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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Non-human Resources" data-source="post: 1911111" data-attributes="member: 23409">It seems to me that we (and WOTC) are going about this backwards.  The problem isn’t that the various schools are unbalanced.  But rather that the various specialists are unbalanced.Consider a campaign where there is no specialization (or think back to 1st edition).  In such a scenario what difference would it make if read magic was a necromancy spell or charm person an evocation spell?  Sure it sounds wrong, but what actual difference does it make?  In a world without specialization or spell focus feats – none.Of course in D&D we have both.  And both of those only matter in combat.Back in 2nd edition I played a shair.  For those who don’t know, this class casts spells by sending out a familiar to find the spells and bring them back to the caster.  The process took a few minutes but could otherwise be done all day long.Not once did that become unbalancing in the game.  I mention this because the primary benefit of specialization is the bonus slot each level.  A benefit I stipulate as only being truly useful during resource intensive combat situations.I say the same thing about spell focus (yes I know it isn’t an actual part of specialization).  First of all, the feat will only benefit you 5% of the time.  That is one saving throw out of 20.  Second, in a non-combat situation you can often just try again.  Sooner or later you will succeed.  If you can’t try again, well, you’re probably no worse off then if you had actually attacked them.So, to sum up, the problem is not unbalanced schools, but unimaginative, one-size-fits-all feats and specializations.  The schools are the size that they need to be.  Balancing necromancy and divination with evocation is a square peg-round whole type of problem that I doubt will ever be solved satisfactorily.</blockquote>

Verification