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: 8623644" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Good luck. The designers themselves don't want that world. They haven't wanted it for over 20 years. I would argue they haven't wanted it since at least 2nd edition.You are asking for a thing that D&D, as made by the people who make it, and as sought out by an extremely influential and demonstrably successful vocal minority, has not been and is not likely to ever be.One option is, of course, to sustain the call for these features despite the vocal pro-caster minority and (likely subconscious) pro-caster bias among the designers. This strategy has thus far failed to produce any headway at all, except during 4e, and that was because someone actively trying to reduce the power of spellcasters was at the helm and constantly fighting a rearguard action against persistent backslide. The only major new limit on caster power in the past 40 years (as opposed to the steady removal of such limits) has been in the form of Concentration, and even that isn't as significant as it could (or, IMO, should) be.The other option is to accept that we will never put this genie back in the bottle. Powerful casters are here to stay, and the designers simply do not want to take that away. We can then either shrug and say "well, guess it just sucks to not be a full caster," or we can work to bring up the power level of non-casters yet further and to extend (to what limited extent we can) the limitations on caster power and flexibility, especially in the domain of setting the expectations of when and how often the party takes a break.</blockquote>

Verification