The specialist wizard

[Jester of the FoS]

The Fighter rules you just mentioned are optional. If a fighter only kills as a final option and tries to capture or aprehend there is no reason to even think about using those rules.
Even if they don't why should killing for them be any worse than a wizard tossing fireballs at the baddies?
I think looting is punishable only if they find the body or if they have to dig someone up. Taking something off a fallen foe is not particularly evil. Call it a job perk.

Despite the interpretation, I agree with your earlier point, alhoon. No matter how many scrolls the wizard creates that day, as long as he makes two or more, then it compensates or exceeds gaining one extra spell slot per day.

Yeah, so a wizard making extra scrolls compensates for him not being a specialist. But can't specialists make scrolls and potions and wands as well? If they make them at the same rate as the wizards they still have the advantage.
They lose two schools and have less choices of spells but they get an extra spell. Seems pretty darned balanced to me.

[Jason of the Fraternity]

If they make them at the same rate as the wizards they still have the advantage. They lose two schools and have less choices of spells but they get an extra spell. Seems pretty darned balanced to me.

I wouldn't argue that they're not balanced. In fact, I've been supporting the fact that the specialist doesn't overpower the generalist since the previous thread. I merely believe that the extra spell slots don't make the specialist that much more powerful than a general wizard. Creating scrolls, wands, etc. helps compensate the lack of the extra memorized spell (which was the strongest argument that the specialist was better).

If played well, both types of wizard come out being rather equal.