Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="QuietBrowser" data-source="post: 7479057" data-attributes="member: 6855057">Honestly? I have to agree that I find character advancement in 5e to be rather dull. It's better than third edition was, and way better than the front-loaded classes of AD&amp;D, but it just doesn't excite me the way that it did in 4th edition.Which is strange, because 4e classes didn't have the class features by level that 5e does. I think maybe it's because, in general, 5e is so much lower powered... I mean, I like that 5e attempted to add some meaningful traits to classes as they grow, but a lot of the time they just feel so... filler-y. Like, there's no real mechanical weight to them for many classes. Which I know is odd, because I really like that the Necromancer finally got the innate ability to control undead and took that from the Cleric, but... yeah, I just don't find &quot;you can speak any language&quot; very interesting.The lack of spells is perhaps part of the problem; there's only so many spells, and most of the &quot;subordinate&quot; casters (bards, warlocks, rangers, druids, paladins, sorcerers) are outfitted with spell-lists that are just slightly tweaked versions of the Cleric &amp; Wizard spell lists, which adds to the &quot;samey&quot; feel, because everybody's drawing from the same well of stuff.The highly individual assortment of powers that every class had in 4e just made it feel like there was more to do whenever you gained a level. Plus, I really miss the Paragon Path and Epic Destiny aspects, which really helped flavor my character's growth from, say, a farm-hand with dreams to being God-Emperor of Reborn Nerath.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="QuietBrowser, post: 7479057, member: 6855057"] Honestly? I have to agree that I find character advancement in 5e to be rather dull. It's better than third edition was, and way better than the front-loaded classes of AD&D, but it just doesn't excite me the way that it did in 4th edition. Which is strange, because 4e classes didn't have the class features by level that 5e does. I think maybe it's because, in general, 5e is so much lower powered... I mean, I like that 5e attempted to add some meaningful traits to classes as they grow, but a lot of the time they just feel so... filler-y. Like, there's no real mechanical weight to them for many classes. Which I know is odd, because I really like that the Necromancer finally got the innate ability to control undead and took that from the Cleric, but... yeah, I just don't find "you can speak any language" very interesting. The lack of spells is perhaps part of the problem; there's only so many spells, and most of the "subordinate" casters (bards, warlocks, rangers, druids, paladins, sorcerers) are outfitted with spell-lists that are just slightly tweaked versions of the Cleric & Wizard spell lists, which adds to the "samey" feel, because everybody's drawing from the same well of stuff. The highly individual assortment of powers that every class had in 4e just made it feel like there was more to do whenever you gained a level. Plus, I really miss the Paragon Path and Epic Destiny aspects, which really helped flavor my character's growth from, say, a farm-hand with dreams to being God-Emperor of Reborn Nerath. [/QUOTE]

Verification