What I am not sure of is why the OP is so intent on make this work with a wizard? If you want to build a swashbuckling caster (even a single classed one) it seems to me there are better options to do that then with a wizard with low int. So if this is more then a thought experiment and you actually want to make this character (the criteria being they are swashbucklery, and cast spells and arent the genius smart type) i would go with a 3rd party class like the super genius vanguard, or an updated 3.5 beguiler or spell theif. It seems to me these are more practical options then trying to play a 13 int wizard.My intent is to see if people can do things other than the excepted standards. Too many discussions around the boards are about standardized ideas of what a class can do and what the stats must be to be playable. I am trying to see if those assumptions are completely true and if not, what can we do when we don't stick with the status quo.
hmmm ok, i think i'd be interested to take a crack at this. Is it the case (as someone suggested) that you are insterested in doing this with restricted rulesets? Is it core only? What about advanced playerguide, 3rd party, or 3.5 material? Obviously we are looking specifically at the wizard here, but there are lots of wizard options scattered about. I think the key here would be making use of metamagic, and digging around alot for a variety of lower level spells. I think what Sean points out would be the key to making this work. You can use your higher level slots with metamagiced lower level spells.
Clear as mud. :)
Your response is not helping.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I just spoke to Jason about this, and we're going to change the wording of this sentence.
Current version:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast as a higher-level spell.
Proposed new version:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast a higher-level spell .
Is that sufficiently clear?
Seems clear to me (but then so did the original) So RAW will match RAI will match RAMTSWC (Rule's At Matthew's Table, So Who Cares?) ;-)
Much clearer SKR.
OK, possibly stupid question here, but let's say a wizard with 13 Int reached seventh level. Could he fill his fourth level spell slot with a third or lower level spell?
OK, possibly stupid question here, but let's say a wizard with 13 Int reached seventh level. Could he fill his fourth level spell slot with a third or lower level spell?
Yes, he can. This was discuss last page in fact, and is made clear in the magic section (there is a specific reference to doing just that).
OK, possibly stupid question here, but let's say a wizard with 13 Int reached seventh level. Could he fill his fourth level spell slot with a third or lower level spell?
Yes, he can. This was discuss last page in fact, and is made clear in the magic section (there is a specific reference to doing just that).
Oops, I must have missed that bit. I thought that discussion was just referring to using metamagic feats.
This is where I was trying to bring the thread. I have heard many people claim that they can't play a wizard without at least an 18 or better at level 1 in Intelligence. I do believe that they can't, but I don't think it's a universal truth.
I love this comment. Thumbs up!
Is it necessary to even have the 19 Intelligence for a wizard? Yes, if you want to prepare 9th level spells it is necessary. If you don't need those spells though, is it still necessary?
If the campaign isn't going to level 17 (and lets face it, that's pretty common), then a 19 Int would not be necessary. I would say that losing spells because your Int is insufficient to cast spells that you would otherwise be able to is a price that should be avoided with Wizards desperately.
Unlike taking spells that happen to not require DC's, losing spells due to insufficient Int would be devastating because getting more spells is really the only significant thing that leveling in Wizard gives you over other classes.
So all you need is 10+the highest level spell you can cast at any time, but plan ahead. If your DM says the campaign will probably go to level 14 for example, then a 17 Int (eventually) will do. You don't want to go below this threshold though.
I don't mean to make a big deal of this, because I don't really care which way is the correct way (either way works for me). But, when I read the "it is prepared and cast as a higher-level spell" part, it seems to clearly mean that a wizard needs a 15 Int to cast an empowered fireball. It takes some effort on my part to see it differently. [Kind of like those color-blindness tests.]I just spoke to Jason about this, and we're going to change the wording of this sentence.
Current version:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast as a higher-level spell.
Proposed new version:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast a higher-level spell .
Is that sufficiently clear?
This would not have been more clear for me had I not read your previous post on the subject and understood the context of the conversation.
If you are going to correct the misunderstanding that was evident in this thread in the metamagic feat section of the rules, I think you are going to need more words.
What's wrong with saying, "Meta-magic feats allow you to cast spells in spell slots higher than your ability score may allow, as long as you have the ability score high enough to cast the base spell."
As a former journalist I can understand the reason to look for the solution with the fewest word count, but I don't know that one can correct the confusion for someone coming into the question blind without a deeper explanation.
I just spoke to Jason about this, and we're going to change the wording of this sentence.Current version:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast as a higher-level spell.
