Quick fix for wizards.

[frogglesmash]

So the fix works like so: We take the mechanics of specialist Wizards and we inverts them i.e. instead of choosing a couple of schools you can't cast from, you choose a couple you can cast from.

I haven't worked out too many of the specifics yet, but I'm thinking you'd have the schools divided into three tiers based on the versatility of each school. You'd then have the option of choosing up to three schools of magic that you can cast from (1 from t1, or 1 from t2 and 1 from t3, or 3 from t3). These (and universal spells) would be the only spells you'd be allowed to add to your wizard spellbook, all other schools would then be treated as prohibited schools.

I'm pretty sure that a system like this would make it significantly more difficult for wizards to be able to do everything while also forcing them to be far more varied than they typically are.

So, what's the verdict. Would this work? Are their any consequences that I may have overlooked?

[gooddragon1]

So the fix works like so: We take the mechanics of specialist Wizards and we inverts them i.e. instead of choosing a couple of schools you can't cast from, you choose a couple you can cast from.

I haven't worked out too many of the specifics yet, but I'm thinking you'd have the schools divided into three tiers based on the versatility of each school. You'd then have the option of choosing up to three schools of magic that you can cast from (1 from t1, or 1 from t2 and 1 from t3, or 3 from t3). These (and universal spells) would be the only spells you'd be allowed to add to your wizard spellbook, all other schools would then be treated as prohibited schools.

I'm pretty sure that a system like this would make it significantly more difficult for wizards to be able to do everything while also forcing them to be far more varied than they typically are.

So, what's the verdict. Would this work? Are their any consequences that I may have overlooked?

Spell Versatility (Ex)

A 5th-level transmuter using this variant can adapt magic of other schools to his own style of spellcasting. For every five class levels that the transmuter gains, he can select one spell of any spell level that he has access to and treat it as if it were a transmutation spell. This means, for example, that the specialist can learn the spell normally and even prepare it as a bonus spell from the transmutation school. This spell can even be from a school that he has chosen as a prohibited school. Once a spell is chosen to be affected by this ability, it cannot be changed.

For example, a transmutation specialist using this variant has selected abjuration and necromancy as his prohibited schools. At 5th level, he gains access to 3rd-level spells. He chooses dispel magic and forever after treats dispel magic as if were a transmutation spell.

A transmuter using this variant does not gain bonus feats for advancing as a wizard.

Alter Self
Polymorph
Polymorph Any Object
Shapechange

[frogglesmash]

I was not aware that Spell Versatility existed, it would definitely need to be replaced with something else so as to avoid rendering my system useless.

Concerning the polymorph line of spells: That's a whole other, admittedly related issue that I am not trying to fix here. I am simply trying to decrease the size to the wizard's bag of trick in a simple and thematically appropriate manner.

[ryu]

I was not aware that Spell Versatility existed, it would definitely need to be replaced with something else so as to avoid rendering my system useless.

Concerning the polymorph line of spells: That's a whole other, admittedly related issue that I am not trying to fix here. I am simply trying to decrease the size to the wizard's bag of trick in a simple and thematically appropriate manner.

There are literally dozens if not hundreds of ways of using spells to emulate or grant other spells. Like, seriously. No quick fix is going to remove caster versatility. It oozes from their every pore.

[frogglesmash]

There are literally dozens if not hundreds of ways of using spells to emulate or grant other spells. Like, seriously. No quick fix is going to remove caster versatility. It oozes from their every pore.

That's great and all, but these abilities can and should be dealt with on a case by case basis. What I am looking for is some feedback on the mechanics I have presented, not the best ways to ignore them.

[Grod_The_Giant]

It'll help some, one supposes, but schools of magic are still huge. It's better to push on to the ultimate manifestation of forced specialization and write fixed lists (or classes!) in the vein of the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer. Like so.

[LTwerewolf]

Transmutation wizards and conjuration wizards aren't really touched by this rule.

[nedz]

I ran something similar in 2E.

Characters either take the powerful schools {Conjuration, Transmutation} and don't lose much or they take the weak schools and suffer. In short you haven't changed the low floor, high ceiling aspect of Wizard, you have just fixed it in place.

[Pluto!]

