Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="gribble" data-source="post: 6434567" data-attributes="member: 12430">How, mechanically, is a wizard who chooses (for &quot;roleplaying&quot; reasons) to never learn/prepare any necromancy spells any different from one who is prevented from doing so by the rules? If the former is balanced for 5e, then by necessity the latter is as well, isn't it?I don't think the balance argument holds any water, though I can understand if you think it's somehow against the spirit of 5e - we'll just have to disagree on that one.Of course, you could always present it as an addition to the wizard class - &quot;at 3rd level, a wizard who only knows spells from ... schools can choose to become a ... robed wizard of high sorcery. Otherwise they are considered renegade&quot;. Then it's not taking anything away at all (and you could even attach benefits to it). If tracking individual spells is too cumbersome, you could even attach it to the choice of specialist school?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="gribble, post: 6434567, member: 12430"] How, mechanically, is a wizard who chooses (for "roleplaying" reasons) to never learn/prepare any necromancy spells any different from one who is prevented from doing so by the rules? If the former is balanced for 5e, then by necessity the latter is as well, isn't it? I don't think the balance argument holds any water, though I can understand if you think it's somehow against the spirit of 5e - we'll just have to disagree on that one. Of course, you could always present it as an addition to the wizard class - "at 3rd level, a wizard who only knows spells from ... schools can choose to become a ... robed wizard of high sorcery. Otherwise they are considered renegade". Then it's not taking anything away at all (and you could even attach benefits to it). If tracking individual spells is too cumbersome, you could even attach it to the choice of specialist school? [/QUOTE]

Verification