Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7443416" data-attributes="member: 22779">That's actually a pretty nuanced question.  So, if you don't mind, I'll take it in order:1.  Does vanilla 5e produce a more grounded swords and sorcery game than 3e?No.  It doesn't.  Well, IMO, it doesn't.  Virtually every class is casting spells and casting spells very, very often.  That right there pushes it out of S&S for me.  Sure, those spells are a LOT less powerful than they were in earlier editions, but, in vanilla 5e, you're probably going to have at least two full casters, each with cantrips and more spells than they can realistically blow through in a given adventuring day.  Which means that you are likely going to have spells being cast every single round.That being said..2.  Does it preserve the high fantasy power level of previous games?No, again, it doesn't.  Yup, you're going to get spells being cast all the bloody time, but, the casters are MASSIVELY rolled back on what they can do.  Clerics get virtually no offensive spells for example (although that does depend on which domain they have).  You go from spell lists that are pages long to a full caster having maybe 15 choices of spells in any given level.  And frequently less than 10 choices at high levels.  So, AFAIC, they have really, really curtailed what casters can do.3.  Does it ramp up power beyond 3e?No, not even close.  Casters in 5e are powerful, but, not really all that powerful.  Gone are the days when the caster could simply buff/summon himself an army and pretty much ignore the rest of the party.  The range from top to bottom between the classes in 5e is really not that far at all.</blockquote>

Verification