Cleric v Druid, Wizard v Illusionist

[Penny-Whistle]

Cool.

I got the idea of randomly rolling the sex of characters from a story I heard about the production of Ridley Scott's Alien (1979) He gave the characters last names and randomly divided them up because any of those characters could be male or female. It is the same in games. A shop keeper can be either sex. The big bad can be male or female. If a person rolls a fair dice to decide then another bonus is you know about half the world will be female.

I'm fine with that for NPC's, even though I wouldn't do it. Especially for faceless and nameless characters (the Innkeeper, the Shopkeeper, a random informant being questioned), who cares about their gender, or if they even have one at all?

More important characters that are likely to be around and play a significant part in the story, though, I tend to have a certain image in my mind. Usually, but not always, it's female. As I noted, the Big Bad in our current game is both Male and a Sorcerer.

I would never force a player to roll randomly for their character's gender, though; I want them to be comfortable playing the part they want to play. After five years of gaming, my wife still only wants to play Elf Thieves or "Lightly Armored" Barbarian Women. Finally, just a few days ago, she finally said she might be open to playing something else, and my jaw just dropped.

I completely agree. I would never try to interfere with a player character. Some people put a lot of love and care into character generation. I know I wouldn't be happy with a CK changing up something I created.

[Bree_Yark]

Yep, healing except for psyche doesn't work for me.

Joe is stabbed. Bill the illusionist tells Joe, I'll heal ya buddy. Joe knows Bill is an illusionist (to me that kills the whole bloody idea of how illusionists can use their trickery to help fellow party members). But let's say Bill really believes that Joe can heal him.

Bill casts cure light wounds on Joe. Joe feels better, gets up and walks around a bit. The rest of the party notice that Joe's guts are hanging out and is bleeding profusely.

Nice work Bill!

You are stuck on the name, an Illusionist is literally imprinting their will on reality. The higher level the spell the greater the effects and the longer the duration. Mage The Ascension's magic system is entirely based on the idea, and this is a watered down version.

Think of it like Neo bending the rules of the Matrix or parsing through 1,000's of alternate realities and bringing forth something from another to ours.

[mmbutter]

Again, from the CKG (emphasis mine):

The illusionist projects his power into the target’s mind, causing the target’s own belief to actually break his own bones or split open his own flesh. Any damage caused in this way remains, even after the character casts out the illusionist’s magic. Such physical effects of mental attacks should not be limited to causing damage. After all, if the character’s own mind actually caused wounds to the body because of an illusionary attack, then it stands to reason (and maintains a sense of consistency, balance, and fair play) that the character’s own mind can heal those same wounds if he were the recipient of an illusionary healing spell. Anything the mind can do, it can undo. Treat other types of effects the same way. If the character believes there is a bridge over the bottomless pit, then his own mind will carry him safely across that bridge. If he believes that he has grown wings out of his back, then his own mind will give him the power of flight. If he believes he carries a magic item, then that item will have all of the magical effects of the real thing. It is important to note that mental magic derives its power NOT from the target’s inability to make his saving throws, but rather the illusionist’s ability to channel his magic and manipulate the world around him through his target.

[Tadhg]

Yep, healing except for psyche doesn't work for me.

Joe is stabbed. Bill the illusionist tells Joe, I'll heal ya buddy. Joe knows Bill is an illusionist (to me that kills the whole bloody idea of how illusionists can use their trickery to help fellow party members). But let's say Bill really believes that Joe can heal him.

Bill casts cure light wounds on Joe. Joe feels better, gets up and walks around a bit. The rest of the party notice that Joe's guts are hanging out and is bleeding profusely.

Nice work Bill!

You are stuck on the name, an Illusionist is literally imprinting their will on reality. The higher level the spell the greater the effects and the longer the duration. Mage The Ascension's magic system is entirely based on the idea, and this is a watered down version.

Think of it like Neo bending the rules of the Matrix or parsing through 1,000's of alternate realities and bringing forth something from another to ours.

I'm not stuck on anything. I've played illusionists and had them in my game for over 10 years in C&C. He can attempt to imprint his will on perceptions and/or reality and it works in certain situations.

Not in my example above. Joe is bleeding out - someone with real healing powers better save him.

I don't know the game you are referring to, but it doesn't matter since it would have no bearing on my conception of how illusionary magic works or doesn't work.

