Class: Magician: Another why?

[Arentak]

Magicians seem a bit overpowered as regents. They got set up to be very similiar to Beguilers (PHB2), who take the role of Rogue and Wizard and do both nearly as well. I had a player who reviewed the rules, and decided he wanted to be a Magician, because of the skill points, and the way the online version created at this site does regency collection, skills are all that matter for a regent.

Fundamentally, I think no one should ever want to be a magician when wizard is an option. Magician is a wanna-be class. I would treat it like adept or something. The way its written seems too strong to me. Set it up with 2 skill points, like Clerics or Wizards, what, since they are gimps at spellcasting they suddenly get more skill points?

[kgauck]

The design of the magician, for better or worse, was not intended to be a gimped wizard, but to be a balanced class, as good as any other class.

[Arentak]

That would make sense then. The Magician is very balanced as a real class

From the actual published BR Campaign Setting
"Wizards who are restricted to lesser magic are known as Magicians in Cerilia. Magicians much work much harder at their craft...Magicians must be more creative in their spellcasting due to their limited choices of spells...Magicians are..specialists in either Divination or Illusion...They can only cast 1st or 2nd level spells from other schools."

In the 2E world, one would be daft to choose to be a Magician. Its a curse, a weakness, but here its a choice. I'll houserule them out when I DM, in any event, but I don't get why it should be a real class. PC arcanists should be wizards in Birthright.

[kgauck]

The designer(s) of the class had the option of making it a PC class, or an NPC class. One may well prefer the Magician to stand along side the Adept and the Warrior as NPC's, but that was not where the authors of this class went with it.

[irdeggman]

Also read the information in the Book of Magrecraft on Magicians - they expanded on the class quite a bit from the core rulebook.

Weaker than wizards but more versatile, better weapons and skills and spontaneous casting of all cantrips.

[irdeggman]

That would make sense then. The Magician is very balanced as a real class

From the actual published BR Campaign Setting

In the 2E world, one would be daft to choose to be a Magician. Its a curse, a weakness, but here its a choice. I'll houserule them out when I DM, in any event, but I don't get why it should be a real class. PC arcanists should be wizards in Birthright.


Since you have to be a scion (or an elf) in order to be a wizard - I strongly disagree with this standpoint.

Now if all PCs are scions then it makes sense but there are quite a few groups who focus on adventure level games and not domain level ones that a non-blooded class is a good idea.

Also note that in 2nd ed a magician by the fact that the character had to be non-blooded automatically gained a 10% xp bonus.

[AndrewTall]

Social norms also play a big role, magicians are tolerated in the Rjurik Highlands and Vosgaard far more than mages. I'd see that as true in Anuire / Brechtur as well - 'real' wizards are a threat to the churches claims to godly righteousness...

The Magician, like all classes, should be balanced across all game levels, in combat they suffer, in casting realm spells they are non functional, but they can get by as other regents. I'd consider letting them gain RP from sources and maybe even cast illusion / charm domain spells if they were blooded - and I'd note that a mage stacked with a landed regent who can predict/watch enemy movements, transfer orders, create battlefield illusions, etc, is far more dangerous than a testosterone drenched wizard who thinks battle is him zipping ahead lobbing fireballs (and likely being pincushioned...)

I see no reason not to say that restricted spellcasting should be countered by more skills, I'm not sure about the extra hp as they seem unnecessary. I'm not a fan of 'pc' and 'npc' classes - I think any L'X' character should be equally viable and 'weak' classes are a system failing, so if magicians are weak in your system I'd give them compensating skills or such like. I'd note though that with bards around they become somewhat redundant.

[Exile]

Also note that in 2nd ed a magician by the fact that the character had to be non-blooded automatically gained a 10% xp bonus.

I thought that non-blooded magi had to be Magicians; but blooded magi could choose to be Magicians if they wished.

Isn't Caliedhe Dosiere a high-level Magician, yet not merely blooded but also a regent?

Certainly, I've seen a player designing a scion choose to be a Magician, as an IC rejection of the "war magics" of Wizards (and to specialise in divination).

