Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TheOneGargoyle" data-source="post: 8491979" data-attributes="member: 6924207">Exactly. And that work is about designing / defining a concept that makes sense for it. Having The Mountain be able to fly doesn't fit to me unless there's more to it. Yep, this sounds great to me. Agreed but as you say that fits for a large and /or strong char type. Having this available to say a swashbuckler doesn't really make sense to me. I love this. That makes perfect sense to me. Of course. But just cos one character can do it doesn't mean every char should be able to too. For the right concept, yes, but not for say a bear totem barbarianI love this too. This sounds like a great subclass idea. I can just imagine a whole set of lore/story about how &amp; why their rage manifests as primal forms. Agree 100%. This is why I think char concept is so important. I once made a wizard who's whole concept was that he didn't want anyone to know he was a wizard so he pretended to be a cat burglar instead. So he didn't take single spell with a visually discernible effect, and subtle spell meta magic, and high dex, etc. He wasn't much good in combat but he was one of my all time favourite characters to play. Agree it should apply across the board but the game isn't published by &quot;Fighters of the Coast&quot; now is it &lt;grin&gt; Agreed. Meaningful &amp; interesting build choices that are trade-offs is what makes a game fun to create characters in. Hehe yeah the concept of a blue dragon barbarian did occur to me as I was writing that example, I figured someone would pick that up <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤣" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f923.png" title="Rolling on the floor laughing&nbsp; &nbsp; :rofl:" data-shortname=":rofl:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" />Agreed. Which is why both casters &amp; martials need more differentiating character concept options in my opinion.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TheOneGargoyle, post: 8491979, member: 6924207"] Exactly. And that work is about designing / defining a concept that makes sense for it. Having The Mountain be able to fly doesn't fit to me unless there's more to it. Yep, this sounds great to me. Agreed but as you say that fits for a large and /or strong char type. Having this available to say a swashbuckler doesn't really make sense to me. I love this. That makes perfect sense to me. Of course. But just cos one character can do it doesn't mean every char should be able to too. For the right concept, yes, but not for say a bear totem barbarian I love this too. This sounds like a great subclass idea. I can just imagine a whole set of lore/story about how & why their rage manifests as primal forms. Agree 100%. This is why I think char concept is so important. I once made a wizard who's whole concept was that he didn't want anyone to know he was a wizard so he pretended to be a cat burglar instead. So he didn't take single spell with a visually discernible effect, and subtle spell meta magic, and high dex, etc. He wasn't much good in combat but he was one of my all time favourite characters to play. Agree it should apply across the board but the game isn't published by "Fighters of the Coast" now is it <grin> Agreed. Meaningful & interesting build choices that are trade-offs is what makes a game fun to create characters in. Hehe yeah the concept of a blue dragon barbarian did occur to me as I was writing that example, I figured someone would pick that up 🤣 Agreed. Which is why both casters & martials need more differentiating character concept options in my opinion. [/QUOTE]

Verification