Hakuna Matata, friend... don't worry so much.
Now, by "monster" you mean "villain", right? Not being conentious, just making sure you're thinking in the right direction.
The 450 limit does help, I think on purpose. Just enough rope to hang yourself if you really put your mind to it and your nose to the grindstone. But, not so much that you're forced to hang yourself.
Also, I'd apply as much of the Item Auto-Reject advide to the archetype submission. No vomit, no pricing errors (give up Fast Movement, get Gate at 3rd Level). SIAFC, "no spell in a fleshy can" unless you're a spell caster and have no choice.
Be cool (creative) and be cool (minded).
I've only come up with one mechanic I worry about. The other thing is, what is the essence of the base or core class? You can't lose that. Hopefully no comments like, "That's not even a frillin' Cleric anymore!"
Suggestion would be to have it done (with a backup version or another one entirely) by Jan 18th, so when the official rules come out you can tweak for the 3 days.
Good luck all.
Peace.
And, yes... you have to assume you're Top 32, if you're serious about advancing. And, if you don't make Top 32, so be it.
Calavier is basically, a Fighter archetype... turned into a Class. So, you'd be making an archetype or an archetype. I'd stay away from that one, that's unsolicited advice. Take it as you will, or not.
Spell-casters are tougher, but I'm not saying don't do it... I might go spell-caster. It's the whole risk/reward thing. And, in 450... "Will they get it?"
Hassan, you've had a lot of very astute observations, but I really don't agree that the Cavalier is basically a fighter archetype. Archetypes replace some class abilities with others to provide a new flavor to the class. As far as class features go, the only thing that fighters and cavalier's have in common are bonus feats; by that definition, a wizard is just a fighter archetype.
If you are pitching an archetype at a high level (that is to say without a lot of detail, not a high class level), you should be able to say "A Spirit Ranger is the same as any other ranger expect Spirit Bond replaces Hunter's Bond and Wisdom of the Spirits replaces Camoflauge." If you try to do that with your archetype and you find that you have replaced every class feature with something else, than you've created a new class, not a new archetype. I haven't checked closely, but I don't think there is a published archetype that replaces all of the class features.
And a lot of the current archetypes fall into the 400 to 500 word range, so I suspect that's why the word count was set where it was. A few (like the Ranger Skirmisher at 1186 words or the Spirit Ranger at 218 words) come in well above or below that. I think looking at some of the archetypes that fall into this range (like the Ki Mystic at 463 words) should give you a good idea of what you can get away with in this challenge.
Here are my thoughts on what you could replace with APG base classes. These are just parts of the classes that I think could be replaced for other abilities, I'm not suggesting anything to replace with. I'm not going to mention armor proficiencies, skills, or spell progression changes since those are kind of universal.
-brew potion
-mutagen
-throw anything
-poison resistance chain
-poison use
-swift alchemy
-persistent mutagen
-instant alchemy
-delay the discovery progression
-grand discovery
-mount
-order
-tactician progression
-charge progression
-expert trainer
-banners
-bonus feats
-demaning challenge
-delay judgment progression
-monster lore
-stern gaze
-cunning initiative
-detect alignment
-track
-solo tactics
-teamwork feats
-bane progression
-discern lies
-stalwart
-exploit weakness
-delay mystery spells
-delay revelations
-delay summon monster progression
-bond senses
-shield ally
-maker's call
-transposition
-aspect
-life bond
-merge forms
-gate
-twin eidolon
-delay hex progression
As you can see, some of these have a few more bits to fiddle with. However, that doesn't stop someone from tweaking a class like oracle or witch. Personally I would archtype a wizard before a witch...messing with arcane bond and bonus feats seem a lot easier to me.
Here I was thinking that my archetype for witch that changed the witch's familiar and delayed hex progression was clever and unique, and you ruined it :p Maybe we shouldn't be posting ideas for others who make it into top 32 to use.
Not at all my friend, not at all. Anyone who looks at the witch will see that the options are rather limited. A real winning archtype will carefully balance what it takes away from a class with what it gives to it. It's easy to see what can be taken away, the hard part is what you add.
I worry when I see people referring to the cavalier as "a fighter archtype" when there is so much potential there to alter and change.
markofbane, I can see it that way too... and what I'd said should have been bokended with the [opinion][/opinion] tags.
I hadn't meant it literally, but in my opinion as one looks at the canvas before them, they have to make some broad stroke decisions about what they're going to tackle and what they shouldn't.
I can't see (immediately) anything by way of archetype that can be done to the Cavalier that would work nicely enough with the Orders and stand out.
Perhaps if anyone cares for it... a Percival type or "true innocent" that is a Cavalier and acts like a Paladin, but doesn't have the magic component.
But, unlike Fighter archetypes... Cavalier Orders dictate or hint at personality, code of conduct and/or goals. So, if the archetype does the same... it could be in contention with some Orders. For compatibility's sake I'd (just lil ole me) not want to do that.
We're adding another layer, that should be compatible with the existing layers, IMHO.
And, let's be honest... our Cavalier is going head to head with the 4E Warlord. So, yes it has to be a different class. And, marketing would kill the designers if they said... let's have one universal class and everything is an archetype! Yeah!!
Every other system, X races, X classes, etc... Pathfinder, "Just one class, we're good."
Taking a step back, archetypes, bloodlines, orders, subclasses, etc, etc... are allowing Pathfinder RPG extensibility. It will not be outdated. Talents, abilities, class features, etc... At will, once a day, etc... Seems to flirt with the 4E method. And, that's cool.
Pathfinder doesn't want it to be cookie cutter, and I respect that and agree with it. I think it's better for balanced RP (storytelling vs. action). I was disappointed in 4E when I purchased the core product and saw the cookie cutter approach. I went Pathfinder all the way.
Hope I'm not tipping the apple cart,letting any cat out of its bag or upsetting anyone.
Sincerely,
Hassan
PS: Thanks for the compliment, it wasn't lost on me!
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9
|
So it turns out the cleric, sorcerer, and wizard were all pretty easy to archetype.
*WARNING*Real archetype in next spoiler...
Skills A defensive master adds Sleight of Hand (Dex) to his list of class skills.
Deceptive Casting At 1st level, the defensive master makes a sleight of hand check with a +2 circumstance bonus to deceive an opponent. His check is opposed by an opponents spellcraft check to be able to identify the spell the defensive master is casting. This ability replaces Scribe Scroll.
Improved Counterspell At 5th level, the defensive master gains the Improved Counterspell feat. This replaces the bonus feat at 5th level.
Greater Counterspell At 10th level, when counterspelling, you may use a spell of a different school that is one or more spell levels higher than the target spell. He may not use spells from his opposed schools as a counterspell. This replaces the 10th level bonus feat.
Parry Spell At 15th level, the defensive master gains the Parry Spell feat. This replaces the 15th level bonus feat.
Enhanced Counterspell At 20th level, the defensive master may counter spells using spells at the same level of the spell being countered. This ability replaces the 20th level bonus feat.
And for the finale...
So it turns out the cleric, sorcerer, and wizard were all pretty easy to archetype.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted ***WARNING*Real archetype in next spoiler...
** spoiler omitted **And for the finale...
** spoiler omitted **
While I do appreciate the 4th spoiler at some levels, I wonder if you might be playing it a little too openly there (not in your design, but in sharing it).
The bonus feats are an obvious tweak for wizards, as is the energy channel for clerics. Beyond those things though, your messing with arcane bond, domains or the actual casting charts, which can get hairy.
Not that these things can't be changed, but I know that I for one found it rather challenging to work on sorcerers becuase of this. I did try, mind you, but any/all sorcerer archetypes I wrenched free from my Jungian tie to the collective ended up feeling wonky on account of this.
Its a fun challenge to make caster archetypes sleek, and I hope to see at least a few next round.
My biggest fear would be making an archetype too similar to another contestants', or similar to a prestige class or something I wasn't aware of. But that was my concern in the monster round too. It might be bad to end up as one of five who made a witch archetype, for instance.
This is my strongest concern, and is really giving me some paralysis.
