| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|
| #1ThaenokMay 21, 2015 7:26:37 | Being a fan of wizards hasn't been easy for us that have chosen them as their favorite fantasy archetype. In the beginning with DND, adnd, and adnd 2nd edition we wizard lovers had ONE spell to contribute at first level and most of the time you would roll about 2 on average for your starting HP. This alone is bad but when you take in account that pretty much ANY distraction screwed up your spellcasting it really sucked being a wizard. Even at high levels you had to be careful or someone could grapple you if they won initiative and you were toast. In 3rd you had to roll concentration checks to cast spills defensively and if you failed, you lost the spell AND got attacked. Most of the time in the beginning there was about a 60-70% chance to succeed on this check depending on your build. If you maximised by taking combat caster your chance went up but still not to a 100% certainty. I kept feeling the lack of love for the mage. I'm not talking about power either. I'm talking about letting a mage do his thing without penalty. I will not address 4th edition wizards. I had the books and read them but wasn't my idea of what I wanted. Anyhow back to the topic. We already had d4 HP and no armor and we still had to worry about even getting a spell cast. It sucked. Now in 5e there are no concentration checks or opportunity attacks( always confused me by the way) and spells are bonus actions and regular actions which means you cast your spell during your part of the initiative. If you get attacked that round, no big deal( well it is bit that's not the point). It doesn't interrupt your spell and you get to feel like a mage without fighting for it. I never cared about power so this thread isn't about that. It is about being able to FUNCTION as a mage without being punished for it. For that I have to thank the designers so thank you  Edit: I know there are oppurtunity attacks but not thousands of them and they don't confuse me now is what I mean. |
| #2melloredMay 21, 2015 9:09:23 | You still need to make concentraion checks when you take damage.
For some spells anyways.
|
| (Reply to #2)AaronOfBarbaria | |
| #4ThaenokMay 21, 2015 9:50:49 | Well I wasn't clear about the concentration part but yeah, you guys got my meaning. I'm perfectly okay with the concentration rules to maintain a spell. It makes sense to focus on a spell and lose said focus after being sliced with a sword or swiped with a demon's claw. I just hated the sheer complexity it used to be just to get a spell off the ground. I agree that after awhile once you got contingency and stone skin plus globe of invulnerability and all the other god mage combos, it did take off but at least now we have a good system to let everyone shine at all levels which wizards just didn't do back then. As far as some people saying a wizard sucks at low level, I looked at the cr recommended for 1st level characters for one on one and I think a starter mage has a good chance. What is it like a 1/4 cr for a single character at first level for a medium challenge? That's reasonable and doable to me. After I had my fill of my current character, I'm planning a transmuter as my next. I see nothing but good times ahead. And the defensive ability and utility of that philosopher stone is just awesome. |
| #5ORC_AnimusMay 21, 2015 11:20:05 | I’ve removed content from this thread because edition warring is deemed to be forum disruption and is a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_company_about_codeofconduct
You can read how to prevent edition wars here: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/28870729/
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
|
| #6DiffanMay 21, 2015 12:39:20 | |
| (Reply to #6)AaronOfBarbaria | |
| #8ThaenokMay 21, 2015 13:05:03 | @Diffan. I would space if I could. I am using a smartphone and every time I hit the page down button that makes paragraphs it doesn't work. So I am sorry about that but I can't figure it out. Your 3rd edition argument is fine but it still didn't just let me do what I do as a mage without making it complicated. Just let me cast my spell please. I played it even with the warts because I love my wizards. Now I don't have to do anything complicated and just cast the spell. I like that. |
| (Reply to #7)Diffan | |
| #10ZardnaarMay 21, 2015 14:02:44 | |
| #11ThaenokMay 21, 2015 15:18:09 | I want to point out that I did play and enjoy wizards in those past editions. I unfortunately didn't get to play odnd but I did look at it and it was very close to adnd 1st edition. I would actually like to play it though really. Also, I am neither knocking any edition. I accepted what was the reality at the time and to me that was just the cost of playing a wizard. Now with 5e I am content and this is the only point I was trying to make. I am unsure if I was the one who was doing the edition war stuff mentioned above as that was not my intent. I merely stated 4th wasn't my cup of tea and moved on quickly but I can see how someone would like it. Please do not mistake me saying I like this version of the mages because the mechanics are what I was waiting on to mean I didn't cherish the past editions. Contrare. I have every edition (except white box odnd, sadly) sitting on the shelf beside me right now and I still love them dearly. I will even play them on occasion but now I am enjoying the new era and trying to give some love to the mage class. I am sorry if there was any confusion. |
| (Reply to #8)AaronOfBarbaria | |
| #13Tony_VargasMay 21, 2015 20:44:24 | |
| #14ThaenokMay 22, 2015 3:47:22 | Actually power was never the reason I was into wizards. Well technically, magic is power but I'm talking about the balancing aspects of it. Being able to pull a object from a shelf and into your hand or teleportation and even lightning from your hands. Now that's just cool to me. |
| #15SirAntoineMay 22, 2015 6:57:16 | 5th Edition has too few spells, and bards get easy access to whatever they want, making wizards feel less unique and privileged.
|
| #16ThaenokMay 22, 2015 8:02:03 | Not this wizard. |
| (Reply to #15)AaronOfBarbaria | |
| #18MechaPilotMay 22, 2015 10:57:50 | |
| #19SirAntoineMay 22, 2015 11:45:42 | |
| #20ThaenokMay 22, 2015 12:21:55 | 5th edition is overpowered? Compared to what? I think it is the most balanced system so far and the one that makes the most sense in a fantasy setting that meets many people's ideas of what certain classes should be. In other words why I made this thread for example. There will never be a perfect system but there may be one more to your liking if this one doesn't do it for you. You should play what makes you happy. |
| (Reply to #19)AaronOfBarbaria | |
| (Reply to #19)Ashrym | |
| #23SirAntoineMay 22, 2015 13:36:11 | |
| #24MechaPilotMay 22, 2015 13:40:55 | No edition is perfect. Every one has its flaws, just as every one has places where it excels.
|
| #25ThaenokMay 22, 2015 13:49:29 | @SirAntione. I love 2nd. It was my start to RPGs. I have more experience with it than any other system in existence but it wasnt ideal for mages in my opinion. I must repeat I am not referring to power and only the functionality of the 5th edition wizard that he may cast spells without it being a chore. That's all I mean. If it wasn't for that I'd be right there with you. |
| (Reply to #23)Diffan | |
| (Reply to #23)arnwolf666 | |
| #28ZardnaarMay 22, 2015 22:27:18 | If I had to pick one editin to play for the rest of my life I would pick 2E. That is beacuse there was a lot of 2E material I did not see, there is enough of it to last the rest of my life, it is better balanced than most versions of D&D and you can hack the hell out of it. One can replace THAC0 with BAB, use ascending AC or even dump level limits and racial restrictions easily enough.
5E is to sparse to iw would be near the bottom of that list although it would be ahead of OD&D and 4E. It scores higher in the what do I want to play right now category.
|
| #29ThaenokMay 23, 2015 1:21:57 | Come on people. This isn't an edition war thread and isn't about who's wizard is more powerful. I made it to express my enjoyment of the FUNCTIONALITY of the wizard in 5th edition. Functionality is not the same as me saying I like a certain edition over the other. There are things I like about each edition that the others simply don't have. I won't go into it but the point remains we aren't talking about what edition is best. Please let's not do this. |
| #30DiffanMay 23, 2015 5:48:37 | @ Thaenok: each edition's wizard has a large portion of functionality, its just obtained at different levels. I feel the 4e wizard starts off the best with the most HP and best AC and has the most options right off the bat. They offer the greatest amount of ability early on. Where it starts to fall away is that other editions crank up the spell's known, surpassing the 4e wizard at about 10th level. They also have a bit more versatility in that they can cast the same level spell multiple times. |
| #31ThaenokMay 23, 2015 6:22:03 | Okay but again this isn't about that. I am talking about the 5th edition version. Earlier in the thread a mod stated no edition warring so I'm trying to keep the focus on 5 th edition. If you find the 5th edition version to be inefficient that would be more along the the lines I was intending. It is my belief that I like how the wizard comes together now. I won't comment further on any other wizard from any other edition. |
| (Reply to #31)Diffan | |
| #33ThaenokMay 23, 2015 8:36:16 | @Diffan. I know what I said but I wasn't trying to say any edition is better than any other. I said FOR ME the new edition makes me able to cast spells without worrying about casting the spell. As far as casting a spell in one turn yeah, there were plenty you could cast in one round but are you forgetting if you got hit before you were able to cast it, the spell was lost? |
| #34DiffanMay 23, 2015 9:08:44 | Not forgetting that, just that it hasn't been an issue since 4E debued 7 Years ago. And even in 3e, it was such an easy thing to avoid except under special circumstances like monsters using the delay action or using reach weapons. I'd say losing a spell due to damage taken hasn't been a significant problem since, at the latest, 2e AD&D days. |
| #35ThaenokMay 23, 2015 9:21:33 | 3rd still had the concentration checks to even cast the spell though. I always just wanted to cast it and forget it. As far as concentrating to maintain a spell, I get that. Its cool with me to. I notice you bring up 4th edition. I have the books and I like certain aspects but it isnt a perfect example of a wizard to me either. This is the first time I looked at a wizard in DND and said "yes! This!". I understand they you may disagree and that is cool but it is fact that one man's trash is another man's treasure. I think its obvious on where I stand. |
| #36OrethalionMay 23, 2015 9:38:48 | |
| #37OrethalionMay 23, 2015 9:42:50 | |
| #38ThaenokMay 23, 2015 10:13:58 | Yeah I'm going to disagree there. The low hit points and no armor was the balancing factor. The aggravating nature of spellcasting was just a bit too much. Think of a warrior who had to make a check just to even start the process of swinging a sword. That's kind of like what it was for me. |
| #39AshrymMay 23, 2015 11:52:50 |
Supplements provided concentration options in older editions that led to concentration check mechanics. In later editions. I find 5e the most restricted concentration system of any edition because spells are keyworded to it and stacking is prevented, unlike other editions.
|
| #40SirAntoineMay 23, 2015 13:27:33 | It doesn't make sense to me why they would prevent stacking, not with fewer spells per level.
|
| (Reply to #19)CCS | |
| (Reply to #40)AaronOfBarbaria | |
| #43hunterian7May 23, 2015 15:20:13 | |
| #44ZardnaarMay 23, 2015 15:41:10 | |
| #45ThaenokMay 23, 2015 16:02:30 | @ Hunterian7. I respect your opinion. |
| #46DwarfslayerMay 23, 2015 16:27:42 | |
| #47SirAntoineMay 23, 2015 19:17:06 | |
| #48AaronOfBarbariaMay 23, 2015 20:31:10 | You are correct, SirAntoine, but one is a far higher degree of predictability than the other. |
| #49SirAntoineMay 23, 2015 20:37:55 | |
| #50AaronOfBarbariaMay 23, 2015 20:44:07 | On that, we will disagree. I find there to be no punitive quality in the concentration rules at all. |
| #51SirAntoineMay 23, 2015 20:49:29 | |
| (Reply to #43)Diffan | |
| #53SirAntoineMay 23, 2015 21:01:09 | |
| (Reply to #51)AaronOfBarbaria | |
| #55ThaenokMay 24, 2015 2:33:58 | @SirAntoinne and Hunterian7. I get it. You like 4th edition. That is good but how easy or not it was to introduce new players to isn't the same as how functional a class is or isn't. There was a mod who earlier on this thread warned not to make the posts so "editiony" so please stay away from that topic. |
| #56ZardnaarMay 24, 2015 2:44:22 | The main problem with concentration is individual spells that do not need it. Dancing lights for example. As the dm I messed the rules up having levitating drow use faerie fire or cloudkill or greater invisabilty. It didnt matter that much. |
| #57OrethalionMay 24, 2015 7:04:29 | |
| (Reply to #57)Diffan | |
| #59SirAntoineMay 24, 2015 23:49:14 | |
| (Reply to #29)arnwolf666 | |
| (Reply to #58)arnwolf666 | |
| #62OrethalionMay 25, 2015 11:33:31 | |
| (Reply to #62)arnwolf666 | |
| #64ZardnaarMay 25, 2015 12:35:33 | |
| #65OrethalionMay 25, 2015 12:41:53 | |
| #66ZardnaarMay 25, 2015 12:55:39 | |
| #67OrethalionMay 25, 2015 13:03:28 | |
| #68ZardnaarMay 25, 2015 14:14:19 | |