Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7543292" data-attributes="member: 6919838">&quot;Or you could give the bard the mental domination spells and give wizards or sorcerers something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT thematically. Currently, we can have 4 completely different characters at a table using the same numbered slot to cast the same spells with the same variables and same DC. It didn't have to be that way&quot;It doesnt have to,be that way now!!!Your four guys throwing the same spells at same times with ssne DCs are doing so with four classes because they **all** wanted to br doing that that wsy at that time. It was a need they saw they wanted or needed to cover&nbsp; and made multiple choices to get to. In your alternative, wouldnt they all be there doing that but with that one class that allows it because thats the only way to cover thst thing they **all** want to do that way?If your game sees in actuality four players of spell casters and what not all needing, wanting, choosing the ssme things, same dcs etc often enough to be a &quot;problem&quot; that is saying more about the game-table and the challenges experienced than the rules snd flexible class structure.In my experience, the more restrictive you make classes, the more you see classes being sorted into &quot;the ones we need&quot; and the &quot;ones we dont&quot; instead of having class not be more of a straight-jacket.But changing thongs up so the bard and sorc cannot be part of that samesome foursome you fret might just lead to (likely will) you seeing the same thing - just four wizards and less variety than you have now.But hey, good luck with that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7543292, member: 6919838"] "Or you could give the bard the mental domination spells and give wizards or sorcerers something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT thematically. Currently, we can have 4 completely different characters at a table using the same numbered slot to cast the same spells with the same variables and same DC. It didn't have to be that way" It doesnt have to,be that way now!!! Your four guys throwing the same spells at same times with ssne DCs are doing so with four classes because they **all** wanted to br doing that that wsy at that time. It was a need they saw they wanted or needed to cover and made multiple choices to get to. In your alternative, wouldnt they all be there doing that but with that one class that allows it because thats the only way to cover thst thing they **all** want to do that way? If your game sees in actuality four players of spell casters and what not all needing, wanting, choosing the ssme things, same dcs etc often enough to be a "problem" that is saying more about the game-table and the challenges experienced than the rules snd flexible class structure. In my experience, the more restrictive you make classes, the more you see classes being sorted into "the ones we need" and the "ones we dont" instead of having class not be more of a straight-jacket. But changing thongs up so the bard and sorc cannot be part of that samesome foursome you fret might just lead to (likely will) you seeing the same thing - just four wizards and less variety than you have now. But hey, good luck with that. [/QUOTE]

Verification