Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Obryn" data-source="post: 6068052" data-attributes="member: 11821">Okay.&nbsp; A lot to reply to. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The main issue with &quot;at-will&quot; is its limiting nature as to the sorts of effects which are balanced in the game.&nbsp; I'm not content with the &quot;mundane&quot; classes just having rather humdrum special effects.Yep, precisely!I agree - that's a good direction, but it's got two main issues.&nbsp; (1) The At-Will limitation mentioned above.&nbsp; If dice refresh every round, the range of special effects will have to be constrained for balance reasons.&nbsp; (2) If you allow something dramatic like &quot;burning&quot; a die for an entire combat for the better effects, you're much more constrained than a caster.&nbsp; If a caster blows their 8th level spell, their 7th are just as effective.Nope.&nbsp; That's like saying, &quot;The Fighter is okay because of all the magic stuff he's carrying!&quot;&nbsp; There's a difference between being inherently that good and just lugging around stuff.I would not be averse to a Utility Belt-like ability, where you happen to have the right item at the right time.&nbsp; That could work - because then we're back to intrinsic competency rather than stocking up on gear.Okay.&nbsp; Let's try and find a way to make this about the character, then....no.That's all well and good, but it just further illustrates that Next can't be the grand compromise WotC is looking for.&nbsp; I'm likewise uninterested in a game that rolls back all of 4e's innovation, but would be content with a middle ground so long as it also has other new, innovative mechanics that are all its own.Yep - it's another great approach.&nbsp; I think D&amp;D Next would be stronger and more flavorful if magic were scaled back considerably.-O</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Obryn, post: 6068052, member: 11821"] Okay. A lot to reply to. :) The main issue with "at-will" is its limiting nature as to the sorts of effects which are balanced in the game. I'm not content with the "mundane" classes just having rather humdrum special effects. Yep, precisely! I agree - that's a good direction, but it's got two main issues. (1) The At-Will limitation mentioned above. If dice refresh every round, the range of special effects will have to be constrained for balance reasons. (2) If you allow something dramatic like "burning" a die for an entire combat for the better effects, you're much more constrained than a caster. If a caster blows their 8th level spell, their 7th are just as effective. Nope. That's like saying, "The Fighter is okay because of all the magic stuff he's carrying!" There's a difference between being inherently [I]that good[/I] and just lugging around stuff. I would not be averse to a Utility Belt-like ability, where you happen to have the right item at the right time. That could work - because then we're back to intrinsic competency rather than stocking up on gear. Okay. Let's try and find a way to make this about the character, then. ...no. That's all well and good, but it just further illustrates that Next can't be the grand compromise WotC is looking for. I'm likewise uninterested in a game that rolls back all of 4e's innovation, but would be content with a middle ground so long as it [I]also[/I] has other new, innovative mechanics that are all its own. Yep - it's another great approach. I think D&D Next would be stronger and more flavorful if magic were scaled back considerably. -O [/QUOTE]

Verification