PDA

View Full Version : [3.X ed] Making the wizards MAD



Learnedguy
2008-12-28, 04:42 AM
What would happen if I made wizards MAD like this;


Intelligence decides max spell level they can learn
Constitution decides how many bonus spells they get
and Charisma decides the spell DC


(I suppose you could exchange intelligence with wisdom for the divine casters, and make sorcerers abide to the same rules as the wizards, but anyway, that's of little consequence, so ignore it for now)

Also, I was thinking of making spellcasting cause the wizard damage equal to the spell's level multiplied with X. What would make a good multiplier? (Or do you think I should assign different multipliers depending on the spells?)

Ah, I realize that this might very well be a repeat of some old thread. My excuses, but I blame it on the search functions.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-28, 04:46 AM
Why on earth constitution? Or, for that matter, charisma? Wizards aren't known for being friendly and social-like.



Also, I was thinking of making spellcasting cause the wizard damage equal to the spell's level multiplied with X.
It should probably be exponential. X=1 sounds about right for level-1 spells, but is too weak for level-5 and up.

Kristoss
2008-12-28, 04:49 AM
Your ability dependency would make tweaking a wizard more interesting, it basically creates two sub-types (high DC save or X wizard / buff-debuff area control wizard).

Why should casting spells hurt a caster, are you trying to make a magic is dangerous mechanic. Maybe it would be better if you created a backfire effect for each spell, and let the spell casters make checks against backfire?

Learnedguy
2008-12-28, 04:50 AM
Why on earth constitution? Or, for that matter, charisma? Wizards aren't known for being friendly and social-like.

Well now they are:smallwink:

Well, I just put the onesI thought would suit best. Charisma because they use sheer force of personality to power up those spells and constitution because they need endurance to cast many spells (especially when I apply the damage when casting).

Anyway, it doesn't have to be constitution and charisma. It could be strength and wisdom instead for that matter.


Why should casting spells hurt a caster, are you trying to make a magic is dangerous mechanic. Maybe it would be better if you created a backfire effect for each spell, and let the spell casters make checks against backfire?

Because even without bonus spells wizards still get quite a few slots. Making the spells hurt them will thus;
A, Encourage them to raise their constitution
B, Make them think a bit more before nova:ing the opponent
C, Keep the "Frail wizard" stereotype even though they got an 18 in con.

Or so I hope.

(Backfire isn't a bad idea either. A little bit more dice rolling I suppose, but if that's what you like...)

TempusCCK
2008-12-28, 05:16 AM
I like the idea of spellcasting hurting the caster, but perhaps you should use a number of D4 equal to the spelllevel? So perhaps casting a 9th level spell does 9d4 damage, since you are altering reality on a mind-boggling scale, this represents the drain on your person, you become tired.

Honestly, most magic system pre-D&D are like this in some way. Most non-Modern fantasy portrays magic as being a drain on the caster in some way.

Salvonus
2008-12-28, 05:31 AM
I like the idea of spellcasting hurting the caster, but perhaps you should use a number of D4 equal to the spelllevel? So perhaps casting a 9th level spell does 9d4 damage, since you are altering reality on a mind-boggling scale, this represents the drain on your person, you become tired.

Honestly, most magic system pre-D&D are like this in some way. Most non-Modern fantasy portrays magic as being a drain on the caster in some way.

Just to provide further material for thinking about drain mechanics, the third party supplements Slayers d20 and Advanced d20 Magic used something along the lines of what you're thinking, Tempus. It's slotless casting, mind you, so you can theoretically cast all day. Lots of potential for ways around the drain and all, but it's an interesting springboard for creating a drain-based system. I think this site includes the basic rules... (http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/index.php/Advanced_d20_Magic)

TempusCCK
2008-12-28, 05:43 AM
The other problem is see with that is that it only makes you fatigued and exhausted, which really doesn't conflict with the ability to cast spells. I also dislike the multiple checks. "If you do not meet the Fort save DC, roll another save to see if you become fatigued.." A penalty to strength and dex? Makes the Wizard slightly easier to hit.

That being said, it's a good springboard, maybe the DC system they use could be applied to take away hitpoints or some ability to cast spells, for instance, we could streamline the system, require Fort checks for spells, and every time they fail a fort check they could take an intellect penalty, showing that they are being drained of the ability to focus, or of course, they could just lose hitpoints on the failed save too...

Bayar
2008-12-28, 06:16 AM
Wizards have naturally high INT score, and usually pump their CON stat so they get more HP.

If someone wants to become a focused specialist enchanter wizard, i can see a CON/INT/CHA wizard. And it will rule.

Frog Dragon
2008-12-28, 06:37 AM
I actually developed something alonng these lines. Basically for each spell you do a caster level check though the DC isn't very high. Then if you fail you make another caster level check this time double the original DC. Success nothing happens and you only lose your action. Failure and you take 1d4 damage per spell level and you lose the slot and any costs associated with the spell.

Curmudgeon
2008-12-28, 08:21 AM
Simple is almost always better, and you'll get most of the improvement you want just by adding a second dependent ability. Just follow the Favored Soul approach: one stat for spells per day, and another for spell DC. Forcing Wizards to use Charisma for spell DCs is simple and effective.

Wabbajack
2008-12-28, 08:47 AM
It even makes some sense: You can learn spells with intelligence but you need force of personality to cast spells effective^^

Tengu_temp
2008-12-28, 09:28 AM
Why on earth constitution? Or, for that matter, charisma? Wizards aren't known for being friendly and social-like.


But they're known for being majestic and awe-inspiring. The powerful ones, at least.

Eldariel
2008-12-28, 10:32 AM
Force of your mind determines the power of your spell. I think Charisma to save DCs is trivial. Con to memorizing makes less sense; it's not like you scribed the spells on your body or something. Not to mention, Wizards already always buff Con right after Int. Wis would be more interesting. Right now it's a dump for Wizards.

Also, for Charisma making them sociable, remember that Sorcerers are Charisma-based and yet, the stereotypical Sorcerer is even more eccentric than your average Wizard. Just because you're charismatic doesn't mean you actually act in socially active nor leadership role. If anything, high Cha Wizard easily makes for one of those unwilling leaders. He doesn't really want to lead, nor take the limelight in conversation (just because you have high Charisma doesn't mean you're comfortable as the center of attention), but people just listen to him so he finds himself with little choice.

Roderick_BR
2008-12-28, 11:04 AM
Also, I was thinking of making spellcasting cause the wizard damage equal to the spell's level multiplied with X. What would make a good multiplier? (Or do you think I should assign different multipliers depending on the spells?)
Funny. Not long ago, I was making some rules for that. Like, every level of the spell deals the caster 1 point of "mana burn". For all mechanics, it counts like non-lethal damage, stacking with it, but can't be avoided by immunity to nonlethal damage. Resting restores the mana burn damage like normal damage (1 x level/8 hours of rest). Zero level spells deals no mana burn.

Quirinus_Obsidian
2008-12-28, 11:16 AM
The Spellcaster drain effect does not exist in DnD; thus making Wizards (or any spellcaster for that matter) way too powerful. A CON damage, or HP damage effect would be too harsh, IMO.

Losing the ability to focus on the spell being cast, though, is intriguing. I would
make it a concentration check to be able to cast a spell the following round; something like 15+2x or 3x the spell level.

I am also working on some houserules for Spellcaster Psychosis effects. For example, shapechange ability (spell, power, Wild Shape, polymorph, etc.) causes the caster to become more and more feral, or at the extremes losing grip on reality itself. Stuff like that. Of course it will scale with the amount of casting being done and the level of the ability. :smallbiggrin:

Learnedguy
2008-12-28, 12:39 PM
Force of your mind determines the power of your spell. I think Charisma to save DCs is trivial. Con to memorizing makes less sense; it's not like you scribed the spells on your body or something. Not to mention, Wizards already always buff Con right after Int. Wis would be more interesting. Right now it's a dump for Wizards.

Actually, this is a case of a refluff. The con isn't used to memorize, it's used because it's a physical effort to cast spells. A more fit person can cast more spells per day (or something like that. Exchange it con with wisdom and we get something along the lines of " amount of spells per day is decided by willpower")

Wis instead of con got the advantage of being even more MADer than the initial houserule.

Jimp
2008-12-28, 02:58 PM
In 2nd edition if a wizard wanted to specialise they needed certain stats to be high enough. Different schools needed different stats/values. For example, I think it was illusion that needed 15 cha as well as int. You could use something similar and force specialisation. Just change the stat values for 3rd edition.

TempusCCK
2008-12-28, 03:14 PM
There's actually alot of good ideas coming out of this thread.

One, I like the non-lethal damage compared to lethal damage, it more adequately represents the idea, I didn't think of it at all.

Two, having a certain stat high enough to specialize. This idea is all kinds of good. I love it. Wisdom for Divination (Combine that with making Divination a school where you have to ban two other schools, because it is not any less powerful than any other school.) Cha for Enchantment and Illusion, Dex for Evocation (Have to have the ability to send the spells where you want them to go, of course) Wisdom for Necro, as well as Conjuration, and probably Transmutation as well.

chiasaur11
2008-12-28, 03:38 PM
MAD?

The foolish non casters always think their betters mad! I'll show them! I'll show them all!

Sorry. Had to do a mad scientist rant. Just seemed right.

Aquillion
2008-12-28, 04:01 PM
Wisdom fits more than Con thematically. Dexterity might be another option instead of Charisma, but it doesn't fit for spells that have no somatic components...

With Int the way it is, wizards have no incentive to ever raise it about 19. Is this a problem? Int should still probably be their highest stat, since that ensures that they have knowledge skills that are thematically important (instead of, say, a ton of HP or whatever from putting those skill points elsewhere.)


C, Keep the "Frail wizard" stereotype even though they got an 18 in con.I disagree with this. I don't think you should give wizards a reason to raise Con beyond the existing HP bonus (so I don't think it should be used for any part of spellcasting), but given that, I also don't think that you should deliberately enforce the 'frail wizard' stereotype.

