Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8854939" data-attributes="member: 6987520">Well, at the time I posted them, I only had my commentary. Others have theirs in their own posts. When people post issues I didn't think of, I added them. Some of the current posts have issues, but I am trying to figure out if those issues call under one of the originals I posted or is its own thing.Did I say "solely a player problem"? No. I said IMO (my comments, after all <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> ) that is only a problem when it is a player who is trying to do it.It isn't bad faith at all--in fact it is the other way around. Personally, I'm tired of listening to people post about how bad Wizards are with broad claims and not backing them up with why they see it that way.As for "arguing", I'm not. I might question an example if I don't see or understand the rationale behind it, but that is because I am trying to gain a better, more broad, perspective instead of just relying on my own experiences and insight.Then you're reading it wrong. I am asking because (if the poster knows...) why the DM didn't it clarifies their understanding of how the spells work, etc. When people claim spells are too powerful, for example, I like to know if it is because they are reading it differently than I am. Is it a problem with the spell, or just a difference of ruling how the spell works.Even in that example I just said the DM's design let to an unforeseen consequence of the spell doing more than it was designed for. If they further rule the sphere block teleport because it blocks all spell effects, that gives me more information to work with.Now, this is an issue I didn't identify (because personally I don't find them "boring") so I'll add it to the OP when I am done with this post. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Aren't Artificers? I could be wrong since I don't use them in my games.Anyway, I agree Warlocks could easily have been INT-based as well and in one iteration of our Mod we considered it.Agreed. Without spells, they have nothing. At least other full and half-casters have other things to fall back on without spells (although admittedly Sorcerers are pretty much just as hamstrung without spells...).</blockquote>

Verification