Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 8177539" data-attributes="member: 6750235">That's beside the point, however.&nbsp; The errata and sage advice are the official updates and rulings.&nbsp; That's going to be the default when different groups from different tables share a discussion because they are the official standpoint.I don't always follow them either but I cannot present the rules I use as the rules over those ones.Present the arguments instead of general statements if you would make that argument. ;-)Bards are an excellent support class and we already touched on those differences.&nbsp; Clerics have more spell prep and similar AC to artificers but still lack the infusions, SSI, flash of genius, or tool expertise.The bottom line is spell progression is traded off for infusions and infusions don't suck.Cannith us a decent race choice to pick it up with the mark of making.I'm going to reverse that.&nbsp; How many people in this discussion are at your table?The concern I had was the apparent denial of the official material as official because DM's are not required to follow it.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; The default rules are going to be the errata and the default rulings are going to be the sage advice.&nbsp; None of us is required to follow it, and none of us should be forcing it on others; but we should be acknowledging it and there's nothing wrong with explaining it.Explaining the rules isn't forcing them anymore than a DM expressing what he/she/they do and why.I'm dropping that particular argument and this point.&nbsp; It still seems to be a tangent to the artificer topic.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ashrym, post: 8177539, member: 6750235"] That's beside the point, however. The errata and sage advice are the official updates and rulings. That's going to be the default when different groups from different tables share a discussion because they are the official standpoint. I don't always follow them either but I cannot present the rules I use as the rules over those ones. Present the arguments instead of general statements if you would make that argument. ;-) Bards are an excellent support class and we already touched on those differences. Clerics have more spell prep and similar AC to artificers but still lack the infusions, SSI, flash of genius, or tool expertise. The bottom line is spell progression is traded off for infusions and infusions don't suck. Cannith us a decent race choice to pick it up with the mark of making. I'm going to reverse that. How many people in this discussion are at your table? The concern I had was the apparent denial of the official material as official because DM's are not required to follow it. The default rules are going to be the errata and the default rulings are going to be the sage advice. None of us is required to follow it, and none of us should be forcing it on others; but we should be acknowledging it and there's nothing wrong with explaining it. Explaining the rules isn't forcing them anymore than a DM expressing what he/she/they do and why. I'm dropping that particular argument and this point. It still seems to be a tangent to the artificer topic. [/QUOTE]

Verification