It wouldn't hurt.

What I like to consider is replacing Wizard with multiple Warmage-styled casting classes, giving all casters fixed spell lists. Spells from outside that list would have to be picked up through Eclectic Learning. Otherwise, casters would need to find scrolls. Spellbooks wouldn't need to be abandoned as a trope, but they would be treated as compilations of multiple scolls - each a 1-off effect that coupdn't be reused.

[Troacctid]

I don't like it. A Wizard with only one school of magic might as well be a Sorcerer. I don't play Wizards so that I can not have a wide range of spells known. That's practically the whole point of a Wizard. If this rule were in play, I would probably just never play the class--I'd be a Cleric or Druid or Archivist instead.

If you want to increase diversity among arcane casters, this is just a worse version of "Make specialization mandatory" or "Make all specialists use at least two of their Unearthed Arcana variants." It's also going to be less impactful than buffing the Sorcerer--as the rules stand, the Sorcerer is ridiculously nerfed compared to the Wizard, to the point where it's just depressing to compare the two. If you bring the Sorcerer up to par with the Wizard (just give it bonus feats and boost its casting progression up a level), then suddenly you have a meaningful choice between them instead of "Oh, yeah, obviously Wizard every time."

[KillianHawkeye]

I would consider looking at the 3.0 version of specialization for inspiration, since it at least made an attempt at recognizing that the schools of magic aren't equal as written.

[frogglesmash]

I don't like it. A Wizard with only one school of magic might as well be a Sorcerer. I don't play Wizards so that I can not have a wide range of spells known. That's practically the whole point of a Wizard. If this rule were in play, I would probably just never play the class--I'd be a Cleric or Druid or Archivist instead.

If you want to increase diversity among arcane casters, this is just a worse version of "Make specialization mandatory" or "Make all specialists use at least two of their Unearthed Arcana variants." It's also going to be less impactful than buffing the Sorcerer--as the rules stand, the Sorcerer is ridiculously nerfed compared to the Wizard, to the point where it's just depressing to compare the two. If you bring the Sorcerer up to par with the Wizard (just give it bonus feats and boost its casting progression up a level), then suddenly you have a meaningful choice between them instead of "Oh, yeah, obviously Wizard every time."

I think you've missed the point, I'm trying to have fewer overpowered god mages, not more.

[Andezzar]

I would consider looking at the 3.0 version of specialization for inspiration, since it at least made an attempt at recognizing that the schools of magic aren't equal as written.

How did it work?

I think you've missed the point, I'm trying to have fewer overpowered god mages, not more.

What he's trying to say, you will get fewer god mages, but more god archivists/clerics/druids.

[Grod_The_Giant]

What he's trying to say, you will get fewer god mages, but more god archivists/clerics/druids.

To be fair, the wizard list is the most powerful, and there exist similar easy/obvious nerfs for most of the others.

[Andezzar]

To be fair, the wizard list is the most powerful, and there exist similar easy/obvious nerfs for most of the others.

Cleric and Druid are still tier 1 and the OP did not propose any nerf alongside the wizard nerf. So it is a valid concern.

[KillianHawkeye]

How did it work?

Each school had a list of options for what you gave up when you specialized, and the more powerful schools made you give up more than the weaker ones. Actually, it was sort of ordered into three tiers like the OP proposed.

Basically, if you wanted to specialize in Conjuration, Evocation, or Transmutation, you could either a) give up one of those same three schools which you didn't specialize in, b) give up two of the following: Abjuration, Enchantment, or Illusion, or c) give up any three schools.

If you wanted to specialize in Abjuration, Enchantment, or Illusion, you could either a) give up one of those same three schools which you didn't specialize in, b) give up Conjuration, Evocation, or Transmutation, or c) give up both Divination AND Necromancy.

If you wanted to specialize in Divination or Necromancy, you just had to pick any single other school of magic to give up.

Now this might need to be re-examined to take into consideration the changes made in the 3.5 conversion as well as there just being a lot more spells added over the years. Also, there are some noobish misconceptions evident which arose from the 3E play-testers failure to deviate from the standard party roles established by older editions of D&D, such as over-valuing Evocation and possibly under-valuing Necromancy. At the very least, I'd say it's a decent starting point.