Making wizards more MAD (without including Con) will already enforce it much more strongly than it already is. And the fact is... all of the 'armored mage' PRCs and so forth are mechanically far less powerful than a full wizard. If someone wants to give up arcane ability in order to play a physically tough wizard, let them. They're essentially giving up mechanical power to better reflect their character concept, no need to punish them just because your concept of wizards is squishy.

(This is a problem that WotC had a lot with early fighter-mage PRCs, when they'd drastically overrate how valuable casting in armor really is. But even the more recent ones are nowhere near as strong as a full wizard.)

Mark Hall
2008-12-28, 10:16 PM
I have suggested this in the past, but with the set-up of Intelligence (understanding of complexity) determines maximum spell level, Charisma (force of will) determines DC, and Wisdom (endurance of mental reserves) as determining bonus spells.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-28, 10:35 PM
I have suggested this in the past, but with the set-up of Intelligence (understanding of complexity) determines maximum spell level, Charisma (force of will) determines DC, and Wisdom (endurance of mental reserves) as determining bonus spells.

Seems odd to me to make Int the lowest mental stat for Wizards.

Zeful
2008-12-28, 10:46 PM
I've thought something along the same lines. Wizards would need Int: For highest spell level available (the ability to understand the spell formula). Wis for bonus spells per day (intuition to better utilise the invisible and intangable energy you can safely focus). Cha for Spell DC (coaxing more energy into the spell).
Sorcerers would have Cha for highest level available, Wis for spell DC (knowledge of the self leads to more power afterall, though I've thought about moving it to Con recently) and Int for bonus spells per day (knowledge of what your working with allows you to do it more effecently).
Clerics would need Wis for highest spell level availible(only the pious are given power), Cha for spells per day(Coaxing more power from your god/power), and Int for Spell DC(knowledge of the magical energies you are granted). Druids would simply be Clerics of a nature deity and don't exist as a seperate class.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-28, 10:50 PM
I've thought something along the same lines. Wizards would need Int: For highest spell level available (the ability to understand the spell formula). Wis for bonus spells per day (intuition to better utilise the invisible and intangable energy you can safely focus). Cha for Spell DC (coaxing more energy into the spell).
Sorcerers would have Cha for highest level available, Wis for spell DC (knowledge of the self leads to more power afterall, though I've thought about moving it to Con recently) and Int for bonus spells per day (knowledge of what your working with allows you to do it more effecently).
Clerics would need Wis for highest spell level availible(only the pious are given power), Cha for spells per day(Coaxing more power from your god/power), and Int for Spell DC(knowledge of the magical energies you are granted). Druids would simply be Clerics of a nature deity and don't exist as a seperate class.

See, this is just weird. Sorcerers have Cha as the lowest mental stat, Wizards have Int as lowest, and Clerics have Wisdom as the lowest stat.

Why would you completely destroy the archetypes?

Mark Hall
2008-12-28, 11:07 PM
Seems odd to me to make Int the lowest mental stat for Wizards.

Why would Intelligence be their lowest stat?

Unless they have at least a 19, they're not casting the most powerful spells available. They don't, technically, need any higher than that (except to cast Epic spells, gain bonuses to Spellcraft and thus learn spells), but in a point-buy system, intelligence is going to need to be one of your highest stats to get the most out of a wizard. Wisdom is useful, but not necessary. Charisma is great, but most of the batman builds emphasize giving your enemies as few chances to save as possible.

Flickerdart
2008-12-28, 11:08 PM
Having separate stats for highest spell level and save DC seems silly to me. Why isn't the stat that lets you know fancy spells also letting you know more of them at once? Two stats is more than enough: INT for spells (since the wizard needs to be smart to understand them) and WIS (exploiting the enemy's weakness) or CHA (persuading the target the spell worked) for DCs, depending on the school (Illusion, Abjuration and Enchantment, as well as Conjuration to convince things to appear would be CHA, Divination, Evocation and Transmutation would definitely be WIS). Then we have two kinds of wizards: those who buff their friends with a lot of spells and those who pack a punch with a few irresistible spells per day. The Batmen who want to have every spell for every situation prepared have to juggle 3 stats, everyone else gets along fine with one or two.

@^: Yeah, 19 for INT, and then high 20s if not 30s for whatever their save DCs are based on. Periapts of Wisdom and Cloaks of Charisma as well as Tomes and Wish can make your stats skyrocket, don'tchaknow.

xanaphia
2008-12-28, 11:11 PM
What does MAD mean?

Also, is this trying to be a way to make wizards balanced? What is it for?

Zeful
2008-12-28, 11:18 PM
MAD. Multiple Ability Dependence.

Mark Hall
2008-12-28, 11:20 PM
Having separate stats for highest spell level and save DC seems silly to me. Why isn't the stat that lets you know fancy spells also letting you know more of them at once?

It's not a matter of knowing more of them... it's a matter of being able to manage energy well enough to prepare more of them at once. By forcing multiple stats, you make it more difficult (dare I say, expensive) to have all of them high at once. You want to Item, Wish and Tome your way to high stats relevant stats? Sure, you only need a 19 in one, but then you're going to want really high in two... which is better, from a balance standpoint, than needing only one.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-28, 11:27 PM
Why would Intelligence be their lowest stat?

Unless they have at least a 19, they're not casting the most powerful spells available. They don't, technically, need any higher than that (except to cast Epic spells, gain bonuses to Spellcraft and thus learn spells), but in a point-buy system, intelligence is going to need to be one of your highest stats to get the most out of a wizard. Wisdom is useful, but not necessary. Charisma is great, but most of the batman builds emphasize giving your enemies as few chances to save as possible.

Well a level 1-6 Wizard could get by on a Int of 13. Get a +2 Item, and it's up to level 10. At level 11, get a +4 item and at level 15 a +6.

Alternatively, if it where just natural scores, grab a Gray elf or other Int boosting race (preferably also Cha, like one of the lesser Gensai) start with a PB of 16 int, and probably 16 Cha or Wis, then after racials it's 18. That's if high level.

The worst problem with sure a plan is that if a stat, like Int, only matters for highest level of spells cast, and nothing else, People know how long the game is going to last, or they make a character with 14 int, play it till level 10, and then they die. Two stats is fine, especially since some people actually play with 28PB the poor bastards, and with that, you have crap stats like:

Str 8
Dex 12
Con 14
Int 14
Wis 14
Cha 14

Aquillion
2008-12-28, 11:30 PM
What does MAD mean?

Also, is this trying to be a way to make wizards balanced? What is it for?
MAD = Multiple Ability Dependence. Means a character who needs good scores in many different abilities to be effective; as opposed to SAD, single ability dependent, a character who needs only one good ability score (plus con, maybe, which everyone needs some of) in order to do well. Wizards are very SAD, because they only need Int, and the only other stats that even really benefit them significantly are Con and Dex -- a wizard with an 8 in Wisdom, Strength, and Charisma could do just fine. Heck, they could have a 3 in Strength and Charisma, and it'd only really hurt their carrying capacity. (And their melee touch attacks, which they can do without.)

On the other hand, Paladins, say, are one of the MADdest classes out there. They need, to some extent or another, Strength for combat, Con for hitpoints, Wisdom for spells, Charisma for most of their class abilities, and they can't even completely dump Dex, since they need decent AC. The only stat a Paladin can safely ignore is Intelligence.

Now, fixing the wizard's SADness isn't going to make them balanced all on its own, but it can't hurt, either.

TempusCCK
2008-12-29, 01:18 AM
No, but combine it with basic spell fixes and maybe implement the Fort saves and non-lethal damage, as well as the required stat bonuses for specialization.

Arcane_Snowman
2008-12-29, 01:43 AM
If you want to make it tripple stat dependancy make it like this:
Wisdom for highest spell known (you need some sense to be able to understand these rather intricate worldbending spells)
Charisma for saves (force of personality)
and Intelligence for more spells per day (Brain capasity)

Only having two attributes for dependancy still leaves you open to chose from the spells that don't actually depend that much on DCs. (summons and the like)

Forcing a wizard to take something like Focused Specialst, could also help lessen the amount of combined brokenness involved.

Learnedguy
2008-12-29, 06:07 AM
Also, is this trying to be a way to make wizards balanced? What is it for?

Oh, it's just to screw with them because I hate 'em:smallwink:

(Seriously though this won't make them balanced, because nothing but a serious rundown of all the spells and metamagic feats will do that. This will challenge the wizard player a bit more though. And I am person who like to challenge my players.)

Sir Giacomo
2008-12-29, 07:50 AM
Again, providing an alternative interpretation:

Wizards are already MAD in 3.5 system, just like all other classes.

Apart from INT, they NEED for bare survival:

- high DEX; to get higher AC, better stealth skill base mods, shore up a weak reflex save AND, above all, to get the best possible initiative. They NEED to be faster than or at least as fast as the enemy archer, for instance.
- high CON; otherwise they get out by that one attack throughout a fight that may get through the magical defenses and/or friends protecting the wizard. 14 is the usual value. It also helps the vital concentration skill.

Apart from that, the only "dump" stat you can afford (like many other classes) is CHR. STR needs to be OK to carry around the spellbook plus other supplies without getting slower. And WIS needs to be OK to improve the will save and base spot/listen skill.

So, in an elite array, a distribution for the wizard may look like:
STR 10, DEX 13, CON 14, INT 15, WIS 12, CHR 8.
Or, as pointed out above, you could also have a DEX of 15 and INT of 13, since you could also get through a normal spell progression with an INT of 13. And DEX is vital for a wizard.

- Giacomo

Telonius
2008-12-29, 08:16 AM
Potentially insane idea ...

DC for spells are modified by:

Abjuration: Constitution
Conjuration/Evocation: Strength
Divination/Necromancy: Wisdom
Enchantment: Charisma
Illusion: Dexterity
Transmutation: Intelligence
Universal: Your choice

Eldariel
2008-12-29, 08:34 AM
Again, providing an alternative interpretation:

Wizards are already MAD in 3.5 system, just like all other classes.

Apart from INT, they NEED for bare survival:

- high DEX; to get higher AC, better stealth skill base mods, shore up a weak reflex save AND, above all, to get the best possible initiative. They NEED to be faster than or at least as fast as the enemy archer, for instance.
- high CON; otherwise they get out by that one attack throughout a fight that may get through the magical defenses and/or friends protecting the wizard. 14 is the usual value. It also helps the vital concentration skill.

Apart from that, the only "dump" stat you can afford (like many other classes) is CHR. STR needs to be OK to carry around the spellbook plus other supplies without getting slower. And WIS needs to be OK to improve the will save and base spot/listen skill.

So, in an elite array, a distribution for the wizard may look like:
STR 10, DEX 13, CON 14, INT 15, WIS 12, CHR 8.
Or, as pointed out above, you could also have a DEX of 15 and INT of 13, since you could also get through a normal spell progression with an INT of 13. And DEX is vital for a wizard.

- Giacomo

Dex is only vital for Wizards on low levels. On higher levels, you can handle your defenses, initiative and all that through spells. And Str 8 is plenty to carry all a Wizard needs: Heward's Handy Haversack, clothes, spellbook and spell component pouch. Since your spellbook will be kept in an extradimensional space (for safety reasons), it won't actually count towards your weight limit.

No, Wizards are not MAD. The only class that requires less attributes than a Wizard is the Druid, and even Druids want 3 attributes on low levels (before level 6). Want a MAD class? Look at the Monk (you need Str for all the combat maneuvers, Wis and Dex for AC, Con for HP and Int for skills only being able to dump Cha and really needing 3 18s to match up to a simple Fighter) or the Paladin (Str, Con, Cha and 14 Wis, plus some Dex wouldn't hurt either; really want at least two 18s). Ranger is MAD too (Str for damage, Dex for combat style/AC/skills, Int for skillpoints, Con for HP, Wis for spells, Cha for Wild Empathy (negligble); really wants at least one 18, one 16, two 14s and 12).

Really, the only non-MAD core classes are the casters, the Fighter and the Barbarian (and even both of them would really like some Will-save buffs from Wis). And even out of the casters, the Cleric tends to like 4 ability scores (18, 14, 14, 14 for Wis, Str, Con, Cha respectively; non-warrior Cleric doesn't really need the last 14 for Str though and when pressed for points, Cha can be dumped and Turnings used to fuel divine feats).

Sir Giacomo
2008-12-29, 08:45 AM
Dex is only vital for Wizards on low levels. On higher levels, you can handle your defenses, initiative and all that through spells. And Str 8 is plenty to carry all a Wizard needs: Heward's Handy Haversack, clothes, spellbook and spell component pouch. Since your spellbook will be kept in an extradimensional space (for safety reasons), it won't actually count towards your weight limit.

No, Wizards are not MAD. The only class that requires less attributes than a Wizard is the Druid, and even Druids want 3 attributes on low levels (before level 6). Want a MAD class? Look at the Monk (you need Str for all the combat maneuvers, Wis and Dex for AC, Con for HP and Int for skills only being able to dump Cha and really needing 3 18s to match up to a simple Fighter) or the Paladin (Str, Con, Cha and 14 Wis, plus some Dex wouldn't hurt either; really want at least two 18s). Ranger is MAD too (Str for damage, Dex for combat style/AC/skills, Int for skillpoints, Con for HP, Wis for spells, Cha for Wild Empathy (negligble); really wants at least one 18, one 16, two 14s and 12).

Really, the only non-MAD core classes are the casters, the Fighter and the Barbarian (and even both of them would really like some Will-save buffs from Wis). And even out of the casters, the Cleric tends to like 4 ability scores (18, 14, 14, 14 for Wis, Str, Con, Cha respectively; non-warrior Cleric doesn't really need the last 14 for Str though and when pressed for points, Cha can be dumped and Turnings used to fuel divine feats).

In case you start with a high-level wizard, you may afford more "dump-stats". But what about the levels before to survive to the high levels? Before you get the handy haversack? (provided in a "no-magic-mart" campaign you ever get it). And what 24/7 spells are out there that boost initiative?

The monk is certainly not MAD (see my sig as to why). If at all, the fighter and barbarian can be considered more MAD, since they have more weak saves, the need for more feats minimum abilities (improved trip? or e.g. combat reflexes, in particular when enlarged a minimum of DEX 15). But of course, they can also be built around that.

And as you pointed out for the cleric, everyone certainly LIKES having high stats in many abilities.

- Giacomo

Telonius
2008-12-29, 09:33 AM
Okay, I'll make the argument shorter.
See below.
Team Monk (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704)
Team Wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19085)

/thread derail

Move along, nothing to see here.

Now about making the Wizard more MAD... any thoughts on my suggestion above?

Kesnit
2008-12-29, 10:26 AM
I like the idea of spells doing X amount of damage, though I vote lethal. Non-lethal is too easy to recover from, and probably won't affect any given combat. Lethal is slower to recover, or forces the party healer to get involved. Someone mentioned Xd4, where X is the spell level. It still allows WIZ to use their high-level spells, but they have to balance them against the damage to themselves. (Perhaps make buffing and summoning spells exempt from the damage.)

Mixing and matching spell school specialization with secondary casting stat will just get confusing. ("OK, I want to specialize in Conjuration. That means I need [flipping through book] INT and CON. But if I played a [insert race here], I would get a bonus to those stats.") INT and CHA would be enough. That still leaves some reliance on CON for HP to avoid death from their own spells.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-29, 10:44 AM
1) Giamoco, we are all going to ignore your ridiculous wrongness about Str not being a huge Dump stat, or needing "High" Dex or Con, or putting anything but your highest stat in Int.

2) The book weighs 5lbs. Seriously, you can carry it, and a couple extras, and anything else you'll have at that level from level 1. You just put it in the HH later.

3) In the no magic Mart campaign, the Wizard crafts a HH and gets whatever magic items he wants. Because casters can do that and Monks can't.

4) Spells that boost Init? Nerveskitter, Polymorph, Shapechange. Non spells include various Init boosting items and a Hummingbird Familiar. Also, being well protected creates situations in which the Wizard doesn't need to boost Init, because he won't be hurt by the enemy.

5) The 13 in Int only applies if Int doesn't effect number of spells per day or save DC, since it effects both, you put an 18 in it. Every time.

6) All that said, Wizards certainly need decent Dex at low levels, and outside of some specific builds that everyone hates more then regular Wizards, they need Con.

Why people think the solution to Wizards being too powerful is to make them bad wizards and more MAD then the Monk or Paladin I have no idea. If they did the math, they'd see that having your saves be tied to a different stat then bonus spells results in characters not having a chance against CR enemies, because those enemies have save bonuses assuming Wizards are pumping everything into one stat.

That's the reason Favored Souls absolutely never buff their save stats, because even if they try, no one is ever going to fail.

Splitting it up 3 ways is just so much worse, and I challenge anyone to play as such a character (Wizard or Cleric, not Druid) in a game, so that the monsters can walk all over you.

EDIT: Also, having spells do damage is silly, it just means that the 500 ways of gaining infinite healing are used slightly more often, and the Wizard has a lower HP pool, but not by much.

Flickerdart
2008-12-29, 11:24 AM
It's not a matter of knowing more of them... it's a matter of being able to manage energy well enough to prepare more of them at once. By forcing multiple stats, you make it more difficult (dare I say, expensive) to have all of them high at once. You want to Item, Wish and Tome your way to high stats relevant stats? Sure, you only need a 19 in one, but then you're going to want really high in two... which is better, from a balance standpoint, than needing only one.
You mean three, because you suggested three. I suggested two. And that isn't even the issue. A Wizard with INT the lowest of his mental stats is not a Wizard anymore. It destroys the archetype. And that's not what we're trying to do here.

Kesnit
2008-12-29, 11:42 AM
You mean three, because you suggested three. I suggested two. And that isn't even the issue. A Wizard with INT the lowest of his mental stats is not a Wizard anymore. It destroys the archetype. And that's not what we're trying to do here.

Why is it not a Wizard? Cast spells from a book? Yes. Prepares spells based on number of spell slots? Yes. Gains spells from leveling and scribing them? Yes. Casts arcane spells? Yes.

Eldariel
2008-12-29, 11:50 AM
The monk is certainly not MAD (see my sig as to why). If at all, the fighter and barbarian can be considered more MAD, since they have more weak saves, the need for more feats minimum abilities (improved trip? or e.g. combat reflexes, in particular when enlarged a minimum of DEX 15). But of course, they can also be built around that.

I've read your guide. None of what you say changes the fact that you need Str, Dex, Wis and Con. Also, your build needs Cha (for UMD) and Int (for skillpoints) too so it's even more MAD. Effectively, you've proven that Monks can be made even more MAD than they are out of the box. You have yet to prove that they could be made less MAD than that.

And yes, Fighter and Barbarian REALLY want a few higher stats (13s-14s will do), but Fighters can make do with JUST Str and Con thanks to Full-Plate Proficiency (although they do want Int for Improved Trip), and Barbarians only need Dex (they can actually get Improved Trip without having 13 Int so they're even better).

Sure, they like Wis for higher saves, but they don't NEED Wis like Monks do. You'll have slightly worse chance at resisting spells, but at least not having Wis doesn't cost you your AC. They use actual armor instead.


Stop arguing those points. You know just as well as I do that the books say one thing and nothing changes what's printed. Monks are printed to require multiple attributes to be competent.

Flickerdart
2008-12-29, 11:52 AM
Why is it not a Wizard? Cast spells from a book? Yes. Prepares spells based on number of spell slots? Yes. Gains spells from leveling and scribing them? Yes. Casts arcane spells? Yes.
But a Wizard that runs predominantly on WIS and CHA isn't a Wizard. It's a Favoured Soul.


