Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6052802" data-attributes="member: 7006">But what's the difference?So the first method has a &quot;default&quot;.&nbsp; Great.&nbsp; So what?&nbsp; What does that &quot;default&quot; gain you?I fail to see how arranging the Class chapter to have five different casting methods each appear once within five different classes with a side bar stating &quot;here's how you can swap them all around&quot;... is any better or worse than having the five classes without stating a casting method within the body of the class description, then following those five class descriptions with the five methods of casting, instructing players and DMs to use the casting method for their spellcasters as they see fit.Especially considering that if they want to create &quot;core documents&quot; that show you how you can replicate all the different editions of D&amp;D... you CAN'T assign specific classes specific mechanics because each edition used different ones.Seems to me you're less likely to piss people off if you don't tell them &quot;the Wizard is Vancian, but if you want to houserule it to something else, here are the rules...&quot; and instead say &quot;Wizards have used many methods for spellcasting over the years.&nbsp; Select one of the following methods that make sense for your game.&quot;&nbsp; Because you aren't implying to them that you know what rules they should be using better than they do (since those rules are the &quot;default&quot;.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 6052802, member: 7006"] But what's the difference? So the first method has a "default". Great. So what? What does that "default" gain you? I fail to see how arranging the Class chapter to have five different casting methods each appear once within five different classes with a side bar stating "here's how you can swap them all around"... is any better or worse than having the five classes without stating a casting method within the body of the class description, then following those five class descriptions with the five methods of casting, instructing players and DMs to use the casting method for their spellcasters as they see fit. Especially considering that if they want to create "core documents" that show you how you can replicate all the different editions of D&D... you CAN'T assign specific classes specific mechanics because each edition used different ones. Seems to me you're less likely to piss people off if you don't tell them "the Wizard is Vancian, but if you want to houserule it to something else, here are the rules..." and instead say "Wizards have used many methods for spellcasting over the years. Select one of the following methods that make sense for your game." Because you aren't implying to them that you know what rules they [I]should[/I] be using better than they do (since those rules are the "default".) [/QUOTE]

Verification