[AvatarVecna]

There is no "quick fix" for this problem; it goes down too many layers. Firstly, while taking away access to broken BS is a good idea, this rule doesn't do that, it just slightly reduces the amount of broken BS a single mage can access. Secondly, I don't think we should be taking wizards down a peg, but rather boosting up non-casters to caster level awesomeness. Thirdly, no blanket fix will actually fix anything, and this is no different because a broken school of magic is not the same thing as a broken class/build; is the Illusion School T3 because it's rendered pointless by one of the most common immunities in the game, T2 because it has lots of combat and utility effects with a variety of uses, T1 because a good portion of the school is only limited by your imagination and creativity, or T-1 because Shadowcraft Mages who use Arcane Disciple (Luck) to abuse hyper-realistic Miracles can accomplish literally anything, despite technically only using one school of magic? Finally, and this is the biggest issue, its nerfing power does more to screw over non-optimizers than optimizers; veteran munchkins have lots of tricks around little fixes like this, but less obsessive players will be stuck being mediocre at best, and borderline monk-incapable at worst (if they have no idea what they're doing).

[frogglesmash]

~snip~

I personally feel that bringing everyone up to the level of t1 casters is not a good direction for the game to take, mainly because it generates more of a workload that I, as a DM, am willing to shoulder. I should also address the the fact that when people read "quick fix" they seem understand it to mean "quick, easy, and perfect." What I mean when I say "quick fix," is something that is quick and dirty, and helps fix the game in a way that requires a modicum of player co-operation.

[Cosi]

The idea that Wizards are powerful because they are "versatile" is wrong. The reason 2nd level spells are powerful isn't because you can use glitterdust, cloud of bewilderment, or web to win encounters. It's because alter self lets you do stupid things with spellcasting and inheritance structures.

And this fix manages to nerf the cool parts of Wizards (casting a variety of spells), but not the broken parts. You can do Chain Binding with Abjuration and Conjuration. With Necromancy (or is summon undead Conjuration?) you can do the Shadow Over The Sun. And shapechange is totally capable of breaking the game all on its own.

[ryu]

The idea that Wizards are powerful because they are "versatile" is wrong. The reason 2nd level spells are powerful isn't because you can use glitterdust, cloud of bewilderment, or web to win encounters. It's because alter self lets you do stupid things with spellcasting and inheritance structures.

And this fix manages to nerf the cool parts of Wizards (casting a variety of spells), but not the broken parts. You can do Chain Binding with Abjuration and Conjuration. With Necromancy (or is summon undead Conjuration?) you can do the Shadow Over The Sun. And shapechange is totally capable of breaking the game all on its own.

No no, it's actually both. That is unless you'd like to claim that a sorcerer boosted to wizard caster progression is wizard equivalent. Versatility is power in itself.

[Troacctid]

I think you've missed the point, I'm trying to have fewer overpowered god mages, not more.

Nerfing the Wizard is unlikely to reduce the number of god mages--it will just push them over to the other T1 classes. Then you end up with lower diversity overall because there are fewer viable options.

[Cosi]

No no, it's actually both. That is unless you'd like to claim that a sorcerer boosted to wizard caster progression is wizard equivalent. Versatility is power in itself.

It's closer than you seem to think. The Wizard still has a bunch of advantages, but they're mostly structural (bonus feats, Spontaneous Divination + Versatile Spellcaster, and so on). If you bumped things up so that the Sorcerer actually got more base spells (like 4/level or something) and gave them actual class features, they would be basically competitive.

[nedz]

It's closer than you seem to think. The Wizard still has a bunch of advantages, but they're mostly structural (bonus feats, Spontaneous Divination + Versatile Spellcaster, and so on). If you bumped things up so that the Sorcerer actually got more base spells (like 4/level or something) and gave them actual class features, they would be basically competitive.

You can't build a Batman Sorcerer.

Actually the reason I did this in 2E was to create more Thematic Wizards.

[ryu]

It's closer than you seem to think. The Wizard still has a bunch of advantages, but they're mostly structural (bonus feats, Spontaneous Divination + Versatile Spellcaster, and so on). If you bumped things up so that the Sorcerer actually got more base spells (like 4/level or something) and gave them actual class features, they would be basically competitive.

