Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Arkan Redenford" data-source="post: 7359498" data-attributes="member: 6942506">Again, im not saying that a wizard has to do damage. Only that he can do. I read a lot of posts here from people complaining that&nbsp; has failed to do ANYTHING and that wizards are a weak class, im only pointing to other direction.Sure i could be casting web, sometimes i do that. But the ultimate goal is to win the encounter, shatter on both ocasion ended the encounter, it did the job same or better than a web.And if the ideia is to fight 6 to 8 encounters im not wrong too. I casted one second level spell and ended an encounter. On the first encounter i casted one first level spell and ended that too. And on the third encounter i used one second level and one first level spell.&nbsp; That can hardly be considered &quot;nova&quot;, if any wizard that has spend one spell in one encounter is not playing conservative i dont see a point to play a wizard if i cant cast spells. I still had left one second level spell and two first level spell, more than enought to finish 2-3 encounters. And even that, all my party was pratically full on HPs and class features/spells at that point.And to finish, i only had given an example that a wizard can do damage. Im not saying that this is the best or the only way to play a wizard. Some of you failed to see the importance of the familiar in that story that granted surprise on 2 of 3 encounters and valuable intel.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Arkan Redenford, post: 7359498, member: 6942506"] Again, im not saying that a wizard has to do damage. Only that he can do. I read a lot of posts here from people complaining that has failed to do ANYTHING and that wizards are a weak class, im only pointing to other direction. Sure i could be casting web, sometimes i do that. But the ultimate goal is to win the encounter, shatter on both ocasion ended the encounter, it did the job same or better than a web. And if the ideia is to fight 6 to 8 encounters im not wrong too. I casted one second level spell and ended an encounter. On the first encounter i casted one first level spell and ended that too. And on the third encounter i used one second level and one first level spell. That can hardly be considered "nova", if any wizard that has spend one spell in one encounter is not playing conservative i dont see a point to play a wizard if i cant cast spells. I still had left one second level spell and two first level spell, more than enought to finish 2-3 encounters. And even that, all my party was pratically full on HPs and class features/spells at that point. And to finish, i only had given an example that a wizard can do damage. Im not saying that this is the best or the only way to play a wizard. Some of you failed to see the importance of the familiar in that story that granted surprise on 2 of 3 encounters and valuable intel. [/QUOTE]

Verification