| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Note: none of this usually applies to player characters, because they have a party to keep alive and worry about.
Some people like to complain about "Schrodinger's Wizard" and pretend it's some kind of fallacy. It's not. There is something called the "Magic Game". Some characters have the INT score, spell lists and spells known to pull it off (Typically Wizards). Most don't.
It involves: High level magic, divination, teleportation, abjurations to prevent opponents from locating you, the clone spell, multiple clones and a defensive mindset.
Basically, characters capable of playing the "Magic Game" always go first and attack when their target is most vulnerable, and when they are prepared to the best of their ability to attack whatever target they have chosen because their capabilities allow them to do that.
Whenever this kind of character perceives a danger to themselves, They immediately use their magic to remove themselves from the situation, and begin preparing to eliminate the threat and build up their defenses. Now sometimes danger gets the jump on them, and scores the first blow. If this blow doesn't kill them outright, their contingency spell activates and removes them to a safe location, and they begin preparing to eliminate the threat and build up their defenses.
In a worst case scenario, they are killed outright, and wake up in one of their clones, and they begin preparing to eliminate the threat and build up their defenses.
There are only two ways to defend against these tactics, GM fiat protecting the PCs, and being capable of the same tactics. This is why Wizard lords always rule the world in D&D settings that make sense (See Darksun, and Jack Vance's Dying Earth, on which D&D was largely based), and why Wizard lords have trouble eliminating each other. And why a Lich is a source of Lovecraftian cosmic horror.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually it is a fallacy because when debates about wizards take place they also refer to solving out of combat situations, which can have unlimited problems, but the number of spells you can have per day is limited, and often these debate are about PC wizards.
You can't make a wizard that can the "best" spell availible for any situation which is what happens in a debate. Often in a real game a good player can find a spell that works, or he will use a spell in an unintended but legal way, which I dont think most of us would have an issue with.
Also wizards in various settings have different powers so trying to apply any character in a game to one in a D&D or Pathfinder is a poor choice.
They only have trouble killing each on novels because the author says so, which is just like GM Fiat for a game. That has nothing to do with a game's actual rules.
Actually it is a fallacy because when debates about wizards take place they also refer to solving out of combat situations, which can have unlimited problems, but the number of spells you can have per day is limited, and often these debate are about PC wizards.
You can't make a wizard that can the "best" spell availible for any situation which is what happens in a debate. Often in a real game a good player can find a spell that works, or he will use a spell in an unintended but legal way, which I dont think most of us would have an issue with.
Also wizards in various settings have different powers so trying to apply any character in a game to one in a D&D or Pathfinder is a poor choice.
They only have trouble killing each on novels because the author says so, which is just like GM Fiat for a game. That has nothing to do with a game's actual rules.
Pathfinser is D&D by another name. I know the debate is often about PC Wizards, but It sometimes veers into talking about NPCs, which is especially relevant to actual gameplay when the BBEG has 20 levels of Wizard (not uncommon). Hence the comment on "GM fiat".
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinser is D&D by another name. I know the debate is often about PC Wizards, but It sometimes veers into talking about NPCs, which is especially relevant to actual gameplay when the BBEG has 20 levels of Wizard (not uncommon). Hence the comment on "GM fiat".Actually it is a fallacy because when debates about wizards take place they also refer to solving out of combat situations, which can have unlimited problems, but the number of spells you can have per day is limited, and often these debate are about PC wizards.
You can't make a wizard that can the "best" spell availible for any situation which is what happens in a debate. Often in a real game a good player can find a spell that works, or he will use a spell in an unintended but legal way, which I dont think most of us would have an issue with.
Also wizards in various settings have different powers so trying to apply any character in a game to one in a D&D or Pathfinder is a poor choice.
They only have trouble killing each on novels because the author says so, which is just like GM Fiat for a game. That has nothing to do with a game's actual rules.
The problem with most discussions on this topic is the fact that the scenarios are described first followed by a list of spells that the wizard could use to complete that scenario. The problem is this doesn't happen in real games. Now if your DM describes everything before hand then fair enough but the part that tends to be ignored is that your spells are chosen first followed by a scenario you know nothing about. Did you plan on that random encounter with four grizzly bears whom all have Improved Grab? Maybe if you really got lucky and you just happen to have some spells memorized that are useful in that situation.
I'm not saying you can't get some insight on a scenario but it doesn't happen as often as people make it out to be.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also want to point out that while spells like Clone are neat, they aren't very practical. When your clone wakes up, unless you sacrifice your own money and gear, the clone will have ni items or gold and will not know where you died nor where to find your gear. It would also be up to your DM whether or not he's going to provide you with anyway, can't just quote WBL and expect to get it.
Agreed with 'Strike and 'Soul. To pull this off, you have to prepare to do little else, especially at lower levels. Now, the OP mentions that PCs are less likely to do this because they have full parties to worry about, but an NPC prepared to do this would have to be pretty damn paranoid, and how many of such an identical villain would a party be willing to put up with before they called their GM out on it, and how much could that NPC accomplish as a villain when all he is concerned about is playing a vanishing game?
As has been mentioned, virtually any scenario can be described, and then a contingency worked out for it, but that is simply not a reflection on how spells and encounters are planned out.
|
There are only two ways to defend against these tactics, GM fiat protecting the PCs, and being capable of the same tactics. This is why Wizard lords always rule the world in D&D settings that make sense (See Darksun, and Jack Vance's Dying Earth, on which D&D was largely based), and why Wizard lords have trouble eliminating each other.
If we look at Dragonlance based on 1e AD&D things don't look so good for the Wizards. The 3e+ concept of wake up and poof all your spells are back makes what you say true, but in 1e/2e you only had to be willing to sacrifice a few and they were dead meat. Wizards now have far more spells per day and get them back almost instantaneously compared with their 1e/2e counterparts.
S.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are only two ways to defend against these tactics, GM fiat protecting the PCs, and being capable of the same tactics. This is why Wizard lords always rule the world in D&D settings that make sense (See Darksun, and Jack Vance's Dying Earth, on which D&D was largely based), and why Wizard lords have trouble eliminating each other.If we look at Dragonlance based on 1e AD&D things don't look so good for the Wizards. The 3e+ concept of wake up and poof all your spells are back makes what you say true, but in 1e/2e you only had to be willing to sacrifice a few and they were dead meat. Wizards now have far more spells per day and get them back almost instantaneously compared with their 1e/2e counterparts.
S.
Well, first off, Dragonlance is terrible. And doesn't represent high level D&D at all, it falls into the "high levels are just like low levels but epic" trap that many novelists and GMs fall prey to. And is absolutely untrue.
As to spell slots, it doesn't really matter. Remember how I said,"begin preparing to eliminate the threat and build up their defenses"? well I meant it, and it seems like a lot of posters are having trouble with that concept. They can take as long as they want to set up the perfect scenario and spell list to deal with the issue. Heck, maybe they'll even torment their target with the nightmare spell for a week. Or two. Or a year. While they craft a golem to teleport in with them. And send planar bound outsider assassins at them. etc. etc. etc.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with most discussions on this topic is the fact that the scenarios are described first followed by a list of spells that the wizard could use to complete that scenario. The problem is this doesn't happen in real games. Now if your DM describes everything before hand then fair enough but the part that tends to be ignored is that your spells are chosen first followed by a scenario you know nothing about. Did you plan on that random encounter with four grizzly bears whom all have Improved Grab? Maybe if you really got lucky and you just happen to have some spells memorized that are useful in that situation.
I'm not saying you can't get some insight on a scenario but it doesn't happen as often as people make it out to be.
I agree, with one proviso: the wizards I have played have always invested heavily in scrolls. Lots of scrolls. Every spell they think might be useful, they make a scroll of. As soon as they have the resources, they make wands of the most commonly used ones as well.
Hence my wizards do tend to wander along with every spell they might need available. The ones they prepare are the ones that work best when cast from preparation and not from scrolls. It's resource heavy, but it works.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, first off, Dragonlance is terrible. And doesn't represent high level D&D at all, it falls into the "high levels are just like low levels but epic" trap that many novelists and GMs fall prey to. And is absolutely untrue.As to spell slots, it doesn't really matter. Remember how I said,"begin preparing to eliminate the threat and build up their defenses"? well I meant it, and it seems like a lot of posters are having trouble with that concept. They can take as long as they want to set up the perfect scenario and spell list to deal with the issue. Heck, maybe they'll even torment their target with the nightmare spell for a week. Or two. Or a year. While they craft a golem to teleport in with them. And send planar bound outsider assassins at them. etc. etc. etc.
Again 1e is a very different beast. Teleport, unless teleport without error may end in you killing yourself. Any close encounter with a fighter with multiple attacks results in you automatically losing initiative, no concentration rolls back then. Having INT 18 and being even able to cast 9th level spells wasn't a certainty (no point system back then). Not to mention you didn't automatically have access to every spell in the book just because you gained a level. They did have more save or die spells that is true. An archmage burning all of their spells takes 144 hours to recover those spells - that isn't including resting. I am not saying wizards in 1e weren't powerful, just they pale in comparison to their PF counterparts and have real weaknesses that actually mean something in game. So again under 3e/PF you are correct but under 1e I'm not so certain.
I'll assume that "Dragonlance is terrible" was meant to include a sentence where you state that this is your opinion?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As to spell slots, it doesn't really matter. Remember how I said,"begin preparing to eliminate the threat and build up their defenses"? well I meant it, and it seems like a lot of posters are having trouble with that concept. They can take as long as they want to set up the perfect scenario and spell list to deal with the issue. Heck, maybe they'll even torment their target with the nightmare spell for a week. Or two. Or a year. While they craft a golem to teleport in with them. And send planar bound outsider assassins at them. etc. etc. etc.
If, in a high level game, you are consistently able to be successful with these tactics and your opponents never develop effective counter-measures, your GM has the game on the Easy setting for you.
Remember, high level characters face high level, powerful foes with significant resources. Many of them have superhuman intelligence scores as well. Safe to assume that their opponents are also planning and preparing. The U.S. military has a saying, as true in PF as it is combat: the enemy gets a vote. That doesn't mean the PCs will never get the jump on their opponents, it just means they won't always get the jump on their opponents. In fact, some times their opponents will get the jump on them, and given the extreme lethality of high-level contact, that can mean a lot of dead PCs.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
My understanding of this term is: when a person is arguing for the utter superiority of the wizard among all classes, that wizard invariably has just the right spell even if the situation was contrived against them.
This exists, because some people just really like to be right.
What you're talking about in the OP is the paranoia loop that high level NPC spellcasters can create. That's frankly kind of neat, and I love it when my players really dig in. But that's not really Schrodinger's Wizard. I would only apply the term to people who only really choose their wizards spells at the time of casting.
Cheating, in a word.
I agree with evil dead president. A Schrodinger's Wizard is one where a situation is presented for a forum discussion and someone says "well, he just casts X" where X is the perfect spell to solve the problem.
It completely ignores that to have X prepared, the wizard in question has to have made the conscious decision to prepare it in preference to other spells. Usually X has such limited use that it wouldn't make most wizards' "just in case" list, and therefore the wizard must have prior knowledge of the circumstance which would make him want X prepared. Yes, he might have it on a scroll, but to guarantee having it, he must heavily invest in scrolls of all spells he doesn't actually prepare, which would wipe out his wealth in short order. It would be insanely generous, for example, to allow a 5% chance that any Scrodinger's Wizard just happens to have the right spell prepped or on a scroll, especially if the spell is non-core.
The Schrodinger's Wizard is a fallacy because it assumes infinite knowledge and wealth on the wizard's part.
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Schrodinger's Wizard" has only one weakness.
Opening the box and having it appear.
Which is why serious discussions need builds, not theorycraft.
A wizard can do everything, but not at the same time. Each choice means a choice you didn't take isn't available. And when people have lots of empty slots, that shows they play with the kind of GM who has nice quiet places for wizards to study in the middle of dungeons...
Wizards can be all win or all fail depending on if they guessed right about 1) What they will need for the day 2) When they will need it 3) How long the day is.
"Schrodinger's Wizard", "Schrodinger's Fighter", "Schrodinger's" anything really is a function of people trying to show how right they are rather than trying to prove how right they are.
