Hammers don't dig holes well, this doesn't mean they aren't good tools, it means they aren't shovels.
You complaining about wizards being poor blasters is just the same.
Hammers aren't good shovels, Wizards aren't good blasters.
Hammers are great tools if you use them right.
Wizards are a great class if you use it right.
Wizards are problem-solvers.
Need to get somewhere right now? Teleport!
Need to stop an advancing monster? Wall spells, solid fog, Evard's Black Tentacles, take your pick!
Absolutely need to stop an opponent? Here's where wizards shine. Try these spells by spell level (some better than others):
1) Charm person, sleep, grease, color spray
2) Web, glitterdust
3) Hold person
4) Solid fog, Evard's Black Tentacles, wall of ice, wall of fire, phantasmal killer
5) Wall of force, wall of iron, wall of stone, cloudkill
6) Circle of death
7) Power word-blind, forcecage
8) Power word-stun
9) Power word-kill, wail of the banshee
This isn't an exhaustive list, merely what popped into my head. Yes, a wizard knows blasting spells, including the ever-fun fireball, lightning bolt, and the spectacular meteor swarm. But a wizard can prepare for anything if given time, and then deal with it. Think of this fact: it doesn't matter if you survive a fight at 1 HP, you still won it, and being down to 1 HP doesn't actually mechanically affect you in any way. But being blinded, stunned, unable to move, and dead (to name some of the effects in the above spell list) affects you mechanically. Take a look around at some of the other threads to see what I'm talking about.
Wizards are [lots of stuff].
So...you're saying wizards are for role-playing, not just combat-playing? And still, they've got some mighty effective evocation spells for combat? Yep, that matches my experience.
Lathiira, has the right of it, that seems how wizards are in everygame i have played
So if their not blasters then what the hell are they?Hammers don't dig holes well, this doesn't mean they aren't good tools, it means they aren't shovels.
You complaining about wizards being poor blasters is just the same.
Hammers aren't good shovels, Wizards aren't good blasters.
Hammers are great tools if you use them right.
Wizards are a great class if you use it right.
Wizards are [lots of stuff].So...you're saying wizards are for role-playing, not just combat-playing? And still, they've got some mighty effective evocation spells for combat? Yep, that matches my experience.
I'm saying wizards can do a lot more than just Xd6 damage to some number of opponents, yes. And as I pointed out, it doesn't matter how much damage you've taken from blasting spells (e.g. many evocations) if you're still standing and your opponent just fell over dead as the recipient of your favorite save-or-die (save-or-suck, for that matter) spell. My personal favorite will always be transmute rock to mud, just for dropping a large load of mud on someone if underground or by turning the ground they're standing on into something a lot less solid. Not the most effective, but for me the most fun.
Personally I prefer Slow to Hold person. It affects almost anything and hit's multiple targets.
However the point still stands, if you want a wizard to stop foes don't blast -- kill their ability to hurt you either with SoS or SoD spells.
Heck if you really really want to blast, use summon monster 4+ to get some lantern archons. These babies get 2 30 ft EXTRAORDINARY ray attacks that bypass all damage reduction on full attack.
With my Flashbulbs from Heaven (TM) I was doing 10d6 damage a round for 12 rounds off of two spells slots (5 archons... I didn't have time to haste them). Much better than a misely Cone of Cold or Chain Lightning. Also I was still able to use them for scouts afterwards and they have free unlimited Aid and Continual Light spells, but a nice follow up for after a battle (temporary HP plus bonuses for 3 minutes and free everflaming torches).
And let's not forget the "You can't hit me!" Spell list for good measure:
Grease (no grappling for you!)
Mirror Image
Blink
Displacement
Resilient Sphere (Or as I call it for my wizard "BUBBLE!")
Stoneskin (iffy but it still makes the list)
Greater Invisibility
Telekinesis (TRIP TRIP TRIP TRIP!)
Prismatic Wall
Antipathy
off the top of my head.
It is not by coincidence that, in 3.X and all its logical follow-throughs, the list of best classes is populated exclusively by spellcasters.
