D&D 5th Edition makes the New York Times

[TheMeMan]

Um....I think a wizard SHOULD be able to do most things other classes can do. Simply because well...your playing a wizard. You manipulate time and space to your whims. Unless you turn a wizard into a "I attack mindlessly" zombie thats always going to be the case.

The issue is that with your fix, it'd only marginally decrease the Wizard in Strength(Meaninglessly really), while maintaining the key issue with the wizard. It's not so much that they have more options, but that they have nearly limitless options and near high levels have absolutely no limits to what the can do and how many times they can do it. It's a game-breaking issue, to say the least.

Which makes sense in a setting sort of way, but in actual mechanics means that they grossly out-do other classes.

What needs to be done to reduce Wizard effectiveness is several things:

Dramatically reduce, in some way, the raw power of their abilities. The same range of options exist, just less-so.

Dramatically reduce their ability to freely and easily cast spells. Casting of spells, particularly higher, would be far less problematic if it took much longer to do so, or came at a meaningful cost to do so.

Reduce the number of spells they can actually cast in a day.

Even with these changes, they would probably easily beat out most other classes. But it would bring them in line to about a T3, I would say.

[TheArsenal]

Which makes sense in a setting sort of way, but in actual mechanics means that they grossly out-do other classes.

Yeah.

What needs to be done to reduce Wizard effectiveness is several things:

Dramatically reduce, in some way, the raw power of their abilities. The same range of options exist, just less-so.

Probably, then the problem will still exist in epic play, because epic play is about being godlike and martial classes...simply aren't.

Dramatically reduce their ability to freely and easily cast spells. Casting of spells, particularly higher, would be far less problematic if it took much longer to do so, or came at a meaningful cost to do so.

I agree.

Reduce the number of spells they can actually cast in a day.

Possibly

Even with these changes, they would probably easily beat out most other classes. But it would bring them in line to about a T3, I would say.

Well then alright.

[TheMeMan]

If I want to play a game thats completely disoriented from reality, with unrealistic attacks, and doing nothing but inflicting damage/ push pulling Il go play a videogame. THOSE fights last for 2 minutes and are a lot faster.

(Thats not to say that options for other martial classes shouldn't be broadened)

Problem with the Wizard in a nutshell:

BBEG: Haha! You will never beat my army of a hundred orcs! What shall you do now!

Wizard: Lol, wut? Time Stop, spam fireball.

BBEG: I knew you would try that! Behold! I have now bunches of Fire Elementals, immune to your firey death balls of doom!

Wizard: Lol, wut? Time Stop, Polymorph into Red Dragon.

BBEG: Haha!... Wait, you can do that? Er... well... Mooks of a thousands deadly blades, charge! You can't kill them all! Mwahaha!

Wizard: Lol, wut? Teleport.

BBEG: Son of a...

[TheArsenal]

Who is the BBEG?

Problem is in fiction, the whole story is in reverse. Its the MAGE turning into a snake/ dragon, mass charming everybody and summoning elementals for the heroes to fight.

ps: You cannot time stop and attack.

[Bhaakon]

The problem is this: If he next version of D&D gimps wizards (or tier 1/2's in general), a substantial number of people are going to be POed that their favorite toys were taken away and not play the new version.

So then you decide to upgrade martial classes, right? Try again. Players with a simulationist bent will revolt over theoretically mundane classes exhibiting decidedly unmundane powers.

So what do you do? No idea. Some people aren't interested in a balanced game, they want a game they can "win" by being the most bad-ass/best optimized, or one that reflects the inherent unfairness of real life (or, in this case, most popular fantasy fiction). Others want a balanced game, at any cost to verisimilitude. Most people are somewhere in between, or hold some offshoot preference at odds with the two I presented. These are irreconcilable differences of opinions (and only one example of many). When you get down to it, I fear the "one role-playing game to rule them all" model is just not viable model in the information age.

[TheMeMan]

Who is the BBEG?

Problem is in fiction, the whole story is in reverse. Its the MAGE turning into a snake/ dragon, mass charming everybody and summoning elementals for the heroes to fight.

ps: You cannot time stop and attack.

Should have said Delayed Blast Fireball. Or, really any number of Summons, Buffs, etc. The options are limitless there, and there are ways to abuse it to no end.

Also, it doesn't matter if it's the story or not. Give the player an option to do this, and they will. I've been in games where a low optimized player effectively ended an encounter in 1 turn with time stop shenanigans.

[TheArsenal]

But then I though. What if the casting time for teleport/ time stop/ dragon shape III and fireball was like a minute? But fire resistance spell was 1 round? And casting a powerfull spell greatly damages the wizards con score?

Would that result in a climactic battle with the heroes defending the wizard until he can concentrate enough to be able to cast teleport to retreat?

