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="Dimwhit" data-source="post: 947171" data-attributes="member: 2576">First, I was going to post this even before I saw the topic about Sorcerers knowing more spells. And this may have been debated before, but...I'm hoping someone can convince me why I'm wrong about this, but is it me, or do Wizards get the shaft with number of spells in their spellbooks? The way I figure it, by the time a Wizard hits 18th level, he has 4 spells per spell level in his book (besides the extra 1st level spells he gets when he starts), assuming he always chooses spells of the highest available level. This is without scribing spells, of course. 4 per spell level! Sorcerers almost have that many.I'm wondering how that's balanced, given that Clerics and Druids have access to EVERY spell per level each morning. There's the arguement that Wizards can scribe spells into their spellbooks, but I have two issues with that. 1. Even with 3.5 rules, it still costs a decent amount of money and requires breaks in the adventuring to do any decent amount and 2. Why should Wizards have to go through all the time and expense with other spellcasting classes essentially get every spell automatically?So what's the logic? The only think I can think of is that Wizards can specialize. Woopee. That doesn't help them learn any more spells. It only let's them cast an extra spell per spell level. What do they get the others don't? Scribe Scroll feat for free (and scribing scrolls is so ridiculously expensive and time consuming it's not worth it) and a whopping d4 hit dice (compared to the d8 for divine casters).Now I love my Wizards, so I'm not capping on the class, but can someone give me the logic for hamstrining the Wizards on their spell selection so much?</blockquote>

Verification