I find it amusing that you posted the same link I did for the first. The second one I've seen before and is pretty good.
Lazarx wizards have always been controllers. It's just what they control has shrunk as time (and editions) goes by.
If you want direct damage there are plenty of ways to do it. If you want to win a fight in a spell or two you can do it with SoS or SoD spells. If you want to buff there are lots (at lower levels) of buff spells to choose from. If you want to be a diviner, transmuter, abjurationist, et al you can do it and still be very effective at it. It's all up to the player.
**** Edit ****
And how do wizards not have great firepower?
Fireball -- Up to 16 enemies -- 10d6 damage
Chain Lightning -- up to 21 enemies -- 20d6 damage 1st 10d6 everyone else
Disintergrate -- one target -- 40d6 damage
Finger of Death -- one target -- 200 points of damage
Cone of Cold -- 60 ft cone (lots of targets) -- 15d6 damage
Scorching Ray -- Up to 3 targets -- 4d6 per target
Sunburst -- 80 ft burst -- 6d6 anthing, up to 25d6 against undead, oozes, slimes, and molds
Vampiric Touch -- one target -- 10d6 gives back temporary HP
Wail of the Banshee -- up to 20 targets -- 200 points of damage
Burning Hands -- 15 ft cone (up to 6 targets) -- 5d4 damage
All these spells are standard actions that can hit more people, do more damage, or both than any fighter can do in a standard action.
That's the key part to remember: Standard action, multple targets, good damage. Not many other characters can do that (a few clerics) and few even get up the nerve to try.
Yeah you probably are going to kill everything with one spell, but why should you?
In other words, you've pretty much elucidated the 4th Edition definition of Wizards... they are controllers.
I have no idea what a 4e Controller does. Wizards can serve a lot of roles in the party. Dishing out tons of damage with fireball is probably one of the least effective of those but it's certainly possible.
Up until yesterday I would have agreed that wizards are perhaps the most powerful classes in the game.
Then I saw this thread:
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/design/skillsFeats/goodbyeSwordAxeAndDaggerHelloScythePickAndKukri
Check the "spoilers" in the post about half a dozen posts into the thread.
All of a sudden the fighters melee abilities make pretty much all of the other classes into sidekicks.
The fighter should be the most powerful in melee combat, but shouldn't the other classes at least be able to make a meaningful contribution to combat?
Up until yesterday I would have agreed that wizards are perhaps the most powerful classes in the game.
Then I saw this thread:
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/design/skillsFeats/goodbyeSwordAxeAndDaggerHelloScythePickAndKukriCheck the "spoilers" in the post about half a dozen posts into the thread.
All of a sudden the fighters melee abilities make pretty much all of the other classes into sidekicks.
The fighter should be the most powerful in melee combat, but shouldn't the other classes at least be able to make a meaningful contribution to combat?
Suddenly the fighter can turn a fight with 20 enemies into two fights with 10 enemies? Fighters can now dominate huge portions of the battlefield and suck up massive amounts of damage? They can now teleport across continents? Raise Dead? Sneak up on someone and do massive damage? Shift into a giant octopus for underwater combat? Cast waterbreathing or fly so he can engage the enemy in it's home territory... The list goes on for days. Suggesting that the fighter does anything that invalidates the wizard/ cleric/ druid in the battlefield is only demonstrating your lack of experience with those classes.
If fighters are stronger at hurting other people directly in combat that means that the system is maybe finally coming back into balance.
I have nothing against fighters getting nice stuff (to borrow a quote), and I think being the master of melee combat should entail more than doing lots of damage. As pointed out, it doesn't matter if you end the fight at 1 HP as long as you end it, and wizards do that well. The problem is this:
How well do you fight at . . .
Max HP? Just fine, thanks.
Down a quarter? Still good.
Halfway? No problem!
To a quarter? Rollin' along fine.
At one HP? What, me worry? I'll bite your bloody kneecaps off!
