Wizards in 4E have been 'neutered' argument...

[Obryn]

2. Spell preperation time: 10 min per level of spell. (So preparing 2 3rd level spells are one hour to prepare.) So a cast out high level spellcaster needs days of rest to replenish his spells and thus has an even harder time preserving his power in the course of an andventure.

On the flip side of the coin, however, 1e magic-users only needed to rest for ... I can't remember if it's 2 or 4 hours right now ... to prepare low-level spells. So it kind of goes both ways.

-O

 

[Henry]

2. Spell preperation time: 10 min per level of spell. (So preparing 2 3rd level spells are one hour to prepare.) So a cast out high level spellcaster needs days of rest to replenish his spells and thus has an even harder time preserving his power in the course of an andventure.

it was 15 min. per level of spell in 1E: Someone worked out in a dragon mag letter that a 29th level magic-user would take 72 HOURS of straight prep time to replenish all his spells. Let's see someone want to wait three days for the wizard just to read War and Peace so that he's at his best.

 

[Nifft]

it was 15 min. per level of spell in 1E: Someone worked out in a dragon mag letter that a 29th level magic-user would take 72 HOURS of straight prep time to replenish all his spells.

Therefore, Lich.

It doesn't sleep. It doesn't eat. It doesn't need to take a bathroom break. It doesn't have twelve children pulling at its ankle-bones (not for long anyway).

- - -

Clearly, this is why only madmen and monsters are high-level wizards. It's just too annoying for regular people who have any kind of a life.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Saeviomagy]

Wizards have been neutered.

This is because previously they were spraying their seed everywhere, and it was making a mess of the game.

 

[awesomeocalypse]

Wizards still have probably the most impressive daily spells of any class in the game. Their dailies often effect tons of enemies, often last a very long time if not the entire combat, and have some extremely powerful effects that can absolutely swing a fight if used properly/the dice are at all favorable. It is not at all rare in our sessions to see a well-deployed wizard daily turn a tough encounter into a cakewalk. On the other hand, they can be tricky to use without hurting teammates, and they tend to do a whole lot of rolling (IME about 3-5 attack rolls per daily, plus a lot of saves and stuff), which means players scramble for any buff they can get. The result is that wizard players are still pretty damn careful about resource management, and still get to do their "god of cosmic power" thing once in a while. 4e made some major changes, no doubt. But play a few levels of the new wizard and I think you'll come to appreciate the ways that the designers have tried to build him in a way that would recreate some of the feel of previous editions.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Wizards still have probably the most impressive daily spells of any class in the game. Their dailies often effect tons of enemies, often last a very long time if not the entire combat, and have some extremely powerful effects that can absolutely swing a fight if used properly/the dice are at all favorable. It is not at all rare in our sessions to see a well-deployed wizard daily turn a tough encounter into a cakewalk. On the other hand, they can be tricky to use without hurting teammates, and they tend to do a whole lot of rolling (IME about 3-5 attack rolls per daily, plus a lot of saves and stuff), which means players scramble for any buff they can get. The result is that wizard players are still pretty damn careful about resource management, and still get to do their "god of cosmic power" thing once in a while. 4e made some major changes, no doubt. But play a few levels of the new wizard and I think you'll come to appreciate the ways that the designers have tried to build him in a way that would recreate some of the feel of previous editions.

This can be seen at early levels with spells like Flaming Sphere, Grasp of the Grave and Visions of Avarice. Any of these timed right can destroy an encounter by themselves.

 

[pawsplay]

In 3e, a Wizard just picks their "Zap against Reflex" spell against a cleric, or a "Zap your Fortitude" spell against a wizard, or a "Zap your Will" spell against a brute. It's the weak save that's the issue - and a 3e wizard has both a limitless capacity to learn spells which target all defenses, and more spells prepared per day because of bonus spells.

-O

A wizard does not, however, have a limitless capacity to cover all saving throw bases. Further, SR is likely to be a limiting factor, especially at high levels. I have rarely had a main villain type who was extremely vulnerable to saving throws of any stripe.

 

[Hussar]

If that assumption were true, then our groups shouldn't be able to survive. And yet they do.

Typically, our 3.X groups are built along the lines of earlier editions: There will probably be a rogue of some kind, there will be a healer, there will be an arcanist, and warriors of some kind outnumber any other archetype.

Oftentimes, there is no solo-class healer, and only one pure arcanist- almost everyone multiclasses (discounting PrCls).

And yet, we're doing just fine without the Wiz slinging spells every round.

2 campaigns ago, we were playing RttToEE, and my buddy was- as I described- playing his typical Wizard. I was playing a heavily multiclassed Specialist Diviner/Warrior type PC who had almost no offensive spell capability (he knew Lesser Orb of Electricity). We were the only arcane casters.

For campaign reasons, my PC approached the Wiz to see if he could arrange for a little cross-tutelage in the ways of magic. I'd teach him my divinations, he'd teach me some evocations and the like. Thus, the party would have a little bit more low-level firepower and detection ability. He refused (in character).

He also didn't change his playstyle.

Despite this, we still managed to finish off the campaign with only 1 PC death (the rogue).

May I ask, DannyA, how many players and NPC's do you typically have in your group?

OTOH, if a party is built along the lines that Hussar suggested upthread, with 3 full-caster arcanists, a rogue, a warrior, and a cleric, that party will be killed if those arcanists don't do something each time they have the opportunity. The inaction of the rogue, the warrior or the cleric for one combat won't matter much.

Whoops, I think there was a miscommunication there somewhere. I said three FIGHTER types, a cleric, wizard and thief. Not three wizard types.

That archetype, combined with much lower hit points, meant that wizards could sit back and not contribute to a given fight and it didn't matter all that much.

Heck, take a 2nd level 1e party vs an ogre. The ogre has 4+1 HD, meaning it's got, on average 19 hit points. It also does about 10 points of damage per round, if it hits, which, with a THAC0(yeah, I know 1e, but they still had THAC0 then) of about 16 (I'm running from memory here, so my numbers are probably a bit off.

The ogre probably won't even drop a 2nd level fighter in a given round. It will likely need two rounds. Meanwhile, the fighter types are doing d12 points of damage to it from their longswords. Three attacks plus the cleric means that probably 2 hits per round. Ogre dies in the second round most of the time and the party might get away without any damage if their lucky, or a cure light wounds amount of damage being fairly likely. Note, the thief and the MU sat back and watched this fight.

Compare this to a 3.5e 2nd level party squaring off with the ogre. Mr. Ogre now has 29 hit points on average (50% more) and does 2d8+7 points of damage (and has reach possibly giving it some extra attacks. It's got a pretty decent chance of dropping the 2nd level fighter types and the cleric or the rogue had better be VERY careful. Yeah, they will probably win, but there's a very, very good chance of outright PC death.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

May I ask, DannyA, how many players and NPC's do you typically have in your group?

In the group that went through RttToEE? 1 DM, 7 regular players. There were 2 guys who joined briefly, but only for a few sessions.

Almost no NPCs were included in the party- 1 ally (for 3 combats), mp hirelings, no mounts, no companions, and my PC lost his familiar in the 2nd session. The single-classed Wizard didn't have a familiar, nor did the Rog/Sorc. There were 2 draft horses that were frequent rally points (a la Richard the Sorcerer's battlecry here).

The party was 1 Wizard, 1 Diviner/Ftr/Rgr/Spellsword, 1 Ftr/Clc, 1 Rog/Sorc, 1 Monk, 1 Fighter, 1 Brb/Drd. We finished at level 11. No PC had more than 4 divine casting levels. The Rogue had only 1 or 2 Sorc levels. He was also the single PC who died, but was brought back by an NPC.

Whoops, I think there was a miscommunication there somewhere. I said three FIGHTER types, a cleric, wizard and thief. Not three wizard types.

Perhaps I misunderstood this post:

In 1e, you were assumed to have 3 frontline fighter types. Plus the cleric and you have 4 PC's that can form a nice wall for the wizard to hide behind. Because the monsters were quite a bit smaller hit point wise and damage potential wise, the three fighter types could put a serious pounding on pretty much any threat.

The wizard was just icing on the cake.

In 3e, the assumption is that there is no icing, there is only cake. The wizard HAS to pull his weight every round or the party is going to start losing PC's. The monsters are not only considerably tougher, but their damage potential is significantly higher. Sometimes to the tune of doubling their 1e damage. 1st to 10th level PC's aren't all that different in any system 1e-3e as far as hit points go.

Suddenly, you had only 1 fighter type in the front instead of 3 spreading out the damage and the monsters were doing possibly twice as much damage per round.

It's not an option for the wizard to not do damage. If the wizard is just watching the fight, the fighter is seriously going to get pummeled.

(bolded emphasis mine)

Are you saying there that if the Wizard isn't spellslinging every round then he goes from 3 warriors to 1? Are you describing attrition?

If so, my bad!

However, it still doesn't match anything I've seen in gameplay.

Our parties do best when our spellcasters hoard their spells and only use them when absolutely necessary. Typically, that means 1-3 spells in a given combat from arcanists plus 1-3 from the divine casters (depending on type)- they still tend to wait until afterwards to cast the heals. The exceptions are usually when we have foes that aren't affected by the melee attacks of the front-liners or sometimes when we're facing a "boss."

But even "boss battles" don't necessarily draw out the "nova." When the RttToEE party was facing an Aboleth & allies, one of the interim players was playing a single classed Druid (and 2 other players were absent). He cast a Summon Nature's Ally into the Aboleth's water sphere- I believe it was a shark- and a Flaming Sphere, while the Wizard cast 3 mid-level spells directly on the Aboleth (who saved once- and the third spell was the kill-shot) and one spell at its minions. The rest was handled by melee combat. My Diviner and the various multiclassed divine casters cast no spells until after the combat.

The combat lasted 10+ rounds with only 6 total spells cast, one without effect. The Aboleth wasn't killed until after the 7th or 8th round.
The spellcasters didn't cast every round. No PC died, despite our being shorthanded for the evening.

Would the combat have been shorter if the casters had gone nova? Sure...but we would have had our butts handed to us about 20 minutes later in the combat that followed.

Which, for the record, was the 6th combat the party had gone through in that campaign day (IOW, between opportunities to rest & rememorize spells).

Also for the record: despite 6 combats in that "day," the Wizard finished the day with a Fireball still ready to go.

 

[Hussar]

When I said 3 fighters to 1, I meant in 3e, when you go from 6 assumed PC's (1e) to 4 assumed PC's (3e) you lose two fighter types. The assumption in 1e is 3 fighters, a cleric, MU and a thief. The assumption in 3e is 1 fighter, a cleric, wizard and a rogue.

The loss of those two fighters HURTS.

I would also point out that your seven PC's five were casters. That's a pretty far cry from the baseline assumptions of 3e D&D. You've got a party that's almost twice the size of normal. Of course that means that your wizard can pick and choose combats.

I'm thinking that your expectations have been very strongly colored by your experiences.

Having two healers, and three casters means you have a gazillion spells per day. Of course you can go longer.