Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Variant Wizard Spellbook
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="paradox42" data-source="post: 5744043" data-attributes="member: 29746"><p>To me, this seems like a solution in search of a problem. Wizards are versatile: that's the primary focus and strength of the class, and that <strong>alone</strong> is why Character Optimization (CharOp) people always look at them to be sure of what they're doing: the Wizard can do just about anything, <em>if</em> he properly prepares. That's the key factor there- the Wizard has to think ahead. If he prepares Fire spells expecting to face a White Dragon, and the dragon turns out to be a Red that was using disguises to <em>look</em> White, then the Wizard is SOL- but the Fighter's sword works just as well either way.</p><p></p><p>Your response to the other posters is very telling in this regard: when you state why you're doing this, your answer is not "my players always play Wizards because they're so powerful" or "one of my players has a Wizard character that has broken my game and I don't want it to happen again." Your answer is instead "because whenever people talk about builds, they always compare to the Wizard." This suggests that you have gotten worried by stuff you've read online, but you haven't actually encountered a problem in a real game resulting from a Wizard character.</p><p></p><p>If my supposition is correct, then you should be aware that your proposed rule change doesn't affect character optimization at all- and here's why. CharOp threads and boards invariably assume ideal circumstances. They don't talk about how difficult a particular combination of items and/or spells is to acquire; they just assume that the optimizer acquired them and explain how to use the combo. Your rule won't stop serious Wizard optimizers from assembling a list of spells they want; it just makes the acquisition more annoying. A player focused on optimization is going to acquire what he wants anyway- unless you use your power as GM to stop him of course, but then again, you can do that anyway without changing the existing rules set.</p><p></p><p>In the meantime, your proposed rule change will make life more difficult for players who have Wizard characters who are <em>not</em> trying to optimize them or break the game. Inexperienced players, or players who prefer to focus on roleplaying and story over Getting The Most Plusses, will be badly crippled by this rules change, but they're precisely the type of player who wouldn't have broken your game anyway under the old rules system.</p><p></p><p>This is why the responders so far have been largely against your idea.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="paradox42, post: 5744043, member: 29746"] To me, this seems like a solution in search of a problem. Wizards are versatile: that's the primary focus and strength of the class, and that [B]alone[/B] is why Character Optimization (CharOp) people always look at them to be sure of what they're doing: the Wizard can do just about anything, [I]if[/I] he properly prepares. That's the key factor there- the Wizard has to think ahead. If he prepares Fire spells expecting to face a White Dragon, and the dragon turns out to be a Red that was using disguises to [I]look[/I] White, then the Wizard is SOL- but the Fighter's sword works just as well either way. Your response to the other posters is very telling in this regard: when you state why you're doing this, your answer is not "my players always play Wizards because they're so powerful" or "one of my players has a Wizard character that has broken my game and I don't want it to happen again." Your answer is instead "because whenever people talk about builds, they always compare to the Wizard." This suggests that you have gotten worried by stuff you've read online, but you haven't actually encountered a problem in a real game resulting from a Wizard character. If my supposition is correct, then you should be aware that your proposed rule change doesn't affect character optimization at all- and here's why. CharOp threads and boards invariably assume ideal circumstances. They don't talk about how difficult a particular combination of items and/or spells is to acquire; they just assume that the optimizer acquired them and explain how to use the combo. Your rule won't stop serious Wizard optimizers from assembling a list of spells they want; it just makes the acquisition more annoying. A player focused on optimization is going to acquire what he wants anyway- unless you use your power as GM to stop him of course, but then again, you can do that anyway without changing the existing rules set. In the meantime, your proposed rule change will make life more difficult for players who have Wizard characters who are [I]not[/I] trying to optimize them or break the game. Inexperienced players, or players who prefer to focus on roleplaying and story over Getting The Most Plusses, will be badly crippled by this rules change, but they're precisely the type of player who wouldn't have broken your game anyway under the old rules system. This is why the responders so far have been largely against your idea. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Variant Wizard Spellbook
Top