PDA

View Full Version : Logic Ninja's Famous Guide, what do you think?



EvilElitest
2007-04-14, 10:41 PM
Now before posting we should read this
Logic's Ninja's Guide (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18500)
I want to know what you guys thing about it.
I don't mean so much crunch as what do you think of the Flavor of that kind of optimizing of a wizard play. What do you think of taht style of play? Do you find the guide useful, or vauge. Do you feel it is a very welll made way to play a wizard or do you feel it ruins the fun of the play.
Do you feel taht it is the best way to play and why. Back up your points
Do you feel it destroys the flavor of the game and why.
And please, no flaming or arguing. This is just about Flavor of play, everybody has their own way of doing things
from,
EE

Matthew
2007-04-14, 10:45 PM
This sounds like a dangerous thread. I found it informative, but boring. I take a strong interest in D&D Magic, but it was pretty much just a compilation of stuff I had heard before or was otherwise aware of. That's not to say that there was not stuff in it that was new to me (hence the informative part, for me), but for the most part I found it a chore to read through and didn't follow the conversation that resulted.

EvilElitest
2007-04-14, 10:50 PM
Just to claify i am not talking about the thread itself, just the Guide and what you think of the flavor and how it compars to you own personal gameplay
from,
EE

kamikasei
2007-04-14, 10:57 PM
Wizards are (necessarily) intelligent people who have devoted a lot of time and effort to studying a field that gives them certain abilities. The entire basis of the class is learning, theory, study, planning, etc. It's entirely fluff-consistent for a wizard to know what his options are and to make choices that maximize his effectiveness. TLN's guide seems, from my reading of it, to be an excellent resource for helping a player to have his character's build reflect the intelligence and learning that's part and parcel of the wizarding profession.

Matthew
2007-04-14, 11:01 PM
I see. I don't perceive the game in the terms the guide seems to and so I feel a certain disconnect with what is being said. Once the discussion goes past Fourth Level Spells, I cannot really comment, as few of my games go to such a high level of play
From what I can tell, I think for people just getting started in the game and a strong interest in making the most of their Wizard it is a useful guide.

EvilElitest
2007-04-14, 11:02 PM
I'm just going to name my person option

While i enjoyed the guide as a read, a bit dry but quite nice at customizing, i do not enjoy that manner of play. Fluff wise, i don't think people would act so logic (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/XbsQgS9YYu9g3HZBAGE.html) or at least mathamitcally logical
I raley have wizards knowing very spell from the PHB back to front just to start off with, pertically those they don't know about.
I also find that manner of play rather runins the fun of the game, because it is not ment to be players vs. the Dm or Players vs. the other Players
That being said, if people enjoy their games taht way, let them, it does annoy me when my players try to pull it off though. It is a nice guide for wizard tatics though
more to say later, but i'll let other speak first
from,
EE
EDIt: Oh and Kamikasei, wizard may be intellegent but intellegence is measured in different ways

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-04-14, 11:08 PM
Wizards are super intelligent. They have to be, or they're very poor wizards. It makes a lot of sense to me that a super intelligent person would make super intelligent use of their spells. This guide helps reach that level of smart that, quite frankly, no one can actually achieve in reality.

Matthew
2007-04-14, 11:10 PM
Whoah, whoah. Not all Wizards are super intelligent. That's rather the point. In some styles of gameplay every PC Wizard is Intelligence 18, but it's not always the case.

kamikasei
2007-04-14, 11:12 PM
What is the "manner of play" you seem to think the guide endorses? The only manner I see is play your strengths against the enemy's weakness.

It's not "player vs. DM" for a wizard faced with a challenge to say to himself, "I could use spell X and hammer this screw into the wall. I could use spell Y and turn the screw, which would be a better fit for the situation and be more likely to succeed. I could conjure a screwdriver and hand it to the rogue, who is good at DIY, and thus the long-lasting screwdriver will let us deal with many such encounters for the price of one spell." This, as I see it, is the point of the guide: there are certain things that wizards do better than anyone else, and if you're playing a wizard, you should therefore focus on doing those things and doing them well. I don't see this as being part of any particular "manner" of play.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-04-14, 11:13 PM
Oh sure, not all are. Just the ones that like casting spells :P

Seriously though, outside of poor luck on stat rolling or a very odd roleplaying choice, wizards are, on the whole, crazy smart. If 10 is average intelligence, even a 14 is practically Einstein-level.

