Two reasons: money and encumbrance. And a complete spellbook does not allow complete memorization.
Uncanny Forethought says hi.
I would also add that I don't find a GM seeking to enforce some balance and challenge in his game is "completely insane".
When it comes down to basically complete fiat, though, it does.
You are claiming omnipotence for wizards. My experience is that this happens only when GM's are insanely liberal.
Then your experience is wrong.
That's my starting point. Lower level spells lose DC's and become less relevant, typically becoming utilities over time. A couple of levels down, probably still some attack spells in there.
Then you're using the wrong spells.
You said you don't run out of spells because you use only one, maybe 2, per encounter. The ones you cast beforehand also contribute to running out of spells.
Because by the time you get free persists, of course you never have any slots at all.
Still not seeing your spell load.
Then you can't read. Hardly my problem.
First off, I'd be banning Uncanny Forethought's second ability
Not my problem.
Celerity is fourth level, and leaves you Dazed - best take out all your opponents.
Third Eye: Clarity. Cheap, effective, never leave home without it.
I also note it's another "generally viewed as broken and therefore banned" spell.
Cool. And if you ban every spell above second level, wizards are totally balanced, amirite?
I'm not sure we're proving much beyond "late 3e material was over the top and there's a reason it didn't make its way to later editions".
We seem to not only have different definitions of "overpowered," considering how you appear to find Complete Scoundrel and Tome of Magic overpowered, but also "making it into later editions," given the abundance of extra actions in 4e.
It also combines only with spells you have selected - you need a full round action to use those empty slots, remember?
I hardly see a problem with that.
Still waiting for build and spell load, not examples of broken abilities one might take, but how you place them together in a character.
I've already given it to you.
I'm counting a lot of feats
Then you're having trouble counting. Improved Initiative is free.
Read it yourself.
Looks like the humming bird comes from a magazine article, so we're assuming open season on sources.
Meh. It's hardly mandatory, just a winmore.
Nerveskitter is a spell - so we use only one, maybe two, spells per encounter, do we?
Because first level spells are so useful at those high levels, right?
Can't use Uncanny Forethought for that - you don't want it to become a full round action.
And? I expect you to actually read my post before arguing against it.
Still awaiting that spell load.
Still waiting for you to read.
Assuming you are that focused on winning initiative (STILL waiting on that full build), how focused are your teammates?
Not focused enough to be spellcasters, apparently, so they don't matter.
Unless you're telling me my teammates are incompetent enough to actually waste money in something they'll lose regardless? Next you'll be telling me they actually put more than a +1 enhancement bonus on their armor.
I believe you still need to beat their rolls to move first.
...You're joking, right?
Contingency being a spell few L7 wizards are casting, so what level are we up to before your wizard can operate,
Level one, but hey, if you want me to take random pieces of your post out of context, I'd be glad to oblige.
and how does he survive to get there?
By being a wizard, and therefore winning.
To the wand, nerveskitter is an immediate action, so you get one party member.
No, casters are using from their slots. Non-casters are using it to break Flat-Footed.
Assuming you carry that wand everywhere you go, of course - you don't have time to draw it.
Wand chambers. Do try to keep up.
Unless you want to get the enemies and not the allies, of course.
If my partymates were such Darwin Award material as to get caught in my spell, I'm not feeling terribly sympathetic.
If you can't see, so much for spells with targets. The fact that a spread's "effect can extend around corners and into areas that you can’t see." implies it can't be cast to start somewhere you can't see, and that this is an exception to most areas of effect.
...Please, please try to at least achieve a minimal level of reading comprehension.
In a brief glance precise enough to determine he's less than 20' away from his ally and more than 20' away from your teammate? I doubt it.
Then you obviously have some problems with spacial reasoning. Again, hardly my problem.
To your question, literally no one is twice as smart as the smartest human, as the smartest human is precisely 100% as smart as the smartest human
Reading comprehension is cool. I'd suggest you reread my post, but that'd be impossible as its' apparent you've not actually read it yet.
They are metagaming, to an extent. There would be nothing wrong with no grid - you say what you plan on doing. "I will close 10' and cast a Fireball centering here", "I move towards the War Elephant - I will attack if I can get there without a charge, or close to melee range further if I need a full move". Now get out the ruler. Few people play this style,
Because it's against the rules.
but I've also never had anyone suggest they can cast spells by verbal description of an unseen area either.
Are you familiar with the concept of "area of effect?" Or at least the word "radius?"
And still no build, spell load, etc.
This is quite tiresome. Learn to read. I enjoy strong debate, but I have little patience for those incapable of even the very lowest levels of reading comprehension.
Most characters with unlimited resources do tend to appear quite overpowered.
Most characters with arbitrary restrictions, when seen by someone with little advanced understanding of the game's mechanics, seem much weaker than they are. Want to compare notes?
