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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9091383" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Some of these have already been said by others.<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Wizards are simultaneously too versatile and too powerful. As a result, they crowd out other ways characters could be spellcasters that could be much more interesting, and also deprecate non-caster alternatives that simply can't compete.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Failure to deliver on the premise. The idea of the wizard is someone who develops spells by researching. Nothing--literally nothing--about the Wizard supports spell research. You spontaneously manifest extra spells as you level, and you copy the spells of others. That's not research! That's at best rote-memorization, and at worst plagiarism!</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Over-dependence on spells...despite, not because of, the thematic origins. The fiction that inspired the D&D Wizard has "wizards" who wield swords, use skills, rely on  magic items, and in many other ways DON'T work like any D&D Wizard ever has, to the D&D Wizard's detriment. It's more interesting to have a mix of talents.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Blandness. Because of the "too versatile" from point #1, the Wizard cannot have much character to it. It's merely a container for spells....but any class can be a container for spells, while also having diverse options for other flavors. It's not bad to have one subclass that is "unflavored oatmeal," but to have a whole class of it, that's another story.</li> </ol></blockquote>

Verification