Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Doug McCrae" data-source="post: 5891686" data-attributes="member: 21169">You have a point. The problem is the wizard, and the other main Vancian casters - the cleric and druid - have too many spells to select from. So they can go all exploration on an 'exploration day' and all combat on a 'combat day' and be better than the rogue or the fighter.This is one reason why I prefer the sorcerer style of casting - it forces the casters to be 'this' and not 'that', to be about as limited as the fighter and rogue are, and so have to rely on their team-mates. Another advantage is that it makes each individual caster a lot more flavorful. Sorcerers are really what specialist wizards should be, but aren't.I've lately developed a particular dislike, when playing/running points-based rpgs such as Mutants & Masterminds, of players creating characters who can do everything. Sadly this is all too easy in M&M, by means of alternate powers. They'll go for a very broad theme, which justifies being able to excel at every aspect of the game - combat, movement, healing, investigation, npc interaction - they can do it all, and sometimes better than a character who can only do one thing, due to the vagaries of the system.It is possible, I think, to create balanced classes that are unbalanced on the triple axis - AD&D fighters and thieves are reasonably well balanced against one another for example. It's the 'one-man party' characters that need to die in a fire, in my view. I hates them! <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=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification