Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8842513" data-attributes="member: 6987520">Are you on different forum than I am? Do you happen to have any of these posts bookmarked? I've seen more people complain that martials aren't powerful enough...So, in some of the fighter vs. wizard threads I've questioned the balance, tried posting options to bring martials up to a higher power level and bring the power of spells (the only issue*, really, not just "wizards") down to keep things more in balance.The problem is different people want different things from the game. It isn't the class. Some people want superheroic fantasy, others want more toned down games. Unfortunately, WotC has thrown balance out the window. They designed most martials for the toned down games, but left full casters (again, not just Wizards!) with the power they need (via spells and some of those other class features) for the superheroic games.I've only been playing 5E for four years, but I've never (not once!) had a player of a wizard (or any class) "feel entitled to be gods" or anything like it. I really would have to question a player who acted like that and they probably wouldn't remain in my game long because they would quickly find out their PC (Wizard or whatever) is not a god or anything like it.Tell me why instead of just making blanket statements. Convince me.IMO Bards are worse offenders: full-casters with a variety of spells and more known spells than others (including magical secrets!), expertise, other helpful features, and with the right subclass choice good in combat as well![spoiler="*"]What are Wizards without spells? Nothing really. Clerics, Druids, Bards, even the half-casters, have features separate from their spells. If you took away their spells or decreased spells' power, those classes could still contribute. If you take away spells from Wizards, they literally have nothing. So, the ISSUE is spells, more than anything.While it's true Wizards have the largest selection of spells, it is because they have nothing else. Wizards have limited access to their spell list, and depend on DM fiat to get more. Meanwhile, Clerics, Druids, and Paladins have access to all their spells. Even known spell casters have access to their entire spell lists, even if they have limited options to change them out.Some might argue Wizards have too many options when you consider the versatility of their spell list. Yes, they do have a lot of spells that can do a lot of things and overcome a lot of challenges--if they choose them. They can't have them all--there are always gaps. Even if they have a well-chosen list, they still need a long rest to prepare a spell (if they even have it...) that isn't prepared to meet a challenge. That option isn't always available.FWIW, it isn't hard to redistribute the spell list. It isn't hard to slow down the spell progression of full casters so their power more matches the other classes. If you want other classes to have more powerful features, you can go the other way and make those, too.If you think Wizards are boring, etc. that is a different issue and fine with me. Everyone has their preferences for what classes they like or don't, find interesting and fun to play or don't.I love the class, it is one of my top three (along with Fighter and Rogue). I enjoy it because it is a challenge to select spell and prepare the right ones for an adventure. I also don't cast spells like candy, because as a player I never know when my wizard will get another long rest to get those spell slots back.Frankly, I would LOVE to see one of these "wizards should be gods" players and the game they're in, because I really don't see how they can be played like that.[/spoiler]</blockquote>

Verification