Are Magic-Users Too Weak?

[Hywaywolf]

This discussion is the reason I like zero level spells. They give the MU more magicy stuff to do without making him/her more powerful or think they have to be in combat to be useful. I have said it before, but the less time a MU spends thinking about being useful in combat the more time they will spend making their PC a better MU. Once a player gets to higher levels he will get to play Gandolf. At lower levels he is Willow. Willow was a great character.

[Joe the Rat]

Yeah, but he had that disappearing pig trick to fall back on.

A good fledgling mage always has a disappearing pig trick to fall back on.

Barring some really unusual rolls or stat assignments, the Magic-User will be the Smart one in the party - use your time to come up with clever ideas and out-of-box solutions to things... possibly even ones that use magic. This is the hardest part to learn. My wife - in her first character, in her first game ever - picked illusionist. I tried to warn her of the difficulty there - that everything you do is clever thinking and deception. She's done well, but continues to struggle with where she fits when we kick in the door and start busting heads. Sometimes you just need a good throwing arm.


NOW THEN. If you want to give your magelings a source of low-damage firepower without walking around looking like an stunt double for Machete or overbalancing play with baby warlock firepower, perhaps a mechanical approach is in order. Might I suggest the blasting rod? It's a magic-user only weapon: A short, heavy, intricately runed and decorated wood and/or metal rod that can be used to channel bolts of concussive force. The trick here is that the rod has to be charged up, using special crystals or powders or an incense-intensive ceremony. Also, it takes a little time for the magic-user to focus the charge between blasts, limiting you to firing every other round. Hmm, let's say 30gp for the rod, and 2gp of reagents to give it a full ten charges. Limit on shots and shot frequency, costs to maintain, and taking it away prevents the magic-user from shooting you. Seems like a reasonable balance.

Of course, we already have a lobby against Magic-Users with crossbows, so I'm not sure if a refluffed light crossbow is appropriate.

[Dimirag]

Some games let the mu to buy and recharge wands or similar objects that works like bows and arrows.
It would not be a bad idea to create some of these, with varying damage/effect and max number of charges. The only thing is the attack resolution, I don't recommend the "auto-hit" approach, not even the "fully st" way, for those that mimic attacks (and the idea is primarily for those) you can give the mu an magic attack bonus (mab), you can use the mu ab, the thief/cleric or the fighter one depending on how accurate, reliant you want the mu attacks to be.

[LibraryLass]

I like to have at-will cantrip effects-- I figure basically any trick a real-world performing magician could do with objects carried on his person is fine-- and a blast of some kind or minor wands.

I think the "mages are weaker than fighters at low level but much stronger than them at high level" argument rings a little hollow to me because first it presupposes that most campaigns will even last into high levels, and second because it just means later someone else is sitting with their thumbs up their butts.

[bobtheoldcrank]

I like the at-will cantrip effects. Interesting idea. Thank you!

We shall agree to differ on your ringing hollow. Can fighters make time stop? Can they do 10d6 damage with a flick of the wrist and a pinch of guano? That's not the fighter sitting with thumb emplaced, either; the fighter still has his job to do in the front line.

I agree that not all campaigns last until even mid-range levels, much less high. But the core rules must assume that they will in order to assure the game is playable to that extent.

To be rather brutally frank, my first reaction to as statement like that is "If my campaigns don't last, the first place to look is my own play and planning. To look at the game instead of how I use the game is blaming the tool when it's more than likely user error or inexperience." I'm not accusing you of that! I'm just saying that's my reaction to your statement about campaigns lasting. I know sometimes campaigns fold for reasons other than play itself - scheduling conflicts, player loss, etc. - but if I'm experiencing short-duration campaigns and those reasons aren't evident,* the very next place I look is within.

Cheers,

Bob

* Of course, it's worth looking really hard at those excuses, too. If you're losing players, for any reason, it's worth examining why. You know that already, but I thought it worth putting out there.

[Hywaywolf]

Campaigns don't have to last a long time to get to higher levels. Just start your players at whatever level you want. Starting at level 1 is traditional and can be fun, but really is only "necessary" when you don't have a bunch of scarred and jaded players at the table. Starting at level one is how you learn to play the game and how each race and classes do what they do. Its always been my opinion that if you think low level mages are too weak then just start them at a higher level. That was my impression of 4e the one time I played it. They just started everyone at level 5 and called it level 1. And also that it didn't really matter what class you took since in essence they were all various types of fighters, as well as their own medic.

I will say this again, if your lower level MU is carrying 5 daggers or blazing away with a wand or arcane bolt, then you are playing him/her with a fighters mindset rather than the brainiac a MU is supposed to be. If thats how you want to play someone who uses magic then either play a cleric of a fighter/mu (and pay the XP penalty). MUs are supposed to be thinkers and experts at misdirection and using communication to get themselves out of trouble.