Matthew
2007-04-14, 11:14 PM
Ah, back to calibrating our expectations. I'm not so sure. 14, I think, is more like Lecturer level.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-04-14, 11:19 PM
But we can certainly agree that the vast, vast majority of all wizards in D&D have an intelligence of around 16-18 at first level, and will put every fourth-level extra attribute point into intelligence. So, on the whole, wizards are smart beyond comprehension. The other ones are oddities that raise eyebrows. You could always bar them from using this guide simply because they aren't smart enough to think through all that, but what's the point? They're apparently already nerfed.

EvilElitest
2007-04-14, 11:23 PM
YOu forget, the guide is hard to you for hte main reason of

No matter not intellegent you are, it is hard to use something you simple don't know.
I find it highly unbeliveable that a wizard finds every obsere orginization, writes down their secrets, figures out how it will effect him, then publishes it to the world
Anyways, so how does the guide effect you feel of the game?
from,
EE

Matthew
2007-04-14, 11:24 PM
Well, no, actually. It depends what you mean. I don't really think it is the case in that the majority of Wizards start with 16-18 Intelligence in the context of a single game world, any more than every Fighter has Strength 16-18. Elite Array puts your highest Attribute at 15. Again, though, that's just my perception. I wouldn't deny anybody access to this guide. I wouldn't be inclined to play a Wizard using it, though. half the fun is experimenting, for me.

Dhavaer
2007-04-14, 11:25 PM
I find it highly unbeliveable that a wizard finds every obsere orginization, writes down their secrets, figures out how it will effect him, then publishes it to the world

Really? Except for the publishing bit, that sounds to me exactly like something a wizard would do.

EvilElitest
2007-04-14, 11:31 PM
Really? Except for the publishing bit, that sounds to me exactly like something a wizard would do.

Why? Maybe for his own personal benafit, but why go though all the trouble. Bear in mind, NPCs, are not aware of levels and classes. So why would you find an need to look up every obsere prestiage class.
Note, most prestige classes are belong to orginazation that i would image would not be willing to share their sercrets
Also, while it take up abotu five min. tops to find out the abillites of a prestige class, it would take a wizard unfamlier with the class much more time an eneregy. If the wizard is doing this simple for his own personal benifit, then i don't think he would publish this info mation, and i would imagine it would take a massive expanse of time and energy to pull it off. Hell, a low level wizard most likely would not even know anything about high level spells.
So yes, while it is possible to use the guide to its fullest potiental, it is implasable
from,
EE

Ramza00
2007-04-14, 11:31 PM
LN guide is one way to play a wizard, it isn't the only way to play a wizard. Sometimes I play wizards like that, sometimes more absent minded and around a theme, depends on the character.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-04-14, 11:32 PM
I meant more the player wizards, not the NPC wizards. Those guys probably won't have such high intelligence. NPC's are quite different from the players in intent, though, so I don't think they ought to be using this guide.

And I certainly feel that ordinary wizards ought to research everything feasible. They're given every knowledge skill for a reason. Hell, their entire class is based upon learning things, and they even have an entire spell school dedicated to learning more stuff (divination).

lsfreak
2007-04-14, 11:34 PM
I miss TLN :P
Yup, a wizard searching out obscure, long-forgotten, and highly dangerous stuff sounds exactly like what a wizard would and should be doing.
I also very much like the way he says to play a wizard. Too many people don't grasp how powerful wizards are, especially new players (I was that way -_-), and try and make them into heavy artillery when they're not.

kamikasei
2007-04-14, 11:36 PM
I find it highly unbeliveable that a wizard finds every obsere orginization, writes down their secrets, figures out how it will effect him, then publishes it to the world

The guide is not written in character. It tells you whether one prestige class is a good bet over another (among other things). This is something you do anyway when choosing whether/how to PrC. It is simply a guide to doing so.

The in-character basis for saying "okay DM, I'd like to progress into Loremaster at level X. Is that possible in this game? Are there steps my character has to take, such as finding a particular organization, or performing special research?" is entirely separate from the mechanical question of "will this class or this feat or whatever be a net gain or net loss in my ability to survive and help my friends survive?"


Anyways, so how does the guide effect you feel of the game?

