IMHO,
its all about Fluff, Why give a Barbarian d12, because the typical sterotype is an oily bare chested he-man, the wizard is a weak neard. But he is a weak neard that can change the laws of reality. A d4 just makes sense to me. I'll keep it if Pathfinder does away with it. As a side note however even before 3.5 came out Sor. got d6 hit die in my game. Mainly again because of Fluff. A Wizard spent all his pre-advanturing time in school or some such, Sor. just got the ablities. So they, in theory had a more active life-style. I've never care that much about balance per-say, but for the two the balance comes from how many spells one knows over the other. As for balance with other classes I've never understood the a lot of the discusion over it.
Fighter type- starts vital, hits sweet spot, is bound by the laws of physics no longer as vital.
Wizards type- starts out sucks to be you, hits the sweet spot, ends able to change the laws of reality at a wim.
Cleric type - Always vital and always slightly better then the rest, but hey they are backed by the Gods. makes sense.
As a side note. And since this is my first message, errr, ever, I'm going to post my ideas for the changing the Sor.
the basics.
d6 hit
Gets to pick what he is decendent from, (Dragon, Fey, Outsider, ect.)
Skills more Cha. dependent
Every five levels gets to pick either Metamagic feat or Heritage feat(much like the Wizard but they get Metamagic feat or item creation).
Used Sor. from Book of Eldric Might for spells per day/slot.
I also used Dragonlance's Mystic this way. I may post this in the class section. For me in my game this has made the sor. a true independt class equal to the Wizard and his spell list. I'm not sure what to do with pathfinders update on the Wizard. Prob. adjust up when I see the Sorc.
He I like posting a message and getting my opinion out. This internet thing might actually catch on.
|
Considering the addition of feats that can double a melee specialists strength modifier or improving the ability to deliver critical hits, a few more hit points are not going to even come close to contributing to overpowering the wizard as a class. As was pointed out it amounts only to a +21 hit points over the wizard's career. And any martial combat worth their salt can deliver that sort of damage in a round at higher levels. That round or two of extra survivability can and should make all the difference though.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
The extra hit points are just enough to possibly prevent the wizards untimely demise from a critical hit.
Given that a wizard has plenty of magical options for bolstering their ability to survive (mage armor, bear's endurance, etc.), I'm really not following you. Are you saying that wizards shouldn't have a d4 because it puts them at risk?
Let's consider the options. Mage Armor. +4 armor bonus to AC. That's kinda like wearing a chain shirt. Except, a chain shirt can be enhanced. Mage Armor can't.
A cleric can wear fullplate (+8 to AC), can get that enhanced (say another +2), and cast other spells that stack with armor bonuses.
A fighter can buy the chain shirt, or the breastplate (+5 to AC), can get that enhanced.
The Rogue can get that chain shirt and have it enhanced as well.
So, essentially, the Wizard's AC at 1st level is pretty much what it is going to be for a long time. Sure, Shield is nice... but that's 1 min/level... so at lower levels you can have a +8 to your AC for 1 encounter. Yup... 18. Fantastic.
Bear's endurance... at level 5 you can get a +5 increase in hitpoints for 5 minutes a day.
I guess my feeling on wizards and defensive spells is this... those that have durations of several minutes, hours or all day are great and useful. But you don't have any of those at lower levels when you really need the higher AC to avoid getting hit. You've got Mage Armor for 1 to x hours.
If you get surprised and can't spend 5 rounds buffing up before hand, you'll be dead before your initiative comes around.
I guess my point is... casting buff spells on yourself to try to get on par with where the rest of the party is defensively (Mage Armor, Bear's Endurance, Shield) is going to occupy your first 3 rounds (or more if you want protection from arrows, fox's cunning for the dex bonus, etc.) of the fight. Figure three fights a day, you've got 4 first level spells and 3 second level spells used up. So this wizard who is maxed out defensively is entering the fight 2-5 rounds late, and doing so without any 1st or 2nd level spells to use.
Maybe it's just the way I play wizards... but spending 3 rounds buffing myself or 3 rounds trying to help the party with the fight at hand, I'm going to do what I can to help defeat the opponents.
