DMs Guild Review: The Magician Class
Hello, everyone! Recently I promised more content besides just Newbieville session summaries, and today I deliver on that promise!
I'm going to be (regularly, I hope) reviewing products on the DMs Guild created by small, independent creators. Today I just scanned the "most recent products" listing for something interesting. In the future, I might dig deeper for undiscovered gems, but more than that I'd like to review things by request. So if you know of an RPG product (DMs Guild or not) that you'd like to see reviewed, let me know in the comments or on social media!
Since this is my first review, I'd like to lay out my plan for how I'll do my reviews. This may change over time, but I wanted some sort of framework in place before beginning. I'll be rating each product according to the following categories:
Concept — What does this product promise to be, and is that promise exciting? Is it something that fills a needed gap or does something cool and original, or is it just reinventing the wheel?
Delivery — How well is the content delivered? Can I quickly find the information I need, in the place I expect it to be? Do explanations make sense? Does the author use established terminology, or shorthand that a reader might not understand and won't be able to find in the rules?
Execution — The title, product summary, and possibly other sections of copy have promised something; does the mechanical content make me feel like I got what I was promised?
Implementation — Has the content been properly translated into the game system? For D&D content, is it clear that the author knows what edition they're writing for? If system norms were violated, were those violations intentional and clever or just clumsy accidents?
Quality — Does the design itself actually work? Can the material be used as-written or do I have to fill in blanks and resolve self-contradictions before I can use it?
Balance — Is the power level of the content in line with established paradigms? Are PC options balanced against other options of the same type (class, feat, spell of the same level, etc)? Are monsters comparable to other monsters of the same challenge rating, and are adventure skill DCs appropriate for the stated level range of the adventure?
Each of these categories will receive a score ranging from 1 to 5, with 5 being the best. Then, the scores will be combined into an overall score. Note that depending on the type of product, certain categories might be weighted more or less heavily than others, or even eliminated entirely.
So! Using the above system, today I will be reviewing a new D&D class called "The Magician," which you can find HERE. It's currently listed as "Pay What You Want," which I think is silly for a full class — even if it turns out to be bad, it was still a lot of work — so if you want to check it out, please drop them a few bucks if you can.
Here's how the class presents itself on the product page, for those who didn't click through:
"Outside of fantasy situations, we all know what 'magic' means, what a 'magician' is. Harry Houdini. Penn and Teller. Ricky Jay. The Amazing Randi. The tragic rivals of The Prestige. Fortune tellers, puffs of smoke, rabbits coming out of hats, card tricks, and so much more. They're entertainers, highly skilled performers, experts at misdirection and audience manipulation, and deeply serious artists.
This class is my attempt to answer the question: what would this noble profession be in a world in which magic is real?
Spellcasting is normally understood as falling within the province of the 'mental' ability scores: Intelligence (wizards), Wisdom (clerics and druids), or Charisma (bards, sorcerers, and warlocks). And yet, spells are deeply physical, kinetic interventions in the world. They have verbal components, somatic components, material components. They make haptic demands on the caster.
The magician is a character class that embraces these deeply physical aspects of spellcasting, using Dexterity as its primary ability score."
Taking a look inside, I found a class description that follows the layout of the Player's Handbook, including several paragraphs of opening description and a class ability chart. The class has a d8 hit die, light armor, mostly just simple weapons, and two skills. The class uses "ki points" (much like a monk) for a set of unique abilities, as well as to fuel the casting of spells without the use of spell slots (and, as promised, with Dexterity as its spellcasting ability). You know all the spells on your class list, and you always cast spells at your highest spell level, which follows the progression of "half-casters" like paladins and rangers. You also have a variant Sneak Attack ability and an assortment of more original class features. There are three subclasses.
