Search results

the very fact that you need to say "Hey this is for 2014 and this other one is for 2024" is enough to make it act like 3e/3.5 at least.

I mean a new set of rules that changed like 1e/2e and 3e/3.5

I don't mind familiars being a spell (although I don't need it to be) but writing in your book is a page too far.

okay good I am glad I misread it then (and even more glad I didn't report it) okay, that is something I run into other places but I only know of 1 poster here that is close to a 'never wizards'. if it was a normal game I would agree... for a playtest if I have two readings of a rule (see...

isn't the entire discussion speculation at this point? I believe that this is a new edition even if they say other words. You believe it is not. Neither of us have an agenda outside of talking about the games we all enjoy

yeah total word games to expect that after 10 years of warlock cantrips being cantrips warlocks can take, to read a warlock cantrip as a cantrip warlocks can take...

as clear as mud

I think if I read it right you take the 5e subclass remove the levels and instead line up as 1st 2nd 3rd ect (if you got multi ability's at a level you keep them grouped) then assign them at the new levels... so a wizard would get all the 2nd level features at 3rd level

there are plenty of ways to allow for different attacks without resorting to some things add some subtract do them in the right order then look at a negative target number.

I wonder why we should buy ANY book that has subclass features at wrong levels and feats that will need to be updated? Isn't this why between 3e and 4e they put out system neutral books?

this seems pretty much an attack on people that disagree with you. I am NOT reporting it hopeing I am reading it wrong. But are you saying that if we think this is middle ground waffeling we are trying to "hurt wotc"?

Yeah someone tried to tell us not to talk about something when it comes up naturally... it's not like the old warlord issue where talking about an adventure would make a warlord subthread... this is the amount of compatibility and the amount of change

or at least C make them actual cantrips that can be picked

I might have been alive but I don't remember it. I do however know the story of the changing of the flavor profile. Edit: New coke was 85 so no I wasn't around yet

clairity... imagine tomorrow Mcdonalds made a 'new' big mac that is a single burger on a sourer dough bun with mayo mustard lettuce tomato and pickle. That MIGHT be a great burger, but calling it a big mac confuses people. putting out a taste test of that new burger and saying "It's still...

100% they could have chose 1 side or the other but instead they are standing in-between and getting attacked from both. I don't know if it would be better to not change race/class/feat to keep it really compatible, or if it is better to redo everything and have it be 6e. I know that I would...

those words only make sense if you CHANGE editions to say that is the new rule... right now warlock spells are spells on the warlock list it is the oppisite of plain

So I sit down with my 2014 warlock and my buddy sits down with his 2024 warlock... he takes blade pact I take chain lock. I hit the level where I get a new cantrip and do what I do now... google "Warlock cantrips" and now a new one comes up 'pact of the blade' and it is exactly what my buddy is...

so there are two different ways to two weapon fight at 1 table, 2 different ways fatigue effects you, seems like it will get quite confusing. ESPECIALLY when I cast 2014 Aid and someone else casts 2024Aid that are nothing alike... can they stack?

I can't wait until a player decided to use the most powerful version of each spell... and class