Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MoonSong" data-source="post: 6221413" data-attributes="member: 6689464">Not entirely made up, we've seen early prototypes of them last year, we know they will be in the game, each with it's own casting method (Warlock will probably have somethign AED-Like and sorcerer with something similar to their 3.x incarnation), and we know Warlock subclasses will be based around the hexblade, binder and classical warlock with patron as another decision point, and we know that neither has ever prepared spells, moreover while the bard isn't a full caster, it is the only class that doesn't prepare spells so we know that will exist in some way. So no it isn't an entirely hypothetical matter, and while we don't know the specific implementations they'll have, we know of the trappings and problems non-prepared casters face when compared to prepared casters, moreover some of those issues are potentially greater now. Also by the time we see the final versions is very likely the rest of the rules will be finished too, so should I take it as a tacit refusal to ever discuss over them?.&nbsp; It is valid not wanting to, after all non-prepared casters are like an elephant in the room in caster-mundane discussions, they are ignored or swept under the rug most of the time, but like I said, that kind of matters are hardly black and white, placing spells priority under all other elements will greatly detract from potential space design for non-prepared casters and some half casters, limit spells too much and you will get prepared caster-mundane parity, but at the cost of everything else inbetween.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MoonSong, post: 6221413, member: 6689464"] Not entirely made up, we've seen early prototypes of them last year, we know they will be in the game, each with it's own casting method (Warlock will probably have somethign AED-Like and sorcerer with something similar to their 3.x incarnation), and we know Warlock subclasses will be based around the hexblade, binder and classical warlock with patron as another decision point, and we know that neither has ever prepared spells, moreover while the bard isn't a full caster, it is the only class that doesn't prepare spells so we know that will exist in some way. So no it isn't an entirely hypothetical matter, and while we don't know the specific implementations they'll have, we know of the trappings and problems non-prepared casters face when compared to prepared casters, moreover some of those issues are potentially greater now. Also by the time we see the final versions is very likely the rest of the rules will be finished too, so should I take it as a tacit refusal to ever discuss over them?. It is valid not wanting to, after all non-prepared casters are like an elephant in the room in caster-mundane discussions, they are ignored or swept under the rug most of the time, but like I said, that kind of matters are hardly black and white, placing spells priority under all other elements will greatly detract from potential space design for non-prepared casters and some half casters, limit spells too much and you will get prepared caster-mundane parity, but at the cost of everything else inbetween. [/QUOTE]

Verification