The OotS Thread III

[Ahriman238]

Oh sure, you should never be without a couple of damage spells, scrolls or wands. But generally precious spell slots should be saved for something your compatriots can't do, just for flexibility's sake because most mornings you don't know exactly what you're going to run into, and so you'll try and prepare spells for all the most probable circumstance.

[Forgothrax]

Oh sure, you should never be without a couple of damage spells, scrolls or wands. But generally precious spell slots should be saved for something your compatriots can't do, just for flexibility's sake because most mornings you don't know exactly what you're going to run into, and so you'll try and prepare spells for all the most probable circumstance.

True. On the other hand, direct damage has a place for various builds-- the already mentioned Mailman Sorc is capable of dealing with most threats via direct damage.

[Jub]

Similar complaints apply to Jub, whose argument basically boils down to "officially, in theory, I can carry around a midget in a sack who does literally nothing but make magic scrolls for me, so I have an unlimited supply of scrolls!"

Who the hell would want to play a game on those terms? Does Jub actually think that this should be the norm in a Dungeons and Dragons game? That all stories should reduce to "LOL wizard gibs you with spells from his sack-midget's scrolls!"

If not, what's the point?

If they didn't want you to have the ability to craft items while you adventure why would things such as the Dedicated Wright and Quill of Scribing exist to finish items that you've started? Hell, why would they have designed the Artificer at all if they didn't want players crafting items? Why give the mage the ability to create a demiplane and not expect him to customize it so it allows him more time to craft and think? Why put in guilds that reduce crafting costs (both gold and xp) and time, and then add in feats and special locations on top of those that can help further reduce the effort needed to crank out items.

I'm not talking about stupid stuff like getting level drained, spending enough xp to just about lose you another level, and then getting restored back to your original level, or using a pair of thought bottles to only ever use 500 xp to craft as many items as you want. I'm suggesting that the wizard take a couple of crafting feats, shrink himself and craft during the bits of the game where you're just walking from place to place anyway. Is it the small size that bothers you or does it feel less cheap if you buy a cart and have him craft in there instead?

On the subject of high powered games, have you ever played a gestalt game with monster races allowed where you roll 5d6 for stats and seen what insanity can happen? Have you ever had a party with an awakened hydra wizard with multiheaded casting, his twin who is a cleric also with multiheaded casting who is focused on touch spells, a thri-kreen gestalt monk/paladin with saves that can't be touched and who can leap castle walls with ease, and a Will-O'-Wisp sorcerer/rogue who can go naturally invisible and sneak attack you with weapon like spells? I ran that game so don't sit here and preach to me that you can't play a permissive game and don't tell me that it can't be fun for all involved. I have access to the same books that my players do, and I don't believe in rule zero or restricting all but the Pun-pun levels of broken, yet with some thought and planning they can still be challenged. Should I be restricting things and playing in a tiny box just so people like you can look at my game and say that I'm playing the right way?

Pretty much what simon says. Wizards, especially towards the beginning of the game need their team to handle any threat they don't have a spell prepared for. As the game progresses, the casters need to learn to work with their team to be more than a Wizard and his meat shields. Wizards bring options to the table, spells that help you get around easier, battlefield control, communication, buffs. Direct damage is the least of what they can do, a capability they share with everyone else.

Sure, you can build a Wizard that can smite everything that looks at him wrong, in much the same way you "can" (assuming the world's most permissive DM) play Pun-pun. But the game will suck for both you and everyone playing with you if it's all you. Wizards are supposed to be wise men, creative and intelligent in their use of magic, and there's no creativity in a Fireball.

Why would the wizard ever cast fireball? It's far better to bend the mind of a monster to your will or call angels and demons from other planes and make use of their abilities to aid you. Wizards are next to gods in terms of the powers they can potentially command, why should they ever feel boring to play?

Oh sure, you should never be without a couple of damage spells, scrolls or wands. But generally precious spell slots should be saved for something your compatriots can't do, just for flexibility's sake because most mornings you don't know exactly what you're going to run into, and so you'll try and prepare spells for all the most probable circumstance.

That's a horrid way to do things. Utility spells don't need a high DC or caster level so you put them into low cost wands and scrolls and keep you real slots loaded with all the nastiness a high intelligence mind can think of.

-----

@Irbis:

I would quote those posts for truth, but this post will already be rather long without it.

[Grumman]

I am endlessly amazed by how badly the build-optimizers have missed the point of the game when they obsess over how STUPIDLY EASY RAARGH it is to turn an arcane spellcaster into an enemy-crushing demigod.

Because some of them have no vision. While Wizards went too far the other direction in 4th, there are things in 3.5 that the game is better off without. Any idiot can take Shivering Touch and ruin a dragon's day. I prefer trying to optimise for more unusual attributes than "make the most powerful class more powerful".

[Jub]

I am endlessly amazed by how badly the build-optimizers have missed the point of the game when they obsess over how STUPIDLY EASY RAARGH it is to turn an arcane spellcaster into an enemy-crushing demigod.

Because some of them have no vision. While Wizards went too far the other direction in 4th, there are things in 3.5 that the game is better off without. Any idiot can take Shivering Touch and ruin a dragon's day. I prefer trying to optimise for more unusual attributes than "make the most powerful class more powerful".

Shivering touch works less well if the dragon is creative and uses his own considerable wealth and magic to ward his lair making it harder to slip in. If you can get in touch range of a dragon in his lair either the dragon wasn't being run well or you burned a ton of spells getting past his defenses without alerting him and you've earned your easy victory.

[Rogue 9]

And then you discover that dragons are immune to paralysis anyway.

[Jub]

And then you discover that dragons are immune to paralysis anyway.

They aren't immune to having 0 dexterity and having the next attack start to deal constitution damage.

[Rogue 9]

And then you discover that dragons are immune to paralysis anyway.

They aren't immune to having 0 dexterity and having the next attack start to deal constitution damage.

The effect of 0 Dexterity is, drumroll please... Paralysis! Thanks for playing.

[Jub]

And then you discover that dragons are immune to paralysis anyway.

They aren't immune to having 0 dexterity and having the next attack start to deal constitution damage.

The effect of 0 Dexterity is, drumroll please... Paralysis! Thanks for playing.

I could have sworn that once a physical ability was at zero you started taking con damage if it took more. I guess that was a house rule. Still having a dex score of zero is stated to have the following effects.

Page 289 of the 3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide:

"Dextrerity 0 means that the character cannot move at all. He stands motionless, rigid, and helpless."