Sure, at higher levels, there are prestige classes, spells, and equipment that can buff up a wizard. The problem is surviving long enough to get there. The d6 is going to help a lot in that regard.
|
Given that a wizard has plenty of magical options for bolstering their ability to survive (mage armor, bear's endurance, etc.), I'm really not following you. Are you saying that wizards shouldn't have a d4 because it puts them at risk?In short, there are lots of ways that a wizard, doing his job of staying in the back, is going to get beat up and killed anyway. Being able to withstand one or two attacks and then die isn't a very good prospect, no matter how big the party is. Lasting 3 or maybe, maybe 4 hits means the cleric can do something else with his turn and the Wizard might venture far enough in to try using some of those shorter range spells. And, who knows, the wizard might just survive that other caster's fireball. (in my experience, wizards don't do well with fort or ref. saves).
I don't see how giving the wizard the cushion of being able to survive 1 more hit is making the class over-powered.
I agree -- in my experience wizards usually have the highest AC among the PCs. And high-level wizards in my group *always* use Persistent (i.e. 24H) versions of all the "stat buffs". Therefore I'd like to see them still having D4, because I feel bumping up the HD is not fair to clerics, fighters, rangers and paladins.
I agree -- in my experience wizards usually have the highest AC among the PCs. And high-level wizards in my group *always* use Persistent (i.e. 24H) versions of all the "stat buffs". Therefore I'd like to see them still having D4, because I feel bumping up the HD is not fair to clerics, fighters, rangers and paladins.
Yet the best AC boosting spells are divine spells... in my experience, the Cleric tends to have the highest AC, the Fighter is usually next, and the Wizard is tied with the Rogue.
Persistent spell requires 2 feats... 2 feats you're not going to have at lower levels when you really need to be able to survive getting hit.
I disagree. Please keep wizards with a d6 hit die.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
For what it's worth, from Small Favor, a novel of the Dresden Files, Chapter Thirteen
"The second most important rule in combat wizardry is a simple one: Don't let them touch you.
Whether you're talking about vampires or ogres or some other kind of monstrous nasty, most of them can do hideous things to you if they get close enough to touch -- as even a lesser member of the gruff clan had demonstrated on my nose the night before.
The prime rule of combat wizardry is simple, too: Be prepared.
Wizards can potentially wield tremendous power against just about anything that might come along -- if we're ready to handle it. The problem is that the things that come after us know that too, so the favored tactic is the sudden ambush."
Seems to me that low hit points and attention to magical defenses best simulate that kind of thing.
For what it's worth, from Small Favor, a novel of the Dresden Files, Chapter Thirteen
"The second most important rule in combat wizardry is a simple one: Don't let them touch you.
Whether you're talking about vampires or ogres or some other kind of monstrous nasty, most of them can do hideous things to you if they get close enough to touch -- as even a lesser member of the gruff clan had demonstrated on my nose the night before.
The prime rule of combat wizardry is simple, too: Be prepared.
Wizards can potentially wield tremendous power against just about anything that might come along -- if we're ready to handle it. The problem is that the things that come after us know that too, so the favored tactic is the sudden ambush."
Seems to me that low hit points and attention to magical defenses best simulate that kind of thing.
Wait... you're saying Harry Dresden has low hitpoints!?! If Harry had hitpoints based on a d4, he'd have been dead in the first book! Someone with d4 hitpoints wouldn't have survived the fight with the lesser gruff... let alone had a chance against the medium gruff.
If anything, Wizards in the Dresden universe are tougher (heal faster than normal humans, can take more of a beating, etc.)... but they also have Listen as a class skill... something not true of 3.5 Wizards.
Also... the fight with the gruff in the train station... Harry hit the gruff with the staff. This was melee combat involving a Wizard, and the Wizard hit (which suggests a BAB), and did damage (involving a strength bonus). Not something a D&D 3.5 Wizard would do.
I think it's safe to say that Wizards in Harry's world aren't mirrored off of D&D 3.5 Wizards.
Although... it is a good example of how a Wizard who should be prepared and should use magic to boost his defenses and should avoid melee combat can't always do any of those things, and in those cases must be able to take a shot or two to the chin before being able to do anything. A d4 pretty much drops the survivability of the shot or two to the chin to nill. The lack of perception as a class skill means you are going to be surprised fairly often. The combination means you are in serious threat of death in every encounter in low levels.
