I'm trying to make sense of HQ2's wizardry rules, and there's something I can't figure out. Simply put, what's the advantage (in terms of game balance) of playing a Wizard rather than a Theist? A Theist gets three runes which he can manifest in a broad range of magical effects, limited mostly by the way his god embodies those runes. This gives a theistic character a lot of options in game. A Wizard in contrast, doesn't get runes, he gets a set number of spells that do 1 thing and 1 thing only. He can get one extra spell a session, but only if the storyline allows for regular journeys to the Other Side, which seems pretty messy for a narrator to accommodate. The Wizard gets a tiny advantage over a Theist because he can do overtly magical things before he gets to 1W, but that's pretty small, since most players will get to 1W fairly quickly. The Theist can become a Devotee, which allows him access to fairly powerful feats, although they limit what he can do because he has to be emulating his god closely. He has to pay a hero point for new feats. The Wizard can discover new spells, with no hero point cost, but again has to go to the Other Side ever session to do this. But again, feats are way more dynamic and flexible than spells are. Am I missing something about what balances out Wizardry against Theism? Theism just seems much more flexible than Wizardry. Only a very experienced wizard will have anything approaching the range of options that even a relatively new Theist will have.
Andrew E. Larsen
Powered by hypermail