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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7174785" data-attributes="member: 12731">Still, it's better to restrict player access only to "weak" spellcaster class options. Than to nerf say Wizard and still expect players to pick it.That is, the game already provides useful class options for a game where the best PC caster has only half or third spellcaster progression.For instance, if you allow the Eldritch Knight, you have a perfectly reasonable build that just also happens to not be Elminster. Or, you could say "You can pick spellcaster levels but only every other character level" to ensure no level 9 spells but still leave it up to the player to build a character she's comfortable with, no actual nerfing needed (outside of multiclassing caster and martial levels).It's the idea to actually nerf wizards because you don't like high magic I don't like. Playing up the wondrous and fearsome nature of magic does help alleviate that somewhat, but still: you move from a codified well-working familiar system to an arbitrary unknown state where the casters are dependent on DM fiat to gain any bang for their buck.I just think it isn't worth all the effort. Neither from the DMs end, nor the player's.I'd just say something like "no PC can have more than half progression regardless", leave everything as-is, and let the players sort it out to end up with a viable build they're happy with. At least they know what they're getting into - the parameters are stable. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification