Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 9510983" data-attributes="member: 6750235">It seems cinematic as I imagine it.That's conflating subclass with class abilities, and EK's gave up every ability other subclasses gained as an opportunity cost in gaining those spell in the first place.EK's being a fighter subclass as gave up everything a spellcaster gains in the base class by being a fighter instead.&nbsp; EK's as compared to other full spellcasters is a false equivalent.This is a false equivalent.&nbsp; It implies that the spellcasting ability is equal to the spellcasting power of those other full spellcasters, which is not the case.Or at least close enough to warrant another benefit to those full spellcasters.&nbsp; I disagree with giving that free benefit to classes that don't need it, particularly when the context of spellcasting is being applied as if these examples are equal.&nbsp; They are not.The benefits of weapon mastery aren't even closed off.&nbsp; Just pay the feat or use one of the other methods to add them.&nbsp; That's how we avoid stepping on toes here.I'm not one of the ppl who sees the huge divide in casters vs martials.&nbsp; I see them as different classes with different functions and purposes done in different ways based on different archetypes.&nbsp; I still wouldn't do this.It's a class based system and some classes get weapon masteries and many do not.&nbsp; Those classes that don't get weapon mastery have plenty of toys.&nbsp; There's no purpose in giving them another toy for free that they can already add if the player wants other than the eat your cake and have it too approach.This is an &quot;at your table&quot; option.&nbsp; It's not a &quot;convince everyone else this is the way it should be&quot; option.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ashrym, post: 9510983, member: 6750235"] It seems cinematic as I imagine it. That's conflating subclass with class abilities, and EK's gave up every ability other subclasses gained as an opportunity cost in gaining those spell in the first place. EK's being a fighter subclass as gave up everything a spellcaster gains in the base class by being a fighter instead. EK's as compared to other full spellcasters is a false equivalent. This is a false equivalent. It implies that the spellcasting ability is equal to the spellcasting power of those other full spellcasters, which is not the case. Or at least close enough to warrant another benefit to those full spellcasters. I disagree with giving that free benefit to classes that don't need it, particularly when the context of spellcasting is being applied as if these examples are equal. They are not. The benefits of weapon mastery aren't even closed off. Just pay the feat or use one of the other methods to add them. That's how we avoid stepping on toes here. I'm not one of the ppl who sees the huge divide in casters vs martials. I see them as different classes with different functions and purposes done in different ways based on different archetypes. I still wouldn't do this. It's a class based system and some classes get weapon masteries and many do not. Those classes that don't get weapon mastery have plenty of toys. There's no purpose in giving them another toy for free that they can already add if the player wants other than the eat your cake and have it too approach. This is an "at your table" option. It's not a "convince everyone else this is the way it should be" option. [/QUOTE]

Verification