NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6195132" data-attributes="member: 2067">4e had a rough parity in abilities of a given level, I don't think 5e should abandon that, in the interest of its goal of modularity and getting 4e fans on board. If fireball is a significant advantage over whatever a fighter can do at level 5, that imbalance is a problem for both 4e fans who liked class balance, and for people who want to swap out class features. I'm not personally in favor of getting rid of good 4e developments just because 4e used them -- I like keeping my babies when I throw out the bathwater. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> I don't think it's too much to say that, if (a) wizards and sorcerers both use arcane magic, and so (b) they are both mages, and (c) "mage" is a category that determines who can use what magic items, that it then follows that (d) mages can use scrolls. I could certainly be wrong, but it's a reasonable projection. But the broader point is that the class group threatens to create nonsensical exclusions and inclusions. Something like "spellbook proficiency" is less likely to do that (though, it must be said, still possible -- the only way to avoid it entirely is to drop prerequisites entirely), because it captures a finer level of detail than "knows how to use arcane magic." Sure. Then they're rogue characters who might want to be the party's best healer. If wands of cure light wounds are reserved for or powered up by priest characters only, why should that exclude bards? That's an example of the nonsensical, arbitrary, irrelevant-to-actual-play nature of these things that I'm talking about. I don't think the fireball fighter needs to be necessarily included in the core rules, but I do think that the rules set should enable me to do this kind of thing, and not throw up pointless roadblocks. Class groups are a pointless roadblock. I shouldn't render magic items, feats, and magic systems irrelevant just because I dare to have a cleric of a god of night and stealth who is a priest but who might want to use a lot of things designed for rogues.</blockquote>

Verification