Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 7852630" data-attributes="member: 6750235">This I question because it looks like you're saying the wizard's roll is to rewrite reality while the sorcerer and warlock are just there for some more damage and maybe talk to people.  I have a different opinion on the expectation level of power for a wizard.  And those roles for sorcerers and warlocks.  <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=";)" />The wizard has a niche.  It vaguely stems from the controller concept.  5e doesn't have niche protection, however, but spell versatility isn't going to change the actual spell lists or other class mechanics or that niche.You might think this is mmo nerfing talk but Crawford stated it was done to move in the direction of the design goal, which was spell swapping at a certain pace.  He just upped the pace and over-compensated (in some opinions).  Swapping was always a thing whether it was the level up method or DM retraining methods.I've discussed sorcerers with [USER=6677017]@Sword of Spirit[/USER] in other threads and want to be careful not to put words in anyone's mouth, so correct me if I'm wrong on this:  Sword of Spirit sees a need for improvement to the restrictive nature of the sorcerer's spells known.  Sword of Spirit does not like this particular implementation.  Sword of Spirit's opinion is valid in that the restrictiveness exists and a lot of people share it.  This is not necessarily because wizard's have any disadvantage in comparison.I personally work around the spells on sorcerers by not trying to be too thematic, select spells carefully, and supplement the spell selection using feats because those feats are worth a lot more on a spell starved class.  I like meta-magic and think it's worth the restrictiveness but that's still just an opinion and no more valid than anyone else's, and I recognize how restrictive the spells known mechanic can be.I think the spell versatility feature is trivial.  A sorcerer with a different 4th level spell on a different day is still restricted to a 4th level spell and just gave up a 4th level spell that was chosen in the first place because it was a better fit.  Spell versatility as a general concept exists on a much larger scope for some classes using spell preparation.  It's literally a case of a lot of general spell versatility compared to the little bit swapping out a spell, and that general spell versatility doesn't actually come from changing spells via prep.  It comes from having more spells prepped than sorcerers know.Losing a spell known to gain a spell known is not as significant as having 2 or 3 or 4 or 10 more spells prepared in the first place, let alone swapping any of them.  It's actually a zero sum exchange with the benefit being situational or not being saddled with an out-dated spell.</blockquote>

Verification