Cap'n Kobold
Hero
?Any PC takes ritual caster, they can cast Leomund's tiny hut and forces a long rest.
Who are they getting that spell from?
?Any PC takes ritual caster, they can cast Leomund's tiny hut and forces a long rest.
Gonna do it again.
Yep, the wizard made big sacrifices simply because he made them. These choices were real sacrifices. Beside its versatility, no wizard subclasses (save one) has anything remotely half as powerful as what the sorcerers, bards and warlocks had to compensate for their then "limited spell list". Portent might have been the only feature remotely strong yet, usable only twice a day for most the Diviner's career.
Now, your friends the warlock, bard and sorcerer get better than the wizard's versatility at absolutely no cost.
You keep looking only one aspect and yet, the whole thread brought so many things showing that now, the wizard sacrificing quite a few of his known spells is now useless. 44 unchangeable known spells vs 185 for the sorcerer. Yep, this is clearly a well balanced rule.
You shown no evidence whatsoever. You just repeat everything you said in your other post which was focusing on info gathering. Which I clearly state was not the sole point of the wizard but that in ordre to do it, the wizard had to sacrifice 7 (sometimes more) of his 44 spell known while the other classes were sacrificing nothing to do the same job.Well, since you will refuse to engage with my evidence, I will simply say you are wrong about the wizard abilities.
I could back it up, but why bother.
Gonna do it again.
Yep, the wizard made big sacrifices simply because he made them. These choices were real sacrifices. Beside its versatility, no wizard subclasses (save one) has anything remotely half as powerful as what the sorcerers, bards and warlocks had to compensate for their then "limited spell list". Portent might have been the only feature remotely strong yet, usable only twice a day for most the Diviner's career.
Now, your friends the warlock, bard and sorcerer get better than the wizard's versatility at absolutely no cost.
You keep looking only one aspect and yet, the whole thread brought so many things showing that now, the wizard sacrificing quite a few of his known spells is now useless. 44 unchangeable known spells vs 185 for the sorcerer. Yep, this is clearly a well balanced rule.
Yes, but now who needs wizards now? Versatility is now in the hands of others at no costs and what they lacked in versatility was compensated with strong class options. Now they get an even better versatility AND their original compensations. What a deal! (save for the wizards...)
You shown no evidence whatsoever. You just repeat everything you said in your other post which was focusing on info gathering. Which I clearly state was not the sole point of the wizard but that in ordre to do it, the wizard had to sacrifice 7 (sometimes more) of his 44 spell known while the other classes were sacrificing nothing to do the same job.
Again, you missed the point of the argument because you thought you had a bone to pick on. But this bone is just one face of the problem. You still fail to see the rule as a whole and try to nitpick a small part of what you think is a weak point. You see it as a weak point because you don't play high level and we do. We did the tests and you tried to invalidate the tests by minimizing both the experience of those doing it and the fact that these tests have been used for more than one additional rule. And they did find potential abuses very fast.
On an other forum, I was one of the first to claim the problems of not following the 6-8 encounters per day as a potential problem. People laughed at me, and yet, today, most people agree that it is a good thing to follow the guide line or to modify the rest rule to make sure that the 5 mwd does not come back to gnaw at your game.
And to finish, If I were the only one claiming that the wizards subclasses are weak, read this post and many others on the subject. You're in for a big surprise. Versatility is about the only real good thing about wizards. Now it's everyone's shtick...
Did you read my post showing 4 variants a Sorcerer could make with less than a week of downtime during level 5? Seriously, I am asking--not being snarky.That sounds so wrong. I don't like the rule either, but the sorcerer being more versatile is bollocks.
And those are the types of options @Helldritch and myself have both been suggesting that would make the feature more reasonable. While I am not thrilled with the concept, itself, at least giving it a cost of some sort and/or having it take much longer (which I think would suit the play style this was more intented for...) would go a long way towards balancing it out.probably I would allow the sorcerer to swap a single spell during a week of downtime or so. Maybe they get a free spell swap during a long rest every level. But I would certainly not allow swapping happily every day.
Point given dozens of pages ago friend.And still, no one forces you to use that rule at your table if it does not suit your game.
Point given dozens of pages ago friend.
But what about those that will think this is a good rule and will think it balanced when it is not?
How many games will be scrapped because of one rule?
I remember the days of endless unbalanced "prestige classes" that destroyed more than one 3.xed games. But hey, who cares about the inexperienced? I am one of the few it seems...
If you say so...You are way overreacting.
Did you read my post showing 4 variants a Sorcerer could make with less than a week of downtime during level 5? Seriously, I am asking--not being snarky.
It had 24 completely unique spells covering 4 different scenarios. No Wizard at level 5 could hope to match that IMO unless you have an extremely generous DM.
And those are the types of options @Helldritch and myself have both been suggesting that would make the feature more reasonable. While I am not thrilled with the concept, itself, at least giving it a cost of some sort and/or having it take much longer (which I think would suit the play style this was more intented for...) would go a long way towards balancing it out.
As you, yourself, say, "But I would certainly not all swapping happily every day."