The Wizard Experience

[Wings of Peace]

I don't understand the outlook that wildmages can't multiclass. I have a 27/3 Wildmage and it runs fine. 50% surge probability is enough to make use of the mechanics and you're still better than a vanilla wizard. I disagree with the pvp point as well, there's enough high damage aoes and cc in the wizard's arsenal these days that they're far from lacking in ways to contribute to a pvp fight.

[Eyeliner]

Maybe give them new feats they can take that boost DCs higher, or give them more interesting options without having to cripple themselves by taking specializations. Because the specs give so little for so much that they take. Try playing a wizard without conjuration for example. Unless you're a necromancer, unless you 100% have a dedicated front liner to always quest with, you're worthless and will die.

Everyone seems to write off the specialist wizards as not worth taking but there are a few solid ones that are definitely worth giving up a school. Like if you can live without premo then necromancer specialty on a shadow mage is almost all benefit. I could write a paragraph on all the permutations and I'm not giving away my particular favorite but they're pretty wildly different and some much, much better than others.

But the thing I really meant to say is, I think the summon I-IX ought to be castable even if the specialist gives up conjuration, just for quality of life in PVE and nothing else (there's almost no PVP benefit there). That would make some of the specialist paths more viable to level up without really affecting anything.

[-XXX-]

Specialist wizards have always been a trap and probably should have been axed instead of given any dev attention.
Clearly a lot of effort went into updating them and I don't mean to bash on that here, but it's also rather apparent that flavor took priority over mechanical improvements there.
As a result some of the specialist wizard variants still remain straight up unplayable (some spells are simply too essential for the wizard's ability to even function), while the few more viable ones still do not offer enough upside to justify the enormous sacrifice they are making.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

Specialist wizards have always been a trap and probably should have been axed instead of given any dev attention.
Clearly a lot of effort went into updating them and I don't mean to bash on that here, but it's also rather apparent that flavor took priority over mechanical improvements there.
As a result some of the specialist wizard variants still remain straight up unplayable (some spells are simply too essential for the wizard's ability to even function), while the few more viable ones still do not offer enough upside to justify the enormous sacrifice they are making.

Still kind of trapping but have some merit. I feel conj specialist gets it the roughest. The got hasted summons in leui of haste if but lost of self haste and time stop AND greater sanctuary is way too rough. If Greater sanctuary was changed to abjuration they could pull off mono elemental + greater sanctuary. (Mono is only guarantee if pure too)


Necromancer specialists dont lose too much, gain quite a few boons including more spells per day and can rest spam until they get 2 top tier undead feom mummy dust and then fully buff them both

Abjuration specialist has a very unique and potentially pvp game changing boon with dispel.meta in group fights.

Evocation specialist can focus on party support when in group with no summon or sneak in undead when solo. Their signature spells lets them trickle offense into more encounters and they can acquire very high DCs which is very useful for spells like thunderclap that are evo and have three separate saves. Being a specialist pushes them closer to sorc timestop nuking oy their igms actaully does more damage.

Transmutation specialist not great but not gimped like conjuration specialist. It can be a poor man's spellsword pve wise with actaul undead summons and hellball. Helps buff undead better and again.more spells per day.

Illusionist specialist loses no critical spells

Enchantment specialist is odd with no leadership

[Eyeliner]

Calling something with that many options and variations a trap is ridiculous. Some are meme and only good for pve but others give plenty of benefit and flavor in exchange for losing a few spells you can do without, not to mention another slot per level.

Just tone it down a notch. Specialists can work, some of them at least.

[-XXX-]

50 shades of sad is still sad.

Even the few specialist wizard variants that seemingly work get outshined in their gimmick by something else. All while sacrificing access to essential features inherent to their core class.

Necromantic specialist? Undead pacted warlock.
Transmutation specialist? Spellsword.
Evocation specialist? True flame.
Conjuration specialist? Wild mage.


The illusionist specialist is pretty much the only where the downside does not outweigh the upside.