Honestly, I'm not really sure what you're asking. It's a guide. It says, "these options and these actions will make you more effective that these others. You will be better able to survive and win battles and progress through the game. This is a good thing." It does not say "be a wizard and do this and this and you win, end of game, don't bother playing because the Problem is Solved". If you have already decided you want to be a wizard, it helps you make best use of the options available to you.

I don't understand how a guide is supposed to affect the feel or "manner" of a game.

Matthew
2007-04-14, 11:36 PM
Sure, but the default expectation is that Player Character Wizards use something similar to the Elite Array. NPC Wizards work by the same rules. That's not to say you can't build higher Attribute versions. The up and down of it for me, is that Player Character's with a Primary Attribute of 16+ at Level 1 are exceptional, rather than the rule (but that's not the case in every game)

EvilElitest
2007-04-14, 11:45 PM
The guide is not written in character. It tells you whether one prestige class is a good bet over another (among other things). This is something you do anyway when choosing whether/how to PrC. It is simply a guide to doing so.

I know this, and i do not complain about the guide, i does not match my style. My main question is using the guide in your own world
Do all wizards follow this format?
Do you allow PCs to use it
Do you allow them to use parts of its
Do you not like it and why
Do you like it and why?
Do you think it is unrealistic to have
Do you think it is to unuse able


The in-character basis for saying "okay DM, I'd like to progress into Loremaster at level X. Is that possible in this game? Are there steps my character has to take, such as finding a particular organization, or performing special research?" is entirely separate from the mechanical question of "will this class or this feat or whatever be a net gain or net loss in my ability to survive and help my friends survive?"
Then have to know about Lore master to begine with and how to enter. Even if my wizard could take it, does he even know about it's requirments?


Honestly, I'm not really sure what you're asking. It's a guide. It says, "these options and these actions will make you more effective that these others. You will be better able to survive and win battles and progress through the game. This is a good thing." It does not say "be a wizard and do this and this and you win, end of game, don't bother playing because the Problem is Solved". If you have already decided you want to be a wizard, it helps you make best use of the options available to you.

please don't jump to conclusions. The point is how people feel about the guide and how they like the style of play. I know at least one person compared it to Pun-Pun, and while i disagree i want to know why people would not like the guide


I don't understand how a guide is supposed to affect the feel or "manner" of a game.
Simple, what it says has an effect on you like everything else. Do you find the guide's recomanded approach fitting for your champain or do you find it an abomanation

And I certainly feel that ordinary wizards ought to research everything feasible. They're given every knowledge skill for a reason. Hell, their entire class is based upon learning things, and they even have an entire spell school dedicated to learning more stuff (divination).
Learning everything you want is fine, but it is very hard and time consuming

from,
EE

kamikasei
2007-04-14, 11:49 PM
Bear in mind, NPCs, are not aware of levels and classes. So why would you find an need to look up every obsere prestiage class.

If I was reading my History of the West and saw mention of a group of mages who had apparently learned to use, at will, facets of some of the most powerful abjuration magics known to thaumaturgy, I would be intrigued. I would wonder whether this was something I could learn. I would pursue it. Why? Because I love knowledge. Because it might save my life.


Note, most prestige classes are belong to orginazation that i would image would not be willing to share their sercrets

Sure, for those PrCs which are actually fluffed out as secretive or selective, you would not expect every NPC wizard of sufficient level you come across to have levels in them. For things like Archmage or Loremaster or any other class that doesn't have a specific time/place/person requirement - why wouldn't a wizard of appropriate level or inclination take that route?

Really this is just the question of how do characters access options available to players, and has little to do with either wizards or TLN's guide specifically.


Hell, a low level wizard most likely would not even know anything about high level spells.

That seems... implausible. Spellcraft checks apply to things like "identifying the spell on a scroll" or "figuring out what another mage is casting", not to "having heard of a spell in the first place". Off the top of my head, there's nothing specific about how to use Knowledge: arcana to represent knowing of a spell's existence. Unless for fluff reasons high level spells are extremely rare and almost never seen by anyone, a low-level wizard could be expected to have heard of them and know a fair amount about them - just not to be able to cast them. A physics undergrad would certainly have heard of string theory and have a reasonable idea of what it's about, though he couldn't make heads nor tails of a problem in the field.

kamikasei
2007-04-15, 12:00 AM
Then have to know about Lore master to begine with and how to enter. Even if my wizard could take it, does he even know about it's requirments?

Yes. He does.

That's the default assumption for pretty much any class, as I understand it. Some have specific requirements in-character. Many do not. Those presented in recent books have a handy-dandy guide to how much you know about them for a given Knowledge check. However, for any prestige class, the idea is not that your character says "man I want to be an Archmage. Better spend a feat on a second Spell Focus." The player says that. The character says "gosh magic is fascinating! I'm not satisfied learning about just one school of magic in detail, I'll learn about a second! Huh - the breadth of my knowledge is leading me to see patterns in how magic works - you know, I think there's a way to..." And hey, now you have a High Arcana.


please don't jump to conclusions. The point is how people feel about the guide and how they like the style of play. I know at least one person compared it to Pun-Pun, and while i disagree i want to know why people would not like the guide

...What "style of play"? This is what I don't understand. Is it a "style of play" for a fighter to pick up a greatsword and invest in Power Attack? No? Then how is it a "style of play" for a wizard to have a spell prepared for each save type?

Also: what conclusions did you think I was jumping to?


Learning everything you want is fine, but it is very hard and time consuming

So's learning enough about how the world works at the most fundamental level that you can shut down people's minds or create fire or water from nothing with a gesture and a word. It's what wizards do.

Matthew
2007-04-15, 12:05 AM
Wait, I think I see what EE is getting at. Magic is usually a mystery in Fantasy, even to those that practice it. It's secretive and powerful, beyond understanding, but in D&D it is demystified by rules, but they are complex enough that they require a guide. So, by making a guide, you demystify what is already demystified. It's late, I know I'm not making sense, but put it this way. If I were a Wizard with knowledge of how to shoot Lightning Blolts out my Finger Tips I wouldn't be inclined to make that knowledge available to everyone, still less any actually useful spell.

The Logic Ninja is like Bruce Lee breaking the rules of Kung Fu nondiscolsure or (more aptly) one of those no good tell all the secrets ex circle of magic guys...

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-04-15, 12:13 AM
Really, I can't stress enough how much the players need to communicate future intent to their DM. How does a wizard learn about a prestige class/the obscure prerequisites for obtaining it? Because the player asked the DM if he could become one and the DM included it in the campaign itself for his benefit.

Then, the DM gets to play a delightful game of "counter the player wizard" once you start using a dedicated spell system like this. So it balances itself out, either by banhammer or DM bloodlust.

kamikasei
2007-04-15, 12:13 AM
Wait, I think I see what EE is getting at. Magic is usually a mystery in Fantasy, even to those that practice it. It's secretive and powerful, beyond understanding, but in D&D it is demystified by rules, but they are complex enough that they require a guide. So, by making a guide, you demystify what is already demystified. It's late, I know I'm not making sense, but put it this way. If I were a Wizard with knowledge of how to shoot Lightning Blolts out my Finger Tips I wouldn't be inclined to make that knowledge available to everyone, still less any actually useful spell.

That's a legitimate approach to play, but I think it's a deviation from the assumptions of the standard game, where scrolls have a certain price and a certain probability of being found... etc. Wizards with super-special spells that only they know get to research them and be their first creator. Then they can refuse to ever scribe it to a scroll or show that page of their spellbook to a student or friend. Wizards who learn lightning bolt don't get to do this, in the standard game. They have to deal with the fact that it's clearly considered worthwhile for a wizard to take a spell he knows and spread it around in scroll form or otherwise, for profit.

You can play a game where the role of magic and wizards and such is different enough that the guide's advice no longer fits, but then you're not asking "does the guide fit with your campaign", but "does my campaign fit with the assumptions of the basic game that the guide is based on".


Really, I can't stress enough how much the players need to communicate future intent to their DM. How does a wizard learn about a prestige class/the obscure prerequisites for obtaining it? Because the player asked the DM if he could become one and the DM included it in the campaign itself for his benefit.

Yes, I agree entirely.

Matthew
2007-04-15, 12:20 AM
Well, Greyhawk is the default setting, so I guess we have to look at it from that Campaign Setting and the default RAW. What EE is asking, though, is how many of us really play that way?

Zagreen
2007-04-15, 12:20 AM
I don't really see what the point is in devoting a thread to griping about it.

I agree with the technical aspects of the guide and find it useful but don't devote myself to following it in every particular. The fact that wizards (past low levels) have so much awesomeness at their fingertips means that they don't need to aggressively optimize in order to pull their own weight.

