3.5 Rebuild Poll part 2

[bhu]

If you were rebuilding 3.5, would you make Wizards (and other casters) an all-encompassing class, or would you divide casters into specialties to make them more similar in power level to the other classes?

By Generalist I mean the ability to cast any spell from the Arcane list (like Wizard is now), and by specialist any spell from a more focused list like the Dread Necromancer, Warmage, or Beguiler.

[Flay Crimsonwind]

Melee guys, swingers of swords and other hunks of matter that can hurt things with the proper applied kinetic energy, generally focus themselves on a sole weapon, at most a group type. Why shouldn't wizards, who are trying to learn to alter and reshape reality, not be as specialized, if not moreso?

[PhaedrusXY]

I really like how the psion does it. You specialize, but there are lots of general powers also, and if you really want a specialist power from another group, you can get it with a feat (except for the 9th level ones).

[bkdubs123]

Melee guys, swingers of swords and other hunks of matter that can hurt things with the proper applied kinetic energy, generally focus themselves on a sole weapon, at most a group type. Why shouldn't wizards, who are trying to learn to alter and reshape reality, not be as specialized, if not moreso?

Well, but what if the game were built so that a melee guy could pick up any weapon he wanted and still be successful with it, and not have to specialize? Just playing devil's advocate.

[veekie]

I really like how the psion does it. You specialize, but there are lots of general powers also, and if you really want a specialist power from another group, you can get it with a feat (except for the 9th level ones).

Yeah, I reckon thats a decent way to do it as well.
Though my personal definition of specialisation is probably a little unusual, treating it as a theme you can use to differentiate characters IC. A primary focus, with some secondary stuff being available at no extra cost, and some limited stuff available at cost of multiclassing/feats.

[Runestar]

I say specialized along the lines of warmage and beguiler.

Not sure if it is possible to manage a divination or abjuration variant though, these 2 seem more utilitarian in nature, and so would be less useful in combat.

[dman11235]

Totally going with other, since a single generalist (good at everything, master of none) should be a viable option, and balanced if done right.  But generally, specialists would be preferred as a result of character limitations.

[InnaBinder]

Specialists all the way.

[bkdubs123]

Here's my thought: Make specialist the accepted, easy way, but Generalist a possible, if difficult, and non-optimal way.

For example, if for each school of magic, spells 4th level and higher required the spellcaster know 1 spell of the same school; spells 6th level and higher required 2 of the same school, spells 8th level and higher required 3 of the same school, and 9th level spells required 4 of the same school; more specialized casters would be the trend (especially if spells known were drastically reduced). Further, if for each subschool of magic, spells 6th level and higher required the spellcaster know 1 spell of the same subschool; and spells 8th level and higher required the spellcaster know 2 of the same subschool; specialization would be further encouraged (again, more effective if spells known are drastically reduced).

Which leads me to my next point: drastically reduce spells known, and don't allow Wizards, or any other class for that matter, to simply learn every spell in the game.

[AfterCrescent]

I'm somewhere in the ballpark with Phaedrus & veekie.

[awaken DM golem]

Archivist / Erudite StP would sort-of have access to the most stuff,
but still has gimpage of the divine or the psi side or the arcane+psi stuff, depending on direction.
I like that.

I don't know what the proper scale would be, but ... would you trade 2 7th level spells, for 1 8th level spell ??
If you really know what you are doing, it's still a tricky question.
And that feels like a balance-y question.

If you had a Caster with only PAO, but lots of uses of it (kinda like a recharge Erudite StP  with no other powers)
that would still be quite the dish.
A caster with just one spell, and yet still functional. This is hyper-specialization.
Now, if this was only available at epic levels, it feels tool-kit like. And not very powerful.

21 ... PAO at-will, lose all other spell casting abilities
22 ... 1/day metamorphic transfer type effect (wording blah blah)
23 ... 2/day
24 ... etc
use epic feats to gain more casting , needs work.

[JaronK]

Depends on the class.  I think some generalist casters should exist, but with seriously reduced casting power (like, an Archivist that only gets up to 6th level spells over time or something).  The Factotum is a good example of how this can work and still be useful.  And then some specialist casters are good too... the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer are solid classes already.

JaronK

[RobbyPants]

I'd say specialist.  You could always learn a spell or two here and there with the equivalent of Expand Knowledge.

Alternately, assuming a good multiclassing system where it doesn't hurt to drop caster levels, you could become a "generalist" by doing something like Necromancer 5/Evoker 5/Illusionist 5/Conjurer 5 (or whatever).  There's no way something like that would fly in 3x, but depending on how multiclassing works, how caster level increases, and what class features are available to each of these classes, it could be a viable choice.  You end up with a quarter of the spell selection of a straight-class specialist, but you do this with four different spell lists.

[veekie]

Alternately, assuming a good multiclassing system where it doesn't hurt to drop caster levels, you could become a "generalist" by doing something like Necromancer 5/Evoker 5/Illusionist 5/Conjurer 5 (or whatever).  There's no way something like that would fly in 3x, but depending on how multiclassing works, how caster level increases, and what class features are available to each of these classes, it could be a viable choice.  You end up with a quarter of the spell selection of a straight-class specialist, but you do this with four different spell lists.

Well, presuming that you gain level appropriate damage/DCs/resources, sure.

[awaken DM golem]

It's a stock situation in fantasy lit and tv, that two "wizards" get together - they might be anything really, in D&D terms - and try to figure out what they have in common or can trade or secrets etc ... but they can't just swap Spellbooks; it's a tougher to do than that.
Easy to trade
Difficult to trade with checks, and balances
Impossible to trade
There's already some to this with Divine and Arcane isolated, but not high Tiers at highish levels.

[Midnight_v]

I really like how the psion does it. You specialize, but there are lots of general powers also, and if you really want a specialist power from another group, you can get it with a feat (except for the 9th level ones).

+1

[TunFiskeMad]

I like the psion way to - seems more fun.