Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 1577863" data-attributes="member: 172">Snarky sayings do not an argument make.We already know that 3 levels &quot;off the top&quot; is the cost of the class; fixating on SR doesn't prove anything further. Further, it undermines your argument by relying on a very specific condition. You are really only proving they don't make good blast mages, which I can only agree with.The 3 level cost is telling at low levels. But when you have 10 extra levels of spells, even if lower, that begins to make up for it.Not IME. My PC sorcerers and clerics of this level frequently ran through their higher level spells at this level and did have to rely on their lower level spells. My high level party relied extensively on mass haste... but that's only what, a 6th level spell? Likewise, harm is a very viable spell at high levels, as is disintigrate. That's worthless, right? I don't think so.&nbsp;<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused&nbsp; &nbsp; :confused:"&nbsp; data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /> There are many spells that are exclusively arcane and/or exclusively divine; that the cleric is &quot;nearly as good&quot; seems somewhat off. Clerics can't cast teleport, or mass haste, or a variety of other potent spells. Since clerics can access their whole spell list, you can focus your attention on spells that clerics don't have, making those wizard levels even more effective, making the class's very broad indeed. This makes them very versatile in overcoming challenges set forth by the GM. Which can make the MT a spotlight hog or DM spoiler of the fist degree.In short, at high levels, the class enjoys broad utility, good synergy between its spell lists, and high endurance. Pretending that every challenge you face is a demon with high SR or is a mage duel is far from telling the whole story about the MT.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Psion, post: 1577863, member: 172"] Snarky sayings do not an argument make. We already know that 3 levels "off the top" is the cost of the class; fixating on SR doesn't prove anything further. Further, it undermines your argument by relying on a very specific condition. You are really only proving they don't make good blast mages, which I can only agree with. The 3 level cost is telling at low levels. But when you have 10 extra levels of spells, even if lower, that begins to make up for it. Not IME. My PC sorcerers and clerics of this level frequently ran through their higher level spells at this level and did have to rely on their lower level spells. My high level party relied extensively on mass haste... but that's only what, a 6th level spell? Likewise, harm is a very viable spell at high levels, as is disintigrate. That's worthless, right? I don't think so. :confused: There are many spells that are exclusively arcane and/or exclusively divine; that the cleric is "nearly as good" seems somewhat off. Clerics can't cast teleport, or mass haste, or a variety of other potent spells. Since clerics can access their whole spell list, you can focus your attention on spells that clerics don't have, making those wizard levels even more effective, making the class's very broad indeed. This makes them very versatile in overcoming challenges set forth by the GM. Which can make the MT a spotlight hog or DM spoiler of the fist degree. In short, at high levels, the class enjoys broad utility, good synergy between its spell lists, and high endurance. Pretending that every challenge you face is a demon with high SR or is a mage duel is far from telling the whole story about the MT. [/QUOTE]

Verification