It's not about being too good, it is the classes having some coherent identity mechanically and thematically. This change makes sorcerers mechanically more similar to wizards, which makes them existing as as separate class even less justified. I actually like the themes of sorcerer, warlock mechanics just fit those themes better.It's also amusing to me that those that are arguing that Sorcerers are too good now are busy over in the psionics thread arguing Sorcerers should not even exist. Message acknowledged.
Well, no, it is absurd. It’s not hyperbole.
It's weird how much identity the various caster classes derive by being in competition with each other. Wizards have lost exactly nothing, but because there are some other related caster classes that are now stronger in comparison, they have somehow become less good?the only hyperbole in this discussion is people claiming that wizards are losing something.
So how would you feel about giving fighters the sneak attack? Would you also think that it would be weird that if people though that it would make rogues feel less special and muddy the differentiation between these two classes? Because this is kinda like that.It's weird how much identity the various caster classes derive by being in competition with each other. Wizards have lost exactly nothing, but because there are some other related caster classes that are now stronger in comparison, they have somehow become less good?
There's a psychology lesson in there somewhere.
The pressure is part of the game. For the sake of the gods I am sick and tired of WotC making a version of D&D that coddles to players. 5E is already a very easy game as designed. Oh, you picked a spell you thought was great and it turned out you were wrong??? The HORROR!!!Well, it is one spell, look through the list and when you level choose a better one... But you might be wrong again.
Personally, I would have preferred a scaling damage bonus over multiple attacks, so I'm down.So how would you feel about giving fighters the sneak attack? Would you also think that it would be weird that if people though that it would make rogues feel less special and muddy the differentiation between these two classes? Because this is kinda like that.
It's weird how much identity the various caster classes derive by being in competition with each other. Wizards have lost exactly nothing, but because there are some other related caster classes that are now stronger in comparison, they have somehow become less good?
There's a psychology lesson in there somewhere.
So how would you feel about giving fighters the sneak attack? Would you also think that it would be weird that if people though that it would make rogues feel less special and muddy the differentiation between these two classes? Because this is kinda like that.
Personally, I would have preferred a scaling damage bonus over multiple attacks, so I'm down.
I'll be Na, you be Cl, and we can be salty together.Multiple Attacks feel so much like a 3.x thing... "Fighters in 3e got lots of feat and more attacks than anybody, let's just do that and not try to push the design in any exciting direction or the grognard will not buy into this new edition. Let's hide the Fighter's other class features in the Feat section.". But I'm kinda salty so who knows?![]()

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.