I don't see any mention of paralysis in there at all. Plus, paralysis is the in ability to move, not being stuck in a rigid pose, so even trying to quote medical texts won't help you.

[Rogue 9]

From the definition of ability damage:

Ability Damaged

The character has temporarily lost 1 or more ability score points. Lost points return at a rate of 1 per day unless noted otherwise by the condition dealing the damage. A character with Strength 0 falls to the ground and is helpless. A character with Dexterity 0 is paralyzed. A character with Constitution 0 is dead. A character with Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma 0 is unconscious. Ability damage is different from penalties to ability scores, which go away when the conditions causing them go away.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Literally every discussion I've seen on the topic has determined that dragons are immune to paralysis effects, not paralysis as a side effect of 0 Dexterity.

[Jub]

From the definition of ability damage:

Ability Damaged

The character has temporarily lost 1 or more ability score points. Lost points return at a rate of 1 per day unless noted otherwise by the condition dealing the damage. A character with Strength 0 falls to the ground and is helpless. A character with Dexterity 0 is paralyzed. A character with Constitution 0 is dead. A character with Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma 0 is unconscious. Ability damage is different from penalties to ability scores, which go away when the conditions causing them go away.

That seems like a general quote made for the SRD. The full text of the rule I quoted is on page 289 of the 3.5 DMG and page 72 of the 3rd edition DMG.

A more full quote including text from pages 289 and 290 from the 3.5 DMG:

"Various attacks cause ability score loss, either ability damage or ability drain. Points lost to ability damage return at the rate of 1 point per day (or double that if the character gets complete bed rest) to each damaged ability, and the spells lesser restoration and restoration offset ability damage as well. Ability drain, however, is permanent, though restoration can restore even those lost ability score points.

While any loss is debilitating, losing all points in an ability score can be devastating.

Strength 0 means that the character cannot move at all. He lies helpless on the ground.
Dexterity 0 means that the character cannot move at all. He stands motionless, rigid, and helpless.
Constitution 0 means that the character is dead.
Intelligence 0 means that the character cannot think and is unconscious in a comalike stupor, helpless.
Wisdom 0 means that the character is withdrawn into a deep sleep filled with nightmares, helpless.
Charisma 0 means that the character is withdrawn into a catatonic, comalike stupor, helpless."

I see nothing about paralysis in there at all.

[Simon_Jester]

I suggest investing some skill points into 'reading' category as all I criticized was inane, offhand comment that wizards are always reduced to guessing and are worthless without a party. No, they are not, which was proved repeatedly. My comment had literally nothing to do with OotS, it was about broad stroke, false statements.

Or is your wizard illiterate in order to give party barbarian one more occasion to shine?

I'm responding to the general vein of "only poorly optimized wizards want or need backup!" which I've been seeing here and elsewhere for several years, and which you happened to encapsulate very well. Since this is a thread about OotS, I specifically referenced OotS, among other things, to explain why I think this is wrong.

YES, you can optimize a D&D wizard such that they have little or no need of allies, support, or anything else except unlimited time and freedom to prepare their magic items and scrying tactics.

So what?

As to why a D&D wizard wouldn't always do that... hm. I can think of a lot of reasons. They might not have immediate access to the resources they need. They might not have time, or might reasonably be afraid that if they take time to prepare themselves perfectly, they will be beaten by a rival wizard who got there first with a good plan, instead of second with a perfect one.* They might be in an environment where specialist splatbook classes are not made uniformly available to just anyone- the very existence of a "Wizard" class as a core rule concept implies that most magic-users are in fact wizards, not specialty superwizards.

*"Beaten" need not imply direct combat- it could simply be a matter of who swoops in and makes off with the treasure first.

Who the hell would want to play a game on those terms?

Sure, claim it's boring or that you wouldn't play this way. However, any claim that it can't be done, that real person wouldn't behave like this, or any other reply in the vein "no because I am offended by this" is plainly false.

I'm not offended, I'm annoyed by the pretense that people working from the fruits of ten years of systematic build optimization have a right to pooh-pooh people who don't share their sub-genre of the larger gaming hobby. And annoyed that they persistently intrude on any conversation about the strategy of D&D that takes place outside the bounds of their hobby.

Also, you know, people do play superpowered campaigns, and (what a shock!) these can be fun for everyone involved, provided GM is competent and not the "no because no" kind.

At best, that is a specialty niche, which should keep to itself rather than trying to take a dump on everyone else's front lawn by endlessly complaining about how other people aren't doing it too.

[Simon_Jester]

Addendum:

Also, I love how all the 'OotS is not optimizing' crowd ignore the fact that V and Durkon were always by far most powerful members without even trying and last 20 strips were basically Roy hugging the cover while spellcasters were doing all the legwork. Someone said something about missing points?

V and Durkon are very powerful, but for very significant reasons the Order tends to maneuver them around like they were artillery pieces. Especially V- like artillery, V is devastating to whatever is downrange of those magical attacks, but also like artillery, there are limits to what those attacks can accomplish. V is periodically caught by circumstances that play off V's physical weaknesses as a wizard. I would argue that this makes for an interesting story- not the only kind of interesting story, but an interesting one.

[Jub]

As to why a D&D wizard wouldn't always do that... hm. I can think of a lot of reasons. They might not have immediate access to the resources they need. They might not have time, or might reasonably be afraid that if they take time to prepare themselves perfectly, they will be beaten by a rival wizard who got there first with a good plan, instead of second with a perfect one.* They might be in an environment where specialist splatbook classes are not made uniformly available to just anyone- the very existence of a "Wizard" class as a core rule concept implies that most magic-users are in fact wizards, not specialty superwizards.

*"Beaten" need not imply direct combat- it could simply be a matter of who swoops in and makes off with the treasure first.

How did he beat you when you did your planning off site in a demiplane where time moves faster that the plane the item you need is on? The only way he could beat you is by finding a faster demiplane or rushing in without any sort of prep. In the second case you let him take the item and then take it from him later and in the first you were beaten by the better wizard.

Also who mentioned splat books anywhere in this discussion? A wizard with just the just in the PHB can beat anything except maybe a well done CoDzilla.

I'm not offended, I'm annoyed by the pretense that people working from the fruits of ten years of systematic build optimization have a right to pooh-pooh people who don't share their sub-genre of the larger gaming hobby. And annoyed that they persistently intrude on any conversation about the strategy of D&D that takes place outside the bounds of their hobby.

