Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="James Gasik" data-source="post: 9510909" data-attributes="member: 6877472">So thinking about this, I don't really believe that masteries are a huge deal.&nbsp; If a caster had them, sure, they could add a neat rider to a melee cantrip attack.Which is far from the most efficient use of their resources.&nbsp; Being in melee sucks, and if you have a choice, you really shouldn't be there as a caster.&nbsp; For most casters, you're talking about making a single attack with some extra damage to do what?&nbsp; Prone an enemy or push them back?&nbsp; They have spells that can do that to multiple foes at once and worse.I don't even see the Monk as a problem, as unarmed has no mastery, so a big chunk of their attacks are just going to be damage, with the potential for one stun attempt per turn.Now I get it- there's a thing that the warrior types have been given that full casters don't natively get, and the instant reaction is &quot;hey, we got something cool, it's ours, don't let the finger wigglers get it!&quot;.But in the grand scheme of things, masteries aren't a big deal.&nbsp; I mean, what's the most impressive thing they could do?&nbsp; A Fighter at higher levels could run around making single attacks against foes to knock a bunch of them prone? Push them back?&nbsp; Give themselves higher accuracy that they really don't need?And let's not forget that Paladins and Rangers are, in fact, casters.&nbsp; So them having masteries already makes them less special, not that they really are.Basically Wizards of the Coast gave some classes a bowl of grits and we're immediately acting like it's steak.&nbsp; If there's going to be a mechanic that really settles the martial/caster debate, this isn't it.To the OP: just make Weapon Master an origin Feat.&nbsp; See how many of your players actually take it over something else.&nbsp; I've a sneaking suspicion most won't in the first place.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="James Gasik, post: 9510909, member: 6877472"] So thinking about this, I don't really believe that masteries are a huge deal. If a caster had them, sure, they could add a neat rider to a melee cantrip attack. Which is far from the most efficient use of their resources. Being in melee sucks, and if you have a choice, you really shouldn't be there as a caster. For most casters, you're talking about making a single attack with some extra damage to do what? Prone an enemy or push them back? They have spells that can do that to multiple foes at once and worse. I don't even see the Monk as a problem, as unarmed has no mastery, so a big chunk of their attacks are just going to be damage, with the potential for one stun attempt per turn. Now I get it- there's a thing that the warrior types have been given that full casters don't natively get, and the instant reaction is "hey, we got something cool, it's ours, don't let the finger wigglers get it!". But in the grand scheme of things, masteries aren't a big deal. I mean, what's the most impressive thing they could do? A Fighter at higher levels could run around making single attacks against foes to knock a bunch of them prone? Push them back? Give themselves higher accuracy that they really don't need? And let's not forget that Paladins and Rangers are, in fact, casters. So them having masteries already makes them less special, not that they really are. Basically Wizards of the Coast gave some classes a bowl of grits and we're immediately acting like it's steak. If there's going to be a mechanic that really settles the martial/caster debate, this isn't it. To the OP: just make Weapon Master an origin Feat. See how many of your players actually take it over something else. I've a sneaking suspicion most won't in the first place. [/QUOTE]

Verification