Matthew
2007-04-15, 12:21 AM
I think EE may have an Axe to grind, but it could be that he is just interested in how many people play under the assumptions that the guide makes.

EvilElitest
2007-04-15, 12:21 AM
Well, Greyhawk is the default setting, so I guess we have to look at it from that Campaign Setting and the default RAW. What EE is asking, though, is how many of us really play that way?

Well said, i'd say more buti need to go to bed
from,
EE

kamikasei
2007-04-15, 12:32 AM
What are the basic assumptions of the guide?

- If spells from a certain source are available in the game, then they're available normally. They may be found on scrolls at a certain price, with a certain likelihood of being for sale depending on the size of a given settlement.

- If a certain PrC exists in the world, then your character can work towards gaining access to it. This might be handled in a wide variety of ways, from the character hearing of a secret organization and seeking to join, to simply starting down a particular path of study and learning new things as he progresses.

- A character can reasonably expect to gain in power, and will not embark on an entire career thinking he'll only ever be able to cast magic missile. He will have a good idea of what spells he doesn't know how to cast, do.

So it seems to me that the real question being asked is: who plays with those basic assumptions intact?

In your game, are you lucky to find any given spell on a scroll or otherwise, and have no control over what you get in this way? Do your arcanists have to take a randomly-dealt hand of spells and make do?

That question doesn't really have much to do with the guide at all.

Matthew
2007-04-15, 12:35 AM
Yes, that's what I am thinking.

The J Pizzel
2007-04-15, 01:15 AM
I ain't going to lie...I hadn't played a wizard in a long time. I finally decided to play one and was pointed to TLN's guide, thankfully, right before making my Tiefling Wizard, Lucias. I'm not saying that it is the ONLY way to make a good wizard, but it certainly taught me how to play a VERY effective wizard. My DM was so tired of the See Inivisibily/Glitterdust combo he gradually just refused to throw invisible baddies. So, yeah I love TLN's guide.

jp

Yahzi
2007-04-15, 01:57 AM
What do you think of taht style of play? Do you find the guide useful, or vauge.
I think it's brilliant.

I would never require a player to run his wizard that way... but you can bet all my NPC wizards read and memorized TLN's guide.

Wizards are supposed to be smart. They're supposed to have thought of everything. Heck, in my games sometimes I just roll a d20 and say, "Oh, sorry, the INT 27 wizard already thought of that (even though I, the GM, didn't), so he's prepared for it." I mean, he got his INT to 27, he deserves a freakin' saving throw VS. being outsmarted. :smallbiggrin: (Even players should get this.)

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-15, 07:26 AM
The guide is an OOC thing. You can play a wizard who casts the spells the guide suggests in a hundred different ways. Wizards don't necessarily know every spell in the PHB (although D&D assumes that players will have access to any given spell in the PHB)--a first-level wizard might know Mage Armor, Ray of Enfeeblement, Sleep, Grease, and Color Spray because his advanced classes at Wizard College taught him those spells were good, or because he indepdently studied disabling and weakening spells, or because that's just what the spells in his dead master's spellbook happened to be.

Then, there's simple reasoning. The wizard knows some people are stronger of body than of will, and vice-versa--so why wouldn't he prepare some spells that attack the mind, and others that attack the body?

Using spells a wizard knows to not be the most effective out there is like bringing a knife to a gunfight. A wziard's spells are like a fighter's fighting style and weapons--except more so, because it's not just for life-and-death situations, it's how the wizard does everything.

The guide has nothing to do with fluff. You can fluff a wizard who uses the spells the guide says are good in lots of different ways.

Ruik
2007-04-15, 08:03 AM
I agree with BWL's... I used the guide when I made my current wizard that I play on the boards, and really my first ever wizard thats lasted more than a couple of sessions (in RL speak :smallwink:). I have to say that just because it presents a lot of logical ideas about spells, feats and wizards in general doesn't mean you can't create fluff for your character.

The guide is very useful for those of use who are not as aware to the same extent about things that others on these boards just seem to take for granted regarding wizards and how to play them.

What you choose to do with the guide is your own issue, but in and of itself, it is a great OOC guide as to one way to play wizards, and do so effectively, instead of flailing wildly because your character choices sucked :smallsigh: :smallbiggrin:

Annarrkkii
2007-04-15, 08:22 AM
You feel that this guide impairs your feeling of the game because it's a guide to optimizing your character? There are vast sections of the PHB II, Complete Arcane, Complete Divine, Complete Adventurer, Complete Mage, Tomb of Battle, Tomb of Magic, and numerous Green Ronin books devoted to optimizing classes and getting comfortable with your role in a party. They are meant as OOC guides to a player to help him make his character the best it can be. D+D, whether you like it, is about "winning." It's not as much fun to play someone who loses. Sitting around dead while your party finishes the dungeon, or preparing all fireballs and finding yourself underwater for half the dungeon, are NOT fun situations.

Logic's guide is excellent, not to mention very amusing, in many places, and is extremely helpful for making your wizard what he should be.

Also, bear in mind that the CRs in the MMs are all calibrated assuming you'll have a competent spellcaster.

Sir Giacomo
2007-04-15, 09:10 AM
Hi everyone,

just my comment on the logic ninja OP on wizard tactics: it is, overall excellent and highly entertaining; and as BWL has rightly mentioned, deals with game mechanics, not the way you use it in your campaign. So it is highly useful in almost all settings that somehow use the magic spells with the rules.

Having said that, it is also not perfect; I would disagree with some conclusions drawn by logic ninja. For instance, not all spells indicated as "broken" need to be interpreted in the rules as such and/or could easily resolved within the game with a minimum of nerfing. Additionally, evocation/attack/damage spells are a bit underrated. Evocation spells have the great advantage of being cast at long range (as opposed to the close range of most ray spells), also at low levels (before you could get the shadow evocation emulations). But that threatens to move into discussing overall wizard tactics and would not be fair to logic ninja who, banned to post, would be unable to respond/discuss.

- Giacomo

waynethegame
2007-04-15, 09:11 AM
I like the guide, but I have never played an arcane spellcaster (well not a true one. I've played a Warlock and a Duskblade). The reason why is simple: It's too confusing for me. I understand how spells work, that's not the problem, but I'm never creative enough to come up with half the "odd" uses for spells that people point to. Half of them, I would never in a million years have thought of using, simply because it never crossed my mind. I'd be the guy who plays a Warmage (or blaster-Sorcerer or something) just because its simple and straightforward, without needing to spend 10 minutes a round trying to figure out what spell combo to use.

That said, however, I enjoy LN's guide and if/when I ever do play a caster I'm definitely going to be reading it more in-depth.

Annarrkkii
2007-04-15, 09:14 AM
If you even just read the basics of the guide, you'll be that much better of a wizard. Glance at some of the Optimization guides on the WotC Boards, and you can whip up a reasonably effective Wizard. Don't let the "complicated" aspect intimidate you.

bosssmiley
2007-04-15, 09:19 AM
The premise of "Being Batman", that "you as a wizard are there to do all the things the other guys simply can't", was one of those *ting* (lightbulb) moments for me as a player. It gave me loads of pointers for dirty tricks, sneaky feat/spell combos and introduced me to the immortal phrase 'save-or-suck'. :smallamused:

LN's "Being Batman" article and Goodman Games "Wizard Power Gamers Guide 3.5" are my bibles for playing arcane full-casters. LN's article covers all the bases the published book does, has additional commentary on non-OGL spells, feats, PrC, etc. and is entirely free to the public. It also has Admiral Akbar in it. It has mighty win.

PaladinBoy
2007-04-15, 09:34 AM
I think that the guide is funny in some places, particularly the part about the Mystic Theruge ("It's a TRAP!") That said though, I have not read it in detail, nor do I ever expect to. And my second favorite class to play is wizard.

A large part of my decisions about my current character are made from a roleplaying standpoint or just done purely because I want to. I've already multiclassed once and plan to do so again; I'll have lost 6 caster levels by level 20. That's because I think my character might want to be some of these classes. And yes, the abilities I gain from them are probably worth it. My spell selection isn't that great either. I don't care that Fireball might be underpowered, I'm going to include it anyway, because it's fun to point at things and watch them blow up.

To me, it seems that that guide is designed to help you optimize your wizard and bring him to the most deadly power level possible. There's nothing wrong with that - for most classes. Do you really want to do it playing a 20th level wizard that can break the game with one 9th level spell?

Counterpower
2007-04-15, 09:59 AM
It's an interesting guide, and if I wanted an optimized uber-wizard of doom, I might use it.

I can't see myself ever wanting to play such a character, though. Which is what I think EE's getting at with the "style of play." I don't optimize. Most of my decisions when making a character is "what abilities is my character trying to get?" I just don't worry that much about combat effectiveness.

