I'd say that they are a commoner with the wizard's skill list and that upon gaining wizard 1 they gain the spell list and.. keep going from therre. (they even learn a few more simple weapons in the process!).
If that didn't work then I'd say they are wizard 1 without any of hte class abilities (just HD saves and bab) until they actually "learn it".
The game though really just assumes that they don't exist, much as children don't have class levels either. They are just.. there.
-S
I say that before that point they had no stats because there was nothing you needed to determine mechanically.
Slow down, cuz I've been considering the mechanics of time travel, and I need a way to kill myself to prevent all the evil deeds I done... Are we immortal until we get a level?
The best explanation of sorcery I have heard, is pyromancy in Dark Souls.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEGkgOdi9XU&hd=1
1:26 and move forward a bit. Very ethnic, calling on the natural, obsessing over fire.
Kybryn, I've played with a dm that gave sorcerers powers and spells when they were children. It was annoying to see the rules broken like that. The child hasn't learned the means to cast spells, hasn't matured enough, but the dm just waved all that. He was so happy making a child kobold cast burning hands, because it fit with his point of view. Sigh.
I don't understand LazarX's initial comments. Seemed angry though.
I always thought ALL classes had a certain amount of 'training' in their backgrounds before 'becoming' first level.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I were to walk into a wizard's academy, what would all the students be? If I were to attack and attempt to kill a student before he was a 1st-level wizard, what would his stats be?
Irrelevant. The dice would have more influence on his survival than any stats he may have.
|
Alright, so a 1st-level wizard isn't a wizard until he spends a lifetime studying to be a wizard. So...
...what were they before that?
Fractional-level characters. With only some bonus to saves, BAB, skill points, class powers, bonus feats, etc.
As the game works in steps simbolized by integers (eg. levels) you have the starting level at... guess, 1.
Maybe you're looking for some more granularity in the handling of the game system.
I'm not really sure why any stats are needed at all. If you are fighting a bunch of zero-level characters you're probably going to do just fine. What's the best saves they are going to have? +2? Best hit points? 4? Best AC? 11? I don't see it as an issue.
If you really need something, you can work with this and see if you can make it work with Pathfinder (I think it should be an incredibly easy conversion). It basically took the apprentice level rules in the 3.0 DMG and added to them.
Dead children have no stats.If I were to attack and attempt to kill a student before he was a 1st-level wizard, what would his stats be?
They still have height and weight. Since you'll need to determine wether the party wizard will be able to move them around with mage hand.
Don't ask. There's something wrong with my group.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I once ran a campaign where I had the players all start as NPC classes. When they gained enough experience (which I made 500 xp), they were allowed to "switch out" their NPC class for a PC class, and proceed from there. I even designed an "apprentice" and "acolyte" npc class at level 1, for wizard and cleric types respectively (this was back in 3.5), both of which only had level 0 spell access. It was neat, but not really worth the effort.
I imagine something like that happens, though.
1st level player characters pop into being fully-formed.
Irrelevant. The dice would have more influence on his survival than any stats he may have.
If I were to walk into a wizard's academy, what would all the students be? If I were to attack and attempt to kill a student before he was a 1st-level wizard, what would his stats be?
Urgh. I wish you could explain it to a dm I know. He insisted adding child templates and giving children levels.
If a sorcerer casts spells innately, that is, they were born with magic, and a wizard had no magic and was forced to study to learn it...
...then how is it you can play a 1st-level wizard at all? Shouldn't all wizards be multiclassed characters?
The same can be said of any other class that requires extensive training.
Just some food for thought.
Discuss.
What I try to figure out isn't whether there should be 1st level Wizards, but whether there should be 1st level Wizards in play. They are incredibly weak, vulnerable and have such incredible limits on what they can initially do that they are almost unplayable.
If I were a Wizard I wouldn't dream of leaving my school/master until I was 5th level at least - its a very dangerous world out there.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I were a Wizard I wouldn't dream of leaving my school/master until I was 5th level at least - its a very dangerous world out there.
Me too.
But, a party of adventurers is often (not always) an unexpected group of extraordinary people in unusual circumstances.
That being the case, I look at what the 3.5 format makes possible and I laugh a little bit inside. Here's an example.
3.5 Wizard 1 vs 3.5 Warblade 1
Wizard: HP 4, AC 11
Warblade: HP 14, AC 17
Warblade attacks with: Fullblade + Sapphire Nightmare Blade + Punishing Stance
This nets him:
Melee Fullblade +5 (2d8+2d6+6)
So lets try this out.