Concept — The idea is pretty cool, on multiple levels. The idea of a stage magician in a world where magic is real definitely deserves to be explored. Experimenting with non-mental spellcasting ability scores is a bold move that the author gets credit for even attempting, and frankly the game needs more half-casters. Score: 5.0/5.0
Delivery — The author lays out the information in the familiar format of the Player's Handbook, so looking for a piece of information is easy: everything's exactly where you'd expect. On the other hand, the representation of spellcasting in the class table is a little wonky and difficult to reference at a glance. Plus, unfortunately, the author does sometimes slip into colloquialisms instead of proper terminology. Some of it is pretty minor and forgivable (like saying "concentration checks" instead of "Constitution saving throws to maintain concentration") but some of it really impedes understanding (like, "You always know all the spells that you are able to cast and always cast at the highest spell level you know," which is delivered without much context and takes a bit of further reading to puzzle out). Score: 3.5/5.0
Execution — The concepts of a DEX-caster and a stage magician were exciting, but it feels like they haven't been properly synthesized into a single coherent whole. Most of the descriptive text makes it feel like the magician should have been CHA-based, but then for some reason it's DEX-based instead. Meanwhile, we've got a class with Sneak Attack, boosted unarmed strike damage, and ki points; it feels like a rogue/monk hybrid chassis with the promised magician sort of built on top of it with the other class features (and even those are sometimes random and off-theme). Score: 2.5/5.0
Implementation — This category is where this class struggles. For example, the default non-spell ki abilities all modify skill checks, but it's not completely clear how they work. Do I spend the point as part of the check? Do I spend the point with an action or bonus action beforehand, much like Bardic Inspiration or the Guidance cantrip? I'm leaning toward the former simply because the description lacks any of the information of the latter, but it doesn't actually clearly state that that's how it works.
The Sneak Attack ability you get is different from the established ability, in a game which routinely copies abilities across multiple classes (Ability Score Increase, Extra Attack, Fighting Style, and more). Normally you would either copy an ability entirely (except possibly limiting options in a multiple-choice ability), or you would invent a new ability to accomplish what you want. The idea here is that if a class uses an ability you're already familiar with, that knowledge will transfer over. By calling it Sneak Attack but modifying a few details, that goal is undermined, so it should have been a separate ability entirely.
All in all, this class really struggles to fit into the game it's written for. Score: 2.0/5.0
Quality — Okay, so aside from some flavor misalignments and system-meshing shortcomings, does the class function? Once you've figured out what was meant by all of the class feature descriptions, can you actually play the class without having to fix anything first? Mostly, yes. There are some ambiguities that are big enough you'll have to make decisions with your DM rather than just puzzle out the intended meaning, but for the most part, the class does indeed function. Score: 4.0/5.0
Balance — Finally, if you play this class, will you be on a similar power level as other classes? It's a little tricky to say. On the one hand, the two PHB half-casters we have to use for templates both have a bigger hit die and better armor than the magician, and one of those two is considered one of the weakest classes in the game. On the other hand, the magician's spell list includes some real heavy-hitters, and the class has a casting system which can let you cast far more high-level (well, high-level for a half-caster) spells per day than the traditional slots-per-day chart allows. This would probably put the magician in a solid place, being a more magic-leaning counterpart to the more martial-leaning paladin and ranger, but... the magician also has Sneak Attack. It's a smidge weaker than the rogue's Sneak Attack (like, a few points less average damage at high levels), but it still offers scaling attack damage throughout the character's career that's normally meant to help the rogue keep up with other martial characters. In other words, you've got almost-rogue damage capability (and the same level of defense) alongside a half-caster model that outpaces other half-casters in both spell quality and total output. I can't help thinking this class grows too fast in power as it levels up. Score: 3.5/5.0
Alright, so out of all of those scores, that gives us a total score of 20.5/30.0, landing it solidly in "cool but flawed" territory. When you consider that this appears to be their first class design, that's pretty much what you'd expect for a talented greenhorn.
The magician class is a cool idea which makes a valiant attempt at working with some under-explored mechanics, but it needs significant refinement in identity, mechanics, and language. If this author keeps practicing and learns to bring their technical skills up to par with their creativity, I would anticipate some very exceptional products to surface. I hope they will keep creating.
That's all for today. Let me know if there's something you'd like to see me review, even if it's something you created yourself. Until next time, take care of each other, okay?
I'm going to be (regularly, I hope) reviewing products on the DMs Guild created by small, independent creators. Today I just scanned the "most recent products" listing for something interesting. In the future, I might dig deeper for undiscovered gems, but more than that I'd like to review things by request. So if you know of an RPG product (DMs Guild or not) that you'd like to see reviewed, let me know in the comments or on social media!