[Eldan]

That would work of many spells, but there's a problem with that. First of all:

Think of the gamte table.

DM: Okay, combat starts!
Fighter: Yay! I won initiative! I kill the first orc. *takes three minutes to resolve his turn*
Wizard: I start casting fireball.
DM: Orcs do orcy things. *takes ten minutes to resolve them all*
Fighter: I kill the second orc *takes three minutes to resolve his turn*
Wizard: I continue casting fireball.
*Repeat DM and fighter five times each*
Wizard: And I unleash the fireball!
DM: You fry the last two orcs.

The problem here is that you have the wizard sitting around for an hour, doing nothing. Probably playing with his phone or building dice towers while the others get to fight.

Second: some spells make no sense that way. Why would you stop time for fifteen seconds, when it takes you ten minutes to do so? Unless you are a theoretical physicist-wizard.

[TheArsenal]

Well ****.

Magic users simply don't work in D&D. There-I said it. Wizards are always the boss monsters in movies and in film, and in game form they simply make people upset.

I like wizards, im fine with them as a GM and as a Player of both arcane and martial classes.

[Eldan]

Which is why I usually urge my players to stick to vaguely the same tier.

Beguilers work pretty well in a party. Warlocks, too. They still have tons more options than other classes out of combat, but they are note quite that overpowering.

Really, I think it helps if you see wizards as a kind of campaign and mundanes as a different kind of campaign. You don't put Conan and Raistlin in the same party.

[TheArsenal]

Really, I think it helps if you see wizards as a kind of campaign and mundanes as a different kind of campaign. You don't put Conan and Raistlin in the same party.

Pretty much.

Its spoonies "All Jedi or no Jedi rule"

[Alleran]

Really, I think it helps if you see wizards as a kind of campaign and mundanes as a different kind of campaign. You don't put Conan and Raistlin in the same party.

Because Conan would win, naturally. He'd shout "By Crom!" and IHS away all of Raistlin's spells.

[DonutBoy12321]

But then I though. What if the casting time for teleport/ time stop/ dragon shape III and fireball was like a minute? But fire resistance spell was 1 round? And casting a powerfull spell greatly damages the wizards con score?

Would that result in a climactic battle with the heroes defending the wizard until he can concentrate enough to be able to cast teleport to retreat?

I think the Con damage idea works, actually. Gives wizards the sane versatility, but increases MAD, and puts them in danger when they cast really powerful spells.

[pffh]

I think the Con damage idea works, actually. Gives wizards the sane versatility, but increases MAD, and puts them in danger when they cast really powerful spells.

Eh Con is the wizard best secondary stat anyway so it won't increase their MAD at all.

I think the way to fix this is by forcing wizards to be more specialized. This was done to some extent in 3.5 with beguilers, warmages and dread necros.

[Shatteredtower]

The thing about wizards as boss monsters is that they typically have several advantages players aren't assumed to have:

1) They've had time to truly master spells, items, and locations. D&D has always tried to hand wave this requirement toward achieving "true power", possibly because players will ask to play characters that have dedicated the time to achieving it before they set out into the world. If it can be done, players will want their characters to be able to do it, and they won't accept "play balance" as a reason for refusing them that option.

2) They've paid outrageous personal prices for that power. Too many of those mean nothing to players. Who cares that your character's soul if forfeit in ten years when the campaign will run its course within two? Being unable to stomach any food for a day after you recall a daily power means nothing. The prices that might mean something to your players tend to be too high for your NPCs as well: a 5% chance of death every time you use Power X can make you wonder how the villain lasted long enough to become this threat. Sacrificing minions might work as a cost, but some players believe they should be allowed to work around such limitations.

In short, the problem with magic is that there are people who want it able to do more than others can accomplish and they want their characters to have access to that magic without regard to what it should have cost in terms of time and sacrifice that the players didn't have to endure personally.

...Please do not try to balance such systems by creating a series of physical trials a player can undergo to be allowed to acquire more powerful magic.I wouldn't recommend letting them pay off such powers through hours given to community service either.

[Ramza00]

This is a how a wizard in 3.5 fights (and to some extent the other editions). It works in this anime for the character has a magical artifact meant to be the most powerful item on the planet, yet ever battle from mook to boss shouldn't be like this (aka rocket tag).