But whether specialist wizards are viable or not isn't even relevant for this thread. The base premise is that the wizard class is underperforming. Being a specialist wizard does not alleviate this. Specialist wizards end up struggling with the same obstacles as generalist wizards do - their restrictions are likely to only introduce additional hurdles.

[Party in the forest at midnight]

I don't think divination specialist is that bad, you don't lose TOO much with illusion. If you want scrying to be your gimmick it's fine.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

50 shades of sad is still sad.

Even the few specialist wizard variants that seemingly work get outshined in their gimmick by something else. All while sacrificing access to essential features inherent to their core class.

Necromantic specialist? Undead pacted warlock.
Transmutation specialist? Spellsword.
Evocation specialist? True flame.
Conjuration specialist? Wild mage.


The illusionist specialist is pretty much the only where the downside does not outweigh the upside.

Necromantic specialist? Undead pacted warlock.
- warlock doesnt get mummy dust nor timestop, nor the ability to hellball, etc.

Transmutation specialist? Spellsword.
- yeah, your right. spellsword doesnt get summons or epic spells though. This one is a bit gimmicy, but not completely gimped

Evocation specialist? True flame.
- plain jain sorceror would be a much better comparison, having more spells per day than a specialist and able to cast conjuration. Though an evo specialist will still have more feats, skill points, more damage per IGMS and higher DCs (useful for stuff like thunder clap or bigby spells)

Conjuration specialist? Wild mage.
- conjuration specialist is absolutely terrible. Like super terrible. The lost of haste/mass hate, timestop, and great sanctuary is absolutely crippling as you have no way of kiting (speed of haste), guranteed escape spells, not timestop nuking, no two spells per round without auto quicken and parties won't love you.
If they had some short range teleport ability, this would actually be playable (or if they could at least cast greater sanctuary)

[-XXX-]

GSanc automatically unsummons all pets that the caster has out.
The Undying pact unlocks access to tier 6 undead upon reaching lvl 20.

Anyway, whether or not some specialist wizard variant is or isn't straight up bad does not really address the issue with them still being wizards who as a class seem to be struggling in general.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

GSanc automatically unsummons all pets that the caster has out.
The Undying pact unlocks access to tier 6 undead upon reaching lvl 20.

Anyway, whether or not some specialist wizard variant is or isn't straight up bad does not really address the issue with them still being wizards who as a class seems to be struggling in general.

ah the wiki needs updating, says auto unsommons all epic summons and gate (like conduit, mummy dust EDK. so not the mono summon)

tier 6 undead isnt tier 7 which is what mummy dust gives accesss to. one 7 tier two 6 tier I believer? (can be two seven tier with necromancer specialist)

I am not aware of how much wizards are suffering in general; just jumping in on the specialist conversation.

[-XXX-]

You're right, GSanc does not unsummon Summon Creature IX pets. Just tried that IG. My mistake.

The difference between tier 7 and tier 6 undead isn't that great. Warlocks with the undying pact also give their undead SR, which helps vs WoF scrolls - I'd rather have tier 6 undead with SR than tier 7 undead without it TBH.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

You're right, GSanc does not unsummon Summon Creature IX pets. Just tried that IG. My mistake.

The difference between tier 7 and tier 6 undead isn't that great. Warlocks with the undying pact also give their undead SR, which helps vs WoF scrolls - I'd rather have tier 6 undead with SR than tier 7 undead without it TBH.

You get both with necromancer specialist along with uncapped circle if death which is also a signature spell. Along with buffed GSF and ESF making summons stronger

Passive bonus:
+2 to Undead Caster Level
Circle of Death scales as Pale Master (HD Cap = Caster Level if > 9)
Signature spell: Circle of Death and Undeath to Death
GSF bonus:
Necromancy summon stat bonuses double what regular GSF provides
Summons gain 15 + (Wizard Level/2) Spell Resistance
ESF bonus: 5 + Wizard Level % chance to create two Dread Mummies with Mummy Dust instead of one

Necromancer specialist prob has best undead of arelith.

[-XXX-]

Have you ever used them? The difference between tier 7 undead and tier 6 undead is largely cosmetic. Yes, tier 7 undead have objectively better stats, but in practice this improvement is barely noticable in most situations.