As for the Matrix, no offense - but that was one of the worst movies I have ever seen (and for sure, would have no influence or bearing on my game).

[Tadhg]

Again, from the CKG (emphasis mine):

The illusionist projects his power into the target’s mind, causing the target’s own belief to actually break his own bones or split open his own flesh. Any damage caused in this way remains, even after the character casts out the illusionist’s magic. Such physical effects of mental attacks should not be limited to causing damage. After all, if the character’s own mind actually caused wounds to the body because of an illusionary attack, then it stands to reason (and maintains a sense of consistency, balance, and fair play) that the character’s own mind can heal those same wounds if he were the recipient of an illusionary healing spell. Anything the mind can do, it can undo. Treat other types of effects the same way. If the character believes there is a bridge over the bottomless pit, then his own mind will carry him safely across that bridge. If he believes that he has grown wings out of his back, then his own mind will give him the power of flight. If he believes he carries a magic item, then that item will have all of the magical effects of the real thing. It is important to note that mental magic derives its power NOT from the target’s inability to make his saving throws, but rather the illusionist’s ability to channel his magic and manipulate the world around him through his target.

Thanks for posting this. I started to look for this, but got sidetracked.

OK - making sure not to piss anyone off ~

the text above is thee height of utter ridiculousness to the max. The Trolls are trolling us with this non-sense. It seems like an effort to make us think that the illusionist is some incredibly powerful caster (and if you buy this, then it's true).

Don't y'all see what's happening here?

Steve has cast an illusionary spell through the CKG and y'all failed yer saves and believe the non-sense mentioned above.

[Rhu attempts to shake every one here and slap them to their senses ~ realizing that he may get the crap kicked out of his-self]

Sensible CKs . . unite against this faux caster and this faux magic power.



Final thoughts . . the CKG is not C&C rules, so the above text is meaningless - more so than anything else I've seen in that book.

[Go0gleplex]

Been playing an illusionist even longer than Rhu (nigh on 30 yrs). I've stripped out the healing and physical creation spells as well not related to shadow or light because they don't fit the illusionist concept as I have played/ran it. But that is my game and a pointless argument to get into.

We used to have to keep track of all the creatures we'd encountered, spells, items, and NPCs because if someone used an illusion spell poorly featuring something we knew about or something we knew nothing about we could get bonuses to disbelief rolls. No actual physical damage was done by the mind to the body though the mind would shut the body down or react as if the damage had occurred. Death results required a system shock roll back then...fail and the PC actually died. Success and they were just in a coma until their mind was fixed.

One big problem I have with illusionists healing is that most people know that mages cannot heal, so disbelief is high...and if the person is unconscious, their brain is shut down and is not processing any information related to disbelief or belief and as such is unaware of anything even being attempted by non-divine healing or potions, etc. Another thing is that Illusionist as a class was designed to be all smoke and mirrors hence the greater flexibility of their spells such as the Images spells as opposed to simple direct effects. Otherwise, why even bother with a wizard or other spell casting class when the Illusionist as being portrayed these days, can do everything they can do simply by 'altering reality'. But again, that is opinion based on my early groups and experiences with the class.

In the end, the only thing that really matters is that the CK is consistent and up front with how they intend the Illusionist to function in their game. The subject itself is one of those endless debates that will not end...it just goes on and on my friend...(insane cackling ala Lamb Chop)

[Tadhg]

Google - thanks for your thoughts, some excellent points.

Btw, I say 10 years ~ I'm referring to C&C.

[Sept 2004 White Box. Didn't have illusionist, so 2005 Jan or Feb for the first PH. I rolled up an illusionist to play in a PbP game along with Rigon).

The CK knew AD&D well (and C&C) so handled the illusionist spells perfectly.

I think some CKs don't understand how simple illusions can affect combat and game play. I know we've all discussed this before. But I know that when CK'd well the illusionist can be fabulous.

When I started D&D - 1978 . . Holmes BD&D didn't have this class. WOW, is it going to be 40 years soon when I bought the box. OMGosh!

I assume the class came along with AD&D.



[Hope the OP doesn't mind all my posts and pontificating on the illusionist. If so, I'll be quiet].

[KeyIXTheHermit]

Wow. And it seemed like such a simple question, too.

