The Wizard discussion

[SharkBait]

Expand it? I have 2 x 24's so it should be large enough. Sorry about that if it's tiny

[zot]

THIS JUST IN! It turns out that the wizard can do everything an arraxian crown warlock does just as well as an arraxian crown warlock, if not better. Yes, you heard right. A wizard that's pretending to be a warlock is equal to the real thing if not better. And a wizard that isn't pretending to be a warlock is even better than that.

I just had a really fun epic duel with the gen con champ on OCTGN. He was using his fake warlock against my real one. Other than the one main play mistake I made all game and the fact that I got terrible rolls, we were actually fairly evenly matched.

The wizard should not be able to warlock just as well as or better than a warlock. I think this counts as conclusive evidence that the wizard is OP. While I was using core set x1 only arraxian crown warlock, core set x1 only is not a big enough disadvantage to explain how his imitation-warlock was able to put up such a good fight and win against my real one.

You can watch the awesome fight here:

http://www.twitch.tv/carcharodonmega/v/10684198

   so how does pretty evenly matched translate to wizard is op? i would expect warlock and wizard to be close most of the time. also, given you both pay double for each others school, the only book advantage is whatever holy spells the wiard puts in. expecting that to be a small number of levels there is only a 3-6 pt book difference.  again even match all other things being equal. so how does evenly matched imply wizard is a better warlock? an epic fun match in no way implies you got slaughtered. so again, how does that mean op? will try to watch this link at some point when i have time to see how you arrive at this conclusion. but my impression right off is that it is an incorrect conclusion, especially based on one game.

[SharkBait]

I'm not convinced after watching the game that the wizard is OP either. The warlock did have his hands tied behind his back a little with the card choices in the book while the wizard did not. It was also a fairly close match most of the  way through.

[jhaelen]

Imho, the problem with the Wizard isn't so much that he's overpowered, it's that he's the most flexible and versatile Mage - and he's strong, too!

There's nothing you cannot do with a Wizard, and you're able to have a potential answer to any kind of threat your opponent might throw against you.

What this means is that there's no matchup that is unfavorable for you, so by definition it's the best Mage to choose for a tournament.

If, however, you're in a situation where you know what to expect, i.e. what kind of Mage your opponent will play, other Mages can often be a better choice.

So, if players would prefer to see fewer Wizards in tournament, he'd either have to lose some of his flexibility (e.g. by having him play triple for some spells) or power (e.g. reduce his Channeling, maybe conditionally).

[Sailor Vulcan]

You guys are totally missing the point. Yes we were fairly evenly matched that game. That game, where he was playing a fake-warlock rather than a normal wizard. If we were evenly matched while his wizard was using a wizard strategy, then I might say you had a point. The wizard can do basically everything a warlock can do but better. If he were using a regular wizard build I probably wouldn't have stood a chance.

Hanma said that the imitation-warlock is just one of his casual wizard builds.

The big advantage wasn't just access to holy spells. He also had mana denial and much better defense on top of all the warlock stuff he was doing. For all intents and purposes he was playing a warlock with wiz tower  and healing spells instead of bloodreaper, ranged attacks instead of melee attacks, and hurl boulders instead of fireballs, but with the addition of mana denial, extra armor, and innate 10 channeling on top of everything else. This means that the warlock is currently defunct because the wizard can take on his role and do it just as well if not better.

And that's when the wizard is "handicapping" himself by taking on the role of another Mage. If he were playing normal wizard strategy, he would have done even better.

The fact that we were fairly evenly matched in this case does not mean that the wizard is not OP. It indicates the exact opposite of that. Wizard is WAY OP.

[Halewijn]

I thought it might be interesting to look at the book of the Gencon winner. 

If you look at the weighted training clothes book and add the x3 for nature and x3 for attack spells you see that he would have to pay 5 extra spellpoints for non-attack spells (hawkeye, regrowth, rhino hide, 2x dragonscale hauberk).

Which isn't that bad and easily replaceable with other spells.

but 12 extra spellpoints for attack spells. 6x hurl rock, 1 hurl boulder, 1 fireball, 2 flameblasts. Which is even more powerfull due to the spellbind of the wizards tower.  (which might be a good card to change). This advantage will become even bigger when the siren will get new powerfull water spells out.

This sums it pretty much up:

I really, really like the idea of making other elements cost the Wizard X3. Pretty much every Wizard book I saw at Gen Con had a swiss army knife of attack spells.

When adjusting the spellbook with these rules you would have to remove a total of 17 spellpoints.
Note: his 6 hurl rocks would be 18 spellpoints already. So clearly, even with these changes it's still very versatile.

[Sailor Vulcan]

Actually, making non-trained elemental spells cost triple would cause the champion spellbook to go over by 56 points.

This is how I determined that:

1) open champ's spellbook in OCTGN
2) remove all spells except for non-water elemental spells
3) calculate spellbook points.
4) subtract the number you got in 3) from 120.
5) multiply the number you got in 3) by 3
6) add the result you got in 4) to the result you got in 5)


(120-28)+(28*3)

The result I got was 176 spellbook points, or 56 points over.

I think tripling nature would be overkill and unthematic. Paying 3x for nontrained elements should be more than enough to fix the problem.