At the end of the day, the Necro Specialist is a gutted wizard while the Undying pacted is a Warlock. If I wanted to roll up a cackling necromancer type character, I'd consider the latter to be the go-to choice while the former is not even a consideration.

[Eyeliner]

I do think some of the specialists are a "trap" in that they're enticing to new players and may be fun to level but aren't good for end-game pvp, but that's primarily the conjuration wizards who give up haste/mass haste/time stop and transmuters who are gimmicky. And honestly for a new player mostly interested in exploring Arelith solo or in pick up groups you could still do worse than either of those, though they ought to be warned they're not great long term.

My diviner on the other hand is awesome and much more suited for their RP than a generalist would be. Loss of improved invisibility is the biggest sacrifice and I have multiple ways to cover that. I was playing an illusionist specialist even before the upgrade and had no regrets, I didn't really miss enchantment spells and was glad to have the extra slots. I think some of the other paths look decent too assuming you know enough about the game to know what you're giving up. I see specialists as a way for players who like wizards to do something a little different after they've played a bunch of them already, which IMO is welcome. End of the day most can do ye olde time stop combo or be a hastebot like any other wizard.

This is mostly a question of personal taste, to which I say "let people enjoy things."

[-XXX-]

The entire section of this topic concerning specialist wizards was a derail. They should have never been brought up in the first place, because their most viable variants are on par with the generalist wizard at best.

The major concern here is how wizards in general translate into the wider context of the meta with 700+ hp monstrosities that have saves high enough to reliably overcome DC based spells and can cleave the mage in a half with two attacks.



It's great that you're having fun playing your wizard character. There's no argument against that. However, that does not mean that it could not be improved and made even more fun somehow, especially since the design space is there.

[ElvenEdibles]

I think it'd be really, really great if it were possible to take the Eschew Component feat as a wizard/sorcerer epic feat (although Sorc will likely never ever have room for it), while it remains as an automatic given for zhent/harper mages. Like seriously I'd like to play a wizard that wasn't an artist haha. Being able to opt out of the spell component micro at the cost of an epic feat is a fair trade I think.

edit: I think introducing a 'spellshape' feat for epic levels that causes your spells to not harm friendlies would be pretty nifty too.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

The entire section of this topic concerning specialist wizards was a derail. They should have never been brought up in the first place, because their most viable variants are on par with the generalist wizard at best.

The major concern here is how wizards in general translate into the wider context of the meta with 700+ hp monstrosities that have saves high enough to reliably overcome DC based spells and can cleave the mage in a half with two attacks.



It's great that you're having fun playing your wizard character. There's no argument against that. However, that does not mean that it could not be improved and made even more fun somehow, especially since the design space is there.

You are right there. Like i could argue some specialists are maybe worth it but never actually full out better than generalist (i am quite fond of evocation and necromancer)

so lets get into the meats of high hp (resistant to timrstop nuke tactics and can heal pot spam after your big bangers are gone) and their dont roll 1s saves.


We can get into how there are partial save spells like NEB (that can be quickly fixed with restoration) and the fogs and clouds which again restoration can fix. Though clouds are persistent and if they are busy drinking lessee restoration, that might creste openings.

We could go in a few circles about these tactics but lets discuss if ways we could improve wizard experience without breaking game too muchbas you seem interested in.

More partial save spells.

Like if slow still reduced partisl speed on a passed save. Yes they can freedom but you csn breach it and their NEP same time and they csnt spend too much time rebuffing. Mages are suppose to control battlefield so more partial save spells could work great.

Review cooldown of timestop. Should it ever only be one timestop per encounter or could we afford avg of 2 (i have no clue)

Control spells that dont rely on saves at all.

Like teleport swapping an ally (will save if enemy)
Like the telekenetically launching a team mate. Creating physical walls. (Wall of force would be mint and could still smash it)

[-XXX-]

Most of the issues have been already addressed in this thread.
Partial saves would have been nice, but there's simply too many spells and the amount of work to alter them would have been too much.

