The 5e Wizard...initiate thy worship or thy fury!!

Sacrosanct · July 01, 2014, 11:31:09 AM

Quote from: Brad;763093Yes, but Gandalf hardly ever cast spells, and he's pretty much the iconic wizard most people think about when you say Tolkien. Having read a ton of Forgotten Realms novels and bunches of other stuff, wizards casting spells all the time works for a specific sub-set of fantasy, which alters the old D&D paradigms. It's not a bad thing, but it is different.

Don't conflate "didn't cast spells often" with "can't cast spells often". I strongly suspect that if Gandalf wasn't also the best melee fighter in the group, he's be casting more spells.

Point is, is that in much of Appendix N literature, there is nothing that says the casters couldn't cast at will spells. Just like my personal experience playing 5e, the mages having the ability to cast at will didn't mean they did cast it over and over.

Marleycat · July 01, 2014, 11:31:45 AM

Quote from: Brad;763085Wizards throwing endless spells is definitely not Swords & Sorcery, but certainly within the realm of fantasy. I don't really think it's D&D, either, if by D&D we're talking about pre-3.5ish D&D. Videogame fantasy, absolutely.

Gotta agree with the crossbow thing...I never liked the expanded weapons list in the newer versions of D&D.

Dnd isn't really Sword and Sorcery anyway. Warhammer is closer to it though.

crkrueger · July 01, 2014, 11:34:13 AM

What would be interesting is if the DM's guide introduces "Setting Option Rulesets" or something like...

Low Fantasy
Sword & Sorcery
High Fantasy

...or whatever, and then listed options for each class of setting to help newbie GM's hit the right tone. What would be even more interesting, is if they released different settings with different base assumptions like back in the 2e setting days.

Brad · July 01, 2014, 11:34:33 AM

Quote from: CRKrueger;763095Will it have a positive or negative effect, at this point no one knows, but I have my doubts.

If you enjoy low-magic settings like me, at-will cantrips will totally fuck up the game. Completely. Right? Well, only if I'm a pedantic jackass and ASSume every wizard out there has nothing better to do with their time but cast ray of frost 5000 times a day to make igloos in the Sahara. Instead, I could assume wizards are fucking WIZARDS doing THINGS that wizards DO, like poring over old tomes and cackling loudly when their minions bring them eye of newt.

It's definitely how you want to interpret the material. If anyone can be a wizard, then yes, at-will cantrips will destroy the game. If wizards are special, then IDGAF, honestly.

Haffrung · July 01, 2014, 11:35:45 AM

I'll probably nerf the damage-dealing cantrips to 1d6, and scrap mage hand.

Brad · July 01, 2014, 11:36:25 AM

Quote from: Marleycat;763100Dnd isn't really Sword and Sorcery anyway. Warhammer is closer to it though.

Absolutely not; it's D&D fantasy. Which is a specific brand of fantasy that has more in common with pulps than it does Tolkien. I just brought up S&S because for some reason people always want to play Conan, even though D&D doesn't do a very good job of modeling him.

Brad · July 01, 2014, 11:37:38 AM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763099Don't conflate "didn't cast spells often" with "can't cast spells often". I strongly suspect that if Gandalf wasn't also the best melee fighter in the group, he's be casting more spells.

I'm going by what Gandalf did, not what you suspect he could do.

Marleycat · July 01, 2014, 11:37:47 AM

Quote from: CRKrueger;763094I've already decided to houserule them, limit the list, or cut out at-wills all together. As I said, my table's not the issue.

Things don't happen in a vacuum. We didn't start with 3.0 and then magically teleport to the Gauntlets of Ogre Power thread at purple. That kind of idiocy over there was built over time and was supported by the rules WotC kept issuing.

So you have a satisfactory solution good.

Sacrosanct · July 01, 2014, 11:40:04 AM

Quote from: Brad;763105I'm going by what Gandalf did, not what you suspect he could do.

That's dumb, especially when he have a lot of reference material to work with to get a good idea of what he was capable of. Do you think Gandalf didn't have to ability to cast something like a levitation spell because he never actually did that?

That's like saying Aragron couldn't fight with an axe because he never did.

Omega · July 01, 2014, 11:46:14 AM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763086Has anyone ever seen magic users run out of sling stones or crossbow bolts before?

I have run out of sling stones before. But that was because we were in a hall holding the line and I'd swept the floor of any debris. I prefer darts and I run out of those pretty fast if I dont get a chance to recover them afterwards.

Inside a dungeon the chances for nabbing some rocks on the floor dropped dramatically. So Id be counting ammo as we went and allways on the lookout for suitable stones to replenish.

