Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pming" data-source="post: 7475385" data-attributes="member: 45197">Hiya!Ahhh... a total misunderstanding on my part. My bad. I apologize. I thought &quot;you&quot; (not just you but others) were pretty much saying &quot;It's stupid, but that's what it says so we can't change the rules. WotC needs to officially change them, and until they do...Beastmasters suck because there's nothing we can do about it&quot;.I think I generally agree with you...generally. I don't agree that, if I'm reading this right, the expectation is for the DM to not change things that make no/little sense...or to interpret things in a very verbose and literal meaning. A case of &quot;RAW' versus &quot;RAI&quot; I'm thinking.To me, because 5e is specifically designed with a lot of...shall we say, &quot;wiggle room&quot; for the DM throughout it's core, it very much is the DM's fault if he/she is interpreting something that results in a 'bad' game (or spell, race, or class in this case). I think this is just a difference of expectations with regards to the Rule Books and the DM's/Players. I, personally, don't have any problem with the rule as is, because I see my DM job as to interpret, fix, ignore, add or otherwise modify the game rules and expectations. In this case, I don't think WotC was &quot;bad&quot; for writing the rule that way. Could it have been written better? Probably. But I paid for the book which includes a Beastmaster. I don't expect the class (or books in general) to be &quot;perfect&quot; (and I don't think you do either). From what I read, &quot;...must use an action to command&quot; is only &quot;moronic&quot; if the DM is interpreting it literally and with no other factors taking place in the game. As I said...RAW versus RAI. I read that and think &quot;Huh...seems kinda limiting. I don't think that's what they meant because then the PC Beastmaster would be really disadvantaged. They must mean that to change or initiate a command, the Beastmaster has to do that. Then the pet takes over doing that. Hmmm...yeah. That makes much more sense. Probably what they intended&quot;.RAW vs RAI.Thanks for clearing up your POV on it. ^_^Paul L. Ming</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pming, post: 7475385, member: 45197"] Hiya! Ahhh... a total misunderstanding on my part. My bad. I apologize. I thought "you" (not just you but others) were pretty much saying "It's stupid, but that's what it says so we can't change the rules. WotC needs to officially change them, and until they do...Beastmasters suck because there's nothing we can do about it". I think I generally agree with you...generally. I don't agree that, if I'm reading this right, the expectation is for the DM to not change things that make no/little sense...or to interpret things in a very verbose and literal meaning. A case of "RAW' versus "RAI" I'm thinking. To me, because 5e is specifically designed with a lot of...shall we say, "wiggle room" for the DM throughout it's core, it very much is the DM's fault if he/she is interpreting something that results in a 'bad' game (or spell, race, or class in this case). I think this is just a difference of expectations with regards to the Rule Books and the DM's/Players. I, personally, don't have any problem with the rule as is, because I see my DM job as to interpret, fix, ignore, add or otherwise modify the game rules and expectations. In this case, I don't think WotC was "bad" for writing the rule that way. Could it have been written better? Probably. But I paid for the book which includes a Beastmaster. I don't expect the class (or books in general) to be "perfect" (and I don't think you do either). From what I read, "...must use an action to command" is only "moronic" if the DM is interpreting it literally and with no other factors taking place in the game. As I said...RAW versus RAI. I read that and think "Huh...seems kinda limiting. I don't think that's what they meant because then the PC Beastmaster would be really disadvantaged. They must mean that to change or initiate a command, the Beastmaster has to do that. Then the pet takes over doing that. Hmmm...yeah. That makes much more sense. Probably what they intended". RAW vs RAI. Thanks for clearing up your POV on it. ^_^ Paul L. Ming [/QUOTE]

Verification