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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 7916949" data-attributes="member: 6750235">"Chrystal clarity" sounds like a character from a bad novel.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> That post only demonstrates wizards lost 3.5e abilities in 5e.  That's true for all other classes too and why it's not 3.8e.  [USER=6776240]@oreofox[/USER] is correct in stating all spell casters could use metamagic previously.While I do think the larger spell list and ritual casting can get over-rated at times I would never try to undersell them either.  Wizard spells not available to sorcerers are obviously an advantage over sorcerers.  The larger number of spells prepped vs known is an obvious advantage for wizards over sorcerers.  Ritual casting straight from the spell book is an obvious advantage over sorcerers and further enables skipping prepping those spells where a sorcerer might be inclined to learn some of them.This isn't 3.x and it doesn't need to be.Yes, those are bonus feats.  Those are not class exclusive abilities.  This is true for metamagic and item creation.  The only class feature is wizards lost was the bonus feats and going by that logic rogues stole the ability instead of sorcerers.  Wizards lost bonus feats ==> rogues gained a bonus feat.  ;-)The difference is sorcerers have metamagic as a class ability now but that's representative of the sorcerer's link to magic.  What 3.x did or did not do doesn't actually impact a comparison between the two classes as they are implemented now.  What's relevant is how they compare now, what types of tropes they are meant to cover, and how well they cover those tropes.  None of that would dictate merging the two classes.</blockquote>

Verification