Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 6042059" data-attributes="member: 58197">This is the same way of thinking that concluded 3E warlocks were OMG BROKEN because they didn't have use limits on their invocations--even though those invocations were no more powerful than a ranger shooting a bow.No matter how many spells you have in your arsenal, you still only get to cast one per round. Your power level scales strictly with the power of your spells; spells per day is not a factor, except insofar as it limits your top-level spell slots. But you never get more of those! A 5th-level hedge wizard and a 17th-level archmage both have the same number of top-level spell slots. Sure, the hedge wizard's best blasting spell is fireball and the archmage's is meteor swarm, but both of them only get one per day.As long as the power of your top-level spells scales at the same rate as a fighter's sword swing, you'll stay at parity with the fighter. The only time spells per day affects this dynamic is at the lowest levels, where you have so few spells that you can actually run out of them in a day's adventuring. And WotC has dealt nicely with that by introducing at-will cantrips.The reason wizards were so powerful in 3E was that their nondamaging spells scaled too fast and offered too many ways to bypass obstacles. The only balance issue caused by Vancian magic, in and of itself, is that it lets wizards accumulate a stupidly large toolbox of spell options.Question: Why are you trying to "fix" Vancian casting? It sounds like your main complaint about Vancian is you find the bookkeeping to be a headache. So do I (I also dislike it for thematic reasons). But other people love that aspect of Vancian casting, and it's central to the whole mechanic. So instead of trying to change Vancian to be more like what I want, I just focus on agitating to have non-Vancian caster options. Let the Vance-lovers have their wizards and their elaborate spell prep plans. As long as I get the option to play a sorceror or a half-decent warlock*, we can all be happy.[size=-2]*What is it about the warlock, anyway? No edition of D&D yet has managed to produce a warlock that isn't weaksauce. Given how much I love the concept, this makes me really sad.[/size]</blockquote>

Verification