Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9380958" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Because this is a continuing trend of 5e: turn things that would be simpler, easier, and better as individual class features into spells, forcing them to dance to the rules of spellcasting regardless of how it fits.Because it means that the game leans EVEN MORE into "everyone must be a spellcaster to have cool features" problem that already frustrates a number of fans, so every new feature that gets turned into a spell just aggravates it that much more.Because there's really no need for it to be a spell, and if it's a spell, it reduces the class's internal synergy and combo potential, which some fans like. (I'm ambivalent about this one, but I get why folks would be annoyed.)I think that about covers the bases, even if I've missed something. And the thing is, there are a number of people who only care about one of these things (or some other thing I've neglected), but all roads lead to Rome. It doesn't matter whether you want a lower-magic game or hate the idea of offloading damn near every class feature into spells or are annoyed by the removal of combo potential. Whatever gets you there. With many of these reasons being heavily non-overlapping, there's a lot of pathways for very different people to come to the same conclusion.</blockquote>