Do you get mad at chess masters who know that only certain move sets will win high level games because they talk about strategies that boil the game down to a select few end states?

Also, you've yet to answer the question as to what a super powered wizard should be doing with his study time, intellect, and the ability to learn any spell of the correct level in the PHB. How would an intelligence 20+ wizard, who's studied hard, and has advanced knowledge of spell craft and the arcane approach the idea of adventuring? My bet is that he'd do it in a way that allows him to continue studying and crafting items in as much safety as possible, like a nerd going camping, instead of rushing in like an idiot because the fighter is happy enough sleeping in a sack on the ground and hanging his armor from a tree.

At best, that is a specialty niche, which should keep to itself rather than trying to take a dump on everyone else's front lawn by endlessly complaining about how other people aren't doing it too.

At best the whole hobby is a nice thing. Besides, why do you care if it gets brought up in passing? We suggested ways that a wizard might be able to stretch his resources, and you all started bitching about power gaming.

[Jub]

Ghetto Edit: Niche, not nice.

[Civil War Man]

Wise men, yes. Incredibly wise, even. Let me ask you a question - you are wise, frail man that spent decades learning art of spellcasting, poring over old sorcerers tomes and grimoires, researching arcane beasts for spell components and inherent magic.

Why, in the name of Great Ctulhu, such person cannot do what takes roleplayers on Earth an hour in afternoon and do prepare for worst seeing you won't always have a buddy handy you can buff?

If you have one, great, but saying creative and intelligent person will gimp himself for no apparent purpose just because it offends some people that care more about 'story' than realism? If this wizard was a real person, being prepared to smite anything (and not become utterly useless without meatshield or two around) would be his second nature. Wizards are like that in say, Pratchett's works, and I for one love that portrayal.

Wizards are intelligent, not necessarily wise. They are smart, not omniscient. Ignoring for a moment how hilarious it is that you a) used "realism" unironically when talking about D&D, and b) show utter contempt for people who prefer a good story when consuming a storytelling product, Wizards, and the people playing them, are mortal and fallible, and even an Int score of 37 doesn't change that.

Also, I question whether you've read any of Pratchett's books past Sourcery if you think that the Wizards are prepared to smite anything at a moment's notice. The whole point of his depiction of Wizards is that true power and wisdom comes from having the ability to smite anything but choosing not to use it, which works against your whole argument.

Also, you know, people do play superpowered campaigns, and (what a shock!) these can be fun for everyone involved, provided GM is competent and not the "no because no" kind.

ITT DMs only veto stuff because they are incompetent, and not because they don't want to deal with certain mechanics in their story.

Then said GM is clearly incompetent or the player behaving maliciously because proper time to ensure everyone is on the same page is BEFORE the game. Not during. Once machine starts running, I find stopping it kills fun for everyone and it's better to roll with it appropriately adjusting things.

Doesn't change that your response in this hypothetical is "Fuck you" and throwing a hissy fit because you were asked to tone down your powergaming because it was negatively impacting everyone else's experience. Congrats on being That Guy.

I will say something that will shock the 'YOU MISS THE POINT' guys - if your party is tier 4-6, then sorry, wizard is horrible choice to play. The class is just way too powerful and can be turned into tier 1 in a moment's notice barring the player being idiot who assigned Int 8 or something. Had tier 1 been unintended, all the capabilities wouldn't be in RPG book, but sadly, they are and ignoring it is being three Chinese monkeys at once.

Want to play something on the level of weak party? You don't like demigods? Pick warmage, shadowbinder, truenamer, beguiller or any other spellcasting class tooled more toward functioning in party, you will have more fun with simpler, but deeper options, as will have your low powered party/GM. But anyone showing righteous rage YOUMISSTHEPOINT! is still wrong, sorry.

So, your response to certain Wizard builds being game-breaking is that the DM should veto the entire class and buy extra sourcebooks to add arcane spellcasters back into the game. But just vetoing the game-breaking builds is unacceptable.

Also, I love how all the 'OotS is not optimizing' crowd ignore the fact that V and Durkon were always by far most powerful members without even trying and last 20 strips were basically Roy hugging the cover while spellcasters were doing all the legwork. Someone said something about missing points?

Yes, V and Durkon possess a lot more raw power than the rest of the party. And both choose to limit the use of their power. Durkon because the idea doesn't occur to him, and V because s/he attempted to achieve unlimited raw power and it resulted in horrific consequences.

And yet, for all of that raw power, V could not have saved Roy had it not been for a single well-placed level 1 spell from the Bard.

If they didn't want you to have the ability to craft items while you adventure why would things such as the Dedicated Wright and Quill of Scribing exist to finish items that you've started? Hell, why would they have designed the Artificer at all if they didn't want players crafting items? Why give the mage the ability to create a demiplane and not expect him to customize it so it allows him more time to craft and think? Why put in guilds that reduce crafting costs (both gold and xp) and time, and then add in feats and special locations on top of those that can help further reduce the effort needed to crank out items.

Because some DMs might want that in their game. However, if your DM vetoes it, "B-but the book says I can have it!" means jack shit.

On the subject of high powered games, have you ever played a gestalt game with monster races allowed where you roll 5d6 for stats and seen what insanity can happen? Have you ever had a party with an awakened hydra wizard with multiheaded casting, his twin who is a cleric also with multiheaded casting who is focused on touch spells, a thri-kreen gestalt monk/paladin with saves that can't be touched and who can leap castle walls with ease, and a Will-O'-Wisp sorcerer/rogue who can go naturally invisible and sneak attack you with weapon like spells? I ran that game so don't sit here and preach to me that you can't play a permissive game and don't tell me that it can't be fun for all involved. I have access to the same books that my players do, and I don't believe in rule zero or restricting all but the Pun-pun levels of broken, yet with some thought and planning they can still be challenged. Should I be restricting things and playing in a tiny box just so people like you can look at my game and say that I'm playing the right way?

If you are playing in a permissive game where the whole point is having everyone powergame, knock yourself out. If you are not, stop being That Guy and getting bent out of shape because the other people in the party don't want to spend the next few hours watching you masturbate onto a character sheet.

Do you get mad at chess masters who know that only certain move sets will win high level games because they talk about strategies that boil the game down to a select few end states?

That you view D&D as comparable to chess says a lot. Chess is a competitive game with no story and hard and fast rules. There are correct and incorrect ways to play chess. D&D depends entirely on the group playing it. Some are heavily story-driven, some are not. House rules are commonplace, and the DM has ultimate veto power over whether or not some rule will apply to the game they are running. There is no "correct" way to play D&D.

