Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gadget" data-source="post: 7353585" data-attributes="member: 23716">I would say it is mostly by &quot;feel&quot;.&nbsp; For instance, bards get mostly enchantment, utility, and buff type spells, Warlocks get &quot;curse&quot; type spells along with some others that may match the pact, and sorcerer's get more of an X-men powers type of a feel for their spell list.&nbsp; For your spell, it does sound like Ranger, Wizard, &amp; maybe even bard would be a good fit.&nbsp; Heck, it might not be bad on the Druid list, or a particular Cleric domain, though these would be pushing it with the name Tenser on the spell.&nbsp; I do not think it would fit the Sorcerer list, and probably not the Warlock (maybe as an eldritch evocation available to a pact?).&nbsp; Usually spells with nomenclature &lt;wizard inventor's name&gt; &lt;Spell&gt; are fairly exclusive to the wizard list, with the exception of Evard's Black Tentacles (matches some Warlock flavor really well), and Leomund's Tiny Hut (Bard could use some of the Utility).&nbsp; Another thing to consider is how the spell balances in 5e.&nbsp; Not knowing the details, it sounds like the caster gets a hawk summons for the duration, which might warrant a higher level spell slot than in AD&amp;D and/or Concentration.Edit: After some reflection, I think WOTC is a bit more tight with the &lt;Wizard's Name&gt;&lt;Spell&gt; nomenclature now for reason of making spells generally available to more classes if it fits.&nbsp; Didn't Expeditious Retreat use to be &lt;Wizard Name&gt; Expeditious Retreat?&nbsp; Or am I mis-remembering?&nbsp; They seem to reserve it for mostly Wizard Exclusive spells, that maybe fit another class really well.&nbsp; Given what is said above about the spell in question, I would be tempted to just name it Hunting Hawk and put it on the Ranger, Bard, Wizard (maybe Druid or a particular cleric domain) spell lists.[h=1][/h]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gadget, post: 7353585, member: 23716"] I would say it is mostly by "feel". For instance, bards get mostly enchantment, utility, and buff type spells, Warlocks get "curse" type spells along with some others that may match the pact, and sorcerer's get more of an X-men powers type of a feel for their spell list. For your spell, it does sound like Ranger, Wizard, & maybe even bard would be a good fit. Heck, it might not be bad on the Druid list, or a particular Cleric domain, though these would be pushing it with the name Tenser on the spell. I do not think it would fit the Sorcerer list, and probably not the Warlock (maybe as an eldritch evocation available to a pact?). Usually spells with nomenclature [I]<wizard inventor's name>[/I] [I]<Spell>[/I] are fairly exclusive to the wizard list, with the exception of [I]Evard's Black Tentacles[/I] (matches some Warlock flavor really well), and [I]Leomund's Tiny Hut[/I] (Bard could use some of the Utility). Another thing to consider is how the spell balances in 5e. Not knowing the details, it sounds like the caster gets a hawk summons for the duration, which might warrant a higher level spell slot than in AD&D and/or Concentration. Edit: After some reflection, I think WOTC is a bit more tight with the <Wizard's Name><Spell> nomenclature now for reason of making spells generally available to more classes if it fits. Didn't [I]Expeditious Retreat[/I] use to be [I]<Wizard Name> Expeditious Retreat[/I]? Or am I mis-remembering? They seem to reserve it for mostly Wizard Exclusive spells, that maybe fit another class really well. Given what is said above about the spell in question, I would be tempted to just name it [I]Hunting Hawk[/I] and put it on the Ranger, Bard, Wizard (maybe Druid or a particular cleric domain) spell lists. [h=1][/h] [/QUOTE]

Verification