Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 7917061" data-attributes="member: 93670">[USER=7015698]@Undrave[/USER] can't help but notices that wide circle you made around the point of the 5e wizard not having core mechanics that they bring to the table in meaningful fleshed out ways beyond the spell list copied by sorcerer &amp; warlock.&nbsp; There have been a couple times in this thread where people have had to admit &quot;well uhh.. tiny hut.. detect magic... some other super niche stuff like phantom steed&quot; only after much cajoling to be specific &amp; <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/on-whether-sorcerers-and-wizards-should-be-merged-or-not-they-shouldnt.670175/post-7916331" target="_blank">even then</a> they needed to dress it up in flavorful text to obscure how empty the strawman of a mechanic they were inflating was rather than just listing the specifics.If you don't like the parallels to past editions, perhaps you'd like to expound on the wizard's core class mechanics that really set it's duplicated spell list access apart from classes like warlock &amp; sorcerer who effectively have all the meaningful portions of the wizard spell list and core class mechanics that shine.&nbsp; Be specific, don't just say &quot;ritual magic, bigger spell list&quot;... This thread has gone over those &amp; nobody has been willing or able to admit what meaningful contribution&nbsp; those play at the table other than the occasional niche edge case[USER=996]@Tony Vargas[/USER] the sorcerer has a few wizard does not have, I made a list <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/on-whether-sorcerers-and-wizards-should-be-merged-or-not-they-shouldnt.670175/post-7914247" target="_blank">earlier</a>.&nbsp; Enhance ability, daylight, dominate beast, &amp; insect plague.&nbsp; I don't know if your none also includes cleric/warlock/bard/etc.&nbsp; Critically important to your &quot;more unique spells&quot; point is the fact that few if any (depending on your criteria for weighing them) are not the critical must have top shelf spells.&nbsp; If you click on that link there that says earlier you can see the last time someone tried to build an argument around those spells &amp; they couldn't even do it without obfuscating the sprells behind descriptive text, maybe you are itching to do better?[USER=6776240]@oreofox[/USER] on those &quot;wizards get eight&quot; point, they took a core class mechanic &amp; made it an archtype.&nbsp; Sorcerer's draconic bloodline is a bunch of feats &amp; wild magic was a PrC that I sourced earlier.&nbsp; The wizard arcane toolbox was indeed &quot;practically nonexistant&quot; because the toolbox was those bonus feats and differences to how the int mod applied to various things.&nbsp; In short it was extensive.&nbsp; they took a portion of the core class that applied at level 1 rather than a feat grouping or PrC &amp; made it into the vast majority of wizard archtypes then cut the rest including some of that core class stuff from the game[ATTACH=full]118343[/ATTACH]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tetrasodium, post: 7917061, member: 93670"] [USER=7015698]@Undrave[/USER] can't help but notices that wide circle you made around the point of the 5e wizard not having core mechanics that they bring to the table in meaningful fleshed out ways beyond the spell list copied by sorcerer & warlock. There have been a couple times in this thread where people have had to admit "well uhh.. tiny hut.. detect magic... some other super niche stuff like phantom steed" only after much cajoling to be specific & [URL='https://www.enworld.org/threads/on-whether-sorcerers-and-wizards-should-be-merged-or-not-they-shouldnt.670175/post-7916331']even then[/URL] they needed to dress it up in flavorful text to obscure how empty the strawman of a mechanic they were inflating was rather than just listing the specifics. If you don't like the parallels to past editions, perhaps you'd like to expound on the wizard's core class mechanics that really set it's duplicated spell list access apart from classes like warlock & sorcerer who effectively have all the meaningful portions of the wizard spell list [I]and[/I] core class mechanics that shine. Be specific, don't just say "ritual magic, bigger spell list"... This thread has gone over those & nobody has been willing or able to admit what meaningful contribution those play at the table other than the occasional niche edge case [USER=996]@Tony Vargas[/USER] the sorcerer has a few wizard does not have, I made a list [URL='https://www.enworld.org/threads/on-whether-sorcerers-and-wizards-should-be-merged-or-not-they-shouldnt.670175/post-7914247']earlier[/URL]. Enhance ability, daylight, dominate beast, & insect plague. I don't know if your none also includes cleric/warlock/bard/etc. Critically important to your "more unique spells" point is the fact that few if any [SIZE=1][I](depending on your criteria for weighing them)[/I][/SIZE] are not the critical must have top shelf spells. If you click on that link there that says earlier you can see the last time someone tried to build an argument around those spells & they couldn't even do it without obfuscating the sprells behind descriptive text, maybe you are itching to do better? [USER=6776240]@oreofox[/USER] on those "wizards get eight" point, they took a core class mechanic & made it an archtype. Sorcerer's draconic bloodline is a bunch of feats & wild magic was a PrC that I sourced earlier. The wizard arcane toolbox was indeed "practically nonexistant" because the toolbox was those bonus feats and differences to how the int mod applied to various things. In short it was extensive. they took a portion of the core class that applied at level 1 rather than a feat grouping or PrC & made it into the vast majority of wizard archtypes then cut the rest including some of that core class stuff from the game [ATTACH type="full" alt="1581544292545.png"]118343[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]

Verification