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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dropbear8mybaby" data-source="post: 7083562" data-attributes="member: 6863518">Read the title, didn't bother reading the post, eh?My point is, as I stated, that a class shouldn't be reliant on DM fiat to be balanced. The Wild Sorcerer is the only other example I can think of where a core class component is so heavily reliant on DM interpretation and effort. I could play a champion fighter in a no magic campaign and be exactly the same in terms of class-based power as I would in a high magic campaign. Class balance shouldn't be at the DM's whim, or rely on them to contrive a resource solely for a player. If you're playing in a campaign without a wizard and find you don't ever find spellbooks, and then a wizard player joins and suddenly you're finding spellbooks, that's a contrivance I'd rather do without.The wizard is the best at utility and versatility if they get spellbooks to compliment their level choices. The sorcerer, cleric, warlock and bard, have in-built utility. The sorcerer's utility comes from metamagic and extra spell slots, and the warlock's from invocations, for instance. The wizard relies on spell selection for that.You're comparing apples and oranges. The sorcerer is by far the better blaster and can outpace the wizard on spell slots and instantaneous utility through metamagic. The warlock has their invocations that give them insane levels of utility, like detect magic at will for instance. If a wizard wants detect magic then they have to either choose that and lose out on damage/defence, or risk never finding it in a scroll/spellbook.Yes, heaven forbid that I'd want a constructive conversation about an issue I have an interest in.I've played several wizards, thank you very much. I think it's you who is doing the assuming here.</blockquote>

Verification