Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RealAlHazred" data-source="post: 6749914" data-attributes="member: 25818">Originally posted by Tempest_Stormwind:And those are the unique spells I was talking about. I don't view them as detached from the class they're in - I view them as part of the class they're in. The artificer can already steal the low-level ones for hiimself relatively easily - a prospect that I will probably end up curtailing, if the multiclass tests come out the way I think they will. I wouldn't want him to also be able to steal them for others. I did mention earlier that having two sets of &quot;spells known&quot; raises all sorts of confusion and exceptions (Why can't he cast a spell he knows? He knows it! And likewise, why can't he create an item of a spell he's got committed to memory?), while having a spellbook (described as blueprints, not spells) and a separate space of spells known keeps the concept separate in players' minds. This is a cognitive argument independent of the size of the book.  That said, I mentioned a while ago, and I didn't follow it, but I will mention it again now and I WILL follow it going forward: I will not address concerns about the size of the spellbook until you bring me some hard data on it being broken under 5e's basic assumptions. In your case, that must involve at least some experience with wizards in 5e standard. And yes, that includes its treasure tables - you'll be surprised at the results. I will continue to be open to other feedback about the rest of the class, without any qualifiers. </blockquote>

[QUOTE="RealAlHazred, post: 6749914, member: 25818"] [b]Originally posted by Tempest_Stormwind:[/b] And those are the unique spells I was talking about. I don't view them as detached from the class they're in - I view them as [i]part[/i] of the class they're in. The artificer can already steal the low-level ones for hiimself relatively easily - a prospect that I will probably end up curtailing, if the multiclass tests come out the way I think they will. I wouldn't want him to [i]also[/i] be able to steal them for others. I did mention earlier that having two sets of "spells known" raises all sorts of confusion and exceptions (Why can't he cast a spell he knows? He knows it! And likewise, why can't he create an item of a spell he's got committed to memory?), while having a spellbook (described as blueprints, not spells) and a separate space of spells known keeps the concept separate in players' minds. This is a cognitive argument independent of the size of the book. That said, I mentioned a while ago, and I didn't follow it, but I will mention it again now and I WILL follow it going forward: [b]I will not address concerns about the size of the spellbook until you bring me some hard data on it being broken under 5e's basic assumptions[/b]. In your case, that must involve at least some experience with wizards in 5e standard. And yes, that includes its treasure tables - you'll be surprised at the results. I will continue to be open to other feedback about the rest of the class, without any qualifiers. [/QUOTE]

Verification