An example from a recent encounter in a game I am in. I have a mu/scout PC. We were in a cave entrance with potential enemies (kobolds) deeper in the cave and a boatload of wolves barreling down at us. Being smart, our other MU happened to speak more languages than us, he was able to negotiate a cease fire and convince them we weren't there to harm them and to get their assistance. And since our other skilled archer had gotten his ass in a crack and disappeared, my PC had to take on his more offensive scout role (ranging) and defend the kobold who ran outside to reset the traps we had tripped. There was two things I wanted to do at this time, be a offensive player and take the battle to our enemy and be a defensive player and defend us from the oncoming avalanche of wolves. I had to choose which "Role" I wanted to take. Stay outside the cave defend the kobold with arrows (I had sleep but the wolves were to spread out to waste it on a single wolf). Or start pouring oil in a half circle around the front of the entrance and light is as a wall against the wolves, where they would have to bunch up and then be fodder for the sleep spell. I chose to protect the kobold, because that's what you do when you build an alliance, even a temporary one. But i also had to fall back and waste a round to pour the oil because no one else had thought of it. I didn't have time to light it because then i had to use 1 of my sleep spells to knock out the two wolves that had initiative on our kobold. Luckily someone else used a round to light the oil, so we the plan worked.

But my point is, if a MU frees his mind from thinking like a fighter (that the only good defense is a strong offense) then a whole world of opportunities will unfold before them. That frees up teh fighters to just fight. But, this only works when the gaming group enjoys roleplaying as much as combat. To many, its just the boring stuff you do before slicing somethings head off

[LibraryLass]

Here I thought they were supposed to be the experts at using magic, hence the name "magic user".

[Hywaywolf]

A thief is a simple name too, but in my opinion an actual thief (as opposed to tomb raiders and such like the rest of the party) is the absolutely worst way to play that class, especially when they steal from party members.

A cleric is also a magic user (devine magic but still magic) yet they are more than walking band aids

[Dimirag]

Personally, I have a 7th level ad&d thief that has never robed anybody, in fact, I have never put any skill point in pick pocket. And I really enjoy playing him and love the face of people when they see he does not rob others!

Characters are much more than just their class name. It's a matter of play taste both in setting, game style and personal choices.

[SmootRK]

I agree with just about all of what Hyway says about wizard role in the game. He should be the thinker, planner, or even the leader of a group (being the most intelligent). The game does not NEED the magic-user to be expanded for extra abilities, but I too find them a little lacking at times, especially for the lower levels. Note that it is not the lacking of power; I think they end up fine over time, but I find them lacking in participation during the events of the game. I find that the game itself has a particular focus upon combat... it is a major portion of everything within the rule book (how attacks are resolved, how spells affect combat, how magical items are utilized in combat, even the monster section itself is largely about how the creature can be utilized in combat). While the MU is often the mentor of the group, when this major portion of the game unfolds, the MU is a back-burner nobody at the lower levels when everyone else is doing things. (and yes, I agree the great players of rpgs can MAKE themselves relevant in many ways, I too find myself gaming with children who WANT to be Gandalf or Merlin or whatever, but do not have the saavy to really pull it off... rather than lose their interest, I would rather give them minor things to do).

With all that focus on combat, (to me) it is not so fun to only see a MU with a couple of special purpose spells to potentially utilize in combat. I like to give them something to do other that cower behind the front line fighters waiting for their special situation where their limited spell options are best utilized. I think that Magic-Users should be able to utilize small amounts of magic throughout the day, so I like the expansion of cantrips or even the at-will sort of minor magics. I also like the Arcane Bolt, because even if negligible combat effectiveness (my version is roll to hit, d3 damage, thrown dagger range), it at least gives them something to do round to round during combat that is thematically in their forte'.

That said about the combat kudos I add in for MU (which is largely irrelevant after a number of levels because their actual spells come into full fruitition), I try to give more things to MU to devote the player's thinking into. I added in the Familiars Supplement to give the characters the ability to utilize the familiar for other sorts of tasks while gaming. I add in the Libram Magica to expand spell choices and give them reason to research and expand their character's options. I encourage magic item research for largely the same reasons. I also use Channelling Items to expand the character's flexibility in and out of combat (see that supplement as well). I largely added the Sage Quasi-Class as yet another way for a MU to expand their brainy aspect of the game.

What I am trying to say here, is that with enough things for the MU character to role-play and focus upon out of combat (or in combat in a tangently related way such as using a familiar to scout around and gather intelligence), then the character may be just fine in their role of keeping safe behind the meat shields. Bear in mind, that I am not saying that all these supplements need be in place just to make the MU work in a campaign (as each aspect could still be incorporated in just role-play aspects without actual rules crunch behind it), but the addition of these rules helps my youthful players busy with their role of MU... basically easing them into this way of thinking.