IMO the biggest issue for arcane spellcasters is twofold:

In PvE they operate mainly as a summonner relying on the pets to do the bulk of the heavy lifting. In this they get outclassed by Cleric and Druid who both have the access to the same summons (+elemental swarm on top of that) AND can function as fairly decent combatants themselves. There's literally no justification for this - the arcane spell list is not that much better in comparison.
I'd see see the solution in giving arcanists better summons to make up for the fact that they really can't fight themselves.

In PvP their most glaring flaw is survivability. They have very low hp and little to no AC. To survive, the mage needs to capitalize on the range of spells while staying out of melee, but casting a spell temporarily pins them down allowing melee to close up the distance. Furthermore sprint makes this dynamic even more aggrevating for the mage.
I'd see the solution here in giving wizards and sorcerers AC to allow them some time to actually try to control the battlefield - not... cast one spell and get mauled.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

Most of the issues have been already addressed in this thread.
Partial saves would have been nice, but there's simply too many spells and the amount of work to alter them would have been too much.

IMO the biggest issue for arcane spellcasters is twofold:

In PvE they operate mainly as a summonner relying on the pets to do the bulk of the heavy lifting. In this they get outclassed by Cleric and Druid who both have the access to the same summons (+elemental swarm on top of that) AND can function as fairly decent combatants themselves. There's literally no justification for this - the arcane spell list is not that much better in comparison.
I'd see see the solution in giving arcanists better summons to make up for the fact that they really can't fight themselves.

In PvP their most glaring flaw is survivability. They have very low hp and little to no AC. To survive, the mage needs to capitalize on the range of spells while staying out of melee, but casting a spell temporarily pins them down allowing melee to close up the distance. Furthermore sprint makes this dynamic even more aggrevating for the mage.
I'd see the solution here in giving wizards and sorcerers AC to allow them some time to actually try to control the battlefield - not... cast one spell and get mauled.

fair enough, i wouldn't change all the spells just a few/addinga few. we dont neeed a whole list of partial save spells.

I am unsure of the survivability of wizards like which spells do or don't break invisibility and, or greater sanctuary in terms of putting things in the battlefield. Something like adding a wall spell would be able to control and immediately stop oneself from being bummed rushed too fast. But if it's already been addressed then I digresss.

[MissEvelyn]

I would love to know if the Staff team are interested in reworking "save or nothing" spells to doing some form of effect on a succeeded saving throw.

It doesn't have to be anything extraordinary.
You could have a second saving throw for a lesser effect with a +5 to the DC, and if that succeeds, an even lesser effect with a +10 to the DC.

The numbers and effects could all be tweaked as needed, and not all such spells need have this, but it would be quite a welcome addition if spells were not either a win button or useless. I understand it's a tricky balance to walk, and I do not blame the devs whatsoever if they don't want to touch those.

But if the devs are all for this, there's plenty of us who are more than happy to assist. It's a boring and long process to go through all the spells' NSS files, but it really doesn't take much scripting knowledge to do so. I know because I did it with a friend for our campaign in NWN2, which uses the same scripting language.

[Skibbles]

I would love to know if the Staff team are interested in reworking "save or nothing" spells to doing some form of effect on a succeeded saving throw.

It doesn't have to be anything extraordinary.
You could have a second saving throw for a lesser effect with a +5 to the DC, and if that succeeds, an even lesser effect with a +10 to the DC.

The numbers and effects could all be tweaked as needed, and not all such spells need have this, but it would be quite a welcome addition if spells were not either a win button or useless. I understand it's a tricky balance to walk, and I do not blame the devs whatsoever if they don't want to touch those.

But if the devs are all for this, there's plenty of us who are more than happy to assist. It's a boring and long process to go through all the spells' NSS files, but it really doesn't take much scripting knowledge to do so. I know because I did it with a friend for our campaign in NWN2, which uses the same scripting language.

I made a suggestion just like this last year but it was more or less beyond the scope at the time. It would take some serious work so I can't blame 'em.

[MissEvelyn]

I would love to know if the Staff team are interested in reworking "save or nothing" spells to doing some form of effect on a succeeded saving throw.

