D&D 5E Spell Versatility is GONE. Rejoice!

[FrogReaver]

I agree with @EzekielRaiden , your reading of Acerak's point was harsher than was required. But, fine I'll concede that if @AcererakTriple6 truly meant that every single possible rule is better as an official variant rule rather than a house rule, that your rebuttal was a correct response.

Maybe. I don't think he actually believed that. But he did say it. He did use the fallacious universal in an attempt to bolster his other point. Addressing that was not pedantry because it needed addressed. Perhaps there was a better method than reducto ad absurdum? I'm willing to concede to that.

However, since that was clearly not the intent of their argument, I think it is fair to say that spoke loosely and informally, and that you responded to that instead of to the intent of their post.

I would agree except that the intent of that post was clearly to bolster the case that it would have been good to include the rule simply because it would make the rule official.

What other intent could the statement have meant to convey? That some rules are better as official than optional? How would that have helped his case?

Edit: And I agree with the rest of Ezekiel's points too. The discussion has been whether or not it was a bad rule, with the impetus being that people were celebrating it not being included. People put forth that they were celebrating it because it was a bad rule, and that it wasn't included because it was a bad rule, but this discussion on this rule has never definitively been proven if it is good or bad.

Nor will it ever be proven. A rule being good or bad isn't objective, but rather subjective.

 

[Maxperson]

Selfish isn't the right word in your circumstance. If you liked the rule it would aptly apply.

Most importantly - no one is stopping anyone from their enjoyment of using that rule if they like it. They can still use it via homebrew. Why exactly must the rule be official before someone can enjoy it?

I don't know, since I never said it had to be official before someone can enjoy it. I'm sure many can enjoy it as homebrew. However, many cannot. There's no good reason to exclude it from a small book like this when it is expressly optional and will not in any way impact anyone who doesn't opt to use it.

 

[FrogReaver]

I don't know, since I never said it had to be official before someone can enjoy it. I'm sure many can enjoy it as homebrew. However, many cannot. There's no good reason to exclude it from a small book like this when it is expressly optional and will not in any way impact anyone who doesn't opt to use it.

Not every rule that someone may enjoy needs to be official. I hope that's a concept we can agree on.

 

[MoonSong]

Not every rule that someone may enjoy needs to be official. I hope that's a concept we can agree on.

But if it isn't official, it is very unlikely I'd benefit from it. This happens because:

Many DMs don't homebrew nor use third party period. This fact can't be changed, and it doesn't matter how open to homebrew, third party and outright tinkering I am myself as a DM. Nothing I could ever do as a DM will ever benefit myself as a player short of holding players in my games hostage.
If it isn't official, some DMs won't even know of it. (Only a reduced percentage of DMs even follow UA)
Coming this close to being official, then being withdrawn actually weights against it. The very vocal opposition to this one rule creates a perception that this rule is inherently bad, and anybody asking for it is a powergaming munchkin. Let's face the truth, this option is basically gone forever.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Maybe. I don't think he actually believed that. But he did say it. He did use the fallacious universal in an attempt to bolster his other point. Addressing that was not pedantry because it needed addressed. Perhaps there was a better method than reducto ad absurdum? I'm willing to concede to that.

That was a mistake, I did not mean to suggest that it was true all of the time.

 

[Maxperson]

Not every rule that someone may enjoy needs to be official. I hope that's a concept we can agree on.

Sure, but this isn't about "someone." It's about everyone, and not nearly everyone can use the rule without it being official.

Given that adding the rule as an option to Tasha's would not have impacted the game of a single person who didn't opt into using it AND that there was plenty of room to add such a small rule, there's really no good reason for its exclusion. It's not as if it would have taken some other rule away.

 

[Helldritch]

Sure, but this isn't about "someone." It's about everyone, and not nearly everyone can use the rule without it being official.

Given that adding the rule as an option to Tasha's would not have impacted the game of a single person who didn't opt into using it AND that there was plenty of room to add such a small rule, there's really no good reason for its exclusion. It's not as if it would have taken some other rule away.

You are forgetting the syndrome of "that's in an official book, I should be able to use it!". It is a very strong syndrome that puts a lot of pressure on young DM. Yes, I know, I am not their defender. I am not their spoke person. But I have brought enough people into the hobby (and keeps doing it) to know that it is not a hypothetical thing. It is a real thing. And as soon that something is official, some will try to armwrestle young DM into using it. We're not talking about 3pp. We're talking about official as official as it can get. Optional I hear you say? Yeah... so are feats... So are Dragonborns, Tieflings, Gnomes... Know any campaign that never use them? I don't.

 

[Maxperson]

You are forgetting the syndrome of "that's in an official book, I should be able to use it!". It is a very strong syndrome that puts a lot of pressure on young DM. Yes, I know, I am not their defender. I am not their spoke person. But I have brought enough people into the hobby (and keeps doing it) to know that it is not a hypothetical thing. It is a real thing. And as soon that something is official, some will try to armwrestle young DM into using it. We're not talking about 3pp. We're talking about official as official as it can get. Optional I hear you say? Yeah... so are feats... So are Dragonborns, Tieflings, Gnomes... Know any campaign that never use them? I don't.

I have little sympathy for a DM who can't say no to something that disrupts his game. That's a personal issue that doesn't qualify as a good reason in my book(see what I did there? ) to exclude a rule from publication.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Sure, but this isn't about "someone." It's about everyone, and not nearly everyone can use the rule without it being official.

Given that adding the rule as an option to Tasha's would not have impacted the game of a single person who didn't opt into using it AND that there was plenty of room to add such a small rule, there's really no good reason for its exclusion. It's not as if it would have taken some other rule away.

But that argument can be made for every conceivable optional rule. 'If you don't like it, don't use it.' But the book cannot contain every conceivable optional rule.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

But that argument can be made for every conceivable optional rule. 'If you don't like it, don't use it.' But the book cannot contain every conceivable optional rule.

And no one wants every conceivable optional rule in a book, but we do want ones that people did want in the book, balanced ones that were offered by WotC.