[Jub]

@Civil War Man:

...show utter contempt for people who prefer a good story when consuming a storytelling product...

So I can't make have made a back story for my wizard and be fully ready to role play him fully if I take moderately powerful options for him? What gives you the right to assume that just because I can make a decent build, and 10 years of playing time and reading forums has shown me a few options, means I can play along with a story?

ITT DMs only veto stuff because they are incompetent, and not because they don't want to deal with certain mechanics in their story.

The DM is the one that allowed the Wizard into the party, he should have been ready to deal with stuff that can be found in the PHB. Or are idiot blaster wizards the only acceptable way to play in a story driven game now?

Doesn't change that your response in this hypothetical is "Fuck you" and throwing a hissy fit because you were asked to tone down your powergaming because it was negatively impacting everyone else's experience. Congrats on being That Guy.

In this hypothetical the DM allowed Irbis and myself to play wizards, how could he have not seen a level of power that can be found in the PHB coming?

So, your response to certain Wizard builds being game-breaking is that the DM should veto the entire class and buy extra sourcebooks to add arcane spellcasters back into the game. But just vetoing the game-breaking builds is unacceptable.

Yes, otherwise why even bother to play a wizard at all? If the DM says no every time I try to cast a spell from a core and/or approved source maybe he should have just asked me to play something else instead. If I were playing a wizard with an ice theme I'd be a bit upset if the DM told me that he wasn't allowing Shivering Touch after we'd already played a few sessions.

Plus, 3.x is how old now, no excuses not to have the rules and spell compendiums at least if you're going to run a game.

Yes, V and Durkon possess a lot more raw power than the rest of the party. And both choose to limit the use of their power. Durkon because the idea doesn't occur to him, and V because s/he attempted to achieve unlimited raw power and it resulted in horrific consequences.

And yet, for all of that raw power, V could not have saved Roy had it not been for a single well-placed level 1 spell from the Bard.

And this is the only way to play a wizard/cleric because...?

Because some DMs might want that in their game. However, if your DM vetoes it, "B-but the book says I can have it!" means jack shit.

The DM has every trick from every book at his disposal, after taking out the infinite damage pun-pun type builds, if he can't challenge you he's doing it wrong. Rule zero is for guys that can't hack running a a game properly, or guys who didn't set expectations for his game before hand. In either case I'd likely be gone from his table before he asked me to leave anyway.

If you are playing in a permissive game where the whole point is having everyone powergame, knock yourself out. If you are not, stop being That Guy and getting bent out of shape because the other people in the party don't want to spend the next few hours watching you masturbate onto a character sheet.

Why do you have such a hate on for guys who know how to string spells together in a decent fashion? How is building a high powered character, something I wouldn't even need to spend much effort on,equated to masturbating over your character sheet? I could build and full stat a Cloistered Cleric/Paragnostic Apostle/Malconvoker that will make you cry and stat all his possible called/summoned creatures in less time than I would spend on his backstory, clothing, and personality. Don't try to spin this as an either or thing just because you expect all wizards to sit back and let the fighter take a few swings before finally stepping in and ending the fight.

Want proof, I made this for a game I didn't know I was playing until two days before the session:

Code: Select all

Selnin Gysseneldth (High Rite, Clan of the Arcane)
Grey Elf, Wizard 1

Chaotic Good
Boccob

Age: 143 – Sex: Male – Height: 5'3” - Weight :  105lb. - Eyes: Amber - Hair: Silver, Long Ponytail
--Seven rings of words around each bicep, each telling the tale of a span of twenty years in poetry

Born under a dire sign to the Gysseneldth was an Arcane protected child and he was grown under the eye of all.
In years of growth and play the child, of sharpest mind and quickest hand, was loved by all he saw.
Reading was a joy to him and play the youth did not, instead with ink stained hands arcane power he sought.
Knowledge filling eager mind he sought an outside view, with wanderlust in heart he bid fairwell to all he knew.
In days beyond the leafy veil the wanderer did travel. City, mountain, dale, and dell the seeker went and saw.
When coin the travelled one did lack, choices he had few. Crime found him and offered a lower view.
With purse in hand he left the lawless ways, still marks and records yet remain. 

--Has a thieves' guild tattoo depicting a white rose growing out of a cracked diamond over his heart

HD: 1d4+1 (HP: 5)
Init: +4
Speed: 30ft.
AC: 14 – Touch: 14  – Fla t-Footed: 10 – SR: N/A – DR: N/A
With Pack AC: 13 – Touch: 13  – Fla t-Footed: 10 – SR: N/A – DR: N/A
Resistances: N/A
Immunities: Sleep
Save Bonuses: +2 versus Enchantment spells and effects
BAB/Grapple: +0/+0
Attack: Staff +0 1d6 20/x2 or Dagger +0 1d4 19-20/x2 or Sling +4 1d4 20/x2 50ft.
Full Attack:  Staff +0 1d6 20/x2 or Dagger +0 1d4 19-20/x2 or Sling +4 1d4 20/x2 50ft.
Space/Reach: 5ft/0ft
Special Attacks: None
Special Qualities: Low-Light Vision, +2 to Spot, Listen, and Search
Class Abilities: Summon Familiar
Saves: Fort: +1 – Ref: +4 – Will: +4
Abilities: Str: 11  – Dex: 18 – Con: 12 – Int: 20 – Wis: 14 – Cha: 9
Rolls: 18, 14, 14, 13, 9, 8 – Reroll: 16
Total ACP: 0
Skills: Appraise +8, Concentration +5, Decipher Script +9, Knowledge (Arcana) +9, Knowledge (Nature) +9, Knowledge (History) +9, Knowledge (The Planes) +9, Listen +4,  Search +4, Spellcraft +9, Spot +4
Feats: Scribe Scroll, Spell Focus (Enchantment)
Weapon and Armor Proficiencies: Longsword, Rapier, Longbow, Shortbow
Languages: Common, Elven, Draconic, Gnome, Sylvan, Orc, Goblin

Familiar: 
Pedsûl (Speaking Wind) – Raven

Spells:
Level 0 – DC: 15 – 3/Day – Known: All
Level 1 – DC: 16 – 3/Day – Known: Charm Person, Sleep, Mage Armor, Color Spray, Grease, Magic Missile, Shield, Ray of Enfeeblement

Level 0 – Prepared: Light, Read Magic, Open/Close
Level 1 – Prepared: Mage Armor, Sleep (DC:17), Sleep (DC: 17)

Gear:  

Weight: 69lb.