Cyborg Pirate
2007-04-15, 10:24 AM
It's an interesting guide, and if I wanted an optimized uber-wizard of doom, I might use it.

I can't see myself ever wanting to play such a character, though. Which is what I think EE's getting at with the "style of play." I don't optimize. Most of my decisions when making a character is "what abilities is my character trying to get?" I just don't worry that much about combat effectiveness.

As I see it, when you're roleplaying an intelligent wizard, you do 'optimize', as that would be what an intelligent wizard would do.

Talya
2007-04-15, 10:29 AM
I miss TLN :P
Yup, a wizard searching out obscure, long-forgotten, and highly dangerous stuff sounds exactly like what a wizard would and should be doing.



Sure, but it might take him 20 years just to get that one spell he's trying to ferret out...

Larrin
2007-04-15, 10:36 AM
What i find most useful in the guide is the break down of spells, since i like many find it a pain to pour through the dange pages and read all the little bits of every spell to figure out what the heck is this spell good for. it gives a nice level by level break down of what a wizard might pick up and why they would do so. For a starting wizard, or one who just picked spells at random (or for fun) its great at pointing you in the right direction for picking really usefull spells.

The biggest critisism I can make of the guide is that it ignores an entire, pretty big, section of spells on the basis that "They suck". While direct damage lacks the immediate and total effectiveness that is demanded of spells in these optimized days, i would have enjoyed it more if those spells had gotten their due and been critiqued for their effectiveness WITHIN the scope of other direct damage spells. He could have ended each entry with "..but still don't take it because it sucks" as long as he'd at least acknowledge that ALOT of people find enjoyment with these spells, and will, despite it making them pathetic weak minded fools with no concept of how a wizard should be played, take some of the evocation spells. Sometimes Batman's gotta punch some one in the face.....

that being said, as someone who is really ONLY well aquainted with the fun explodey spells, this guide has helped me understand how to add the next level of effectiveness to a wizards repetoir should i so desire.

Matthew
2007-04-15, 10:37 AM
Sure, but it might take him 20 years just to get that one spell he's trying to ferret out...
...but not in Default Core D&D, hence the original poster's (rephrased) question: "Do the core rules and default assumptions about D&D and reflected in the Logic Ninja's Guide to Wizards represent the kind of D&D game you conventionally play or not?"

In my case, no it doesn't, except for when we play one shot D&D 3.x, then it pretty much does.

Counterpower
2007-04-15, 11:05 AM
As I see it, when you're roleplaying an intelligent wizard, you do 'optimize', as that would be what an intelligent wizard would do.

Tell that to PaladinBoy's Wizard 5/Dragonmark heir 3. That prestige class gets no caster level or spells per day enhancement. He's also going to multiclass to windwright captain, which only gets said enhancement at 1st, 3rd, and 5th. Is that optimized? Not according to said guide. Is it what Auran d'Lyrandar wants to do with his time and effort, Int score 19 or no? Yes, as far as I know. (Note: if you're wondering how I know this, I'm his DM.)

If I create a wizard, I might go for some prestige classes like elemental savant (Complete Arcane) or elemental scion of Zilargo (Magic of Eberron). The first "loses" two levels of spell progression, the second gets none at all. Why would anyone ever want to make such a horrible choice, one might ask? Well, I like the idea of a wizard who is completely fascinated by the Elemental Plane of Water, and goes to a lot of effort to learn more about it. Just because he has Int 27 doesn't mean that he is completely logical, and always makes the most combat-effective decision.

EvilElitest
2007-04-15, 11:09 AM
I think EE may have an Axe to grind, but it could be that he is just interested in how many people play under the assumptions that the guide makes.

I do?

Anyways, some of the later posters got this right.

The style of play involves how you want to play your wizards.
I have read some of LN explanations on tatics for certain spells and i use some of them if i want to make an effective wizard.
If i prefer playing a weaker class, by Logic Ninja's terms, i'll do so.
If i read the whole guide and play my wizard following the guide to the letter, then i am using one style of play.