You do not get to say sorcerers aren't weaker for versatility and then posit your fix as directly improving their gimped versatility. Do you not see the inherent logical flaw in that argument?

[Cosi]

You do not get to say sorcerers aren't weaker for versatility and then posit your fix as directly improving their gimped versatility. Do you not see the inherent logical flaw in that argument?

The suggested fix is still less versatile than the Wizard. Well, strategically. It's more versatile than the Sorcerer, but the thesis "versatility == power" would suggest that it shouldn't matter unless the character in question is at least as versatile as the Wizard.

[ryu]

The suggested fix is still less versatile than the Wizard. Well, strategically. It's more versatile than the Sorcerer, but the thesis "versatility == power" would suggest that it shouldn't matter unless the character in question is at least as versatile as the Wizard.

Wrong. If versatility is the primary benefit of your fix you've already ceded that the sorcerer is weaker with versatility as a significant factor. Literally my point was that you can't just give a sorcerer a wizard's power to make them equal. The other significant gimped area is versatility. Yes the bonus feats and superior ACFs are also there and they are real points, but they aren't the main points by any stretch of the imagination.

[johnbragg]

Hmm What if we use Grod The Giant's idea of Tier 1 casters being limited to the BArd spell progression, advanced one level (so a Wizard 1 still starts with a first level spell). Divine casters have the option of Spontaneous Divine Caster from UA.

That way there is a serious tradeoff between versatility and raw power.

Obviously the problem of broken spells still exists, but I'm going to let Mr. Oberroni handle that.

[Beheld]

Wrong. If versatility is the primary benefit of your fix you've already ceded that the sorcerer is weaker with versatility as a significant factor. Literally my point was that you can't just give a sorcerer a wizard's power to make them equal. The other significant gimped area is versatility. Yes the bonus feats and superior ACFs are also there and they are real points, but they aren't the main points by any stretch of the imagination.

You are wrong, no really.

If Sorcerers with 3-5 spells of each spell level who get spells at the same level as Wizards who can cast 40 spells of each level is equally as strong, then versatility clearly isn't the power you think it is.

Sorcerers who have can spontaneously cast from one spell are not strong, sure whatever, but that's not because versatility is not power, it's because one level appropriate spell isn't going to help in all level appropriate challenges. But the difference between 5 and 50 known spells of each level is super minor.

[Amphetryon]

So the fix works like so: We take the mechanics of specialist Wizards and we inverts them i.e. instead of choosing a couple of schools you can't cast from, you choose a couple you can cast from.

I haven't worked out too many of the specifics yet, but I'm thinking you'd have the schools divided into three tiers based on the versatility of each school. You'd then have the option of choosing up to three schools of magic that you can cast from (1 from t1, or 1 from t2 and 1 from t3, or 3 from t3). These (and universal spells) would be the only spells you'd be allowed to add to your wizard spellbook, all other schools would then be treated as prohibited schools.

I'm pretty sure that a system like this would make it significantly more difficult for wizards to be able to do everything while also forcing them to be far more varied than they typically are.

So, what's the verdict. Would this work? Are their any consequences that I may have overlooked?

Consider a Wizard who takes only Conjuration and Necromancy spells, in addition to those Universal spells that are always available. Which situations do you see this Wizard hampered in, aside from contrived social situations where a Wizard with Necromancy spells may be considered to be dabbling in Teh Evulz.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Hmm What if we use Grod The Giant's idea of Tier 1 casters being limited to the BArd spell progression, advanced one level (so a Wizard 1 still starts with a first level spell). Divine casters have the option of Spontaneous Divine Caster from UA.

That way there is a serious tradeoff between versatility and raw power.

Obviously the problem of broken spells still exists, but I'm going to let Mr. Oberroni handle that.

You probably want to weaken T2 casters as well, since the power discrepancy is quite close, but yeah- it's goofy that wizards et al are both the most powerful AND most versatile classes. That's just poor design. It probably wouldn't hurt to have unrestricted-access casters top out at, oh, 7th level spells, specialists and spontaneous casters at 8th, and focused specialist classes at 9th.