Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 9025524" data-attributes="member: 87792">Why? Other than that you value symmetry and all classes working in the same cookie cutter manner for spellcasting (and thereby making magic less magical) why does the game &quot;need a primal spellcaster&quot;? And it already has a primal half-caster.If we are going for symmetry then &quot;full&quot;, &quot;half&quot;, and pact would at least be an improvement.The thing about the bard is that lacking direct offensive power is and always has been part of the job description. It's not a coincidence that the only PHB direct damage cantrip they get is Vicious Mockery, which is the lowest damage cantrip in the game, and the only other one they get is Thunderclap which is not only the joint second lowest damage cantrip in the game but is melee only.But some of the existing invocations (starting with the Disguise Self At Will) are right up the bard's street. And then you can put more power into their buffs rather than have a bard as just another flavour of arcane caster (which is one of D&amp;Done's bad ideas).Translation: you keep all the advantages of pact magic and, rather than eliminate an entire play style from the game ensure that everyone has to play a cookie cutter class that you personally like. Most of the ways the warlock is broken with multiclassing are sloppy writing (such as Eldritch Blast scaling which has been fixed) and the rest are because 5e short rests for class based resources are a failed idea. Oh, and that 5e multiclassing is conceptually bad and undermines the strength of the class system, making sure it has the downsides of both class based and point buy.And if slot hoarding is a problem let's just abolish slots entirely. Oh look. There went the wizard. And the cleric. It's a problem with them all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 9025524, member: 87792"] Why? Other than that you value symmetry and all classes working in the same cookie cutter manner for spellcasting (and thereby making magic less magical) why does the game "need a primal spellcaster"? And it already has a primal half-caster. If we are going for symmetry then "full", "half", [I]and[/I] pact would at least be an improvement. The thing about the bard is that lacking direct offensive power is and always has been part of the job description. It's not a coincidence that the only PHB direct damage cantrip they get is Vicious Mockery, which is the lowest damage cantrip in the game, and the only other one they get is Thunderclap which is not only the joint second lowest damage cantrip in the game but is melee only. But some of the existing invocations (starting with the Disguise Self At Will) are [I]right[/I] up the bard's street. And then you can put more power into their buffs rather than have a bard as just another flavour of arcane caster (which is one of D&Done's bad ideas). Translation: you keep all the advantages of pact magic and, rather than eliminate an entire play style from the game ensure that everyone has to play a cookie cutter class that you personally like. Most of the ways the warlock is broken with multiclassing are sloppy writing (such as Eldritch Blast scaling which has been fixed) and the rest are because 5e short rests for class based resources are a failed idea. Oh, and that 5e multiclassing is conceptually bad and undermines the strength of the class system, making sure it has the downsides of both class based and point buy. And if slot hoarding is a problem [I]let's just abolish slots entirely.[/I] Oh look. There went the wizard. And the cleric. It's a problem with them all. [/QUOTE]

Verification