[Halewijn]

um... You are tripling everything  , not only nature and non-trained elements. You should just add the level of those spells. You really made some calculus errors.

Fireball: level = 2
In his book: 2 x 2 = 4
with triple rules: 2 x 3 = 6
So just add the level.

And about the theme: That's really a matter of opinion. Let's agree to disagree on that 

[Sailor Vulcan]

um... You are tripling everything  , not only nature and non-trained elements. You should just add the level of those spells. You really made some calculus errors.

Fireball: level = 2
In his book: 2 x 2 = 4
with triple rules: 2 x 3 = 6
So just add the level.

And about the theme: That's really a matter of opinion. Let's agree to disagree on that 

Sigh. I'm starting to feel like people aren't listening to me lol. No, I ONLY tripled non-trained elements, not nature. No, you don't just add the levels. The fireball is already included in the 120 points. If you don't subtract the 4 points BEFORE adding 6, then you're adding 4 points worth of imaginary spells ON TOP OF the triple-costed fireball.


You're not just adding a triple costed fireball, you're taking away the double-costed fireball first and replacing it with a triple-costed fireball.



As far as I'm aware, I didn't make any errors. 120 spellbook points total -28 spellbook points worth of non-trained elements +(28*3) spellbook points worth of non-trained elements =176 spellbook points total.

Also, if you just add the levels, you actually get 204 spellbook points!

I think you need to show your work lol...

Also, why are you using Calculus for this? It only needs simple, one-variable algebra, of the variety you learn in elementary school. It might sound weird coming from me, but I think you're thinking too hard on this.

[Halewijn]

aha, now I get what you did! You do make errors
You actually let him pay x6

He has 14 points for non-trained spells. He has to pay double, so indeed this is 28.

But here you are wrong: It's not 120-28+28x3 but:

120-28+14x3
= 120-(14x2) + (14x3)
= 120+14x(3-2)
= 120 + 14

--> Just adding the level, what I said in the beginning.

[Halewijn]

Without the nature you have 14 spellpoints. But adding the regrowth belt, the rhino hide and the hawkeye gives you 17.

(In your calculation you double the points and afterwards you triple them, making it x6 in total)

I think you need to show your work lol...

Also, why are you using Calculus for this? It only needs simple, one-variable algebra, of the variety you learn in elementary school. It might sound weird coming from me, but I think you're thinking too hard on this.

And to be fair, I was using the word calculus, because counting sounds a bit simple and I didn't want to offend you...

[Sailor Vulcan]

According to OCTGN, he has 28 points in non-trained elemental spells. I think you were trying to get at the answer a different and better way than I was.

28 spellbook points worth of non-trained elements/2=Total combined levels of non-trained elements.

Total combined levels of non-trained elements*3=42

120+42=162.

You're right I accidentally hextupled it instead of tripling it. I should have gotten the level first.

However, even if he did have only 14 points worth of non-trained spells...

14 spellbook points/2 = 7 total combined levels of non-trained elements

7  total combined levels of non-trained elements *3=21 total spellbook points worth of non-trained elements.

Pointing out that I made a mistake doesn't offend me. I was just kind of incredulous. I'm sorry if I sounded irritated. Even the best of us make obvious easily avoidable mistakes sometimes.

EDIT: This time I also forgot to subtract 28. The correct answer should be 134 points, so actually you're right that it's only +14.

[Halewijn]

120+42=162.

Here you forgot to substract the 28 sp. (But I think you know.)

However, even if he did have only 14 points worth of non-trained spells...

14 spellbook points/2 = 7 total combined levels of non-trained elements

7  total combined levels of non-trained elements *3=21 total spellbook points worth of non-trained elements.

Not sure what you are trying to say here. But indeed you are correct 

And yes, making a mistake is nothing to be ashamed of but when correcting someone it's easy to sound horribly pompous. I was trying to avoid that. 

[Sailor Vulcan]

You actually got the right answer. It is just 14 points over. Thanks for pointing it out. I suppose I need more math practice lol.

The next and more important question is how much of a difference does 14 points make?

[Halewijn]

The next and more important question is how much of a difference does 14 points make?

When adjusting the spellbook with these rules you would have to remove a total of 17 spellpoints.
Note: his 6 hurl rocks would be 18 spellpoints already. So clearly, even with these changes it's still very versatile.

1) add nature.  but let's not continu about that.

2) It's a step in the right direction. If you use this and remove the spellbind on the tower, a wizard will think twice before adding another 6 sp hurl boulder.

Because the spellbind makes them use that 6 sp-spell 3-4 times. Making it actually 20-ish spellpoints.
Combining the triple payment with the spellbind-removal will make a big difference because they won't be able to reuse expensive spells like that.

They can of course still use a wand, but then they have to spend actions to use it. (+ no channeling, and easier to counter with dissolve)

Someone mentioned that changing spells on its own wasn't going to help, but I think for the tower it will because it is more an extension of the wizards ability card. "being able to use the wizard tower"

Combining these 2 effect would probably force a wizard to make choices. Which counters the biggest problem of the wizard: being able to have a counter for everything. And next to that, I think the element choice will feel more game-changing than just "being the most sp.-efficient".