Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9405021" data-attributes="member: 6801228">You don't even play the same game I do. You have repeatedly told us that you don't play 5e. Yes, I'm comfortable that not every single cleric concept has a subclass. I was comfortable with that when the PHB had 7 sublclasses, I was comfortable with that when they were still lacking subclasses after Xanathars, I was comfortable with that when they were still lacking subclasses after Tashas, and I remain comfortable with it. Because you can't end up covering every single possible subclass. I'm also comfortable with those same limits on Barbarians, Fighters, Rogues, Druids, Bards, Sorcerers, Wizards, Monks, Rangers, Paladins, Artificers and Warlocks. And other than sighing wistfully into the distance you haven't actually laid out what concepts are supposedly both vital and missing, just making side comments about how you are glad you aren't comfortable with it like I am.</blockquote>