Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Digitalnamshub" data-source="post: 6551724" data-attributes="member: 6791792">&quot;...any classes's lists&quot; (currently reads 'class's list') - because that is the plural possessive form of the phrase. I am assuming the book was edited by someone who understood English grammar better then me, but I'm fairly certain that is the correct form to indicate plural possessive; many many different classes different lists. But it is obvious there is a lot of ambiguity and mistakes in the book. Such as the quick start spell given to Warlocks that Warlocks can't even take....I think the thought is RAI is broken. Meaning, Ritual Caster is limited because the intention was to give a spell caster a secondary focus of ritual study. Wizard magic is much different the Druidic magic in flavor and theme. The same thing could be said to apply here. Flavor is reinforced by a mechanic. Which arguably was one of the main focus' of 5e. RP over min/max.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Digitalnamshub, post: 6551724, member: 6791792"] "...any classes's lists" (currently reads 'class's list') - because that is the plural possessive form of the phrase. I am assuming the book was edited by someone who understood English grammar better then me, but I'm fairly certain that is the correct form to indicate plural possessive; many many different classes different lists. But it is obvious there is a lot of ambiguity and mistakes in the book. Such as the quick start spell given to Warlocks that Warlocks can't even take.... I think the thought is RAI is broken. Meaning, Ritual Caster is limited because the intention was to give a spell caster a secondary focus of ritual study. Wizard magic is much different the Druidic magic in flavor and theme. The same thing could be said to apply here. Flavor is reinforced by a mechanic. Which arguably was one of the main focus' of 5e. RP over min/max. [/QUOTE]

Verification