An evoker or other blasting mage is in the same boat as a fighter in their limitations, except the wizard can learn new spells to promote themselves in new roles. Many I've outlined previously are controlling effects, but some are problem-solving (e.g., all the death effects, as the problem of the hostile critter is solved). Wizards will only be sidekicks to other, more powerful wizards, or the occasional druid or cleric, thanks to versatility and effectiveness. Think of it like this: in battle, you usually want to kill your opponent. You have limited resources. So you want to use the least resources to do so. A fighter expends HP as he kills foes, due to the HP he loses in battle. That's a precious resource. A wizard that relies on blasting spells is using spells, another precious resource. A mage (or cleric, or druid, or other spellcaster) that can take a foe out with one spell (e.g. finger of death) uses minimal resources to get the job done. If the mage uses spells that screw over the enemy (e.g. slow) and let's the fighter finish off the foe, he's still using minimal resources, makes the enemies highly ineffective, and the fighter is now also using minimal resources (his HP) as he does the job.
That said, sometimes a large explosion also gets the job done. Always choose the right tool for the job at hand.
If fighters are stronger at hurting other people directly in combat that means that the system is maybe finally coming back into balance.
My issue would be that the fighter still isn't better than the wizard in said position. IF the wizard wants to he can easily do as much damage as the fighter can with less effort, to more people. Maybe not as often but more than enough to clear 3~5 fights a day with judious spell usage.
My issue would be that the fighter still isn't better than the wizard in said position. IF the wizard wants to he can easily do as much damage as the fighter can with less effort, to more people. Maybe not as often but more than enough to clear 3~5 fights a day with judious spell usage.
If fighters are stronger at hurting other people directly in combat that means that the system is maybe finally coming back into balance.
I don't think the fighter should in the first place be made to deal tons of damage. He should be able to take tons of such and keep enemies away from less resilient party members, so those can deal lots of damage (and that's rogues and casters)
If anyone, rogues should be able to deal more damage than wizards/sorcerers
When the land-bound fighter has to fight a dragon, the wizard will sit in his Mordenkainen's Magic Mansion and chuckle a bit while sipping gnomish brandy. You'd require verrrrry long arms to reach a dragon or [insert various flying creatures here] flying 60 feet above you with a melee weapon.
When the land-bound fighter has to fight a dragon, the wizard will sit in his Mordenkainen's Magic Mansion and chuckle a bit while sipping gnomish brandy. You'd require verrrrry long arms to reach a dragon or [insert various flying creatures here] flying 60 feet above you with a melee weapon.
So here we have a good point for tuning down the Wizards direct damage and killing abilities so the wizard and the fighter work together, by either the wizard csting fly on the fighter so the fighter can fly up to the dragon and start smacking, or the wizard hindering the dragon from flying with spells so the fighter can smack it on the ground.
After all theyd have to work together anyway. Before the wiztard breaks the dragon's SR he'd probably have been clawed, bitten, slammed and breath-attacked to hell and back, with the few hitpoints he has.
A character class is only as good as the player playing it. There seems to have been a lot of talk about one class being more powerful than another, but everyone seems to have forgotten the human factor in all of this. Just because one class may be slightly better than another here and there isn't that big of a deal. The difference in how well the class is played by the player makes more of a difference than if the classes are perfectly balanced (which they'll never be since each class has its strengths and weaknesses).
When the land-bound fighter has to fight a dragon, the wizard will sit in his Mordenkainen's Magic Mansion and chuckle a bit while sipping gnomish brandy. You'd require verrrrry long arms to reach a dragon or [insert various flying creatures here] flying 60 feet above you with a melee weapon.So here we have a good point for tuning down the Wizards direct damage and killing abilities so the wizard and the fighter work together, by either the wizard csting fly on the fighter so the fighter can fly up to the dragon and start smacking, or the wizard hindering the dragon from flying with spells so the fighter can smack it on the ground.
After all theyd have to work together anyway. Before the wiztard breaks the dragon's SR he'd probably have been clawed, bitten, slammed and breath-attacked to hell and back, with the few hitpoints he has.
