D&D 4E I would rather not have 4e combat "powers" in D&D Next

[Tony Vargas]

A lot of discussion has gone around regarding the playtest fighter. I've heard a lot of people say that because the fighter is too simple and boring, 4e style "powers" should be available to the fighter (and perhaps to all classes). I respectably disagree. Encounter powers are something that should be kept out of D&D next.

I don't agree, but why isn't important. Neither is your reasoning for not wanting them.

5e's mandate is to be oh-so-'inclusive.' I've heard excellent arguments why Vancian casting is a game-wrecking abomination and should never see the light of day again. They don't matter, because some of those folks WotC wants to 'include' love Vancian casting. So Vancian is in.

If someone objects to Vancian classes being un-balanceable or Psionics being genre-inappropriate, or whatever, the response is "well don't use 'em in your game."

If you don't like encounter powers, don't use 'em in your game. If you don't like martial classes being any good, don't use 'em in your game. Ban them: tell prospective players, "This is Harry Potter D&D, no muggles allowed!"

 

[keterys]

There have been several reported posts, and the general tone of the thread looks ready to slip into edition warring. Let's not bicker about terminology or preferences. Every edition of D&D _is_ an edition of D&D. They each have their merits and downsides. D&D Next will have an interesting battle to face to meld them in the best possible way and we can help that best by discussing the _best_ parts of editions we love, rather than griping about any problems (actual or perceived) with editions we don't love.

Carry on.