Coin: 4gp 25sp 29cp

Weapons:
-Sling (0lb.)
--Bullets x20 (10lb.)
-Dagger (2lb.)
-Quarterstaff (4lb.)

Carried:
-Backpack (2lb.)
-Bedroll (5lb.)
-Blanket (5lb.)
-Chalk x5 (0lb.)
-Flask x1 (1.5lb.)
--Wine (0.5lb)
-Flint and Steel (0lb.)
-Ink x2 (0lb.)
-Inkpen x2 (0lb.)
-Lamp (1lb.)
-Oil x2 (2lb.)
-Parchment x20 (0lb.)
-Pouch x2 (1lb)
-Rations x5 (5lb.)
-Scholar's Outfit x1 (6lb.)
-Scroll Case x2 (1lb)
-Sealing Wax (1lb.)
-Soap (1lb.)
-Spellbook (3lb.)
-Sunrod (1lb.)
-Traveller's Outfit x1 (5lb.)
-Waterskin (4lb.)

Worn:
-Scholar's Outfit x1 (6lb.)
-Spell Component Pouch (2lb.)

Pack Animal:
-None

Home:
-None

Dues and Fees Paid:
-None

Other:
-None

Code: Select all

Selnin Gysseneldth (High Rite, Clan of the Arcane)
Grey Elf, Wizard 1

Chaotic Good
Boccob

Age: 143 – Sex: Male – Height: 5'3” - Weight :  105lb. - Eyes: Amber - Hair: Silver, Long Ponytail

Physical Markings:

--Seven rings of words around each bicep, each telling the tale of a span of twenty years in elven poetry
Born under a dire sign to the Gysseneldth was an Arcane protected child and he was grown under the eye of all.
In years of growth and play the child, of sharpest mind and quickest hand, was loved by all he saw.
Reading was a joy to him and play the youth did not, instead with ink stained hands arcane power he sought.
Knowledge filling eager mind he sought an outside view, with wanderlust in heart he bid fairwell to all he knew.
In days beyond the leafy veil the wanderer did travel. City, mountain, dale, and dell the seeker went and saw.
When coin the travelled one did lack, choices he had few. Crime found him and offered a lower view.
With purse in hand he left the lawless ways, still marks and records yet remain. 

--Has a thieves' guild tattoo depicting a white rose growing out of a cracked diamond. Placed over his heart.

Personal Symbol:

--His personal symbol is a laurel of oak leaves around a waxing crescent moon.

Clothing Style:

-Likes to leave his upper arms exposed to show the story of his life.
-Favours loose fitting clothing that allows him to move freely.

Scholar's Outfits:
--A pair of loose fitting sleeveless tunics. One white and the other gold.
--A pair of arm sleeves designed to match a tunic.
--A pair of breaches that goes with a tunic.
--Four sashes: one in midnight blue with silver designs, one in royal purple with gold designs, one in sky blue with white designs, and the last in green and gold.
--A pair of comfortable golden slippers.

Traveller's Outfit:
--A tough white woollen tunic with a pair of breast pockets and a pair of hip pockets
--A tough pair of white woollen breaches.
--A wide leather traveller's belt with several pouches and pockets.
--A tough pair of deep brown knee-boots.

Code: Select all

Culture: Civilized (2 CuMod)
Social Status: Comfortable (0 SolMod)
Birth Legitimacy: Legitimate
Family: Mother and Father only
Siblings: Second Born, Older Brother, Younger Sister
Time of Birth: June (6th Month)
Place of Birth: In a field
Unusual Birth: Milk soured and wolves howled
Head of Household: Soldier, Light Cavalry, Losing Side, Lost a Friend and he was the sole survivor, Mustered out as a Soldier

Significant Events (Childhood): Exotic Event 
-Survived and encounter with an owlbear
Significant Events (Adolescene): Loved by parents 
Significant Event 1 (Adulthood): Illegal Activities
--Needed Money, Worked for Crime Family, Jailed for a few days, Eventually left
Significant Event 3 (Adulthood): Rival
-An old lover, trying to outdo each other, friendly rivals

Traits: 
-Driving Study
-Average Peaceful Spirit
-Average Flippant
-Trivial Allergic to Mould

Hobby: Reads for fun

Code: Select all

Spellbook 1:

This simple leather bound book is plain but well made with a chain running along its spine ending in a hook to attach to a belt or pack. It closes tightly shut with a simple steel hook and loop plated with copper. Inside it contains sheep skin pages filled with a tight flowing script and detailed symbols. What words aren't common to the arcane community are written in poetic Elven. The book doesn't yet contain any traps, but the table at the front has an arcane mark in the shape of a laurel of leaves surrounding a waxing moon.

