Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cognomen's Cassowary" data-source="post: 6706967" data-attributes="member: 6801445">Thanks for the feedback. You and CapnZapp have definitely convinced me that I need to rewrite a few sections to be more explicit about my thought process. My concern at lower levels is largely maximizing the effects of wild-magic surges through positioning and having AoE spells to multiply the strongest effects on the table. The emphasis on AoEs leads to a strong preference for empowered spell, which happens to be very similar to spell bombardment in terms of preferring larger dice.In other words, I see the sub-class tending in that direction well before level eighteen.The point was that optimization is subjective and depends heavily on how you conceive of the game you are optimizing for. I am very forthright that one of the goals of the guide is maximizing fun.I love scorching ray. It's a powerful spell that scales really well. In fact, I would wager that it is among the spells most mentioned by name throughout the guide. Still, tides of chaos grants advantage on only one of its attack rolls. Once cantrips scale up at level five, you get more for your advantage by using it on a fire bolt and then quickening a scorching ray . . . and triggering a surge. That's really my view of the ideal WMS playstyle, added to good positioning to maximize the value of the surge.Don't hold your breath for a damage-dealing ranged spell attack above second level. I believe that their absence is by design, because of the chance to crit.This is probably my opportunity to point out that the two best draconic features come at high levels, while the top wild-magic feature, tides of chaos, is available from the word "go". Beyond that, you asked for a side-by-side comparison, and I gave it to you, starting with the most direct "force multiplier" to "force multiplier". We can dicker about diction--I call flight "great"; you say it's "huge"--but the features remain what they are. I'm not looking to defend the wild-magic sub-class, because I don't see it needing to be defended. Which is better is a matter of player preferences.Plain and simple, we disagree on this point.It's not that I'm enamored with wild surges and can't look at the situation clinically. I simply think that you undervalue them as a source of damage and survivability. The entire min/maxing process is one of generalizing randomness, of making it seem not random. From that perspective, the surge table is intimidating, because it is nigh on impossible to approach computationally. However, that does not mean that the surge table cannot be generalized at all. And when we generalize it, we find that it is positive on the whole, becomes more so as we gain control over it, and becomes even more so when we pick spells and position our PCs to maximize the effects of the good results and minimize the bad. Min/maxing of wild-magic surges is very possible, but the extremity of the randomness denies us the comfortable illusion of certainty which we normally get from min/maxing. Thus, with respect, I think that the argument that it's too random is made from a position of discomfort, not of clinical detachment.I appreciate the civil discourse, and, as I say, I am already planning revisions based on your thoughts. Come back anytime.The best kind there is! Glad you find it helpful.</blockquote>

Verification