Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6874672" data-attributes="member: 996">A fact that demolishes a hopeful theory often feels that way.    'Vancian' has never been a perfect description of D&D magic, but, the 4e Wizard did prepare 1-10 single-use spells on a daily basis, depending on level and choice of utilities.  That's actually closer to the number of spells Dying Earth magicians could memorize at once than high level wizards in other editions (who prepared a lot more).  Not that fidelity to the Dying Earth is or ever was a goal of D&D.  The mechanics were also closer to traditional D&D Vancian than 5e - in the sense that spell choice was not spontaneous.   That's a pretty weak excuse for 'forgetting' a past example that stands in stark contrast to the idea of 5e wizards somehow having 'fewer' spells.  In any case, the fact stands:  5e wizards have more spells than they did in the last edition - a lot more.Not the only strike against them, but neither was Spontaneous casting the only thing they had over the Wizard.  The two biggest things the Sorcerer had going for it relative to the Wizard, though, were Spontaneous casting and more slots/day.    Relative to 3.5, given that the Wizard picked up the Sorcerer's Spontaneous Casting, the Sorcerer didn't pick up the Wizard's prepped casting, and that the Sorcerer lost it's greater number of slots/day, it's hard to see how they'd be /better/ balanced, at least, not for values of 'better' that include the two being closer to equal, rather than the wizard widening his putative lead.We'll have to agree to disagree.  I maintain that 'better balancing' is that which brings high-level casters closer to the level of power & versatility of other high-level characters, not pushes them further beyond the pale.  ;P</blockquote>

Verification