Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7704743" data-attributes="member: 996">Yes.  Yes, it did, and there's a lot more that needs to, as well (obviously, including a Warlord class), if 5e is to live up to it's goal of inclusiveness towards fans of all past editions, rather than wallowing in self-congratulatory intolerance as the h4ter edition.Yes, like Vancian casting, 6-8 encounter days, band-aid clerics and beatstick fighters, the mark mechanic works well for certain styles and clashes with others - that's the /point/, those styles it works for are a step closer to being enabled in 5e.But not "shared by everyone."  Every rule out after the PH (and some in it) is an optional rule the DM must opt into if a player is to use it at his table.  Even if the recent UAs make it to print in an official supplement, they'll still be optional.  There's no need to label a mechanic with meaningless edition-war pejoratives to make it optional.  It's all optional.  Make the game your own.  Don't try to make everyone else conform to your own game.And people always seem to think that their preferences are the popular ones.  They are often wrong.  And, popularity is fickle.  Defend the rights of the  minority, because you never know when you might end up part of one.They are, if the game is to be inclusive.  If it were not for the desire to treat all preferences equally, there'd've been no need for 5e in this form, nor even for Essentials.Two thoughts:1) In 5e, there's often more than one way to get to a concept, depending on the options in play.  Noble is a background even in the pdf, you could tweak it to make a Samurai background pretty easily.  Feats & MCing also let you pull in bits from other classes, so if you wanted a 'Samurai' with some CS dice or spells, you could take the Samurai archetype and pull in spells via MCing or CS dice via a feat, or you could use a Background to evoke the Samurai social position, and play a Battlemaster or EK.2) The silo'ing of fighter sub-class abilities rather than building up of options may be frustrating, but if you followed Essentials, which Mike Mearls also helmed, it's not surprising.  The fighter sub-classes in that line each gained very different and innately incompatible abilities from the preceding AEDU fighters, eliminating virtually all synergy between the two.  Nod.  (2), above.  Mike has a solid record of limiting customizeability and power creep when introducing new choices for non-casters.  Nod.  (1), above.  It's one of the things 5e got 'right,' IMHO.  It presents the DM with a lot of options, but if the DM doesn't allow feats or MCing, the player can still get to certain concepts that might've been optimally done that way, via backgrounds and sub-classes.Not everyone hated Essentials, and those of us who did often hated them for diametrically opposed reasons.   The Knight Fighter archetype is certainly strongly reminiscent of the Essentials Knight(Fighter).  The Champion was already strongly evocative of the Slayer.</blockquote>

Verification