The specialist wizard

[alhoon]

Necromancy, Illusion and Enchantment contain most of my favourite spells, but I like all the schools and they all contain spells I like to use all the time.

I continue from the Sorcerer Thread:
I agree that sacrificing two schools entirely (in my campaigns and in my opinion) is too much for just a single extra spell. The reason is that I like spells from all schools and all are useful. As for the extra spell per day, I agree that it is useful too, but a wizard can make scrolls easily, so that isn't that great boon.

However at the 1-3 levels, the wizard is weaker than the specialist. After all, a 3rd level wizard/ specialist has 10 - 12 spells in his spellbook (so he probably doesn't have access to all spells anyway), has very few memorized spells and the costs of scrolls seem a bit steep in that levels.

Also in Ravenloft, I declare that use of necromancy is inherently evil even if it is used for good causes. So a good generalist wizard wouldn't want to have necromancy spells or at least use them often. When I discussed that with one of my players that want a wizard, he decided to take a diviner and throw the (least useful and dangerous) necromancy school.

So a few solutions that I thought (but I haven't tried yet) are:
- Specialist can cast spells from all schools but they still choose schools that they are weaker at. The Specialists have a -5 spellcraft penalty to learn spells from their forbidden schools & they have a -4 caster level penalty to their forbidden schools. That means that a 5th level specialist can cast spells of his forbidden schools like a 1st level wizard.

- Specialist take the spell focus feat as a free feat. At any point, they can take a feat and become generalist wizards losing their extra spell per day essentially becoming generalist wizards. It is balanced. They become exactly like a wizard that took the spell focus feat.

[Troile]

wow...someone thinks specializing is underpowered...

Its not just "1 extra spell"...think of it in terms of fractions of existing spells.

I know my wizards don't go around getting EVERY spell in their spellbook...or even 1 from each school...usually at each level except the first there are a few schools not being represented.

I guess it depends on the campaign...

[alhoon]

Of course the argument is...but invisibility is really good...or hold person is really good...it is true...but you can't have all the spells let alone memorize them all (esp if you're a general wizard).

1. You can make scrolls if all your spells easily.
2. With a research taking 1 week/ spell level, you can get the spells you like.
3. By killing an enemy wizard and taking his spellbook you certainly gain access to some more spells.

[Troile]

1. Not necessarily.
2. Not in my games. (most of the time...)
3. Thats evil. And if you're an evil character you can certainly go for it...though somebody might get pissed off.

[Ivana_Boritsi]

1. Why can't you make scrolls? It takes 1 day per scroll and is well worth the trouble. Well worth it. In 3.X my casters have been scroll writin', potion brewin', lil' sistahs. I remember the first time I sat down at a table and began passing out the potions. My DM almost had a heart attack. "How many potions did you make?" I shrugged. "Dude. I had two weeks. My character's a nun. She has no life. I made potions. So here's another Bull's Strength for ya...."

3. Why can't you take an enemy wizard's spellbook? That's like telling the fighter he can't take the flaming sword of the barbarian he just capped. Or telling the rogue he can't take the nice boots of the elven assassin you just beat. That's just part of D&D. Keep in mind that looting is historically accurate. In medieval times, knights and warriors were expected to supply their own armor, clothing, and mounts. Thus, scavenging from the battle field was a common practice. It even gave you braging rights. "Behold the Sword of Acheron, which I took from Lord Merlek at the Battle of Bloody Hill." So why wouldn't a spellbook be the same? In medieval times, libraries were constantly raided for books of knowledge and, in fact, books of spells. People did this on a regular basis.

My comments on the specialist thing: On paper, the specialist looks more powerful, I'll give you that. Who can argue with +1 extra spell per level? But in practice, I think the realitiy is very different. I've never seen a specialist outshine the regular wizard just because of the spell power, and here's why:

You can only cast one spell at a time. You might have that one extra spell, but it's rare that your wizard runs out of spells in a combat. So here's the other argument - with another spell slot you have a greater variety of spells, right? Not really. A specialist's extra spell always has to be from their special school, so you're not getting that much more flexibility. Not to knock specialists or say they suck. Specialists can be cool if you munchkin the right way.....

Troile, I can't argue that having a +1 extra 4th level spell at 7th level ain't great. 'Cause it is great. But there are other things to consider. If I nix two schools, I know that I'm going to lose some benchmark spells somewhere. There's no way to avoid it. Benchmark spells being, of course, those spells that ya just can't do without.

If I nix illusion, I loose mirror image (drool). If I nix enchantment, I give up charm person (double drool) or charm monster (triple drool). If I nix necromancy, I lose vampiric touch (bring on the powers check, baby!).

Now to be fair to the specialist fans, here's my Enchanter story. Friend of mine made a specialist Enchanter, and took the Mindbender presitge class. Wow. I mean, wow. Everytime we'd meet a monster, instead of fighting it, we'd add it to our roster. It rocked! So specialists can be fun, but I think the way to go is to take your specialization as far as you can take it and blow it out the window.

[Reginald de Curry]

Was the enchanter named . . . Tim? *ducks*

[Wiccy of the Fraternity]

3. Thats evil. And if you're an evil character you can certainly go for it...though somebody might get pissed off.

You could be a good wizard taking the book to make sure it never falls into the "wrong" hands ever again, but you must peruse through it to make sure that it is truly that evil. Preferrably you should wear thick leater gloves lined to chainmail, a breastplate and an iron cap to stop evil enchantments leaping of the book as they attempt to consume your soul, lol.