Potentially insane idea ...

DC for spells are modified by:

Abjuration: Constitution
Conjuration/Evocation: Strength
Divination/Necromancy: Wisdom
Enchantment: Charisma
Illusion: Dexterity
Transmutation: Intelligence
Universal: Your choice
That's what they did for 3.0 Psionics and it was terrible. If you're planning to suggest skill checks to cast next, Truenaming, also a disaster.

Kesnit
2008-12-29, 12:07 PM
But a Wizard that runs predominantly on WIS and CHA isn't a Wizard. It's a Favoured Soul.

Except that FS's cast divine spells, don't use spell slots, and have a limited number of spells known.

Telonius
2008-12-29, 12:09 PM
But a Wizard that runs predominantly on WIS and CHA isn't a Wizard. It's a Favoured Soul.


That's what they did for 3.0 Psionics and it was terrible. If you're planning to suggest skill checks to cast next, Truenaming, also a disaster.

I normally don't play Psionics - what about it was that terrible? I'm honestly curious here. Was it the bookkeeping, balance issues?

And yes, skill check to cast would be horrendously obnoxious. The system for adding a spell to the book is clunky enough, I'd never suggest requiring a check to cast after all of that.

ShneekeyTheLost
2008-12-29, 12:22 PM
What would happen if I made wizards MAD like this;


Intelligence decides max spell level they can learn
Constitution decides how many bonus spells they get
and Charisma decides the spell DC


(I suppose you could exchange intelligence with wisdom for the divine casters, and make sorcerers abide to the same rules as the wizards, but anyway, that's of little consequence, so ignore it for now)

Also, I was thinking of making spellcasting cause the wizard damage equal to the spell's level multiplied with X. What would make a good multiplier? (Or do you think I should assign different multipliers depending on the spells?)

Ah, I realize that this might very well be a repeat of some old thread. My excuses, but I blame it on the search functions.

Here's what I did once:

Int is the strength of intellect, determines max spell level
Wis is the hardiness of intellect, it determines how many spells can be cast
Cha is the force of intellect, it determines DC's.

Sir Giacomo
2008-12-29, 02:27 PM
OK, Telonius provided some good advice. So after this post, I'll either think up houserule ways to make casters more MAD or not post at all.

In a last ditch attempt again...


1) Giamoco, we are all going to ignore your ridiculous wrongness about Str not being a huge Dump stat, or needing "High" Dex or Con, or putting anything but your highest stat in Int.

Let us see how ridiculously wrong I am...:smallwink:

2) The book weighs 5lbs. Seriously, you can carry it, and a couple extras, and anything else you'll have at that level from level 1. You just put it in the HH later.

Let us see how much a level 1 elf wizard with STR 8 (= "huge dump stat") will be able to carry, shall we?
The moment he goes beyond 26 pounds, he slows to 20ft.
The starting equipment listed in PHB p. 58 provides a good basis (luckily the outfit does not count).
4 Quarterstaff
4 Crossbow, light
1 Case with 10 crossbow bolts
2 Backpack with
4 full waterskin
1 one day's trail rations
5 bedroll
0.5 sack
- flint and steel
- 10 candles
0.6 map case/3 pages of parchment/ink/ink pen
2 Spell component pouch
3 Spellbook
27.1 TOTAL
Oopsey, you "STR dump stat" wizard just slowed down himself and everybody else of his group.
Of course, you may give up the quaterstaff (the only melee weapon you have here), but remember that your STR 8 wizard will be never able to pick up anything (no loot, no additional food for a longer expedition, zip). And, of course, most of the time his negligible-hp-familiar will just be hidden on his body, adding to the weight carried.
So- yes, he should get at least a STR of 10.

3) In the no magic Mart campaign, the Wizard crafts a HH and gets whatever magic items he wants. Because casters can do that and Monks can't.

Yep, in a no magic Mart campaign, the wizard can buy his spell components and craft magic items materials exactly where?:smallamused:

4) Spells that boost Init? Nerveskitter, Polymorph, Shapechange. Non spells include various Init boosting items and a Hummingbird Familiar. Also, being well protected creates situations in which the Wizard doesn't need to boost Init, because he won't be hurt by the enemy.

But...when will the wizard get those spells? At what level? How willl he survive until then?
And...when will the wizard cast those non-24/7-spells? AFTER initiative the high DEX is not really of great use to the wizard, since then he may already be dead. And a hummingbird familiar is so optional/campaign/DM-specific, it is hardly worth mentioning.

5) The 13 in Int only applies if Int doesn't effect number of spells per day or save DC, since it effects both, you put an 18 in it. Every time.

Yes, your slow-moving, initiative-losing wizard is free to do it. But this is what MAD is all about. Put everything into one stat and you get glaring weaknesses elswewhere. Ah....balance...

6) All that said, Wizards certainly need decent Dex at low levels, and outside of some specific builds that everyone hates more then regular Wizards, they need Con.

Oh, so you agree to MAD applicable to the wizard (note the use of your word "need")? Thanks a lot! That's exactly the scores I put in the first three slots with the elite array above.
But why then the objections above? Makes no sense to me.

Why people think the solution to Wizards being too powerful is to make them bad wizards and more MAD then the Monk or Paladin I have no idea. If they did the math, they'd see that having your saves be tied to a different stat then bonus spells results in characters not having a chance against CR enemies, because those enemies have save bonuses assuming Wizards are pumping everything into one stat.That's the reason Favored Souls absolutely never buff their save stats, because even if they try, no one is ever going to fail.Splitting it up 3 ways is just so much worse, and I challenge anyone to play as such a character (Wizard or Cleric, not Druid) in a game, so that the monsters can walk all over you.

These paragraphs I tried to read a couple of times and still do not understand them.
But to sum up: wizards are as MAD as paladins and monks, no houseruling needed. But if you wish to nerf wizards, you certainly can do it.

EDIT: Also, having spells do damage is silly, it just means that the 500 ways of gaining infinite healing are used slightly more often, and the Wizard has a lower HP pool, but not by much.

Check out Saph's highly entertaining reports on the Red Hand of Doom campaign currently being discussed in this same forum - it's full of proof that damage spells (in particular the AoE kind) are highly useful and certainly not "silly". I'd suggest not to get too stuck with the batmanesque style of wizard playing.

- Giacomo

Blood_Lord
2008-12-29, 03:43 PM
Let us see how much a level 1 elf wizard with STR 8 (= "huge dump stat") will be able to carry, shall we?
The moment he goes beyond 26 pounds, he slows to 20ft.
The starting equipment listed in PHB p. 58 provides a good basis (luckily the outfit does not count).
4 Quarterstaff
4 Crossbow, light
1 Case with 10 crossbow bolts
2 Backpack with
4 full waterskin
1 one day's trail rations
5 bedroll
0.5 sack
- flint and steel
- 10 candles
0.6 map case/3 pages of parchment/ink/ink pen
2 Spell component pouch
3 Spellbook
27.1 TOTAL
Oopsey, you "STR dump stat" wizard just slowed down himself and everybody else of his group.

Except of course that 90 percent of that is crap and most of the rest can be handed to the fighter.

Just off the top of my head, things not even needed by anyone: Map case/candles/quarterstaff. Hey look, already not encumbered.

Hand the bedroll/water and rations to the Pack Mule of the party.


Of course, you may give up the quaterstaff (the only melee weapon you have here), but remember that your STR 8 wizard will be never able to pick up anything (no loot, no additional food for a longer expedition, zip). And, of course, most of the time his negligible-hp-familiar will just be hidden on his body, adding to the weight carried.
So- yes, he should get at least a STR of 10.

No, he should be Str 6 and he should not carry **** he doesn't need, like weapons. And he should not pick things up because he's the wizard and he doesn't need to.


Yep, in a no magic Mart campaign, the wizard can buy his spell components and craft magic items materials exactly where?:smallamused:

He already has them, because none of them are magical. And are all easily obtainable.


But...when will the wizard get those spells? At what level? How willl he survive until then?
And...when will the wizard cast those non-24/7-spells? AFTER initiative the high DEX is not really of great use to the wizard, since then he may already be dead. And a hummingbird familiar is so optional/campaign/DM-specific, it is hardly worth mentioning.

He will cast those 8 hour spells before he starts doing something, he will finish doing something before they end. He will have the Init. He will have a higher Init then most other characters in the party.

At high level. Which is what I said. Wizards do not need Dex at a high level. All Wizard's need Con except ones that take a certain feat, but any level 9+ Wizard no longer needs Dex, and people do build characters that start at level 9 plus. Or that compensate for bull**** for 9 levels.


Yes, your slow-moving, initiative-losing wizard is free to do it. But this is what MAD is all about. Put everything into one stat and you get glaring weaknesses elswewhere. Ah....balance...

Yes, my fast moving Init winning Wizard is just fine.

Here's your problem. 32PB, the Wizard has an 18 Int, 14 Dex, 16 Con. He has a higher Con and higher Dex then any monk build I've ever seen. And he doesn't even care about them. He only has those stats because he's not allowed to put more points into Int.


Oh, so you agree to MAD applicable to the wizard (note the use of your word "need")? Thanks a lot! That's exactly the scores I put in the first three slots with the elite array above.
But why then the objections above? Makes no sense to me.

The objections above are to the need for Str (he doesn't) or Wis (again, not needed or wanted). Also towards your strange claim that having an 18 in the only stat you care about and just having a couple 14s in the stats that affect everyone equally is MAD. It's not. He is dependent on one attribute, and appreciates a moderate score, but is not terribly concerned with two others. Unless he's high level, in which case he ignores Dex, or if he's high level and took a feat, he only uses Int for anything at all that matters.


These paragraphs I tried to read a couple of times and still do not understand them.
But to sum up: wizards are as MAD as paladins and monks, no houseruling needed. But if you wish to nerf wizards, you certainly can do it.

No, Wizards are not as MAD as Paladins or Monks. Only 3 skills actually have any meaningful effect at all, compared to a Monk, who uses five (or six if retardedly attempts to UMD), or Paladins who use four, and accept that they will never have more then 1 skill point.

Wizards care about 1 stat, and will put points into two others, because they might as well. So what. Paladins need three 16s to even function. That's not even counting the other 14 and 12 they need.

Also, I quite clearly opposed the nerfing of Wizards, at least in the function of adding stat dependancies. I feel like most characters should probably only require 1 good score, and a couple average ones. Such as Monks using Wisdom for hit/damage/Str checks. Paladins using Cha for spells and getting a good Will save, ect.


Check out Saph's highly entertaining reports on the Red Hand of Doom campaign currently being discussed in this same forum - it's full of proof that damage spells (in particular the AoE kind) are highly useful and certainly not "silly". I'd suggest not to get too stuck with the batmanesque style of wizard playing.

If you read the actual thread instead of just using it to push your agenda, you might have realized that I was talking about having spells do 1 damage per spell level to Wizards. Since it functionally just reduces their HP pool by 2-3 times their highest spell level, but they heal it up right after the fight.

And if a Wizard is getting hit he's already in trouble.

As for Saph, I have read it, and it doesn't actually matter, because stupid people are a bad example. All it proves is that people who never prepare or cast Resist Energy when facing Dragons get owned by Dragons and Evocation spells that they don't try to stop the Wizard from casting.

A black tentacles or Solid Fog would rape the party just as hard. Because they aren't prepared for that either.

As for Batman style, I am of the Tippy school, which is very different, and primarily emphasizes specialization of tactics. As for fireball et/all, not really a concern, since I do actually prepare and cast Resist Energy, and by the time damage becomes meaningful over Resist Energy, have energy Immunity to all elements. (pisses off the Batman with their Acid Fogs too.)

Mark Hall
2008-12-29, 05:04 PM
Again, providing an alternative interpretation:

Wizards are already MAD in 3.5 system, just like all other classes.

That's a definition of MAD that makes everyone MAD. SAD is when you can fulfill you class role, ably, with only one stat.

If a wizard has 10s in everything, but a 20 intelligence, he's competent. Would he be better if he had more Dexterity or Constitution? Sure. But he's competent without it.

If a Druid has straight 10s, but an 18 Wisdom, he's fine.

A fighter, on the other hand, with an 18 Strength and 10s in everything else, DOES suffer. He can't swing his basic role as a meat shield without improbably great rolls on HP. He's incredibly limited in what feats he can take. While a fighter is limited in the first place, having only one stat night unto cripples him, putting him beneath his own CR even at early levels.

Temp.
2008-12-29, 05:25 PM
Before you get the handy haversack? (provided in a "no-magic-mart" campaign you ever get it)

...

- Giacomo

Heh.


[edit:]But at the same time, I do agree that MAD is a rubbish idea with regards to non-spellcasters. Everyone needs every stat. Monks and the like just need high ability scores more because their class abilities can't pull the character's weight alone.

In a game with Polymorph and Wild Shape, natural physical attributes are little more than decoration. And with all the forms of magical defense, direct combat abilities stop mattering.

Anyway, if you want a Wizard to have to balance casting more powerful spells, casting more spells and casting more reliable spells, this is could be a decent way to go. It would probably be more elegant to use this for a generic "Spellcaster" class, basing each of the abilities off a different mental attribute. As it is, it just feels kinda awkward.

TempusCCK
2008-12-29, 05:26 PM
I don't think one point per spell level is adequate honestly, especially not non-lethal damage, it needs to be more than that, you figure, a wizard with a 3 Constitution mod, over 20 levels, has an average of about 100 HP. If he metamagics the crap out of lower level spells, with metamagic reducers, he can effectively kill anything with with very low level spells, meaning absolutely nothing in terms of what he can and can't do.

I'm saying, 1D4 per level of the spell, nonlethal damage, Fort save for Half, and the save is set by the level of the spell.

Either way, this falls into the category of house rules, Wizard-lovers won't say or admit to anything that might hurt their babies and not many people are capable of actually devising appropriate encounters. (which means, for all intents and purposes, ignoring the obviously broken CR system.)

Charlie Kemek
2008-12-29, 05:41 PM
Potentially insane idea ...

DC for spells are modified by:

Abjuration: Constitution
Conjuration/Evocation: Strength
Divination/Necromancy: Wisdom
Enchantment: Charisma
Illusion: Dexterity
Transmutation: Intelligence
Universal: Your choice

I made a thread based on something like this, will post link later. It only used 3 abilities used for stuff.

Aquillion
2008-12-29, 05:52 PM
Let us see how much a level 1 elf wizard with STR 8 (= "huge dump stat") will be able to carry, shall we?
The moment he goes beyond 26 pounds, he slows to 20ft.
The starting equipment listed in PHB p. 58 provides a good basis (luckily the outfit does not count).
4 Quarterstaff
4 Crossbow, light
1 Case with 10 crossbow bolts
2 Backpack with
4 full waterskin
1 one day's trail rations
5 bedroll
0.5 sack
- flint and steel
- 10 candles
0.6 map case/3 pages of parchment/ink/ink pen
2 Spell component pouch
3 Spellbook
27.1 TOTAL
Let's see.

The quarterstaff is useless (it's worth holding a weapon so you don't count as unarmed for various reasons, but you can get a dagger weighing 1 and do just fine -- you're not going to attack with it anyway.) -3. Already unencumbered.

Bedroll (-5), rations (-1), waterskin (-4), and map case (-0.6) can all be carried by someone else, or by a floating disc, or your packmule or whatever else you want.

Oh! What do you know, that brings us down to 13.5, most of which is from our not-strictly-necessary crossbow and bolts. Well hey, it's a shame to waste the extra carrying capacity -- if the fighter has an extra Greatsword he can't carry 'cause of all that heavy armor he needs, the wizard can happily hold it for him. :smallbiggrin:


4) Spells that boost Init? Nerveskitter, Polymorph, Shapechange. Non spells include various Init boosting items and a Hummingbird Familiar. Also, being well protected creates situations in which the Wizard doesn't need to boost Init, because he won't be hurt by the enemy.

But...when will the wizard get those spells? At what level? How willl he survive until then?
And...when will the wizard cast those non-24/7-spells?
Nerveskitter is a 1st level spell. And it is an immediate action to cast; the spell's description specifically says you can cast it after rolling for initiative and still get the bonus, even while flatfooted.

Hey, you asked.

Sir Giacomo
2008-12-29, 06:42 PM
Can't resist...
...so you say a wizard has no MAD since someone else can easily carry stuff for him?:smallsigh:
Well, as soon as we include other party members into the picture, truly no-one has any ability dependency, since others can jump in for any weaknesses, including a too low DEX for that initiative check. Which is what group play is about btw
"Hey, fighter, got too low spot check due to low WIS? No problem, rogue jumps in for you..".:smallamused:

Although yes, the (optional, non-core) nerveskitter is one way around too low DEX for initiative. Better prepare it several times, though, for the many encounters that can come up during the day (exceeding your capacity of 1st level spells per day at low levels, and blocking a large chunk of the 1st level area afterwards). And also remember that a 1st-level arcane spell is easily available to more in the game, quickly resulting in many foes also having that extra +5 boost, meaning again DEX becomes important in the "initiative arms race".

As for a wizard being "competent" at what he does with only INT 20 and everything else low, well - it's the same for all classes, even the monk! (The monk can simply have STR 20 and work out just fine).
Unfortunately, though, the wizard is not "competent" at doing his spell stuff if he has a low CON and DEX and thus has lower overall chances of survival (like others who just focus on one stat at the expense of others).

- Giacomo

Eldariel
2008-12-29, 06:49 PM
The job of frontliners is to take hits and to attack. They can't do both competently without high Str and Con. Also, they need a high tertiary to properly fulfill their function of protecting the weaker party members (otherwise they don't qualify for the given feats). Also, characters without full-plate proficiency who still are frontliners (such as Monk) need more high stats to get their AC up to the par for their frontliner task. That's already 4 stats you need to fulfill your role competently. Your build of Monk also adds skills to that, which just happens to require a fifth stat.

Wizard isn't frontliner; he isn't expected to be there taking hits for the others. As for protecting the party members, Wizard does that with his spells (derived from his Int). Wizard also protects himself with spells given fews levels (derived from his Int) and attacks with his spells (derived from his Int), and even bypasses many skill checks with his spells (derived from his Int). Do you see where this goes? Wizard does everything with his casting stat (and same really applies to the other casters. Melee characters, however, can't protect themselves with Str nor attack with Dex nor restrict opponent's options with Con. No, they need the whole trifecta to do all the things casters do with one stat (spellcasting stat) and the ability derived off it (their spells).

xanaphia
2008-12-29, 07:36 PM
To Giacomo:

Every character needs to be able to defend and attack.

Wizard defends with spells, and attacks with spells. Both are off Int.

Fighter defends with Dex and Con, attacks with Str or Dex. To get good feats, also needs Int.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-29, 08:14 PM
Can't resist...
...so you say a wizard has no MAD since someone else can easily carry stuff for him?:smallsigh:
Well, as soon as we include other party members into the picture, truly no-one has any ability dependency, since others can jump in for any weaknesses, including a too low DEX for that initiative check. Which is what group play is about btw
"Hey, fighter, got too low spot check due to low WIS? No problem, rogue jumps in for you..".:smallamused:

Is it part of the Wizards job to carry crap? No. If it was, someone might actually memorize tenser's floating disk. The Wizard does his job without Str. The Monk doesn't do his job without a stat other then Cha.


