Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 7025585" data-attributes="member: 6677017">Editions past feel is alive and well in my campaigns, so need to resurrect them. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I agree that sorcerer struggles a bit in the role. There are just going to be things you can't do with them, the same as with a bard, and you have to accept that if your party has the sorcerer as their mage.The only official 5e adventure we've played has been LMoP, but I'm not surprised if they down-played the importance of particular spells. In concept my preference is that you don't need any particular class combination, but that some party configurations are significantly better in certain situations, whether that's a cleric for turning, a wizard for utility, a tanky fighter, a natury ranger or druid, etc. If your party doesn't feel like its composition matters for what areas it excels or suffers in, then it's a rather bland world.Thanks for the forewarning on 5e adventures. I will be running some of the official ones, and now I know I might need to spice them up a bit to let different classes shine.I find is exceedingly hard to get a satisfying mix of EK and Wizard levels that feels right for its entire career rather than just for the first few and last couple of levels, but maybe it works better for some.I agree with that premise. You can't be the best at everything. I'm just not convinced that the wizard is so much better than other casters that having a subclass with cleric or valor bard level of melee competency is an issue. That's why I think bladesinger is fine for balance, it just needs those tweaks for feel.As far as the general concept of a better fighter/wizard blend, I think the easiest solution is some sort of balanced hybrid or gestalt that reduces the raw power of both the fighter and wizard features compared to other characters of the same level, but still hands out enough stuff to let them do their things.For your home campaign, such a solution might work wonderfully, of course, but for a general solution, the character needs to NEED to enter melee because his other options aren't strong enough.</blockquote>But it does work for the Bladesinger as designed, unless you think it is overpowered. That's why I tried to keep my lore restoration desired fixes from upping the power, because then it would be overpowered.So you do think that the Bladesinger is overpowered then? If we're talking about my general fighter/mage interest (we kind of keep switching back and forth between the two topics, so I'm trying to clarify which issue I'm on), I think it's a great precedent. I don't think it truly captures the feel I'm going for though.First, there is the question of whether wizard casting is overall better than bard casting at all, given Magical Secrets.However, setting that aside for a moment, we can look at the rest of the bard. One problem is that they come loaded with stuff that is really bardy. They have Bardic Inspiration and other support focused elements that don't scream "traditional warrior mage" to me. They also have other unnecessary items like Expertise, musical instruments...pretty much everything but their spellcasting and a Valor Bard's bit of combat and War Magic stuff.Since we're just theorizing, how much of that would have to be dropped to justify giving them wizard spellcasting? Or to take it in the other direction, if you gave a wizard the Valor college as its subclass, would it be balanced? With other wizard traditions; with the Valor bard? If you just switched spell lists (rather than the entire spellcasting feature), but kept the rest of the bard class, then I think there would be very little you'd want to take away from the class. You could probably yank out Bardic Inspiration and call it close enough, though you'd still be left with other bardic features which probably would be better replaced with something that fits better, since eliminating them would weaken the class too much compared to the official options.From class design, it looks to me like WotC agrees with you that the wizard spell list is supreme and justifies giving a whole lot of stuff to bards to make up for it. Or it could just be that they were more concerned with making bards rock this edition than making sure wizards stayed magically on top. They certainly did a great job with the bards.[/QUOTE]

Verification