Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cybit" data-source="post: 6317214" data-attributes="member: 66111">I think they are leaning on DM judgment as well a bit of wording to convey the intent of the rule.  No amount of testing and wordsmithing gets around people trying to willfully mis-interpret the intent and argue.  I think if they intend to use short rests in the future as a way to convert the game to 4E, they have to leave it sufficiently vague in order to allow that.  Can anyone quote me what the public playtest rules were for short rest?  (Don't have them on me)No no, it is similar to 3E where it is build-as-you-go, I'm just simply meaning that multi-classing is opt-in as stated by Mearls previously.  (I'm being careful to state things that have already been tweeted or stated by Mearls & co already).  I think they know that they had to choose between balance and flexibility, and they chose the latter while trying to do as much of the former as possible.  But it's hard to make everyone's class defining abilities take hold at higher levels, just because it makes low level D&D not very fun.  So I think the best option is to leave MC'ing as an option, and say "look, this is something the DM can choose to allow, and here are the consequences of doing so."</blockquote>