Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="UngeheuerLich" data-source="post: 5994429" data-attributes="member: 59057">While the sorcere seems quite powerful right now, he is actually to be compared to the cleric. And they are standing on equal footing in hp and armor department, and their attack and spell DC progressions, while the fighter and the wizard and even the warlock outclass both of them on their own battlefield.And people, please leave the wizard spellcasting mechanics in peace. There are people who like it that way and honestly believe it is the more flexible mechanic - like me.Would I mind some at-will spells? No. Some tradition? No. Schools of magic? No. But the core of the wizard is the vancian type who can learn every spell but must prepare wisely.The ADnD bard was also vancian. I´d take him everytime over the 3rd edition bard who was limited to so few spells per level it was not funny. Never intended to play the sorcerer.This type (although maybe a bit of balance needs to be done) seems cool right out of the gate, not stepping on the wizards toe. The warlock also seems like an interesting incarnation of the 3e one. Ritual casting replacing use magic device. Nice. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I also like, that all three of them use the same spell list. If 4e had used unified spell and maneuver lists, I guess it wouls have been received a lot better. Mostly identical spells and maneuvers in 2-4 different lists prevented us from remembering iconics  (come and get it or twin strike non-withstanding) and wasted a lot of space.</blockquote>

Verification