D&D 5E does it seem lke tcoe Order of scribes wizard is largely solutions in search of a problem dressed up as an archetype?

[Guest User]

Of all the things to be criticizing TreantMonk for, this is not one of the better and more persuasive arguments.

LOL...due to time constraints, I skimmed your response before.
Let's be honest...this is the whole crux of your posting, the fact that I stated that Treantmonk's universal assumptions, should not be treated as universal.

History has amply demonstrated, you lose your , when TM critiques are invoked.

I see a lot of confirmation bias in this thread. Discount and ignore that which does not meet your experiences, and double down on what does.

Some games are brutal, some are not. One doesnt really need a cold weather coat in Los Angeles, one absolutely needs one in Chicago.

You are in Los Angeles saying the need to consider cold weather gear is too niche and extreme to be relevant. My response, again, is that it depends upon where you live.

 

[Mistwell]

LOL...due to time constraints, I skimmed your response before.
Let's be honest...this is the whole crux of your posting, the fact that I stated that Treantmonk's universal assumptions, should not be treated as universal.

It's really not. Your assumptions, based on your prior reply, are on highly opitional rules from the DMG's houserule options section. Which is a nonsense reply when discussing a new published subclass which of course is not assuming massive changes to the resting rules.

At the point where you explained that's what you mean, I dismissed you because this isn't legit criticism. It was a personal attack later though, for some bizarre reason. Not sure why you took this topic so personal you felt the need for that? We're just talking about D&D rules man. No reason to go there.

 

[Mistwell]

Why does it matter what's in the hardcovers so much?

Because he raised that as his proof the class was not working well? I didn't raise those books, he did. So I, and others, responded to it.

 

[BacchusNL]

LOL...due to time constraints, I skimmed your response before.
Let's be honest...this is the whole crux of your posting, the fact that I stated that Treantmonk's universal assumptions, should not be treated as universal.

History has amply demonstrated, you lose your , when TM critiques are invoked.

I see a lot of confirmation bias in this thread. Discount and ignore that which does not meet your experiences, and double down on what does.

Some games are brutal, some are not. One doesnt really need a cold weather coat in Los Angeles, one absolutely needs one in Chicago.

You are in Los Angeles saying the need to consider cold weather gear is too niche and extreme to be relevant. My response, again, is that it depends upon where you live.

Argueing that TM's assumptions are wrong because they are "universal" is akin to saying that a chef's food sucks because he or she didn't cook it like your mum. You can not discuss official D&D content in a video and take every random house-rule into account, you use the universaly accepted baseline as published by WotC.

 

[Don Durito]

Because he raised that as his proof the class was not working well? I didn't raise those books, he did. So I, and others, responded to it.

And by doing so seem to be conceding that it matters.

That's generally how it works.

 

[Mistwell]

And by doing so seem to be conceding that it matters.

That's generally how it works.

I am conceding it matters to him. So far, I think he's the only one that has said he has issues with this subclass?

 

[Don Durito]

If it doesn't matter at all, then arguing about whether he is right or wrong about the details would seem a fairly pointless waste of everyone's time wouldn't it.

 

[Umbran]

History has amply demonstrated, you lose your , when TM critiques are invoked.

Mod Note:

Dude, don't make it personal. Address the post, not the poster. It isn't about them, or their habits, it is about the logic on the page at the moment.

 

[Mistwell]

If it doesn't matter at all, then arguing about whether he is right or wrong about the details would seem a fairly pointless waste of everyone's time wouldn't it.

It matters to him, and he is who I am trying to persuade? If you feel the thread is wasting your time, I am sorry about that. Did you want to discuss some other aspect of the topic?

 

[Sword of Spirit]

People have been clamoring for a "generalist" wizard since 5E's release 6 years ago (because apparently "generalist" wizards are unable to avoid hitting their party members in combat, which is why the Evocation school wasn't "generalist" enough for them.)

So now we have the Order of Scribes to fill the "generalist" wizard motif. It only took 6 years, but hopefully those that wanted it got what they were hoping for.

I don't have the book yet, but unfortunately it doesn't sound like it's going to satisfy my desire for a generalist wizard at all. It's so over the top with its new super- magic sentient spellbook, and features that invalidate standard wizard functioning assumptions that I don't even think I can easily salvage it to make use of the few features it has that would work.

(The reason using Evoker as generalist isn't terribly satisfying is that it is the specialist of the evocation school, and not specializing in a school is exactly what a generalist is about.)