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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MerricB" data-source="post: 1905217" data-attributes="member: 3586">3.5e saw a pretty radical shift in the way spells were assigned to schools - a rebalancing of the power of the specialist wizards.Observant people will also note the design space that opened up with Melf's Acid Arrow - a damage-dealing conjuration spell that ignores spell resistance. (It was affected by SR in 3e)The line that Al'Kelhar objects to is actually a legacy from 3e: it was not correctly changed to 3.5e. (It is in the DMG, pg 83 of the 3e version, page 299 of the 3.5e version). By the design principles of 3.5e, it should be struck from the book.Because of the design space of Melf's Acid Arrow, similar spells (the orb spells) were moved into the Conjuration school and made compatible. This isn't a conspiracy.Wizards are applying the new rules correctly.I said we were in the middle of a rebalancing of the spells, and I stick by that: the traditional "transmuters have everything" way is dead. Instead, Wizards are trying to make every school attractive.Personally, I still think the Evocation spells are the best damage-dealing spells by a long, long way - the orb spells don't even come close (though they're good against a single, powerful enemy).When 4e eventually rolls around, expect the schools spells are assigned to to be one of those areas that is reconsidered. (Along with metamagic and turning undead). This isn't something that will happen tomorrow, though.I think there is now a design space for high-level evocation spells; you might want to consider submitting some to Dragon Magazine. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Cheers!</blockquote>

Verification