Search results

Probably not for Action Surge, because its totally internalized and based entirely on the metagame concept of the action economy.

Why wouldn't he call it Lay on Hands? Unless he's the only paladin in existence, someone would have named the ability they all share at some point.

Right there with ya.

See I think a sorcerer for sure would be called that by people or identify as such.

I get what you mean. But you can be a Sellsword without being a Fighter. You can be a Pickpocket without being a Rogue. A Knight of the Temple could be a Fighter or Cleric instead of a Paladin. Those terms don't actually answer the question of your character's very specific game world...

Reading through the read. When this conversation comes up the Fighter, Rogue and Barbarian tend to be the classes that people say wouldn't self identify. I feel like in part that's because of D&Ds tradition of " A class without spells? Who cares?" Magic classes are specific and special...

Sure. The class structure as it stands pretty much demands it to me.

Huh interesting. It still baffles me that there isn't a page listing next to those, or what classes can take what spellsin the actual spell description.

Nice! Now if someone could redo the terrible spells lists.

That's crazy.

I don't disagree with that in theory. But if a player is only missing the game once in a while, what point does them having slightly less XP even serve? Why bother with the distinction?

It is a reasonable question, don't feel bad.

Who cares? Why do people seem to take a fun game so seriously like its a cutthroat business? If someone misses a game of Scrabble do you make them start the next game with less letter tiles? If they miss a friendly game of basketball do they have to play the next game barefoot?

There are a lot of issues going on in your group. But rage quitting is never a good answer. I've done it before, and the end result is always negative.

"Hating" a fictitious species in a game so much that even them existing in the world or being played by someone else ruins the game for you? Huge warning sign of behavior I'm not going to tolerate being around.

I think this thread has convinced me I like Warlord.

Two problems with Witch. 1) When people hear Witch they think of an ugly monster woman, and as the majority of D&D players are men it's kind of a bad idea. I know a lot of the guys in my group would be iffy in playing a witch over a warlock. And come to think of it the "ugly" connotation is...

WARLO- which kind of does bug me. I'd have probably renamed the Warlock the Sorcerer in 5e, but I'm a monster.

Banneret seems kind of prissy to me. Like a class that gets shoved into lockers a lot.

Yeah, I still haven't thought of or found a name I really like. Warlord I'm fine with just because that's already in use. Marshal I would be fine with if Martial wasn't already in use in the game (especially in 4e.) Commander I'm actually okay with even if its a bit bland. Warduke I've never...