Sorry, I haven't read all the thread, but I would like to say that d6 hp for wizards is a good idea (pretty sure I like the idea of the d8 for rogues too).
|
|
Given that a wizard has plenty of magical options for bolstering their ability to survive (mage armor, bear's endurance, etc.), I'm really not following you. Are you saying that wizards shouldn't have a d4 because it puts them at risk?Let's consider the options. Mage Armor. +4 armor bonus to AC. That's kinda like wearing a chain shirt. Except, a chain shirt can be enhanced. Mage Armor can't.
A cleric can wear fullplate (+8 to AC), can get that enhanced (say another +2), and cast other spells that stack with armor bonuses.
A fighter can buy the chain shirt, or the breastplate (+5 to AC), can get that enhanced.
The Rogue can get that chain shirt and have it enhanced as well.
So, essentially, the Wizard's AC at 1st level is pretty much what it is going to be for a long time. Sure, Shield is nice... but that's 1 min/level... so at lower levels you can have a +8 to your AC for 1 encounter. Yup... 18. Fantastic.
Bear's endurance... at level 5 you can get a +5 increase in hitpoints for 5 minutes a day.
I guess my feeling on wizards and defensive spells is this... those that have durations of several minutes, hours or all day are great and useful. But you don't have any of those at lower levels when you really need the higher AC to avoid getting hit. You've got Mage Armor for 1 to x hours.
If you get surprised and can't spend 5 rounds buffing up before hand, you'll be dead before your initiative comes around.
I guess my point is... casting buff spells on yourself to try to get on par with where the rest of the party is defensively (Mage Armor, Bear's Endurance, Shield) is going to occupy your first 3 rounds (or more if you want protection from arrows, fox's cunning for the dex bonus, etc.) of the fight. Figure three fights a day, you've got 4 first level spells and 3 second level spells used up. So this wizard who is maxed out defensively is entering the fight 2-5 rounds late, and doing so without any 1st or 2nd level spells to use.
Maybe...
Not to mention that buffing yourself, all you're really doing is using your magical power to keep yourself alive. You're not contributing to the party. Using pathfinder rules (with racial HP) your level 1 human wizard would have 12 HP with only a 10 Con. THAT will help your wizard live to second level. It will allow your wizard to contribute to the party by casting combat spells during combat.
I must say that Pathfinders solution to Wizards low level survivability in combat is much better than 4th editions solution in allowing wizards to use any armor they want with no arcane spell failure as long as they have the proficiency...how many wizards are going to take Heavy Armor proficiency at first level? Wow...BROKEN...
I would suggest that a d6 doesn't go far enough. To me the goal should be to end teh reliance of wizards and sorcerors on toads, and a 1 hp increase per level is not going to do that.
I think hit points should be based on creature type. Elves, dwarves, half-orcs, half-elves, gnomes and halflings are all listed in the monster manual as humanoids, giving them 1d8 hit points per hit die. (the most glaring omission from the monster manual is humans) Why not apply that logic across the board?
You can give fighter types an additional +1 hp per HD as a class ability, and barbarians a +2 hp per HD to preserve the edge they already possess, and to preserve some backwards compatibility.
Lump
Considering the addition of feats that can double a melee specialists strength modifier or improving the ability to deliver critical hits, a few more hit points are not going to even come close to contributing to overpowering the wizard as a class. As was pointed out it amounts only to a +21 hit points over the wizard's career. And any martial combat worth their salt can deliver that sort of damage in a round at higher levels. That round or two of extra survivability can and should make all the difference though.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
The extra hit points are just enough to possibly prevent the wizards untimely demise from a critical hit.
That is my point,Xaaon. And as i said, dying just because some grubby little goblin got a lucky shot is not very heroic and this is a heroic game. Even the grittier settings are heroic, at least as far as PCs are concerned.
Wizards in a large amount of fantasy literature can be some tough bastards. The company wizards from the Black Company series come to mind. Wizards from the Paksennarion series can also be surprisngly tough for the image of scholars. I wouldnt count Gandalf though, as an Istari/Maiar he is a demigod basically (at the least a celestial of some sort) not a human. Many of the ones in Conan stories are preternaturally hard to kill and that is before any spells.