Never used a crossbow with a mage type. But I'd have run out there too.

As DM I tend to have the players track ammo loosely. Players choice as to how rigorous they want to track. Toothpicks or glass beads if handy and now-a-days Ive got a couple of jars of beads.

Brad · July 01, 2014, 11:55:00 AM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763107That's dumb, especially when he have a lot of reference material to work with to get a good idea of what he was capable of. Do you think Gandalf didn't have to ability to cast something like a levitation spell because he never actually did that?

That's like saying Aragron couldn't fight with an axe because he never did.

Going by the books, including the Silmarillion, Gandalf could have simply been using the power of Narya to do everything that you're considering a spell. If I use that line of logic, then no, he couldn't cast levitation as the ring was tied to controlling fire and sustaining life. Further, casting "spells" would probably be seen as the work of Sauron, hence, I doubt Gandalf would ever do such a thing except in the most dire of circumstances. Could he? I think it'd be against his nature, so no.

crkrueger · July 01, 2014, 12:01:39 PM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763086Has anyone ever seen magic users run out of sling stones or crossbow bolts before?

I haven't, and I suspect it's a spurious argument.

Seek and ye shall find.

If you never keep track of ammo or weight, you never will.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763086Much like at will cantrips, they are last resort attacks after all other more powerful means have been exhausted/not applicable to the scenario.

So you must have never run out of spells either.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763086To be honest, I hardly ever saw a decent level magic user, even in AD&D, resort to slings or crossbows when they had spells, scrolls, and wands at that point.

If you hand out unlimited scrolls and wands, well sure.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763086And I see little difference in the AD&D 'pew pew" wizard with a wand of magic missles vs. a "pew pew" wizard in 5e who has at wills and not nearly as many wands*. They are both pew pewing.

*wands in 5e don't have nearly the # of charges as in 1e

Ever read the 1e spell Enchant Item? Some more charges, and entire orders of magnitude harder to create.

Quote from: Omega;763109I have run out of sling stones before. But that was because we were in a hall holding the line and I'd swept the floor of any debris. I prefer darts and I run out of those pretty fast if I dont get a chance to recover them afterwards.

Inside a dungeon the chances for nabbing some rocks on the floor dropped dramatically. So Id be counting ammo as we went and allways on the lookout for suitable stones to replenish.

Never used a crossbow with a mage type. But I'd have run out there too.

As DM I tend to have the players track ammo loosely. Players choice as to how rigorous they want to track. Toothpicks or glass beads if handy and now-a-days Ive got a couple of jars of beads.

How...spurious of you. :rolleyes:

Thanks to all who had an honest discussion, it was a pleasant change, alas it couldn't last. :hatsoff:

Exploderwizard · July 01, 2014, 12:07:37 PM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763088This makes no sense. Casting magic is what mages do. Magic is not a side job for a mage. It's the thing they do as a class feature.

Precisely. Magic is what wizards DO. The magic does not come from them directly, they channel it from some other plane and shape it to their purpose through study. Such magic is a resource which has a cost.

I actually have less of an issue with clerical at-will magic because it is powered by a deity and can be withheld should the cleric cease to be a shining example of the faith.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763090Tolkien as been referenced as a huge influence of D&D. The Shannara series has widely been cited as a rip off of Tolkien, and is a hugely popular fantasy series that came out in the 1970s. Allanon cast spells all the time, whenever he wanted, at will.

Allanon used his magic only when the need was dire. Remember that using his magic actually drained his life force. He had to hibernate for years to regain the energy he spent in a few weeks.

His magic was not Vancian but it was not free either.

mcbobbo · July 01, 2014, 12:11:47 PM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;763086And I see little difference in the AD&D 'pew pew" wizard with a wand of magic missles vs. a "pew pew" wizard in 5e who has at wills and not nearly as many wands*. They are both pew pewing.

*wands in 5e don't have nearly the # of charges as in 1e

Some differences:

1) You can take the wand away. See the prisoner scenario above. Disarm, too, maybe.
2) Wands are limited resources with a GP cost, at least.
3) You can identify wands and could sort them at the gate, so to speak.

There's a lot more, I am sure. I agree they're mostly similar in combat, but that's about where it ends.

Omega · July 01, 2014, 12:18:31 PM

Quote from: CRKrueger;763111How...spurious of you. :rolleyes:

Thanks to all who had an honest discussion, it was a pleasant change, alas it couldn't last. :hatsoff:

/me makes sanity check. roll-roll...

Oh fuck! there goes the meds again! Guess it was all a hallucination...

Here. Have some toothpicks...