Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 6728559" data-attributes="member: 5100">I agree with what you're saying, but I disagree with what the developers/designers did. A couple of times in 5E, they've added really nice frameworks that seem to answer certain questions very well, then publish advice contrary to that. It feels like different folks built different parts of the system (probably true and expected), but they've never come to an internal concord on how to use them (which is unfortunate)..In this case, I think Crawford (or whoever advised him) made a bad call. IMC, I explicitly overrule that entry and let people throw the bonus spell into their mix. A big reason for that is because I run an Eberron game, have based my home brewed Dragonmarks off the Magic Initiate feat, and like the way the Wizard and Arcane Trickster have played out with with my ruling: it allows a very flavorful sub-focus on the marks and houses without requiring a feat tree, prestige classes, or other heavy mechanics. If they ever post a "design notes" on why they made that interpretation, I'd happily read it and consider changing my view. Otherwise, it gets filed (in my head) as a bad gut reaction or internal inconsistency that got floated to "official" and should be ignored.</blockquote>