Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Harzel" data-source="post: 7639336" data-attributes="member: 6857506">Certainly fun comes first, but I have a slightly different perspective.That depends on how finely tuned your sense of balance is.  Versatility is a significant asset; having spells that cover more situations is plainly more powerful than having fewer.  And the wizard spell list is much more expansive than either the cleric list or the druid list.When you say 'limit' here, I assume you are not talking about enforcing an actual, hard numerical limit as an additional rule, since that's not something that anyone has proposed in the thread (and something that I would not particularly favor).  I'm assuming that you instead mean the provision of in-game obstacles that make it nontrivial for the wizard PC to acquire spells beyond those they get 'for free'.Since there is always a great diversity of attitudes, I won't claim that the following is always true, but I posit that most instances of such annoyance arise from unmet expectations, that is from the player expecting and anticipating that their wizard is supposed to have access to all or most of the spells in the spell list.  I mean, I've never heard, for instance, of a wizard player who was 'annoyed' that their wizard did not get all the features from all the wizard subclasses instead of just one.  The RAW expectations around how many spells a wizard will know are a lot more vague, of course, but clarification up front in the form of a narrowing of those expectations ought to avoid, I would think, most instances of the annoyance.But that brings us to this part, which is probably the more important point.No, there's actually a very good reason.  Limiting (even if the limit is somewhat plastic) the number of spells that a wizard knows provides a constraint.  Constraints force choices.  Choices are what makes the game interesting.  In fact, they're what make the game a game.  No constraints, no game.  Of course it is rare for any particular constraint to be strictly necessary (and limiting a wizard's known spells certainly isn't), but I think it is best to ask whether you have a really, really good reason when you are contemplating whittling one away.The PCs are supposed to struggle with and against the constraints of their world; that is their lot.  A wizard character ought to (or at least might reasonably) do their utmost to gain as many spells as they can.  However, I don't think it does the game or the players any favors to encourage the player to drag the character's problems into the meta and try to solve them by modding the game.</blockquote>

Verification