| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have noticed that a lot of people online consider wizards in pathfinder or in D&D as the 'god' class and I am curious as to the reason why. From what I have seen, most of the time the wizard does less damage than your fighter or paladin. Is it to do with their versatility or their battle-field control? If so, how do they have such a large impact in general?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At higher levels they can make other classes obsolete. With single fight ending spells, binding powerful minions, and being able to have the perfect spell on hand. They can fulfill every role and while they may not be able to deal as much damage, they usually don't need to.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is going to be a fun thread.
The short of it is their utility and adaptability is unmatched and they can theoretically have an answer to literally any problem you present them with.
Also there are several spells which are so powerful that an adventures needs to plan around their existence them or be ruined
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards do less damage. If prepared, they’re better at everything else. They’re better at flying, teleporting, creating pocket dimensions, cloning people, turning enemies into allies, battlefield control, and skills than Paladin and Fighter. And then they contribute just as much to the damage total by casting Haste.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Narrative power is the real power a character has. It doesn't matter how much damage you can do when the spellcaster can force the game to accommodate his abilities. The fighter follows the narrative along the story. The wizard teleports to the end.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
You have tto understand that most metrics of determining class power is based on the "Tier list" of 1 to 6. (I think it's been forever since I've looked). Tier 1 is the best and tier 6 is the worst. The thing about this list is it is based on a test of how that class generally functions in three scenarios:
Scenario 1: A dungeon full of various monsters and traps. Pretty much your standard dungeon crawl with an end boss of APL+2-3 and various level appropriate challenges along the way.
Scenario 2: A village is going to be attacked by generic evil horde of evilness. The party has X amount of time(usually a week) to prepare the village and townsfolk to recieve and hold against the attack with minimal casualties.
Scenario 3: There is a King/Baron/Whatever. You need a great favor from this person that may put them at risk. Do whatever you can to get this favor. This scenario can be replaced with any other social only multilayered encounter.
As you can see it's a bit skewed but let's compare Fighter, Unchained Rogue, and a Wizard (I'm leaving out cleric for simplicity as it falls in the same tier).
Scenario 1: This is where the fighter has the most going for him, but still not very much. A fighter contributes two things: DPR and an HP buffer. The best he can do against traps is face-tank them and gets ruined by fireballs, dominate persons, but can tank fingers of death(assume these are all the same power level and DC or replace them with similar effects).
The rogue is really good against traps and as long as she has a flanking buddy can mostly produce as much DPR as the fighter against any encounter not immune to sneak attack. The rogue can easily spot and deal with traps, can solve puzzles, can tank fireballs, has a better chance against will save effects with the right talents, and dies to finger of death. Rogue is almost or just as good at being an HP buffer as the fighter.
The wizard on the other hand can do everything in this encounter. In fact, hes the best HP buffer too because he has summons and/or undead minions. With good preparation and divinations he will always have spells that are effective in every encounter. He can even deal with traps simply by sending a summoned sheep through the tunnel ahead and has the best knowledge checks to deal with puzzles. He can take will save effects but will die to reflex and fort save effects or wait he has Abjuration spells, or just straight up doesn't need to enter the room until his minions tank those spells first, if at all.
Grades: Wizard +A, Unchained Rogue -B, Fighter -C
Scenario 2: The wizard can again do everything. Summon outsiders to defend the town, build fortifications with spells, dominate the mayor and have him order around the townsfolk into preparing for the attack by conscripting them all into the militia. Blow up evil horde with fireballs as they approach.The fighter and rogue can't do anything here a commoner couldn't do but perhaps the rogue might have some useless skills to apply in places.
Grades: Wizard +A, Unchained Rogue -C, Fighter F
Scenario 3: Insivibility, nondetection,teleport,hold person, teleport, geas/dominate person=Instant friendly noble...until the spell ends. Rogue can do a lot here with just diplomancy and offering skills to assist the noble at less risk then the wizard. Fighter is useless.
Grades: Wizard +A, Unchained Rogue A, Fighter F
As you can see the Wizard is always useful in these scenarios, meanwhile the fighter is only sort of useful in combat. The rogue has some nice spots but is also very hit and miss. Stuff like Bard and Alchemist are somewhere in the middle between rogue and wizard obviously.
Personally, I'd say Druid and Cleric as just as good as Wizards. The wizard just has different tools availible to them that people tend to gawk at more and are a little shinier at level 17+.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
damage is for those poor fools that can't win by other means. Why do direct damage when I can throw them to another plane, or in a pit, or mind control them, or insta kill them, or have a horde of summons/necromancy/gated creatures to kill for you?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Scenario 3: There is a King/Baron/Whatever. You need a great favor from this person that may put them at risk. Do whatever you can to get this favor. This scenario can be replaced with any other social only multilayered encounter.
... Insivibility, nondetection,teleport,hold person, teleport, geas/dominate person=Instant friendly noble...until the spell ends. Rogue can do a lot here with just diplomancy and offering skills to assist the noble at less risk then the wizard. Fighter is useless.
Grades: Wizard +A, Unchained Rogue A, Fighter F
..assuming the wizard is fairly high level and doesn't have any moral qualms about mind-controlling innocent people and the Baron doesn't have any decent magical protection.
How this scenario plays out in a typical adventure: the party send a PC with Diplomacy skill to ask the Baron if there's anything they can do to help him. Due to RPG logic, there is usually a quest that needs doing, and it will involve battles and magical loot. In which case, the Fighter will be fairly useful and the Wizard approach would have caused you to miss out on a lot of adventuring and treasure.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have noticed that a lot of people online consider wizards in pathfinder or in D&D as the 'god' class and I am curious as to the reason why. From what I have seen, most of the time the wizard does less damage than your fighter or paladin. Is it to do with their versatility or their battle-field control? If so, how do they have such a large impact in general?
Spells are considered overpowered. Wizards use spells, so they use overpowered abilities and become overpowered.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Scenario 3: There is a King/Baron/Whatever. You need a great favor from this person that may put them at risk. Do whatever you can to get this favor. This scenario can be replaced with any other social only multilayered encounter.
... Insivibility, nondetection,teleport,hold person, teleport, geas/dominate person=Instant friendly noble...until the spell ends. Rogue can do a lot here with just diplomancy and offering skills to assist the noble at less risk then the wizard. Fighter is useless.
Grades: Wizard +A, Unchained Rogue A, Fighter F
..assuming the wizard is fairly high level and doesn't have any moral qualms about mind-controlling innocent people and the Baron doesn't have any decent magical protection.
How this scenario plays out in a typical adventure: the party send a PC with Diplomacy skill to ask the Baron if there's anything they can do to help him. Due to RPG logic, there is usually a quest that needs doing, and it will involve battles and magical loot. In which case, the Fighter will be fairly useful and the Wizard approach would have caused you to miss out on a lot of adventuring and treasure.
A hyperbole example I'll admit but generally the Wizard ends up being about as useful as the rogue on their own or ends up augmenting the rogue depending on the charisma disparity.
In your example, the quest just becomes a repeat of scenario 1 aka the Wizard is just better. However, this scenario is generally assumed to be followed up by more social/intrigue related quests. I was trying to be general to save space on an already long post as anyone who can deconstruct my example probably already knows why wizard is strong already.
Yeah, it's mostly because sometimes higher level spells have the power to solve whole obstacles/problems/mysteries with a single action, so if the GM wants something to be potentially a substantial undertaking they've got to plan somehow to preclude those spells.
The cleric/druid/witch don't have as many of these spells on their lists, and the sorcerer/oracle/psychic likely doesn't know as many of them, so you can plan around having things that are only trivially solved by stuff the characters in your party don't have at their fingertips, but not so much with the Wizard.
Past like level 8 or so, having a Wizard in the party is at least twice as much work for the GM than any other class in my experience, and past level 12 it's like ten times as much work. I would consider banning the class if anybody in my group actually liked playing wizards.
|
I have noticed that a lot of people online consider wizards in pathfinder or in D&D as the 'god' class and I am curious as to the reason why. From what I have seen, most of the time the wizard does less damage than your fighter or paladin. Is it to do with their versatility or their battle-field control? If so, how do they have such a large impact in general?
well druids are arguably the most op class
but wizards done right have answers for most issues and can arguably make many classes 3rd wheelsthey can be outclassed in damage but they have many spells that if used can end combats in one action
I have noticed that a lot of people online consider wizards in pathfinder or in D&D as the 'god' class and I am curious as to the reason why. From what I have seen, most of the time the wizard does less damage than your fighter or paladin. Is it to do with their versatility or their battle-field control? If so, how do they have such a large impact in general?well druids are arguably the most op class
but wizards done right have answers for most issues and can arguably make many classes 3rd wheels
they can be outclassed in damage but they have many spells that if used can end combats in one action
In theory, a perfectly built wizard, that has read ahead in the adventure path and memorized the perfect spells, can control a game. Although I've never actually seen this happen in actual play. That dishonor has gone to a druid and a summoner.
