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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5740389" data-attributes="member: 6668292">Hmm, interesting. My group has always accepting houseruling if it helps accomplish a player's goal, and shied away from reskinning most of the time.Yes, The Fighter can mimic the mechanics of base attack, HP, etc., but the Wizard cannot mimic the mechanics of spells with no components, unlimited reactive spells, spells that work extensively in antimagic fields, etc. That is, if these are spells, they are unique in that other spells cannot copy the mechanics. Thus the hiccup in internal consistency, from my point of view.Well, allowing a Wizard to be a Fighter is ignoring the current rules (in your 3.X example), and thus houseruling. It's not massive, but the "martial spells" that you're casting are breaking some pretty major rules, and you're ignoring those.In 4e, the "exception-based design" approach is pretty exclusively for things outside the PCs. It's for things that the PCs interact with. Yes, you can definitely use it for PCs, but that approach itself seems to have been designed for the PCs to interact with, not to help shape potential or conceptual PCs.I know that a lot of groups functioned from the standpoint of what the PHB says: "Civilized people call them barbarians" is the very beginning of the second sentence in 3.5 (which is where you made your character). The 3.5 PHB gives some details about them, and they're definitely men from the wilds, away from civilization. The fluff is embedded in the class.Yes, you can reskin and strip the given fluff away, and there's nothing wrong with that, but players following the basic guidelines that the PHB explicitly states does not seem outrageous to me. It seems like these people see the Barbarian class as representing something specific in regards to D&D, and attempting to change that is "not playing the game."Just like you don't like being confined, some groups don't like disrupting the perceptions of the setting, as that helps them immerse, connect, or gives them a sense of what the internal consistency of the setting looks like.Like you say, though, it's preference. Neither way is "right" or "wrong" in any objective sense. On that note, I don't think either preference seems overtly unreasonable or overly restrictive, either.If you don't want to have a conversation based on anecdotal evidence, you can stop discussing things with me. That's the basis of most conversations, and I'm not about to shy away from using my experience to color my opinions.As far as me saying that "no matter what table I sit at, it's expected that my Cleric be a Leader, or my Fighter be a Defender", I stand by that in concept. There probably are a few exceptions, but they're probably inexperienced or heavily houseruled.However, when I generalize by saying "when you play a class labeled Leader, people will expect you to play a Leader," I feel like my meaning should be clear. If it's not, I apologize, but arguing the semantics of "every table" while not addressing the point I'm trying to make feels very unproductive to me.Of course? I don't see any objection to the above. I don't think your ideas are crap, but I feel like you're giving the impression that groups that don't accept most reskinning are somehow overly restrictive, and I'd disagree with that assessment.I definitely think you're trying to discuss this with me honestly. I'd rather not get involved in your and Imaro's argument, since I like how well our talk is going. I feel it's definitely going somewhere, if slowly (the unfortunate effect of a text-based medium). So, thanks for the discussion thus far <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification