Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mmadsen" data-source="post: 91640" data-attributes="member: 1645">I've discussed multiple different &quot;low magic&quot; options on multiple threads, and there's no One True Spellcaster I'm aiming for.&nbsp; I've discussed both &quot;low magic&quot; spellcasters with &quot;subtle&quot; spells and &quot;classic&quot; spellcasters with &quot;fairy tale&quot; spells.&nbsp; I'm sorry if that's made things difficult to follow.&nbsp; For the purpose of this thread, I'd like to discuss the Shaman, as is, and an alternate &quot;subtle&quot; wizard with the Shaman's spell list (probably with a few tweaks).The basic question is, is the Shaman's spell list too boring to play and enjoy?&nbsp; It has perhaps the most subtle spell list of any of the D&amp;D spellcasters, and that's why it was suggested.&nbsp; Is that subtlety intrinsically boring?A new question that's come up is, are the Shaman's non-spellcasting abilities so interesting that they make up for a boring spell list?&nbsp; I don't see it, but obviously some people think the Shaman class is much more playable than one that doesn't wear leather armor and needs a staff in place of bare hands.At any rate, if I were to introduce a Wizard with the weaker Shaman spell list, I'd want to find appropriately subtle special abilities or spells to add to the class to keep it playable and fun (rather than &quot;orc food&quot; that dies quickly).You earlier said &quot;yes&quot; to the notion that the Shaman is underpowered and consequently unpopular.&nbsp; Or did I misunderstand, because you're now saying it's &quot;balanced just about right.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mmadsen, post: 91640, member: 1645"] I've discussed multiple different "low magic" options on multiple threads, and there's no One True Spellcaster I'm aiming for. I've discussed both "low magic" spellcasters with "subtle" spells and "classic" spellcasters with "fairy tale" spells. I'm sorry if that's made things difficult to follow. For the purpose of this thread, I'd like to discuss the Shaman, as is, and an alternate "subtle" wizard with the Shaman's spell list (probably with a few tweaks). The basic question is, is the Shaman's spell list too boring to play and enjoy? It has perhaps the most subtle spell list of any of the D&D spellcasters, and that's why it was suggested. Is that subtlety intrinsically boring? A new question that's come up is, are the Shaman's non-spellcasting abilities so interesting that they make up for a boring spell list? I don't see it, but obviously some people think the Shaman class is much more playable than one that doesn't wear leather armor and needs a staff in place of bare hands. At any rate, if I were to introduce a Wizard with the weaker Shaman spell list, I'd want to find appropriately subtle special abilities or spells to add to the class to keep it playable and fun (rather than "orc food" that dies quickly). You earlier said "yes" to the notion that the Shaman is underpowered and consequently unpopular. Or did I misunderstand, because you're now saying it's "balanced just about right." [/QUOTE]

Verification