Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kae'Yoss" data-source="post: 395040" data-attributes="member: 4134">OK, an oversight. They do get their two new spells.But the point is this: The number of spells an epic wizard can know is only limited by the number of spells in existance (or, more precisely, spells on his spell list and not of his forbidden schools). But that's also true for a non-epic wizard, even for a 1st-level wizard (except non-epic wizards maybe don't have access to all spell levels). So the role of sorcerer and wizard don't change: the wizard is still the one with many spells, but who must prepare them, and the sorcerer still has only a fixed amount of known spells but can cast them spontaneously.The sorcerer has in fact an advantage: he can downplay his disadvantage by gaining additional spells via a feat, while the wizard still can't cast them spontaneously! They can also erase their metamagic disadvantages with the automatic metamagic feats. But what do you propose? Give sorcerers a feat that they can learn spells like wizards do, via scrolls? That would make the wizard obsolete? Increasing the number of known spells you get per feat? That would be OK I think, but that won't change the nature of sorcerers. Automatically granting sorcerers new known spells after 20th? That could work, but you have to be _very_ cautious, or you end up with the sorcerer as the much more powerful class.No, it's no oversight. They determined that the feat grants you one single slot. If your ability score's high enough, you get the bonus feat. But you won't get another to use with your specialist school, nor do clerics get their domain slot (see the drow cleric for that).They did that because it would make the feat much stronger for certain classes, and would severly unbalance it.So it seems that the poeple involved had actually used some of the stuff, and seen the consequences. But you have not, or you would not complain that sorcerers get the shaft, and in the same discussion demand that they empower wizards.</blockquote>

Verification