It doesn't have to be anything extraordinary.
You could have a second saving throw for a lesser effect with a +5 to the DC, and if that succeeds, an even lesser effect with a +10 to the DC.

The numbers and effects could all be tweaked as needed, and not all such spells need have this, but it would be quite a welcome addition if spells were not either a win button or useless. I understand it's a tricky balance to walk, and I do not blame the devs whatsoever if they don't want to touch those.

But if the devs are all for this, there's plenty of us who are more than happy to assist. It's a boring and long process to go through all the spells' NSS files, but it really doesn't take much scripting knowledge to do so. I know because I did it with a friend for our campaign in NWN2, which uses the same scripting language.

I made a suggestion just like this last year but it was more or less beyond the scope at the time. It would take some serious work so I can't blame 'em.

Oh that was you, I remember this! It's definitely an intricate design-change, and I imagine it would be a long while before they do anything like this.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

i think a problem is people are wantign to add tiers of effects to spells are that die or pass. And thats a hard no no. Spells that have partial effects when you pass the save, also don't instagib you when you fail the save. That's how dnd balances the spells. So you would only modify spells like slow, or add new spells.

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

i think a problem is people are wantign to add tiers of effects to spells are that die or pass. And thats a hard no no. Spells that have partial effects when you pass the save, also don't instagib you when you fail the save. That's how dnd balances the spells. So you would only modify spells like slow, or add new spells.

The idea for partial effect spells actually specifically comes mostly from save-or-die spells.

https://nwn.fandom.com/wiki/Slay_living
https://nwn.fandom.com/wiki/Finger_of_death
https://nwn.fandom.com/wiki/Weird
https://nwn.fandom.com/wiki/Wail_of_the_banshee
https://nwn.fandom.com/wiki/Phantasmal_killer
https://nwn.fandom.com/wiki/Destruction

Most of these spells were adjusted here from vanilla because Arelith's save meta is in the realm of utterly ridiculous, and save-or-die spells, for the most part, were intended to still have at least a noticeable effect when they were resisted (which was meant to be a lot less than 95% of the time, but players don't really enjoy that dynamic against hundreds of other players).

If there were no pass-or-die spells and everything just did damage, there wouldn't be a need to discuss partial saves at all - most of the spells above that were adjusted were specifically adjusted because they can be expected to be resisted, yet do practically nothing in comparison to a damage spell of equal (or even lower) level in our particular save meta in their vanilla form.

[-XXX-]

That's the thing - wizards and sorcerers have been designed with the assumption of DC spells having a higher success rate than they do on Arelith. Their defense is being waived because all of the encounter's variance is meant to be condensed into a single roll - either the enemy dies to the DC spell or the mage dies.



There was this interesting concept implemented on Arelith in the past - armor movement speed penaly. Essentially, if a character wore armor, they moved slower. The heavier the armor, the greater the movement speed penalty. This was, admittedly, really annoying (and I'm not sad to see this gone) but in PvP it allowed more wiggle room for glasscannon builds to better control the battlefield by being able to move sligtly faster. At the same time it gave characters a reason not to wear their best armor 24/7.

Movement speed is another good way of making mages more viable - but the way a series of mechanics got implemented further solidifies the role of the mage as a sitting duck punching bag.

Firstly, armor movement speed penalties have been removed. This means that melee characters get to move at the same rate (or faster if they are barb) as mages. If the melee moves toward the mage and the mage moves away, they are locked in a parity that does not advance the encounter in any way. Casting any spell pins the mage down, breaking the parity closer to their doom.

Further mechanics have been introduced to break the parity - riding allows characters to move faster. Riding a horse confers arcane spell failure and even though arcane steeds exist in the module, this mechanic was clearly not intended for arcanists.

Sprint being a free action further trims tempo in favor of the melee - now they do not need to spend any time (use haste potion) to reach 150% movement speed rate, while the mage is unlikely to be able to use this feature to the same effect (it does little to nothing for them in most cases).


Movement speed parity is bad and makes encounters silly, but all the mechanics intended to break this parity only aim to allow dedicated melee builds to run down the mage. Mages run away from melee because their life expentancy there is 0.5-1 round.