- Including Cantrips, Wizard Powers with the Acid, Charm, Force, Illusion, Necrotic, Poison, Psychic, Radiant or Teleportation keywords don't exist.
- Elemental Maw still exists and still has the Teleportation keyword, but can't have the Acid keyword - and, thus, can't deal acid damage.
- Black Fire still exists, but doesn't have the Necrotic keyword and deals only fire damage.
- Time Stop doesn't exist.
- Wizards can only use their Powers when they are wielding an implement.
Now, I realize that I'm greatly limiting Wizards and would like to design something to compensate those restrictions. I was thinking of creating a new class feature that would help with ritual casting, reducing both the time needed to cast a ritual and its gold cost.
Any thoughts?
- Including Cantrips, Wizard Powers with the Acid, Charm, Force, Illusion, Necrotic, Poison, Psychic, Radiant or Teleportation keywords don't exist.
...So is there anything Wizards in your campaign CAN do? I mean, these changes are horrifically limiting... Conjuration, Cold, Fear, Fire, Lightening, Polymorph, Sleep, Thunder, Zone... That's an extremely limited list. Do you realize how badly you're weakening the Wizard by doing this?
- Wizards can only use their Powers when they are wielding an implement.
...The only way this house rule is acceptable is if you also make it such that martial and divine characters cannot perform their prayers or exploits without their holy symbols or weapons. At least then you're screwing everybody over equally...
Any thoughts?
Yes. These are horrible ideas. I really want to hear your justification for this unbelievable nerf. Do you just hate Wizards or something?
Now I have a question : are you going for a kind of elemental focus? If so, maybe casters should be able to choose and element and get bonuses there.
Hmmm, an interesting idea. Maybe the Wizard could get one of the elemental focus feats, like Astral Fire or Burning Blizzard, for free, as long as he qualified for it? Or some other benefit related to the element in question - maybe expanded uses for the Implement Mastery with the chosen element?
...So is there anything Wizards in your campaign CAN do? I mean, these changes are horrifically limiting... Conjuration, Cold, Fear, Fire, Lightening, Polymorph, Sleep, Thunder, Zone... That's an extremely limited list. Do you realize how badly you're weakening the Wizard by doing this?
That is the reason why I asked if anyone had any thoughts on the matter. I want to compensate the Wizard for these losses - which really aren't that bad, considering the majority of his Powers (and, arguably, some of the best) have the Cold, Fire, Lightning and Thunder keywords.
...The only way this house rule is acceptable is if you also make it such that martial and divine characters cannot perform their prayers or exploits without their holy symbols or weapons. At least then you're screwing everybody over equally...
Actually, I probably will also "screw" Divine classes in the same way, yes. As for Exploits, they already can't be performed if you're not wielding a weapon.
Yes. These are horrible ideas. I really want to hear your justification for this unbelievable nerf. Do you just hate Wizards or something?
Why, thank you for that piece of "constructive" advice!
No, I don't hate Wizards, but I'm also not in the mood to explain my campaign setting to a troll. If you have any truly constructive criticism, please share; otherwise, don't waste both your time and mine.
As for Exploits, they already can't be performed if you're not wielding a weapon.
Yes they can. Unarmed Strikes count.
No, I don't hate Wizards, but I'm also not in the mood to explain my campaign setting to a troll.
Oh come now. You can't expect us to tell you these massive nerfs are a good thing when you haven't exaplained any of your reasoning behind them (however good they may happen to be) and you've not given us details on how you're planning to compensate the wizard for these losses.
Just because my opinion wasn't one you liked doesn't make me a troll.
...
Why, thank you for that piece of "constructive" advice!
No, I don't hate Wizards, but I'm also not in the mood to explain my campaign setting to a troll. If you have any truly constructive criticism, please share; otherwise, don't waste both your time and mine.
Do you mind explaining it to me? I'm curious and it might actually help. Context is important in just about every case.
Yes they can. Unarmed Strikes count.
Oh, right. Sorry, my mistake.