Although yes, the (optional, non-core) nerveskitter is one way around too low DEX for initiative. Better prepare it several times, though, for the many encounters that can come up during the day (exceeding your capacity of 1st level spells per day at low levels, and blocking a large chunk of the 1st level area afterwards). And also remember that a 1st-level arcane spell is easily available to more in the game, quickly resulting in many foes also having that extra +5 boost, meaning again DEX becomes important in the "initiative arms race".

Your obsession with Core leads you to mistakenly believe that everyone has access to Nerveskitter. However, no one but Wizards, Sorcerers, and Factotums in all of D&D can use this spell.

Arcane_Snowman
2008-12-29, 08:29 PM
As for a wizard being "competent" at what he does with only INT 20 and everything else low, well - it's the same for all classes, even the monk! (The monk can simply have STR 20 and work out just fine).
Okay, so a 1st level Monk with the following stats: 20 str, 10 dex, 10 con, 10 int, 10 wis, 10 cha works?
You have 10 AC, +5 to hit, 8hp, 4 (5 with human) skill points, Improved Grapple (at this stage Stunning Fists benefits you as much as a glass shards in your underwear) Flurry of Blows (which truly does Blow) and good saves. You're meant to be in the front line, hitting stuff, for 1d6+5 damage (2d6+10 with Flurry). So what are you going to do? I'm pretty sure that most things will drop you quicker than a hot pan. Or is there some kind of Monk only feat that equals auto win?

Meanwhile the Wizard with 20 int and 10 in the rest, has 10 AC as well (boostable to 18 with Mage Armor and Shield, for short periods of time, but you'll still have more AC) they have resistance a couple of times per day, to make the saves somewhat close to equal to the monks (+1/+1/+3) 4hp and 7 skill points (8 as human). In addition they have spells like Color Spray and Sleep which are capable of ending the encounter before it actually begins.

Aquillion
2008-12-29, 11:11 PM
Can't resist...
...so you say a wizard has no MAD since someone else can easily carry stuff for him?:smallsigh:
Well, as soon as we include other party members into the picture, truly no-one has any ability dependency, since others can jump in for any weaknesses, including a too low DEX for that initiative check. Which is what group play is about btw
"Hey, fighter, got too low spot check due to low WIS? No problem, rogue jumps in for you..".:smallamused:This is sadly untrue. There are some things other people can cover for you, and some things they can't (not without defeating the whole purpose of your character, at least.) The most important question is whether they can cover it without taking an action, or under non-combat circumstances where taking an action doesn't matter -- fighters can rely on the rogue's spot check (although spot checks are something it doesn't hurt to be good at yourself, since everyone makes them automatically... search is a better example.) The wizard can rely on someone else to carry things.

But the Paladin can't rely on someone else's Strength, Constitution, or Dexterity in combat, or someone else's Charisma for their class features, or someone else's Wisdom for casting. Therefore the Paladin is MAD -- they have to depend on all those abilities to a certain extent. They can dump Dexterity, possibly, but if they start to dump any of the others they will seriously suffer in combat -- they need good scores in just about all of those, simply to use their class features effectively and contribute to the group. While a wizard benefits from a decent Con and Dex, the only score they strictly need to contribute is Int -- a wizard with Int 18 and 8 in every other stat could still be useful. Hence, wizards are SAD.

A wizard can absolutely rely on someone else's carrying capacity, and that sort of thing is, indeed, what the game is all about. You seem to be under a misconception about 'Batman' wizards -- they are not intended to do everything themselves. They are often capable of it at higher levels, but it is actually non-optimal. A Batman wizard's optimal role is to make the entire party more awesome -- Slow would be a much less useful spell if you didn't have an entire party beating up the monster while you make it useless, and Haste would be completely pointless with nobody to cast it on. Casting Improved Invisibility or Polymorph on yourself is nice, but casting it on the rogue is often better. And so on.

Clerics and druids are really much more suited for doing everything themselves, if that's what you go for. Wizards work best by cooperating with a party. The overpowering thing about wizards is that, because they have such a wide variety of high-impact options compared to other classes that generally have low-impact options, encounters can easily (in a group with a poor dynamic) come down to the wizards basically deciding how everything goes while the rest of the party mechanically does the one or two things they're good at, taking the obvious actions in the situations that the Wizard, by and large, gets to shape. It's not that well-made fighters are useless; it's that (short of throwing down their sword and refusing to fight) it often ends up feeling like they're the pawn and the wizard is the Chessmaster.

TempusCCK
2008-12-29, 11:19 PM
Indeed, making them more MAD would certainly help. Also taking on some non-lethal damage or maybe some INT damage from casting would go a hella long way to help keeping them from overshadowing the rest of the party.

As for your logic, Giacomo, it's fundamentally flawed, extra carrying capacity is absolutely passive, whereas, as others have said, a Wizard can do everything with just high INT.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-29, 11:51 PM
Indeed, making them more MAD would certainly help. Also taking on some non-lethal damage or maybe some INT damage from casting would go a hella long way to help keeping them from overshadowing the rest of the party.

RAWR! Play that character. Play it just once. I challenge you to do anything even remotely worthwhile ever.

You seriously have DC 2 DC 13 spells at level freaking 1. You suck. And now you are taking Int damage?

Fix spells. Fix spells. Do not arbitrarily subtract 5-10 from saving throw DCs of humanoid casters only and give them fewer spells.

They already have a good percentage of saves being made/failed. They already have a good number of spells per day. What they don't have is spells that allow other people to compete.

Making Wizards incapable of casting spells is not a solution.

If a guy with one arm has an uzi, and you have a knife, the way to balance you two is not to cut off the other arm.

TempusCCK
2008-12-30, 12:35 AM
the problem with Wizards is that the balancing mechanic for them was supposed to be that they cannot do what they do all day long, my ideas fix this.
This also models the idea that wizards feel fatigued after casting a ton of spells all day long.

I'm sorry that you like overpowered wizards, but temporary INT damage or the taking non-lethal damage, with the proper balances, would bring them down to a reasonable level.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-30, 12:58 AM
the problem with Wizards is that the balancing mechanic for them was supposed to be that they cannot do what they do all day long, my ideas fix this.
This also models the idea that wizards feel fatigued after casting a ton of spells all day long.

I'm sorry that you like overpowered wizards, but temporary INT damage or the taking non-lethal damage, with the proper balances, would bring them down to a reasonable level.

The problem with your idea is that nonlethal damage doesn't prevent them from doing it all day long, and Int damage makes them worse at their job, not prevents them from doing it. It makes them cast spells that suck. It makes the glitterdust do nothing instead of being too powerful. This is not better.

Wizards are not balanced based on winning two encounters and then sitting in a corner and crying for the next to. That's a bad idea.

Your ideas show a fundamental inability to understand how D&D works. You force the Wizard to buy a wand of Lesser Restoration, because otherwise he ceases to be a character.

All your ideas actually do nothing to make the Wizard cast fewer spells, but a lot to make the spells he does cast less effective.

Instead of unconscionably lying, why not deal with my actual statement, which is that the spells need nerfing not the abilities. Instead of lying about me wanting Wizards to be overpowered.

Why not reduce him to a d1 HD and take away Con too? He'll cast a lot fewer spells.

Why not declare that save DCs are equal to 0+spell level. His spells will never do anything just like under your plan. Change what he does, don't make him suck at doing it.

Stop chopping the guys other arm of and give him a pistol or a knife.

Sir Giacomo
2008-12-30, 06:19 AM
Once more my friends, into the breach, once more...

@xanaphia:
a wizard hoping for SAD will have lower AC, lower hp and thus get killed for more often. Before level 7, there is no way that he can consistently protect himself all the time and mage armour only goes so far.
Thus he is not doing what he is supposed to do: support the party with spells (since being dead or incapacited prevents doing that).
Actually what this tactics leads to (and why it is so often perceived it works) is that many DMs will not want to kill the wizard all the time and thus be more lenient.
You should really build your wizards, though, as if you yourself would be going on adventures - you'll quickly see how big of an advantage it is not to just focus on INT, believe me.

@Blood_Lord
You make it sound as if the group should help the wizard ("carry crap") but seem hesitant to think the same is possible the other way round. Which would put an end to the MAD perception for some classes. Take for instance a monk having low DEX and high STR. The monk could carry the stuff for the wizard, covering his weak stat, and the wizard could provide the monk with a mage armour (plus nerveskitter you brought up). There, both MAD issues covered through group play, as intended by the game. What is the problem about that?
And on that nerveskitter thing: yes, only sorcerers/wizards (and also monsters like dragons) and some other optional classes can cast it, but they can also cast it for others. It will not always come up, but it is as common since it is a 1st level spell as, say, mage armour.

@Arcane_Snowman
The wizard you described can for SHORT TIME periods, IN CASE HE STILL HAS IT PREPARED (unlikely at low levels), IN CASE HE WINS INITIATIVE protect himself in the way you described. And even then he's much worse off than having high DEX and CON, working just fine 24/7. (OK, DEX bonus is lost when you lose initiative/get surprised, but it adds to your initiative roll

@Acquillon
You brought up some good points, I think.
However, it only pertains to the STR 10 issue (instead of STR 8 or 6), not to the usefulness of the wizard shoring up his survival chance and defenses with high CON and DEX.
The wizard cannot just hope that someone "carries" his defenses for him. And handing out his equipment to the frontline fighter is not always such a good idea (for instance, when he wants to use his crossbow).



A wizard can absolutely rely on someone else's carrying capacity, and that sort of thing is, indeed, what the game is all about. You seem to be under a misconception about 'Batman' wizards -- they are not intended to do everything themselves. They are often capable of it at higher levels, but it is actually non-optimal. A Batman wizard's optimal role is to make the entire party more awesome -- Slow would be a much less useful spell if you didn't have an entire party beating up the monster while you make it useless, and Haste would be completely pointless with nobody to cast it on. Casting Improved Invisibility or Polymorph on yourself is nice, but casting it on the rogue is often better. And so on.