The druid was the worst. With lots of summons, battlefield control, and presistant damaging spells like flaming sphere and ball lightning, he'd could turn any fight into a living hell for everyone. Outdoors was even worse, because he'd usually be hiding in the form of a sparrow. The dude also photocopied every single druid spell, from every book, so his potential spell list for the day included hundreds of spells. Yeah, I know, a wizard can keep a dozen spell books and do the same thing, but again, I've never seen that done in actual play.
As a disclaimer, I guess, we usually reset after level 15 (everything is just lethal beyond that point), so I've never run or had to manage a level 20 wizard (or anything else for that matter).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
yeah a well played druid is brutal, its telling that most druid archtypes tend to weaken druids a little :)
This is a pretty important point.
Most martial archetypes are designed to make certain concepts functional. (Go ahead and try to make a whip wielder or a dual wielder without an archetype)
Most full caster archetypes are designed to give a certain thematic flair and usually give up a lot to do it, but players tend not to care because they are still full casters. In some cases, it's actually better to play certain concepts without the archetypes designed for them (necromancer wizard and wildshape focused druid come to mind)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(Go ahead and try to make a whip wielder or a dual wielder without an archetype)What do you mean? Vanilla warpriest or magus or swashbuckler can all work great with a whip.
Either variety of unarchetyped vigilante too, since you can get whip mastery and improved whip mastery for a single vigilante talent ("Whip of Vengeance") and lethal grace will let you TWF with whips pretty effectively (though the extra BAB for the avenger is pretty handy here.)
At higher levels wizards start to shine, but I can tell you my 5th level wizard (that was killed last session) never did. The Barbarian dominated every fight and there was another PC that had high knowledge rolls (investigator). Being a somewhat low wealth campaign so much of my gold went to paying for access to new spells, copying them into my spellbook and copying them into the backup copy I always felt poor. Taking item creation feats may have been a mistake- it helped raise the power level of the party but didn't do anything to help him shine.
(Go ahead and try to make a whip wielder or a dual wielder without an archetype)What do you mean? Vanilla warpriest or magus or swashbuckler can all work great with a whip.
Two of those are casters. Swashbuckler takes quite a while to get all the necessary feats. The first few levels as a whip-buckler are going to suck.
I hadn't looked at the vigilante as a whip wielder before. That's pretty awesome and doesn't take forever for the build to come together, so that's a point I'll happily concede. Now I want to play one!
|
Low level wizards are excellent at a few things, and good within their limitations.
Mid level wizards are extremely powerful, generally have a spell that can handle any given skill check you might need, and can end fights almost as soon as they start.
High level wizards create whole planes of reality, make legions of simulacra, and if they feel like it can go live on the sun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards do less damage. If prepared, they’re better at everything else. They’re better at flying, teleporting, creating pocket dimensions, cloning people, turning enemies into allies, battlefield control, and skills than Paladin and Fighter. And then they contribute just as much to the damage total by casting Haste.
Well, if prepared, they're better. What about all those times when they CAN'T prepare, because they have incomplete and/or misleading information (even after considerable Divination and research)? And also, how many spells can you prepare? It isn't all that much at each level, if you're going to go the route of playing safe by preparing the most generic spells of each level. And if your adventuring day is 15 hours instead of 15 minutes, you're going to be begging for a rest. Either way, better have a load of Pearls of Power.
To be fair, from what I have been able to determine about reading about gameplay of PFS Scenarios and APs, the above Wizard-hurting situations don't seem to come up very often.
Well, if prepared, they're better. What about all those times when they CAN'T prepare, because they have incomplete and/or misleading information (even after considerable Divination and research)?
Use summons to fill the gaps?
Use summons to fill the gaps?
Well, if prepared, they're better. What about all those times when they CAN'T prepare, because they have incomplete and/or misleading information (even after considerable Divination and research)?
Limit Summons. That might sound mean or the Iron Fist of the DM, but on the flip side, no Dm wants to memorize every summon possible and the rest of the party might actually want a turn that session.
Wizards can fully break a game past a certain level. But if you do play Wizard maybe consider what you can actually do, and what that means to the other people at the table.