Proposed new version:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast a higher-level spell .
Is that sufficiently clear?
This would not have been more clear for me had I not read your previous post on the subject and understood the context of the conversation.If you are going to correct the misunderstanding that was evident in this thread in the metamagic feat section of the rules, I think you are going to need more words.
What's wrong with saying, "Meta-magic feats allow you to cast spells in spell slots higher than your ability score may allow, as long as you have the ability score high enough to cast the base spell."
As a former journalist I can understand the reason to look for the solution with the fewest word count, but I don't know that one can correct the confusion for someone coming into the question blind without a deeper explanation.
I'm guessing there may not be room to squeeze in more words without repaginating who knows how many sentences. I think the wording is clearer, but would be amazingly more clear if they could put an example in there. The extra words might cause more trouble, though.
My intent is to see if people can do things other than the excepted standards. Too many discussions around the boards are about standardized ideas of what a class can do and what the stats must be to be playable. I am trying to see if those assumptions are completely true and if not, what can we do when we don't stick with the status quo.Bob Loblaw I'm interested in getting your opinions on that prestige class to if you don't mind -- it could just be spoiler if you don't want to go off topic too much.
I'll try to look it over the next day or so. I'm having a hard time understanding it right now but I think it's my medications interfering with me. I do agree that the name needs to change.
A wizard can do fine with a lower casting stat -- he just has to plan for it more. It's like a fighter starting with a 14 strength, you can come out just fine (in some ways better) but you have to be aware of where your strengths are going to be. My wife and I are playing in LoF, she is playing a colligate mobile fighter (we used 25 point buy) that had the following stats to start: 14 Str 14 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 14 Wis 10 Cha. She had eight skill points per level, and at level 1 wasn't high on damage, but could stay in the fight long enough to get it done. At level 14 she's a skill monkey and drops most things with her falcata in one round. Her save throws are great, and she's really enjoying her wings of flying (60 foot flight speed with the mobile fighter archetype is nasty), she uses a buckler instead of two handing the falcata and rarely gets hit in combat (her AC is actually a bit on the low side, but the monsters don't have that high of a to hit in LoF -- so we have an agreement with the GM to not get to the point that we can only be hit on a 20+... we leave it at about the 18+ range for him).
This is the stuff that Snapple is made of. It's what makes GMs happy. Taking a concept other than the cliche and seeing what you can do with it. I love these types of characters.
hmmm ok, i think i'd be interested to take a crack at this. Is it the case (as someone suggested) that you are insterested in doing this with restricted rulesets? Is it core only? What about advanced playerguide, 3rd party, or 3.5 material? Obviously we are looking specifically at the wizard here, but there are lots of wizard options scattered about. I think the key here would be making use of metamagic, and digging around alot for a variety of lower level spells. I think what Sean points out would be the key to making this work. You can use your higher level slots with metamagiced lower level spells.What I am not sure of is why the OP is so intent on make this work with a wizard? If you want to build a swashbuckling caster (even a single classed one) it seems to me there are better options to do that then with a wizard with low int. So if this is more then a thought experiment and you actually want to make this character (the criteria being they are swashbucklery, and cast spells and arent the genius smart type) i would go with a 3rd party class like the super genius vanguard, or an updated 3.5 beguiler or spell theif. It seems to me these are more practical options then trying to play a 13 int wizard.My intent is to see if people can do things other than the excepted standards. Too many discussions around the boards are about standardized ideas of what a class can do and what the stats must be to be playable. I am trying to see if those assumptions are completely true and if not, what can we do when we don't stick with the status quo.
I'd like to see it with Pathfinder only material and 15-20 point buy. I'm not concerned with the race so long as it's a playable race. If it's only an NPC race, that's fine because as GMs, we need NPCs and the more interesting they are, the better.
As to the alt wizard build, we could probably divide it into four groups: those that focus on strength, and use spells that boost their melee weapons and damage potential; those that focus on dexterity, and use spells that boost their defense and ranged attacks; those that focus on dexterity, and focus on their stealth; and those that focus on charisma, and use their spells to enhance their diplomatic or bluffing options.
I think that this is a good start to see where we can go. I won't be adding much right now but I will be paying attention. I have increased some medications and it makes concentration very difficult.
This is the stuff that Snapple is made of. It's what makes GMs happy. Taking a concept other than the cliche and seeing what you can do with it. I love these types of characters.
I love this type of thread. It really has been eye opening for me. Not that I felt one "had" to max int..but it is nice seeing people present options. And the spell slot thing had been an issue for my group for a long time. So glad it is resolved. Moreso, in that it was resolved the way I wanted it ;P
Always enjoy your ideas, Bob. Even if I do not always agree. Keep up the good fight.
Greg
weeellll, technically this character doesn't max out int, though it is higher than what the OP was looking for. the problem is that skills rely on int too, which makes it hard to really give the character something to do.
I don't think there is a hard maximum I'm looking for. You should pick the minimum Intelligence needed to get the job done and stop there. I am just looking to see Intelligence as something other than the primary focus.
however, i think this does a fair job of deemphasizing int for spellcasting and making the character seem less like a typical wizard. and i know i dropped two scores to the minimum, but i think it's justified and makes sense.
Since this is just a "for fun" exercise, I don't think it's a problem. If you came to me with stats like that, I would probably question them.
i didn't bother buying gear, but i think the important points are a +16 initiative and 12 uses per day of prescience school power without any extra hardware. in addition a skill set that has nothing to do with a typical mage, but would make an excellent co scout with the rogue.
I like this. I can see him as a kinda voodoo witch or tarot reader. I think he could be a lot of fun.
it would fit the rules of this thread better to drop int a couple of points, but i hate to give up the skills. i suppose survival could go without impacting the character too much. and maybe even split points between climb and swim. taking int down to 14 would be possible then with the extra points improving the physical stats or maybe offsetting that wis penalty.
I really like the fact that you didn't go for the standard wizard build and showcased other abilities.
I don't mean to make a big deal of this, because I don't really care which way is the correct way (either way works for me). But, when I read the "it is prepared and cast as a higher-level spell" part, it seems to clearly mean that a wizard needs a 15 Int to cast an empowered fireball. It takes some effort on my part to see it differently. [Kind of like those color-blindness tests.]I just spoke to Jason about this, and we're going to change the wording of this sentence.
Current version:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast as a higher-level spell.
Proposed new version:
Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast a higher-level spell .
Is that sufficiently clear?
I would of murdered my players with a blunt axe if they would of argued the original errata with me.
Bob Loblaw I'm interested in getting your opinions on that prestige class to if you don't mind -- it could just be spoiler if you don't want to go off topic too much.
So I spent a little time looking over the prestige class. I like the idea. From what I can tell, this type of caster is more of a theory crafter rather than an applied caster (like physicists).
So if I am reading it right, you only gain up to 4th level spells? So you add each level to the spells known for your class?
I like Applied Theory. So if you have a 13 Intelligence, and your 7th level wizard has 7 ranks in Spellcraft, then your effective casting stat is 14 for purposes of DCs and spell effects but not spells/day, correct?
I really like the Bend and Break Limits. I need to look over the metamagic mastery and heightened mastery tomorrow.
Bob Loblaw I'm interested in getting your opinions on that prestige class to if you don't mind -- it could just be spoiler if you don't want to go off topic too much.So I spent a little time looking over the prestige class. I like the idea. From what I can tell, this type of caster is more of a theory crafter rather than an applied caster (like physicists).
So if I am reading it right, you only gain up to 4th level spells? So you add each level to the spells known for your class?
I like Applied Theory. So if you have a 13 Intelligence, and your 7th level wizard has 7 ranks in Spellcraft, then your effective casting stat is 14 for purposes of DCs and spell effects but not spells/day, correct?
I really like the Bend and Break Limits. I need to look over the metamagic mastery and heightened mastery tomorrow.
The maximum spell level in the prestige class is 4 -- this is because the class will give enough metamagic effects for "free" to put that effectively up to 11 (5 from spell level (only at level 19), 3 free heightens and 3 levels of metamagic from metamagic mastery) -- I know 11 breaks the maximum spell level of 9 limit, however since the spells are limited in effect by the fact they are low level I didn't feel bad about it.
If you were to make a character that was wizard 10/master journeyman 10 you could cast 5th level spells -- you will only have about 3~5 slots for such but you could do it.
For Applied Theory: It is supposed to be class level in the prestige class + ranks in spellcraft = casting stat for purposes of DC's and spells per day but not maximum spell level that you can cast. So if you had spellcraft 13 and 6 levels in the class you could use that total (19) as your casting stat for DCs and bonus spell slots. It isn't something that will be useful immediately (at level 8 when you could first take a level in this class the total would be 9) but quickly should overcome your original casting stat with a maximum total of 30. The current stat maximum for casters is 36 -- and with the metamagic mastery in the class already I didn't quite want to hit that number -- very close, but not on the nose.
