Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
PC Limitations vs. Do Whatever You Want
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 8747320" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>And I'm, saying that this is simply untrue. Subclasses are inherently forked, limited characters. And the classes that are getting buffed are the ranger and sorcerer (which are spells known rather than spells prepared and therefore are forked limited characters) and the fighter (which is a very limited character).</p><p></p><p>The problem is that the additive characters are the wizard, the cleric, and the druid. And they are right there in the PHB. This gives WotC the choice of (a) not printing any more spells ever or (b) giving them more options.</p><p></p><p>But to do that would be a complete rewrite of what the wizard class actually is. WotC chose not to do that in 2014. WotC's design philosophy can't move away from that because for 5e that has never been the design philosophy.</p><p></p><p>We do however have an arcane caster that works on even tighter limits; you pick a few spells known and you only get to change them on a long rest. That class is called the sorcerer.</p><p></p><p>What they are doing is giving lots of toys to the sorcerer, warlock, ranger, and artificer - the limited casters. (And some cool toys to the bard but the bard started slightly overtuned).</p><p></p><p>What they are not doing is fundamentally re-writing the wizard and cleric to change them away from the "can mix up their spells" classes they were in 2014</p><p></p><p>This is a false dichotomy. The ultimate limited character would be an inanimate carbon rod. The ultimate expansive character would be playing Calvinball. I do not think that <em>either</em> extreme leads to particularly good play; if given the choice you at least get to <em>play</em> Calvinball so if you are forcing this as a dichotomy then pure expansive beats pure limited.</p><p></p><p>But it's not a dichotomy. It's a sliding scale and the question is where on it you want to be. Clearly not at either extreme - and no D&D character is or can be at either extreme unless they are the worst DMPC I ever heard of or in the absolute worst railroady game I ever heard of. The question is one of where on the scale are you comfortable - and that's a matter of taste.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 8747320, member: 87792"] And I'm, saying that this is simply untrue. Subclasses are inherently forked, limited characters. And the classes that are getting buffed are the ranger and sorcerer (which are spells known rather than spells prepared and therefore are forked limited characters) and the fighter (which is a very limited character). The problem is that the additive characters are the wizard, the cleric, and the druid. And they are right there in the PHB. This gives WotC the choice of (a) not printing any more spells ever or (b) giving them more options. But to do that would be a complete rewrite of what the wizard class actually is. WotC chose not to do that in 2014. WotC's design philosophy can't move away from that because for 5e that has never been the design philosophy. We do however have an arcane caster that works on even tighter limits; you pick a few spells known and you only get to change them on a long rest. That class is called the sorcerer. What they are doing is giving lots of toys to the sorcerer, warlock, ranger, and artificer - the limited casters. (And some cool toys to the bard but the bard started slightly overtuned). What they are not doing is fundamentally re-writing the wizard and cleric to change them away from the "can mix up their spells" classes they were in 2014 This is a false dichotomy. The ultimate limited character would be an inanimate carbon rod. The ultimate expansive character would be playing Calvinball. I do not think that [I]either[/I] extreme leads to particularly good play; if given the choice you at least get to [I]play[/I] Calvinball so if you are forcing this as a dichotomy then pure expansive beats pure limited. But it's not a dichotomy. It's a sliding scale and the question is where on it you want to be. Clearly not at either extreme - and no D&D character is or can be at either extreme unless they are the worst DMPC I ever heard of or in the absolute worst railroady game I ever heard of. The question is one of where on the scale are you comfortable - and that's a matter of taste. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
PC Limitations vs. Do Whatever You Want
Top