(makes the wizard flat footed)
(plenty)
(wtf)
The level Wizard 1 was just removed from Existence by the Warblade 1. He is now at -25 hp.
Oh the sad and scary life of a lvl 1 wizard/sorcerer.... or anything vs a Warblade at lvl 1.
If I were a Wizard I wouldn't dream of leaving my school/master until I was 5th level at least
But, how would you ever reach 5th level if you never went out and gained experience?
Training, experimentation, even teaching others would all be things that could grant you experience. Naturally adventuring would be a vastly faster method of gaining experience, but that doesn't mean it's the only way.
this kind of thought process always messes me up when a player decides that they want their level 3 paladin to suddenly manifest level 1 wizard ability at 4th level.
I make my characters display some kind of long term PC planning or they cant do it. if you want your character to suddenly manifest new class abilities then you have to spend a certain amount of RP time either in character creation or for a level or two before the class change explaining how you are going to gain these levels. maybe you were an apprentice mage before taking up arms during the goblin raid but now 3 levels into fighter you decide to return to your studies during down time so that at level 4 you can be a level 1 wizard.
or maybe the barbarian that wants to take alchemist levels spent the early part of his life as some mad scientists test subject giving him an innate understanding that he later spends a few levels practicing so that he can begging leveling as an alchemist.
but I refuse to allow the level 6 barbarian with a great axe and 11 int to suddenly and miraculously wake up one morning with an alchemy lab, reagents and an innate understanding of magic just so that the player can make mutagens that enhance his rage and a tentacle arm to hold his potions of healing.
|
|
but I refuse to allow the level 6 barbarian with a great axe and 11 int to suddenly and miraculously wake up one morning with an alchemy lab, reagents and an innate understanding of magic just so that the player can make mutagens that enhance his rage and a tentacle arm to hold his potions of healing.
What if said barbarian delves into knowledge forbidden by the elders and learns what plants and fungi can be used to touch the power of the outer realms, horribly misshaping his form and strengthening his inner fury?
Using the Alchemist class, of course.
this kind of thought process always messes me up when a player decides that they want their level 3 paladin to suddenly manifest level 1 wizard ability at 4th level.
When I begin to feel this way I remind myself I am playing a fantasy game not running a reality simulation. ;-)
I accept many game mechanics as they are without trying to tie some kind of "real world" logic to them.
It is the only way I can just play and have fun.
What I try to figure out isn't whether there should be 1st level Wizards, but whether there should be 1st level Wizards in play. They are incredibly weak, vulnerable and have such incredible limits on what they can initially do that they are almost unplayable.Damm it! I knew I was doing something wrong. Between AD&D, Living Greyhawk, and Pathfinder, I've gone and leveled several wizards beyond first... and had fun doing it! How can I redeem myself?
@Ravingdork: I think Wiggz position explains why LazarX was offended by the post. He was thinking it was another attempt to prove that Sorcerers were better than Wizards, but had the context wrong. Instead this is a theoretical discussion about what happens pre-Level 1, which is not really the point of the game, even if it is fun to consider.
@LazarX: Wizards are a great class. Initial weakness balanced by immense future power. Do not worry about having to justify your skill to random strangers online :)
@Wiggz: 1st level anything alone will die to a huge amount of stuff. 1st level Wizards will be in a party who can keep them safe and reap the benefits of a non Level-1 wizard later.
Don't forget, we're also dealing with people gaining power exponentially once they start adventuring.
Let's say you're playing Rise of the Runelords. You start at level 1. How long does RotR last? Maybe a year? Less, if your characters are highly motivated.
So Mr Wizard has spent 25 years getting to 1st level, then he goes to, what, Level 17 in a year or less? I personally try to string things out a little...having a decently-sized downtime gap between adventures, for example (which is also handy when someone *does* want to multiclass: "Yes, you spend the next three years studying at the Tower of Slightly-Elevated Sorcery" and return to your friends, older, wiser, and wielding a staff as well as your trusty old sword..."). I usually try to modify the "pointers" to the next adventure somewhat so it will logically take some time/resources to figure out.
I guess my point is that sometimes scratching the surface can lead to unsightly and unwanted blemishes! :)
If a sorcerer casts spells innately, that is, they were born with magic, and a wizard had no magic and was forced to study to learn it......then how is it you can play a 1st-level wizard at all? Shouldn't all wizards be multiclassed characters?
The same can be said of any other class that requires extensive training.
Just some food for thought.
Discuss.
Without going through the thread I always figured Sorcerors manifested pimples, hormones and magic at about the same time. Starting with a bit of all three and advancing as they age :) They start with an average age of 17-18 iirc at first level. End of adolescence, welcome to adulthood. I'd imagine a lot of those kids would get the boot out of the house by then. Imagine; hormones, angst, pimples and accidentally burning down the barn...
