Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Al'Kelhar" data-source="post: 7847656" data-attributes="member: 7884">Sure, I get that.&nbsp; But there's no design justification for the second column in that table.Bards are already a very solid class and get the Magical Secrets class feature anyway.Ranger - What?&nbsp; Why do they suddenly get this bennie?&nbsp; Seriously, first UA wildly overcompensates for the poorly designed PHB ranger with stupid gimmicks like &quot;you can never be lost, like ever&quot; and &quot;you know how many bad guys are within 5 miles of you, cos, you know, that's cool&quot;.&nbsp; And now, what, they're super flexible spellcasters, too?&nbsp; Not really sure what they're smoking in the old WoTC design team...Sorcerer - A solid class that doesn't need extra spellcasting bennies, and Spell Versatility goes against the whole design ethos of the sorcerer anyway.Warlock - If anything, Spell Versatility should be an Eldritch Invocation available to Tome Pact warlocks only, and allow them to write warlock spells into their Book of Shadows.&nbsp; They now &quot;prepare&quot; spells like a wizard, preparing a number of spells per day from their Book of Shadows equal to the number of warlock spells known for their level.&nbsp; Or something like that.Seriously, Spell Versatility is just dumb.&nbsp; Sure, give a variation of it to Tome Pact warlocks as an Invocation, but giving it to bards, sorcerers and rangers (again, WTF guys?) is completely unnecessary and just another kick in the crotch to the wizard.Cheers, Al'Kelhar</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Al'Kelhar, post: 7847656, member: 7884"] Sure, I get that. But there's no design justification for the second column in that table. Bards are already a very solid class and get the Magical Secrets class feature anyway. Ranger - What? Why do they suddenly get this bennie? Seriously, first UA wildly overcompensates for the poorly designed PHB ranger with stupid gimmicks like "you can never be lost, like ever" and "you know how many bad guys are within 5 miles of you, cos, you know, that's cool". And now, what, they're super flexible spellcasters, too? Not really sure what they're smoking in the old WoTC design team... Sorcerer - A solid class that doesn't need extra spellcasting bennies, and Spell Versatility goes against the whole design ethos of the sorcerer anyway. Warlock - If anything, Spell Versatility should be an Eldritch Invocation available to Tome Pact warlocks only, and allow them to write warlock spells into their Book of Shadows. They now "prepare" spells like a wizard, preparing a number of spells per day from their Book of Shadows equal to the number of warlock spells known for their level. Or something like that. Seriously, Spell Versatility is just dumb. Sure, give a variation of it to Tome Pact warlocks [I]as an Invocation[/I], but giving it to bards, sorcerers and rangers (again, WTF guys?) is completely unnecessary and just another kick in the crotch to the wizard. Cheers, Al'Kelhar [/QUOTE]

Verification