NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6648349" data-attributes="member: 996">That's D&D in a nutshell, sure.  You see the same 'best' spells and combat options used relentlessly in every day (then rest to get them back).  Casters all draw from the same spell lists, so you can't tell the players apart without a scorecard.  You can't blame 5e for that, it's just the nature of the beast.  Every edition has had it's obvious best choices, and re-use of mechanics and/or overlapping spell lists.  So Clerics, Druids, Bards, Warlords, Artificers, Paladins, Shamans, Psionics, Priests, and other classes have all been able to heal in one ed or another, it doesn't make them all Clerics, even though several of them all used the exact same Cure..Wounds spells to do it. Spells have been the main source of meaningful options and effective tactics or complex strategies in most editions of D&D, yes.  5e does keep it's few non-casters relevant with big DPR, though. While it was option-rich - thousands upon thousands of options, at the very least - far too many of those options were non-viable, or even just sub-optimal, so were essentially 'closed.'  Worst case anything but the few Tier 1 classes and the odd outre power builds were it.  So the better the other editions were balanced, the more of the (fewer) options that they presented were actually viable.  5e 'only' has 38 sub-class choices, for instance, but probably at least 30 of them are arguably viable - potentially all of them if you limit consideration to viability in combat over the prescribed 6-8 encounter 'day.' It was really open-ended at chargen/level up, thanks to the MCing system, which 4e abandoned but 5e brought back, and to the large number of feats, which 4e expanded but 5e paired away and made individually 'bigger.'  Really, 3.5 was the most prolific edition as far as sheer number of character options, even if a lot of system mastery was required to comb through them for the best ones.   Well, those would both have been in conflict with the RAW in 3e (not that the intent of 3e was for RAW to be final, but the community went the way it did), but might be done with less controversy in other editions, either because there was no specific rule, so DM fiat came into play, or because the available rules were more flexible.</blockquote>

Verification