Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bacon Bits" data-source="post: 8598068" data-attributes="member: 6777737">If this theory were true, then clerics, wizards, or sorcerers would also not choose a path until level 3. You don't need a domain (or domain powers) to have a patron. Acolyte priests and apprentice wizards are certainly an established trope, too. Sorcerers literally grow into their powers already. If the game wants the play style to be one way, then it should be that one way. Not choose half one way and half another and ending up with neither style working particularly well. Either all classes begin at level 1, or all classes begin at level 3. Pick one. It's absurd to have half the classes fully fledged at level 1, and the other half have to wait until they're far enough away from the starting equipment shop to become so. It's a bad design.Either you need to know enough at level 1 to become an adventurer, or you don't. This half-measure thing where some classes begin play and mysteriously learn to use longbows and greataxes by using daggers, or learn how to be persuasive by slaughtering goblins, or learn how to speak Giant by not studying them is just silly.If the game really wants us to start at level 3, then it should say somewhere, "You should start at level 3 for most campaigns." The starting equipment should say, "Here's what you get if you start at level 3 instead." Yes, I get that level 1 and 2 are about 3 adventuring days total on the outside. But you can't build the game with a level 1, and say, "here's what you get at level 1," and then publish 20 modules that start you all at level 1 and then say... oh, but you're supposed to start at level 3 or the game is kinda wonky. That would be such a poor design that it would be incompetent.</blockquote>

Verification