I know the requirements for the class are high, but part of that is on purpose -- I realize there is a lot of room for abuse in the idea so making it something you would need to be building toward helps limit the appeal of dipping. This fear is also evident in the metamagic mastery and heighten spell mastery -- they both only work on spells that have spell levels equal to or less than 1/2 your level in the prestige class.
The spontaneous casters would get spells known every other time they gained a spell slot from this class -- This comes out as follows:
spell level -- class level at which a new spell known is gained
1st - 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th
2nd - 3rd, 6th, 8th
3rd - 3rd, 6th, 8th
4th - 3rd, 7th
If you were to add up the spells per day across each class and included the maximum number of bonus spells you could gain it would come out to:
Wizard: 19(1st) 15(2nd) 14(3rd) 12(4th) 5(5th)
Sorcerer: 19(1st) 16(2nd) 16(3rd) 13(4th) 6(5th)
Bard: 19(1st) 14(2nd) 13(3rd) 9(4th)
That may seem like a lot of spells -- but that's accounting for a casting stat of 36 (and why would you take this class with a stat that high?) and the fact that you don't get any spell slots of the higher levels. In order to have enough stamina to last a full adventuring day (especially with lower level effects) I had to give them enough slots to make up for the lack of higher level slots.
If you're worried about spell slots and stuff, use d20 Modern. The base wizard class goes only up to 5th level spells, but if you take the Archmage class, you double all your spells in number over 5 levels.
Add metamagic on top of that, and you're going to be doing FINE.
Another way would be 'give up' all spells of a certain level, and all your lower level spells get a free +1 Meta. Example: Hit 11th level, give up all 6th level spells. Effectively give +1 to all your level 1-5 spells, chosen from among your Metas as you cast. Give up 6-9th level spells, get +4 to all spells...a free Quicken on everything, but you're still only casting 5's.
==Aelryinth
If you're worried about spell slots and stuff, use d20 Modern. The base wizard class goes only up to 5th level spells, but if you take the Archmage class, you double all your spells in number over 5 levels.
Add metamagic on top of that, and you're going to be doing FINE.
Another way would be 'give up' all spells of a certain level, and all your lower level spells get a free +1 Meta. Example: Hit 11th level, give up all 6th level spells. Effectively give +1 to all your level 1-5 spells, chosen from among your Metas as you cast. Give up 6-9th level spells, get +4 to all spells...a free Quicken on everything, but you're still only casting 5's.
==Aelryinth
Aelryinth I don't think you've read the link in question or you would have seen that everything you are saying is already included in the prestige class. I do appreciate the ideas though -- it is exactly where I went with the thought process that lead me to develop the class in question and you saying much the same thing as what I thought raises my hopes that the class is at least close to being good!
I'll provide the link again because I really do want more thoughts on it:
Again I would appreciate ideas on a new name for it too -- I'm think about something using the word (or a derivative of) fundamental.
If you're worried about spell slots and stuff, use d20 Modern. The base wizard class goes only up to 5th level spells, but if you take the Archmage class, you double all your spells in number over 5 levels.
Add metamagic on top of that, and you're going to be doing FINE.
Another way would be 'give up' all spells of a certain level, and all your lower level spells get a free +1 Meta. Example: Hit 11th level, give up all 6th level spells. Effectively give +1 to all your level 1-5 spells, chosen from among your Metas as you cast. Give up 6-9th level spells, get +4 to all spells...a free Quicken on everything, but you're still only casting 5's.
==Aelryinth
Aelryinth I don't think you've read the link in question or you would have seen that everything you are saying is already included in the prestige class. I do appreciate the ideas though -- it is exactly where I went with the thought process that lead me to develop the class in question and you saying much the same thing as what I thought raises my hopes that the class is at least close to being good!
I'll provide the link again because I really do want more thoughts on it:
Again I would appreciate ideas on a new name for it too -- I'm think about something using the word (or a derivative of) fundamental.
I'm looking it over some more and I'm going to see what it looks like when I create a character for each level of the prestige class. Could you start a new thread though? It will probably help us focus on this better for you.
I was wondering if you have considered how Bend and Break Limits work with Intensify. I would assume that you would increase the damage dice by 75% (15th level wizard in your example would deal 17d6 damage and not 23d6) and your caster level + 50% respectively (level 18 wizard in your example would deal 27d6 damage).