Page 1: Table of Contents with an arcane mark as a background
Page 2: *****          Blank          *****
Page 3: Acid Splash – Conj – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – No Save, No SR – PHB 197
Page 4: Amanuensis – Trans – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – Will, SR – SpC 9
Page 5: Arcane Mark – Univ – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Touch – No Save, No SR – PHB 202
Page 6: Caltrops – Conj – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – No Save, No SR – SpC 42
Page 7: Dancing Lights – Evoc – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Medium – No Save, No SR – PHB 217
Page 8: Daze – Ench – Verbal, Somatic, Wool – One Standard – Close – Will, SR – PHB 218
Page 9: Detect Magic – Div – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – 60ft. Cone – No Save, No SR – PHB 220
Page 10: Detect Poison – Div – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – No Save, No SR – PHB 220
Page 11: Disrupt Undead – Necro – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – No Save, SR – PHB 224
Page 12: Electric Jolt – Evoc – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – No Save, SR – SpC 78
Page 13: Flare – Evoc – Verbal – One Standard – Close – Fort, SR– PHB 233
Page 14: Ghost Sound – Illus – Verbal, Somatic, Wool – One Standard – Close – Will, No SR – PHB 236
Page 15: Launch Bolt – Trans – Verbal, Somatic, Bolt – One Standard – 80ft. – No Save, No SR – SpC 130
Page 16: Launch Item – Trans – Verbal, Somatic, Item – One Standard – Medium – No Save, No SR – SpC 130
Page 17: Light – Evoc – Verbal, Somatic, Firefly – One Standard – Touch – No Save, No SR – PHB 249
Page 18: Mage Hand – Trans – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Touch – No Save, No SR – PHB 250
Page 19: Mending – Trans – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – 10ft. – Will, SR – PHB 254
Page 20: Message – Trans – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Medium – No Save, No SR – PHB 254
Page 21: Open/Close – Trans – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – Will, SR – PHB 259
Page 22: Prestidigitation – Univ – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – 10ft. – No Save, No SR – PHB 265
Page 23: Ray of Frost – Evoc – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – No Save, SR – PHB 270
Page 24: Read Magic – Div – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Personal – No Save, No SR – PHB 270
Page 25: Repair Minor Damage – Trans – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Touch – No Save, No SR – SpC 173
Page 26: Resistance – Abjur – Verbal, Somatic, Mini Cloak – One Standard – Touch – No Save, No SR – PHB 273
Page 27: Silent Portal – Illus – Somatic – One Standard – Close – Will, SR – SpC 190
Page 28: Sonic Snap – Evoc – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – Will (Partial), SR – SpC 195
Page 29: Stick – Trans – Verbal, Somatic, Dried Glue – One Standard – Touch – Will, SR – SpC 206
Page 30: Touch of Fatigue – Necro – Verbal, Somatic, Sweat – One Standard – Touch – Fort, SR – PHB 295
Page 31: *****          Blank          *****
Page 32: Charm Person
Page 33: Ench – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – Will, SR – PHB 210
Page 34: Color Spray
Page 35: Illus – Verbal, Somatic, Colored Sand – One Standard – 15ft. – Will, SR – PHB 211
Page 36: Grease
Page 37: Conj – Verbal, Somatic, Pork Rind – One Standard – Close – Balance, Ref, No SR – PHB 238
Page 38: Mage Armor
Page 39: Conj – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Touch – Will, No SR – PHB 250
Page 40: Magic Missile
Page 41: Evoc – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Medium – No Save, SR – PHB 252
Page 42: Ray of Enfeeblement
Page 43: Necro – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Close – No Save, SR – PHB 270
Page 44: Shield
Page 45: Abjur – Verbal, Somatic – One Standard – Personal – No Save, No SR – PHB 279
Page 46: Sleep
Page 47: Ench – Verbal, Somatic, Fine Sand – One Standard – Medium – Will, SR – PHB 281
Page 48:
Page 49:
Page 50:
Page 51:
Page 52:
Page 53:
Page 54:
Page 55:
Page 56:
Page 57:
Page 58:
Page 59:
Page 60:
Page 61:
Page 62:
Page 63:
Page 64:
Page 65:
Page 66:
Page 67:
Page 68:
Page 69:
Page 70:
Page 71:
Page 72:
Page 73:
Page 74:
Page 75:
Page 76:
Page 77:
Page 78:
Page 79:
Page 80:
Page 81:
Page 82:
Page 83:
Page 84:
Page 85:
Page 86:
Page 87:
Page 88:
Page 89:
Page 90:
Page 91:
Page 92:
Page 93:
Page 94:
Page 95:
Page 96:
Page 97:
Page 98:
Page 99:
Page 100:

Code: Select all

Pedsûl (Speaking Wind) – 
Raven, Familiar

HD: 1/4 d8 (HP: 1)
Init: +2
Speed: 10ft., fly 40ft. (average)
AC: 14 – Touch: 14  – Fla t-Footed: 12 – SR: N/A – DR: N/A
Resistances: N/A
Immunities: Sleep
Save Bonuses: +2 versus Enchantment spells and effects
BAB/Grapple: +0/-13
Attack: Claws +4 1d2-5 20/x2
Full Attack: Claws +4 1d2-5 20/x2
Space/Reach: 2.5ft/0ft
Special Attacks: None
Special Qualities: Low-Light Vision
Saves: Fort: +2 – Ref: +4 – Will: +2
Abilities: Str: 1  – Dex: 15 – Con: 10 – Int: 2 – Wis: 14 – Cha: 6
Total ACP: 0
Skills: Listen +3, Spot +5
Feats: Weapon Finesse
Languages: Elven

Still think power gamers can't also RP fucktard? That was with no prep time my friend. Think of what I might do if I'd been at a few planning sessions first?

That you view D&D as comparable to chess says a lot. Chess is a competitive game with no story and hard and fast rules. There are correct and incorrect ways to play chess. D&D depends entirely on the group playing it. Some are heavily story-driven, some are not. House rules are commonplace, and the DM has ultimate veto power over whether or not some rule will apply to the game they are running. There is no "correct" way to play D&D.

D&D has a rule set and a competitive scene too. Have you ever seen the builds people bring to arena battles before?

[Jub]

Ghetto Edit:

Note: Some stuff changed after the first session, but that's all on my PC back in Canada. Of note is the fact that he didn't go to a mage's college and was considered and illegal mage and had a death sentence on his head for it. I decided that I wouldn't be a school trained wizard before I played a session and stuck to it even after the DM told me what it meant. I shrugged and called in a plot hook. I also ended up doing the entire first dungeon, a dungeon filled entirely with mindless creatures, with little aside from enchantment spells prepared after the fighter dragged me in without letting me or the party prep. I still pulled my weight, and I would have had time to prep if I wasn't literally the new guy the party hired specifically to help tackle a dungeon and dragged in less than 8 hours after I had been paid.

So please stop making it out that I'm some sort of mad power gamer. I'm not. I just know how to play the game and know a few tricks to make characters do their jobs well. If the DM says he wants a lower powered game, I take it upon myself to build something that's tough to play. Such as an enchanter who dropped access to most combat spells, a good chunk of save or dies, and who can't cast magic in public for fear of being hunted down and killed.

[Simon_Jester]

So I can't make have made a back story for my wizard and be fully ready to role play him fully if I take moderately powerful options for him? What gives you the right to assume that just because I can make a decent build, and 10 years of playing time and reading forums has shown me a few options, means I can play along with a story?

The problem here is that, given your ability to come up with "decent builds," you are taking a critical stance toward people with... I don't know, "indecent builds?"

The issue is not your roleplaying competence, it is your attitude.

The DM is the one that allowed the Wizard into the party, he should have been ready to deal with stuff that can be found in the PHB. Or are idiot blaster wizards the only acceptable way to play in a story driven game now?

Wizards should be played responsibly, by characters who know and understand that the game isn't supposed to revolve entirely around their actions. That is all there is.

Doesn't change that your response in this hypothetical is "Fuck you" and throwing a hissy fit because you were asked to tone down your powergaming because it was negatively impacting everyone else's experience. Congrats on being That Guy.