[Troile]

Killing a wizard to get to his spellbook is evil.

[AdamGarou]

Killing a wizard to get to his spellbook is evil.

Well, then, like Ivana said, so is killing an ogre because he has a +1 sword that your fighter wants.

So is having your thief stab another thief in the back to get his Boots of Elvenkind.

And so is killing a bunch of kobolds so you can get to their treasure.

All D&D games have a certain amount of violence (that's kinda the point of combat), so is the act of killing any sentient creature evil (within the context of the D&D game)? Regardless of the alignment of the creature itself, and how much evil it may have done (and will continue to do) in its life?

Or is it the motivation that's important? Is it okay to kill an enemy wizard who's killing townspeople and making the entire village into mindless zombie slaves because what HE's doing is wrong (and his uber-powerful spellbook is just a nice little present to yourself after you're done)?

I understand the point you're making, Troile--or at least I think I do. Anyone who goes around indiscriminately killing other wizards just so they can get their greedy little hands on his/her spellbook is totally on the road to Powers Checks and probably damnation. That said, no wizard PC worth the time it took to roll up his/her stats is going to ignore the spellbook once the other magic-flinging dude is dead. So somewhere in the back of their minds, every PC wizard is out to improve his/her own power and make money to buy a laboratory and research supplies and cool magical stuff (assuming you allow that sort of thing in your campaign).

Wizards hoard their own spells and drool over the possibility of acquiring others--does that mean alll PC wizards are evil, just because they have that little voice at the back of their mind that says "Hey, check out that dusty tome on the desk... this may just be that ice storm spell you've been waiting on"?

[Troile]

Scrolls: (spell level x caster level x 25 gp)/2

Thats a lot of gold!

I don't know how much gold you have to throw around in the games you play but I know I certainly never had enough to just willy nilly make as many scrolls as I have days to rest.

I find the average gold per level thing to be inflated at times but even using that chart you're going to use up all your money in scrolls.

Each level your specialist ability will give you that much more gold per day...

And yes you do run out of spells quickly...at least I suppose it depends on the DM...I'm used to DM's that make things hard..not that your's don't but just to say that defeat is certainly going to happen unless the PCs are very good about going about things which means using all their resources.

a 1st level wizard spell is going to cost you 12.5gp sure...

2nd level...75 gp

3rd... 187.5 gp.

4th... 350 gp...

do you have that much gold?

I can certainly see making *some* scrolls...they are very very handy things to have around but mass production is not something I see happening. At least in the groups I'm used to being with.

I think all of these arguments come down to what people are used to playing with I suppose.

[Wiccy of the Fraternity]

As said in the past, magic is not as common in the demiplane of dread as in other worlds, but gold is certtainly plentiful.

Adam and Ivana raise good points, as did I in my previous post. In my post the wizard was not killing another wizard to just gain possession ofthe spellbook, he was killing him to gueard the spellbook so no other may use it for ill means. That would not justify a powers check in my view.

I also use the spells per day in a different method. Instead i have it as spells you may cast until you have rested again for a sufficient length of time. So it is possible to refill your quota of spells even if you have used them all that same day. Tjhe same goes for other classes that have a per day quota on class abilities.

[Troile]

the other point is how much of one item you can get in a city...I mean you don't just put gold into making a scroll...its the cost to make the scroll. You must acquire the materials. Cities in Ravenloft are small...you can't just go around throwing your gold around every small town and expect tons of magic al supplies...

There are a ton of legitimate ways to add spells to your spellbook...or gain spellbooks I'm not arguing that...but again magic is scarce...

I think its just a case of different styles...

The way we've always played that extra spell per day is always very useful...we don't carry around thousands of gold coins and fistfuls of magic items...the fighters aren't clad in masterwork full plate etc etc...

but thats just us...

[Ivana_Boritsi]

a 1st level wizard spell is going to cost you 12.5gp sure...
2nd level...75 gp
3rd... 187.5 gp.
4th... 350 gp...
do you have that much gold?

All I need is the 1st through 3rd level spells in scroll or potion form. Alot of people assume that you should buy scrolls that either A) zap opponents, or B) boost yourself.

I do neither. Most of my scrolls or potions go to buffing my other party members. Maybe 'cause I'm a girl. Anyhow, most scrolls and potions go to 1st and 2nd level spells that aid my party. Bull's Strength scrolls, or Mirror Image potions. Let me tell you. The Mirror Image potions for your fighter? Ouchie.

And understand - I don't need alot of potions or scrolls. Just 2 scrolls, maybe 3 potions? But having just that many makes a big difference.

[Troile]

The argument was that scrolls and potions negate the need for spell slots...I was just pointing out that you really can't make that many scrolls/potions.

[Ivana_Boritsi]

No, no, no. Potions and scrolls don't negate the need for spell slots. After all, scrolls or potions take an entire day to make. But scrolls and potions definately change the equation. You don't need alot of them to make a difference.

But I think the extra slot that specialists has ain't all that if you get my meaning. Again, because you can only cast one spell at a time. The sorcerer gets props from me, not because of the amount of spells she can cast, but because she can summon up just the right spell when she needs it.