I think people who state that giving D6 to wizards break the class and make it too powerful are not really looking at the math compared to other classes. Or have never seen a fighter dish out 30+ points of damage in a single round.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
|
|
Considering the addition of feats that can double a melee specialists strength modifier or improving the ability to deliver critical hits, a few more hit points are not going to even come close to contributing to overpowering the wizard as a class. As was pointed out it amounts only to a +21 hit points over the wizard's career. And any martial combat worth their salt can deliver that sort of damage in a round at higher levels. That round or two of extra survivability can and should make all the difference though.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
The extra hit points are just enough to possibly prevent the wizards untimely demise from a critical hit.
That is my point,Xaaon. And as i said, dying just because some grubby little goblin got a lucky shot is not very heroic and this is a heroic game. Even the grittier settings are heroic, at least as far as PCs are concerned.
Wizards in a large amount of fantasy literature can be some tough bastards. The company wizards from the Black Company series come to mind. Wizards from the Paksennarion series can also be surprisngly tough for the image of scholars. I wouldnt count Gandalf though, as an Istari/Maiar he is a demigod basically (at the least a celestial of some sort) not a human. Many of the ones in Conan stories are preternaturally hard to kill and that is before any spells.
I think people who state that giving D6 to wizards break the class and make it too powerful are not really looking at the math compared to other classes. Or have never seen a fighter dish out 30+ points of damage in a single round.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
single round? perhaps a single hit. Greataxe with 18 STR critical. 3d10+ 18 dmg. averages 33, but maxes at 48. You can get that at level 1.
Any hit by a 18str fighter will take down a 12 con level 1 wizard from the PHB. How many times have you had a level 3 wizard enemy get taken out in the first round of combat before he could get a single spell off?
The d6 is inconsequential in the long run, but it does help a little bit. The best part of Pathfinder character creation is the racial hit points. 12 hit points for a level is enough to prevent unconsciousness in a single hit by a normal weapon of a high strength combatant.
My group and I are fans of class hit dice but with the racial hit point bonus concept. Makes sense that a half-orc wizard is going to be much tougher than his elven counterpart even beyond the bonus to Constitution and the meager bonus hit points it would provide.
The d4 is a large part of why i dont play wizards to be honest. A d6 wizard i would eagerly play. Especially with the feats the provide the option for armor without having to multiclass or acquire a prestige class. Lost track of how many of our groups wizards in various campaigns died before reaching 4th level. Usually because of a critical hit from an otherwise weak opponent. Very disappointing to say least after the player put a great deal of work into the character's backstory and overall development.
However, I dont think those bonus points should be granted at every level. The extremely high hit points i have seen in 4th edition peaks is part of what turned me off from it. If it is felt that it should be every level then perhaps this:
Frail race: +4 hit points at first level/+0 per level thereafter
Average race: +6 hit points at first level/+1 per level thereafter
Hardy race: +8 hit points at first level/+2 per level therafter
-Weylin Stormcrowe
I like the tie of BAB and Hit die. I also like d6 hit dice for wizards and sorcerers.
Back in the day Rangers got 2d8 for hit points at first level and Monks got d4 hit die.
|
|
I like the tie of BAB and Hit die. I also like d6 hit dice for wizards and sorcerers.
Back in the day Rangers got 2d8 for hit points at first level and Monks got d4 hit die.
wow it's been a LONG time since I played 1e, I don't remember 2d8, though I do remember monks and their d4s. I also remember Bards....
Ah, bards...one of the first "prestige classes" in D&D. I dont miss having to multiclass several times just to play a bard.
|
wow it's been a LONG time since I played 1e, I don't remember 2d8I like the tie of BAB and Hit die. I also like d6 hit dice for wizards and sorcerers.
Back in the day Rangers got 2d8 for hit points at first level and Monks got d4 hit die.
Ah, yes. Back before rangers were ever associated with two-weapon fighting. Damn you, Drizt!
I prefer the d4 for wizard hit points, since it has been a part of D&D from the beginning.
Yeah, but fighters also had only d8 hp back then too and there was no such thing as d12 hps. Of coarse I'm going back to the old D&D box sets.