Oh come now. You can't expect us to tell you these massive nerfs are a good thing when you haven't exaplained any of your reasoning behind them (however good they may happen to be) and you've not given us details on how you're planning to compensate the wizard for these losses.
Well, I did mention I thought of giving Wizards a bonus to ritual casting. I also mentioned that I acknowledged they were heavy restrictions and asked for help in trying to compensate Wizards for those losses.
But, very well. Since you and Crashy75 both asked for it, here's a summary: in this setting, there are, basically, three types of arcane magic. One, based on the medieval stories about Merlin, Maugis and other sorcerers, is based on bringing the energies of the Otherworld (the Feywild, as its known in this world) into the material world; this is where all the Psychic, Illusion and Teleportation Powers will end up. Another, based on legendary figures such as Hermes Trimegisto and on Michael Moorcock's "Elric of Melniboné", summons elemental spirits to do his bidding; this is the Wizard I proposed, with Powers based mainly on Fire, Lightning, Cold and Thunder. The final magic is the campaign's equivalent of "black magic", and uses mainly Acid and Necrotic Powers.
Why? Specifically, how do you plan to incorporate the other two types of arcane magics? Are you going to create new classes? Is the Warlock going to suffer a similar fate as the Wizard?
But, of the three "types" of arcane magic you've described, only the second can be accessed as a Wizard.
Why? Specifically, how do you plan to incorporate the other two types of arcane magics? Are you going to create new classes? Is the Warlock going to suffer a similar fate as the Wizard?
Consider this concern seconded. Why can the Wizard not have access to more than one form of this new arcane magic? After all, the Warlock has access to more than one pact and the Fighter has access to more than one weapon. Could you please explain a bit further?
Consider this concern seconded. Why can the Wizard not have access to more than one form of this new arcane magic? After all, the Warlock has access to more than one pact and the Fighter has access to more than one weapon. Could you please explain a bit further?
Not to speak for the OP, but you may have just answered the question. It's perfectly fair for a DM to declare that a particular power source simply works differently in his game. When 3.0 came out, I DMd and the party started in a kingdom where all Wizards had to be registered, and sorcerers were killed on proof of sorcery. I further ruled that all Sorcerers were defacto specialists, because it made more sense to me. My best friend played a Sorceric Illusionist, and played it off as a bard, and no one suspected him.
I'm guessing (for a very brief moment), that perhaps Warlocks will be changed to reflect this paradigm, and will only have access to another "source" or arcane magic.
Which begs yet another question: What about Swordmages and Artificers?
Having said that, maybe I'll rethink making the third type of sorcery the province of a different class; maybe I'll let the Wizard choose Acid and Necrotic Powers, but attach a stigma to them?
Swordmages definitely won't exist in this world. I'm still in doubt over Artificers, but, so far, I'm inclined against them as well.
As far as evening things out: Change keywords that you removed (acid arrow could be a fireball...) ans replace any removed powers.
Why wouldn't swordmages exist? Just wondering. I've already got my arcane melee, swo swordmages are a moot point in my campaign.
As far as evening things out: Change keywords that you removed (acid arrow could be a fireball...) ans replace any removed powers.
Hmmm... That's an interesting idea; more elegant than simply removing the Powers.
Why wouldn't swordmages exist? Just wondering. I've already got my arcane melee, swo swordmages are a moot point in my campaign.
Too high-magic, and the flavour doesn't really fit the setting.
I think the above idea is the best. Any power that can simply be re-typed to a form of damage that is acceptable in your campaign should remain available under the new type. This keeps most of the powers in play, but keeps your campaign flavor. Any powers that can't be, I suggest you come up with a replacement power that does fit and is of a similar power level, so that your wizards still have the variety of choices available.
For the implements, if you're going to make wizards unable to cast at all without their wand, staff or orb, I'd give them an additional ability. The focus or bond between them and their implement could allow them to "pull" it to them. If the implement is within line of sight, the wizard can spend an action (maybe standard, but up to you) to cause it to slide toward them (maybe 6 squares/rd, again up to you) and if it is within a certain distance (maybe 2 squares, or 10') it leaps into their hand. This gives them a chance of re-arming themselves and could lead to some cool Luke-in-the-ice-cave-on-Hoth type moments.
