Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ydars" data-source="post: 4331186" data-attributes="member: 62992">Malraux; I see what you are saying, but to me, fragmenting the wizard into many "one trick pony" sub-classes is a mistake. It might work for the combat part of the game, and I am sure this will be nicely balanced (an important concern) but it makes wizards SO lame out of combat that I can't really see many people playing them. It feels like, in trying to make it so you don't actually need any class, they have completely shafted the wizard. I mean, how long will it be before summoning and controlling undead becomes old. I certainly would not want to play a wizard who could only do this for 30 levels, and the same applies to the other sub-magical disciplines.Now I agree that 3.5E wizards were ridiculous, but now they have been bashed down too much; not in combat, but they just don't have many magical options anymore. They should have included MANY more harmless powers, like presdigitidation, that have roleplaying potential to add flavour. The same is probably true for the other classes actually.Since magic is an important part of D&D it just feels very.........disappointing that it is SO diluted.</blockquote>