Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AllisterH" data-source="post: 4606415" data-attributes="member: 51325">There were some bad placement of priest spells when the sphere system was created....&nbsp;It wasn't until PO:S&amp;M (which itself was inspired by a DRAGON article talking about the same thing) that someone actually sat down and thought, &quot;ok, this spell does WHAT and HOW does it compare to other spells and WHO should have access to it&quot;.&nbsp;2e is also partly responsible in a way for how much more versatile and powerful the 3e wizard became. When illusionists had their own separate spell lists, there was a very good mechanical reason to play an illusionist.&nbsp;Not only did you get some spells sooner but you got unique spells that a generalist couldnt touch. 2E's merging of the spell lists, while great for creating new specialists was IMO a bad thing in the grand scheme of D&amp;D.&nbsp;Sure, there was still a relatively strong incentive to play a specialist in 2E, but I believe that if the 2E designers had kept spell lists separate for each specialists, we wouldn't be talking so much about how wizards were &quot;broken&quot; in 3E.&nbsp;For example, while strong and fun classes, nobody generally considers the Dread Necromancer, Beguiler or the Warmage even on the level of the sorceror much less the wizard....</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AllisterH, post: 4606415, member: 51325"] There were some bad placement of priest spells when the sphere system was created.... It wasn't until PO:S&M (which itself was inspired by a DRAGON article talking about the same thing) that someone actually sat down and thought, "ok, this spell does WHAT and HOW does it compare to other spells and WHO should have access to it". 2e is also partly responsible in a way for how much more versatile and powerful the 3e wizard became. When illusionists had their own separate spell lists, there was a very good mechanical reason to play an illusionist. Not only did you get some spells sooner but you got unique spells that a generalist couldnt touch. 2E's merging of the spell lists, while great for creating new specialists was IMO a bad thing in the grand scheme of D&D. Sure, there was still a relatively strong incentive to play a specialist in 2E, but I believe that if the 2E designers had kept spell lists separate for each specialists, we wouldn't be talking so much about how wizards were "broken" in 3E. For example, while strong and fun classes, nobody generally considers the Dread Necromancer, Beguiler or the Warmage even on the level of the sorceror much less the wizard.... [/QUOTE]

Verification