Would it be against the spirit of the competition for the top 32 to coordinate or plan out what they are going to do before they write up their ideas?
|
And, we've heard that there are archetypes for spell casters in Ultimate Magic, from Paizo for Pathfinder RPG. Releasing at a later date.
It would be nice if they showed us one to give us an idea of an Archtype for a wizard or cleric or sorcerer. They seem the hardest to type because most of their stuff is related to spells. I mean I guess, for the wizard, you could just swap out Bonus feats, but they don't have much more to swap out for different abilities.
|
|
So it turns out the cleric, sorcerer, and wizard were all pretty easy to archetype.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted ***WARNING*Real archetype in next spoiler...
** spoiler omitted **And for the finale...
** spoiler omitted **
And you aren't really creating an Archtype for the wizard with that. You mostly just told them what to spend their Bonus Feat on. That's the problem. You need to give them a decent ability that replaces that feat. Something they couldn't get through a feat.
I sincerely hope to make Top 32. I'll go Wizard most likely, only one I'm working on.
Though I'm not sure about the "spirit" of the restriction, but I think the rule against talking about your submission applies only after the round begins.
And, if I make it that far I'm hoping I get eliminated for:
"Hey, that's too frillin' cool. He can't do that! Reject!"
LOL
|
|
I sincerely hope to make Top 32. I'll go Wizard most likely, only one I'm working on.
Though I'm not sure about the "spirit" of the restriction, but I think the rule against talking about your submission applies only after the round begins.
Well, the later rounds are not anonymous, so it really doesn't matter. But, you certainly don't want to give your ideas out for someone else of the Top 32 to "use".
I had a friend hem and haw about whether to enter Superstar. He said he jsut had no clue about an archetype. I said "Sure you do" and rattled off half a dozen. I don't even remember them. I am not saying I rule archetypes, I am saying there could be this mental block of "What do I do?" Get passed that and realize that any character you've heard of that is really focused on one part of his class, or who wanted to do things just a bit differently, might be suitable for an archetype. THink very conceptually, and then fit a class to the features you want, rather than wondering how you could possibly make fighters any better.how the heck would you do a cavalier archetype without comming out with a new order? its nearly synonymous.
I still havent come up with an archetype, theyve all already been done or have existed in 3.5.
anyone have suggestions?? lol.
What character class is really lacking an archetype, druids, rangers, rogues, bards, all over done.... I hate all the pally ones, it's just comming up with one good one that isnt partly in one of the already existing ones...
arg, this is something i never do,,,archetypes (its largely something i don't care about either)
Agreed. I came up with at least 40 original ideas.
RPG Superstar 2013
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka Steven T. Helt
|
Well, 40 is a lot. But I guess if pressed I could put 40 meh ones on paper and choose the cream of the crop to develop. I get what you're saying.
Not to extend too much help to the competition, but I do think one great way to feel out for archetypes is to look at how characters develop in other systems and Pathfinderize them.
Not that that's what I am doing. My four finalists are all plays on CRB or APG classes, and think I have a clear favorite.
|
RPG Superstar 2013
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka Steven T. Helt
|
I disagree that barbarians are hard to do -
One of my final four ideas to develop is a barbarian - and kind of a no brainer to me. Not that someone should have already done it, just that the name is cool, is clearly a barbarian, and clearly has cool abilities not reflected in other classes.
I think the challenge in barbarian is what to give up. I mean, you're not giving up rage, or most progressions of rage, so you're stuck with other abilities and balancing them out. On the up side, they are powerful abilities, so you have a lot fo play with.
I wonder if posting in this thread is making my advancement harder? Hmm. Anyone else wonder about that?
No harder than discussing what not to do with magical items really. I like the fact I haven't seen anyone tread anywhere close to the archtypes I've been thinking about ;)
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9
|
And you aren't really creating an Archtype for the wizard with that. You mostly just told them what to spend their Bonus Feat on. That's the problem. You need to give them a decent ability that replaces that feat. Something they couldn't get through a feat.