{. . .}
Huge slogs are also not playing to most other classes' strengths, either. That's basically the purview of Kineticists and characters that have both Life Link and Fast Healing.I suppose the guy that invested in Craft Wand and pumped out a paranoid number of wands of Cure Light Wounds or Infernal Healing would be feeling pretty vindicated.
Also could give a feeling of vindication to the Ley Line Guardian Witch, or at really high levels, even a Mystic Theurge with one spontaneous casting base class. Or to somebody who invested in Craft Wondrous Item and Craft Rod and pumped out both a paranoid number of Pearls of Power and Metamagic Rods of Echoing Spell. . . .
Use summons to fill the gaps?
Well, if prepared, they're better. What about all those times when they CAN'T prepare, because they have incomplete and/or misleading information (even after considerable Divination and research)?
Limit Summons. That might sound mean or the Iron Fist of the DM, but on the flip side, no Dm wants to memorize every summon possible and the rest of the party might actually want a turn that session.
Wizards can fully break a game past a certain level. But if you do play Wizard maybe consider what you can actually do, and what that means to the other people at the table.
It shouldn't be the DMs job to handle memorization of summons. That's the summoning player's job, just like it's their job to keep track of their own damn sheet.
On our table I play a lot of Druids, which btw are way better summoners then default wizards or even the summoner class, and it was my job to keep track of the stats of all my summons without it slowing down the game. I had all the summons I'd use at all levels of the spell prepared ahead of time(having a computer helps) and prepared the turns of both my character, my animal companion, and my summons all before my turn actually came so I could execute it as fast as I could speak. I even pre-rolled attack dice if my DM let me, or at least had all the dice ready to roll. Any summoner who could not do this on our table was not allowed to use those spells.
That being said, the wizard still has to have summon spells prepared. They cannot spontaneously cast them like a Druid can(or even a cleric with the right build). A wizard who is not strictly prepared for the encounter hes facing is just a worse version of a Sorcerer with better knowledge skills. However, proper execution of the class is assumed when doing these theorycrafting comparisons which does skew things a bit. Many people just don't have the mindset to play Wizards, and no I'm implying those players are less intelligent they simply think in a different way that doesn't mesh perfectly or whats expected out of them when playing a wizard isn't their kind of fun. Everyone plays differently. I happen to really like the vancian preparation spell system because it reminds me of playing Magic or other CCGs, but not honestly a lot of people hate it and I originally did to. Those players simply aren't gonna be game breaking with the wizard and either move on from them or not play them in the first place. Honestly, I can't even remember the last time I played with a wizard in our party...
Wizards do less damage. If prepared, they’re better at everything else. They’re better at flying, teleporting, creating pocket dimensions, cloning people, turning enemies into allies, battlefield control, and skills than Paladin and Fighter. And then they contribute just as much to the damage total by casting Haste.Well, if prepared, they're better. What about all those times when they CAN'T prepare, because they have incomplete and/or misleading information (even after considerable Divination and research)? And also, how many spells can you prepare? It isn't all that much at each level, if you're going to go the route of playing safe by preparing the most generic spells of each level. And if your adventuring day is 15 hours instead of 15 minutes, you're going to be begging for a rest. Either way, better have a load of Pearls of Power.
To be fair, from what I have been able to determine about reading about gameplay of PFS Scenarios and APs, the above Wizard-hurting situations don't seem to come up very often.
If the player is average to slightly above average they will be able to do something. The misconception with spells is that you need the perfect spell to solve a problem. In reality some spells are just better at certain things than others.
At the same the wizard always having THE perfect spell is also not always going to happen, but as I stated they often don't need to.
As for running out of spells that is managed by resource management, and not casting spells just to be casting spells. If you cast a spell in round 1, and the party has things in hand then you can sit back and relax. Also many parties stop adventuring for the day when the divine or arcane caster is low on spells. This is not a hard rule, but in those cases my idea of conserving spells can work.
With all of this being said wizards are said to be overpowered based on what can happen more than what does happen. A good(as in character creation) player can take other classes and also give the GM fits, but most people don't go that route, so "breaking the game" almost never comes up.
High-level spellcasters in general get to ignore the plot. Divinations break any kind of mystery. Enchantments remove the need for Diplomacy and other interaction skill checks. Transmutations and teleportation can get you past obstacles. Then you get to spells like Black Tentacles with can end entire fights with one casting.
And then there's 'scry and fry' ...
I'm of the opinion that the game becomes next to unplayable after about 8th level because of how open-ended and unrestricted magic is in D&D/PF.
