NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 8094753" data-attributes="member: 6677017">I didn't read all the pages so I'm not sure exactly which points are being argued...but to dip my toes in a bit...Conceptually, part of Sorcerer's traditional identity is that they have less unique spells available to them each day (and replace them rarely), but more spell slots. Compared to a wizard, they get power over flexibility.Part of a Wizard's traditional identity is that they have more unique spells available to them each day, and can change them daily from their spellbook, but have less spell slots. They can theoretically learn every spell on their list. Compared to a sorcerer, they get flexibility over power. In addition, if you need a rare spell, a wizard is both the one most likely to have access to it (since their spellbook will have more spells than a sorcerer knows), and the one capable of gaining access to it if they don't (because if they can find it they can add it to their spellbook, while the sorcerer can only learn new spells at the right levels).In 5e, a Sorcerer either has the same spell power as a wizard (if they use all of their sorcery points to power their spells) or less spell power if they use it for metamagic. This is something I considered a problem that disfavored the sorcerer.Another problem for the 5e sorcerer is that their flexibility is too restricted. Their spell list is too small, and their known spells are too limited.This rule in Tasha's attempts to fix only one of these problems--that their known spells are too limited. The problem for me is that, while it partially does that job, it ruin the concept of the wizard being the one who is most able to gain access to an unknown spell. With this change, if there is a spell on both lists that the party needs access to, instead of having the wizard go look for it (maybe involving a quest), the party just takes a long rest and the sorcerer prepares it tomorrow. In fact, unless you don't use any of the rules for creating scrolls, the sorcerer can potentially make scrolls for every spell on the sorcerer list this way, and then switch to their preferred known spells and still have their entire list available to them that way. The wizard would have to have the entire wizard spell list in their spellbook to pull off the same feat. The wizard can only do that for the spells in their spellbook, which would almost always be less than the number of spells on the sorcerer list*.Groups that lack downtime and have adventuring days = sessions, might not see this problem at all due to the fast advancement in 5e. If you are only taking 2 or 3 long rests before leveling, they are only getting a little more spell swapping flexibility. But for groups with downtime, this conceptual issue is there.So basically, they didn't fix two of the major sorcerer problems (that they have equal or less spell power than wizards, when they should have more, and that their class list is too limited), and the one problem they half fixed (that their known spells are too limited--though they didn't increase the number of them) broke something else. That's my issue with the change.* However, if you have both a wizard and sorcerer in your party, you absolutely should have the sorcerer do this, and have the wizard copy every one of those scrolls into their spellbook so they have the same selection of spells available, because why not? If you did that, then it could be considered to actually balance out and fix that particular problem.</blockquote>

Verification