Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Asisreo" data-source="post: 8269027" data-attributes="member: 7019027">Not really. Ranger's companions can do it as well and they do it unquestionably better.Which is 100% fine, but that means it was a convenience, not a necessity in these cases. Which is the point. The player allocated resources for these conveniences, so they should be rewarded. But that doesn't mean the wizard has broken new ground and has somehow invalidated noncasters.While I agree that it can come in handy at that time, a noncaster could simply bar the room. Naturally, it has to be a room where there's at least 11 minutes of breathing room anyways so prep time is pretty lenient. And yes, LTH is more resilient, but for a 3rd-level spells known competing for the likes of Haste, Counterspell, Fireball, and Hypnotic Pattern; it should be doing something better. I don't assume anything, really. I gave an example but research, lore checks, interrogations, and bribes are external means to get this information. It gives another source of info, true, but this information is as reliable as talking to someone nonmagically. It opens up witnesses, though U doubt an adventure would require a party to have this specific spell. So its a nice bonus, but unnecessary. It doesn't (imo, you could argue bounded accuracy but bleh). However, the point is that its supposed to be the Wizard gaining all of these external, unique benefits...but advantage on checks is something that 90% of scenarios can accomplish via the help action. This isn't my point. My point isn't that the abilities are useless or have no value, they better have at least some value or else they are just broken spells. The point is that they add value in a safety-net sense, not as a necessity sense. Your campaign probably won't hinge on whether or not the wizard decided to take Find Familiar. Nor will your party be TPK'd if you didn't use Leomund's Tiny Hut. That's my point: that the game isn't reliant on these spells for your campaign to succeed. Therefore these spells, while having value, are still merely conveniences and not necessities. Noncasters can succeed without the wizard or bard. Casters can succeed without the fighter or rogue. But having them together can create a more diversified party where each class can boost themselves off the conveniences of the other. The casters don't need to wear themselves thin with defensive spells if the fighter can stay engaged. The noncasters don't have to take greater risks through detours if the wizard casts a handy spell. And while you could try to argue that wizards provide more value through the exploration/social pillars, that isn't exactly how it works. All the pillars are interconnected, there is no single pillar encounter because a failed social spell may invoke combat. A failed combat could take you to a dungeon. A failed exploration interaction could have you interrogated. Same even for successes in these encounters. You can't really predict whether having more HP would be useful against this Poison trap because you didn't see it coming. Ultimately, value in one pillar is value in them all. How your party is composed will almost always determine what type of encounters you will try to lean towards. A very social party tries to be social throughout (not always possible). A very combatant party tries to fight their way through (not always probable). A very explorative party tries to examine their way out (not always plausible). Having someone with a big stick is useful in socials as a deterrent or insurance. Having someone with sturdy flesh is useful in explorations as a front rank or an examiner.</blockquote>

Verification