Wizards get the shaft - again?

Sooo...

We welcome the d6. However...

*divine casters are armored
*divine casters use d8
*divine casters get better weapons
*divine spells do more damage (WHY?)
*divine spells can buff allies
*channel divinity

Wizard has 3 good spells in the full of his spelllist - Mage Hand, Charm and Ray of Frost. Everything else is boring or stricktly inferior to divine spell in usefulness.

You're not the Fighter. That alone should dry up any tears.
Fighter is not all that bad. Boring - sure - but he does reliable and respectable damage, and is pretty sturdy.
Got the shaft again? When has the wizard ever "gotten the shaft"?
Wizards have always played second fiddle to clerics in the old edition power races.  They were terrifyingly, insanely good with the right build, but CoDzilla (Cleric or Druid + Godzilla) was better.

"Enjoy your screams, Sarpadia - they will soon be muffled beneath snow and ice."

 

Follow me to No Goblins Allowed

A M:tG/D&D message board with a good community and usable software

 


THE COALITION WAR GAME -Phyrexian Chief Praetor
Round 1: (4-1-2, 1 kill)
Round 2: (16-8-2, 4 kills)
Round 3: (18-9-2, 1 kill)
Round 4: (22-10-0, 2 kills)
Round 5: (56-16-3, 9 kills)
Round 6: (8-7-1)

Last Edited by Ralph on blank, 1920

Got the shaft again? When has the wizard ever "gotten the shaft"?


This is my question...
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
You don't have to use a shaft. Try using daggers.
So what specifically happened in your game to make wizards seem bad? 

How many encounters did you run them through?
Wizards always get the shaft, which they're apparently supposed to hit people with.

EDIT: Ninja'd. I should seriously stop getting distracted when typing.

Sooo...

We welcome the d6. However...

*divine casters are armored
*divine casters use d8
*divine casters get better weapons
*divine spells do more damage (WHY?)
*divine spells can buff allies
*channel divinity

Wizard has 3 good spells in the full of his spelllist - Mage Hand, Charm and Ray of Frost. Everything else is boring or stricktly inferior to divine spell in usefulness.





Sounds like a good start. Its easier to buff up than tear down.
I was hoping that wizards would get d6 hit die.
Got the shaft again? When has the wizard ever "gotten the shaft"?


This is my question...



No S#$@!
At the start of 4e the wizard was the least useful class over all imo.  In fact over the course of playing 4e in my group the people who favored the wizard in past editions gave up on the class.  I have heard that the problems got fixed a bit eventually but never saw another wizard in play.  I also remember reading that the developers confessed they cut the wizard down too much in 4e at one point on the site.

Prior to 4e the wizard was generally pretty good, maybe not the best but still a good class that was fun to play.
At the start of 4e the wizard was the least useful class over all imo.  In fact over the course of playing 4e in my group the people who favored the wizard in past editions gave up on the class.  I have heard that the problems got fixed a bit eventually but never saw another wizard in play.  I also remember reading that the developers confessed they cut the wizard down too much in 4e at one point on the site.

Prior to 4e the wizard was generally pretty good, maybe not the best but still a good class that was fun to play.



the wizard is one of the strongest classes in 4e. easily. not many other classes can say they knock out an entire enemy team out, and end an entire encounter before it begins... at level 1. 

At the start of 4e the wizard was the least useful class over all imo.  In fact over the course of playing 4e in my group the people who favored the wizard in past editions gave up on the class.  I have heard that the problems got fixed a bit eventually but never saw another wizard in play.  I also remember reading that the developers confessed they cut the wizard down too much in 4e at one point on the site.

Prior to 4e the wizard was generally pretty good, maybe not the best but still a good class that was fun to play.

idk i played a wizard and a mage to paragon. my first ever char was a illusionist deva. was so happy with that. then right at the end my human pyromancer was beyond broken. when ur level 3 party takes down lvl 11-13 creatures and like half levels in encounters, somethings gone wrong. on a side note my friend played a summoner once, and that seems to really own against elite encounters
Darrius, 4E Wizard very early on had issues since they made it a weak blaster by default, though orb wizards were broken good at higher levels because of how orb of imposition scaled.

As is wizards are one of the more powerful 4E classes, though the Arcanist are now weaker than the Mage wizards that came out in essentials.  Edit: I would be reluctant as a DM to allow more than one wizard in a party because of how they work and their power level.

IME Next wizards are fine.
I was hoping that wizards would get d6 hit die.



But they don't. Take a quick look at the High-Elf Wizard PDF, and you'll findhim using the d4


Prior to 4e the wizard was generally pretty good, maybe not the best but still a good class that was fun to play.



The wizard has always been one of the strongest classes in the game.  In 3e, it was third only behind the cleric and druid for brokenness.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
At the start of 4e the wizard was the least useful class over all imo.  In fact over the course of playing 4e in my group the people who favored the wizard in past editions gave up on the class.  I have heard that the problems got fixed a bit eventually but never saw another wizard in play.  I also remember reading that the developers confessed they cut the wizard down too much in 4e at one point on the site.

Prior to 4e the wizard was generally pretty good, maybe not the best but still a good class that was fun to play.



Former edition Wizard players didn't like the new version because it wasn't clearly the most powerful class in the game (excepting 3E Clerics/Druids).

They don't need a shaft or daggers, they have Magic Missile.
At the start of 4e the wizard was the least useful class over all imo.  In fact over the course of playing 4e in my group the people who favored the wizard in past editions gave up on the class.  I have heard that the problems got fixed a bit eventually but never saw another wizard in play.  I also remember reading that the developers confessed they cut the wizard down too much in 4e at one point on the site.

Prior to 4e the wizard was generally pretty good, maybe not the best but still a good class that was fun to play.



Former edition Wizard players didn't like the new version because it wasn't clearly the most powerful class in the game (excepting 3E Clerics/Druids).




That's WHY I liked it. :p
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Darrius, 4E Wizard very early on had issues since they made it a weak blaster by default, though orb wizards were broken good at higher levels because of how orb of imposition scaled.

As is wizards are one of the more powerful 4E classes, though the Arcanist are now weaker than the Mage wizards that came out in essentials.  Edit: I would be reluctant as a DM to allow more than one wizard in a party because of how they work and their power level.

IME Next wizards are fine.



I am still trying to get past the Http 400 error to get to look at the new stuff.  The wizard at release soured my whole group on them so badly they just never even looked at the class again.  Why play Wizard when you could be Invoker and later Psion was the general feel.

Wizard's only get the shaft in the fact they have over 1000 words off their character sheet they have to deal with. 10 different spells, doing 10 different things, sharing very little in design concepts. This class has more things than a mid-level 4e character, and has some of the best abilities in the game (mass slowing Sleep, the Save-or-Lose Hold Person, "no, you can't move, ever" Frozen Ray).

Frankly, I'm very disappointed at the class. It went back to why Wizards were too strong.
At the start of 4e the wizard was the least useful class over all imo.  In fact over the course of playing 4e in my group the people who favored the wizard in past editions gave up on the class.  I have heard that the problems got fixed a bit eventually but never saw another wizard in play.  I also remember reading that the developers confessed they cut the wizard down too much in 4e at one point on the site.

Prior to 4e the wizard was generally pretty good, maybe not the best but still a good class that was fun to play.



Former edition Wizard players didn't like the new version because it wasn't clearly the most powerful class in the game (excepting 3E Clerics/Druids).




This isn't the correct forum for this discussion. 
Sign In to post comments