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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7072744" data-attributes="member: 996">It cares about them:  it cares about them being simple to play, and about combats being fast.  General combat options get in the way of the latter, class-specific ones in the way of the former. Some of the more problematic ones, maybe.  Or, at least, bring them in at a higher opportunity cost - fewer spells known, less flexibility in which known spell you can use how often, that kinda thing. Care to give some direct quotes from 0D&D illustrating that?  ;PSeriously, though, D&D has always presented high-impact, limited-use, push-button abilities - mostly in the form of spells.  So it's not always been /all/ about desperately groping about for something outside-the-box to do because you have no mechanical options.   Nah, it was a pretty old complaint.  2e C&T, for instance, introduced a lot of tactical rules & options, because we had been missing any sorts of options beyond hitting things for the preceding 20 years or so.  With 3.0 we got the actual rules for actual maneuvers in combat (even if they worked pretty badly until you invested feats in 'em).   That's a major contributor, true.  4e had more or less balanced martial & caster classes for the first time.  It did it by greatly reducing the number of 'daily' spells casters got, reigning in their power significantly, pushing high-impact effects to much higher levels, removing the last few particular restrictions on magic, and giving the non-caster an unprecedented number & variety of choices & resources that was actually comparable to that of casters (still narrower in scope and lesser in flexibility, but comparable in effectiveness). It wasn't true, but it was an accusation repeated often enough that you have to acknowledge there are folks that believe it in spite of that.  Either way, whether because you experienced the fun of balanced martial classes with many tactical options in actual play, or because you looked on in horror at 'fighters casting spells' from the edition-war trenches, the point is that D&D has been able to give martial characters meaningful options & depth, and 5e has chosen not to explore that potential much, as yet. The options were actually removed, so there's no 'felt like' about it.   EK & AT can, and if feats are in play, there's Magic Initiate.</blockquote>

Verification