I notice that the "which is more powerful X or Y" debate focuses on the Wizard v Illusionist. I presume that's because the concepts of Druids are more clear in the minds of the players, while "Illusionist" seems to have very different definitions for different players.

I do have some printing of the CKG (I think it's an older one though) that describes Illusionists as super powerful mondo godlike characters capable of doing almost anything... it might even talk about healing and attempts to make logic out of the idea that they have healing spells.

The problem here, it seems to me, is that this game is very much an extension and outgrowth of 1e, and I think the 1e Illusionist was not intended to be so over-the-top powerful. Yes, I read the text, but much like many of you here, I couldn't process it as "The One True Way of Illusionists."

Based on what I'm reading here, it seems like that by the strict RAW, no Wizard and Illusionist aren't balanced, but I've totally flipped the power levels... Illusionists are infinitely more powerful than Wizards. As has been pointed out, the basic idea of the Illusionist has always been, "They make you believe you are dead, so you are dead," but it appears that the text has been rewritten to say, "It has nothing to do with belief... the Illusionist is able to alter space and time so that you are dead." The dragon is not in the mind of the victim(s); the Illusionist has actually created a dragon.

That seems to play at odds with how many perceive the term Illusionist, and it's got me thinking that perhaps much of this new text was written either A) by Illusionists, who are tired of playing second fiddle to Wizards, or B) by Wizards who are tired of being hunted by a scared populace, and are therefore trying to take the heat off of themselves by making people go after Illusionists instead!

Either way, it seems like there is no clear answer. It's either, "Yes, they are balanced, just very different, and must be played different ways (but are roughly equal in power level" (if you follow the old idea of the class), or "No, they are not balanced; Illusionists are the most badass character type in the game and nothing else comes close to the feats they can do," if you follow the ideas of the CKG.

Now... what about those pesky druids?

[KeyIXTheHermit]

[Hope the OP doesn't mind all my posts and pontificating on the illusionist. If so, I'll be quiet].

Your posts and pontifications are exactly why the OP came here in the first place. By all means, post and pontificate away... that goes for everybody!

[Fizz]

the text above is thee height of utter ridiculousness to the max. The Trolls are trolling us with this non-sense. It seems like an effort to make us think that the illusionist is some incredibly powerful caster (and if you buy this, then it's true).

Don't y'all see what's happening here?

Steve has cast an illusionary spell through the CKG and y'all failed yer saves and believe the non-sense mentioned above.

[Rhu attempts to shake every one here and slap them to their senses ~ realizing that he may get the crap kicked out of his-self]

LOL! That's awesome Rhu. I am glad you said it. I agree with you completely. I've never liked this new way of handling illusions. It's as if they thought illusions were weak. But when done right illusions are immensely potent, even if they never cause damage.


-Fizz

[mmbutter]

The interpretation of "illusions" as being "real" and causing real damage, and also real healing, and the ability to create real objects - if only temporary - goes back to the early days of Rolemaster (which was initially an "add-on" to AD&D before becoming it's own set of rules).

This same debate came up frequently on my Rolemaster mailing list many times over the 20 or so years it was active.

[Penny-Whistle]

Now... what about those pesky druids?

I'd like to hear what people think. I want to play a druid. I really dig the concept but it always seems like the adventures played worked against the class. For example, in one game I went a whole level before even encountering an animal which meant no companion =( The floors were stone so I couldn't use an entangle spell or collect a good berry. ... It was a low level character and without those spells and advantages I felt hobbled.

[Fizz]

I think which is considered most powerful is dependent on context.

A standup non-magical slug-fest, i'd bet on the cleric. But if they can bring a bit of their special powers, i'd bet on the druid (shapeshifting is potent stuff). But if you can start the fight from a distance with full spells, i'd bet on the wizard.

But the above is just for combat. Power is not just a measure of combat prowess, but overall ability to get out of a variety of situations. In that case, i'd probably put the cleric at the bottom, because i think both the wizard and druid have better overall flexibility i think. If i had to pick... probably i'd say druid. Again, don't underestimate that shapechange.

I use the older-school definition of illusions (none of that "becomes real" stuff). But even so, i'd put the illusionist on par with the wizard overall. No, he can't dish out the massive damage, but there are many other ways to be valuable in combat scenarios.


-Fizz

[Penny-Whistle]

I think which is considered most powerful is dependent on context.