Since this is my first review, I'd like to lay out my plan for how I'll do my reviews. This may change over time, but I wanted some sort of framework in place before beginning. I'll be rating each product according to the following categories:
Concept — What does this product promise to be, and is that promise exciting? Is it something that fills a needed gap or does something cool and original, or is it just reinventing the wheel?
Delivery — How well is the content delivered? Can I quickly find the information I need, in the place I expect it to be? Do explanations make sense? Does the author use established terminology, or shorthand that a reader might not understand and won't be able to find in the rules?
Execution — The title, product summary, and possibly other sections of copy have promised something; does the mechanical content make me feel like I got what I was promised?
Implementation — Has the content been properly translated into the game system? For D&D content, is it clear that the author knows what edition they're writing for? If system norms were violated, were those violations intentional and clever or just clumsy accidents?
Quality — Does the design itself actually work? Can the material be used as-written or do I have to fill in blanks and resolve self-contradictions before I can use it?
Balance — Is the power level of the content in line with established paradigms? Are PC options balanced against other options of the same type (class, feat, spell of the same level, etc)? Are monsters comparable to other monsters of the same challenge rating, and are adventure skill DCs appropriate for the stated level range of the adventure?
Each of these categories will receive a score ranging from 1 to 5, with 5 being the best. Then, the scores will be combined into an overall score. Note that depending on the type of product, certain categories might be weighted more or less heavily than others, or even eliminated entirely.
So! Using the above system, today I will be reviewing a new D&D class called "The Magician," which you can find HERE. It's currently listed as "Pay What You Want," which I think is silly for a full class — even if it turns out to be bad, it was still a lot of work — so if you want to check it out, please drop them a few bucks if you can.
Here's how the class presents itself on the product page, for those who didn't click through:
"Outside of fantasy situations, we all know what 'magic' means, what a 'magician' is. Harry Houdini. Penn and Teller. Ricky Jay. The Amazing Randi. The tragic rivals of The Prestige. Fortune tellers, puffs of smoke, rabbits coming out of hats, card tricks, and so much more. They're entertainers, highly skilled performers, experts at misdirection and audience manipulation, and deeply serious artists.
This class is my attempt to answer the question: what would this noble profession be in a world in which magic is real?
Spellcasting is normally understood as falling within the province of the 'mental' ability scores: Intelligence (wizards), Wisdom (clerics and druids), or Charisma (bards, sorcerers, and warlocks). And yet, spells are deeply physical, kinetic interventions in the world. They have verbal components, somatic components, material components. They make haptic demands on the caster.
The magician is a character class that embraces these deeply physical aspects of spellcasting, using Dexterity as its primary ability score."
Taking a look inside, I found a class description that follows the layout of the Player's Handbook, including several paragraphs of opening description and a class ability chart. The class has a d8 hit die, light armor, mostly just simple weapons, and two skills. The class uses "ki points" (much like a monk) for a set of unique abilities, as well as to fuel the casting of spells without the use of spell slots (and, as promised, with Dexterity as its spellcasting ability). You know all the spells on your class list, and you always cast spells at your highest spell level, which follows the progression of "half-casters" like paladins and rangers. You also have a variant Sneak Attack ability and an assortment of more original class features. There are three subclasses.
