Wizard Traditions

Stoat

Adventurer
Somewhat lost in the fracas over the name "Golden Wyvern" is the fact that WoTC seems to be making some fairly major mechanical changes through the use of Wizard Traditions

Originally posted by: Design and Development Article 9/17/2007

Serpent Eye cabalists use orbs to focus powers of enchantment, beguiling, and ensnaring. The mages of the Iron Sigil, on the other hand, employ orbs to guard themselves with potent defenses when invoking spells of thunder or force.

Servants of the Hidden Flame wield fierce powers of fire and radiance through their staves. Golden Wyvern initiates are battle-mages who use their staves to shape and sculpt the spells they cast.

Emerald Frost adepts use wands to help channel powers of cold and deadly acidic magic, while Stormwalker theurges channel spells of lightning and force through their wands.

Names aside, what do we know about the six wizard traditions? I haven't seen a lot of leaks or preview info about them.

Are they just feat chains, or will they include talents or other class abilities?

Is it more or less mandatory for a 4E wizard to take a tradition, similar to the way that a 3.5 ranger more or less had to choose a combat style? Or are traditions optional the way specialization was in 2E and 3E?

Will a wizard's tradition limit the spells/rituals/whatever he can learn in the way that a 3E specialist had to choose prohibited schools?

How easy will it be for homebrewers/3rd Party publishers/Whoever to cook up new traditions?

Please don't let this get bogged down into another name thread. I'm more interested in the mechanics than than the esthetics.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The relevant information from the 4e information page about wizards (my emphasis)

* It seems like four "classic" wizardly implements - the orb, staff, tome, and wand - are to play a more central role in the Wizard character class. Each implement is associated with certain types of magic: orb for terrain control, manipulation and divination; staff for forcefully projected powers as well as flight and telekinisis; tome for teleportation, summoning, shapechanging; and wand for long-range effects and protection. The wizard can cast without the items, but is likened to "a slightly near-sighted man with glasses"; holding the associated implement grants a benefit to the wizard’s attack. The article refers to "the wand spell cinder storm", which implies that each spell will be an orb, staff, wand or tome spell.

* Update - conspiracy theorists ahoy! All references to the "tome" have been edited out of the above article, leaving orb, staff and wand only. Why? I don't know! But there were references to the "tome" before, and now there aren't. Instead, we have extra flavour text, referring to Iron Sigil [potent defenses when invoking spells of thunder or force] and Serpent Eye [enchantment, beguiling, and ensnaring] traditions (orb), disciplines of the Hidden Flame [fierce powers of fire and radiance] and the Golden Wyvern [battle-mages] (staff), and Emerald Frost adepts [powers of cold and deadly acidic magic] and Stormwalker theurges [spells of lightning and force] (wand).

* Bart Carroll on the change: "Hmm, well we do say it in the Design & Development column intro: "Keep in mind that the game is still in a state of flux, as refinements are made by our design and development staff." Case in point -- take another look at the most recent Wizards and Wizard Implements article. A revised version has just been posted, with several changes to the original article posted Friday [Note from Morrus - it wasn't there on Friday; it appeared today]. The version you see now is the version that should have originally gone live."

* Note: breschau posted the original article.

* Dave Noonan has spoken a little more about wizards implements (the orb, staff, wand, and elusive tome). He mentions that the level of importance attached to these items has not yet been finally decided ("The pendulum has swung around a lot during design on the implement issue... Right now the pendulum is resting somewhere in the middle.") He compares it to a fighter and his weapons: "...it might be worthwhile to think of a wizard's implements as analogous to a 3e fighter's weapon choice--if you assume that the fighter hasn't deeply, deeply specialized in that weapon through feat choice. Mid-level Tordek prefers axes, sure, and he probably has an advantage with an axe that's substantial but not overwhelming. You put a polearm in his hands, though, and he functions just fine. And he's accessing the salient properties of the polearm--reach, for example."

* He also confirms that the design intention is that these things be adjustable to work in your campaign -- "You can add your own implements and disciplines/traditions to the mix. Doing so takes some work, but it's not a massive undertaking."

* And on the nature of the described traditions: "...traditions are not groupings (fluffy or otherwise) of spells/spell schools/etc... I can see how someone could read the preview article and make the reasonable speculation that the traditions we mention are analogous to spell schools or domains. While that's a decent guess, and it fits the available data, it's not a correct guess."

* Wizardly orders: "They're not really specializations in the sense of 3rd Edition specialist wizards; choosing one doesn't make the spells belonging to another unavailable to you. Basically they're a mechanism by which we answer the question, "How did your wizard learn magic? Was he trained in a magical academy, tutored by a single mentor, etc., etc." So each order provides a subset a spells your character is *best* at, but doesn't replace the notion of spell school from previous editions."

* Implements: "Wizard implements now provide your character with a reason to care about a signature weapon in much the same way that the fighter cares about a signature sword. We think it's a good thing. Many other implements have been suggested, including things such as mask, dagger, and (of course) tome."
 

We know very little.

We know that they at least include some associated feats.

Its been suggested that a wizard can cast any sort of spell regardless of their implement choice, but that implement choice will affect extra bonuses that can be attached to the spell. This suggests in turn that wizard traditions won't limit the spells a wizard can learn.
 

I R SOOO happy with this new implement idea, I'm positively quivering in anticipation of the sweetness of all the quest possibilities. Here are some reasons I'm pumped:

1. Quests to create new implements (with some instructions from Obi-Won)
2. Quests to recover stolen implements (revenge of the stolen Spellbook!)
3. Quests to locate the lost implement of destiny (Anyone seen a Deathly Hallow around here?)
4. Quests to destroy heinous implements (that Sarumon wouldn't be so tough without his staff!)
5. Most importantly, all new reasons to sing "A Wizard's Staff Has a Knob on the End". Thanks, Nanny Og!
 


Goken100 said:
4. Quests to destroy heinous implements (that Sarumon wouldn't be so tough without his staff!)
Not to be picky, but I think Sarumon was more dangerous with that black orb of his, using it to see and communicate and such.
 

Rechan said:
Not to be picky, but I think Sarumon was more dangerous with that black orb of his, using it to see and communicate and such.

Although Gandalf chose to break Saruman's staff to break his power... the subsequent loss of Saruman's palantir was fortuitous happenstance.

Think of it in (potentially) 4e terms - Saruman used his staff to do his own magic. On the other hand he also had an ancient artifact (the palantir) which he couldn't fully use and which turned out to be his downfall.
 


* Wizardly orders: "They're not really specializations in the sense of 3rd Edition specialist wizards; choosing one doesn't make the spells belonging to another unavailable to you. Basically they're a mechanism by which we answer the question, "How did your wizard learn magic? Was he trained in a magical academy, tutored by a single mentor, etc., etc." So each order provides a subset a spells your character is *best* at, but doesn't replace the notion of spell school from previous editions."

From this it sounds like what we formerly thought of as Sorcerers ( i.e. guys who cast magic b/c of their magic blood) might be folded into wizards. Sort of the self-taught wizards or natural savants.


If they're not dividing orders by spell choice, I wonder what the mechanical differences between them are? Number of spells known? Number of per/day spells? Metamagic? Something new?
 

There's been some info on sorcerers. The idea is that they're barely in control of their surging magical powers. So if they cast a fireball, they might have a lingering aura of flame afterwards from all the extra magic energy.
 

Remove ads

Top