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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MoonSong" data-source="post: 7915786" data-attributes="member: 6689464">I wasn't going to respond anymore, because you called me a munchkin by proxy. That really made me upset. However that could have been just me, so i'll just assume you didn't mean it.I had a witch in 3.5 that was a lot of fun. She would ride everywhere on a floating disk pulled by two unseen servants. She couldn't distinguish magic from non magic as both were equally natural to her and she wasn't very bright. She also had a familiar. In 5e I can't make her again. Sorcerers don't get any of these spells and are too useless at mundane stuff.  I can't make a "creation" sorcerer at all.  All of this for no reason at all... But I digress, if your wizard player is being overshadowed by the sorcerer player, your wizard player isn't taking advantage of the wizard spell list and other advantages. Rituals, utility spells, making use of the familiar, taking advantage of school/tradition features -which are on average better than an equivalent sorcerer feature-. Your sorcerer player isn't taking advantage of having a wizard in the party either. Tell me one of these themes that is impossible because sorcerer has it. Really, I can't see one.  Also, we don't have a generic wizard, because wizards are too tied to the academic spellcaster image. It is hard to come up with something generic for the wizard that all wizard shouldn't have either. All attempts have been too powerfull in comparison to other traditions. Besides  no class has a truly generic subclasss. That's a distinction without a difference. "I was birn magical, I just had to take twenty years of wizard college tobcast my first cantrip!Source plz.</blockquote>

Verification