Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 7974866" data-attributes="member: 18">I just don't believe that all these people actually look at the balance, sorry, and the fact that the Wizard subclasses are both "really solid/powerful Wizard subclass, which as a bonus has access to spells outright better than other ones in 5E", doesn't exactly scream "we did a great job on balance!".Authors, even lovely smart people, tend to be terrible at balance unless it's a major concern for them (which it is for few, in my experience). 3PP stuff by experienced RPG designers is a good example - it's often got ludicrous balance issues (despite having playtesters and so on). I don't for a second believe the publishers or editors (in the conventional sense) analyze the balance. Why on earth would they?(As an aside, we don't know how the playtesters actually felt, or whether they were all fans of CR or the like, or what. My feeling is that there's no way a spell like Magnify Gravity gets past even a mildly competent, unbiased playtester. So the fact that it did shows there's a problem, rather undeniably. And it being only accessible by two Wizard subclasses only matters if they're worse than other subclasses, like missing one or more of the L2/6/10 etc. abilities to "pay" for access to better spells. But they actually have really good 2/6/10/etc abilities.)I see no-one is willing to suggest Magnify Gravity is actually fine, which is interesting.</blockquote>