Alphonose Erik vs Pride (homunclius) and Kimblee
- Battlefield Control reducing vision (fog cloud)
- Direct Damage
- Wings of Cover
- Repair Damage
- Magical Buffing before going melee (think weapon like spells such as flame dagger/thunder lance)
- Tactile Movement (teleport)
- Fails, Saves or Die (resilient sphere), pride dispels the spell
- Fails, Saves or Suck, blindness and dazed
- Succeeds, Saves or Suck, blindness and dazed
- Succeeds, Saves or Die (forcecage)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoRyXCWegK4

[Mystify]

This is a complex problem with conflicting criteria. Designing a system from scratch, with its own setting, and no external views on what is doable, and you can easily sidestep all of these issues. However,the popular view of the wizard says he can teleport and fly and turn to stone etc. etc.
As long as you follow that view of the wizard and spellcasting, you have a immediate problem. They can easily cast a wide net, learn a ton of useful abilities for every situation, and then use all of them to solve everything.

I think the best solution is to constrain the scope of any individual wizard's power. Sure, there are wizards who can csat teleport, and wizards who can create magical barriers, and wizards who command armies of undead, and wizards who enslave the minds of others. However, they tend to be different wizards.

The specialized casters in 3.5 tend to clock in at tier 3, which is a very solid tier, and a reasonable goalpost when designing a system. This tells me that a specialized caster can be a reasonable character archetype to include, whilst the generalist, do-anything casters lead to god-mode.

I see 2 main ways to acheive that goal, there may be others. The first is that 3.5 did, and have predesigned specialty classes to choose from. This could work, but restricts the player to those specific predesigned options.
The second appeals to me more. Have some system where spells are classified, probably similar to the school/subschool system we already have, but with some refinement. Instead of being given a fixed number of spells known, you have a scaling cost based on how similar spells are. This could still allow the necromancer to pick a couple of spells that aren't necromancy, but he would have to give up several necromancy spells for a single other spell. So while it may be worth it to learn teleport, trying to take all sorts of disparate abilities will end up giving you an extremely small bag of tricks.

Themed casters also appeals to me aesthetically. It seems much mroe flavorful to have necromancers and enchantresses running around than a bunch of generic wizards and sorcerers.

Of course, after you bring casters down to tier 3, you still need to elevate the martial classes to tier 3, but thats a different discussion.

[NeoSeraphi]

One suggestion for weakening wizards that I've seen around the forum is that wizards are forced to specialize (Elven generalist does not exist) and they only get spells from their chosen school (and universal, obviously).

This cements wizards in, what I think anyway, their correct niche. A specialist should be specialized, he should have spent all his youth studying one specific school of magic, rather than "oh, I'm going to focus on this school, and you know, study a little on five others, but forget those last two entirely!"

Of course, if WotC went this route, they would have to expand 3.5's Core spell list, and include an equal amount of spells per level, so that transmutation and conjuration wouldn't have such an edge. Also, they would have to make at least some enchantment spells that weren't (Mind-Affecting). That way the new 5e would be balanced like 4th but retain 3.5's mechanics.

[Psyren]

I'm fine with casters being able to do more than "muggle classes" for lack of a better term. But Wizards in 3.P took this just a bit too far.

Splitting the class up into a number of T3, limited-list casters like Beguiler and DN would be a great direction to go in, and open up a lot of design space. Especially if the big 3 schools (Conjuration, Transmutation and Illusion) got broken up or otherwise limited in scope.

[NeoSeraphi]

And while we're at it, let's sacrifice shadow evocation, shadow conjuration and shades to our dark gods and laugh maniacally. Seriously, that is way too much wish for too low a level.

[Novawurmson]

It might as well be posted in a sticky:

Tier System for Classes

Why Each Class is in its Tier

[Psyren]

And while we're at it, let's sacrifice shadow evocation, shadow conjuration and shades to our dark gods and laugh maniacally. Seriously, that is way too much wish for too low a level.

I'd rather tweak them. I like the idea of fake blasts or fake summons that have some actual bite to them (and more of a bite for the weak-willed); what I don't like are things like Shadow Contingency or Shadow Holy Word. If belief and shadow are truly components to these things, I would rule that you can only duplicate evocations and conjurations with a visual component built-in. So you could Shadow Orb of Fire (as intended) because someone will see the fire coming at them, but not Shadow Teleport because there's nothing to believe or disbelieve.

And I think shadowcraft shenanigans should be capped. You should never go above 80% or possibly even 60% reality no matter how much of those effects you stack up.

[undead hero]

The best fix for 3.5 would be something like...

Magic
Dread Necromancer
Beguiler
Warmage
Bard
Druid (with alternate class abilities from Unearth Arcana to get rid of the bear riding a bear summoning more bears "problem")

Melee (I'm reading ToB again for the first time in years)
Swordsage (give it some monk or rogue class features and UMD)
Warblade (give a choice between fighter feat line or rage ability line)
Crusader (give him mount and cha to saves)

Other:
Add in some other Tier 3 classes but the above if you like but those classes pretty much cover all the bases... besides a healer -_-;;;. Give the healer a boost up from tier 5 and you should be good.

