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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MoonSong" data-source="post: 6060101" data-attributes="member: 6689464">Emphasis mine, you are still thinking on terms of wizards, sorcerer players are less picky about casting mechanics, IME the only people who don't like how sorcerers cast are the people who don't like sorcerers at all and don't play them. It is ok for WotC to pick a default for sorcerers that many people will dislike, as long as it is liked for all of the sorcerer players instead of failling to provide a default that will satisfy sorcerer players just to make sorcerer haters happy.  I'm not saying that the only difference between classes are their mechanics, the difference between one class and another is the whole package: Flavor+Mechanics, if the mechanics are at odds with the flavour then the flavour is meaningless and the best of mechanics are pointless number-crunching without a good flavor to back them out. Change the sorcerer mechancis and you shift the way they play even in ways that can potentially go counter-intuitive to the flavor of the class. I'm not against options, what I'm against is to dissociate a default that almost everybody will want to use from the class in order to make room for options practically nobody will.  Never, never underestimate the power of a shared set of conceptions about a game. Having a shared, consistent framework was the reason behind Ad&D, and 2nd edition, and more strongly 3rd and 4th. Such framework necessitates defaults. It may look like soemthing completely superfluous to you, but would you be forced to relly on pbp as the sole source of gaming you'd understnad things from my POV. Let me tell you one thing about pbp, it's not pretty, basically is the same as jumping groups all the time, having to constantly shift and adapt to wildly different DMing styles and tables, but somehow having a shared framework makes the constant transition easier: most DM's don't change the default and when they do it, it is very easy to spot. Yes I have mentioned that it isn't uncommon to have to read pages and pages of text before joining a game, but those usually come form DM's focussed on the setting, the mood, what they expect from the prospective players, what to write to filter out the exact kind of players they want, they rarely bother to make a stand about classes unless they have a good reason not to. (again a benefit of a baseline) remove the defaults and you force them to make a stand about every single class when before they at most had to say: "no warlocks, no psionics" and those only came after years of gainning some system mastery and understanding how those interact, being forced to make a stand about all classes when they before didn't had to and when they don't know nothing yet about them and overnight is no small task. I'd rather have the designers time used to fine tune a single casting system for sorcerers and do it well, the playtest being used to gauge what will be liked and what will be disliked by sorcerer players instead of taking the impossible task to balance things that are just too different -you cannot just balance casting systems, you balance the whole package- just for symmetry sake.Despite all strifes and complaints D&D Next will get nowhere without a good (and user friendly) baseline the same way Linux didn't became popular before Ubuntu, you may have all of the customization and fiddly bits to suit your user, but unless you provide soemthing usable out-of-the-box that works for general purposes and has ease of use, you'll never get to  be mainstream.</blockquote>

Verification