Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 7439394" data-attributes="member: 1210">There's definitely truth to the idea that spellcasters can impact the game in ways non-spellcasters can't. That's the whole idea behind magic, right? But that's not a bad thing, in my opinion. Some people don't want to be flying and shooting magic zaps at their enemies, they want to cut them to pieces or smash them to bits. Nothing wrong with that.Well- first of all, of course what a character does is dependent on its capabilities to a great extent. But the (or at least a) whole point of rpgs is that a creative player can stretch beyond the boundaries of what's written on the sheet. Nowhere on a fighter's character sheet does it have a number for rolling a boulder off the edge of a cliff at an enemy camp, for instance. More importantly, though, the fact is that there are lots of players who enjoy playing gritty warriors or sneaky thieves without spells. If it works for the players who enjoy that style of character, I'm not sure what there is to fix.And personally, I love playing wizards, but I also love playing fighters. And I do think 5e is a tactical enough game, and the 5e fighter has a wide enough set of abilities, that fighters (and other noncasters) are enjoyable, impact the way the game plays both in and out of combat (but maybe that's because I have creative players), and lend themselves to a fighter-player's preferences.</blockquote>