Wizards went to school or apprenticed to learn their trade. In the Middle Ages apprenticeship typically began about 10-15 years of age and lasted about 7 years. That fits for Wizards with an average starting age about 22 at first level, again iirc. The academic rigor of apprenticing / schooling to become a Wizard would probably push the starting age of apprenticeship to the upper range (c. 15), so 22 sounds about right. So they start first level just out of college in modern terms. A pre first level Wizard should have the stats, BAB and saves but less knowledge. Cantrips, skills and so on should increase over the span of their training and getting the ability to cast a first level spell should mark their "graduation" to first level status.
My 2 cp, and no doubt I've been ninja'd further up thread but I thought I'd just drop my opinions into the mix.
*edited a bit for clarity...
Thanks, John Kerpan.
If a sorcerer casts spells innately, that is, they were born with magic, and a wizard had no magic and was forced to study to learn it......then how is it you can play a 1st-level wizard at all? Shouldn't all wizards be multiclassed characters?
The same can be said of any other class that requires extensive training.
Just some food for thought.
Discuss.
Without going through the thread I always figured Sorcerors manifested pimples, hormones and magic at about the same time. Starting with a bit of all three and advancing as they age :) They start with an average age of 17-18 iirc at first level. End of adolescence, welcome to adulthood. I'd imagine a lot of those kids would get the boot out of the house by then. Imagine; hormones, angst, pimples and accidentally burning down the barn...
Wizards went to school or apprenticed to learn their trade. In the Middle Ages apprenticeship typically began about 10-15 years of age and lasted about 7 years. That fits for Wizards with an average starting age about 22 at first level, again iirc. The academic rigor of apprenticing / schooling to become a Wizard would probably push the starting age of apprenticeship to the upper range (c. 15), so 22 sounds about right. So they start first level just out of college in modern terms. A pre first level Wizard should have the stats, BAB and saves but less knowledge. Cantrips, skills and so on should increase over the span of their training and getting the ability to cast a first level spell should mark their "graduation" to first level status.
My 2 cp, and no doubt I've been ninja'd further up thread but I thought I'd just drop my opinions into the mix.
*edited a bit for clarity...
They might feel the inner power, but they still have to learn the various components behind the casting of spells. Verbal, somatic, whatever. I've seen a dm put child sorcerer npcs into a game. So this kobold kid hits us with burning hands, after we startled him. I asked, did he cast the spell? How did he know how to do it? When did he learn it? What is his spell list? He has one already?
I don't like some things changed because a dm wants children to cast without actually casting, learning how to cast properly and satisfying the pre-req age rules. Grrr.
I think the main problem here is - again - multiclassing.
A character started with wizard spend a lot of time studying, but then the fighter suddenly announces, I am a wizard now, and puff, he is.
That's what makes the whole thing stupid...
Perfect Example HERE.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They might feel the inner power, but they still have to learn the various components behind the casting of spells. Verbal, somatic, whatever. I've seen a dm put child sorcerer npcs into a game. So this kobold kid hits us with burning hands, after we startled him. I...
There is little that annoys me more than sorcerer/bard/whatever spontaneous caster players that want to play like trainee X-men, with vast power spilling out of them when startled or afraid. Usually, I see them wanting to use this excuse to get away with quickened silent stilled spells and justify it as an emotional response. In one game a sorcerer wanted to cast fly unwittingly and only realise that it had been cast when she was several feet off the ground... in a tense meeting with bandits who were about to jump us if we made a wrong move. If she'd been going 'blahblahcastingnoises', they probably would have gutted her on the spot.
Spells take actions.
Spells (usually) have somatic and verbal components.
You don't get to skip core mechanics of spellcasting for free just for flavour.
:)
Damn straight umbral.
Yep. I've forced the requirement of time and rp for classes to change, and said no to only a few when it made no sense and was just for the phat abilities. I like multi-classing, but not all are allowed so easily.
The game I ran where they started as commoners, your next class was chosen ahead of time. It is what your Isgerian peasant hoped they could become, and had been planning as best as they could for years. The blacksmith's daughter is self taught and an old opponent of the local bullies, she will go fighter, the rogue is in a family of thieves and gamblers, and so on. One person wanted to play an alchemist after going from a ranch-hand/sausage-maker, I said no to that one. Some people allow sudden changes though.
Force it to make sense, be plausible and follow a continuity, and some get s%**ty. I want I want, says the player.