So the real question is, do you play as Logic Ninja recomened?
Do you only use bits and peices of his guide instead of the whole thing
Do you find the guide reposlive in nature (explain)
Do you find the guide a life saver
Do you hate some parts and not some others
Do you like the idea of the guide but not the exacution
Do you find this way to play a wizard wrong
Do you think this is the best way to play a wizard
Would you play your wizards this way
Do you NPCs follow this guide
Do you find this guide to logical
Do you thinks it differens with Rich's aformentioned article
What don't you like about hte guide
What do you like about the the guide
How do you use the guide
Do you feel the guide misses some things
Do you find the guide insulting

Tell that to PaladinBoy's Wizard 5/Dragonmark heir 3. That prestige class gets no caster level or spells per day enhancement. He's also going to multiclass to windwright captain, which only gets said enhancement at 1st, 3rd, and 5th. Is that optimized? Not according to said guide. Is it what Auran d'Lyrandar wants to do with his time and effort, Int score 19 or no? Yes, as far as I know. (Note: if you're wondering how I know this, I'm his DM.)

If I create a wizard, I might go for some prestige classes like elemental savant (Complete Arcane) or elemental scion of Zilargo (Magic of Eberron). The first "loses" two levels of spell progression, the second gets none at all. Why would anyone ever want to make such a horrible choice, one might ask? Well, I like the idea of a wizard who is completely fascinated by the Elemental Plane of Water, and goes to a lot of effort to learn more about it. Just because he has Int 27 doesn't mean that he is completely logical, and always makes the most combat-effective decision.
Nicely said
You know Paladin Boy in Real life?
Anyways, paladin boy how is that going for you?
from,
EE

PaladinBoy
2007-04-15, 11:22 AM
Anyways, paladin boy how is that going for you?
from,
EE

It's a lot of fun right now, but I really can't wait to get into the windwright captain PrC. Because being able to call my airship from 2 miles away sounds like basketloads of fun.

I don't use the guide mostly because I 1) like coming up with my own tactics (invisibility+delayed empowered magic missile really does get quite powerful) and 2) don't care much for optimization. I care more for having fun, which includes the other members of the group. If creating a massively optimized wizard is going to ruin the fun for them, then I'll find good RP reasons for why my character wouldn't optimize.

Matthew
2007-04-15, 11:35 AM
I do?
No, just 'you may'. The subject of the Thread suggests the possibility.

Person_Man
2007-04-15, 11:38 AM
I think its a helpful guide, especially for new players. We often talk about how powerful full casters are, but its also been my experience that new players are much weaker and more prone to die as arcane casters then they are as anything else. Arcane casters are very fragile. And if a new player doesn't understand the spells out there or how to use them properly, its very easy for a arcane caster to get killed. So I actually prefer it if my new players read up on the best ways to use magic. It makes the game more interesting, because I don't have to throw milquetoast encounters at them.


Also, does anyone know why TLN got banned from this board? I liked having him around, and more importantly, I want to be able to post in my normal acerbic tone without fear of being banned.

PaladinBoy
2007-04-15, 11:40 AM
I don't believe we're allowed to discuss why TLN was banned.

Ramza00
2007-04-15, 11:46 AM
Also, does anyone know why TLN got banned from this board? I liked having him around, and more importantly, I want to be able to post in my normal acerbic tone without fear of being banned.

The reason why he was banned by the Mods, according to them is that he was rude, passive aggressive, confrontational, condescending, and a few other words. They asked him to rephrase his language and he did not thus he was banned.

It wasn't what he was saying it was how he was saying it.

That said, now that you know you aren't supposed to talk about it anymore. The moderators don't want anybody to waste time arguing was it just or not. It happened, move on. I agree with the moderators that TLN was all the things he listed, and thus broke the rules for he continued doing it when he was asked to stop.

Roland St. Jude
2007-04-15, 11:59 AM
Sheriff of Moddingham: And...that's a lock.



Inappropriate Topics
The following topics are always off-limits on these forums, no matter what (hence, Inappropriate Topics). Any posts including these topics will be edited, and any threads started to discuss these topics will be locked. ...

Protesting Bannings/Glorifying or Discussing Banned Posters: We value our posters, and take care only to ban posters who commit egregious or repeated violations of our Rules. Once that action is taken, though, it is an Inappropriate topic to discuss, glorify, or memorialize banned posters or their rules violations. We have found in the past that such displays are disruptive to the community. If you have a concern regarding a banned poster, we ask that you send a PM to WampaX, the board guru for these forums.

If someone wanted to discuss this topic without reference to banned posters, please let me know via PM and perhaps a new thread would be permitted.