Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jbear" data-source="post: 5864403" data-attributes="member: 75065">I voted for limited range of spells: I would prefer a smaller spell list where all options are good ones. This means making related spells into the same spell and the caster chooses which option to implement upon casting: eg. Protection is the spell. Not protection from good or evil or cats or three legged goats wearing purple stockings over their head. The wizard chooses what it wants protection from when spell is cast. Waaaay better and zing! 6 spells become 1. I also like the idea that specialising&nbsp; means a limited array of spell lists. And possibly some options that a generalist is unable to master as well. Maybe it could be possible for wizards later in their career to learn a secondary school&nbsp; and open up more spell options.I also voted for Limit Power: For me&nbsp; I'm&nbsp; really only talking about those spells that are just a total headache for the game&nbsp; ... like Wish. Something like a Wish should be the kind of thing that the DM CHOOSES to place in a game as really really special magical item which 1 character can use ... ONCE in their entire life time!!!! Not a spell you can pull off time and time again.If spells are limited, well they should be powerful. But they shouldn't break the game. I also like Monte's idea that certain powerful spells require certain conditions before they can be cast, meaning the wizard relies on his team mates at times to soften foes up.I would be open to having Wizards use some kind of personal resource in order to cast spells, mana whatever ... but they won't go there. Not with the wizard. I also would like to see wizards have options to be useful in other ways during combat that don't rely on a vancian memory system. Be that with unlimited use of cantrips or a minor at will spell they can use ad infinitum or at least many more times than their more powerful spells. No cross bow wizards thanks.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jbear, post: 5864403, member: 75065"] I voted for limited range of spells: I would prefer a smaller spell list where all options are good ones. This means making related spells into the same spell and the caster chooses which option to implement upon casting: eg. Protection is the spell. Not protection from good or evil or cats or three legged goats wearing purple stockings over their head. The wizard chooses what it wants protection from when spell is cast. Waaaay better and zing! 6 spells become 1. I also like the idea that specialising means a limited array of spell lists. And possibly some options that a generalist is unable to master as well. Maybe it could be possible for wizards later in their career to learn a secondary school and open up more spell options. I also voted for Limit Power: For me I'm really only talking about those spells that are just a total headache for the game ... like Wish. Something like a Wish should be the kind of thing that the DM CHOOSES to place in a game as really really special magical item which 1 character can use ... ONCE in their entire life time!!!! Not a spell you can pull off time and time again. If spells are limited, well they should be powerful. But they shouldn't break the game. I also like Monte's idea that certain powerful spells require certain conditions before they can be cast, meaning the wizard relies on his team mates at times to soften foes up. I would be open to having Wizards use some kind of personal resource in order to cast spells, mana whatever ... but they won't go there. Not with the wizard. I also would like to see wizards have options to be useful in other ways during combat that don't rely on a vancian memory system. Be that with unlimited use of cantrips or a minor at will spell they can use ad infinitum or at least many more times than their more powerful spells. No cross bow wizards thanks. [/QUOTE]

Verification