Not at all. Wizard cast a defensive spell (resilient sphere is a good choice) spends a few rounds prepping, then goes at it. There are plenty of good spells that don't have a weakness to SR that the wizard can use, and he has more mobility than the fighter does seeing as he only needs a standard action each round to do something significant to the fight. The fighter has a five foot step if he wants his full attack action in, and unless he has some means to fly (or whatever) he's stuck waiting on the dragon. Beyond that the Wizard can still summon up more help if he wants to, fighter is again stuck on his own unless he travels with a group.
A character class is only as good as the player playing it. There seems to have been a lot of talk about one class being more powerful than another, but everyone seems to have forgotten the human factor in all of this. Just because one class may be slightly better than another here and there isn't that big of a deal. The difference in how well the class is played by the player makes more of a difference than if the classes are perfectly balanced (which they'll never be since each class has its strengths and weaknesses).
You are correct. Playing ANY class poorly makes that class seem weak--just as a string of good (or bad) dice rolls makes a particular monster, trap, adventure, villain, or CLASS seem over- or under-powered. The fine act of "balancing" everything is a noble goal--some disagree with this--but all it can EVER accomplish is putting everyone on the same starting line. After that, it's up to the dice, your ingenuity, your strategy, and the whimsy of the DM. After the gun fires, nothing is balanced anymore. And that's the way it should be.
A character class is only as good as the player playing it. There seems to have been a lot of talk about one class being more powerful than another, but everyone seems to have forgotten the human factor in all of this. Just because one class may be slightly better than another here and there isn't that big of a deal. The difference in how well the class is played by the player makes more of a difference than if the classes are perfectly balanced (which they'll never be since each class has its strengths and weaknesses).
The problem with this view is that we're not comparing what one human (who might just happen to suck at character building) to another different human (who happens to be brilliant at character building), we're talking about the potential of one class versus another independent of the human element. Because the human element is considered the same in all cases (just because Scott Brilliant knows every trick in the book to make Fighters a mighty force and because Joe Average is playing a Wizard and he has no idea what to do with it does not make that a fair comparison). Comparing Scott Brilliant as a Fighter to Scott Brilliant as a Wizard is a fair comparison. Comparing Joe Average as a Fighter to Joe Average as a Wizard is a fair comparison.
|
The real reason wizard is the absolute most powerful character class in the game, they can do everything. Need a rogue? A wizard with a few knock, spider climb, dimension door and invisibility spells will do the trick. Need heavy firepower? You've got fireball, lightning bolt, disintegrate, cone of cold. On top of all that, they have high IN, so they typically have high ranks in a half-dozen or more useful knowledge skills. If it wasn't for the healing magics provided by clerics, wizards could pretty much dispense with all the other classes in the game.
|
I am gonna agree with Torsin on this dance, Wiz/Sor. are the walking Target in most games.
Sure, they are the awesome problem solvers when played by someone who knows what he is doing, and they have truely awesome powers at higher levels.
But from what little I've read, a Light Crossbow [Range 80ft] or Shortbow [60ft] which are the two lowest ranged stringed projectile weapons, Throwing Axe or Shuriken being the shortest hand weapons.
Against a hand thrower, the Wiz/Sor. has a chance with his Charm Person spell against the "Hand Thrower", but that Rogue Halfling in the cover of brush? *Thunk!* Gonna need a New Tim!
Are Wizards/Sorcerers Powerful beings? Yes!
Are they starting that way? No... not at all, and I've read a lot of semantics through this thread, like how They are the Thinkers and Fighters are the doers, cute.. wonderful.. and thank you for helping to enforce a stereotype.
I'm one of those whacky people who think outside the Books, Till you reach high enough level to defend yourself without friend Fighter or Paladin, raising your hand for anything other than to say "Hi!" will mark you as Target #1.
Now, I am sure many will disagree and I am not the most eloquent speaker, so if I have just mashed some toes or poked some eyes, I apologize.
I tend to type first, reason later.. sad fact, sorry.
But please explain how at First thru Third Level, a Wiz/Sor. is over powered...
With shield and mage armor up and a decent dex a mage is going to have an AC 20 from first level on, if you are fighting evil creatures protection from evil raises that 2 more. If you are playing a conjurationist specialist you get your specialist bonus on top of all the other. Add second level spells and you could have mirror image or blur. Third level gets displacement, haste, fly, and blink, while fourth adds stoneskin, dimensional door, and resilient sphere.
Protecting a mage in pathfinder is especially easy since you don't even have to memorize the spells anymore, just spend some gold and time to have scrolls of the basic spells at low level.
Mage Armor lasts for hours so it's always a good bet for starting into a cave/dungeon/etc. so you only spend the first action of combat protecting yourself with shield leaving every round past that for offensive options.
For wizards the big thing is having that scribe scroll available from level 1. Given just a few hours each day and he can have all his options ready several times a day slung across his chest in a bandoleer.
I'm not claiming the wizard or sorcerer are overpowered, just that they don't need anymore stuff either.
And against someone that uses ranged weapons... why use charm person?
Sleep -- Save or Die
Cause Fear -- Save or lose
Ray of Enfeeblement -- Save or damage stinks
Grease -- Save or fall over
Class ability (hand of the apprentice, energy ray, etc) -- straight damage
Summon Monster 1 -- distract, move or provoke attack, tactical, damage
Are all great valid options.
With shield and mage armor up and a decent dex a mage is going to have an AC 20 from first level on, if you are fighting evil creatures protection from evil raises that 2 more. If you are playing a conjurationist specialist you get your specialist bonus on top of all the other. Add second level spells and you could have mirror image or blur. Third level gets displacement, haste, fly, and blink, while fourth adds stoneskin, dimensional door, and resilient sphere.
Well she did say 1st though 3rd level which means the wizard casts mage armor, shield, and prot from evil he is out of spells and not much use.
Much more realistic is the old school method, just stay out of the fray. Stay in the background and use at-will abilities to help soften or finish off targets then cast your encounter ending powers (sleep, color spray, or grease) on critical encounters. This is ultimately the way wizards are supposed to be played. They are marginal characters for much of play then Boom! They do something amazing.
Pathfinder introduces a lot of ideas that bolster wizards at low levels. Higher HD, Bonus HP at low levels, Favored class bonus HP, at will powers. Wizards are still not able to slug it out in the low levels but they are able to do something productive for almost every round and still have that reserve of encounter ending abilities.
Well yes if he casts them from his memorized spells he is out...
But the wizard pays 37 gp 5 sp and has all three available above and beyond his daily allotment of spells.
Beyond that even if he runs out of 1st level spells he still has plenty to do with cantrips and class abilities. Evokers can still ray people to death and universialists have their hand of the apprentice to do stuff too. If nothing else a wizard can always throw darts back!
However the easiest way would be to stay out of the fray as you suggest. I'm just pointing out that for a paltry amount of gold the first level wizard can have everything he needs for the day and still replace it has he goes along, and at lower levels his AC can easily beat everyone else's on the field.
All in all I would say he is never the weakest link.
Well I generally don't calculate expendables as part of the characters class power... my wizards like to keep their gold ;)
I wasn't disagreeing with your point, just some of the details.
Well I agree with keeping it, but gold does a dead man no good (usually). Beyond that the ability to scribe scrolls is a class ability, after all the class gets it at level 1. Just makes since to use what you got.
However we both get the point so no reason to beat the horse anymore.
|
|
On the Scribe scroll, where is the XP cost? in the original 3.5, its "To scribe a scroll, you must spend 1/25 of this base price in XP and use up raw materials costing one-half of this base price."
Oh, don't tell me Pathfinder has no cost.. cause we are in the testing and building faze here... they may or may not add XP cost, lets assume it is for now till the Writers say otherwise.
Gold isn't the only issue, mind you.. its a good idea I have tried to use many times over.