A standup non-magical slug-fest, i'd bet on the cleric. But if they can bring a bit of their special powers, i'd bet on the druid (shapeshifting is potent stuff). But if you can start the fight from a distance with full spells, i'd bet on the wizard.

But the above is just for combat. Power is not just a measure of combat prowess, but overall ability to get out of a variety of situations. In that case, i'd probably put the cleric at the bottom, because i think both the wizard and druid have better overall flexibility i think. If i had to pick... probably i'd say druid. Again, don't underestimate that shapechange.

I use the older-school definition of illusions (none of that "becomes real" stuff). But even so, i'd put the illusionist on par with the wizard overall. No, he can't dish out the massive damage, but there are many other ways to be valuable in combat scenarios.


-Fizz

An Illusionist could make the role playing part of the game better. I mean you can just hit someone with a fireball but it is kind of cooler to trick your opponent. Every problem doesn't have to be solved with violence. I like games where people think outside the box

[Fizz]

I'd like to hear what people think. I want to play a druid. I really dig the concept but it always seems like the adventures played worked against the class. For example, in one game I went a whole level before even encountering an animal which meant no companion =( The floors were stone so I couldn't use an entangle spell or collect a good berry. ... It was a low level character and without those spells and advantages I felt hobbled.

It is true that a druid's abilities can be context-specific. But they have decent spells even outside of that. I think they gain significantly one they can shapechange. I don't think that power is given sufficient respect. Small, large, fly, swim, etc... lots of options for many situations become available then.

-Fizz

[Penny-Whistle]

I'd like to hear what people think. I want to play a druid. I really dig the concept but it always seems like the adventures played worked against the class. For example, in one game I went a whole level before even encountering an animal which meant no companion =( The floors were stone so I couldn't use an entangle spell or collect a good berry. ... It was a low level character and without those spells and advantages I felt hobbled.

It is true that a druid's abilities can be context-specific. But they have decent spells even outside of that. I think they gain significantly one they can shapechange. I don't think that power is given sufficient respect. Small, large, fly, swim, etc... lots of options for many situations become available then.

-Fizz

My problem was I was playing a low level druid in a stone dungeon. A bad choice. At higher levels a druid is endless fun and really powerful The flexibility of shape change allows myriad possibilities including flight and deceit. And when you can channel elemental powers ...

[Fizz]

My problem was I was playing a low level druid in a stone dungeon. A bad choice. At higher levels a druid is endless fun and really powerful The flexibility of shape change allows myriad possibilities including flight and deceit. And when you can channel elemental powers ...

Hopefully that wasn't the entirety of the first few levels for you. If so, then that is on the CK. Any class can be rendered useless (or at least taken out of its wheelhouse) with particular situations. So i'm a believer that the CK should tailor the adventure to account for that sort of thing.

-Fizz

[Go0gleplex]

Druids, very much like Illusionists, Rogue's, Bards, and Assassins, require players to be able to think well outside of the (combat) box if they want to make the most of the class and its abilities.

I love Druids. I think they have some of the most potential in the game. To deal with the underground issue at low level, my druids would carry a couple 'ropes' of blackberry vines or 'potted' nuisance plants like nettles or bamboo. Sure, I looked like a walking bush at times, but it was worth it. There is always stocking up on Good Berries too and going for more support (buff/debuff) type stuff and playing as missile or second-line support though it can be boring at moments.

[KeyIXTheHermit]

Hopefully that wasn't the entirety of the first few levels for you. If so, then that is on the CK. Any class can be rendered useless (or at least taken out of its wheelhouse) with particular situations. So i'm a believer that the CK should tailor the adventure to account for that sort of thing.

-Fizz

I can't say enough how much I agree with this statement, but I know there are large number of GM's (who usually refer to themselves as running a "sandbox") that disagree with it. To those GM's, and I'm quoting one specific one here whose words burned into my brain, "I create a world, which moves on its own regardless of what the players do."

If Penny-Whistle was playing with one of those GM's, then the GM would lay the blame strictly on the group, saying that "it wasn't [the GM'S] choice where they went."

As stated, I disagree conceptually, but I understand that to these GM's, they feel like the world "is just there" and your powers are not taken into consideration in any way. Either you figure out how to make them work in the situation, or you do something else.

[Fizz]

To those GM's, and I'm quoting one specific one here whose words burned into my brain, "I create a world, which moves on its own regardless of what the players do."

