Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 7848690" data-attributes="member: 1465">I find the OP very painful to read. Thousands of words to explain something I already know anyway i.e. how the core classes work.I don't see any reason why Spell Versatility should be added to 5e. It doesn't have any benefit. It makes all characters of those classes a lot more similar to each other, which is not good. It won't matter than much anymore which spells to choose when designing a character of that class, so why bother. Players will create those characters with less care because they can fix them later.In addition, core characters will get the shaft, so DMs will be asked to enable Spell Versatility to all characters so they can get a free boost. In AL organized play it will suck if you're already using another book for character material, because with the PHB+1 book rule everyone who picks whatever new book has Spell Versatility will get a boost for free, but if you wanted an Archetype or feat or else from a different book, no free boost for you.So in order to avoid the previous scenario, if Spell Versatility receives good feedback then WotC will put it into a new PHB instead, meaning 5.5 and the usual fracture between gamers.I don't know if WotC does it on purpose because they already need a revision or new edition financially, but if they care for 5e then this kind of &quot;global fixes&quot; are seriously bad design ideas. They are very significant changes to some basic assumptions of the game. Of course they can easily find lots of players who will shout &quot;yes, free boost!&quot; and use it as a &quot;proof&quot; that it's a good idea instead.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 7848690, member: 1465"] I find the OP very painful to read. Thousands of words to explain something I already know anyway i.e. how the core classes work. I don't see any reason why Spell Versatility should be added to 5e. It doesn't have any benefit. It makes all characters of those classes a lot more similar to each other, which is not good. It won't matter than much anymore which spells to choose when designing a character of that class, so why bother. Players will create those characters with less care because they can fix them later. In addition, core characters will get the shaft, so DMs will be asked to enable Spell Versatility to all characters so they can get a free boost. In AL organized play it will suck if you're already using another book for character material, because with the PHB+1 book rule everyone who picks whatever new book has Spell Versatility will get a boost for free, but if you wanted an Archetype or feat or else from a different book, no free boost for you. So in order to avoid the previous scenario, if Spell Versatility receives good feedback then WotC will put it into a new PHB instead, meaning 5.5 and the usual fracture between gamers. I don't know if WotC does it on purpose because they already need a revision or new edition financially, but if they care for 5e then this kind of "global fixes" are seriously bad design ideas. They are very significant changes to some basic assumptions of the game. Of course they can easily find lots of players who will shout "yes, free boost!" and use it as a "proof" that it's a good idea instead. [/QUOTE]

Verification