They might feel the inner power, but they still have to learn the various components behind the casting of spells. Verbal, somatic, whatever. I've seen a dm put child sorcerer npcs into a game. So this kobold kid hits us with burning hands, after we startled him. I...There is little that annoys me more than sorcerer/bard/whatever spontaneous caster players that want to play like trainee X-men, with vast power spilling out of them when startled or afraid. Usually, I see them wanting to use this excuse to get away with quickened silent stilled spells and justify it as an emotional response. In one game a sorcerer wanted to cast fly unwittingly and only realise that it had been cast when she was several feet off the ground... in a tense meeting with bandits who were about to jump us if we made a wrong move. If she'd been going 'blahblahcastingnoises', they probably would have gutted her on the spot.
Spells take actions.
Spells (usually) have somatic and verbal components.
You don't get to skip core mechanics of spellcasting for free just for flavour.
Yeah, you start blahing. Initiative time. If bandits win, some will shiv you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could see a sausage-maker becoming a very interesting alchemist. Making potions? No! Making bratwurst of bear's endurance! Instead of bandoliers of vials, he wears strings of sausages.
The german in me instantly feals appealed :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember that kobold sorcerer. X-men type nonsense. I remember asking the dm about that later and he couldn't offer an explanation other than "I like the flavour of it." When asked about how spells work, verbal and somatic stuff, he let slip that he felt all individuals with the unique bloodline would be sorcerers at the first level. I suggested the possibility of certain such individuals not experimenting with their inner power. If they train extensively with a weapon, their first level could be fighter. If they are forced by circumstances growing up, to be a frontiersman, learning to trek and all that, ranger. So on and so forth. He seemed quite baffled by such a suggestion.
As for the suggestion of wizards training until 5th level before they leave the academy, it sounds a bit odd. By the pathfinder npc guide, elites are about level 4 or 5. So.... this individual who has yet to even educate himself in the ways of the world by travelling, interacting with different races and the undertaking of certain ardous tasks, steps out into the world an elite? Teaching and instruction of others would fall under some form of individual training but training only gets you so far. Rarely more than just the bare basics. To better themselves, the gloves have to come off,the safety net has to disappear. Or else, the average member of the town militia/ fresh wizard graduate starts off as an elite. Which completely throws the mechanics of level dependence way off course. In such a setting, if there are no wizards below fifth level, there would also be no fighters/rogues/bards/etc below fifth level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The wizard only becomes a first level wizard AFTER years of training to master those few basic spells he knows: he's basically done high school and going on to university.
According to the random starting age table in the Pathfinder rules, this seems to be true not only for the wizard but also for the cleric, the druid and the monk.
It takes an average of 7 years after adulthood for a cleric/druid/monk/wizard to achieve 1st level (whether their training started before 15 years old is another matter altogether).
Comparatively, bards, fighters, paladins and rangers "graduate" in an average of 3.5 years after maturity, while it takes 2.5 years for barbarians, rogues and sorcerers to acquire their 1st level certificate.
I could see a sausage-maker becoming a very interesting alchemist. Making potions? No! Making bratwurst of bear's endurance! Instead of bandoliers of vials, he wears strings of sausages.
Also, they can extra as Saps for 1d6 nonlethal.
They might feel the inner power, but they still have to learn the various components behind the casting of spells. Verbal, somatic, whatever. I've seen a dm put child sorcerer npcs into a game. So this kobold kid hits us with burning hands, after we startled him. I...
Without going through the thread I always figured Sorcerors manifested pimples, hormones and magic at about the same time. Starting with a bit of all three and advancing as they age :) They start with an average age of 17-18 iirc at first level. End of adolescence, welcome to adulthood. I'd imagine a lot of those kids would get the boot out of the house by then. Imagine; hormones, angst, pimples and accidentally burning down the barn...
Yes, they have to learn how to cast the spell... to shape the magic within them into a recognizable, and useful, spell. I have always assumed that Wizard / Sorceror / divine spells are the same because it is the correct way to get that effect. My assumption for Sorcerors is that magic manifests itself in odd ways that aren't useful in a young Sorceror. They learn the correct way to do so with minimal training / exploration. Hence the younger starting age. Rather than cramming memorization and magical theory and "academic magic" like a Wizard they learn in a more vocational style. The spell will come out much the same. Again, my 2 cp, ymmv.
Princes of the Monarchy of England are required to do military service, especially in times of war. They may not be on the absolute front lines, but they're not outside of rsk.
It would be an interesting dilemma for a king though. Do you send your heir off on adventures and risk losing him or keep him at safe and guarantee he'll be a 1st level incompetent when he inherits?
Look at Prince's William and Harry.