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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8728767" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I'm viewing it from a perspective of both how often the topic is broached, and when it is so, whether it is typically controversial or typically showing some kind of consensus.Warlords are 100% always contentious when they are brought up. Doesn't matter how the topic is approached. Even if you go out of your way to try to avoid controversy, someone will drag it in, guaranteed. It's sort of a miniature version of Godwin's Law, the probably that someone will crap on the very concept of the Warlord approaches 1 as a thread about them grows in length.Fighters, similarly, usually only get much discussion in the context of caster/martial balance, which is a major controversy with entrenched partisans on both sides (including yours truly.) Part of this is that there's not a whole lot to the class mechanically nor thematically so there's not a lot to discuss about it otherwise, but part of it is that people put a lot of value on the Fighter class (IMO, more than they should!) and as a result it gets hyperfocused by people pushing various agendas.Monks, rangers, etc. don't tend to get much pushback. People either don't engage, or agree that there are issues. Sorcerer is a little bit more controversial (remember when people crowed with glee because Spell Versatility was removed? That sure was a fun time and not at all tedious and insulting!) but not much. Wizard? People only really talk about Wizard as the poster child of caster classes. Honestly I wish it was MORE controversial, because I see major flaws in the 5e implementation (specifically, it does literally nothing to support the "I am an academic researcher" theme), but that's a separate story.First, I just want to say, I continue to loathe how "have one's cake and eat it too" 5e is about balance. Spellcasters in general are horrendously powerful but that's fiiiine. Paladins are straight-up superior to Fighters but that's fiiiine. But good God man, if you let someone spend 2 class levels to have medium armor, attack in melee q with Charisma, and get a decent cantrip attack, YOU'LL DESTROY THE GAME! It's just very tedious dealing with the double standards in play here.As for the rest: yeah, that's definitely splitting hairs in my opinion. Though to be honest Hexblade does get very specific hate over and above warlock dips in general. I almost never hear people complain about someone going (say) Tomelock with Book of Ancient Secrets, since that lets you learn ritual spells from ANY class, not just your own (but you can only cast them as rituals unless you learn them from some other source.) So yeah, I do think Hexblade gets very specific vitriol, and the fact that it's focused on multiclassing doesn't really change my mind that it is a reason people find the Warlock class controversial.</blockquote>

Verification