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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 615476" data-attributes="member: 151">Intrinsically, no, I don't think they're balanced, if you assume the standard D&D world to be in effect, as per the core.  Icebear has already pointed out the economic difference.  Your changes enhance the wizard compared to other classes, as the economic disincentive to scribing spells is removed, BBB or no BBB.  Gaining new spells has never been a problem in world with purchasable magic items, easily obtainable in most larger urban centers.The Sorceror specialist rules would just become the de facto design for sorcerors,who generally gravitate to a very focused approach to spell casting (the artillery cannon being the most popular type).  Not many Abjuration Sorcerors will feel that bad about losing Divination and Necromancy, for example.Now, if you were to prevent the players from having lots of downtime, or limit access to the 'magic' ink, for example, those change the equation.  If magic items, especially scrolls, are not readily available, that's another thing, as well.  If there is more than one wizard in a party, that too, changes things.  It's just not that simple an equation.  Saying you're giving a barbarian a d20 instead of d12 is a straightforward mathematical change, and reasonably easy to gauge.  Saying you're giving a barbarian literacy, but having him forbidden from writing...that's another kettle of fish.  It may be balanced, it may not.  The 'intrinsic' balance of your changes is too heavily tied to other factors to be judged accurately without a point of reference, IMHO.</blockquote>

Verification