Posting a build leaves you vulnerable to being wrong...heaven forbid...
|
|
My understanding of this term is: when a person is arguing for the utter superiority of the wizard among all classes, that wizard invariably has just the right spell even if the situation was contrived against them.
This exists, because some people just really like to be right.
What you're talking about in the OP is the paranoia loop that high level NPC spellcasters can create. That's frankly kind of neat, and I love it when my players really dig in. But that's not really Schrodinger's Wizard. I would only apply the term to people who only really choose their wizards spells at the time of casting.
Cheating, in a word.
Which happens. Hopefully you have a group of people who play honestly, but it can be damn tempting for some people when you need a spell at that moment that you could have had, but didn't.
In my experience, Wizards, Clerics and Druids are the classes most tempting to cheat while playing. Which is a large part of my skepticism.
|
Actually it is a fallacy because when debates about wizards take place they also refer to solving out of combat situations, which can have unlimited problems, but the number of spells you can have per day is limited, and often these debate are about PC
Schrodinger's Wizard is real. He is a half-elven sorcerer.
"Schrodinger's Wizard" has only one weakness.
Opening the box and having it appear.
Which is why serious discussions need builds, not theorycraft.
....
Posting a build leaves you vulnerable to being wrong...heaven forbid...
I am developing a library of reference builds I can use for these arguements. I am in the process of updating my general purpose wizard build at the moment.
What I have found is, even when I post a build, people ignore it and continue making claims my posted build shows to be false. This is particularly true with my versatile sword-and-board fighter.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I have found is, even when I post a build, people ignore it and continue making claims my posted build shows to be false. This is particularly true with my versatile sword-and-board fighter.
Well, it is the internet.
...
I am developing a library of reference builds I can use for these arguements. I am in the process of updating my general purpose wizard build at the moment.
What I have found is, even when I post a build, people ignore it and continue making claims my posted build shows to be false. This is particularly true with my versatile sword-and-board fighter.
Oooh.... Links? Something like RavingDork's character thread.
I'd like to see them. I love it when people post builds.
... "Schrodinger's Fighter", ...
That was funny. In a good way.
|
|
I'd like to see them. I love it when people post builds.
Here is a bladebound kensai I am working on. I've only made builds for levels 1, 4 & 8 so far.
Unlike Ravingdork, I'm using strict wealth my level and avoiding custom magic items. I tend to follow PFS rules where possible, since I might be posting links to argue a random point.
An example of my fighter at level 20. I keep meaning to revise a couple of her feats but never seem to find the time.
Google Docs can get touchy if your not logged in, even when the files are set to public viewing.
Pathfinser is D&D by another name. I know the debate is often about PC Wizards, but It sometimes veers into talking about NPCs, which is especially relevant to actual gameplay when the BBEG has 20 levels of Wizard (not uncommon). Hence the comment on "GM fiat".Actually it is a fallacy because when debates about wizards take place they also refer to solving out of combat situations, which can have unlimited problems, but the number of spells you can have per day is limited, and often these debate are about PC wizards.
You can't make a wizard that can the "best" spell availible for any situation which is what happens in a debate. Often in a real game a good player can find a spell that works, or he will use a spell in an unintended but legal way, which I dont think most of us would have an issue with.
Also wizards in various settings have different powers so trying to apply any character in a game to one in a D&D or Pathfinder is a poor choice.
They only have trouble killing each on novels because the author says so, which is just like GM Fiat for a game. That has nothing to do with a game's actual rules.
If you are recommending that a GM not hold his NPC wizard to a prechosen list of spells in order to show the NPC's intelligence that is another argument altogether IMO.
Is that what you are saying?
With fast study you can get a bit closer to schrodinger's wizard in non-stressful environments you still can't fully hit it without wasting a lot of feats on contingencies like spell mastery still spell eschew materials and the like.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With fast study you can get a bit closer to schrodinger's wizard in non-stressful environments you still can't fully hit it without wasting a lot of feats on contingencies like spell mastery still spell eschew materials and the like.
Fast Study and metamagic rods are two things I think need to be looked at again by the devs. Many of the other issues I find to be more GM reading things loosely rather than actual rule problems.