Some GM's being more flexible than others, then there is that.. what other class Burns XP to make things? besides magical classes of course...
On the Scribe scroll, where is the XP cost? in the original 3.5, its "To scribe a scroll, you must spend 1/25 of this base price in XP and use up raw materials costing one-half of this base price."
Oh, don't tell me Pathfinder has no cost.. cause we are in the testing and building faze here... they may or may not add XP cost, lets assume it is for now till the Writers say otherwise.
Gold isn't the only issue, mind you.. its a good idea I have tried to use many times over.
Some GM's being more flexible than others, then there is that.. what other class Burns XP to make things? besides magical classes of course...
Part of Pathfinder's goal is to remove all experience costs. You no longer lose experience when your familiar dies, when you craft magic items (I've agreed with this position for some time, it just makes the feats suck more then they did), when you cast certain spells, or through virtually any other method. I completely agree with their approach.
Yeah the xp cost? It's been left out, on purpose sense alpha. Developers didn't like it.
|
|
Yeah the xp cost? It's been left out, on purpose sense alpha. Developers didn't like it.
O_O HUZZAH! I win! ... sorry, Old arguement I had with people.
I hated the idea of working my tail off to save up XP, Build a nice item, then loose it through play or someone else screwing with my character... As the soul Magic user in the group, no one else saw it as a problem, even when I made things for others..Ok, Maybe.. "Maaaybe" Wizard are a bit too powerful ... Nah, I still say that as the walking Target, you get stuck as Lacky till higher levels, I am not asking you to agree.. we all have our views and few, if any, will agree all the time.
Wow...I just had to post.
Wizard's are too weak...just wow.
As has been mentioned in the replies - a wizard's job isn't hacking the enemy - and yes - they aren't as good at that as a fighter - whether they use a dagger or blast spells.
However, wizards are very likely the most powerful class in 3.5 including all suppliments. There only real competition was the Druid, Artificer, or Archivist.
In Pathfinder the Druid has had the wildshape feature scaled back - but Wizards are as powerful (or even more powerful) than ever.
If you want to make your Wizard powerful - simply look for 3 things on spell selection: Buff, Debuff, Battlefield Control. Let the fighter do his job by doing damage - but you will make sure he wins.
Powerups for Wizards beyond what's already given would be a very poor idea for any semblance of balance in Pathfinder - the scale is already tipped in favor of Wizards as is.
Really, the place wizards shine is in the battlefield. Heavy-hitting warrior-types are the giant killers. But the wizards are able to clear the battlefield of the rabble so that the warriros can do their jobs better. While it's true that a strong fighter will outdamage a wizard on a regular basis against single enemies, the same warrior will never be able to handle waves of smaller creatures with the ease of a wizard.
Actually it's usually the exact opposite in my experience. The wizard hits the big nasty with some equally nasty spell and wants the fighter to keep him from getting overwhelmed becuase his worthwhile (offensive) spells only affect one monster at a time. Battlefield control spells help the fighter from getting overwhelmed, but they don't (generally) actually stop the enemy or remove them from the field.
Sorry if I'm asking in the wrong thread. But is there an errata for Wizards?
They show School Power on every even level and the only thing I see in the schools are 1, 8, 20.
Am I missing something?
|
|
Sorry if I'm asking in the wrong thread. But is there an errata for Wizards?
They show School Power on every even level and the only thing I see in the schools are 1, 8, 20.
Am I missing something?
The 'School powers' at the other levels are the ability to cast one spell of appropriate level as a spell-like ability. This is outlined on page 194 of the Beta, but the wording is confusing as things were changed in the spells section but not the class section.
The 'School powers' at the other levels are the ability to cast one spell of appropriate level as a spell-like ability. This is outlined on page 194 of the Beta, but the wording is confusing as things were changed in the spells section but not the class section.Sorry if I'm asking in the wrong thread. But is there an errata for Wizards?
They show School Power on every even level and the only thing I see in the schools are 1, 8, 20.
Am I missing something?
THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!