not.

What would you say are the best options for a would-be necromancer? What schools shoould he prohibit? There's been plenty of discussion about it, but nothing concise.

 

[Kershek]

I have the following suggestion: Just drop the School Specialization restrictions and allow a Favored School for wizards like Domains for clerics. . . The Favored School is chosen at 1st level.

Why? The restrictions on School Specialization (loss of 2 schools usually) outweigh the benefit to the wizard (basically +1 spell slot per level with the school). A wizard character wanting the benefits of school specialization should not have to eliminate two entire schools of magic.

How about leaving the specialization rules as-is, but also giving the specialized school a +1 caster level for the extra spell per level that is cast?

So, a 4rd level evoker prepares magic missile as his bonus 1st level evocation spell. When cast, its effects will be as if he were 5th level, and thus getting an extra missile.

This will sweeten the pot a little more for those specialists not to go back to being genearalists.

 

[Amrynn Moonshadow]

while i have alternative views regarding specialization, for a quick fix for specialists give them either (at 1st level):

a) +1 (or +2) effective caster level in terms of spell power (something like what those red wizards get)

b) two additional spell slots / level for bonus speciality school spells . . .

???

i would do things much differently though, but alas this is just a quick fix....

(to see what i'm talking about, visit the 'what do you hate from 1e' thread....

 

[The Little Raven]

Part of my reaction stems from the fact that the PC necromancer I was referring to was not going to animate except in extreme circumstances - partly as an aesthetic choice, partly as a nod to the way my GM wants the campaign to run (no "Zombie! Trigger that trap!") So am aware that I'm putting extra limitations on myself here in addition to the mechanical ones. I'd just like necromancy to be more about the primal forces of flesh and bone, life and death rather than simply undead-creation and eeeeevilness.

Necromancy is often called "the black art" (which is confusing with niger, Latin for black), which has the traditional focus of communicating with the spirits of the dead in order to predict the future.

In D&D, it is defined as the manipulation of the power of death, unlife, and the life force. It is used to creature undead creatures. In no way should it be "about the primal forces of flesh and bone."

The act of raising a corpse to do your bidding is not a good one. And that is why good necromancers do not work out too well.