If you can be Schroedinger's Wizard by wasting a few feats, then they were not wasted. :)
With fast study you can get a bit closer to schrodinger's wizard in non-stressful environments you still can't fully hit it without wasting a lot of feats on contingencies like spell mastery still spell eschew materials and the like.Fast Study and metamagic rods are two things I think need to be looked at again by the devs. Many of the other issues I find to be more GM reading things loosely rather than actual rule problems.
Well the one time I did a full on "paranoid wizard" I did take eschew material, still and silent spell, as several spell masteries. While out of combat I usually had a solution it did require time.
Personally I stayed away from the rods as those could be taken away. My main thought was if everything taken from me and I was cuffed and gagged could I still kick butt?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with evil dead president. A Schrodinger's Wizard is one where a situation is presented for a forum discussion and someone says "well, he just casts X" where X is the perfect spell to solve the problem.
It completely ignores that to have X prepared, the wizard in question has to have made the conscious decision to prepare it in preference to other spells.
Technically any wizard with an Arcane Bond can do this - once a day.
|
|
Technically any wizard with an Arcane Bond can do this - once a day.I agree with evil dead president. A Schrodinger's Wizard is one where a situation is presented for a forum discussion and someone says "well, he just casts X" where X is the perfect spell to solve the problem.
It completely ignores that to have X prepared, the wizard in question has to have made the conscious decision to prepare it in preference to other spells.
Paragon Surge allows a half-elven sorcerer to do this multiple times per day.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
AM BARBARIAN keeps Schroedinger's Wizard in a box. A very small box. It's so small he had to remove the limbs and rearrange things in order to make the wizard fit so he could get the lid closed.
AM BARBARIAN is schroedinger's barbarian, no one has actually posted a full build.
More importantly, Paragon Surge allows a half-elven Oracle to do this multiple times a time off of both the Wizard/Sorcerer list and their own Oracle list.
That being said, Schrodinger's Wizard is silly because the only time not having a spell matters for immediate issues. Given a day a wizard can in fact switch spells or go out and learn just the right spell for a problem. Even outside of that power many spells can solve multiple problems without even touching on the Shadow X/Shades line. Add on to that Fast Study and the Spellbinder Archetype for Elven Wizards... and being prepared with the exact right spell at the drop of a hat is exactly what these casters are capable of.
Furthermore, its really not that hard (or expensive) for a Wizard to maintain a pretty comprehensive spell list. You already begin with 3+INT spells and then get another 38 spells for free as you level. Lets not forget Wizards get Scribe Scroll at 1st level and Craft Wondrous Item off their bonus feat list, which makes Blessed Book a massive money saver when it only costs you 6,250 (hell with just copying 9th level spells you see a profit). Even if you have to buy scrolls to add to your spellbook (which hey... free additional one-time use of a spell + new spell in book = good deal), a 9th level spell scroll is only 3,825 gp, so even if you absolutely must have all of them (don't forget that you can get 8 9th level spells for free off of leveling) that is not unreasonable at high level WBL, while still maintaining your necessities.
Really I think its more surprising to assume that a Wizard *doesn't* have the exact right spell (or one that is versatile enough to be right enough), rather than saying having the right spell to solve the problem = Schrodinger's Wizard.
The shroedinger wizard exists because no one is able to make a build that is able to do every thing that people on the forum imagine he can do.
That's it.
Yes it is possible to create a wizard that knows all his spell list. Yes, you can take Fast study to have a limited ability to choose your spell during the day instead of just out of bed.
But you can't have exactly the spell you want when you need : because knowing is different from prepared, and because even if you could prepare spells very quickly, you still need time to do so.
|
|
At the cost of a spell known specifically chosen to allow the sorcerer to do this, 1 round of action and a 3rd level spell cast,Paragon Surge allows a half-elven sorcerer to do this multiple times per day.
For 35,000 I get rid of the 1 round delay.
For 24,000 I can use a Ring of Spell Knowledge IV to access level 4 and lower sorcerer spells and level 3 and lower witch/bard spells with the cost of a standard action.
Not a bad price for a high level caster to always have exactly the right spell.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also want to point out that while spells like Clone are neat, they aren't very practical. When your clone wakes up, unless you sacrifice your own money and gear, the clone will have ni items or gold and will not know where you died nor where to find your gear. It would also be up to your DM whether or not he's going to provide you with anyway, can't just quote WBL and expect to get it.
Umm...contingency spell?!? Seriously, what wizard with the intelligence of a super genius at least does not have a contingency up to teleport him right before he dies to his clone?
Sorry, just because your bad at the let's be an uber wizard does not mean other are as well.
And failing that...who says your clone does not know where your body is? Divination spells should make short work of that even if you don't know the exact location of where you died (generally speaking this shouldn't even be an issue since how the heck do you NOT KNOW WHERE YOU DIED?!?).
Not saying that a wizard can ALWAY do EVERYTHING...but they aren't as limited as some people seem to think. They are extremely limited in use for YOU is not the same as they are extremely limited.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't follow Avh. If a Wizard knows all his spell list, then how isn't he able to do everything people imagine him being able to? I can think of very few people who understand the "Magic Game" that believe a Wizard is powerful because he literally has all spells at all times. No one thinks that. But even then, needing to have all spells at all times is very small corner case of the Wizards power and even then they can cover that to an extent with Spellbinder, Fast Study, and Scrolls.
You seem to believe that there is hypothetical scenario where the only spells a Wizard needs are all for immediate use and that somehow the Wizard (despite having well over 60 spells available at any given time) has nothing appropriate prepared. This is an unrealistic scenario even more so then the so called "Schrodinger Wizard". The only time "What you have prepped right this second" could really matter in is combat and if a wizard knows he's going to be in that... he probably will have the exact spell he needs or one that close enough that it might as well be exact.
Please keep in mind that there is actually a limited number of "effective" spells, while there may be a combat situation made just for "Conjure Black Pudding", I guarantee that in most combat scenarios Summon Monster VI can pick up the slack well enough to be "exact".
|
|
I don't follow Avh. If a Wizard knows all his spell list, then how isn't he able to everything people imagine him being able to do?
Mr. Wizard is strolling through the demonic dungeon of fiery doom. He has all his best demon and fire squishing spells memorized. He's kickin but and takin names.
Out of the shadows jumps a couple of ghosts.
Mr. Wizard did not memorize his ghost squishing spells today; he did not know they were there.
He has 6 seconds to respond......
Teleportation magic, amulet of magecraft, spellbinder, and why did he focus all his spells? Bad wizard, you aren't a sorcerer!
But generally I'll pop my resilent sphere on myself while I work on a better solution.
It's a fallacy. I have a longstanding character, a 13 Wizard/2 Rogue who started back in D&D 3.0, who is more than a little paranoid. She always always always has at least one silenced Teleport spell and usually has at least one silenced Dimension Door and Dispel Magic. This is on top of a greater than normal complement of protective spells, always including other Teleports, Dimension Doors, and Dispel Magics. This is in large part because I play with a group with fun but very unoptimized characters (one plays a monk) and even though the wizard is herself highly unoptimized, she is still primarily a wizard, so I deliberately put a paranoia tax on her spell list every day so she won't hog the limelight too much. Even so, although this character tries to be as much like Schrodinger's wizard as possible (i.e., tries to be prepared for every contingency), she is well aware of her fragility.
I realize that the TRUE Schrodinger's Wizard is supposed to be considerably higher level, but I don't see how anything will really change in this regard as she gets there. There is always a way around spell defenses and there are plenty of ways to take someone out that will not activate a Clone: Imprisonment, Trap the Soul, possibly petrification or Baleful Polymorph (not if Contingency has been used to cast a countering spell, but you only get one Contingency and there are too many possible events), using Plane Shift to transport them to a tailored created demiplane with the dead magic feature, etc., etc.
The only real defenses are to either not make powerful enemies in the first place (which could conceivably mean not allowing anyone to gain sufficient power to become a threat) OR to have friends/allies sufficiently powerful to retrieve you from whatever fate an enemy has managed to assign to you. Wizards with a stationary base of operations who have allowed PCs to get to the level they can be a threat and who have given them reason to do so are probably doomed, at least eventually.