In this hypothetical the DM allowed Irbis and myself to play wizards, how could he have not seen a level of power that can be found in the PHB coming?

He should expect you to play responsibly and understand that the game doesn't revolve entirely around you. If you try to modify your character's actions and do something absurd like turn into a midget in a sack so you can make scrolls on the road, you can expect negative consequences. Eventually, the DM gets tired of putting up with the wizard acting in a ridiculous way and trying to claim that his great intelligence allows him to optimize his tactics in the exact way a metagaming player would.

Now, if the DM knew this would happen and embraced it, there is no problem. But if the 'social contract' among the party is more typical, then expectations should be:
-The wizard will act like a vaguely normal human being who can function in a group while doing dangerous things.
-Item crafting rules will be used in the way they were pretty clearly intended (i.e. only when the party gets down time, and on a limited rather than mass-produced scale).
-The wizard will be prepared to act under conditions that don't always allow for perfect concentration and preparation.

Yes, otherwise why even bother to play a wizard at all? If the DM says no every time I try to cast a spell from a core and/or approved source maybe he should have just asked me to play something else instead. If I were playing a wizard with an ice theme I'd be a bit upset if the DM told me that he wasn't allowing Shivering Touch after we'd already played a few sessions.

If he rewrites Shivering Touch so it doesn't automatically let you one-shot powerful monsters, will you be upset then?

Plus, 3.x is how old now, no excuses not to have the rules and spell compendiums at least if you're going to run a game.

They cost money. Should I have to spend money and study time figuring out in advance all the ways you might decide to blow through the obstacles I set in your path? If so, how much? At what point is it more reasonable to simply ask YOU to be responsible about this?

The DM has every trick from every book at his disposal, after taking out the infinite damage pun-pun type builds, if he can't challenge you he's doing it wrong. Rule zero is for guys that can't hack running a a game properly, or guys who didn't set expectations for his game before hand. In either case I'd likely be gone from his table before he asked me to leave anyway.

Good riddance.

Rule zero serves a simple purpose: to ensure that the DM doesn't have to think of everything in advance. That should not be his job- or if it should be, then the game needs to be modified so that "everything" consists of a shorter list. First and second editions were better about that, IMO.

That you view D&D as comparable to chess says a lot. Chess is a competitive game with no story and hard and fast rules. There are correct and incorrect ways to play chess. D&D depends entirely on the group playing it. Some are heavily story-driven, some are not. House rules are commonplace, and the DM has ultimate veto power over whether or not some rule will apply to the game they are running. There is no "correct" way to play D&D.

D&D has a rule set and a competitive scene too. Have you ever seen the builds people bring to arena battles before?

D&D has a ruleset, and a competitive scene, but it was not designed specifically as a competitive activity. The fact that you can play it like it was chess does not mean everyone else should. Or that you have a right to develop an attitude problem when someone else doesn't play it like it was chess, and feels that you're "it's just chess" stance makes the game unpleasant and annoying.

[Ralin]

I think the point you're missing is that if the rules are written in such a way that someone playing a wizard (or any other class) has to constantly hobble himself and just ignore effective tactics to avoid making the other players feel useless, tactics that moreover would be things that any wizard with a bent towards adventuring and the intelligence to be good at his chosen career would think of, that's a sign that something is wrong with the fucking rules.

It's one thing to not actively try to break the system and be an asshole to your DM and fellow players (I permanently disinvited the last person who did this in my games), but the system should be able to stand up to some goddamn creativity from a player who bothers to learn the damned rules well enough to use them effectively.

[Simon_Jester]

Yes; the question is where the line lies.

I don't have a problem with a wizard who becomes overpowered because she keeps summoning creatures or trapping enemies in force bubbles, and because this is intrinsically more effective than blasting.

I do have a problem with a wizard does this, and whose player prates endlessly about how lame and inferior blasting is. Or how stupid and ignorant a DM must be if they didn't expect this outcome. Or if they throw a hissy fit when the DM starts thinking of countermeasures against summoning/bubbling/whatever, claiming that the DM's privilege of altering the rules of the game is for weaklings and that a real DM and a real group of players would be prepared to accept the consequences of the wizard predictably taking an 'inherently powerful' strategy like summoning/bubbling/whatever.

[Jub]

So I can't make have made a back story for my wizard and be fully ready to role play him fully if I take moderately powerful options for him? What gives you the right to assume that just because I can make a decent build, and 10 years of playing time and reading forums has shown me a few options, means I can play along with a story?

The problem here is that, given your ability to come up with "decent builds," you are taking a critical stance toward people with... I don't know, "indecent builds?"

The issue is not your roleplaying competence, it is your attitude.

A first time player can accidentally build a wizard that blows the socks off of anything aside from a cleric, druid, or other wizard. So why does the fact that I already know how to build a reasonable wizard mean that I need to play like I'm Harrison Bergeron handicapped and shackled so that idiots can shine?

The DM is the one that allowed the Wizard into the party, he should have been ready to deal with stuff that can be found in the PHB. Or are idiot blaster wizards the only acceptable way to play in a story driven game now?

Wizards should be played responsibly, by characters who know and understand that the game isn't supposed to revolve entirely around their actions. That is all there is.

Define responsibly such that any wizard can fit in the rules without being forced to play in a bland and uncreative way.

He should expect you to play responsibly and understand that the game doesn't revolve entirely around you. If you try to modify your character's actions and do something absurd like turn into a midget in a sack so you can make scrolls on the road, you can expect negative consequences. Eventually, the DM gets tired of putting up with the wizard acting in a ridiculous way and trying to claim that his great intelligence allows him to optimize his tactics in the exact way a metagaming player would.

How is the wizard being tiny and crafting in a pocket any worse than him making a floating disk, setting it to follow the fighter, and crafting at normal size on a perfectly stable platform, or doing the same thing in the back of a covered wagon? Also, when did you become the arbiter of what is and isn't acceptable to do with a Wizard and where do you get off telling me how to play the game?

Now, if the DM knew this would happen and embraced it, there is no problem. But if the 'social contract' among the party is more typical, then expectations should be:
-The wizard will act like a vaguely normal human being who can function in a group while doing dangerous things.
-Item crafting rules will be used in the way they were pretty clearly intended (i.e. only when the party gets down time, and on a limited rather than mass-produced scale).
-The wizard will be prepared to act under conditions that don't always allow for perfect concentration and preparation.

