Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 7854986" data-attributes="member: 6750235">Still double-speak.  The reasons for vague magic items were given.  I gave 3 reference points to use in your games (general magic purchasing, costs based on item creation rules, the AL guidelines).  This was to help you because you are concerned about the resource.  Helping you with some of the options available has nothing to do with any concerns for or against spell versatility.The only person hung up on the cost and / or the availability of additional spells for a spell book in this thread so far has been you.  You've been clinging to it and repeating it as a rebuttal to the discussion on spell versatility while making posts like the one above that don't give any information regarding "issues" with spell versatility.What do you think is actually going to happen in play?  A group with a wizard and a sorcerer go into town, sleep for the night, the sorcerer changes out 1 spell maybe and the wizard changes to his or her "in town" list?  Or the group doesn't have both and it's not possible for one to overshadow the other?  Replacing "sorcerer" with bard doesn't change anything because the bard is just going to take different spells from the wizard.I'm not dismissing the "stepping on toes" argument.  I'm disagreeing with it.  And giving reasons why.  The reasons why, to be clear, are:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">There is no incentive to regularly change spells for spells known classes.  How often something can be done has nothing to do with how often something will be done.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The wizard's connection to the spell book is reinforces in his identity because it's still the key to his spell selection as different from other arcane spell casters.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Other aspects of the wizard's identity are completely untouched.  These include class features and traditions.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Spell versatility is completely underwhelming as a long rest mechanic in comparison to spell preparation.  There's no comparison between swapping a single spell for a single spell with the same level compared swapping any number of spells among any number of levels available.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">This is a move to correct a concern to meet the intended spell swapping of these classes.  A class cannot step on any toes in doing what it was originally intended to do.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">This started in the concept stage years ago according to interview with Crawford that you also reposted.  That demonstrates a lot of though and feed back has gone into it before getting to this point.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Crawford stated several times in several ways how this did not negatively impact the wizard identity as he sees it.  As a designer and player this should be a consideration at the very least.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">What happens in downtime play is a minor consideration.  Downtime is mostly not playing by definition and simply things that happen as time goes by.  Once play begins it's become a detail in history.  What's important is what happens in actual gameplay.</li> </ol>The problem isn't that I have been ignoring what's been said.  It's that what I've said in response seems to have been ignored.</blockquote>

Verification