I only had 2 feats in that archetype. Unless the other three abilities aren't in the corebook or apg. The greater and enhanced counterspell abilities just seemed like natural progressions that would use improved counterspell as a prerequisite. And I have never seen sleight of hands used to misdirect someone as to the nature of the spell being cast, just to hide the fact that a spell is being cast.
Scipion del Ferro,
But if everyone else is keeping their faves to themselves, are we all keeping those very ones you note are not mentioned?
Dilemma!
Just thought it was an interesting cunundrum.
As to hurting one's chances, well:
1) One has to make it to the Top 32, statistically slim - myself included.
2) Only 31 other people could possibly benefit, assuming they're reading the boards, think someone else has a better idea (against human nature)... slim.
3) They actaully had to have understood another's idea enough to be able to execute. They could take what they thought someone meant and botch the execution, falling flat with less passion as it wasn't really their idea.
4) One's idea actually has to be better and not just "as good", or else you're not hurting yourself at all (would have lost anyway)... But, helping the other 30 (32 - you - idea thief, could be less than thirty)... slim.
As I'd said in a previous thread "Archetype Mechanics", this discussion should only elevate the caliber of the future 32 submissions. Those with superstar potential will navigate through the chaff and get their juices flowing, bettering their own ideas.
Mechanics is part of it, that's what we're discussing... Marketability is another, some would say, harder component.
Now, if there's some lurker... watching, reading and not offering anything useful. Well, their basically sniping ideas. And, if they need to do that... It's anyone's call.
Fear (of whatever) is what keeps us divided. That's how the world got to the sad state we're in now. Do we really want to microcosm that here?
I'd approach the entire "how to archetype an inflexible class?" issue somewhat differently.
Our archetypes are going to be judged as a whole. Yes, taking on difficult challenges is certainly appreciated, but what's far more important is: define a compelling archetype that people will want to play; create mechanics that successfully bring the cool aspects of the archetype into play; don't unbalance the class; don't stray too far from the core class concept.
So focusing on how, mechanically, to archetype the most difficult classes, seems to me to be misplaced emphasis. Players want cool, fun things to play; they don't care if those things took minutes or weeks to design. Sometimes a very simple concept can be far more powerful than a complex, difficult, or esoteric one. Find the concept that seems coolest and most fun; then you can figure out whether bringing that concept to life will be easy, difficult, or impossible. The advantage here is that once you have a concept, that concept will guide you towards the trade-offs possible and necessary to implement what you've conceived. For me, at least, it's difficult to consider how to do something before I know what it is I want to do.
Trading mechanisms in and out is an interesting exercise, but it's only a small part of what we actually need to do here. Don't lose sight of that - designing an awesome, unique rogue archetype in under 450 words is no small challenge in itself.
I'm really just trying to call some attention to focusing on concept and playability, and to the strength of simple archetypes, since the discussion of the challenge is leaning so heavily on difficult mechanics. I'm certainly not saying anybody else is "doing it wrong."
Oh, come on... say it! We can take it! We're doing it ALL wrong!
Actually, there is no right and wrong... I agree with you Standback (I wonder if you're also "Amazed"), j/k... Har-dee-har-har.
I think the mechanics thing is the training, the warm up, stretches, jumps, etc... and we'll all become beautiful ballerinas! And the dudes are called, you guessed it... cavaliers!
The real choreography is still in our heads I'm sure.
And there's another consideration no one's touched upon yet, that I've noticed (or noticed the absence of). Wondering if I should keep it to myself or share. But, if no one's brought it up... maybe it's nothing.
Who am I kidding? It's SOMETHING!
Oh, come on... say it! We can take it! We're doing it ALL wrong!
Oh, very well. But let's be precise. You're not doing it ALL wrong.
I'd say you're doing it about 57.2% wrong. You may subtract twice your Wisdom modifier from this number; a successful Perception check (DC 18) allows you to subtract your Intelligence modifier as well, but if the Perception check fails by 5 or more, you must add your Intelligence modifier instead. A successful Bluff check (DC 16) allows you to act as though you are doing it only half as wrong as you actually are. A successful Intimidate check (DC 16) convinces everybody in the forum that you are doing it 107.6% wrong.
There are presently few wondrous items which affect the percentage with which one does it wrong; hence this is considered an extremely likely candidate for a 2012 Superstar item meme.
|
|
Aw shucks! You revealed my Wondrous Item!
Probability Stone
Aura strong alteration; CL 12th
Slot -; Price 100,000; Weight -
Description
These stones always float in the air and must be within 3 feet of their owner to be of any use. When a character first acquires a stone, she must hold it and then release it, whereupon it takes up a circling orbit 1d3 feet from her head. Thereafter, a stone must be grasped or netted to separate it from its owner. The owner may voluntarily seize and stow a stone (to keep it safe while she is sleeping, for example), but she loses the benefits of the stone during that time. Probability stones have AC 24, 10 hit points, and hardness 5.
Each stone is about 1 inch in diameter and made of pure diamond. More than one stone can be used at a time.
Each stone will add 1.004% probability of success to any action made by the character and a .503% probability of failure to any action made by enemies of the character. As more stones are used the probability factor is squared by the power of 2. However, if the character has 13 probability stones circling him, then divide the probability by 3.14, unless it's a full moon, then, instead, multiply by the number of stars currently visible in the sky.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, creator must be 12th level, wish; Cost 99,999
So, yes it has to be a different class. And, marketing would kill the designers if they said... let's have one universal class and everything is an archetype! Yeah!!
Every other system, X races, X classes, etc... Pathfinder, "Just one class, we're good."
D20, at least the Fantasy RPG version, just isn't designed for that model. It's been tried many times, but has always failed because part of the attraction to the system is the intense focus on class specific abilities.
If that's someone's preferred system, they may be better trying something like Rolemaster or GURPs.
Pathfinder has done a fantastic job of combining the best of all the original d20 systems into one model that works wonders.
Ken
Well, 40 is a lot. But I guess if pressed I could put 40 meh ones on paper and choose the cream of the crop to develop. I get what you're saying.
Not to extend too much help to the competition, but I do think one great way to feel out for archetypes is to look at how characters develop in other systems and Pathfinderize them.
Not that that's what I am doing. My four finalists are all plays on CRB or APG classes, and think I have a clear favorite.
Yeah, most are just deviations from the primary class. Many are good ideas that aren't great ideas. There are some, though, that I really like. NOW, if I can only do them justice :)
Ken
OK, here we go.
I don't know what perspective to call this: Designer, Developer, Marketing or Publisher (maybe all or neither).
But, we've kinda been hashing things out back and forth like DMs and Players. Which is great, but I think we could benefit from taking a step back for a broader perspective.
Our good friend the Wizard, powerful as all heck... eventually. You have to have spells in your spellbook and prepare spells in advance. And you'll either run out... or end up taking watch with so many spells left you're annoyed! What a waste!!!
Fine, let's get over it.
1st Level - Arcane Bond, Scribe Scroll, Cantrips, Arcane School - YAY!
2nd, 3rd, 4th Level - nothing
5th Level - Bonus Feat - OK, I'll take it!
6th, 7th, 8th Level - nothing
etc, etc... 10th, 15th, 20th... all Bonus Feats.
With society, technology, etc... advancing, changing... PbP (Play by Post) is becoming more popular, people in general are becoming less patient. You gotta love'em, they're our customer (as one of the above, Designer, etc...)
Pathfinder already recognizes this and have a "Fast Progression", for those who like to keep things moving... I mean, come on! Character advancement is one of the most enjoyable parts of the game, sometimes moreso than the campaign (unfortunately).
Keeping the Wizard progression in mind, think on the Fighter, Rogue or Monk. Just about every level there is something and we're not even talking about the Character Feats (outside of Class).
Besides spells... what can I as a Wizard do? Eh, Knowledge Skills. Schools came along and gave us some powers that can be used multiple times a day! Who doesn't drool over the Evoker Force Missiles. That's like six-guns, friend.
Suddenly, Mr. Wizard is in the action! 1st Level, sometimes around 3rd and 6th or 8th depending on School. We get something. It helps.
Archetype is another layer, make it compatible and fill in the gaps. Make it exciting to be a Wizard, at EVERY frillin' level!!!
Anywho... that's what I've noticed. I hope it helps someone. I don't think Glitterdust Gnache will make Top 32.
====================================================
*J/K about the Glitterdust Gnache, it's a great name... It's not my item, I'm not disclosing anything. But, imagine this with those pesky Runelords Gobbos. Shiny desserts they can't resist! And, then they glow, unable to stealth!
There's something about you I find very strange, Hassan.
Wizards get new spell levels almost every odd level. Not to mention they can learn new spells with the gold (that they don't need like a fighter). A fighter or rogue can't just go drop some gold and get a new feat.
There is a reason that wizards and clerics don't get new abilities every level like the rogue or barbarian. Even those two only get "new" toys every other level. Archtypes cannot really be used to "fill" the levels like you mention because they require replacing existing abilities, while maintaining balance.
Hey Guys,
I'm weird, sure... and I do understand about game balance and spells.
But, for a kid starting to play the game... that's an aweful adult concept. "Out of sight, out of mind."
Take off your DM and Player hats.
Try to sell me on taking a Wizard. I'm talking from a slight "marketing" angle. Wizards, though admittedly powerful... seem barren.
We can agree to disagree. I thought it would be helpful, dunno.
Maybe it'll just mess me up if I get a chance to use the observation.
Peace.
|
|
Well, I've always thought the Wizard was broke at lower levels. Yes, they can get all the spells they want to buy. But, they can only cast so much. 1st level, 1 magic missile, boom!, done until everyone sleeps. Oh sure, you can whack with your lovely staff or dagger, but pray you dont get hit in return. "I'll just sit over here in the corner until you guys kill everything. Thanks."
Technically, a level 1 wizard can cast 4 spells without needing to rest.
But please, let's not turn this into another Wizards vs. everyone thread. :)
|
|
Technically, a level 1 wizard can cast 4 spells without needing to rest.
But please, let's not turn this into another Wizards vs. everyone thread. :)
Oh yes. Must not forget those 1d3 damage cantrip spells, that is if you don't memorize other useful spells for the group. I don't want a Wizard war either. I'm just saying, the wizard could use some more useful options to make them more viable at lower levels. That's what I am hoping to see if anyone does any Wizard Archetypes.
Rocksoul... yes, that's what I'm trying to say.
I'm 42 (not that anyone cared), but Ezren got dumped on me as a pre-gen for Silverflame. he's supposed to be 43, it was funny. Especially since we were playing PbP and no one knew I was 42. Ironic, poetic, etc...
When that game ended, I created a Half-Orc Wizard Transmuter (yes, strange again).
But, I find Message is awesome to mess with Goblins, to be a tactical communications officer, etc... Scouts go out, I'm the switchboard.
Have to try to keep the character relavent at lower levels and "in the mix". But, I'm an older player who's been playing for 27 years. Ezren was my first Wizard.
It's a difficult class to master or attempt to master, not saying I'm there.
I agree with most of what's said, the artistry will be in finding how to balance the whole thing.
EDIT: Sleep is Enchantment School which along with Necromancy are prohibited for my current character.
Oh yes. Must not forget those 1d3 damage cantrip spells, that is if you don't memorize other useful spells for the group. I don't want a Wizard war either. I'm just saying, the wizard could use some more useful options to make them more viable at lower levels. That's what I am hoping to see if anyone does any Wizard Archetypes.Technically, a level 1 wizard can cast 4 spells without needing to rest.
But please, let's not turn this into another Wizards vs. everyone thread. :)
Sorry, I meant to say 4 1st level spells.
|
|
You've obviously never played a low-level game as a wizard, or ran one with a wizard in it. There's this nasty little spell called "Sleep" that is an AoE disable that very few creatures have immunities against and very few can pass the saves. Every time I run a low-level game, a wizard puts things to sleep and then coup-de-graces them. Sure, you can throw elves at them, but you can't CONSTANTLY throw monsters with sleep-immunities at them, it get's boring otherwise.Wizards don't really need an extra oomph to them that schools, feats, and spells don't give them. Of course, Arcane Bond is another way that wizards are more versatile. Of all the classes to be complaining doesn't have enough, I'm surprised to hear it's wizards. The draw to being a wizard is that you make things go boom. You are the game changer.
