Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="takyris" data-source="post: 1010747" data-attributes="member: 5171">I'm sort of glad that they didn't, because I suspect that if it were done in the DMG, it would be seen as "officially official" and subject to a lot of people making overpowered characters because new DMs don't know when to stop them.I'd LOVE to see it addressed in more detail in a separate book or PDF, though.Yes.No.Hm.  That's based on your anecdotal evidence.  Based on my anecdotal evidence, spontaneous spellcasters far outstrip their peers, since they don't have to memorize.  The sorcerer and bard in my game chose good spells (and swapped out when levelling as well, which is now even a REAL rule!).  They weren't just damage monkeys.  They were flexible and powerful and darn fun.It probably relates to campaign form.  My games had enough craziness going on at any time that the spell-memorizers had trouble guessing what spells they'd need that day.  If your campaigns are simple dungeon hacks, a specialized wizard can out-do a sorcerer, because there's less concern over which spells to memorize.In other words: Make your campaigns more complex, and the sorcerer gets more powerful.S'not about minmaxing.  It's about HOW you minmax.  One guy builds a fighter with Finesse:Rapier, Focus:Rapier, Spec:Rapier, and ImpCrit:Rapier.  Another guy takes Power Attack, Spring Attack, Precise Shot, and Two-Weapon Fighting:The first guy is minmaxed for depth – while holding a rapier, he’s great.  If he’s disarmed or sundered, he’s in trouble.The second guy is minmaxed for breadth – he can shine a bit in any type of fight, but isn’t the best at any one combat style.Both guys are minmaxed, but not in a bad way – and you can do the same for a sorcerer.  If you think the sorcerer is weak, my guess would be that you’ve only seen him minmaxed one way.I don’t think that it’s as much not a focus as it is an attempt to be broad.  Some D&D groups pretty much do dungeon hacking.  Others can go for an entire session talking and doing intrigue with no combat dice rolls whatsoever.  Most do some kind of middle ground.I agree with you that I’d like to see more of an emphasis on roleplaying tips in the PHB, but I don’t agree that D&D is not good for roleplaying as a result.  Some folks are great at roleplaying, and will be great in any system.  Other folks are lousy, and will be lousy in any system, including those that give bonuses for it.  The only thing worse than a D&D player whose character has no family is a Vampire player who keeps trying to get awards for fulfilling his character role through the least amount of work possible.Integrating roleplaying more strongly into the rules doesn’t make it better.  It just makes it vulnerable to minmaxing, which effectively turns it into a parody of roleplaying.</blockquote>

Verification