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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nyeshet" data-source="post: 3088155" data-attributes="member: 18363">Wizard specialization is akin to specialization in any class that offers options: Psion specialization (as you've already stated)Cleric specialization (domain selection)Fighter specialization (bonus fighter feats)Ranger specialization (combat styles / feats)Monk specialization (combat style / feats)Rogue specialization at higher levels (rogue specials)What does a wizard gain / lose from specializing? Is it really that massive compared to the gains / losses that other classes experience when they specialize? A Ranger must choose to either focus on melee or ranged combat, and that choice will determine the feel and use of their character for the duration of their existence. Clerics must choose a deity - limiting their domain choice - and then two domains from 3-4 selections. They lose access to some domain specials and spells and gain others in their place. When taking feats they have the option of divine feats or non-divine feats (ie: all others for which they qualify). Should they choose divine they must further choose whether most / all of their divine feats will be focused on Turning Undead or using Turing attempts for other purposes. Either way the feel of their character and its future uses are limited in one sense while empowered in another sense - all due to their specilization. How does this differ from a Wizard that chooses to Specialize in a school at the cost of one or two other schools, gaining slightly more spells in the one school while losing the use of entire schools of magic in the process. So, from that perspective, how can you really state that choosing to specialize is anything other than a class feature - gaining access to some features at the cost of losing access to other features? You are still the same class, just focused in a particular area. Your earlier post strongly suggested that Wizard (Illusionist) was not the same as Illusionist - thus my comments on giving me and others the book and page number that this "Illusionist" class appears in. You also stated that whenever someone on this thread stated "Illusionist" as their choice they were not choosing "Wizard (Illusionist)" but instead some pre-3e class that does not exist in the current edition and thus has no place on this poll. Then, in your second post you stated that Wizard (Illusionist) was, in fact, the class that everyone has been stating they are voting for when they stated "Illusionist." From that view then all Wizard votes count towards "Illusionist" and none of the Beguiler, Bard, etc votes count towards it. After all, they do mean Illusionist in the sense of Wizard (Illusionist),. right? But that is not what you said in your first statement at all. Illusionist should not now nor ever be on this poll, as it is not a class in its own right - merely a specialization of the Wizard class. So either all / most Wizard votes count towards Wizard (Illusionist), or Illusionist is a class in an of itself that has not yet been published for 3.5e (nor even for 3e). Either way it is not a viable option for this poll - which focuses on current and complete classes - not past edition or sub-sets of classes.</blockquote>

Verification