If you want to know why Wizards are so damn good, go find a guy named Treeant and read his writings on wizards. Then you'll understand, you have nothing to complain about.
I've played wizards, I've ran games with wizards in them, I've seen wizards played at conventions and the like. I've been playing RPGs for 28 years. Yes, sleep is awesome. I'm not saying Wizards don't have awesome AOE spells (Fireball anyone?). But, at level 1, you have 1 sleep spell. Once you cast it, you're done. When do you use that spell in the dungeon? The first room has 1 goblin, nah, don't waste it. The next room has 2 goblins. Maybe? Until you cast that spell, what do you have? A dagger? A staff? You can't even wear armor.
The Wizard is the be-all god when you get to higher levels. Hands down. Again, I'm saying some help at lower levels. Give them abilities that helps them at lower levels. How about a battle mage Archetype that gives up their familiar for the ability to wear chain armor without penalty?
How do you figure that?
Sorry, I meant to say 4 1st level spells.
1 base + 1 bonus from high int + 1 from specialization + 1 from bonded object (technically that's one spell of any level they pick, but since you're a 1st level wizard, that's a 1st level spell).
Which is not to say that every wizard has to be a specialist with bonded object, but if what you really want are more spells per day right out the gate the options are there for it.
You've obviously never played a low-level game as a wizard, or ran one with a wizard in it. There's this nasty little spell called "Sleep" that is an AoE disable that very few creatures have immunities against and very few can pass the saves. Every time I run a low-level game, a wizard puts things to sleep and then coup-de-graces them. Sure, you can throw elves at them, but you can't CONSTANTLY throw monsters with sleep-immunities at them, it get's boring otherwise.
So a Wizard can - once, maybe twice, a day - put to sleep 4 Orcs in the group of probably twice that many (if they are in a 20' radius square and fail their save)? Yeah, I'm afraid that isn't very "OMG THE WIZARD IS BROKEN."
You've obviously never played a low-level game as a wizard, or ran one with a wizard in it. There's this nasty little spell called "Sleep" that is an AoE disable that very few creatures have immunities against and very few can pass the saves. Every time I run a low-level game, a wizard puts things to sleep and then coup-de-graces them. Sure, you can throw elves at them, but you can't CONSTANTLY throw monsters with sleep-immunities at them, it get's boring otherwise.Wizards don't really need an extra oomph to them that schools, feats, and spells don't give them. Of course, Arcane Bond is another way that wizards are more versatile. Of all the classes to be complaining doesn't have enough, I'm surprised to hear it's wizards. The draw to being a wizard is that you make things go boom. You are the game changer.
If you want to know why Wizards are so damn good, go find a guy named Treeant and read his writings on wizards. Then you'll understand, you have nothing to complain about.
I've played wizards, I've ran games with wizards in them, I've seen wizards played at conventions and the like. I've been playing RPGs for 28 years. Yes, sleep is awesome. I'm not saying Wizards don't have awesome AOE spells (Fireball anyone?). But, at level 1, you have 1 sleep spell. Once you cast it, you're done. When do you use that spell in the dungeon? The first room has 1 goblin, nah, don't waste it. The next room has 2 goblins. Maybe? Until you cast that spell, what do you have? A dagger? A staff? You can't even wear armor.
The Wizard is the be-all god when you get to higher levels. Hands down. Again, I'm saying some help at lower levels. Give them abilities that helps them at lower levels. How about a battle mage Archetype that gives up their familiar for the ability to wear chain armor without penalty?
But You'll more likely have 4 spells for that day (1 base +1 school +1attribute, +1 bonded item) , at least 2. If you take the powerful ones every single one of them will likely end an encounter all by itself. How many Encounters per day do you expect for a first level party? how many can the fighter sustain with his HP?