I would also make wizard implements extra-durable. I haven't read up on breaking items in 4E, but if it's possible, you should make it extra difficult for anyone other than the wizard to break their implement.
As for giving them additional abilities due to the potential loss of combat power, perhaps allowing them to buy second implement in the heroic teir (or just outright giving it to them) would offset this. Or enhancing their existing implement power, perhaps giving them something equivalent to proficiency (or simply plus to attack) with their implement or extra damage would suffice.
I think modding the game to fit your specific campaign world is laudable, just be careful not to make playing a particular class less fun tactically, as that is what most of the combat is about.
Just kinda lost me there...
Make sure when you give the powers different keywords that you make sure not to favor any one keyword over the others.
The implement thing: Give the implements more power. Or make them less conspicuous. And of course you need a similar requirement for Clerics and other divine casters.
9 times out of 10 requiring an implement to cast spells isn't a restriction.
... I forgot another point I had ready to say...
... Are Swordmages any more "high magic" than Wizards?
I'd have to say they are. Wizards are part and parcel of most any fantasy setting from low fantasy, dark and gritty like the wizards of Black Company to high fantasy settings such as Forgotten Realms. Swordmage on the other hand just screams high fantasy, almost pulp.
That being said, I suppose it would be possible to build a low fantasy setting sword mage, or maybe even craft one with just the right amount of description and tone without changing much, but again, the OP is asking for help on balancing wizards to fit his campaign and his ideas of how they should work. He's not asking for our opinion of whether the basis of his campaign world meets with our approval. Let's stay on topic, unless he asks for additional help in other areas.
And the rest of my post was on-topic.
... Still don't remember my final point...
... Are Swordmages any more "high magic" than Wizards?
A warrior swinging a sword and invoking a cyclone of flames does seem a bit too high-magic for me, yes.
The implement thing: Give the implements more power. Or make them less conspicuous. And of course you need a similar requirement for Clerics and other divine casters.
I'm still not sure if there will be Clerics or Paladins - the gods of this setting aren't real, or, at least, they aren't as real as in a typical D&D setting.
Do you have any suggestions for what extra power I could give the implements?
Quick question about the implements, is each implement going to be tied to a type of magic or can each type use all of the implements?
Since, so far, only the second type of magic actually uses the Wizard class, that's the only type that uses implements. It can use all three implements, however,
And as far as what to give implements: I really don't know. Make them have "more powerful" abilities. Maybe orbs which change your damage type? Stuff like that.
And a swordmage swinging a sword: Well how would you describe a flaming weapon? A swordmage is a logical extension of that. I have no problem with you deciding he doesn't fit, I just see multiple instances where the "swing a sword and producing fire. Flavor is mutable. Mechanics are even mutable, if you know what you're doing.
A warrior swinging a sword and invoking a cyclone of flames does seem a bit too high-magic for me, yes.
So somebody can swing a sword or invoke a cyclone of flames, but not both? I'm not sure I follow your logic here...
So somebody can swing a sword or invoke a cyclone of flames, but not both? I'm not sure I follow your logic here...
It's a matter of what feeling I want to give the setting. Going by the legends, myths and folktales I'm basing myself on, a sorcerer invoking a cyclone of flames is appropriate, while an arcane warrior who does the same with the swing of a sword isn't.
Orb of Imposition - Gain a one-time bonus to a saving throw against an Arcane power equal to Wis modifier.
Staff of Defense - Reduce damage from a cold, fire, lightning or thunder attack by 2 + Con modifier as an immediate interrupt.
Wand of Accuracy - Increased range of one attack spell by Dex modifier.
Ritual Caster - Wizards need spend only half of the gold cost of the ritual. However, some rituals won't exist (at the very least, Raise Dead won't).
Also, maybe I'm being too rigid here. I'm thinking of still keeping Powers with the Force keyword, but re-flavoring them to work as if forces from the spirit world were acting on behalf of the magician.