Why Tier 1s are in Tier 1.

[Runestar]

Nothing much I can add here, though I have a quote from an old thread about wizards.

Originally from Ongorth:

Another really funny party was Fighter, Wizard, Wizard, Nymph. Both of the wizards focused on control spells, with one favoring summons and the other favoring defensive stuff. Basically, this party was the exact opposite (even though the fighter in this party was one of the fighers in the other party) of the other. They simply did not so any damage, instead completely looking up the fight with stunning gaze, acid fog, wall of ________, trips, summoned elementals, etc. while slowly chipping the opponent away. Every combat took a long time to resolve, but usually it was a forgone conclusion early on. The opponents would get seperated and stalled while the fighter individually pounded them. For a powerful single opponent would be subjected to repeated save-or-abilities from behind barriers of spell created obstacles and the fighter. Probably the most "professional" party I'd ever been in, from the perspective that they always were able to solve every encounter they faced with a clear, efficient strategy that was often ad-libbed and always effective.

It also helped convince me that the game is less fun with two wizards, because you really, really always have a solution to every problem as a standard action, even when both wizards are intentionally limiting their spell lists for thematic and balance concerns.

This is more to silence those who would claim that wizards are really only powerful when they get to abuse supposed loopholes in the game, such as infinite wishes, spamming major creation or how they presumably always have the "perfect" spell for the job, despite having to prepare their spells beforehand. Even when playing them at a fraction of their capabilities, they should still be able to eclipse the rest of the non-casters.

[PhaedrusXY]

And finally, they don't have one more spell slot than wizards, they have the same number, since all wizards are either specialists or domain wizards.  

Uhh... what? I've played and played with plenty of generalist wizards. Maybe in hypothetical "CO-land", but not in real games. This was especially true before all the "extras" came out for specialists, like Abrupt Jaunt. Back in the early days of 3.X, I never though the extra spell slots were worth the loss of schools. In core only games, I still don't.

[Alastar]

I'D still go specialist in core only, specially if you start from level 1.  That extra spell slot is SO worth it .

[Gr1lledcheese]

Added: Agita's note on the erudite, Lycanthromancer's wizard description, Alastar and JaronK's description on the Archivist, including a bit of their back and forths about cons and Runestar's quote from an old wizard thread.

[PhaedrusXY]

I'D still go specialist in core only, specially if you start from level 1.  That extra spell slot is SO worth it .

Your statement of "everyone plays a specialist" is still obviously a huge overdramatization, though. Just because you always play one doesn't mean everyone else does. That was my point.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

I never go specialist.  If I wanted to have fewer spells known, and more spells per day, I'd play a sorcerer.

[Alastar]

I know, i'm just saying if i wanted more spells with a wizard, i could.

[johnboy069]

Actually, I think he was serious... 

I actually was.  At this tier it's a consideration.  If you're playing gamebreaking characters, not having access to a couple of gamebreaking techniques is significant especially when a lowly sorcerer CAN get those tricks.

I apologize then. I thought you were being sarcastic. I didn't mean to offend if I did.

[woodenbandman]

Just so I can add to the fire, I usually go focused specialist, just 'cuz it's so darn cool. If I specialize, it's either Focused Specialist, or generalist. Focused Specialist makes a huge leap over normal specialist, and I'd never miss dumping evocation, then it's just a choice between necromancy, enchantment, and abjuration to dump. I would specialize in either illusion, transmutation, or conjuration (and abjuration, in rare cases).

[ninjarabbit]

The evocation and enchantment schools are very easy to dump so there's almost no reason not to specialize, and honestly necromancy is also an easy school to drop if you aren't too interested in debuffs (though conjuration and transmutation have plenty of debuffs).

Doing the math a specialist has 9 more spell slots than a generalist over the course of his career and the focused specialist has a whopping 18 extra spell slots over the course of his career thana generalist.

The only reason I would be a generalist is to be an elven generalist or if I'm allowed to be a domain wizard.

[duncandun]

Anyone have any arguments for Artificer? I'm trying to convince my group that it's a really good class, but everyone seems either ridiculously irrational about it(Ie not listening to facts) or just receiving TMI at once when I explain how much damage a dual wand wielding meta-trigger artificer can do.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Artificers can, effectively, cast any spell in the game.  The only thing remotely as broken as magic spells is magic items.  And the artificer is really good at making and using magic items

[awaken DM golem]

Artificer

Con - Really complicated. It needed the longest guide ever, just for regular game play ... see the Endymnion (sp?) threads. No CO-er ever made an easyplay or quickstart type guide, perhaps because you can't.

Pro - TWF with Wands means, you are two Wizards, but it's expensive. You can torque Caelic off, by just suggesting Artificers CAN'T do something. 

[Agita]

You can torque Caelic off, by just suggesting Artificers CAN'T do something. 

Ah, but can they see why kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?

[Havok4]

You can torque Caelic off, by just suggesting Artificers CAN'T do something. 

Ah, but can they see why kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?

Well they do have access to every divination spell ever made, so probably.

[duncandun]

can artificers somehow get wands above 5th level? Or are we talking staves?

[The_Mad_Linguist]

You can torque Caelic off, by just suggesting Artificers CAN'T do something. 

Ah, but can they see why kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?

Because it gives an alchemical bonus to charisma?

[Bastian]

can artificers somehow get wands above 5th level? Or are we talking staves?

Scepters are a higher level version of wands if you allow Faerun material.

[Bastian]

Artificer

Con - Really complicated. It needed the longest guide ever, just for regular game play ... see the Endymnion (sp?) threads. No CO-er ever made an easyplay or quickstart type guide, perhaps because you can't.

Pro - TWF with Wands means, you are two Wizards, but it's expensive. You can torque Caelic off, by just suggesting Artificers CAN'T do something.  

More Pros: An optimised craftificer can make magic items ridiculously cheaply (as in at about 2.05 percent of the market price). Furthermore, using a Spell Clock that casts the spell that extracts Ambrosia(from BoED), Leadership, an item of continuous Wrack, and the item that turns pain to pleasure (BoVD), they can have continuously regenerating crafting XP.
 
Note: I will eventually get around to posting a guide to really cheap craftificing.

Edit: Posted here.

[Runestar]

For me at least, I can't imagine playing anything other than a focused specialist ever since complete mage was released. Getting 4 slots instead of 2 at 1st lv is just too good to resist...