And on top of that you likely get an ability that is useable 3+Int times per day ( like an auto hit for 1d4 dmg) which is valuable all by itself, and all the cantrips ( even the sucky 1d3 ones do add up) you could possibly need, ever.I think thats more than enough to keep the wizards player busy even at low levels.
|
|
1 base + 1 bonus from high int + 1 from specialization + 1 from bonded object (technically that's one spell of any level they pick, but since you're a 1st level wizard, that's a 1st level spell).Which is not to say that every wizard has to be a specialist with bonded object, but if what you really want are more spells per day right out the gate the options are there for it.
Yes, but that's the thing. The only way you are useful as a Wizard is by casting spells. And there is more to the game than combat. Sure, I could memorize 2 magic missiles and 1 sleep (the bonded object can cast any spell without prep). But, what about the utility spells? Which, as a wizard, you have to know what you are going to encounter. (Damn, knew I should have memorized Knock, because I knew the Rogue was going to be unconscious).
Any class can be power built. Everyone is missing my point. I'm not bashing the Wizard. I'm not saying he's a bad class. I'm saying at lower levels he's too weak compared to other classes (heck, at least the Cleric can wear decent armor and hit decently). Once he's exhausted his spells, the party has to sleep.
Interestingly "Out of sight, out of mind" could be one of those developmental theologies.
i.e. when you are very young, if a ball is placed under a box, it ceases to exist. You brain doesnt yet comprehende existence out of sight.
As you get older, your brain becomes more subjective to such thinking.
This is one of the reasons babies laugh at the game of "pee-boo", the magical reappearance of your face from non-existence behind your hands.
The other reason is probably the face you make playing it with the child. :D
I could be talking utter rubbish too - that's also likely, but I'm sure I read something along those lines, somewhere, when studying child development as part of my BEd in teaching.
But that was sooooo many years ago when kids were scared of loud teachers ;)
1 base + 1 bonus from high int + 1 from specialization + 1 from bonded object (technically that's one spell of any level they pick, but since you're a 1st level wizard, that's a 1st level spell).Which is not to say that every wizard has to be a specialist with bonded object, but if what you really want are more spells per day right out the gate the options are there for it.
Yes, but that's the thing. The only way you are useful as a Wizard is by casting spells. And there is more to the game than combat. Sure, I could memorize 2 magic missiles and 1 sleep (the bonded object can cast any spell without prep). But, what about the utility spells? Which, as a wizard, you have to know what you are going to encounter. (Damn, knew I should have memorized Knock, because I knew the Rogue was going to be unconscious).
Any class can be power built. Everyone is missing my point. I'm not bashing the Wizard. I'm not saying he's a bad class. I'm saying at lower levels he's too weak compared to other classes (heck, at least the Cleric can wear decent armor and hit decently). Once he's exhausted his spells, the party has to sleep.
Well I don't think people aren't missing your point, they just aren't agreeing with you. Can we now just keep it at that? (Or alternatively start a new thread elsewhere discussing the matter)
A wizard has limited resources to spend, and if at low levels he spends significant parts of these resources on utility, he will fall behind in combat powress, but the same is true for every other class in my eyes (like a fighter who doesn't pick up power attack and weapon focus, but skillfocus and alertness).-- But enough of the derailing. ;)
Well I don't think people aren't missing your point, they just aren't agreeing with you. Can we now just keep it at that? (Or alternatively start a new thread elsewhere discussing the matter)
+1 (And I will cease derail.)
Some points...
1) If they save, the spell totally fails, wasted turn and spell.
2) A smarter creature with a bow can hold it's action to counter spellcasters at early level.
Injured while casting = Concentration DC (10 + damage + spell level)
3) If they get initiative, they can get in close and force the caster to cast defensively.
4) Forget Elves... Undead, contructs, creatures with high will saves, other casters can counterspell!
5) Level 1 is pretty treacherous. If something crits you, chances are decent that you are dead. This spell becomes exponentially less powerful at level 2-3... so let the PCs have their fun for 1 level.
6) How about throwing in an encounter while they are on horseback or in a carriage or while it's windy/rainy. Those encounters would require a concentration check.
Wizards have to deal with all this crap and more... what if their spell component pouch is stolen... or their spellbook gets damaged?