Explain why you think the acceptable social contract includes smarters player being handicapped so that they are restricted from certain classes and spells that exist in the core books? I can see banning splat books and their contents, because not everybody can be expected to have them and they can create results that a person who has no knowledge of them might find unexpected, but a DM ought to know what's in the core books given that the first edition of this system came out in 2000.

Yes, otherwise why even bother to play a wizard at all? If the DM says no every time I try to cast a spell from a core and/or approved source maybe he should have just asked me to play something else instead. If I were playing a wizard with an ice theme I'd be a bit upset if the DM told me that he wasn't allowing Shivering Touch after we'd already played a few sessions.

If he rewrites Shivering Touch so it doesn't automatically let you one-shot powerful monsters, will you be upset then?

If he had an issue with spells for my theme build he might have mentioned it before I played the class. Or would you feel cool with a DM saying, 'You know, your charging knight who took a few feats just does too much damage when he gets his full charge attack of. I'm going to need to change the way a few feats work.' Does the nerfing feel as unjustified as it is when you apply it to a weaker class?

Plus, 3.x is how old now, no excuses not to have the rules and spell compendiums at least if you're going to run a game.

They cost money. Should I have to spend money and study time figuring out in advance all the ways you might decide to blow through the obstacles I set in your path? If so, how much? At what point is it more reasonable to simply ask YOU to be responsible about this?[/quote]

WotC obviously doesn't mind, they built the game, hand crafted every spell, and erratted the ones they had issues with. Why should I have to head into a game expecting my DM to be a retard who can't handle a Wizard built around a small subset of books that have been out for half a decade?

Also, what precisely is playing responsibly? Does it mean letting the fighter get a swing or two in before trying your save or dies? Is it acceptable to buff yourself while he flails away worthless at a giant sack of HP? Or does the fact that you did it easily make the fighter sad anyway?

The DM has every trick from every book at his disposal, after taking out the infinite damage pun-pun type builds, if he can't challenge you he's doing it wrong. Rule zero is for guys that can't hack running a a game properly, or guys who didn't set expectations for his game before hand. In either case I'd likely be gone from his table before he asked me to leave anyway.

Good riddance.

Rule zero serves a simple purpose: to ensure that the DM doesn't have to think of everything in advance. That should not be his job- or if it should be, then the game needs to be modified so that "everything" consists of a shorter list. First and second editions were better about that, IMO.

Rule zero is a crutch, if the players solve a problem in an unexpected way the DM needs to smile and move on. Some encounters will be bypassed with clever item use, quick thinking, and the players having the right resources at hand. Between the guy with the highest possible Int and the guy with the highest possible Wis, the party should have that on hand as a matter of course. Or should every wizard be a stereotype who shouts, 'You shall not pass!' and tosses a fireball when and only when, the fighter is about to die?

D&D has a ruleset, and a competitive scene, but it was not designed specifically as a competitive activity. The fact that you can play it like it was chess does not mean everyone else should. Or that you have a right to develop an attitude problem when someone else doesn't play it like it was chess, and feels that you're "it's just chess" stance makes the game unpleasant and annoying.

What makes your stance more right? What if I build my character like the game is chess, and make a back story where his studying of magic, time, and space has lead him to believe that the world runs on fundamental rules and has spells that see time in six second chunks? Given the study of magic is firmly established in the D&D mutliverse, doesn't it seem likely that wizards would have figured some of this stuff out already?

Is this idea suddenly unacceptable just because his fluff also partial interacts with the rules?

Yes; the question is where the line lies.

I don't have a problem with a wizard who becomes overpowered because she keeps summoning creatures or trapping enemies in force bubbles, and because this is intrinsically more effective than blasting.

I do have a problem with a wizard does this, and whose player prates endlessly about how lame and inferior blasting is. Or how stupid and ignorant a DM must be if they didn't expect this outcome. Or if they throw a hissy fit when the DM starts thinking of countermeasures against summoning/bubbling/whatever, claiming that the DM's privilege of altering the rules of the game is for weaklings and that a real DM and a real group of players would be prepared to accept the consequences of the wizard predictably taking an 'inherently powerful' strategy like summoning/bubbling/whatever.

Why would I get mad if a DM counted one out of many wizard tactics, and a lame duck one at that? I'd just prep up a new set of spells the next day and change gears. I might also wonder why, depending on circumstance, the next group of enemies is also optimized against my signature tactic. Just as a rogue might question things if a long stretch of the game is against oozes, undead, and constructs after he single handedly destroyed a couple of 'tough' fights earlier in the game.

Why allow a class at all if you aren't ready for it? The problem even has a name, it has for ages, it's linear fighters quadratic wizards for the divine side you have the term CoDzilla. Any idiot who searches for one of these classes online will find these terms quickly enough and that might clue them into the power of a full caster.

[Jub]

The issue here is, that there is no universal standard for how to play D&D, what seems reasonable, or even weak to me, might seem overpowered to a party that is used to wizards slinging fireballs and clerics healing in combat. How am I to know what is too powerful for a game when even within core fireball and healing in combat has never been optimal?

Example, which is a better spell:

Magic Missiles or Grease?
Burning Hands or Sleep?
Color Spray or Ray of Enfeeblement?
Shield or Mage Armor?

Which am I allowed to have at first level and which are too good? Why? How was I supposed to know?

EDIT:

The problem here is that, given your ability to come up with "decent builds," you are taking a critical stance toward people with... I don't know, "indecent builds?"

The issue is not your roleplaying competence, it is your attitude.

You're the one getting pissy here. I'm just pointing out the fact that there is no set standard for what is and isn't game breaking and that the DM needs to set these standards before the game starts and not after the fact. You also seem to think that any player who knows the rules and expects the DM to know them as well is a bad person. Yet you seem perfectly comfortable to bash me for thinking the same of a person who DMs without even knowing the power that lies within the few hundred spells of the core book.

[Mr Bean]

Jub there is a set standard it's called Encounter level.

If your Level X Wizard can solo something meant for four people he's breaking EL. If he can solo something meant for four people four levels higher than he is he's getting into munchkin territory.

The standard of playing D&D is to mix encounters to fight player strengths and weaknesses and if your party of 5th level adventures can fight and win vs an equivalent EL fight your doing fine. If they can struggle past and just beat a little bit higher EL fight fine. But if the Wizard can solo the fight you meant for all of them to have it's breaking. Sometimes it happens with someone getting smart/lucky/DM is dumb. But when up several fights and all are one and done affairs you've got a breakage. A weakness... a screw lose in the world.