As stated, I disagree conceptually, but I understand that to these GM's, they feel like the world "is just there" and your powers are not taken into consideration in
any way. Either you figure out how to make them work in the situation, or you do something else.

And even in those cases, where the GM wants an independently flowing world, the GM could make a few tweaks. So in Penny-Whistle's case, the GM could have the dungeon contain some mossy areas, or fungi. (There can be quite a bit of life in a dungeon if one knows where to look.) For example, the GM could even rule that spells, say an Entangle spell, could be cast but at half-effectiveness due to there being only thin layers of moss. That would give the feel of the dungeon and the sense that the druid is out of his element, but still allow him the opportunity to contribute.

-Fizz

[Rigon]

I've said my peice on Illusionists and we can all get along dispite differences. That's the bueaty of C&C. You can bend it and shape it however you want and still be playing basically the same game.

Now to the original question, of the 4 classes listed, I would play in this order:
Druid - I prefer lightly armored, wilderness type characters and druids are effective spellcasters in there own right.
Wizard - I usually combine this with a fighter. I like elves.
Cleric - I've played them before but don't much care for them.
Illusionist - Never played one, thought about it once or twice, but went wizard instead.

R-

[Tadhg]

I think the druid has some excellent dungeon delving spell choices.

It's up to the PC to plan and/or switch spells when entering the dungeon or if the adventure goes from outside to inside.

Lose the outdoor/wilderness effective ones and utilize the ones that will work in the dungeon.

Many powerful ones, methinks!

Druids ~ used to be my 2nd fav class after clerics.

Paladins are now 2nd - challenging my love of clerics!

[Tadhg]

Illusionist - Never played one, thought about it once or twice, but went wizard instead.

R-

Well, well and well!

That certainly explains yer weird warped thinking about that class.

Thanks for that admission.

You fail!

[Tadhg]

I've said my peice on Illusionists and we can all get along dispite differences.
R-

Hellz no.

I'm going to box yer ears and rip them out when I see you next time.

[Oh wait, nevermind. I forgot Rigon could tear my arms out of my sockets - you know, like a wookie could]

Sorry, Rig. Yeah, we can all get along!

[Tadhg]

I wish this forum model had a chat or chat box like the last TLG forum.

Then we could all get online and . . chat 'em up and blast away.

Rig, is it possible to fire a chat box up here?

[Rigon]

Illusionist - Never played one, thought about it once or twice, but went wizard instead.

R-

Well, well and well!

That certainly explains yer weird warped thinking about that class.

Thanks for that admission.

You fail!

If someone would let me run it the way I preceive it, than I would run one. :p

R-

[Rigon]

I've said my peice on Illusionists and we can all get along dispite differences.
R-

Hellz no.

I'm going to box yer ears and rip them out when I see you next time.

[Oh wait, nevermind. I forgot Rigon could tear my arms out of my sockets - you know, like a wookie could]

Sorry, Rig. Yeah, we can all get along!

Remember, "Let the wookie win."

R-

[Rigon]

I wish this forum model had a chat or chat box like the last TLG forum.

Then we could all get online and . . chat 'em up and blast away.

Rig, is it possible to fire a chat box up here?

If there is, I don't have that power. But there is the chat over at the KotC's page.

R-

[Tadhg]

Illusionist - Never played one, thought about it once or twice, but went wizard instead.

R-

Well, well and well!

That certainly explains yer weird warped thinking about that class.

Thanks for that admission.

You fail!

If someone would let me run it the way I preceive it, than I would run one. :p

R-

Funny.

ssx17sx or whatever PWs forum name is - wanted to play an illusionist in my game last year. I said only the early version of that class. He declined.

Anyway, after our game ended - he took a break from our Sunday night game.

Later, I tried to lure him back offering full illusionist powers - hoping to draw him back. He couldn't do it.

Yer too busy on Sunday nights or I would offer it up to you - ya know, just so you could crash and burn my game!!

[Tadhg]

I wish this forum model had a chat or chat box like the last TLG forum.

Then we could all get online and . . chat 'em up and blast away.

Rig, is it possible to fire a chat box up here?

If there is, I don't have that power. But there is the chat over at the KotC's page.

R-

Get Steve to give the power. Sheesh, no one else with the power is ever here at the forum.