Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 9276429" data-attributes="member: 6704184">And those aren't Swordmages. Also, having a spellbook doesn't mean using the spellbook to cast spells. That's...not what a spellbook is. Wizards don't currently use their book to cast spells. The idea that anyone with a book has to be a wizard is unnecessarily restrictive nonsense. Like if literally having a spellbook and casting arcane spells makes it a wizard to you, there isn't much else to say past that. At that point everything is just two classes, at most. No. Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight should at least have the option of a spellbook, as well. Hell, it should be a common feature to most arcane characters, making multi-classing use the spellbook to smooth out wrinkles, while other caster groups can have other common features. But at the least, a class that is a mage should have the mage spellcasting feature.If it isn't a mage, don't call it a swordmage. Make a monk subclass.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 9276429, member: 6704184"] And those aren't Swordmages. Also, having a spellbook doesn't mean using the spellbook to cast spells. That's...not what a spellbook is. Wizards don't currently use their book to cast spells. The idea that anyone with a book has to be a wizard is unnecessarily restrictive nonsense. Like if literally having a spellbook and casting arcane spells makes it a wizard to you, there isn't much else to say past that. At that point everything is just two classes, at most. No. Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight should at least have the option of a spellbook, as well. Hell, it should be a common feature to most arcane characters, making multi-classing use the spellbook to smooth out wrinkles, while other caster groups can have other common features. But at the least, a class that is a mage should have the mage spellcasting feature. If it isn't a mage, don't call it a swordmage. Make a monk subclass. [/QUOTE]

Verification