Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Falling Icicle" data-source="post: 6044601" data-attributes="member: 17077">While I'm glad that they took the time to explain their thinking behind these changes, after hearing their reasons for them, I still strongly disagree.They say there will be feats to make TWF better, but you shouldn't need a feat to be merely competent at something. That, and the mechanic is just clunky and poor to begin with. Having to roll 4 times (twice for each weapon) is poor game design, to put it nicely. I think it's also silly that you can't fight with two weapons at once unless one of them is light. I should be able to play a character that wields two scimitars, for crying out loud.I get tired of the comparison between the fighter/rogue with expertise and clerics/wizards with spells. Why can't they just give rogues special tricks that have nothing to do with expertise dice? And what's going to happen when other classes, like the ranger and paladin, come out? Are they going to have expertise dice too? I liked expertise when it gave fighters something to call their own. I'm not so fond of it as a generic mechanic for all non-spellcasting classes.The loss of at-will cantrips/orisons is the change that most angers me. They keep saying that at-will spells make up for vancian casting (especially the extremely cut back vancian casting of this packet), but then they go and greatly restrict them. They say that it's too confusing, but I think having some of your prepared spells at-will and some not is more confusing, not less. "0th level spells can be cast at-will." How is that hard for anyone to understand? They say they want some wizards to be better at some spells, but illusionists already are better at minor illusions than other wizards because they can use both visual and audible illusions at the same time. All 0th level spells should be at-will, and your tradition should give you benefits ON TOP OF THAT. As it is now, it's easily possible for a wizard to be able to run out of spells because he didn't prepare the "right" ones that his tradition demands. That is unacceptable.I also firmly reject the notion that the possibility of rangers with at-will detect magic is a reason to take at-will cantrips away from wizards. Why is at-will detect magic fine for one class but overpowered in the hands of another class? That makes no sense. Besides, alot of people don't think rangers should even have spells in the first place! And what about the elf ranger that picks detect magic for his at-will spell? Is it only overpowered when rangers get it from their class and not their race?I'm not trying to be overly dramatic, but if they do not make all 0th level spells at-will again, it will absolutely be a deal-breaker for me. I refuse to play a wizard with at most 10 daily spells who is then left shooting a crossbow the rest of the day.</blockquote>

Verification