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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Falling Icicle" data-source="post: 5811651" data-attributes="member: 17077">This is a radical idea, maybe even crazy, but hear me out before you throw vegetables at me. After playing a warlock in 3e, I've been asking myself, why have spells per day at all? The warlock was far from overpowered (despite people's initial reaction), and there are other reasonably easy ways of limiting certain spells so that they aren't abused. Some of the more powerful spells cost money, experience points, or other costly resources, so a wizard wouldn't go around casting those spells excessively anyway. Other spells that are particularly potent, like time stop, could be balanced by having a "cooldown" period before it could be cast again, could cause fatigue, or have some other drawback. Maybe big gun type spells like fireball could take a full round to cast, to balance their destructive potential. Persistent spells, like firewall or summoning spells, could have the limitation that you can only have one instance of it in effect at a time (one firewall, one summoned monster, etc). If you cast another, the previous one disappears. But alot of spells, like levitate, or magic missile, do they really break the game if the wizard can just cast them at-will?Perhaps the wizard still has a selection of daily prepared spells, but can cast those spells at-will? I know, it sounds crazy, but really, if the game were designed with that assumption from the beginning, I have no doubt that they could balance it.Okay, you can start throwing vegetables now. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification