Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6263106" data-attributes="member: 7006">No.  Not in the slightest.  Because the game is built such that to LITERALLY not function properly... you have to purposely take a whole bunch of BAD choices by design.  You have to be a fighter who takes an 8 Strength, uses a weapon you are not proficient in, wears no armor, and spends all resources on things other than fighting.  You do that... then yes, maybe then you "literally cannot function properly" as a fighter.  But you CHOSE to do all those things (presumably for a character concept that was meant to be a person who thinks they are a warrior but really isn't.)  The game allows you to do this, but you didn't just blunder into it.  You did all of this on purpose.However... if you are trying to equate not taking an attack cantrip as "literally cannot function properly"... then you probably need to learn what "literally" means.  Because to say you are incapable of functioning as a wizard because you chose to not take an attack cantrip is complete and utter hogwash.  Might you do a point of damage or so less because you were using a crossbow in place of an attack cantrip,?  Maybe.  (But based upon what other people are saying, that might not even be true.)  But one or two points of damage less is not "incapable".  Less "min-maxed" for combat?  Sure.  But you make up for it in other situations outside of combat with the other cantrip you took.You are still a functional and completely capable wizard even without that attack cantrip.  And to suggest otherwise is to use ridiculous hyperbole to try and make your point.That's not my point at all.  My point is that you... Johnny3D3D... want a specific ability (attack cantrips) removed from the game because as you said:Let us ignore for the moment whether or not attack cantrips are "obviously" better than every other cantrip.  Because there are plenty of people who think that is hogwash.Instead... the issue is that you don't like feeling stupid.  And to take a cantrip that you think is demonstratively worse than another makes you feel stupid.  As though you'd have to have "brain damage" to choose it.  Your ego can't handle the idea that you are playing stupid.  It's like you think you are letting the table down, and letting yourself down.  Nevermind the fact that you're not actually playing stupid, you're rather just playing your character... you have built up this idea in your head that if there is a min-max choice available, then it doesn't matter what it is, that's the only option available to you.  You will subsume your wants and desires for this character in order to "play correctly" (in your mind), because the D&D has been built this way, and you feel guilty or stupid otherwise.And my point is this:  Me... DEFCON 1... a person who will never be sitting at your table, nor probably ever play with you in any capacity... does not care if you don't like feeling stupid.  That's not my problem.  It is YOUR issue.  You're the one who has this thing in your head that forces you to always choose the obvious good choice, rather than the character-centric one.  But that's not my problem.My problem is that because you have this thing in your head... your solution to get around it is to not just work on your own personal issue... but to ask that the entire rule be removed from the game so that you won't HAVE to work on this issue.  You can just sidestep it completely.  If the rule is gone, you no longer have to worry about it, and you're HAPPY!But meanwhile... all the rest of us thousands of players have lost a really cool rule and game ability because YOU didn't want to work on your own issues.  You wanted to just ignore them and hope that they went away.  Well guess what?  I have a problem with that.  I'm not going to sit here and allow WotC to remove from the game something I happen to like (something that does not in fact "literally make you incapable of functioning properly" despite your claims)... so that you can feel better about yourself by avoiding your psychological issues.If you can't handle not min-maxing, you learn to handle it.  I'm not going to handle it for you.</blockquote>

Verification