Archivist vs. Wizard? (Who is more powerful/flavorful?) [Archive] - Wizards Community

Archivist vs. Wizard? (Who is more powerful/flavorful?) [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
darkone7141981
11-06-05, 06:27 PM Please do not misunderstand this question! I am NOT saying the Wizard is underpowered or anything else like it...

The Archivist (from Heroes of Horror) is very similar to the Wizard in respect to spellcasting (Spellbook = Prayer Book, both must learn their spells, similar number of spells/day/level, etc...), but seems superior in all other respects (higher hit dice, good fortitude and will saving throws, armored spellcasting, more class abilities...).

So...does this mean that WotC thinks Arcane magic is so much better than Divine magic that they must balance out the Arcanist with more stuff than the Wizard?

Or is this just an internal inconsistancy?

Or does this suggest that the Wizard could use some more flavor without being overpowered (low-powered class abilities like Dark Lore...)?

What do you think?

DarkOne7141981
Puca
11-07-05, 12:58 PM So...does this mean that WotC thinks Arcane magic is so much better than Divine magic that they must balance out the Arcanist with more stuff than the Wizard?I think they do. Also compare the sorcerer to the favored soul. I tend to agree; arcane is, by and large, more powerful.

Or does this suggest that the Wizard could use some more flavor without being overpowered (low-powered class abilities like Dark Lore...)?When well prepared (and what decent-level wizard is not) very few things can compete with the power of a powerful wizard.

I think that abilities like Dark Lore would add a lot of flavor to the wizard, but I dont think that he necessarily needs a flavor-boost. Besides, it is the shtick of this new class: let him have it for a little while at least.

I am very leery about adding anything to the wiz when he is already as powerful as he is. You could theoretically take something away from him to compensate, but it is hard for me to say what for sure. Ive yet to play with an Archivist, so getting a feel for just how powerful his Dark Knowledge stuff will turn out to be.
MysteryGilgamesh
11-07-05, 01:06 PM Archivist blows the wizard out of the water, sadly. It's basically a wizard, without any of the downsides, plus full clerical magic use, which follows the standard rules of WotC creations.

WotC follows only two rules of PrC/spell/feat/class writing:
1: If it involves divine magic of any sort, it must be at least twice as powerful as any arcane counterpart.
2: If it could ever possibly aid a sorcerer, it must explicitly contain rules that equate to "No sorcerer can use or ever take this".
IceFractal
11-07-05, 02:34 PM Heh, you've cracked the code! ;)

It's true - I made a Wizard PrC that was basically a Cleric, as a joke, and everyone who saw it said it was too powerful.

And even the supposed superiority of the Wizard spell list doesn't hold water when the Archivist can learn any divine spell. That includes Adept spells and Domain spells, so that's most of the arcane spells right there. Also, it includes Ranger and Paladin spells that aren't even balanced for a full caster (they get many spells at a lower level because of only being able to cast up to 4th level spells), as well as every spell list of every fringe PrC around. Sure, they've got to have a source to learn it from, but the same thing applies to Wizards.
Puca
11-07-05, 03:05 PM Also, it includes Ranger and Paladin spells that aren't even balanced for a full caster (they get many spells at a lower level because of only being able to cast up to 4th level spells),OK, yes, some paladin and ranger spells are of a lower level than the equivalent cleric spell.

But take something like Break Enchantment: It is fourth-level for a paladin and fifth-level for a cleric. Does that mean that the archivist can “get it sooner?”
Only if the DM regularly makes overpowered treasure available to the characters.

A fourth-level paladin spell requires a fourteenth-level paladin to cast it. That would make such a scroll suitable for characters around 14th level, not for characters around 7th level when the archivist is able to cast 4th level spells.

If it does show up when the archivist is 14th-level, clerics (and archivists) have been able to cast it since they were 10th level. Sure, if an archivist wanted to wait four levels to get that paladin spell on a scroll instead of getting it for free as a fifth-level cleric spell, he could do so. Then he could spend 1400 gp on the scroll, and another 400 scribing it into his book, just so he could cast it in a level-four slot instead of a level-5. Sorry, but I dont think that is as powerful as people are making it out to be.