The point is that ma ny posters believe and suggest to me that the batman wizard CAN do everything by himself since he only needs one high stat and are just fine. You at least are convinced that he cannot do everything himself (as many other classes), but still make a distinction when it comes to MAD which I think is wrong.


Clerics and druids are really much more suited for doing everything themselves, if that's what you go for. Wizards work best by cooperating with a party. The overpowering thing about wizards is that, because they have such a wide variety of high-impact options compared to other classes that generally have low-impact options, encounters can easily (in a group with a poor dynamic) come down to the wizards basically deciding how everything goes while the rest of the party mechanically does the one or two things they're good at, taking the obvious actions in the situations that the Wizard, by and large, gets to shape. It's not that well-made fighters are useless; it's that (short of throwing down their sword and refusing to fight) it often ends up feeling like they're the pawn and the wizard is the Chessmaster.

So you are basically saying that a wizard can affort more to put everything into a single stat, whereas the fighter not. Why? If both greatly profit from working together, both should have the same MAD or SAD issues. There is nothing preventing the fighter from focusing entirely on STR and hoping the wizard is there to counterspell any enemy will save attacks, or act faster to take out the enemy spellcaster, or buff him to cover his weaknesses - while the fighter covers the wizards weaknesses stemming from putting everything into INT (carrying stuff for him, shielding him, cutting down enemy ranged attackers etc).

I see no differences.

- Giacomo

Arcane_Snowman
2008-12-30, 06:41 AM
@Arcane_Snowman
The wizard you described can for SHORT TIME periods, IN CASE HE STILL HAS IT PREPARED (unlikely at low levels), IN CASE HE WINS INITIATIVE protect himself in the way you described. And even then he's much worse off than having high DEX and CON, working just fine 24/7. (OK, DEX bonus is lost when you lose initiative/get surprised, but it adds to your initiative roll Then enlighten me, what does your monk do?

Eldariel
2008-12-30, 07:22 AM
So you are basically saying that a wizard can affort more to put everything into a single stat, whereas the fighter not.

They should, but that's just the problem, that's not the case. Once again, in addition to what everyone else said, Wizards aren't frontliners so they're harder to target than the Fighters. Wizards therefore have less need for AC. Fighter, on the other hand, needs the AC, because their place is in the front if they want to do anything. Same with Monk. In the front, you need HP more. The Wizard can simply rely on not being targeted for the first levels, while the Fighter...well, Fighter's role is making sure that he gets targeted. That means that not only does he need the offense to make targeting him worthwhile, he also needs the defense to live to tell the tale. Same applies to all frontliners. Wizard can take out most encounters, but he can't take the hits nor deal the damage for your frontliners. The frontliners need to do that themselves, for which they need stats the Wizard really doesn't.

And frankly, a Monk can't expect for the Mage Armor on low levels simply because that leads to the Wizard running out of spells one encounter earlier. On level 1, Wizard can't even afford Mage Armor on himself; he needs all his slots for offense to cast even one spell every encounter. Even if the Wizard were able to cast Mage Armor on the Monk though, Dex 14, Wis 14 Monk would have AC 18. Just a Dex 12 Full-Plate Fighter has AC 19 without bumming a spell from the Wizard's small pool (and thus leaving yet another would-have-ended-with-a-spell encounter to kick the Monk's ass), and he's going to have higher Str and Con than the Monk due to lower requirements in the base scores. Also, improving AC will be hard for the Monk since he can't wear armor and thus can't apply armor enhancements to it, and Mage Armor makes cheap Bracers useless so he needs to buy Deflection- and NA-bonuses, which aren't exactly cheap, which leaves him further behind.

The Fighter who focuses on Str needs not worry about the damn spells (also, the Wizard would be better off trying to disable the opposing casters than to counterspell; those spells could also catch other opponents and actually do stuff - counterspelling is unreliable and mostly a trap), he also needs to worry about melee and he dies to 20 (since y'know, he put no points in Con). And you need to remember that the Wizard would be making himself useless by counterspelling. The Fighter needs no actions to carry the Wizard's stuff. Basically, the Fighter gives nothing away by making the Wizard better, but the Wizard makes the whole party worse by trying to help the Fighter/Monk (and the only way he can really properly protect them is to one-shot every encounter before opponents start rolling attacks, something you just can't always do).

Sir Giacomo
2008-12-30, 10:06 AM
Then enlighten me, what does your monk do?

A STR focused monk just takes the improved grapple bonus feat and grapples in the low levels. There is hardly any creature/opponent of his CR to best him at this. You could check my sig as to what grapple can do. Grappling basically is attack and defend all in one - AC as well as superior enemy feats/weapons become unimportant vs the enemy you grapple (leave the many weak creatures to the battlefield controlling fighter).

This way, just like the INT 20 wizard, the STR 20 monk has of course quite a lot of weaknesses - but this is the consequence of specialising so much.

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2008-12-30, 10:14 AM
They should, but that's just the problem, that's not the case. Once again, in addition to what everyone else said, Wizards aren't frontliners so they're harder to target than the Fighters. Wizards therefore have less need for AC. Fighter, on the other hand, needs the AC, because their place is in the front if they want to do anything. Same with Monk. In the front, you need HP more. The Wizard can simply rely on not being targeted for the first levels, while the Fighter...well, Fighter's role is making sure that he gets targeted. That means that not only does he need the offense to make targeting him worthwhile, he also needs the defense to live to tell the tale. Same applies to all frontliners. Wizard can take out most encounters, but he can't take the hits nor deal the damage for your frontliners. The frontliners need to do that themselves, for which they need stats the Wizard really doesn't.

Hmmm. There are actually quite some good points about this. In the low levels, wizards are awfully weak in combat, so might lose not much by trying to push up their survivability. Meanwhile, all characters who will fight often enough will need good stats in all the physical abilities, and maybe a good one in either INT or WIS.
Will think on this.


And frankly, a Monk can't expect for the Mage Armor on low levels simply because that leads to the Wizard running out of spells one encounter earlier. On level 1, Wizard can't even afford Mage Armor on himself; he needs all his slots for offense to cast even one spell every encounter. Even if the Wizard were able to cast Mage Armor on the Monk though, Dex 14, Wis 14 Monk would have AC 18. Just a Dex 12 Full-Plate Fighter has AC 19 without bumming a spell from the Wizard's small pool (and thus leaving yet another would-have-ended-with-a-spell encounter to kick the Monk's ass), and he's going to have higher Str and Con than the Monk due to lower requirements in the base scores. Also, improving AC will be hard for the Monk since he can't wear armor and thus can't apply armor enhancements to it, and Mage Armor makes cheap Bracers useless so he needs to buy Deflection- and NA-bonuses, which aren't exactly cheap, which leaves him further behind.


Basically all of what you say amounts to that wizards are very vulnerable at low levels at eat up way more party resources. Worse still, wizards RELY on the other characters to more evenly spread their stats on the abilities so as not to have too many weakness and being able to protect and do stuff for the wizard who then is is the true specialist of the group. Like the genius scentist the sci-fi adventuring group brings along who is protected all the time and who is then there at the decisive moments to do his stuff.
Hmmm. Will also think on that. Oddly enough, the result WOULD be that the wizard is SAD, more than others, although it would just mean the opposite of what a lot of posters think: the wizard is SAD because he is so weak at low levels, whereas the other classes make use of spreading their abilities much more, since they have a default higher rate of surivivability...


The Fighter who focuses on Str needs not worry about the damn spells (also, the Wizard would be better off trying to disable the opposing casters than to counterspell; those spells could also catch other opponents and actually do stuff - counterspelling is unreliable and mostly a trap), he also needs to worry about melee and he dies to 20 (since y'know, he put no points in Con). And you need to remember that the Wizard would be making himself useless by counterspelling. The Fighter needs no actions to carry the Wizard's stuff. Basically, the Fighter gives nothing away by making the Wizard better, but the Wizard makes the whole party worse by trying to help the Fighter/Monk (and the only way he can really properly protect them is to one-shot every encounter before opponents start rolling attacks, something you just can't always do).

Ah - sorry about that counterspelling thing. A bad example. Best would be to ready an action to magic missile/color spray/whatever the enemy ranged attacker/spellcaster the moment that caster is trying to do something against the fighter.
And I do not think that buffing the fighter or monk at low levels would make the whole party worse. Think about a chain-tripping fighter with enlarge, or a monk with enlarge (increasing the damage output and grapple chances). At low levels, this certainly beats a magic missile 1d4+1 or even the enchantment save-or-dies.

- Giacomo

Eldariel
2008-12-30, 10:20 AM
Yes, on low levels, Wizard is pretty much a glass cannon. He packs the most offensive punch (with a smart choice of spells), but is also the weakest party member (especially due to the d4 hit die). Once he gains a bit level and can afford to use his spells for defenses (especially Mirror Image, Displacement and the like), this changes, but on levels 1-5, a Wizard pretty much needs to walk around with a ****ing Tower Shield used for total cover if he wants real protection (drop for casting, of course). And it's a pretty ridiculous, if efficient, character concept. Heavy load, but that hardly matters when you pretty much cannot be affected by anything.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-30, 10:45 AM
You make it sound as if the group should help the wizard ("carry crap") but seem hesitant to think the same is possible the other way round. Which would put an end to the MAD perception for some classes. Take for instance a monk having low DEX and high STR. The monk could carry the stuff for the wizard, covering his weak stat, and the wizard could provide the monk with a mage armour (plus nerveskitter you brought up). There, both MAD issues covered through group play, as intended by the game. What is the problem about that?
And on that nerveskitter thing: yes, only sorcerers/wizards (and also monsters like dragons) and some other optional classes can cast it, but they can also cast it for others. It will not always come up, but it is as common since it is a 1st level spell as, say, mage armour.

A party should help each other out. But not by wasting actions and resources. Mage armor is a waste. The Wizard can't cast Nevreskitter for the Monk, and the Monk still needs AC beyond what Mage Armor even offers.

The Monk should just not be a Monk, because Monks are not a useful part of a cooperative team. The Wizard can help the Fighter/Druid/Cleric by casting Color Spray or Glitterdust, not by wasting spells for no reason on crappy things.

Also, a Wizard that puts all his points in Int doesn't have a lower AC or HP, because he automatically gets a 14 Dex and Con anyway.

Aquillion
2008-12-30, 09:56 PM
So you are basically saying that a wizard can affort more to put everything into a single stat, whereas the fighter not. Why? If both greatly profit from working together, both should have the same MAD or SAD issues. There is nothing preventing the fighter from focusing entirely on STR and hoping the wizard is there to counterspell any enemy will save attacks, or act faster to take out the enemy spellcaster, or buff him to cover his weaknesses - while the fighter covers the wizards weaknesses stemming from putting everything into INT (carrying stuff for him, shielding him, cutting down enemy ranged attackers etc).Truthfully, fighters are not overwhelmingly MAD (not in the way that, say, Paladins are). They can safely dump Int and Charisma unless they've got a specific concept that requires them. They overwhelmingly need Strength, have a moderate need for Constitution (verses other classes -- on one hand they're likely to take a lot of damage, but on the other, they already have high HD and fort saves), need decent Dex for initiative and to avoid an AC penalty, and need decent Wisdom for reasons I'll get into in a moment. But only one stat is absolutely, inescapably vital to them.

(Note also that fighters tend to get a lot more MAD as soon as you start looking at feats, although that varies depending on the build. Obviously any build that uses Combat Reflexes or Improved Grapple will need Dex, any build that wants Improved Trip needs at least 13 Int, and so on. Since the whole point of the fighter is feats, this issue is non-trivial. Nobody can do anything realistic to help you satisfy feat prerequisites.)

Nonetheless. Dumping wisdom and relying on the wizard to spend all his actions countering any spell that could possibly force a will save is not comparable to having someone carry your bedroll. Most high-strength characters have plenty of free carrying space; carrying your bedroll costs them nothing.

Depending on the wizard to counterspell anything that could force you to make a will save, on the other hand, is requiring a patently absurd commitment from another player (you are quite literally expecting them to spend every single action for you specifically -- and non-optimally, since counterspelling is not a particularly good strategy.) Counterspelling requires both actions and valuable spell slots. It doesn't always work. And on top of that, there are some effects that force saves which are not spells and cannot be countered.

Relying on buffs is a bit less absurd (since at least you aren't demanding the wizard spend every single action in combat mechanically preparing counterspells to protect your poorly-statted ass), but still, there aren't enough good, long-term buffs out there to cover for having a really awful will save. And, once again -- unlike having someone carry your bedroll, which is trivial enough to go without mention in most parties -- you are relying on someone else to spend valuable, limited slots to prepare the spells you need, then spend time casting them on you exactly when you need them.

Furthermore, the spells you are depending on here are weak and not a good use of your wizard's time or effort. The extra spells and DC a wizard gets from one more point of int are mind-bogglingly more powerful than anything a bit of carrying capacity can do; conversely, the tiny bonus to damage you get from an extra point of strength is meaningless compared to the massive impact the wizard can have on the battle if they cast Glitterdust or whatever instead of wasting time counterspelling because you wanted to stupidly dump Wis.

On top of this, will saves are generally the most catastrophic for the rest of your party when you fail them, not just for you. A fighter who dumps wisdom is putting his entire party at risk.

able
2009-01-01, 09:06 AM
When I first read the title I thought about maybe having magic making wizards actually go mad. Maybe something along the lines of a DC10 + spell level will save (without resistance bonuses) or take wisdom damage depending on spell level (D2 for up to lvl 2, D4 for 3/4, D6 for 4/5...). If this reduces your wisdom below 5 then roll a D4 and take the following

1- Panic, runs from everyone including party members
2- Manic, Blasts everyone with most powerful spells for number of rounds equal to caster level. immunity to wisdom drain/damage past 1 and at end wisdom goes to 0. Similar to frenzied
3- Confused,
4- Paralyzed

All these effects last until you recover at least 1 point of wisdom. Any thoughts?

Sir Giacomo
2009-01-01, 03:33 PM
A party should help each other out. But not by wasting actions and resources. Mage armor is a waste.

It is not. It is cast on the person who may be more often exposed to enemy melee attacks. This is not "a waste" (in particular not when said monk replaces the mage armour cast with a cheap pearl of power later).

The Wizard can't cast Nevreskitter for the Monk,

but he can...

and the Monk still needs AC beyond what Mage Armor even offers.

Luckily the monk gets an AC bonus as a class ability. Plus, through his good movement (+4 cover) and tumble skill (+3 defensively), has even more methods to pump up his AC.

The Monk should just not be a Monk, because Monks are not a useful part of a cooperative team.

But they are. You can check my sig as to what monks can do to contribute in the group (including the stuff only they can do). For instance, they increase the number of sneak attacks, are a great way to tackle enemy ranged fighters (archers and spellcasters) and can second as a scout for the group.

The Wizard can help the Fighter/Druid/Cleric by casting Color Spray or Glitterdust, not by wasting spells for no reason on crappy things.

He can. But there is a risk involved, since the enemy 1) has to fail the save, 2) has to be in range for the spell to work at all, 3) has to be a legal target (impossible with total concealment, for instance). All kinds of things can go wrong with an attacking spell that is used up in an instant and can put the wizard at significant risk at low levels in case it does not work.
On the contrary long-lasting buffs? Are up all the time until dispelled (quite unlikely at lower levels) and work 100%. THAT is definitely helping the party, and thus not a "crappy thing". There are times for a well-timed color spray, but at low levels, buffing the group batman-style offers the best bang for the buck for a wizard.

Also, a Wizard that puts all his points in Int doesn't have a lower AC or HP, because he automatically gets a 14 Dex and Con anyway.

? How? With starting DEX and CON of 8 (the equivalent of "puts all his points in Int"), not even some minutes/level 2nd level buff spells will help here (and cost time to get up). This is the oddest denial so far that a wizard has no MAD since he gets higher stats when needed "automatically".

- Giacomo

Blood_Lord
2009-01-01, 06:42 PM
It is not. It is cast on the person who may be more often exposed to enemy melee attacks. This is not "a waste" (in particular not when said monk replaces the mage armour cast with a cheap pearl of power later).

It's a first level spell cast for 4 AC, it's not worth it at all, no matter who it's cast on.


but he can...

If by can you mean in the same sense that he can cast fireball on himself and no enemies, yes. But because he's not an idiot, he will use his single immediate action on someone with a higher base Init, and the person with the best contribution. This will either be the Rogue, or the Wizard.


Luckily the monk gets an AC bonus as a class ability. Plus, through his good movement (+4 cover) and tumble skill (+3 defensively), has even more methods to pump up his AC.

The Monks class bonus is generally less then even the basic armor, he has no cover because you can't have cover if you are ever going to fight in melee, and he does not have "even more" methods of pumping AC. He has one additional way, more then anyone else, and his limit on that is still only a bit more then he loses from others.

Also he can't fight defensively because doing to is stupid for Tank syndrome reasons and because it doesn't benefit him enough to be worth it.

But all that aside, AC isn't even useful enough to be a real issue, because the difference is a Monk with 18 Dex and 18 Wis who dies in two rounds, and a Monk with 14 Dex and 12 Wis who dies in one.


But they are. You can check my sig as to what monks can do to contribute in the group (including the stuff only they can do). For instance, they increase the number of sneak attacks, are a great way to tackle enemy ranged fighters (archers and spellcasters) and can second as a scout for the group.

We've all seen your sig. You are just wrong.

First of all monks can't increase number of sneak attacks, tackle enemy ranged fighters, or act as a secondary scout.

Secondly, none of those rolls are even remotely specific to the Monk, as all of them can be done better by an Archer Ranger. Not to mention casters or rogues.


He can. But there is a risk involved, since the enemy 1) has to fail the save, 2) has to be in range for the spell to work at all, 3) has to be a legal target (impossible with total concealment, for instance). All kinds of things can go wrong with an attacking spell that is used up in an instant and can put the wizard at significant risk at low levels in case it does not work.
On the contrary long-lasting buffs? Are up all the time until dispelled (quite unlikely at lower levels) and work 100%. THAT is definitely helping the party, and thus not a "crappy thing". There are times for a well-timed color spray, but at low levels, buffing the group batman-style offers the best bang for the buck for a wizard.

1) The risk is minimal compared to the gain. The risk of not casting Glitterdust and letting the Ogre beat the Fighter to death with ease is greater.

2) Stop harping your favorite arguments, no one cares. We are bored of your constant false spurious statements, and your inability to admit wrong even about the most obvious of things.

3) Mage armor isn't a long lasting buff until after it stops being worth it. And is therefore never worth it. At low levels, it is a waste of a spell slot, at high levels, it's largely irrelevant given the multiple ways to get a +4 or more Armor bonus to AC.

4) Stop talking about Batman, you don't even know what it is. And it sure as hell doesn't involve casting Mage armor on the Monk.


? How? With starting DEX and CON of 8 (the equivalent of "puts all his points in Int"), not even some minutes/level 2nd level buff spells will help here (and cost time to get up). This is the oddest denial so far that a wizard has no MAD since he gets higher stats when needed "automatically".

I know you don't actually know any of the rules to D&D, and that you regularly say incredibly stupid things to mis-portray your opponents instead of having an actual argument. None the less, I find the fact of the Wizards 14 Dex and Con after maxing Int so incredibly obvious I will not even correct your purposeful stupidity, because no one in the entire world is stupid enough to fall for it.

TengYt
2009-01-01, 07:02 PM
I think we've found the perfect way to nerf Wizards. Make them cast all useful spells to make the party Monk slightly less crappy, and use the rest to counter-spell anything that tries to hit the Monk. In exchange, the Monk will carry the Wizard's bedroll. Perfect!