Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9662963" data-attributes="member: 7045806">I'm not here to debate the merits, but just to offer a different point of view.The issue has never been one, at least for me, about the actual mechanical differences. I bemoan the idea that it needs to be "fixed" because in the many games, for many different people, that I'd been in, it never actually surfaces. It's a ghost.If players naturally share the spotlight, which is my experience, the issue largely melts away. Players realize that a situation is for the rogue. They realize this encounter is for the barbarian. And so on. And so every game more than enough people want to be a martial, and every game someone volunteers to be a caster. In every game, this "problem" seems to cease to be a "problem."So the question is, how much does a theoretical problem matter if most of the community doesn't see it in their games? If martial classes dominate the only hard data we have, and half of a deeply enfranchised board, such as Enworld, disagree on the topic, is it possible the problem only exists in theory?I don't know the answer, and I doubt we ever will. I do know that theory and practice can diverge sometimes, and I wonder if this is one of those instances.</blockquote>