[NeoSeraphi]

I'd rather tweak them. I like the idea of fake blasts or fake summons that have some actual bite to them (and more of a bite for the weak-willed); what I don't like are things like Shadow Contingency or Shadow Holy Word. If belief and shadow are truly components to these things, I would rule that you can only duplicate evocations and conjurations with a visual component built-in. So you could Shadow Orb of Fire (as intended) because someone will see the fire coming at them, but not Shadow Teleport because there's nothing to believe or disbelieve.

And I think shadowcraft shenanigans should be capped. You should never go above 80% or possibly even 60% reality no matter how much of those effects you stack up.

But it's any Conjuration or Evocation spell of a lower level. Yes, you could drop it down to just visuals, but that means that with just a 4th level spell slot, you could drop any elemental damage you needed, rather than having to prepare them all separately, so your DM can't plan around your spells available. (Without it, you might have fireball and lightning bolt, but not lesser orb of cold, so he could send you up against a CR 7 red dragon without worries, but with it, you can just choose your element at the drop of a hat.)

Shadow conjuration is just too unfair for words, mostly because of just how large the conjuration school is. Again, it's too much wish for a low-level wizard.

If you want to tweak it, I say that (if combined with my only specialist school spells allowed fix), you have to choose the spell you want to copy when you prepare it, so it locks you in. You can choose any spell, of course, but then it's just like copying a spell from another school at +1-3 Spell Level, instead of an emergency anyspell for illusionists.

[NeoSeraphi]

The best fix for 3.5 would be something like...

Magic
Dread Necromancer
Beguiler
Warmage
Bard
Druid (with alternate class abilities from Unearth Arcana to get rid of the bear riding a bear summoning more bears "problem")

Melee (I'm reading ToB again for the first time in years)
Swordsage (give it some monk or rogue class features and UMD)
Warblade (give a choice between fighter feat line or rage ability line)
Crusader (give him mount and cha to saves)

Other:
Add in some other Tier 3 classes but the above if you like but those classes pretty much cover all the bases... besides a healer -_-;;;. Give the healer a boost up from tier 5 and you should be good.

What about archers?

[Reluctance]

I'd rather tweak them. I like the idea of fake blasts or fake summons that have some actual bite to them (and more of a bite for the weak-willed); what I don't like are things like Shadow Contingency or Shadow Holy Word. If belief and shadow are truly components to these things, I would rule that you can only duplicate evocations and conjurations with a visual component built-in.

Why not simply make one shadow-blasty spell and one shadow-summon spell, sidestepping the ability to draw from an entire school of magic? Ideally you'd go something like 3.5 psi, where you could have a smaller number of base powers that can be augmented as needed.

[ScionoftheVoid]

The Shadow spells used for damage aren't really very effective unless you use Shadowcraft Mage shenanigans to get to or above 100% on a successful save. Choosing your damage type isn't exactly powerful (there's a +1 metamagic feat for that, and psionic powers have it by default), and doing it via Shadow spells loses most of the advantage by adding a second save. Not to mention adding spell resistance, losing a large advantage to the Orb spells.

Also, Shadow Conjuration only works for Conjuration spells of the (Summoning) and (Creation) subschools, so you can't get Shadow Teleport anyway. Shadow Contingency and Shadow Holy Word, however, are fair complaints.

[JellyPooga]

Why not simply make one shadow-blasty spell and one shadow-summon spell, sidestepping the ability to draw from an entire school of magic? Ideally you'd go something like 3.5 psi, where you could have a smaller number of base powers that can be augmented as needed.

There's something deeply satisfying about the phrase "shadow-blasty spell"

It's not a bad idea either. It's fairly obvious that's what the spells are supposed to do and they're only broken because the designers couldn't be bothered to word it better, so you end up with the unintended.

[NeoSeraphi]

The Shadow spells used for damage aren't really very effective unless you use Shadowcraft Mage shenanigans to get to or above 100% on a successful save. Choosing your damage type isn't exactly powerful (there's a +1 metamagic feat for that, and psionic powers have it by default), and doing it via Shadow spells loses most of the advantage by adding a second save. Not to mention adding spell resistance, losing a large advantage to the Orb spells.

What feat is that? Plus, it doesn't take into account that you also get to choose your range, AOE, and whether it's a single target for big damage or a massive radius for catching smaller creatures. Yeah, it allows a Will save to disbelieve as well, but that's a small price to pay for a Sudden Sculpt effect, as well as the ability to cast spells you don't even know/have in your spellbook.

[undead hero]

What about archers?

That's why i said add in the other tier 3 classes (ranger) though the martial adepts can make decent/great archers depending on how much work you put into them.