Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rocker26a" data-source="post: 9399275" data-attributes="member: 7042495">It is dumber, because you choose to take Feats. Not to mention they come a bit later in the levelling table. If learning additional languages is direly important for some reason, you can account for that in your roleplay if you take the feat, or ask your DM to learn them on your down-time, or whatever. Being railroaded into it as a part of the classes' early levels, &quot;hey, you better come up with some reason to need languages and an excuse to learn them sharpish or this'll seem extremely strange&quot;, is dumber.I wasn't advocating for removing them from subclasses and feats. I gave a theoretical example that I thought made adequate sense. I don't think this thing they've foisted onto Ranger, perhaps because they'd do anything rather than give Ranger a more straightforwardly strong feature at an early level, makes much sense at all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rocker26a, post: 9399275, member: 7042495"] It [I]is[/I] dumber, because you [I]choose to take Feats[/I]. Not to mention they come a bit later in the levelling table. If learning additional languages is direly important for some reason, you can account for that in your roleplay if you take the feat, or ask your DM to learn them on your down-time, or whatever. Being railroaded into it as a part of the classes' early levels, "[I]hey, you better come up with some reason to need languages and an excuse to learn them sharpish or this'll seem extremely strange[/I]", is dumber. I wasn't advocating for removing them from subclasses and feats. I gave a theoretical example that I thought made adequate sense. I don't think this thing they've foisted onto Ranger, perhaps because they'd do anything rather than give Ranger a more straightforwardly strong feature at an early level, makes much sense at all. [/QUOTE]

Verification