Community

I guess we'll have to wait for the Wizard Traditions that Mike Mearls and others are talking about.  Those might add more interest to the iconic Wizard and add just enough glitz/roleplaying/power to hook new players.   I loved playing wizards back in the day, by the way.

Aug 25, 2012 -- 11:57AM, Ramses42 wrote:

I think that wizard still holds potential as well. I agree with our Last Wizard that it is hard to argue with the versatility of seven cantrips (if you are a Magic User AND a High Elf) or even four cantrips. And a large spell selection. Most people seem cursed to pick the wrong spells. Sleep with Undead. Charm Person with Centipedes. Cause Fear with Constructs. Sigh. This why many people hate Vancian Magic.
The second set of rules added many more spells, which removed the Boring If-Then statement issue. I was curious to see how the situation would have changed. But, now one noticed how it changed because we couldn't keep the Wizards alive long enough to see how the new spells changed things. If we can get more Wizards, I see how things are at 2nd and 3rd level. Or when I run another 1st level game having 8 hp wizards.

One idea that came to mind is have each Wizard be able to pick a Speciality like ... well, Specialities - including a Speciality in Generality. It has worked well for Pathfinder. This is should be different than the Speciality Necromancer, or be a way to have too Specialities. Something would have to cut to balance the new glitch - maybe a cantrip or something. I will see if I can get this played and that a look at it.  

Pathfinder didn't originate the specialty wizards. Wizards focusing on a single school of magic is what made them so interesting in AD&D back in 1st and 2nd edition. Now it looks like they are relagating part of that specialization on to the actual "specialties" tree. My suggestion is to take the spell-caster specialties and give the wizard a free one from the list, the same way they did with backgrounds in the form of Schemes for rogues. Allow one for generalist wizards as well, so that path is still viable.  This means that any caster CAN specialize, but wizards are going to be known for it, as it should be.

Interestingly, it does mean that it would be possible for a wizard to dual-specialize (one with his scheme'ish specialty, and one for his 'actual' specialty), but I'm not completely against that. 

It will be interesting to see what Wizard Traditions look like. If they are like Schemes, Sytles and Domains that will good. The "Double Specialist" effect on Wizards will also really make the class more interesting - be with the in style Specialists like Magic User or unusual choices like Defender. (Oh, Defender needs to get off being limited to a shield - that limits to a few classes). I have only seen one Wizard Defender, but it was an interesting option.

I have seen or heard of  changes in the playtest rules changing player choices. Like everyone wanting to be a wizard at first and then shifting away from them. Or more Fighters when Styles came out. But, Sorcerors and Warlocks felt different. It was a Mass Exodus when half of the group makes a shift. And it was not - Oh, the new rules are cool. It was the possibility of what "I can make with the rules are cool!" With Fighter Styles players wanted to use what the new rules gave them. With Sorcerors and Warlocks, they got creative and made their own unique characters. The energy and excitement was different. It was a new Shiny sure, but I was some magical and exciting beyond what the previous New Shinys had been.
It also has energized the whole group. About half of the characters are Sorcerors and Warlocks. Thus, the storys have gotten richer and more character focused because Sorceror and Warlocks require character focus. When players of other classes saw this, they are jumping on the train too. Many players specificly mentioned this. So everyone's game is better. 
Now, I think that there is the another factor. With 1st level characters being potential walking corpses, no one really put investment in them for story elements. They where not going to be around long enough. They focused more on power and survivability and experimentation. Now, that they can survive an attack from a monster - players are thinking of their story more.

Rituals are good, especially for roleplaying. I have allowed players to ritualize spells to cast them again if out of spellslots or to get a different effect out of them.  I usually require a Magic or Religion Lore check and it does cost resources (gold and materiels) and time. So, it is not done often, but it does really seem to add to the game.