[Green Knight]

No, Caliedhe Dosiere is a specialist wizard - Diviner. One of the two types of specialist not found in BR - since divination/illusion is a magician specialty (that was in 2E, before the magician became something else entirely). Oh well, either he's just a special person, it its an inconsistency :eek:

[Thelandrin]

The magician studies Lesser Magic, something which non-blooded non-Elves can only access and which blooded scions and Elves cannot access. Just like there are no Elven magicians, there are no magician realm mages.

[AndrewTall]

Hmm, I know that non-blooded mages (except elves) can't be wizards, but I don't recall a ban on the reverse being true. I think it was just generally assumed that there was no point being a magician if you could be a wizard with magicians mostly being a way of having mages in the game but keeping 'real' magic rare.

[kiryk]

I had a player who reviewed the rules, and decided he wanted to be a Magician, because of the skill points, and the way the online version created at this site does regency collection, skills are all that matter for a regent.

Whats wrong with making a blooded magician? The increased skill points compensate for the lack of spell ability from a mechanics perspective. I'm a pretty hardcore fascist when it comes to meta-gaming, it is my biggest pet peeve. If a player rolls up with a "this character has the best stats/racials/etc." mentality i send them back to the drawing board. If they come up with the story of a character and it fits, even if its a half-dragon bard/monk/sorcerer/paladin/berserker/bartender i'm ok with it.

If you are worried about the magician unbalancing your campaign, keep in mind that they will always be unmatched against a rogue or wizard. Hybrids are always weaker.

[ryancaveney]

Whats wrong with making a blooded magician?

I have always thought it just wasn't possible (or necessary). The magician class has always existed solely as a way for nonblooded people to become wannabe wizards. IMO, "a blooded magician" is precisely "a wizard." We discussed years ago (before there was a web site) what would happen to an unblooded magician who somehow gained a bloodline; my opinion, which ISTR being commonly held, was that his character class would change from magician to wizard.

[kgauck]

We discussed this problem with regard to Rogr Aglondier

http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?t=4118

Rogr was unblooded as an apprentice, and hence a magician, while his stat block calls him a wizard 3, now that he is a regent. Rogr's entry on the wiki now includes a big note about this.

Since the magician is a full PC class (rather than an NPC class) having characters suddenly go from magician to wizard is rather like having characters go from paladin to fighter. In the sense that they loose a lot of abilities and gain a bigger potential palet of spellcasting. One can argue for class retraining (such as in Unearthed Arcana), but it is a bit disconcerting to go from a skills heavy to a skills light class.

I'm not sure how common a problem this is. If its Rogr's alone, I'm happy to call it a curiosity. If its more common, it may need a fix. The easiest fix is to stack magician and wizard spellcasting.

[ryancaveney]

We discussed this problem with regard to Rogr Aglondier

What I had in mind was more our discussion of December 2002: http://www.birthright.net/forums/showpost.php?p=11267


Since the magician is a full PC class (rather than an NPC class) having characters suddenly go from magician to wizard is rather like having characters go from paladin to fighter. In the sense that they loose a lot of abilities and gain a bigger potential palet of spellcasting. One can argue for class retraining (such as in Unearthed Arcana), but it is a bit disconcerting to go from a skills heavy to a skills light class.

IMO, wizard should be strictly better than magician at all things, so everyone would switch if they could. I give wizards more skills (because learning the same amount of magic takes a lot less time when you're blooded), better access to weapons (ditto) and armor (IMO, arcane spell failure is a problem of magicians and unblooded priests, but not wizards and blooded priests; in fact, IMC there is no "priest" class at all -- they're just multiclassed wizards or magicians with centrally-issued spellbooks), and everything else. I don't even try to balance having a bloodline vs. not, since the first several years of that discussion convinced me it was both impossible and unnecessary.

[kgauck]

For my own purposes, being blooded is like having a PC class, and being unblooded is like having an NPC class. I don't see a reason anyone should ever play an unblooded character.

What kind of party is king, king, peasant hero?

King Edward, the Archbishop of Canturbury, and a talented blacksmith from Hartlepoole were discussing a possible war with France.

His Excellency the Archsbishop of Arles summoned his Astrologer and a pick-pocket from Marsailles to provide answers.

Unblooded characters make fine followers, cohorts, lieutenants, spear-carriers, and other kinds of NPC's when you want to have something like that. But PC's?

The transfer you mention on the 2002 thread seems like it would work very nicely under the class retraining principles in Unearthed Arcana.