That's actually a super easy situation to solve, as an out of combat spell can handle it with little issue. Without needing to use any of his spell slots, the Wizard calmly reaches for his Explosive Runes and laughs manically. (Just toss them away from you and have a party member read it from a safe distance, hell get a durable enough material to place them on and toss a stack.)
Thank you though Artanthos, as this gives me an opportunity to address something a lot of people miss. A lot of wizards spells can be prepped during a day of downtime and contribute to a wizards power at a later date. At no point is a wizard simply the combination of spells he has prepared today. He is also the Explosive Runes he cast last week, the Permanency buffs he has on, his Contingency, his Animated Dead, his Simulacrums, his Planar Binding associates, his 40+ hour buffs, etc., etc.
Keep in mind, you only need to prepare those on off-days so the Wizard would not bother prepping anything he prepared longer than yesterday ago. This means he can devote his full compliment of spells to kicking demon butt.
I dm 1st edition...I make up spell lists for all my npc's and expect my players to do the same.
Many times either myself or a player has been caught with our robes down by not having the spell we really needed...sometimes the end result was merely annoying [we could use a different spell that was close enough]...
Other times we were well and truly toast...
It's just part of being a spellcaster in 1st edition.
Makes the game interesting having to second or third guess ourselves and the future days encounters.
|
|
Teleportation magic, amulet of magecraft, spellbinder, and why did he focus all his spells? Bad wizard, you aren't a sorcerer!
But generally I'll pop my resilent sphere on myself while I work on a better solution.
The example I provided was highly simplified. Trying to name a specific scenario on the forums is playing into the Schrodinger's wizard's home ground. Somebody WILL respond, "my wizard has X memorized."
There always comes a time when the unforeseen happens. Heavens Forbid, the same event occurs twice in one day and the wizard only prepared for it happening once.
|
|
Teleportation magic, amulet of magecraft, spellbinder, and why did he focus all his spells? Bad wizard, you aren't a sorcerer!
But generally I'll pop my resilent sphere on myself while I work on a better solution.
The example I provided was highly simplified. Trying to name a specific scenario on the forums is playing into the Schrodinger's wizard's home ground. Somebody WILL respond, "my wizard has X memorized."
There always comes a time when the unforeseen happens. Heavens Forbid, the same event occurs twice in one day and the wizard only prepared for it happening once.
The example you gave assumed the wizard was played by a moron who uber specialized their memorized spells without taking into account the standard array of general purpose spells. And at higher levels, your wizard should have enough general purpose spells to deal with a few unexpected encounters. If you need more then that, you just teleport or extra dimensional space away, rest up and continue on your marry way. If the GM decides to put not covered by rules reasons that you can not rest...then yes EVERY limited resource character will be weak and the fighter and rogue can do their happy dance while the incredibly intelligent wizard just teleports away and find a better way to solve the problem then go head long into certain death because I don't have any spells left.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except this happens a couple of times, and OOOPS! No more resilient spheres to pop.
And when you run out of hp you die. Of course given the infinite resources of the gm eventually the wizard runs out of tricks. That is when you retreat with the teleport or dimensional space or some such.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also want to point out that while spells like Clone are neat, they aren't very practical. When your clone wakes up, unless you sacrifice your own money and gear, the clone will have ni items or gold and will not know where you died nor where to find your gear. It would also be up to your DM whether or not he's going to provide you with anyway, can't just quote WBL and expect to get it.Umm...contingency spell?!? Seriously, what wizard with the intelligence of a super genius at least does not have a contingency up to teleport him right before he dies to his clone?
Sorry, just because your bad at the let's be an uber wizard does not mean other are as well.
And failing that...who says your clone does not know where your body is? Divination spells should make short work of that even if you don't know the exact location of where you died (generally speaking this shouldn't even be an issue since how the heck do you NOT KNOW WHERE YOU DIED?!?).
Not saying that a wizard can ALWAY do EVERYTHING...but they aren't as limited as some people seem to think. They are extremely limited in use for YOU is not the same as they are extremely limited.
So every X mount of days your Wizard casts two spells that would allow him to appear at his Clone just in case of an emergency?
It's not about being an "Uber Wizard" player and you are a perfect example of the scenario mentioned and X solution comes afterwards.