Concept — The idea is pretty cool, on multiple levels. The idea of a stage magician in a world where magic is real definitely deserves to be explored. Experimenting with non-mental spellcasting ability scores is a bold move that the author gets credit for even attempting, and frankly the game needs more half-casters. Score: 5.0/5.0
Delivery — The author lays out the information in the familiar format of the Player's Handbook, so looking for a piece of information is easy: everything's exactly where you'd expect. On the other hand, the representation of spellcasting in the class table is a little wonky and difficult to reference at a glance. Plus, unfortunately, the author does sometimes slip into colloquialisms instead of proper terminology. Some of it is pretty minor and forgivable (like saying "concentration checks" instead of "Constitution saving throws to maintain concentration") but some of it really impedes understanding (like, "You always know all the spells that you are able to cast and always cast at the highest spell level you know," which is delivered without much context and takes a bit of further reading to puzzle out). Score: 3.5/5.0
Execution — The concepts of a DEX-caster and a stage magician were exciting, but it feels like they haven't been properly synthesized into a single coherent whole. Most of the descriptive text makes it feel like the magician should have been CHA-based, but then for some reason it's DEX-based instead. Meanwhile, we've got a class with Sneak Attack, boosted unarmed strike damage, and ki points; it feels like a rogue/monk hybrid chassis with the promised magician sort of built on top of it with the other class features (and even those are sometimes random and off-theme). Score: 2.5/5.0
Implementation — This category is where this class struggles. For example, the default non-spell ki abilities all modify skill checks, but it's not completely clear how they work. Do I spend the point as part of the check? Do I spend the point with an action or bonus action beforehand, much like Bardic Inspiration or the Guidance cantrip? I'm leaning toward the former simply because the description lacks any of the information of the latter, but it doesn't actually clearly state that that's how it works.
The Sneak Attack ability you get is different from the established ability, in a game which routinely copies abilities across multiple classes (Ability Score Increase, Extra Attack, Fighting Style, and more). Normally you would either copy an ability entirely (except possibly limiting options in a multiple-choice ability), or you would invent a new ability to accomplish what you want. The idea here is that if a class uses an ability you're already familiar with, that knowledge will transfer over. By calling it Sneak Attack but modifying a few details, that goal is undermined, so it should have been a separate ability entirely.
All in all, this class really struggles to fit into the game it's written for. Score: 2.0/5.0
Quality — Okay, so aside from some flavor misalignments and system-meshing shortcomings, does the class function? Once you've figured out what was meant by all of the class feature descriptions, can you actually play the class without having to fix anything first? Mostly, yes. There are some ambiguities that are big enough you'll have to make decisions with your DM rather than just puzzle out the intended meaning, but for the most part, the class does indeed function. Score: 4.0/5.0
Balance — Finally, if you play this class, will you be on a similar power level as other classes? It's a little tricky to say. On the one hand, the two PHB half-casters we have to use for templates both have a bigger hit die and better armor than the magician, and one of those two is considered one of the weakest classes in the game. On the other hand, the magician's spell list includes some real heavy-hitters, and the class has a casting system which can let you cast far more high-level (well, high-level for a half-caster) spells per day than the traditional slots-per-day chart allows. This would probably put the magician in a solid place, being a more magic-leaning counterpart to the more martial-leaning paladin and ranger, but... the magician also has Sneak Attack. It's a smidge weaker than the rogue's Sneak Attack (like, a few points less average damage at high levels), but it still offers scaling attack damage throughout the character's career that's normally meant to help the rogue keep up with other martial characters. In other words, you've got almost-rogue damage capability (and the same level of defense) alongside a half-caster model that outpaces other half-casters in both spell quality and total output. I can't help thinking this class grows too fast in power as it levels up. Score: 3.5/5.0
Alright, so out of all of those scores, that gives us a total score of 20.5/30.0, landing it solidly in "cool but flawed" territory. When you consider that this appears to be their first class design, that's pretty much what you'd expect for a talented greenhorn.
The magician class is a cool idea which makes a valiant attempt at working with some under-explored mechanics, but it needs significant refinement in identity, mechanics, and language. If this author keeps practicing and learns to bring their technical skills up to par with their creativity, I would anticipate some very exceptional products to surface. I hope they will keep creating.
That's all for today. Let me know if there's something you'd like to see me review, even if it's something you created yourself. Until next time, take care of each other, okay?
______________________________________
Enjoying the Find Familiar blog? Check out my other work!
Follow me on social media too!
Man this isn't a review, it doesn't actually try the class out or tell us anything about what it does or how it actually plays. Good job reading and providing analysis of the book, but without actual play it's hard to take any of your assessments seriously.
ReplyDeleteThat's part of why I broke it down into categories: if you don't trust un-playtested balance assessments (which is certainly a valid stance), you can just leave that part out, giving you a new total of 17.0/25.0 for the parts that don't require playtesting to assess. Sorry that wasn't clear at first.
Delete