* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : "Wizard-only" Items and Non-Mage Spell Casters Started at 04-05-04 07:58 PM by Dugald the Lexicographer Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=214990 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : Dugald the Lexicographer Date : 04-05-04 07:58 PM Thread Title : "Wizard-only" Items and Non-Mage Spell Casters Regarding some magic items per the 2E DMG: Items followed by a group name are usable only by characters of that group. Some examples of this are: Potion of Heroism (Warrior) Ring of Wizardry (Wizard) Rod of Absorption (Priest, Wizard) Rod of Resurrection (Priest) Staff of Power (Wizard) Staff of Woodlands (Druid) For figuring out what characters can use an item, what exactly constitutes membership in one of these "groups?" Can any character who casts arcane spells also use a "Wizard-only" item? e.g. Can a bard use a Staff of Power? If not, why? Our current game has a Shadow Walker character, which is kind of a rogue with some spell casting ability (from Wizards & Rogues of the Realms). They don't get all the rogue abilities, and they're not strong spell casters, so they're definitley in the gray area between the two classes. Would he be able to use a Ring of Wizardry? A test for me of any game-construct rule is whether you can come up with a reasonable explanation outside of the game-construct. What makes a Wizard a Wizard? How is a Bard different than a Wizard who plays a harp? How is a Shadow Walker different than a Roque/Wizard multi-class? If a Rogue/Wizard multi-class can use a Wizard item, why can't a Shadow Walker? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : Wyrmbane Date : 04-05-04 11:05 PM For figuring out what characters can use an item, what exactly constitutes membership in one of these "groups?" Warrior: Fighter, Ranger, Paladin, any multiclass fighter (unless prohibited); any fighter, paladin, or ranger kit (unless prohibited). Priest: Priest, Druid (unless prohibited); any multiclass priest (unless prohibited); any priest or druid kit (unless prohibited). Wizard: Any mage, specialty mage (unless prohibited by school); any mage kit (unless prohibited); any multiclass mage (unless prohibited). Druid: Any Druid or druid kit (unless prohibited). Bard: Any Bard or bard kit (unless prohibited). Can any character who casts arcane spells also use a "Wizard-only" item? e.g. Can a bard use a Staff of Power? If not, why? No, he's not a wizard class. Why not? Read the Bard class in the PHB. Our current game has a Shadow Walker character, which is kind of a rogue with some spell casting ability (from Wizards & Rogues of the Realms). They don't get all the rogue abilities, and they're not strong spell casters, so they're definitley in the gray area between the two classes. Would he be able to use a Ring of Wizardry? Quoting from page 77 of Wizards and Rogues of the Realms: They can use any item intended for thieves but not those fashioned specifically for bards. They can use magical items intended for wizards as well but must always take care when doing so. Because of this, they suffer a -4 penalty to their initiative roll when using magical items intended for wizards in combat." What makes a Wizard a Wizard? His spell casting abilities. He sure isn't a warrior, is he? How is a Bard different than a Wizard who plays a harp? A wizard who plays a harp most likely can't do it as well as a bard. But, the wizard can cast a whole lot more spells, and has a much better selection to boot. How is a Shadow Walker different than a Roque/Wizard multi-class? At the very beginning of the description of the class, it tells you how it's different. A wizard/rogue is a multiclass character, a shadow walker is it's own class, and optional at that (subject to DM approval for his world). If a Rogue/Wizard multi-class can use a Wizard item, why can't a Shadow Walker? See above. One question for you: Have you read any of the books? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : Dugald the Lexicographer Date : 04-06-04 02:46 PM Wyrmbane, thanks for the quote from the Shadow Walker class. I had actually overlooked that, and it is completely pertinent. The rest of your sarcasm wasn't necessary, as you've missed the point of my question. I know what the construct says. I'm trying to justify the construct in terms that make sense outside of the construct. If you imagine yourself IN this world, an individual isn't going to think of himself in terms of "class" or "level" when explaining why he can or can't do something. When I asked "What makes a Wizard a Wizard?" you answered "His spell casting abilities." But that's my very point, since a Bard can cast arcane spells, yet is not counted a Wizard. I know how the different classes are handled, their relative strengths and weaknesses. I can read the stats out of the books and apply the guidelines for creating characters. I just can't explain them in a way that's self consistent outside the construct of the game. Give me an answer in non-game-terms. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : Wyrmbane Date : 04-06-04 08:45 PM First off, I wasn't being sarcastic, or at least I sure wasn't trying to be. Some of your questions seemed to be pretty basic, and I was wondering if you had the books. That would have explained a lot of your questions. As for the rest, the main difference between a wizard and a bard is knowledge. If you read the description of a bard, yes, he does have spell casting abilities. But, as it states, it's pretty ad hoc. The bard has picked up this and that, here and there. A wizard is a master at spell casting, and only spell casting (and the associated arcane lore with it). A bard doesn't have that. He's more of a dabbler in magic. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : Algolei Date : 04-07-04 03:33 AM Thread Title : Re: "Wizard-only" Items and Non-Mage Spell Casters Originally posted by Dugald the Lexicographer A test for me of any game-construct rule is whether you can come up with a reasonable explanation outside of the game-construct. I'll try to help by telling you my own thoughts on the matter. But these are just my own idlings on the matter, not a clear and effective rule I've implemented into my games. ... [Okay, yes, I have implemented similar rules into my games. But don't tell anyone! Because I went for rules that are really really really complicated to describe, but are unseen by my players who never even know they're in place. Hidden rules are my favourite to make.] What makes a Wizard a Wizard? A Wizard has an inborn ability to cast magical spells. I think it says somewhere in the PHB that "Not everyone can be a mage." That's because not everyone is born with the ability. But given that there is an ability, I would also guess that some people have more ability than others. A Wizard would have to have a Major Inborn Magical Ability. And a character needs Major Inborn Magical Ability to use Wizard-only magical items. Since some arcane spellcasters can use Wizard-only items and others can't, it seems reasonable to conclude that you need to have a Major Inborn Magical Ability to use them. How is a Bard different than a Wizard who plays a harp? A bard only has a Minor Inborn Magical Ability. How is a Shadow Walker different than a Roque/Wizard multi-class? A Shadow Walker also only has a Minor Inborn Ability. Since this inborn ability isn't actually an observable part of the game--I mean, nobody decides ahead of time whether or not they have it unless they're a Wizard--you could either (1) add a small complexity to your game by having everyone (or at least the non-Wizards) roll randomly during character creation to determine whether they have the ability, and whether it is Major or Minor; or (2) decide that whether you have a Major Inborn Magical Ability or not, it only becomes useful if you undergo full formal apprenticeship as a Wizard (or subclass, etc., thereof). Choice (1) has the unfortunate side-effect of deciding ahead of time whether or not a human character can dual-class into Wizard-type. (Um, do they have dual-classes in 2e? I can't remember the Real rules anymore.:) ) Also, characters with Major Inborn Magical Ability would be able to use Wizard-only items, which might throw off game balance* if non-Wizards could gain that ability simply by rolling it up randomly. I mean, who wants Bob the Warrior with his mighty 5 Intelligence using a Staff of Power? Nobody, that's who! *But hey, I hate "game balance" anyway. To heck with it! :sad: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : Dugald the Lexicographer Date : 04-07-04 03:09 PM Thanks all for your input. Algolei, that's quite an intriquing angle on the whole topic, and one which sits well with my "non-construct" perspective. You could almost look at it in terms of genetics: if there's a Wizard gene, those who got it from both parents would be Majors, those who got it from one parent would be Minors. As for those who were Majors but didn't know it, they might not even try to use an item if it was widely known that it wouldn't work for a non-mage. It's rough, but I think I can work with it. Wyrmbane, sorry if I misinterpreted your tone. Thanks for your input. My problem with your recent answer is that I don't see how using a magic wand (for example) would be any easier for a learned Wizard than a well-traveled Bard. By definition, a Bard picks up bits of knowledge from all over. They're jacks-of-all-trades. In which case, wouldn't a Bard who's never held a wand have MORE chance to use it properly than a Wizard who's never held one? I think it comes down to the same thing many "oddities" of D&D: game balance. If anyone can use a wand, what makes the Wizard special? (no need to answer, it's a rhetorical question) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : Wyrmbane Date : 04-08-04 02:15 AM The wizard would have a better chance to figure out the wand due to his magical training and talent. Remember, he is a master of magic, not a dabbler in it. True, the bard might have a chance to use it, but that would depend on what he knew, and the DM to a point. A lot of this comes down to what is allowed in your game, and how you interpet the rules, as illustrated by Algolei's description. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : Dugald the Lexicographer Date : 04-08-04 11:46 AM So what if a Wizard gave his wand to a Bard, and taught him how to use it? I think Algolei is on to something. Since knowledge can be shared, there must be something fundamental in the nature of the Wizard that allows him to use wands, staves, etc., something that cannot be shared. I know it all comes down to house rules in the end. That's why I'm being rather persistent on this issue. I and my group try to make our house rules as sensible and self-consistent as possible, so we don't end up finding contradictions down the road. Of course, we're talking about AD&D, so nothing's ever going to be 100% consistent. :rolleyes: Thanks for your input guys. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : Algolei Date : 04-09-04 03:26 AM Glad ta be of soivice. Personally, I'd go with a combination of inborn ability and extensive training to explain things. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:21 AM.