Oh, as far as preparation goes, don't forget that a wizard can leave spell slots unfilled and take 15 minutes during the day to fill them with whatever he needs at the time. Plus he can create scrolls of situational utility spells with ease.
|
|
Are Wizards OP? Wellllllll That depends on what you consider to be strong and High level.
IMO Wizards or hell most 9th level casters don't truly become stupid strong to the point where they can trivialize the whole campaign until level 15....but by that point the campaign is likely almost over anyway as few people are willing to play a full 20 level campaign.
Theoretically they are potentially the most powerful class in the game, theoretically they can break the game 6 ways to sunday by accident and theoretically they can make every other class pointless.
Notice how I say theoretically.
A large part of the wizards Dominance is predictably, generally they have to see it coming in order to roflstomp it, but if they dont see it coming they don't see it coming. And any all purpose spells they could bring to the table are nothing that cant be emulated by a Sorcerer or hell even a Magus.
Not to mention if the DM Decides to pull out the anti magic tactics, the wizard is screwed 6 ways to sunday. Funny story, I once knew someone who did a one time campaign with some people and they pretty much rolled nothing but Clerics, Druids and Wizards. The DM shoved them in an Anti Magic Labyrinth. And half the party instantly committed suicide and never let her run a campaign again.
Anyway Point where is it? Ah here it is, While it's true that a wizard can make a game absolutely trivial. I can promise you he won't be playing it for very long. If not cause of the DM making his life hell, but cause of the group getting fed up with his s#$#.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The wizard, esp at mid to high levels, is capable of breaking the narrative and the game. But the real reason they are considered OP is because some people actually do play them that way, and it only takes a few of those folks for the class to earn a reputation.
The only wrong way to play the game is at the expense of other peoples' fun, and a wizard is more than capable of wrecking everyone's fun. Playing a wizard at high levels generally means exercising restraint, and cooperating with the other players to preserve the game experience. It means using the wizard to make the other players more effective, too, so that your power is shared and not spotlighted.
You also have to cooperate with the GM. You don't need to outright ban scry&fry, for example, but it's a technique you should use sparingly and only when it grows organically out of the story. Because there's such a thing as ruining the GM's fun, too.
I'm of the opinion that the game becomes next to unplayable after about 8th level because of how open-ended and unrestricted magic is in D&D/PF.I've never found that to be a problem with Paizo's adventure paths.
It's been about 25 years since I last experienced the caster-martial divide, and that was playing AD&D. I think 3rd ed and PF have done a lot to correct the imbalance.
And experienced GMs and adventure-writers know how to handle wizards. The last time my group tried scry and fry we teleported into a beautifully set trap that nearly killed us.
This is anecdotal, but from browsing comments on the Adventure Path specific boards on this site, many people seem to report that APs get easier in their last third, from level 10 on up. Certainly, I've noticed in my home games that the amount of layered preparation that full casters can provide starts to get extremely high around these levels. With sufficient prep, even if the party is going into things blind they stay relatively safe.
Before one of the most recent encounters for my 12th level party, they put up Protection from Energy on everyone (fire and lightning), Resist Energy on everyone (30pts of each type), Protection from Evil on everyone, Life Bubble on everyone, Spell Resistance/Ward Shield on key party members, Bull's Strength for party members without it, Cat's Grace for everyone, etc etc. This used a bunch of low level slots across their four full casters and left each of the casters with plenty of slots remaining.
Once they were done with minutes/level and 10minutes/level buffs they had already overcome the next couple of encounters... those encounters could no longer meaningfully hurt them, so it was going through the motions. Its surprisingly difficult to design encounters that challenge casters that do this as there are few gaps to exploit.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unprepared wizard?
That's what Scribe Scroll is for. Forget other item creation feats, those are for NPC's, a mechanic to explain why YOMS is a Sears/Robuck (erm, I mean, Amazon [sorry, my age is showing]) catalog of everything you could want; to get away from the oft-abused DM fiat of 1E & 2E. I never really saw them as PC feats.
A wizard should have callused fingers from scribing so many scrolls.
A wizard should have Carpal Tunnel Syndrome from scribing so many scrolls.
An unprepared wizard, caught with her robes down in an unforeseen, unpredictable situation should calmly reach for her handy haversack which will conveniently place exactly what she's looking for right on top and say, "I have a scroll for that."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unprepared wizard?
That's what Scribe Scroll is for. Forget other item creation feats, those are for NPC's, a mechanic to explain why YOMS is a Sears/Robuck (erm, I mean, Amazon [sorry, my age is showing]) catalog of everything you could want; to get away from the oft-abused DM fiat of 1E & 2E. I never really saw them as PC feats.
A wizard should have callused fingers from scribing so many scrolls.
A wizard should have Carpal Tunnel Syndrome from scribing so many scrolls.An unprepared wizard, caught with her robes down in an unforeseen, unpredictable situation should calmly reach for her handy haversack which will conveniently place exactly what she's looking for right on top and say, "I have a scroll for that."
I imagine that would get REAL obnoxious REAL quickly
|
|
At higher levels wizards start to shine, but I can tell you my 5th level wizard (that was killed last session) never did. The Barbarian dominated every fight and there was another PC that had high knowledge rolls (investigator). Being a somewhat low wealth campaign so much of my gold went to paying for access to new spells, copying them into my spellbook and copying them into the backup copy I always felt poor. Taking item creation feats may have been a mistake- it helped raise the power level of the party but didn't do anything to help him shine.
a support wizard shines when there party shines
but by 5th level a decently played wizard should be doing very good at whet they are trying to be good atyou may want to watch this
http://knowdirectionpodcast.com/2017/03/how-to-wizard-good-private-sanctuar y-300/
it has some good basic advice
|
|
Ung, this is why I don't play wizards. This sounds like sitting at the table and NOT playing the game. I want to be doing something at the table. Sitting around not doing things sounds actively unfun. More power to the people who enjoy this type of play, but I don't think I could ever get behind it.
As for running out of spells that is managed by resource management, and not casting spells just to be casting spells. If you cast a spell in round 1, and the party has things in hand then you can sit back and relax.
there are choices for full casters other then casting spells
using your wands and scrolls.many casters get attack powers that they can use "for example my level 2 firemage has like 6 fire blast attacks
there are also magic ranged weapons,
aid others and so on.
hell worse cast full defensive and block.
in comparison there are many classes who every turn get ...i swing my sword.
now dont get me wrong that can also be a lot of fun,
it all depends on how you use your character
as for down time
in an 8 hour rest your allowed 2 hours to do things like scribing, which is more then enough time to get a low level scroll a day or a higher level one in a 2 or 3 days.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards are powerful. If they think carefully and get information. Against a static dungeon with a known BBEG at the end, sure. Limiting their downtime forces them to make harsh choices, and usually go with general utility and damage spells. They must also spend money to get more than very few spells per level. They are also very vulnerable in combat, and there is never enough actions in combat for them to fix everything.
Don't worry about it. Keep up the pressure. They will struggle.
|
|
nah there are several ways to get spells , buying them is not the best way.
and as has been said the wizard is probably only the 3rd most useful / powerful class.
my personal opinion is a good gm does not set out to screw a player for playing a legal class without cheating.
no taking away the fighters armor and wepaons
no mass use of anti magic fields etc.
the awsner is not to bring down casting classes.
its to do more with non casting ones.
a great example is the soldier in starfinder, its what fighters should always have been.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds like your GM is giving you too much downtime.
Really? At only 3rd level, a wizard should have 3,000 gp (using WBL). He'll only have 2 second level spells and let's say a dozen first level (three to start + INT mod + 2 at 2nd level + a couple random from adventuring).
First (25 gp) and second (150 gp) level scrolls will only take two hours to scribe. If I devote 2,000 to gear and 1,000 to scrolls, I can scribe 5 second level scrolls and 10 first level scrolls in 30 hours, or about four 8-hour work days.
Half a week doesn't sound like too much downtime to me.
|
|
I imagine that would get REAL obnoxious REAL quicklyNo, what is obnoxious is the GM in your second example that couldn't handle magic and so removed it from the game.
Oh I'm sorry. I didn't know having Anti Magic Fields and Enemies specifically trained to fight Magic users was considered "Removing it from the game"
If you're seriously that inflexible, then you deserve to get Screwed over. So sorry if i offended you in anyway.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
So sorry if i offended you in anyway.
No, you're not. (Edit: Or rather, nothing about your words inspires me to believe you are serious.)
Using anti-magic field is fair game. It's a high level spell that has limited use and pros and cons. Running into a dungeon with specific areas protected by it makes sense. Having an entire dungeon warded with anti-magic can be an interesting challenge to overcome. Dropping it as the very first challenge to overcome is pathetic and suggests the GM would rather be playing a less magic heavy game.