For those players who "don't find [this] particularly satisfying" I have no sympathy whatsoever.
If it's a powerful thing then there should be impediments to its use.
And as I said earlier, in different words:
Players don't like that. Players have repeatedly refused to play that way, as a major and sustained pattern. Designers have refused to make rules that actually enforce the impediments, and what impediments they do use are
really annoying and not enriching the game experience at all. Like, there are ways to design game limitations that are fun and interesting. "Your spell fizzles!"
is not one of those ways. And, finally, DMs have repeatedly and continuously, across basically the entire run of the game, refused to actually
enforce the limits that are supposed to be present.
Yet the complaints continue and the power imbalance that results leaves those who aren't spellcasters frustrated.
Your answer seems to be "screw human psychology and effective solutions. We will design the game that I think
should work, and people should just learn to enjoy playing it the
right way." But that, to me, sounds like saying "well if people are going to use it wrong,
design better people, and leave the game alone."
Why not design a game that actually gives people a reason too WANT to play it as intended? Or one that gives players their fun
without making it overpowered and instant-win? It's a hell of a lot easier (though still difficult) to design a good, functional game that gets people to do things as intended, rather than changing human nature.