The archivists ability to get all of these adept spells and domain spells and whatnot is limited to two things: First the availability of such items, which is entirely up to the DM, then on the amount of cash he is willing to spend.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
darkone7141981 11-06-05, 06:27 PM	Please do not misunderstand this question! I am NOT saying the Wizard is underpowered or anything else like it... The Archivist (from Heroes of Horror) is very similar to the Wizard in respect to spellcasting (Spellbook = Prayer Book, both must learn their spells, similar number of spells/day/level, etc...), but seems superior in all other respects (higher hit dice, good fortitude and will saving throws, armored spellcasting, more class abilities...). So...does this mean that WotC thinks Arcane magic is so much better than Divine magic that they must balance out the Arcanist with more stuff than the Wizard? Or is this just an internal inconsistancy? Or does this suggest that the Wizard could use some more flavor without being overpowered (low-powered class abilities like Dark Lore...)? What do you think? DarkOne7141981
Puca 11-07-05, 12:58 PM	So...does this mean that WotC thinks Arcane magic is so much better than Divine magic that they must balance out the Arcanist with more stuff than the Wizard?I think they do. Also compare the sorcerer to the favored soul. I tend to agree; arcane is, by and large, more powerful. Or does this suggest that the Wizard could use some more flavor without being overpowered (low-powered class abilities like Dark Lore...)?When well prepared (and what decent-level wizard is not) very few things can compete with the power of a powerful wizard. I think that abilities like Dark Lore would add a lot of flavor to the wizard, but I dont think that he necessarily needs a flavor-boost. Besides, it is the shtick of this new class: let him have it for a little while at least. I am very leery about adding anything to the wiz when he is already as powerful as he is. You could theoretically take something away from him to compensate, but it is hard for me to say what for sure. Ive yet to play with an Archivist, so getting a feel for just how powerful his Dark Knowledge stuff will turn out to be.
MysteryGilgamesh 11-07-05, 01:06 PM	Archivist blows the wizard out of the water, sadly. It's basically a wizard, without any of the downsides, plus full clerical magic use, which follows the standard rules of WotC creations. WotC follows only two rules of PrC/spell/feat/class writing: 1: If it involves divine magic of any sort, it must be at least twice as powerful as any arcane counterpart. 2: If it could ever possibly aid a sorcerer, it must explicitly contain rules that equate to "No sorcerer can use or ever take this".
IceFractal 11-07-05, 02:34 PM	Heh, you've cracked the code! ;) It's true - I made a Wizard PrC that was basically a Cleric, as a joke, and everyone who saw it said it was too powerful. And even the supposed superiority of the Wizard spell list doesn't hold water when the Archivist can learn any divine spell. That includes Adept spells and Domain spells, so that's most of the arcane spells right there. Also, it includes Ranger and Paladin spells that aren't even balanced for a full caster (they get many spells at a lower level because of only being able to cast up to 4th level spells), as well as every spell list of every fringe PrC around. Sure, they've got to have a source to learn it from, but the same thing applies to Wizards.
Puca 11-07-05, 03:05 PM	Also, it includes Ranger and Paladin spells that aren't even balanced for a full caster (they get many spells at a lower level because of only being able to cast up to 4th level spells),OK, yes, some paladin and ranger spells are of a lower level than the equivalent cleric spell. But take something like Break Enchantment: It is fourth-level for a paladin and fifth-level for a cleric. Does that mean that the archivist can “get it sooner?” Only if the DM regularly makes overpowered treasure available to the characters. A fourth-level paladin spell requires a fourteenth-level paladin to cast it. That would make such a scroll suitable for characters around 14th level, not for characters around 7th level when the archivist is able to cast 4th level spells. If it does show up when the archivist is 14th-level, clerics (and archivists) have been able to cast it since they were 10th level. Sure, if an archivist wanted to wait four levels to get that paladin spell on a scroll instead of getting it for free as a fifth-level cleric spell, he could do so. Then he could spend 1400 gp on the scroll, and another 400 scribing it into his book, just so he could cast it in a level-four slot instead of a level-5. Sorry, but I dont think that is as powerful as people are making it out to be. The archivists ability to get all of these adept spells and domain spells and whatnot is limited to two things: First the availability of such items, which is entirely up to the DM, then on the amount of cash he is willing to spend.