Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7858280" data-attributes="member: 996">I'm not sure how 'common' figures into it.  And I must have missed the claims.  I mean, the point of picking a class with unprecedented versatility is to be able to adapt when needed, not to need to do so with a specific frequency.  I have not.  My objection to Spell Versatility is not that it actually closes the gap between Tier 2 and 1 at all dramatically, but, rather that it is erodes the uniqueness of the sorcerer class and it's suitability for build to concept.The wizard was long since a lost cause, that way, even had it not been given the perks of spontaneous on top of prepped casting, and at-will cantrips, and free rituals.No question, but they are less differentiated because they're both spell swapping. TBF, they may not care about the ranger, or just feel sorry for it.Agreed.  IMHO, the issue of re-jiggering a build that turns out to be off by a bad choice or two should be addressed with a universal retraining mechanic, instead of class-by-class.  And, that mechanic should be kept out of actual play, it should be a chargen/level-up, at most, between-sessions, out-of-character, option.He can: Well, and the rest of the campaign after that stretch of downtime, because you're essentially playing a completely different sorcerer, at that point.  That hurts the sorcerer as a go-to build-to-concept class choice. (Not that it's as good for that purpose in 5e as it was in 3e, anyway.) Removing a restriction is a buff.  Casters have so few restrictions left in 5e, it's can't be an insignificant one, at this point.Then there's no need to let it intrude on play, the extant mechanism is more than adequate. Which is also kinda a weird statement.  Why would it be intended to happen at a given frequency, and how is at level-up not a fairly predictable frequency?Are more people using slower leveling via reduced exp or milestones or something? Again, at level-up is fine - ideal, even - for spell you outgrow, since growth, in that sense, happens at level-up. Why should it intrude in play?You just made the point that spells are situational.  For any spell (not strictly inferior to another), there could be a situation where it's ideal.I'm not sure I see why that's even an issue.  "Y'all aren't swapping spells as much as we thought, so here's some rules that let you choose not to swap them every day instead of choosing not to swap them only when you level up"Really? How good a reason depends on how readily it can be swapped back if it wasn't such a good reason, afterall, too, I guess. Did you ever try to do a thematic wizard, back in the day, before we had sorcerers? The known-spell design is solid for a build-to-concept, precisely because there isn't the option of compromising that concept in play out of simple pragmatism, or even "the party really needs this spell..."  The original sorcerer, introducing spontaneous casting and with more slots than the wizard was even better, because it not only let you choose and stick to a concept-supporting list of known spells, it let you display them relatively more often.5e sorcerers lack that last bit, a little, and there are more known-spell classes now, and everyone's now spontaneous.  So they'd already lost a bit of suitability, that way.  An in-play retraining mechanic just further erodes that.</blockquote>

Verification