Wizards: Squishy or All Powerful?

[pemerton]

Which is a DC of 10 plus damage dealt vs a roll of d20 plus Concentration skill plus other modifiers, such as Skill Focus feat. which could be a plus 11 at first level. But when the fighter is doing fifty point of damage in a single attack, it's far more difficult to make that concentration check. A Wizard would have a very difficult time making a check against a DC of 50 or 60.

I would think that by the time the fighter is doing this sort of damage, the wizard has access to spells like Mirror Image or Invisibility that would thwart the fighter's attack.

And by the way, a simple bag of flour kills invisibility. For every step a Wizard makes a fighter can make and stay within reach. And pole arms have longer reaches than a sword.

As far as a polearm is concerned, can't a wizard negate a 3E polearm attack by closing to touch range with the fighter? And as for the bag of flour, I personally dislike a game in which the defensive strategy against powerful magics is throwing a bag of flour into the air. Leaving aside the need this creates to engage the slightly annoying grenade-like missile rules, and the recoving-bulky-objects-from-backpack rules, I find it just too silly for words.

with the right maneuvering can make the Wizard fall into a ten foot spike laden pit which could cause poison and disease damage to the Wizard.

Or cause him trip over the rogue who's ready to trip him from behind.

Or simply use an action to trip a Wizard. Whoops, the Wizard's now suffering from being prone.

Other than the tripping, which I think would also be affected by Mirror Image or Invis, all of these seem to be rather situational. Whereas, in my experience, wizards are able to use their spells to make their own situational luck.

 

[Diamond Cross]

I would think that by the time the fighter is doing this sort of damage, the wizard has access to spells like Mirror Image or Invisibility that would thwart the fighter's attack.

Not all wizards have the same spells, but, yes, they could.

As far as a polearm is concerned, can't a wizard negate a 3E polearm attack by closing to touch range with the fighter? And as for the bag of flour, I personally dislike a game in which the defensive strategy against powerful magics is throwing a bag of flour into the air. Leaving aside the need this creates to engage the slightly annoying grenade-like missile rules, and the recoving-bulky-objects-from-backpack rules, I find it just too silly for words.

Oh come on. This isn't silly in the least. Not to mention tanglefoot bags and nets. Or bolas even.

A pole arm attack wouldn't be negated, unless you're trying to sunder the weapon or somehow immobilize the fighter. Plus with some ranged touch spells you don't need to close in within a weapon's reach. Ray of Enfeeblement has a range of 25 ft plus 2 ft per level, for example, and it's a first level spell.

Other than the tripping, which I think would also be affected by Mirror Image or Invis, all of these seem to be rather situational. Whereas, in my experience, wizards are able to use their spells to make their own situational luck.

Which boils down to smarts and experience. A more experienced person will almost always win against a lesser or inexperienced person.

For example, say a person who's just learning how to play chess versus a person who's won the World Chess Championship several times. Who do you think is going to win?

So we can always say it's unfair to the inexperienced person and the more experienced person has to have special rules to give the inexperienced person a better chance to beat the World Champion.

But that's just plain silly.

 

[MarkB]

And a fighter is pathetic without their gamut of AC-boosting items. Throw them both in jail, they're pretty weak. But at least the wizard doesn't forget his spells until he casts them.

Although he does lose the use of any spell requiring a material component. And with a genre-savvy jailor, he's likely to be denied the use of verbal and somatic components, and probably line of sight too - cuffs, gags and blindfolds are cheap and readily available.

 

[Ourph]

Although he does lose the use of any spell requiring a material component. And with a genre-savvy jailor, he's likely to be denied the use of verbal and somatic components, and probably line of sight too - cuffs, gags and blindfolds are cheap and readily available.

Yeah, it's capturing the flying, invisible, contigency-teleporting Wizard surrounded by summoned monsters and animated dead that is the problem.

 

[Umbran]

Bull. Utter crapola.

That just sheer utter crap.

Crap crap crap crap crap crap crap.

I know I'm not going to change your mind on the matter. Once somebody's beliefs are locked in it's completely impossible to change their minds, regardless of the evidence.

Well, then I'll just help you resist the temptation to try again, by booting you from this thread.

Ladies and gentlemen, sometimes you'll want to be rude. That is the time to walk away from your keyboard. DC here didn't. I suggest you all attempt to exercise better judgment. If you cannot follow Wheaton's Law, don't post. Very simple.

 

[Neonchameleon]

So have I. We can go around and around in circles. For every thing you come up with a smart fighter and an imaginative player can counter without the need to nerf anything.

If a fighter can't beat a Wizard then the player is playing the fighter wrong or is the other player is smarter than the player who's playing the fighter.

And by the way, a simple bag of flour kills invisibility. For every step a Wizard makes a fighter can make and stay within reach. And pole arms have longer reaches than a sword.

And with the right maneuvering can make the Wizard fall into a ten foot spike laden pit which could cause poison and disease damage to the Wizard.

Or cause him trip over the rogue who's ready to trip him from behind.

Or simply use an action to trip a Wizard. Whoops, the Wizard's now suffering from being prone.

Right.

Even if I were to assume that everything you said above was fair and accurate, every last one of those points assumes that it's the fighter who is hunting the wizard and gets the drop on him. If the wizard gets the drop on the fighter, what happens? The fight's over even before it's begun. The fighter can not disrupt the wizard's spell by any of the means you mention because he didn't know the wizard was there. Spell resistance from items ain't gonna work - far too expensive for the effect.

And who's more likely to be able to get the drop on the other guy? The fighter with his 2+Int modifier skills/level, or the wizard with his 2+Int modifier skills/level (and remember Int is his primary stat and will therefore probably exceed the fighter's), and spells like Change Self, Detect Thoughts, Invisibility, Scry, and Teleport (to pick just a few obvious ones).

In short, if the fighter gets the drop on the wizard (as he needs to for your scenarios to work) or even meets him on equal terms as in an arena, then the wizard has already made huge mistakes. And huge mistakes in a contest that would only start to be fair if you tied both hands behind the wizard's back to prevent him casting spells. (Even then he still wins on the skills - and isn't wearing heavy armour).

As for tricks like bags of flour, you can only get the wizard with the bag of flour if you already know where he is. And you have the spellcraft to realise that when he disappeared. If he disappears how do you know he didn't dimension door somewhere out of your line of sight? Throw your bag of flour to counter his invisibility spell and he holds you or hideous laughters you or flesh to stones you or baleful polymorphs you or whichever other takeout he's prepared. (Some I wouldn't recommend against a fighter admittedly, but that's why the wizard has spell slots). And as for maneuvering the wizard down pit traps - remember that the fighter has to cross the ground to the wizard not the other way round. Meaning that the chance of getting the other guy down a pit trap is an advantage to the wizard, not to the fighter.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

In D&D, I've always had this nagging feeling that making magic items ought to be an adventure (or least an encounter), and thus be risky and award XP. Perhaps consumables made this way could be made in a batch for handling time. Forcing spirits/elementals/demons/etc. into the magic items would be one way to handle the flavor with obvious challenge issues. For powerful items, you can always do one-offs--research how to do it, then go do the adventure.

Note, this is explicitly not--go kill the dragon to get its blood so that you can go back to your nice warm forge and make the dragon slaying sword at your leisure. That's what we keep doing with "components" so that we can handwave it, with the obvious problems. What I mean is more like--get the dragon to breathe on the sword and then finish the crafting in your (magically summoned) forge right there, while the dragon is still alive--let him go or not, your choice. You might even run afterwards.

Or maybe a 10th level potion-making druid and his friends going after a simple healing potion is equivalent to the same group whacking a couple of kobold guards--technically, you could play it out, but you just handwave it, because the XP gain is zero (or effectively so) by that point. It happens in the story, and those are the limits. (For example, you can kill said kobold guards all you want--until you run out. You could make all the healing potions you want--until you run out of whatever "challenge" it was that you had to play through at 1st level, in order to make such a potion.)

 

[CuRoi]

In my previous campaign I had a forge hidden deep in an enchanted wood that was seen to by a very highly skill salamander smithy. The players had to locate this forge and then literally wrestle the salamander into submission. He would then comply with requsests to create magical arms (well, at the start he was just creating Steel weapons as it was a bronze age tech campaign...) later as the players grew in power and the Salamander grew to match, he was capable of creating magic weapons. Edit - Actually he -helped- to create the weapons. He would climb within the forge and work the weapon as the player utilized their own skills in crafting.

Of course, in the same campaign I used a "kill the dragon, get his blood" system for a bit instead of requiring gold/XP for items. The macabre wagon of "parts" the players started toting around was interesting and a bit disturbing, heh.

But I agree, the ATM transaction that has become item creation is sad. My next campaign, I'll most likely remove item creation feats, push scrolls, wands and potions to skills (spellcraft, alchemy) and figure out a better way for permanent item creation (such as quests and the like).

 

[Noctos]

Of course, once in jail the spellbook should be confiscated and sold or, since it was used to commit criminal acts, most likely destroyed. This pretty much screws a mage, but would be expected of a society that had to deal with magical criminals on a regular basis. The fighter can at least pick up the food tray and kill the guard with it if they have to The mage is helpless and possibly at square one (without certain feats, backup spell books, etc.)

you for get about the always over looked but mighty can trip spells. that a mage can cast at will with no prep work

but truth is either could escape with a proper cha as they could convience people to assist them,

 

[Jacob Marley]

you for get about the always over looked but mighty can trip spells. that a mage can cast at will with no prep work

In 3.5 the only spell(s) that can be memorized without a spellbook is Read Magic (or any spells associated with the Spell Mastery feat).